What is wrong with violent sex? Just because you're a prude doesn't mean the people involved don't like it. As long as there are protections to make sure that all participants want to participate, then let them make whatever kind of porn they want. As long as they aren't being forced to do it, what is wrong with it?
I'm a total wuss when it comes to pain, but for some reason during sex things that would normally hurt actually feel good; well until you climax, then you feel it again.
People don't want their names released because of retaliation, not because they are ashamed. If you protect the people then there is no reason the names shouldn't be public. The problem is there are psyco religious groups that then attack these people. It like signing a petition for drug legalization and then having the cops getting a warrant to search your house for drugs. I don't mind putting my name to something I believe in, but does that give you a right to then assault me because of those beliefs that are counter to yours?
I was with you till "This will stop piracy in its tracks"; it won't do that. It may reduce some piracy, but piracy will always exist, the question is how much.
I was with you until you took a tangent on the rule of law. People already route around bad laws, yes a fraction gets snagged in them, but the majority of people just ignore them. For instance Marijuana, about the only thing the law has stopped in the quantity one carries on their person. Speeding, after getting a ticket I though was unjustified I did the speed limit religiously till my court date. 100% of the population speeds, the degree just varies. "The code of law" isn't as strong as you make it out to be. There are nearly 7 billion people on the planet, we only hear about less than.01% of the cases where the code of law is applied as an example to scare off those who would be on the sidelines. Most laws are just for show, it is security theater, the really bad people don't care about the law anyway. It is just to give boundaries to the honest people.
So we have to sanitize the world for the developmentally challenged that have never seen a real vagina or penis.
If that is the test, then no we don't need to sanitize. Everyone has seen a real vagina or penis. Now if you were to use an AND operator, then we might have an issue.
Latitude on the android isn't that accurate. Maybe in the future this will be an issue, right now its off by several miles and the refresh rate on peoples location can be off by as much as a day. In the future when they become more accurate and log location over time, then this might become an issue. As posted in one of the first post in this thread, if you don't want your location known, leave your phone at home.
Damnit, when I started typing the above post I was thinking I might get a "first post", but since I looked up the cool projects it took to long and about a dozen other people brought up makezine, oh well.
Makezine is the closest thing I've seen to anything like that lately. Lots of Arduino projects. I've also linked some projects you might find interesting:
DRM may last 5, 10, 50, 100 years, but eventually it will fade away. As networks bandwidth increases information spreads more quickly. If you look hard enough you can find anything you want right now. Eventually people will realize that we all benefit from having all information available on demand, and once that happens DRM will cease to exist.
If you like those old Jackie Chan movies you should check out this one, if you can find it. Its not Chan, but it is one of my favorite movies out of the Hong Kong cinema.
Because of long-ignored internal contradictions, however, the American research enterprise has become so severely dysfunctional that it actively prevents the great majority of the young Americans aspiring to do research from realizing their dreams.
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I thought the point of advertising was to drive sales. If people aren't interested in your product they are never going to buy it. On the other hand if people are interested in your product but don't know about it, they would buy it as soon as they found out about it. This increases your sales, whereas the other just turns people off of your product.
I work directly with our marketing department and we advertise to people who would buy our product, we avoid people who wouldn't because it is a waist of our resources. The people who might buy our product we do a little bit to keep our brand on the top of their minds when they do need us, and the people who might need us now we actively send a sales for to.
This trying to sell junk to people who don't need or want crap accomplishes nothing. It is just a waist of resources that could be used on something more productive. What a sad state of affairs if that is really the case.
Just because you put "Note, the link is safe for work.", does that really mean that it is? It modded +4 funny at this time, so maybe it is, but then maybe it isn't, maybe that is why it is funny. +5 informative might prove the link to in fact be safe and hopefully the moderation of -1 Troll would in fact prove it to be NSFW.
I actually like ads to be catered to my tastes, it seems like a more useful use of screen real estate. So if there was some sort of central repository, say Google, that housed what ads fit my shopping habits, I'd be for it. However then there are the cons. I don't really want them sending me ads for things that might be private. So I searched something for a health concern, I need to be able to remove that from my "ad profile". But if they want to show me ads for all the new video games coming out, things for my favorite sports teams, movies I might like, etc; I have no problem with them profiling me for those.
This particular publisher puts this warning on all their books, according to the comments on digg. Sorry I don't have better sources, but apparently this publisher is a small publisher that publishes a lot of historical works. This is there standard legal disclaimer. So basically this is an over reaction.
Is it really that simple? Why is biological diversity important? I mean if you fallow Darwinian logic won't there eventually only be one species? Survival of the fittest and all. Eventual all species should optimize to their environment or die off. Why is it so important to keep species who can't adapt?
Really we just need a variety of plants, cows, pigs, chicken, salmon, talapia and some other basic organisms used to support those animals and we're all good. The rest of the stuff out there just adds flavor to the pallet. I mean I guess you would have to worry about a major disease destroying the food supply (like what happened to banana's), but other than that is biological diversity that important? Do we really need to save the whales? What about the useless manatee?
Slashdot Mirror
What is wrong with violent sex? Just because you're a prude doesn't mean the people involved don't like it. As long as there are protections to make sure that all participants want to participate, then let them make whatever kind of porn they want. As long as they aren't being forced to do it, what is wrong with it?
I'm a total wuss when it comes to pain, but for some reason during sex things that would normally hurt actually feel good; well until you climax, then you feel it again.
People don't want their names released because of retaliation, not because they are ashamed. If you protect the people then there is no reason the names shouldn't be public. The problem is there are psyco religious groups that then attack these people. It like signing a petition for drug legalization and then having the cops getting a warrant to search your house for drugs. I don't mind putting my name to something I believe in, but does that give you a right to then assault me because of those beliefs that are counter to yours?
I was with you till "This will stop piracy in its tracks"; it won't do that. It may reduce some piracy, but piracy will always exist, the question is how much.
Honestly, you should know better?
Can he build a high enough profile to protect himself from danger?
The guy has already been put into hiding. He'll either have an accident or be labeled a terrorist.
It is all three.
That is what the Bible teaches, but that is not the way Christians practice it. I still can't get a beer on Sunday...
I was with you until you took a tangent on the rule of law. People already route around bad laws, yes a fraction gets snagged in them, but the majority of people just ignore them. For instance Marijuana, about the only thing the law has stopped in the quantity one carries on their person. Speeding, after getting a ticket I though was unjustified I did the speed limit religiously till my court date. 100% of the population speeds, the degree just varies. "The code of law" isn't as strong as you make it out to be. There are nearly 7 billion people on the planet, we only hear about less than .01% of the cases where the code of law is applied as an example to scare off those who would be on the sidelines. Most laws are just for show, it is security theater, the really bad people don't care about the law anyway. It is just to give boundaries to the honest people.
The ruling was for devices provided by the government, did you expect anything less? If it was for your own personal phone, that would be different.
So we have to sanitize the world for the developmentally challenged that have never seen a real vagina or penis.
If that is the test, then no we don't need to sanitize. Everyone has seen a real vagina or penis. Now if you were to use an AND operator, then we might have an issue.
Latitude on the android isn't that accurate. Maybe in the future this will be an issue, right now its off by several miles and the refresh rate on peoples location can be off by as much as a day. In the future when they become more accurate and log location over time, then this might become an issue. As posted in one of the first post in this thread, if you don't want your location known, leave your phone at home.
Damnit, when I started typing the above post I was thinking I might get a "first post", but since I looked up the cool projects it took to long and about a dozen other people brought up makezine, oh well.
Makezine is the closest thing I've seen to anything like that lately. Lots of Arduino projects. I've also linked some projects you might find interesting:
How to program a person.
How to scavenge a CD drive for parts.
Arduino accelerometer.
Electronics enclosure.
But I'm probably way off, since it sounds like you're looking for software projects, not hardware.
DRM may last 5, 10, 50, 100 years, but eventually it will fade away. As networks bandwidth increases information spreads more quickly. If you look hard enough you can find anything you want right now. Eventually people will realize that we all benefit from having all information available on demand, and once that happens DRM will cease to exist.
Here is some information for you:
/. if I do say so myself.
Top Gear vs Gran Turismo - Possibly the most awesome thing ever posted to
wiki reference
I've seen this done by other gaming mags before with similar results. If someone has those links that would be awesome as well.
If you like those old Jackie Chan movies you should check out this one, if you can find it. Its not Chan, but it is one of my favorite movies out of the Hong Kong cinema.
Because of long-ignored internal contradictions, however, the American research enterprise has become so severely dysfunctional that it actively prevents the great majority of the young Americans aspiring to do research from realizing their dreams.
You mean like arresting young chemists because their equipment serves a dual purpose and could be used to create something illegal like meth?
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I thought the point of advertising was to drive sales. If people aren't interested in your product they are never going to buy it. On the other hand if people are interested in your product but don't know about it, they would buy it as soon as they found out about it. This increases your sales, whereas the other just turns people off of your product.
I work directly with our marketing department and we advertise to people who would buy our product, we avoid people who wouldn't because it is a waist of our resources. The people who might buy our product we do a little bit to keep our brand on the top of their minds when they do need us, and the people who might need us now we actively send a sales for to.
This trying to sell junk to people who don't need or want crap accomplishes nothing. It is just a waist of resources that could be used on something more productive. What a sad state of affairs if that is really the case.
Just because you put "Note, the link is safe for work.", does that really mean that it is? It modded +4 funny at this time, so maybe it is, but then maybe it isn't, maybe that is why it is funny. +5 informative might prove the link to in fact be safe and hopefully the moderation of -1 Troll would in fact prove it to be NSFW.
We used to be brutal and fundamentalist here in the western world
Sadly we still are.
8===D
I actually like ads to be catered to my tastes, it seems like a more useful use of screen real estate. So if there was some sort of central repository, say Google, that housed what ads fit my shopping habits, I'd be for it. However then there are the cons. I don't really want them sending me ads for things that might be private. So I searched something for a health concern, I need to be able to remove that from my "ad profile". But if they want to show me ads for all the new video games coming out, things for my favorite sports teams, movies I might like, etc; I have no problem with them profiling me for those.
This particular publisher puts this warning on all their books, according to the comments on digg. Sorry I don't have better sources, but apparently this publisher is a small publisher that publishes a lot of historical works. This is there standard legal disclaimer. So basically this is an over reaction.
although it opened up a lot of jokes around the office about google/bing.
Is it really that simple? Why is biological diversity important? I mean if you fallow Darwinian logic won't there eventually only be one species? Survival of the fittest and all. Eventual all species should optimize to their environment or die off. Why is it so important to keep species who can't adapt?
Really we just need a variety of plants, cows, pigs, chicken, salmon, talapia and some other basic organisms used to support those animals and we're all good. The rest of the stuff out there just adds flavor to the pallet. I mean I guess you would have to worry about a major disease destroying the food supply (like what happened to banana's), but other than that is biological diversity that important? Do we really need to save the whales? What about the useless manatee?