I agree. There's a clear difference between disciplining one's kid and telling him he's a worthless good-for-nothing, and that he'd be better off dead. The former makes him a better person. The latter will turn him into a poor excuse of a human being, blaming everyone for each of his problems.
You're also hitting the nail on the head on #4 (well, that's a bit obvious with the tag "correlationisnotcausation"). If a kid has murderous intentions and wants to take revenge upon the world, he will get grand theft auto and start killing everyone on the game.
On the contrary, if a kid has a healthy psychological condition, he'll enjoy GTA, but because of the normal gaming elements.
I had a friend whose life was a mess, his father beat him, his mother abandoned him and the people he had to live with kept saying he was useless. His favorite videogames were GTA, Hitman 3, and other violent videogames - including Street Fighter, where I totally kicked his ass:P -. He often gets in streetfights, occasionally beats someone on the street because he felt like it, and one time he tried to commit suicide.
He went once with a psychologist and things have been improving for him, but he gets kicked out of jobs often (guess why). Are videogames the cause of his violent behavior? I don't think so.
But "abused and neglected kid becomes violent" isn't a headline as catchy as "kid who played GTA becomes violent".
Sorry for the anonymous post - I'm on the dead run here.
On the point made in the article about ponds drying up, this has never quite made sense to me. If the climate is warming, would that not imply more moisture in the atmosphere and thus more rain, or at least less evaporation?
Think about the last part of your sentence.
Where do you think the more moisture in the atmosphere comes from? More evaporation. Ponds have very little quantities of water, which are easier to run dry than say.... cold oceans in the arctic.
Now imagine that the ponds run dry and that moisture that goes to the atmosphere ends up in the Pacific Ocean. Also, remember that there are zones in the planet where rain occurs very rarely. Unfortunately, evaporation occurs on a daily basis, especially when the sun shines.
Thanks to this kind of news, every eco-department will have yet another "reason" to tell us how to live our lives. So far, the BAAQMD has now made it a *CRIME* to use your fireplace on "Spare The Air" days, regardless of how cold it gets during the winter. And no, they won't be reimbursing you for your electric bill.
I think those measures are hipocricy. The people being targeted should be SUV selling companies and industry. But educating the people is a good thing. Yes, you don't like spending too much on an electric heater, but who does?
Fortunately, we're approaching the times when you can install a wind-based generator at home.
What worries me is that mankind is a self-destructing species (whether that's caused by selfishness, stupidity or sin, belongs to another discussion). Ever heard of the Eastern Island?
For almost two years, EFF has been a participant in negotiations between human rights groups, investors, academics and Internet companies -- including Yahoo!, Google, and Microsoft -- aimed at improving how those businesses deal with free expression and privacy issues around the world.
Today, the results of that discussion have been announced. The Global Network Initiative is a set of principles on free expression and privacy that the companies have agreed to follow in all countries they do business within, together with a set of implementation guidelines and a skeleton for an independent watchdog body that will monitor companies for compliance with these principles.
Still, the EFF isn't completely satisfied with the results:
It's not a perfect set of documents. EFF continues to work in the Initiative, but we do have concerns with the limits of this initial agreement:
* There is no obligation to inform Internet users of the storage location of personal data, and from where it is accessible.
* There is no commitment to inform users when they hand over their information to agents of government and law enforcement.
* There is no binding requirement to develop privacy and anti-censorship technologies and include them in new products.
* GNI assessors are selected by the companies themselves from a list of neutral groups, and do not have untrammeled access to all relevant company documents.
When it comes to addressing their involvement in worldwide human rights abuses, the first step for Internet companies had been admitting that there is a problem. With the Global Network Initiative, Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google have gone further, and begun to embed human rights assessments into their own company structure. We hope many other companies will join them.
Stop with the paranoia. You'll find people around the world are generally all decent people. Of course, YMMV in Iraq, Afghanistan, The White House, etc, etc
Think about it. Dr Evil could finally get his million dollars only to watch the Joker burn it.
And that would make Dr. Evil angry. And when Dr. Evil gets angry, Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset. (purrrrrr) And when Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset, PEOPLE DIE!!!!
The thing about Doom is we felt alone. There were no computers to read dialog, no diary's, no nothing. It was you, a weapon, and a shit load of monsters. The feeling of being a world by yourself gives you a sense of helplessness, even though you knew you could beat blast the monsters away, if you got caught with no ammo, no one was there to save you.
I agree with the second part, but disagree with the first part. Some games get scarier when you know more about the story.
Watch this little game. Project Firestart is over 20 years old and it still scares the crap out of me.
And what to say about the Silent Hill games? Having to kill your best buddy to survive, the possibility of you actually being insane, etc. How about this: You're trapped trying to get a door open, and there's a key on the other side. You crawl to try to get it, and guess what? A spoiled little brat comes out and kicks it away! Or when you're trapped with all those things hanging in the celing, and the girl is on the other side. You yell, bang at the door and scream. Get me out of here! But guess what, she locked you inside. I'll never forget the frustration, anger and fear I felt at that time. It's one thing going to face the boss on your own account and by your own will. But this feeling of helplessness...
It's not just the monsters. It's the psychology of the games. When designed well (or ill, to be precise), they can give you nightmares for weeks.
If I purchase a copy of the game, I *DO* own it. Otherwise, I have the right to get a replacement and or refund if my CD or DVD gets scratched. Does that really happen? I don't think so.
between the GMail outage and *ANY* IMAP server's outage?
For practical purposes, it's just the same. Regardless of whether this is a "software as a service" curse, what can be done about having your e-mails stored in a remote server? Having my emails on a server was the very reason for me to choose web-based e-mail, so I can check and answer my mails while at home or at work. Also, it's not ISP-dependant, so I can keep the address and mails even if I have to switch ISPs.
Javascript may be a standard but I don't consider it an excuse to break usability. I use Noscript and I don't even bother to explore sites that are totally borked without their Javascript crutch. I spend a lot of time making sure everything works whether Javascript is on or not.
Exactly! With the constantly found vulnerabilities in javascript, there must be a fallback so that links CAN be opened in a new window (or a specific window for that matter).
The problem I have with the target attribute is that some websites have abused it (target=_blank). Just as websites abuse javascript by making it painfully slow (digg, can you hear me?).
What use is forcing arbitrary restrictions for people who want to do things right, and yet allowing everyone else to break the web as they please?
In the first place, if standards (HTML / CSS) had been designed right, we wouldn't need so many javascript workarounds.
Idea: specifying target in XHTML-strict webpages. Justification: To have better control of which frame/window receives a certain info (like help pages) Excuse not to implement it: The user should decide! Workaround: Javascript and using the rel="external" attribute.
Idea: Client-side includes. Justification: Save redundancy, bandwidth (for example, in menus - and to save us from using frames. Did you know blogger uses an iframe for its top menu?) Excuse not to implement it: SSI works just as well. Workaround: AJAX.
For example, xhtml-strict does not include support for "target" attributes in links. What kind of idiotic decision was that?
So, people then choose xhtml-transitional, which is much more relaxed, etc.
Another thing is the inclusion of embedded xml inside html, which due to lack of support in the standards, completely break "standards-compliance", whatever that means.
Now, if you're talking about DOM, then that's another story.
NoScript Options -> Plugins Tab -> Check "Apply these restrictions to trusted sites too"
This will let you whitelist sites for javascript, but prevent the flash or other plugins from loading by default. Then you are still able to click on the placeholder to play the desired flash object. No need to have Flashblock installed if you use this setup.
The problem is that "apply these restrictions" applies them as a whole, and doesn't let me have a fine-grained control over them.
Is there a sensible reason to run Flashblock if you already use NoScript?
Yes- sites where you want javascript enabled but don't want annoying flash ads consuming your CPU. Example: Blogger, wordpress, slashdot, digg, webcomics sites, news sites, etc. etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. There's a clear difference between disciplining one's kid and telling him he's a worthless good-for-nothing, and that he'd be better off dead. The former makes him a better person. The latter will turn him into a poor excuse of a human being, blaming everyone for each of his problems.
You're also hitting the nail on the head on #4 (well, that's a bit obvious with the tag "correlationisnotcausation"). If a kid has murderous intentions and wants to take revenge upon the world, he will get grand theft auto and start killing everyone on the game.
On the contrary, if a kid has a healthy psychological condition, he'll enjoy GTA, but because of the normal gaming elements.
I had a friend whose life was a mess, his father beat him, his mother abandoned him and the people he had to live with kept saying he was useless. His favorite videogames were GTA, Hitman 3, and other violent videogames - including Street Fighter, where I totally kicked his ass :P -. He often gets in streetfights, occasionally beats someone on the street because he felt like it, and one time he tried to commit suicide.
He went once with a psychologist and things have been improving for him, but he gets kicked out of jobs often (guess why). Are videogames the cause of his violent behavior? I don't think so.
But "abused and neglected kid becomes violent" isn't a headline as catchy as "kid who played GTA becomes violent".
They cherry-picked facts to fit the "man is evil" and "climate change is an URGENT" matter narratives.
As opposed to cherry-picked global-warming-is-a-hoax "facts"?
Sorry for the anonymous post - I'm on the dead run here.
On the point made in the article about ponds drying up, this has never quite made sense to me. If the climate is warming, would that not imply more moisture in the atmosphere and thus more rain, or at least less evaporation?
Think about the last part of your sentence.
Where do you think the more moisture in the atmosphere comes from? More evaporation. Ponds have very little quantities of water, which are easier to run dry than say.... cold oceans in the arctic.
Now imagine that the ponds run dry and that moisture that goes to the atmosphere ends up in the Pacific Ocean. Also, remember that there are zones in the planet where rain occurs very rarely. Unfortunately, evaporation occurs on a daily basis, especially when the sun shines.
Thanks to this kind of news, every eco-department will have yet another "reason" to tell us how to live our lives. So far, the BAAQMD has now made it a *CRIME* to use your fireplace on "Spare The Air" days, regardless of how cold it gets during the winter. And no, they won't be reimbursing you for your electric bill.
I think those measures are hipocricy. The people being targeted should be SUV selling companies and industry. But educating the people is a good thing. Yes, you don't like spending too much on an electric heater, but who does?
Fortunately, we're approaching the times when you can install a wind-based generator at home.
1/3 of Amphibians Dying Out, thanks to mankind.
There.
What worries me is that mankind is a self-destructing species (whether that's caused by selfishness, stupidity or sin, belongs to another discussion). Ever heard of the Eastern Island?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Island#Destruction_of_the_ecosystem
...and it shall be silent forever!
Ah, so now we know what M.C. was singing about when he said "STOP! Hammertime!"
Or you could just buy some newer hard drives out there with high ariel density.
So how many mermaids can they fit into a hard drive these days?
Apparently, my HD has at least 3. It keeps singing and making funny noises.
Any contract or promise contrary to the law is null and void.
I'd like to know which specific law you're talking about. The Patriot Act? DMCA? The US Constitution?
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/10/global-network-initiative
Still, the EFF isn't completely satisfied with the results:
Stop with the paranoia. You'll find people around the world are generally all decent people. Of course, YMMV in Iraq, Afghanistan, The White House, etc, etc
There, fixed that for you.
It's going to rather embrassing when both users pick goatse for their photos.
And a terrible security hole!
(I'm talking about using a duplicate famous picture, you pervs)
what did yooooooooo aaaa .... *drools over kybord having forgotten how to type*
Patrick Starfish, is that you?
Think about it. Dr Evil could finally get his million dollars only to watch the Joker burn it.
And that would make Dr. Evil angry.
And when Dr. Evil gets angry, Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset. (purrrrrr)
And when Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset, PEOPLE DIE!!!!
It works on so many levels.
Agreed.
Some men can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Unless they're given
one...
million...
dollars!
Anyone else read that as "Magic Levitating Trains" ?
I read that as "Magnetic Leviatans"... whatever that means.
http://truckbearingkibble.com/comic/2008/09/22/doctor-anachronismus/
Interpol is dangerously close to a one-world-government type deal.
Don't worry. Just jot their names on the sheets i'm going to give to you, and they'll mysteriously die from heart attacks.
Sincerely,
Kira.
P.S. Do you know the Shinigami who likes apples?
The thing about Doom is we felt alone. There were no computers to read dialog, no diary's, no nothing. It was you, a weapon, and a shit load of monsters. The feeling of being a world by yourself gives you a sense of helplessness, even though you knew you could beat blast the monsters away, if you got caught with no ammo, no one was there to save you.
I agree with the second part, but disagree with the first part. Some games get scarier when you know more about the story.
Watch this little game. Project Firestart is over 20 years old and it still scares the crap out of me.
And what to say about the Silent Hill games? Having to kill your best buddy to survive, the possibility of you actually being insane, etc. How about this: You're trapped trying to get a door open, and there's a key on the other side. You crawl to try to get it, and guess what? A spoiled little brat comes out and kicks it away! Or when you're trapped with all those things hanging in the celing, and the girl is on the other side. You yell, bang at the door and scream. Get me out of here! But guess what, she locked you inside. I'll never forget the frustration, anger and fear I felt at that time. It's one thing going to face the boss on your own account and by your own will. But this feeling of helplessness...
It's not just the monsters. It's the psychology of the games. When designed well (or ill, to be precise), they can give you nightmares for weeks.
If I purchase a copy of the game, I *DO* own it. Otherwise, I have the right to get a replacement and or refund if my CD or DVD gets scratched. Does that really happen? I don't think so.
If we gave money and got a CD, it's not a license. It's a sale. Especially when you go to the website and see the words "purchase", "order" and "buy". See Vernor v. Autodesk. A good review of the decision is available at http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080523-court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.html
So what DRM is really about, is an attempt at circumventing the first sale doctrine. Therefore, it should be declared illegal.
between the GMail outage and *ANY* IMAP server's outage?
For practical purposes, it's just the same. Regardless of whether this is a "software as a service" curse, what can be done about having your e-mails stored in a remote server? Having my emails on a server was the very reason for me to choose web-based e-mail, so I can check and answer my mails while at home or at work. Also, it's not ISP-dependant, so I can keep the address and mails even if I have to switch ISPs.
Javascript may be a standard but I don't consider it an excuse to break usability. I use Noscript and I don't even bother to explore sites that are totally borked without their Javascript crutch. I spend a lot of time making sure everything works whether Javascript is on or not.
Exactly! With the constantly found vulnerabilities in javascript, there must be a fallback so that links CAN be opened in a new window (or a specific window for that matter).
The problem I have with the target attribute is that some websites have abused it (target=_blank). Just as websites abuse javascript by making it painfully slow (digg, can you hear me?).
What use is forcing arbitrary restrictions for people who want to do things right, and yet allowing everyone else to break the web as they please?
In the first place, if standards (HTML / CSS) had been designed right, we wouldn't need so many javascript workarounds.
Idea: specifying target in XHTML-strict webpages.
Justification: To have better control of which frame/window receives a certain info (like help pages)
Excuse not to implement it: The user should decide!
Workaround: Javascript and using the rel="external" attribute.
Idea: Client-side includes.
Justification: Save redundancy, bandwidth (for example, in menus - and to save us from using frames. Did you know blogger uses an iframe for its top menu?)
Excuse not to implement it: SSI works just as well.
Workaround: AJAX.
For example, xhtml-strict does not include support for "target" attributes in links. What kind of idiotic decision was that?
So, people then choose xhtml-transitional, which is much more relaxed, etc.
Another thing is the inclusion of embedded xml inside html, which due to lack of support in the standards, completely break "standards-compliance", whatever that means.
Now, if you're talking about DOM, then that's another story.
Hey, it's not news either when Steve-o gets angry, and yet we love the chair-related posts :)
NoScript Options -> Plugins Tab -> Check "Apply these restrictions to trusted sites too"
This will let you whitelist sites for javascript, but prevent the flash or other plugins from loading by default.
Then you are still able to click on the placeholder to play the desired flash object.
No need to have Flashblock installed if you use this setup.
The problem is that "apply these restrictions" applies them as a whole, and doesn't let me have a fine-grained control over them.
Is there a sensible reason to run Flashblock if you already use NoScript?
Yes- sites where you want javascript enabled but don't want annoying flash ads consuming your CPU. Example: Blogger, wordpress, slashdot, digg, webcomics sites, news sites, etc. etc.