Terrorists abrogate rights by deliberately targeting known civilian populations - a position typically held in the Western world, and I believe upheld in Geneva.
By this definition, the worst terrorist act in history was carried out by the USA. Horishima was after all a civilian city.
EA can afford to distrib their games for less because they just recycle the same crap from last year with a new badge and a few small incremental improvements rather than developing NEW games.
The only problem with this idea is that you've identified 2 hours of gameplay. A successful MMOG has to offer thousands of hours of gameplay to be feasible.
Blizzard enforces the rules when someone makes a complaint. They don't have the time or staff to troll though the conversations of millions of subscribers looking for breaches, but when a player lodges a complaint against another player, they check the appropriate logs, find the content about which the complaint was lodged then act.
If there are Christian guilds who are making religious comments in general channel and getting away with it, then it's only because no-one is complaining (enough).
If people were to understand that:
1. It's complaints based; and
2. There's more likely to be a complaint about a sexual reference than a religous reference because more people are comfortable with other people discussing religion than they are discusssing sexuality
then you'll understand why Blizzard took action in this case.
*These are my own observations from playing WoW for the past 10 months and using the complaints system (and I've never complained about people for sexual or religious references, only spamming).
Any system which doesn't involved the money paid by the consumer being attributed to the artist who creates the work is flawed. If I pay my 5 dollars, and download 30 songs, does the system ensure that all 30 artists get compensated with a proportion of my payment? And why should an artist get less for their effort just because I want to have 30 songs this month instead of 5?
The major problem with the current system is that the record label is getting so much more than the artist, then the RIAA is trying to invent schemes to increase income which doesn't relate back to the artists. If the RIAA actually supported artists instead of the big labels, people might care what they have to say.
And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress...
Actually, the prohibition in your constitution only prevents elected officials, and public servants from accepting honours. This derives from the old principle that you can't have 2 masters, or in modern terms, conflict of duty/interest.
In Australia, a child abuse image has to depict a child under the age of 16, or who appears to be under the age of 16.
(I work in Computer Forensics for a state police force, so this stuff is bread and butter for us.)
Actually, PDF is one of our preferred formats for presenting (electronicallly) examination results because:
The formatting information is fixed, so what you see is what gets printed;
Detectives (almost always) don't have the capability to edit PDF, but they all have the ability to view it since Acrobat Viewer is part of the standard build.
(I am a forensic computer analyst for a state police service.)
This reminds me of when Queensland (Australia) had an infestation of cane beetles. (They eat the sugar cane.) Some genius came up with the idea of importing cane toads to eat the cane beetles. It worked, but once the toads wiped out the beetles, they moved on to eating small native wildlife. I think they expected the toads to die out once the beetles were eradicated. Cane toads are now such an infestation, that in sporting circles, Queensland players are referred to as the "cane toads" by fans from other states.
Given that nature will adapt, I doubt the probablility of mutation is as low as 0.001%, and I'd rather die of cancer than become the petri dish for a new super-virus.
The Web Browser gave the average user the ability to view all that good stuff on the internet in a way that made sense... with graphics and tables and the like in a single document. It was the "Mosiac" idea that was truly revolutionary.
The Web Browser changed the internet from data to information.
Why don't they just re-brand Firefox
Oh wait, they already did that, Netscape...
As I recall browser history, Netscape pre-dates Firefox... and MSIE for that matter. The only browsers I recall using before Netscape were Mosiac and Lynx.
Last night I called over my girlfriend who was surfing the web on the laptop next to me to check out how the Simolean versions of ourselves were making out on the couch. Now she's normally critical of me playing games, but she totally got into it as I made them dance, hug and kiss. Ended up, she asked whether I could get them to have sex together. Wonder if that was a request or a hint?
(It could be worse, she could have asked me to make them marry each other;)
I remember back in Law School, we did a case study on cameras in Britain. They were initially trialed in one of the worst boroughs. There was a significant drop in crime, especially violent crime. Now whilst any loss of privacy is worrying, remember: when you walk out of your home, everything you do is open to public inspection. Cameras are just like having police officers with perfect memories and a really good vantage point, but at a significantly reduced cost. (And we all hate big tax bills.) A small increase in scrutiny of what I do in public is a small price to pay for living in a significantly safer place.
Slashdot Mirror
Was there a double B, double G, double L?
Terrorists abrogate rights by deliberately targeting known civilian populations - a position typically held in the Western world, and I believe upheld in Geneva.
By this definition, the worst terrorist act in history was carried out by the USA. Horishima was after all a civilian city.
EA can afford to distrib their games for less because they just recycle the same crap from last year with a new badge and a few small incremental improvements rather than developing NEW games.
The only problem with this idea is that you've identified 2 hours of gameplay. A successful MMOG has to offer thousands of hours of gameplay to be feasible.
Blizzard enforces the rules when someone makes a complaint. They don't have the time or staff to troll though the conversations of millions of subscribers looking for breaches, but when a player lodges a complaint against another player, they check the appropriate logs, find the content about which the complaint was lodged then act. If there are Christian guilds who are making religious comments in general channel and getting away with it, then it's only because no-one is complaining (enough). If people were to understand that: 1. It's complaints based; and 2. There's more likely to be a complaint about a sexual reference than a religous reference because more people are comfortable with other people discussing religion than they are discusssing sexuality then you'll understand why Blizzard took action in this case. *These are my own observations from playing WoW for the past 10 months and using the complaints system (and I've never complained about people for sexual or religious references, only spamming).
Any system which doesn't involved the money paid by the consumer being attributed to the artist who creates the work is flawed. If I pay my 5 dollars, and download 30 songs, does the system ensure that all 30 artists get compensated with a proportion of my payment? And why should an artist get less for their effort just because I want to have 30 songs this month instead of 5? The major problem with the current system is that the record label is getting so much more than the artist, then the RIAA is trying to invent schemes to increase income which doesn't relate back to the artists. If the RIAA actually supported artists instead of the big labels, people might care what they have to say.
And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress...
Actually, the prohibition in your constitution only prevents elected officials, and public servants from accepting honours. This derives from the old principle that you can't have 2 masters, or in modern terms, conflict of duty/interest.
In Australia, a child abuse image has to depict a child under the age of 16, or who appears to be under the age of 16. (I work in Computer Forensics for a state police force, so this stuff is bread and butter for us.)
Actually, PDF is one of our preferred formats for presenting (electronicallly) examination results because:
The formatting information is fixed, so what you see is what gets printed;
Detectives (almost always) don't have the capability to edit PDF, but they all have the ability to view it since Acrobat Viewer is part of the standard build.
(I am a forensic computer analyst for a state police service.)
This reminds me of when Queensland (Australia) had an infestation of cane beetles. (They eat the sugar cane.) Some genius came up with the idea of importing cane toads to eat the cane beetles. It worked, but once the toads wiped out the beetles, they moved on to eating small native wildlife. I think they expected the toads to die out once the beetles were eradicated. Cane toads are now such an infestation, that in sporting circles, Queensland players are referred to as the "cane toads" by fans from other states.
Given that nature will adapt, I doubt the probablility of mutation is as low as 0.001%, and I'd rather die of cancer than become the petri dish for a new super-virus.
"You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem" - Edwards Law.
When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn.
The Web Browser changed the internet from data to information.
As I recall browser history, Netscape pre-dates Firefox... and MSIE for that matter. The only browsers I recall using before Netscape were Mosiac and Lynx.
"One can't solve a sociological problem with a technological solution." - Edwards Law
(It could be worse, she could have asked me to make them marry each other;)
I remember back in Law School, we did a case study on cameras in Britain. They were initially trialed in one of the worst boroughs. There was a significant drop in crime, especially violent crime. Now whilst any loss of privacy is worrying, remember: when you walk out of your home, everything you do is open to public inspection. Cameras are just like having police officers with perfect memories and a really good vantage point, but at a significantly reduced cost. (And we all hate big tax bills.) A small increase in scrutiny of what I do in public is a small price to pay for living in a significantly safer place.