It won't, because it does not prevent cancer. It is used when you have an advanced stage of cancer, and all other methods fail (including chemical castration). It's only a vaccine in the sense that it teaches your body to fight off the cancer, not in the sense that it prevents it. So you'll still be getting those exams.
Japan has an interesting facination with humanoid robots. Their ideal robot is essentially human, and treated as a human in all respects. This includes cost-inefficient recovery of the robot. The whole purpose of this proposed mission is to generate interest in humanoid robotics, so they want to show that a robot can do everything that a person can do. Sending it to the moon and back is just a glamorous way of doing this.
The Moon is considered to be like Antarctica. It is a shared resource, not owned by any one nation. This is mostly because those environments are too harsh and remote to establish any economically viable enterprise. When (if) we eventually find a way to make them economically viable, such as climate change melting the Antarctic or cheap launch / recovery vehicles, then we'll begin fighting over who owns them. Until then, we just look at our neighbors suspiciously, and keep the guns stowed away.
Who's to say that they can't do both? Really, this goes for any degree you get. The school is just the framework around which you build an education. You can go to a really good school, and learn very little, or go to a very poor school, and learn a lot. You get out of it what you put in. The education is just the framework around which you build experience. You can get a really good education, and not turn it into anything useful, or get a very poor education, and become very successful via raw experience. Again, you get out of it what you put in.
The good thing about this kind of degree is that it can lead to several careers. It can lead to a career in marketing, based on the design aspects, or a career in software engineering, based on the programming aspects. In fact, it could even lead to a career in game development, but I doubt that most of the students who graduate (let alone enroll) will actually get into game development.
I studied CS with concentrations in AI and HCI, specifically to do game development. After a couple of years of beta testing games, I came to realize that I wanted to have a family, and working on a game for 4 years, with a 6-12 month crunch period entailing 80 hour work weeks, I decided that the two were not compatible. At least, the career path wasn't compatible with the kind of husband/father I wanted to be. Thankfully, I loved programming. Unfortunately, I hate documentation (Requirements, design, test plans, etc), and I seem to spend more time on that than coding. C'est le vie.
I have similar issues with PA. I used to read it, and thought it was quite humorous, but with the language and dialogue, it was like drinking your favorite soda (Mountain Dew) with a bit of raw sewage in it. After a while, I just couldn't do it anymore.
However, I must give them praise for standing up to Whacko Jacko Thompson. That guy really needed to be put in a box for his own good. Thank you, PA, for taking him on, and being a major factor (IMO) in shutting him up.
Someone who's just being a dumbass isn't really trolling or off topic, so unless they're repeating someone else's point (Redundant) Overrated is used to bury it.
I would say that it actually falls under Troll, but that's my opinion. I see your point of view. I still wonder why I would get -1 Overrated x4 in a day, on comments that didn't have any previous mod, and have no other mods the whole day (other than the -1 Troll x2 for saying that getting -1 Overrated on an unrated comment makes no sense).
Edit your view settings if you disagree with it.
I may be a bit dense, but after spending significant time searching everywhere I can think of, I have yet to find that setting. Please, point me in a more specific direction, because I'd really like to know where it is.
Do you ever go home?
Yeah, but by the time I get home,/. seems a lot less important, and it just isn't worth the effort. I wonder if that's more of a commentary about/., my home life, or work. Perhaps I should ponder that.
Speaking of banning toys "packaged" with food, who here knows what Kinder Eggs are? All my European friends, raise your hands. They're the hollow chocolate eggs with a plastic pellet inside that contains a toy. The best part about the toy is that you usually have to put it together, like a GI Joe vehicle. They're very popular in Europe, and have been for decades. However, despite the fact that the packaging explicitly states, in serveral language, that they are not suitable for children under 3 years of age, they are banned in the US because they're a choking hazard. The other reason is that the toy is inedible, and not allowed to be completely enclosed within a food item. The law that is applied in this case was created to outlaw placing rocks, razors, or other hazards within processed foods, with the intent to cause harm.
When I was a kid, Happy Meals were considered too expensive, so my parents never bought them for me. Buying food at the overstock grocery was a lot cheaper, and that's the food I ate. That's the grocery store that all the others sell their non-perishables and frozen foods to, when they have been sitting around too long, and not selling. If we were not at home, and I wanted something to eat, I just had to deal with it until we got home. Carrying snacks around was not common practice at that time.
Now, fast food is actually cheaper for many people than food purchased at a grocery store and cooked at home.
People are getting modded down for no good reason. Yesterday I had received -1 Overrated for for 4 comments which had no mods on them already. How can a comment be modded as "Overrated" when it hasn't been rated to begin with? Then when I commented on that, it got modded down -1 Troll x2. Some of them were comments on stories from several days prior. Those were the only mods I had the whole day. -1 x6 for the day, and for no good reason whatsoever. I suspect that somebody, or some group, is specifically targetting me because I posted some opinion that they didn't like. Or maybe I just need a tin foil hat.
There needs to be a forum on/. where we can just discuss problems with/. or the mod system, rather than discussing it in the comments of stories. I can't email the admin account, because I'm not about to send personal email through the company system, and all webmail sites are blocked; and no, I absolutely will not proxy around it and risk losing my job.
Perhaps what I really need to do is just not care if I get modded down. That may be a better long term solution.
Sometimes you need a good boot disk that will load DOS, and run Ghost on it. In my experience, making bootdisks on floppies is a lot easier than trying to use CDs or USB flash sticks. Every boot disk image I find is made for floppies, and while I can modify the image and burn it to a CD, every boot disk utility I've seen still requires me to write the image to an actual floppy disk, then burn the CD off that. www.bootdisk.com has some great utilities, but this is the exact process that all of the images from that site require. Believe me, if I could skip the whole floppy disk step, I would. If there is another way to do it, it probably requires some expensive software to write the floppy image directly to the CD. The other option, creating a boot disk from absolute scratch, is not within my skill set. My kung-fu isn't THAT good. This means that for the forseeable future, I'm going to need floppy disks.
Seriously, when did game development become so lucrative? I know that Atari used to pay their devs and coders slave wages, and that has changed (EA excluded, perhaps), but when did the little guy start making $13M? I'll be lucky to see half of that in my lifetime.
If I'm missing something important from the article, please quote it. The site is blocked by my employer's Websense firewall.
Block Reason: The Websense category "Games" is filtered.
I read the article, and I have to say that I am still baffled by how much US law relies on precedents. Judges are fallible humans. Even after several rounds of appeals, erroneous judgements happen. Prior to emancipation, the US Supreme Court issued rulings in favor of owning slaves. If the court followed precedent, then it should have ruled against Lincoln's emancipation proclamation. Ruling on precedent is the same as answering the question "why do we do this?" by saying "because we always have." Why does so much of US law rest on precedent, when it's obvious that past rulings are sometimes (often) flawed? Please, don't say "because we always have."
Kids will still pick cigarette butts off the ground, sneak into their parents' liquor cabinet, or get their older siblings to buy them for them. I know that. Yet, controlling their access via retailers is, for the most part, effective enough. It's not about preventing all kids from ever getting their hands on this stuff. It's about limiting it to as small an amount as possible, to ensure that as many kids grow up to be productive members of society as possible.
Some parents don't want their kids eating sugary snacks. So, should we pass a law making it illegal for grocery stores to sell candy to anyone under 18 without parental permission?
Some parents don't want their kids learning about evolution, either. Should we pass another law making it illegal for bookstores to sell science textbooks to anyone under 18 without parental permission?
Now we're getting to straw-man territory. Science hasn't shown conclusively whether violent games affect the mental, emotional, or behavioral development of kids. Candy, however, is pretty harmless. Kids buying candy to eat won't lead to obesity. It's the junk food, fatty meals, etc., that parents supply their children.
Not all do. In fact, I regularly see kids which are obviously underage purchasing M rated games at several Gamestop and Wal-Mart stores. Hence, the need for government regulation (IMO).
You have a point, and I forgot to mention that in my comment. Parents need to teach their kids how to make wise decisions. It needs to be up to the parents, though, when a child is mature enough to play certain games. That means the parents need to control distribution by being the ones to purchase them for the kids. To do that, it needs to be illegal for stores to sell the games to kids. That takes the power away from the retailers and the kids, and gives it to the parents, who can control what their kids play while teaching them how to make wise decisions.
Kids do mature at different rates. That's why I believe that certain things should be permissable in practice, but not in distribution. It should be permissable for kids to PLAY violent games, if their parents buy it for them, but not for kids to BUY the games themselves. I agree with you. If we lived in a perfect world, kids would be able to determine for themselves when the best time for them to start playing those games is. Unfortunately, the human brain doesn't mature like that.
I agree, it is better to equip kids with the tools they need to make better decisions.
As a side note, I am more inclined to believe that kids are not on the streets because they find games and the internet to be more interesting than playing with their friends. My favorite hobby has always been gaming, so don't mistake me for simply being a hater.
You're looking at a very small portion of the population. Until you've had to parent a child with a naturally unruly and disobedient personality, you can't understand why these laws are necessary. You and I were faily well-bahaved kids. My sister, however, was not.
I know for a fact that my parents didn't do anything different with my sister, yet she has turned out to be a horrible person. I'm pleasantly surprised that she hasn't done time in prison, yet. She had the same rules and restrictions that I did. My parents disciplined her the same way, albeit more often due to her behavioral problems. Somehow, I went to university, graduated, obey the law, and have become an all around productive member of society, unlike her. She barely graduated HS by going to night school, was married and divorced by 21, knocked up by her boyfriend at 22, has had run-ins with the law, and is the biggest self-entitled, abusive jerk you can imagine. She's Brittany Spears, without the money or fame.
Violent games have nothing to do with how my sister turned out, but I guarantee that if selling alcohol to 16-year-olds was legal, she would have killed someone in a drunk driving accident before her 18th birthday. I hate to think what would have happened to her if the sale of illicit drugs was legal.
It's a proven medical fact that the parts of the human brain which control executive, long-term, decision making, are not fully developed until around 20 years of age. That's why the collective experience of society has determined, over the millenia, that 18 and 21 years of age are the key ages for granting freedoms. If my sister was permitted, by law, to purchase things that are currently outlawed for minors, she would not have had the mental capacity to make the wise decision to stay away from them; my parents wouldn't have been able to enforce any rule to prevent her from obtaining them, and she would be a much, much worse person than she is today.
With some kids, you can be as loving as Christ, as harsh as a drill instructor, have complete omniscience, or be anywhere in-between, and the kid will still be unruly, disobedient, and a general drag on society. It really does take a village to raise a child, and in today's society, that means laws which are enforced.
But parents can't be aware of what their children are doing 100% of the time. It's a LOT easier to control distribution at the point of sale, rather than at the point of consumption. If a parent tells their kid they are not allowed to purchase or play a certain game, can that parent ensure that their 15-year-old kid won't still buy that game when said parent tells their kid "yes, you may go to the mall with your friends"? 1,000 parents, enforcing a self-ban on violent games for their 1,500 kids isn't nearly as effective as 100 retailers being banned from selling them to those kids. If the parents want their kids to have access to those games, then they can still buy GTA 9 for Johnny's birthday.
Slashdot Mirror
It won't, because it does not prevent cancer. It is used when you have an advanced stage of cancer, and all other methods fail (including chemical castration). It's only a vaccine in the sense that it teaches your body to fight off the cancer, not in the sense that it prevents it. So you'll still be getting those exams.
Imagine if corporations could simply buy moon advertisements.... We'd be seeing crap like [KRAFT CHEESE] and other crap.
Like the ending to Hancock?
i didnt see that movie yet you insensitive clod!
Oops, my bad.
Maybe they'll send it up there and it'll have some expensive blinking light to let us know it's still there, lol.
Except that the summary says they want to return it to Earth.
Probably for the same reason so many Americans want to send another astronaut to the moon, rather than send rovers and probes.
Japan has an interesting facination with humanoid robots. Their ideal robot is essentially human, and treated as a human in all respects. This includes cost-inefficient recovery of the robot. The whole purpose of this proposed mission is to generate interest in humanoid robotics, so they want to show that a robot can do everything that a person can do. Sending it to the moon and back is just a glamorous way of doing this.
The Moon is considered to be like Antarctica. It is a shared resource, not owned by any one nation. This is mostly because those environments are too harsh and remote to establish any economically viable enterprise. When (if) we eventually find a way to make them economically viable, such as climate change melting the Antarctic or cheap launch / recovery vehicles, then we'll begin fighting over who owns them. Until then, we just look at our neighbors suspiciously, and keep the guns stowed away.
Who's to say that they can't do both? Really, this goes for any degree you get. The school is just the framework around which you build an education. You can go to a really good school, and learn very little, or go to a very poor school, and learn a lot. You get out of it what you put in. The education is just the framework around which you build experience. You can get a really good education, and not turn it into anything useful, or get a very poor education, and become very successful via raw experience. Again, you get out of it what you put in.
The good thing about this kind of degree is that it can lead to several careers. It can lead to a career in marketing, based on the design aspects, or a career in software engineering, based on the programming aspects. In fact, it could even lead to a career in game development, but I doubt that most of the students who graduate (let alone enroll) will actually get into game development.
I studied CS with concentrations in AI and HCI, specifically to do game development. After a couple of years of beta testing games, I came to realize that I wanted to have a family, and working on a game for 4 years, with a 6-12 month crunch period entailing 80 hour work weeks, I decided that the two were not compatible. At least, the career path wasn't compatible with the kind of husband/father I wanted to be. Thankfully, I loved programming. Unfortunately, I hate documentation (Requirements, design, test plans, etc), and I seem to spend more time on that than coding. C'est le vie.
I have similar issues with PA. I used to read it, and thought it was quite humorous, but with the language and dialogue, it was like drinking your favorite soda (Mountain Dew) with a bit of raw sewage in it. After a while, I just couldn't do it anymore.
However, I must give them praise for standing up to Whacko Jacko Thompson. That guy really needed to be put in a box for his own good. Thank you, PA, for taking him on, and being a major factor (IMO) in shutting him up.
Someone who's just being a dumbass isn't really trolling or off topic, so unless they're repeating someone else's point (Redundant) Overrated is used to bury it.
I would say that it actually falls under Troll, but that's my opinion. I see your point of view. I still wonder why I would get -1 Overrated x4 in a day, on comments that didn't have any previous mod, and have no other mods the whole day (other than the -1 Troll x2 for saying that getting -1 Overrated on an unrated comment makes no sense).
Edit your view settings if you disagree with it.
I may be a bit dense, but after spending significant time searching everywhere I can think of, I have yet to find that setting. Please, point me in a more specific direction, because I'd really like to know where it is.
Do you ever go home?
Yeah, but by the time I get home, /. seems a lot less important, and it just isn't worth the effort. I wonder if that's more of a commentary about /., my home life, or work. Perhaps I should ponder that.
Dear friends, don't let this one thing escape you: with the Lord one day is like 1,000 years, and 1,000 years like one day. 2 Peter 3:8
Speaking of banning toys "packaged" with food, who here knows what Kinder Eggs are? All my European friends, raise your hands. They're the hollow chocolate eggs with a plastic pellet inside that contains a toy. The best part about the toy is that you usually have to put it together, like a GI Joe vehicle. They're very popular in Europe, and have been for decades. However, despite the fact that the packaging explicitly states, in serveral language, that they are not suitable for children under 3 years of age, they are banned in the US because they're a choking hazard. The other reason is that the toy is inedible, and not allowed to be completely enclosed within a food item. The law that is applied in this case was created to outlaw placing rocks, razors, or other hazards within processed foods, with the intent to cause harm.
When I was a kid, Happy Meals were considered too expensive, so my parents never bought them for me. Buying food at the overstock grocery was a lot cheaper, and that's the food I ate. That's the grocery store that all the others sell their non-perishables and frozen foods to, when they have been sitting around too long, and not selling. If we were not at home, and I wanted something to eat, I just had to deal with it until we got home. Carrying snacks around was not common practice at that time.
Now, fast food is actually cheaper for many people than food purchased at a grocery store and cooked at home.
People are getting modded down for no good reason. Yesterday I had received -1 Overrated for for 4 comments which had no mods on them already. How can a comment be modded as "Overrated" when it hasn't been rated to begin with? Then when I commented on that, it got modded down -1 Troll x2. Some of them were comments on stories from several days prior. Those were the only mods I had the whole day. -1 x6 for the day, and for no good reason whatsoever. I suspect that somebody, or some group, is specifically targetting me because I posted some opinion that they didn't like. Or maybe I just need a tin foil hat.
There needs to be a forum on /. where we can just discuss problems with /. or the mod system, rather than discussing it in the comments of stories. I can't email the admin account, because I'm not about to send personal email through the company system, and all webmail sites are blocked; and no, I absolutely will not proxy around it and risk losing my job.
Perhaps what I really need to do is just not care if I get modded down. That may be a better long term solution.
Sometimes you need a good boot disk that will load DOS, and run Ghost on it. In my experience, making bootdisks on floppies is a lot easier than trying to use CDs or USB flash sticks. Every boot disk image I find is made for floppies, and while I can modify the image and burn it to a CD, every boot disk utility I've seen still requires me to write the image to an actual floppy disk, then burn the CD off that. www.bootdisk.com has some great utilities, but this is the exact process that all of the images from that site require. Believe me, if I could skip the whole floppy disk step, I would. If there is another way to do it, it probably requires some expensive software to write the floppy image directly to the CD. The other option, creating a boot disk from absolute scratch, is not within my skill set. My kung-fu isn't THAT good. This means that for the forseeable future, I'm going to need floppy disks.
Seriously, when did game development become so lucrative? I know that Atari used to pay their devs and coders slave wages, and that has changed (EA excluded, perhaps), but when did the little guy start making $13M? I'll be lucky to see half of that in my lifetime.
If I'm missing something important from the article, please quote it. The site is blocked by my employer's Websense firewall.
Block Reason: The Websense category "Games" is filtered.
I read the article, and I have to say that I am still baffled by how much US law relies on precedents. Judges are fallible humans. Even after several rounds of appeals, erroneous judgements happen. Prior to emancipation, the US Supreme Court issued rulings in favor of owning slaves. If the court followed precedent, then it should have ruled against Lincoln's emancipation proclamation. Ruling on precedent is the same as answering the question "why do we do this?" by saying "because we always have." Why does so much of US law rest on precedent, when it's obvious that past rulings are sometimes (often) flawed? Please, don't say "because we always have."
Kids will still pick cigarette butts off the ground, sneak into their parents' liquor cabinet, or get their older siblings to buy them for them. I know that. Yet, controlling their access via retailers is, for the most part, effective enough. It's not about preventing all kids from ever getting their hands on this stuff. It's about limiting it to as small an amount as possible, to ensure that as many kids grow up to be productive members of society as possible.
Some parents don't want their kids eating sugary snacks. So, should we pass a law making it illegal for grocery stores to sell candy to anyone under 18 without parental permission?
Some parents don't want their kids learning about evolution, either. Should we pass another law making it illegal for bookstores to sell science textbooks to anyone under 18 without parental permission?
Now we're getting to straw-man territory. Science hasn't shown conclusively whether violent games affect the mental, emotional, or behavioral development of kids. Candy, however, is pretty harmless. Kids buying candy to eat won't lead to obesity. It's the junk food, fatty meals, etc., that parents supply their children.
Not all do. In fact, I regularly see kids which are obviously underage purchasing M rated games at several Gamestop and Wal-Mart stores. Hence, the need for government regulation (IMO).
You have a point, and I forgot to mention that in my comment. Parents need to teach their kids how to make wise decisions. It needs to be up to the parents, though, when a child is mature enough to play certain games. That means the parents need to control distribution by being the ones to purchase them for the kids. To do that, it needs to be illegal for stores to sell the games to kids. That takes the power away from the retailers and the kids, and gives it to the parents, who can control what their kids play while teaching them how to make wise decisions.
Kids do mature at different rates. That's why I believe that certain things should be permissable in practice, but not in distribution. It should be permissable for kids to PLAY violent games, if their parents buy it for them, but not for kids to BUY the games themselves. I agree with you. If we lived in a perfect world, kids would be able to determine for themselves when the best time for them to start playing those games is. Unfortunately, the human brain doesn't mature like that.
I agree, it is better to equip kids with the tools they need to make better decisions.
As a side note, I am more inclined to believe that kids are not on the streets because they find games and the internet to be more interesting than playing with their friends. My favorite hobby has always been gaming, so don't mistake me for simply being a hater.
You're looking at a very small portion of the population. Until you've had to parent a child with a naturally unruly and disobedient personality, you can't understand why these laws are necessary. You and I were faily well-bahaved kids. My sister, however, was not.
I know for a fact that my parents didn't do anything different with my sister, yet she has turned out to be a horrible person. I'm pleasantly surprised that she hasn't done time in prison, yet. She had the same rules and restrictions that I did. My parents disciplined her the same way, albeit more often due to her behavioral problems. Somehow, I went to university, graduated, obey the law, and have become an all around productive member of society, unlike her. She barely graduated HS by going to night school, was married and divorced by 21, knocked up by her boyfriend at 22, has had run-ins with the law, and is the biggest self-entitled, abusive jerk you can imagine. She's Brittany Spears, without the money or fame.
Violent games have nothing to do with how my sister turned out, but I guarantee that if selling alcohol to 16-year-olds was legal, she would have killed someone in a drunk driving accident before her 18th birthday. I hate to think what would have happened to her if the sale of illicit drugs was legal.
It's a proven medical fact that the parts of the human brain which control executive, long-term, decision making, are not fully developed until around 20 years of age. That's why the collective experience of society has determined, over the millenia, that 18 and 21 years of age are the key ages for granting freedoms. If my sister was permitted, by law, to purchase things that are currently outlawed for minors, she would not have had the mental capacity to make the wise decision to stay away from them; my parents wouldn't have been able to enforce any rule to prevent her from obtaining them, and she would be a much, much worse person than she is today.
With some kids, you can be as loving as Christ, as harsh as a drill instructor, have complete omniscience, or be anywhere in-between, and the kid will still be unruly, disobedient, and a general drag on society. It really does take a village to raise a child, and in today's society, that means laws which are enforced.
But parents can't be aware of what their children are doing 100% of the time. It's a LOT easier to control distribution at the point of sale, rather than at the point of consumption. If a parent tells their kid they are not allowed to purchase or play a certain game, can that parent ensure that their 15-year-old kid won't still buy that game when said parent tells their kid "yes, you may go to the mall with your friends"? 1,000 parents, enforcing a self-ban on violent games for their 1,500 kids isn't nearly as effective as 100 retailers being banned from selling them to those kids. If the parents want their kids to have access to those games, then they can still buy GTA 9 for Johnny's birthday.