Holy shit, am I fucking glad you had the decency to self-censor the word "crap"!
I second the well articulated sentiments of Mr. Coward. Anonymous, you are man! (Unless, of course, you are a woman, in which case I mean to convey, in gender-neutral terms, my profound respect for your exquisitely-made point.)
Modern translations of the bible aside, I think it's useful to look at the actual evolution of Christianity and how it shifted from it's pacifist roots (as taught by JC) to accepting the notion that sanctioned killing is different than murder.
Quite so. It's also interesting to observe how eager many people are today to refute the notion that Christianity is generally against violence. Strangly, the translation "thou shalt not kill" commandment seems to be presumed by many to have been chosen because the translators were ignorant of the subtlety of the source language, rather than because the phrasing they chose was more consistent with the teachings of Christ.
This discussion is an interesting reflection not only on the history of Christianity, but of current political agendas.
It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years.
Argh; although nobody appears to have called me on it, I used the word "not" a couple times by accident. This should have read: It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were (and are) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years.
Meanwhile, in response to those who discuss the (debatable) fidelity of the different translations, my contention is that even if a given translation is more technically accurate, it is not "superiour" translation of the Christian Bible unless the people using that version are thereby led to be better Christians.
The argument put forth by the poster to whom I responded was that replacing "thou shalt not kill" with "you shall not murder" was an example of the superiority of the NIV's transation over the KJV. However, I am not at all convinced that this "superiour translation" has or will result in people more able or inclined to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
True enough. USA pennies have used the phrase "ONE CENT" for more than one hundred years. If Canada's mint wants to claim "ONE CENT" as their trademark, they'll have to duke it out at the highest court in the land.
It is not "thou shalt not kill," it is "you shall not murder." Read the NIV, which is a superior translation to the KJV.
Hmmm.... I would be cautious about making such value statements.
Why would one assert that the NIV is a "superiour" translation? The King James Version was the dominant guide to Christian thought for English speaking people for more than 300 years. It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years. Given the short history of this new translation, its value, for better of for worse, is yet to be proven.
Funny how people must be indoctrinated into beliefs that you do not (no longer) share. That leaves the inference that one must become enlightened to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
Every major religious group with which I am familiar either implies or explicitly states that one must become enlightened to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
Most scientists I know believe that education should give you the tools to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
In any case, the shackles of ignorance are not highly regarded.
I rip all of my DVD's for archiving (which if you have kids, you understand the need to do) and to remove all the crap. My rips just have the movie part. That's it. No commercials, previews, FBI warnings, nothing but the movie. Plus it gets loaded into the MythTV library, so I never mess with the disks again.
In my case, my children appear to have ripped my entire collection of "books" and "magazines", but for some reason I still have to flip past "advertisements", "related books" lists, etc.
In any case, this is interesting. I find it peculiar that people's views of digital media is different than their views of older types of media, such as books, vinyl records, etc.
But, how does that stand if you compare them to normal coupons you get in the paper. There is nothing forbidding you from getting as many copies of those to use as you wish? The copyright only applies if you are printing them yourself for personal use but, if you get them out 'in the wild' you can get and use as many as you wish that way?
Hmmm.... If you buy additional copies of the newspaper that contains coupons, wouldn't you think you are also buying the rights to use the coupons distributed therein? (Similarly, if someone gives you the newspaper containing coupons, aren't the coupons already "paid for"?) This is clearly not a copyright issue, since you're not making new copies of the coupons, you're just using coupons that were already published by the person authorized to do so.
How the heck is being utterly unreasonable supposed to help their case?
Fair question. If you think about it, they aren't going to alienate Sony by their irrational demands; they are already filing a lawsuit, which is enough to alienate just about anybody.
It's much more desirable to negotiate down from "give me the moon, and throw yourself on your own sword" to some reasonable compensation than to attempt a more rational-sounding "pay me $5 million, and ten cents per unit henceforth" approach which would get laughed off and negotiated down to $50 and a cup of coffee by Sony.
Do they have a valid claim? Time will tell. However, if their claim is valid, they certainly don't want to end up with nobody using their technology, as that would kill their opportunity for ongoing licensing income.
From the perspective of storytelling, videogames are in fact a poor medium for doing it, for reasons Ebert describes. The physical interactivity with a game world that videogames provide add nothing to a story, and in mediums such as film, the director and editor use decisions to guide the audience.
I agree that these statements apply to most games with which I am familiar except that, in some cases, the interactivity adds a visceral component to the drama experienced by the protagonist. I conclude that Ebert never had the opportunity to play Outlaws, which I think transforms the sport of video gaming into an effective and artistic vehicle for storytelling.
Briefly, what Ebert seems to have missed is that (in my opinion) video games are not stories that are rendered more artistic through interactivity. Rather, they are sports that have been transformed into art through storytelling, sound, and visual design.
What could be more appropriate than "FUCK!" when you hit your finger with a hammer, lock your car keys inside the car with the motor running or drop your laptop while walking up a flight of stairs?
How about "Ouch!" Or perhaps, "Help! I hurt my finger!" Either is more specifically relevant to the context you mention than "FUCK!"
I understand your point, but there are situations where expletives are definitely "appropriate".
There may be contexts in which various words are appropriate, but an expletive is rarely necessary for communication.
Don't complain about the fact a megabyte isn't what you thought it was. Complain about the fact the industry still uses it for labels. But don't try and make the megabyte a mebibyte.
What!?! Next thing you'll be telling me is that a kilometer isn't 1024 meters long. Please, stop this madness before it spreads!
This is slashdot, you have to accept that people are gonna nit-pick you.
No, I don't. You're not the boss of me.
Hmmm.... Perhpas the word "accept" should have been replaced with "exist in a context where". Although the Hadlock may not be the boss of you, it is quite clear that he is the nitpicker of you.
See, this is exactly the argument people seem to miss in the whole DST debacle. Instead of "redefining time," why not just adjust working hours? So it's generally accepted most companies work 9 to 5. Why not 8 to 4?
This is a GREAT question. The answer as I understand it is that (in the USA at least) the government can't mandate the hours of operation for companies. However, the government CAN effect such a change by encouraging states to set their clocks differently.
Extra daylight in the FRIGGING DESERT is NOT helpful. Hmmm....
People don't come out until after 7pm even in normal time. Want the cafes and outdoor busineses to stay closed until 1030pm, or do you want them to waste more water with those evaporative coolers (garden misters) trying to keep the locals from passing out outdoors? Until nightfall they're all sucking every last watt out of their homes barricaded inside on air-conditioned life-support! Hmmm....
Cool evenings save energy. The sooner it arrives the better, and less energy and water is used as a result. And don't get me started on heat islands! Hmmm....
It's not 59-90f degrees everywhere in the USA ya know. Hmmm.... In that situation, I would reconsider my choice to live in an area that would be affected by global temperature increases. Oh, wait....
Umm... Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth oppose nuclear power, and support renewables instead. I wouldn't call either of them NIMBY groups. I'd put this one down to different people making different conclusions based on uncertain risks.
Obviously, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are not "real environmentalist" groups, as we can tell from their unwillingness to completely ignore the long-term impacts of people's actions. Don't they know that they would be more "real" if they simply accepted that technology will eventually be developed that will save us from the results of our willful irresponsibility and greed?
repaving roads... I can think of no one who does not utilize roads, they are a necessary infrastructure. Here's one we can agree goes into the homelessness problem level category!
This only demonstrates a lack of planning. I can walk to pretty much every place I need to go. The others I can get to by bicycle or horse. I see no reason to pay for your roads. You could make an argument that I should pay for a small number of roads supporting infrastructure in my area, but I certainly see no reason the federal government (and by extension I) should pay for your roads.
Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.
Hmmm... I think I understand the plan here: 1. Butcher the English language nearly beyond recognition. 2. ??? 3. Receive Dell desktop computer with Linux preinstalled.
You know, these damn things don't help find lost kids one bit. If a kid is lost no tag that basically says his name is going to be any better than the kid telling a cop his name. I think just about everybody in the world who can talk can pretty much remember their own name.
While there may be truth to what you say, it is also true that no amount of asking will get a 1 year old child to tell a cop (or anyone else) his or her name.
If you are concerned with the privacy implications of this stuff, I certainly understand; that deserves direct attention. However, your argument against this being a means of identification for children seems at least partly flawed.
Of course, like Brain Age or Wii Fitness scores, the values reported make no sense... I'm currently 290 meters away from popular opinion. What the heck does that mean?
I totally know what you mean; that measurement doesn't tell me anything. However, with the help of Google, I was able to figure this out: 290 meters = 951.44357 feet. Dude, you are WAY out on the fringe.
There is a saying that goes something like "The firmer grip you use, the faster the the stuff squirts between your fingers". This is what is happening.
Ick, that's a little too much information, thanks. The way I remember it is this:
Princess Leia: The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
Admittedly, it's not Shakespeare, but the version I recall has a far better soundtrack than what you appear to be thinking of.
Since they didn't distribute the source, in machine-readable form, with every iPhone, they must make (and live up to) the offer to EVERYBODY - not just their customers, not just to repurchasers of their customers' equipment.
Got it now?
Hmmm.... I'm not sure I agree with your optimistic, yet unlikely interpretation. I am not aware of a requirement that the written offer can be exercised by anyone other than an actual recipient of the binary. Furthermore, "any third party" is not the same as "every third party".
Oh, and as this post in this thread already pointed out, the Free Software Foundation's information about the GPL doesn't seem to support your position.
Slashdot Mirror
Holy shit, am I fucking glad you had the decency to self-censor the word "crap"!
I second the well articulated sentiments of Mr. Coward. Anonymous, you are man! (Unless, of course, you are a woman, in which case I mean to convey, in gender-neutral terms, my profound respect for your exquisitely-made point.)
Would you care to contrast that with the other media outlets who are currently run by major contributors and/or political beneficiaries of the DNC?
Hmmm... Which are the DNC-oriented media outlets you describe? I'm curious; it would be interesting to know how the news I'm seeing is being shaped.
Modern translations of the bible aside, I think it's useful to look at the actual evolution of Christianity and how it shifted from it's pacifist roots (as taught by JC) to accepting the notion that sanctioned killing is different than murder.
Quite so. It's also interesting to observe how eager many people are today to refute the notion that Christianity is generally against violence. Strangly, the translation "thou shalt not kill" commandment seems to be presumed by many to have been chosen because the translators were ignorant of the subtlety of the source language, rather than because the phrasing they chose was more consistent with the teachings of Christ.
This discussion is an interesting reflection not only on the history of Christianity, but of current political agendas.
It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years.
Argh; although nobody appears to have called me on it, I used the word "not" a couple times by accident. This should have read:
It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were (and are) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years.
Meanwhile, in response to those who discuss the (debatable) fidelity of the different translations, my contention is that even if a given translation is more technically accurate, it is not "superiour" translation of the Christian Bible unless the people using that version are thereby led to be better Christians.
The argument put forth by the poster to whom I responded was that replacing "thou shalt not kill" with "you shall not murder" was an example of the superiority of the NIV's transation over the KJV. However, I am not at all convinced that this "superiour translation" has or will result in people more able or inclined to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
True enough. USA pennies have used the phrase "ONE CENT" for more than one hundred years. If Canada's mint wants to claim "ONE CENT" as their trademark, they'll have to duke it out at the highest court in the land.
Take that, strong Canadian dollar!
It is not "thou shalt not kill," it is "you shall not murder." Read the NIV, which is a superior translation to the KJV.
Hmmm.... I would be cautious about making such value statements.
Why would one assert that the NIV is a "superiour" translation? The King James Version was the dominant guide to Christian thought for English speaking people for more than 300 years. It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years. Given the short history of this new translation, its value, for better of for worse, is yet to be proven.
Funny how people must be indoctrinated into beliefs that you do not (no longer) share. That leaves the inference that one must become enlightened to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
Every major religious group with which I am familiar either implies or explicitly states that one must become enlightened to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
Most scientists I know believe that education should give you the tools to throw off the shackles of ignorance.
In any case, the shackles of ignorance are not highly regarded.
This is a BD-J issue, not an encryption issue. They usually fix BD-J issues quickly. Notice no problem with the Pioneer/Sony player.
:-)
Hey! Don't dilute our righteous outrage and inaccurate Slashdot summaries with your "facts".
I rip all of my DVD's for archiving (which if you have kids, you understand the need to do) and to remove all the crap. My rips just have the movie part. That's it. No commercials, previews, FBI warnings, nothing but the movie. Plus it gets loaded into the MythTV library, so I never mess with the disks again.
In my case, my children appear to have ripped my entire collection of "books" and "magazines", but for some reason I still have to flip past "advertisements", "related books" lists, etc.
In any case, this is interesting. I find it peculiar that people's views of digital media is different than their views of older types of media, such as books, vinyl records, etc.
But, how does that stand if you compare them to normal coupons you get in the paper. There is nothing forbidding you from getting as many copies of those to use as you wish? The copyright only applies if you are printing them yourself for personal use but, if you get them out 'in the wild' you can get and use as many as you wish that way?
Hmmm.... If you buy additional copies of the newspaper that contains coupons, wouldn't you think you are also buying the rights to use the coupons distributed therein? (Similarly, if someone gives you the newspaper containing coupons, aren't the coupons already "paid for"?) This is clearly not a copyright issue, since you're not making new copies of the coupons, you're just using coupons that were already published by the person authorized to do so.
How the heck is being utterly unreasonable supposed to help their case?
Fair question. If you think about it, they aren't going to alienate Sony by their irrational demands; they are already filing a lawsuit, which is enough to alienate just about anybody.
It's much more desirable to negotiate down from "give me the moon, and throw yourself on your own sword" to some reasonable compensation than to attempt a more rational-sounding "pay me $5 million, and ten cents per unit henceforth" approach which would get laughed off and negotiated down to $50 and a cup of coffee by Sony.
Do they have a valid claim? Time will tell. However, if their claim is valid, they certainly don't want to end up with nobody using their technology, as that would kill their opportunity for ongoing licensing income.
From the perspective of storytelling, videogames are in fact a poor medium for doing it, for reasons Ebert describes. The physical interactivity with a game world that videogames provide add nothing to a story, and in mediums such as film, the director and editor use decisions to guide the audience.
I agree that these statements apply to most games with which I am familiar except that, in some cases, the interactivity adds a visceral component to the drama experienced by the protagonist. I conclude that Ebert never had the opportunity to play Outlaws, which I think transforms the sport of video gaming into an effective and artistic vehicle for storytelling.
Briefly, what Ebert seems to have missed is that (in my opinion) video games are not stories that are rendered more artistic through interactivity. Rather, they are sports that have been transformed into art through storytelling, sound, and visual design.
What could be more appropriate than "FUCK!" when you hit your finger with a hammer, lock your car keys inside the car with the motor running or drop your laptop while walking up a flight of stairs?
How about "Ouch!" Or perhaps, "Help! I hurt my finger!" Either is more specifically relevant to the context you mention than "FUCK!"
I understand your point, but there are situations where expletives are definitely "appropriate".
There may be contexts in which various words are appropriate, but an expletive is rarely necessary for communication.
Don't complain about the fact a megabyte isn't what you thought it was. Complain about the fact the industry still uses it for labels. But don't try and make the megabyte a mebibyte.
What!?! Next thing you'll be telling me is that a kilometer isn't 1024 meters long. Please, stop this madness before it spreads!
This is slashdot, you have to accept that people are gonna nit-pick you.
No, I don't. You're not the boss of me.
Hmmm.... Perhpas the word "accept" should have been replaced with "exist in a context where". Although the Hadlock may not be the boss of you, it is quite clear that he is the nitpicker of you.
Nitpickers of the world, Untie!
See, this is exactly the argument people seem to miss in the whole DST debacle. Instead of "redefining time," why not just adjust working hours? So it's generally accepted most companies work 9 to 5. Why not 8 to 4?
This is a GREAT question. The answer as I understand it is that (in the USA at least) the government can't mandate the hours of operation for companies. However, the government CAN effect such a change by encouraging states to set their clocks differently.
Extra daylight in the FRIGGING DESERT is NOT helpful.
Hmmm....
People don't come out until after 7pm even in normal time. Want the cafes and outdoor busineses to stay closed until 1030pm, or do you want them to waste more water with those evaporative coolers (garden misters) trying to keep the locals from passing out outdoors? Until nightfall they're all sucking every last watt out of their homes barricaded inside on air-conditioned life-support!
Hmmm....
Cool evenings save energy. The sooner it arrives the better, and less energy and water is used as a result. And don't get me started on heat islands!
Hmmm....
It's not 59-90f degrees everywhere in the USA ya know.
Hmmm.... In that situation, I would reconsider my choice to live in an area that would be affected by global temperature increases. Oh, wait....
Umm... Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth oppose nuclear power, and support renewables instead. I wouldn't call either of them NIMBY groups. I'd put this one down to different people making different conclusions based on uncertain risks.
Obviously, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are not "real environmentalist" groups, as we can tell from their unwillingness to completely ignore the long-term impacts of people's actions. Don't they know that they would be more "real" if they simply accepted that technology will eventually be developed that will save us from the results of our willful irresponsibility and greed?
repaving roads... I can think of no one who does not utilize roads, they are a necessary infrastructure. Here's one we can agree goes into the homelessness problem level category!
This only demonstrates a lack of planning. I can walk to pretty much every place I need to go. The others I can get to by bicycle or horse. I see no reason to pay for your roads. You could make an argument that I should pay for a small number of roads supporting infrastructure in my area, but I certainly see no reason the federal government (and by extension I) should pay for your roads.
Is this someone I relay should be concerned with telling me to settle down. Um considering Dell is actually moving towards putting Linux on desk tops, why should we settle down as it seams to be working and people are lisining. If we all sit back and just do nothing and Settle Down, then company's like Dell will not do this and we don't get linux on desk tops. Hell because of this, I may be looking at Dell for a low to medium end Linux system to replace my aging Linux system for testing and programing use. But if thye don't add linux on the system, I an't going dell, end of story.
Hmmm... I think I understand the plan here:
1. Butcher the English language nearly beyond recognition.
2. ???
3. Receive Dell desktop computer with Linux preinstalled.
You said it, brother. Now, get back to work in the air and water mine!
You know, these damn things don't help find lost kids one bit. If a kid is lost no tag that basically says his name is going to be any better than the kid telling a cop his name. I think just about everybody in the world who can talk can pretty much remember their own name.
While there may be truth to what you say, it is also true that no amount of asking will get a 1 year old child to tell a cop (or anyone else) his or her name.
If you are concerned with the privacy implications of this stuff, I certainly understand; that deserves direct attention. However, your argument against this being a means of identification for children seems at least partly flawed.
Of course, like Brain Age or Wii Fitness scores, the values reported make no sense... I'm currently 290 meters away from popular opinion. What the heck does that mean?
I totally know what you mean; that measurement doesn't tell me anything. However, with the help of Google, I was able to figure this out: 290 meters = 951.44357 feet. Dude, you are WAY out on the fringe.
Ick, that's a little too much information, thanks. The way I remember it is this: Admittedly, it's not Shakespeare, but the version I recall has a far better soundtrack than what you appear to be thinking of.
Since they didn't distribute the source, in machine-readable form, with every iPhone, they must make (and live up to) the offer to EVERYBODY - not just their customers, not just to repurchasers of their customers' equipment.
Got it now?
Hmmm.... I'm not sure I agree with your optimistic, yet unlikely interpretation. I am not aware of a requirement that the written offer can be exercised by anyone other than an actual recipient of the binary. Furthermore, "any third party" is not the same as "every third party".
Oh, and as this post in this thread already pointed out, the Free Software Foundation's information about the GPL doesn't seem to support your position.