Try:
|-|a><0|2
Obviously, you need to have 1337 |-|7|\/|1 skillz to do that. (e.g. use the escape codes for the >< signs.)
< for the < sign
> for the > sign
if they make a GoW movie, it would probably look like a Kevin Sorbo Hercules movie with more blood and more CG.
That's probably true. And, I'll admit, I'd be fine with that. I always thought that the Hercules show was good, except for the fact that they never killed anyone. And they acted all shocked if someone tried. Give me a God of War movie with swords, togas, and gorgons getting their heads ripped off, and I'll be content.
Amen to that. I would add to the complaint list the overly long battle animations in some games. The first time I do something, the animation is usually cool, the second and third time, ok it's nice. After that it starts getting old. It would be nice if those things would compress automatically with use. E.g. you get the full effect a few times, afterwhich it gets cut short, after a few more times, it becomes little more than a blip.
...run, jump, and fight cookie-cutter 3rd person game...
And exactly, how is this different from the standard 2d "run, jump, and fight cookie-cutter" games? Technically, both generes change it up a bit occasioanlly, the fighting changes the way it's done, or the character uses a bionic arm insted of jumping, but it's really stil the same thing. When you get right down to it, there aren't that many different things you can actually do in a game. It's all once form, or another, of:
Interact with environment
Accomplish immediate goals
Accomplish larger goals
Every game falls into that list. In the case of action games, it's usually, running and jumping to interact with the environment and fighting to accomplish both immediate and larger goals, with some environment puzzles thrown in for flavor. Even the games you mentioned, which you are currently playing, fall into this description. Super Metroid - Run around, Jump from ledge to ledge, and kill assorted baddies. With the option to run even faster or do some power jumps. And, as is common in most games, you collect stuff hidden around the world to allow you to advance. Zelda: Link to the Past - Run around; jump, but only off ledges; and kill assorted baddies. All while trying to find cleverly hidden things that let you advance.
I've not played Super Mario:Allstars, so I'll leave that one alone, but honsetly take a good look at it, you'll probably find that it fits the same mold you are complaning about, just in 2d.
Really, the games haven't changed much, just gone 3d, and some have really horrid camera angles (Castlevania 64, I'm looking at you). What has really changed is that as we have gotten older many of us gamers have gotten jaded. Personally, I have trouble finding games I like anymore, but I don't blame this on the game makers, I realize that it's just that I'm at a point where I've played enough iterations of the same puzzles that I'm tired of them. Though, the same puzzles, packaged well do still get my attention. Right now I'm playing through Prince of Perisa: Warrior Within. It's not really that different from Sands of Time, but it's well done, and fun, so I enjoy it.
Quit blaming 3d, and the game companies for your own jaded view of games, just accept that you're not as easy to please as you were 10 years ago, and look for the games that do please you.
First off, God of War the game, kick all kinds of ass. The movie I expect will blow big donkey dong. For some reason, I can't help but expect that the great storyline (for a video game) of revenge is going to be wrecked in the movie by some stupid love story. We'll see Kratos setting off on a quest of revenge against Ares, only to be caught up in a "not meant to be" love story with some bimbo, probably Athena.
I'll admit, I'd be more likely to enjoy it if they kept the cold, Kratos who kicks ass and just uses women to try to stave off the memories. It'd almost have to be a low budget film, with lots of fight scenes and boobies flopping about.
Fine! I'll go make my own amusement park. With Blackjack, and Hookers...Actually, forget the park.
</Bender>
Honestly, I see the moon as a great place to setup a playground for the rich, without any sort of government getting in the way. Create a casino, and grow all forms of illicit narcotics, alcohol, and import hookers.
Ya, I noticed this too. The game is a ton of fun, but when a friend asked about it, I warned him up front to not let his kid see/play it. Let's face it, you get sequences where you are literally ripping the head off a gorgon, nice and graphic. There's the sex mini-game, and brests galore. In fact, said gorgons have breasts hanging out if my memory is corret, so not only do we get violence, we get to see boobies in the middle of violence. How that game skated under the AO rating, I'm not sure, but I can't wait until Thomson sees it, he'll have an anurism. Or, more likely, he'll masturbate his dick raw, then go ballistic about it in an attempt to hide the fact that he is a pervert like the rest of us.
Of course the people dont want war...that is understood. But voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. -- Hermann Goering
I know your nephew was only little but isn't this the point the anti-violence in games brigade is making? That people playing violent games can't tell the difference between fantasy violence and real violence?
While that is, roughly, the point, the problem is the "anti-violence in game brigade" doesn't seem to understand what the above poster is getting at, it's the responsibility of the parents to police what their children are exposed to, not the government. If parents would actually pay attention to what their children are doing, and respond appropriaty to it, there wouldn't be a problem with children seeing violence or sex in video games.
Consider for a moment what a kid has to go through to get the "Hot Coffee" mod up and running on GTA. First, he has to get GTA, which requires access to either US$40 or BitTorrent. In the former case, where did he get that much money, and why wasn't he asked what was being done with it? In the later case, he already has unfettered access to the internet, and you're worried about what he will see in GTA?!?!? Here, at home check this link(Really NSFW!) out. A kid on the internet has access to all the porn he wants, and all types, "Hot Coffee" is pointless.
Assuming he got the game on the sly somehow, he still needs access to a computer to play it. Now, last I checked most kids don't have US$1000 just laying about to buy a computer with. Moreover, hiding a computer is sort of tough, so realistically, the parent should know when their kid has access to a computer and should be monitoring what the kid is doing with it. Can they monitor 24/7? No, but then, as stated above, once the kid has a computer and access to the internet, they are going to find far worse on the internet then "Hot Coffee".
Ok, so the kid has a copy of GTA, access to a computer and absolutly no fucking supervision. He hops on the internet, ignores the gobs and gobs of freely available porn. And downloads this "Hot Coffee" mod he's been hearing so much about in the media, which he would have probably never heard about if it hadn't been blown out of proportion. Installs the mod, and plays it. At worst he's going to get a hard-on and masturbate. Might even get some chafe on his little willy if he's a horny kid.
Let's face it, by the time the kid has actually managed to get to view this content, the parent has fucked up so bad it's not even funny. There isn't anything the government is going to do, which is going to have an effect. At most, they will just make it harder for the kid to get the game in the first place. Insted of buying the game himself, the kid will just get the obviously oblivious parent to buy it for them; or, he'll just get it off BitTorrent. Not exactly a huge hurddle. And again, this is ignoring the fact that an unsupervised kid is going to be in porn heaven once he gets on the internet.
The other problem with this, is that it's not going to compel a terrorist into giving up the password. These people are willing to blow themselves up for their cause, do you really think they are going to balk at sitting in a jail, rather than giving up information which might hurt their cause? Insted this will be used in normal criminal investigations where the police don't have enough evidence to get a warrant (or whatever the UK equivilent is), they will just force the suspect to give up all of their passwords, and then start fishing for something to pin on the person.
Of course it's a sham. The government needs a way to keep people distracted so they don't start noticing all of the problems with thier own government. As long as there is a war on with something, any time there is a problem, they can either blame it on the "enemy", or as a necessary thing for fighting the "enemy".
This request by the UK police is a good example. They want to be able to force you to give up passwords, so they say that it is necessary for fighting "terrorists". Along with holding them for a longer period. Of course, they will promise not to abuse this power, but bullshit, it will get used every time they think it will give them an edge over a suspect.
As I often do these days, I find the following quote distubingly apropos: Of course the people dont want war...that is understood. But voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. -- Hemann Goering
Terrorist style attacks even happen in police states. Obviously, it impossible to lock things down far enough to give real security, therefore, there is no reason to destroy privacy in a vain attempt to get there.
That was one of ther best things about the series, and possibly one of the reasons it didn't have (Fox's idea of) mainstream appeal. Many of the jokes would go way over the head of many people. That said, my fiancee still liked the show, even though she isn't a geek, and missed many of those little cracks.
Personally, I find if funny that the guy says that DRM is a necessary evil, right after explaining that it only took him a couple of moments to circumvent it. So, it's a necessary obsticle to put in the way of legitimate users, when the pirates are simply going to take the extra moment or two and get the crack? This doesn't seem the least bit stupid to him?
Re:retro GBAs rule for long distance travel.
on
The GBA's Last Stand
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Have you tried to carry a screwdriver on an Airplane recently? You might as well bend over and hold your ass cheecks open for the security people, it'll hurt less than them just forcing their way in there.
What ever happened to the good old plastic clip? Just press the tab and pull the lid out, replace batteries, replace lid, you're good to go. And, no anal probe from the security because you tried to carry a weapon onto the airplane (known in the rest of the world as a screwdriver).
I would have to agree, 98 was OK. From there, I went to Me, mostly because I was building a machine and had a free (legitimate) copy of Me. As anyone who ran Me can attest, that operating system made you want to upgrade, to anything else. In the end, I got a copy of XP right before it released (gotta love MS conferences), and installed that immediatly. At this point, I'm happy with XP. It's stable, and runs all of the software I want to run.
I'm now looking at the upcomming Longhorn, and wondering, why? I don't see any features, as yet, which I care about. I don't need any more multimedia functions, I don't want to do digital videos. My home network functions will little trouble. My browser (Firefox) works just fine, I can get all the porn I want. My games load up and run, though my video card needs to be replaced. I just don't see what they can offer me that would make me want to upgrade. And with all of the Digital Restrictions Management, which seems to be built in, I have enough reason to want to not upgrade.
The problem with this stance is that, eventually, new games will no longer run on XP, at which point, it's back to the upgrade treadmill. Hopefully though, I'll be able to skip a generation or two of Windows.
I'd guess you're on XP for the same reason I am, games. And the idea of sticking with XP is going to be all fine and good until you're looking at the specs for a really cool looking game and the minimum systems requirements includes "Microsoft Longhorn". Granted, if Linux support takes off enough, and there start to be Linux versions for the same games, then I'll probably switch, but for now I'm stuck on the MS treadmill.
Wouldn't all of those "hacks" be against the "Disney-Microsoft (or is that Digital Millenium?) Copyright Protection Act"?
And people like Jon Johannsen(sp?), a.k.a. DVD-Jon will give Microsoft the one-finger salute as they release the crack in a country where they are un-reachable by the DMCA.
This is the fatal flaw in the attempt to control information on the internet, since the network spans countries, unless every country agrees to something, it will find a safe haven somewhere. Even if it doesn't find a normal safe haven, Freenet still exists, as do P2P networks. More and more the internet is making information nearly impossible to control.
You're never "forced" to upgrade, but if you want to use the latest software you will probably "need" to upgrade. Honestly, do you expect developers to support an old OS forever, or old hardware? Microsoft has been very open about it's OS cycle, they've even extended support on an older OS several times, what more do you want? MS exists to make money, in order to make money they need to sell software. And creating a cycle which gets people to upgrade is the way to ensure a steady flow of purchases.
Also, if content is not available to you because of the OS/software you are using, there is no one holding a gun to your head saying you have to view that content. Go elsewhere and find different content to view.
1. GPS works anywhere in the world where you can "see" enough satellites. Depending upon terrain the accuarcy will be better or worse.
2. Trimble makes some cool GPS units, which can be put through some rather rough conditions and not have a problem.
3. Consider a ruggedized laptop. It will cost more and won't be as fast, but it will stand up to the abuse you will inevitiblly put it through. No kidding, we had one get dropped in a lake by accident, it is still functional.
4. As for the software, the people I work with use ArcPad from ESRI. Along with the rest of the ArcGIS stuff. It's pretty nice, but expensive.
Fairly close. I was trying to point out that the US's version of "freedom of speech" isn't absolute. Granted, the US does allow you to get away with saying just about anything, there are still statements which we self-censor because it would draw the attention of the FBI and they would just generally dick with your life for a while.
On the other hand, I challenge anyone to point out a country where this isn't the case. In both France and Germany, both of which are fairly liberal about their laws, any overt statements supporting the Nazi's is a no-no, and teaching Scientology in the Germany can be a good way to learn about their legal system. The Netherlands might be as close as you can get, as I haven't heard much comming out of there, which restricted free speech; but then, I've not had the chance to study much of their laws either.
Still, my view is that speech on the interenet should be as close to absolutly free as possible. If you can't show direct harm to a person by anything which is posted on a web site, I see no reason it should be removed.
All that said, I don't see why the US would, or should, give up control of the current TLD's, with the exception of country TLD's. Country domains should be wholly controlled, and administered by the applicable country. But, given that inertia has placed.com,.net, etc. firmly in US hands, I see no reason to change that. Like most arguments about who controls new territory, the US got there first, and has the resources to keep it. And, since the internet is inherently extensible, we should simply make new territory in it for everyone else.
People in power uses the "abuse" as an excuse for regulation
Said people use regulation to get themselves money
Profit!!!
There ya go.
On a serious note, yes, this is what tends to happen. Governments, and the people in them seek to control everything, because, anything which is uncontrolled is a threat to their power. I think this is why the UN wants to control the internet. Most of the member states rely on it at this point, and with the US in control of it, they are, in some small way, under the thumb of the US. Since the UN is seen as less of a threat than the US, they would rather have control there. The US, on the other hand, really has no reason to reliquish control, so it won't.
Slashdot Mirror
You're a robosexual!!!1one!1eleventy!1!
Try:
|-|a><0|2
Obviously, you need to have 1337 |-|7|\/|1 skillz to do that. (e.g. use the escape codes for the >< signs.)
< for the < sign
> for the > sign
if they make a GoW movie, it would probably look like a Kevin Sorbo Hercules movie with more blood and more CG.
That's probably true. And, I'll admit, I'd be fine with that. I always thought that the Hercules show was good, except for the fact that they never killed anyone. And they acted all shocked if someone tried. Give me a God of War movie with swords, togas, and gorgons getting their heads ripped off, and I'll be content.
Amen to that. I would add to the complaint list the overly long battle animations in some games. The first time I do something, the animation is usually cool, the second and third time, ok it's nice. After that it starts getting old. It would be nice if those things would compress automatically with use. E.g. you get the full effect a few times, afterwhich it gets cut short, after a few more times, it becomes little more than a blip.
And exactly, how is this different from the standard 2d "run, jump, and fight cookie-cutter" games? Technically, both generes change it up a bit occasioanlly, the fighting changes the way it's done, or the character uses a bionic arm insted of jumping, but it's really stil the same thing. When you get right down to it, there aren't that many different things you can actually do in a game. It's all once form, or another, of:
- Interact with environment
- Accomplish immediate goals
- Accomplish larger goals
Every game falls into that list. In the case of action games, it's usually, running and jumping to interact with the environment and fighting to accomplish both immediate and larger goals, with some environment puzzles thrown in for flavor. Even the games you mentioned, which you are currently playing, fall into this description.Super Metroid - Run around, Jump from ledge to ledge, and kill assorted baddies. With the option to run even faster or do some power jumps. And, as is common in most games, you collect stuff hidden around the world to allow you to advance.
Zelda: Link to the Past - Run around; jump, but only off ledges; and kill assorted baddies. All while trying to find cleverly hidden things that let you advance.
I've not played Super Mario:Allstars, so I'll leave that one alone, but honsetly take a good look at it, you'll probably find that it fits the same mold you are complaning about, just in 2d.
Really, the games haven't changed much, just gone 3d, and some have really horrid camera angles (Castlevania 64, I'm looking at you). What has really changed is that as we have gotten older many of us gamers have gotten jaded. Personally, I have trouble finding games I like anymore, but I don't blame this on the game makers, I realize that it's just that I'm at a point where I've played enough iterations of the same puzzles that I'm tired of them. Though, the same puzzles, packaged well do still get my attention. Right now I'm playing through Prince of Perisa: Warrior Within. It's not really that different from Sands of Time, but it's well done, and fun, so I enjoy it.
Quit blaming 3d, and the game companies for your own jaded view of games, just accept that you're not as easy to please as you were 10 years ago, and look for the games that do please you.
First off, God of War the game, kick all kinds of ass. The movie I expect will blow big donkey dong. For some reason, I can't help but expect that the great storyline (for a video game) of revenge is going to be wrecked in the movie by some stupid love story. We'll see Kratos setting off on a quest of revenge against Ares, only to be caught up in a "not meant to be" love story with some bimbo, probably Athena.
I'll admit, I'd be more likely to enjoy it if they kept the cold, Kratos who kicks ass and just uses women to try to stave off the memories. It'd almost have to be a low budget film, with lots of fight scenes and boobies flopping about.
Bullets are rarely used for anonymous, constitutionally protected, speech.
see: This comment and associated replies.
Fine! I'll go make my own amusement park. With Blackjack, and Hookers...Actually, forget the park.
</Bender>
Honestly, I see the moon as a great place to setup a playground for the rich, without any sort of government getting in the way. Create a casino, and grow all forms of illicit narcotics, alcohol, and import hookers.
Ya, I noticed this too. The game is a ton of fun, but when a friend asked about it, I warned him up front to not let his kid see/play it. Let's face it, you get sequences where you are literally ripping the head off a gorgon, nice and graphic. There's the sex mini-game, and brests galore. In fact, said gorgons have breasts hanging out if my memory is corret, so not only do we get violence, we get to see boobies in the middle of violence. How that game skated under the AO rating, I'm not sure, but I can't wait until Thomson sees it, he'll have an anurism. Or, more likely, he'll masturbate his dick raw, then go ballistic about it in an attempt to hide the fact that he is a pervert like the rest of us.
Of course the people dont want war...that is understood. But voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
-- Hermann Goering
I know your nephew was only little but isn't this the point the anti-violence in games brigade is making? That people playing violent games can't tell the difference between fantasy violence and real violence?
While that is, roughly, the point, the problem is the "anti-violence in game brigade" doesn't seem to understand what the above poster is getting at, it's the responsibility of the parents to police what their children are exposed to, not the government. If parents would actually pay attention to what their children are doing, and respond appropriaty to it, there wouldn't be a problem with children seeing violence or sex in video games.
Consider for a moment what a kid has to go through to get the "Hot Coffee" mod up and running on GTA. First, he has to get GTA, which requires access to either US$40 or BitTorrent. In the former case, where did he get that much money, and why wasn't he asked what was being done with it? In the later case, he already has unfettered access to the internet, and you're worried about what he will see in GTA?!?!? Here, at home check this link(Really NSFW!) out. A kid on the internet has access to all the porn he wants, and all types, "Hot Coffee" is pointless.
Assuming he got the game on the sly somehow, he still needs access to a computer to play it. Now, last I checked most kids don't have US$1000 just laying about to buy a computer with. Moreover, hiding a computer is sort of tough, so realistically, the parent should know when their kid has access to a computer and should be monitoring what the kid is doing with it. Can they monitor 24/7? No, but then, as stated above, once the kid has a computer and access to the internet, they are going to find far worse on the internet then "Hot Coffee".
Ok, so the kid has a copy of GTA, access to a computer and absolutly no fucking supervision. He hops on the internet, ignores the gobs and gobs of freely available porn. And downloads this "Hot Coffee" mod he's been hearing so much about in the media, which he would have probably never heard about if it hadn't been blown out of proportion. Installs the mod, and plays it. At worst he's going to get a hard-on and masturbate. Might even get some chafe on his little willy if he's a horny kid.
Let's face it, by the time the kid has actually managed to get to view this content, the parent has fucked up so bad it's not even funny. There isn't anything the government is going to do, which is going to have an effect. At most, they will just make it harder for the kid to get the game in the first place. Insted of buying the game himself, the kid will just get the obviously oblivious parent to buy it for them; or, he'll just get it off BitTorrent. Not exactly a huge hurddle. And again, this is ignoring the fact that an unsupervised kid is going to be in porn heaven once he gets on the internet.
The other problem with this, is that it's not going to compel a terrorist into giving up the password. These people are willing to blow themselves up for their cause, do you really think they are going to balk at sitting in a jail, rather than giving up information which might hurt their cause? Insted this will be used in normal criminal investigations where the police don't have enough evidence to get a warrant (or whatever the UK equivilent is), they will just force the suspect to give up all of their passwords, and then start fishing for something to pin on the person.
Of course it's a sham. The government needs a way to keep people distracted so they don't start noticing all of the problems with thier own government. As long as there is a war on with something, any time there is a problem, they can either blame it on the "enemy", or as a necessary thing for fighting the "enemy".
This request by the UK police is a good example. They want to be able to force you to give up passwords, so they say that it is necessary for fighting "terrorists". Along with holding them for a longer period. Of course, they will promise not to abuse this power, but bullshit, it will get used every time they think it will give them an edge over a suspect.
As I often do these days, I find the following quote distubingly apropos:
Of course the people dont want war...that is understood. But voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
-- Hemann Goering
Terrorist style attacks even happen in police states. Obviously, it impossible to lock things down far enough to give real security, therefore, there is no reason to destroy privacy in a vain attempt to get there.
That was one of ther best things about the series, and possibly one of the reasons it didn't have (Fox's idea of) mainstream appeal. Many of the jokes would go way over the head of many people. That said, my fiancee still liked the show, even though she isn't a geek, and missed many of those little cracks.
Personally, I find if funny that the guy says that DRM is a necessary evil, right after explaining that it only took him a couple of moments to circumvent it. So, it's a necessary obsticle to put in the way of legitimate users, when the pirates are simply going to take the extra moment or two and get the crack? This doesn't seem the least bit stupid to him?
Have you tried to carry a screwdriver on an Airplane recently? You might as well bend over and hold your ass cheecks open for the security people, it'll hurt less than them just forcing their way in there.
What ever happened to the good old plastic clip? Just press the tab and pull the lid out, replace batteries, replace lid, you're good to go. And, no anal probe from the security because you tried to carry a weapon onto the airplane (known in the rest of the world as a screwdriver).
I would have to agree, 98 was OK. From there, I went to Me, mostly because I was building a machine and had a free (legitimate) copy of Me. As anyone who ran Me can attest, that operating system made you want to upgrade, to anything else. In the end, I got a copy of XP right before it released (gotta love MS conferences), and installed that immediatly. At this point, I'm happy with XP. It's stable, and runs all of the software I want to run.
I'm now looking at the upcomming Longhorn, and wondering, why? I don't see any features, as yet, which I care about. I don't need any more multimedia functions, I don't want to do digital videos. My home network functions will little trouble. My browser (Firefox) works just fine, I can get all the porn I want. My games load up and run, though my video card needs to be replaced. I just don't see what they can offer me that would make me want to upgrade. And with all of the Digital Restrictions Management, which seems to be built in, I have enough reason to want to not upgrade.
The problem with this stance is that, eventually, new games will no longer run on XP, at which point, it's back to the upgrade treadmill. Hopefully though, I'll be able to skip a generation or two of Windows.
I'd guess you're on XP for the same reason I am, games. And the idea of sticking with XP is going to be all fine and good until you're looking at the specs for a really cool looking game and the minimum systems requirements includes "Microsoft Longhorn". Granted, if Linux support takes off enough, and there start to be Linux versions for the same games, then I'll probably switch, but for now I'm stuck on the MS treadmill.
Wouldn't all of those "hacks" be against the "Disney-Microsoft (or is that Digital Millenium?) Copyright Protection Act"?
And people like Jon Johannsen(sp?), a.k.a. DVD-Jon will give Microsoft the one-finger salute as they release the crack in a country where they are un-reachable by the DMCA.
This is the fatal flaw in the attempt to control information on the internet, since the network spans countries, unless every country agrees to something, it will find a safe haven somewhere. Even if it doesn't find a normal safe haven, Freenet still exists, as do P2P networks. More and more the internet is making information nearly impossible to control.
You're never "forced" to upgrade, but if you want to use the latest software you will probably "need" to upgrade. Honestly, do you expect developers to support an old OS forever, or old hardware? Microsoft has been very open about it's OS cycle, they've even extended support on an older OS several times, what more do you want? MS exists to make money, in order to make money they need to sell software. And creating a cycle which gets people to upgrade is the way to ensure a steady flow of purchases.
Also, if content is not available to you because of the OS/software you are using, there is no one holding a gun to your head saying you have to view that content. Go elsewhere and find different content to view.
1. GPS works anywhere in the world where you can "see" enough satellites. Depending upon terrain the accuarcy will be better or worse.
2. Trimble makes some cool GPS units, which can be put through some rather rough conditions and not have a problem.
3. Consider a ruggedized laptop. It will cost more and won't be as fast, but it will stand up to the abuse you will inevitiblly put it through. No kidding, we had one get dropped in a lake by accident, it is still functional.
4. As for the software, the people I work with use ArcPad from ESRI. Along with the rest of the ArcGIS stuff. It's pretty nice, but expensive.
Fairly close. I was trying to point out that the US's version of "freedom of speech" isn't absolute. Granted, the US does allow you to get away with saying just about anything, there are still statements which we self-censor because it would draw the attention of the FBI and they would just generally dick with your life for a while. .com, .net, etc. firmly in US hands, I see no reason to change that. Like most arguments about who controls new territory, the US got there first, and has the resources to keep it. And, since the internet is inherently extensible, we should simply make new territory in it for everyone else.
On the other hand, I challenge anyone to point out a country where this isn't the case. In both France and Germany, both of which are fairly liberal about their laws, any overt statements supporting the Nazi's is a no-no, and teaching Scientology in the Germany can be a good way to learn about their legal system. The Netherlands might be as close as you can get, as I haven't heard much comming out of there, which restricted free speech; but then, I've not had the chance to study much of their laws either.
Still, my view is that speech on the interenet should be as close to absolutly free as possible. If you can't show direct harm to a person by anything which is posted on a web site, I see no reason it should be removed.
All that said, I don't see why the US would, or should, give up control of the current TLD's, with the exception of country TLD's. Country domains should be wholly controlled, and administered by the applicable country. But, given that inertia has placed
- New area of freedom opens up
- Some people "abuse" it
- People in power uses the "abuse" as an excuse for regulation
- Said people use regulation to get themselves money
- Profit!!!
There ya go.On a serious note, yes, this is what tends to happen. Governments, and the people in them seek to control everything, because, anything which is uncontrolled is a threat to their power. I think this is why the UN wants to control the internet. Most of the member states rely on it at this point, and with the US in control of it, they are, in some small way, under the thumb of the US. Since the UN is seen as less of a threat than the US, they would rather have control there. The US, on the other hand, really has no reason to reliquish control, so it won't.