the PC version will carry an additional content descriptor for Nudity
If the nudity isn't available in the basic game but needs a third party hack, isn't it false advertising to claim "nudity" on the box? I'd expect a refund if I bought this and found no nudity included.
Are there gradations of censorship, better and worse ways to limit information? In America, that seems like an intolerable question
Oh come on, very few in Amertica would argue against any limitations on information.
From trade secrets to copyrights to defamation to classified documents to pornography laws, restrictions on information are inherent in our whole legal system. How about court sealed documents? Furthermore, atatcking "propaganda" stations has long been considered a legitmimate aim of our military in waging wars.
Of course there gradations of censorship. The debate has ALWAYS been about which information can be restricted. Pretty much everyone agrees that some should be. Prentending otherwise is unhelpful and it's dishonest.
Having people pledge alliegence to the Country they belong to is a bad thing?
Shouldn't it be the country that belongs to the people, rather than the other way around?
Requiring compulsory pledges from adults would be at best pointless. Requiring compulsory pledges from children is at best damn creepy. And maybe they're not literally compulsory, but they're as close to it as makes no odds.
we all know most of the people using programs like Decrypter are using them to make copies of movies they rent from their favorite dvd rental place (as my friend likes to call it PirateBuster).
So this is, in all honesty, not the real reason to be upset with the MPAA. They are just trying to protect their investments.
Half true.
My experience is people think:
"Hey, DVD rental by post. Cool, it's cheap enough and about as quick as downloading the files anyway, and I can copy them before sending them back".
But there's no incentive to share any they do copy and besides, once they're on the rental service why bother copying the DVD? They can always borrow the same one again anyway, saves time and effort. So they've moved onto a pay for service and don't copy movies or if they do copy them don't share them.
It seems to me that it's in the interests of the MPAA to maintain that draw of "I can always copy them before sending them back" so that people move to pay for services.
One is the situation where a driver chooses to drive over the speed limit. In this case he may or may not bee in control of the vehicle, just as a driver under the speed limit may or may not be. We need more information to reach a conclusion.
The other is the situation where a motorist says he failed to slow down not because he chose not to, but because it slipped his mind that he had cruise control on. In this situation the driver is literally not in control of the vehicle, at least not at the moment when he makes a decision to slow down but fails to do so - hopefully he will regain control shortly thereafter.
I don't think I'm exagerating anything, and I don't think being "crazy" comes into it. If you can't reduce your speed by 10 km/h on seeing a sign then I think there's a problem you need to be aware of.
If you'd said "went from 90 to 45 and the sign was hidden in bushes so I didn't see it until I was right alongside it" then it'd sound more reasonable but the bit about the cruise control slipping your mind is quite disturbing.
yeah, going 90km/h because my cruise control was set for the 90km/h zone that I just left, because it simply slipped my mind as I passed the 80km/h sign, which I could still see from the spot the cop pulled me over, sure makes me an idiotic maniac who's driving way too fast.
If 'slips of the mind' prevent you from slowing down for whatever reason then you're not in control of the vehicle and you're not safe to be driving.
Of course if you consider 1280x1024 at 18" dia. to be low resolution then you need your eyes checked anyway.
"Low" resolution is obviously relative but that's lower resolution and smaller screen size than I'm used to, so it's unappealing. Personally I'll probably switch when 1600x1200 resolution LCDs come down in price, as I expect them to. Saving a little desk space isn't worth it to me to pay out money for a smaller, lower resolution, screen. YMMV.
No, but it is obvious that some illegal, high dollar operations do provide funds to terrorists. Some of these operations include selling pirated DVD's on the street corner.
Maybe we should cut off the income stream of the terrorists by spreading pirate copies for free over the Internet. I hate to do it, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make for my country.
Assuming that they've got it right, then we as a species now know a little more than we did before. That's good imho and worth celebrating. Even if we've got it wrong we're probably a little closer to getting it right than we were:)
The question is, is it deterministic? There are theories of the brain that postulate quantum effects as being important, ie; in the folding of proteins and DNA in neurons. The romantic in me hopes this to be true, because I can't do the math.
There are three basic models: deterministic, random and probabilistic.
The three can be described by reference to a theoretical ability to form a perfect simulation of a person at a precise moment in time, including environmental and sensory data. In effect this is used to replay a moment of decision over and over again.
Deterministic: the person behaves in exactly the same way each time the moment is replayed.
Random: the person behaves in a random manner each time the moment is replayed - he could do anything.
Probabilistic: the person's behaviour changes each time but within a restricted scope e.g. if we could replay my replying to your post then we might find that 90% of the time I write something along the lines of this post, 9% I write "me too!" and 1% I post about how BSD is dying.
The random model doesn't match what we perceive as reality. I don't believe there was as much chance of me trying to eat the keyboard as of typing on it. So that leaves deterministic and probabilistic. Either of these could be valid.
Of the two, I think deterministic is far more emotionally satisfying. That doesn't make it true of course but I'd much rather think that there is something that is ME with a strong sense of identity that in situation X having had day Y and being worried about factors Z I will lose my temper. The less well defined probabilistic alternative me that if the situation was replayed would sometimes get angry and sometimes not is far less appealing.
These emotional preferences don't change reality of course, maybe we are probabilistic in nature, but I really can't understand why anyone would prefer to think of themselves that way.
And the above by Travelsonic is why you will never win a debate with an illegal file-trader. Oh not because you can't support your arguments. But because whatever you come up with will be dismissed out of hand.
The reason you'll never win an argument on the subject is because you're picking ground you can't win on.
If what you're opposed to is copyright infringement then you've got plenty to back you up. It's illegal, that's a damn good point. Copyright is required (imho) to incentivise creative works, certainly on the scale of costs involved in movies. That's a good point. Moral arguments are subjective but you'll get a lot of agreement (not universal I realise) that it's wrong to rip off people's movies.
But instead of focussing on any of that people are trying to justify call it "theft" when that is simply, objectively, the wrong term to use. Why do this? It's just pointless. You won't win on those grounds because you are wrong. Focus on stuff where you're right like "hey, it's illegal!"
Sure it does. English also has a lot of speakers who care if you call a limerick a haiku or if you call a dolphin a fish or if you call copyright infringement theft or if you call a nationality a race. These people will correct you if you get it wrong.
Get over it!
You might want to consider taking your own advice.
Due to the inconsistency, the International System (SI) requires that narrow spaces are used instead of either commas or periods as grouping separators.
So through the wonders of "standardization" we now have three different systems instead of two.
What was it about the way it is presented that you took to mean that this ia a Bad Thing?
I'll repeat the summary here:
DigitumDei writes "The British Phonographic Industry has been busy over the last half year. Their recent success which netted them £50,000 in out of court settlements is certainly not going to be the end of it with the UK courts forcing 6 ISP's to release information on a further 31 file sharers. The ISPs have 14 days to comply. And once located will be offered the opporunity to settle out of court. 'We would particularly advise parents to check what their children are doing on the internet and make sure that they are not breaking the law by filesharing illegally,' said Geoff Taylor, BPI General Counsel." And in other news, the oldest and largest ISP in Sweden, Bahnnof was the subject of a raid that netted what looks to be the biggest results in Europe ever; as well papper writes "The Swedish organization Antipiratbyrån, which has nothing to do with Swedish goverment, recently got hacked. This was both revenge for and an attempt to stop similair raids like the one who took place this friday, against the ISP Banhof. During the raid several FTP-servers were seized. On the hacked site the responsible group, AUH, posts some private e-mails about an alleged informer and makes threats to release more information and of course there is the mandatory braging. The site is located at Antripiratbyran with a mirror elsewhere and a translated verison also online (although it seems unreachable at the moment). "
All looks objective enough. Am I missing something?
Am I to take it that you would be equally outraged whether it's your house, your friend's house or a bank you've never heard of in a faraway country that gets stolen from? If so then well done but you have to realize that you're not a standard issue human being. It's tempting to think that I'm just better at recognising my own imperfections than you are.
Slashdot Mirror
the PC version will carry an additional content descriptor for Nudity
If the nudity isn't available in the basic game but needs a third party hack, isn't it false advertising to claim "nudity" on the box? I'd expect a refund if I bought this and found no nudity included.
Are there gradations of censorship, better and worse ways to limit information? In America, that seems like an intolerable question
Oh come on, very few in Amertica would argue against any limitations on information.
From trade secrets to copyrights to defamation to classified documents to pornography laws, restrictions on information are inherent in our whole legal system. How about court sealed documents? Furthermore, atatcking "propaganda" stations has long been considered a legitmimate aim of our military in waging wars.
Of course there gradations of censorship. The debate has ALWAYS been about which information can be restricted. Pretty much everyone agrees that some should be. Prentending otherwise is unhelpful and it's dishonest.
a software designer or team is likely to have at least one, if not many, problems that have never been solved before.
Don't call them "problems", the correct name is "users".
Having people pledge alliegence to the Country they belong to is a bad thing?
Shouldn't it be the country that belongs to the people, rather than the other way around?
Requiring compulsory pledges from adults would be at best pointless. Requiring compulsory pledges from children is at best damn creepy. And maybe they're not literally compulsory, but they're as close to it as makes no odds.
we all know most of the people using programs like Decrypter are using them to make copies of movies they rent from their favorite dvd rental place (as my friend likes to call it PirateBuster).
So this is, in all honesty, not the real reason to be upset with the MPAA. They are just trying to protect their investments.
Half true.
My experience is people think:
"Hey, DVD rental by post. Cool, it's cheap enough and about as quick as downloading the files anyway, and I can copy them before sending them back".
But there's no incentive to share any they do copy and besides, once they're on the rental service why bother copying the DVD? They can always borrow the same one again anyway, saves time and effort. So they've moved onto a pay for service and don't copy movies or if they do copy them don't share them.
It seems to me that it's in the interests of the MPAA to maintain that draw of "I can always copy them before sending them back" so that people move to pay for services.
You're confusing two separate issues.
One is the situation where a driver chooses to drive over the speed limit. In this case he may or may not bee in control of the vehicle, just as a driver under the speed limit may or may not be. We need more information to reach a conclusion.
The other is the situation where a motorist says he failed to slow down not because he chose not to, but because it slipped his mind that he had cruise control on. In this situation the driver is literally not in control of the vehicle, at least not at the moment when he makes a decision to slow down but fails to do so - hopefully he will regain control shortly thereafter.
I don't think I'm exagerating anything, and I don't think being "crazy" comes into it. If you can't reduce your speed by 10 km/h on seeing a sign then I think there's a problem you need to be aware of.
If you'd said "went from 90 to 45 and the sign was hidden in bushes so I didn't see it until I was right alongside it" then it'd sound more reasonable but the bit about the cruise control slipping your mind is quite disturbing.
yeah, going 90km/h because my cruise control was set for the 90km/h zone that I just left, because it simply slipped my mind as I passed the 80km/h sign, which I could still see from the spot the cop pulled me over, sure makes me an idiotic maniac who's driving way too fast.
If 'slips of the mind' prevent you from slowing down for whatever reason then you're not in control of the vehicle and you're not safe to be driving.
Of course if you consider 1280x1024 at 18" dia. to be low resolution then you need your eyes checked anyway.
"Low" resolution is obviously relative but that's lower resolution and smaller screen size than I'm used to, so it's unappealing. Personally I'll probably switch when 1600x1200 resolution LCDs come down in price, as I expect them to. Saving a little desk space isn't worth it to me to pay out money for a smaller, lower resolution, screen. YMMV.
If you aren't a script then you shouldn't have anything to fear.
Not only that, but if we stop testing for scripts then the scripts have already won.
No, but it is obvious that some illegal, high dollar operations do provide funds to terrorists.
Some of these operations include selling pirated DVD's on the street corner.
Maybe we should cut off the income stream of the terrorists by spreading pirate copies for free over the Internet. I hate to do it, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make for my country.
BTW I was just judged "non-human" even though I typed in the correct letters, has this happened to anyone else?
I haven't even seen these letters everyone keeps talking about. Does it ask you every time you post?
What on earth is the hidden "RTJKJAS"
Return of The Jedi King, Jar-Jar Against Spiderman.
It's the next epic hollywood blockbluster which was leaked early and led to the site being taken down.
Okay, he did seem a little worked upo about it but I don't think I'd call that a troll or flamebait.
I think this is a funny point of view considering how many Slashdotters have complained about offshoring.
Not that funny; there are plenty of us who don't whine about offshoring. Certainly beats protectionism.
Assuming that they've got it right, then we as a species now know a little more than we did before. That's good imho and worth celebrating. Even if we've got it wrong we're probably a little closer to getting it right than we were :)
The question is, is it deterministic? There are theories of the brain that postulate quantum effects as being important, ie; in the folding of proteins and DNA in neurons. The romantic in me hopes this to be true, because I can't do the math.
There are three basic models: deterministic, random and probabilistic.
The three can be described by reference to a theoretical ability to form a perfect simulation of a person at a precise moment in time, including environmental and sensory data. In effect this is used to replay a moment of decision over and over again.
Deterministic: the person behaves in exactly the same way each time the moment is replayed.
Random: the person behaves in a random manner each time the moment is replayed - he could do anything.
Probabilistic: the person's behaviour changes each time but within a restricted scope e.g. if we could replay my replying to your post then we might find that 90% of the time I write something along the lines of this post, 9% I write "me too!" and 1% I post about how BSD is dying.
The random model doesn't match what we perceive as reality. I don't believe there was as much chance of me trying to eat the keyboard as of typing on it. So that leaves deterministic and probabilistic. Either of these could be valid.
Of the two, I think deterministic is far more emotionally satisfying. That doesn't make it true of course but I'd much rather think that there is something that is ME with a strong sense of identity that in situation X having had day Y and being worried about factors Z I will lose my temper. The less well defined probabilistic alternative me that if the situation was replayed would sometimes get angry and sometimes not is far less appealing.
These emotional preferences don't change reality of course, maybe we are probabilistic in nature, but I really can't understand why anyone would prefer to think of themselves that way.
And the above by Travelsonic is why you will never win a debate with an illegal file-trader. Oh not because you can't support your arguments. But because whatever you come up with will be dismissed out of hand.
The reason you'll never win an argument on the subject is because you're picking ground you can't win on.
If what you're opposed to is copyright infringement then you've got plenty to back you up. It's illegal, that's a damn good point. Copyright is required (imho) to incentivise creative works, certainly on the scale of costs involved in movies. That's a good point. Moral arguments are subjective but you'll get a lot of agreement (not universal I realise) that it's wrong to rip off people's movies.
But instead of focussing on any of that people are trying to justify call it "theft" when that is simply, objectively, the wrong term to use. Why do this? It's just pointless. You won't win on those grounds because you are wrong. Focus on stuff where you're right like "hey, it's illegal!"
I think that quibble demonstrates my point :) thanks.
English has ambiguity.
Sure it does. English also has a lot of speakers who care if you call a limerick a haiku or if you call a dolphin a fish or if you call copyright infringement theft or if you call a nationality a race. These people will correct you if you get it wrong.
Get over it!
You might want to consider taking your own advice.
Due to the inconsistency, the International System (SI) requires that narrow spaces are used instead of either commas or periods as grouping separators.
So through the wonders of "standardization" we now have three different systems instead of two.
What a waste of time. What are they trying to accomplish by still working on the HURD?
Be fair: let us all know what you do in your spare time so we can sneer at you too.
Those articles are talking about EM64T, not IA64.
What was it about the way it is presented that you took to mean that this ia a Bad Thing?
I'll repeat the summary here:
All looks objective enough. Am I missing something?
Talk about double standards
Am I to take it that you would be equally outraged whether it's your house, your friend's house or a bank you've never heard of in a faraway country that gets stolen from? If so then well done but you have to realize that you're not a standard issue human being. It's tempting to think that I'm just better at recognising my own imperfections than you are.