Now if your penis is no bigger then a woman's finger THEN you got a problem. For the rest, it is skill and the most important piece of knowledge? If you penis might be a bit small, you still got 10 fingers and a tongue. Some women even seem to like this whole foreplay thing.
Agreed. The penis is a blunt instrument, and penetration also ignores the statistical facts that a) the clitoris is the most sensitive element of the female genitals, and b) when masturbating, more women achieve orgasm successfully via clitoral rather than vaginal stimulation.
The most effective piece of dating advice (for a guy) I ever read? "Become good at cunnilingus, and then let the fact that you are become known."
Apparently someone told Disney that with Herbie: Fully Loaded, Lindsay Lohan's bra was too, so they used CGI to trim that down as well. So it's not just poor Supes who could get the reduction.
Once again, the inherent corruptibility of Slashdot's moderation system rears its' ugly head. I wouldn't know how many times I've seen it demonstrated that the only thing this site's moderation system is really good for is the promotion and enforcement of ovine groupthink.
The parent isn't redundant...completely the opposite. Its' only sin was making a statement that somebody with mod points obviously didn't feel like reading. This is an attempt at censorship, pure and simple.
And even then the Patriot Act limits this ability to terrorism investigations.
Yes, but you're missing something here. Wiretapping only being used in terrorism investigations sounds great on it's own...but define "terrorism." The main reason why politicians and the media both love the word terrorism so much is because it's a purely emotive abstraction. Strictly speaking, the only thing the word terrorism refers to is an act of inducing terror (extreme fear) in an individual or group. The definition of the word by itself does not suggest specifically how said terror might be induced, or whether or not civilian deaths are involved. Those are connotations that have been added.
Tell me what the specific definition of a "terrorism investigation" is, and I'll be able to tell you whether or not I think the use of wiretapping during it would constitute totalitarian behaviour.
I find it interesting also that people who advocate the behaviour of Bush and the GOP nearly always seem to feel a need to end a statement with name calling, as though they need ad hominem to bolster their argument...in this case, "Only a moron would think this provision an assault on civil liberties."
No...1983 was 22 years ago...nearly 23 now, actually.;)
Seriously, don't be a lemming. That cliche/metaphor is tired to the point of being on life support...let it die. Try coming up with *new* paranoid rhetoric for a change.;)
Is it just me, or did the black Shadow emanating from Washington that's seemingly been trying to cover most of the planet lately, just shrink back a few inches?;)
Linus might express his opinions, but I've never seen him try and insist that other people follow them as such.
I can remember reading about Linus saying that he doesn't like the fact that people venerate him as much as they do...that he sees himself as an entirely normal human being. Desiring worship and obedience is Stallman's (and to a lesser extent perhaps, ESR's) neurosis.
'..."He's not the messiah; he's a very naughty boy."...' [2]
I've often heard this quote echoing in my head at times in response to just about all of the "leaders" (read: megalomaniacal narcissists) of the Linux community. Not just Linus, but also Stallman, ESR, and occasionally Bruce Perens.
Linus in my observation is usually the most humble and least obnoxious of those four...but I'm entirely willing to accept that this might not be other people's experience.
Don't use it. The Internet is based on the participation of individual machines.
Companies who try and do things like this forget that they only make revenue from consumers when they satisfy consumer demand. They obviously haven't got the message yet, but we see it proven over and over again that the only thing they end up doing by trying to dictate demand is destroying themselves.
We need to send a very clear message to any companies contemplating this that for them to participate in it will be an act of suicide on their part. We as consumers will demand service providers that utilise the existing, open Internet, and thus, they will get our money.
Do not fear companies such as these who seek to bind things up, because no matter what, they cannot do anything ultimately without our consent. The reason why is because they are ruled by their bottom line...which we as consumers provide. Hence, if they want to maintain said bottom line, they are required to fulfill our desires...not their own.
The man is a complete incompetent, and his repeated tendency of making a fool of himself in public cannot be good for the company's business. On top of that, we've had the large amount of grumbling on MS staff blogs recently about his policies behind closed doors, as well.
Gates should replace him, and soon, before he does too much more damage. If there's one thing Microsoft can't afford these days, it's deer-in-the-headlights leadership.
(Note to mods whose first impulse might be to mod this Offtopic...it is relevant, but you'll need to read down a bit perhaps to find out why.)
"Your five predecessors were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent affirmation that was meant to create a profound detachment to the rest of your species, facilitating the function of the One." -- The Architect talking to Neo, The Matrix: Reloaded. (Emphasis mine)
Most people assume that the largely detached attitude of Neo is due purely to the inability of Reeves as an actor to emote. What they don't realise however, is that said lack of emoting for the most part is an integral part of the character.
What the Architect describes above is basically the astrological sign of Aquarius, which science has labelled autism and assumed to be something neurologically anomalous...whereas the astrological perspective of course is that it is something which fits entirely into the natural order. For those bright sparks in the audience who will rush to remind me that there are autistics who aren't always solar Aquarians, that's true...but I would remind you that contrary to what Cosmopolitan might try and tell you, astrology isn't purely about sun signs...in fact that barely even scratches the surface. Show me any autistic individual with a non-Aquarian sun, and I'll show you a natal chart for the same individual with either several other planets in Aquarius, or a strongly aspected Uranus. (the planet associated with Aquarius)
My point here is that autism isn't a fluke, or something that's "wrong" with people. When the people who wrote that stupid play Hair and the song, "the age of Aquarius," they were wrong about *how* the new period would change people.
Call me a schizophrenic nut case if you like...but us going into the Aquarian period on the one hand, and autism diagnosis going through the roof on the other, is not merely some blind coincidence. It's a case of people adapting to an emerging society whose priorities, conventions, and entire way of life is going to be profoundly different to the one that is currently ending.
The only topics I'd trust Wikipedia for info on are things like zoology, and some other areas of completely non-personal science.
Where Wikipedia falls down is anywhere that human beings enter the equation. The bias concerning coverage of the Church of Scientology in particular is utterly appalling.
It's important to remember that Wikipedia's parent organisation is a business, and like any other business it has benefactors that need to be kept happy. That also means satisfying the leaders of groups such as Amway and the aforementioned Church of Scientology, so that Wikimedia do not get sued...and never mind whether or not the material presented has any relevance whatsoever to the truth.
Because of this however, for objectivity or quality of information, Wikipedia follows the same general pattern you're likely to see anywhere else. For information where there's no danger of offending anyone, it will generally be extremely accurate. Any information there dealing with human beings however, as I said should not be trusted.
Despite being aware that Condi would still be an ever-faithful lieutenant for the representatives of the infernal regions that are currently inhabiting the White House, I think we need to concede that in this instance, for once she's actually managed to make herself genuinely useful. Even more surprising, the letter was actually worded in a somewhat competent and eloquent manner.
Despite also being aware that no doubt, this move was motivated primarily by the American government's own interests rather than any form of higher altruism, it is still something for which I feel a rather deep sense of both gratitude and elation. The Americans currently responsible for the Internet might have their faults, but I suspect most of us would agree that given a choice between them or the likes of Mugabe or Britain's Prime Minister Wormtounge, our best interests lie with the former.
We can only hope that the UN/other such parties will accept Condi's admonition to back off as final, and will not again attempt to usurp jurisdiction of the Internet at some point in the future.
The blurb seems to indicate a version of something like this with a built-in expert system for analysis and presumably, sorting of data. They're claiming that it can identify emotional expressions in video feeds, among other things...which while in itself is certainly no mean feat, calling that genuine strong AI would be an exaggeration.
It looks interesting, and possibly a somewhat more muscular example of weak AI than most of what we've seen so far...but I don't think we need to prepare for welcoming our new cybernetic overlords just yet.;-)
In my last comment I wrote about how although I enjoy the Sims franchise, I understood many might possibly find it boring because of the lack of violence.
If the gaming industry wants to improve its' image, the primary thing it needs to do is develop more games that are not based on the premise of violent conflict. I'm not saying that violent games necessarily are or are not harmful to kids, but no amount of arguing on its own is going to convince the Jack Thompsons of the world.
There need to be more games that are like the Sims in terms of having little or no conflict, or like Black and White in the sense that although conflict is possible, in-game rewards exist for following a non-aggressive path. If we can produce a lot more of these, instead of them seeming like one or two-off novelty projects, it's possible that people who genuinely don't want to play violent games will feel like they have a real supply of alternatives.
I have SC4 and have found it to be enormously enjoyable, as well as allowing for a lot of creativity in terms of geographic/regional design. The other thing about the Sims franchise that needs to be remembered is that they're not violent. Violent conflict is what basically drives most other games available, and because that isn't present in the Sims/SimCity at all, people who are accustomed to violence can find the games boring.
The original Sims took a while to get going, admittedly...the first game sans expansion packs was basically a proof of concept, and as such you not only couldn't do anything outside the house, you couldn't do all that much inside it either.
The strength of the Sims 1 and 2 is not so much playing the game as it is creating stuff for it; wallpapers, flooring, houseplans, commercial lots, neighbourhoods, clothing designs, (if you're into the last) custom Sims, etc. Very few people actually play the game in Live mode extensively, AFAIK...it's a lot more about creating components for it and being able to see the Sims use them.
I agree that EA are vampires...but so far IMHO they genuinely haven't managed to wreck the Sims...they came closer by not releasing the editing tools for TS2 until the first expansion pack, and making TS2 a LOT harder to mod than the last game, but people are still finding ways around those obstacles.
The Sims Online failed at least partly because a lot of aberrant/deviant personalities gravitated to it, and EA tolerated them probably longer than they should have. That was in line with Will's original intent for the game though...he wanted it to be open-ended and experimental and to basically see where people would go with it. Unfortunately he had to discover what the rest of us already know; that the Internet is to some degree a replacement for the conventional mental health system. There are a lot of extremely sick people online, and a disproportionate number of them apparently ended up in TSO.
...is that Superman was intended primarily as an interpretation of the American volksgeist, IMHO. The image of him swooping in and saving the day could be seen as a direct symbolic justification for American imperialism and foreign interventionism...and we've seen how well that turned out.
I find a number of other comic characters interesting in direct proportion to the degree that their humanity is developed. To me Superman has never really been anything more than a walking American flag...so given that, it was virtually impossible for me to sustain much interest in him. With characters like Spiderman or Batman, it's possible to see them as somewhat more nationalistically neutral, but Superman and Captain America in particular are pretty much pure (and vulgar, most of the time) manifestations of jingoism.
Superman Returns will probably fare acceptably at the domestic American box office, but my guess is that in the current climate, international audiences will see it as at best culturally irrelevant, and at worst possibly somewhat offensive.
American nationalism has always been something which the rest of the world has largely considered ugly...but that has become more true than ever before in the last three years.
You hit it on the head. We keep seeing Google is evil posts on/. because they raised rates for software engineers, because they value software engineers, and because they're "steeling all of the talent."
I've often tried to understand it...Maybe someone can help me out here. Why have Slashdotters apparently morphed into such raving, screeching Commies over the lasy few years? The leftist extremism that I keep seeing here and on Newsforge is unbelievable.
Ah, I'm new here, I haven't learned my way around yet.
In that case, some advice:-
1. Go to Wikipedia and study the articles there about Communism, the various branches of Socialism, Karl Marx, Lennin, and Trotsky. This will assist you in understanding the philosophical position of many of the people who post here. If you consider corporations to be the embodiment of hell-spawned evil, that will also help you fit in on this site. The people here generally will not admit to being Communists, and will protest strenuously and resentfully if they are labelled as such...however, if you become intimate with Marx's perspectives, you will be able to identify that by their own philosophies they in fact are, despite their denial of it.
2. Learn as much as you can about Richard Stallman, since (especially if you decide to begin using Linux) he's someone who you'll be hearing mentioned a lot on Slashdot...he tends to be worshipped more or less as God around here. Make sure you read both positive and negative info on him as well, if you can find it...since both exist, but unfortuately the perspectives of too many people around here about him are single-mindedly positive, while ignoring the negative elements that genuinely do exist.
3. If you're going to use Linux, make sure you're aware of what it is and is not good for. Linux is a fantastic environment for programming, secure Internet use, office work, and for if you want a GUI/Windows equivalent that you can customise from the ground up. However, if you're a gamer, I'd either dual-boot with Windows, or else simply stick with Windows entirely. That is not to say that games don't work with Linux at all. Most do; it's just that the amount of screwing around needed to get them to work is likely more than you're interested in doing. Also make sure you get a distribution that is not based on Red Hat, or using the RPM package manager. There is Linux as it existed before Red Hat, and then there is Red Hat...and the two are not the same thing. Also, try to have as little to do with the rest of the Linux userbase as is humanly possible for the most part, since the vast majority (although not *quite* all, thankfully) of them are extreme-leftist morons in my experience.
4. Don't buy into Richard Stallman's bullshit. In fact, after you've studied him primarily in order to understand the mind of the average Slashdotter, you will be best served by ignoring him in general as much as possible. Stallman would like you (and everyone else who doesn't know better) to see him as the leader of a hippie revolution, the end goal of which is the complete commoditisation of free software/information. In reality however, he is simply an authoritarian, chronically autistic narcissist. When he talks about freedom, what he actually means is that he wants people to have the freedom to do what he decrees, and only what he decrees. You'll learn that fairly quickly when you see what the perspectives of his worshippers are on a lot of things. Laura Didio (a staffmember of an IT consulting group) having been issued with death threats and other forms of harassment was a good example of the real character of Stallman's followers, despite the propaganda you'll likely come across.
5. Develop an ability to ignore extremely idiotic/juvenile attempts at humour. Despite users here considering themselves intellectuals, 98% of what gets moderated Funny is the type of material that most five year olds would probably be ashamed of.
6. Don't take the supposed hatred of Microsoft that you'll see here seriously. Slashdot's userbase is made up of less Linux users these days than it used to be. Microsoft get bashed here because there is a lot of groupthink here and an "in" mentality, (which you'll learn about after you've been here for a bit) but a fairly sizable group of the users currently here are actually Windows sysadmins or developers.
7. If you're a monotheist, (Christian or Islamic) keep it to yourself. Although most of the people you'll come across here will likel
Copyrights are not "moral sewage", they are vital to protecting the right of an artist.
As long as it is the actual artist that holds the copyright, yes. As you say though, far too often they end up being held by the publishing company, and the artists themselves get the shaft. The companies wail about how copyright protects artists because they know we care about that...what they don't tell us though is that there intent is to hide behind that, and then take said copyrights themselves.
The job of the responsible citizen is to keep an eye on the system and watch for abuses, correcting the abuses when spotted.
In theory, that sounds great. In the real world, however, it generally doesn't happen. This is why, instead of allowing laws like the DMCA which are prone to abuse to get through, they should be prevented from being passed in the first place.
The grandparent post's author was a Communist. Unfortunately we have a lot of those on Slashdot. I however agree with your assertion that copyright itself should be allowed to survive...but that specific laws like the DMCA should be repealed. Copyright should IMHO be allowed to stand on its' own.
Show me another distro right now that will let me install postgresql 8.1, parrot, mysql 5, mono, and several different FOSS java tools from binary packages in less than 5 minutes.
I no longer use Linux and thus probably don't really care, but IMHO emphasis on binary packages is not something to brag about. I understand that a lot of Debian users consider apt to be one of the single greatest things about the distro, although in my opinion it sucks. For starters, I tried installing Debian on four different occasions and managed to trash the apt database within 18 hours or so...it went completely berserk, randomly deleting things.
For another thing, I don't know of any binary packaging system in existence yet which offers compiled buffer overflow protection as standard...but that isn't just a Debian problem. Because of this, whenever I used Linux I made sure to compile from source wherever possible with the propolice addin. If I want lax security, I might as well just use Windows. (These days I am, but that is another rant, and not one for posting on Slashdot I've discovered.)
I was working on a from-source packaging system for a while, but I got sick of a) being put down about how what I was doing was supposedly redundant, and b) screamed at if I even remotely suggested the idea that I might try and earn an income from what I was doing.
I cannot in all seriousness advocate or recommend Linux to anyone these days, whether it be Debian or any other distro...the reasons however are entirely social. Linux technically speaking is a fantastic operating system. It's much vaunted "community", on the other hand, is an absolute obscenity in my mind. I remember reading about how the Amiga's userbase were part of the reason why Commodore as a company went under, being the group of dictatorial, elitist fanatics that they were. Linux suffers from the same problem.
The groups in question are often populated by 'net old-timers, not the cl00less n00bies (i.e., anyone who discovered teh Intarweb after about 1990) that give most of the rest of the net its unsavory character.
Yeah. Pity us poor fools. While you leet individuals already knew about the Internet in the 70s, the rest of us had to wait until the mid 90s before we could get around to it. You'd be amazed at how sexual activity and interacting with other human beings on a more than once-monthly basis can eat into your schedule.
Slashdot Mirror
Now if your penis is no bigger then a woman's finger THEN you got a problem. For the rest, it is skill and the most important piece of knowledge? If you penis might be a bit small, you still got 10 fingers and a tongue. Some women even seem to like this whole foreplay thing.
Agreed. The penis is a blunt instrument, and penetration also ignores the statistical facts that a) the clitoris is the most sensitive element of the female genitals, and b) when masturbating, more women achieve orgasm successfully via clitoral rather than vaginal stimulation.
The most effective piece of dating advice (for a guy) I ever read? "Become good at cunnilingus, and then let the fact that you are become known."
Apparently someone told Disney that with Herbie: Fully Loaded, Lindsay Lohan's bra was too, so they used CGI to trim that down as well. So it's not just poor Supes who could get the reduction.
Once again, the inherent corruptibility of Slashdot's moderation system rears its' ugly head. I wouldn't know how many times I've seen it demonstrated that the only thing this site's moderation system is really good for is the promotion and enforcement of ovine groupthink.
The parent isn't redundant...completely the opposite. Its' only sin was making a statement that somebody with mod points obviously didn't feel like reading. This is an attempt at censorship, pure and simple.
And even then the Patriot Act limits this ability to terrorism investigations.
Yes, but you're missing something here. Wiretapping only being used in terrorism investigations sounds great on it's own...but define "terrorism." The main reason why politicians and the media both love the word terrorism so much is because it's a purely emotive abstraction. Strictly speaking, the only thing the word terrorism refers to is an act of inducing terror (extreme fear) in an individual or group. The definition of the word by itself does not suggest specifically how said terror might be induced, or whether or not civilian deaths are involved. Those are connotations that have been added.
Tell me what the specific definition of a "terrorism investigation" is, and I'll be able to tell you whether or not I think the use of wiretapping during it would constitute totalitarian behaviour.
I find it interesting also that people who advocate the behaviour of Bush and the GOP nearly always seem to feel a need to end a statement with name calling, as though they need ad hominem to bolster their argument...in this case, "Only a moron would think this provision an assault on civil liberties."
No...1983 was 22 years ago...nearly 23 now, actually. ;)
;)
Seriously, don't be a lemming. That cliche/metaphor is tired to the point of being on life support...let it die. Try coming up with *new* paranoid rhetoric for a change.
Is it just me, or did the black Shadow emanating from Washington that's seemingly been trying to cover most of the planet lately, just shrink back a few inches? ;)
True. For the most part, "line noise" is the term I generally use. ;)
Linus might express his opinions, but I've never seen him try and insist that other people follow them as such.
I can remember reading about Linus saying that he doesn't like the fact that people venerate him as much as they do...that he sees himself as an entirely normal human being. Desiring worship and obedience is Stallman's (and to a lesser extent perhaps, ESR's) neurosis.
'..."He's not the messiah; he's a very naughty boy." ...' [2]
I've often heard this quote echoing in my head at times in response to just about all of the "leaders" (read: megalomaniacal narcissists) of the Linux community. Not just Linus, but also Stallman, ESR, and occasionally Bruce Perens.
Linus in my observation is usually the most humble and least obnoxious of those four...but I'm entirely willing to accept that this might not be other people's experience.
Don't use it. The Internet is based on the participation of individual machines.
Companies who try and do things like this forget that they only make revenue from consumers when they satisfy consumer demand. They obviously haven't got the message yet, but we see it proven over and over again that the only thing they end up doing by trying to dictate demand is destroying themselves.
We need to send a very clear message to any companies contemplating this that for them to participate in it will be an act of suicide on their part. We as consumers will demand service providers that utilise the existing, open Internet, and thus, they will get our money.
Do not fear companies such as these who seek to bind things up, because no matter what, they cannot do anything ultimately without our consent. The reason why is because they are ruled by their bottom line...which we as consumers provide. Hence, if they want to maintain said bottom line, they are required to fulfill our desires...not their own.
The man is a complete incompetent, and his repeated tendency of making a fool of himself in public cannot be good for the company's business. On top of that, we've had the large amount of grumbling on MS staff blogs recently about his policies behind closed doors, as well.
Gates should replace him, and soon, before he does too much more damage. If there's one thing Microsoft can't afford these days, it's deer-in-the-headlights leadership.
(Note to mods whose first impulse might be to mod this Offtopic...it is relevant, but you'll need to read down a bit perhaps to find out why.)
"Your five predecessors were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent affirmation that was meant to create a profound detachment to the rest of your species, facilitating the function of the One."
-- The Architect talking to Neo, The Matrix: Reloaded. (Emphasis mine)
Most people assume that the largely detached attitude of Neo is due purely to the inability of Reeves as an actor to emote. What they don't realise however, is that said lack of emoting for the most part is an integral part of the character.
What the Architect describes above is basically the astrological sign of Aquarius, which science has labelled autism and assumed to be something neurologically anomalous...whereas the astrological perspective of course is that it is something which fits entirely into the natural order. For those bright sparks in the audience who will rush to remind me that there are autistics who aren't always solar Aquarians, that's true...but I would remind you that contrary to what Cosmopolitan might try and tell you, astrology isn't purely about sun signs...in fact that barely even scratches the surface. Show me any autistic individual with a non-Aquarian sun, and I'll show you a natal chart for the same individual with either several other planets in Aquarius, or a strongly aspected Uranus. (the planet associated with Aquarius)
My point here is that autism isn't a fluke, or something that's "wrong" with people. When the people who wrote that stupid play Hair and the song, "the age of Aquarius," they were wrong about *how* the new period would change people.
Call me a schizophrenic nut case if you like...but us going into the Aquarian period on the one hand, and autism diagnosis going through the roof on the other, is not merely some blind coincidence. It's a case of people adapting to an emerging society whose priorities, conventions, and entire way of life is going to be profoundly different to the one that is currently ending.
The only topics I'd trust Wikipedia for info on are things like zoology, and some other areas of completely non-personal science.
Where Wikipedia falls down is anywhere that human beings enter the equation. The bias concerning coverage of the Church of Scientology in particular is utterly appalling.
It's important to remember that Wikipedia's parent organisation is a business, and like any other business it has benefactors that need to be kept happy. That also means satisfying the leaders of groups such as Amway and the aforementioned Church of Scientology, so that Wikimedia do not get sued...and never mind whether or not the material presented has any relevance whatsoever to the truth.
Because of this however, for objectivity or quality of information, Wikipedia follows the same general pattern you're likely to see anywhere else. For information where there's no danger of offending anyone, it will generally be extremely accurate. Any information there dealing with human beings however, as I said should not be trusted.
...as the old saying goes.
Despite being aware that Condi would still be an ever-faithful lieutenant for the representatives of the infernal regions that are currently inhabiting the White House, I think we need to concede that in this instance, for once she's actually managed to make herself genuinely useful. Even more surprising, the letter was actually worded in a somewhat competent and eloquent manner.
Despite also being aware that no doubt, this move was motivated primarily by the American government's own interests rather than any form of higher altruism, it is still something for which I feel a rather deep sense of both gratitude and elation. The Americans currently responsible for the Internet might have their faults, but I suspect most of us would agree that given a choice between them or the likes of Mugabe or Britain's Prime Minister Wormtounge, our best interests lie with the former.
We can only hope that the UN/other such parties will accept Condi's admonition to back off as final, and will not again attempt to usurp jurisdiction of the Internet at some point in the future.
The blurb seems to indicate a version of something like this with a built-in expert system for analysis and presumably, sorting of data. They're claiming that it can identify emotional expressions in video feeds, among other things...which while in itself is certainly no mean feat, calling that genuine strong AI would be an exaggeration.
;-)
It looks interesting, and possibly a somewhat more muscular example of weak AI than most of what we've seen so far...but I don't think we need to prepare for welcoming our new cybernetic overlords just yet.
In my last comment I wrote about how although I enjoy the Sims franchise, I understood many might possibly find it boring because of the lack of violence.
If the gaming industry wants to improve its' image, the primary thing it needs to do is develop more games that are not based on the premise of violent conflict. I'm not saying that violent games necessarily are or are not harmful to kids, but no amount of arguing on its own is going to convince the Jack Thompsons of the world.
There need to be more games that are like the Sims in terms of having little or no conflict, or like Black and White in the sense that although conflict is possible, in-game rewards exist for following a non-aggressive path. If we can produce a lot more of these, instead of them seeming like one or two-off novelty projects, it's possible that people who genuinely don't want to play violent games will feel like they have a real supply of alternatives.
Sim City 4. A shameless lust for more money.
I have SC4 and have found it to be enormously enjoyable, as well as allowing for a lot of creativity in terms of geographic/regional design. The other thing about the Sims franchise that needs to be remembered is that they're not violent. Violent conflict is what basically drives most other games available, and because that isn't present in the Sims/SimCity at all, people who are accustomed to violence can find the games boring.
The original Sims took a while to get going, admittedly...the first game sans expansion packs was basically a proof of concept, and as such you not only couldn't do anything outside the house, you couldn't do all that much inside it either.
The strength of the Sims 1 and 2 is not so much playing the game as it is creating stuff for it; wallpapers, flooring, houseplans, commercial lots, neighbourhoods, clothing designs, (if you're into the last) custom Sims, etc. Very few people actually play the game in Live mode extensively, AFAIK...it's a lot more about creating components for it and being able to see the Sims use them.
I agree that EA are vampires...but so far IMHO they genuinely haven't managed to wreck the Sims...they came closer by not releasing the editing tools for TS2 until the first expansion pack, and making TS2 a LOT harder to mod than the last game, but people are still finding ways around those obstacles.
The Sims Online failed at least partly because a lot of aberrant/deviant personalities gravitated to it, and EA tolerated them probably longer than they should have. That was in line with Will's original intent for the game though...he wanted it to be open-ended and experimental and to basically see where people would go with it. Unfortunately he had to discover what the rest of us already know; that the Internet is to some degree a replacement for the conventional mental health system. There are a lot of extremely sick people online, and a disproportionate number of them apparently ended up in TSO.
Well, in the comics, until last year, Lex Luthor was President of the United States...
;)
That's called art imitating life.
...is that Superman was intended primarily as an interpretation of the American volksgeist, IMHO. The image of him swooping in and saving the day could be seen as a direct symbolic justification for American imperialism and foreign interventionism...and we've seen how well that turned out.
I find a number of other comic characters interesting in direct proportion to the degree that their humanity is developed. To me Superman has never really been anything more than a walking American flag...so given that, it was virtually impossible for me to sustain much interest in him. With characters like Spiderman or Batman, it's possible to see them as somewhat more nationalistically neutral, but Superman and Captain America in particular are pretty much pure (and vulgar, most of the time) manifestations of jingoism.
Superman Returns will probably fare acceptably at the domestic American box office, but my guess is that in the current climate, international audiences will see it as at best culturally irrelevant, and at worst possibly somewhat offensive.
American nationalism has always been something which the rest of the world has largely considered ugly...but that has become more true than ever before in the last three years.
You hit it on the head. We keep seeing Google is evil posts on /. because they raised rates for software engineers, because they value software engineers, and because they're "steeling all of the talent."
I've often tried to understand it...Maybe someone can help me out here. Why have Slashdotters apparently morphed into such raving, screeching Commies over the lasy few years? The leftist extremism that I keep seeing here and on Newsforge is unbelievable.
Ah, I'm new here, I haven't learned my way around yet.
In that case, some advice:-
1. Go to Wikipedia and study the articles there about Communism, the various branches of Socialism, Karl Marx, Lennin, and Trotsky. This will assist you in understanding the philosophical position of many of the people who post here. If you consider corporations to be the embodiment of hell-spawned evil, that will also help you fit in on this site. The people here generally will not admit to being Communists, and will protest strenuously and resentfully if they are labelled as such...however, if you become intimate with Marx's perspectives, you will be able to identify that by their own philosophies they in fact are, despite their denial of it.
2. Learn as much as you can about Richard Stallman, since (especially if you decide to begin using Linux) he's someone who you'll be hearing mentioned a lot on Slashdot...he tends to be worshipped more or less as God around here. Make sure you read both positive and negative info on him as well, if you can find it...since both exist, but unfortuately the perspectives of too many people around here about him are single-mindedly positive, while ignoring the negative elements that genuinely do exist.
3. If you're going to use Linux, make sure you're aware of what it is and is not good for. Linux is a fantastic environment for programming, secure Internet use, office work, and for if you want a GUI/Windows equivalent that you can customise from the ground up. However, if you're a gamer, I'd either dual-boot with Windows, or else simply stick with Windows entirely. That is not to say that games don't work with Linux at all. Most do; it's just that the amount of screwing around needed to get them to work is likely more than you're interested in doing. Also make sure you get a distribution that is not based on Red Hat, or using the RPM package manager. There is Linux as it existed before Red Hat, and then there is Red Hat...and the two are not the same thing. Also, try to have as little to do with the rest of the Linux userbase as is humanly possible for the most part, since the vast majority (although not *quite* all, thankfully) of them are extreme-leftist morons in my experience.
4. Don't buy into Richard Stallman's bullshit. In fact, after you've studied him primarily in order to understand the mind of the average Slashdotter, you will be best served by ignoring him in general as much as possible. Stallman would like you (and everyone else who doesn't know better) to see him as the leader of a hippie revolution, the end goal of which is the complete commoditisation of free software/information. In reality however, he is simply an authoritarian, chronically autistic narcissist. When he talks about freedom, what he actually means is that he wants people to have the freedom to do what he decrees, and only what he decrees. You'll learn that fairly quickly when you see what the perspectives of his worshippers are on a lot of things. Laura Didio (a staffmember of an IT consulting group) having been issued with death threats and other forms of harassment was a good example of the real character of Stallman's followers, despite the propaganda you'll likely come across.
5. Develop an ability to ignore extremely idiotic/juvenile attempts at humour. Despite users here considering themselves intellectuals, 98% of what gets moderated Funny is the type of material that most five year olds would probably be ashamed of.
6. Don't take the supposed hatred of Microsoft that you'll see here seriously. Slashdot's userbase is made up of less Linux users these days than it used to be. Microsoft get bashed here because there is a lot of groupthink here and an "in" mentality, (which you'll learn about after you've been here for a bit) but a fairly sizable group of the users currently here are actually Windows sysadmins or developers.
7. If you're a monotheist, (Christian or Islamic) keep it to yourself. Although most of the people you'll come across here will likel
Copyrights are not "moral sewage", they are vital to protecting the right of an artist.
As long as it is the actual artist that holds the copyright, yes. As you say though, far too often they end up being held by the publishing company, and the artists themselves get the shaft. The companies wail about how copyright protects artists because they know we care about that...what they don't tell us though is that there intent is to hide behind that, and then take said copyrights themselves.
The job of the responsible citizen is to keep an eye on the system and watch for abuses, correcting the abuses when spotted.
In theory, that sounds great. In the real world, however, it generally doesn't happen. This is why, instead of allowing laws like the DMCA which are prone to abuse to get through, they should be prevented from being passed in the first place.
The grandparent post's author was a Communist. Unfortunately we have a lot of those on Slashdot. I however agree with your assertion that copyright itself should be allowed to survive...but that specific laws like the DMCA should be repealed. Copyright should IMHO be allowed to stand on its' own.
Show me another distro right now that will let me install postgresql 8.1, parrot, mysql 5, mono, and several different FOSS java tools from binary packages in less than 5 minutes.
I no longer use Linux and thus probably don't really care, but IMHO emphasis on binary packages is not something to brag about. I understand that a lot of Debian users consider apt to be one of the single greatest things about the distro, although in my opinion it sucks. For starters, I tried installing Debian on four different occasions and managed to trash the apt database within 18 hours or so...it went completely berserk, randomly deleting things.
For another thing, I don't know of any binary packaging system in existence yet which offers compiled buffer overflow protection as standard...but that isn't just a Debian problem. Because of this, whenever I used Linux I made sure to compile from source wherever possible with the propolice addin. If I want lax security, I might as well just use Windows. (These days I am, but that is another rant, and not one for posting on Slashdot I've discovered.)
I was working on a from-source packaging system for a while, but I got sick of a) being put down about how what I was doing was supposedly redundant, and b) screamed at if I even remotely suggested the idea that I might try and earn an income from what I was doing.
I cannot in all seriousness advocate or recommend Linux to anyone these days, whether it be Debian or any other distro...the reasons however are entirely social. Linux technically speaking is a fantastic operating system. It's much vaunted "community", on the other hand, is an absolute obscenity in my mind. I remember reading about how the Amiga's userbase were part of the reason why Commodore as a company went under, being the group of dictatorial, elitist fanatics that they were. Linux suffers from the same problem.
The groups in question are often populated by 'net old-timers, not the cl00less n00bies (i.e., anyone who discovered teh Intarweb after about 1990) that give most of the rest of the net its unsavory character.
Yeah. Pity us poor fools. While you leet individuals already knew about the Internet in the 70s, the rest of us had to wait until the mid 90s before we could get around to it. You'd be amazed at how sexual activity and interacting with other human beings on a more than once-monthly basis can eat into your schedule.
Apparently he has never heard of "Kill files" and other blocking techniques to eliminate the trash from the UseNet data stream.
;-)
You make it sound as though, after eliminating said trash, there'll actually be something else left.