Ok so explain to me, I'm not a doctor or scientist, what's the difference between an embryo and a benign growth. An Embryo is not a human being, or else we would call it a human being, but we don't, we call it an embryo.
Absolutely. It is logically inconsistent to say humans who are born have rights, and humans that are not born have none.
You should take a poll and ask people when their life began. I bet you will find very few that say 9 months before they where born. Personally I couldn't perceive life untill many years after I was born, so it could be possible that what we refere to as human life, that which seperates us from mutant cell growth, really doesn't happen untill years after birth.
So lets nto go lumping everyone together as Pro-choice or Pro-life. Cancer cells are alive and there for removing them would not be acceptable by some one who was truely "Pro-life."
I don't think it is a matter of one person buy alot of games but of each person buying one specific game. Most launch titles are worthless repetitions of the last generation. It would be great to have a launch library that would meet the desires of more than just the Racer and Shooter fans.
How about this for a compelling argument for accepting abortion.
An embryo is an uncontrollable growth not normally existing inside a human body. Cancer is an uncontrollable growth not normally existing inside a human body. We as humans find it completely acceptable to remove a cancerous growth (or even none cancerous cell growth) from the body. If I have the right to remove a mole I don't like then I have the right to remove an embryo I don't like.
Personally I would not support abortion of my own children to be, but I would of most of the world.
My point was actually far more simple than that. You can't prove that anything is infinite, you can only prove it is beyond your ability to measure(percieve) it.
...do not apply to statistical rules because they are a creation of man
I find it intersting that you are of the beleif that creations of man are some how outside of statistical rules. This will definitely improve my poker play.
Very intersting. Originally I was going to hop into this conversation and state that not only is there a 100% chance (therefor not really chance at all) that other intelligent life has to exist else where and else when, but that by the same theories there must exist an infinite number of cases of Humans existing, different only by space or time. But after a little thought about this then by the same measure, if you beleive in either infinite space or infinite time, then so must all gods exist, or atleast will eventually. If you want to beleive in infinite possibility you have to beleive in all of them and not just the sub set that meets your current belief structure.
I personally don't buy into the infinite space/time theory because somethings will just never happen (like myself voluntarily being ass fucked) no mater how larger the universe is. This is because time and space begin and end at the edge of your perception, and to prove me worng on this would be to change my perception therefor proving me right.
As for ID being taught in schools. Not if I have anything to say about it (which sadly I probably don't). We have an acepted idea of science and currently creationism does not fit that idea.
Then parents could dedicate more time to interacting with their children, teaching them, and preparing them to be good people.
Thanks for making my argument for me, I appriciate it. I was saying in the very begining that if parents spent more time interacting with thier children there would be no need for any specially labeling or governing of content because parents would know what thier kids were doing and be able to stop them if objectionable content came up. If you think you need "better tools" than spending time with your children, then I'll just resort to my comment that you probably shouldn't be a parent.
Don't worry I have a lot more statements that you will consider incendiar, I mean Mandatory Sterilization is a pretty mild comment. So while I'm on a roll allow me to continue.
I had a long retort to your comment but then I realized you obviously think it is ok to neglect your children so there really is now way of explaining the importance or parental guidance and involvment. Yes I beleive a neglected child (which includes one that can play things like GTA with out the parents knowing the content) should be removed from the home and place with someone that can give the child the kind of attention they need. But I am sad to admit that this is probably not possible with the number of children in abusive families or raised by strangers (A.K.A. Nanies).
There is no excuse for neglecting a childs needs. None. Don't even try it, there is no possible way you will convince me it is acceptable to ignore your child. And yes it is true I beleive it is our societies job (AKA The Government) to protect current and future children from abusive (neglect is abuse) parents.
If that doesn't make my position clear then nothing will. Oh and if you or your spouses death will mean a child being neglected or left to fend for themselves without parental supervision, please, PLEASE what ever you do, DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN.
"I think disclosure of contents would be very helpful, without being intrusive."
My point is, how much do the companies have to disclose. Seriously I could claim I am offended by the color Red and the game I bought for my child contains that color but it was not disclosed in the warning. To be fair the GTA:SA warning would have to say. "Contains digital images of interacial, clothed, dry humping." Because seriously some people may be more offended by the interacial part than anything else. Where does it all stop. I guess we could go as far as putting warnings on Coffee that say "Contents may be hot", Oh wait we do.
(once again risking the Troll mod)
"I know several single parents working two jobs, who simply do not have the time to preview everything their children see."
And people wonder why I lobby for Parental Certification and Madatory Sterilization.
This will clear it things up. What I am saying is the government should stay out of how children are raised (with the obvious exception being if the parents are causing actual physical harm or commiting illegal acts, and yes I realize there are laws that govern some moral issues but that's outside this topic). But if a parent up and tries to blam a company for supplying thier children with material the parents consider unfit for thier children then the children should be taken away because the parents are obviouslly not even paying attention to what thier kids do. So what I am saying is that you can raise your kinds how ever you want, but if you make it blatanly obvious that you're an idiot (blaming someone else for allowing your child unfit material) then you should be removed from child raising.
Oh and the rating system should be removed completely and replaced with this warning (which should be placed on ALL products). "This product may contain material that you may find objectionable." Or the more explict "Allowing a child access to this product with out previouslly reviewing the content makes you a fucking idiot, please report for immediate execution"
Growing up i was not allowed to watch certain Cartoons do to the violent content. My Parents never sued anyone when I did watch them.
"It's not the job of the government or any corporation to raise
your children."
"If the goverment has to get involved it should be through Child Protective Services by taking the child away from these unfit parents that facilitate the purchasing of unfit material for thier children."
"Blatant contradiction. If you require the children to raise their kids without help, then deal with the consequences. "
Actually there is no contridiction. If you read carefully you will relize that in the second once the government steps in then the children are the ward of the state and there for not "raising your children" but instead rasing thier own. If anyone wants to voluntarily give up thier children to the state I beleive they can (but I can't say for sure). The point is, if you want to be a parent then be a parent and don't expect to have children but not have to actually raise them.
"Plus, it is the guardians who are responsible for raising their children. Is it too much to ask for companies to honestly, completely, disclose whether their products contain possibly inappropriate material?"
First of all, Rockstar did disclose that there is "Strong Sexual Content" in GTA:SA. Second, it's not any companies and/or goverments job to decide what is or is not moraly appropriate for someone elses children. Parents should spend a little time reviewing products before pasing them on to thier children. Or better yet, parents should spend time with thier children so when they do get into something inappropriate the parent will see it and stop them when it's happening.
Amazing how a simple, and poorly thought out comment sparks up such controversy.
As many as possible. Use PHP for the front end, Perl for input parsing, Euphoria for the graphics, JavaScript on the client-side, Moo for the database and Python for the glue to hold things togethe
Where in I agree with the commentor statement elsewhere that "there is no killer language" I beleive that the inverse is also true that "All languages are capable of all things." It may not hold 100% true but most languages, those called general purpose languages, are capable of meeting the needs of most programs. If you need to do something truely time sensitive or real-time, then you will have to leave out interpreted or VM based languages. If you are really worried about performance, your just choking your own chain if you are using anything other than assembly. On the other hand, if performance is not the issue and maintance is more important, then use something like Java.
The important thing, in todays market, is to maintain a versatile team. If you are going to use to many languages (basically more than 3 that don't atleast have something in common, and XML/HTML do not count as languages) you are going to either lose versatility, by having specialized developers, or lose expertise by having unfocused developers.
The best bet, IMO, is to chose the one CORE language that is best suited for your company/projects (notice that is pluar not possesive) needs. If you need to use a different language for a specialized purposed make sure it is a very small piece, actually needs to be implmented in a different language and is VERY WELL DOCUMENTED. And remember that using similar languages (Java, C#, JavaScript) is better than using languages that have little in common (Java, C , Assembly, Basic).
On a more personal note, find me a native compiler for JavaScript and you can pretty much throw all other languages right out the window (excluding assembly which could be argued is or is not a language).
I've never gotten upset at a post before but this time I risk the bad karam because the parent poster is a fucking retard.
It's not the job of the government or any corporation to raise your children. Corporations jobs are to make money, and if people will buy violent sexual games then let them. Kids can't just go into any store and buy an M rated video game, regardless of the fact that a store might be willing to sell it to them. See you miss the point that the child has to get the money for the purchase and be taken to the store, or allowed to go there on there own. The point is, some where in this process there SHOULD be parental involvement. If the goverment has to get involved it should be through Child Protective Services by taking the child away from these unfit parents that facilitate the purchasing of unfit material for thier children. (Then euthanize or at least setilize the parents)
All you idiots that think you can have a child and let it raise it self should fucking be shot by children with guns. Why? Because you are the fucking idiots that allow children to get ahold of firearms. And stop blaming your stupid mistakes in raising children on your parents mistakes. Take some responsibility people.
I always though RPGs where about character. What happend to Character growth. I mean people have character growth and their "stats" don't have to go up. Heck some of the best human Character growth comes from what could be called a reduction in "stats" like when some one gets hurt (say loses an arm) and continues agains adverse conditions (say continues as a world famous profesional, even if untalented, drummer).
Roleplaying is by defenition, playing a role. This is acting, not "stat" generating, not experience earning, not item finding. It would be nice to have a cRPG that did actually take a players decisions into accoung in building a good story (there are some limited examples of cRPGs that do, dating back to Phantasy Star III, maybe earlier, but the majority do not). In Pen and Paper (or Live Action) there is a benifit for being interesting (trust me I tend to make weak characters that are fun to be around) which has yet to be achived in a cRPG. Oh and asking ever dweeb with a Female avatar to join you in cyber sex is not exactly "being interesting."
When did Physics make a game? I mean I recall a time when games where, well how can I put this, games. When people came up with uique ideas and where not constrained to real world physics. Sad as it may be, it seems that the more powerful the systems become (XBox 360 and ps3 included) the less interesting the games become because they are clones of real world scenarios. My only hope that is that with all this power available the next generation round of games has at least a few gems in it like Katamari Damaci or Disgae, games that, though may use some interesting physics, that don't have to be real world simulations. Or even something as simple as ICO, which does have a real world enviroment, but also steps out of the common mold and avoid the usual hack and slash (or shoot and run).
Oh and Pong is a great skill game where no amount of button mashing will save your ass.
Ok, I already know all the details about the inner workings of the cell and the multi core power (not G5 specifically but the power architecture) chips. My question still remains, has anyone seen a reputable source (sony specifically) state that there will be only one cell in the ps3. The Cell chip was designed to work in clusters, and Sony originally announced that the ps3 would have 4 cell chips (4 cpus each with 8 spes). If it turns out that sony chose to using a single cell in each ps3 then they really dropped the ball on this one. On the other hand if they do plan on using even 2 cells in a single unit then there is no competition between the consoles. With what little I know about the manufacturing process it shouldn't greatly increase the cost of the ps3 to add an additional cell being as it would double to number produced and there fore reduce the cost of each individual chip.
Ok I have read the reviews and seen the slides from the press conference and I don't see anything that says the ps3 has only 1 cell in it. From everything they have said there should be 4 (maybe 3) cells in a single ps3. I may be missing someone so if someone could please point me to a credible source (sony) that states there is only one cell in the ps3 I would appriciate it.
On the other hand if it turns out there are more than one cell in a single ps3 then I don't think the comparisons are even close.
You're looking at it the wrong way. These are not boss fights like anything you have seen before. the bosses are both enemy and enviroment. they are of such large scall that getting around them (and other environmentals) to find their weak points are the puzzels and the rest of the game. this is not some hack and slash game. Like ICO before it you are not so much worried about being killed by the monsters as you are trying to figure them out and how to destroy them. If you look closely at some of the screen shots around you will even see that some of the monsters have railings and walkways and ladders on them. This is just from what little I have seen and read, but so far it seems like a great concept. And of course it will have stunning award winning visuals like ICO before it, so you could easily spend hours just looking around.
Why spend money on scholarships when, instead, we could teach students what they need to know in High School or earlier. Currently in American High Schools (and earlier schools) we teach History, Math, Science and english. This may seem all well and good untill you realize that most of that education is never used by the average worker. We need to start turning out the programers and IT workers, engineers and other technical trades straight from High School, and leave the colleges for the people unable to be productive with out it.
We have made this society that looks so highly upon College graduates that we have schooled ourselves out of skilled labor. We are not short on many import skill jobs, like electrictions, plumbers, and mechanics. And it's not as if we do not need these jobs to be filled. We have even gotten to the point where college is almost more expensive than it is worth. I wish I could find the study that showed that because of the cost of College most college graduates make very little more than a motivated High School grade once they pay for their education. I for one understand this being a Chief Software Engineer even though I spent barely 2 semesters in a community college, and none of that for computer skills. So with my nearly zero education cost I sit next to people that have paid for 4 or more years of education (most even went to private highschools) and somehow I am not only the chief engineer but also the highest paid.
Oh now that you put it that way I can see how being able to watch full motion video, listen to a CD, run numerical simulations, and do 3D-POVRAY shading all at once increases your productivity. Not only can you do the same thing with a multi-thousand dollar machine that you could do with a couple hundred dollars in AV equipment but you can also have fancy 3d graphics going on while you do the one actually productive thing, the numerical simulation. I love when people talk about all the things there computer can do at once even though 99% of the time most of it is just wasting processing power.
Ok so here is a link to a few c64 apps, including 2 that have Full motion video capability.
All that I really get out of your post is, yes there is no more productivity, but it is prettier. Also my new computer which cost over 100 times what it would cost to build a 20 year old computer can do 5 things at once. Hmm why not spend that money on 100 older computers and do 100 things at once?
It's this kind of thinking that has set up an enviroment where my 1ghz+, 512mb computer can't do anything more than my 2mhz, 64kb computer could do in the 80's. Heck a c64 with the right programmers behind it can actually be more productive than modern PCs. Thanks to feature creep the OSes have gotten so bloated that it takes the system a thousand times longer to start up. Yes that's right there was a time when a computer was ready to use when you turned it on.
No program should take 14mbs of storage space, especially a web browser, and most certainly not a minimum of 20megs active memory (that bloats well into the 70s given enough time), which is where the latetest realease of firefox is.
Don't get me wrong I like and use Firefox, but it is become as bloated as any other program. I'm just saying there was a time when even GUI OSes fit on a single floppy disk (true that QNX does that to this day, but that is rare). Lets just stop the bloat now.
I have performed every requirement imposed by the EULA. As far as I am able to determine, the seller has, too.
This is a matter of interpetation. It could bee seen that the seller has not completed the requirements of the EULA in the fact that they have not turned over the account opened using the products key, which can be seen as part of the product itself. Had the seller sold it before activating the account the transfer could have taken place with out issue. The fact that the account can not actually be transfered is also another matter that would probably take lots of legal argument. It is not Blizzards fault that you can not actually complie to the EULA it is the end users fault for assuming they are complying just beacuse they can not transfer the account. That may be ethically wrong but I am not sure about legally.
A book is a one-time-use product?
Ok I don't know about everyone else but I know very few people that have read a book more than once. On the other hand I don't know anyone that has purchased a car and only used it once.
When shopping for new (or used) books... If I like that author, I am very likely to select another book by that author
Good to know that when you aquire a book with out giving money to the author (borowing or buying used) you consider the fact that you liked the authors work. I am sure the author is very happy to continue writing books you like even though they are getting nothing from you.
No, it is not. Copyrights and patents grant the producer specific and limited rights to determine what can and can not be done with their products.
As has been pointed out to me in the past we are not actually discussing copyright or patents in this context, we are discussing usage licensing. I think you, and many others, are foolishly assuming that when you pay for a peice of software that you now own that peice of software, where in reality, according to most EULAs, you don't actually own it but are licensing use of it. You may own the disk and the box but not the actual data, which is still the property of the producer.
Blizzard is attempting now: prevent re-sale of the product. Except, Blizard's own EULA specifically allows it.
Regardless of the fact that the EULA in this case has not been followed in it's entirty, I don't think blizzard is preventing you from buying or selling their products. Obviously Blizzard has not sued anyone for selling a used version of WoW. Blizzard is also not stopping you from putting the disk in your computer and executing the program. The fact that you can not complete the agreement to use the service online has nothing to do with your ability buy or sell the product.
Even with as much as I hate Blizzard I can see why they do not want to waste any time on people who obviously do not want to pay for thier products in a way that they receive the payment. As I have said before, Blizzard should just give the disks out for free and charge for the service, but they don't. You don't like the way they do buiness then don't do buisness with them. Or you could go on a public forum, bitch and complain, and then get upset when not all of the public agrees with your point of view.
I almost agree with this but I think it should be a bit more extream. Considering the fact that a five year old commiting murder will not even be eligable for capital punishment and most like will receive a few years of treatment and no real punshiment at all, your formula is a little to easy on the parents. It should start at 1000% and head down to 0% at age 30. I say age 30 because that is the average age when the current generation of children will move out of their parents homes.
On the more extream side, I think parents should be flogged repeatedly, just to have the right to raise children, that way you get only the truely dedicated (or masochists, not exactly a perfect plan yet).
It is certainly rour right and choice to avoid used merchandise. But it is not your right to prevent other people from doing so.
When exactly did I prevent others from buying used merchandise? If you are refering to the producer of a product when you say we, then you are entirely wrong. It is most certainly the producers right to determine what can and can not be done with their products. Take a look at how most car sellers are pushing leases instead of purchase. Of course they make it out to be in your best interest because of the lower cost of ownership, but trust me when I say they are doing it so that you gain no benifit from resale.
As for your concern about ripping off the artist, do you allow your friends to listen to music you have purchased, or do you insist they go and buy the CD themselves?
Except in cases where I know the arists personally and I have been given explict permision for reproduction I do not copy and distribute works of art. Yes it is true that if someone is in a car with me, or in my home they will be able to hear the music that I play, but if they want to be able to listen to it when they want to and where they want to, they will have to purchase the CD themselves.
Do you rent cars from companies such as Hertz, Enterprise, etc.? Multiple people are using those cars without the manufacturer getting any extra compensation.
I am no expert in the car rental buisness and I have no problem being corrected here, but you statement is entirely false. Car manufactures gain lots of compensation for allowing there vehicles to be rented. For one there is a per use fee that is paid to the producer just as is done with video and game rentals. The manufacture also gains the added benifit that , unlike a book, a car is not a one time use product and the user of the vehicle will hopefully keep the experience in mind when purchasing their next car. Oh and I have only rented cars 3 times in my life, and only when there was no other reasonable alternative.
Other than that I find you arguments to be valid and I have no issue with people buying and selling used items as long as that was the intent of the producer. On the other hand I certainly don't think people should be getting upset when a manufacture decides to wisen up and license their product in a way that does not allow for it's resale after first use. In the case we where discussing here, people should not be mad at Blizzard (who I personally find to be a dispicable company) because they bought a useless box full of useless disks from someone they can not get their money back from. Blizzards EULAs are freely available on the web, and if you can't understand the full potential ramifications of the agreement you might not want to buy the product.
I beleive I specificaly mentioned automobiles in my original post, infering that I am not bothered by used car sales. High price items, like cars and houses have the resale of their products included in the original cost. This is why services such as warranties are only applicable to the original owner, as an incentive to purchase a new vehicle rather than a used one. Also there is a enviromental effect I think about in regards to large items that is not as much of a problem in smaller (especially completly virtual) items. Having personally considered designing and producing a car at somepoint in my life I have considered changing this. My approach would be to bring down the price on the car considerable but license it rather than sell it, stating that the original user can not sell it an must return it to the producing company. This would allow the company to refurbish and resell the item, and in my case, would have the item warranted for life.
...used book stores, used music stores, Salvation Army used clothing stores, pawn shops, and any other type of second-hand store.
I am not going to judge, but yes I avoid used clothing stores, pawn shops and very specifically used music. As for books, I don't even use public libraries because I feel this is ripping off the original artist who is usually getting robbed by the publishers already.
If more people would actually pay money for an original product, the cost of those products would go down. Most products are priced as if they would be used by multiple people over a life time.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok so explain to me, I'm not a doctor or scientist, what's the difference between an embryo and a benign growth. An Embryo is not a human being, or else we would call it a human being, but we don't, we call it an embryo.
Absolutely. It is logically inconsistent to say humans who are born have rights, and humans that are not born have none.
You should take a poll and ask people when their life began. I bet you will find very few that say 9 months before they where born. Personally I couldn't perceive life untill many years after I was born, so it could be possible that what we refere to as human life, that which seperates us from mutant cell growth, really doesn't happen untill years after birth.
So lets nto go lumping everyone together as Pro-choice or Pro-life. Cancer cells are alive and there for removing them would not be acceptable by some one who was truely "Pro-life."
I don't think it is a matter of one person buy alot of games but of each person buying one specific game. Most launch titles are worthless repetitions of the last generation. It would be great to have a launch library that would meet the desires of more than just the Racer and Shooter fans.
How about this for a compelling argument for accepting abortion.
An embryo is an uncontrollable growth not normally existing inside a human body. Cancer is an uncontrollable growth not normally existing inside a human body. We as humans find it completely acceptable to remove a cancerous growth (or even none cancerous cell growth) from the body. If I have the right to remove a mole I don't like then I have the right to remove an embryo I don't like.
Personally I would not support abortion of my own children to be, but I would of most of the world.
My point was actually far more simple than that. You can't prove that anything is infinite, you can only prove it is beyond your ability to measure(percieve) it.
...do not apply to statistical rules because they are a creation of man
I find it intersting that you are of the beleif that creations of man are some how outside of statistical rules. This will definitely improve my poker play.
Very intersting. Originally I was going to hop into this conversation and state that not only is there a 100% chance (therefor not really chance at all) that other intelligent life has to exist else where and else when, but that by the same theories there must exist an infinite number of cases of Humans existing, different only by space or time. But after a little thought about this then by the same measure, if you beleive in either infinite space or infinite time, then so must all gods exist, or atleast will eventually. If you want to beleive in infinite possibility you have to beleive in all of them and not just the sub set that meets your current belief structure.
I personally don't buy into the infinite space/time theory because somethings will just never happen (like myself voluntarily being ass fucked) no mater how larger the universe is. This is because time and space begin and end at the edge of your perception, and to prove me worng on this would be to change my perception therefor proving me right.
As for ID being taught in schools. Not if I have anything to say about it (which sadly I probably don't). We have an acepted idea of science and currently creationism does not fit that idea.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=139334&thresh
Follow the whole thread from there down, I left some people speachless.
Thanks for making my argument for me, I appriciate it. I was saying in the very begining that if parents spent more time interacting with thier children there would be no need for any specially labeling or governing of content because parents would know what thier kids were doing and be able to stop them if objectionable content came up. If you think you need "better tools" than spending time with your children, then I'll just resort to my comment that you probably shouldn't be a parent.
Don't worry I have a lot more statements that you will consider incendiar, I mean Mandatory Sterilization is a pretty mild comment. So while I'm on a roll allow me to continue.
I had a long retort to your comment but then I realized you obviously think it is ok to neglect your children so there really is now way of explaining the importance or parental guidance and involvment. Yes I beleive a neglected child (which includes one that can play things like GTA with out the parents knowing the content) should be removed from the home and place with someone that can give the child the kind of attention they need. But I am sad to admit that this is probably not possible with the number of children in abusive families or raised by strangers (A.K.A. Nanies).
There is no excuse for neglecting a childs needs. None. Don't even try it, there is no possible way you will convince me it is acceptable to ignore your child. And yes it is true I beleive it is our societies job (AKA The Government) to protect current and future children from abusive (neglect is abuse) parents.
If that doesn't make my position clear then nothing will. Oh and if you or your spouses death will mean a child being neglected or left to fend for themselves without parental supervision, please, PLEASE what ever you do, DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN.
"I think disclosure of contents would be very helpful, without being intrusive."
My point is, how much do the companies have to disclose. Seriously I could claim I am offended by the color Red and the game I bought for my child contains that color but it was not disclosed in the warning. To be fair the GTA:SA warning would have to say. "Contains digital images of interacial, clothed, dry humping." Because seriously some people may be more offended by the interacial part than anything else. Where does it all stop. I guess we could go as far as putting warnings on Coffee that say "Contents may be hot", Oh wait we do.
(once again risking the Troll mod)
"I know several single parents working two jobs, who simply do not have the time to preview everything their children see."
And people wonder why I lobby for Parental Certification and Madatory Sterilization.
This will clear it things up. What I am saying is the government should stay out of how children are raised (with the obvious exception being if the parents are causing actual physical harm or commiting illegal acts, and yes I realize there are laws that govern some moral issues but that's outside this topic). But if a parent up and tries to blam a company for supplying thier children with material the parents consider unfit for thier children then the children should be taken away because the parents are obviouslly not even paying attention to what thier kids do. So what I am saying is that you can raise your kinds how ever you want, but if you make it blatanly obvious that you're an idiot (blaming someone else for allowing your child unfit material) then you should be removed from child raising.
Oh and the rating system should be removed completely and replaced with this warning (which should be placed on ALL products). "This product may contain material that you may find objectionable." Or the more explict "Allowing a child access to this product with out previouslly reviewing the content makes you a fucking idiot, please report for immediate execution"
Growing up i was not allowed to watch certain Cartoons do to the violent content. My Parents never sued anyone when I did watch them.
Actually there is no contridiction. If you read carefully you will relize that in the second once the government steps in then the children are the ward of the state and there for not "raising your children" but instead rasing thier own. If anyone wants to voluntarily give up thier children to the state I beleive they can (but I can't say for sure). The point is, if you want to be a parent then be a parent and don't expect to have children but not have to actually raise them.
"Plus, it is the guardians who are responsible for raising their children. Is it too much to ask for companies to honestly, completely, disclose whether their products contain possibly inappropriate material?"
First of all, Rockstar did disclose that there is "Strong Sexual Content" in GTA:SA. Second, it's not any companies and/or goverments job to decide what is or is not moraly appropriate for someone elses children. Parents should spend a little time reviewing products before pasing them on to thier children. Or better yet, parents should spend time with thier children so when they do get into something inappropriate the parent will see it and stop them when it's happening.
Amazing how a simple, and poorly thought out comment sparks up such controversy.
As many as possible. Use PHP for the front end, Perl for input parsing, Euphoria for the graphics, JavaScript on the client-side, Moo for the database and Python for the glue to hold things togethe
Where in I agree with the commentor statement elsewhere that "there is no killer language" I beleive that the inverse is also true that "All languages are capable of all things." It may not hold 100% true but most languages, those called general purpose languages, are capable of meeting the needs of most programs. If you need to do something truely time sensitive or real-time, then you will have to leave out interpreted or VM based languages. If you are really worried about performance, your just choking your own chain if you are using anything other than assembly. On the other hand, if performance is not the issue and maintance is more important, then use something like Java.
The important thing, in todays market, is to maintain a versatile team. If you are going to use to many languages (basically more than 3 that don't atleast have something in common, and XML/HTML do not count as languages) you are going to either lose versatility, by having specialized developers, or lose expertise by having unfocused developers.
The best bet, IMO, is to chose the one CORE language that is best suited for your company/projects (notice that is pluar not possesive) needs. If you need to use a different language for a specialized purposed make sure it is a very small piece, actually needs to be implmented in a different language and is VERY WELL DOCUMENTED. And remember that using similar languages (Java, C#, JavaScript) is better than using languages that have little in common (Java, C , Assembly, Basic).
On a more personal note, find me a native compiler for JavaScript and you can pretty much throw all other languages right out the window (excluding assembly which could be argued is or is not a language).
I've never gotten upset at a post before but this time I risk the bad karam because the parent poster is a fucking retard.
It's not the job of the government or any corporation to raise your children. Corporations jobs are to make money, and if people will buy violent sexual games then let them. Kids can't just go into any store and buy an M rated video game, regardless of the fact that a store might be willing to sell it to them. See you miss the point that the child has to get the money for the purchase and be taken to the store, or allowed to go there on there own. The point is, some where in this process there SHOULD be parental involvement. If the goverment has to get involved it should be through Child Protective Services by taking the child away from these unfit parents that facilitate the purchasing of unfit material for thier children. (Then euthanize or at least setilize the parents)
All you idiots that think you can have a child and let it raise it self should fucking be shot by children with guns. Why? Because you are the fucking idiots that allow children to get ahold of firearms. And stop blaming your stupid mistakes in raising children on your parents mistakes. Take some responsibility people.
Hmm I guess for some it would be too difficult to move the top left corner where you want it and the resize the bottom right.
I always though RPGs where about character. What happend to Character growth. I mean people have character growth and their "stats" don't have to go up. Heck some of the best human Character growth comes from what could be called a reduction in "stats" like when some one gets hurt (say loses an arm) and continues agains adverse conditions (say continues as a world famous profesional, even if untalented, drummer).
Roleplaying is by defenition, playing a role. This is acting, not "stat" generating, not experience earning, not item finding. It would be nice to have a cRPG that did actually take a players decisions into accoung in building a good story (there are some limited examples of cRPGs that do, dating back to Phantasy Star III, maybe earlier, but the majority do not). In Pen and Paper (or Live Action) there is a benifit for being interesting (trust me I tend to make weak characters that are fun to be around) which has yet to be achived in a cRPG. Oh and asking ever dweeb with a Female avatar to join you in cyber sex is not exactly "being interesting."
When did Physics make a game? I mean I recall a time when games where, well how can I put this, games. When people came up with uique ideas and where not constrained to real world physics. Sad as it may be, it seems that the more powerful the systems become (XBox 360 and ps3 included) the less interesting the games become because they are clones of real world scenarios. My only hope that is that with all this power available the next generation round of games has at least a few gems in it like Katamari Damaci or Disgae, games that, though may use some interesting physics, that don't have to be real world simulations. Or even something as simple as ICO, which does have a real world enviroment, but also steps out of the common mold and avoid the usual hack and slash (or shoot and run).
Oh and Pong is a great skill game where no amount of button mashing will save your ass.
Ok, I already know all the details about the inner workings of the cell and the multi core power (not G5 specifically but the power architecture) chips. My question still remains, has anyone seen a reputable source (sony specifically) state that there will be only one cell in the ps3. The Cell chip was designed to work in clusters, and Sony originally announced that the ps3 would have 4 cell chips (4 cpus each with 8 spes). If it turns out that sony chose to using a single cell in each ps3 then they really dropped the ball on this one. On the other hand if they do plan on using even 2 cells in a single unit then there is no competition between the consoles. With what little I know about the manufacturing process it shouldn't greatly increase the cost of the ps3 to add an additional cell being as it would double to number produced and there fore reduce the cost of each individual chip.
Ok I have read the reviews and seen the slides from the press conference and I don't see anything that says the ps3 has only 1 cell in it. From everything they have said there should be 4 (maybe 3) cells in a single ps3. I may be missing someone so if someone could please point me to a credible source (sony) that states there is only one cell in the ps3 I would appriciate it.
On the other hand if it turns out there are more than one cell in a single ps3 then I don't think the comparisons are even close.
You're looking at it the wrong way. These are not boss fights like anything you have seen before. the bosses are both enemy and enviroment. they are of such large scall that getting around them (and other environmentals) to find their weak points are the puzzels and the rest of the game. this is not some hack and slash game. Like ICO before it you are not so much worried about being killed by the monsters as you are trying to figure them out and how to destroy them. If you look closely at some of the screen shots around you will even see that some of the monsters have railings and walkways and ladders on them. This is just from what little I have seen and read, but so far it seems like a great concept. And of course it will have stunning award winning visuals like ICO before it, so you could easily spend hours just looking around.
Why spend money on scholarships when, instead, we could teach students what they need to know in High School or earlier. Currently in American High Schools (and earlier schools) we teach History, Math, Science and english. This may seem all well and good untill you realize that most of that education is never used by the average worker. We need to start turning out the programers and IT workers, engineers and other technical trades straight from High School, and leave the colleges for the people unable to be productive with out it.
We have made this society that looks so highly upon College graduates that we have schooled ourselves out of skilled labor. We are not short on many import skill jobs, like electrictions, plumbers, and mechanics. And it's not as if we do not need these jobs to be filled. We have even gotten to the point where college is almost more expensive than it is worth. I wish I could find the study that showed that because of the cost of College most college graduates make very little more than a motivated High School grade once they pay for their education. I for one understand this being a Chief Software Engineer even though I spent barely 2 semesters in a community college, and none of that for computer skills. So with my nearly zero education cost I sit next to people that have paid for 4 or more years of education (most even went to private highschools) and somehow I am not only the chief engineer but also the highest paid.
Oh now that you put it that way I can see how being able to watch full motion video, listen to a CD, run numerical simulations, and do 3D-POVRAY shading all at once increases your productivity. Not only can you do the same thing with a multi-thousand dollar machine that you could do with a couple hundred dollars in AV equipment but you can also have fancy 3d graphics going on while you do the one actually productive thing, the numerical simulation. I love when people talk about all the things there computer can do at once even though 99% of the time most of it is just wasting processing power.
Ok so here is a link to a few c64 apps, including 2 that have Full motion video capability.
All that I really get out of your post is, yes there is no more productivity, but it is prettier. Also my new computer which cost over 100 times what it would cost to build a 20 year old computer can do 5 things at once. Hmm why not spend that money on 100 older computers and do 100 things at once?
It's this kind of thinking that has set up an enviroment where my 1ghz+, 512mb computer can't do anything more than my 2mhz, 64kb computer could do in the 80's. Heck a c64 with the right programmers behind it can actually be more productive than modern PCs. Thanks to feature creep the OSes have gotten so bloated that it takes the system a thousand times longer to start up. Yes that's right there was a time when a computer was ready to use when you turned it on.
No program should take 14mbs of storage space, especially a web browser, and most certainly not a minimum of 20megs active memory (that bloats well into the 70s given enough time), which is where the latetest realease of firefox is.
Don't get me wrong I like and use Firefox, but it is become as bloated as any other program. I'm just saying there was a time when even GUI OSes fit on a single floppy disk (true that QNX does that to this day, but that is rare). Lets just stop the bloat now.
I have performed every requirement imposed by the EULA. As far as I am able to determine, the seller has, too.
This is a matter of interpetation. It could bee seen that the seller has not completed the requirements of the EULA in the fact that they have not turned over the account opened using the products key, which can be seen as part of the product itself. Had the seller sold it before activating the account the transfer could have taken place with out issue. The fact that the account can not actually be transfered is also another matter that would probably take lots of legal argument. It is not Blizzards fault that you can not actually complie to the EULA it is the end users fault for assuming they are complying just beacuse they can not transfer the account. That may be ethically wrong but I am not sure about legally.
A book is a one-time-use product?
Ok I don't know about everyone else but I know very few people that have read a book more than once. On the other hand I don't know anyone that has purchased a car and only used it once.
When shopping for new (or used) books... If I like that author, I am very likely to select another book by that author
Good to know that when you aquire a book with out giving money to the author (borowing or buying used) you consider the fact that you liked the authors work. I am sure the author is very happy to continue writing books you like even though they are getting nothing from you.
No, it is not. Copyrights and patents grant the producer specific and limited rights to determine what can and can not be done with their products.
As has been pointed out to me in the past we are not actually discussing copyright or patents in this context, we are discussing usage licensing. I think you, and many others, are foolishly assuming that when you pay for a peice of software that you now own that peice of software, where in reality, according to most EULAs, you don't actually own it but are licensing use of it. You may own the disk and the box but not the actual data, which is still the property of the producer.
Blizzard is attempting now: prevent re-sale of the product. Except, Blizard's own EULA specifically allows it.
Regardless of the fact that the EULA in this case has not been followed in it's entirty, I don't think blizzard is preventing you from buying or selling their products. Obviously Blizzard has not sued anyone for selling a used version of WoW. Blizzard is also not stopping you from putting the disk in your computer and executing the program. The fact that you can not complete the agreement to use the service online has nothing to do with your ability buy or sell the product.
Even with as much as I hate Blizzard I can see why they do not want to waste any time on people who obviously do not want to pay for thier products in a way that they receive the payment. As I have said before, Blizzard should just give the disks out for free and charge for the service, but they don't. You don't like the way they do buiness then don't do buisness with them. Or you could go on a public forum, bitch and complain, and then get upset when not all of the public agrees with your point of view.
I almost agree with this but I think it should be a bit more extream. Considering the fact that a five year old commiting murder will not even be eligable for capital punishment and most like will receive a few years of treatment and no real punshiment at all, your formula is a little to easy on the parents. It should start at 1000% and head down to 0% at age 30. I say age 30 because that is the average age when the current generation of children will move out of their parents homes.
On the more extream side, I think parents should be flogged repeatedly, just to have the right to raise children, that way you get only the truely dedicated (or masochists, not exactly a perfect plan yet).
It is certainly rour right and choice to avoid used merchandise. But it is not your right to prevent other people from doing so.
When exactly did I prevent others from buying used merchandise? If you are refering to the producer of a product when you say we, then you are entirely wrong. It is most certainly the producers right to determine what can and can not be done with their products. Take a look at how most car sellers are pushing leases instead of purchase. Of course they make it out to be in your best interest because of the lower cost of ownership, but trust me when I say they are doing it so that you gain no benifit from resale.
As for your concern about ripping off the artist, do you allow your friends to listen to music you have purchased, or do you insist they go and buy the CD themselves?
Except in cases where I know the arists personally and I have been given explict permision for reproduction I do not copy and distribute works of art. Yes it is true that if someone is in a car with me, or in my home they will be able to hear the music that I play, but if they want to be able to listen to it when they want to and where they want to, they will have to purchase the CD themselves.
Do you rent cars from companies such as Hertz, Enterprise, etc.? Multiple people are using those cars without the manufacturer getting any extra compensation.
I am no expert in the car rental buisness and I have no problem being corrected here, but you statement is entirely false. Car manufactures gain lots of compensation for allowing there vehicles to be rented. For one there is a per use fee that is paid to the producer just as is done with video and game rentals. The manufacture also gains the added benifit that , unlike a book, a car is not a one time use product and the user of the vehicle will hopefully keep the experience in mind when purchasing their next car. Oh and I have only rented cars 3 times in my life, and only when there was no other reasonable alternative.
Other than that I find you arguments to be valid and I have no issue with people buying and selling used items as long as that was the intent of the producer. On the other hand I certainly don't think people should be getting upset when a manufacture decides to wisen up and license their product in a way that does not allow for it's resale after first use. In the case we where discussing here, people should not be mad at Blizzard (who I personally find to be a dispicable company) because they bought a useless box full of useless disks from someone they can not get their money back from. Blizzards EULAs are freely available on the web, and if you can't understand the full potential ramifications of the agreement you might not want to buy the product.
If more people would actually pay money for an original product, the cost of those products would go down. Most products are priced as if they would be used by multiple people over a life time.