Yes, but ask any marketing exec. What specific factors cause these trends, and she'll tell you she'd give her right arm to know. Causality of basic human bahaviors, especially on a societal scale is the Holy Grail of modern marketing and psycology. And it hasn't been found yet, with all of the billions of dollars spent in researching it.
No. The question is: Did your extremely thorough, and well planned psychologically effective training in the military desensitise you to violence enough to lower your self control and cause you to commit violent acts in normal social settings?
If not, then why are you willing to ascribe the lack of self control and tendency for violence in children who have not undergone nearly as psycologically intense and focused training on their gaming?
If your training and deliberate desensitisation isn't causing you, or your collegues, to be more violent in social situations where it is not called for, then why would densensitisation affect adolescents that way? Or are you admitting that your training has caused you to be more violent in normal societal situations? If you ascribe the knee-jerk response, of, "Well they aren't being taught resposibility to go along with it," then you are saying exactly what the pro-game side is saying. That it isn't that the games cause adolescents to commit violence, it is the lack of social training and proper upbringing that causes it.
It's not like learning passable english is hard. I should know, I did it by the time I was 12.
You and 100 million american elementary school students. But unlike them, you are probably closer to fluent in the language, as you actually wanted to learn it.
Can't stand US born and raised teens at the checkout line that can't understand or respond to a simple question.
Don't worry about it. I think most of us are as lazy as I am, and didn't even RTF "N". My eyes see RT.... and automatically interpret RTFA or RTFM as appropriate for the context.
Capitalism, like freedom and democracy, is inherently unstable. As Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must occassionally be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants." We all wish that everyone would recognize and support the best system for all, but unfortunately, the best system for all, inherently allows the unscroupulous to take advantage at the expense of others.
For the type of society that I think most of us here on/. would want, we must constantly battle the forces of oppression, becuase the very freedoms and responsibilities that we treasure, harbor the seeds of destruction for those same freedoms. If we control too tightly, then we lose the things we are protecting. If we relax our vigilance then those things will be taken from us.
While you may be right that this is a sign of the end of Capitalism as we know it, your condemnation of Capitalism is way off base. Patents, copyrights, etc. are the antithesis of "free market".
The corporations are trying their best to get the governments to kill free markets and support legalized, goverment enforced monopolies.
Corporations use and abuse the "free market" to steal ideas, undercut competition, and protect their markets under a free market system until they become dominant, then they try to use their influence to destroy that same free market, so that some young upstart doesn't come in and do the same thing to them. In an idealized system the most efficient company will gain market share, while less efficient ones lose. The nature of corporations and bureaucracy generally means that once an entity gets too large in its market, a smaller competitor, that can meet changing requirements more quickly, can out manouver it.
A distinct parallel could be made to a democracy where a government is elected by a strong majority, and then, with all the power a strong majority implies, moves to change the rules so that opponents to that government cannot be elected, or even remove elections all together. This is what seems to have happened in the EU, but also just look at the U.S. system and how difficult and unlikely it is for a challenger to unseat an incumbent.
Except that:
1) The beam of light the lighthouses currently, and for centuries, send out have the same limitations that you are complaining about for the DGPS signal.
2) The "next big hotel" is most probably located along that nice sandy gently sloping beach, not at the edge of the very dangerous and sharp rocks.
3) In a storm getting a lock on a WAAS, EGNOS, or even standard GPS satellite can be a real problem. It would be much easier to get a lock on a DGPS signal from a terrestrial based location, such as a *gasp* lighthouse.
And as the GP pointed out, the fact that it is not available miles at sea is irrelevant. If you're in a storm, no GPS lock, and not sure how far, or in what direction, you've been blown, then having your map suddenly light up with an accurate position 5 miles from the rocks, is much nicer than hearing the sound of them tearing through your hull. Almost as nice as *gasp* suddenly having the beam of a lighthouse shine through the night and the fog.
Actually, he dug a hole in the floor of his room so his (hypothetical) kids will have someplace to live after he meets that hot supermodel who is dying to have his babies.
Except for the obvious difference that the people who receive welfare have not paid a bloody dime into the system. It is those of us who pay income tax that provide the benefits to welfare recipients, on the basis that it is better for all of us to be forced to support them, than for us to see them starving beside the street.
On the other hand, Social Security is sold to the people as a system where they pay money in over their working career so that they can then have it back after they retire. (The fact that the system doesn't actually work that way seems to be irrelevant to the masses of SS devotees.) What SS should have been, assuming you agree that people are in general too stupid to save money on their own for retirement, is mandatory personal retirement savings accounts. Determine the average length of time people will live, subtract the average length of time they can usefully work, determine the average monthly income needed after retirement, figure out a reasonable rate of return on funds deposited, and do the math to determine how much they need to be forced to save to provide for themselves.
Social Security was never supposed to be, and should never be thought of as, a welfare program. If you agree that it is a necessary program at all, then it should just be a mandatory retirement account. Every penny of which you put in, is then yours to take back out when the time comes.
The speeds are all artificially throttled. My work has a 100Mb VLAN running over exactly the same cable plant that my home Comcast account only gets unbalanced 3Mb on. Of course they pay more, but I'm sure the only difference on the cable companies end is a config setting on a central router, and a setting on the modem.
It's reviews like this one on/. that I bookmark to bring up whenever my boss asks why the server logs show me spending so much time on/. Of course, the other excuse is that I loaded it and left it in the background while doing other work...
Re:yep. That's why I say "hang some politicians no
on
In the Year 2020
·
· Score: 1
The only problem is that the politicians are all trial lawyers, and they appoint the judges... Professional courtesy will keep justice at bay.
Re:Internal conflict is what I worry about...
on
In the Year 2020
·
· Score: 1
I agree with you. This is the inevitable byproduct of the Oprah generation and talk radio. Jerry Springer, Oprah, et al, and all the talk radio shows of all bias' make each individual feel that they have something to say that is worthwhile. They give people with poorly thought out ideas, no sense of logic, and severe provincialism the idea that they have something important to say and a right to have it listened to.
I now leave you to ponder the irony (used in it's proper definition) of my above rant in a forum such as/.
Exactly. That's part of why this is so scary. It has nothing to do with gathering evidence that can be admitted in court, only a trail of leads. Actually, even the postulated device that transmitted the location in real time would be worthless in court. Unless you can prove that the person was the one driving... which... amazingly enough, would require an actual cop to be tailing the car to see who was in it. Which removes the need for the device in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but ask any marketing exec. What specific factors cause these trends, and she'll tell you she'd give her right arm to know. Causality of basic human bahaviors, especially on a societal scale is the Holy Grail of modern marketing and psycology. And it hasn't been found yet, with all of the billions of dollars spent in researching it.
No. The question is: Did your extremely thorough, and well planned psychologically effective training in the military desensitise you to violence enough to lower your self control and cause you to commit violent acts in normal social settings?
If not, then why are you willing to ascribe the lack of self control and tendency for violence in children who have not undergone nearly as psycologically intense and focused training on their gaming?
If your training and deliberate desensitisation isn't causing you, or your collegues, to be more violent in social situations where it is not called for, then why would densensitisation affect adolescents that way? Or are you admitting that your training has caused you to be more violent in normal societal situations? If you ascribe the knee-jerk response, of, "Well they aren't being taught resposibility to go along with it," then you are saying exactly what the pro-game side is saying. That it isn't that the games cause adolescents to commit violence, it is the lack of social training and proper upbringing that causes it.
You and 100 million american elementary school students. But unlike them, you are probably closer to fluent in the language, as you actually wanted to learn it.
Can't stand US born and raised teens at the checkout line that can't understand or respond to a simple question.
Short answer...
Get rid of it. Pop-ups are evil.
And here I thought
I must be new here.
Don't worry about it. I think most of us are as lazy as I am, and didn't even RTF "N". My eyes see RT.... and automatically interpret RTFA or RTFM as appropriate for the context.
Capitalism, like freedom and democracy, is inherently unstable. As Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must occassionally be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants." We all wish that everyone would recognize and support the best system for all, but unfortunately, the best system for all, inherently allows the unscroupulous to take advantage at the expense of others.
For the type of society that I think most of us here on
While you may be right that this is a sign of the end of Capitalism as we know it, your condemnation of Capitalism is way off base. Patents, copyrights, etc. are the antithesis of "free market".
The corporations are trying their best to get the governments to kill free markets and support legalized, goverment enforced monopolies.
Corporations use and abuse the "free market" to steal ideas, undercut competition, and protect their markets under a free market system until they become dominant, then they try to use their influence to destroy that same free market, so that some young upstart doesn't come in and do the same thing to them. In an idealized system the most efficient company will gain market share, while less efficient ones lose. The nature of corporations and bureaucracy generally means that once an entity gets too large in its market, a smaller competitor, that can meet changing requirements more quickly, can out manouver it.
A distinct parallel could be made to a democracy where a government is elected by a strong majority, and then, with all the power a strong majority implies, moves to change the rules so that opponents to that government cannot be elected, or even remove elections all together. This is what seems to have happened in the EU, but also just look at the U.S. system and how difficult and unlikely it is for a challenger to unseat an incumbent.
Except that:
1) The beam of light the lighthouses currently, and for centuries, send out have the same limitations that you are complaining about for the DGPS signal.
2) The "next big hotel" is most probably located along that nice sandy gently sloping beach, not at the edge of the very dangerous and sharp rocks.
3) In a storm getting a lock on a WAAS, EGNOS, or even standard GPS satellite can be a real problem. It would be much easier to get a lock on a DGPS signal from a terrestrial based location, such as a *gasp* lighthouse.
And as the GP pointed out, the fact that it is not available miles at sea is irrelevant. If you're in a storm, no GPS lock, and not sure how far, or in what direction, you've been blown, then having your map suddenly light up with an accurate position 5 miles from the rocks, is much nicer than hearing the sound of them tearing through your hull. Almost as nice as *gasp* suddenly having the beam of a lighthouse shine through the night and the fog.
Actually, he dug a hole in the floor of his room so his (hypothetical) kids will have someplace to live after he meets that hot supermodel who is dying to have his babies.
And so was the race of Morlock born...
Nah... he specializes in forgiveness. There's no place for that kind in today's FBI.
Or your cloned twin sisters... now that's hot!
hmmm.... so just how many kittens would god have to kill for that one?
Wow...
I didn't know Mick Jagger had a 5-digit ID on slashdot, or that he was a l33t Python programmer.
4 of the 5 major TV channels still show Get Smart re-runs...
Well, if I ever needed a reason to not move to the netherlands...
Then again, you guys have legal prostitution and drugs over there don't you? With that I would guess there not a lot of reason to be watching T.V.
Both my daughter (17 now) and my son (12 now) had girls get pregnant in 6th grade. (average age 11-13 for 6th grade)
Everyone benefits until the birthrate falls, then the largest generation gets screwed.
Yeah, and as long as we can end the auction before the next gyro goes out, we can even provide free delivery with a controlled de-orbit...
Back in college my roommate dated a girl who was attending a neighboring college. When she dumped him, he went out and had a t-shirt made...
My ex is a
Coed at the
University of
North
Texas
Except for the obvious difference that the people who receive welfare have not paid a bloody dime into the system. It is those of us who pay income tax that provide the benefits to welfare recipients, on the basis that it is better for all of us to be forced to support them, than for us to see them starving beside the street.
On the other hand, Social Security is sold to the people as a system where they pay money in over their working career so that they can then have it back after they retire. (The fact that the system doesn't actually work that way seems to be irrelevant to the masses of SS devotees.) What SS should have been, assuming you agree that people are in general too stupid to save money on their own for retirement, is mandatory personal retirement savings accounts. Determine the average length of time people will live, subtract the average length of time they can usefully work, determine the average monthly income needed after retirement, figure out a reasonable rate of return on funds deposited, and do the math to determine how much they need to be forced to save to provide for themselves.
Social Security was never supposed to be, and should never be thought of as, a welfare program. If you agree that it is a necessary program at all, then it should just be a mandatory retirement account. Every penny of which you put in, is then yours to take back out when the time comes.
The speeds are all artificially throttled. My work has a 100Mb VLAN running over exactly the same cable plant that my home Comcast account only gets unbalanced 3Mb on. Of course they pay more, but I'm sure the only difference on the cable companies end is a config setting on a central router, and a setting on the modem.
You have a suspiciously low ID for someone who is obviously so new here...
It's reviews like this one on
The only problem is that the politicians are all trial lawyers, and they appoint the judges... Professional courtesy will keep justice at bay.
I agree with you. This is the inevitable byproduct of the Oprah generation and talk radio. Jerry Springer, Oprah, et al, and all the talk radio shows of all bias' make each individual feel that they have something to say that is worthwhile. They give people with poorly thought out ideas, no sense of logic, and severe provincialism the idea that they have something important to say and a right to have it listened to.
I now leave you to ponder the irony (used in it's proper definition) of my above rant in a forum such as
Exactly. That's part of why this is so scary. It has nothing to do with gathering evidence that can be admitted in court, only a trail of leads. Actually, even the postulated device that transmitted the location in real time would be worthless in court. Unless you can prove that the person was the one driving... which... amazingly enough, would require an actual cop to be tailing the car to see who was in it. Which removes the need for the device in the first place.