Possibly, but I don't think China much cares what an American president has forbidden.
That isn't what I was getting at. When he mentioned it, people were thinking about mad scientists and wondering why America should be prohibited from doing something so obviously wacky...The answer is because it may lead to pigs that can produce better insulin, cows that can produce better milk, and the only real cost is that people have to get over the "playing god" cliche.
There's nothing wrong in genetically altering stuff. Nature does it all the time. The difference though, is that we don't call our tweaking "Evolution" as we ought to.:|
Isn't this (the milk thing in the article) what Bush 43 referred to as "human-animal hybrids", and forbid by executive order?
What's sad is the amount of racism in the republican party. I mean, this is the group that tried to tell Muslims that they should not build Mosques within five blocks of ground zero, and that is becoming more convinced by the day that Obama is Kenyan, despite the fact that his birth certificate is on the internet. This is the group that is openly anti-atheist and anti-gay. So, why shouldn't we call them out for being bigots, or at least being a party where open bigotry is tolerated?
Cheap labour - that's going to be off-shored by any wealthy country.
Exactly. It is so disappointing to see my home state among others saying "gut education. screw infrastructure. We gotta cut taxes so we can get jobs!" I know that
count(manual_laborers) > count(professionals)
, but why do the teabaggers have such a boner for the notion of becoming the next China or India?
Isn't this already covered by the gas tax, which is inherently incurred on a "per mile" (gallon, really) basis?
Anything that can be taxed, will. Those things which can not be taxed will be fined.
Someone already pointed out that the problem is that people who drive gas-guzzlers are being unfairly discriminated against. there is also the (possibly legitimate) concern that pure EV cars can evade these taxes entirely. Why must we be early adopters when it comes to finding new ways to tax efficiency, and late adopters when it comes to efficiency?
There are some odd ideas in there (like the exclusion for theme park operators),
Methinks Disney had more than a little input.
I would say either them, or the theme park industry, in general. There is so much money in that industry that they could probably buy an exemption even without Disney's help.
I think you are not giving the subconscious mind enough credit, but here are a couple of citations to show that people can be influenced by small things.
How an issue is framed can influence how an individual approaches a problem. I would suggest that children are more impressionable than the people in this study, and would be more likely to be swayed.
But to be honest, I wasn't convinced by research. I just grew up around boys who imitated Beavis and Butthead and girls who mindlessly followed every fashion trend of the day. I know it is anecdotal, but seeing how teens and people in their twenties openly imitate the people they see on TV, I see nothing "crazy" or implausible about the idea that a small child would emulate the attitudes of characters he sees in games or in TV. Again, when I say "emulate", I don't mean "rape women". I mean that he will be more likely to treat them as objects than someone who has never been exposed to that attitude.
But, just to make it clear. I don't really care if you play the game. If I had the free time, I would probably play it myself. I choose not to expose my son to that, because I feel that the characters he sees on TV are role models that I will have to compete with, even if they are nothing more than cartoon trains that like to read stories, or muscle-heads who like to punch people in the balls. When he's a teenager, I'll let him play whatever he wants (although we may have an unspoken agreement that the porn stays hidden), but not until then.
Slashdot has been re-Tweeting long before "re-Tweeting" was a word. "Re-Tweeting" would be called Slashdotting if life were fair and language went to the pioneers.
If that were the case, the English language would have never been invented.
TFA and TFS keep focusing it on MS, as if they are the only people who can sue, but from the excerpts quoted, it sounds like any closed software can. Here's the kicker that should have been in the summary:
Exceptions. A person may not sue under this cause of action when:
1. the end product sold or offered for sale in Washington is:
a. a copyrightable work under the United States Copyright Act;
b. merchandise manufactured by or on behalf of a copyright owner and that displays a component or copyrightable element of a copyrighted work;
c. merchandise manufactured by or on behalf of a copyright owner or trademark owner and that displays a component or copyrightable elements relating to a theme park or theme park attraction; or
d. packaging or promotional material for such copyrightable works or merchandise.
2. the allegation that the IT is stolen is based on a claim that the IT infringes on patents or trade secrets;
3. the allegation that the IT is stolen is based on a claim that the use of the IT violates the terms of an open source software license; or
4. the allegation that a person aided, facilitated, or otherwise assisted someone else to acquire or use stolen IT.
So, you can sue someone for infringing upon someone's rights, as long as you aren't violating an FOSS agreement?
There are some odd ideas in there (like the exclusion for theme park operators), but I'm surprised that one flew under the slashdot radar.
We could makeit happen, but I don't see us having the political clout. If the US dictated that the anybody who wanted to sell her provide reasonable evidence of software legitimacy, then those companies would start making it standard practice to keep scanned copies of all their licenses in one place. It would be a real PITA the first time around, and every time new equipment was bought, but they would gladly do it, if it meant the difference between getting a US contract and not getting that contract.
Of course some would cheat, but you could still buy insurance (like malpractice insurance) to reduce your risk, and of course the risk would be naturally low, as it would only apply to situations where foreign companies get caught.
But I don't think we would have the political clout. This would cost too many businesses too much money*. Instead, we will pursue filesharers to the ends of the earth, because harming businesses is always bad for the economy, and harming individuals isn't (/sarcasm).
* Also, I may be biased because in my neck of the woods, politicians are all about cutting education, taxes, and getting jobs for the common man. This law would help the tech sector and hurt the "moving pallets with a forklift" sector. The GOP is all about trying to keep the latter on their side.
Yeah, it is a pretty stupid non-story. Basically saying that after a network shut down, which amounted to x number of downloads they were able to track, they saw a fall of x downloads. OMGWTFBBQ shutting down a network removes the downloads occuring on it! Who would've thought.
In other news, pirates are moving to other less trackable networks or methods.
In other news: New version of Peerblock released. RIAA reports that piracy has dropped to 1%.
In other news, the RIAA published a press release today requesting tighter anti-P2P laws because P2P music sharing is on the rise and their profit margins may take an infinitesimal hit next quarter. I'm not even putting a sarcasm tag on this; you watch, it'll happen.
If it's at an all-time low, then that means it must be rising, right now. After all, 12:02pm is a time...
And I suppose male and female plugs will be the next to be attacked?
Absolutely. To call plugs "male" and "female" offends the sensitivity of the gay community, since it implies that it's not right to plug a male into another male.
Please stop this. I don't want to have to hire a priest to hook up my television cables, just so I won't be watching the news "in sin"
Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him
"Wrong" is subjective.
Ahh...moral relativism...As a parent, there are some behaviors I want to encourage in my children and some I do not.
No, it doesn't work like that.
It doesn't? I seem to be able to remember that video games aren't real. I remembered it even as a child (though my parents didn't need to tell me such an obvious thing).
The game isn't real, but the attitudes of the developers are. The attitudes of the people who play those games are real.
repetition works.
On some people. Perhaps most? It doesn't work on me, anyway.
Are you sure?
And I've never heard of an instance where a video game influenced someone to such a great degree.
How great a degree? I never said the game would turn children into rapists, or anything like that. My argument is that a game where the hero rapes women may cause young children to believe that sexism is ok.
Seeing an extremist often makes a moderate view seem more reasonable. The Simpsons, for example, was controversial when it first came out. Part of the reason that isn't true today is because Beavis And Butthead, Family Guy, South Park, etc shifted the middle toward that direction.
Perhaps it's only an abysmally small minority of the population?
How much of their money do they make from the cable companies? If their only viewership was what they receive via rabbit ears, would they still be in business?
This is why nerds will never rule the world. We see an article about Governments blocking mail services with the intention of silencing would-be whistle-blowers, and the first thread is about "wouldn't this be a better way to accomplish that?":)
Slashdot Mirror
Possibly, but I don't think China much cares what an American president has forbidden.
That isn't what I was getting at. When he mentioned it, people were thinking about mad scientists and wondering why America should be prohibited from doing something so obviously wacky...The answer is because it may lead to pigs that can produce better insulin, cows that can produce better milk, and the only real cost is that people have to get over the "playing god" cliche.
They are meddling with forces that they cannot possible control or understand!
Cows?
There's nothing wrong in genetically altering stuff. Nature does it all the time. The difference though, is that we don't call our tweaking "Evolution" as we ought to. :|
Isn't this (the milk thing in the article) what Bush 43 referred to as "human-animal hybrids", and forbid by executive order?
obviously you don't understand jews. We'd still us it
You'd try to haggle with it?
Agreed. Fuck everything that moves until age 60. At 60, jump off a cliff - optionally with a wingsuit, your choice.
but look out for any 59 year olds on the way down, you know what they have in mind.
What's sad is the amount of racism in the republican party. I mean, this is the group that tried to tell Muslims that they should not build Mosques within five blocks of ground zero, and that is becoming more convinced by the day that Obama is Kenyan, despite the fact that his birth certificate is on the internet. This is the group that is openly anti-atheist and anti-gay. So, why shouldn't we call them out for being bigots, or at least being a party where open bigotry is tolerated?
Cheap labour - that's going to be off-shored by any wealthy country.
Exactly. It is so disappointing to see my home state among others saying "gut education. screw infrastructure. We gotta cut taxes so we can get jobs!" I know that
count(manual_laborers) > count(professionals)
, but why do the teabaggers have such a boner for the notion of becoming the next China or India?
Hate the game not the player.
Can't we hate both?
Isn't this already covered by the gas tax, which is inherently incurred on a "per mile" (gallon, really) basis?
Anything that can be taxed, will. Those things which can not be taxed will be fined.
Someone already pointed out that the problem is that people who drive gas-guzzlers are being unfairly discriminated against. there is also the (possibly legitimate) concern that pure EV cars can evade these taxes entirely. Why must we be early adopters when it comes to finding new ways to tax efficiency, and late adopters when it comes to efficiency?
There are some odd ideas in there (like the exclusion for theme park operators),
Methinks Disney had more than a little input.
I would say either them, or the theme park industry, in general. There is so much money in that industry that they could probably buy an exemption even without Disney's help.
I think you are not giving the subconscious mind enough credit, but here are a couple of citations to show that people can be influenced by small things.
How an issue is framed can influence how an individual approaches a problem. I would suggest that children are more impressionable than the people in this study, and would be more likely to be swayed.
But to be honest, I wasn't convinced by research. I just grew up around boys who imitated Beavis and Butthead and girls who mindlessly followed every fashion trend of the day. I know it is anecdotal, but seeing how teens and people in their twenties openly imitate the people they see on TV, I see nothing "crazy" or implausible about the idea that a small child would emulate the attitudes of characters he sees in games or in TV. Again, when I say "emulate", I don't mean "rape women". I mean that he will be more likely to treat them as objects than someone who has never been exposed to that attitude.
But, just to make it clear. I don't really care if you play the game. If I had the free time, I would probably play it myself. I choose not to expose my son to that, because I feel that the characters he sees on TV are role models that I will have to compete with, even if they are nothing more than cartoon trains that like to read stories, or muscle-heads who like to punch people in the balls. When he's a teenager, I'll let him play whatever he wants (although we may have an unspoken agreement that the porn stays hidden), but not until then.
I'm in Canada. I have downloaded the document. I await the black helicopters...
In Canada, does the government show up in black Zambonis? :)
Slashdot has been re-Tweeting long before "re-Tweeting" was a word. "Re-Tweeting" would be called Slashdotting if life were fair and language went to the pioneers.
If that were the case, the English language would have never been invented.
(Admit: Did not fully RTFA)
TFA and TFS keep focusing it on MS, as if they are the only people who can sue, but from the excerpts quoted, it sounds like any closed software can. Here's the kicker that should have been in the summary:
Exceptions. A person may not sue under this cause of action when:
1. the end product sold or offered for sale in Washington is:
a. a copyrightable work under the United States Copyright Act;
b. merchandise manufactured by or on behalf of a copyright owner and that displays a component or copyrightable element of a copyrighted work;
c. merchandise manufactured by or on behalf of a copyright owner or trademark owner and that displays a component or copyrightable elements relating to a theme park or theme park attraction; or
d. packaging or promotional material for such copyrightable works or merchandise.
2. the allegation that the IT is stolen is based on a claim that the IT infringes on patents or trade secrets;
3. the allegation that the IT is stolen is based on a claim that the use of the IT violates the terms of an open source software license; or
4. the allegation that a person aided, facilitated, or otherwise assisted someone else to acquire or use stolen IT.
So, you can sue someone for infringing upon someone's rights, as long as you aren't violating an FOSS agreement?
There are some odd ideas in there (like the exclusion for theme park operators), but I'm surprised that one flew under the slashdot radar.
We could makeit happen, but I don't see us having the political clout. If the US dictated that the anybody who wanted to sell her provide reasonable evidence of software legitimacy, then those companies would start making it standard practice to keep scanned copies of all their licenses in one place. It would be a real PITA the first time around, and every time new equipment was bought, but they would gladly do it, if it meant the difference between getting a US contract and not getting that contract.
Of course some would cheat, but you could still buy insurance (like malpractice insurance) to reduce your risk, and of course the risk would be naturally low, as it would only apply to situations where foreign companies get caught.
But I don't think we would have the political clout. This would cost too many businesses too much money*. Instead, we will pursue filesharers to the ends of the earth, because harming businesses is always bad for the economy, and harming individuals isn't (/sarcasm).
* Also, I may be biased because in my neck of the woods, politicians are all about cutting education, taxes, and getting jobs for the common man. This law would help the tech sector and hurt the "moving pallets with a forklift" sector. The GOP is all about trying to keep the latter on their side.
My understanding (as a former Xtian) is that you have to believe and honestly* ask forgiveness for your every sin.
* honestly, meaning that it doesn't count if you're just going through the motions to cover your ass.
Yeah, it is a pretty stupid non-story. Basically saying that after a network shut down, which amounted to x number of downloads they were able to track, they saw a fall of x downloads. OMGWTFBBQ shutting down a network removes the downloads occuring on it! Who would've thought.
In other news, pirates are moving to other less trackable networks or methods.
In other news: New version of Peerblock released. RIAA reports that piracy has dropped to 1%.
In other news, the RIAA published a press release today requesting tighter anti-P2P laws because P2P music sharing is on the rise and their profit margins may take an infinitesimal hit next quarter. I'm not even putting a sarcasm tag on this; you watch, it'll happen.
If it's at an all-time low, then that means it must be rising, right now. After all, 12:02pm is a time...
And I suppose male and female plugs will be the next to be attacked?
Absolutely. To call plugs "male" and "female" offends the sensitivity of the gay community, since it implies that it's not right to plug a male into another male.
Please stop this. I don't want to have to hire a priest to hook up my television cables, just so I won't be watching the news "in sin"
So what you and GP are telling us is, "Florida is where everything goes to die"?
Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him
"Wrong" is subjective.
Ahh...moral relativism...As a parent, there are some behaviors I want to encourage in my children and some I do not.
No, it doesn't work like that.
It doesn't? I seem to be able to remember that video games aren't real. I remembered it even as a child (though my parents didn't need to tell me such an obvious thing).
The game isn't real, but the attitudes of the developers are. The attitudes of the people who play those games are real.
repetition works.
On some people. Perhaps most? It doesn't work on me, anyway.
Are you sure?
And I've never heard of an instance where a video game influenced someone to such a great degree.
How great a degree? I never said the game would turn children into rapists, or anything like that. My argument is that a game where the hero rapes women may cause young children to believe that sexism is ok.
Seeing an extremist often makes a moderate view seem more reasonable. The Simpsons, for example, was controversial when it first came out. Part of the reason that isn't true today is because Beavis And Butthead, Family Guy, South Park, etc shifted the middle toward that direction.
Perhaps it's only an abysmally small minority of the population?
Or perhaps it is a small effect.
How much of their money do they make from the cable companies? If their only viewership was what they receive via rabbit ears, would they still be in business?
This is why nerds will never rule the world. We see an article about Governments blocking mail services with the intention of silencing would-be whistle-blowers, and the first thread is about "wouldn't this be a better way to accomplish that?" :)
The US GDP is 14.12 Trillion...
37?!?
Try not to get sued on the way to the parking lot...