Well I agree its right to be moral than get free money, you're going to have a hard time to convince people to believe so when $400 is involved. Face it, espically to students, $400 is a lot of money, heck I'd love $400 right now (in Canadian dollars I could buy a car:)
Its always been an interesting question though to see how much money it takes to make people change their minds on an issue, when they know its wrong. Maybe only $400 can do it.
"There are lawmakers out there demanding laws to protect children from Internet predators and things like that. There are already laws on the books governing what is and what is not allowed through postal mail, on the phone etc. Just because it's data packets instead of ink or sound being sent doesn't change a whole lot."
Actually it does change a whole lot, in terms of laws. If the law doesn't specifically state data packets as a medium that the activity is illegal on, then its allowed. While most people don't like the fact the law, and by extension laywers, are very picky about small details like this, without them our system of law would just not work. While it would be nice to believe we could work more on "common sense", it will be abused eventually, and less then common sense things will happen.
What we need, is the laws dealing with predators to be updated to include the internet, and technology as a whole, as an unacceptable medium for this type of activty.
Well as others have mentioned UT is a lot about just fragging your buddies to pieces, but it has a lot of other interesting gameplay modes included with it.
There's the standard capture the flag game play, which most people are familar with.
They also have domination where each team gets points for holding certain parts of the map.
Then there's Assult, which I've been finding a lot of fun. You have two teams, one defeneding a base, one attacking it. Each team takes a turn as each side, winner is the team with the quickest time to capture the base. The bases aren't just standard fortresses either, you go from a fortress, to d-day landing, to jumping onto a high speed train.
So don't expect an actual story in UT, just tons of fun killing your friends and new people online.
Well I definatly would NOT include Hitler on the list, how many possible genious did he wipe out? There is a point when what you did against humanity can outweigh any good you did for it.
Also from what I remember two people, on both sides of the war, independently invented the jet engine. I think the Nazi's did have it out before the Allies, but it was much too late to make a difference. But without Hitler it still would have been invented.
If anything the two guys who invented the jet engine should be on the list, definatly not Hitler.
Actually from what I understand most farmers still want to, and some still do, use their own seeds. Its the new companies that are selling the seeds to the farmers under agreements forbidding them to keep the seed from one season to the next. Or to breed new varients of the seeds, or has been mentioned elsewhere the plants have sterile seeds.
And if we thought people telling us how many times we can view a movie, or how we can run out software, is scary, having a large company control our food is even worse.
I don't know if it would redefine P/NP, maybe give us a new class of problems which are NP put can be solved using quantum computers. From what I understand in some ways a QC is just like using a brute force approach, only it does run fast enough it is possible, unlike many brute force approaches today.
I don't think you would be able to crack every machine on the net that easily though, your QC may be able to try every possible password at once, but my machine waiting for your login can only process one at a time.
Have you ever heard of sarcasim? Loosing at least lets people know that the justice system won't let lame ass suits like this go through. Ever wonder why people (in Canada at least) laugh whenever we hear about American lawsuits?
You can laugh all you want now, but I know several people, for good or bad, that are being held up right now in advancing their careers because they lack a degree. Management won't outright say it, but "off the record" they tell them that's the only reason they're not getting the job/promotion.
I'm not saying this is a good thing, I know several people without degrees who are just as talented programmers, but it does exist. And the one thing a degree does tell your employer that you can learn, and they like knowing that.
So you believe your group is allowed to determine what people should and should not see? If not who determines what is morally appropriate? Why is South Park producing so much "crud"? Is the Simpson's any better (which I firmly believe is the best show on TV).
I believe that parents should have a decision whether their children see movies like South Park, not some other group. If the mom thought it was appropriate for them to see it, then they should be able to see it.
And after seeing the movie I truly believe and teenager who has half a mind would realise the extreme satire in the movie, and take it for what it is worth. Its funny how all this conterservy is coming from South Park which so greatly shows the absurdity in the whole situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I agree its right to be moral than get free money, you're going to have a hard time to convince people to believe so when $400 is involved. Face it, espically to students, $400 is a lot of money, heck I'd love $400 right now (in Canadian dollars I could buy a car :)
Its always been an interesting question though to see how much money it takes to make people change their minds on an issue, when they know its wrong. Maybe only $400 can do it.
"There are lawmakers out there demanding laws to protect children from Internet predators and things like that. There are already laws on the books governing what is and what is not allowed through postal mail, on the phone etc. Just because it's data packets instead of ink or sound being sent doesn't change a whole lot."
Actually it does change a whole lot, in terms of laws. If the law doesn't specifically state data packets as a medium that the activity is illegal on, then its allowed. While most people don't like the fact the law, and by extension laywers, are very picky about small details like this, without them our system of law would just not work. While it would be nice to believe we could work more on "common sense", it will be abused eventually, and less then common sense things will happen.
What we need, is the laws dealing with predators to be updated to include the internet, and technology as a whole, as an unacceptable medium for this type of activty.
Well as others have mentioned UT is a lot about just fragging your buddies to pieces, but it has a lot of other interesting gameplay modes included with it.
There's the standard capture the flag game play, which most people are familar with.
They also have domination where each team gets points for holding certain parts of the map.
Then there's Assult, which I've been finding a lot of fun. You have two teams, one defeneding a base, one attacking it. Each team takes a turn as each side, winner is the team with the quickest time to capture the base. The bases aren't just standard fortresses either, you go from a fortress, to d-day landing, to jumping onto a high speed train.
So don't expect an actual story in UT, just tons of fun killing your friends and new people online.
Well I definatly would NOT include Hitler on the list, how many possible genious did he wipe out? There is a point when what you did against humanity can outweigh any good you did for it.
Also from what I remember two people, on both sides of the war, independently invented the jet engine. I think the Nazi's did have it out before the Allies, but it was much too late to make a difference. But without Hitler it still would have been invented.
If anything the two guys who invented the jet engine should be on the list, definatly not Hitler.
Actually from what I understand most farmers still want to, and some still do, use their own seeds. Its the new companies that are selling the seeds to the farmers under agreements forbidding them to keep the seed from one season to the next. Or to breed new varients of the seeds, or has been mentioned elsewhere the plants have sterile seeds.
And if we thought people telling us how many times we can view a movie, or how we can run out software, is scary, having a large company control our food is even worse.
I can't check out their site yet, but having just completed a class which was dealing with pipeline optimizations, if they took those into account?
Having seen what modern processors do I would definatly not want to try to write a large assembler program let alone a whole OS.
Mark
I don't know if it would redefine P/NP, maybe give us a new class of problems which are NP put can be solved using quantum computers. From what I understand in some ways a QC is just like using a brute force approach, only it does run fast enough it is possible, unlike many brute force approaches today.
I don't think you would be able to crack every machine on the net that easily though, your QC may be able to try every possible password at once, but my machine waiting for your login can only process one at a time.
Have you ever heard of sarcasim? Loosing at least lets people know that the justice system won't let lame ass suits like this go through. Ever wonder why people (in Canada at least) laugh whenever we hear about American lawsuits?
You can laugh all you want now, but I know several people, for good or bad, that are being held up right now in advancing their careers because they lack a degree. Management won't outright say it, but "off the record" they tell them that's the only reason they're not getting the job/promotion.
I'm not saying this is a good thing, I know several people without degrees who are just as talented programmers, but it does exist. And the one thing a degree does tell your employer that you can learn, and they like knowing that.
Mark
So you believe your group is allowed to determine what people should and should not see? If not who determines what is morally appropriate? Why is South Park producing so much "crud"? Is the Simpson's any better (which I firmly believe is the best show on TV).
I believe that parents should have a decision whether their children see movies like South Park, not some other group. If the mom thought it was appropriate for them to see it, then they should be able to see it.
And after seeing the movie I truly believe and teenager who has half a mind would realise the extreme satire in the movie, and take it for what it is worth. Its funny how all this conterservy is coming from South Park which so greatly shows the absurdity in the whole situation.
Mark