Don't forget that the US two party system doesn't give you the option of voting for someone that doesn't want to ban videogames. However, the US courts will not allow legislation like this to be introduced so a quick lawsuit from the ESA will strike it down like all the others.
A theory I heard was that since you're allowed to start driving at 18 they didn't want to have that be the same age as for booze. This way you should theoretically have three years to come to grips with driving and learn enough responsibility that by the time you start getting alcohol you know better than to drive home from a keg party.
Of course my country does it the other way around, you can start drinking your ass off at the age of 16 so you already know how to deal with alcohol by the time you get your license.
If it was an automated system that launched the missiles with no human interaction I'd agree but as long as we involve humans that may not be willing to sign their death warrant (even a nuclear shelter will not prevent you from being torn apart by a lynch mob of survivors once you get out and I really expect the population to have zero consideration for any needs to start a nuclear war) there will be hesistation.
OTOH, what if China started a policy that any spy satellite over their territory is a reason for a nuclear first strike? Would that keep US spy satellites out?
No idea but I suppose it's because they are used for playing that they count as toys (they also count as media which is not required to equal art, being media means they are subject to sales limitations and ratings). I suppose they block "nazi toys" whether they are art or not since the ban on toys is stronger than the exception on art. Generally the freedom of expression is limited if it is used to promote ideas that facilitate a war of aggression, undermine the democratic foundation of the country or promote/glorify violence or war. I have no idea why games cannot show nazi symbols in any context (e.g. in the videogame version of Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade the swastikas were censored) but I suppose it may be meant for reducing the difficulty of proving that a game promotes nazi ideas.
Or perhaps games don't count as art because about 99.9% of them are designed for pure entertainment rather than serious discussion of a matter.
You can't be friendly to anyone at once, especially when they hate each other.
Friendly, no. But you can be neutral enough that the people shooting each other forget you exist (or at least don't care about you). I mean you don't see Al-Qaeda bombing e.g. New Zealand because noone cares enough about New Zealand to wage a guerilla war against them. Or Switzerland. Who'd bother to attack Switzerland?
Since China would be capable of pursuing MAD the US politicians would probably pull in their tails and try a diplomatic solution. At least until all of their assets have been successfully transferred to some tropical islands far away from ground zero.
However, only the government's executive branch should be able to search private property as they are the only ones properly bound by laws and trained to handle these correctly, never mind that they are on the state's payroll and most likely more impartial than whatever mercenaries the RIAA would hire for the job.
Scientific consent is on neither global warming nor cooling, it's on climate change. Some regions will get warmer, some get cooler and the whole weather will go out of whack.
If decreasing CO2 output turns out to be a bad thing we can easily increase the output just by burning random crap. What would we do if it turns out we've overshot the save CO2 levels? We can take the precaution at little risk and reverse it if it's a bad choice. Of course the economy will have to pay but if we bowed to the economy's wishes on everything you'd die from drinking tapwater.
Castlevania 4? What's so new about that compared to previous Cv games? You're probably thinking of Symphony of the Night but Castlevania 4 was Super Castlevania.
When more people vote for the green party (which has politicians that do understand that) instead of the CSU (which just wants to ban the easiest target).
Because it's very easy to trade stuff across EU-internal borders and as such minors could circumvent an age restriction by ordering the game from e.g. Austria (or even walking over there and buying it if they live close enough to the border).
When you're under 18 you can buy games with violence in them, yes. But that's only because a little violence doesn't immediately trigger the 18 rating. In Germany many of the more violent games are rated 18 and cannot be legally sold to minors.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget that the US two party system doesn't give you the option of voting for someone that doesn't want to ban videogames. However, the US courts will not allow legislation like this to be introduced so a quick lawsuit from the ESA will strike it down like all the others.
The courts won't be happy with that one since they're getting neither the votes nor the money.
A theory I heard was that since you're allowed to start driving at 18 they didn't want to have that be the same age as for booze. This way you should theoretically have three years to come to grips with driving and learn enough responsibility that by the time you start getting alcohol you know better than to drive home from a keg party.
Of course my country does it the other way around, you can start drinking your ass off at the age of 16 so you already know how to deal with alcohol by the time you get your license.
If it was an automated system that launched the missiles with no human interaction I'd agree but as long as we involve humans that may not be willing to sign their death warrant (even a nuclear shelter will not prevent you from being torn apart by a lynch mob of survivors once you get out and I really expect the population to have zero consideration for any needs to start a nuclear war) there will be hesistation.
OTOH, what if China started a policy that any spy satellite over their territory is a reason for a nuclear first strike? Would that keep US spy satellites out?
No idea but I suppose it's because they are used for playing that they count as toys (they also count as media which is not required to equal art, being media means they are subject to sales limitations and ratings). I suppose they block "nazi toys" whether they are art or not since the ban on toys is stronger than the exception on art. Generally the freedom of expression is limited if it is used to promote ideas that facilitate a war of aggression, undermine the democratic foundation of the country or promote/glorify violence or war. I have no idea why games cannot show nazi symbols in any context (e.g. in the videogame version of Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade the swastikas were censored) but I suppose it may be meant for reducing the difficulty of proving that a game promotes nazi ideas.
Or perhaps games don't count as art because about 99.9% of them are designed for pure entertainment rather than serious discussion of a matter.
Not anymore.
Of course as long as it's grounded it may be easier to just glue some dynamite sticks to the belly or (during takeoff) kill the pilots with a rifle.
On the upside it means we finally have a reason to paint commercial airplanes to look like sharks.
Of course noone's talking about the number of planes shot down by pirates.
Good luck hitting an aircraft with an unguided missile. You'd probably have more luck using a cannon of some sort (e.g. flak).
You can't be friendly to anyone at once, especially when they hate each other.
Friendly, no. But you can be neutral enough that the people shooting each other forget you exist (or at least don't care about you). I mean you don't see Al-Qaeda bombing e.g. New Zealand because noone cares enough about New Zealand to wage a guerilla war against them. Or Switzerland. Who'd bother to attack Switzerland?
I'd say China is much more stable than the US, their government is certainly not going to change as often.
Shouldn't a laser like this have melted or cut the satellite instead of shattering it?
Since China would be capable of pursuing MAD the US politicians would probably pull in their tails and try a diplomatic solution. At least until all of their assets have been successfully transferred to some tropical islands far away from ground zero.
However, only the government's executive branch should be able to search private property as they are the only ones properly bound by laws and trained to handle these correctly, never mind that they are on the state's payroll and most likely more impartial than whatever mercenaries the RIAA would hire for the job.
I'd assume you can get a few chaffs and flares for cheap these days. No need for all this fancy and probably expensive laser stuff.
Scientific consent is on neither global warming nor cooling, it's on climate change. Some regions will get warmer, some get cooler and the whole weather will go out of whack.
If decreasing CO2 output turns out to be a bad thing we can easily increase the output just by burning random crap. What would we do if it turns out we've overshot the save CO2 levels? We can take the precaution at little risk and reverse it if it's a bad choice. Of course the economy will have to pay but if we bowed to the economy's wishes on everything you'd die from drinking tapwater.
I LOVE the Saturn. You can't get 8-10 player Bomberman anywhere else.
Yes you can, Atomic Bomberman for the PC supports 10 players, though I think you need more than one computer for that many people.
Castlevania 4? What's so new about that compared to previous Cv games? You're probably thinking of Symphony of the Night but Castlevania 4 was Super Castlevania.
When more people vote for the green party (which has politicians that do understand that) instead of the CSU (which just wants to ban the easiest target).
Because it's very easy to trade stuff across EU-internal borders and as such minors could circumvent an age restriction by ordering the game from e.g. Austria (or even walking over there and buying it if they live close enough to the border).
When you're under 18 you can buy games with violence in them, yes. But that's only because a little violence doesn't immediately trigger the 18 rating. In Germany many of the more violent games are rated 18 and cannot be legally sold to minors.
Videogames count as toys and as such are not permitted to show Nazi symbols.
The Bavarians are more of a running joke than any serious political force.