Hey, there IS a certain treshold where "national security" ends and "public domain" starts. Agreed, this is not a clear line, but a rather (thick) grey band between... Problem is in the "human rights" department... everybody with a brain can use it [information] to do good or to wreak havoc.
Any democracy is far more exposed to terrorist acts than any totalitarian regime, and there's a cause-and-effect link between them. YES, you could sacrifice all possible "public information" to the altar of "national security", but then where's the all-so-praised democracy and freedom of information ??? So we end up again and again to the same dillema: what is the treshold between democracy and a police state? That "kid" was just exposing weaknesses. IF you were to classify something, you should classify the INFORMATION that he gathered to reach a result in his research, not clasify his research's result! This is as stupid as classifying (for instance) the formula of gunpowder and leaving all other informations about chemical reactions available to everybody!
That being said, would you rather live in a "safe and steril" or in a "free but slightly dangerous" environment ?
Oh well, I was looking at the PDF survey myself... and I liked to consider myself as "computer litterate" and all that... but... ahem... What in the blazes is "DPI"? That was my reaction on pages 4 and 5 of the "survey". Needless to say, I "googled" in an instant... here's what my first searches returned *sigh*... 1. Disabled Peoples International 2. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction ... 5. DPI - Digital Printing & Imaging Association6.... need I go on?... Hmm, needless to say, I'm still confused that DPI stands for, LOL. You do know what "LOL" means, no?:)
CNN has "Surprising findings about video game players"
Well, if you are a 40+ year old person who uses the computer only to play Solitaire and solve spreadsheets, yes, that could be surprising (the fact that most computer players are NOT geeks or recluses). This should however come as a natural for everybody who maybe learned to type sooner than (s)he could handwrite...
The "game world" is just an extension of the real world, with several advantages (interaction possibilities, a huge potential community, somebody "available" to talk to at any given time) and disadvantages (Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna' get (F.Gump) - never know who will be or how will be the next person you encounter and interact with). I hope I don't need to remind anybody that information can be both a curse or a blessing, and that's what you get when you're "on-line-gaming" - sometimes too much information... It's up to you to deal with it.
In conclusion: everybody's playing, has played or will be playing...something... sooner or later. There are no limits to the categories that will play computer games. So, stop acting surprised:) On-line games are all about interaction and socual aspects, how do you expect to find somebody else playing it? I mean, you wouldn't expect to find nuns playing American football, but you would definetely expect mathematicians playing chess...
YES, games CAN be good learning tools, but they also can be harmfull.
It depends on the game.
Almost "mindless" kill-em-all types of games seem to me as a waste of time as "educational tool" (one might argue "but they improve hand-eye coordination and... - and they would be right... but that's not education).
Almost (and I repeat, almost) all games have SOMETHING that is good in them... even the crappy ones (oh well, make you realise that they are crap and help you build your own oppinions).
PROBLEM is that not every type of game is good for "teaching" usefull things to the younger people... and the danger exists (in the nowadays MMOGs trend) that you will encounter vulgar language (which by itself, in small doses is not harmfull, but when in excess... no comment).
What I want to say is... what happened to QUESTS (Lucasarts, oh where art thou), to REAL strategy games like "Gengis Khan", "Nether Earth"(that one's for Z80)... those were more than usefull, both entertaining and educative. The current "computer game industry" trend of "if more buy it it is good" and "more violence sells better" is a big problem.
___
As a "bottom line": IF it would be SCIENTIFICALLY proven beyond a shadow of a doubt for any dimwit (in the Congress or where they might be) that certain types of games ARE of educational value, it will be a major step forward.
Hey, if you insist on using the damn IE (like I do) just set your security settings to "paranoia".
Set everything to "prompt", disable everything that you don't think you'll need, etc.
Just use some other browser... or better... get a shell somewhere and browse with "links", or even "lynx".
It won't be pretty, but... who needs images when you have text?:)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, neither am I... I'm from Romania!
That doesn't change the facts, only the perspective (i.e., I HOPE a bit "more free" of subjectivism).
Hey, there IS a certain treshold where "national security" ends and "public domain" starts. Agreed, this is not a clear line, but a rather (thick) grey band between...
Problem is in the "human rights" department... everybody with a brain can use it [information] to do good or to wreak havoc.
Any democracy is far more exposed to terrorist acts than any totalitarian regime, and there's a cause-and-effect link between them.
YES, you could sacrifice all possible "public information" to the altar of "national security", but then where's the all-so-praised democracy and freedom of information ???
So we end up again and again to the same dillema: what is the treshold between democracy and a police state?
That "kid" was just exposing weaknesses. IF you were to classify something, you should classify the INFORMATION that he gathered to reach a result in his research, not clasify his research's result! This is as stupid as classifying (for instance) the formula of gunpowder and leaving all other informations about chemical reactions available to everybody!
That being said, would you rather live in a "safe and steril" or in a "free but slightly dangerous" environment ?
Oh well, I was looking at the PDF survey myself... and I liked to consider myself as "computer litterate" and all that... but... ahem... ... need I go on?... Hmm, needless to say, I'm still confused that DPI stands for, LOL. You do know what "LOL" means, no? :)
What in the blazes is "DPI"?
That was my reaction on pages 4 and 5 of the "survey". Needless to say, I "googled" in an instant... here's what my first searches returned *sigh*...
1. Disabled Peoples International
2. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
...
5. DPI - Digital Printing & Imaging Association6.
"all your base are belong to us" :)
LoL. That's what you wanted to say, right?
CNN has "Surprising findings about video game players"
:)
Well, if you are a 40+ year old person who uses the computer only to play Solitaire and solve spreadsheets, yes, that could be surprising (the fact that most computer players are NOT geeks or recluses).
This should however come as a natural for everybody who maybe learned to type sooner than (s)he could handwrite...
The "game world" is just an extension of the real world, with several advantages (interaction possibilities, a huge potential community, somebody "available" to talk to at any given time) and disadvantages (Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna' get (F.Gump) - never know who will be or how will be the next person you encounter and interact with).
I hope I don't need to remind anybody that information can be both a curse or a blessing, and that's what you get when you're "on-line-gaming" - sometimes too much information... It's up to you to deal with it.
In conclusion: everybody's playing, has played or will be playing...something... sooner or later. There are no limits to the categories that will play computer games.
So, stop acting surprised
On-line games are all about interaction and socual aspects, how do you expect to find somebody else playing it?
I mean, you wouldn't expect to find nuns playing American football, but you would definetely expect mathematicians playing chess...
YES, games CAN be good learning tools, but they also can be harmfull. It depends on the game. Almost "mindless" kill-em-all types of games seem to me as a waste of time as "educational tool" (one might argue "but they improve hand-eye coordination and... - and they would be right... but that's not education). Almost (and I repeat, almost) all games have SOMETHING that is good in them... even the crappy ones (oh well, make you realise that they are crap and help you build your own oppinions). PROBLEM is that not every type of game is good for "teaching" usefull things to the younger people... and the danger exists (in the nowadays MMOGs trend) that you will encounter vulgar language (which by itself, in small doses is not harmfull, but when in excess... no comment). What I want to say is... what happened to QUESTS (Lucasarts, oh where art thou), to REAL strategy games like "Gengis Khan", "Nether Earth"(that one's for Z80)... those were more than usefull, both entertaining and educative. The current "computer game industry" trend of "if more buy it it is good" and "more violence sells better" is a big problem. ___ As a "bottom line": IF it would be SCIENTIFICALLY proven beyond a shadow of a doubt for any dimwit (in the Congress or where they might be) that certain types of games ARE of educational value, it will be a major step forward.
Hey, if you insist on using the damn IE (like I do) just set your security settings to "paranoia". Set everything to "prompt", disable everything that you don't think you'll need, etc. Just use some other browser... or better... get a shell somewhere and browse with "links", or even "lynx". It won't be pretty, but... who needs images when you have text? :)