I think people like the convenience of consoles, mainly. Turn them on, and bang, you're playing in a moment. The locked-in hardware means that everything you run on it will be compatible, or updates will be auto-installed.
However, we've gotten sick of the console-makers' sense that somehow they OWN us as customers, and can reach further and further into our lives to control the console experience downstream.
If I mod my console, that's MY BUSINESS, not the hardware-sellers. I don't think anyone would object to the developers saying "ok then that voids your warranty" - that's fair. But when they push updates that then (pretty obviously deliberately) break modding, brick systems, and contrive to rope us back into their definition of what we should be doing with their systems, we resist and look for alternatives.
Which is why I hope this works, but its main impact will be in policy, not product. It's a vote against the proprietary walled-garden mentality of the big hardware makers. PERHAPS they'll see that a console player just wants to play the damned games, not become part of the dev's 'family'.
"Anyway, are there any tweaks in the softawe to account for this? If you DO angle the displays, then you no longer have a flat "window" into the virtual 3D world. "
Basically, yes. The side-monitors aren't just the left and right 'edges' of the main view.
I know from early Quake2 implementations, that while your front view might be 70deg in front of you, the left/right monitors could be set to be the view from the players view, looking to the side X degrees, with their own FOV adjustment. So the right monitor displays the view from your character as if the viewpoint was locked 60 degrees rightward, or whatever. It was generally best to arrange the monitor so that the faceplane would be exactly parallel to your eyes when you turned your head that way. I found that failing to bring the monitors in far enough would cause me to get sort of a fisheye effect that was disorienting (and probably would make sensitive players sick).
It was fun, but at that point (without flatscreens) it was hot, unwieldy, and tons of space. Personally, I found it was less useful than I expected; I didn't find much more utility than a single screen with FOV90. Certainly not enough to justify the cost.
Personally, I wish they'd drop ALL restrictions. Let's see what the best labs, piles of money, human ingenuity, and OCD athletes can accomplish.
I want to see sprinters winning the 10k in under 10m times with spliced cheetah tendons, and hyperoxygenated shrew blood. I want to see swimmers with shark skin, webbed everything, and re-plumbed breathing holes out the top of their head doing the 1500m without taking 2nd breath.
Screw it, it's all about $$ anyway, and these athletes are already essentially sacrificing a normal existence for their sport. Let's see what we can accomplish when we REALLY try.
If you believe that it's ok to use tweetspeak and such in emails and electronic communication for business, etc. - then please, be my guest.
I sincerely doubt that any amount of persuasion from me is going to convince the people who already do this to change their habits. On the contrary, I invite people to use WHATEVER language they feel is appropriate in their communications with management, coworkers, and customers.
When I get your email, I'll treat you with the respect and professionalism it appears to deserve, and I look forward to watching your progress in the workplace/marketplace.
That's even a fairly tame framing of the question.
I'd ask further that - as long as the individuals are consenting, sane adults, why is any other relationship prohibited? Why not a relationship between two (or more) adult siblings? Or an adult parent and an adult child?
Marriage isn't just about procreation anymore so why not these choices as well?
Personally, I'd be all for opening the legally-recognized relationship definition to encompass WHATEVER, *but* with the caveat that getting OUT of that relationship is much, much harder. And if there are kids, you are financially tied to support them until at least 18 or 21, whatever the magic 'adult' number is these days - along with concomitant draconian increases in penalties for people that bail on those financial commitments including complete seizure of assets and/or indentured servitude.
Why I hate the Left, lesson 123: No matter what you do, you get complaints. If you do some good, it's not according to THEIR methods, or it's not good enough.
Except that repeatedly throughout Earth's history, CO2 levels have spiked almost instantly (at least to the resolution of whatever's being used as a temperature proxy), and the earth has some sort of feedback mechanism that restores the system.
If the raised taxes actually WENT to something like actual infrastructure, instead of paying Lateisha to have her 12th kid from unknown dad number 8, Republicans would probably be more likely to support it.
But then again, we understand that Dems are cool with it, it's just another Democratic voter.
""The Congress is one of limited powers while the bulk are reserved to the States and the People, respectively (10th amend.)." - James Madison, author of the Constitution."
Oh, I was pretty sure that they'd gotten rid of that part by now..
My favorite features about liberals. 1) they can't really distinguish humor from ideological whinging 2) if they do find a premise recognizably humorous, they beat it far, far past the point that it's even worth a chuckle 3) no matter how inane their comments, on slashdot it's +5 insightful
You've encased all your vehicles in faraday cages, you are now immune to the "lightning weapon". Of course, none of them can communicate with each other unless they open hatches and yell.
I'm sure that this has NOTHING to do with the X37, and any conceivable plan to disable/grab/dissect/plunder Chinese/Russian satellites in orbit.
No, no, we're going to send a multimillion-dollar mission aloft to repair and enable broken space junk that even if restored to functional within a year or three is grossly outdated by new advances in hardware.
Our immigrant ancestors, who braved the almost-complete unknown, packed their worldly belongings into a trunk or two, in order to give us a chance better life - are now spinning in their graves.
The didn't expect the complete pussification of their descendants to proceed quite so rapidly.
If you think Fox News or the BBC or NPR don't already have a strong editorial bias, you're fooling yourself. Even if politically neutral (which none of them are), they all have a market-bias (commercial or otherwise). Fox of course is trying to embarrass its compeition, NPR is deliberately slamming Fox during its begging, er, 'pledge' drives.
At least with government-controlled media, the bias will be overt and inarguable.
"Since the 1970s scouts have to pass both a one on one review of personal morality with an adult leader and a community board of review" This is simply wrong or a lie. There is a requirement for a scoutmaster review, and an adults-group board of review at each rank level. These are opportunities to review the scout's role in the troop, how he's getting along with the other scouts, and if he's remembering/maintaining basic elements of the scout law/motto/oath in his daily life outside of scouts - like doing a good turn daily, etc. I would hardly call this a "review of personal morality" except insofar as the scouts HAVE a code of conduct and a core set of beliefs.... NOTHING has anything to do with Mormonism or funny underwear or polygamy or whatever the hell you think is the 'secret' bit. The board of review is some dads talking with the boy, spot-reviewing the skills and such that the boy had to learn to get the rank (to make sure he's at least somewhat internalized them), and just chatting with the boy to find out 'how it's going'.
"rejecting the Unitarian religious emblem badge on doctrinal grounds and barring Wiccans from membership entirely" Duty to God medal: there is an optional medal a scout can pursue called "Duty to God" as Scouting takes very seriously that the scouts have SOME sort of 'higher belief'. Contrary to your screed, there is NO doctrinal affiliation encouraged or suggested; a scout says "I'd like to do the Duty to God medal" performs the requirements, and gets the specific medal for his faith. You'd have to be a complete nutter to look at the COMPREHENSIVE list of religious badges available http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/512-879_WB.pdf and conclude "aha, Mormon conspiracy!"...completely setting aside that there IS, in fact a religious award for "Unitarian Universalist" - would that be Unitarian? They have a website, if that helps, JUST for Unitarian Universalist scouts http://www.uuscouters.org/.
As far as "Wiccans not allowed" that's a complete lie. If you had done any research, you'd find that these religious emblem programs were STARTED in conjunction with the Church and the Scouts. The BSA doesn't design the programs. Without a formal Wiccan church, there's no such program. You'll also notice there's no Mithraic medal, Norse mythos medal, nor FSM medal. *HOWEVER* at the local troop level, if a scout has a faith that he would like to pursue the Medal on, I'd be willing to bet MOST thoughtful troop leaders would work with the scout to figure out a way to make such a program possible. The Wiccan scouts that were ejected from a scout program (to which I'm sure you're referring) were part of a local CHURCH troop, which was uncomfortable with the boys' affiliation. I certainly wouldn't have handled it that way, but our troop is sponsored by a Lions Club, not a church.
I know it's hard to believe, but Boy Scout organizations are neither homogenous nor perfect. They're made up of humans, with all the foibles and weaknesses inherent thereto. That troop leader was simply wrong in his whole approach. (shrug). I guess it's easy to paint a whole organization with the mistakes of a few, if that's really what you WANT to do.
The "Traditional Scouting" movement you refer to is a sort of internal movement that's common to many 100-year-old organizations - some people like the expansion into citizenship and such, some want to get back to the 'classic skill set' of building fires and camping. Pretty common tension in big organizations, in my view.
It's not homophobia, although I'm sure it's politically useful to call it that. Does BSA ban gay scouts? Nope.
Read further, and examine their stringent Child Protection rules (for example, ALWAYS at least 2 adults present, etc.).
Bury your head in a bucket all you like, but child predators exist. And the bulk of them are adult men.
Put it this way, to not offend your sensitivities: no person with a potential sexual attraction to the child is allowed in a leadership position.
I wouldn't let an adult male be the Scout leader for a bunch of teenage girl scouts, would you? (If your answer is yes, you're answering politically and not realistically.)
BSA has nothing against homosexuality per se, only in positions in which the potential exists for that individual to have access to same-gendered children.
I'm not sure you're not falling into a sort of Manichean black/white thing. What you're describing is SCANDINAVIAN culture, which has always been liberal with their kids. Hell, I routinely see in Denmark women parking their strollers outside a coffeeshop to sit inside and chat. BECAUSE THEY CAN.
Would you do that with your kid in Atlanta? The Bronx? How about San Francisco, often considered one of the more socially "enlightened" cities in the US.
Different cultures, and it's fairly dangerous to try to make value judgements because aspects of culture can't be excised and analyzed out of context.
FWIW I see lots of kids at the Loring Park pride events. (Twin Cities Pride Festival). Then again, that's a strongly scandinavian root-culture, if not the 99% white that it used to be not so many years ago.
It's a wild and wooly world out there, folks, and what you're seeing is the difference between an open society and closed ones. Russian, Chinese, DPRK, terrorist, and organized crime entities have been working aggressively to field all sorts of bots, viruses, and trojans designed to inflict harm or break into US systems for at least a decade.
When Israel and/or the US do it, it's almost inevitable that *someone* will find out, and at the NYT, they interpret this as "OMG look at what we're doing!"
By the same measure, one could blame the police for increasing violence by deciding to employ firearms. In fact, that's pretty much exactly what the NYTs position is on the 2nd amendment, so at least they're consistent, if absurdly naive.
It really is impossible for government (local, state, or federal) to kill a program, isn't it?
Just for SOMEONE to say "you know, this may have been a good idea, but now it's just stupid, let's stop this"?
Please note that the Rural Electrification Administration - a 1935 New Deal office set up to bring electricity to US farms - still exists. 1935 11% of farms had electricity 1949 mandate was expanded, to allow the REA to offer federal loans to local telephone co-ops 1952 98% of farms had electricity...agency still not dead. 1994 agency renamed the Rural Utilities Service
The role of the current agency is hilariously described in Wiki: "The RUS administrator makes the primary policy and program decisions for the agency and is assisted by a borrower and program support staff that includes a financial services staff, an administrative liaison staff, and a program accounting services division. Because of the financial nature of the agency's work, the administrator and associated staff work closely with two other agencies that are not part of the USDA, the Federal Financing Bank (FFB)--and the former Rural Telephone Bank (RTB), which was dissolved in 2006. These banks provide the funds for many of the loan programs administered by the RUS. The program functions of the RUS are divided into three operating units: water and waste, electric, and telecommunications, each led by an assistant administrator. The administrator and staff concentrate on the financial details of individual RUS projects, and these three operating units provide the engineering and technical personnel to plan and execute projects."
Which pretty much translates to a self-justifying rationale any Byzantine Emperor would have been proud to call his own.
"Children learn by observing as well. What are you teaching them by not having a social live of your own?" Not having a social life != not having a social life of your OWN. You can certainly have a social life, you just have to re-arrange it so it's appropriate that they participate. Instead of bars and clubs, it's playdates and parks.
If you set aside going out to the bar with friends for the time your kids are little, you're probably teaching them that - having a family involves sacrifice - loved ones, and people that depend on you, are more important than 'having some fun' - that self-sacrifice is worth something
What I found good was that they supposedly had a way to link multiple clients to a single central db of rules, logs, etc. I could never get it to work, so just ended up running it in standalone versions and it did a good job.
Their support was excellent, they constantly answered my stupid questions right away.
Then again, it seems pretty expensive now, it was only $20 for a 5-user license roughly 10-12 yrs ago when I bought it, which was a steal.
If you had kids WITHOUT understanding that the next 20-25 years of your life were going to be about them, and not you, you're an idiot.
You have to quit your full time job? Don't your kids go to school? Dump your friends and drop sports or hobbies? Oh noes! Their lives take priority over yours.
Your new life IS monitoring every waking second of your child's, then every other second, then every third, etc. And when you're not monitoring them, you're worried about them.
Slashdot Mirror
I think people like the convenience of consoles, mainly. Turn them on, and bang, you're playing in a moment. The locked-in hardware means that everything you run on it will be compatible, or updates will be auto-installed.
However, we've gotten sick of the console-makers' sense that somehow they OWN us as customers, and can reach further and further into our lives to control the console experience downstream.
If I mod my console, that's MY BUSINESS, not the hardware-sellers. I don't think anyone would object to the developers saying "ok then that voids your warranty" - that's fair. But when they push updates that then (pretty obviously deliberately) break modding, brick systems, and contrive to rope us back into their definition of what we should be doing with their systems, we resist and look for alternatives.
Which is why I hope this works, but its main impact will be in policy, not product. It's a vote against the proprietary walled-garden mentality of the big hardware makers. PERHAPS they'll see that a console player just wants to play the damned games, not become part of the dev's 'family'.
"Anyway, are there any tweaks in the softawe to account for this? If you DO angle the displays, then you no longer have a flat "window" into the virtual 3D world. "
Basically, yes. The side-monitors aren't just the left and right 'edges' of the main view.
I know from early Quake2 implementations, that while your front view might be 70deg in front of you, the left/right monitors could be set to be the view from the players view, looking to the side X degrees, with their own FOV adjustment. So the right monitor displays the view from your character as if the viewpoint was locked 60 degrees rightward, or whatever. It was generally best to arrange the monitor so that the faceplane would be exactly parallel to your eyes when you turned your head that way. I found that failing to bring the monitors in far enough would cause me to get sort of a fisheye effect that was disorienting (and probably would make sensitive players sick).
It was fun, but at that point (without flatscreens) it was hot, unwieldy, and tons of space. Personally, I found it was less useful than I expected; I didn't find much more utility than a single screen with FOV90. Certainly not enough to justify the cost.
Personally, I wish they'd drop ALL restrictions.
Let's see what the best labs, piles of money, human ingenuity, and OCD athletes can accomplish.
I want to see sprinters winning the 10k in under 10m times with spliced cheetah tendons, and hyperoxygenated shrew blood.
I want to see swimmers with shark skin, webbed everything, and re-plumbed breathing holes out the top of their head doing the 1500m without taking 2nd breath.
Screw it, it's all about $$ anyway, and these athletes are already essentially sacrificing a normal existence for their sport. Let's see what we can accomplish when we REALLY try.
I wish I could mod you to +8 million.
Frankly, I'm saving your post, it's the most insightful thing I've read in a week.
If you believe that it's ok to use tweetspeak and such in emails and electronic communication for business, etc. - then please, be my guest.
I sincerely doubt that any amount of persuasion from me is going to convince the people who already do this to change their habits. On the contrary, I invite people to use WHATEVER language they feel is appropriate in their communications with management, coworkers, and customers.
When I get your email, I'll treat you with the respect and professionalism it appears to deserve, and I look forward to watching your progress in the workplace/marketplace.
That's even a fairly tame framing of the question.
I'd ask further that - as long as the individuals are consenting, sane adults, why is any other relationship prohibited?
Why not a relationship between two (or more) adult siblings?
Or an adult parent and an adult child?
Marriage isn't just about procreation anymore so why not these choices as well?
Personally, I'd be all for opening the legally-recognized relationship definition to encompass WHATEVER, *but* with the caveat that getting OUT of that relationship is much, much harder. And if there are kids, you are financially tied to support them until at least 18 or 21, whatever the magic 'adult' number is these days - along with concomitant draconian increases in penalties for people that bail on those financial commitments including complete seizure of assets and/or indentured servitude.
Why I hate the Left, lesson 123: No matter what you do, you get complaints. If you do some good, it's not according to THEIR methods, or it's not good enough.
Except that repeatedly throughout Earth's history, CO2 levels have spiked almost instantly (at least to the resolution of whatever's being used as a temperature proxy), and the earth has some sort of feedback mechanism that restores the system.
If the raised taxes actually WENT to something like actual infrastructure, instead of paying Lateisha to have her 12th kid from unknown dad number 8, Republicans would probably be more likely to support it.
But then again, we understand that Dems are cool with it, it's just another Democratic voter.
""The Congress is one of limited powers while the bulk are reserved to the States and the People, respectively (10th amend.)." - James Madison, author of the Constitution."
Oh, I was pretty sure that they'd gotten rid of that part by now..
My favorite features about liberals.
1) they can't really distinguish humor from ideological whinging
2) if they do find a premise recognizably humorous, they beat it far, far past the point that it's even worth a chuckle
3) no matter how inane their comments, on slashdot it's +5 insightful
You've encased all your vehicles in faraday cages, you are now immune to the "lightning weapon".
Of course, none of them can communicate with each other unless they open hatches and yell.
Congratulations?
Thanks for that, because "cherry picking" quotes is a neat way of illustrating the subtle ways bias can be deployed.
I'm sure that this has NOTHING to do with the X37, and any conceivable plan to disable/grab/dissect/plunder Chinese/Russian satellites in orbit.
No, no, we're going to send a multimillion-dollar mission aloft to repair and enable broken space junk that even if restored to functional within a year or three is grossly outdated by new advances in hardware.
aka the "Erin Andrews" option.
Our immigrant ancestors, who braved the almost-complete unknown, packed their worldly belongings into a trunk or two, in order to give us a chance better life - are now spinning in their graves.
The didn't expect the complete pussification of their descendants to proceed quite so rapidly.
If you think Fox News or the BBC or NPR don't already have a strong editorial bias, you're fooling yourself. Even if politically neutral (which none of them are), they all have a market-bias (commercial or otherwise). Fox of course is trying to embarrass its compeition, NPR is deliberately slamming Fox during its begging, er, 'pledge' drives.
At least with government-controlled media, the bias will be overt and inarguable.
What are you even TALKING about?
"Since the 1970s scouts have to pass both a one on one review of personal morality with an adult leader and a community board of review"
This is simply wrong or a lie. There is a requirement for a scoutmaster review, and an adults-group board of review at each rank level. These are opportunities to review the scout's role in the troop, how he's getting along with the other scouts, and if he's remembering/maintaining basic elements of the scout law/motto/oath in his daily life outside of scouts - like doing a good turn daily, etc. I would hardly call this a "review of personal morality" except insofar as the scouts HAVE a code of conduct and a core set of beliefs.... NOTHING has anything to do with Mormonism or funny underwear or polygamy or whatever the hell you think is the 'secret' bit. The board of review is some dads talking with the boy, spot-reviewing the skills and such that the boy had to learn to get the rank (to make sure he's at least somewhat internalized them), and just chatting with the boy to find out 'how it's going'.
"rejecting the Unitarian religious emblem badge on doctrinal grounds and barring Wiccans from membership entirely"
Duty to God medal: there is an optional medal a scout can pursue called "Duty to God" as Scouting takes very seriously that the scouts have SOME sort of 'higher belief'. Contrary to your screed, there is NO doctrinal affiliation encouraged or suggested; a scout says "I'd like to do the Duty to God medal" performs the requirements, and gets the specific medal for his faith. You'd have to be a complete nutter to look at the COMPREHENSIVE list of religious badges available http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/512-879_WB.pdf and conclude "aha, Mormon conspiracy!"...completely setting aside that there IS, in fact a religious award for "Unitarian Universalist" - would that be Unitarian? They have a website, if that helps, JUST for Unitarian Universalist scouts http://www.uuscouters.org/.
As far as "Wiccans not allowed" that's a complete lie. If you had done any research, you'd find that these religious emblem programs were STARTED in conjunction with the Church and the Scouts. The BSA doesn't design the programs. Without a formal Wiccan church, there's no such program. You'll also notice there's no Mithraic medal, Norse mythos medal, nor FSM medal. *HOWEVER* at the local troop level, if a scout has a faith that he would like to pursue the Medal on, I'd be willing to bet MOST thoughtful troop leaders would work with the scout to figure out a way to make such a program possible. The Wiccan scouts that were ejected from a scout program (to which I'm sure you're referring) were part of a local CHURCH troop, which was uncomfortable with the boys' affiliation. I certainly wouldn't have handled it that way, but our troop is sponsored by a Lions Club, not a church.
I know it's hard to believe, but Boy Scout organizations are neither homogenous nor perfect. They're made up of humans, with all the foibles and weaknesses inherent thereto. That troop leader was simply wrong in his whole approach. (shrug). I guess it's easy to paint a whole organization with the mistakes of a few, if that's really what you WANT to do.
The "Traditional Scouting" movement you refer to is a sort of internal movement that's common to many 100-year-old organizations - some people like the expansion into citizenship and such, some want to get back to the 'classic skill set' of building fires and camping. Pretty common tension in big organizations, in my view.
It's not homophobia, although I'm sure it's politically useful to call it that.
Does BSA ban gay scouts? Nope.
Read further, and examine their stringent Child Protection rules (for example, ALWAYS at least 2 adults present, etc.).
Bury your head in a bucket all you like, but child predators exist. And the bulk of them are adult men.
Put it this way, to not offend your sensitivities: no person with a potential sexual attraction to the child is allowed in a leadership position.
I wouldn't let an adult male be the Scout leader for a bunch of teenage girl scouts, would you? (If your answer is yes, you're answering politically and not realistically.)
BSA has nothing against homosexuality per se, only in positions in which the potential exists for that individual to have access to same-gendered children.
I'm not sure you're not falling into a sort of Manichean black/white thing.
What you're describing is SCANDINAVIAN culture, which has always been liberal with their kids. Hell, I routinely see in Denmark women parking their strollers outside a coffeeshop to sit inside and chat. BECAUSE THEY CAN.
Would you do that with your kid in Atlanta?
The Bronx?
How about San Francisco, often considered one of the more socially "enlightened" cities in the US.
Different cultures, and it's fairly dangerous to try to make value judgements because aspects of culture can't be excised and analyzed out of context.
FWIW I see lots of kids at the Loring Park pride events. (Twin Cities Pride Festival). Then again, that's a strongly scandinavian root-culture, if not the 99% white that it used to be not so many years ago.
It's a wild and wooly world out there, folks, and what you're seeing is the difference between an open society and closed ones. Russian, Chinese, DPRK, terrorist, and organized crime entities have been working aggressively to field all sorts of bots, viruses, and trojans designed to inflict harm or break into US systems for at least a decade.
When Israel and/or the US do it, it's almost inevitable that *someone* will find out, and at the NYT, they interpret this as "OMG look at what we're doing!"
By the same measure, one could blame the police for increasing violence by deciding to employ firearms. In fact, that's pretty much exactly what the NYTs position is on the 2nd amendment, so at least they're consistent, if absurdly naive.
It really is impossible for government (local, state, or federal) to kill a program, isn't it?
Just for SOMEONE to say "you know, this may have been a good idea, but now it's just stupid, let's stop this"?
Please note that the Rural Electrification Administration - a 1935 New Deal office set up to bring electricity to US farms - still exists.
1935 11% of farms had electricity
1949 mandate was expanded, to allow the REA to offer federal loans to local telephone co-ops
1952 98% of farms had electricity...agency still not dead.
1994 agency renamed the Rural Utilities Service
The role of the current agency is hilariously described in Wiki:
"The RUS administrator makes the primary policy and program decisions for the agency and is assisted by a borrower and program support staff that includes a financial services staff, an administrative liaison staff, and a program accounting services division. Because of the financial nature of the agency's work, the administrator and associated staff work closely with two other agencies that are not part of the USDA, the Federal Financing Bank (FFB)--and the former Rural Telephone Bank (RTB), which was dissolved in 2006. These banks provide the funds for many of the loan programs administered by the RUS.
The program functions of the RUS are divided into three operating units: water and waste, electric, and telecommunications, each led by an assistant administrator. The administrator and staff concentrate on the financial details of individual RUS projects, and these three operating units provide the engineering and technical personnel to plan and execute projects."
Which pretty much translates to a self-justifying rationale any Byzantine Emperor would have been proud to call his own.
"Children learn by observing as well. What are you teaching them by not having a social live of your own?"
Not having a social life != not having a social life of your OWN. You can certainly have a social life, you just have to re-arrange it so it's appropriate that they participate. Instead of bars and clubs, it's playdates and parks.
If you set aside going out to the bar with friends for the time your kids are little, you're probably teaching them that
- having a family involves sacrifice
- loved ones, and people that depend on you, are more important than 'having some fun'
- that self-sacrifice is worth something
Yeah, those are HORRIBLE lessons.
I found Child Control from http://www.salfeld.com/ good (there's German and US sites).
What I found good was that they supposedly had a way to link multiple clients to a single central db of rules, logs, etc. I could never get it to work, so just ended up running it in standalone versions and it did a good job.
Their support was excellent, they constantly answered my stupid questions right away.
Then again, it seems pretty expensive now, it was only $20 for a 5-user license roughly 10-12 yrs ago when I bought it, which was a steal.
If you had kids WITHOUT understanding that the next 20-25 years of your life were going to be about them, and not you, you're an idiot.
You have to quit your full time job? Don't your kids go to school?
Dump your friends and drop sports or hobbies? Oh noes! Their lives take priority over yours.
Your new life IS monitoring every waking second of your child's, then every other second, then every third, etc. And when you're not monitoring them, you're worried about them.