And I hope they have caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices.
One of the big sticking points with me is that the FO series allowed you to be good or evil. It gave you total freedom and even some in between.
But this entailed of course stealing from anyone, doing drugs, killing children, having sex with prostitutes, being a porn star, and basically killing everything that moves, but you would have some repreccusions such as encounters with bounty hunters or various other groups who were mad at you.
But at the same time you could also be a saint or follow the path of good.
Personally, I joined the brother hood and spent my time being a vigilante cleansing places like New Reno with healthy dose of burst fire.
And it still allowed you to beat the game without firing a single shot.
Without the freedom to be truly evil or good... It won't be Fallout.
It's just that the free software that I did find for the most common tasks - word processing and graphics editing, were buggy and too unstable to be used - even compared to their counterparts on other OSes.
I'm curious, besides MS Office and Adobe Photoshop (which are not free), what other free word processing and graphics programs have you found that work fine on Linux and Windows?
If you say OOo or Gimp, I'm going to hit you with a wet trout because Open Office still has compatibility problems with MS Docs (and especially with 2007 docs) and Gimp is still painful to use compared to Photoshop! (Its getting better though!)
So in light of this, I personally would like to know what the free applications are because I would like to use them too. Although, I have found that Google Docs work fine on any OS.
So unless you are talking about MS Office and Photoshop being free on the Mac because of torrents, for the life of me I can't think of any free software for any OS that compares for what most people need to do. (except Google Docs)
Online shops shouldn't get exempt from collection taxes just because they don't have a physical presence in the state.
What if the site is overseas in a tax friendly country?
Say like Vanatu? Seeing the internet does not require much of a brick and mortar HQ, you can literally setup shop anywhere in the world. How do you expect to collect taxes from businesses not even truly doing direct business in the states?
I suppose you could tax paypal or the Visa company for the transactions, but internet tax will simply drive businesses overseas. Thats about it.
Just goes to show that in a free market, the prices of goods will come down.
I'm fine with the free market, but the telcos have gobbled up way too much tax payers money and used too much legislation (aka banning competitors like municipal wifi) to get a free lunch on this free market thing.
Had they not received all that public money for development in the 90's and legislated mandate of monopolies I think it would be fine... But they have and don't have much to show for it compared to other nations services.
We might need another trust busting of the telcos and maybe cable companies because the free market doesn't work well with monopolies.
His hobby is EVE, and they bumped his bottle, causing damage to his tiny ship.
I forget... Does EVE actually have a clause that says players own in game property or is it just like WoW? I remember there was one, but I can't remember which company. So in that regard it could be said the ship he rented was damaged.
what comes from your territory is your responsibility,
Seems well enough to work for the Lebanese government. Of course when you are at the brink of civil war... You really don't have control over what goes over your border.
When kids become adults (the legal kind) then and only then should they expect freedom to go their own way. But that's just my $0.02.
This brings up the old question about legally being an adult.
When you become 18 you can vote, smoke, be in a porn, watch porn, and serve in the army but you cannot drink.
(unless of course you serve in the military and serve overseas in a nation that allows 18 for drinking while on base leave)
Obviously there is some type of discrepancy of what it means to be an adult here.
And although being almost being 30 now this is a moot point for me at least, I still have to question this because of 18 year olds serving in Iraq not having the same freedoms as I do.
Eh. I have, but I believe it was due to a bad Windows TCP/IP stack. I bough Red Orchestra which requires steam even if you buy the store copy. Didn't work no matter what I did.
Eventually, the computer was reformatted for another non-related reason and out of curiosity I tried reinstalling steam and it worked fine. I couldn't tell you want configuration caused it to not work or if it was just windows.
Even though this is anecdotal, I've heard lots of similar complaints and not everyone is going to completely reformat their computer just to play a game or two.
Steve Jobs is pretty adamant about the "no drivers" issue with OS X.
I can't remember the last time I saw a graphics driver patch or fix for OS X.
Of course when you can threaten to pull a vendors entire line of video cards from potentially millions of new computers they tend to jump when you say jump. (and I believe jobs once did over ATI leaking a new Mac product once a few years back)
When you ask yourself "am I allowed to use this network?", "I don't know" does not equal "yes". The onus is upon you to verify that you are not trespassing before proceeding. In this particular case, it doesn't initially appear that any malice was involved. $400+40hrs sounds a little steep, but not in the realm of the unreasonable.
Am I allowed to use Slashdot's network? I really don't know but I'm assuming yes because it responds to port 80 HTTP requests.
How about Walnut's Creek puclic FTP. No one gave me specific permission but yet its fine for me to view and download things.
Same with municipal free Wifi that many cities have no in which are purely DHCP.
If people had to ask permission each time to use something on a "public" channel then the network admins would simply be flooded with manual requests.
If you want an working Wifi analogy, then let us say that it would be like the shop owner took a Cat 5 cable and strung it out to the middle of the parking lot and with a router that had a sign on it that says "Internet Access"
It does not say "no trespassing" or "do not use" and implies this network is free to use.
However even if the SSID simply said "Private Network Do Not Use" even if it was DCHP with full blow use it would be as fine as a no trespassing law (and as an aside in most states it is actually OK to cross property as long as there is A.) No fence or obstacles and B.) no posted "No Trespassing signs" and C.) You haven't asked them to leave)
And with tons of free Wifi networks open for use, and to expect users to get permission every single time to use an open resource is not only is unreasonable to the user but also to the network administrator who will have to manually deal with the requests.
And back to private networks and public... Even without wifi, most private networks will alert you immediately that they are private and that only certain people are allowed and have some type of identification or password security involved.
Don Imus was entitled by the First to say what he said about the Rutgers Women's Basketball team but there were severe consequences.
MSNBC was a private organization and does not have the constitution applied to it. Public schools are a government organizations and by legal precedent required to obey the constitution. (Remember the prayer in school cases?)
Protection of free speech doesn't mean what you think it means. It simply means that the government cannot restrict or punish people for what they say.
However, private organization can and will restrict and punish people for what they say. The key issue here is that this is a public school. If it were a private school it would be a non-issue.
Secondly, if it is libel then it has to be done in court by dafamed private individuals because government organizations as a whole cannot sue someone for libel.
What online rights is this about? Your right to post videos on the internet without being held accountable for what they contain?
IANAL, but public schools are part of the government and government cannot restrict or repress your freedom of speech due to the first amendment. Of course, this does not apply to private schools since they are not a part of the government and also doesn't mean that disrupting class in public school has free speech protection. The same would apply if you went into Congress and shouted at the top of your lungs in order to prevent the speaker from being heard.
Seeing that that this is a public school and that they punished him for something that was not direct disruption of school and was off campus would constitute (IMO) a free speech issue.
However, if this is libel then it is up to the courts to decide and not the school system. One cannot simply say "Oh this is libel and untrue!" without testing the court opinion first to receive that legal definition.
Isn't that going to get laughed right out of the courtroom?
Actually, I think it would be a big deal if you were using a laptop for desktop publishing to high quality printers. Most publishing houses are pretty strict when it comes to true colors because what you see on the screen may not actually print out the expected color if this is the case.
Slashdot Mirror
Screw that! I'm not connecting my brain to the company network.
Oh come on chummer! It ain't that bad unless you tamper with the company's Black ICE!
That's their job.
It was the job of the guards at a concentration camp to gas people, but it didn't make it right.
In fact it makes it doubly worse because you are being paid to do evil and are directly benefiting from your actions.
Just because it is your job doesn't make it OK and it does not absolve you of any wrong doing.
And I hope they have caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices.
Whooops! I meant I hope they have not caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices...
And I hope they have caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices.
One of the big sticking points with me is that the FO series allowed you to be good or evil. It gave you total freedom and even some in between.
But this entailed of course stealing from anyone, doing drugs, killing children, having sex with prostitutes, being a porn star, and basically killing everything that moves, but you would have some repreccusions such as encounters with bounty hunters or various other groups who were mad at you.
But at the same time you could also be a saint or follow the path of good.
Personally, I joined the brother hood and spent my time being a vigilante cleansing places like New Reno with healthy dose of burst fire.
And it still allowed you to beat the game without firing a single shot.
Without the freedom to be truly evil or good... It won't be Fallout.
That is what I am worried about.
It's just that the free software that I did find for the most common tasks - word processing and graphics editing, were buggy and too unstable to be used - even compared to their counterparts on other OSes.
I'm curious, besides MS Office and Adobe Photoshop (which are not free), what other free word processing and graphics programs have you found that work fine on Linux and Windows?
If you say OOo or Gimp, I'm going to hit you with a wet trout because Open Office still has compatibility problems with MS Docs (and especially with 2007 docs) and Gimp is still painful to use compared to Photoshop! (Its getting better though!)
So in light of this, I personally would like to know what the free applications are because I would like to use them too. Although, I have found that Google Docs work fine on any OS.
So unless you are talking about MS Office and Photoshop being free on the Mac because of torrents, for the life of me I can't think of any free software for any OS that compares for what most people need to do. (except Google Docs)
Disney Children's movies with the main character casually committing felonies with no apparent consequences are a problem.
Huh? What's so wrong at showing how real life works in Washington, DC?
No red-shirted crewman were harmed in this experiment.
Well... Except the one that looked at the fiber optic laser with his remaining good eye.
Online shops shouldn't get exempt from collection taxes just because they don't have a physical presence in the state.
What if the site is overseas in a tax friendly country?
Say like Vanatu? Seeing the internet does not require much of a brick and mortar HQ, you can literally setup shop anywhere in the world. How do you expect to collect taxes from businesses not even truly doing direct business in the states?
I suppose you could tax paypal or the Visa company for the transactions, but internet tax will simply drive businesses overseas. Thats about it.
I can't wait to see the consumer-whores freak out over not being able to dodge sales tax at the expense of their local communities!
Umm... That will just mean all the net businesses will move to states or countries that don't have local taxes.
USA has never really been expanisionist in the same sense
I know some native Americans who would disagree with you.
Not only that, but in the 1890's America adopted a hostile stance towards Spain and expanded it territories in Guam, Cuba, and the Philippines.
But on Stalin's scale... Well no... But the US has been historically expansionist since its early days.
And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it.
Whats preventing private citizens from installing alarm systems and their own CCTV?
In the states it costs me a paltry $20(US) a month for an alarm system with remote monitoring.
I could install a CCTV system for $5,000 or less, but I don't really see the need due to the monitoring.
Just goes to show that in a free market, the prices of goods will come down.
I'm fine with the free market, but the telcos have gobbled up way too much tax payers money and used too much legislation (aka banning competitors like municipal wifi) to get a free lunch on this free market thing.
Had they not received all that public money for development in the 90's and legislated mandate of monopolies I think it would be fine... But they have and don't have much to show for it compared to other nations services.
We might need another trust busting of the telcos and maybe cable companies because the free market doesn't work well with monopolies.
I dunno... Finger printing a media file ain't even close to a root kit on the evil scale.
You can right click on the file and convert it to mp3, which would erase all tracks.
;)
Its not trivial if you have a one button mouse!
His hobby is EVE, and they bumped his bottle, causing damage to his tiny ship.
I forget... Does EVE actually have a clause that says players own in game property or is it just like WoW? I remember there was one, but I can't remember which company. So in that regard it could be said the ship he rented was damaged.
Taking money I've earned to encourage others not to work makes me want to commit violence.
Right on! Its about time we did something about those extravagant CEO bonuses!
what comes from your territory is your responsibility,
Seems well enough to work for the Lebanese government. Of course when you are at the brink of civil war... You really don't have control over what goes over your border.
When kids become adults (the legal kind) then and only then should they expect freedom to go their own way. But that's just my $0.02.
This brings up the old question about legally being an adult.
When you become 18 you can vote, smoke, be in a porn, watch porn, and serve in the army but you cannot drink.
(unless of course you serve in the military and serve overseas in a nation that allows 18 for drinking while on base leave)
Obviously there is some type of discrepancy of what it means to be an adult here.
And although being almost being 30 now this is a moot point for me at least, I still have to question this because of 18 year olds serving in Iraq not having the same freedoms as I do.
I've never had a problem with it.
Eh. I have, but I believe it was due to a bad Windows TCP/IP stack. I bough Red Orchestra which requires steam even if you buy the store copy. Didn't work no matter what I did.
Eventually, the computer was reformatted for another non-related reason and out of curiosity I tried reinstalling steam and it worked fine. I couldn't tell you want configuration caused it to not work or if it was just windows.
Even though this is anecdotal, I've heard lots of similar complaints and not everyone is going to completely reformat their computer just to play a game or two.
Steve Jobs is pretty adamant about the "no drivers" issue with OS X.
I can't remember the last time I saw a graphics driver patch or fix for OS X.
Of course when you can threaten to pull a vendors entire line of video cards from potentially millions of new computers they tend to jump when you say jump. (and I believe jobs once did over ATI leaking a new Mac product once a few years back)
When you ask yourself "am I allowed to use this network?", "I don't know" does not equal "yes". The onus is upon you to verify that you are not trespassing before proceeding. In this particular case, it doesn't initially appear that any malice was involved. $400+40hrs sounds a little steep, but not in the realm of the unreasonable.
Am I allowed to use Slashdot's network? I really don't know but I'm assuming yes because it responds to port 80 HTTP requests.
How about Walnut's Creek puclic FTP. No one gave me specific permission but yet its fine for me to view and download things.
Same with municipal free Wifi that many cities have no in which are purely DHCP.
If people had to ask permission each time to use something on a "public" channel then the network admins would simply be flooded with manual requests.
If you want an working Wifi analogy, then let us say that it would be like the shop owner took a Cat 5 cable and strung it out to the middle of the parking lot and with a router that had a sign on it that says "Internet Access"
It does not say "no trespassing" or "do not use" and implies this network is free to use.
However even if the SSID simply said "Private Network Do Not Use" even if it was DCHP with full blow use it would be as fine as a no trespassing law (and as an aside in most states it is actually OK to cross property as long as there is A.) No fence or obstacles and B.) no posted "No Trespassing signs" and C.) You haven't asked them to leave)
And with tons of free Wifi networks open for use, and to expect users to get permission every single time to use an open resource is not only is unreasonable to the user but also to the network administrator who will have to manually deal with the requests.
And back to private networks and public... Even without wifi, most private networks will alert you immediately that they are private and that only certain people are allowed and have some type of identification or password security involved.
Oh Dogmeat... Oh how my burst fire missed you.
Don Imus was entitled by the First to say what he said about the Rutgers Women's Basketball team but there were severe consequences.
MSNBC was a private organization and does not have the constitution applied to it.
Public schools are a government organizations and by legal precedent required to obey the constitution. (Remember the prayer in school cases?)
Protection of free speech doesn't mean what you think it means. It simply means that the government cannot restrict or punish people for what they say.
However, private organization can and will restrict and punish people for what they say. The key issue here is that this is a public school. If it were a private school it would be a non-issue.
Secondly, if it is libel then it has to be done in court by dafamed private individuals because government organizations as a whole cannot sue someone for libel.
What online rights is this about? Your right to post videos on the internet without being held accountable for what they contain?
IANAL, but public schools are part of the government and government cannot restrict or repress your freedom of speech due to the first amendment. Of course, this does not apply to private schools since they are not a part of the government and also doesn't mean that disrupting class in public school has free speech protection. The same would apply if you went into Congress and shouted at the top of your lungs in order to prevent the speaker from being heard.
Seeing that that this is a public school and that they punished him for something that was not direct disruption of school and was off campus would constitute (IMO) a free speech issue.
However, if this is libel then it is up to the courts to decide and not the school system. One cannot simply say "Oh this is libel and untrue!" without testing the court opinion first to receive that legal definition.
Isn't that going to get laughed right out of the courtroom?
Actually, I think it would be a big deal if you were using a laptop for desktop publishing to high quality printers. Most publishing houses are pretty strict when it comes to true colors because what you see on the screen may not actually print out the expected color if this is the case.