I'd just go with the standard we already have, which states that human subjects have special protections. If fetuses really require protection, just get them legally declared human beings from conception.
My fellow republicans, it is time we got out our pitchforks and torches. The mad scientists are going too far, and frankly, I think we all know we're overdue for some lynchings. God didn't put us on this earth to suck cells out of unborn babies to heal the sick, but he gave us fire for good reason, and it is time we used some of it!
This laws has no effect on that hypothetical situation.
This law potentially sends the seller, not the buyer of an inappropriate game to jail.
Since the seller sold it to an adult, he's off the hook.
Since you gave it, without monetary consideration, to the minor, I think you're off the hook too. It's vaguely possible that you could get busted, though, IANAL, and the last time I read this bill was a couple of weeks ago.
That's pretty much what they're aiming for (restricting sales of intense games to minors... whether by ESRB rating or by the judgement of the court), it's just that explicitly enforcing the ESRB ratings specifically would mean governmentalizing the ESRB. (IE... what would happen to this law if the ESRB went out of business, or decided to change their rating system?)
That's why, in terms of a law, they need to keep the ratings system out of the process.
A game cannot be sold to minors only if it fails all 3 clauses. Clause 3 is an escape clause saying that even if your game, say contained scenes of nazis torturing jews to death graphically, if it accurately portrayed the holocaust (qualifying for literary, artistic or political merit) the game would not be restricted.
As to who decides... I believe it would come to a judge, and he would hear arguments about whether or not the game had any of the mentioned merits. If the game has any merit, you're off the hook.
Frankly, I'd find it hard to believe that anyone with a competent lawyer wouldn't be off the hook for nearly any game on the basis of artistic merit. Nearly every videogame these days has a reasonable story line, and should qualify.
Can you find a reference to any law in the U.S. restricting the sale of R-rated movies to minors?
And even if there was one, no one could possibly be brought up on charges (successfully anyway, one would hope) given that video games are not movies.
And the whole reason laws like this are getting passed is that none of the big 3 games distributors is willing to be first to put in place a national policy to restrict sales of mature games to minors.
How do you estimate the research costs though? What is the limit on hourly pay for researchers? How much documentation do you have to supply to prove the actual research costs.
And you're ignoring the side issue: Patents aren't just there to protect an inventor's costs, but also to allow them a time period to profit from their invention. If it takes you one, ten minute stroke of genius to come up with a new quantum computer design that turns out to be cheap for IBM to manufacture, and make 10 trillion dollars from, it seems mildly unfair for you to be compensated $12 for your ten minutes when it turns out that you don't have the resources to produce any such quantum computers, and you make no further money.
That's rather a stretch... been hit up by his PR campaign? It's hard to see how anyone could claim that MS did anything but drive up the cost of computing with their predatory monopolistic practices.
I'm sorry, but clearly, since all of the people you're talking about are viewed as evil villains, it seems hard to claim that using philanthropy as a cover up for a lifetime of evil moneymaking works.
I can't see how someone familiar with the history of the computer industry could think that... if anything I think the PC would be quite a bit more popular today had MS never existed.
I could well even imagine that using RTTI in C++ he could actually just split out whatever logic expected different types. Certainly there's some work there, but it seems plausible to me.
I think this sort of tool serves a different purpose. If you have an evolving program, one that needs some speed, but also needs rapid development, then hopefully what this allows is that you do not need to write the heavily used functions in c++, but instead can translate and compile each version of your python program as part of your tool chain. Your strategy makes more sense as your project reaches maturity and stability, whereas this sort of technique is more effective for situations where performance is important, but there is also still rapid development going on.
Well, it's not quite as bad as it sounds. He's seemingly only really forbidding incompatible mixed types in the same variable, a usage that isn't exactly extremely common.
A more significant roadblock, IMO, is that he can't handle mixed types in 3+-tuples, which is very common.
Actually, the people who think global warming is a looming catastrophe expect that it will impact us all, severely, in the next 20-30 years (surely within most slashdotter lifetimes). By their theory the warming atmosphere will yield multiple Katrina level disasters per year. Rising sea levels will do hundreds of billions of dollars of property damage, etc.
You have to understand. It has been about a year from being done, for oh, the last 6 years. If they rushed, they could be 9 months from being done for the next 3 or 4 years.
Umm... yeah. Your claims are incorrect. My claims were neither.
ad lazarum requires, essentially, that I argue that the position taken by the poor is right, which I do not. Instead I claimed that his position was not equatable with that of the poor, which is not the same thing, but I'm sure you just ignored that for the inconvenience.
ad hominem requires that I attack the messenger, which I did not, I attacked his specific claims about his condition being equal to that of the exploited workers, by giving examples that would differentiate the two conditions. I didn't claim the author was ignorant, or stupid, or otherwise not worth listening to, I attacked his specific message, which happened to be about himself. This mistake is rather more forgiveable (it is easier to believe you mistook the content of my post for ad hominem by mistake rather than deliberate intent).
Out of curiosity, why would it be important to purify the water before separation into hydrogen/oxygen? Most of the methods I'm familiar with don't particularly care if the water is pure, the waste rate from impurities is meaningless, and cleaning just means occasional sludge removal.
You understand that this is China, right, and that these women don't get to vote for their government? And to be fair, I doubt that anyone discussing this wouldn't rather do something about the Chinese government, but since they have a lot of nuclear weapons, that's a challenge. And the US government is hopelessly controlled by big business.
Everyone has a responsibility not to be complicit with exploitation. That includes Apple. Just because something is legal, doesn't make it right to get involved in it.
Apple is an easier target for change than the Chinese or US governments. They are a US company, selling a high priced product that isn't a necessity, an obvious target for a boycott.
I'm whining about the symptom because it is an addressable, voluntarily participating part of the disease.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if it was up to me, i'd say certainly not prior to brain formation.
I'd just go with the standard we already have, which states that human subjects have special protections. If fetuses really require protection, just get them legally declared human beings from conception.
My fellow republicans, it is time we got out our pitchforks and torches. The mad scientists are going too far, and frankly, I think we all know we're overdue for some lynchings. God didn't put us on this earth to suck cells out of unborn babies to heal the sick, but he gave us fire for good reason, and it is time we used some of it!
The performance of full-disk encryption tools probably wasn't adequate at the time.
Ten bucks says they find a way to lead Google away in handcuffs.
f &client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&s a=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=gambling+we bsite&spell=1
Yup:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=xf0&safe=of
If google has any washington based employees, they better watch out.
This laws has no effect on that hypothetical situation.
This law potentially sends the seller, not the buyer of an inappropriate game to jail.
Since the seller sold it to an adult, he's off the hook.
Since you gave it, without monetary consideration, to the minor, I think you're off the hook too. It's vaguely possible that you could get busted, though, IANAL, and the last time I read this bill was a couple of weeks ago.
That's pretty much what they're aiming for (restricting sales of intense games to minors ... whether by ESRB rating or by the judgement of the court), it's just that explicitly enforcing the ESRB ratings specifically would mean governmentalizing the ESRB. (IE ... what would happen to this law if the ESRB went out of business, or decided to change their rating system?)
That's why, in terms of a law, they need to keep the ratings system out of the process.
A game cannot be sold to minors only if it fails all 3 clauses. Clause 3 is an escape clause saying that even if your game, say contained scenes of nazis torturing jews to death graphically, if it accurately portrayed the holocaust (qualifying for literary, artistic or political merit) the game would not be restricted.
... I believe it would come to a judge, and he would hear arguments about whether or not the game had any of the mentioned merits. If the game has any merit, you're off the hook.
As to who decides
Frankly, I'd find it hard to believe that anyone with a competent lawyer wouldn't be off the hook for nearly any game on the basis of artistic merit. Nearly every videogame these days has a reasonable story line, and should qualify.
Can you find a reference to any law in the U.S. restricting the sale of R-rated movies to minors?
And even if there was one, no one could possibly be brought up on charges (successfully anyway, one would hope) given that video games are not movies.
And the whole reason laws like this are getting passed is that none of the big 3 games distributors is willing to be first to put in place a national policy to restrict sales of mature games to minors.
How do you estimate the research costs though? What is the limit on hourly pay for researchers? How much documentation do you have to supply to prove the actual research costs.
And you're ignoring the side issue: Patents aren't just there to protect an inventor's costs, but also to allow them a time period to profit from their invention. If it takes you one, ten minute stroke of genius to come up with a new quantum computer design that turns out to be cheap for IBM to manufacture, and make 10 trillion dollars from, it seems mildly unfair for you to be compensated $12 for your ten minutes when it turns out that you don't have the resources to produce any such quantum computers, and you make no further money.
Metamods: always enjoy an overrated unmoderated post.
That's rather a stretch ... been hit up by his PR campaign? It's hard to see how anyone could claim that MS did anything but drive up the cost of computing with their predatory monopolistic practices.
I'm sorry, but clearly, since all of the people you're talking about are viewed as evil villains, it seems hard to claim that using philanthropy as a cover up for a lifetime of evil moneymaking works.
I can't see how someone familiar with the history of the computer industry could think that ... if anything I think the PC would be quite a bit more popular today had MS never existed.
I could well even imagine that using RTTI in C++ he could actually just split out whatever logic expected different types. Certainly there's some work there, but it seems plausible to me.
I think this sort of tool serves a different purpose. If you have an evolving program, one that needs some speed, but also needs rapid development, then hopefully what this allows is that you do not need to write the heavily used functions in c++, but instead can translate and compile each version of your python program as part of your tool chain. Your strategy makes more sense as your project reaches maturity and stability, whereas this sort of technique is more effective for situations where performance is important, but there is also still rapid development going on.
Well, it's not quite as bad as it sounds. He's seemingly only really forbidding incompatible mixed types in the same variable, a usage that isn't exactly extremely common.
A more significant roadblock, IMO, is that he can't handle mixed types in 3+-tuples, which is very common.
Until he addresses mixed types in n-tuples, this won't be useful for very many people.
Actually, the people who think global warming is a looming catastrophe expect that it will impact us all, severely, in the next 20-30 years (surely within most slashdotter lifetimes). By their theory the warming atmosphere will yield multiple Katrina level disasters per year. Rising sea levels will do hundreds of billions of dollars of property damage, etc.
We'll know if the alarmists were right in 30 years.
You have to understand. It has been about a year from being done, for oh, the last 6 years. If they rushed, they could be 9 months from being done for the next 3 or 4 years.
Maybe they should consider deleting the 'Me too!' posts, otherwise, I have a new business plan for Michael Dell.
Umm ... yeah. Your claims are incorrect. My claims were neither.
ad lazarum requires, essentially, that I argue that the position taken by the poor is right, which I do not. Instead I claimed that his position was not equatable with that of the poor, which is not the same thing, but I'm sure you just ignored that for the inconvenience.
ad hominem requires that I attack the messenger, which I did not, I attacked his specific claims about his condition being equal to that of the exploited workers, by giving examples that would differentiate the two conditions. I didn't claim the author was ignorant, or stupid, or otherwise not worth listening to, I attacked his specific message, which happened to be about himself. This mistake is rather more forgiveable (it is easier to believe you mistook the content of my post for ad hominem by mistake rather than deliberate intent).
Out of curiosity, why would it be important to purify the water before separation into hydrogen/oxygen? Most of the methods I'm familiar with don't particularly care if the water is pure, the waste rate from impurities is meaningless, and cleaning just means occasional sludge removal.
You understand that this is China, right, and that these women don't get to vote for their government? And to be fair, I doubt that anyone discussing this wouldn't rather do something about the Chinese government, but since they have a lot of nuclear weapons, that's a challenge. And the US government is hopelessly controlled by big business.
Everyone has a responsibility not to be complicit with exploitation. That includes Apple. Just because something is legal, doesn't make it right to get involved in it.
Apple is an easier target for change than the Chinese or US governments. They are a US company, selling a high priced product that isn't a necessity, an obvious target for a boycott.
I'm whining about the symptom because it is an addressable, voluntarily participating part of the disease.