...and parents everywhere scorn the moral perversity that he brings to their children and to the general culture. The year was 1956; young teens everywhere were easily corrupted by his swaying mid-section and his sexual intimations, and the parental populace was outraged.
This isn't a new inroad into the development of societal and cultural abnormalities, and their adoption into general society; this happens all the time with culture, it is how it expands and grows. Whether religious outrages, musical inventions and divas, or video games; cultural changes often represent subcultures which are likely scorned before gaining acceptance. Many times they are simply fads that come and go, and other times they are changed and instituted into the definition of a culture. Either way, it is assimilated by the system by some extent, and helps to expand our definition of society. Video games will be percieved as bad, evil and wrong for a long time, and this is what drives its sub-culture for many people. I predict that it will eventually become accepted more generally by society and its violent imagery may change...or maybe it will continue to be it's driving force. Either way, we must realize that games are here to stay, and if we don't like their atmosphere we must work to change it.
All that you say is just to say "It's new, there's no way it can change culture or society". THAT is obtuse and an incredibly negative viewpoint. All aspects of any culture by definition define it, that is the point of culture. television helps define our culture, mass media helps to define our culture...democracy helps to define our culture and ALL of these are 'simply specs' in the 15,000 years you seem to think is the state-length of our culture.
Now notice this makes no mention of our underlying values changing...culture and values have some relationship with each other, but in that our values help to define our culture, and sometimes vice versa. But they are not the same...to say that Rock & Roll has no effect in our culture is tantamount to absurdity....but you are basically saying this with video games. However, I don't suggest that video games will change our moral values, at least not without slow progression. Rap music often glorifies (or makes conscious notice of, depending on your opinions of it) concepts of murder and other typically 'evil' things as acceptable and often desirable. Rap music is for many of us a part of our culture in a way, even if we dont ascribe to it...but it hasn't changed my moral views on these things, and arguably one could say it hasn't for those who ascribe to it either (that innately or environmentally they have the propensity towards such value in regards to the cultural whole of their environment).
Anyways, you cannot say that some significant aspect of what people do in day to day activity does NOT affect our culture. Television is an influence in our culture, no matter how you try to deny it, we all know it is. It is a rather new medium...so? that does not detract from its existence and effects. Would you say the internet hasn't changed culture? I dare you.
that would be:
Up, Right, Right, Down, Down, Down, Left, Left, Left, Left, B, A, Start
...err thats for extra lives at least, the most useful of the cheats
To think that 'some pimply kids twitching and flicking themselves into early carpal tunnel syndrome' is all that the recent interest in interactive story-driven environments is, much less that it has and will have no affect on cultural development and the methodology of learning and progression is ignorant outright. Video games have a very strong influence on a very large and growing percentage of the population of our country. That's like stating that TV is this new thing that only rich people use and it wont ever replace or change radio.
The future of entertainment will develop into a more interactive environment where users decide outcomes in increasingly chaotic story-threaded algorythms. Watching a movie once or five times can be great but 100 might be stretching it. Hopefully in the near future a game will be something you can sit down and play endlessly, and have no fear of 'beating' if properly done. This is the strong interest in online gaming and why PC game companies like id and Epic have recently focused on online multiplayer games; these unfortunately lack the story to gain the interest of many older/more 'serious' gamers but I suspect that is changing already. Games and gamers help define our culture at this point and taking advantage of the obvious interests of people who play games is good for companies (money) and can also be beneficial to parents and teachers in general (learning). I don't think this represents a monoculture at all, it displays one of the developing cultural changes brought about by the advent of technology and we should all appreciate it.
Communism is an economic viewpoint in my mind...I never understood why communism and democracy couldn't coexist...replace capitalism with communism, and create a true form of democracy then its fine right? course...good luck getting it to work =/
I also remember that character...it wasn't 3-2-1 contact thought I'm sure of that...are you SURE it wasn't the electric company? I cant remember any others like that besides sesame street and it sure as hell wasn't THAT....
yes, that's nice you're obviously a science major. now, where does that energy come from originally? what drives it and keeps it persistent since it's lost in sound, erosion and many other subtle things? the moon..and the moons not going anywhere. Stop this silly discussion on the effect this would have on the net energy of our environments, it is unfounded and ridiculous to speak of it. Read a little more about energy in systems before trying to preach mmk?
Actually Intel is planning on releasing the 1.4 at $625 base price...which is something like $20 more than the current price for 1.2 Tbird IIRC..
This isn't gonna be about price, its gonna be about 2 things. Availabilty (volume) and public perception (which Intel has a strong userbase backing because of its more public image and persistence in the market).
but its good to see competition in the market, We shouldn't be rooting for AMD or Intel, but rather both at the same time...technology advances with great competition
and how is he misusing that statement anyways? beg the question does mean invite the question...interpreted vernacular language evolutionary practices; Ipso Facto.
Please explain the correlation between Machiaveli and Bill Gates? I know both, so maybe it's just something I didn't catch? (beyond thirst for power which is arguable here IMO)
You sound like a religious salesman: The Revolution(tm) is coming, repent from your sins or you will be destroyed evil miscreant corporations!
Come now, I would like to think that an intellectual community like/. would avoid vague overgeneralizations and obscure theological threats at companies to change their ways 'or else'...keep at it that way, your revolution will never occur...
and btw, not everyone is fooled into thinking the internet is a 'revolution'..its a communications system, where did politics enter into that one?
The reason this doesn't happen is because our politicians aren't honest about how they vote. They use public polling to discover popular opinion, run with that mentality, and once elected vote the way that curries the most favor at that time in that legislative body. Now sure a few don't but honestly, just 1 would be too many. So...how do we clean up this country (and specifically the legislative body)? Any ideas?
I'd like to think Clinton did a better job that Dubya is about to do (PLEASE VOTE AGAINST HIM!) but I'm not sure. He made some mistakes but truthfully, the majority of the people who are disgusted with his behavior are hardcore republicans so he doesn't really care because those people were already polarized against him.
I think this speaks very strongly towards the nature of the openness of our country. In many situations, the national government chooses to keep certain information secret, supposedly to protect the state of the government, and its peoples. Now to state that any government should be completely open is a silly suggestion; there are many secrets that are worth keeping in order to ensure the security of the country. To be outright against such privacy in regards to the power of the state is ignorant in my opinion.
I do however understand the objections that arise in the present situation and in regards to how it has been handled in the recent past of this country. Some secrets that have been kept do not need keeping and corruption or political maneuvering to mask mistakes are most likely the cause of many of these. The fact that the recent deal with Russia was kept secret (albeit a part of the agreement which I cannot understand Russia caring about) in regards to sales to Iran of arms and other things including a submarine should not have been kept secret from the people of the U.S, much less the senate! This seems to be an attempt to mask a politically unfavored action. Luckily the media uncovered this story and we now know about it. But would you favor someone leaking information to the public regarding the military deployment of our factions in a hostile situation, and having the person who leaked that information not recieve major repercussions?
I think the government needs to reform its moral values before something like this bill passes but I don't think in a better situation federally, that it would be a bad thing.
I agree with most of what you've said here. How do you think commercialization of space exploration would affect the successes and rates at which things in that field progress? Would NASA suffer from federal or privatized competition? Or would it attempt to flounder such competition in negative lights so as to decrease their funding models? I'm not sure at this point myself...
why not put it into a stable orbit in one of the 2 spots between the earth and the moon where gravitational effects are null. Then it wouldn't require boosts and it wouldn't cost that much to put it there.
The supposition is that exploration and yearning for advancement that isn't explicitely financially rewarding in the immediate vicinity creates the advancements of technology that expand the depth of the growth of financial markets and gives us something to look up to beyond just next week's paycheck. I'm all for spending my tax dollars on things like this but I don't think it is generating enough interest in the public sector and should be privatized (with strict rules on ownership et al enforced strongly, which is a fear we should have). If we didn't yearn to explore, many things in history would have changed. Columbus wouldn't likely make more money using his new route to India which he was exploring, but it would have been worth it in the long run if it was discovered. When it was discovered to not be any route to india, explorations continued and eventually people came to live here (and not for financial reasons either, technically). I thank them for that because now we have this continent which we occupy (and stole from other peoples, unfortunately).
Go to mars? why not...for oil? uh duh, course not...thats not economically feasible in even the most abstract thinking. For the advancement of technology, the technological market, and for the advancement of human understanding in general? Yes.
Re:How can Russia donate money to keep up the Mir?
on
Mir Lives
·
· Score: 1
More like you delegating the necessary amount of blood to your hand so that it is able to lift the sandwich to your mouth.
Slashdot Mirror
Just out of curiosity, were you a kid when the Empire State building was built?
The trend has been going the other way for a while now; cars, computers, apartments, etc...
I think the exciting prospect is building large things with small things (micro/nano tech etc) in large arrays. If only I could live that long.
...and parents everywhere scorn the moral perversity that he brings to their children and to the general culture. The year was 1956; young teens everywhere were easily corrupted by his swaying mid-section and his sexual intimations, and the parental populace was outraged.
This isn't a new inroad into the development of societal and cultural abnormalities, and their adoption into general society; this happens all the time with culture, it is how it expands and grows. Whether religious outrages, musical inventions and divas, or video games; cultural changes often represent subcultures which are likely scorned before gaining acceptance. Many times they are simply fads that come and go, and other times they are changed and instituted into the definition of a culture. Either way, it is assimilated by the system by some extent, and helps to expand our definition of society. Video games will be percieved as bad, evil and wrong for a long time, and this is what drives its sub-culture for many people. I predict that it will eventually become accepted more generally by society and its violent imagery may change...or maybe it will continue to be it's driving force. Either way, we must realize that games are here to stay, and if we don't like their atmosphere we must work to change it.
All that you say is just to say "It's new, there's no way it can change culture or society". THAT is obtuse and an incredibly negative viewpoint. All aspects of any culture by definition define it, that is the point of culture. television helps define our culture, mass media helps to define our culture...democracy helps to define our culture and ALL of these are 'simply specs' in the 15,000 years you seem to think is the state-length of our culture.
Now notice this makes no mention of our underlying values changing...culture and values have some relationship with each other, but in that our values help to define our culture, and sometimes vice versa. But they are not the same...to say that Rock & Roll has no effect in our culture is tantamount to absurdity....but you are basically saying this with video games. However, I don't suggest that video games will change our moral values, at least not without slow progression. Rap music often glorifies (or makes conscious notice of, depending on your opinions of it) concepts of murder and other typically 'evil' things as acceptable and often desirable. Rap music is for many of us a part of our culture in a way, even if we dont ascribe to it...but it hasn't changed my moral views on these things, and arguably one could say it hasn't for those who ascribe to it either (that innately or environmentally they have the propensity towards such value in regards to the cultural whole of their environment).
Anyways, you cannot say that some significant aspect of what people do in day to day activity does NOT affect our culture. Television is an influence in our culture, no matter how you try to deny it, we all know it is. It is a rather new medium...so? that does not detract from its existence and effects. Would you say the internet hasn't changed culture? I dare you.
did you ever beat it with 3 lives?
me and my friends probably beat contra with 30 lives 100 times over. it was fun, we were like 10
that would be: Up, Right, Right, Down, Down, Down, Left, Left, Left, Left, B, A, Start
...err thats for extra lives at least, the most useful of the cheats
To think that 'some pimply kids twitching and flicking themselves into early carpal tunnel syndrome' is all that the recent interest in interactive story-driven environments is, much less that it has and will have no affect on cultural development and the methodology of learning and progression is ignorant outright. Video games have a very strong influence on a very large and growing percentage of the population of our country. That's like stating that TV is this new thing that only rich people use and it wont ever replace or change radio.
The future of entertainment will develop into a more interactive environment where users decide outcomes in increasingly chaotic story-threaded algorythms. Watching a movie once or five times can be great but 100 might be stretching it. Hopefully in the near future a game will be something you can sit down and play endlessly, and have no fear of 'beating' if properly done. This is the strong interest in online gaming and why PC game companies like id and Epic have recently focused on online multiplayer games; these unfortunately lack the story to gain the interest of many older/more 'serious' gamers but I suspect that is changing already. Games and gamers help define our culture at this point and taking advantage of the obvious interests of people who play games is good for companies (money) and can also be beneficial to parents and teachers in general (learning). I don't think this represents a monoculture at all, it displays one of the developing cultural changes brought about by the advent of technology and we should all appreciate it.
Communism is an economic viewpoint in my mind...I never understood why communism and democracy couldn't coexist...replace capitalism with communism, and create a true form of democracy then its fine right? course...good luck getting it to work =/
I also remember that character...it wasn't 3-2-1 contact thought I'm sure of that...are you SURE it wasn't the electric company? I cant remember any others like that besides sesame street and it sure as hell wasn't THAT....
Let me know if you figure it out
yes, that's nice you're obviously a science major. now, where does that energy come from originally? what drives it and keeps it persistent since it's lost in sound, erosion and many other subtle things? the moon..and the moons not going anywhere. Stop this silly discussion on the effect this would have on the net energy of our environments, it is unfounded and ridiculous to speak of it. Read a little more about energy in systems before trying to preach mmk?
Yeah well p4 isn't out yet so of course it's price will be alot higher
Actually Intel is planning on releasing the 1.4 at $625 base price...which is something like $20 more than the current price for 1.2 Tbird IIRC..
This isn't gonna be about price, its gonna be about 2 things. Availabilty (volume) and public perception (which Intel has a strong userbase backing because of its more public image and persistence in the market).
but its good to see competition in the market, We shouldn't be rooting for AMD or Intel, but rather both at the same time...technology advances with great competition
You mean Datafage not Taco.
and how is he misusing that statement anyways? beg the question does mean invite the question...interpreted vernacular language evolutionary practices; Ipso Facto.
Please explain the correlation between Machiaveli and Bill Gates? I know both, so maybe it's just something I didn't catch? (beyond thirst for power which is arguable here IMO)
You sound like a religious salesman: The Revolution(tm) is coming, repent from your sins or you will be destroyed evil miscreant corporations!
/. would avoid vague overgeneralizations and obscure theological threats at companies to change their ways 'or else'...keep at it that way, your revolution will never occur...
Come now, I would like to think that an intellectual community like
and btw, not everyone is fooled into thinking the internet is a 'revolution'..its a communications system, where did politics enter into that one?
The reason this doesn't happen is because our politicians aren't honest about how they vote. They use public polling to discover popular opinion, run with that mentality, and once elected vote the way that curries the most favor at that time in that legislative body. Now sure a few don't but honestly, just 1 would be too many. So...how do we clean up this country (and specifically the legislative body)? Any ideas?
Never underestimate the power of the letter j
I'd like to think Clinton did a better job that Dubya is about to do (PLEASE VOTE AGAINST HIM!) but I'm not sure. He made some mistakes but truthfully, the majority of the people who are disgusted with his behavior are hardcore republicans so he doesn't really care because those people were already polarized against him.
Now this is off-topic, -1
Never underestimate the power of the letter j
I think this speaks very strongly towards the nature of the openness of our country. In many situations, the national government chooses to keep certain information secret, supposedly to protect the state of the government, and its peoples. Now to state that any government should be completely open is a silly suggestion; there are many secrets that are worth keeping in order to ensure the security of the country. To be outright against such privacy in regards to the power of the state is ignorant in my opinion.
I do however understand the objections that arise in the present situation and in regards to how it has been handled in the recent past of this country. Some secrets that have been kept do not need keeping and corruption or political maneuvering to mask mistakes are most likely the cause of many of these. The fact that the recent deal with Russia was kept secret (albeit a part of the agreement which I cannot understand Russia caring about) in regards to sales to Iran of arms and other things including a submarine should not have been kept secret from the people of the U.S, much less the senate! This seems to be an attempt to mask a politically unfavored action. Luckily the media uncovered this story and we now know about it. But would you favor someone leaking information to the public regarding the military deployment of our factions in a hostile situation, and having the person who leaked that information not recieve major repercussions?
I think the government needs to reform its moral values before something like this bill passes but I don't think in a better situation federally, that it would be a bad thing.
Never underestimate the power of the letter j
I agree with most of what you've said here. How do you think commercialization of space exploration would affect the successes and rates at which things in that field progress? Would NASA suffer from federal or privatized competition? Or would it attempt to flounder such competition in negative lights so as to decrease their funding models? I'm not sure at this point myself...
why not put it into a stable orbit in one of the 2 spots between the earth and the moon where gravitational effects are null. Then it wouldn't require boosts and it wouldn't cost that much to put it there.
NEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrddddd -- Homer Simpson
considering penguins jump out of water onto their bellies and then promptly stand up, I consider this a farse in its entirety.
G Bush Sr. said "Read my lips, no new taxes"
Dukakis said "Yes, I will raise taxes."
Bush won...he raised taxes. Honesty doesn't often work in politics, sadly enough.
I really dont wanna see that one crash =(
The supposition is that exploration and yearning for advancement that isn't explicitely financially rewarding in the immediate vicinity creates the advancements of technology that expand the depth of the growth of financial markets and gives us something to look up to beyond just next week's paycheck. I'm all for spending my tax dollars on things like this but I don't think it is generating enough interest in the public sector and should be privatized (with strict rules on ownership et al enforced strongly, which is a fear we should have). If we didn't yearn to explore, many things in history would have changed. Columbus wouldn't likely make more money using his new route to India which he was exploring, but it would have been worth it in the long run if it was discovered. When it was discovered to not be any route to india, explorations continued and eventually people came to live here (and not for financial reasons either, technically). I thank them for that because now we have this continent which we occupy (and stole from other peoples, unfortunately).
Go to mars? why not...for oil? uh duh, course not...thats not economically feasible in even the most abstract thinking. For the advancement of technology, the technological market, and for the advancement of human understanding in general? Yes.
More like you delegating the necessary amount of blood to your hand so that it is able to lift the sandwich to your mouth.