I agree with MoneyT. That quote means nothing. Real said they got it to work "without technical glitches". Does this mean they were able to play videos from within Word? Was the system as functional as before without running Real's software? Even if they installed RealPlayer, does that mean that all those third-party applications that depend on the WMP DLLs continued to work? I bet not.
This is asinine. The EU bitches about Media Player being integrated with Windows, so Microsoft removes it. Suddenly vidoes don't play! Shock!
Seeing as this is Slashdot, I'm sure I'll take a karma hit for this but I'm not trying to slam or promote anything.
What's the big deal with IE and Media Player being bundled with Windows? This is a good thing! I'd like anyone who really thinks otherwise to speak up and backup their claim.
I'd like to introduce them to something called integration. I know it might be a foreign concept for some people, but the idea that I have an "out-of-the-box" computer that will handle just about every form of media, and can easily view webpages is nice. The way that HTML viewing is integrated into Windows (XP specifically) is great for writing help files and even applications. I know that unless there's been some odd update to IE, if I create a webpage that uses ActiveX, or make a help file out of HTML and Javascript that my clients can view it immediately and don't need to go download some other programs.
Media player is the same way. Think about it. How else could you integrate video and audio into programs like Word and PowerPoint without providing native support (which is essentially the same thing)? By providing an easily extensible and accessible A/V system, any application in Windows can very quickly have access to a fairly powerful media playing backend.
Also, products like media players and web browsers are for the most part completely free anymore! I can see where they may have been an issue before, when browsers were being sold like other software, but with them freely available, Microsoft doesn't directly profit from people using IE. You can argue that this helps them get people to use ActiveX and therefore helps promote the entire Windows-IE-ActiveX platform, but again, having a mature system for delivering all sorts of content is good.
What would be better? First, you have to admit that Windows is not going anywhere. It's going to be around for a long time. That agreed upon, think about how else you might be able to go about doing this. You have three options really:
1) Microsoft continues to provide their own software, designed specifically to integrate and work fluidly with Windows while continuing to allow users to use other applications at their leisure; or
2) Get Microsoft to come up with a combination package of third-party and open source software to provide a similar set of tools. Ignoring of course the issues with compatibility and the impossible task of choosing which products to go with. Choosing third-party applications to include would bring all sorts of problems to bear, such as claims of favoritism, even more bullying and whatnot. Similar issues apply for open source projects. I suppose you could always install as many as you can, then let the poor end user, be it Joe Sixpack or Grandma May, figure out which of the 12 browsers and 21 media players they should use. Not to mention keeping them all up-to-date and secure. File associations running amok. Conflicting codecs and settings. Essentially eliminating any hope for a simple but powerful integration. I suppose you could also:
3) Install nothing and let the end user (again, an average computer illiterate victim) try to hunt and download all the programs they need to have a fully functional desktop. This option destroys any hope of any integration at all. It also creates issues for developers since they have no idea what software might be installed and will have to try to package everything they can along with their product, pushing all the programs even further apart. Any program that wants to provide the ability to playback media content for example, would either have to include all the needed libraries itself, or direct the user to download some program X and install it. Messy.
All in all folks, options 2 and 3 are a step backwards. It reminds me a little of the old days for hunting for Netscape plug-ins and trying to get them to work and play nice together. Not something I'd like to do again.
I realized that I didn't say anything at all about the issue at hand. Part of this was because I'm not quite sure how I feel about it.
I like the idea of holding website owners responsible for their content, and allowing the customers of an ISP to filter out content they don't want. This is good. I don't mind punishing somebody for not adhering to the law, though I agree a felony might be a bit harsh. I'd think something like making it a misdemeanor, but after 2 or 3 offenses it becomes a felony might be better, but I'm not a lawyer. I guess they're assuming that the harsher the punishment, the fewer people will try to slide by (like a law which demands the death penalty for anyone convicted of spamming, hmmm, maybe not a bad idea?:)
The problem is primarily in the plausibility of such a law (maintaining a list, and conforming to a ratings standard are the big ones I can think of) and if it's determined to be plausible then the execution is another issue.
The rating system is the one I have the biggest problem with, and has been a problem for ages. Who decides what's "bad" and what's not? I know TFA says the AG, but who really thinks that the AG is going to sit down and personally peruse every website? It's going to be a panel like the MPAA uses to rate movies, which could work, but there will be issues raised as have already been mentioned, such as anatomy and medical content; and how "hard" does the material need to be before it's passed into the no-no zone? Webmasters are responsible for rating their websites, so there will need to be very clear-cut rules defining each rating level.
The other big thing that comes to mind is free webspace providers. Are sites that allow small websites or blogging responsible for all their users' content? You might be able to argue that no, they are not, kind of like Slashdot has removed themselves from legal issues by saying that user comments are owned by the poster. However, it could just as easily swing the other way I think.
Blah blah blah... in the end there are tons of questions. I'd love to see a system that works, but I just don't know if that's going to happen. Perhaps given time it will, in which case this bill is a good starting step. The question is, how much will it work, and is that value better than what could be achived simply by more attentive and perhaps responsible parents/guardians?
so who's gonna decide which sites are in the block list and which ones are not? Or is that another mormon oversight?
RTFA: "This blacklist will be drawn up by the state's Attorney General."
I don't support porn sites and their cause
And you're on Slashdot? Riiiiight...:)
Probabition
Interesting word. Too bad it doesn't mean anything. Sorry.
sensored tv
It's called modesty. There's a general agreement between most Americans who haven't been brainwashed by the ACLU that daytime TV shouldn't contain content that would earn a PG-13 or R rating. Besides that, private cable companies can filter what they like and it's up to the consumer to decide what provider they use.
politically correct language
Agreed! While I don't care for Bill Maher's politics, his show was aptly titled and often entertaining. Oh, and my hard drives are now intentionally and unnecessarily labeled MASTER and SLAVE.
controling that kids can and cannot watch
Here I have to disagree however. By "kids" I assume you mean minors under the age of 18 still living with their parents. It is completely the prerogative of the parents what their children watch. Minors have few rights (as should be) and it's up to their guardians to prevent them from participating in activities that they don't agree with. Call it what you like, but it's how it should be.
What happened to learn from your mistakes?
It's called thinking ahead and anticipating events. Odds are most children will be confronted with alcohol and drugs in high school (or earlier!). Parents and responsible members of society anticipate this and try to teach them the dangers of these substances before they "learn from [their] mistakes". Same for violence, guns, whatever. It's tough to learn if you're dead; tough to prevent a teenage pregnancy if you're already pregnant; and tough to return to reality if you're already a hippie.
Hell kids can't even hit each other anymore or they get send to therapy for aggresive behaviour.
While I think an increased awareness for children's activities is good (preventing bullying and real violence) I agree that there is a lot more crap going on like you suggest. The same thing goes for parents who would spank their kids. This is a valid form of punishment that has worked for an awful long time. Spankings and getting my mouth washed out with hand soap (that pink stuff is sick!) made a lot larger impact on me than "time out" and "a stern talking to".
that's what they call it, the church. Not the LDS church. Not the mormon church. the church. The fucking arrogance!
Give me a break. How often in the middle of a story about the Pope do you hear the Catholic church referred to as "the church" or references to "church officials"? I'll save you the effort: the answer is all the time.
It's called abbreviation. The full name is given at the beginning of the topic and usually a few other times. Past that saying "the church" is the same as saying "he/she" instead of a person's proper name.
I'm also a member of the LDS church and appreciate AArnott's comments.
I just want to point out that while I disagree with your political viewpoint, many members of the church do not. There are plenty of democrats, republicans, independants, and who-knows-what-else members. Trust me, if you want to have a heated discussion (haha, yeah) at a family gathering such as a reunion or thanksgiving, just bring up politics.
Calling Utah a "religious dictatorship" is quite ignorant. Sure there is a large number of LDS members there but it really has nothing to do with internal politics. Regarding it's Republican vote last year, consider that ALL the midwest states voted red.
I was just looking over the CDs and found that they actually contain Appendix A in it's entirety. This is pretty cool because you get to hear a lot of names the way they are supposed to be pronounced.
I personally consider Lord of the Rings to be plenty nerdish. I bought these audio CDs a while back and am very happy with them. Rob Inglis, whose British accent fits perfectly with them, does an amazing job of narrating the trilogy.
It's unabridged, and contains every single word from the books (with the exception of the appendices). Consists of 46 CDs and 52 hours of audio. Combine it with The Hobbit and you've got about 64 hours of Tolkien's genius.
Online poker is a big waste of time. Anyone who partakes in online poker should have their head examined for online poker-itis. Unfortunately there are way to many online poker fanatics out there to keep them away from online poker websites. With some luck however, this onslaught of online poker business will eventually die out just like those online poker charities have.
It's too bad really. Think about online poker for a minute. Does anyone take the time to play online poker seriously? The answer of course is online poker! If you consider that online poker accounts for 99% of online poker spam then you'd instantly come to the conclusion that online poker is not something you want your children doing. If anything, online poker needs to be outlawed throughout the world. If online poker was outlawed, then perhaps we wouldn't get so much online poker spam.
I don't mean to rant about online poker nonstop, but while we are on the subject of online poker, it makes sense to consider one more tidbit of fact. Do you have any idea how many online poker websites there are? I would personally wager that there are more than 10. 10 online poker websites! This in and of itself seems to suggest that online poker has detrimental health effects. If online poker were healthy, I think you would find online poker pamphlets at the doctor's office. Have you ever seen an online poker pamphlet? I didn't think so. Pregnancy, drugs, smoking, and sex, but online poker? Never.
Online poker should be listed as an illegal substance along with online poker spam. Anyone found to be "playing" online poker needs to have their entrails removed and sent to an online poker website owner's home.
Online poker. Bigger than Big Tobacco and deadlier than processed cheese. Online poker is like online communism, except that online poker is a game and not a form of government. Hitler and Stalin both swore by online poker and look where they ended up. They are both DEAD! That's all it takes folks, a little online poker and you're screwed.
A long time ago there was no online poker. It was lightsabers
In a related story, Infinium Labs has also made an announcement. With the upcoming rewrite of DNF, they have decided to preform an engineering overhaul of the Phantom to provide unparalleled support of DNF utilizing this new technology.
The announcement brought dissapointment to many suck^H^H^H^Hinvestors who had hoped to see the console this year. It is expected however that we will have a brand new rendering of this amazing console sometime during this fall!
With popups and banner ads! The Internet was raised on these mediums so they must still work. Also, with all those words, think how good AdSense would work!
Toss in a couple "CLICK_YES_TO_USE_THIS_SITE_FOR_FREE_AND_GET_FREE_ WEATHER_ON_YOUR_COMPUTER_WHILE_NAKED_STRIPPERS_DAN CE_ON_YOUR_DESKTOP!" prompts and they would be rolling in the dough!
It seems obvious that magnetic mediums are going to eventually become a thing of the past, especially for removable media. Optical and solid-state memory like Flash are the way it's going to be.
Personally, I think three-dimensional optical media will be the next huge leap in removeable data storage, though these tiny metal wires do remind me of those little rings the Seleeches wore in Battlefield Earth:)
I have a modded xbox sitting beside me right now, modded for a friend, it's not mine. I have played Thief3 on both and have to say that as a long-time gamer, consoles suck for something needing real control. Those game controllers make eating with 10-foot chopsticks seem natural.
First, I agree with the other poster that a well designed game pad (such as the Xbox Controller S) is at least 80% as usefull as a mouse/keyboard combo. It's all about what you are accustomed to; using twin joysticks to control your character gives you as much freedom of movement as a mouse/keyboard. One issue can be fine tuned aiming, however games written for consoles use various techniques to help overcome this small issue. In the end if you really miss you mouse, just pick up one of these. Problem solved.
MS dosen't care if windows sucks. They only care that people don't feel that they have an alternative. I have spoken with several MS folks over the last 15 years and they care about marketshare above everything else that was discussed.
Obviously their biggest concern is market share. If it weren't, they wouldn't be in business any more. A company's first priority should be staying in business, just as a human's first priority should be (and is, instinctively) staying alive. The question is how are you going to go about this. The best way to guarentee longevity is to please your customers and get them to come back; any other way will eventually lead to your demise.
If a person went around their entire life pissing off and trying to bully and intimidate everyone they meet they'll eventually regret it by getting killed or otherwise having their life taken from them (or being put in prison, meaning basically the same thing).
An attempt at some humor. In popular sci-fi whenever species A successfully creates a new and intelligent species B it never seems to work out too well for species A.
This will, if it hasn't already, lead to a genetic weaking of our species. If we have any hope of surviving and improving, we need to start applying changes to our genetics ourselves. Essentially put an artificial selective pressure on our genome.
We can't do this unless we understand how we work. We can't experiement on ourselves very easily for many reasons (actually, mostly because we all value our lives above all else). So the only solution is to experiment on non-humans. By putting a little bit of humans into non-humans, we can better see how those parts of humans work.
Perhaps this step is not nessesay, but it certainly makes sense if one wants to find out how we tick faster than we are finding out now.
Perhaps, and that's a good goal, until we try to actually modify our genome and because of our ignorance we do something to harm ourselves. I suppose you could apply Darwinian logic to this and suggest that if we really screw up our own species then we deserve our fate. Expirimenting on 'chimeras' may be benificial to us in the long run, but it might not be. The issues I have are two big questions: 'How far is too far?' and 'Do the potential rewards justify the likely risks?'
I just think this is something that needs to be looked at subjectively. Suppose the guy does actually give full human brains to mice. Assuming that one's consiousness is tied directly to the flesh the you'd assume these mice would have something at least akin to human consiousness. Strapped down and studied, considered sub-human; that's not something I'd like anyone to experience. We're still worrying about racial issues, let alone rights issues dealing with a completely different species.
Lots of assumptions, but that's the problem with this. We have no idea how far we could go. Is it an empty, disfigured husk or--not to sound too cliched--a 'tortured soul' trapped in that disfigured husk? I think mixing ignorance, science, and this "Meaning of Life stuff" together could have either very good or very bad outcomes and should be something studied carefully and taken slowly.
Honestly though, I don't care what your moral or ethical beliefs are... this is something that needs watching and a good combination of government and private control. Playing God in a petri dish is one thing, but creating a new species and bringing an unknown consiousnous with who knows what kind of mental trama to bear is just plain wrong. I'm no scientific antagonist, but this is one line that should not be crossed.
"One doesn't have to be religious or into animal rights to think this doesn't make sense," he continued. "It's the scientists who want to do this. They've now gone over the edge into the pathological domain."
Indeed.
(And obviously if we did muck around in this too much, homo sapiens would eventually be overthrown as the dominant species of this planet. That would kinda suck.)
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with MoneyT. That quote means nothing. Real said they got it to work "without technical glitches". Does this mean they were able to play videos from within Word? Was the system as functional as before without running Real's software? Even if they installed RealPlayer, does that mean that all those third-party applications that depend on the WMP DLLs continued to work? I bet not.
This is asinine. The EU bitches about Media Player being integrated with Windows, so Microsoft removes it. Suddenly vidoes don't play! Shock!
Seeing as this is Slashdot, I'm sure I'll take a karma hit for this but I'm not trying to slam or promote anything.
What's the big deal with IE and Media Player being bundled with Windows? This is a good thing! I'd like anyone who really thinks otherwise to speak up and backup their claim.
I'd like to introduce them to something called integration. I know it might be a foreign concept for some people, but the idea that I have an "out-of-the-box" computer that will handle just about every form of media, and can easily view webpages is nice. The way that HTML viewing is integrated into Windows (XP specifically) is great for writing help files and even applications. I know that unless there's been some odd update to IE, if I create a webpage that uses ActiveX, or make a help file out of HTML and Javascript that my clients can view it immediately and don't need to go download some other programs.
Media player is the same way. Think about it. How else could you integrate video and audio into programs like Word and PowerPoint without providing native support (which is essentially the same thing)? By providing an easily extensible and accessible A/V system, any application in Windows can very quickly have access to a fairly powerful media playing backend.
Also, products like media players and web browsers are for the most part completely free anymore! I can see where they may have been an issue before, when browsers were being sold like other software, but with them freely available, Microsoft doesn't directly profit from people using IE. You can argue that this helps them get people to use ActiveX and therefore helps promote the entire Windows-IE-ActiveX platform, but again, having a mature system for delivering all sorts of content is good.
What would be better? First, you have to admit that Windows is not going anywhere. It's going to be around for a long time. That agreed upon, think about how else you might be able to go about doing this. You have three options really:
1) Microsoft continues to provide their own software, designed specifically to integrate and work fluidly with Windows while continuing to allow users to use other applications at their leisure; or
2) Get Microsoft to come up with a combination package of third-party and open source software to provide a similar set of tools. Ignoring of course the issues with compatibility and the impossible task of choosing which products to go with. Choosing third-party applications to include would bring all sorts of problems to bear, such as claims of favoritism, even more bullying and whatnot. Similar issues apply for open source projects. I suppose you could always install as many as you can, then let the poor end user, be it Joe Sixpack or Grandma May, figure out which of the 12 browsers and 21 media players they should use. Not to mention keeping them all up-to-date and secure. File associations running amok. Conflicting codecs and settings. Essentially eliminating any hope for a simple but powerful integration. I suppose you could also:
3) Install nothing and let the end user (again, an average computer illiterate victim) try to hunt and download all the programs they need to have a fully functional desktop. This option destroys any hope of any integration at all. It also creates issues for developers since they have no idea what software might be installed and will have to try to package everything they can along with their product, pushing all the programs even further apart. Any program that wants to provide the ability to playback media content for example, would either have to include all the needed libraries itself, or direct the user to download some program X and install it. Messy.
All in all folks, options 2 and 3 are a step backwards. It reminds me a little of the old days for hunting for Netscape plug-ins and trying to get them to work and play nice together. Not something I'd like to do again.
I'm no huge fan of Microsoft, tr
I realized that I didn't say anything at all about the issue at hand. Part of this was because I'm not quite sure how I feel about it.
:)
I like the idea of holding website owners responsible for their content, and allowing the customers of an ISP to filter out content they don't want. This is good. I don't mind punishing somebody for not adhering to the law, though I agree a felony might be a bit harsh. I'd think something like making it a misdemeanor, but after 2 or 3 offenses it becomes a felony might be better, but I'm not a lawyer. I guess they're assuming that the harsher the punishment, the fewer people will try to slide by (like a law which demands the death penalty for anyone convicted of spamming, hmmm, maybe not a bad idea?
The problem is primarily in the plausibility of such a law (maintaining a list, and conforming to a ratings standard are the big ones I can think of) and if it's determined to be plausible then the execution is another issue.
The rating system is the one I have the biggest problem with, and has been a problem for ages. Who decides what's "bad" and what's not? I know TFA says the AG, but who really thinks that the AG is going to sit down and personally peruse every website? It's going to be a panel like the MPAA uses to rate movies, which could work, but there will be issues raised as have already been mentioned, such as anatomy and medical content; and how "hard" does the material need to be before it's passed into the no-no zone? Webmasters are responsible for rating their websites, so there will need to be very clear-cut rules defining each rating level.
The other big thing that comes to mind is free webspace providers. Are sites that allow small websites or blogging responsible for all their users' content? You might be able to argue that no, they are not, kind of like Slashdot has removed themselves from legal issues by saying that user comments are owned by the poster. However, it could just as easily swing the other way I think.
Blah blah blah... in the end there are tons of questions. I'd love to see a system that works, but I just don't know if that's going to happen. Perhaps given time it will, in which case this bill is a good starting step. The question is, how much will it work, and is that value better than what could be achived simply by more attentive and perhaps responsible parents/guardians?
My apologies, I was unclear as to the strict definition of "midwest".
I'll change it to '95% of the Mountain time zone', or 'about -127* to -97* latitude', or '82% of the states west of the Mississippi'.
so who's gonna decide which sites are in the block list and which ones are not? Or is that another mormon oversight?
:)
RTFA: "This blacklist will be drawn up by the state's Attorney General."
I don't support porn sites and their cause
And you're on Slashdot? Riiiiight...
Probabition
Interesting word. Too bad it doesn't mean anything. Sorry.
sensored tv
It's called modesty. There's a general agreement between most Americans who haven't been brainwashed by the ACLU that daytime TV shouldn't contain content that would earn a PG-13 or R rating. Besides that, private cable companies can filter what they like and it's up to the consumer to decide what provider they use.
politically correct language
Agreed! While I don't care for Bill Maher's politics, his show was aptly titled and often entertaining. Oh, and my hard drives are now intentionally and unnecessarily labeled MASTER and SLAVE.
controling that kids can and cannot watch
Here I have to disagree however. By "kids" I assume you mean minors under the age of 18 still living with their parents. It is completely the prerogative of the parents what their children watch. Minors have few rights (as should be) and it's up to their guardians to prevent them from participating in activities that they don't agree with. Call it what you like, but it's how it should be.
What happened to learn from your mistakes?
It's called thinking ahead and anticipating events. Odds are most children will be confronted with alcohol and drugs in high school (or earlier!). Parents and responsible members of society anticipate this and try to teach them the dangers of these substances before they "learn from [their] mistakes". Same for violence, guns, whatever. It's tough to learn if you're dead; tough to prevent a teenage pregnancy if you're already pregnant; and tough to return to reality if you're already a hippie.
Hell kids can't even hit each other anymore or they get send to therapy for aggresive behaviour.
While I think an increased awareness for children's activities is good (preventing bullying and real violence) I agree that there is a lot more crap going on like you suggest. The same thing goes for parents who would spank their kids. This is a valid form of punishment that has worked for an awful long time. Spankings and getting my mouth washed out with hand soap (that pink stuff is sick!) made a lot larger impact on me than "time out" and "a stern talking to".
I say enough is enough!
Yep. I'm done.
that's what they call it, the church. Not the LDS church. Not the mormon church. the church. The fucking arrogance!
Give me a break. How often in the middle of a story about the Pope do you hear the Catholic church referred to as "the church" or references to "church officials"? I'll save you the effort: the answer is all the time.
It's called abbreviation. The full name is given at the beginning of the topic and usually a few other times. Past that saying "the church" is the same as saying "he/she" instead of a person's proper name.
I'm also a member of the LDS church and appreciate AArnott's comments.
I just want to point out that while I disagree with your political viewpoint, many members of the church do not. There are plenty of democrats, republicans, independants, and who-knows-what-else members. Trust me, if you want to have a heated discussion (haha, yeah) at a family gathering such as a reunion or thanksgiving, just bring up politics.
Calling Utah a "religious dictatorship" is quite ignorant. Sure there is a large number of LDS members there but it really has nothing to do with internal politics. Regarding it's Republican vote last year, consider that ALL the midwest states voted red.
[begin thick Australian accent]
Firefox, Australian for beer.
[end accent]
Maybe they were confused?
I usually don't do this, but the parent's link is dead on. It answers a lot of questions that have been flying around and is getting overlooked.
Ha, I lied.
I was just looking over the CDs and found that they actually contain Appendix A in it's entirety. This is pretty cool because you get to hear a lot of names the way they are supposed to be pronounced.
I personally consider Lord of the Rings to be plenty nerdish. I bought these audio CDs a while back and am very happy with them. Rob Inglis, whose British accent fits perfectly with them, does an amazing job of narrating the trilogy.
:)
It's unabridged, and contains every single word from the books (with the exception of the appendices). Consists of 46 CDs and 52 hours of audio. Combine it with The Hobbit and you've got about 64 hours of Tolkien's genius.
No, I don't work for Amazon
Save your soul from those thieving bastards and use this login if you want:
username: slashdot@mailinator.com
password: slashd0t
(not the zero in slashd0t)
Online poker is a big waste of time. Anyone who partakes in online poker should have their head examined for online poker-itis. Unfortunately there are way to many online poker fanatics out there to keep them away from online poker websites. With some luck however, this onslaught of online poker business will eventually die out just like those online poker charities have.
It's too bad really. Think about online poker for a minute. Does anyone take the time to play online poker seriously? The answer of course is online poker! If you consider that online poker accounts for 99% of online poker spam then you'd instantly come to the conclusion that online poker is not something you want your children doing. If anything, online poker needs to be outlawed throughout the world. If online poker was outlawed, then perhaps we wouldn't get so much online poker spam.
I don't mean to rant about online poker nonstop, but while we are on the subject of online poker, it makes sense to consider one more tidbit of fact. Do you have any idea how many online poker websites there are? I would personally wager that there are more than 10. 10 online poker websites! This in and of itself seems to suggest that online poker has detrimental health effects. If online poker were healthy, I think you would find online poker pamphlets at the doctor's office. Have you ever seen an online poker pamphlet? I didn't think so. Pregnancy, drugs, smoking, and sex, but online poker? Never.
Online poker should be listed as an illegal substance along with online poker spam. Anyone found to be "playing" online poker needs to have their entrails removed and sent to an online poker website owner's home.
Online poker. Bigger than Big Tobacco and deadlier than processed cheese. Online poker is like online communism, except that online poker is a game and not a form of government. Hitler and Stalin both swore by online poker and look where they ended up. They are both DEAD! That's all it takes folks, a little online poker and you're screwed.
A long time ago there was no online poker. It was lightsabers
In a related story, Infinium Labs has also made an announcement. With the upcoming rewrite of DNF, they have decided to preform an engineering overhaul of the Phantom to provide unparalleled support of DNF utilizing this new technology.
The announcement brought dissapointment to many suck^H^H^H^Hinvestors who had hoped to see the console this year. It is expected however that we will have a brand new rendering of this amazing console sometime during this fall!
With popups and banner ads! The Internet was raised on these mediums so they must still work. Also, with all those words, think how good AdSense would work!
_ WEATHER_ON_YOUR_COMPUTER_WHILE_NAKED_STRIPPERS_DAN CE_ON_YOUR_DESKTOP!" prompts and they would be rolling in the dough!
Toss in a couple "CLICK_YES_TO_USE_THIS_SITE_FOR_FREE_AND_GET_FREE
Haha! Those would be some small Beetles, just about 2.4" tall :)
It would appear from this site that it is about 5,081 (25,000' / 4.92') new VW beetles stacked on top of each other.
It seems obvious that magnetic mediums are going to eventually become a thing of the past, especially for removable media. Optical and solid-state memory like Flash are the way it's going to be.
:)
Personally, I think three-dimensional optical media will be the next huge leap in removeable data storage, though these tiny metal wires do remind me of those little rings the Seleeches wore in Battlefield Earth
I have a modded xbox sitting beside me right now, modded for a friend, it's not mine. I have played Thief3 on both and have to say that as a long-time gamer, consoles suck for something needing real control. Those game controllers make eating with 10-foot chopsticks seem natural.
First, I agree with the other poster that a well designed game pad (such as the Xbox Controller S) is at least 80% as usefull as a mouse/keyboard combo. It's all about what you are accustomed to; using twin joysticks to control your character gives you as much freedom of movement as a mouse/keyboard. One issue can be fine tuned aiming, however games written for consoles use various techniques to help overcome this small issue. In the end if you really miss you mouse, just pick up one of these. Problem solved.
MS dosen't care if windows sucks. They only care that people don't feel that they have an alternative. I have spoken with several MS folks over the last 15 years and they care about marketshare above everything else that was discussed.
Obviously their biggest concern is market share. If it weren't, they wouldn't be in business any more. A company's first priority should be staying in business, just as a human's first priority should be (and is, instinctively) staying alive. The question is how are you going to go about this. The best way to guarentee longevity is to please your customers and get them to come back; any other way will eventually lead to your demise.
If a person went around their entire life pissing off and trying to bully and intimidate everyone they meet they'll eventually regret it by getting killed or otherwise having their life taken from them (or being put in prison, meaning basically the same thing).
Is it just me or does the icon for this story (and other FPS games) remind you of something else?
"One credit card receipt for a Swedish-made..."
I'm telling you though, baby, it's just an observation based on pictures I've seen. Really!
Would it kill the submitter to explain what SBC, AT&T and MSNBC *mean*?
SBC: Some Bastard Child of
AT&T: A former Totalitarian Telephone company which
MSNBC: May eventually Sire New Bastard Children.
It's all about that circle of life crap. You know, like the way black widow babies eat their mothers. The corporate paradigm in a nutshell!
Yes folks, it's happened again.
Yes folks, it's happened again.
Umm, sorry, but this is not obvious at all.
An attempt at some humor. In popular sci-fi whenever species A successfully creates a new and intelligent species B it never seems to work out too well for species A.
This will, if it hasn't already, lead to a genetic weaking of our species. If we have any hope of surviving and improving, we need to start applying changes to our genetics ourselves. Essentially put an artificial selective pressure on our genome.
We can't do this unless we understand how we work. We can't experiement on ourselves very easily for many reasons (actually, mostly because we all value our lives above all else). So the only solution is to experiment on non-humans. By putting a little bit of humans into non-humans, we can better see how those parts of humans work.
Perhaps this step is not nessesay, but it certainly makes sense if one wants to find out how we tick faster than we are finding out now.
Perhaps, and that's a good goal, until we try to actually modify our genome and because of our ignorance we do something to harm ourselves. I suppose you could apply Darwinian logic to this and suggest that if we really screw up our own species then we deserve our fate. Expirimenting on 'chimeras' may be benificial to us in the long run, but it might not be. The issues I have are two big questions: 'How far is too far?' and 'Do the potential rewards justify the likely risks?'
I just think this is something that needs to be looked at subjectively. Suppose the guy does actually give full human brains to mice. Assuming that one's consiousness is tied directly to the flesh the you'd assume these mice would have something at least akin to human consiousness. Strapped down and studied, considered sub-human; that's not something I'd like anyone to experience. We're still worrying about racial issues, let alone rights issues dealing with a completely different species.
Lots of assumptions, but that's the problem with this. We have no idea how far we could go. Is it an empty, disfigured husk or--not to sound too cliched--a 'tortured soul' trapped in that disfigured husk? I think mixing ignorance, science, and this "Meaning of Life stuff" together could have either very good or very bad outcomes and should be something studied carefully and taken slowly.
Why would it suck?
Well, if it occurs quickly then you'll be dead or enslaved. If it takes longer then your kids will be dead or enslaved.
Either way it kinda sucks--from a certain point of view.
to watch The Island of Dr. Moreau again?
Honestly though, I don't care what your moral or ethical beliefs are... this is something that needs watching and a good combination of government and private control. Playing God in a petri dish is one thing, but creating a new species and bringing an unknown consiousnous with who knows what kind of mental trama to bear is just plain wrong. I'm no scientific antagonist, but this is one line that should not be crossed.
"One doesn't have to be religious or into animal rights to think this doesn't make sense," he continued. "It's the scientists who want to do this. They've now gone over the edge into the pathological domain."
Indeed.
(And obviously if we did muck around in this too much, homo sapiens would eventually be overthrown as the dominant species of this planet. That would kinda suck.)