Should they be taught all the other creation myths around the world also?
They'd sure as hell better teach whatever nonsensical theories I can make up on the spot! After all, if I don't understand something, any random nonsense I make up that I think explains it must be as good as a scientific theory!
But then you shouldn't be a hypocrite and play the game anyway.
I'm confused about how that's hypocritical. I was talking about people who don't want to pay the developers/companies because they included DRM in the games, not people who say they don't like the games to begin with.
This also has nothing to do with cracking DRM.
what you're really doing is using an excuse to get stuff for free.
If you say you believe this, what you're really saying is that you don't believe this. There, I'm now pretending to be able to read your mind.
You can't actually say what other people believe.
and stand by your principles...and not play the game.
I didn't mention anything about not playing the games.
And why don't you grow up, and join the real world where not everyone has the same ideals and ideas regarding DRM.
I wish people would stop saying that people need to 'grow up' because they disagree with them. In any case, I don't think anyone here is saying that everyone has the same ideals and ideas regarding DRM, anyway.
At any rate, I can guarantee you that when they grown up (emotionally, mentally), that film may still touch their heart, but it will have dropped down a few notches or more in their top ten.
I don't believe that claiming that someone may agree with you at some unspecified point in the future is useful at all; doubly so when you do it because someone enjoys something that you don't enjoy as much as him/her. Perhaps it is you who needs to 'grow up' for not enjoying something as much as other people do; did you consider that?
Or what if people just tend to have different opinions and likes/dislikes, and it has nothing to do with being "grown up"? Well, unless you involve a magical opinion fairy, or your comment wasn't serious...
It looks like you just arbitrarily decided that your own standards are capable of objectively qualifying the quality of a piece of art. At any rate, I didn't see any proof that the matter is objective.
Examples of US citizens being denied the 4th amendment protections?
Warrantless wiretapping and people being molested at airports don't count? The latter happens in broad daylight, and if you think the government hasn't been using warrantless wiretapping despite the fact that they now think they have the power to, well, I don't know what to say.
The judicial segment of the US government provides remedies to those who feel their constitutional rights have been violated.
Except that the entire government is obsessed with safety over freedom; even the people don't seem to care.
It's not a perfect system but there are plenty of examples of legislative and executive branch laws being ruled illegal and overturned.
I wish they were overturned, but until they are, they'll stick around.
Stop using the words 'stealing' and 'taking' to describe copyright infringement; instead, use the word 'raping'. Using 'rape' to describe copyright infringement makes so much more sense because copyright infringement is almost as bad as a child running a lemonade stand without permission from the government, and we need to recognize it as such!
I don't see many people going to prison for this. In fact, it's difficult enough to catch people to even sue them! Given the nature of the Internet, punishing people based on ip addresses could harm innocents, too.
Oh, and let's not forget that the old punishment strategy is simply not working. Remember how prohibition failed miserably? Well, trying to stop people from copying certain data will also fail miserably, but the degree of failure will be an order of magnitude higher.
What the hell are they wasting people's tax dollars (through the courts) on? What the hell are they suing people over? Copying data? What a good use of time, money, and resources! Thank you for tackling this national security emergency!
Formal education environments always allow the student to work on their own in their free time.
Not without soaking up their time.
I think that the student who doesn't do well in a formal education environment will have great troubles in a self directed environment, especially an experimental one designed to teach the student a very narrow focus of material. Will that student have the discipline to branch out from the narrow focus (ie, more than web building or mobile app building), will that student bother to learn theory, will that student take the time to learn a foreign language or literature?
I don't see why not.
We've always had young people from the beginning of time think they know more than their teachers.
I don't see why you keep mentioning this.
The entire point is that formal education is not a one-size-fits-all solution to everything; there are almost always exceptions.
If you have a teacher who teaches then you will absolutely to better with that person than alone.
Depends on the student. There is no 'one size fits all' solution for education.
Plus, even with the dumbest teacher and the most boring class you still always have the opportunity to do both, go to the boring class and teach yourself at home or the library.
Except that then you'd be wasting your time in the class.
If you "opt out" of the system you will only hurt yourself in the long run
But there are people who do not do as well in the formal education environment for various reasons.
Everyone else was so used to relying on Intelesense that their code was riddled with syntax errors.
I'd say actually understanding the material is far more important than being able to write down compilable code on a piece of paper. That might be more of a problem is compilation was extremely difficult, but you rarely need to write perfect code on a piece of paper.
its pretty impossible to know that your level of skill is adequate or inadequate until looking at it in hindsight.
Which is pretty much what should be happening to begin with. You will improve over time and then be able to look back at your old work and laugh. Of course, a teacher being there allows that to happen more immediately.
Studying the code of skilled programmers is very helpful, too.
but you will NEVER do so more efficiently than under a teacher and program.
Never? As in, it's 100% impossible for anyone to ever do it? I object to that. Someone who learns at a fast pace may only be held back by having to complete mundane assignments, being told what to do and when to do it, and having to attend a class. As I said, I don't think this is the case for a lot of people, but I also think it's wrong to say that it's never true. There are plenty of ways to get information, and getting information on what you need to know is no different.
I hope the irony of you using "on" in error, when you meant "in" is not lost on you. Whether English is your primary or secondary language, why are you making that mistake? Shouldn't your use of "doing" and books have corrected it by now?
Unsurprisingly, I see people who have degrees making the same mistakes, but I still would not claim that that alone means that formal education is doomed to fail.
Do you still maintain that classrooms are useless?
I don't think I see anything in your comment that would change anyone's mind.
I know an awful lot of "self taught" programmers who are completely incapable of finding any solution that can't be googled for.
In my opinion, people in general lack critical thinking skills. I've noticed quite a few people with degrees that display similar symptoms of ignorance.
And dear god was my code completely lacking in any real understanding of what I was doing.
It sounds like your self-teaching was inadequate. Information doesn't just come from universities; if you have the right resources and enough willpower, you can train yourself quite well, and perhaps even more efficiently than a college/university could. Not everyone is capable of educating themselves properly, but there are people who are.
Execution takes someone's life, but life behind bars has pretty much done the same thing.
No, because they can still live afterwards. Of course, I can think of no one that wouldn't be resentful of the fact that they spent years in prison even though they were innocent. I know that people who want to live after getting out of prison do exist, and without the death penalty, they have that option even though they can't make up for the time lost in prison.
which would cause this tax scheme to run afoul of the constitutionally-mandated separation of church and state.
I'm not seeing how taxes would stop anyone from worshiping any god. But maybe if I claim to be a believer of the flying spaghetti monster and that the flying spaghetti monster says it is a sin to pay taxes, I'll be able to avoid paying taxes...
Also, organized religious communities provide a great many benefits to their members and to the community at large, including help for the poor, food kitchens, etc.
Then the church a way to acquire the necessary money to pay the taxes. If everyone else has to, I don't see why they shouldn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Should they be taught all the other creation myths around the world also?
They'd sure as hell better teach whatever nonsensical theories I can make up on the spot! After all, if I don't understand something, any random nonsense I make up that I think explains it must be as good as a scientific theory!
But then you shouldn't be a hypocrite and play the game anyway.
I'm confused about how that's hypocritical. I was talking about people who don't want to pay the developers/companies because they included DRM in the games, not people who say they don't like the games to begin with.
This also has nothing to do with cracking DRM.
what you're really doing is using an excuse to get stuff for free.
If you say you believe this, what you're really saying is that you don't believe this. There, I'm now pretending to be able to read your mind.
You can't actually say what other people believe.
and stand by your principles...and not play the game.
I didn't mention anything about not playing the games.
And why don't you grow up, and join the real world where not everyone has the same ideals and ideas regarding DRM.
I wish people would stop saying that people need to 'grow up' because they disagree with them. In any case, I don't think anyone here is saying that everyone has the same ideals and ideas regarding DRM, anyway.
Now they just need to release DRM-free and cross-platform titles.
Not if you want to say that the developers/company made the wrong decision by including DRM.
Yes, anyone who is against DRM and wants to support indie companies must also infringe upon copyright! How "interesting"!
At any rate, I can guarantee you that when they grown up (emotionally, mentally), that film may still touch their heart, but it will have dropped down a few notches or more in their top ten.
I don't believe that claiming that someone may agree with you at some unspecified point in the future is useful at all; doubly so when you do it because someone enjoys something that you don't enjoy as much as him/her. Perhaps it is you who needs to 'grow up' for not enjoying something as much as other people do; did you consider that?
Or what if people just tend to have different opinions and likes/dislikes, and it has nothing to do with being "grown up"? Well, unless you involve a magical opinion fairy, or your comment wasn't serious...
It looks like you just arbitrarily decided that your own standards are capable of objectively qualifying the quality of a piece of art. At any rate, I didn't see any proof that the matter is objective.
Examples of US citizens being denied the 4th amendment protections?
Warrantless wiretapping and people being molested at airports don't count? The latter happens in broad daylight, and if you think the government hasn't been using warrantless wiretapping despite the fact that they now think they have the power to, well, I don't know what to say.
The judicial segment of the US government provides remedies to those who feel their constitutional rights have been violated.
Except that the entire government is obsessed with safety over freedom; even the people don't seem to care.
It's not a perfect system but there are plenty of examples of legislative and executive branch laws being ruled illegal and overturned.
I wish they were overturned, but until they are, they'll stick around.
The fourth amendment has been violated time and time against by laws such as the Patriot Act and organizations such as the TSA.
How do you know that all of the bias is because the older developers are underperforming from your anecdotal evidence alone?
So in other words, DRM seeks to harm all customers to stop the copying of some data.
Stop using the words 'stealing' and 'taking' to describe copyright infringement; instead, use the word 'raping'. Using 'rape' to describe copyright infringement makes so much more sense because copyright infringement is almost as bad as a child running a lemonade stand without permission from the government, and we need to recognize it as such!
I don't see many people going to prison for this. In fact, it's difficult enough to catch people to even sue them! Given the nature of the Internet, punishing people based on ip addresses could harm innocents, too.
Oh, and let's not forget that the old punishment strategy is simply not working. Remember how prohibition failed miserably? Well, trying to stop people from copying certain data will also fail miserably, but the degree of failure will be an order of magnitude higher.
Just like counterfeiting money, right? Or art?
Precisely so.
What the hell are they wasting people's tax dollars (through the courts) on? What the hell are they suing people over? Copying data? What a good use of time, money, and resources! Thank you for tackling this national security emergency!
Formal education environments always allow the student to work on their own in their free time.
Not without soaking up their time.
I think that the student who doesn't do well in a formal education environment will have great troubles in a self directed environment, especially an experimental one designed to teach the student a very narrow focus of material. Will that student have the discipline to branch out from the narrow focus (ie, more than web building or mobile app building), will that student bother to learn theory, will that student take the time to learn a foreign language or literature?
I don't see why not.
We've always had young people from the beginning of time think they know more than their teachers.
I don't see why you keep mentioning this.
The entire point is that formal education is not a one-size-fits-all solution to everything; there are almost always exceptions.
You are also describing a rote class.
It doesn't even have to be a rote class.
If you have a teacher who teaches then you will absolutely to better with that person than alone.
Depends on the student. There is no 'one size fits all' solution for education.
Plus, even with the dumbest teacher and the most boring class you still always have the opportunity to do both, go to the boring class and teach yourself at home or the library.
Except that then you'd be wasting your time in the class.
If you "opt out" of the system you will only hurt yourself in the long run
But there are people who do not do as well in the formal education environment for various reasons.
Everyone else was so used to relying on Intelesense that their code was riddled with syntax errors.
I'd say actually understanding the material is far more important than being able to write down compilable code on a piece of paper. That might be more of a problem is compilation was extremely difficult, but you rarely need to write perfect code on a piece of paper.
its pretty impossible to know that your level of skill is adequate or inadequate until looking at it in hindsight.
Which is pretty much what should be happening to begin with. You will improve over time and then be able to look back at your old work and laugh. Of course, a teacher being there allows that to happen more immediately.
Studying the code of skilled programmers is very helpful, too.
but you will NEVER do so more efficiently than under a teacher and program.
Never? As in, it's 100% impossible for anyone to ever do it? I object to that. Someone who learns at a fast pace may only be held back by having to complete mundane assignments, being told what to do and when to do it, and having to attend a class. As I said, I don't think this is the case for a lot of people, but I also think it's wrong to say that it's never true. There are plenty of ways to get information, and getting information on what you need to know is no different.
I hope the irony of you using "on" in error, when you meant "in" is not lost on you. Whether English is your primary or secondary language, why are you making that mistake? Shouldn't your use of "doing" and books have corrected it by now?
Unsurprisingly, I see people who have degrees making the same mistakes, but I still would not claim that that alone means that formal education is doomed to fail.
Do you still maintain that classrooms are useless?
I don't think I see anything in your comment that would change anyone's mind.
I know an awful lot of "self taught" programmers who are completely incapable of finding any solution that can't be googled for.
In my opinion, people in general lack critical thinking skills. I've noticed quite a few people with degrees that display similar symptoms of ignorance.
And dear god was my code completely lacking in any real understanding of what I was doing.
It sounds like your self-teaching was inadequate. Information doesn't just come from universities; if you have the right resources and enough willpower, you can train yourself quite well, and perhaps even more efficiently than a college/university could. Not everyone is capable of educating themselves properly, but there are people who are.
It has existed in various forms for quite a large time - it cannot be all bad.
Plenty of things that would be considered bad by many now existed for quite some time before being gotten rid of.
That said, whether marriage is a good thing or not depends on who you ask.
Execution takes someone's life, but life behind bars has pretty much done the same thing.
No, because they can still live afterwards. Of course, I can think of no one that wouldn't be resentful of the fact that they spent years in prison even though they were innocent. I know that people who want to live after getting out of prison do exist, and without the death penalty, they have that option even though they can't make up for the time lost in prison.
which would cause this tax scheme to run afoul of the constitutionally-mandated separation of church and state.
I'm not seeing how taxes would stop anyone from worshiping any god. But maybe if I claim to be a believer of the flying spaghetti monster and that the flying spaghetti monster says it is a sin to pay taxes, I'll be able to avoid paying taxes...
Also, organized religious communities provide a great many benefits to their members and to the community at large, including help for the poor, food kitchens, etc.
Then the church a way to acquire the necessary money to pay the taxes. If everyone else has to, I don't see why they shouldn't.