We are so superior. We use smart bombs, let their own people execute their leaders and go directly for their minerals.
Sorry is my text is a bit garbled. I was in a country with so called Muslims and it goes without saying I was almost killed 7 times, but in the end they only cut off nine fingers and my dick. That's what they do, you know...
I remember a story about a man that was found guilty in one country. The secret service of that country proceeded to kidnap that person in an other country to bring him to "trial". *shrug* What was his name again. Venuna? Something like that. Anyway. That would be a quite absurd situation that nobody would accept.
First of all, thank you for calling me a authoritarian pig. It's always good to have a friend that knows you better than you know your self.
The point you raise (exactly which point a child can be considered developed enough, mentally, to make decisions about their sexuality) is a valid one to which I have no answer. The thing is, however, that we want to protect children from being abused. I'm sure we agree on that.
The point I raise is simple. I don't want people to hide behind the argument that their childporn collection is all photoshopped or Maya renderings or very realistic drawings, so there was no harm done to children.
As you are probably aware 3d animation is getting really close to the point where you can't tell if it's a 3d model or real. (Benjamin Button for example)
This is no imaginary issue, but it is the actual reason why the law (in some countries) go one step further than "harm being done to children". That way there will be no discussion in court about the images being real or not.
Therefore: Real child porn and virtual (photoshopped, drawn, rendered) child porn is illegal. If that also means obviously drawn child porn is illegal, that is fine with me. Everybody that needs images of children of nay kind to fap should have their heads examined.
So, also reacting to "then the right answer in a free society is for the authorities to work harder to find the distinction", I'd say I agree in most cases (google for the article about twins, dna, robbery here on./) In that case the solution isn't to put them both in jail, but find better evidence. But in case of children I'll gladly make the exception and save the law enforcement the trouble of finding the actual child who is in those pictures to prove the image is real or not.
And finally: "This discussion is about non-realistic images - your argument only applies to realistic fictional images." Yes, that was my point indeed:)
The problem is the difference between virtual (photoshopped) child porn and real child porn sometimes is hard to see. You don't want somebody to be able to say it's photoshopped, therefore not real child porn and get away with it. So generalize and make all porn showing (real, photoshopped or drawn) children illegal. Seems a good solution to me.
Anyway. If you want something special from Japan, there is always shokku-shu kei;)
What strikes me is that some of the discussions here are STILL about Republicans Democrates. Those people don't get it. The topic SHOULD be about the fact that a president that spies on his own citizens.
my perception of somebory that is "visually impaired" is somebody that doesnt see very well, but is not blind. if you can see, but not very well, buying a beamer would be the obvious solution instead of suing Sony.
anyway, if the changes for Sony would be reasonable and it wouldn't affect the quality of the product in a negative way, i'd say why not? do it!
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose you're new to the Internet? You will soon learn the meaning of "what has been seen can not be unseen". Welcome to the Internet...
totally forgot about that site. "thanks" for keeping the memory alive. ;)
We are so superior. We use smart bombs, let their own people execute their leaders and go directly for their minerals.
Sorry is my text is a bit garbled. I was in a country with so called Muslims and it goes without saying I was almost killed 7 times, but in the end they only cut off nine fingers and my dick. That's what they do, you know...
And, oh horror, they threw cartoons at me!
I remember a story about a man that was found guilty in one country. The secret service of that country proceeded to kidnap that person in an other country to bring him to "trial". *shrug*
What was his name again. Venuna? Something like that.
Anyway. That would be a quite absurd situation that nobody would accept.
a couple has two children. at least one of them is a boy.
what are the odds that the other one is a boy too...
It's the wrong question.
The question should be which one uses more gasoline...
two cars. one uses 20 mpg. the other uses 50 mpg. which one spends the most on gasoline for, say 100 miles.
Have the machine inspected by your local independent hacker.
He'll find a glitch. Aha! You should have won 11.000.000.000!
Thx. +1 Informative from me :)
Enough people who couldn't care any less. And frankly I don't too.
The whole point about climate change isn't climate change.
There is only one question. Do you want to poison and pollute the world we're living in?
Ignorance is strength :)
"Rosenberg filed suit against both the driver of the car that struck her and Google, claiming both carried responsibility in her injury."
Needless to say she has no responsibility for her own actions. She's just a mindless drone following orders.
NEWS: Movie totally sucks, but makes millions from file sharing law suits. Investors are pleased.
Free Market already took care of the nice cinema in my town.
I'm sure Free Market also has a nice solution for scareware.
No. But your assumption that this is the kind of assignments that CS students have to hand in is far more interesting ;)
First of all, thank you for calling me a authoritarian pig. It's always good to have a friend that knows you better than you know your self.
The point you raise (exactly which point a child can be considered developed enough, mentally, to make decisions about their sexuality) is a valid one to which I have no answer. The thing is, however, that we want to protect children from being abused. I'm sure we agree on that.
The point I raise is simple. I don't want people to hide behind the argument that their childporn collection is all photoshopped or Maya renderings or very realistic drawings, so there was no harm done to children.
As you are probably aware 3d animation is getting really close to the point where you can't tell if it's a 3d model or real. (Benjamin Button for example)
This is no imaginary issue, but it is the actual reason why the law (in some countries) go one step further than "harm being done to children". That way there will be no discussion in court about the images being real or not.
Therefore: Real child porn and virtual (photoshopped, drawn, rendered) child porn is illegal. If that also means obviously drawn child porn is illegal, that is fine with me. Everybody that needs images of children of nay kind to fap should have their heads examined.
So, also reacting to "then the right answer in a free society is for the authorities to work harder to find the distinction", I'd say I agree in most cases (google for the article about twins, dna, robbery here on ./) In that case the solution isn't to put them both in jail, but find better evidence. But in case of children I'll gladly make the exception and save the law enforcement the trouble of finding the actual child who is in those pictures to prove the image is real or not.
And finally: "This discussion is about non-realistic images - your argument only applies to realistic fictional images." :)
Yes, that was my point indeed
The problem is the difference between virtual (photoshopped) child porn and real child porn sometimes is hard to see.
You don't want somebody to be able to say it's photoshopped, therefore not real child porn and get away with it.
So generalize and make all porn showing (real, photoshopped or drawn) children illegal.
Seems a good solution to me.
Anyway. If you want something special from Japan, there is always shokku-shu kei ;)
They're so soft and cuddly and those cute stripes. Awwww!
What strikes me is that some of the discussions here are STILL about Republicans Democrates. Those people don't get it.
The topic SHOULD be about the fact that a president that spies on his own citizens.
That last line ruins the quality of the rest of your reaction...
Connect them satellites to Google Maps and draw arrows on the streets in the safe directions.
Zap everybody that isn't listening.
While we're at it. If there is no water, there is no wave.
Use the lasers to evaporate the wave part of the sea before it hits the shore.
your insurance replaced you email account? kewl!
"...but they don't link to the server using any of the standard methods."
I bet they link to the server using WIFI...
the fact that this process inevitably will cost more energy than plugging the device is seems unimportant...
my perception of somebory that is "visually impaired" is somebody that doesnt see very well, but is not blind. if you can see, but not very well, buying a beamer would be the obvious solution instead of suing Sony.
anyway, if the changes for Sony would be reasonable and it wouldn't affect the quality of the product in a negative way, i'd say why not? do it!
my spambox is fullfilled with cyber terror