This was no troll. This was an honest statement of opinion. And it is more sick than "any other FPS" because it pushes a skewed political perspective on people in such a way that killing is glorified in the name of your country.
Obviously Quake, Half-Life and all those other lovely shoot-em ups are full of guns etc. But "America's Army" is propaganda in disguise (well, not too well disguised really). It's a product which pushes an agenda at the same time as it poses as an innocent video game.
America's Army
on
Gentoo Games
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Anyone else find that America's Army game kind of sick? Sort of glorifies the horrors of war by caricaturing it through a cartoon-like portrayal. Plus, it makes it look like war is a cakewalk for a teenage audience. Reality is people dying, not losing 20 points off your health.
"I highly doubt Billy-Bob Flatbush from Podunk, TN is gonna be in a terrorist ring."
I disagree. Anyone is quite capable of carrying out acts of terrorism, and although not as highly organised as certain rings we have seen in action, the United States has its own share of "terrorists", particularly ultra-extremist right-wingers. We just saw how over 120 people died in South Korea when someone lit a milk-carton filled with gasoline. This stuff can happen anywhere. Buildings have been blown up in the US, and they were Americans. McCartheism lives!
Let's say you're a terrorist. Now that you know they check anyone that orders pork, the solution seems simple. Don't order pork? Jeez...What is the point of this database then? All it does is target those people who are Muslims/Jews/Whatever who aren't planning on doing anything wrong. The logic escapes me....
But will they? The answer is most likely, No. Why do we have to subject ourselves to one more danger? It's like saying, "Well driving a car is extremely dangerous and you can get killed any minute. So you might as well go bungee jumping off a cliff or see an airshow." The logic...
I'm not sure I'd call my previous post a "diatribe". If you look up that word in the dictionary, you might find that it means "A bitter, abusive denunciation". My post was neither of those two. It was not bitter, but rather a response to some typical military lines that hit us in the face all the time, whether it be in the media or "real life". It was not abusive - at least, that was not its intent - but rather a truthful declaration of views, that were somewhat well-justified (as far as an Internet forum allows, I suppose). You might say it was a denuncation. In this case it would only be a denunciation of some quite poor logic.
I don't believe the use of aggression (or "force" as you like to call it) should be applied in such unjust ways as we've seen in recent years. However, I realise that this would be _far_ too long of a debate to be held properly on Slashdot, so I will refrain from going on to any length. As to your somewhat idealistic view that "usually the nation's interests can be served through diplomacy", I have but one thing to say: look at the Middle East. What chances are being offered to the inspections in progress? Hardly any. Yes, yes, I realise that the official line is, "We're waiting for the UN report". Come on. Let's get real here. But, I fear we've already trodden past the "Offtopic" line;)
After having posted the first comment in this thread I realised that the Army employee in question was involved in the technology department (as far as I could tell). Thus, I can't accuse him of being a field soldier. That would be wrong and harsh. However, my belief still holds true to the "average soldier".
Well let's see. You're a professional soldier (can I call it that?). That means that you've _chosen_ to be a soldier? That means you've chosen a life dominated by the use of aggression to solve problems throughout the world? I honestly don't feel sorry for your wife or children. Call me cruel, but you know what you're getting into, and so did she. If it is so that this was your choice (unlike some people that do it just to get free education -- I can sympathise a bit with these guys), you shouldn't expect everyone to feel sorry for ya. Perhaps you don't, but it seems like your reply implies this.
"My $0.02"
Re:Chemistry is fun-damental
on
Uncle Tungsten
·
· Score: 1
I don't think either of the above comments could be justified rationally. I could boldly claim that BIOLOGY is the foundation of practical science, because where would we be if we didn't understand the way our bodies work, plants respire...OH WAIT! We'd be more or less fine (just a little less healthy perhaps)...
I've often wondered why companies and websites have insisted on using _banner_ ads as their preferred medium of profiling a product. It seems that everyone can spot such an advertisement a mile off. A much more subtle "trick" is to use advertise in a simple text link. That way the user has a harder time differentiating the commercialised crap and actual content. Oh well, I suppose I should be grateful. On another note, I like how Google clearly marks their text ads with a yellowish frame.
I'm not even trolling, but Hollywood has to be one of the trashiest places on Earth. The crap that they mass-produce is awful. Degenerate low-life, snooty capitalist den of second-rate activity. I wish more people could/would read a book...
I don't know that you could argue the stability factor for Linux vs. Microsoft (BLASPHEMY!). Windows 2000 is actually a very good operating system in regards to this issue, with excellent uptimes and no major problems here.
You know, if you say that something is impossible, it just might be. I keep hearing from people like yourself (although in different contexts). Stop trolling, and be optimistic. You just MIGHT know - granted not with the current level of technology (we've seen how quickly that level changes). The truth is that you are no keeper of knowledge - you can't predict what will come to be. Creativity and open-mindedness are two things you should have in science. Rigidity is not desirable.
Think about it. A website carries information that might be useful to thousands of web browsing 1337 |-|@xxx0rz. If they had banner ads, having such a hot page on their site would undoubtedly lead to some increased revenue, generated on a per-click basis. So, technically you might be able to argue that there was economic benefit from the release of such technology.
My question is this: People are talking about being able to press Elvis recordings in the public domain now. However, doesn't this expiry only apply for _European_ copyright holders? Since Elvis took out the copyrights in the United States, presumably the 95-year rule still holds true, and not the one which the RIAA is so worried about?
Yes, I thought "The Thing" was in reference to the Adam's family (you know: dum, dum, dum! dum dum! dum dum... No? Oh...). Of course then I read the article and...
Well the situation in Norway is quite interesting, because there is already a switch from Microsoft licenses to Linux in the education system. In fact, the state has sponsored a project called "Skolelinux" (SchoolLinux), where Norwegian/Nynorsk/Same language editions are being made based on the Debian operating system. One of the reasons why it was started was obviously the lowered costs, but also the ability to have more native language output. The site is at www.skolelinux.no but I think it's only in Norwegian...
Yeah, so now you've got your widgets on all the platforms and developing apps will become easier. How long is that going to last, until someone decides to implement a superior technology? Then we'll all have to start over again...It's just annoying to think that this cycle will never actually end. The horrors of software development!
No, because the spammers aren't making any money off you reading their email. They only make money if you actually _buy_ something. Therefore, blocking most (if not all) spam is still worthwile, just for the convenience factor. Your argument seems a little flawed.
Slashdot Mirror
Or perhaps they will just become order-munching zombies with no ability to question authority. I'm putting my bets on the latter.
This was no troll. This was an honest statement of opinion. And it is more sick than "any other FPS" because it pushes a skewed political perspective on people in such a way that killing is glorified in the name of your country.
Obviously Quake, Half-Life and all those other lovely shoot-em ups are full of guns etc. But "America's Army" is propaganda in disguise (well, not too well disguised really). It's a product which pushes an agenda at the same time as it poses as an innocent video game.
Anyone else find that America's Army game kind of sick? Sort of glorifies the horrors of war by caricaturing it through a cartoon-like portrayal. Plus, it makes it look like war is a cakewalk for a teenage audience. Reality is people dying, not losing 20 points off your health.
"I highly doubt Billy-Bob Flatbush from Podunk, TN is gonna be in a terrorist ring." I disagree. Anyone is quite capable of carrying out acts of terrorism, and although not as highly organised as certain rings we have seen in action, the United States has its own share of "terrorists", particularly ultra-extremist right-wingers. We just saw how over 120 people died in South Korea when someone lit a milk-carton filled with gasoline. This stuff can happen anywhere. Buildings have been blown up in the US, and they were Americans. McCartheism lives!
Let's say you're a terrorist. Now that you know they check anyone that orders pork, the solution seems simple. Don't order pork? Jeez...What is the point of this database then? All it does is target those people who are Muslims/Jews/Whatever who aren't planning on doing anything wrong. The logic escapes me....
But will they? The answer is most likely, No. Why do we have to subject ourselves to one more danger? It's like saying, "Well driving a car is extremely dangerous and you can get killed any minute. So you might as well go bungee jumping off a cliff or see an airshow." The logic...
Anyone else notice the Amazon.com affiliate link snuck into the story? No? Well he's gonna make a pile of money. Err. Yes.
I'm not sure I'd call my previous post a "diatribe". If you look up that word in the dictionary, you might find that it means "A bitter, abusive denunciation". My post was neither of those two. It was not bitter, but rather a response to some typical military lines that hit us in the face all the time, whether it be in the media or "real life". It was not abusive - at least, that was not its intent - but rather a truthful declaration of views, that were somewhat well-justified (as far as an Internet forum allows, I suppose). You might say it was a denuncation. In this case it would only be a denunciation of some quite poor logic.
;)
I don't believe the use of aggression (or "force" as you like to call it) should be applied in such unjust ways as we've seen in recent years. However, I realise that this would be _far_ too long of a debate to be held properly on Slashdot, so I will refrain from going on to any length. As to your somewhat idealistic view that "usually the nation's interests can be served through diplomacy", I have but one thing to say: look at the Middle East. What chances are being offered to the inspections in progress? Hardly any. Yes, yes, I realise that the official line is, "We're waiting for the UN report". Come on. Let's get real here. But, I fear we've already trodden past the "Offtopic" line
After having posted the first comment in this thread I realised that the Army employee in question was involved in the technology department (as far as I could tell). Thus, I can't accuse him of being a field soldier. That would be wrong and harsh. However, my belief still holds true to the "average soldier".
Well let's see. You're a professional soldier (can I call it that?). That means that you've _chosen_ to be a soldier? That means you've chosen a life dominated by the use of aggression to solve problems throughout the world? I honestly don't feel sorry for your wife or children. Call me cruel, but you know what you're getting into, and so did she. If it is so that this was your choice (unlike some people that do it just to get free education -- I can sympathise a bit with these guys), you shouldn't expect everyone to feel sorry for ya. Perhaps you don't, but it seems like your reply implies this.
"My $0.02"
I don't think either of the above comments could be justified rationally. I could boldly claim that BIOLOGY is the foundation of practical science, because where would we be if we didn't understand the way our bodies work, plants respire...OH WAIT! We'd be more or less fine (just a little less healthy perhaps)...
I've often wondered why companies and websites have insisted on using _banner_ ads as their preferred medium of profiling a product. It seems that everyone can spot such an advertisement a mile off. A much more subtle "trick" is to use advertise in a simple text link. That way the user has a harder time differentiating the commercialised crap and actual content. Oh well, I suppose I should be grateful. On another note, I like how Google clearly marks their text ads with a yellowish frame.
I'm not even trolling, but Hollywood has to be one of the trashiest places on Earth. The crap that they mass-produce is awful. Degenerate low-life, snooty capitalist den of second-rate activity. I wish more people could/would read a book...
I don't know that you could argue the stability factor for Linux vs. Microsoft (BLASPHEMY!). Windows 2000 is actually a very good operating system in regards to this issue, with excellent uptimes and no major problems here.
Your words carry little weight as an Anonymous Coward. If you believe so strongly in this, why don't you post under your real name?
You know, if you say that something is impossible, it just might be. I keep hearing from people like yourself (although in different contexts). Stop trolling, and be optimistic. You just MIGHT know - granted not with the current level of technology (we've seen how quickly that level changes). The truth is that you are no keeper of knowledge - you can't predict what will come to be. Creativity and open-mindedness are two things you should have in science. Rigidity is not desirable.
I think you mean, "Alright, I can't wait till we start drilling for oil on every planet. That will be so cool."
Think about it. A website carries information that might be useful to thousands of web browsing 1337 |-|@xxx0rz. If they had banner ads, having such a hot page on their site would undoubtedly lead to some increased revenue, generated on a per-click basis. So, technically you might be able to argue that there was economic benefit from the release of such technology.
My question is this: People are talking about being able to press Elvis recordings in the public domain now. However, doesn't this expiry only apply for _European_ copyright holders? Since Elvis took out the copyrights in the United States, presumably the 95-year rule still holds true, and not the one which the RIAA is so worried about?
Imagine the echo...
Yes, I thought "The Thing" was in reference to the Adam's family (you know: dum, dum, dum! dum dum! dum dum ... No? Oh...). Of course then I read the article and...
Well the situation in Norway is quite interesting, because there is already a switch from Microsoft licenses to Linux in the education system. In fact, the state has sponsored a project called "Skolelinux" (SchoolLinux), where Norwegian/Nynorsk/Same language editions are being made based on the Debian operating system. One of the reasons why it was started was obviously the lowered costs, but also the ability to have more native language output. The site is at www.skolelinux.no but I think it's only in Norwegian...
"Nick Monahan works in the film industry. He writes out of Los Angeles where he lives with his wife and as of December 18th, his beautiful new son."
Above comment stolen from http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/monahan1.html.
Yeah, so now you've got your widgets on all the platforms and developing apps will become easier. How long is that going to last, until someone decides to implement a superior technology? Then we'll all have to start over again...It's just annoying to think that this cycle will never actually end. The horrors of software development!
No, because the spammers aren't making any money off you reading their email. They only make money if you actually _buy_ something. Therefore, blocking most (if not all) spam is still worthwile, just for the convenience factor. Your argument seems a little flawed.