In the Japanese yakuza, members who make a mistake are traditionally punished by having one of their fingers removed, starting with the pinky.
I imagine that there are several yakuza bosses in Japan who have even more control over their subordinates (and their bank accounts).
So neither of those mentioned would be breaking the law here, yet in the US, one would be a heinous criminal?
The US may be the land of the free, with many human rights protections, but what they don't tell you is that there are millions upon millions of other ways to get arrested.
Furthermore, in the US, having sex makes you a heinous criminal no matter what you're doing.
This is what happens when you make a technology Garden of Eden. Compared to a computer, a cell phone is a paradise: everything is, on the whole, much closer to perfect. Nearly no errors; hardly any bugs.
Cell phones are largely the domain of Joe Sixpack types. And they could fool Joe Sixpack into thinking all technology was as lacking in bugs as cell-phone software.
Luckily, this potentially dangerous belief is soon to be broken... I always thought text-messaging should be punishable by death, so I say let them have it.
Look at it this way. A phone (any phone) is designed to call people; it takes number input well, but it can take letters if it has to. Text messaging is an alphabetical function, and the phone's keypad makes each letter a two-button input.
Long story short: Text messaging on a cell phone is a bitch.
Text messaging is also a ridiculous devolution. It costs more than a call, and is pretty lifeless in comparison. Not to mention, they're shorter than hell (three words?). It makes a decent tactic if you're weaseling out of something (or lying), but that's about it. It's expensive too, if you want to have a conversation, it's ten bucks. Not worth it, in my opinion.
I love technology as much as the next guy. I don't really mind technology for the sake of technology (Segway et al). But when technology is so completely pointless that it seems to lower the intelligence of the people that use it, then it should be left as far behind as the horse and buggy.
My wife is a sexual predator that deals with social workers. The Internet is a great thing, but it is a VERY useful way for law enforcement to find predators. And just thinking "My wife's smarter than that" or "I'm keeping close watch" is not even good enough. People who do these things are very good at getting what they want and sometimes all it takes is a chat program.
So it's fine if your 15 year old sees images that are incredibly degrading to women?
That's an awfully broad statement. I think it's more accurate to say that it degrades only the woman/women in the porn. I've noticed that, for some reason, people generally perceive women more as a collective and less as individuals. I don't understand it, but it's there.
Porn hurts people. It hurts those who film and participate in it. It hurts families and has robbed so many people of innocence.
It hurts people? Please explain that. Acting in porn is, as I understand it, a voluntary job. Maybe you're confusing pornography with prostitution. As for the innocence bit... if porn doesn't rob you of your innocence, something else sure as hell will. I take it that you use "innocence" to mean "naivete". Well, regular old network TV will "rob" you of that pretty early on (Monica Lewinsky anyone?). If you use "innocence" to mean something else... Kids get in brutal fights as early as third grade. There's not much innocence left to go around, particularly once you're a teenager.
If it's so normal, why do we instinctively hide our tracks?
As someone else already replied... Because of people like you.
My advice, loose the computer in the rooms thing. Put all of the computers out in the open and only let your kids chat online when you are home. Otherwise, you never know who that name is on the otherside of the program asking them if they would like to get together sometime or where they live.
Why not teach them that people on the Internet are strangers too? A helpful idea is not to trust anyone you don't already know. I have internet friends, but I'll never see them in person because frankly, I don't trust anyone over the Internet. It keeps me, my money, and everything else safe.
Actually, I don't mind the ads they have in games now, because they don't detract from the game. TV commercials interrupt the show, and are designed to draw attention to themselves. Product placement, done well, does not draw any attention to itself, and even adds to the experience. If the soda machines in Half-Life were all Pepsi machines, it really wouldn't detract from the experience. In fact, the Pepsi machines would make the setting more realistic, because if the Black Mesa facility actually existed, you would probably see Pepsi machines in it.
Done badly, product placement sticks out like a sore thumb, and distracts the player so much that it makes the game less fun. This would seem to make the advertisement more effective, since it draws more attention, but in practice it would anger the player. "Find a McDonalds(R) Big Mac(tm) sandwich? Fuck McDonalds! See if I ever eat there again!"
Hopefully, developers will resist pushes to make product placement more irritating, or else companies won't push for irritating placements. Of course, most video games don't lend themselves to product placement well, and I find it highly unlikely that Blizzard (for example) would put a McDonald's in Diablo, because it just doesn't fucking fit.
Sad to say but it seems to me that computers are just a thin substitute for people craving what they used to have before TV and radio - entertainment, socializing, and human interaction.
TV and radio could be considered entertainment, and I would certainly consider your participation in this discussion socializing and human interaction. If you disagree that/. is human interaction, so be it, but I take offense at being called inhuman.
For example, you can make small talk about what happened on 24 this week, or you can even join various mailing lists/message boards to discuss the same. You can't really do that with Counterstrike.
I will not rant at you about the so-called "education" in public schools, or about teachers actually teaching. That has been done before.
Nor will I rant about how regular old people do a better job at keeping kids safe than a damned microchip.
I won't even rant about the semantics involved with calling high-schoolers "children." (If you don't know what I'm talking about, the word "children" usually is associated with people under age 10.)
I just want to ask you a question: How many parents who "wasted their youth" saw their kids better off than they? I can speak from personal experience that intelligence has little to do with success in high school, which is supposedly the point of HS... so since that's not the point of youth, then what is? I would sincerely like to know.
If the serial numbers of the tags was distributed outside of the school, I could see a privacy concern, but as long as they're only used internally, I don't see the privacy violation. Seriously, how much do you do in high school that you want to do anonymously?
As a high school student, I know the answer to your question: A lot. Criticizing the education system in general, or specific aspects of it, for example. Imagine what high school would be like if you couldn't call your principal a fat bull-dyke, even if she deserved it? A lot of harmless activities could be quashed. Cursing, for instance. If I stub my toe and say "Fuck!", who does it hurt? Nobody. It's a victimless crime.
Alternatively, I don't think the question is what you want to do anonymously, it's more like who. But then, to a horny teenage geek, it would probably be easier to list who he didn't want to do. And then there's the issue of anonymity... it's no fun doing the prom queen if nobody knows about it!
Slashdot Mirror
In the Japanese yakuza, members who make a mistake are traditionally punished by having one of their fingers removed, starting with the pinky. I imagine that there are several yakuza bosses in Japan who have even more control over their subordinates (and their bank accounts).
Troll? What the hell? I'm not trolling.
I don't want people to think "Oh, this E-Voting has to be great! Look at cell-phones!"
This virus influx could be a good thing, in a way. It might make people say "OMG, cell phones can get viruses! What about (important things)?"
This is the United States. Sex is evil here.
Furthermore, in the US, having sex makes you a heinous criminal no matter what you're doing.
Yes. Yes, I would.
This is what happens when you make a technology Garden of Eden. Compared to a computer, a cell phone is a paradise: everything is, on the whole, much closer to perfect. Nearly no errors; hardly any bugs.
Cell phones are largely the domain of Joe Sixpack types. And they could fool Joe Sixpack into thinking all technology was as lacking in bugs as cell-phone software.
Luckily, this potentially dangerous belief is soon to be broken... I always thought text-messaging should be punishable by death, so I say let them have it.
Look at it this way. A phone (any phone) is designed to call people; it takes number input well, but it can take letters if it has to. Text messaging is an alphabetical function, and the phone's keypad makes each letter a two-button input.
Long story short: Text messaging on a cell phone is a bitch.
Text messaging is also a ridiculous devolution. It costs more than a call, and is pretty lifeless in comparison. Not to mention, they're shorter than hell (three words?). It makes a decent tactic if you're weaseling out of something (or lying), but that's about it. It's expensive too, if you want to have a conversation, it's ten bucks. Not worth it, in my opinion.
I love technology as much as the next guy. I don't really mind technology for the sake of technology (Segway et al). But when technology is so completely pointless that it seems to lower the intelligence of the people that use it, then it should be left as far behind as the horse and buggy.
None of the deaths listed on the Snopes page were decapiations. Sorry.
An archive strip, not on the subject of Acclaim's advertising stunts, but really the company itself. I wonder how do they really feel about it?
Nintendo's own games are well-known for their kid-friendly nature, but that doesn't mean the platform is all happy. Ever played Eternal Darkness?
No, the parent is right. The security holes in MS products are all about ease-of-use; just to the cracker, though, not the user.
My wife is a sexual predator that deals with social workers. The Internet is a great thing, but it is a VERY useful way for law enforcement to find predators. And just thinking "My wife's smarter than that" or "I'm keeping close watch" is not even good enough. People who do these things are very good at getting what they want and sometimes all it takes is a chat program.
Shut the fuck up, troll.
I always assume everyone on IRC is a 27 year old sexual predator.
Really, it makes things so much easier when you automatically assume everyone is a villain.
Nice dress! It's probably made of mesh and blackened hot grits.
I mean...
This is speculation, but I think that the destruction of the Matrix in the previous five incarnations was caused by nuclear war.
One more time: "AOL is the Special Olympics of ISPs".
Actually, I don't mind the ads they have in games now, because they don't detract from the game. TV commercials interrupt the show, and are designed to draw attention to themselves. Product placement, done well, does not draw any attention to itself, and even adds to the experience. If the soda machines in Half-Life were all Pepsi machines, it really wouldn't detract from the experience. In fact, the Pepsi machines would make the setting more realistic, because if the Black Mesa facility actually existed, you would probably see Pepsi machines in it.
Done badly, product placement sticks out like a sore thumb, and distracts the player so much that it makes the game less fun. This would seem to make the advertisement more effective, since it draws more attention, but in practice it would anger the player. "Find a McDonalds(R) Big Mac(tm) sandwich? Fuck McDonalds! See if I ever eat there again!"
Hopefully, developers will resist pushes to make product placement more irritating, or else companies won't push for irritating placements. Of course, most video games don't lend themselves to product placement well, and I find it highly unlikely that Blizzard (for example) would put a McDonald's in Diablo, because it just doesn't fucking fit.
I will not rant at you about the so-called "education" in public schools, or about teachers actually teaching. That has been done before.
Nor will I rant about how regular old people do a better job at keeping kids safe than a damned microchip.
I won't even rant about the semantics involved with calling high-schoolers "children." (If you don't know what I'm talking about, the word "children" usually is associated with people under age 10.)
I just want to ask you a question: How many parents who "wasted their youth" saw their kids better off than they? I can speak from personal experience that intelligence has little to do with success in high school, which is supposedly the point of HS... so since that's not the point of youth, then what is? I would sincerely like to know.
Alternatively, I don't think the question is what you want to do anonymously, it's more like who. But then, to a horny teenage geek, it would probably be easier to list who he didn't want to do. And then there's the issue of anonymity... it's no fun doing the prom queen if nobody knows about it!
Watch as a new fashion trend sweeps the nation: tinfoil hats!