Exactly. If the guy thinks that he's a hero for trying to argue that people shouldn't be able to define their own rules and policies on their own private property, he's an idiot. If you don't like their rules, stay off their property, you stupid nard.
Wow, you work for one of my favorite game companies... cool. =)
I don't know if I just was fortunate to find an excellent chiropractor, or if I'm just easily swindled, but I strongly suspect the former. My chiropractor holds free information sessions and a variety of both field and mainstream sources to back up the benefits of chiropractic, and he sold me quite absolutely in that respect. I've known others who have gone to some lousy chiropractors, however.
My chriopractor no longer uses the cracking technique, but rather a very gentle technique called torque-point release or something along those lines. You're probably already aware, but the reason for focusing on the neck and spinal cord is to optimize the function of the nervous system, which is still done with this technique. I'm a natural skeptic, and I was quite skeptical when he adopted this technique, but the results on me, my family, my girlfriend, and other patients who I know are indisputable. I attend just for maintenance on a monthly basis, but my mother and girlfriend, both of whom suffered from frequent headaches and general soreness, have seen significant and tangible change since they started seeing my chiropractor.
I'm not sure I'd agree that 99.9% of chiropractors out there aren't worth going to, but clearly people should do some research before signing up. My chiropractor initially does an X-ray and a scan of some sort (relating to muscle tension I believe), and then the same thing again one month after beginning, so you get to see the initial results (or lack thereof) after just one month. I wish I had more information and resources to share, but my memory is lousy.
I see lots of recommendations for drugs, which I suppose are fine if you don't mind the side-effects and aren't worried about not finding the cause for the symptoms. But if you're more interested in removing the cause of the pain rather than taking something to mask the symptoms, I would suggest chiropractic. If that recommendation seems odd to you, or you're thinking, "but I don't have back pain, you moron," track down a good chiropractor who holds free information sessions. I'd recommend chiropractic to absolutely everyone, whether they have health problems (read: symptoms) or not.
Now I am 23, but I am still much more comfortable lying to them than telling the truth. Was it worth it to them to be control freaks? I don't think so.
You're mad at your parents for telling you not to play games when you needed to be doing school work? At 23, you still hold that against them?? And you have the nerve to blame them for you being a compulsive liar??? Give me a fucking break!
If you want to blame your parents for something, blame them for not teaching you personal responsibility.
Do you seriously think that having the family computer in an open area will stop a teenager from watching porn?
Pretty much, yep.
The point is to have the computer in plain site of at least one parent while it's in use. Their disc shuffling, proxying, and circumventing of security won't help them if they're being watched; that's the whole point. I haven't given consideration to what I'd do when no parents are home. I may have the house disable all web activity when no parents are home (how fool-proof that would be, I really have no idea).
If they circumvent my measures, oh well; I've done the best I know to do. I believe that it's still my responsibility as a parent to take measures. If my kids want to circumvent them, or go to a friend's house, etc., that's their choice, and they are responsible for all of their choices. So are parents. So am I.
If you are just simply uncomfortable with them seeing inappropriate images, bear in mind they'll see them elsewhere if not at home, so what's the point in stopping them?
I'm amazed that this mind-numbing logic is so prominant. What's the point of stopping them?? Where should I begin? Just because your children have decided not to listen to you doesn't mean you should abandon your responsibilities as a parent. If little Petunia starts having sex with 40-year-old men, parents shouldn't say, "Oh darn. Well there's no point in not allowing her to have sex with men in her bedroom, since she'll just go have sex with men in an alley somewhere." Let your kids be responsible for their own actions. Let them see that your value system isn't so weak that you'll give into them as soon as they break the rules. What kid would respect a parent who not only gave into them at the drop of a hat, but actually facilitated them doing what they're not supposed to do?
Place the "family" computer in an open area of the house in plain sight, so the kids will realize there's a significant chance of them getting caught for looking at naughty stuff. I'm still in college, but when I get around to having 4 or 7 little rugrats, I'll allow them to have a computer in their room, but it will only be used for school, e-mail, IMing, music, and movies (and programming, in the event that I have little nerdlings). As for web access, all but certain sites will be blocked, and other sites will be unblocked as requested on a site-by-site basis if they check out.
Sound restrictive? Well yeah; that's the point. I don't plan on letting my kids watch TV unmonitored, either, or even use drugs in their bedrooms. All of this up to a certain age, of course. I don't think that's unreasonable. With earned trust comes greater freedom.
Oh, and "Don't ever lie to us about what you're doing"?? Riiight. Nice.
An excellent program that I've had great success with for playing DOS games in Windows with sound is VDMSound. It hasn't been able to run everything (System Shock and Crusader: No Remorse are two that haven't worked for me), but for the most part, games play pretty much the way they were meant to.
I realize this is a bit off-topic, but my girlfriend is getting her own apartment for school in the fall, and I've been trying to find the best deal for local phone service. I haven't had much luck, and right now it looks as though Bell might have the cheapest service (their website says $20-28). Is there cheaper service to be found in Ontario?
She's also looking for Internet access, which is why she didn't just go the cell phone route. I was hoping to find a local phone service provider with a promotion or discount for buying both local phone and Internet service, but haven't found anything.
Thanks for any help/advice in advance! =)
I went through the exact same process when I had to re-install QuickTax. What a friggin' pain in the ass that was. As a result, I'll NEVER purchase another Intuit product as long as I live and will encourage everyone I know to do the same.
Apparently there's a decent and much more customer-friendly program called TaxWiz (which seems to be for Canadians only); I'll be checking that out come next time to do taxes.
...you may be able to find yourself an inexpensive hitman. And it's much more satisfying if you go that route. Heck, you'd probably be doing all of us a favor in the long run.
(Calm down people, this is a joke. I wish it wasn't, but it is.)
And you will suffer the loss of quality and the inability to play them on a real TV that goes along with it, no thanks. DivX sucks.
Loss of quality? I'm afraid that's simply not true. There's no other way to put it; you're flat-out wrong. And you managed to get a mod point for it somehow:)
I realize you can't watch DivX-encoded movies on TV (not with a typical DVD player, anyways), but that wasn't my point. I was just trying to say that the 1,500TB Netflix distributes daily is just cuz it uses the inferior MPEG technology. DivX can look just as good as DVD, and with a whole lot less space.
The reason I was making that point is cuz the story was noting how impressive 1,500TB was in relation to the Internet's proposed 2,000TB/day. But the fact is, if people were transferring these movies over the Internet after they'd been DivX-encoded, the bandwidth they would use would be about 80-90% less than that figure.
Maybe Netflix distributes 1,500TB a day of movies, but that's using DVD's MPEG-2 compression. Encode 'em with DivX and you're gonna slash that figure by what... 80-90%?
Now that MP3 is now going to have a pricetag on it, it should be irradicated as far as I'm concerned. I think Sun is doing a service by dropping MP3 support. OggVorbis is the future.
Preach away all ya want. You're welcome to raise your kids any way you want, and even criticize me for wanting to raise mine differently -- but I want and have the right to do so.
You should probably ask them to pay for your student loans and education too, because God knows your employement depended on it. If you're unhappy having to purchase clothing or gas for your job, by all means find a job without a strict dress code within walking distance of your home... it's entirely your choice.
Which is quite bizarre; science is the study of what is and was and will be. From a Christian perspective, God has created all that there is and was and will be. So for a Christian to attempt to explain away our observation of God's creation seems awfully backwards to me.
As a Christian, I'm frequently annoyed at what lengths some other Christians will go in an attempt to artificially substantiate what they believe. I believe what I believe as a result of what I see and know; not as a result of what I'd like to see or have been told to believe. A Christian who fears science is a Christian who is unable to trust God.
The constitution may say the word "speech", but it should be very clear and obvious that the spirit of the law isn't to protect JUST speech. Written works as well as visual art are protected, and they're not literal speech.
Rather, the spirit of the law is meant to protect the right to create and express one's self through whatever means necessary, except in cases where the rights of another person are being violated (ie. I can't express my anger by blowing your head off with a shotgun). The judge, for obvious reasons, is unable to say why he thinks that film should be covered under freedom of speech, but games are not. There is simply no way to justify that illogic.
Bottom line: This judge is more concerned with his incorrect belief that the government needs to -- or has the RIGHT to -- raise our children for us, than upholding our constituional rights (of freedom of speech and of freedom to raise our own children). If this judge believes that is acceptable, he should be permanently removed from his capacity as a judge. He is abusing his position to do exactly the opposite of what the law's purpose is: to protect our rights, not remove them from us.
I can't believe you just said that. And I can't believe you're the second person I'm having to explain this to. The difference is obviously the fact that Ad-Aware removes ONLY the software that I tell it to (ie. spyware), and it's a voluntary, intentional act. Can that be legal? How the hell CAN'T it be legal??
Naw, the author of RadLight has superficially apologized after catching a lot of heat, so I don't think this is going to continue. He actually said, and I quote, "...the point was NOT to destroy the adaware [...] BUT TO SHOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN IF THE PROGRAMS START UNINSTALLING EACHOTHER [sic]." Friggin' hilarious. You can read more of his amusing ass-kissing excuses and lies at the Lavasoft forums.
Re:What about installing Adaware afterwards?
on
Spyware Fights Back
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Ad-Aware has released a new version that will prevent RadLight from effecting it. Of course, that's obviously not the point here.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. If the guy thinks that he's a hero for trying to argue that people shouldn't be able to define their own rules and policies on their own private property, he's an idiot. If you don't like their rules, stay off their property, you stupid nard.
I don't know if I just was fortunate to find an excellent chiropractor, or if I'm just easily swindled, but I strongly suspect the former. My chiropractor holds free information sessions and a variety of both field and mainstream sources to back up the benefits of chiropractic, and he sold me quite absolutely in that respect. I've known others who have gone to some lousy chiropractors, however.
My chriopractor no longer uses the cracking technique, but rather a very gentle technique called torque-point release or something along those lines. You're probably already aware, but the reason for focusing on the neck and spinal cord is to optimize the function of the nervous system, which is still done with this technique. I'm a natural skeptic, and I was quite skeptical when he adopted this technique, but the results on me, my family, my girlfriend, and other patients who I know are indisputable. I attend just for maintenance on a monthly basis, but my mother and girlfriend, both of whom suffered from frequent headaches and general soreness, have seen significant and tangible change since they started seeing my chiropractor.
I'm not sure I'd agree that 99.9% of chiropractors out there aren't worth going to, but clearly people should do some research before signing up. My chiropractor initially does an X-ray and a scan of some sort (relating to muscle tension I believe), and then the same thing again one month after beginning, so you get to see the initial results (or lack thereof) after just one month. I wish I had more information and resources to share, but my memory is lousy.
I see lots of recommendations for drugs, which I suppose are fine if you don't mind the side-effects and aren't worried about not finding the cause for the symptoms. But if you're more interested in removing the cause of the pain rather than taking something to mask the symptoms, I would suggest chiropractic. If that recommendation seems odd to you, or you're thinking, "but I don't have back pain, you moron," track down a good chiropractor who holds free information sessions. I'd recommend chiropractic to absolutely everyone, whether they have health problems (read: symptoms) or not.
When are people going to learn? If you're going to post news on slashdot about your new software, set up a .torrent!
Wowsers, just 0.85"! One-dimensional storage is teh FUTARE!!!1
You're mad at your parents for telling you not to play games when you needed to be doing school work? At 23, you still hold that against them?? And you have the nerve to blame them for you being a compulsive liar??? Give me a fucking break!
If you want to blame your parents for something, blame them for not teaching you personal responsibility.
Pretty much, yep.
The point is to have the computer in plain site of at least one parent while it's in use. Their disc shuffling, proxying, and circumventing of security won't help them if they're being watched; that's the whole point. I haven't given consideration to what I'd do when no parents are home. I may have the house disable all web activity when no parents are home (how fool-proof that would be, I really have no idea).
If they circumvent my measures, oh well; I've done the best I know to do. I believe that it's still my responsibility as a parent to take measures. If my kids want to circumvent them, or go to a friend's house, etc., that's their choice, and they are responsible for all of their choices. So are parents. So am I.
Sound restrictive? Well yeah; that's the point. I don't plan on letting my kids watch TV unmonitored, either, or even use drugs in their bedrooms. All of this up to a certain age, of course. I don't think that's unreasonable. With earned trust comes greater freedom.
Oh, and "Don't ever lie to us about what you're doing"?? Riiight. Nice.
An excellent program that I've had great success with for playing DOS games in Windows with sound is VDMSound. It hasn't been able to run everything (System Shock and Crusader: No Remorse are two that haven't worked for me), but for the most part, games play pretty much the way they were meant to.
She's also looking for Internet access, which is why she didn't just go the cell phone route. I was hoping to find a local phone service provider with a promotion or discount for buying both local phone and Internet service, but haven't found anything. Thanks for any help/advice in advance! =)
Apparently there's a decent and much more customer-friendly program called TaxWiz (which seems to be for Canadians only); I'll be checking that out come next time to do taxes.
Read the caption on the website for that file.
(Calm down people, this is a joke. I wish it wasn't, but it is.)
Loss of quality? I'm afraid that's simply not true. There's no other way to put it; you're flat-out wrong. And you managed to get a mod point for it somehow :)
I realize you can't watch DivX-encoded movies on TV (not with a typical DVD player, anyways), but that wasn't my point. I was just trying to say that the 1,500TB Netflix distributes daily is just cuz it uses the inferior MPEG technology. DivX can look just as good as DVD, and with a whole lot less space. The reason I was making that point is cuz the story was noting how impressive 1,500TB was in relation to the Internet's proposed 2,000TB/day. But the fact is, if people were transferring these movies over the Internet after they'd been DivX-encoded, the bandwidth they would use would be about 80-90% less than that figure.
Maybe Netflix distributes 1,500TB a day of movies, but that's using DVD's MPEG-2 compression. Encode 'em with DivX and you're gonna slash that figure by what... 80-90%?
Now that MP3 is now going to have a pricetag on it, it should be irradicated as far as I'm concerned. I think Sun is doing a service by dropping MP3 support. OggVorbis is the future.
Preach away all ya want. You're welcome to raise your kids any way you want, and even criticize me for wanting to raise mine differently -- but I want and have the right to do so.
You should probably ask them to pay for your student loans and education too, because God knows your employement depended on it. If you're unhappy having to purchase clothing or gas for your job, by all means find a job without a strict dress code within walking distance of your home... it's entirely your choice.
Which is quite bizarre; science is the study of what is and was and will be. From a Christian perspective, God has created all that there is and was and will be. So for a Christian to attempt to explain away our observation of God's creation seems awfully backwards to me.
As a Christian, I'm frequently annoyed at what lengths some other Christians will go in an attempt to artificially substantiate what they believe. I believe what I believe as a result of what I see and know; not as a result of what I'd like to see or have been told to believe. A Christian who fears science is a Christian who is unable to trust God.
Blame the idiot that invented English. Man did he screw a lot of stuff up.
Rather, the spirit of the law is meant to protect the right to create and express one's self through whatever means necessary, except in cases where the rights of another person are being violated (ie. I can't express my anger by blowing your head off with a shotgun). The judge, for obvious reasons, is unable to say why he thinks that film should be covered under freedom of speech, but games are not. There is simply no way to justify that illogic.
Bottom line: This judge is more concerned with his incorrect belief that the government needs to -- or has the RIGHT to -- raise our children for us, than upholding our constituional rights (of freedom of speech and of freedom to raise our own children). If this judge believes that is acceptable, he should be permanently removed from his capacity as a judge. He is abusing his position to do exactly the opposite of what the law's purpose is: to protect our rights, not remove them from us.
I can't believe you just said that. And I can't believe you're the second person I'm having to explain this to. The difference is obviously the fact that Ad-Aware removes ONLY the software that I tell it to (ie. spyware), and it's a voluntary, intentional act. Can that be legal? How the hell CAN'T it be legal??
Naw, the author of RadLight has superficially apologized after catching a lot of heat, so I don't think this is going to continue. He actually said, and I quote, "...the point was NOT to destroy the adaware [...] BUT TO SHOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN IF THE PROGRAMS START UNINSTALLING EACHOTHER [sic]." Friggin' hilarious. You can read more of his amusing ass-kissing excuses and lies at the Lavasoft forums.
Ad-Aware has released a new version that will prevent RadLight from effecting it. Of course, that's obviously not the point here.