Hmm. Interesting question though. If looking at an image that _appears_ to be of someone underage is pornographic, then surely if your girlfriend looks a little young, and happens to like dressing up in lingerie, are you then faced with it being legal to have sex, but illegal to do so with the light on?
You don't get to choose what you find sexually attractive. Once upon a time, we tried to cure people of 'being gay', but most of the civilised world has given up the notion.
The key difference is that the person who finds children sexually attractive has no prospect of that happening.
So perhaps we need to stop looking at it as a thought crime, and treat it as a mental illness maybe? But in order to do that, we'd have to stop witch hunting - who's going to go to a doctor and say 'doctor, I have pervy thoughts about children, please help' when they're face with going on the sex offenders register, and being scapegoated evermore?
I would be prepared to bet that for every case of child sexual abuse, there's many more who have thoughts, but have never, and would never do that. Does using pornographic material to indulge a fantasy make someone more or less likely to actually commit an act?
I'm sure my mum has baby photos of me. That's not porn, and the only 'harm' I've had was when they got shown to my girlfriend.
So what if someone finds them erotic though? I mean, really? The crime is in harming a child that because of age is not able to meaningfully consent to sexual activity
Underage sex doesn't necessarily cause harm - but we set an age threshold because the only person who is able to consent to sexual activity is the child themselves, and we acknowledge that not being an adult means we cannot be sure that they know and understand the implications of doing so - much like other areas in life, such as drinking or getting a drivers license, or smoking.
When we do the 'lets think of the children' then... great, but lets be sure that's actually who we're thinking of - no child was harmed in the making of this cartoon porn. That makes it a witch hunt, and one that diverts attention to the real problem.
It's ok. They're actually 1000 year old zombies, so it's not CP at all.
Seriously. What the hell? The anti-pedophilia laws are there to protect children from harm, particularly from people in a position of trust or influence. That's eminently reasonable.
How does a cartoon - however tasteless - have anything to do with that?
Change MTU upwards.
Set Do Not Fragment on packet
If connection doesn't work, say user's connection isn't good enough, but offer to let them continue anyway, provided they accept this.
Thus the get to weasel it, so the users who's connection is 'substandard' don't count towards their metrics, and the 2 people who happen to have end to end gig-e get good response times, which they can cite in their propaganda.
If they can sell their service to enough customers within the same city, why exactly do they need to provide coverage for people in the middle of nowhere again?
It does indeed. I personally quite like that aspect - it's self balancing, in the sense that you can 'buy' an advantage with in game currency, but are essentially gambling with it - A T2 fitted heavy assault cruiser is more potent than a T1 fitted cruiser, but it's not proportionate to the price difference.
A 'super pimped' officer fit faction battleship will carry tens of billions of isks of price tag. And it'll be a beast (assuming you're not an idiot) but at best it'll take 3:1 odds, against a 100mil battleship fit.
I really like that - it means you don't see everyone running around 'full epic stuffz', but... there's a lot of people who _don't_ play EVE, and who will _never_ play EVE because they hate the idea - hell they hate the idea of equipment degredation in WOW.
Thing is, even a 'niche' game like EVE, I can see the temptation of 'all that money'. Catering to the less 'hardcore' players. The ones that want raid loot, and epic mounts, and respecs and... whatnot.
Catering to those players brings in a lot of revenue, and maybe only a slight dilution of the 'founding principles' of the game. But that can gradually drift onwards, as the game developers start to realise that the more mainstream they make their game, the more people they attract - you lose the 'niche', and you lose the 'niche' players, but they were a minority towards the end, so the company goes on.
Same problem really. I'm only glad that CCP is a privately owned company, with a 'vision' of what they want the game and the company to be like. I do catch myself twitching when I see things that I see as signs of 'dilution' though.
Core problem though is that 'good for you' is not a binary state toggle. And we seem to keep wanting to pretend that it is. Or at least, that's what the market droids might want you to think. Which is kinda the problem - there is nothing that's unambigiously 'good for you' - the red wine you cite, is a good example - it has ways in which it's good for you, and ways in which it's bad for you, both at the same time.
Well, no. But that's less because Software != Network and way more because you're talking about development vs. support/maintenance.
You could probably draw a better comparison with network development/implementation, or helpdesk process development.
Then there are similarities.
BS can't be toxic, there's loads in circulation in management circles without any ill effects... well, I suppose mental retardation is a pretty strong side effect isn't it?
audio feedback? What is this audio feedback? I'm fairly sure I don't have it on my Sony eReader, and it's not something I've missed. I'm pretty sure it can play MP3s, but I've never done so - everyone I know with an ebook reader of some kind, is also the type of person who already has a phone that plays MP3s, and an MP3 player if they want one. Part of me sort of says that combining functionality is good, so you have the option to use whatever for whatever.
But the other part of me thinks that MP3 playback, and active displays are... well, essentially actively countering the primary functionality of the device - mp3 playback is a much larger battery drain than reading ebooks, for example.
Hmm, I think you have problems with hysteresis there. If I look closely at my ebook reader, I can see an afterimage when it's only redrawn part of the screen - I therefore assume that the 'blank and redraw' is to minimise that effect. It seems slow, but having had my reader for the better part of a year now, it's honestly not that big a deal. At least, not compared to how it's nice to have 'proper' printed text.
Thing is, I can't recall last time I read a book that needed 'colour' - the only colour in it was the front/back cover, and even that would have been fine black and white.
I like my ebook reader to function as an ebook - that means nice sharp black on white text, with a long battery life, and ideally a ruggedized case so it'll survive being dropped. (For bonus points 'survive being dropped in the bath'). As features go, being able to display colour text/pictures is actually very low on the list. Although, I guess slightly ahead of 'can play MP3s'...
No, you're not. You're at work because it's a place you can be productive, and deliver value for your salary. Hours spent with nose pressed to grindstone do NOT correlate directly with productive output - Mr. Ford proved that, when he switched to a 40 hour, 5 day working week.
The only jobs where time spent is directly proportional to work accomplished are the kind that involves putting stickers on boxes - e.g. not the kind where you have a net link in the first place.
They'll do it, because they can. When times are tough, companies will squeeze you, even if they don't technically need to. That's because it keeps them 'competitive' which means they can get better profit off 'the market'.
If you can move on for something better, then do so. If you can't, you get to shut up and take it. It's not very nice, but it's how it is - if you can't do better, then your skills aren't worth as much as you think they are.
What a lot of companies don't understand though, is that loyalty cuts both ways - it's _VERY_ easy to do a half-assed job in all but the most trivial of situation (e.g. number of labels stuck to number of boxes) and even then it's not exactly hard. You make your employees miserable, and they won't quit, nor will they outright fail to deliver, but standards will drop, because they just don't care enough to do any more than just the minimum to keep their job - no point busting your balls for more pay, if there's no more pay to be had, right?
Actually, you don't. Grinding is one of the worst ways to make money in EVE - isk per hour spent mission running or mining for example, is really very bad indeed.
Sure, you can do it, and it makes you a start point, but... you will make significantly more through the market - either by buying one thing, manufacturing it and selling it elsewhere at a mark up, or just simple buy low, sell high style market manipulation.
It takes (in game) cash, and a bit of brain power, but it's not particularly time intensive - I do my 'industry' for a couple of hours a month, and turn over enough to keep myself in quite well fitted ships. Admittedly I'm getting better at keeping them alive these day, but I still probably make 500 mil a month without any particular difficulty.
Of course, understanding 'the market' and playing it, also works quite well in real life too...
Not really. I know many people who spend hours restoring classic cars. The value of their time in doing so is not well repaid in material terms, but they do it because they enjoy it.
EVE is much the same - technically speaking, I accumulate in game assets by 'work' and that's some sort of reflection on how much time and effort was involved. But I do it for fun, and if it stops being fun, I do something else.
No more than Chess or Supreme Commander is. Despite what it may appear, EVE is a strategy game. Real time ish, too, but not 'per game' just... plain Real Time. Assets are accumulated and destroyed, for tactical and strategic advantage.
It's quite awesome really - there's no other strategy games that do it at that 'level' - with morale, logistics, strategy, command capability, unit veterancy, politics, diplomacy, resource management. The key difference is, of course, that you don't actually get to be the 'commander' unless you can convince some people that you're worth following.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm. Interesting question though. If looking at an image that _appears_ to be of someone underage is pornographic, then surely if your girlfriend looks a little young, and happens to like dressing up in lingerie, are you then faced with it being legal to have sex, but illegal to do so with the light on?
You don't get to choose what you find sexually attractive. Once upon a time, we tried to cure people of 'being gay', but most of the civilised world has given up the notion.
The key difference is that the person who finds children sexually attractive has no prospect of that happening.
So perhaps we need to stop looking at it as a thought crime, and treat it as a mental illness maybe? But in order to do that, we'd have to stop witch hunting - who's going to go to a doctor and say 'doctor, I have pervy thoughts about children, please help' when they're face with going on the sex offenders register, and being scapegoated evermore?
I would be prepared to bet that for every case of child sexual abuse, there's many more who have thoughts, but have never, and would never do that. Does using pornographic material to indulge a fantasy make someone more or less likely to actually commit an act?
Because I'd have to clean my carpet. Blood's such a nusiance.
I'm sure my mum has baby photos of me. That's not porn, and the only 'harm' I've had was when they got shown to my girlfriend. ... great, but lets be sure that's actually who we're thinking of - no child was harmed in the making of this cartoon porn. That makes it a witch hunt, and one that diverts attention to the real problem.
So what if someone finds them erotic though? I mean, really? The crime is in harming a child that because of age is not able to meaningfully consent to sexual activity
Underage sex doesn't necessarily cause harm - but we set an age threshold because the only person who is able to consent to sexual activity is the child themselves, and we acknowledge that not being an adult means we cannot be sure that they know and understand the implications of doing so - much like other areas in life, such as drinking or getting a drivers license, or smoking.
When we do the 'lets think of the children' then
It's ok. They're actually 1000 year old zombies, so it's not CP at all.
Seriously. What the hell? The anti-pedophilia laws are there to protect children from harm, particularly from people in a position of trust or influence. That's eminently reasonable.
How does a cartoon - however tasteless - have anything to do with that?
Change MTU upwards.
Set Do Not Fragment on packet
If connection doesn't work, say user's connection isn't good enough, but offer to let them continue anyway, provided they accept this.
Thus the get to weasel it, so the users who's connection is 'substandard' don't count towards their metrics, and the 2 people who happen to have end to end gig-e get good response times, which they can cite in their propaganda.
If they can sell their service to enough customers within the same city, why exactly do they need to provide coverage for people in the middle of nowhere again?
It does indeed. I personally quite like that aspect - it's self balancing, in the sense that you can 'buy' an advantage with in game currency, but are essentially gambling with it - A T2 fitted heavy assault cruiser is more potent than a T1 fitted cruiser, but it's not proportionate to the price difference. ... there's a lot of people who _don't_ play EVE, and who will _never_ play EVE because they hate the idea - hell they hate the idea of equipment degredation in WOW.
A 'super pimped' officer fit faction battleship will carry tens of billions of isks of price tag. And it'll be a beast (assuming you're not an idiot) but at best it'll take 3:1 odds, against a 100mil battleship fit.
I really like that - it means you don't see everyone running around 'full epic stuffz', but
Thing is, even a 'niche' game like EVE, I can see the temptation of 'all that money'. Catering to the less 'hardcore' players. The ones that want raid loot, and epic mounts, and respecs and ... whatnot.
Catering to those players brings in a lot of revenue, and maybe only a slight dilution of the 'founding principles' of the game. But that can gradually drift onwards, as the game developers start to realise that the more mainstream they make their game, the more people they attract - you lose the 'niche', and you lose the 'niche' players, but they were a minority towards the end, so the company goes on.
Same problem really. I'm only glad that CCP is a privately owned company, with a 'vision' of what they want the game and the company to be like. I do catch myself twitching when I see things that I see as signs of 'dilution' though.
Core problem though is that 'good for you' is not a binary state toggle. And we seem to keep wanting to pretend that it is. Or at least, that's what the market droids might want you to think. Which is kinda the problem - there is nothing that's unambigiously 'good for you' - the red wine you cite, is a good example - it has ways in which it's good for you, and ways in which it's bad for you, both at the same time.
I think that would largely be the point of the article though - that sitting at a desk 8 hours a day is actively counterproductive.
Well, no. But that's less because Software != Network and way more because you're talking about development vs. support/maintenance.
You could probably draw a better comparison with network development/implementation, or helpdesk process development.
Then there are similarities.
"Used Correctly" presumably meaning 'the times at which it didn't cause a pregnancy' I take it?
Does alcohol count as 'volatile molecules'?
I can see some applications for this as a way of making better moonshine.
BS can't be toxic, there's loads in circulation in management circles without any ill effects... well, I suppose mental retardation is a pretty strong side effect isn't it?
audio feedback? What is this audio feedback? I'm fairly sure I don't have it on my Sony eReader, and it's not something I've missed. I'm pretty sure it can play MP3s, but I've never done so - everyone I know with an ebook reader of some kind, is also the type of person who already has a phone that plays MP3s, and an MP3 player if they want one. Part of me sort of says that combining functionality is good, so you have the option to use whatever for whatever. ... well, essentially actively countering the primary functionality of the device - mp3 playback is a much larger battery drain than reading ebooks, for example.
But the other part of me thinks that MP3 playback, and active displays are
Hmm, I think you have problems with hysteresis there. If I look closely at my ebook reader, I can see an afterimage when it's only redrawn part of the screen - I therefore assume that the 'blank and redraw' is to minimise that effect. It seems slow, but having had my reader for the better part of a year now, it's honestly not that big a deal. At least, not compared to how it's nice to have 'proper' printed text.
Thing is, I can't recall last time I read a book that needed 'colour' - the only colour in it was the front/back cover, and even that would have been fine black and white.
I like my ebook reader to function as an ebook - that means nice sharp black on white text, with a long battery life, and ideally a ruggedized case so it'll survive being dropped. (For bonus points 'survive being dropped in the bath'). As features go, being able to display colour text/pictures is actually very low on the list. Although, I guess slightly ahead of 'can play MP3s'...
Best feature of doom 2, was being able to do IDFA - full ammo, but no keys, so you still had to actually go through the level, and explore and stuff.
How much would they cost the _employee_ each year instead though?
No, you're not. You're at work because it's a place you can be productive, and deliver value for your salary. Hours spent with nose pressed to grindstone do NOT correlate directly with productive output - Mr. Ford proved that, when he switched to a 40 hour, 5 day working week.
The only jobs where time spent is directly proportional to work accomplished are the kind that involves putting stickers on boxes - e.g. not the kind where you have a net link in the first place.
They'll do it, because they can. When times are tough, companies will squeeze you, even if they don't technically need to. That's because it keeps them 'competitive' which means they can get better profit off 'the market'.
If you can move on for something better, then do so. If you can't, you get to shut up and take it. It's not very nice, but it's how it is - if you can't do better, then your skills aren't worth as much as you think they are.
What a lot of companies don't understand though, is that loyalty cuts both ways - it's _VERY_ easy to do a half-assed job in all but the most trivial of situation (e.g. number of labels stuck to number of boxes) and even then it's not exactly hard. You make your employees miserable, and they won't quit, nor will they outright fail to deliver, but standards will drop, because they just don't care enough to do any more than just the minimum to keep their job - no point busting your balls for more pay, if there's no more pay to be had, right?
Actually, you don't. Grinding is one of the worst ways to make money in EVE - isk per hour spent mission running or mining for example, is really very bad indeed. ... you will make significantly more through the market - either by buying one thing, manufacturing it and selling it elsewhere at a mark up, or just simple buy low, sell high style market manipulation.
Sure, you can do it, and it makes you a start point, but
It takes (in game) cash, and a bit of brain power, but it's not particularly time intensive - I do my 'industry' for a couple of hours a month, and turn over enough to keep myself in quite well fitted ships. Admittedly I'm getting better at keeping them alive these day, but I still probably make 500 mil a month without any particular difficulty.
Of course, understanding 'the market' and playing it, also works quite well in real life too...
Not really. I know many people who spend hours restoring classic cars. The value of their time in doing so is not well repaid in material terms, but they do it because they enjoy it.
EVE is much the same - technically speaking, I accumulate in game assets by 'work' and that's some sort of reflection on how much time and effort was involved. But I do it for fun, and if it stops being fun, I do something else.
No more than Chess or Supreme Commander is. Despite what it may appear, EVE is a strategy game. Real time ish, too, but not 'per game' just ... plain Real Time. Assets are accumulated and destroyed, for tactical and strategic advantage.
It's quite awesome really - there's no other strategy games that do it at that 'level' - with morale, logistics, strategy, command capability, unit veterancy, politics, diplomacy, resource management. The key difference is, of course, that you don't actually get to be the 'commander' unless you can convince some people that you're worth following.