Allow me to contribute one or two more links to your list here: The Truth About Violent Videogames is one of the more informative articles on violence and videogames that I've read.
I don't like the fact that rape is used as a deterrent. That's basically the prison system finding a way around the "cruel and unusual punishment" provision by turning a blind eye.
You make it sound like the prison system advocates for rape of inmates as punishment. I'm pretty positive that it's not in the policy guidelines.*
I love the line: "is building your music library in a format that could be obsolete in the future really the best strategy?"
Name a format that will never go obsolete! We make "progress" in going from records to 8-tracks to tapes to CDs to DVD-A to the next 7.1 surround-sound format, while going between AIFF to MP3 to OGG to AAC and back again. To which I impulsively say, "shut up, pick one that works, enjoy the music."
Re:The French were there first.
on
A Real Transformer?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think this is a great project to keep the information flowing to censored places in the world, but I suppose the problem I've got picturing this set-up is two-fold.
First, how do you start receiving "blocked" information if the government blocks you first (which they're sure to do, now that you've just announced a $3M grant to fight censorship)?
Second, how do you know the information is going to the right people (activists and such, rather than just "the man")?
And on a third note - How much of this organization will be concerned with the truthfulness, usefulness, or goodness of the information being sent? It's one thing to be able to see the Tienamin Square results unfiltered by Google, it'd be another thing to be spending a $3M grant on ways to sneak porn (or illegal stuff) past the government proxies.
Normalizing doesn't "fuel" consumption of porn, it would simply break down a cultural taboo in the consumer's mind. That doesn't provide impetitus, it just loosens a restriction.
Is that cultural taboo/restriction on child pornography really something that you want loosened at all then?
The original issue was that viewing and masturbating to (child) pornography leads to further viewing of pornography, and/or (child) sexual abuse. I do not know whether "only looking" provides an initial impetus, but it certainly perpetuates desires and results in an increase in both "looking" and "contact" behaviors.
Google Cache of an article "But I Was Only Looking..." by McCarthy and Gaunt. The orginal.pdf can be found here.
You can't just make totally unsubstantiated statements like this and expect anyone to take you seriously. Where's your proof?
The proof is a "scholar.google.com" search away. You could start with an article by Quayle and Taylor, which has a small sample size, but cites a number of other relevant articles. The big idea of the article is (quoted from the abstract) "the important role that the Internet plays in increasing sexual arousal to child pornography and highlights individual differences in whether this serves as a substitute or as a blueprint for contact offenses. It also draws our attention to the important role that community plays in the Internet and how collecting facilitates the objectification of children and increases the likelihood that in the quest for new images children continue to be sexually abused."
It is unproven that consumption of child pornography causes one to desire it more.
I just replied to another post requesting similar information, over here. Consumption of child pornography seems to normalize the behavior, and is reinforced by the pedophile community on the Internet. When viewing and masturbating to that material becomes "normal," the threshold for committing child sex abuse is lowered, and the likelihood of someone acting on that increases.
Can you point to some evidence that backs up that assertion?
Absolutely. Searching scholar.google.com can get you some interesting research. Here's a start. While it is a small sample size for this study, other researchers have also found with various sample sizes that it's not uncommon for people viewing, masturbating to, and producing child pornography to have it "normalized" by their fellow pedophiles. Once they consider it "normal," they're more likely to commit further sex crimes against children.
Is that a fancy way of saying he got bit by a spider?
The Arachnoid Mater is a layer of tissue (meninges) that protects your brain. So a subarachnoid hemorrhage is bleeding underneath that layer of tissue. And bleeding in your brain = bad.
You might be right - I was reading the book as one of several "recommended" books (not "required" textboooks) for a neuropsychology class, and it was one of the ones I kept on a shelf full of neuropsychology books, thinking "this might be useful later." I'm probably attributing the whole ball of knowledge to just a little part.;)
I would recommend to anybody who is interested Oliver Sacks, a neurologist who wrote a great book called The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat for other intriguing and amusing tales from the fringes of psychology and medicine. As I recall (eek!) it did a fair job of explaining our understanding of the brain (even as the book is 20 years old).
On one hand, people fail to enjoy the work they have in front of them -- sometimes work they chose for themselves -- because it doesn't match their ideal of perfection. They're weighed down with "shoulds" ("I should have a better boss than this idiot") and "mights" ("The project might fail and they might blame me") and wild inferences ("The fact they didn't take my suggestion to use Linux means they disrespect me.").
That quote reminded me of a word that I believe is attributed to the psychologist Albert Ellis*: "Musturbation" - taking a want or desire and turning it into an absolute need or must. "We must love our jobs, or we'll never be happy in life."
While it's nice to love your job, there are relationships to cultivate, lives to live**, and things to see and do in the world that are equally, if not more important than having a job that you love.
* Albert Ellis was once called "the Lenny Bruce of psychotherapy," and I'd consider that fairly complimentary.;) ** "lives to live" should be taken with a grain of salt - this is slashdot after all.
Go ahead and blather all the rationalizations you want, but efficacy is the main concern, and privacy is a stupid red herring.
Well, I would like to see some evidence that this program would actually be efficacious, before implementing a costly technological solution. Do child abductions happen after school, on school property? I'm sure they do. Why aren't we just checking for already-made, already-in-use, government-required identification? "Because people can forge that." How often does that happen, for this purpose? If they are looking to use checking ID's as a deterrant, people who are desparate and want to abduct children are going to find another venue to do so.
It doesn't matter what you are(color or gender); not everyone is suited to be a scientist.
If white coats and glasses are enough to deter you, go work at the makeup counter at your local mall. You were never going to be a scientist anyway.
While I was about to agree with you on that, I reflected on my own experience and shudder to think what my teenage self would've said about my career trajectory. My teenage self wanted to be an architect, who would design weird and fanciful structures, and leave it to a skilled group of engineers to make it work.;) "That scientific number-crunching stuff isn't for me..."
Of course, I didn't pursue the archiecture direction very long - but I ended up getting a graduate degree, working in a research lab, and writing a dissertation. I'd say that counts as science (although I've always wanted a white lab coat...). But the point I'm trying to get at is that I never would have considered that I wanted to be a "scientist" as a teenager, it wasn't until I got myself into college that the opportunity knocked. Why are we making assumptions about what these teenagers want to do/be when they get older?
Slashdot Mirror
Allow me to contribute one or two more links to your list here:
The Truth About Violent Videogames is one of the more informative articles on violence and videogames that I've read.
And of course, for offline reading, there is Everything Bad is Good for You.
Endorsing unethical practices in the hopes that they will scare people into behaving ethically is the pinnacle of stupidity.
That was the smartest summation of this part of the thread that I've read. (Mods, if you're listening, move that up).
I don't like the fact that rape is used as a deterrent. That's basically the prison system finding a way around the "cruel and unusual punishment" provision by turning a blind eye.
You make it sound like the prison system advocates for rape of inmates as punishment. I'm pretty positive that it's not in the policy guidelines.*
*I'm not counting Abu-Ghraib.
Early 2000, deep inside Bill Gates' Secret Lab under Lake Washington.
How could anyone even remotely believe that this was the true story... Ballmer doesn't throw a chair at anybody! =P
I love the line: "is building your music library in a format that could be obsolete in the future really the best strategy?"
Name a format that will never go obsolete! We make "progress" in going from records to 8-tracks to tapes to CDs to DVD-A to the next 7.1 surround-sound format, while going between AIFF to MP3 to OGG to AAC and back again. To which I impulsively say, "shut up, pick one that works, enjoy the music."
Oh Snap! Voltron just got served!
I don't know of any other religion in the world, that outright preaches violence as a direct approach to anything offensive.
(Since a fellow slashdotter brought it up in another post...) I take it you never met Fred Phelps?
I think this is a great project to keep the information flowing to censored places in the world, but I suppose the problem I've got picturing this set-up is two-fold.
First, how do you start receiving "blocked" information if the government blocks you first (which they're sure to do, now that you've just announced a $3M grant to fight censorship)?
Second, how do you know the information is going to the right people (activists and such, rather than just "the man")?
And on a third note - How much of this organization will be concerned with the truthfulness, usefulness, or goodness of the information being sent? It's one thing to be able to see the Tienamin Square results unfiltered by Google, it'd be another thing to be spending a $3M grant on ways to sneak porn (or illegal stuff) past the government proxies.
Another fluff study done almost entirely by statisticians so that they could suck up grant money and waste my tax dollars.
I think you should write the researchers and demand your $0.00001 back.
The device is the size of a golf ball, can be launched via an air-powered shooter
Hhhmmm. The only person safe from this device: Tiger Woods!.
...well, and Chuck Norris, but that goes without saying.
Normalizing doesn't "fuel" consumption of porn, it would simply break down a cultural taboo in the consumer's mind. That doesn't provide impetitus, it just loosens a restriction.
.pdf can be found here.
Is that cultural taboo/restriction on child pornography really something that you want loosened at all then?
The original issue was that viewing and masturbating to (child) pornography leads to further viewing of pornography, and/or (child) sexual abuse. I do not know whether "only looking" provides an initial impetus, but it certainly perpetuates desires and results in an increase in both "looking" and "contact" behaviors.
Google Cache of an article "But I Was Only Looking..." by McCarthy and Gaunt. The orginal
You can't just make totally unsubstantiated statements like this and expect anyone to take you seriously. Where's your proof?
The proof is a "scholar.google.com" search away. You could start with an article by Quayle and Taylor, which has a small sample size, but cites a number of other relevant articles. The big idea of the article is (quoted from the abstract) "the important role that the Internet plays in increasing sexual arousal to child pornography and highlights individual differences in whether this serves as a substitute or as a blueprint for contact offenses. It also draws our attention to the important role that community plays in the Internet and how collecting facilitates the objectification of children and increases the likelihood that in the quest for new images children continue to be sexually abused."
It is unproven that consumption of child pornography causes one to desire it more.
I just replied to another post requesting similar information, over here. Consumption of child pornography seems to normalize the behavior, and is reinforced by the pedophile community on the Internet. When viewing and masturbating to that material becomes "normal," the threshold for committing child sex abuse is lowered, and the likelihood of someone acting on that increases.
Can you point to some evidence that backs up that assertion?
Absolutely. Searching scholar.google.com can get you some interesting research. Here's a start. While it is a small sample size for this study, other researchers have also found with various sample sizes that it's not uncommon for people viewing, masturbating to, and producing child pornography to have it "normalized" by their fellow pedophiles. Once they consider it "normal," they're more likely to commit further sex crimes against children.
Bonus points to you for using the word "sophistry," in your reply. Good job. :)
Put yourself in your Senator's shoes. One industry lobbyist offers you a line of cocaine from between some Hollywood starlet's tits.
;)
**snort**
I'm sorry, go on, what were you saying? I was a little distracted. Repeat it all from the beginning, I'm sure I'll hear it all the next time around.
Is that a fancy way of saying he got bit by a spider?
The Arachnoid Mater is a layer of tissue (meninges) that protects your brain. So a subarachnoid hemorrhage is bleeding underneath that layer of tissue. And bleeding in your brain = bad.
You might be right - I was reading the book as one of several "recommended" books (not "required" textboooks) for a neuropsychology class, and it was one of the ones I kept on a shelf full of neuropsychology books, thinking "this might be useful later." I'm probably attributing the whole ball of knowledge to just a little part. ;)
I would recommend to anybody who is interested Oliver Sacks, a neurologist who wrote a great book called The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat for other intriguing and amusing tales from the fringes of psychology and medicine. As I recall (eek!) it did a fair job of explaining our understanding of the brain (even as the book is 20 years old).
On one hand, people fail to enjoy the work they have in front of them -- sometimes work they chose for themselves -- because it doesn't match their ideal of perfection. They're weighed down with "shoulds" ("I should have a better boss than this idiot") and "mights" ("The project might fail and they might blame me") and wild inferences ("The fact they didn't take my suggestion to use Linux means they disrespect me.").
;)
That quote reminded me of a word that I believe is attributed to the psychologist Albert Ellis*: "Musturbation" - taking a want or desire and turning it into an absolute need or must. "We must love our jobs, or we'll never be happy in life."
While it's nice to love your job, there are relationships to cultivate, lives to live**, and things to see and do in the world that are equally, if not more important than having a job that you love.
* Albert Ellis was once called "the Lenny Bruce of psychotherapy," and I'd consider that fairly complimentary.
** "lives to live" should be taken with a grain of salt - this is slashdot after all.
Go ahead and blather all the rationalizations you want, but efficacy is the main concern, and privacy is a stupid red herring.
Well, I would like to see some evidence that this program would actually be efficacious, before implementing a costly technological solution. Do child abductions happen after school, on school property? I'm sure they do. Why aren't we just checking for already-made, already-in-use, government-required identification? "Because people can forge that." How often does that happen, for this purpose? If they are looking to use checking ID's as a deterrant, people who are desparate and want to abduct children are going to find another venue to do so.
It doesn't matter what you are(color or gender); not everyone is suited to be a scientist.
;) "That scientific number-crunching stuff isn't for me..."
If white coats and glasses are enough to deter you, go work at the makeup counter at your local mall. You were never going to be a scientist anyway.
While I was about to agree with you on that, I reflected on my own experience and shudder to think what my teenage self would've said about my career trajectory. My teenage self wanted to be an architect, who would design weird and fanciful structures, and leave it to a skilled group of engineers to make it work.
Of course, I didn't pursue the archiecture direction very long - but I ended up getting a graduate degree, working in a research lab, and writing a dissertation. I'd say that counts as science (although I've always wanted a white lab coat...). But the point I'm trying to get at is that I never would have considered that I wanted to be a "scientist" as a teenager, it wasn't until I got myself into college that the opportunity knocked. Why are we making assumptions about what these teenagers want to do/be when they get older?
it often portrays students as mindless autobots
... so that makes the conservatives Decipticons? I knew there was something shifty about them...
(On a completely different note, damn, Wikipedia has an entry for everything!)
/me puts on an asbestos suit
(and why didn't they pour money into helping Chinese succeed in basketball?)
putko, Yao Ming. Yao Ming, putko.
I have the same question. :) What card are you using for the Digital Cable, and do you have any links on getting it set up?