Seriously? South Korea failed twice IN A ROW? Straight? I can't believe it! I mean, what are the odds of two things going wrong RIGHT AFTER eachother?
Erm, editorializing much?
ED was not supposed to be a full length movie...it was supposed to be a short. The story was decided for the main reason that it wouldn't be immediately stale after seeing it once...it had a bit of replay value. Most assuredly ED was designed in an attempt to showcase the power of Blender, but I think that it stands on its own within the genre of weird short films. Also, from what I have seen about this announcement, the next project will be similar in scope...and should probably be enjoyed for what it is, not what people wish it to be.
Without getting too in depth with this, I want to say a few things.
First, it is not an arms race most of the time. A robber is generally in it for one of three reasons: money, thrill, or insanity. The chance of being shot tends to deter the first two. The third is dangerous no matter how you cut it.
Further, a robber is already breaking the law. Possessing a gun is quite possibly just one more thing to add on to the list of legality issues they have.
As far as the gun crime rate vs the USA, I haven't done a direct comparison in a few years, but a quick google search will (assuming it remains true, which I believe it does) yield that while the UK saw a drop in gun crime, they saw a massive influx of violent crimes. The exact opposite correlation (removal of gun control leading to lower violent crimes) can be seen in several places in the US. I submit that crime (and the effects thereof) are much more complicated than can be maintained by a single variable: i.e. the inclusion/removal of guns.
I have argued gun rights against many people for many years. What it comes down to generally is experience: people who have handled guns, fired guns, and even treated bullet wounds (several of my extended family members are in the medical professions) understand the trade off: perceived safety for direct control of a situation. If I ever have to defend myself with a firearm, at least I will have control of my situation. Giving up that control in the hopes that the government will protect you (especially in the US/UK where the government is proving to be pretty much useless on that front) is generally something that most people I know are not willing to do. Have someone else ask that of us is worrisome to say the least.
I don't expect to change a slashdotters (or anyone else's) mind on this topic directly. I can only ask that you do some solid pro-gun reading (try and avoid the idiot rednecks, I know it can be hard since they are the most vocal) and attempt to fire a firearm at some point. I think your perception will shift a bit.
I hope that this (and my previous) post have given you a deeper understanding of the pro-gun perspective, and I hope I have done that perspective justice. It is a right that is simply too important to lose by misunderstandings and lack of experience.
I own guns. I routinely (if not as often as I would like) fire guns. I have taken the California mandated Hunters Safety course. I have killed animals and consumed them, both of which have been in a much more "humane" manner than something you would get at your local burger/chicken joint. I have been in the presence of more guns than you have apparently seen in your life, and I have never once seen gun violence against a human being nor heard of any person whom I had personally met be injured by guns.
I have, on the other hand, heard firsthand stories of three major incidents of ATV injuries, both intentional and unintentional. I realize this has minimal amounts to do with crime, but that was in the last year alone and should give you a point of reference. Your "I haven't seen it so it must not be there" statement scares me because you believe it to be true. When it does become a problem, when someone breaks into your home, what will you do? I will be trained, armed, and ready. Let us hope that that day never comes for either of us, but given the state of the world from the first tribe vs. tribe dispute until present day, it is in fact simply hope. I am not trying to tug at heartstrings, I am trying to give you my perspective. There is a rather nice post at the top of this article that describes the actual numbers in quite a bit of detail.
Parent hits the heart of the topic exactly. Of course in all actuality if guns are outlawed all civilians who will be willing to use them will have them already, but that is neither here nor there.
so I was driving down the road one day after dark and I ended up getting stuck next to three big rings who were all doing between 65 and 70 in the slow lane of a two lane highway. So as I am slowly passing them at just over 70 this person starts tailgating me. So I tap my brakes, trying to get them to back off. No luck. Finally I pass this train of big rigs and get over, and this guy goes flying by at like 75. So I slam my hand, one finger up, against the window.
The next day I walk into my math class and my math professor says: "Hey, were you the one who flipped me off last night?"
I stand there stunned for a minute, figure out what the hell he is talking about, and then I respond "Oh, were you the asshole tailgating me?"
While I agree with you, I would like to point out that (high amounts) discipline is not always a good thing. Discipline requires structure, and often times structure ruins creativity. Many of the teachers and students I have met in college whom I believe you are referring to can ace a test with simple determination and discipline, but if I ask them about anything outside of their very narrow field, they just go blank. Even if I discuss it with them for a significant amount of time, they just can't contribute unless it is something you would read in a textbook. Reminds me of Good Will Hunting.
I would say it would take a lot of discipline in American schools to go that far in the other direction, though.
The basic premise of the "roll back room" law in the US actually has nothing to do with rolling back. If a person rearends another person for any reason other than something such as a drastic lane change, it is considered follow too close. If, for example, I got rearended myself and hit the car in front of me from the momentum, the second accident is my fault because I was "following too closely". The rule of thumb in the US (California, at least) is you should be able to see the bottom of the person's tires in front of you when you come to a stop. This generally gives about half a carlength which is more than enough for rollback or a low velocity collision. Or at least, that is what I have been told.
posts on Slashdot I have read in quite some time. If you polished this up a bit and added some references, I think it would stand on its own as a decent essay. You would get flamed for your opinionated view, but overall I think it is an interesting way to start looking. I know people have said "the desktop will die" before, but I think this was perhaps the best argument for it.
Oh, and for a name: CompuGlobalHyperMegaNet, or CGHMN for short.:)
Do you ever go to the theaters? If you do, you probably spend approximately $8 to see a crap movie filled with advertisement, on top of the first half hour being new movie trailers. Server forbid you should get there early and watch their ridiculous PowerPoint style adverts, too.
My point being...the general populace already does these things.
You sir, astound me. You sound like a bully on a playground.
"It's perfectly normal to push people around for lunch money, but you'd better fight back, we don't like squealers."
Please, before you again attack without knowledge of what you speak, take an economics course. There is more to this than some losing team crying foul.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously? South Korea failed twice IN A ROW? Straight? I can't believe it! I mean, what are the odds of two things going wrong RIGHT AFTER eachother? Erm, editorializing much?
..."Personal information" means a natural person's first name...
As opposed to an unnatural person, congealed into existence in the dark quagmires of the legal landscape...
I don't care what Universal Language we choose: English, Mandarin, Zulu, whatever.
Just pick one, already! The longer it takes to decide the more entrenched in English I become.
I will tell you the difference, because I am an American.
On the whole, Americans are dumb.
ED was not supposed to be a full length movie...it was supposed to be a short. The story was decided for the main reason that it wouldn't be immediately stale after seeing it once...it had a bit of replay value. Most assuredly ED was designed in an attempt to showcase the power of Blender, but I think that it stands on its own within the genre of weird short films. Also, from what I have seen about this announcement, the next project will be similar in scope...and should probably be enjoyed for what it is, not what people wish it to be.
Without getting too in depth with this, I want to say a few things.
First, it is not an arms race most of the time. A robber is generally in it for one of three reasons: money, thrill, or insanity. The chance of being shot tends to deter the first two. The third is dangerous no matter how you cut it.
Further, a robber is already breaking the law. Possessing a gun is quite possibly just one more thing to add on to the list of legality issues they have.
As far as the gun crime rate vs the USA, I haven't done a direct comparison in a few years, but a quick google search will (assuming it remains true, which I believe it does) yield that while the UK saw a drop in gun crime, they saw a massive influx of violent crimes. The exact opposite correlation (removal of gun control leading to lower violent crimes) can be seen in several places in the US. I submit that crime (and the effects thereof) are much more complicated than can be maintained by a single variable: i.e. the inclusion/removal of guns.
I have argued gun rights against many people for many years. What it comes down to generally is experience: people who have handled guns, fired guns, and even treated bullet wounds (several of my extended family members are in the medical professions) understand the trade off: perceived safety for direct control of a situation. If I ever have to defend myself with a firearm, at least I will have control of my situation. Giving up that control in the hopes that the government will protect you (especially in the US/UK where the government is proving to be pretty much useless on that front) is generally something that most people I know are not willing to do. Have someone else ask that of us is worrisome to say the least.
I don't expect to change a slashdotters (or anyone else's) mind on this topic directly. I can only ask that you do some solid pro-gun reading (try and avoid the idiot rednecks, I know it can be hard since they are the most vocal) and attempt to fire a firearm at some point. I think your perception will shift a bit.
I hope that this (and my previous) post have given you a deeper understanding of the pro-gun perspective, and I hope I have done that perspective justice. It is a right that is simply too important to lose by misunderstandings and lack of experience.
I own guns. I routinely (if not as often as I would like) fire guns. I have taken the California mandated Hunters Safety course. I have killed animals and consumed them, both of which have been in a much more
"humane" manner than something you would get at your local burger/chicken joint. I have been in the presence of more guns than you have apparently seen in your life, and I have never once seen gun violence against a human being nor heard of any person whom I had personally met be injured by guns.
I have, on the other hand, heard firsthand stories of three major incidents of ATV injuries, both intentional and unintentional. I realize this has minimal amounts to do with crime, but that was in the last year alone and should give you a point of reference. Your "I haven't seen it so it must not be there" statement scares me because you believe it to be true. When it does become a problem, when someone breaks into your home, what will you do? I will be trained, armed, and ready. Let us hope that that day never comes for either of us, but given the state of the world from the first tribe vs. tribe dispute until present day, it is in fact simply hope. I am not trying to tug at heartstrings, I am trying to give you my perspective. There is a rather nice post at the top of this article that describes the actual numbers in quite a bit of detail.
Parent hits the heart of the topic exactly. Of course in all actuality if guns are outlawed all civilians who will be willing to use them will have them already, but that is neither here nor there.
so I was driving down the road one day after dark and I ended up getting stuck next to three big rings who were all doing between 65 and 70 in the slow lane of a two lane highway. So as I am slowly passing them at just over 70 this person starts tailgating me. So I tap my brakes, trying to get them to back off. No luck. Finally I pass this train of big rigs and get over, and this guy goes flying by at like 75. So I slam my hand, one finger up, against the window.
The next day I walk into my math class and my math professor says: "Hey, were you the one who flipped me off last night?"
I stand there stunned for a minute, figure out what the hell he is talking about, and then I respond "Oh, were you the asshole tailgating me?"
True story
While I agree with you, I would like to point out that (high amounts) discipline is not always a good thing. Discipline requires structure, and often times structure ruins creativity. Many of the teachers and students I have met in college whom I believe you are referring to can ace a test with simple determination and discipline, but if I ask them about anything outside of their very narrow field, they just go blank. Even if I discuss it with them for a significant amount of time, they just can't contribute unless it is something you would read in a textbook. Reminds me of Good Will Hunting.
I would say it would take a lot of discipline in American schools to go that far in the other direction, though.
Your post makes you sig extremely ironic.
and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Seriously though, I came to this same conclusion about a year ago. I could not have put it better myself.
Here I am using a mouse like a sucker...
I really wish I had mod points. Bravo.
I am glad someone else said it first, but I hate being labeled.
What a terrible thing to say, "transhumanist"....
The basic premise of the "roll back room" law in the US actually has nothing to do with rolling back. If a person rearends another person for any reason other than something such as a drastic lane change, it is considered follow too close. If, for example, I got rearended myself and hit the car in front of me from the momentum, the second accident is my fault because I was "following too closely". The rule of thumb in the US (California, at least) is you should be able to see the bottom of the person's tires in front of you when you come to a stop. This generally gives about half a carlength which is more than enough for rollback or a low velocity collision. Or at least, that is what I have been told.
posts on Slashdot I have read in quite some time. If you polished this up a bit and added some references, I think it would stand on its own as a decent essay. You would get flamed for your opinionated view, but overall I think it is an interesting way to start looking. I know people have said "the desktop will die" before, but I think this was perhaps the best argument for it.
:)
Oh, and for a name: CompuGlobalHyperMegaNet, or CGHMN for short.
Ask Pavlov.
Do you ever go to the theaters? If you do, you probably spend approximately $8 to see a crap movie filled with advertisement, on top of the first half hour being new movie trailers. Server forbid you should get there early and watch their ridiculous PowerPoint style adverts, too. My point being...the general populace already does these things.
You sir, astound me. You sound like a bully on a playground.
"It's perfectly normal to push people around for lunch money, but you'd better fight back, we don't like squealers."
Please, before you again attack without knowledge of what you speak, take an economics course. There is more to this than some losing team crying foul.
Heh, mod parent up. Made me laugh out loud.
especially the part about the trailers. Insightful!
I would have modded this up if it weren't AC.
I was completely zoning:
http://gutenberg.org/ Sorry.