When speaking, people make up for it with intonation, where other languages would make distinctions using word order and choice.
Actually, from people I've spoken to about language, English is not very inflection-dependant, if you speak it correctly. A language like Mandarin relies much, much more heavily on the way a word is said. The only reason most English speakers have trouble making themselves understood through email is that they can't actually speak the language properly.
I don't even see an arguement against it on grounds of civil liberties
Let's say you don't like the current government, and you'd rather a different one be in power. You meet with a bunch of other people who feel the same, at one of their houses. You discuss upcoming election plans, talk about a mailing list, etc. etc. etc. The government doesn't take kindly to these kinds of meetings, and it finds this house, through a mole or whatever. Government sends in their enforcers, who arrest the owner of the house, but he won't tell them who all was at the meeting. No matter, they can just check the house for DNA and fingerprints, and then discredit/blackmail/arrest/eliminate everyone who was at the meeting.
Also, all it would do is require criminals to be much more careful. You build a better mousetrap, they build a better mouse.
So _if_ violence is considered a reason to keep kids from playing a game, then, yes, I fail to see why this game wasn't M to start with.
The violence has to be truly obscene for an M rating. Of course, show a couple boobs, and it gets slapped on right away. I really can't figure out why ripping someone apart is less damaging to a child then seeing breasts, but maybe that's just me.
Actually, 1 seconds is not subliminal at all. Everyone watching will be very aware of what they see. The threshold for subliminal for vision is on the order of 1/20th of a second.
As for subliminal advertising being illegal, it's not, at least in Canada. It simply doesn't work, so it's not used.
You don't get it. The whole damned point is that it shouldn't be illegal. That the law itself is immoral. Your reactions are themselves disturbing to me.
You think copyright law is immoral? Do you mean the current laws on the books, or the idea itself that people can own the rights to copy things they produce? If it's the first, I (and most here) would agree; if it's the second, you need to do a reality check. You honestly think that if I produce something, through honest means and hard work, you should be able to copy and sell it without my permission? That attitude is damn disturbing to me.
Please note that I don't believe the current system is good. Copyright lasts far too long, has become monopolized by companies like the RIAA, and definately needs an overhaul. But I believe someone who creates something should have their work protected to some degree. If I write a novel, why should anyone with a printing press be able to turn out copies unless I allow them?
Using the LAN to share files you don't have the rights to is also unauthorized use of the University's network. If the Unis expelled students for spying on pirates and didn't expell the pirates themselves, they would have a buttload of lawsuits on their hands.
Imagine if everytime a new book came out, somebody put out a crappy one with an almost identical name. Go to the book store to get a present for your mother and you come back with "The DiVinco Code".
You do realize that this is fully legal, right? It's allowed as parody at least, and titles aren't generally copyrightable, IIRC. Song titles, for example, are definately not. I can advertise my singing of "yellow submarine" and sing somethingi you won't recognize at all. Of course, in my case that'd be true regardless of whether I sang the beatles version or my own...
...by that logic, why would any employer ever allow their employees to join a union?
Often employers allow them to because the employees have a specific set of skills that cannot be easily replaced by people with no training. If I had to train for 6 months to be able to work effectively in a factory, for example, I can probably start up a union with the other workers, since, if the big-wigs decide to fire us, they'll have no workforce for half a year. Walmart has no such restrictions. Nearly all the employees at a walmart are *very* replaceable - there's always a retiree or high school student who can stock shelves, ring up sales, greet customers, etc. It sucks, but the employees at walmart have no bargaining chip, so they can be pushed around by management.
What right does Wal-Mart have to dictate employees' off-duty behavior? Should you be able lose your job based on the where, who and why of your own private fraternization--regardless of how well you do your job? Should your employer be allowed to dictate the terms of your own private life?
This isn't just walmart - don't lots of employers in the US drug test? You can be fired (or not hired) for doing things on your personal time that have no impact on your work.
There's a problem, sure, but it's not with walmart exclusively.
Aren't you? I've heard of people roleplaying in-game dates and marriages. As well, some of the quests at the very least make reference to marriage (I recall one Tauren who wants you to find his wife or something). There is discussion of sexuality already in place, and it is of heterosexuality.
What do you mean by discussing sexual preferences? If a guy in your guild says, "oh, I have to go, got a date with a hot chick" that would be perfecly accepted by most people. If a guy said "oh, I have to go, got a date with a hot guy" there are lots of people who'd be all over him with slurs and insults.
As for "heterosexual friendly" guilds, well, that's basically all of them, now isn't it? Or do you often hear people say "that's so straight" and "OMG you hetero!"?
The problem is, a lot of guilds (and people) aren't that accepting of people of different races, ages, sexual orientations, etc. No, it doesn't matter if a member of Timmy's guild is gay, unless Timmy is a douchebag, and then it starts to matter because he acts like a douchebag.
I agree, politics should be left out of the games. But currently, they're not. My understanding is, this guy wanted to create a guild where it really didn't matter who you were, or who you felt attracted to, as long as you weren't a dick.
The fact is, it shouldn't be an issue, but it is. So do you cater to the people who are making it an issue by being jerks, or the people who are just trying to play the game and leave others be?
Contrary to what you seem to be thinking, a GLBT-friendly guild doesn't mean you have to be queer to join. It just means you have to not be an asshole.
Which automatically excludes a large portion of the people who play WoW.
This just reminded me of a story a teacher of mine passed along, which he heard from someone on the staff at a respected big-city newspaper.
Brezhnev, leader of the USSR, had just died, and so the staff of the paper was gathered to write up an article about his life, politics, death, etc. etc. Obviously, this would be front page news. The article was written quickly and easily enough, but the editorial staff argued for over 6 hours straight over whether or not to run it with the headline "HEAD RED DEAD."
Settlements are not just for the guilty. If someone has the choice between settling for $x and going to court where it would cost them $10x just for a lawyer, settling is a pretty good choice, guilty or not.
Not saying that the RIAA isn't being a giant tool here, just that settling isn't an indication of guilt.
No, there aren't. Theft is taking something without paying. In music piracy (a special case of copyright infringement), you took music without paying for it.
The difference is with theft, you deprive someone else of something. In piracy, the original owner still has the thing. I'd rather have a "thief" come in and make copies of all my cds then steal my laptop, wouldn't you?
It could well be true in California, but everywhere in Canada the left lane is supposed to be used specifically for passing. As in, you drive in the right lane, until you come up behind someone you wish you pass, when you then quickly switch into the left lane, pass, and go back into the right lane. It works very, very well when everyone does it.
Just a heads up, if you drive up the coast too far, *you* will be the asshole plenty of drivers are complaining about.
But the point is, your own are fine, comparatively. There isn't widespread disease or famine, there's clean water availible, there are social programs in place, etc. No, the western world isn't perfect, but it's still a hell of a lot better than Africa. "Taking care of your own" in this case is like giving your son caviar while your nephew starves.
i fail to understand the basic rational of helping others before you help those in your own back yard
The rational is you should help those that need it most, regardless of where they live, what colour their skin is, and how much they are like you. I'm not saying, necessarily, that these laptops are the best way to do that, but there are a lot more people in very, very desperate situations in Africa than in the US or Canada or Europe, or wherever you're from.
Slashdot Mirror
When speaking, people make up for it with intonation, where other languages would make distinctions using word order and choice.
Actually, from people I've spoken to about language, English is not very inflection-dependant, if you speak it correctly. A language like Mandarin relies much, much more heavily on the way a word is said. The only reason most English speakers have trouble making themselves understood through email is that they can't actually speak the language properly.
I don't even see an arguement against it on grounds of civil liberties
Let's say you don't like the current government, and you'd rather a different one be in power. You meet with a bunch of other people who feel the same, at one of their houses. You discuss upcoming election plans, talk about a mailing list, etc. etc. etc. The government doesn't take kindly to these kinds of meetings, and it finds this house, through a mole or whatever. Government sends in their enforcers, who arrest the owner of the house, but he won't tell them who all was at the meeting. No matter, they can just check the house for DNA and fingerprints, and then discredit/blackmail/arrest/eliminate everyone who was at the meeting.
Also, all it would do is require criminals to be much more careful. You build a better mousetrap, they build a better mouse.
So _if_ violence is considered a reason to keep kids from playing a game, then, yes, I fail to see why this game wasn't M to start with.
The violence has to be truly obscene for an M rating. Of course, show a couple boobs, and it gets slapped on right away. I really can't figure out why ripping someone apart is less damaging to a child then seeing breasts, but maybe that's just me.
Actually, 1 seconds is not subliminal at all. Everyone watching will be very aware of what they see. The threshold for subliminal for vision is on the order of 1/20th of a second.
As for subliminal advertising being illegal, it's not, at least in Canada. It simply doesn't work, so it's not used.
You don't get it. The whole damned point is that it shouldn't be illegal. That the law itself is immoral. Your reactions are themselves disturbing to me.
You think copyright law is immoral? Do you mean the current laws on the books, or the idea itself that people can own the rights to copy things they produce? If it's the first, I (and most here) would agree; if it's the second, you need to do a reality check. You honestly think that if I produce something, through honest means and hard work, you should be able to copy and sell it without my permission? That attitude is damn disturbing to me.
Please note that I don't believe the current system is good. Copyright lasts far too long, has become monopolized by companies like the RIAA, and definately needs an overhaul. But I believe someone who creates something should have their work protected to some degree. If I write a novel, why should anyone with a printing press be able to turn out copies unless I allow them?
Using the LAN to share files you don't have the rights to is also unauthorized use of the University's network. If the Unis expelled students for spying on pirates and didn't expell the pirates themselves, they would have a buttload of lawsuits on their hands.
Imagine if everytime a new book came out, somebody put out a crappy one with an almost identical name. Go to the book store to get a present for your mother and you come back with "The DiVinco Code".
You do realize that this is fully legal, right? It's allowed as parody at least, and titles aren't generally copyrightable, IIRC. Song titles, for example, are definately not. I can advertise my singing of "yellow submarine" and sing somethingi you won't recognize at all. Of course, in my case that'd be true regardless of whether I sang the beatles version or my own...
Often employers allow them to because the employees have a specific set of skills that cannot be easily replaced by people with no training. If I had to train for 6 months to be able to work effectively in a factory, for example, I can probably start up a union with the other workers, since, if the big-wigs decide to fire us, they'll have no workforce for half a year. Walmart has no such restrictions. Nearly all the employees at a walmart are *very* replaceable - there's always a retiree or high school student who can stock shelves, ring up sales, greet customers, etc. It sucks, but the employees at walmart have no bargaining chip, so they can be pushed around by management.
What right does Wal-Mart have to dictate employees' off-duty behavior? Should you be able lose your job based on the where, who and why of your own private fraternization--regardless of how well you do your job? Should your employer be allowed to dictate the terms of your own private life?
This isn't just walmart - don't lots of employers in the US drug test? You can be fired (or not hired) for doing things on your personal time that have no impact on your work.
There's a problem, sure, but it's not with walmart exclusively.
You're calling building a space elevator trivial? Damn, what do you consider hard?
So good it was immediately outlawed. Which is fine but, you have to admit, golf is a pretty artificial sport.
And there are sports that are more "real"? The very nature of sport is artifical.
You fool! You've given them the idea, now it's only a matter of time!
If you think China is still communist, you must have been asleep for the last 20 years.
It's not a sleepover.
And if it was, they'd just build a fort in front of the tv anyway.
Aren't you? I've heard of people roleplaying in-game dates and marriages. As well, some of the quests at the very least make reference to marriage (I recall one Tauren who wants you to find his wife or something). There is discussion of sexuality already in place, and it is of heterosexuality.
What do you mean by discussing sexual preferences? If a guy in your guild says, "oh, I have to go, got a date with a hot chick" that would be perfecly accepted by most people. If a guy said "oh, I have to go, got a date with a hot guy" there are lots of people who'd be all over him with slurs and insults.
As for "heterosexual friendly" guilds, well, that's basically all of them, now isn't it? Or do you often hear people say "that's so straight" and "OMG you hetero!"?
The problem is, a lot of guilds (and people) aren't that accepting of people of different races, ages, sexual orientations, etc. No, it doesn't matter if a member of Timmy's guild is gay, unless Timmy is a douchebag, and then it starts to matter because he acts like a douchebag.
I agree, politics should be left out of the games. But currently, they're not. My understanding is, this guy wanted to create a guild where it really didn't matter who you were, or who you felt attracted to, as long as you weren't a dick.
The fact is, it shouldn't be an issue, but it is. So do you cater to the people who are making it an issue by being jerks, or the people who are just trying to play the game and leave others be?
Contrary to what you seem to be thinking, a GLBT-friendly guild doesn't mean you have to be queer to join. It just means you have to not be an asshole.
Which automatically excludes a large portion of the people who play WoW.
Disclaimer: I play WoW, that is a joke, folks.
How about a suit made of duct tape.
s hion3.html
Ask and ye shall receive. http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/fashion/fa
Aboot a third the size of a looney.
This just reminded me of a story a teacher of mine passed along, which he heard from someone on the staff at a respected big-city newspaper.
Brezhnev, leader of the USSR, had just died, and so the staff of the paper was gathered to write up an article about his life, politics, death, etc. etc. Obviously, this would be front page news. The article was written quickly and easily enough, but the editorial staff argued for over 6 hours straight over whether or not to run it with the headline "HEAD RED DEAD."
Sadly, they decided against it.
Settlements are not just for the guilty. If someone has the choice between settling for $x and going to court where it would cost them $10x just for a lawyer, settling is a pretty good choice, guilty or not.
Not saying that the RIAA isn't being a giant tool here, just that settling isn't an indication of guilt.
No, there aren't. Theft is taking something without paying. In music piracy (a special case of copyright infringement), you took music without paying for it.
The difference is with theft, you deprive someone else of something. In piracy, the original owner still has the thing. I'd rather have a "thief" come in and make copies of all my cds then steal my laptop, wouldn't you?
It could well be true in California, but everywhere in Canada the left lane is supposed to be used specifically for passing. As in, you drive in the right lane, until you come up behind someone you wish you pass, when you then quickly switch into the left lane, pass, and go back into the right lane. It works very, very well when everyone does it.
Just a heads up, if you drive up the coast too far, *you* will be the asshole plenty of drivers are complaining about.
But the point is, your own are fine, comparatively. There isn't widespread disease or famine, there's clean water availible, there are social programs in place, etc. No, the western world isn't perfect, but it's still a hell of a lot better than Africa. "Taking care of your own" in this case is like giving your son caviar while your nephew starves.
i fail to understand the basic rational of helping others before you help those in your own back yard
The rational is you should help those that need it most, regardless of where they live, what colour their skin is, and how much they are like you. I'm not saying, necessarily, that these laptops are the best way to do that, but there are a lot more people in very, very desperate situations in Africa than in the US or Canada or Europe, or wherever you're from.