The "general public" was never asked to vote on such matters. The closest that We the People ever got to this state of affairs was to try to elect what we thought were sensible people to Congress, and the better of the two choices we had for President. Now the law is in the hands of lawyers paid by everyone BUT the general public, judges who were put into office by the aforementioned Congress and President (All elected judges are subservient to the appointed judges.), and by airline corporate policies and lobbyists, who obviously are only interested in profit.
Now while I agree with you that the effort that is put into thwarting airline terrorists are ludicrous and overbearing, please don't blame them on the "general public". I'm pretty sure that given the choice, the "general public" would vote for something a little bit less invasive than what we have now.
As a father of three, I can confirm the door locks work very well to shield innocent children from the horrors of adult fluid exchanges. The do not, however, sufficiently block out the sound of breaking dishes, overdriven home theaters, screaming, bawling fights over toys, and persistent knocking on the door to inform us of the most recent disaster cooked up, always by the OTHER sibling.
I see the problem. You view mild antagonism as a direct and painful assault. Do you also fear duckies and bunnies?
As for the humorous accusation of projecting myself onto you, care to elaborate? I haven't had my good laugh today yet.
You haven't addressed the fact that I have the right to advertise my location in the attempt to congregate with like-minded individuals. The fear of said activity seams to be the basis of your claim that these types of games should be banned. Don't lose focus!
My dear AC, the "locus of your reasoning" is that when people come together, the crazies inevitably start attacking you, or worse. Your world view is a relevant concern for parents, but it's also a gauranteed right under the Constitution (Apologies for readers outside the US). Freedom of Assembly requires communication and knowledge of location. An interactive game is a perfectly valid excercise of my Freedom of Assembly.
As long as I am made completely aware of the fact that my physical location is going to be made available to everyone who knows my avatar, there is no breech of my rights, or desires. Consider the millions of webcam feeders and social website authors that intentionally put their location up, or enough details to trivially deduce the location. Do you see a mass of crime arising?
You are the kind of person who objects to an idea because you have not idea how it actually works. The kind of person who is afraid to try something to actually map out the consequences with evidence.
Let see, centralized opponent tracking, smaller fees, non-physical based combat, virtual costumes, round the month activity, iPhone image instead of costumed wierdo image, and possible diversity of themes are a few I can think of.
As someone who can see individual pixels on my 1680x1050 monitor, I do wear lenses, and with them I have BETTER than 20/20 vision. I can tell you for certain that dithering, aliasing, or any other kind of indiscriminate fuzzing of sharp edges causes me incredible amounts of fatigue. I certainly don't need cleartype to remove all the benefits I get from having perfectly usable vision.
So I guess you missed the grade school class explaining why the executive and judicial branches are separate. There is NO form of punishment or harassment acceptable under the US Constitution that's not ordered by a judge and/or jury. This is to protect you, MightyYar, from police who hate people with Yar in their screen names. Or some other equally ridiculous reason.
Which is a marker of elitism and systematic abuse of those not serving the politicians. Sad but unavoidable in every system where one group (ingrained politicians and lawyers) can gain control over another (John Public). We already live in a society where everyone can be jailed at any time simply because there are enough laws about every little thing that any dickhead with a badge can enforce one of them at an unusual time.
Yes. Yes they could. Terrorists are remarkably resourceful when they're on a suicide mission. This is a legitimate fear, but it's laughably ineffective at enforcing secrecy. Anyone with half a brain know that every site blurred by Google is worthy of terrorist attack. Therefor all the UK government is doing is composing a hotlist of good terrorist targets by blurring them.
No, actually. Research that uses illegal methods is still illegal, even if that research may benefit you or anyone. Care to become my back end sex slave, so I can conclude my research on the acceptability of my organ size and shape?
The founding fathers of the United States did: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." This clause from the US Constitution affirms the public domain by limiting the duration of copyright and patent.
The big problem is that the current people controlling the government (hint: they're not elected) have more interest in controlling profitable media than they have in contributing to the public domaign.
If you think that Big Corporations don't control the government, then ask if any other unit or group has been able to scare trillions of dollars in "protection money" from the United States.
Slashdot Mirror
Except your relationship with your mother-in-law . . . never get caught!
Your point? Industrial accidents happen, in all sorts of factories. Now go out and have some fun.
Sure, there are rouge servers . . .
It's ROGUE dammit! Rouge is a face paint!
The "general public" was never asked to vote on such matters. The closest that We the People ever got to this state of affairs was to try to elect what we thought were sensible people to Congress, and the better of the two choices we had for President. Now the law is in the hands of lawyers paid by everyone BUT the general public, judges who were put into office by the aforementioned Congress and President (All elected judges are subservient to the appointed judges.), and by airline corporate policies and lobbyists, who obviously are only interested in profit.
Now while I agree with you that the effort that is put into thwarting airline terrorists are ludicrous and overbearing, please don't blame them on the "general public". I'm pretty sure that given the choice, the "general public" would vote for something a little bit less invasive than what we have now.
As a father of three, I can confirm the door locks work very well to shield innocent children from the horrors of adult fluid exchanges. The do not, however, sufficiently block out the sound of breaking dishes, overdriven home theaters, screaming, bawling fights over toys, and persistent knocking on the door to inform us of the most recent disaster cooked up, always by the OTHER sibling.
I see the problem. You view mild antagonism as a direct and painful assault. Do you also fear duckies and bunnies?
As for the humorous accusation of projecting myself onto you, care to elaborate? I haven't had my good laugh today yet.
You haven't addressed the fact that I have the right to advertise my location in the attempt to congregate with like-minded individuals. The fear of said activity seams to be the basis of your claim that these types of games should be banned. Don't lose focus!
My dear AC, the "locus of your reasoning" is that when people come together, the crazies inevitably start attacking you, or worse. Your world view is a relevant concern for parents, but it's also a gauranteed right under the Constitution (Apologies for readers outside the US). Freedom of Assembly requires communication and knowledge of location. An interactive game is a perfectly valid excercise of my Freedom of Assembly.
As long as I am made completely aware of the fact that my physical location is going to be made available to everyone who knows my avatar, there is no breech of my rights, or desires. Consider the millions of webcam feeders and social website authors that intentionally put their location up, or enough details to trivially deduce the location. Do you see a mass of crime arising?
You are the kind of person who objects to an idea because you have not idea how it actually works. The kind of person who is afraid to try something to actually map out the consequences with evidence.
Let see, centralized opponent tracking, smaller fees, non-physical based combat, virtual costumes, round the month activity, iPhone image instead of costumed wierdo image, and possible diversity of themes are a few I can think of.
I'm not an expert on sat feeds or anything, so exactly how "live" are current available feeds?
Hear Hear.
Isn't outer space beyond international law, like the high seas used to be?
As someone who can see individual pixels on my 1680x1050 monitor, I do wear lenses, and with them I have BETTER than 20/20 vision. I can tell you for certain that dithering, aliasing, or any other kind of indiscriminate fuzzing of sharp edges causes me incredible amounts of fatigue. I certainly don't need cleartype to remove all the benefits I get from having perfectly usable vision.
It was one time, and consensual! * This is a joke, and in no way represents an actual occurrence.
So I guess you missed the grade school class explaining why the executive and judicial branches are separate. There is NO form of punishment or harassment acceptable under the US Constitution that's not ordered by a judge and/or jury. This is to protect you, MightyYar, from police who hate people with Yar in their screen names. Or some other equally ridiculous reason.
Which is a marker of elitism and systematic abuse of those not serving the politicians. Sad but unavoidable in every system where one group (ingrained politicians and lawyers) can gain control over another (John Public). We already live in a society where everyone can be jailed at any time simply because there are enough laws about every little thing that any dickhead with a badge can enforce one of them at an unusual time.
Yes. Yes they could. Terrorists are remarkably resourceful when they're on a suicide mission. This is a legitimate fear, but it's laughably ineffective at enforcing secrecy. Anyone with half a brain know that every site blurred by Google is worthy of terrorist attack. Therefor all the UK government is doing is composing a hotlist of good terrorist targets by blurring them.
But you still get the headache from the math!!!!
No, actually. Research that uses illegal methods is still illegal, even if that research may benefit you or anyone. Care to become my back end sex slave, so I can conclude my research on the acceptability of my organ size and shape?
They still won't have suntans, good nutrition, social skills, or usable vision. We don't have anything to worry about.
As the Zen practicioners are indistinguishable from day-dreamers such as my 9 year old son, your refutiation is meaningless.
After a lengthy, one-sided dialogue with the nearest rock, I conclude that your theory is false.
Yes, but you could _eat_ the hamster meat, and burn the carcass, ending up with a tasty positive!
I know I was breastfeeding before My children's births. *licking my lips*
Who said software should be free?
The founding fathers of the United States did: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." This clause from the US Constitution affirms the public domain by limiting the duration of copyright and patent.
The big problem is that the current people controlling the government (hint: they're not elected) have more interest in controlling profitable media than they have in contributing to the public domaign.
If you think that Big Corporations don't control the government, then ask if any other unit or group has been able to scare trillions of dollars in "protection money" from the United States.
Then maybe we should make laws about the taking of pictures, not silly little sounds
That's no good, we already ignore those laws, and it's boring now. We need NEW laws to ignore!