Beauty (and art) are better left to the eye of the beholder. Video games are more than capable of being art. The proof: (The short list) Bioshock and Mass Effect. If you can make the same statement after a few hours of both these games, then I will eat a sock.
Also your analogy to subways, paintings, and music is very flawed. All art is about making someone else have an experience which guides them to a thought you have designed, provokes their own creative feelings, or share some kind of feeling. A painting is art, but seeing a painting itself is not, but the experience of seeing is what gives the art its value. Likewise, a game is art, and simply playing a game may not be art, but the experience it evokes can be more vivid and thought provoking than any mere painting.
I want all my packets to be protected in the same way my letters are at the post office. In the between time, I'll just use my encrypted communications links for data. Screw face-to-face conversation, the air is too insecure.
Everyone does have the right to everything, but they can only claim that which their resources will allow them to gain. For instance, nations do it by force (via military etc.) and individuals do it by wealth. That my friend, is capitalism, not Anarchic Communism.
Revolution no longer occurs in the developed world in the classical sense. It is now done with wallets and votes, and I'm glad to be participating fully in the eventual decline of irresponsible business.
No doubt that day will come.
However, I'm not convinced that the problem is any deeper than the concentration of wealth a corporate entity provides. Even a private citizen with wealth and a mission can do as much harm or good as they desire. In the event of your second enlightenment, the lobbyists would be paid personally by interested private citizens (some already are!). Is the natural conclusion then to separate citizens and government? Hopefully, you can see that a corporation is no different than a private citizen lots of money. Therefore, the only real cure is to make wealth concentration illegal. This of course would never fly without a revolution.
No doubt they just install a rootkit/keylogger on your box after ripping your HD so after you leave their rootkit calls back and gives them your truecrypt passwords.
Don't use a laptop you've lost sight of.
My apologies for grouping your type of ideas with those who claim to be "generally spiritual" and believe in no specific deity. I'll admit that the most pure logic only lends itself to the statement of agnosticism you presented. The only difference of opinion between your agnosticism and my atheism (as I see it) is that I'm willing to make the hypothesis that the evidence suggests there is no god, even if my hypothesis is unprovable. Mayhaps the foolishness of the atheist is that they believe something thats unprovable, but the formation of the belief is not illogical.
My problem with agnosticism is that it promotes a certain hope or at least implies spiritual things exist...maybe. So I call myself a resolute atheist because:
I refuse to be non-critical of ideas or thoughts entering my space.
If someone had compelling evidence, or even sound logic why a god might need to exist, maybe I'd reconsider, but the fact of the matter is, there isn't any to show, and in my opinion, there never will be.
1. Before the beginning was the Nonexistent Chao, balanced in Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpushpull of the Hodge and the Podge.
2. Whereupon, by an Act of Happenstance, the Hodge began gradually to overpower the Podge -- and the Primal Chaos thereby came to be.
3. So in the beginning was the Primal Chaos, balanced on the Edge of Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpullpush of the Podge and the Hodge.
4. Whereupon, by the Law of Negative Reversal, the Podge swiftly underpowered the Hodge and Everything broke loose.
How true. I don't watch TV (except the occasional episode of House), but often I can hear it when my wife watches. I don't know how many adds have slipped into my head when I'm not even in the room.
Believe it or not, the USAF/DoD is smarter than that. Their botnet would likely use hefty crypto, centralized command and control, and tons of clever mechanisms to prevent cascading compromise. DoD is uber paranoid about losing capabilities.
People are the problem only due to thousands of years of political oppression.
I assure you the best of us are not stupid, certainly not irrational, potentially short-sighted (but no doubt trying to beat this), completely serving the public interest, and are herd-oriented in the sense that they give a damn about the herd enough to try fight for it.
The expression "Knowledge is Power" isn't just about individuals making single decisions, but about society at large. Educate the people, free the people, and empower the people with knowledge and you free them from the herd.
Was I the only one in school who had any serious questions about the current theory of evolution?
Agreeing with the previous post, critisism is absolutely fundamental to science. However, my educational experience has made it obvious that any question of doubt was a serious issue. I recall an episode of Nova that we watched, which offered no critisism, which of course, I understood. After the video finished, I asked a few questions, in a very scientific, and respectful way, that had obviously been opposed to the video. After the second question I was asked to leave the classroom. When I petitioned the school administration on the issue, I at first was ignored, then marginalized as a conservative with opposing views. That, to me, was a serious disrespect AS A SCIENTIST.
I believe it is the responsibility of the educator to be able to establish when to discuss the current questions in a theory with respect to the student. It would also be the responsibility of the student to respect the answer given by the educator. Obviously, the greater responsibility, appropriately, lies in the hand of the educator.
Forcing ID into science class == Bad idea. Respecting fellow scientists == Good idea.
Let's not force ID into classrooms, but make science classrooms like the scientific community, an open forum for various ideas and discussions.
You can't be serious...
Any application that exploits a security flaw should be illegal (With the exception of your own or authorized, as stated in the bill). MS may have flawed software, but taking advantage of a flaw, for personal gain is down right evil.
This legislation brings to light the fact that there are corporations out there(mainly marketing) that essentially, yet passively, hack people's systems.
This is already illegal. If they were not to legislate this, then at least expand the scope of the definitions of hacking, viruses, and the like. The new vulnerabilities that are found regularly(IN ALL PLATFORMS AND BROWSERS) it shows that MS(still being evil) is not that bad guy on this one.
The bad guys are spending millions on researching how to make there "spyware" hard to detect and difficult to remove. I know most of you hate MS but you can't ignore these things.
STOP THE BAD GUYS(and let the evil be)
Slashdot Mirror
Mod parent up for its insightful breakdown of the OP point.
Beauty (and art) are better left to the eye of the beholder. Video games are more than capable of being art. The proof: (The short list) Bioshock and Mass Effect. If you can make the same statement after a few hours of both these games, then I will eat a sock. Also your analogy to subways, paintings, and music is very flawed. All art is about making someone else have an experience which guides them to a thought you have designed, provokes their own creative feelings, or share some kind of feeling. A painting is art, but seeing a painting itself is not, but the experience of seeing is what gives the art its value. Likewise, a game is art, and simply playing a game may not be art, but the experience it evokes can be more vivid and thought provoking than any mere painting.
I want all my packets to be protected in the same way my letters are at the post office. In the between time, I'll just use my encrypted communications links for data. Screw face-to-face conversation, the air is too insecure.
Everyone does have the right to everything, but they can only claim that which their resources will allow them to gain. For instance, nations do it by force (via military etc.) and individuals do it by wealth. That my friend, is capitalism, not Anarchic Communism.
Revolution no longer occurs in the developed world in the classical sense. It is now done with wallets and votes, and I'm glad to be participating fully in the eventual decline of irresponsible business.
No doubt that day will come. However, I'm not convinced that the problem is any deeper than the concentration of wealth a corporate entity provides. Even a private citizen with wealth and a mission can do as much harm or good as they desire. In the event of your second enlightenment, the lobbyists would be paid personally by interested private citizens (some already are!). Is the natural conclusion then to separate citizens and government? Hopefully, you can see that a corporation is no different than a private citizen lots of money. Therefore, the only real cure is to make wealth concentration illegal. This of course would never fly without a revolution.
Obviously a physical implant is far outside the scope of what they could do... (yes, I know I'm paranoid)
No doubt they just install a rootkit/keylogger on your box after ripping your HD so after you leave their rootkit calls back and gives them your truecrypt passwords. Don't use a laptop you've lost sight of.
My apologies for grouping your type of ideas with those who claim to be "generally spiritual" and believe in no specific deity. I'll admit that the most pure logic only lends itself to the statement of agnosticism you presented. The only difference of opinion between your agnosticism and my atheism (as I see it) is that I'm willing to make the hypothesis that the evidence suggests there is no god, even if my hypothesis is unprovable. Mayhaps the foolishness of the atheist is that they believe something thats unprovable, but the formation of the belief is not illogical.
My problem with agnosticism is that it promotes a certain hope or at least implies spiritual things exist...maybe. So I call myself a resolute atheist because: I refuse to be non-critical of ideas or thoughts entering my space. If someone had compelling evidence, or even sound logic why a god might need to exist, maybe I'd reconsider, but the fact of the matter is, there isn't any to show, and in my opinion, there never will be.
1. Before the beginning was the Nonexistent Chao, balanced in Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpushpull of the Hodge and the Podge.
2. Whereupon, by an Act of Happenstance, the Hodge began gradually to overpower the Podge -- and the Primal Chaos thereby came to be.
3. So in the beginning was the Primal Chaos, balanced on the Edge of Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpullpush of the Podge and the Hodge.
4. Whereupon, by the Law of Negative Reversal, the Podge swiftly underpowered the Hodge and Everything broke loose.
How true. I don't watch TV (except the occasional episode of House), but often I can hear it when my wife watches. I don't know how many adds have slipped into my head when I'm not even in the room.
Which is why adds regarding new and practical innovation are so popular among older people?
Believe it or not, the USAF/DoD is smarter than that. Their botnet would likely use hefty crypto, centralized command and control, and tons of clever mechanisms to prevent cascading compromise. DoD is uber paranoid about losing capabilities.
People are the problem only due to thousands of years of political oppression. I assure you the best of us are not stupid, certainly not irrational, potentially short-sighted (but no doubt trying to beat this), completely serving the public interest, and are herd-oriented in the sense that they give a damn about the herd enough to try fight for it. The expression "Knowledge is Power" isn't just about individuals making single decisions, but about society at large. Educate the people, free the people, and empower the people with knowledge and you free them from the herd.
For good reason, no doubt! We wouldn't want all the mindless masses not being so mindless. It would destroy the economy!
Was I the only one in school who had any serious questions about the current theory of evolution?
Agreeing with the previous post, critisism is absolutely fundamental to science. However, my educational experience has made it obvious that any question of doubt was a serious issue. I recall an episode of Nova that we watched, which offered no critisism, which of course, I understood. After the video finished, I asked a few questions, in a very scientific, and respectful way, that had obviously been opposed to the video. After the second question I was asked to leave the classroom. When I petitioned the school administration on the issue, I at first was ignored, then marginalized as a conservative with opposing views. That, to me, was a serious disrespect AS A SCIENTIST.
I believe it is the responsibility of the educator to be able to establish when to discuss the current questions in a theory with respect to the student. It would also be the responsibility of the student to respect the answer given by the educator. Obviously, the greater responsibility, appropriately, lies in the hand of the educator.
Forcing ID into science class == Bad idea. Respecting fellow scientists == Good idea.
Let's not force ID into classrooms, but make science classrooms like the scientific community, an open forum for various ideas and discussions.
You can't be serious... Any application that exploits a security flaw should be illegal (With the exception of your own or authorized, as stated in the bill). MS may have flawed software, but taking advantage of a flaw, for personal gain is down right evil. This legislation brings to light the fact that there are corporations out there(mainly marketing) that essentially, yet passively, hack people's systems. This is already illegal. If they were not to legislate this, then at least expand the scope of the definitions of hacking, viruses, and the like. The new vulnerabilities that are found regularly(IN ALL PLATFORMS AND BROWSERS) it shows that MS(still being evil) is not that bad guy on this one. The bad guys are spending millions on researching how to make there "spyware" hard to detect and difficult to remove. I know most of you hate MS but you can't ignore these things. STOP THE BAD GUYS(and let the evil be)