I understand many things on TV wouldn't be acceptable in the 60s, but why do you think they would have been in the 30s? I doubt that highly. --MBCook
Surprised me, too, but all you have to do is look back to comic books in the 50's. Comics depicted gruesome or fairly explicit images, prompting hearings in congress and an industry attempt to create a "Comics Code", thus policing itself (sound familiar, i.e. Hollywood these days?) By comparison many became very bland (think Superfriends) afterwards and not challenging again until the 80's. Books and radio were no strangers to carrying more explicit material until conservative types threatened them with bans, etc. I don't think radio has ever recovered, though s[c]hlock-jocks can be pretty much like it was. Don't assume your in your grand-parents or great-grand-parents time the world was like Little House on the Prairie.
Aside from all the alleged artificial muscles (hint: Steroid use can fubar your body, re: Mark McGwire) AI detection shouldn't be all the necessary, just get people to play clean (unlike that ridiculous body block in today's FRA/SEN match) and work out within reason. When $$$ incentives encourage overdoing (or drug abusing) you're going to get injuries.
Of course some injuries are most commonly associated with certain sports (torn ACL == football, broken collar bone == cycling) and you're not going to do much to stop that, aside from some absurd contrivance like the old
OSHA Approved Cowboy was wearing.
Also, are we all forgetting that IT IS ILLEGAL FOR ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 18 IN MOST STATES TO VIEW PORNOGRAPHY?
Most. That's part of the problem, see? Once you pass a federal law, it takes precedence over state laws (excepting those exclusive to states in the Constitution.) Another part is, once you start censorship, you have to pick someone to set the bar. That bar would vary from state to state, so it's probably best to find the lowest common denominator. The Bible Belt is going to want it high, more liberal states, lower. And the definition of what's unsuitable keeps changing. Even scenes common on TV, beginning at 8PM (or any time of day on MTV) would have been unacceptable in the 60's, even 70's, though acceptable in the 30's in large parts of the country.
Like many mention, the first line of defense is the parent. IMHO the best line of defense is to explain what's wrong with it, how demeaning it is of people, to your children. Same applies to drugs, alcohol, unsafe sex, etc.
Problem is, so many parents are locked in some eternal struggle between the Respectable Puritans they want everyone to think they are and the people they really are and want to be.
Don't Be quick to blame the ACLA or ALA for children having access to pr0n -- rather blame the legislators who write sloppy, special interest crippled legislation. If congress could ever intelligently craft legislation and keep crippling amendments away from it, there will be a better chance of something like this not being thrown out on "protected speech" rulings.
Re:The same music over and over again
on
Homogenized Music
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
o'er here in engerland, specifically london, the two or three main radio stations (imo): capital [capitalfm.com] & radio [bbc.co.uk], play the same tunes everyday.
When I lived in Michigan there were a couple radio stations, WHNN & WIOG which pretty much fit that same bill. Result: I stopped listening to them.
I've often wondered, even aloud to others, why radio stations insist upon overplaying music. I once had the complete Led Zepplin collection, but go so sick of hearing it over and over on the radio (usually on a radio at work) that I sold off all but two albums (Physical Graphitti & In through the out door, which didn't get much airplay.)
I still have to be in a very narrowly defined mood to listen to Phil Collins, so scarred am I by years of radio beating me over the head with his music. Pretty good stuff, but not when you hear it all the time. (There was even a radio station which planned a Phil Collins-Free weekend, it was so bad.)
I've got a collection of about 400 CDs (mostly bought in the 80's) most of the newer stuff is alternative, classical, jazz and euro-pop. At the pace I once bought music, I'd think the RIAA and affiliated scum would like to cultivate that, but the influences which built my collection were listening to music from other people's collections (which the RIAA appears dead-set against and even prosecuting me if they could nail one incident. There's the rub, eh?)
Hark! Yon Radioplay Doth Sucketh Verily!
on
Homogenized Music
·
· Score: 1
Acually, it's a pretty good thing that much of it sucks, otherwise I'd probably hear more music I like and spend a ton more money buying it.
If artists want to be heard they should look into making some of their music available over the web, with its considerably smaller financial requirement (as opposed to owning a radio station or network)
Just because the RIAA and broadcasters want to hobble internet play of their corporate property or sacred cow, shouldn't limit the ability of grass roots growth of online broadcast and distribution of non-properties. Seems to me the burden of proving ownership of music was placed upon the RIAA in the Napster trials, which should offer some protection for small startups.
Problem is, though, if it doesn't get a move on then you can expect the legal/regulatory groundwork to be followed up by the same old corporate crap on the web, and protected against competition; i.e. to be a webcaster you must have an engineer, you must have records of all air play, you must have permits, you must blah blah blah, you must leap over very high hurdles cleverly placed by purchased legislation/regulation.
Basically what are you saying is that Chinesse people like our DVDs and want to listen/play/watch
them but they don't want to pay for it so they just gonna start stealing.
I don't suppose it has occured to you that China (Hong Kong included) has a thriving film and entertainment industry if its own and people there would like to watch their own country's films and see no point in having to pay a technology tax if they can develop their own standard. China *is* a big market and growing rapidly (~6.5% in Q1 2002)
A glassy-winged sharpshooter, which said it would be my friend, told me Lucas really does plan to do an Episode VII, he just tried to fool us all by saying he had no plans to, until he got I - III out of the way. Turns out Jar Jar is Palpatine's love child and is what drove him to the dark side in the first place. Jar Jar returns in Episode VII as Darth Woogums, takes the remnants of the imperial fleet, sets up shoppe on the planet Potrzebie and bides his time until he can again establish control over the reformed senate. The sharpshooter would have told me more, but Santa Clara County Pest Control seemed keen on erradicating the species and nuked it. There was a curious dark van with them, though, with a license plate reading ILUVJJ and a Lucas Valley Ford frame...
While I was lead to believe that Jar Jar would pretty much shut up in Episode II, he talked and babbled a bit more than I cared for, but the rest of the film made up for it. (Note: Reviewers who didn't like it should avoid reviewing any other Lucas films)
Inserting Amidala/Padmé into the other films wouldn't do anything but confuse fans, offering nothing in the way of the story. Same goes for Jar Jar, only adding suffering to fans.
I do hope, after E III they run IV thru VI in theaters again. Preferably in the summer after E III comes out, it would be cool to watch I (even w/Jar (ugh) Jar) and II at home then III through VI at the theater. I'd be there. 8^)
this is a really good thing we need to support these open standards to avoid the Information Nazi's.
Well, not so much in those words, but I do like the principle of the thing. Chinese, particularly rural don't have a lot of cash to swing and eliminating Itellectual Property tax is the next logical step, as pretty much everything else has been shaved to mass produce electronics. (It's still a big deal to the PRC to keep up/improve the standard of living for their base of support (i.e. the majority of chinese who don't wear western suits and talk on cell phones). I was pretty stunned to see 5" B/W TV sets in the grocery store for $12.99 (yeah, that cheap!)
I imagine the powers that be (Hollywood lobbyists, lawyers, etc.) will push something forbidding any of these open technologies from reaching US shores (because it doesn't kowtow to their wishes, of course.)
Ok, so this means I can sue all the dealerships who've sold me cars over the years because the gas tank wasn't full when I bought them? Cool!
I did wonder why I could never find that HP cartridge number when I went to replace it the first time, just different cart which would replace it. Seems to me, we all got what we paid for, even if we think we should have got full cartridges. I see no deceit, to be honest, even if I think it smells like the fresh dead skunk on Highway 17 this morning.
Sure, but you'd only get the big fish. It'd be on par with stomping out drug dealers (which are also connected with.. ha.. dopes) And it'd be pretty much useless once they move off-shore, to places we love to laud like Sealand (whom we'd torpedo in a second if they became the sole relay of spam.)
Here I was thinking it was, not only legitimate, but favored by legislators, this method of everyone in the USA, by default, being opt-in for every sort and channel for solicitation. Perhaps derived from the business community's interpretation of the 1st Amendment (a re-vision not entirely unlike Ashcroft's attempt to re-write the 2nd Amendment, but I digress), promoting and protecting commercial speech to the populace in much the same manner as the populace ought not have regarding political candidates, public figures and the government.
I'm sure if the NY AG, by some miscarriage of justice, wins against MonsterHut, that telephone solicitors, junk mailers and door-to-door sales groups will leap to MonsterHut's aid and have it overturned, thus ensuring their much cherished freedom to do business as usual.
"There ought to be
limits to freedom" -- George W. Bush, regarding www.gwbush.com
* TOP SECRET *Invest heavily into materials research
License applicable intellectual property
Re-tool or build new fab
Produce more memory than market needs in effort to crowd out competitors
When all competitors do same thing complain for years how memory market not profitable and any-minute-now prices will have to go up
Continue to overproduce and cut prices
Repeat for each advance in memory technology
If Bill Simon uses it to make hay against Gray Davis, things will get changed fast. The Oracle mess and power crisis have already given Simon a lot to beseige Davis with.
The combined taxable income for the county I work in, of public school employees is nearly a billion $. (nothing scandalous about mentioning this, as it's all a matter of public record, but I won't mention the county anyway) You still think that's nothing? A thousand here, a couple hundred there, it could easily add up, particularly if used to obtain credit cards. Some joke, once you have a few hundred people trying to put their lives back together after someone trashes their credit rating, etc.
A friend had something like this happen and spent months sorting it out, over a few hundred dollars charged to a credit card mailed to a different address.
The Chinese government has expressed an interest in building a station on the Moon. That's about all that's needed, for U.S. pride to suddenly rediscover the competitive joys of space exploration. It's as if China had just launched Sputnik II. Expect NASA to suddenly get an influx of cash and a directive to "build a station on the Moon before China does (but don't tell anyone that's our your reason for the mission.)"
Gee, and I thought that paying for cable in the first place was meant to eliminate the need for
commercial spots.
Nope, it's just to fatten the wallets of cable providers and networks. Reminds me of how public servants (i.e. elected officials) sold half the country on lotteries to fund schools then just stole the additional money from the schools that the lottery generated (at least some people have finally caught on and forced lottery money to be in addition to) if they ever thought about it, they probably forgot it as soon as one of them pointed out they could charge both subscribers and advertisers and make lots of money. It's the american way.
Sorry, man, but only got a couple words into your post and already have issues, please consider:
Make ads work with PVR
You really don't want this, if you think about how abusive pop-under ads and hideous flashing x20 pr0n-cam ads are. Imagine JavaScript/VBScript TV, running along with all your other content, only your PVR sees it and throws crap all over the screen in front of your shows and you have to kill them or wait for them to time-out until you can go on.
To make advertising work, they'll have to experiment with variable length ads (so obvious no-one ever thought of it, surprised?), you get a 23 second ad, a 37 second ad, etc., also placement in shows (which is where radio and TV once were), make advertising in such a way you don't know your really watching an ad (i.e. pretty much any saturday morning cartoon, it's a plug for toys.)
I wouldn't want them farking around with PVRs to make the ad content carried and processed by it, but you know money talks, and even TiVo may be listening.
Slashdot Mirror
Surprised me, too, but all you have to do is look back to comic books in the 50's. Comics depicted gruesome or fairly explicit images, prompting hearings in congress and an industry attempt to create a "Comics Code", thus policing itself (sound familiar, i.e. Hollywood these days?) By comparison many became very bland (think Superfriends) afterwards and not challenging again until the 80's. Books and radio were no strangers to carrying more explicit material until conservative types threatened them with bans, etc. I don't think radio has ever recovered, though s[c]hlock-jocks can be pretty much like it was. Don't assume your in your grand-parents or great-grand-parents time the world was like Little House on the Prairie.
"ah gawd, AC Milan is one of the most famous teams in the world, maybe the name could be included in the article, not just an Italian soccer team."
Yeah, that's not all that's happening in Milan, either
Go Tyler!!!!
Of course some injuries are most commonly associated with certain sports (torn ACL == football, broken collar bone == cycling) and you're not going to do much to stop that, aside from some absurd contrivance like the old OSHA Approved Cowboy was wearing.
Most. That's part of the problem, see? Once you pass a federal law, it takes precedence over state laws (excepting those exclusive to states in the Constitution.) Another part is, once you start censorship, you have to pick someone to set the bar. That bar would vary from state to state, so it's probably best to find the lowest common denominator. The Bible Belt is going to want it high, more liberal states, lower. And the definition of what's unsuitable keeps changing. Even scenes common on TV, beginning at 8PM (or any time of day on MTV) would have been unacceptable in the 60's, even 70's, though acceptable in the 30's in large parts of the country.
Like many mention, the first line of defense is the parent. IMHO the best line of defense is to explain what's wrong with it, how demeaning it is of people, to your children. Same applies to drugs, alcohol, unsafe sex, etc.
Problem is, so many parents are locked in some eternal struggle between the Respectable Puritans they want everyone to think they are and the people they really are and want to be.
Hmm.. Graphical representation of the Purity Test?
Don't Be quick to blame the ACLA or ALA for children having access to pr0n -- rather blame the legislators who write sloppy, special interest crippled legislation. If congress could ever intelligently craft legislation and keep crippling amendments away from it, there will be a better chance of something like this not being thrown out on "protected speech" rulings.
When I lived in Michigan there were a couple radio stations, WHNN & WIOG which pretty much fit that same bill. Result: I stopped listening to them.
I've often wondered, even aloud to others, why radio stations insist upon overplaying music. I once had the complete Led Zepplin collection, but go so sick of hearing it over and over on the radio (usually on a radio at work) that I sold off all but two albums (Physical Graphitti & In through the out door, which didn't get much airplay.)
I still have to be in a very narrowly defined mood to listen to Phil Collins, so scarred am I by years of radio beating me over the head with his music. Pretty good stuff, but not when you hear it all the time. (There was even a radio station which planned a Phil Collins-Free weekend, it was so bad.)
I've got a collection of about 400 CDs (mostly bought in the 80's) most of the newer stuff is alternative, classical, jazz and euro-pop. At the pace I once bought music, I'd think the RIAA and affiliated scum would like to cultivate that, but the influences which built my collection were listening to music from other people's collections (which the RIAA appears dead-set against and even prosecuting me if they could nail one incident. There's the rub, eh?)
I sure as h311 ain't buying any Britney Spears.
If artists want to be heard they should look into making some of their music available over the web, with its considerably smaller financial requirement (as opposed to owning a radio station or network)
Just because the RIAA and broadcasters want to hobble internet play of their corporate property or sacred cow, shouldn't limit the ability of grass roots growth of online broadcast and distribution of non-properties. Seems to me the burden of proving ownership of music was placed upon the RIAA in the Napster trials, which should offer some protection for small startups.
Problem is, though, if it doesn't get a move on then you can expect the legal/regulatory groundwork to be followed up by the same old corporate crap on the web, and protected against competition; i.e. to be a webcaster you must have an engineer, you must have records of all air play, you must have permits, you must blah blah blah, you must leap over very high hurdles cleverly placed by purchased legislation/regulation.
I don't suppose it has occured to you that China (Hong Kong included) has a thriving film and entertainment industry if its own and people there would like to watch their own country's films and see no point in having to pay a technology tax if they can develop their own standard. China *is* a big market and growing rapidly (~6.5% in Q1 2002)
A glassy-winged sharpshooter, which said it would be my friend, told me Lucas really does plan to do an Episode VII, he just tried to fool us all by saying he had no plans to, until he got I - III out of the way. Turns out Jar Jar is Palpatine's love child and is what drove him to the dark side in the first place. Jar Jar returns in Episode VII as Darth Woogums, takes the remnants of the imperial fleet, sets up shoppe on the planet Potrzebie and bides his time until he can again establish control over the reformed senate. The sharpshooter would have told me more, but Santa Clara County Pest Control seemed keen on erradicating the species and nuked it. There was a curious dark van with them, though, with a license plate reading ILUVJJ and a Lucas Valley Ford frame...
Inserting Amidala/Padmé into the other films wouldn't do anything but confuse fans, offering nothing in the way of the story. Same goes for Jar Jar, only adding suffering to fans.
I do hope, after E III they run IV thru VI in theaters again. Preferably in the summer after E III comes out, it would be cool to watch I (even w/Jar (ugh) Jar) and II at home then III through VI at the theater. I'd be there. 8^)
Well, not so much in those words, but I do like the principle of the thing. Chinese, particularly rural don't have a lot of cash to swing and eliminating Itellectual Property tax is the next logical step, as pretty much everything else has been shaved to mass produce electronics. (It's still a big deal to the PRC to keep up/improve the standard of living for their base of support (i.e. the majority of chinese who don't wear western suits and talk on cell phones). I was pretty stunned to see 5" B/W TV sets in the grocery store for $12.99 (yeah, that cheap!)
I imagine the powers that be (Hollywood lobbyists, lawyers, etc.) will push something forbidding any of these open technologies from reaching US shores (because it doesn't kowtow to their wishes, of course.)
"Is the inkjet cartridge half-full or half-empty?"
I did wonder why I could never find that HP cartridge number when I went to replace it the first time, just different cart which would replace it. Seems to me, we all got what we paid for, even if we think we should have got full cartridges. I see no deceit, to be honest, even if I think it smells like the fresh dead skunk on Highway 17 this morning.
Sure, but you'd only get the big fish. It'd be on par with stomping out drug dealers (which are also connected with .. ha .. dopes) And it'd be pretty much useless once they move off-shore, to places we love to laud like Sealand (whom we'd torpedo in a second if they became the sole relay of spam.)
I'm sure if the NY AG, by some miscarriage of justice, wins against MonsterHut, that telephone solicitors, junk mailers and door-to-door sales groups will leap to MonsterHut's aid and have it overturned, thus ensuring their much cherished freedom to do business as usual.
"There ought to be limits to freedom" -- George W. Bush, regarding www.gwbush.com
If Bill Simon uses it to make hay against Gray Davis, things will get changed fast. The Oracle mess and power crisis have already given Simon a lot to beseige Davis with.
A friend had something like this happen and spent months sorting it out, over a few hundred dollars charged to a credit card mailed to a different address.
From there it's just a matter of time.
Nope, it's just to fatten the wallets of cable providers and networks. Reminds me of how public servants (i.e. elected officials) sold half the country on lotteries to fund schools then just stole the additional money from the schools that the lottery generated (at least some people have finally caught on and forced lottery money to be in addition to) if they ever thought about it, they probably forgot it as soon as one of them pointed out they could charge both subscribers and advertisers and make lots of money. It's the american way.
Make ads work with PVR You really don't want this, if you think about how abusive pop-under ads and hideous flashing x20 pr0n-cam ads are. Imagine JavaScript/VBScript TV, running along with all your other content, only your PVR sees it and throws crap all over the screen in front of your shows and you have to kill them or wait for them to time-out until you can go on.
To make advertising work, they'll have to experiment with variable length ads (so obvious no-one ever thought of it, surprised?), you get a 23 second ad, a 37 second ad, etc., also placement in shows (which is where radio and TV once were), make advertising in such a way you don't know your really watching an ad (i.e. pretty much any saturday morning cartoon, it's a plug for toys.)
I wouldn't want them farking around with PVRs to make the ad content carried and processed by it, but you know money talks, and even TiVo may be listening.
Now Microsoft believes it's important to confirm that assumption and perpetuate the trend.
"We had a lock on the missiles, sir, then the screen turned blue."
IMHO it's a bit like patenting the process of Littering or copyrighting farting in a crowded theater.