Dual booting is the complicated option. All that rebooting wears me down, and I don't want to mess around with extra partitions. Plus, while I don't usually attempt to multitask while gaming, sometimes my computer is doing something that I don't want to interrupt (maybe downloading) when I get the urge to play a game. No problem if it's a Linux game, but if it's Windows only there's a bit of a conflict.
See my other nearby post too, please, as it may be pertinent.
I don't consider it an issue of women's rights. If a man managed to get pregnant, I'd give him the same choice.
Child support payments are a bit different, I think. As I understand it, the non-custodial parent makes payments, whether it's the mother or father. So there's no double standard there. Also, they're not punishment (although they may feel like it). They're intended to defray the cost of caring for a kid. Abortions aren't free either, although the price does seem out of proportion to the killing. But that's because it's not a punishment.
I don't see a double standard anywhere here. Both men and women can be required to make child support payments, and both men and women can legally have abortions, or at least there's no precedent for disallowing it in the unlikely event that a male pregnancy should come up.
As for consequences, maybe abortion should have some. I'm sure the psychological impact is pretty big as it is. Hell, someone just got killed, so maybe jail time is appropriate. But it should still be up to the mother. If she wants to make it stop and is willing to accept the consequences, then she should be allowed to, whether killing the kid is right or not.
My standpoint is that a child in the womb is a special case. Pregnancy is different because the baby is literally living inside of its mother. I think that a person's body is their absolute domain. It's the one thing that you, or I, or a pregnant woman should have absolute control over. So I think she gets to kill it (or him/her, if you like) if she wants. Because I think her right to decide how she uses her body supercedes the child's right to live. If there were an alternative that allowed her to stop bearing the child but not kill it, I might be in favor of outlawing abortion. Now that I read my previous post again, "Do what you please about it" isn't quite what I meant. I probably should have said, "Do what is necessary to stop it." If it were possible to move it to an artificial womb or a surrogate mother, then outlawing abortion would be another matter.
It differs from a born infant's dependance on its mother or a patient's dependance on a hospital because in neither of those cases is a person forced to use their body in a way they don't want to. It's not about the child's dependance on its mother; it's that the one right supercedes the other. While I lean towards calling abortion morally wrong, I think that forcing a person to use their body in a way they don't want to is morally wronger. Or at least as wrong. It's her call to make, but that doesn't mean both alternatives are right.
I don't argue that a fetus isn't a human being. That's kind of a bitch move. For that matter, I don't think it makes a difference whether it is or not. In a few months it's *going* to be one, so it doesn't make sense to me to treat it with different moral standards.
Pregnancy is avoidable. I think it's a bad thing if a girl gets herself knocked up then has daddy pay to get the kid killed. It's especially stupid since she could have prevented it so easily. She's definitely going to Hell for it (not that I believe in Hell). But it's her body, and it's between her and the gods.
I almost agree, but I still think that a woman should get to make that choice for herself, even if she's an idiot. I would never recommend an abortion to anyone, but growing a person in your own body is a unique situation. I don't think anyone should have to use their body in a way that they would prefer not to. Fetus be damned, so to speak. Or maybe mother be damned, if you believe literally in that sort of thing.
It's not bullshit. As it says, all the systems are doing their job, but they're not able to support life on their own yet. A one ounce fetus can't live on its own.
Other than that, I have to agree. Normally killing is a bad thing, but when a person is growing inside your body, you should be able to do what you please about it. Abortions are probably not the best option, but it's not my place (or the government's) to make that call.
It doesn't make violent revolution any more appropriate either. Revolution isn't punishment for the administration's crimes, it what you do when they whole lot of them has to go and there's no other way to make it happen.
Same here. I'd rather see a horror movie where the characters do everything right yet it does no good. It doesn't scare me so much when they're only fighting their own stupidity.
Yes, yes! The library was one of the few game areas that sent me running from the (virtual) room to calm down. I had to go stand in the secret passage for a while. And also the Old Quarter and Cathedral missions in Thief 1. Going in there and not knowning what horrors to expect was something else. Now that I think about it, the Bonehoard was pretty unsettling at first too. Thief had some amazing zombies.
I find it interesting that even though those zombies were awful at first, they eventually became pathetic once you knew what they could do and learned where the hiding places were. It was more like avoiding bloodthirsty toddlers than anything.
Have you tried the Thief games? They've got some pretty anxious moments. Thief 3 has some of the scariest moments, like an abandoned mental hospital with things in it. I'm not really sure what they are, but I know it's dark and they show up quick.
Yep, empty rooms can be scary. Thief 3 had some very unsettling moments. The mental hospital, with the bandaged whatever-they-weres rushing unexpectedly out of the darkness had me on edge, and I'm not the type to be easily freaked out.
It's funny how zombies are scary the first time you encounter them, but just become pathetic shambling corpses after a while. Eventually fighting zombies is more like a puzzle game than a horrific battle against the undead. This seems to hold true for every game.
It doesn't much matter if someone working at an ISP gets access to it. Honestly, I don't give a damn if people are getting off to pictures of little kids. That's not the problem; the problem is the people exploiting and photographing children in the first place. Once the pictures are out there, there's no more harm to be done. Why not create a database to make it easier to detect it and catch its creators? Although I have doubts about whether ISPs are the ones to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Just think, the whole problem would be removed if windows were tiled instead of scattered about the desktop in a messy stack.
Dual booting is the complicated option. All that rebooting wears me down, and I don't want to mess around with extra partitions. Plus, while I don't usually attempt to multitask while gaming, sometimes my computer is doing something that I don't want to interrupt (maybe downloading) when I get the urge to play a game. No problem if it's a Linux game, but if it's Windows only there's a bit of a conflict.
Yeah, I'm not sure either, but I'm not going to point it out every time someone gets it wrong.
Ouch. Are you and the AC that thinks "undermind" is a word the same guy?
That would certainly be less work than pointing out every misuse of the word.
This is a little underwhelming. Who does anything for just 15 minutes unless they're interrupted?
See my other nearby post too, please, as it may be pertinent.
I don't consider it an issue of women's rights. If a man managed to get pregnant, I'd give him the same choice.
Child support payments are a bit different, I think. As I understand it, the non-custodial parent makes payments, whether it's the mother or father. So there's no double standard there. Also, they're not punishment (although they may feel like it). They're intended to defray the cost of caring for a kid. Abortions aren't free either, although the price does seem out of proportion to the killing. But that's because it's not a punishment.
I don't see a double standard anywhere here. Both men and women can be required to make child support payments, and both men and women can legally have abortions, or at least there's no precedent for disallowing it in the unlikely event that a male pregnancy should come up.
As for consequences, maybe abortion should have some. I'm sure the psychological impact is pretty big as it is. Hell, someone just got killed, so maybe jail time is appropriate. But it should still be up to the mother. If she wants to make it stop and is willing to accept the consequences, then she should be allowed to, whether killing the kid is right or not.
My standpoint is that a child in the womb is a special case. Pregnancy is different because the baby is literally living inside of its mother. I think that a person's body is their absolute domain. It's the one thing that you, or I, or a pregnant woman should have absolute control over. So I think she gets to kill it (or him/her, if you like) if she wants. Because I think her right to decide how she uses her body supercedes the child's right to live. If there were an alternative that allowed her to stop bearing the child but not kill it, I might be in favor of outlawing abortion. Now that I read my previous post again, "Do what you please about it" isn't quite what I meant. I probably should have said, "Do what is necessary to stop it." If it were possible to move it to an artificial womb or a surrogate mother, then outlawing abortion would be another matter.
It differs from a born infant's dependance on its mother or a patient's dependance on a hospital because in neither of those cases is a person forced to use their body in a way they don't want to. It's not about the child's dependance on its mother; it's that the one right supercedes the other. While I lean towards calling abortion morally wrong, I think that forcing a person to use their body in a way they don't want to is morally wronger. Or at least as wrong. It's her call to make, but that doesn't mean both alternatives are right.
I don't argue that a fetus isn't a human being. That's kind of a bitch move. For that matter, I don't think it makes a difference whether it is or not. In a few months it's *going* to be one, so it doesn't make sense to me to treat it with different moral standards.
Pregnancy is avoidable. I think it's a bad thing if a girl gets herself knocked up then has daddy pay to get the kid killed. It's especially stupid since she could have prevented it so easily. She's definitely going to Hell for it (not that I believe in Hell). But it's her body, and it's between her and the gods.
I almost agree, but I still think that a woman should get to make that choice for herself, even if she's an idiot. I would never recommend an abortion to anyone, but growing a person in your own body is a unique situation. I don't think anyone should have to use their body in a way that they would prefer not to. Fetus be damned, so to speak. Or maybe mother be damned, if you believe literally in that sort of thing.
It's not bullshit. As it says, all the systems are doing their job, but they're not able to support life on their own yet. A one ounce fetus can't live on its own.
Other than that, I have to agree. Normally killing is a bad thing, but when a person is growing inside your body, you should be able to do what you please about it. Abortions are probably not the best option, but it's not my place (or the government's) to make that call.
It doesn't make violent revolution any more appropriate either. Revolution isn't punishment for the administration's crimes, it what you do when they whole lot of them has to go and there's no other way to make it happen.
You're lucky I'm not the paragraph police.
I forgot. By Adblock I meant Adblock + Filterset.g Updater. I haven't seen a Flash ad since I installed the two.
Adblock blocks Flash ads too, you know.
Apparently it's not only games that aren't realeased for Linux. Neither are articles about them.
Eek! Don't scare me like that.
Same here. I'd rather see a horror movie where the characters do everything right yet it does no good. It doesn't scare me so much when they're only fighting their own stupidity.
Yes, yes! The library was one of the few game areas that sent me running from the (virtual) room to calm down. I had to go stand in the secret passage for a while. And also the Old Quarter and Cathedral missions in Thief 1. Going in there and not knowning what horrors to expect was something else. Now that I think about it, the Bonehoard was pretty unsettling at first too. Thief had some amazing zombies.
I find it interesting that even though those zombies were awful at first, they eventually became pathetic once you knew what they could do and learned where the hiding places were. It was more like avoiding bloodthirsty toddlers than anything.
One of the top games ever. The other two are amazing as well.
Have you tried the Thief games? They've got some pretty anxious moments. Thief 3 has some of the scariest moments, like an abandoned mental hospital with things in it. I'm not really sure what they are, but I know it's dark and they show up quick.
Yep, empty rooms can be scary. Thief 3 had some very unsettling moments. The mental hospital, with the bandaged whatever-they-weres rushing unexpectedly out of the darkness had me on edge, and I'm not the type to be easily freaked out.
It's funny how zombies are scary the first time you encounter them, but just become pathetic shambling corpses after a while. Eventually fighting zombies is more like a puzzle game than a horrific battle against the undead. This seems to hold true for every game.
Yep. :)
It doesn't much matter if someone working at an ISP gets access to it. Honestly, I don't give a damn if people are getting off to pictures of little kids. That's not the problem; the problem is the people exploiting and photographing children in the first place. Once the pictures are out there, there's no more harm to be done. Why not create a database to make it easier to detect it and catch its creators? Although I have doubts about whether ISPs are the ones to do it.
I think you mean steganography.