It is censorship when a person tries to stop another from saying or doing something. It doesn't necessarily have to do with the gov't or with law. The leader of a community can censor its members.
I have to disagree with you when you said digg doesn't answer to its users. When a site is user driven such as it is to the point that we call it a community based site, there is an extent to where digg MUST answer to its users, but of course within reason. Should digg fail to do so, which I don't totally feel that they have (thought they did drop a very large ball), the community is neglected and there would be a lack of genuine participation.
Where do YOU buy games where they let you return opened boxes with cd keys.
Not to mention the fact that any retailer would look at the "violently opened box" and be like...gee maybe the game doesnt work because you treat the things you own like crap.
And why would the shop resell a disc that someone claims to be defective...
"Human error, including 'computer rage', seems to be a growing problem" -Adrian Palmer, Ontrack Data Recovery
OMFG I HATE THIS FUCKING COMPUTER. IM GOING TO THROW IT OUT THE FUCKING WINDOW!!! All these ads keep popping up. I didn't install them, ive been hacked!
I personally believe that it is better to expose kids to the world and teach them why things is wrong. Shielding someone from something only creates ignorance.
This is the way I was raised, I was able to watch what I wanted and play what I wanted. My mother made sure however, that I knew the difference between video and real life. She's also extremely non violent (she personally can not stand violent movies), she has passed on these views to me. As a result, I play a range of violent games, and watch violent movies yet I am a non violent person.
I believe shielding from reality to be a conservative view (as opposed to the liberal value of teaching). Walking into a religious or conservative home, often I find that the children are not allowed to watch R movies or violent games. From experience, I find that conservatives would rather stop someone from doing something through ignorance rather than to show them and show them why they shouldn't.
I think the game rating should be used as a parental tool, but should not be enforced.
But i also think that parents should always be teaching showing their children right from wrong. Its when this doesn't happen, the parents aren't there to guide them enough, that the enforced ratings become necessary.
The government should not have to be parents to our children, however the lack of parenting in society is forcing it to.
None of what i have said is universally true. These are my findings. Dont get mad because your a good parent and your son is a psycho. There are exceptions to everything.
Or you could just install a slipstreamed sp2 copy..
That would be the smarter way to go about it. But of course the linux zealots won't take the time to point out how easy it is to do that, because...well that would make MS look positive. No, can't do that.
Slashdot Mirror
It is censorship when a person tries to stop another from saying or doing something.
It doesn't necessarily have to do with the gov't or with law.
The leader of a community can censor its members.
I have to disagree with you when you said digg doesn't answer to its users.
When a site is user driven such as it is to the point that we call it a community based site, there is an extent to where digg MUST answer to its users, but of course within reason. Should digg fail to do so, which I don't totally feel that they have (thought they did drop a very large ball), the community is neglected and there would be a lack of genuine participation.
Where do YOU buy games where they let you return opened boxes with cd keys. Not to mention the fact that any retailer would look at the "violently opened box" and be like...gee maybe the game doesnt work because you treat the things you own like crap. And why would the shop resell a disc that someone claims to be defective...
First, this isn't exactly new. Not in Ontario.
I personally believe that it is better to expose kids to the world and teach them why things is wrong. Shielding someone from something only creates ignorance.
This is the way I was raised, I was able to watch what I wanted and play what I wanted. My mother made sure however, that I knew the difference between video and real life. She's also extremely non violent (she personally can not stand violent movies), she has passed on these views to me. As a result, I play a range of violent games, and watch violent movies yet I am a non violent person.
I believe shielding from reality to be a conservative view (as opposed to the liberal value of teaching). Walking into a religious or conservative home, often I find that the children are not allowed to watch R movies or violent games. From experience, I find that conservatives would rather stop someone from doing something through ignorance rather than to show them and show them why they shouldn't.
I think the game rating should be used as a parental tool, but should not be enforced. But i also think that parents should always be teaching showing their children right from wrong. Its when this doesn't happen, the parents aren't there to guide them enough, that the enforced ratings become necessary.
The government should not have to be parents to our children, however the lack of parenting in society is forcing it to.
None of what i have said is universally true. These are my findings. Dont get mad because your a good parent and your son is a psycho. There are exceptions to everything.
Where did you get Sweden from? According to my understanding, the request is from Switzerland.
Or you could just install a slipstreamed sp2 copy.. That would be the smarter way to go about it. But of course the linux zealots won't take the time to point out how easy it is to do that, because...well that would make MS look positive. No, can't do that.
It didnt work just fine though. He was unable to access his account for several days. RTFA?