Secondly, parents on the most part do not think that it is their responsibility to teach their kids.
Maybe. Or maybe parents don't have enough TIME to teach their kids since they are working at two or more jobs just to pay the bills (and the salaries of incapable teachers who expect the parents to do their job for them.)
If you're doing something that you know they mind, reconsider why. Is this something you can't do more safely from home, or from a public library or Internet café?
If you're looking up porn from school, you're a ****ing idiot. Same goes if you're breaking into important stuff for the fun of it.
Maybe. But I don't think that is the point. Is it reasonable and just to damage a child's future for a minor infraction? After all, children do not have all the rights, responsibilities, and protections of an adult. Childhood is the time for making (and learning from) mistakes. When are we going to get away from this puritanical witch-hunting mindset?!?
Absolutely. We shouldn't try to actually EDUCATE the students, because they simply don't care. Just go with the flow, hand them a laptop running WinXP, and prepare them for corporate serfdom.
This is just the government pandering to lazy parents who aren't willing to take responsibility for how they raise their children.
I beg to differ. The government is responding to politically active parents that want to establish a theocracy. The lazy parents are the ones that don't stand up and cry out against this type of nonsense.
Are you trying to make some kind of point with that? Or are you advocating that people should forfeit their lives for even the tiniest little infraction?
My point was and is that the same crime committed "in person" or via IT is equivalent.
I won't argue with that. Why didn't you say so in the first place instead of being vague?
He will never contribute anything of value, has no redeeming qualities, so why should his life be preserved?
And who are you (or anyone else) to judge that someone will never contribute anything of value or that they have no redeeming qualities? His life should be preserved for several reasons. One of the most important reasons is redemption. People change. It is entirely possible that he might someday turn into a good person. Who knows, he may someday save your life. Isn't that worth something?
Just exactly what the hell does that mean? I hear that quite a bit. Are you saying that all crimes are equivalent? Obvious nonsense. If not, just what are you saying?
"just because it is IT based has no mitigating (nor magnifying--agreed) effect."
Sure it does, unless you attach the same (or less) value to human life as you do money and property --- which appears to be a growing trend.
I am fairly confident that my wife and I are the only ones with keys to my home and access to my computer. This remote storage business would be like me letting a maid have keys to my home and all my computer passwords. On top of that, she might have a secret prior arrangement with the government or a company to look through my drawers and files, collect my SS#, credit card numbers, receipts, and invoices, medical records, and whatnot for tasty information that can be used to advertise to me or profile me. This isn't paranoia: governments and business have been, are, and will continue to compile databases on people. No thanks. I'll pass.
That method works for me as well. I used to room with a guy who would randomly buy a cd every week by someone he had never listened to. Much of it was crap. Some of it was pretty good. I discovered Nick Cave by listening to a cover song on a Neil Young Tribute album. I filed it away. A few years later I went to Blockbuster Music, and grabbed Murder Ballads and listened to it in the store. Awesome stuff. Now I own his entire catalog. But, I got even more bang for my buck when I did some research on Nick, and discovered artists like Barry Adamson, Foetus (my absolute favorite artist, bar none), Lydia Lunch, Swans, and others that get zero radio exposure.
1) some people (including me) have been collecting for a long time, and have acquired nearly everything they like.
2) some people prefer film on DVD's (better value) or video games.
As I said, I've been collecting cd's since 1986. There are only a handful of artists I enjoy that are still producing new material --- when they release it, I buy it. On rare occasions, I will discover something new, and make a purchase. But, for the most part, I have what I like, and only buy about 6 or 7 cd's per year. I don't do the whole Napster, Kazaa, Torrent, whatever, thing.
Just too many D&D'ers must ask themselves what is the alignment of my army, and come up with the answer Lawful Evil.
That's right. The military would certainly reject me on the grounds that I am Chaotic Evil, and just as likely to fire on my comrades as the enemy --- discriminating bastards.
Ahhh, the OTHER cure for all your ills (besides money) --- DRUGS. Oh the sweet irony of a "War on Drugs" in the most drug-addicted civilization to ever grace our mother Earth.
These patent lawsuits must stop. They're getting ridiculous.
I hope they grow exponentially. Once every business discovers they can't even type on a keyboard without paying a fee for the "method for entering symbols on a plastic interface and converting to binary numbers" patent maybe they'll lobby to get rid of the damned things.
If you realllly want to protect your children from the big bad mean old world full of ads and porn, I suggest you don't tell the government about them and keep them locked up in the home without internet access, telephone, video games, radio, music, art, TV, books, newspapers, or anything else with information in it. All that stuff corrupts them, you know. Family members and friends can corrupt them too --- keep 'em in the basement --- in the dark. They'll be just fine.
It gives parents the ability to better control the content their children consume and we would all be better off to have such a thing implemented in our ISPs.
I disagree. I don't have displays of cigarettes, liquor, and porno magazines in my home. Nevertheless, I am quite certain that when my children reach their teen years, if they desire those things they will be able to get them through their friends or their friends' parents who may be more lax about such things.
This legislation will not solve any problems. Truly concerned parents need to have an open relationship with their children, and TALK with them about these things.
Of course, the easiest way to implement this is to deny service to the "consumer". When are people in this country going to grow the hell up and take some freaking responsibility for themselves? What's next? Are we going to pass a law requiring Charmin (at the consumer's request) to come wipe our asses for us because we are too lazy to do it ourselves?
So, what leads adults to kill? Bad/no parenting? Why are our soldiers killing people in Iraq? Because they had poor parents? Why did the hijackers on the 9/11 flights cause the deaths of thousands? They must have had bad parents too. Your argument fails miserably. It is not insightful, it is unsupported. Children kill most likely for the same reasons adults do --- over property, love, the perception of being backed up against the wall, religion, insanity. I will agree that one of the reasons is NOT video games.
Yeah right. I suppose you've never been stopped at a road block, sobriety checkpoint, or whatever, and asked to produce your ID. Now, it may be that you don't HAVE to show your ID, but then you will be detained, possibly have your vehicle searched, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Secondly, parents on the most part do not think that it is their responsibility to teach their kids.
Maybe. Or maybe parents don't have enough TIME to teach their kids since they are working at two or more jobs just to pay the bills (and the salaries of incapable teachers who expect the parents to do their job for them.)
No. It's more like
If you don't like it, you can live without music, TV and movies, an increasingly appealing proposition to me.
Sign me up.
If you're doing something that you know they mind, reconsider why. Is this something you can't do more safely from home, or from a public library or Internet café?
If you're looking up porn from school, you're a ****ing idiot. Same goes if you're breaking into important stuff for the fun of it.
Maybe. But I don't think that is the point. Is it reasonable and just to damage a child's future for a minor infraction? After all, children do not have all the rights, responsibilities, and protections of an adult. Childhood is the time for making (and learning from) mistakes. When are we going to get away from this puritanical witch-hunting mindset?!?
Right. It is the federal government's exclusive right to shred the constitution --- they are doing a great job of it.
Absolutely. We shouldn't try to actually EDUCATE the students, because they simply don't care. Just go with the flow, hand them a laptop running WinXP, and prepare them for corporate serfdom.
For that matter, 1/3 goes on forever.
This is just the government pandering to lazy parents who aren't willing to take responsibility for how they raise their children.
I beg to differ. The government is responding to politically active parents that want to establish a theocracy. The lazy parents are the ones that don't stand up and cry out against this type of nonsense.
Are you trying to make some kind of point with that? Or are you advocating that people should forfeit their lives for even the tiniest little infraction?
My point was and is that the same crime committed "in person" or via IT is equivalent.
I won't argue with that. Why didn't you say so in the first place instead of being vague?
He will never contribute anything of value, has no redeeming qualities, so why should his life be preserved?
And who are you (or anyone else) to judge that someone will never contribute anything of value or that they have no redeeming qualities? His life should be preserved for several reasons. One of the most important reasons is redemption. People change. It is entirely possible that he might someday turn into a good person. Who knows, he may someday save your life. Isn't that worth something?
"Crime is Crime"
Just exactly what the hell does that mean? I hear that quite a bit. Are you saying that all crimes are equivalent? Obvious nonsense. If not, just what are you saying?
"just because it is IT based has no mitigating (nor magnifying--agreed) effect."
Sure it does, unless you attach the same (or less) value to human life as you do money and property --- which appears to be a growing trend.
I am fairly confident that my wife and I are the only ones with keys to my home and access to my computer. This remote storage business would be like me letting a maid have keys to my home and all my computer passwords. On top of that, she might have a secret prior arrangement with the government or a company to look through my drawers and files, collect my SS#, credit card numbers, receipts, and invoices, medical records, and whatnot for tasty information that can be used to advertise to me or profile me. This isn't paranoia: governments and business have been, are, and will continue to compile databases on people. No thanks. I'll pass.
the lawyer named Roach. That's priceless.
That method works for me as well. I used to room with a guy who would randomly buy a cd every week by someone he had never listened to. Much of it was crap. Some of it was pretty good. I discovered Nick Cave by listening to a cover song on a Neil Young Tribute album. I filed it away. A few years later I went to Blockbuster Music, and grabbed Murder Ballads and listened to it in the store. Awesome stuff. Now I own his entire catalog. But, I got even more bang for my buck when I did some research on Nick, and discovered artists like Barry Adamson, Foetus (my absolute favorite artist, bar none), Lydia Lunch, Swans, and others that get zero radio exposure.
And you honestly believe there won't be any backdoors or skeleton keys to such a service?
That's bullshit.
1) some people (including me) have been collecting for a long time, and have acquired nearly everything they like.
2) some people prefer film on DVD's (better value) or video games.
As I said, I've been collecting cd's since 1986. There are only a handful of artists I enjoy that are still producing new material --- when they release it, I buy it. On rare occasions, I will discover something new, and make a purchase. But, for the most part, I have what I like, and only buy about 6 or 7 cd's per year. I don't do the whole Napster, Kazaa, Torrent, whatever, thing.
Just too many D&D'ers must ask themselves what is the alignment of my army, and come up with the answer Lawful Evil.
That's right. The military would certainly reject me on the grounds that I am Chaotic Evil, and just as likely to fire on my comrades as the enemy --- discriminating bastards.
Ahhh, the OTHER cure for all your ills (besides money) --- DRUGS. Oh the sweet irony of a "War on Drugs" in the most drug-addicted civilization to ever grace our mother Earth.
These patent lawsuits must stop. They're getting ridiculous.
I hope they grow exponentially. Once every business discovers they can't even type on a keyboard without paying a fee for the "method for entering symbols on a plastic interface and converting to binary numbers" patent maybe they'll lobby to get rid of the damned things.
If you realllly want to protect your children from the big bad mean old world full of ads and porn, I suggest you don't tell the government about them and keep them locked up in the home without internet access, telephone, video games, radio, music, art, TV, books, newspapers, or anything else with information in it. All that stuff corrupts them, you know. Family members and friends can corrupt them too --- keep 'em in the basement --- in the dark. They'll be just fine.
It gives parents the ability to better control the content their children consume and we would all be better off to have such a thing implemented in our ISPs.
I disagree. I don't have displays of cigarettes, liquor, and porno magazines in my home. Nevertheless, I am quite certain that when my children reach their teen years, if they desire those things they will be able to get them through their friends or their friends' parents who may be more lax about such things.
This legislation will not solve any problems. Truly concerned parents need to have an open relationship with their children, and TALK with them about these things.
Of course, the easiest way to implement this is to deny service to the "consumer". When are people in this country going to grow the hell up and take some freaking responsibility for themselves? What's next? Are we going to pass a law requiring Charmin (at the consumer's request) to come wipe our asses for us because we are too lazy to do it ourselves?
Although not a board game, the CCG VTES (formerly called Jyhad) is a fantastic back-stabbing (with a stake) game.
So, what leads adults to kill? Bad/no parenting? Why are our soldiers killing people in Iraq? Because they had poor parents? Why did the hijackers on the 9/11 flights cause the deaths of thousands? They must have had bad parents too. Your argument fails miserably. It is not insightful, it is unsupported. Children kill most likely for the same reasons adults do --- over property, love, the perception of being backed up against the wall, religion, insanity. I will agree that one of the reasons is NOT video games.
I have found the Anarchists Cookbook at a library. It was in the closed stacks.
Yeah right. I suppose you've never been stopped at a road block, sobriety checkpoint, or whatever, and asked to produce your ID. Now, it may be that you don't HAVE to show your ID, but then you will be detained, possibly have your vehicle searched, etc.