Maybe American Psycho should be banned from grade school libraries, but not from public ones. While Ellis isn't the best novelist of his kind (I'd personally prefer Chuck Palahniuk or Douglas Coupland), he still gives some good lessons on the state of our society. Ellis's novel gives insight through satire to how people in a superficial society would/do simply ignore the mistakes of those who are "perfect" on a superficial level. At the same time it, like many other Ellis novels, tells of how a such a society would ruin a person's morals and individuality. Of course it is a bit exaggerated, but then again it is satire.
I can't speak Spanish, but I have been told by a person from Brazil that one of the words for "girl" in European Portuguese becomes "bitch" in Brazilian Portuguese. It is most likely that this is the same situation: a matter of the word's usage changing in other regions that speak that language.
Because GTA is not presented as being a simulation of reality. This, on the other hand, is present as just that. Believe it or not, people do fall for such claims. If the Army calls this an accurate representation, then who's to argue with them? Not the many people out there who won't stop to think about it themselves. And even though children can tell the difference between reality and fantasy, when you try to "educate" them by saying this is accurate, they'll believe it. After all, we are told that our government wouldn't lie to us, right? Plenty will just believe what they are told no matter how often the government misinforms them.
Inflated self-confidence on the battlefield will get you killed. It is a bad thing.
Whether you like to think so or not, there is a such thing as strategy on the battlefield. You have to think things over before making your move. The army isn't about simply sending waves and waves of your men at the enemy until they tire out.
This isn't about training; it's about marketing. He was not talking about actual military personnel being trained; he was talking about the kids at home who are playing the game for fun. These people have not decided to go into the military yet, but are already being trained to see it as harmless play, when in truth it is far from that.
If they were making fun of sitcoms for trying to prove a point, wouldn't they have stopped doing so after only a few episodes? After all, a joke is only funny after the first few times you see it, and this one doesn't even have any humor to it.
And look at the episodes as a whole. The apposing side to the "lesson" is ridiculed a lot more than the side for it. At the same time, the opposite side's opinions are never fully fleshed out, making it biased in favor of the "lesson". By the end, after the "lesson" is made, nobody is still apposing it. They try to show their view as been universally correct when in reality it wouldn't have worked that way. It's obvious bias, whether you want to admit it or not.
It tells you nothing about profanity, nudity, or sex. And in this country, parents are more likely to be worried about those elements than violence (sad as that may be).
It is also worth noting the totality of who wants Bush out of office: - Democrats - Green party - Nader supporters - non-party affiliated liberals - Republicans who have lost faith in Bush - Liberitarians - some non-party affiliated conservatives - some moderates
Thus, there's a lot more people who want him out than just Democrats, and not all of them are liberals.
Actually, there are some out there who enjoy watching fighting games. There are several web sites out there which host videos of experts playing them against each other, and I have to admit that it can be quite impressive at times (especially when they can pull off advanced combos).
Every morning, millions of Americans will wake up to turn on their Microsoft EggsBox and Sony PlayBacon before sitting down for breakfast. And for those in Britain, there'll always be the Nintendo SugarCube to help you make tea.
Whether or not he had the right intentions, he still phrased it poorly. He said that the terrorists never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people. He did not, however, say that they think of ways that the country could be harmed, which is what our government is supposed to think about. Instead, he blocked both of us together as having ill intent. Of course, he didn't mean for it to come off that way, but the way he said it was still wrong. Something along the lines of "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and we never stop thinking of ways to stop thier ideas before the can be implemented." would have been more appropriate.
Many "worst movies of all time" lists tend to not include the absolute worst ones ever made. Many obscure poorly done films are overlooked, and instead these lists will only put in the bad films that will be remembered. In fact, we could sum most of these lists up to be really lists of 3 things: 1) most disappointing hyped-up films, 2) most memorable bad films, and 3) worst recent films.
That said, IMDb does an ok job of giving the bad obscure films their due.:)
I was responding to a comment made on my comment, not the modding the parent comment got. Oh, and aren't you brave by posting as an anonymous coward to insult someone?:P
And why is this neccasarily off-topic? They could attempt to use the catalogue entries to filter files on the network. It'd probably be in vain, but it is still possible.
Because they won't give a complete and fair review of copyright laws. Corporation interests will be put before the truth, and this will be nothing more than de-education. Not to mention they are teaching a very complex subject to an age group that doesn't understand legal issues well enough to understand the subject correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't the phrase "Good riddance to bad rubbish"?
Keep in mind that video games are much more popular now than then. It could have just been ahead of its time.
Maybe American Psycho should be banned from grade school libraries, but not from public ones. While Ellis isn't the best novelist of his kind (I'd personally prefer Chuck Palahniuk or Douglas Coupland), he still gives some good lessons on the state of our society. Ellis's novel gives insight through satire to how people in a superficial society would/do simply ignore the mistakes of those who are "perfect" on a superficial level. At the same time it, like many other Ellis novels, tells of how a such a society would ruin a person's morals and individuality. Of course it is a bit exaggerated, but then again it is satire.
Wasn't that in Army of Darkness? I don't remember that in the original film.
It's from Adequacy.org, a Slashdot troll site. Believe nothing they say there.
I can't speak Spanish, but I have been told by a person from Brazil that one of the words for "girl" in European Portuguese becomes "bitch" in Brazilian Portuguese. It is most likely that this is the same situation: a matter of the word's usage changing in other regions that speak that language.
Because GTA is not presented as being a simulation of reality. This, on the other hand, is present as just that. Believe it or not, people do fall for such claims. If the Army calls this an accurate representation, then who's to argue with them? Not the many people out there who won't stop to think about it themselves. And even though children can tell the difference between reality and fantasy, when you try to "educate" them by saying this is accurate, they'll believe it. After all, we are told that our government wouldn't lie to us, right? Plenty will just believe what they are told no matter how often the government misinforms them.
Inflated self-confidence on the battlefield will get you killed. It is a bad thing.
Whether you like to think so or not, there is a such thing as strategy on the battlefield. You have to think things over before making your move. The army isn't about simply sending waves and waves of your men at the enemy until they tire out.
This isn't about training; it's about marketing. He was not talking about actual military personnel being trained; he was talking about the kids at home who are playing the game for fun. These people have not decided to go into the military yet, but are already being trained to see it as harmless play, when in truth it is far from that.
If they were making fun of sitcoms for trying to prove a point, wouldn't they have stopped doing so after only a few episodes? After all, a joke is only funny after the first few times you see it, and this one doesn't even have any humor to it.
And look at the episodes as a whole. The apposing side to the "lesson" is ridiculed a lot more than the side for it. At the same time, the opposite side's opinions are never fully fleshed out, making it biased in favor of the "lesson". By the end, after the "lesson" is made, nobody is still apposing it. They try to show their view as been universally correct when in reality it wouldn't have worked that way. It's obvious bias, whether you want to admit it or not.
Sounds more like something we forgot for a while. We've had those since Super Mario Bros (remember the star song?).
It tells you nothing about profanity, nudity, or sex. And in this country, parents are more likely to be worried about those elements than violence (sad as that may be).
Hands? As in two of them? But how will you carry your boomstick?
It is also worth noting the totality of who wants Bush out of office:
- Democrats
- Green party
- Nader supporters
- non-party affiliated liberals
- Republicans who have lost faith in Bush
- Liberitarians
- some non-party affiliated conservatives
- some moderates
Thus, there's a lot more people who want him out than just Democrats, and not all of them are liberals.
And you just showed that you don't have either yourself. Way to go generalize an entire group of people based on a small segment.
Actually, there are some out there who enjoy watching fighting games. There are several web sites out there which host videos of experts playing them against each other, and I have to admit that it can be quite impressive at times (especially when they can pull off advanced combos).
Every morning, millions of Americans will wake up to turn on their Microsoft EggsBox and Sony PlayBacon before sitting down for breakfast. And for those in Britain, there'll always be the Nintendo SugarCube to help you make tea.
Whether or not he had the right intentions, he still phrased it poorly. He said that the terrorists never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people. He did not, however, say that they think of ways that the country could be harmed, which is what our government is supposed to think about. Instead, he blocked both of us together as having ill intent. Of course, he didn't mean for it to come off that way, but the way he said it was still wrong. Something along the lines of "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and we never stop thinking of ways to stop thier ideas before the can be implemented." would have been more appropriate.
Mike Myers was once planning to make a movie of Sprockets, but it seems to have been canned.
Many "worst movies of all time" lists tend to not include the absolute worst ones ever made. Many obscure poorly done films are overlooked, and instead these lists will only put in the bad films that will be remembered. In fact, we could sum most of these lists up to be really lists of 3 things: 1) most disappointing hyped-up films, 2) most memorable bad films, and 3) worst recent films.
:)
That said, IMDb does an ok job of giving the bad obscure films their due.
Dubya put it best:
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
I was responding to a comment made on my comment, not the modding the parent comment got. Oh, and aren't you brave by posting as an anonymous coward to insult someone? :P
And why is this neccasarily off-topic? They could attempt to use the catalogue entries to filter files on the network. It'd probably be in vain, but it is still possible.
Even if they catalogue everything, they could still have the same problem that viagra spam filters have.
Because they won't give a complete and fair review of copyright laws. Corporation interests will be put before the truth, and this will be nothing more than de-education. Not to mention they are teaching a very complex subject to an age group that doesn't understand legal issues well enough to understand the subject correctly.