Just a thought. Since the recent Mac OS X is just BSD and there are Linux ports for them, isn't it likely that Linux games are more likely to crop up when people are doing the Mac versions?
Re:Is it Linux users, or is it the games?
on
Loki Games Closing?
·
· Score: 1
It was a Loki problem, too...I tried really hard to buy their games, but they never released a single game I was genuinely interested in playing, and buying games I didn't play to support them got old fast...
Yeah. I've got about five that I bought, but I wasn't really interested in them.
Now, I am interested in The Sims, so I'm very happy that they did a WINE bundle with Mandrake Linux!
I'm not an OS purist about games - I like buying one disk that works for Mac, Win, Linux. And I want to buy what I'm interested in.
On the other hand, is such a hoax any worse than the current hoax we all live under, the one that says that Oil is necessary for our survival and operation?
I mean, science and small companies have been operating clean coal and wind energy power at less than half the cost of oil or even natural gas for years now, and yet the media would have you believe we "have" to support the terrorists so we can get their oil.
So, given the general state of the media and its coverage of energy, and the gullibility of the American public on this matter, I don't see why it's so unbelievable they'd buy into a "free energy" scam.
If our precious youth have access to such Internet access they will undoubtably explore the boundaries of information, learn how to pilot combat drones with people from around the world, and learn skills that might actually lead to real world jobs.
This is incredibly dangerous!
Why, if they start thinking, if they can interact with people from other societies and cultures it will be as bad as when Rock Music became popular in the 1940s and 1950s and society will fall into ruin! As people said then, society will not outlast the decade!
This is not Ms. Drobiazko's first experience with oppression at the hands of multinational corporations, as she was formerly employed at a quaint coffee house in Vilnius which was crushed last year under the oppressive heel of Starbucks.
Yes, that was quite the funny response.
However, it avoids the fact that media access is limited by the controls, just as web surfer access is limited by using JavaScript.
I have JavaScript turned off in virtually all my browsers, and only turn it on for a few trusted sites. Why not use server-side Java, something that IBM can easily provide with an IBM mainframe running multiple Linux instances ("virtual boxes")?
Why use JavaScript at all (or ECMAScript, which is what most coders settle on, since it works fairly well)?
The biggest accessibility mogul in my mind, though it really doesn't have to do with the usability of the site per se, is the restrictive conditions put on independent Web media reporting on the games.
Does this mean that IMC reporters are barred? They gave the best coverage of many modern events, such as Genoa, Seattle, and other events.
As an American, as a citizen, it is your duty to report (and possibly sue if no action is taken) any problems with site accessibility.
Think of all those people in China with Linux running non-MSFT browsers! Think of those handicapped people who have perl-scripts that turn their screens into speech.
We must all pull to together and make sure the site works with all Linux/BSD browsers.
And let's hope the script kiddies make it bulletproof from the bin Ladens of the world - where is the testing?
Five years before the ACLU handled its first Internet case, the EFF pioneered the field in a pair of landmark cases. The first involved Steve Jackson Games, a Texas-based company that had been raided by federal agents investigating hacking. The EFF brought a suit that established that e-mail is protected under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Law enforcement would be required to have a warrant describing each message or e-mail participant before the mail could be read.
And this is a case I remember well, since it happened to a friend. Steve was a great guy, lending his computers and people when we had the Worldcon in NoLa and had to rewrite some dBase programs to get panel/author registration up, since the coders had not bothered testing it for large-scale use and it collapsed when we scaled up to the size of a Worldcon.
And then they took his computers when he wrote a GAME about hackers, broke them into bits (literally) and "returned" the broken parts to him. Tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, destroyed. For no reason.
If you have problems destroying documents, you could always ask Arthur Anderson or Enron.
And it's a good thing that the files are recoverable using these techniques, because even the old standard, writing 010101 patterns five times over won't stop modern recovery techniques.
When I served, we had to scrub our old hard drives in this way (010101), as otherwise they could get the info.
Because of all the fallout and implications between Enron execs and the Bush administration. Bush may want to do something to show that he's not a pushover for business.
You are probably correct. They've already got 6 investigations ongoing, half the DOJ recused, and 20 different statements to try to deflect from that.
What they need now is a good scapegoat. Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll decide to make Bill G the scapegoat.
The judge was unhappy with the "private suits?" Great. Now MS will just release "public suits" for us to buy. In a year from now all of our clothing will be covered by.NET!
Will that have a.NET virus in it that undoes your zipper when you're not looking?
Yeah, in PA, there are NO limits on family work. NONE. In fact, parents could force me to work for zero pay (It happened with my dad before.. long story).
Exactly. On the other hand, this allows the parents to pay a salary to the kid, and withhold money to put in a Roth IRA and Education IRA for later education - if they're smart. And maybe a state plan to cover college. I pay my 10yo son to do some things, and save most of it for him. Which will mean he'll be able to buy a house in his 20s, and retire a multimillionaire without putting anything else away, if needed.
In PA, you can get a State ID at any age, I think. But it DOES still present a problem. I can get on a plane with ID on my own.. but Dr. Jihad could just take his suicide bomber kid on to do the duty so long as Dr. Jihad himself was clean. Perhaps these IDs (and passports) should have no picture on the face, and a EEPROM on the inside containing an updatable (whenever you want) picture.
If they're going to do it, they'll need to have better controls than they're talking about, so I fear it won't work - and won't stop the terrorists in any case.
And you sure are right about the child soldiers, I've heard my share of stories about them.
Wish it wasn't true. One of the things I wish I could forget.
The reason that MSFT employees had to "fix" the UK poll on what developers wanted to develop web services in. Because developers chose something stable like Java, not.Net - something harder to hack (not impossible, just harder).
-
Re:Is your head ENTIRELY lodged in your ass?
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
While the concept of a drone war is interesting, and even possible, we haven't gotten there yet, and saying that people fighting on one side of the war don't have any emotional investment is INCREDIBLY callous. Just because you don't have any friends stuck in Afghanistan doesn't mean it's the case for all of us. Beyond that, I assure you that the troops getting shot at have PLENTY of emotional investment in the war. Jackass.
If you don't think that Navy Seals have been in Afghanastan since September 12th, and that some of them died before we even declared war, then you shouldn't even speak of war, cause you are out of the loop.
Very true. Just as British commandos and Canadian special ops have been there since shortly after 911.
But Jon Katz likes to post about things he knows nothing about. So he ignores the reality to spin his fictional view of the universe, ignoring the evidence.
-
Northern Alliance drones - proxy or not?
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
The fact that America achieved her objectives with little loss of American life is meaningless in this context for a few simple reasons. American objectives were simply to eliminate the Taliban & Al Quaeda's abilities to carry out terrorism. Not neccessarily to "liberate" the Afghani people. It happened that in this instance this goal dove-tailed nicely with the goals of certain Afghani parties whose ambitions were to remove the Taliban from power and institute a new state - so supporting those forces in achieving their goals was the simplest and most effective way of achieving the American goals.
Very true, just as it is true that neither the current regime in Afghanistan or Pakistan are truly our allies. In fact, they're most likely where many terrorists will come from, regardless of the nice words we say on TV.
Mostly however it was because America was fighting by proxy. There was little need for large numbers of ground troops to be deployed because the local forces were already in place and familiar with the landscape and the methods of fighting in this region. Also the political consequences both at home and in the eyes of other Muslim nations of a large-scale American invasion were prohibitive. So using somebody else to do the grunt-work of the war made both good political and military sense
And this is the trap we in the USA find ourselves in, far too often. It looks good on paper to have others fight our wars and be mercenaries. But the blowback is huge. It is only thru sacrifice of our own, thru our own casualties (if you will), that we learn the horror of war, and understand what we do.
For when we train a man to kill, he can use that skill to kill others we are friends with, or even use it against us. As happened with our proxies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. For it is mostly our proxies that seek to kill us.
The saving grace in this War is that we have partially learned this lesson. We now take the risks to our own lives, and suffer small casualties, and thus understand what we risk. And this makes us better - for it is not drones that have died, our honored dead; it is our soldiers and our spies that die and are buried for their service to our country.
And on TV we hear of the loss of these families, and we understand that this is truly War, not some video game.
-
Re:How can you compare Afghanistan to WW2?
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
Actually, it's not a bad comparison. In WW II terms, we're fighting the War in the Pacific right now. We got bombed in Hawaii (New York). We crippled their ability to strike at Midway (Afghanistan). And now we're island hopping (al-Qaeda forces).
At best, Iraq could be compared to Germany. A Germany weakened by fighting with Russia, one we can take on. But it has nothing to do with our current War, much as the neo-conservatives wish it did.
Despite the claims of JonKatz, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan does not disprove the need for infantry. We might not have many ground troops in, but the Northern Alliance has a whole bunch
In fact, it's because of our ground infantry, our special ops, that we've been able to drive the delivery cost of destruction down to such low levels.
When we have ground troops in position, we can target the places for the smart bombs to drop. Then we can drop $2500 bombs (smart dumb bombs - like JDAM - made here) instead of $250,000 bombs. And we hit more often and to more effect.
Without the infantry, the air war would be 1/20th as effective.
-
Re:Once again, Katz is totally clueless
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
Will someone please keep this idiot away from military issues?
Have to agree, it's painful to watch Jon write about such things.
He probably has no idea that we now have a substantial portion of the US military, the UK military, virtually all of the Canadian military, and loans of many NATO vessels and transports from many other countries involved.
This is NOT a small operation. It's actually larger than Desert Storm, but they're not sitting on the ground in Saudi Arabia, so people can't see how many people are involved in how many countries.
-
It's all about the money, honey
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 2
And Jon also failed to understand the real implications of this War. The real implication is that we moved to the CHEAP phase of combat quickly - that cheaper, faster, better has replaced expensive, powerful, bigger.
War is a combination of strategy, tactics, and applied economics. We can fight a war like this for decades, because we've dropped the cost of operations down to a level where it's cheaper for us to kill them than ever before.
A cruise missile that costs millions is ineffective except in certain conditions. A drone that can fly multiple times and deliver intel, allows us to drop cheap bombs ($2500 instead of $125,000) that are more accurate on positions where they cause more damage.
That is the implication of this war. And that is why we will WIN. And we're only about one-quarter done (maybe one-third at most), and are now in the island hopping phase (we just fought Midway after Pearl Harbor).
-
Jon - Drones are not Robots
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
Sigh. SciFi 101, Jon. Drone wars are usually about semi-autonomous machines which a remote controller supervises in large groups, not the current tech which is more of a single operator type.
Now there are things, sort of a BattleTech proxy line of SciFi, where you have Avatars (TM) who represent one person. This could be inferred from the Afghani experiences, but we're really not at that stage yet.
We only just got hellfires on some of the drones this year (been prototyped since last century), and it still needs a team of 2-3 people per machine at this point.
Perhaps at the later stages of The War we'll start to see one-man drones with weapons and armor, but we are not there yet.
[personal aside to Jon - please stop writing about things you know little about - it's very embarrassing to the rest of us here who may know something about these subjects - stick to what you know about, ok?]
Valid points. You're quite correct that you're not given the full rights of a citizen, even though you get all the downsides.
However, the work restrictions you mention apply only to work outside the family. As I recall my employment law (which varies from state to state, so your mileage may vary), non-adult family members are permitted to work more flexible hours and a little bit later.
For example, you may only be able to work privately until 7pm and no more than 15 hours a week, but if it was a family business, you'd probably be allowed to work until about 10pm and no more than 35 hours a week.
The concept is that your parents, as employers, would care more about you, and if you needed to do something for school, would have you do it. A private employer is presumed not to care about your schooling or your physical health as much, so the restrictions are tighter.
However, it still presents problems. For example, my son has to get a new passport when he's 15 or so, and I think they're only good for about 3 years when you're a kid.
The same restrictions would apply to drivers licenses. Because we look different as we age, they make you get new IDs.
But if you're 12 - how can you even apply for a non-drivers license? I thought they only gave out such state ID at age 13 at the least.
When my son and I travelled to the French West Indies (Caribbean) we only took birth certificates and my drivers license. When we fly on planes, only the adult shows ID - they never ask my son for ID.
And considering all the games he plays, he's probably better at causing harm than me, so you'd think they'd be more worried about him being a terrorist than me.
I've seen soldiers as young as 10 in Africa, on peacekeeping missions. They shoot you just as dead as adults do. And they're not as easy to reason with.
Slashdot Mirror
Just a thought. Since the recent Mac OS X is just BSD and there are Linux ports for them, isn't it likely that Linux games are more likely to crop up when people are doing the Mac versions?
It was a Loki problem, too...I tried really hard to buy their games, but they never released a single game I was genuinely interested in playing, and buying games I didn't play to support them got old fast...
Yeah. I've got about five that I bought, but I wasn't really interested in them.
Now, I am interested in The Sims, so I'm very happy that they did a WINE bundle with Mandrake Linux!
I'm not an OS purist about games - I like buying one disk that works for Mac, Win, Linux. And I want to buy what I'm interested in.
Is that so wrong?
-
On the other hand, is such a hoax any worse than the current hoax we all live under, the one that says that Oil is necessary for our survival and operation?
I mean, science and small companies have been operating clean coal and wind energy power at less than half the cost of oil or even natural gas for years now, and yet the media would have you believe we "have" to support the terrorists so we can get their oil.
So, given the general state of the media and its coverage of energy, and the gullibility of the American public on this matter, I don't see why it's so unbelievable they'd buy into a "free energy" scam.
-
If our precious youth have access to such Internet access they will undoubtably explore the boundaries of information, learn how to pilot combat drones with people from around the world, and learn skills that might actually lead to real world jobs.
...
This is incredibly dangerous!
Why, if they start thinking, if they can interact with people from other societies and cultures it will be as bad as when Rock Music became popular in the 1940s and 1950s and society will fall into ruin! As people said then, society will not outlast the decade!
Oh. Wait. Never mind
-
This is not Ms. Drobiazko's first experience with oppression at the hands of multinational corporations, as she was formerly employed at a quaint coffee house in Vilnius which was crushed last year under the oppressive heel of Starbucks.
Yes, that was quite the funny response.
However, it avoids the fact that media access is limited by the controls, just as web surfer access is limited by using JavaScript.
I have JavaScript turned off in virtually all my browsers, and only turn it on for a few trusted sites. Why not use server-side Java, something that IBM can easily provide with an IBM mainframe running multiple Linux instances ("virtual boxes")?
Why use JavaScript at all (or ECMAScript, which is what most coders settle on, since it works fairly well)?
-
The biggest accessibility mogul in my mind, though it really doesn't have to do with the usability of the site per se, is the restrictive conditions put on independent Web media reporting on the games.
Does this mean that IMC reporters are barred? They gave the best coverage of many modern events, such as Genoa, Seattle, and other events.
-
As an American, as a citizen, it is your duty to report (and possibly sue if no action is taken) any problems with site accessibility.
Think of all those people in China with Linux running non-MSFT browsers! Think of those handicapped people who have perl-scripts that turn their screens into speech.
We must all pull to together and make sure the site works with all Linux/BSD browsers.
And let's hope the script kiddies make it bulletproof from the bin Ladens of the world - where is the testing?
By the way, does it work in Urdu?
-
Five years before the ACLU handled its first Internet case, the EFF pioneered the field in a pair of landmark cases. The first involved Steve Jackson Games, a Texas-based company that had been raided by federal agents investigating hacking. The EFF brought a suit that established that e-mail is protected under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Law enforcement would be required to have a warrant describing each message or e-mail participant before the mail could be read.
And this is a case I remember well, since it happened to a friend. Steve was a great guy, lending his computers and people when we had the Worldcon in NoLa and had to rewrite some dBase programs to get panel/author registration up, since the coders had not bothered testing it for large-scale use and it collapsed when we scaled up to the size of a Worldcon.
And then they took his computers when he wrote a GAME about hackers, broke them into bits (literally) and "returned" the broken parts to him. Tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, destroyed. For no reason.
-
If you have problems destroying documents, you could always ask Arthur Anderson or Enron.
And it's a good thing that the files are recoverable using these techniques, because even the old standard, writing 010101 patterns five times over won't stop modern recovery techniques.
When I served, we had to scrub our old hard drives in this way (010101), as otherwise they could get the info.
-
Because of all the fallout and implications between Enron execs and the Bush administration. Bush may want to do something to show that he's not a pushover for business.
You are probably correct. They've already got 6 investigations ongoing, half the DOJ recused, and 20 different statements to try to deflect from that.
What they need now is a good scapegoat. Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll decide to make Bill G the scapegoat.
-
The judge was unhappy with the "private suits?" Great. Now MS will just release "public suits" for us to buy. In a year from now all of our clothing will be covered by .NET!
.NET virus in it that undoes your zipper when you're not looking?
Will that have a
-
How about a compulsory $37-billion donation to the Free Software Foundation as punishment?
Nah. That might actually break the monopoly up and serve justice.
And then how could we here in Seattle feel smug about Bill G living in his dark castle in Redmond across the lake of doom from us?
-
Inquiring /. minds want to know.
Yeah, in PA, there are NO limits on family work. NONE. In fact, parents could force me to work for zero pay (It happened with my dad before.. long story).
Exactly. On the other hand, this allows the parents to pay a salary to the kid, and withhold money to put in a Roth IRA and Education IRA for later education - if they're smart. And maybe a state plan to cover college. I pay my 10yo son to do some things, and save most of it for him. Which will mean he'll be able to buy a house in his 20s, and retire a multimillionaire without putting anything else away, if needed.
In PA, you can get a State ID at any age, I think. But it DOES still present a problem. I can get on a plane with ID on my own.. but Dr. Jihad could just take his suicide bomber kid on to do the duty so long as Dr. Jihad himself was clean. Perhaps these IDs (and passports) should have no picture on the face, and a EEPROM on the inside containing an updatable (whenever you want) picture.
If they're going to do it, they'll need to have better controls than they're talking about, so I fear it won't work - and won't stop the terrorists in any case.
And you sure are right about the child soldiers, I've heard my share of stories about them.
Wish it wasn't true. One of the things I wish I could forget.
-
The reason that MSFT employees had to "fix" the UK poll on what developers wanted to develop web services in. Because developers chose something stable like Java, not .Net - something harder to hack (not impossible, just harder).
-
While the concept of a drone war is interesting, and even possible, we haven't gotten there yet, and saying that people fighting on one side of the war don't have any emotional investment is INCREDIBLY callous. Just because you don't have any friends stuck in Afghanistan doesn't mean it's the case for all of us. Beyond that, I assure you that the troops getting shot at have PLENTY of emotional investment in the war. Jackass.
This is Jon Katz who wrote this.
I mean, c'mon, when are they going to fire him?
-
If you don't think that Navy Seals have been in Afghanastan since September 12th, and that some of them died before we even declared war, then you shouldn't even speak of war, cause you are out of the loop.
Very true. Just as British commandos and Canadian special ops have been there since shortly after 911.
But Jon Katz likes to post about things he knows nothing about. So he ignores the reality to spin his fictional view of the universe, ignoring the evidence.
-
The fact that America achieved her objectives with little loss of American life is meaningless in this context for a few simple reasons. American objectives were simply to eliminate the Taliban & Al Quaeda's abilities to carry out terrorism. Not neccessarily to "liberate" the Afghani people. It happened that in this instance this goal dove-tailed nicely with the goals of certain Afghani parties whose ambitions were to remove the Taliban from power and institute a new state - so supporting those forces in achieving their goals was the simplest and most effective way of achieving the American goals.
Very true, just as it is true that neither the current regime in Afghanistan or Pakistan are truly our allies. In fact, they're most likely where many terrorists will come from, regardless of the nice words we say on TV.
Mostly however it was because America was fighting by proxy. There was little need for large numbers of ground troops to be deployed because the local forces were already in place and familiar with the landscape and the methods of fighting in this region. Also the political consequences both at home and in the eyes of other Muslim nations of a large-scale American invasion were prohibitive. So using somebody else to do the grunt-work of the war made both good political and military sense
And this is the trap we in the USA find ourselves in, far too often. It looks good on paper to have others fight our wars and be mercenaries. But the blowback is huge. It is only thru sacrifice of our own, thru our own casualties (if you will), that we learn the horror of war, and understand what we do.
For when we train a man to kill, he can use that skill to kill others we are friends with, or even use it against us. As happened with our proxies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. For it is mostly our proxies that seek to kill us.
The saving grace in this War is that we have partially learned this lesson. We now take the risks to our own lives, and suffer small casualties, and thus understand what we risk. And this makes us better - for it is not drones that have died, our honored dead; it is our soldiers and our spies that die and are buried for their service to our country.
And on TV we hear of the loss of these families, and we understand that this is truly War, not some video game.
-
Actually, it's not a bad comparison. In WW II terms, we're fighting the War in the Pacific right now. We got bombed in Hawaii (New York). We crippled their ability to strike at Midway (Afghanistan). And now we're island hopping (al-Qaeda forces).
At best, Iraq could be compared to Germany. A Germany weakened by fighting with Russia, one we can take on. But it has nothing to do with our current War, much as the neo-conservatives wish it did.
-
Despite the claims of JonKatz, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan does not disprove the need for infantry. We might not have many ground troops in, but the Northern Alliance has a whole bunch
In fact, it's because of our ground infantry, our special ops, that we've been able to drive the delivery cost of destruction down to such low levels.
When we have ground troops in position, we can target the places for the smart bombs to drop. Then we can drop $2500 bombs (smart dumb bombs - like JDAM - made here) instead of $250,000 bombs. And we hit more often and to more effect.
Without the infantry, the air war would be 1/20th as effective.
-
Will someone please keep this idiot away from military issues?
Have to agree, it's painful to watch Jon write about such things.
He probably has no idea that we now have a substantial portion of the US military, the UK military, virtually all of the Canadian military, and loans of many NATO vessels and transports from many other countries involved.
This is NOT a small operation. It's actually larger than Desert Storm, but they're not sitting on the ground in Saudi Arabia, so people can't see how many people are involved in how many countries.
-
And Jon also failed to understand the real implications of this War. The real implication is that we moved to the CHEAP phase of combat quickly - that cheaper, faster, better has replaced expensive, powerful, bigger.
War is a combination of strategy, tactics, and applied economics. We can fight a war like this for decades, because we've dropped the cost of operations down to a level where it's cheaper for us to kill them than ever before.
A cruise missile that costs millions is ineffective except in certain conditions. A drone that can fly multiple times and deliver intel, allows us to drop cheap bombs ($2500 instead of $125,000) that are more accurate on positions where they cause more damage.
That is the implication of this war. And that is why we will WIN. And we're only about one-quarter done (maybe one-third at most), and are now in the island hopping phase (we just fought Midway after Pearl Harbor).
-
Sigh. SciFi 101, Jon. Drone wars are usually about semi-autonomous machines which a remote controller supervises in large groups, not the current tech which is more of a single operator type.
Now there are things, sort of a BattleTech proxy line of SciFi, where you have Avatars (TM) who represent one person. This could be inferred from the Afghani experiences, but we're really not at that stage yet.
We only just got hellfires on some of the drones this year (been prototyped since last century), and it still needs a team of 2-3 people per machine at this point.
Perhaps at the later stages of The War we'll start to see one-man drones with weapons and armor, but we are not there yet.
[personal aside to Jon - please stop writing about things you know little about - it's very embarrassing to the rest of us here who may know something about these subjects - stick to what you know about, ok?]
-
Valid points. You're quite correct that you're not given the full rights of a citizen, even though you get all the downsides.
However, the work restrictions you mention apply only to work outside the family. As I recall my employment law (which varies from state to state, so your mileage may vary), non-adult family members are permitted to work more flexible hours and a little bit later.
For example, you may only be able to work privately until 7pm and no more than 15 hours a week, but if it was a family business, you'd probably be allowed to work until about 10pm and no more than 35 hours a week.
The concept is that your parents, as employers, would care more about you, and if you needed to do something for school, would have you do it. A private employer is presumed not to care about your schooling or your physical health as much, so the restrictions are tighter.
However, it still presents problems. For example, my son has to get a new passport when he's 15 or so, and I think they're only good for about 3 years when you're a kid.
The same restrictions would apply to drivers licenses. Because we look different as we age, they make you get new IDs.
But if you're 12 - how can you even apply for a non-drivers license? I thought they only gave out such state ID at age 13 at the least.
When my son and I travelled to the French West Indies (Caribbean) we only took birth certificates and my drivers license. When we fly on planes, only the adult shows ID - they never ask my son for ID.
And considering all the games he plays, he's probably better at causing harm than me, so you'd think they'd be more worried about him being a terrorist than me.
I've seen soldiers as young as 10 in Africa, on peacekeeping missions. They shoot you just as dead as adults do. And they're not as easy to reason with.
-
When she can't get a fake driver's license anymore?
...
What will her sister do?
I tell you, National IDs have unintended consequences. Unless you think this is just GWBush's way of grounding his daughters
-