I'm running 2.6 with an NVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 as well, and don't experience this problem. I do, however, run with 512MB of RAM, so i usually don't go into swap.
As for the faster-than-light communications, we could do that with tangled photons. Einstein was troubled by the fact that quantum entanglment causes an instantaneous change across a large distance. It's been used in a large number of sci-fi novels, including Orson Scott Cards Ender's Game series of books.
No, we couldn't. I'm so tired of people who consider themselves to be educated hearing something in a movie or in passing conversation or in a sci-fi book and taking it to be true. It's the physics equivalent of learning how to use computers from the movie Hackers. Quantum physics is pretty damn counter-intuitive, but it's amazing the number of supposedly educated people around here that just make wild guesses at things they think sound nice.
Anyway, the parent post doesn't deserve this lecture as much as the other children. Point being, never assume you know this stuff unless you actually take the time to educate yourself on it (read, "many years of intense study").
And no, i don't claim to know this stuff, i just know enough to know that i know that most of these cliches are no more than that.
If the newsbot creates a dynamic RSS feed anyway, just punish those people who have their spiders hitting the site too often without respecting the 304's.
A simple RSS feed to the tune of, "Go bugger yourself, and either don't hit my site so often or use an RSS spider that respects 304s," would probably work wonders.
I can't believe this is modded down as flamebait. This is god's own truth. 90% of everything sucks, as any good geek knows.
And you anime fans should get off your high horses about, "people expect cartoons to be for kids." This explaination may work great for you, 'cause it shows you as openminded and better than most people, but you know what? Many of us other geeks who aren't anime fans, but are, for example, comic book fans, know these things aren't just for kids. People have different tastes. Get over it.
A) No, homophobia does not mean that you hate homosexuals due to repressed homosexual urges. It's quite simple. If you hate or are afraid of homosexuals, then you are homophobic. Look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary or any other dictionary for that matter. It may list repressed feelings as one of the definitions, but not to the exclusion of general hatred.
B) I do know what you mean about terms becoming detached from their original meanings, as "fag" often is. However, using the terms "gay" or "homosexual" in a duragatory manner is not only a direct response to the modern emergence of homosexuality, but is also intended to be hurtful or dismissive my many people today, so by using it, others don't know which way you mean it, unlike the term "bitch."
Let me put it another way: i'm of somewhat German descent, and i'm not anti-semetic. Does that make it alright for me to call my friends "dirty kikes?" What about in public?
I'm not intending to be the language police, but i've heard the whole "calling someone queer/a fag/gay/homosexual in a duragatory manner doesn't mean i don't like people who are queer/fags/gays/homosexuals" and while i believe it doesn't, i can't help but assume that it usually does.
And here in the US if you've got the cash, you're golden, but if you don't, when that chest pain gets worse, well, we'll give you the cheapest heart operation that's legal.
Both types of healthcare have problems. It's my belief that a national healthcare system is less fundementally broken, but neither is perfect.
To me, the only way i can justify fully privatized healthcare is if i accept that a human is worth her current funds plus her future earning potential. I have yet to make that jump.
I'm no fan of Microsoft or anything, but if and when WINE is faster than native Windows, perhaps it's because libwine has a whole lot of stub functions where Windows has functionality. Not that i have a problem with WINE, but it just doesn't do some things that Windows does, and there's a performance benefit for that.
PHB's love to buy "all-in-one" and "easy-to-use" solutions that can be used by morons, instead of hiring people who know what they're doing to assemble a solution out of reliable, well-tested components (which often are used from that scaaary command line.)
If you really think that CLIs are a problem for users, write a front-end in ${INTERPRETED_LANGUAGE}. If it's too much work to write a decent front-end, maybe the expensive product really is worth the money. That is, assuming the person who wrote the system is not its only user.
Not to say that CLIs are bad. I just see a lot of people who tack on an interface as an afterthought, resulting in a great program that can't be used.
It's the fed's money, so they can pretty much do what they want with it.
Actually, it's the taxpayers' money, and so we should be able to do what we want with the equipment that our money has purchased. Now, if it was just a question of pornography, there are of course already laws on the books for obscenity, public decency, and so on. However, if i want to go read an article about sex education or queer rights, or, god forbid, how fucked up filtering software is, i'm of the opinion that i should be able to use the equipment that my money bought to do that.
It's only because people are willing to bow down before the government's will that the government gets away with this sort of thing.
As an aspiring game maker and current game theorist, i have to agree with you that currently, most games out there are total crap. Even the really popular ones that you and i loved as kids (or adults) are generally really lacking on any deep level.
But that's not to say that games, as a medium, are not able to be meaningful. It's just that the barriers for entry have been too high, the system of production has been entirely profit-driven and ultimately very conservative (this whole "fun" requirement is holding games back), and amatuer game makers are very often technology driven, and are happy to just reimplement the same pap they've been playing all these years. Some of these things will change. Some of them won't. It's something we have to deal with.
I guess my point is that yes, most games are total crap. Just don't rule out the medium as a whole. We'll do interesting things with it one of these days. I know i'm trying my hardest.
The one part of this reply i'll actually dignify with a response follows:
What a sad state of humanity when you take out a sex scene or violent scene in a movie and suddenly you missed a vital part of the storyline.
So you'd look more kindly upon humanity when all the sexuality and violence is superfluous to the story? Sorry, but if you remove the violence from Schindler's List, you've castrated the artistic vision because the violence is dehumanizing and that is important. Hell, i think it's a sad state of affairs when most of the sex and violence can be cut from a movie and you haven't missed any part of the storyline or dramatic effect. At that point, what's the point of having it, beyond simple pornography?
Sorry, that doesn't qualify as anything substantial from or for humanity. Art, it may be, can also be expressed in ways that are more intellectual.
If you think sexuality is orthogonal to intellectual discourse, and violence to the human experience, i suggest you live some. If not, then why do you think art can get by without these things?
And, finally, i'd like to point out that i'm not objecting in any way to giving people the tools to modify these movies for themselves. While, as i said, i have a personal distate for that sort of [self-]censorship, it's everyone's right to manipulate their own possesions as they want.
Schultz argues that companies like ClearPlay and Trilogy do not infringe on movie copyright because those laws or restrictions only apply to public performances or involve "derivative works," in which the movies are drastically changed
Drastically changed and sold in mass... THAT would be illegal. It's no different if I bought a DVD and wanted some of the violence or sex "skipped" by a third party. This is all Trilogy Studios in Sandy, ClearPlay in Salt Lake City and CleanFlicks of Salt Lake City are doing.
"Sold in mass" like, having an electronic store where they sell versions of these? Or is it only bad if it's brick-and-mortar? Or is the 10,000th copy illegal?
Also, if Microsoft comes along and makes a few changes to your favorite GPLed software, would they be allowed to distribute it without regard to the licence just because they didn't "drastically change" it enough to be considered a derivative work under the GPL? What if they make their own version of Linux that has DRM, native support for various Windows formats, has an incompatible standard C library, but whose archetecture and normal operations are not "drastically changed?" They wouldn't have to release the source, right?
I fully support people's abilities to edit their own movies, and maybe the studios will offer DVDs with "clean" versions of play, though i personally am happier without bastardizing creative works. But for someone to alter and resell a creative work-- something which is obviously a derivative work, because it couldn't exist without the original and has some non-trivial amount of work put into it-- without regard to the licence is obviously illegal, and in my personal opinion, immoral. Personally, if they had made something that was, by the above definition, a "derivative work," i'd be much more forgiving. I mean, if they've drastically altered the movie, then maybe there's something meaningful and artistic there that we, as a society, should allow for. If they're just editing out all the scenes with the naughty-bits, then forget that. That just misrepresents the original work.
I agree with you, but your argument actually doesn't encompass the full length of the absurdity of the decision. Judge Limbaugh actually didn't play the games whose names he misquoted. Instead, he watched videos of someone else playing them, and, on top of that, it was often video of the cutscenes, as the publishers who put these videos together (in a grand misunderstanding of the medium they were supposed to be defending) wanted to show the more narrative elements of the games, and submitted to the judge scripts, storyboards, and videos of the gameplay.
So yeah, based on four videos of four games that the judge never played and whose names he could not be bothered to learn, Limbaugh ruled that no game currently in production or for the forseeable future, can qualify for first-ammendment protection. It's this sort of blatent disrespect for our forefathers and the laws this man is supposed to be upholding by a sheer laziness in his inquisision that i can, without reservation, call that man a "big fat idiot." His nephew is a different matter, and one i won't get into here.
Yeah, i'm reading "The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay" right now, and i'm really enjoying it. It's a book about comic book writers in the age of masked superheros, so you know there's some geekiness in there, though i wouldn't call it a "geek book" exactly. However, i'm surprised you call it dense. I'm breezing through it, and i'm generally not one to breeze through dense material. While it's a little on the long side at >600 pages, i find i've read fifty pages before i even notice.
Can i find a game idea that's original? Yeah, sure. I'm working on one right now. Is it easy anymore? Well, not as much as it once was. People have been making video games for fifty years now. Wow, that seems like a long time, until you think about how long people have been telling stories. Are there no new stories? Well, at a really macroscopic level, you might say that the structures of narratives are all played out (though i'd say that some of the postmodernist novels claimed new ground recently), but i'd hardly say that you can't write a new story. It's just that all the low-hanging fruit is long gone.
Just because you can't think of anything original doesn't mean that nothing original can be created.
And by the way, it's "Snood" not "snord," and it always bothers me, too, when people call it original, when it's blatently the same game as Puzzle Bobble.
You also wrote that, "Just becuase you are doing something in a new medium doesnt make it unique." Technically, I agree with this, though i'd like to make the corralary statement that just because you're doing something that's been done in another medium, you may still be doing something unique. There are examples of things that are transcribed from one medium to another that don't really add anything, but on the other hand, is "War and Peace" the book the same as "War and Peace" the movie? Hell no! Just because the story has already been done does not make the latter a rip-off, a copy, or even unoriginal.
Unfortunately, i don't have the time to give you the full length reply that this deserves, but i'll say this:
I'm legally an adult, and i certainly agree with you that "kids are not the most reputable sources of what is good for themselves," but in reality, i think they're no worse than humanity's average. If i restricted the speech of every person who squanders their right, or uses it poorly, there'd be a hell of a lot less talking around, and a much better signal to noise ratio. However, i know that i'm no exception to the rule, and i nor anyone else deserves the power to make that descision. Let the parents parent their kids-- not the government. A child disobeying his or her parents should NOT be the business of the law, but of the parents themselves.
"People tend to forget we get our freedoms in small doses until we are able to handle them all." Look into the phrase, "human rights." I'm not saying that this proves you wrong, but if you really want to argue that "we get our freedoms in small doeses until we are able to handle them all," you'd better be ready to address hundreds of years of philosophy on the subject.
You know, i agreed with everything you said, up 'til the last paragraph. The question is largely not, "Do videogames encourage violence," though that's an important issue that i seem to disagree with you on, but rather, "Is there something about videogames that makes them not qualify as 'speech'?"
I mean, what makes GTA3 more dangerous and less redeeming than The Anarchist's Cookbook or the aforementioned IceT music? If you ask me, i'll admit that GTA3 isn't the pinacle of human expression, but it certainly says something, just in a way that the legistlators, and unfortunately, many of the populace of today aren't familiar with. Why is it that as soon as there's interaction, there can no longer be speech?
My question - If these cards are getting so powerful at computations then why do we need a Intel/AMD processor at all? Just make a graphics card with more transistors and drop the traditional processor...
If you'd really like the answer to this question, try programming anything on the GPU and you'll understand. It's hell to do half this stuff. GPUs are highly specialized and make very specific tradeoffs in favor of graphics processing. Of course, some operations, specifically those that can be modeled using cellular automata, map well to this set of constraints. Others, such as ray-tracing can be shoe-horned in, but if you were to try to write a word processor on the GPU, it'd essentially be impossible. The GPU allows you to do massively parallel computations, but penalizes you heavilly for things such as loops of variable length or reading memory back from the card outside of the once-per-cycle frame update, and the price of interrupting computation is prohibitive. Clearing the graphics pipeline can take a long, long time.
Furthermore, while there have been a few papers published claiming the orders of magnitude increase in speed in these sorts of computations, none actually demonstrate this sort of speed-up. Everyone's speculating, but when it comes to it, results are lacking.
Well, people building RPGs in their backyard doesn't hurt business-- it's not like they're selling you RPGs anyway.
Or, to put it another way, those groups who are against amatuers building assualt rifles and mortars, picking locks, or making fake IDs have a lot less money than those groups who're against people hacking their own equipment.
Not that i think any of this should be illegal (at least not writing about it).
What if i'm a parent in Alabama in the 50's? What if i find the idea of integration objectionable? What if i find the idea of queer mariage objectionable? What if i see all works that do not exist to exhibit the glory of God objectionable?
I guess i have a right to make sure none of these things exist in the public sphere. It's not censorship, it's protecting my children.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm running 2.6 with an NVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 as well, and don't experience this problem. I do, however, run with 512MB of RAM, so i usually don't go into swap.
b.c
As for the faster-than-light communications, we could do that with tangled photons. Einstein was troubled by the fact that quantum entanglment causes an instantaneous change across a large distance. It's been used in a large number of sci-fi novels, including Orson Scott Cards Ender's Game series of books.
No, we couldn't. I'm so tired of people who consider themselves to be educated hearing something in a movie or in passing conversation or in a sci-fi book and taking it to be true. It's the physics equivalent of learning how to use computers from the movie Hackers. Quantum physics is pretty damn counter-intuitive, but it's amazing the number of supposedly educated people around here that just make wild guesses at things they think sound nice.
Anyway, the parent post doesn't deserve this lecture as much as the other children. Point being, never assume you know this stuff unless you actually take the time to educate yourself on it (read, "many years of intense study").
And no, i don't claim to know this stuff, i just know enough to know that i know that most of these cliches are no more than that.
b.c
If the newsbot creates a dynamic RSS feed anyway, just punish those people who have their spiders hitting the site too often without respecting the 304's.
A simple RSS feed to the tune of, "Go bugger yourself, and either don't hit my site so often or use an RSS spider that respects 304s," would probably work wonders.
b.c
Yeah, i understand this, and it's simply not funny.
I get it. It conflicts with itself on different levels of meaning. Still not funny.
b.c
I can't believe this is modded down as flamebait. This is god's own truth. 90% of everything sucks, as any good geek knows.
And you anime fans should get off your high horses about, "people expect cartoons to be for kids." This explaination may work great for you, 'cause it shows you as openminded and better than most people, but you know what? Many of us other geeks who aren't anime fans, but are, for example, comic book fans, know these things aren't just for kids. People have different tastes. Get over it.
b.c
Technically, that should be "verse," not "prose."
Still, good point.
b.c
A) No, homophobia does not mean that you hate homosexuals due to repressed homosexual urges. It's quite simple. If you hate or are afraid of homosexuals, then you are homophobic. Look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary or any other dictionary for that matter. It may list repressed feelings as one of the definitions, but not to the exclusion of general hatred.
B) I do know what you mean about terms becoming detached from their original meanings, as "fag" often is. However, using the terms "gay" or "homosexual" in a duragatory manner is not only a direct response to the modern emergence of homosexuality, but is also intended to be hurtful or dismissive my many people today, so by using it, others don't know which way you mean it, unlike the term "bitch."
Let me put it another way: i'm of somewhat German descent, and i'm not anti-semetic. Does that make it alright for me to call my friends "dirty kikes?" What about in public?
I'm not intending to be the language police, but i've heard the whole "calling someone queer/a fag/gay/homosexual in a duragatory manner doesn't mean i don't like people who are queer/fags/gays/homosexuals" and while i believe it doesn't, i can't help but assume that it usually does.
b.c
And what exactly do you use your dogs and cats for?
b.c
I thought we already passed the USA PATRIOT ACT.
b.c
And here in the US if you've got the cash, you're golden, but if you don't, when that chest pain gets worse, well, we'll give you the cheapest heart operation that's legal.
Both types of healthcare have problems. It's my belief that a national healthcare system is less fundementally broken, but neither is perfect.
To me, the only way i can justify fully privatized healthcare is if i accept that a human is worth her current funds plus her future earning potential. I have yet to make that jump.
b.c
I'm no fan of Microsoft or anything, but if and when WINE is faster than native Windows, perhaps it's because libwine has a whole lot of stub functions where Windows has functionality. Not that i have a problem with WINE, but it just doesn't do some things that Windows does, and there's a performance benefit for that.
b.c
Umm... They say it supports rear-projection. The bastards are one step ahead of you.
b.c
If you really think that CLIs are a problem for users, write a front-end in ${INTERPRETED_LANGUAGE}. If it's too much work to write a decent front-end, maybe the expensive product really is worth the money. That is, assuming the person who wrote the system is not its only user.
Not to say that CLIs are bad. I just see a lot of people who tack on an interface as an afterthought, resulting in a great program that can't be used.
b.c
Actually, it's the taxpayers' money, and so we should be able to do what we want with the equipment that our money has purchased. Now, if it was just a question of pornography, there are of course already laws on the books for obscenity, public decency, and so on. However, if i want to go read an article about sex education or queer rights, or, god forbid, how fucked up filtering software is, i'm of the opinion that i should be able to use the equipment that my money bought to do that.
It's only because people are willing to bow down before the government's will that the government gets away with this sort of thing.
b.c
As an aspiring game maker and current game theorist, i have to agree with you that currently, most games out there are total crap. Even the really popular ones that you and i loved as kids (or adults) are generally really lacking on any deep level.
But that's not to say that games, as a medium, are not able to be meaningful. It's just that the barriers for entry have been too high, the system of production has been entirely profit-driven and ultimately very conservative (this whole "fun" requirement is holding games back), and amatuer game makers are very often technology driven, and are happy to just reimplement the same pap they've been playing all these years. Some of these things will change. Some of them won't. It's something we have to deal with.
I guess my point is that yes, most games are total crap. Just don't rule out the medium as a whole. We'll do interesting things with it one of these days. I know i'm trying my hardest.
b.c
So you'd look more kindly upon humanity when all the sexuality and violence is superfluous to the story? Sorry, but if you remove the violence from Schindler's List, you've castrated the artistic vision because the violence is dehumanizing and that is important. Hell, i think it's a sad state of affairs when most of the sex and violence can be cut from a movie and you haven't missed any part of the storyline or dramatic effect. At that point, what's the point of having it, beyond simple pornography?
If you think sexuality is orthogonal to intellectual discourse, and violence to the human experience, i suggest you live some. If not, then why do you think art can get by without these things?
And, finally, i'd like to point out that i'm not objecting in any way to giving people the tools to modify these movies for themselves. While, as i said, i have a personal distate for that sort of [self-]censorship, it's everyone's right to manipulate their own possesions as they want.
b.c
"Sold in mass" like, having an electronic store where they sell versions of these? Or is it only bad if it's brick-and-mortar? Or is the 10,000th copy illegal?
Also, if Microsoft comes along and makes a few changes to your favorite GPLed software, would they be allowed to distribute it without regard to the licence just because they didn't "drastically change" it enough to be considered a derivative work under the GPL? What if they make their own version of Linux that has DRM, native support for various Windows formats, has an incompatible standard C library, but whose archetecture and normal operations are not "drastically changed?" They wouldn't have to release the source, right?
I fully support people's abilities to edit their own movies, and maybe the studios will offer DVDs with "clean" versions of play, though i personally am happier without bastardizing creative works. But for someone to alter and resell a creative work-- something which is obviously a derivative work, because it couldn't exist without the original and has some non-trivial amount of work put into it-- without regard to the licence is obviously illegal, and in my personal opinion, immoral. Personally, if they had made something that was, by the above definition, a "derivative work," i'd be much more forgiving. I mean, if they've drastically altered the movie, then maybe there's something meaningful and artistic there that we, as a society, should allow for. If they're just editing out all the scenes with the naughty-bits, then forget that. That just misrepresents the original work.
b.c
I agree with you, but your argument actually doesn't encompass the full length of the absurdity of the decision. Judge Limbaugh actually didn't play the games whose names he misquoted. Instead, he watched videos of someone else playing them, and, on top of that, it was often video of the cutscenes, as the publishers who put these videos together (in a grand misunderstanding of the medium they were supposed to be defending) wanted to show the more narrative elements of the games, and submitted to the judge scripts, storyboards, and videos of the gameplay.
So yeah, based on four videos of four games that the judge never played and whose names he could not be bothered to learn, Limbaugh ruled that no game currently in production or for the forseeable future, can qualify for first-ammendment protection. It's this sort of blatent disrespect for our forefathers and the laws this man is supposed to be upholding by a sheer laziness in his inquisision that i can, without reservation, call that man a "big fat idiot." His nephew is a different matter, and one i won't get into here.
b.c
Yeah, i'm reading "The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay" right now, and i'm really enjoying it. It's a book about comic book writers in the age of masked superheros, so you know there's some geekiness in there, though i wouldn't call it a "geek book" exactly. However, i'm surprised you call it dense. I'm breezing through it, and i'm generally not one to breeze through dense material. While it's a little on the long side at >600 pages, i find i've read fifty pages before i even notice.
Anyway, i second the Chabon reccomendation.
b.c
Can i find a game idea that's original? Yeah, sure. I'm working on one right now. Is it easy anymore? Well, not as much as it once was. People have been making video games for fifty years now. Wow, that seems like a long time, until you think about how long people have been telling stories. Are there no new stories? Well, at a really macroscopic level, you might say that the structures of narratives are all played out (though i'd say that some of the postmodernist novels claimed new ground recently), but i'd hardly say that you can't write a new story. It's just that all the low-hanging fruit is long gone.
Just because you can't think of anything original doesn't mean that nothing original can be created.
And by the way, it's "Snood" not "snord," and it always bothers me, too, when people call it original, when it's blatently the same game as Puzzle Bobble.
You also wrote that, "Just becuase you are doing something in a new medium doesnt make it unique." Technically, I agree with this, though i'd like to make the corralary statement that just because you're doing something that's been done in another medium, you may still be doing something unique. There are examples of things that are transcribed from one medium to another that don't really add anything, but on the other hand, is "War and Peace" the book the same as "War and Peace" the movie? Hell no! Just because the story has already been done does not make the latter a rip-off, a copy, or even unoriginal.
b.c
Unfortunately, i don't have the time to give you the full length reply that this deserves, but i'll say this:
I'm legally an adult, and i certainly agree with you that "kids are not the most reputable sources of what is good for themselves," but in reality, i think they're no worse than humanity's average. If i restricted the speech of every person who squanders their right, or uses it poorly, there'd be a hell of a lot less talking around, and a much better signal to noise ratio. However, i know that i'm no exception to the rule, and i nor anyone else deserves the power to make that descision. Let the parents parent their kids-- not the government. A child disobeying his or her parents should NOT be the business of the law, but of the parents themselves.
"People tend to forget we get our freedoms in small doses until we are able to handle them all." Look into the phrase, "human rights." I'm not saying that this proves you wrong, but if you really want to argue that "we get our freedoms in small doeses until we are able to handle them all," you'd better be ready to address hundreds of years of philosophy on the subject.
b.c
You know, i agreed with everything you said, up 'til the last paragraph. The question is largely not, "Do videogames encourage violence," though that's an important issue that i seem to disagree with you on, but rather, "Is there something about videogames that makes them not qualify as 'speech'?"
I mean, what makes GTA3 more dangerous and less redeeming than The Anarchist's Cookbook or the aforementioned IceT music? If you ask me, i'll admit that GTA3 isn't the pinacle of human expression, but it certainly says something, just in a way that the legistlators, and unfortunately, many of the populace of today aren't familiar with. Why is it that as soon as there's interaction, there can no longer be speech?
b.c
My question - If these cards are getting so powerful at computations then why do we need a Intel/AMD processor at all? Just make a graphics card with more transistors and drop the traditional processor...
If you'd really like the answer to this question, try programming anything on the GPU and you'll understand. It's hell to do half this stuff. GPUs are highly specialized and make very specific tradeoffs in favor of graphics processing. Of course, some operations, specifically those that can be modeled using cellular automata, map well to this set of constraints. Others, such as ray-tracing can be shoe-horned in, but if you were to try to write a word processor on the GPU, it'd essentially be impossible. The GPU allows you to do massively parallel computations, but penalizes you heavilly for things such as loops of variable length or reading memory back from the card outside of the once-per-cycle frame update, and the price of interrupting computation is prohibitive. Clearing the graphics pipeline can take a long, long time.
Furthermore, while there have been a few papers published claiming the orders of magnitude increase in speed in these sorts of computations, none actually demonstrate this sort of speed-up. Everyone's speculating, but when it comes to it, results are lacking.
b.c
Well, people building RPGs in their backyard doesn't hurt business-- it's not like they're selling you RPGs anyway.
Or, to put it another way, those groups who are against amatuers building assualt rifles and mortars, picking locks, or making fake IDs have a lot less money than those groups who're against people hacking their own equipment.
Not that i think any of this should be illegal (at least not writing about it).
b.c
What if i'm a parent in Alabama in the 50's? What if i find the idea of integration objectionable? What if i find the idea of queer mariage objectionable? What if i see all works that do not exist to exhibit the glory of God objectionable?
I guess i have a right to make sure none of these things exist in the public sphere. It's not censorship, it's protecting my children.