As a disclaimer I should state that I'm not a parent... but I intend to be at some point down the line... and while this might be impractical, my goal is to not put limitations on my child as far as "can't play violent games, cant watch porn, can't listen to obscene music etc" mainly because I don't think these things are bad. In some ways I think they're good... a lot of people fear that these games will desensitize people towards violence, etc... and I think that's true, but I don't think desensitization (word?) is a bad thing.
that being said, I'd still have the ability to raise my kid the way I want, I'd just have to be the one to pay for the games... so I'm not totally against this... I just think that if a freedom doesn't need to be infringed on, it shouldn't be... and I don't believe this is a clear and present threat.
To me, stats are very important. They track my progress over time... one game, the one I play the most now, (N) tracks the fastest times for each level on my own machine, and the top 20 speeds for each level and episode (5 levels) which can be downloaded and viewed. If it weren't for the stats and the competition that came from them, I probably would've quit a long time ago.
The interesting thing is that if just a few, say 20, votes were changed on every machine, it'd be enough to make a huge difference, and no one would be the wiser.
First, I am not actually someone who believes that I should strap a bomb to my chest, and blow people up... I just want to make that clear...
However, if I were, you mention that this would be wrong by my "violating other peoples rights by denying them life" I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. You're right! However, Christianity is a religion that has thrived on the blood of the people it's killed. And I'm not talking about the people it killed after the book was written and done (crusades, inquisition) I'm talking about the people it lists as being struck down by those following Gods will. The different civilizations ended, the different families slaughtered (not just soldiers killed in these wars, children were slaughtered, and virgin girls were taken and raped) all condoned by the christian god (that is, if you take the bible is complete fact... if you don't, you don't count as a right wing puritan radicalist, and this conversation isn't attacking you)
Now, its arguable whether or not people are killed today by this country because someone in command believes god wants them dead... and I'm not saying that is the case, but I am saying that a good deal of people are getting the christian morality's pushed on them. Gay marriage, for example. This is a case of christians forcing the morality's specified in their book, on others who do not believe in their ways. This is just as wrong, as radical muslims forcing their morals on christians. I've heard the argument that marriage is a sanctioned union between the two people and god... which is poppycock... if this were true, christianity (or judaism) would have been the first religion with marriages... but this is completely untrue. Marriages have existed in most cultures as far back as history exists (that we have records of)
And because of the forceful application of morals into law by such a large group of people, onto people who disagree with them (and are arguably, not harming anyone, anyone who's bothered by their existance should deal with their own issues) I spit on you, and your groups ignorance, and I wish that you would exit that box you're in, and realize that there is much more to this world than your small little book provides.
I completely agree with you. I don't own a TV, but I do occassionally download TV shows I enjoy. I would even pay to be able to download shows from the actual companies with the commercials, just to have a reliable download. Surely the profits that could be reaped from allowing people to purchase and download shows to their computer would cover any bandwidth problems.
Hypothetically, has anyone considered the possibility that this is someone who is anti-open-source trying to scare other people from pressing forward the open source movement by making companies that make their developments open source... I'm not saying this is definitely the case, but a little bit of caution may be in order...
Sure, some matches up... but it's not like there aren't errors as well...
Matthew claims that the birth of Jesus occurred during the reign of Herod the Great of Judea, a puppet king of the Romans, whom we know died in 4 B.C. Luke also tells us that Jesus' birth happened during Herod's reign. Luke even adds what appears to be detailed and historical evidence of the period. He writes that Jesus was born during a census or registration of the populace ordered by emperor Augustus at the time that Quirinius (Cyrenius) was Roman governor of Syria (Luke 2:1-3). In reality, this has to be a fabrication because Quirinius was not governor of Syria and Judea during Herod's kingship. Direct Roman rule over the province of Judea, where Bethlehem was located, was not established until 6 A.D. In other words, ten years separated the rule of Quirinius from Herod.
Taken from http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmas_lib.htm Granted, it's a site that would be tough to claim is free from bias, however I went with the first link from google that confirmed what I was taught in college, it is a fact that is agreed on by many historians... this alone of course doesn't make the Bible a fantasy story... just not a completely historically accurate story.
Man... I was thinking this was really cool. But now I'll probably have to buy a new book as well =( I think this is just a ploy by "the man" to sell more calc books... bastard.
Oh come on mods, I know that this person is attacking something some people hold near and dear, but it's not as if he lied. There are some security concerns My guess is Ericsson just couldn't find a long term way to battle these problems, and felt it was best to search for something new and better. The parent isn't flaming, the parent is insightful.
No, of course it's not necessary. We as a species have survived without it for 1.3 million years. For that matter, cars aren't necessary, hell, horses aren't necessary. But all of that isn't the point. The point is we have an opportunity to be able to transfer more data, do things better. We could keep doing things the old way, but if that was all we had ever done we'd still be sitting around a fire happy to be eating rabbits. Improvements aren't a bad thing, just because you don't see the immediate gain doesn't mean there wont be one.
True enough, and certainly useful, but DQSD is helpful in that it integrates perfectly with the desktop, and its a windows program... whereas Konqueror is not... althout Mozilla and Maxthon can also do the same thing.
Google's deskbar is great and all but Dave's Quick Search Taskbar is much better. Integrates into the desktop the same way, a default search is google, but comes with tons of other searches. Want to find a page on wikipedia about Steve Martin? Just type "wik Steve Martin"... want to search Sourceforge for Synergy? Just type "sf synergy" it also makes adding new searches incredibly easy, and does math equations without popping up a browser window. Google's Deskbar is great, but certainly not as capable. DQSD is the first program I install on any new computer I'm using.
This reads like a troll to me, but since you don't seem to have been marked a troll recently, if at all, I'll bite...
How many more times are we going to let the courts, Congress, the President, etc. surrender our national sovereignty like this? Don't we pay them to follow and enforce the law, not surrender it to foreign entities?
This event has nothing to do with our sovereignty, not yet have our rights been surrendered. Another country has expressed a dislike of one of our businesses items, that goes against their laws. Businesses have to accept the laws of the country they do business in... if a company centered in Denmark came here and started selling marijuana even if online, through an american domain, they would be circumspect to our laws, and we would all applaud the ripping apart of that country. Yes, I agree that they shouldn't be offended over something like this, and that they should just let the past be the past, but I do not think we should dictate their laws. The idea that we should be allowed to do that is to that country exactly what in your post you aren't willing to take anymore.
Yeah, this'll probably get marked Flamebait for asking such a provoking question.No, you probably wont be marked Flamebait, but maybe you'll be marked overrated for not thinking before you post.
On the phone, they only ask a few questions, but there's typically a way they WANT you to answer them.
Right, I'm not refuting the fact that there are companies that are paid to get the answers they want. However, I wouldn't say that they're all bad. Companies like "The Associated Press" and the "Gallup Organization" the ones with long standing reputations at being accurate, (for the most part) need to get the correct answers, rather than "paid for" answers, or they become worthless. These are companies that exist and are paid for because they can find a true representation of the public (albeit a more and more biased one now due to the more proficient use of cell phones and negativity towards telemarketers.) All I'm saying is that not every polling organization is out to create marketable lies... some survive on marketing the truth, and as soon as they fail to do that, their profits crumble.
This is true, for groups like "Tammage Market Research" but not for all polling organizations. In the time I worked for Gallup, none of our polls that could be shown to anyone paid the person taking it, and typically, had only a couple of qualifier questions (are you 18 years old?) for example. This, I believe, cut down on the bias enough to be something people could trust.
I've gotta disagree with you... there are I believe some organizations that aren't swayed by their fundings... I worked at the Gallup Organization for several years, and we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars every year paying people to make sure our questions were free from bias... yes, there is always the risk of the people delivering the survey having a bias, but, they're typically weeded out before they can make a difference, and they cancel each other out (people delivering opposite biases) Surveys paid for by "Bank of America" to find out who the best bank is are much more likely to be biased than surveys payed for by CNN to find out which bank is the best... sometimes all a particular party has to gain from is presenting the most accurate statistics, and sometimes the most to gain comes from lying... I see nothing wrong with paying close attention to who's paying for the survey, and deciding based on those factors, what they have to gain or lose...
hmmm "The government has been advised that doing nothing isn't really a sensible option any more."
She said the last examination, in 2003, showed the site to be no more dangerous than in the past.
Alright, according to the article the bombs could detonate at any point spontaneously, but the risk hasn't changed from the past,... with something having a continuous risk, no matter how small, the chance of it exploding approaches one over time... it seems like something should have been done immediately... certainly not 60 years later. The only excuse I can think of is the hope that the technology would improve enough to find a safer way to safeguard the town, but surely no one thought this would happen quick enough to be worth the risk... this sounds like a bunch of people not willing to take a risk and just waiting for the next person to take on the responsibility... pah.
... Personally, while I'm going to probably be voting the same way as these hackers come election day, I don't think this is at all the right way to go about things. If you disagree with someone or some groups actions/beliefs etc, the correct way to beat them is through logic, presenting better arguments, getting a higher listing on google... what these people are doing is much closer to censorship. "We disagree with these people so we aren't going to let them speak" It's also a mistake to believe that every person that's going there is going to be convinced. I know that I have in the past gone to a political candidates website and after reading their beliefs found that I don't match up as closely to them as I previously thought... To me this is just a bunch of script kiddies trying to get attention, and going at something with as little thought as they're used to giving to their actions.
There's a station available in Winamp that I believe is called "FragTV" that plays peoples recorded kills to music. I've spent more than a few hours watching it, though I'll admit, there probably aren't a lot of people like me out there that would enjoy this as much as me... but there is surely an audience.
Well, the way this article is written, it's not so much skill that they're focusing on, though it's not really evolution either... it seems more like sociology, and the "evolution" of civilizations... So, evolution works, but not so much the biological aspects of it. Skill (and, to some extent, yes biological evolution, and sometimes drugs =)) is the deciding factor for a single person gaining a gold medal, but this isn't about what specific people are getting the medals, but what amount a country will get.
Slashdot Mirror
As a disclaimer I should state that I'm not a parent... but I intend to be at some point down the line... and while this might be impractical, my goal is to not put limitations on my child as far as "can't play violent games, cant watch porn, can't listen to obscene music etc" mainly because I don't think these things are bad. In some ways I think they're good... a lot of people fear that these games will desensitize people towards violence, etc... and I think that's true, but I don't think desensitization (word?) is a bad thing.
that being said, I'd still have the ability to raise my kid the way I want, I'd just have to be the one to pay for the games... so I'm not totally against this... I just think that if a freedom doesn't need to be infringed on, it shouldn't be... and I don't believe this is a clear and present threat.
To me, stats are very important. They track my progress over time... one game, the one I play the most now, (N) tracks the fastest times for each level on my own machine, and the top 20 speeds for each level and episode (5 levels) which can be downloaded and viewed. If it weren't for the stats and the competition that came from them, I probably would've quit a long time ago.
The interesting thing is that if just a few, say 20, votes were changed on every machine, it'd be enough to make a huge difference, and no one would be the wiser.
First, I am not actually someone who believes that I should strap a bomb to my chest, and blow people up... I just want to make that clear...
However, if I were, you mention that this would be wrong by my "violating other peoples rights by denying them life" I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. You're right! However, Christianity is a religion that has thrived on the blood of the people it's killed. And I'm not talking about the people it killed after the book was written and done (crusades, inquisition) I'm talking about the people it lists as being struck down by those following Gods will. The different civilizations ended, the different families slaughtered (not just soldiers killed in these wars, children were slaughtered, and virgin girls were taken and raped) all condoned by the christian god (that is, if you take the bible is complete fact... if you don't, you don't count as a right wing puritan radicalist, and this conversation isn't attacking you)
Now, its arguable whether or not people are killed today by this country because someone in command believes god wants them dead... and I'm not saying that is the case, but I am saying that a good deal of people are getting the christian morality's pushed on them. Gay marriage, for example. This is a case of christians forcing the morality's specified in their book, on others who do not believe in their ways. This is just as wrong, as radical muslims forcing their morals on christians. I've heard the argument that marriage is a sanctioned union between the two people and god... which is poppycock... if this were true, christianity (or judaism) would have been the first religion with marriages... but this is completely untrue. Marriages have existed in most cultures as far back as history exists (that we have records of)
And because of the forceful application of morals into law by such a large group of people, onto people who disagree with them (and are arguably, not harming anyone, anyone who's bothered by their existance should deal with their own issues) I spit on you, and your groups ignorance, and I wish that you would exit that box you're in, and realize that there is much more to this world than your small little book provides.
I completely agree with you. I don't own a TV, but I do occassionally download TV shows I enjoy. I would even pay to be able to download shows from the actual companies with the commercials, just to have a reliable download. Surely the profits that could be reaped from allowing people to purchase and download shows to their computer would cover any bandwidth problems.
Hypothetically, has anyone considered the possibility that this is someone who is anti-open-source trying to scare other people from pressing forward the open source movement by making companies that make their developments open source... I'm not saying this is definitely the case, but a little bit of caution may be in order...
Sure, some matches up... but it's not like there aren't errors as well...
Matthew claims that the birth of Jesus occurred during the reign of Herod the Great of Judea, a puppet king of the Romans, whom we know died in 4 B.C. Luke also tells us that Jesus' birth happened during Herod's reign. Luke even adds what appears to be detailed and historical evidence of the period. He writes that Jesus was born during a census or registration of the populace ordered by emperor Augustus at the time that Quirinius (Cyrenius) was Roman governor of Syria (Luke 2:1-3). In reality, this has to be a fabrication because Quirinius was not governor of Syria and Judea during Herod's kingship. Direct Roman rule over the province of Judea, where Bethlehem was located, was not established until 6 A.D. In other words, ten years separated the rule of Quirinius from Herod.
Taken from http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmas_lib.htm Granted, it's a site that would be tough to claim is free from bias, however I went with the first link from google that confirmed what I was taught in college, it is a fact that is agreed on by many historians... this alone of course doesn't make the Bible a fantasy story... just not a completely historically accurate story.
Man... I was thinking this was really cool. But now I'll probably have to buy a new book as well =( I think this is just a ploy by "the man" to sell more calc books... bastard.
I don't know how I managed to copy the link wrong... heh... just remove the slashdot part of the link...
Oh come on mods, I know that this person is attacking something some people hold near and dear, but it's not as if he lied. There are some security concerns My guess is Ericsson just couldn't find a long term way to battle these problems, and felt it was best to search for something new and better. The parent isn't flaming, the parent is insightful.
No, of course it's not necessary. We as a species have survived without it for 1.3 million years. For that matter, cars aren't necessary, hell, horses aren't necessary. But all of that isn't the point. The point is we have an opportunity to be able to transfer more data, do things better. We could keep doing things the old way, but if that was all we had ever done we'd still be sitting around a fire happy to be eating rabbits. Improvements aren't a bad thing, just because you don't see the immediate gain doesn't mean there wont be one.
True enough, and certainly useful, but DQSD is helpful in that it integrates perfectly with the desktop, and its a windows program... whereas Konqueror is not... althout Mozilla and Maxthon can also do the same thing.
Google's deskbar is great and all but Dave's Quick Search Taskbar is much better. Integrates into the desktop the same way, a default search is google, but comes with tons of other searches. Want to find a page on wikipedia about Steve Martin? Just type "wik Steve Martin"... want to search Sourceforge for Synergy? Just type "sf synergy" it also makes adding new searches incredibly easy, and does math equations without popping up a browser window. Google's Deskbar is great, but certainly not as capable. DQSD is the first program I install on any new computer I'm using.
Agh... sorry I'm an idiot and completely misread your post. Ignore my last comment, as it was just really really dumb.
Anyone know where I can find this hypothetical domain for... research purposes?
here =D
Forgive me if you were just making a quip based on its "widespread" use, and already knew about it.
This reads like a troll to me, but since you don't seem to have been marked a troll recently, if at all, I'll bite...
How many more times are we going to let the courts, Congress, the President, etc. surrender our national sovereignty like this? Don't we pay them to follow and enforce the law, not surrender it to foreign entities?
This event has nothing to do with our sovereignty, not yet have our rights been surrendered. Another country has expressed a dislike of one of our businesses items, that goes against their laws. Businesses have to accept the laws of the country they do business in... if a company centered in Denmark came here and started selling marijuana even if online, through an american domain, they would be circumspect to our laws, and we would all applaud the ripping apart of that country. Yes, I agree that they shouldn't be offended over something like this, and that they should just let the past be the past, but I do not think we should dictate their laws. The idea that we should be allowed to do that is to that country exactly what in your post you aren't willing to take anymore.
Yeah, this'll probably get marked Flamebait for asking such a provoking question.No, you probably wont be marked Flamebait, but maybe you'll be marked overrated for not thinking before you post.
On the phone, they only ask a few questions, but there's typically a way they WANT you to answer them.
Right, I'm not refuting the fact that there are companies that are paid to get the answers they want. However, I wouldn't say that they're all bad. Companies like "The Associated Press" and the "Gallup Organization" the ones with long standing reputations at being accurate, (for the most part) need to get the correct answers, rather than "paid for" answers, or they become worthless. These are companies that exist and are paid for because they can find a true representation of the public (albeit a more and more biased one now due to the more proficient use of cell phones and negativity towards telemarketers.) All I'm saying is that not every polling organization is out to create marketable lies... some survive on marketing the truth, and as soon as they fail to do that, their profits crumble.
This is true, for groups like "Tammage Market Research" but not for all polling organizations. In the time I worked for Gallup, none of our polls that could be shown to anyone paid the person taking it, and typically, had only a couple of qualifier questions (are you 18 years old?) for example. This, I believe, cut down on the bias enough to be something people could trust.
I've gotta disagree with you... there are I believe some organizations that aren't swayed by their fundings... I worked at the Gallup Organization for several years, and we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars every year paying people to make sure our questions were free from bias... yes, there is always the risk of the people delivering the survey having a bias, but, they're typically weeded out before they can make a difference, and they cancel each other out (people delivering opposite biases) Surveys paid for by "Bank of America" to find out who the best bank is are much more likely to be biased than surveys payed for by CNN to find out which bank is the best... sometimes all a particular party has to gain from is presenting the most accurate statistics, and sometimes the most to gain comes from lying... I see nothing wrong with paying close attention to who's paying for the survey, and deciding based on those factors, what they have to gain or lose...
hmmm "The government has been advised that doing nothing isn't really a sensible option any more."
... with something having a continuous risk, no matter how small, the chance of it exploding approaches one over time... it seems like something should have been done immediately... certainly not 60 years later. The only excuse I can think of is the hope that the technology would improve enough to find a safer way to safeguard the town, but surely no one thought this would happen quick enough to be worth the risk... this sounds like a bunch of people not willing to take a risk and just waiting for the next person to take on the responsibility... pah.
She said the last examination, in 2003, showed the site to be no more dangerous than in the past.
Alright, according to the article the bombs could detonate at any point spontaneously, but the risk hasn't changed from the past,
... Personally, while I'm going to probably be voting the same way as these hackers come election day, I don't think this is at all the right way to go about things. If you disagree with someone or some groups actions/beliefs etc, the correct way to beat them is through logic, presenting better arguments, getting a higher listing on google... what these people are doing is much closer to censorship. "We disagree with these people so we aren't going to let them speak" It's also a mistake to believe that every person that's going there is going to be convinced. I know that I have in the past gone to a political candidates website and after reading their beliefs found that I don't match up as closely to them as I previously thought... To me this is just a bunch of script kiddies trying to get attention, and going at something with as little thought as they're used to giving to their actions.
There's a station available in Winamp that I believe is called "FragTV" that plays peoples recorded kills to music. I've spent more than a few hours watching it, though I'll admit, there probably aren't a lot of people like me out there that would enjoy this as much as me... but there is surely an audience.
Well, the way this article is written, it's not so much skill that they're focusing on, though it's not really evolution either... it seems more like sociology, and the "evolution" of civilizations... So, evolution works, but not so much the biological aspects of it. Skill (and, to some extent, yes biological evolution, and sometimes drugs =)) is the deciding factor for a single person gaining a gold medal, but this isn't about what specific people are getting the medals, but what amount a country will get.
Exactly, and programming is just pushing keys on a keyboard and moving a mouse. Honestly, how hard could it be? =)
I think those are two seperate statements... like Raven Software has licensed the software and an as yet unidentified developer.