a girl i know has a 9 year old son who recently began guitar lessons. he became interested after playing Guitar Hero. also, i'm sure guitar hero doesn't not help with practical guitar skills (chord changes, strumming), but this kid seems to have picked up a good deal of skill when it comes to rhythm and tempo thanks to the game. he's actually rocking ass on a real guitar compared to others in his guitar class.
Pretty much the first thing that popped into my head as well.
Younger people are more into popular culture, which is heavily marketed on tele. They have more of a propensity to stay in touch. "Older people" are going to be far more "set" in their way and less influenced by ads.
Hence, as the parent suggests, their desire to purchase a DVR
How do you choose a moral framework to put on science then? Ultimately you're going to offend someone. I think what you mean is "Human beings need a moral framework.". Science is a method we utilize to understand the physical world. It should not give unnecessary weight to human compunction or self righteousness. Placing a moral framework on the method immediately reduces the benefits of that method.
When you begin to impose a "moral framework" on it, you get things like banning the teaching of evolution. You get crusades to defend the morally superior. You get jihads. You get unnecessary suffering wrought by people who have decided that simply, in reality, they don't agree with you.
If someone chooses to act outside the moral framework, it is to no detriment of you. Unless those actions quantitatively effect others in a negative way and not in a "Oo that makes me *feel* uncomfortable." they should be allowed the freedom to continue what they're doing.
Way to turn an individuals opinion into a generalized group mentality. I stand by what I wrote. Thank you for fixing it to fit a point of view that is more easily acceptable to you.
I submit that religion can have a profoundly positive impact on an individual. Personally, religions are usually seen as a means to an end - the end being manipulation and control of the population. Example A
Religion as a world-view for a person is great. Key to that is realizing it is that persons world-view. Not the world's. If other's share a similar world-view, then by all means get together and have a pow-wow to discuss your views.
I personally do not feel a desire to view the world via religious principles. I want to view it though experience, experimentation, extrapolation, discovery, etc. I hold these views to be mine and mine alone. I have friends and family that share similar view and we discuss them.
I do not feel the need to push these ideas onto others. I have no wish to see the exercise of religion banned or otherwise controlled by laws. However... Example BExample CExample D
No matter how counter to ones own beliefs, allowing everyone the free exercise of their beliefs is of utmost importance to me. Given the blatant desire by religious zealots to squash that for their own personal comfort, as my original comment suggested, I feel little weight should be given to religious views concerning the topic at hand. Partially because they're already well known; additionally because they tend to offer little in the way of leeway when it comes to constructive discussion. Especially concerning subjects like in the article.
"Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle." --Thomas Jefferson
This is where I was coming from with my original comment. Ones religion is between them and their God(s). Leave the rest of the world out of it.
The effects of religion have proven time and again to be more than overwhelmingly negative. They're only competition for motivation to reap atrocities on mankind is lust for money.
Point out where I said this wasn't an ethically ambiguous question? Granted my comment was made hastily; I was splitting my attention between 3 things. Given the detailed history of religious followers to shoot first and refuse to ask/answer questions later, I personally give little value to their opinions.
It would be just as easy to out-of-hand dismiss Slashdot users (the only group I can knowingly lump you into) as incapable of reasonable political debate. I'm not here to have reasonable political debate. This isn't a political forum. I'm not running for office. I want nothing to do with "politics".
What I'm saying is, I tire of religious rhetoric impacting the lives of those who do not follow a religious association. If to you this has ethical implications along religious principles, fine. To me it does not, to many others it does not. I have no desire to see science and the future of humanities advancement marginalized because somethings make people feel icky.
My beliefs are not your beliefs. Yours are not mine. Science should always recognize this accordingly and avoid being influenced by either.
I figure all religious beliefs on the topic should be thrown out before the discussion begins. Religion is responsible for more genocide than anything else. Today's rallying cry of "Save the babies!" is typically political babble to earn votes.
2) Stop posting on/. and see what you can to trim it down.
Re:not cost effective for the performance gain
on
DDR3 RAM Explained
·
· Score: 5, Informative
And to take it even further, that's just the cost of memory. A quick NewEgg search for DDR3 motherboard came up with a whopping 10 boards. The cheapest are 150 for open box items. The typical price is over 300.
I am insinuating you have no sense of humor and the joke flew over your head. However it was out of range before your brain could trigger the mechanism that tickles one's funny bone.
If you stick with this DRM scheme, I will only buy your game when I CANNOT find a hacked/cracked copy for download on the Internet (which I also promised I would not download:)).
This is better, or at least good enough for me to buy a copy now (which is cool I really wanted to play but have no plan to buy a 360 right now). So yea, I at least plan to buy it and follow through.
So it's your argument that it's your network and you should be able to control what data flows over it?
Hm, sounds like AT&T/Verizon/Comcast. I'll remember that next time net neutrality laws come up and everyone is talking about how the Internet should be unfettered by business interests.
How do you "steal" bandwidth anyway? Is that like "stealing" an mp3?
That's one thing I discovered about Oregon, particularly the Portland area, that is a huge misnomer. I'm all about social liberalism and freedom to be yourself. However here it is more like "I want to be myself which means all these other things I should worry about but get in the way of me being 'me', I want someone else to take care of for me."
I'm from small town midwest, which has its share of quirks and ignorant tools. They're far easier to ignore though, since, in my experience, they by and large do their thing, see it as 'their thing' and accept the consequences.
I've gotten into some pretty heated 'debates' about it and have been on the end of some pretty vitriolic rants. Pretty ironic for people that started out claiming to be all peace loving and friendly "artists".
Slashdot Mirror
a girl i know has a 9 year old son who recently began guitar lessons. he became interested after playing Guitar Hero. also, i'm sure guitar hero doesn't not help with practical guitar skills (chord changes, strumming), but this kid seems to have picked up a good deal of skill when it comes to rhythm and tempo thanks to the game. he's actually rocking ass on a real guitar compared to others in his guitar class.
Microsoft not having any plans on May 14th 2008 to release a new X360 model before December 31, 2009 is front page news worthy?
Coolest screensaver ever. In the ~4 years since I first downloaded it, I've run it at work, on my laptop... always get positive comments.
http://www.electricsheep.org/
Pretty much the first thing that popped into my head as well.
Younger people are more into popular culture, which is heavily marketed on tele. They have more of a propensity to stay in touch. "Older people" are going to be far more "set" in their way and less influenced by ads.
Hence, as the parent suggests, their desire to purchase a DVR
PICS! or it didnt happen!!!!1
oh wait
How do you choose a moral framework to put on science then? Ultimately you're going to offend someone. I think what you mean is "Human beings need a moral framework.". Science is a method we utilize to understand the physical world. It should not give unnecessary weight to human compunction or self righteousness. Placing a moral framework on the method immediately reduces the benefits of that method.
When you begin to impose a "moral framework" on it, you get things like banning the teaching of evolution. You get crusades to defend the morally superior. You get jihads. You get unnecessary suffering wrought by people who have decided that simply, in reality, they don't agree with you.
If someone chooses to act outside the moral framework, it is to no detriment of you. Unless those actions quantitatively effect others in a negative way and not in a "Oo that makes me *feel* uncomfortable." they should be allowed the freedom to continue what they're doing.
Way to turn an individuals opinion into a generalized group mentality. I stand by what I wrote. Thank you for fixing it to fit a point of view that is more easily acceptable to you.
I submit that religion can have a profoundly positive impact on an individual. Personally, religions are usually seen as a means to an end - the end being manipulation and control of the population. Example A
Religion as a world-view for a person is great. Key to that is realizing it is that persons world-view. Not the world's. If other's share a similar world-view, then by all means get together and have a pow-wow to discuss your views.
I personally do not feel a desire to view the world via religious principles. I want to view it though experience, experimentation, extrapolation, discovery, etc. I hold these views to be mine and mine alone. I have friends and family that share similar view and we discuss them.
I do not feel the need to push these ideas onto others. I have no wish to see the exercise of religion banned or otherwise controlled by laws. However... Example B Example C Example D
No matter how counter to ones own beliefs, allowing everyone the free exercise of their beliefs is of utmost importance to me. Given the blatant desire by religious zealots to squash that for their own personal comfort, as my original comment suggested, I feel little weight should be given to religious views concerning the topic at hand. Partially because they're already well known; additionally because they tend to offer little in the way of leeway when it comes to constructive discussion. Especially concerning subjects like in the article.
"Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle." --Thomas Jefferson
This is where I was coming from with my original comment. Ones religion is between them and their God(s). Leave the rest of the world out of it.
Point out where I said this wasn't an ethically ambiguous question? Granted my comment was made hastily; I was splitting my attention between 3 things. Given the detailed history of religious followers to shoot first and refuse to ask/answer questions later, I personally give little value to their opinions. It would be just as easy to out-of-hand dismiss Slashdot users (the only group I can knowingly lump you into) as incapable of reasonable political debate. I'm not here to have reasonable political debate. This isn't a political forum. I'm not running for office. I want nothing to do with "politics".
What I'm saying is, I tire of religious rhetoric impacting the lives of those who do not follow a religious association. If to you this has ethical implications along religious principles, fine. To me it does not, to many others it does not. I have no desire to see science and the future of humanities advancement marginalized because somethings make people feel icky.
My beliefs are not your beliefs. Yours are not mine. Science should always recognize this accordingly and avoid being influenced by either.
I figure all religious beliefs on the topic should be thrown out before the discussion begins. Religion is responsible for more genocide than anything else. Today's rallying cry of "Save the babies!" is typically political babble to earn votes.
You should care about receiving. It's still fuckin' stupid.
The ultimate display of lazy/pretending we're so important we can't stop for 10 seconds.
Ask Slashdot?
Now that the code is available
/. and see what you can to trim it down.
1) Who cares?
2) Stop posting on
And to take it even further, that's just the cost of memory. A quick NewEgg search for DDR3 motherboard came up with a whopping 10 boards. The cheapest are 150 for open box items. The typical price is over 300.
I am insinuating you have no sense of humor and the joke flew over your head. However it was out of range before your brain could trigger the mechanism that tickles one's funny bone.
To paraphrase my quote on the Mass Effect forum:
:)).
If you stick with this DRM scheme, I will only buy your game when I CANNOT find a hacked/cracked copy for download on the Internet (which I also promised I would not download
This is better, or at least good enough for me to buy a copy now (which is cool I really wanted to play but have no plan to buy a 360 right now). So yea, I at least plan to buy it and follow through.
How much profit is there in perpetually paying attorney's fees?
So that means they will replace my copy if something happens to the disk and I cannot either re-install or run the software at a later time?
Just when I was considering purchasing Mass Effect. Guess not.
So it's your argument that it's your network and you should be able to control what data flows over it?
Hm, sounds like AT&T/Verizon/Comcast. I'll remember that next time net neutrality laws come up and everyone is talking about how the Internet should be unfettered by business interests.
How do you "steal" bandwidth anyway? Is that like "stealing" an mp3?
I realize this is a bit redundant now, but Darl, you're a fuckin' idiot.
That's one thing I discovered about Oregon, particularly the Portland area, that is a huge misnomer. I'm all about social liberalism and freedom to be yourself. However here it is more like "I want to be myself which means all these other things I should worry about but get in the way of me being 'me', I want someone else to take care of for me."
I'm from small town midwest, which has its share of quirks and ignorant tools. They're far easier to ignore though, since, in my experience, they by and large do their thing, see it as 'their thing' and accept the consequences.
I've gotten into some pretty heated 'debates' about it and have been on the end of some pretty vitriolic rants. Pretty ironic for people that started out claiming to be all peace loving and friendly "artists".