How long has it been since something new and interesting has happenned to flight sims? The last thing to happen was the two WWII super-detailed sims. But that was some time ago. Space sims are uncompelling and make situational awarenes very difficult, not to mention, usually ignorant of physics. Gimme a Delta Squadron Star Fury in a correct Newtonian (or relativistic, where appropriate) universe, with a useful wingman, a useful squadron, and lotsa action. Sorta like Q3A team deathmatch pace, but with a goal.
Last I heard, China had some rigid population control laws. Next, the Chinese won't be allowed to have them at all (the natural way). Chinese children will be issued from the same branch of the government that tries to censor the'net.
In the cold war era USSR: You will be issued a coal mining child. It will have four arms to facilitate faster digging.
How is the US the worst choice? I do believe that the English speaking West still has the strongest Judeo-Christian ethic among those technologically capable of doing such things.
Now, if you don't like the Judeo-Christian ethic, you'd better get another standard before you start crying about a Judeo-Christian society does with its technology.
It won't be the illiterate masses of the US who control this thing anyway. They're for selling it to. The only people who understand this stuff well enough to use it are medical geeks.
Just exactly what do you mean by "meaningful standard"?
You Cite McCarthyism is an assertion that the peopel were generally immoral in the past. That was a tiny minority of the population.
You cite the "genocide" of the Indians (American of course). It was never the program of the US gov. to exterminate them. Not even their culture. (Don't confuse genocite with a violent disregard). Even then The National Concience was salved by the notion that they were being relocated to a place where they'd be more happy, the truth being hidden by those responsible.
You cite slavery as immoral, but seem to forget that everone at the time thought it was quite acceptable.
Have you forgotten the rampant violence and other crimes of the late 20th century? Have you forgotten the skyrocketing divorce, etc. rates?
You champion a floating moral standard, but then support your assertions with "every meningful standard". It's no wonder your notions of the moralities of history are confused.
Mud to Mud is a world view of confusion based on a notion that any individual can set their own standard. But it is the only standard there can be when we cannot agree on a real standard. As usual, we are sinking to the lowest common denominator because of the lack of a real standard. This was a function of tradition. I suppose you make up you traditions on the fly too.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry about it. Do they have enough DNA material to generate a viable gene pool for a large population? Can they make males and females both?
How long has it been since something new and interesting has happenned to flight sims? The last thing to happen was the two WWII super-detailed sims. But that was some time ago. Space sims are uncompelling and make situational awarenes very difficult, not to mention, usually ignorant of physics. Gimme a Delta Squadron Star Fury in a correct Newtonian (or relativistic, where appropriate) universe, with a useful wingman, a useful squadron, and lotsa action. Sorta like Q3A team deathmatch pace, but with a goal.
In the cold war era USSR: You will be issued a coal mining child. It will have four arms to facilitate faster digging.
How is the US the worst choice? I do believe that the English speaking West still has the strongest Judeo-Christian ethic among those technologically capable of doing such things.
Now, if you don't like the Judeo-Christian ethic, you'd better get another standard before you start crying about a Judeo-Christian society does with its technology.
It won't be the illiterate masses of the US who control this thing anyway. They're for selling it to. The only people who understand this stuff well enough to use it are medical geeks.
You Cite McCarthyism is an assertion that the peopel were generally immoral in the past. That was a tiny minority of the population.
You cite the "genocide" of the Indians (American of course). It was never the program of the US gov. to exterminate them. Not even their culture. (Don't confuse genocite with a violent disregard). Even then The National Concience was salved by the notion that they were being relocated to a place where they'd be more happy, the truth being hidden by those responsible.
You cite slavery as immoral, but seem to forget that everone at the time thought it was quite acceptable.
Have you forgotten the rampant violence and other crimes of the late 20th century? Have you forgotten the skyrocketing divorce, etc. rates?
You champion a floating moral standard, but then support your assertions with "every meningful standard". It's no wonder your notions of the moralities of history are confused.
Mud to Mud is a world view of confusion based on a notion that any individual can set their own standard. But it is the only standard there can be when we cannot agree on a real standard. As usual, we are sinking to the lowest common denominator because of the lack of a real standard. This was a function of tradition. I suppose you make up you traditions on the fly too.