You'll find a difference anyway. Look at Northern Ireland. As a foreigner, I found this conflict incomprehensible. I can't tell the difference between a Catholic from there and a Protestant unless they tell me. Yet people were willing to kill over miniscule differences.
Do you really want to go back to living under the shadow of the bomb? I don't understand all this nostalgia for the cold war. People were really afraid that the baloon could go up sometime and the world would end. Do you really want to go back to that?
I've not heard of this before. Do you have a credible reference for it? Without a credible reference (emphasis on credible), this is a he-said-shes-said story.
"I'm sure nobody cares about you littering or antisocially behaving"
I care!
I have a confession. I HATE people who litter! I routinely get into the face of strangers that I see littering. Seriously, if I were world dictator, it would be a capital crime. Why? It's really easy to just toss that piece of wrapper or empty drink container to the side and forget about it. In doing so, you show that you really don't give a whit about your fellow human beings. It's a classic case of externalizing your costs onto society and by doing it; you show that you are not a very nice person.
Ideas are worthless without an implementation. There are more ideas than people in the game industry. People go into that line of work becasue they have an idea; sometimes more than one. This article is an interesting read for anyone under the illusion that ideas alone are worth anything. http://www.sloperama.com/advice/idea.htm
As for accepting whatever pay terms and work hours. The fact is that making video games is one of the "passion" things. Jobs that people love can pay less than being say an actuary, database programmer or professor.
I might re-install NWN1 and take a look at it just for fun.
The sad thing here is that in the end, the whole case will likely revolve around which email accounts were used and whethere so-and-so lied about it. Its Whitewater and the Clinton impeachment all over again, only with party roles reversed.
Is it too late to demansd that politicans put their district/country before their party instead of the other way around?
If I had mod points right now, I'd give them to you. People seem unable or unwilling to grasp that most forums are in fact private places where the host has no obligation to allow you to post whatever you want - as opposed to public places. USENET is probably closer to the latter. Unless you live in a country that legally restricts speech however, there is nothing stopping you from hosting yourself and saying what you want.
"but a question about the morality of censoring one of Flickr's top submitters"
I have a hard time associating "morality" with "censoring one of Flickr's top submitters". That would seem to imply that its okay to "censor" non-top submitters. I doubt thats what you intended.
"Personally, I think what we need is a push for a counter to this complaint culture by creating a culture where people who complain to get good things shut down without VERY good reason are subjected to no end of humiliation, emotional torment, destruction of their professional life, etc."
You seem have a problem with freedom of speech I see. Freedom of speech means the right to say stupid and outrageous things. It's the price we pay. And no, having her images pulled by Flicker does not constitute a muzzling. She was using their servers to post and has to play by their rules. There was nothing holding her back from doing it on a server with different rules.
I can understand Flickr being cowards here, but I don't see them being at fault. If Flickr explicitly says "do your money related things elsewhere", then she should not be surprised if they pull her post. It's not as if she could not post it elsewhere or take 1/2 an hour to set up a blog.
As far as craven cowards running most business. Their desire to make a buck/living/ill-gotten-fortune/whatever is stronger than their passion for . They are in the business of making money, not moral crusades. That's life. They are not required to join you on your crusade. In fact, they'll probably avoid it like the plague. Every political issue has two sides and being in any way political invariably results in SOMEBODY boycotting them. From their perspective, its better to go the inoffensive to anyone route. I won't spend a dime on Benetton's clothes because of they way they did a billboard campaign against the death penalty in the US a few years ago. I object to the death penalty, but was offended at the way they portrayed the various convicts - and the victims were never mentioned at all. This same company has been accused of sweatshop labor. Cynical old me has a hard time accepting their holier than thou "we are social responsible" line. So can you blame most companies for not stepping into the minefield?
I don't know where you are posting from, so you may or may not know about this reference - a few weeks ago, a morning radio commentator in the US said some unpleasant things about a womens' basketball team with mostly black players. In the ensuing uproar, many advertisers pulled their sponsorship and the the commentator eventually lost his job. For weeks afterwards, I was reading editorials about how political correctness. Bull; all of it. The man did not loose his right to call someone a nappy ho. A company merely decided that paying him megabucks to do so was bad for business - just as the advertisers dropped his show. It boiled down to firms simply not wanting to offend people.
This is unadulterated bull. This lame "how the technology is meant to be used" argument is simply a crack at blaming the victim. Is it okay to rape a woman in a minskirt because she dressed "too sexy" and was asking for it "by not taking proper precautions and dressing modestly enough"? If someone shoots you in the heart and kills you because "that's how the technology was meant to be used" and you did not take proper precautions by wearing dragon skin 24/7, was that homicide justified? Society is in serious trouble if the answer is yes. The examples I gave are a bit extreme, but the concept is the same. Just because something is technically possible, does not make it right.
" but you have no right to stop us from using technology as it was intended to be used if the only reason for limiting our use is your mistake,"
Can you rephrase this? It is unclear. Do you mean that if I "mistakenly" sesure my router and block my neighbor's kids from using it, that I had no right to do that? Or did you intend to say that I have no right to secure my router and prevent the technology from being used as intended? Or that if I don't secure it, you have the right to use it? The first two are strange logic and the thirst is simply bull. Or did you mean something else?
Normally I'd agree. This one reeks of pork however. Yes, it would be beneficial to the local economy of both Alaska and Siberia. Given the probably cost however, it is unlikely that it can be financed by Alaskans and Siberians alone. I'd have to be skeptical about its utility to the populations centers of the lower 48 and European Russia and these people would be footing the bill.
It being left on by mistake should be corrected, but it is no reason to be punished and no excuse for using it as the GP advocates. As far as making it easy to do, it should be as easy as possible for someone with zero interest (such as turning it on by default). This is no different than disabling bluetooth by default on mobile phones. Phones are a better analogy than cars as it is something that anyone can use, but complex enough to be problematic if you don't know your way around. Everyone can use a phone, but most mobile phones carry zillions of features that the majority of their users never even bother to learn how to use. My wife, who holds a PhD in Physics, was once published in Science and works as a software architect did not even know if her phone had bluetooth when I asked her if she had secured it. Is someone going to tell her that she is "not qualified" to use a phone?
Technical ignorance does not justify "punishment". People deal with things outside of their area of expertise all the time and don't feel any particular need to become domain experts. Have you ever had your car repaired in a shop? Do you do all of your own home maintenance/improvements? Have you ever visited a doctor? If you are American, have you ever used one of the simplified 1040 tax form?
Its called specialization. Economists say that it makes the world go around.
Dude, this ain't the 70's anymore. Normal - meaning ABSOLUTELY uninterested in how their computer or internet connection works - are also using these things. Get over it!
That depends on the country you live in. Since this one was about people in the US, I'll use that. The care for Huntington's is easily enough to eat up all that equity, so what would be the point in saving in the first place, just to see it going to medical/care bills in the end.
There is no point in preparing for tomorrow when you don't have one.
My impression from the article is that it is about using commercial networks. This is fine for FEMA, but not something I see the military using. It looks like a solution chasing a problem to me.
I also have a serious problem with the grandparent's philosophy. I have a major problem with the current administration's ways. I also have a small daughter. If she were to be molested and the GP aquitted the attacker to make a political statement, I'd be forced to commit TWO murders afterwards.
"Oh, right, because any political system that isn't an outright representative democracy is a dictatorship. Please travel more, or at least just get an education."
Wow! The grandparent is a moron, but the parent is also something special. We're hair splitting, but I'll bite. Every government system that is not an outright representative democracy IS a dictatorship. What do monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, oligarchies, etc. all have in common? The common citizen has no legal recourse for changing his government when he feels his country is being governed badly. The terms are different, but the effect is the same.
Even Bush overplayed his hand and has had his wings clipped by the American electorate.
They care becasue it is relevant information when it comes to giving that person a security clearance. Say a soldier decides to apply to one of the special operations units such as the green berets. In addition to being able to pass the course (highly nontrivial), he would need to get a security clearance so that he is trusted to be dropped off in Whereisthatistan in the middle of the night with a GPS, submachine gun and a million dollars in cash.
Slashdot Mirror
You'll find a difference anyway. Look at Northern Ireland. As a foreigner, I found this conflict incomprehensible. I can't tell the difference between a Catholic from there and a Protestant unless they tell me. Yet people were willing to kill over miniscule differences.
Do you really want to go back to living under the shadow of the bomb? I don't understand all this nostalgia for the cold war. People were really afraid that the baloon could go up sometime and the world would end. Do you really want to go back to that?
I've not heard of this before. Do you have a credible reference for it? Without a credible reference (emphasis on credible), this is a he-said-shes-said story.
"I'm sure nobody cares about you littering or antisocially behaving"
I care!
I have a confession. I HATE people who litter! I routinely get into the face of strangers that I see littering. Seriously, if I were world dictator, it would be a capital crime. Why? It's really easy to just toss that piece of wrapper or empty drink container to the side and forget about it. In doing so, you show that you really don't give a whit about your fellow human beings. It's a classic case of externalizing your costs onto society and by doing it; you show that you are not a very nice person.
Ryanair is a shining example of service?
Ideas are worthless without an implementation. There are more ideas than people in the game industry. People go into that line of work becasue they have an idea; sometimes more than one. This article is an interesting read for anyone under the illusion that ideas alone are worth anything.
http://www.sloperama.com/advice/idea.htm
As for accepting whatever pay terms and work hours. The fact is that making video games is one of the "passion" things. Jobs that people love can pay less than being say an actuary, database programmer or professor.
I might re-install NWN1 and take a look at it just for fun.
Hey!
I'm a member of the Illuminati and I have to fess up that we did not do that one. It was the Freemasons.
The sad thing here is that in the end, the whole case will likely revolve around which email accounts were used and whethere so-and-so lied about it. Its Whitewater and the Clinton impeachment all over again, only with party roles reversed.
Is it too late to demansd that politicans put their district/country before their party instead of the other way around?
If I had mod points right now, I'd give them to you. People seem unable or unwilling to grasp that most forums are in fact private places where the host has no obligation to allow you to post whatever you want - as opposed to public places. USENET is probably closer to the latter. Unless you live in a country that legally restricts speech however, there is nothing stopping you from hosting yourself and saying what you want.
"but a question about the morality of censoring one of Flickr's top submitters"
I have a hard time associating "morality" with "censoring one of Flickr's top submitters". That would seem to imply that its okay to "censor" non-top submitters. I doubt thats what you intended.
"For weeks afterwards, I was reading editorials about how political correctness. Bull; all of it. "
gah... must proofread!
That should read: "For weeks afterwards, I was reading editorials about how political correctness is intruding on free speech. Bull; all of it. "
"Personally, I think what we need is a push for a counter to this complaint culture by creating a culture where people who complain to get good things shut down without VERY good reason are subjected to no end of humiliation, emotional torment, destruction of their professional life, etc."
You seem have a problem with freedom of speech I see. Freedom of speech means the right to say stupid and outrageous things. It's the price we pay. And no, having her images pulled by Flicker does not constitute a muzzling. She was using their servers to post and has to play by their rules. There was nothing holding her back from doing it on a server with different rules.
I can understand Flickr being cowards here, but I don't see them being at fault. If Flickr explicitly says "do your money related things elsewhere", then she should not be surprised if they pull her post. It's not as if she could not post it elsewhere or take 1/2 an hour to set up a blog.
As far as craven cowards running most business. Their desire to make a buck/living/ill-gotten-fortune/whatever is stronger than their passion for . They are in the business of making money, not moral crusades. That's life. They are not required to join you on your crusade. In fact, they'll probably avoid it like the plague. Every political issue has two sides and being in any way political invariably results in SOMEBODY boycotting them. From their perspective, its better to go the inoffensive to anyone route. I won't spend a dime on Benetton's clothes because of they way they did a billboard campaign against the death penalty in the US a few years ago. I object to the death penalty, but was offended at the way they portrayed the various convicts - and the victims were never mentioned at all. This same company has been accused of sweatshop labor. Cynical old me has a hard time accepting their holier than thou "we are social responsible" line. So can you blame most companies for not stepping into the minefield?
I don't know where you are posting from, so you may or may not know about this reference - a few weeks ago, a morning radio commentator in the US said some unpleasant things about a womens' basketball team with mostly black players. In the ensuing uproar, many advertisers pulled their sponsorship and the the commentator eventually lost his job. For weeks afterwards, I was reading editorials about how political correctness. Bull; all of it. The man did not loose his right to call someone a nappy ho. A company merely decided that paying him megabucks to do so was bad for business - just as the advertisers dropped his show. It boiled down to firms simply not wanting to offend people.
This is unadulterated bull. This lame "how the technology is meant to be used" argument is simply a crack at blaming the victim. Is it okay to rape a woman in a minskirt because she dressed "too sexy" and was asking for it "by not taking proper precautions and dressing modestly enough"? If someone shoots you in the heart and kills you because "that's how the technology was meant to be used" and you did not take proper precautions by wearing dragon skin 24/7, was that homicide justified? Society is in serious trouble if the answer is yes. The examples I gave are a bit extreme, but the concept is the same. Just because something is technically possible, does not make it right.
" but you have no right to stop us from using technology as it was intended to be used if the only reason for limiting our use is your mistake,"
Can you rephrase this? It is unclear. Do you mean that if I "mistakenly" sesure my router and block my neighbor's kids from using it, that I had no right to do that? Or did you intend to say that I have no right to secure my router and prevent the technology from being used as intended? Or that if I don't secure it, you have the right to use it? The first two are strange logic and the thirst is simply bull. Or did you mean something else?
Normally I'd agree. This one reeks of pork however. Yes, it would be beneficial to the local economy of both Alaska and Siberia. Given the probably cost however, it is unlikely that it can be financed by Alaskans and Siberians alone. I'd have to be skeptical about its utility to the populations centers of the lower 48 and European Russia and these people would be footing the bill.
It being left on by mistake should be corrected, but it is no reason to be punished and no excuse for using it as the GP advocates. As far as making it easy to do, it should be as easy as possible for someone with zero interest (such as turning it on by default). This is no different than disabling bluetooth by default on mobile phones. Phones are a better analogy than cars as it is something that anyone can use, but complex enough to be problematic if you don't know your way around. Everyone can use a phone, but most mobile phones carry zillions of features that the majority of their users never even bother to learn how to use. My wife, who holds a PhD in Physics, was once published in Science and works as a software architect did not even know if her phone had bluetooth when I asked her if she had secured it. Is someone going to tell her that she is "not qualified" to use a phone?
Technical ignorance does not justify "punishment". People deal with things outside of their area of expertise all the time and don't feel any particular need to become domain experts. Have you ever had your car repaired in a shop? Do you do all of your own home maintenance/improvements? Have you ever visited a doctor? If you are American, have you ever used one of the simplified 1040 tax form?
Its called specialization. Economists say that it makes the world go around.
Dude, this ain't the 70's anymore. Normal - meaning ABSOLUTELY uninterested in how their computer or internet connection works - are also using these things. Get over it!
That depends on the country you live in. Since this one was about people in the US, I'll use that. The care for Huntington's is easily enough to eat up all that equity, so what would be the point in saving in the first place, just to see it going to medical/care bills in the end.
There is no point in preparing for tomorrow when you don't have one.
My impression from the article is that it is about using commercial networks. This is fine for FEMA, but not something I see the military using. It looks like a solution chasing a problem to me.
I also have a serious problem with the grandparent's philosophy. I have a major problem with the current administration's ways. I also have a small daughter. If she were to be molested and the GP aquitted the attacker to make a political statement, I'd be forced to commit TWO murders afterwards.
At this time of year, you are not commuting in darkness in the morning, so how can an extra evening hour of daylight possibly be annoying?
So let me get this straight! Instead of my son knocking down my daughter's masterpiece Lego tower, some anonymous greifer will do it?
Oh yeah, I just soooooooooo have to subscribe.
"Oh, right, because any political system that isn't an outright representative democracy is a dictatorship. Please travel more, or at least just get an education."
Wow! The grandparent is a moron, but the parent is also something special. We're hair splitting, but I'll bite. Every government system that is not an outright representative democracy IS a dictatorship. What do monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, oligarchies, etc. all have in common? The common citizen has no legal recourse for changing his government when he feels his country is being governed badly. The terms are different, but the effect is the same.
Even Bush overplayed his hand and has had his wings clipped by the American electorate.
They care becasue it is relevant information when it comes to giving that person a security clearance. Say a soldier decides to apply to one of the special operations units such as the green berets. In addition to being able to pass the course (highly nontrivial), he would need to get a security clearance so that he is trusted to be dropped off in Whereisthatistan in the middle of the night with a GPS, submachine gun and a million dollars in cash.