When you have two people on hand, and both of them can do the job, is it not preferable to pick the one who'll get along with the rest of the team better?
Information in the public domain, is information in the public domain.
If you put it there, then make sure it represents you in a good light, and you won't have a problem.
I'm actually fairly satisfied that if an employer does key my name into Google, they'll see a whole load of stuff that represents me quite well.
Very true. Most customers don't rack up $30k bills, but they do pick up a rather healthy expense from a relatively small amount of 'hey, want to meet at the bar'" style calling.
Most of those don't find it worth the effort of disputing the extra $100 on the bill, and just pay up.
What's the point though? The act of making the "child porn" in the first place is already illegal. Hunting down porn sites to block is basically an exercise in futility, and kinda assumes that it's impossible for people to use 'covert channels' for such things.
The thing is, making the images difficult to access might actually be counterproductive - I mean, making them in the first place is already illegal.
But think of the person who acquires that sort of thing? The person who does, for whatever reason, find 'underage' to be sexually attractive. This person is... well, is faced with having to repress their desire, because society deems it wrong, and it's illegal too.
(I could perhaps draw the parallels with homosexuality, although granted that this is more one sided)
Anyway, is it better for this person to be viewing porn, or is it better for them to spend their lives sexually frustrated to the point where they might just 'snap'?
Mostly though, I think censorship of... anything... is undesirable and oppressive. So fits in quite nicely with the current emergent dynamics of the UK government. 25% of the CCTV cameras of the world. Yeah baby.
Well, it is breach of contract, and technically something that could be brought up in court.
In practice, that won't happen though - it's just not worth the hassle.
More importantly, the Casinos rarely take the matter to court. They can quite happily bar you from their casino, and make sure you're barred from all the rest of them as well.
I'm reminded of a project given to physics undergraduates at the Uni I went to.
They were given the task of measuring the earth's magnetic field, and estimating altitude/height of the buildings around the campus based on it.
Of course what they weren't told was that the physics lab has an Nuclear magnetic resonance lab, with... something of a beast of a magnet.
Catches out the lazy undergrads, or the ones that 'fudge' results, whilst rewarding those that are paying attention and going to the effort to explain quite why the physics lab gives such insane results.
Reproduced the Cold fusion experiemental results... just don't tell 'em about it:).
But that reminds me of the old phrase:
If it moves, it's biology.
If it smells, it's chemistry.
If it doesn't work, it's physics.
... in a really really huge, 3 dimensional field.
Really, the odds of a collision 'just random like' are such that... well, the captains of those subs might want to take up playing the lottery, because they might just be winning twice in a row.
Identity thef and hacking could be stopped in their tracks by a simple mindset shift - they're only possible because people are trusting something that they shouldn't.
In which Yahtzee proceeds to:
Play multiplayer PvP online game.
Does so without the multiplayer or PvP elements.
Find that a game with 95% of it's content removed isn't very good.
EVE has a single universe, and a notable penalty for failure. Those two things mean that 'something like this' can have far reaching consequences across the universe and gamedynamics. It's not really like someone item duping on a PvE server, where... well, actually that guy over there cheating doesn't have much impact on your game. The magnitude of this exploit is such that alliances can rise and fall with the amount of cash in question - and when an alliance falls, there's another player on the receiving end of the sackbeating.
To use an analogy, no one really cares if you've got god mode on in single player Doom. Maybe you find that more amusing, but no one really cares. Face off on someone in a deathmatch though, the fact that they're invulnerable and you're not... well, takes a lot of fun out of the game.
And yes, they're quite careful about the devs thing, because of that scandal. If they _hadn't_ mentioned it, then the question would have been asked. From what I've seen over the last... year or more... internal affairs is scrupulous about it, because the vast majority of CCP employees are as much EVE addicts as the player base.
EVE is a large, single universe. It's adversarial at almost every level, and... only the most trivial things can be done solo.
The market is entirely player driven - barring a few very limited exceptions, everything there is player made and traded.
What it's not, is it's not a PvE experience - they're looking at improving the PvE content in March, but as it is right now, if you want to go 'compete with the system' then... well, frankly EVE just isn't particularly deep in that part of gameplay.
What EVE is is a massively multiplayer PvP game. It's got a lot of 'strategy game' type elements - whilst you fly your own ship, and don't control much else, there's very definitely supply lines, logistics, intelligence, espionage, diplomacy, tactics, unit experience and morale. You don't necessarily get to be 'commander' but the really good corps and alliances are those with strong and effective leadership teams, at every level, but only when supported by competent and intelligent pilots.
It's very open ended - you don't get told to 'go do this quest' or 'go level up' - this doesn't suit everyone, but once you grasp that it's just a case of 'go and do something you find interesting/fun/profitable'... well, that's the start of a giant space playground experience. I've been playing for... 4, 5 years now, and I'm still not bored with it.
Really? You'd say allowing people to willfully exploit until a bug can be fixed is a good thing for a game? To incentivise your playerbase to keep 'decent' exploits hidden for as long as possible, to maximise their gains?
No, I don't think so. EVE GMs don't ban you for 'finding' an exploit. They're banning people for blatantly abusing said exploit. Sure, exploits 'shouldn't exist' but they do, and they always will.
Some games are fun if you're an 'average' player. Others... pretty much require you to be able to rocket jump and sniper-headshot whilst in flight, in order to be allowed to play at all.
The 'casual gamer' is a huge market sector - a _lot_ of my colleagues (25-45) are gamers, be it on their XBOX or PC. They're not the '8 hours a day' awesome ownage machine type of gamer, they're fairly casual players who don't appreciate the difficulty curve being artificially inflated. Some games are fun when you're 'ok' at it. Others... are just dull.
When I saw him shot in the gut, my comment was "gutshot, he's dead then". However I didn't connect this statement with the rest of the film, so really enjoyed it despite having blown the plot twist for the person sat next to me.
Slashdot Mirror
When you have two people on hand, and both of them can do the job, is it not preferable to pick the one who'll get along with the rest of the team better?
Information in the public domain, is information in the public domain.
If you put it there, then make sure it represents you in a good light, and you won't have a problem.
I'm actually fairly satisfied that if an employer does key my name into Google, they'll see a whole load of stuff that represents me quite well.
Thrawn Trilogy + Ridley Scott
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7906381.stm
Covers a bit more of it, without being quite as sensationalist.
Which does actually come from the Daily Fail, but none the less is a source of concern
I'd rather have the hours of my life back, when faced with a highly disappointed but much hyped conversion.
They might. Or they might realise that work on the gonkulator is something they can put on their CV as something they did whilst between jobs.
Very true. Most customers don't rack up $30k bills, but they do pick up a rather healthy expense from a relatively small amount of 'hey, want to meet at the bar'" style calling.
Most of those don't find it worth the effort of disputing the extra $100 on the bill, and just pay up.
What's the point though? The act of making the "child porn" in the first place is already illegal. Hunting down porn sites to block is basically an exercise in futility, and kinda assumes that it's impossible for people to use 'covert channels' for such things.
The thing is, making the images difficult to access might actually be counterproductive - I mean, making them in the first place is already illegal. ... well, is faced with having to repress their desire, because society deems it wrong, and it's illegal too. ... anything ... is undesirable and oppressive. So fits in quite nicely with the current emergent dynamics of the UK government. 25% of the CCTV cameras of the world. Yeah baby.
But think of the person who acquires that sort of thing? The person who does, for whatever reason, find 'underage' to be sexually attractive. This person is
(I could perhaps draw the parallels with homosexuality, although granted that this is more one sided)
Anyway, is it better for this person to be viewing porn, or is it better for them to spend their lives sexually frustrated to the point where they might just 'snap'?
Mostly though, I think censorship of
Well, it is breach of contract, and technically something that could be brought up in court.
In practice, that won't happen though - it's just not worth the hassle.
More importantly, the Casinos rarely take the matter to court. They can quite happily bar you from their casino, and make sure you're barred from all the rest of them as well.
I'm reminded of a project given to physics undergraduates at the Uni I went to. ... something of a beast of a magnet.
They were given the task of measuring the earth's magnetic field, and estimating altitude/height of the buildings around the campus based on it.
Of course what they weren't told was that the physics lab has an Nuclear magnetic resonance lab, with
Catches out the lazy undergrads, or the ones that 'fudge' results, whilst rewarding those that are paying attention and going to the effort to explain quite why the physics lab gives such insane results.
Reproduced the Cold fusion experiemental results... just don't tell 'em about it :).
But that reminds me of the old phrase:
If it moves, it's biology.
If it smells, it's chemistry.
If it doesn't work, it's physics.
... in a really really huge, 3 dimensional field. ... well, the captains of those subs might want to take up playing the lottery, because they might just be winning twice in a row.
Really, the odds of a collision 'just random like' are such that
Identity thef and hacking could be stopped in their tracks by a simple mindset shift - they're only possible because people are trusting something that they shouldn't.
Clearly the most profitable use of 3D is going to be the pornography market.
And lets face it, who want's that in a public space...
In which Yahtzee proceeds to:
Play multiplayer PvP online game.
Does so without the multiplayer or PvP elements.
Find that a game with 95% of it's content removed isn't very good.
EVE has a single universe, and a notable penalty for failure. Those two things mean that 'something like this' can have far reaching consequences across the universe and gamedynamics. It's not really like someone item duping on a PvE server, where ... well, actually that guy over there cheating doesn't have much impact on your game. The magnitude of this exploit is such that alliances can rise and fall with the amount of cash in question - and when an alliance falls, there's another player on the receiving end of the sackbeating.
... well, takes a lot of fun out of the game.
... year or more ... internal affairs is scrupulous about it, because the vast majority of CCP employees are as much EVE addicts as the player base.
To use an analogy, no one really cares if you've got god mode on in single player Doom. Maybe you find that more amusing, but no one really cares. Face off on someone in a deathmatch though, the fact that they're invulnerable and you're not
And yes, they're quite careful about the devs thing, because of that scandal. If they _hadn't_ mentioned it, then the question would have been asked. From what I've seen over the last
EVE is a large, single universe. It's adversarial at almost every level, and ... only the most trivial things can be done solo.
... well, frankly EVE just isn't particularly deep in that part of gameplay.
... 4, 5 years now, and I'm still not bored with it.
The market is entirely player driven - barring a few very limited exceptions, everything there is player made and traded.
What it's not, is it's not a PvE experience - they're looking at improving the PvE content in March, but as it is right now, if you want to go 'compete with the system' then
What EVE is is a massively multiplayer PvP game. It's got a lot of 'strategy game' type elements - whilst you fly your own ship, and don't control much else, there's very definitely supply lines, logistics, intelligence, espionage, diplomacy, tactics, unit experience and morale. You don't necessarily get to be 'commander' but the really good corps and alliances are those with strong and effective leadership teams, at every level, but only when supported by competent and intelligent pilots.
It's very open ended - you don't get told to 'go do this quest' or 'go level up' - this doesn't suit everyone, but once you grasp that it's just a case of 'go and do something you find interesting/fun/profitable'... well, that's the start of a giant space playground experience. I've been playing for
Really? You'd say allowing people to willfully exploit until a bug can be fixed is a good thing for a game? To incentivise your playerbase to keep 'decent' exploits hidden for as long as possible, to maximise their gains?
No, I don't think so. EVE GMs don't ban you for 'finding' an exploit. They're banning people for blatantly abusing said exploit. Sure, exploits 'shouldn't exist' but they do, and they always will.
Give up, because you're too stupid to use a computer.
Some games are fun if you're an 'average' player. Others ... pretty much require you to be able to rocket jump and sniper-headshot whilst in flight, in order to be allowed to play at all.
... are just dull.
The 'casual gamer' is a huge market sector - a _lot_ of my colleagues (25-45) are gamers, be it on their XBOX or PC. They're not the '8 hours a day' awesome ownage machine type of gamer, they're fairly casual players who don't appreciate the difficulty curve being artificially inflated. Some games are fun when you're 'ok' at it. Others
When I saw him shot in the gut, my comment was "gutshot, he's dead then". However I didn't connect this statement with the rest of the film, so really enjoyed it despite having blown the plot twist for the person sat next to me.
And yet, you're the one that's killing real people, and EVE players aren't.