Yet we still put up fences to stop kids running into the road and get them to wear seat belts, insist they eat healthily and not just live off fries and chocolate. In the same way, allowing, especially younger children, full access to the internet could take them to inappropriate places quite by accident - it is not hard to find images of people having their heads sawn off, for example. So it is probably a bit of both. I have used software to prevent accidental access to porn and the like. They know this and I've explained why it is there. And if they find images blocked that they would like to see, we will take a look together and revise the whitelist. But I would really not want them inadvertantly wandering into 4chan and the like. Being a responsible parent is all about nurturing and that includes curtailing certain activities.
What I find strange is that by and large, those who enjoy these games are typically some of the most non-violent people out there. So if things did reach the point of censoring violent blogs and so forth it would be the southern fried bapist brigade who would feel the heat, not your average video game player. Although I should add that, as a father, I would like to know just how graphic these games are. My feelings are that there are differences in grown up folks getting a bit of escapism and under 7s getting off on this kind of stuff. I would like to see youngsters protected from photo-realistic violence and other stuff like hard core porn. So maybe the discussion is not simply a new media thing, buit more that people are not quite certain on how best to deal with some of the issues around games that depict violence.
Similar here - except I add a year directory... so it is like projects/2009/descriptivename/, projects/2010/descriptivename/, media/2009/..., media/2010/... and so on. so once something is finished or reaches a milestone, it gets moved across from a/working/ folder into this hierarchical structure. if a project forks then everything up to that point is copied across and then the project continues to grow in the/working/ folder. it does mean that there is some duplication, but i just see that as an additional layer to by usual backup routine. i'm also in the habit of saving important email into project folders as.eml files, as an additional and sometimes useful form of backup. although i should say that i am still struggling to find a useful way of archiving email. i also save personal photos by/year/month/ which, for me at lest, makes a lot of sense. it is very interesting to hear what everyone else does though. ever since an engineer replaced the wrong disk in a mirror raid i've been terrified of significant data loss (i didn't lose anything, but it did leave me slightly more anxious).
This really is the Streisand Effect ++ At what point will Sony give up? Surely the resources involved in chasing down every site will eventually cost more than the projected income from keeping this key private. Not that it is private anymore. A quick Google finds 136,000 entries for the key!
I like to dabble in stocks and shares occasionally and would like to jump on the China growth curve. But every time I get anywhere near to deciding a strategy I get cold feet. The main reason being Chinese contracts just seem like Chinese lanterns, so ephemeral. How anything gets done in that country is beyond me - yet we keep seeing these monumental projects. I think it is all smoke and mirrors... and I for one don't know how real any of this Chinese IT stuff is.
That's pretty harsh - Grylls is ex special forces, he knows his stuff and what he presents is very different to Les Stroud. Ray Mears is another one who enjoys a good quality of life, but I found his interviews with people who had survived under difficult circumstances very interesting. At the end of the day, all three could probably look after themselves under extreme circumstances, read a map and probably more importantly instil in their viewers that common sense is the most valuable item to take on any trip.
"An advanced civilization within a radius of 100 light years could detect our television shows and already know we are here, so there is little hope in concealing our location in space," they wrote.
So if first impressions matter, developing some standard protocol is kind of shutting the gate after the horse has bolted. Impressions will have been informed on our early TV output. There could well be whole institutions on other worlds tasked with decoding the antics of Tom and Jerry. No wonder they've stayed away.
I seem to remember a quote from a Russian official something along the lines that one of the reasons for the attack, or at least something that facilitated it, was lapses in security at the airport. Add in the grievances in Chechnya and similar conflict zones and, well, there's your "reason". How MW2 figures in all this, except for some oblique tenuous simlarities, is beyond me. MW2 responsible for attacks at Russian airport? That is bonkers. If people have issues over violent games then they should be honest and say that, not make tenuous connections with pretty disturbing real world events.
It was a protest. Short lived, fairly effective (in that it raised awareness of their issue) and no one got hurt. If these same people took to the streets with megaphones, stood outside Barclays and shouted their message out as loudly as they could, most likely the police would turn up and ask them to move along and that would be that. We worry that kids are not engaging in politics and then arrest them when they voice concern - pffft, it is a crazy world.
As far as I can tell, not one of these individuals can be charged under the Computer Misuse Act (but IANAL) - the DDOS was effectively reaslised across many individuals whose net effect was a DDOS. Further, surely they could claim that their action was simply an expression of their right to free assembly? Anyone any insights here?
At the end of the day the super wealthy can only protect their position by sharing their wealth or suppressing dissent. In an age when everyone on the wage spectrum can dial up stories on how much the super-wealthy earn and how much they give back dissent is likely to grow in times of hardship. While some might argue we need these innovators, innovation is not strictly related to wealth but is very much reliant on the resources and infrastructure funded by tax payers. It's not therefore how good their tax advisors are, it is more what people think. And in the fickle tech world empires could crumble if figure-heads fall foul of public opinion. I would say being a good citizen and being seen to share, to pay a fair contribution, is increasingly the only realistic option.
While I don't have a clue on whether his data is true or not, it certainly concerns me that someone who makes such unfounded statements is doing this research in the same way I would be concerned about a paramedic performing a neurosurgical procedure.
Personally I think the guy should be congratulated for trying to communicate some pretty complex stuff to a lay audience. The research paper looks fine, it is where the work is documented, and that is where credibility will be decided. If you want to criticise the science or the scientist go review the paper and then say something a little more substantive.
There are studies linking cometitive sports with poor health. But what has that got to do with the paper? Unless you are trying to say other stuff harms kids so therefore gaming is ok. Which doesn't really help much.
I do not thik the gaming community should be scared by this research and should welcome it. The reason is simple. It might be the case that some types of gaming, in terms of quantity or content, could have deleterious effects. And if we are able to work out exactly who is predisposed and what triggers problems then people can be forewarned. But more than that, if games cause change in one direction then it is entirely possible that they can push behaviour in more pro-social directions. This opens up a whole new world of opportunity. Again, working out what triggers what could be advantageous. This longitudinal study is moderately interesting and maybe warrants a closer look.
I think the sad thing here is that this guy's future is pretty well screwed for what was (from memory) a fairly impetuous and unsophisticated crime. Sure he should be held accountable, but sending the kid to an institution where he is more likely to be released into a world of criminality with contacts that may like to exploit his rudimentary skills is probably not serving the best interests of his community.
Sadly, I agree. Psychology is dying. Not because there's not a lot of potentially interesting research to be done, more because psychologists are increasingly both nepotistic and unable to analyse their way out of a card board box. Yet at the same time we should perhaps be thankful for the science of psychology. Imagine what would happen if all those psychologists tried to do something useful in the world! We'd have a lot more Wakefield/Lancet fiascos, for sure. Returning to the point at hand, my advice has always been to research and accurately describe methods and analytic strategy way before any data collection has begun - instead psychology has become the science of finding the test that provides the significant result, damn the consequences. That said, surprising results with scant evidence can be very useful at times as they can motivate better designed studies that really do find something of interest. So long as people are honest about their findings and are not trying to fudge the issue, we are ok. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with announcing that chewing the bark of some tree cures headaches in a sample of three.
They'll just drive people away from the net. It would be like opening a shop and charging people to walk down the street it's in. People will just start going elsewhere for their recreation and maybe even back to real world shops.
Assuming a crime has been committed - in the UK we are allowed to protest peacefully. I can't think of anything more peaceful than sitting at your computer sipping coffee. Well, I can, but you get my point. Certainly extorting money under threat of DDOS is a crime, as is stealing data. I think Scotland Yard might have a hard time prosecuting these kids who are not in it for personal gain.
So why don't they produce a hybrid? One that will work with the regular mobile network when it can, but has the option of satelite communications when you find yourself up a hill?
Slashdot Mirror
Yet we still put up fences to stop kids running into the road and get them to wear seat belts, insist they eat healthily and not just live off fries and chocolate. In the same way, allowing, especially younger children, full access to the internet could take them to inappropriate places quite by accident - it is not hard to find images of people having their heads sawn off, for example. So it is probably a bit of both. I have used software to prevent accidental access to porn and the like. They know this and I've explained why it is there. And if they find images blocked that they would like to see, we will take a look together and revise the whitelist. But I would really not want them inadvertantly wandering into 4chan and the like. Being a responsible parent is all about nurturing and that includes curtailing certain activities.
What I find strange is that by and large, those who enjoy these games are typically some of the most non-violent people out there. So if things did reach the point of censoring violent blogs and so forth it would be the southern fried bapist brigade who would feel the heat, not your average video game player. Although I should add that, as a father, I would like to know just how graphic these games are. My feelings are that there are differences in grown up folks getting a bit of escapism and under 7s getting off on this kind of stuff. I would like to see youngsters protected from photo-realistic violence and other stuff like hard core porn. So maybe the discussion is not simply a new media thing, buit more that people are not quite certain on how best to deal with some of the issues around games that depict violence.
Similar here - except I add a year directory... so it is like projects/2009/descriptivename/, projects/2010/descriptivename/, media/2009/..., media/2010/... and so on. so once something is finished or reaches a milestone, it gets moved across from a /working/ folder into this hierarchical structure. if a project forks then everything up to that point is copied across and then the project continues to grow in the /working/ folder. it does mean that there is some duplication, but i just see that as an additional layer to by usual backup routine. i'm also in the habit of saving important email into project folders as .eml files, as an additional and sometimes useful form of backup. although i should say that i am still struggling to find a useful way of archiving email. i also save personal photos by /year/month/ which, for me at lest, makes a lot of sense. it is very interesting to hear what everyone else does though. ever since an engineer replaced the wrong disk in a mirror raid i've been terrified of significant data loss (i didn't lose anything, but it did leave me slightly more anxious).
This really is the Streisand Effect ++ At what point will Sony give up? Surely the resources involved in chasing down every site will eventually cost more than the projected income from keeping this key private. Not that it is private anymore. A quick Google finds 136,000 entries for the key!
I like to dabble in stocks and shares occasionally and would like to jump on the China growth curve. But every time I get anywhere near to deciding a strategy I get cold feet. The main reason being Chinese contracts just seem like Chinese lanterns, so ephemeral. How anything gets done in that country is beyond me - yet we keep seeing these monumental projects. I think it is all smoke and mirrors... and I for one don't know how real any of this Chinese IT stuff is.
Nothing to see here, move along...
That's pretty harsh - Grylls is ex special forces, he knows his stuff and what he presents is very different to Les Stroud. Ray Mears is another one who enjoys a good quality of life, but I found his interviews with people who had survived under difficult circumstances very interesting. At the end of the day, all three could probably look after themselves under extreme circumstances, read a map and probably more importantly instil in their viewers that common sense is the most valuable item to take on any trip.
Would it be possible to pass the focussed light through a lens to make a concentrated ray? Or would the lens melt?
As TFA reports:
"An advanced civilization within a radius of 100 light years could detect our television shows and already know we are here, so there is little hope in concealing our location in space," they wrote.
So if first impressions matter, developing some standard protocol is kind of shutting the gate after the horse has bolted. Impressions will have been informed on our early TV output. There could well be whole institutions on other worlds tasked with decoding the antics of Tom and Jerry. No wonder they've stayed away.
I seem to remember a quote from a Russian official something along the lines that one of the reasons for the attack, or at least something that facilitated it, was lapses in security at the airport. Add in the grievances in Chechnya and similar conflict zones and, well, there's your "reason". How MW2 figures in all this, except for some oblique tenuous simlarities, is beyond me. MW2 responsible for attacks at Russian airport? That is bonkers. If people have issues over violent games then they should be honest and say that, not make tenuous connections with pretty disturbing real world events.
It was a protest. Short lived, fairly effective (in that it raised awareness of their issue) and no one got hurt. If these same people took to the streets with megaphones, stood outside Barclays and shouted their message out as loudly as they could, most likely the police would turn up and ask them to move along and that would be that. We worry that kids are not engaging in politics and then arrest them when they voice concern - pffft, it is a crazy world.
As far as I can tell, not one of these individuals can be charged under the Computer Misuse Act (but IANAL) - the DDOS was effectively reaslised across many individuals whose net effect was a DDOS. Further, surely they could claim that their action was simply an expression of their right to free assembly? Anyone any insights here?
If you classify patent trolls as innovators then all is well.
At the end of the day the super wealthy can only protect their position by sharing their wealth or suppressing dissent. In an age when everyone on the wage spectrum can dial up stories on how much the super-wealthy earn and how much they give back dissent is likely to grow in times of hardship. While some might argue we need these innovators, innovation is not strictly related to wealth but is very much reliant on the resources and infrastructure funded by tax payers. It's not therefore how good their tax advisors are, it is more what people think. And in the fickle tech world empires could crumble if figure-heads fall foul of public opinion. I would say being a good citizen and being seen to share, to pay a fair contribution, is increasingly the only realistic option.
While I don't have a clue on whether his data is true or not, it certainly concerns me that someone who makes such unfounded statements is doing this research in the same way I would be concerned about a paramedic performing a neurosurgical procedure.
Personally I think the guy should be congratulated for trying to communicate some pretty complex stuff to a lay audience. The research paper looks fine, it is where the work is documented, and that is where credibility will be decided. If you want to criticise the science or the scientist go review the paper and then say something a little more substantive.
Someone has a whole list of open webcams: http://www.opentopia.com/hiddencam.php
There are studies linking cometitive sports with poor health. But what has that got to do with the paper? Unless you are trying to say other stuff harms kids so therefore gaming is ok. Which doesn't really help much.
I do not thik the gaming community should be scared by this research and should welcome it. The reason is simple. It might be the case that some types of gaming, in terms of quantity or content, could have deleterious effects. And if we are able to work out exactly who is predisposed and what triggers problems then people can be forewarned. But more than that, if games cause change in one direction then it is entirely possible that they can push behaviour in more pro-social directions. This opens up a whole new world of opportunity. Again, working out what triggers what could be advantageous. This longitudinal study is moderately interesting and maybe warrants a closer look.
...enforcing social norms! You have stubble, therefore you must shave. Your hair is messy, here's a comb. Everyone will start to look the same!
I think the sad thing here is that this guy's future is pretty well screwed for what was (from memory) a fairly impetuous and unsophisticated crime. Sure he should be held accountable, but sending the kid to an institution where he is more likely to be released into a world of criminality with contacts that may like to exploit his rudimentary skills is probably not serving the best interests of his community.
Sadly, I agree. Psychology is dying. Not because there's not a lot of potentially interesting research to be done, more because psychologists are increasingly both nepotistic and unable to analyse their way out of a card board box. Yet at the same time we should perhaps be thankful for the science of psychology. Imagine what would happen if all those psychologists tried to do something useful in the world! We'd have a lot more Wakefield/Lancet fiascos, for sure. Returning to the point at hand, my advice has always been to research and accurately describe methods and analytic strategy way before any data collection has begun - instead psychology has become the science of finding the test that provides the significant result, damn the consequences. That said, surprising results with scant evidence can be very useful at times as they can motivate better designed studies that really do find something of interest. So long as people are honest about their findings and are not trying to fudge the issue, we are ok. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with announcing that chewing the bark of some tree cures headaches in a sample of three.
Who protects the children from the government? Just saying...
99.45 slashdot posts are made by people who have drunk coffee at some time in their life. The perils of caffeine!
They'll just drive people away from the net. It would be like opening a shop and charging people to walk down the street it's in. People will just start going elsewhere for their recreation and maybe even back to real world shops.
Assuming a crime has been committed - in the UK we are allowed to protest peacefully. I can't think of anything more peaceful than sitting at your computer sipping coffee. Well, I can, but you get my point. Certainly extorting money under threat of DDOS is a crime, as is stealing data. I think Scotland Yard might have a hard time prosecuting these kids who are not in it for personal gain.
So why don't they produce a hybrid? One that will work with the regular mobile network when it can, but has the option of satelite communications when you find yourself up a hill?