Yeah, I don't know about your friends, but my friends (women) all dig the scantily clad babes. My former roommate's girlfriend loved playing DOA on his XBox and grabbing people with her (female character's) crotch.
The only thing that I've seen immediately turn girls off from "boy" games (aside from a complete lack of practice and experience with their format) is that the main characters are never girls. I wouldn't have thought that would bother anyone, but when my girlfriend's sister picked up Golden Sun on my GBA, I kept hearing her saying (in another room), "I told you my name was Rachel. Stop calling me a boy!"
It was pretty cute. But if I buy her a GBA, I won't be buying Golden Sun for her.
Well, whatever it was, it sure looked like a real new window. The closebox worked, and it was outside of the border of the existing page. I don't think they would have gone to the lengths to put in a fake "close" link while still making a fake close box that worked.
There's some tech website that throws up a popup and scrolls it around your screen. When I saw it, it contained an image with a fake link saying "Close this popup" that also directed you to the ad site.
Just about as despicable as I've ever seen, and it got through Google's blocker. I forget the site.
Your second point is the reason I asked the question:
And while you're at it, if you're White, feel free to smoke pot in your Cadillac Escalade. They're totally not on the list.
I just want to hear that they try to go after everyone, more or less equally. I guess I'm also curious how they would rank someone as a more greivous offender. I mean, if their answer was "We primarily go after college kids with FTP sites, 'cause they're the easiest to bust," I'd be really upset.
It's not due to self interest, really. I'm employed now, so I buy software.
Please characterize the types of criminals that you go after. Mostly warez rings? Businesses that don't license all their software? College kids with FTP sites?
I'm sure it's impossible for a group of 40 people to round up every IP criminal. How do you ensure that you aren't ignoring a piece of the pie?
They don't say if the new EU style patents allow patenting/copyrighting/whatever of raw discovered genetic data. The most obvious bad patent, that we've got here in the states, is patenting the use of a particular genetic sequence (in the human genome!) as a method of finding another copy of that sequence.
Re:Virtual rape = RL sexual assault
on
To Kill An Avatar
·
· Score: 1
That's why I chose the subject line carefully. I consider it to be a sexual assault.
Yeah. That's why I didn't bother replying to your original post. You've made a statement that makes zero sense to me. Why not say, "Books about sexual assault = RL sexual assault"? Or even, "Leafy greens = RL sexual assault"?
If you're going to say two unrelated things are equal to eachother, you're going to have to explain yourself a little better. Not only is virtual rape not sexual assault, it's not even assault. You might be able to convince me that it is immoral (I don't think so.), but that is hardly the point you are trying to make.
It becomes tricky where one or more of the players is not the same sex as their character, though.
I fail to see how that could possible relate to the subject at hand.
Yeah. I wonder what the options prices are for SCO. Does anyone know where to find out that sort of information? Somehow I imagine they've got a pretty high premium right now.
Re:Virtual rape = RL sexual assault
on
To Kill An Avatar
·
· Score: 1
Eh. No. Comparing actual rape to virtual rape is like comparing a real life hit and run to a hit and run in a video game: One is wrong, and one is not wrong at all.
If the game designers don't want virtual rape in their game, then they are perfectly empowered to make it impossible. If they have not done so... it is part of the game.
If there is a game that incorporates things that you do not like (ie griefers in The Sims Online) don't play the game. It's a really simple, 100% effective solution.
The laws in place don't allow record labels to pick a price. There is a fixed price, which is far higher than small webcasters can afford. It doesn't matter if indie labels, or anyone else, feel like lowering the bar.
This law wasn't to benefit copyright holders, it was to benefit advertisers by bringing about market consolidation (forcing small webcasters out of business).
There are specific laws for webcasting that are different from those regarding radio broadcasts.
Why should there be different laws? Otherwise, it would be too cheap to run a webcast! There would be so many different webcasters that advertisers would never know which market was listening to which stations, and labels would have no way to ensure that their product was adequately represented. Mass hysteria! Dogs and cats living together!
I'm not exaggerating. That's actually the reason. Congress just wanted to bring about "market consolidation."
Well, apparently the article author disagrees with me:
"The idea that x86 have RISC-like cores is a myth. They use the same techniques but the cores of x86 CPUs require a great deal more hardware to deal with the complexities of the original instruction set and architecture. "
I'm kindof curious about the 970's power consumption. Everybody seems to assume that it's relatively low (It's in blade servers.), but I've never heard a figure.
You could say that right now, "The x86 is not dead, because the RISC processors that replace them have a CISC compatibility layer".
The P4 decodes the larger, more complex x86 instructions into smaller chunks for use inside the processor, which is more or less RISC in its core. The CISC vs. RISC debate is kindof over, because both CISC and RISC chips have been adapted to gain the advantages of each others' design principles. Even the PPC 970 has to decode some of its "RISC" instructions into separate micro-instructions for execution.
The only chip design methodology that still has its original meaning is VLIW. That original meaning is "bankruptcy."
Right. But his point about the Greek pronunciation of gamma implied a certain correct current pronunciation. His other point said that the current correct pronunciation was whatever people actually usually said.
I wonder if we'll have more griping about language change in our modern, connected, recorded world. Do you think folks in Shakespear's day complained about the great vowel shift?
Slashdot Mirror
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Yeah. I sure am glad that Bungie planned a PC and Mac port for Halo, too.
I know, bad example.
Yeah, I don't know about your friends, but my friends (women) all dig the scantily clad babes. My former roommate's girlfriend loved playing DOA on his XBox and grabbing people with her (female character's) crotch.
The only thing that I've seen immediately turn girls off from "boy" games (aside from a complete lack of practice and experience with their format) is that the main characters are never girls. I wouldn't have thought that would bother anyone, but when my girlfriend's sister picked up Golden Sun on my GBA, I kept hearing her saying (in another room), "I told you my name was Rachel. Stop calling me a boy!"
It was pretty cute. But if I buy her a GBA, I won't be buying Golden Sun for her.
Well, whatever it was, it sure looked like a real new window. The closebox worked, and it was outside of the border of the existing page. I don't think they would have gone to the lengths to put in a fake "close" link while still making a fake close box that worked.
There's some tech website that throws up a popup and scrolls it around your screen. When I saw it, it contained an image with a fake link saying "Close this popup" that also directed you to the ad site.
Just about as despicable as I've ever seen, and it got through Google's blocker. I forget the site.
Your second point is the reason I asked the question:
And while you're at it, if you're White, feel free to smoke pot in your Cadillac Escalade. They're totally not on the list.
I just want to hear that they try to go after everyone, more or less equally. I guess I'm also curious how they would rank someone as a more greivous offender. I mean, if their answer was "We primarily go after college kids with FTP sites, 'cause they're the easiest to bust," I'd be really upset.
It's not due to self interest, really. I'm employed now, so I buy software.
Please characterize the types of criminals that you go after. Mostly warez rings? Businesses that don't license all their software? College kids with FTP sites?
I'm sure it's impossible for a group of 40 people to round up every IP criminal. How do you ensure that you aren't ignoring a piece of the pie?
They don't say if the new EU style patents allow patenting/copyrighting/whatever of raw discovered genetic data. The most obvious bad patent, that we've got here in the states, is patenting the use of a particular genetic sequence (in the human genome!) as a method of finding another copy of that sequence.
Sooo low.
Short answer: No
Long answer: No
In summary: No
That's why I chose the subject line carefully. I consider it to be a sexual assault.
Yeah. That's why I didn't bother replying to your original post. You've made a statement that makes zero sense to me. Why not say, "Books about sexual assault = RL sexual assault"? Or even, "Leafy greens = RL sexual assault"?
If you're going to say two unrelated things are equal to eachother, you're going to have to explain yourself a little better. Not only is virtual rape not sexual assault, it's not even assault. You might be able to convince me that it is immoral (I don't think so.), but that is hardly the point you are trying to make.
It becomes tricky where one or more of the players is not the same sex as their character, though.
I fail to see how that could possible relate to the subject at hand.
Cigarette smoke works too. They didn't tell you about that in Boy Scouts, did they?
Berkeley would be perfect, if it weren't for all those assholes. I vote that we send them all to Santa Cruz where they can't do any more damage.
Yeah. I wonder what the options prices are for SCO. Does anyone know where to find out that sort of information? Somehow I imagine they've got a pretty high premium right now.
Eh. No. Comparing actual rape to virtual rape is like comparing a real life hit and run to a hit and run in a video game: One is wrong, and one is not wrong at all.
If the game designers don't want virtual rape in their game, then they are perfectly empowered to make it impossible. If they have not done so... it is part of the game.
If there is a game that incorporates things that you do not like (ie griefers in The Sims Online) don't play the game. It's a really simple, 100% effective solution.
You misread his post. He actually said, "I don't like Ant for religious reasons."
Transmeta. Crusoe is VLIW, and they're the ones I was making fun of, mostly.
I didn't realize that Sun still had a use for the MAJC CPU, but I don't know much about it. (Somehow that didn't keep me from posting...)
The laws in place don't allow record labels to pick a price. There is a fixed price, which is far higher than small webcasters can afford. It doesn't matter if indie labels, or anyone else, feel like lowering the bar.
This law wasn't to benefit copyright holders, it was to benefit advertisers by bringing about market consolidation (forcing small webcasters out of business).
There are specific laws for webcasting that are different from those regarding radio broadcasts.
Why should there be different laws? Otherwise, it would be too cheap to run a webcast! There would be so many different webcasters that advertisers would never know which market was listening to which stations, and labels would have no way to ensure that their product was adequately represented. Mass hysteria! Dogs and cats living together!
I'm not exaggerating. That's actually the reason. Congress just wanted to bring about "market consolidation."
ClearChannel only webcasting.
You should have played The Extraordinary Adventures
of Baron Munchausen, a much superiour game, with many fewer encumbrances.
It's basically a lying contest. It takes a bit of practice before you're any good, but once you're good... you're great. Fantastic game.
Well, apparently the article author disagrees with me:
"The idea that x86 have RISC-like cores is a myth. They use the same techniques but the cores of x86 CPUs require a great deal more hardware to deal with the complexities of the original instruction set and architecture. "
I'm kindof curious about the 970's power consumption. Everybody seems to assume that it's relatively low (It's in blade servers.), but I've never heard a figure.
You could say that right now, "The x86 is not dead, because the RISC processors that replace them have a CISC compatibility layer".
The P4 decodes the larger, more complex x86 instructions into smaller chunks for use inside the processor, which is more or less RISC in its core. The CISC vs. RISC debate is kindof over, because both CISC and RISC chips have been adapted to gain the advantages of each others' design principles. Even the PPC 970 has to decode some of its "RISC" instructions into separate micro-instructions for execution.
The only chip design methodology that still has its original meaning is VLIW. That original meaning is "bankruptcy."
You can still have sex with twelve year old boys in Thailand. You just can't read about it on the internet.
Funny, here in California, it's...
"Electricity's expensive! Ya trying to... wait. Nevermind."
Right. But his point about the Greek pronunciation of gamma implied a certain correct current pronunciation. His other point said that the current correct pronunciation was whatever people actually usually said.
I wonder if we'll have more griping about language change in our modern, connected, recorded world. Do you think folks in Shakespear's day complained about the great vowel shift?
Your first point and your second point contradict each other.
I agree with you anyway.