Are we now down-modding people as trolls for asking honest questions? I realize that he probably asked it rhetorically, but it is a legitimate question nonetheless. For all you people who would usually just take offense to his question, instead show him proof that pornography is not an unhealthy addition to a relationship. And, even if you ultimately find that it is provably healthy for a relationship, don't mod him down for asking the question.
Also, "I like porn," "sex is good," and "I can do both!" are not clever or relevant responses (even if all are true).
Exactly! I was going to say this if nobody else did.
I bet this is going to be a collectors item. Everybody in LA and New York will have to buy one. So, not only will EW get a huge sales boost, but there will be millions of people who are pushing, clawing, and begging just to watch the ads for their novelty. How many other ways can you get people to seek out your advertisement rather than have it forced upon them? I bet USA and Pepsi are paying through the nose for this.
Of course, the novelty aspect only works once. My guess is that we won't see this regularly until the technology becomes significantly cheaper (if even then).
I searched in vain for anything in the article that says something about sound. Even if the ad will have audio, I don't think it will last long in that form. From what I understand, the technology to put relatively cheap audio ads in print periodicals has been around for sometime - nobody uses them for a reason. It would make the periodical a menace for any environment where quiet is valued (e.g. doctor's office or library). Pure video, on the other hand, does not suffer from this problem.
Moreover, I'm sure that if they can make a small flexible screen, then can probably also make a small "unmute" button that allows the user to choose to listen to the ad.
Tell it to somebody who cares. My only purpose in posting was to find the Time Magazine reference to which the original grandparent was referring. By including the disclaimer "I don't know whether it's a good parallel case", I was hoping to avoid a response like this. I certainly wasn't implying that I need you to tell me - I can decide on my own just fine thanks.
I know we all like to complain here, but Slashdot is one of the most even handed moderation systems I have ever seen. Have you ever posted to Reddit or Digg? If they even suspect you're related to somebody who once voted Republican, you get down-modded by over 300 people and banned within minutes.
I see comments of all flavors that get modded up here - Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Populist (well, maybe not those). I do love it here.
Also known as lying to get votes. Campaign "promises."
McCain, Palin, Romney, H. Clinton, and Edwards all made campaign promises, but they didn't get elected. I realize that they never got their chance to break them, but I'm sure they all would have. All politicians are fantastic liars, but only one person gets to be president at a time. So why did Obama get elected? I call it charisma. You can call it something else if you want, but charisma is as good a name as any.
I think the grandparent was referring to the December 1st 2003 cover. I don't know whether it's a good parallel case, but it seems unlikely to me that Bush was wearing makeup for that photo - it was probably 'shopped.
Perhaps you're right, but I don't think this is a liberal thing. I think it is an Obama thing.
People had no difficulty making fun of both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Neither did they have difficulty making fun of Al Gore. Even in the late 90s when the internet was comparitvely small, parodies, insulting comics, and distorted likenesses of President Clinton were quite common.
Obama just has more charisma. People who like him take greater offense to slander against him. This is probably what the 30s and 40s were like with FDR (the only president to be elected 4 times BTW).
You're absolutely right that Flickr does not have to uphold free speech - they are not the government.
However, we (its users) have the right to protest behavior that we believe to be counter-productive. This is such an example. Don't fault the Slashdot folk who are upset about this - customers have the right to complain about a company's behavior on a forum like this, and sometimes those people get heard (rare though it is).
These pages are helpful for the typical web surfer
How is that? By encouraging them to use a search engine with which they are unfamiliar, or by leading them away from their intended target with advertising. Look at the Sample Page again, and explain to me the utility in that crap. Domain errors should ideally result in a big red "X" so the user knows to turn around and try again.
In fact, an automatic URL "fixing" service would be one of those revolutionary Web 2.0 features that exists in the recesses of the web, part of the infrastructure and totally natural to use.
Now this is an interesting idea. Let me tell you the best way to handle this - on the client side, after the proper DNS opportunities have been exhausted. This is because the client best knows the users browsing proclivities (most often viewed pages, favorite search engines, etc).
Yes, the summary wasn't so good, but as a good Slashdoter, wouldn't you just be reading the source article anyway? That would barely have taken more time than composing your troll response.
I look forward to the scintillating and insightful conversation this invitation to discuss will bring
Are you implying that Slashdot commenters just sheep with the summary? Nothing could be further from the truth - half the time, the loudest voices here scorn the summaries (including yours apparently). If the vast majority of people here are saying the same thing, maybe it's because there's some amount of truth in it. Everybody here said the DMCA would be used for this kind of crap when it was passed, and now it is. Why not scream?
mini-editorial and half-baked legal theorizing in the summary
In defense of the summary, the article itself was a bit one sided too (on the other side IMHO).
In FF3.5, some of my add-ons actually make my browsing experience faster (like flash-block). Rendering an animated gif is significantly faster than launching a 32-bit instance of Flash.
Flynn made it seem as if the biggest obstacle towards getting into space was not gravity and fuel costs as much as government hassles.
That was probably an excellent prediction, and with a publication date of 1997, he didn't even access to the largest hassle precipitating event of all time - 9.11. Think of all the hassle that you have to go through for sub-orbital vessels these days, and multiply that by 10. I bet that spacecraft will be seen by many politicians as profoundly dangerous.
I guess it's hard to visualize how a videogame could provide insight into those areas without engaging in mindless glorification.
I understand what you're saying here, and I don't think it's a prudish comment. However, I have a few responses:
Art doesn't necessarily need to provide insight into its topic in order to be good art. Sometimes, merely an excellent mimicry is good art.
I can definitely visualize video games that successfully incorporate more passionate facets of our life. For the simplest case, consider RPGs - much of the art in an RPG is in the noninteractive scenes. Incorporating these facets into the cut scenes would be no different than incorporating them into a movie. Certainly, you must acknowledge that many movies "provide insight into those areas without engaging in mindless glorification". I would offer as a purely subjective example, "American Beauty," which I love. Certainly, the topics of American Beauty are perfectly adult and taboo, yet I don't think that it engages in any kind of mindless glorification. On the contrary, it was tasteful, beautiful, intellectually engaging, and artistic (once again, this is merely my own opinion).
I don't mean to be the "Slashdot police" here, but what does your comment have to do with mine? My comment was written to:
reject the OP's notion that the technical nature of game development was responsible of the lack of artistic video games
suggest that the article had a better explanation for the lack of art than the OP.
None of these has anything to do with "the morally corrupt of society" or potential "societal downfall". Perhaps you meant that to be a top level post instead of posting a response to my comment?
I would have responded to your particular ideas, but a sibling post beat me to it (and did a damn fine job IMHO).
Because human life is always sex and violence. For better or worse, these are the tools by which the human race defined, refined, and propagated itself throughout history.
As a side note, I don't think that the article is talking about sex and violence in the GTA sense; "Let's run over a hooker with our cars." It's in a much deeper sense - how can something be decent art while not dealing with the most central and passionate areas of our lives?
most people who make video games are technicians rather than artists
Perhaps "most" as you say, but I think there are plenty who don't. In fact, many studios are preferring a model where there is a larger dichotomy between engineering and art. For instance, Mistwalker offloads their engineering work to other firms so they can focus purely on music, story, and visual design. I suppose that their artistic accomplishments using this method are subjective, but I don't think it helped all that much personally. There's almost certainly a larger problem here, and this article might be on to something.
[GP] it's proof that they can actually do what they say.
[P] One case is hardly proof
If they say that they can successfully thwart illegitimate patent, of course it is. If I say I can do 'X', and I do 'X', have I not proved my claim? Do you think that there's some larger claim that they can thwart 42 patents? I haven't seen any.
I just think that this rather blatant advertising.
By whom? Infozine? Did you even read the article, or are you saying this purely based on the summary? I see you already got a response from the submitter himself, so I won't bother explaining to you here the difference between advertising vs advocacy.
But it occurs to me that even if it did, that wouldn't be such a bad thing. Any organization that exists through donations really ought to prove that they're worth a donation. This is once piece of evidence that the EFF is worth your money.
Moreover, to those people who have already donated, this is a form of accountability. Articles like this tell those people that they have not wasted their money - it is being put to good use doing the work that organization was created to do.
Sure there are some serious specialty applications that depend on high volume low latency IO.
Like an operating system boot. Yeah, nobody does that. Mark my words, anybody will notice the performance difference on a decent SSD, regardless of what they do.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Mods:
Are we now down-modding people as trolls for asking honest questions? I realize that he probably asked it rhetorically, but it is a legitimate question nonetheless. For all you people who would usually just take offense to his question, instead show him proof that pornography is not an unhealthy addition to a relationship. And, even if you ultimately find that it is provably healthy for a relationship, don't mod him down for asking the question.
Also, "I like porn," "sex is good," and "I can do both!" are not clever or relevant responses (even if all are true).
Exactly! I was going to say this if nobody else did.
I bet this is going to be a collectors item. Everybody in LA and New York will have to buy one. So, not only will EW get a huge sales boost, but there will be millions of people who are pushing, clawing, and begging just to watch the ads for their novelty. How many other ways can you get people to seek out your advertisement rather than have it forced upon them? I bet USA and Pepsi are paying through the nose for this.
Of course, the novelty aspect only works once. My guess is that we won't see this regularly until the technology becomes significantly cheaper (if even then).
I searched in vain for anything in the article that says something about sound. Even if the ad will have audio, I don't think it will last long in that form. From what I understand, the technology to put relatively cheap audio ads in print periodicals has been around for sometime - nobody uses them for a reason. It would make the periodical a menace for any environment where quiet is valued (e.g. doctor's office or library). Pure video, on the other hand, does not suffer from this problem.
Moreover, I'm sure that if they can make a small flexible screen, then can probably also make a small "unmute" button that allows the user to choose to listen to the ad.
It's not a parallel case at all.
Tell it to somebody who cares. My only purpose in posting was to find the Time Magazine reference to which the original grandparent was referring. By including the disclaimer "I don't know whether it's a good parallel case", I was hoping to avoid a response like this. I certainly wasn't implying that I need you to tell me - I can decide on my own just fine thanks.
Seconded. Also, did anybody else get "Server is Too Busy" in the balloon ads? Amateur hour.
I know we all like to complain here, but Slashdot is one of the most even handed moderation systems I have ever seen. Have you ever posted to Reddit or Digg? If they even suspect you're related to somebody who once voted Republican, you get down-modded by over 300 people and banned within minutes.
I see comments of all flavors that get modded up here - Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Populist (well, maybe not those). I do love it here.
Also known as lying to get votes. Campaign "promises."
McCain, Palin, Romney, H. Clinton, and Edwards all made campaign promises, but they didn't get elected. I realize that they never got their chance to break them, but I'm sure they all would have. All politicians are fantastic liars, but only one person gets to be president at a time. So why did Obama get elected? I call it charisma. You can call it something else if you want, but charisma is as good a name as any.
I think the grandparent was referring to the December 1st 2003 cover. I don't know whether it's a good parallel case, but it seems unlikely to me that Bush was wearing makeup for that photo - it was probably 'shopped.
Perhaps you're right, but I don't think this is a liberal thing. I think it is an Obama thing.
People had no difficulty making fun of both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Neither did they have difficulty making fun of Al Gore. Even in the late 90s when the internet was comparitvely small, parodies, insulting comics, and distorted likenesses of President Clinton were quite common.
Obama just has more charisma. People who like him take greater offense to slander against him. This is probably what the 30s and 40s were like with FDR (the only president to be elected 4 times BTW).
Or maybe jumpy business people worried they'll get in the middle of a legal mess they'd rather not get involved in.
Incredibly, these people would rather trade a legal mess for a PR mess. Certainly, they didn't think that this would stay quiet.
You're absolutely right that Flickr does not have to uphold free speech - they are not the government.
However, we (its users) have the right to protest behavior that we believe to be counter-productive. This is such an example. Don't fault the Slashdot folk who are upset about this - customers have the right to complain about a company's behavior on a forum like this, and sometimes those people get heard (rare though it is).
All he did was talk on a stolen radio.
And purchase it, allegedly.
b) The opt-out is perminent and for all connected through that IP/customer link
But then, how will the user re-enable the service when they start missing those targeted advertisements?
These pages are helpful for the typical web surfer
How is that? By encouraging them to use a search engine with which they are unfamiliar, or by leading them away from their intended target with advertising. Look at the Sample Page again, and explain to me the utility in that crap. Domain errors should ideally result in a big red "X" so the user knows to turn around and try again.
In fact, an automatic URL "fixing" service would be one of those revolutionary Web 2.0 features that exists in the recesses of the web, part of the infrastructure and totally natural to use.
Now this is an interesting idea. Let me tell you the best way to handle this - on the client side, after the proper DNS opportunities have been exhausted. This is because the client best knows the users browsing proclivities (most often viewed pages, favorite search engines, etc).
I look forward to the scintillating and insightful conversation this invitation to discuss will bring
Are you implying that Slashdot commenters just sheep with the summary? Nothing could be further from the truth - half the time, the loudest voices here scorn the summaries (including yours apparently). If the vast majority of people here are saying the same thing, maybe it's because there's some amount of truth in it. Everybody here said the DMCA would be used for this kind of crap when it was passed, and now it is. Why not scream?
mini-editorial and half-baked legal theorizing in the summary
In defense of the summary, the article itself was a bit one sided too (on the other side IMHO).
In FF3.5, some of my add-ons actually make my browsing experience faster (like flash-block). Rendering an animated gif is significantly faster than launching a 32-bit instance of Flash.
Flynn made it seem as if the biggest obstacle towards getting into space was not gravity and fuel costs as much as government hassles.
That was probably an excellent prediction, and with a publication date of 1997, he didn't even access to the largest hassle precipitating event of all time - 9.11. Think of all the hassle that you have to go through for sub-orbital vessels these days, and multiply that by 10. I bet that spacecraft will be seen by many politicians as profoundly dangerous.
The Artist Concept of the spaceport is really quite stunning.
I guess it's hard to visualize how a videogame could provide insight into those areas without engaging in mindless glorification.
I understand what you're saying here, and I don't think it's a prudish comment. However, I have a few responses:
Art doesn't necessarily need to provide insight into its topic in order to be good art. Sometimes, merely an excellent mimicry is good art.
I can definitely visualize video games that successfully incorporate more passionate facets of our life. For the simplest case, consider RPGs - much of the art in an RPG is in the noninteractive scenes. Incorporating these facets into the cut scenes would be no different than incorporating them into a movie. Certainly, you must acknowledge that many movies "provide insight into those areas without engaging in mindless glorification". I would offer as a purely subjective example, "American Beauty," which I love. Certainly, the topics of American Beauty are perfectly adult and taboo, yet I don't think that it engages in any kind of mindless glorification. On the contrary, it was tasteful, beautiful, intellectually engaging, and artistic (once again, this is merely my own opinion).
None of these has anything to do with "the morally corrupt of society" or potential "societal downfall". Perhaps you meant that to be a top level post instead of posting a response to my comment?
I would have responded to your particular ideas, but a sibling post beat me to it (and did a damn fine job IMHO).
Because human life is always sex and violence. For better or worse, these are the tools by which the human race defined, refined, and propagated itself throughout history.
As a side note, I don't think that the article is talking about sex and violence in the GTA sense; "Let's run over a hooker with our cars." It's in a much deeper sense - how can something be decent art while not dealing with the most central and passionate areas of our lives?
most people who make video games are technicians rather than artists
Perhaps "most" as you say, but I think there are plenty who don't. In fact, many studios are preferring a model where there is a larger dichotomy between engineering and art. For instance, Mistwalker offloads their engineering work to other firms so they can focus purely on music, story, and visual design. I suppose that their artistic accomplishments using this method are subjective, but I don't think it helped all that much personally. There's almost certainly a larger problem here, and this article might be on to something.
[GP] it's proof that they can actually do what they say.
[P] One case is hardly proof
If they say that they can successfully thwart illegitimate patent, of course it is. If I say I can do 'X', and I do 'X', have I not proved my claim? Do you think that there's some larger claim that they can thwart 42 patents? I haven't seen any.
I just think that this rather blatant advertising.
By whom? Infozine? Did you even read the article, or are you saying this purely based on the summary? I see you already got a response from the submitter himself, so I won't bother explaining to you here the difference between advertising vs advocacy.
It didn't read that way to me either.
But it occurs to me that even if it did, that wouldn't be such a bad thing. Any organization that exists through donations really ought to prove that they're worth a donation. This is once piece of evidence that the EFF is worth your money.
Moreover, to those people who have already donated, this is a form of accountability. Articles like this tell those people that they have not wasted their money - it is being put to good use doing the work that organization was created to do.
Sure there are some serious specialty applications that depend on high volume low latency IO.
Like an operating system boot. Yeah, nobody does that. Mark my words, anybody will notice the performance difference on a decent SSD, regardless of what they do.