[chart showing 40% decline in sex abuse between 1990 and 2000] All forms of child abuse, not just sexual abuse, are undergoing a dramatic decline. Of course, you'd never know this from the hype the media is giving the cases of online related sexual abuse that they can trace back to MySpace or Facebook.
[chart breaking down sex abuse by relationship] The amazing and sad statistic that is so often overlooked and rarely discussed is that 95% of Child Abuse and Sexual Abuse is perpetrated by family members. 79% of perpetrators are parents. Other relatives accounted for 7% and unmarried partners of parents and "other" accounted for 4% and 5% of abuse.
Funny this from GA. Southern states have a rep for "close" familial relations. I doubt that most child-sex-crimes are perpetrated by outsiders anyway no matter what state we're talking about. Sure, the "be afraid of the internet" cases are the ones that get the headlines, but for the most part, it's mom or dad who are directly at fault. So why not just ban parenthood? Parenthood seems much more risky to children than the net.
When GP says "porn is demeaning", it only means that it is demeaning in GP's eyes. Of course, wearing clothes from Sears would demean a person in certain other people's eyes. Simply put, GP is prejudiced against people who have sex on film. Fact is, porn is demeaning only in the sense that certain people with a "holier-than-though" hangup look down on people who are in it.
As a side note, porn could be actually demeaning if someone was forced to perform, but that is really a completely different issue than consensual porn and has nothing to do with sex. In a similar vein, it would be demeaning to be forced to pick up trash in an orange jumpsuit as a community service sentence. In either case, the exertion of control over another is the issue. Which brings us to certain instances in which exertion of control would not be demeaning, e.g., consensual BDSM, but now I'm getting into too many tangents.
I like good TV shows. The usual you know, Farscape, Firefly, Treks, etc. The current model relies on advertiser support to pay for the end product. I don't like that system because it means I am bombarded with ads. I'm not interested in ads. Ads are annoying and break the spell created by a good story.
You're option is one many choose but one in which I'm not interested for a couple reasons. First, I don't want "pretty good" commercial deletion -- I don't want even the chance the spell will be broken. More importantly, I want content producers to know that there is a "direct to consumer" market. This will allow for more niche content that might really be worthwhile. A direct to DVD Firefly series would have been wonderful. To get producers to know such a market exists, I do not watch broadcast TV at all. Rather, I buy DVDs or episodes from iTunes (not perfect, but a reasonable precursor I think).
Ultimately, I'd like to see DVD quality content available for download on a direct to consumer basis. I see recording and commercial deletion as an imperfect solution because it does nothing to demonstrate that a market for what I want exists. Instead, it will just encourage producers to come up with ever more draconian methods to ensure you are bombarded by ads. Since what we both want is ad free content, I think we should try to demonstrate that there is an actual market for such content.
not really. Commercials which occur during pauses in the action are annoying. If they completely precede the show, then I wouldn't have that much issue with them. Product placement, if not blatantly obvious, is a non-issue. It's only a problem when it is obviously a commercial because then it serves to break concentration. I quit watching broadcast TV in the early 90s because of the annoyance with commercials breaking into the story. If all commercials ran before the show, and then the show ran uninterrupted -- I'd still be watching TV today. Now I just get my stuff on DVD or through itunes.
If the commercials come completely before the content, then the content is uninterrupted. For people who don't like their concentration broken, that is pretty key.
Word of mouth. I don't watch broadcast television at all (I do watch tv on DVD and BSG through iTunes), and yet, I've been able to find movies that interest me. Usually there is some slashdot posting, then I google, then I watch if it sounds interesting.
Ever hear of movies? They're kinda cool. You pay $7.50 or so, and get to watch a story uninterrupted by commercials. Quite often, movies cost double digit millions to make, and some even triple digit millions. I would guess it would be possible to profitably sell copies of TV episodes for $2 each because they cost a mere fraction of the cost of movies. Anyway, you should check them out -- you'd then see there was a model other than advertising which is apparently profitable.
Actually, it isn't precedent at all. "Precedent" refers to published cases of higher courts. A precedential case has the effect of law on everyone within the jurisdiction of the appellate court. If a case is a precedent, a similar case must be resolved in the same manner. Precedents are a form of "mandatory authority".
A trial court decision is "the law" only for the parties involved. Other courts might consider the case to be an influential decision, but are in no way required to follow it to the same result in a similar case. Trial court decisions can be valuable for guessing how things might come out, but they don't tell you how things "will" come out. Trial court decisions are "persuasive authority" (noting that "persuasive" doesn't necessarily mean the trial court would be persuaded -- it means you can suggest the court play along with everyone else, but the court gets to make up its own mind).
Aside from the jackass component, how about the idiocy? Personally, I'd much rather pay for a few dvds than sit in an airport for 36 hours to get them "free".
First you need a bunch of smart people to do the peer review. But if this typically done free as another poster mentioned, then no cost there. Then you need to get it to the people.
Maybe I'm naive, but gone are the days when printing a book required a few thousand bucks to order a bunch of copies (journal should be cheaper than books). There are on demand prinitng companies in fact, which take the order from end customers, print the book, keep the printing costs, and send you whatever profit you decided to make (figure cost of book + profit = price to consumer, you could choose "no profit" and then the consumer just pays the media cost). You don't have to set up a payment system or anything, that is provided by the printer. You just produce the material, make a PDF, and you're off. One such place is http://lulu.com/.
Anyway, such a system means that if you only have 100 subscribers, you won't have 300 unused copies molding in the garage for the next 20 years, but the few people who are interested in the info, can have a portable reliable dead-tree copy with a nice cover and real binding for archival/reference purposes.
I don't know the answer so someone enlightment me. To people who submit and have accepted, papers for publication in scientific journals get paid? If so, how is that divided between all the contributors to the paper? Is there a royalty paid for each time the article is sold? Is it a lump sum payment to the author/authors?
I'm not grasping the funny mods I got. An truly, I really was using Lynx last night (learning how to use the ports system for openBSD after my first install so I could have a browser with multiple tabs rather than multiple xterms running Lynx).
That price seems fair enough for the convenience factor. Here in NW WA though, it really is $45 for a tank+gas, $25 for a swap. I sense some gouging. Maybe I should open a competing business, get it going, then sell it off before the TankXchange (I think that's their name) changes their practice.
I know how to use the net. Heck, I was surfing with Lynx just last night. Anyway, I have largely stopped typing the name directly to url bar because every now and then, I make a typo. The search box is right up there by the url bar on all gui browsers anyway.
Around here, it is $25 to swap a tank a 5 gallon tank (20# tank, usual size for grill). Propane costs about $2.50 per gallon. In other words, you pay double to swap tanks, or half has much to refill (depending on your perspective).
Slashdot Mirror
Choice quote:
Funny this from GA. Southern states have a rep for "close" familial relations. I doubt that most child-sex-crimes are perpetrated by outsiders anyway no matter what state we're talking about. Sure, the "be afraid of the internet" cases are the ones that get the headlines, but for the most part, it's mom or dad who are directly at fault. So why not just ban parenthood? Parenthood seems much more risky to children than the net.
Yeah but last time I didn't receive a piece. And I was told...
Ripped off from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0151804/quotes.
Here's a direct link to the interview. It's a great read: http://news.com.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html?tag=l h
When GP says "porn is demeaning", it only means that it is demeaning in GP's eyes. Of course, wearing clothes from Sears would demean a person in certain other people's eyes. Simply put, GP is prejudiced against people who have sex on film. Fact is, porn is demeaning only in the sense that certain people with a "holier-than-though" hangup look down on people who are in it.
As a side note, porn could be actually demeaning if someone was forced to perform, but that is really a completely different issue than consensual porn and has nothing to do with sex. In a similar vein, it would be demeaning to be forced to pick up trash in an orange jumpsuit as a community service sentence. In either case, the exertion of control over another is the issue. Which brings us to certain instances in which exertion of control would not be demeaning, e.g., consensual BDSM, but now I'm getting into too many tangents.
Like activating the vibe ring?
I like good TV shows. The usual you know, Farscape, Firefly, Treks, etc. The current model relies on advertiser support to pay for the end product. I don't like that system because it means I am bombarded with ads. I'm not interested in ads. Ads are annoying and break the spell created by a good story.
You're option is one many choose but one in which I'm not interested for a couple reasons. First, I don't want "pretty good" commercial deletion -- I don't want even the chance the spell will be broken. More importantly, I want content producers to know that there is a "direct to consumer" market. This will allow for more niche content that might really be worthwhile. A direct to DVD Firefly series would have been wonderful. To get producers to know such a market exists, I do not watch broadcast TV at all. Rather, I buy DVDs or episodes from iTunes (not perfect, but a reasonable precursor I think).
Ultimately, I'd like to see DVD quality content available for download on a direct to consumer basis. I see recording and commercial deletion as an imperfect solution because it does nothing to demonstrate that a market for what I want exists. Instead, it will just encourage producers to come up with ever more draconian methods to ensure you are bombarded by ads. Since what we both want is ad free content, I think we should try to demonstrate that there is an actual market for such content.
not really. Commercials which occur during pauses in the action are annoying. If they completely precede the show, then I wouldn't have that much issue with them. Product placement, if not blatantly obvious, is a non-issue. It's only a problem when it is obviously a commercial because then it serves to break concentration. I quit watching broadcast TV in the early 90s because of the annoyance with commercials breaking into the story. If all commercials ran before the show, and then the show ran uninterrupted -- I'd still be watching TV today. Now I just get my stuff on DVD or through itunes.
If the commercials come completely before the content, then the content is uninterrupted. For people who don't like their concentration broken, that is pretty key.
Word of mouth. I don't watch broadcast television at all (I do watch tv on DVD and BSG through iTunes), and yet, I've been able to find movies that interest me. Usually there is some slashdot posting, then I google, then I watch if it sounds interesting.
Ever hear of movies? They're kinda cool. You pay $7.50 or so, and get to watch a story uninterrupted by commercials. Quite often, movies cost double digit millions to make, and some even triple digit millions. I would guess it would be possible to profitably sell copies of TV episodes for $2 each because they cost a mere fraction of the cost of movies. Anyway, you should check them out -- you'd then see there was a model other than advertising which is apparently profitable.
Actually, it isn't precedent at all. "Precedent" refers to published cases of higher courts. A precedential case has the effect of law on everyone within the jurisdiction of the appellate court. If a case is a precedent, a similar case must be resolved in the same manner. Precedents are a form of "mandatory authority".
A trial court decision is "the law" only for the parties involved. Other courts might consider the case to be an influential decision, but are in no way required to follow it to the same result in a similar case. Trial court decisions can be valuable for guessing how things might come out, but they don't tell you how things "will" come out. Trial court decisions are "persuasive authority" (noting that "persuasive" doesn't necessarily mean the trial court would be persuaded -- it means you can suggest the court play along with everyone else, but the court gets to make up its own mind).
yep. I was really straining my brain to think how IBM could do that.
Aside from the jackass component, how about the idiocy? Personally, I'd much rather pay for a few dvds than sit in an airport for 36 hours to get them "free".
At least "worst buy" still works.
Print on demand?
First you need a bunch of smart people to do the peer review. But if this typically done free as another poster mentioned, then no cost there. Then you need to get it to the people.
Maybe I'm naive, but gone are the days when printing a book required a few thousand bucks to order a bunch of copies (journal should be cheaper than books). There are on demand prinitng companies in fact, which take the order from end customers, print the book, keep the printing costs, and send you whatever profit you decided to make (figure cost of book + profit = price to consumer, you could choose "no profit" and then the consumer just pays the media cost). You don't have to set up a payment system or anything, that is provided by the printer. You just produce the material, make a PDF, and you're off. One such place is http://lulu.com/.
Anyway, such a system means that if you only have 100 subscribers, you won't have 300 unused copies molding in the garage for the next 20 years, but the few people who are interested in the info, can have a portable reliable dead-tree copy with a nice cover and real binding for archival/reference purposes.
I don't know the answer so someone enlightment me. To people who submit and have accepted, papers for publication in scientific journals get paid? If so, how is that divided between all the contributors to the paper? Is there a royalty paid for each time the article is sold? Is it a lump sum payment to the author/authors?
Irradiating sponges is ok but OMG, don't do it to beef!
I'm not grasping the funny mods I got. An truly, I really was using Lynx last night (learning how to use the ports system for openBSD after my first install so I could have a browser with multiple tabs rather than multiple xterms running Lynx).
That price seems fair enough for the convenience factor. Here in NW WA though, it really is $45 for a tank+gas, $25 for a swap. I sense some gouging. Maybe I should open a competing business, get it going, then sell it off before the TankXchange (I think that's their name) changes their practice.
No. Slashdot is always truthful.
Is it possible to generate a list of parked domains and blacklist at the dns level?
I know how to use the net. Heck, I was surfing with Lynx just last night. Anyway, I have largely stopped typing the name directly to url bar because every now and then, I make a typo. The search box is right up there by the url bar on all gui browsers anyway.
Around here, it is $25 to swap a tank a 5 gallon tank (20# tank, usual size for grill). Propane costs about $2.50 per gallon. In other words, you pay double to swap tanks, or half has much to refill (depending on your perspective).