One thing that pisses me of, is that, Microsoft guys should make Service Packs that improve the functionallity of the software, and not only patches system bugs. For example, this so called "Everyone is a User " model could have easly been implemented with the installation of a service pack, just changing the pollicies. Or even the super duper User Interface, it will only be a DirectX-10 install and a Service Patch to add the UI functions.
Not intentionally being an apologist, but: your proposal lacks a revenue model.
I read your comment earlier today. Now, I'm playing GTA: Vice City, listening to Lazlow on VRock, and he just had a caller who complained that Lazlow was playing soft rock; Lazlow's response was "If you don't like what we play, just start you own radio station. It's easy!"
When I heard that tonight (which I've heard before), I was immediately reminded of your post; Laszlo was apparently being extremely sarcastic, as I don't think the landscape has changed much since 2002 (when the game was made).
I don't think you'll eliminate pedophilia without eliminating all humans. It's a simple equation, and evidence can be seen in the animal kingdom:
1. Females cannot be impregnated for some time after birth (there are (at least) two reproductive stages in the female's lifecycle).
2. Males prefer to raise children of their own creation (otherwise they're spending their own resources to support someone else's genes--sure, adoption works, even in the animal kingdom, but it's not the rule).
3. If a male impregnates a female the instant she is able to, then his genes will be carried on by the offspring.
4. If a male attempts to impregnate a day later, then the chances that another male has impregnated are higher, and not only is the sex act wasted energy, any additional energy the male spends in child-rearing is wasted energy as well (from the perspective of the male's genes).
5. If a male attempts to impregnate a day earlier, then only the sex act is wasted energy.
Therefore, males tend to "prefer" to err on the side of "too early" because it results in the least wasted energy/resources. One day early will not matter much, on a human time-scale; a few years likely will matter, in terms of potential scarring (physically and emotionally).
I've been modded down when presenting the above equation before. I don't mind another down-mod, but I would like an explanation: what in the above is inaccurate?
What about having the government perform the victim profiling?
If the government can find the victims before the criminals do, then the government can alert the victims (and their parents) about a potential threat. Or, how to teach their child proper online behavior.
OT: I've watched "at the end of the day" rise from somewhat silly to a Power Statement(TM) in about a year and a half. Perhaps two years.
I still think it's silly: at the end of the day, you're a dollar richer. At the end of the day, you're fucking tired and probably drunk. At the end of the day, tomorrow's still a day away. At the end of the day, it's too dark to see. At the end of the day, you're in bed (hopefully not alone).
It has replaced "the bottom line" which doesn't make sense: when has accounting gone out of style to upper management?
Perhaps it's just bundas that have gone out of style? Americans are enamored of tits anyway, so perhaps it's just a different way of continuing the metaphor "we're all gonna get laid!"?
And that brings me nicely back on topic: sneaking in the back door must be what went out of style. For everyone except politicians, that is.
Then it's the USPS (United States Postal Service) that's scanning the mail and selling (likely) both the to and from addresses.
Wow, they can even insert "relationships" into their database by seeing who is corresponding with whom.
My bet is against the IRS, simply because they take so long to process; but you're right, it could be the "receiving office". And even if it's not the IRS, you're still right that it's "your government" doing it, as the USPS is not privatized (and is still relevant only by force: there are laws preventing FedEx and UPS from delivering first-class mail).
You're absolutely right about the intent. It was the intent of the framers of the Constitution that an artist would not be able to live their entire life on one work.
That is, unless they lived less than 17 years.
It was an incentive to continue to perform -- not an incentive to sit back and collect.
Things like that, I think, are going to become more common. If they can charge the man with some crime associated with his wife's suicide, then they can force him to pay for her medical assistance (if any) and body disposal (if any).
The government needs cash. We've spent far more on the war than we'll get back even if we make Iraq the 51st state; the funding needs to come from somewhere, and I fear that it will come from within.
Those tools don't account for out-of-band communications. Like two griefers sitting in the same room, or talking on the telephone. As long as they're careful (like the afore-mentioned terrorists) never to use in-band communications, they're much less likely to be red flagged by the tools.
As another responder pointed out, they could have been smart about it and created the source images in ridiculously high resolution, knowing that they would make this one the most talked-about game to ever come out since it would be delayed so long.
They could even have purchased, in good faith, licensing contracts for game engines, and had their developers do something else. So the money spent on the developer salaries wouldn't have been wasted; they'd have received value for that time purchased, on other projects. And those licenses are, as you said, six figures, so on average $500,000 but more likely closer to half that. Even at a million, that's only $6 million spent to get the type of advertising that regularly lands articles on Slashdot.
I really like that idea, that they knew what they were doing from the start. As in, knew that the engine was not available at the current technology level to produce the game that they envisioned, so they put together a team to begin the design, and just waited until technology caught up for them to wow us with their story.
I agree with you, that plot makes all the difference in a game.
To use a different example, I'm currently replaying Halo and Halo 2 on my Xbox. And I'm not skipping the cut scenes -- to me, it's like a 30-hour movie.
Most likely, because I just can't convince myself to play anything other than the Easy level -- because then the cut scenes are that much further apart.;-) So my behavior definitely agrees with your frantic enemy theory.
[...] she isn't managing technology, she's betraying her work force [...]
"Her work force" is an expense. She's trying to minimize expenses, so that the corporation can survive longer.
Management is not beholden to the employee. Management is beholden to the shareholders, or if the company is private, to the investors.
While it's possible that some employees are shareholders/investors, it's rare that all employees consist of all the shareholders/investors. Therefore, there are interests that the company must uphold which are not the same as the interests of the employees.
I'm not saying that this is right or wrong. This is the way the world works, and ranting against it won't help us in the short term. Longer term it may help get the laws changed so that industry grinds to a halt, but in the short term, it'll only serve to reduce one's employability.
The good news is that at Slashdot we can at least rant semi-anonymously.
And, I disagree that the return to the shareholders is short term. It will reflect in the balance books every quarter from here out, assuming that the new employees actually can do the same job for less. I've seen outsourced projects that withered and died; and I've seen ones that succeeded. (I.e., same as American companies; some succeed, some die.)
Justice done under the cover of anonymity has less chance of you being a victim of revenge.
Sucks that it's like that, since in America we're supposed to have the right to face our accusers, but I can see it working like this: have the GF confirm that it's your cell phone, then walk away. Have the GF (from inside your car) call the cops. Keep an eye on the guy, follow him if he drives off, keep your distance.
The drug stuff is bonus, and greatly reduces the chances that reporting his stolen cell phone will result in him being targetted; more likely the arresting officer will bear the brunt of the criminal's ire, and there won't be much the criminal can do at that point.
Of course, this guy is entering police academy soon, so the likelihood that he's been bulking up lately would explain the aggression and traffic-dancing. (Probably not using roids, since they'd likely test for that, but who knows?)
I completely agree: it is all, and only, numbers. I really enjoyed some of the mods for Quake, only a few of which were pornographic.
I would actually do the opposite of what you suggested: I would make games that could easily be modified (perhaps including some sort of scripting engine in them, even for console games; typing would be difficult but I can envision some sort of input system that used all the controls to efficiently enter words and characters).
Then, using that engine, I would create innocuous games. Like Spore. I wouldn't even need to encourage developers to make inappropriate mods; it will happen regardless of my communications. Perhaps, actually, using your suggestion, since then I'll have put the idea into people's heads while being plausibly deniable about it. (Which, after having typed all this, I realize was your point. So I feel a bit stupid, but I'll post this anyway in case others didn't quite get you...)
It wasn't really porno, though. The dude was clothed. It was more like a strip club.
And all the previous versions of the game had the feature where, if you just sat in the car (so you could listen to the hilarious talk radio, of course), a hooker would walk up and jump in. The car would start shaking, with moaning, and your money would start going down, a dollar a second or so. After a bit (the shaking getting faster, then stopping), the hooker would get out. (And then you could kill her and get your money back.)
I really, really don't understand why this is not more offensive to them than getting in on with your girlfriend in the privacy of a house (and not killing her). It's just funny to me, but I can't really wrap my mind around their logic.
Slashdot Mirror
Not intentionally being an apologist, but: your proposal lacks a revenue model.
I read your comment earlier today. Now, I'm playing GTA: Vice City, listening to Lazlow on VRock, and he just had a caller who complained that Lazlow was playing soft rock; Lazlow's response was "If you don't like what we play, just start you own radio station. It's easy!"
When I heard that tonight (which I've heard before), I was immediately reminded of your post; Laszlo was apparently being extremely sarcastic, as I don't think the landscape has changed much since 2002 (when the game was made).
I don't think you'll eliminate pedophilia without eliminating all humans. It's a simple equation, and evidence can be seen in the animal kingdom:
1. Females cannot be impregnated for some time after birth (there are (at least) two reproductive stages in the female's lifecycle).
2. Males prefer to raise children of their own creation (otherwise they're spending their own resources to support someone else's genes--sure, adoption works, even in the animal kingdom, but it's not the rule).
3. If a male impregnates a female the instant she is able to, then his genes will be carried on by the offspring.
4. If a male attempts to impregnate a day later, then the chances that another male has impregnated are higher, and not only is the sex act wasted energy, any additional energy the male spends in child-rearing is wasted energy as well (from the perspective of the male's genes).
5. If a male attempts to impregnate a day earlier, then only the sex act is wasted energy.
Therefore, males tend to "prefer" to err on the side of "too early" because it results in the least wasted energy/resources. One day early will not matter much, on a human time-scale; a few years likely will matter, in terms of potential scarring (physically and emotionally).
I've been modded down when presenting the above equation before. I don't mind another down-mod, but I would like an explanation: what in the above is inaccurate?
What about having the government perform the victim profiling?
If the government can find the victims before the criminals do, then the government can alert the victims (and their parents) about a potential threat. Or, how to teach their child proper online behavior.
That was actually an excellent song by The Refreshments.
OT: I've watched "at the end of the day" rise from somewhat silly to a Power Statement(TM) in about a year and a half. Perhaps two years.
I still think it's silly: at the end of the day, you're a dollar richer. At the end of the day, you're fucking tired and probably drunk. At the end of the day, tomorrow's still a day away. At the end of the day, it's too dark to see. At the end of the day, you're in bed (hopefully not alone).
It has replaced "the bottom line" which doesn't make sense: when has accounting gone out of style to upper management?
Perhaps it's just bundas that have gone out of style? Americans are enamored of tits anyway, so perhaps it's just a different way of continuing the metaphor "we're all gonna get laid!"?
And that brings me nicely back on topic: sneaking in the back door must be what went out of style. For everyone except politicians, that is.
Neat juxtaposition:
Sig says: "Hi... I'm English."
Last four words say: " [...] marketer woulr work out."
Then it's the USPS (United States Postal Service) that's scanning the mail and selling (likely) both the to and from addresses.
Wow, they can even insert "relationships" into their database by seeing who is corresponding with whom.
My bet is against the IRS, simply because they take so long to process; but you're right, it could be the "receiving office". And even if it's not the IRS, you're still right that it's "your government" doing it, as the USPS is not privatized (and is still relevant only by force: there are laws preventing FedEx and UPS from delivering first-class mail).
You're absolutely right about the intent. It was the intent of the framers of the Constitution that an artist would not be able to live their entire life on one work.
That is, unless they lived less than 17 years.
It was an incentive to continue to perform -- not an incentive to sit back and collect.
1. They're training soldiers for the upcoming war on Iran.
2. "Get ... the ... boy!!!!"
Actually, that's all I had.
Things like that, I think, are going to become more common. If they can charge the man with some crime associated with his wife's suicide, then they can force him to pay for her medical assistance (if any) and body disposal (if any).
The government needs cash. We've spent far more on the war than we'll get back even if we make Iraq the 51st state; the funding needs to come from somewhere, and I fear that it will come from within.
Those tools don't account for out-of-band communications. Like two griefers sitting in the same room, or talking on the telephone. As long as they're careful (like the afore-mentioned terrorists) never to use in-band communications, they're much less likely to be red flagged by the tools.
As another responder pointed out, they could have been smart about it and created the source images in ridiculously high resolution, knowing that they would make this one the most talked-about game to ever come out since it would be delayed so long.
They could even have purchased, in good faith, licensing contracts for game engines, and had their developers do something else. So the money spent on the developer salaries wouldn't have been wasted; they'd have received value for that time purchased, on other projects. And those licenses are, as you said, six figures, so on average $500,000 but more likely closer to half that. Even at a million, that's only $6 million spent to get the type of advertising that regularly lands articles on Slashdot.
I really like that idea, that they knew what they were doing from the start. As in, knew that the engine was not available at the current technology level to produce the game that they envisioned, so they put together a team to begin the design, and just waited until technology caught up for them to wow us with their story.
I agree with you, that plot makes all the difference in a game.
To use a different example, I'm currently replaying Halo and Halo 2 on my Xbox. And I'm not skipping the cut scenes -- to me, it's like a 30-hour movie.
Most likely, because I just can't convince myself to play anything other than the Easy level -- because then the cut scenes are that much further apart. ;-) So my behavior definitely agrees with your frantic enemy theory.
I realized I had replied to this thread (not you specifically), and totally missed the subject reference. Hooray for boobies! ;-)
Absolutely! Ignorance may be bliss, but being informed can help you get out of town in time to save your life.
They should import their potable water from Ireland, like the rest of us.
Like Quagmire's "Cross Country Wanna-bang-O" -- "Doesn't country have an 'o' in it?"
"Her work force" is an expense. She's trying to minimize expenses, so that the corporation can survive longer.
Management is not beholden to the employee. Management is beholden to the shareholders, or if the company is private, to the investors.
While it's possible that some employees are shareholders/investors, it's rare that all employees consist of all the shareholders/investors. Therefore, there are interests that the company must uphold which are not the same as the interests of the employees.
I'm not saying that this is right or wrong. This is the way the world works, and ranting against it won't help us in the short term. Longer term it may help get the laws changed so that industry grinds to a halt, but in the short term, it'll only serve to reduce one's employability.
The good news is that at Slashdot we can at least rant semi-anonymously.
And, I disagree that the return to the shareholders is short term. It will reflect in the balance books every quarter from here out, assuming that the new employees actually can do the same job for less. I've seen outsourced projects that withered and died; and I've seen ones that succeeded. (I.e., same as American companies; some succeed, some die.)
Sucks that it's like that, since in America we're supposed to have the right to face our accusers, but I can see it working like this: have the GF confirm that it's your cell phone, then walk away. Have the GF (from inside your car) call the cops. Keep an eye on the guy, follow him if he drives off, keep your distance.
The drug stuff is bonus, and greatly reduces the chances that reporting his stolen cell phone will result in him being targetted; more likely the arresting officer will bear the brunt of the criminal's ire, and there won't be much the criminal can do at that point.
Of course, this guy is entering police academy soon, so the likelihood that he's been bulking up lately would explain the aggression and traffic-dancing. (Probably not using roids, since they'd likely test for that, but who knows?)
I read that as "arm" and then "damn man, I thought you meant, like, fingers or hands; take the whole arm? That's heartless."
I completely agree: it is all, and only, numbers. I really enjoyed some of the mods for Quake, only a few of which were pornographic.
I would actually do the opposite of what you suggested: I would make games that could easily be modified (perhaps including some sort of scripting engine in them, even for console games; typing would be difficult but I can envision some sort of input system that used all the controls to efficiently enter words and characters).
Then, using that engine, I would create innocuous games. Like Spore. I wouldn't even need to encourage developers to make inappropriate mods; it will happen regardless of my communications. Perhaps, actually, using your suggestion, since then I'll have put the idea into people's heads while being plausibly deniable about it. (Which, after having typed all this, I realize was your point. So I feel a bit stupid, but I'll post this anyway in case others didn't quite get you...)
It wasn't really porno, though. The dude was clothed. It was more like a strip club.
And all the previous versions of the game had the feature where, if you just sat in the car (so you could listen to the hilarious talk radio, of course), a hooker would walk up and jump in. The car would start shaking, with moaning, and your money would start going down, a dollar a second or so. After a bit (the shaking getting faster, then stopping), the hooker would get out. (And then you could kill her and get your money back.)
I really, really don't understand why this is not more offensive to them than getting in on with your girlfriend in the privacy of a house (and not killing her). It's just funny to me, but I can't really wrap my mind around their logic.
Then, for them, it's working.