Re:Personally, I would go one step further.
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 1
Christianity has always spread very well through traditional methods such as word of mouth and the good example set by its adherents.
Don't forget intimidation, torture, murder and intolerance. The Church has used those pretty effectively too!!!!!
Re:Personally, I would go one step further.
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Heh... those needs are primarily, mutually exclusive.
Really???
Inquisition = violence. RULE RULE!!
Salem Witch Trials = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Roman Empire adopting Christianity to expand its control and influence = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Crusades = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Czars establishing and controling the Orthodox Church to place themselves as God's Proxy on Earth = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Dark Ages = violence. RULE RULE!!
Hmm, if games took a realistic look at Christianity throughout history, they may well be even more violent...
Now *that* brings back memories. Ask any baby-boomer where they were when Kennedy was shot and they can tell you. As for me; I can tell you everything that happened the day I finally beat the Scorpitron....
OK, I'm game, please point to too all the succesful rebellions where non-military Americans with guns stopped the federal government from abusing the population. That's right, YOU CAN'T, because it's NEVER frigging happened. Saying the 2nd Amendment protects you from government oppression is retarded.
Hmmmm, I do recall an event between 1775 - 1789 where this did, in fact, happen. And if you read the declaration of independance, you'll see that the American citizen has not only the right, but the responsibility to take up arms against the government as soon as it stops representing the people. The second amendment was made to reinforce that fact. Unfortunately, the federal government has become so big and powerful (like the founders warned against) that any attempt of a citizen militia to overthrow or subvert it is destined to fail.
Uhm, how can it "blur the line" plain means just that, plain.
Uhm, simple. Take the use of drug-sniffing dogs. The supreme court has ruled that use of these dogs w/out a warrant is legal to "smell beyond" what an officer can plainly see.
What if you have glass doors? The cop can see the drugs, but they're behind closed doors. Are you protected?
Again, this is "plain sight". IANAL, so I don't know if this is enough for a cop to knock down your door to arrest you (he *is* in fact witnessing a crime in progress), but it is at least enough probable cause to get a search warrant that will stick. However, as soon as you pull your blinds shut, it becomes a totally different matter.
Think of this analogy. Let's say you're having sex (yes, this is/., so use your imagination) inside your house in front of an unobstructed window that can be clearly viewed from the street. If a neighbor witnesses this, in most states, you're risking an indecency charge. However, as soon as you pull the blinds shut, you are in essence putting up an expectation of privacy. That same neighbor will have to violate your privacy (again, in many states, a crime) in order to see the juicy events that are going on inside.
You're kind of missing the problem here. The "blobs" being admissible in court isn't the issue. Using this technology to establish probable cause for executing a warrant *is*.
Let me clarify this with a "real world" example that I read about a couple of years ago.
"John" was suspected of growing Marijuana in his attic with intent to sell. The police tried to get a warrant to search John's house, but they hadn't established enough probable cause to get a judge to sign the warrant, even with John's house under surveilance(sp?).
The police then used an Infrared camera to look "inside" John's house (without a warrant) to see what he was up to. They saw the heat coming of the growing lights illuminating what appeared to be a small forest of Home Grown. The police return to the Judge with this evidence. The judge signs the warrant, John's house is searched, the weed is found, and John is arrested.
In a pre-trial hearing, John's lawyer challenged the legality of the search, on the grounds that the police effectively "searched behind closed doors" by using the infrared camera without a search warrant.
Unfortunately, I can't remember for the life of me what the judge ruled on this motion, but it is very similar to what we're dealing with here. Essentially, it deals with what is considered 'plain sight' for an officer. It is accepted that an officer can use what he sees in his depth of vision as evidence. If you allow a policeman into your house, and he sees drugs lying in open on the table, you sure as hell will be arrested. But that same officer has no right to start opening drawers in your house looking for drugs. IR and Sonic technology "blur the line" on what is plain sight, and what is an intrusive search.
1) If a kid is somehow communicating with a real sexual predator, wouldn't their behavior in the outside world show that some kind of problem needs to be addressed?
The problem here is that (very often) by the time outward signs surface, the child has already been solicited for sex/molested. Sorry, but that's too late. Every day you hear of children being lured to meet sexual predators they met on a chat room. It isn't until after the fact (and the damage is done) that the police look at the kid's computer and say, "Gee, little Suzy/Billy was chatting with this pedophile for two months before we found him/her floating in the river.
I'm not saying that filters are 100% successful, but coupled with monitoring kids internet access and talking with your kids about online safety, it can be an effective tool in keeping your family safe.
'Longer codes would require a major overhaul of computer systems that would dwarf the challenges and expenses spawned by the Y2K computer dilemma.'
Let's put this into perspective. Y2K affected virtually every computer system built between the 1960's and the mid 80's. Auto manufacturers can hardly make this claim... What systems read VIN numbers outside of the auto manufacturing industry??? Police, State MVD's and insurance companies are the only ones I can think of. Yeah, it's going to be a PITA, but to claim it's going to be an effort on par with Y2K seems a bit ludicrious.
If careless drivers don't obey the 25-MPH speed limit sign, what's the probability that another sign is going to make any difference? Our neighborhood has "children at play" signs and people still drive down my street like bats out of hell.
I think the sign will make a small difference. I, personally have no qualms about doing 80 in a 65 if that matches the flow of traffic (living in Phoenix, this is a fact of life). Even at lower speeds, it's common for most drivers to "bend" the speed limit by 5 mph or so. If I know I'm in a residential neighborhood, and I'm aware that there are kids playing, (school zone, etc) I'm more apt to keep to the letter of the speed limit. More signs certainly not a "catch-all". If a jerk wants to fly through a school zone at 45, a sign isn't going to stop him. But I do believe that it does slow down a percentage of drivers (especially parents).
Considering that the people usually screaming the loudest for government to "protect" their children are usually the dimmest bulb in the marquee sign
You miss the point entirely. This article is good because it puts the power of filtering in the hands of the parent, where it belongs *NOT* the government.
we have a few on our street who demand "GO SLOW! We love our children!" signs from the town instead of teaching their kids not to run into the road
You're obviously not a parent. If you were, you'd never make such a moronic statement. Kids do stupid things. You can teach your child not to run in the road - is that a guarantee that 100% of the time the lesson is going to stick?? Hell no!!!! That's why residential neighborhoods usually cap the speed limit at 25.
I don't see how filtering for linux is going to help. You're not very likely to find linux running in in a trailer park, folks.
Insightful, my ass. This article isn't for Joe Sixpack. It's for Linux users who want a filtering solution. If I'm a Linux user, and I want to apply net filtering for my kids, this is how I do it. Pretty simple logic, huh bubba??
but then again im only 20 years old what do i know
Since I assume you don't have kids, let me answer your question: You don't know shit.
As a parent, I *do* use the rating system to determine what's appropriate, that's the whole reason the ESRB system is there.
Anyone who lets there 10 year old kid play a game they have never even seen before shouldnt have them
Yeah, that's great. I have no problem knowing the contents of each and every game I get for my kid. The probelm is is that he has four grandparents and three great-grandparents (uncles, aunts, etc.) who aren't as tech/game savvy. The ESRB should be a simple-to-use (and ACCURATE) way of discerning the games contents and appropriateness.
Seriously, you dont have the 10min it'll take to watch your kid play the game when you get it for them?
Uhhhh, you mean to tell me there's a way I can preview an entire store's game library before I make a purchase?? Last time I checked, there were demo consoles set up for a limited number of titles.
I think far to meany people are blaming there kids behavior and influences on media,school,tv,games, etc. instead of on the fact that parents spend allmost no time with there children anymore
The reason games are being blamed is because uneducated parents purchase inappropriate titles. The ESRB system is meant to be a way of informing parents of the game's contents. If the game has graphical violence and "prostitution", I would expect to see that on the label (and I *certainly* woudn't expect it to get an "E" rating. As far as your last silly statement, I could spend 23 hours a day with my kid, it's the 1 hour where he goes unsupervised that I need to worry about.
If you don't think that the game is appropriate for your kid, don't buy it.
At the risk of re-stating what has been said numerous times in this thread, the problem isn't with the game itself, but with the ESRB rating of "E". As a parent who grew up with technology, I use these ratings as a benchmark for what my child can play. The rating is the first factor I consider when I decide if the game is "appropriate for my kid". From what I read in the FA, there are numerous things in these games that should have disqualified them from being given an "E" rating.
I personally don't mind my government (US) tracing my whereabouts and my purchases because I don't feel they can use that information against me. Mainly because I do nothing that they would conceive as harmful to them. Some people want to keep everything private because they fear misuse, but I truly believe most people that want to keep everything out of government hands is because they have something to hide. Perhaps I am wrong in calling them the majority, but I don't understand when someone is worried about your government knowing where you are or how to find you.
Since you have nothing to hide, you certainly wouldn't mind the government tapping your phone or net connection without a warrant, would you? Perhaps you checked out a copy of Mein Kampf or The Turner Diaries (or the Koran) from your local library. Are you a student? A history buff? A socialogist? An anarchist? A Nazi? A terrorist in training? Since you have nothing to hide, you won't mind when the feds knock on your door to find out why you would be reading such "controversial" literature, now would you? Have you ever bought a copy of Hustler? Maybe out of boredomm you bought a subscription to a porno site once. You'd better hope that the cute eleven year old girl accross the street from you never winds up missing, because the government already knows who the sex pervert in your neighborhood is. As you are being interrogated by the police for her disappearance, keep repeating this phrase to the nice detectives: "I have nothing to hide".
The reason I don't want the government to know details of where I travel or what I purchase is simple: It's none of their fucking business!!
Sorry, I've never noticed a problem with the startup time on Mozilla running on Win98 SE: AMD Duron 750 mhz, 256mb. I see the "mozilla is slower than IE" argument on/. all the time, but I have yet to experience it.
Ummm, wrong.
The majority of java class libraries, and (significant parts, if not all) of the compiler are written in Java. There is, of course, some C++ for doing really low level stuff, but not the amount that you're implying.
This is simply because there is a certain amount of time that it takes the JVM to start up. Once it's up and running, you should see these numbers converge. Setting up a more accurate test, I leave as an excercise for the reader.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget intimidation, torture, murder and intolerance. The Church has used those pretty effectively too!!!!!
Really???
Inquisition = violence. RULE RULE!!
Salem Witch Trials = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Roman Empire adopting Christianity to expand its control and influence = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Crusades = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Czars establishing and controling the Orthodox Church to place themselves as God's Proxy on Earth = violence. RULE RULE!!
The Dark Ages = violence. RULE RULE!!
Hmm, if games took a realistic look at Christianity throughout history, they may well be even more violent...
Now *that* brings back memories. Ask any baby-boomer where they were when Kennedy was shot and they can tell you. As for me; I can tell you everything that happened the day I finally beat the Scorpitron....
Hmmmm, I do recall an event between 1775 - 1789 where this did, in fact, happen. And if you read the declaration of independance, you'll see that the American citizen has not only the right, but the responsibility to take up arms against the government as soon as it stops representing the people. The second amendment was made to reinforce that fact. Unfortunately, the federal government has become so big and powerful (like the founders warned against) that any attempt of a citizen militia to overthrow or subvert it is destined to fail.
What language is that? :)
Nope, It's verion 5.0 of the "Java 2 Standard Edition.
Uhm, simple. Take the use of drug-sniffing dogs. The supreme court has ruled that use of these dogs w/out a warrant is legal to "smell beyond" what an officer can plainly see.
Again, this is "plain sight". IANAL, so I don't know if this is enough for a cop to knock down your door to arrest you (he *is* in fact witnessing a crime in progress), but it is at least enough probable cause to get a search warrant that will stick. However, as soon as you pull your blinds shut, it becomes a totally different matter.
Think of this analogy. Let's say you're having sex (yes, this is /., so use your imagination) inside your house in front of an unobstructed window that can be clearly viewed from the street. If a neighbor witnesses this, in most states, you're risking an indecency charge. However, as soon as you pull the blinds shut, you are in essence putting up an expectation of privacy. That same neighbor will have to violate your privacy (again, in many states, a crime) in order to see the juicy events that are going on inside.
"John" was suspected of growing Marijuana in his attic with intent to sell. The police tried to get a warrant to search John's house, but they hadn't established enough probable cause to get a judge to sign the warrant, even with John's house under surveilance(sp?).
The police then used an Infrared camera to look "inside" John's house (without a warrant) to see what he was up to. They saw the heat coming of the growing lights illuminating what appeared to be a small forest of Home Grown. The police return to the Judge with this evidence. The judge signs the warrant, John's house is searched, the weed is found, and John is arrested.
In a pre-trial hearing, John's lawyer challenged the legality of the search, on the grounds that the police effectively "searched behind closed doors" by using the infrared camera without a search warrant.
Unfortunately, I can't remember for the life of me what the judge ruled on this motion, but it is very similar to what we're dealing with here. Essentially, it deals with what is considered 'plain sight' for an officer. It is accepted that an officer can use what he sees in his depth of vision as evidence. If you allow a policeman into your house, and he sees drugs lying in open on the table, you sure as hell will be arrested. But that same officer has no right to start opening drawers in your house looking for drugs. IR and Sonic technology "blur the line" on what is plain sight, and what is an intrusive search.
The problem here is that (very often) by the time outward signs surface, the child has already been solicited for sex/molested. Sorry, but that's too late. Every day you hear of children being lured to meet sexual predators they met on a chat room. It isn't until after the fact (and the damage is done) that the police look at the kid's computer and say, "Gee, little Suzy/Billy was chatting with this pedophile for two months before we found him/her floating in the river.
I'm not saying that filters are 100% successful, but coupled with monitoring kids internet access and talking with your kids about online safety, it can be an effective tool in keeping your family safe.
Let's put this into perspective. Y2K affected virtually every computer system built between the 1960's and the mid 80's. Auto manufacturers can hardly make this claim... What systems read VIN numbers outside of the auto manufacturing industry??? Police, State MVD's and insurance companies are the only ones I can think of. Yeah, it's going to be a PITA, but to claim it's going to be an effort on par with Y2K seems a bit ludicrious.
I think the sign will make a small difference. I, personally have no qualms about doing 80 in a 65 if that matches the flow of traffic (living in Phoenix, this is a fact of life). Even at lower speeds, it's common for most drivers to "bend" the speed limit by 5 mph or so. If I know I'm in a residential neighborhood, and I'm aware that there are kids playing, (school zone, etc) I'm more apt to keep to the letter of the speed limit. More signs certainly not a "catch-all". If a jerk wants to fly through a school zone at 45, a sign isn't going to stop him. But I do believe that it does slow down a percentage of drivers (especially parents).
If you'd RTFA, you can customize the filter based on numerous criteria, including text keywords.
You miss the point entirely. This article is good because it puts the power of filtering in the hands of the parent, where it belongs *NOT* the government.
we have a few on our street who demand "GO SLOW! We love our children!" signs from the town instead of teaching their kids not to run into the road
You're obviously not a parent. If you were, you'd never make such a moronic statement. Kids do stupid things. You can teach your child not to run in the road - is that a guarantee that 100% of the time the lesson is going to stick?? Hell no!!!! That's why residential neighborhoods usually cap the speed limit at 25.
I don't see how filtering for linux is going to help. You're not very likely to find linux running in in a trailer park, folks.
Insightful, my ass. This article isn't for Joe Sixpack. It's for Linux users who want a filtering solution. If I'm a Linux user, and I want to apply net filtering for my kids, this is how I do it. Pretty simple logic, huh bubba??
I've seen some boxes where the floppy drive has a physical lock inserted into it preventing its use.
Since I assume you don't have kids, let me answer your question: You don't know shit.
As a parent, I *do* use the rating system to determine what's appropriate, that's the whole reason the ESRB system is there.
Anyone who lets there 10 year old kid play a game they have never even seen before shouldnt have them
Yeah, that's great. I have no problem knowing the contents of each and every game I get for my kid. The probelm is is that he has four grandparents and three great-grandparents (uncles, aunts, etc.) who aren't as tech/game savvy. The ESRB should be a simple-to-use (and ACCURATE) way of discerning the games contents and appropriateness.
Seriously, you dont have the 10min it'll take to watch your kid play the game when you get it for them?
Uhhhh, you mean to tell me there's a way I can preview an entire store's game library before I make a purchase?? Last time I checked, there were demo consoles set up for a limited number of titles.
I think far to meany people are blaming there kids behavior and influences on media,school,tv,games, etc. instead of on the fact that parents spend allmost no time with there children anymore
The reason games are being blamed is because uneducated parents purchase inappropriate titles. The ESRB system is meant to be a way of informing parents of the game's contents. If the game has graphical violence and "prostitution", I would expect to see that on the label (and I *certainly* woudn't expect it to get an "E" rating. As far as your last silly statement, I could spend 23 hours a day with my kid, it's the 1 hour where he goes unsupervised that I need to worry about.
At the risk of re-stating what has been said numerous times in this thread, the problem isn't with the game itself, but with the ESRB rating of "E". As a parent who grew up with technology, I use these ratings as a benchmark for what my child can play. The rating is the first factor I consider when I decide if the game is "appropriate for my kid". From what I read in the FA, there are numerous things in these games that should have disqualified them from being given an "E" rating.
Since you have nothing to hide, you certainly wouldn't mind the government tapping your phone or net connection without a warrant, would you? Perhaps you checked out a copy of Mein Kampf or The Turner Diaries (or the Koran) from your local library. Are you a student? A history buff? A socialogist? An anarchist? A Nazi? A terrorist in training? Since you have nothing to hide, you won't mind when the feds knock on your door to find out why you would be reading such "controversial" literature, now would you? Have you ever bought a copy of Hustler? Maybe out of boredomm you bought a subscription to a porno site once. You'd better hope that the cute eleven year old girl accross the street from you never winds up missing, because the government already knows who the sex pervert in your neighborhood is. As you are being interrogated by the police for her disappearance, keep repeating this phrase to the nice detectives: "I have nothing to hide".
The reason I don't want the government to know details of where I travel or what I purchase is simple: It's none of their fucking business!!
It's worth the karma hit to say this: you are truly a moron.
RTFPDF - The Projectiles will be tied to GPS.
Sorry, I've never noticed a problem with the startup time on Mozilla running on Win98 SE: AMD Duron 750 mhz, 256mb. I see the "mozilla is slower than IE" argument on /. all the time, but I have yet to experience it.
Ummm, wrong. The majority of java class libraries, and (significant parts, if not all) of the compiler are written in Java. There is, of course, some C++ for doing really low level stuff, but not the amount that you're implying.
This is simply because there is a certain amount of time that it takes the JVM to start up. Once it's up and running, you should see these numbers converge. Setting up a more accurate test, I leave as an excercise for the reader.
This reason alone has practically kept me out of the theatre for two years.
Bender: When will you humans realize that all races are equally inferior to Robots?