If cops and hardened criminals are the only ones with easy access to guns, one thing is gained: The "normal citizen" who goes nuts one day, will *not* simply have to walk by the nearest gun shop before gunning down his coworkers (or classmates)
While tragic, the instances you cite are statistically very very rare. That's why, even in the midst of all such occurrences that have happened over the past couple of years, murder rates are at a 30 year low.
Besides your gain, one thing is lost: the millions of acts of self-defense using a gun that occur each year in America. The normal unarmed citizen against even an unarmed criminal does not result in a level playing field, and citizens have absolutely no reason to expect the police to protect them. Unfortunately, their job is to clean up the mess afterwards. So how do you propose that people protect themselves against larger felons who have had years to learn to use their size to their advantage? Pepper spray that's even harder to use than a gun and often proves ineffective even when a good hit is achieved? Kung Fu? Harsh language?
It's too bad that your argument isn't based in reality at all. Otherwise, it might be convincing.
Your entire position is that "you can only defend yourself after you've been shot". Read it again. Do you realize now how incredibly ludicrous that is? It doesn't bother you that there are (depnding on the source) somewhere between 100 thousand and 3 million defensive gun uses in America each and every year? Or that 99% of defensive gun uses don't involve a shot being fired from either side? Or that a 120 lb woman doesn't have any other defense from a 250 lb man armed or not? Doesn't it seem shocking that American criminals are afraid to do home invasions because they know they're likely to get shot? Or that carjackers focus on vehicles with out-of-state license plates in states with concealed carry laws?
What really demolishes your argument are the document self-defense uses of guns by people who actually have been shot. Have you ever been shot? Why don't you talk to people who have been and still managed to defend themselves before you go blathering on about how impossible it is. Wow, it must really suck to be so amazingly wrong.
See numerous countries which have had guerilla led coups, or long running guerilla campaigns for examples. All of which leading to long running misery and suffering for the ordinary person
A coup is an overthrow of the government by a person in a position of authority without the consent of the people (otherwise it's a "revolution"). Generally this refers to the military... which means you're suggesting that countries disarm their own militaries?
You can't vote people out. You can only vote other people in, and only when the proper time comes around. You seem to think that someone is going to run under the platform "I am a Nazi, elect me." Here's a clue for you... sometimes politicians lie. No, really! It's true!
For starters, there's no way that you could disarm American police. You apparently believe that armed police beget armed criminals. Who knows, maybe you're right, but that still doesn't change the fact that criminals are dangerous and no police officer in even a medium sized city would consider going unarmed on the beat. Any attempt to disarm America's police force would result in a massive strike or walk-out. Suddenly we'd have no police at all. Do you think that would cut down on crime? If you have a gun for self-protection, you keep it near you. Chances are, if you didn't wake up before the burglar found your gun, he could have simply tied you up or killed you in your sleep. But then home invasions are much less common in the United States than the UK, where they have been on the rise. Why? Because burglars are deathly afraid of armed targets. Most American home invasions do that happen occur while the occupant is away. On the other hand, estimates for the number of defensive gun uses ranges anyway from 100 thousand to 3 million, depending on the source, and most of these (99%) don't even involve a shot being fired. I know my neighbor has a gun. I helped him pick it out. Why would that knowledge bother me? For ten thousand years before the creation of firearms, men have found ways to murder each other. Instead of trying to stop people from protecting themselves, maybe you need to start investigating "Why?"
Censorship can be done by anyone. I agree that it isn't always wrong when performed by private individuals or organizations.
However, what we have here is censorship because of the fear of governmental action. Outcast's provider is afraid of UK's civil courts, and with good reason. The problem lies with Britain's stifling libal laws. The end result is that NetBenefit is not acting because it is morally opposed to any of Outcast's content, but because they know they will be held responsible in the eyes of the court, with no defense.
Because the cause is legislature, what we are looking at is, in fact, governmentally sponsored censorship. Play all the word games you like, you can't escape that simple truth.
This only a day after a British poster warned of the American descent into fascism while he was laughingly safe in merry-old England.
You're never safe from encroachment upon inalienable human rights, no matter where you are. The protection of your God-given rights is a continual fight that will never be won, because as long as there are men who seek to be free, there will be others who desire to enslave them. Human nature will never be stamped out in the foreseeable future. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
...I'm right in the middle of playing the first Baldur's Gate myself, so I recognized the name immediately. Call me slow, but I knew I didn't have the time to engage in what I accurately predicted would be a obsessive game when I first received it for Christmas. You know, I was right. Problem is, I still really don't have the time, what with helping to organize North Carolina's biggest LAN party and all.
I commented to my wife that Russel Crowe seemed really pissed when he was up, announcing an award. Did he already know he was going to lose? (Probably.)
Simple... read the last line of the ZDNet article:
The Associated Students and San Francisco City College have also been named in the lawsuit.
The guy is suing the college for actions that are in no way affiliated with the school itself. This reflects the strange "Why sue one person when you can sue everyone?" attitude that seems to have afflicted American lawyers and litigants lately. It's also a sure sign that someone is completely full of shit.
White Wolf has always been a crap system. Simple, maybe, but it throws realism and common sense right out the door as bad as anything TSR has ever made.
I've been working for the past couple years on my own free (as in source) role-playing system. Like described in this article, it has a core set of rules and specific settings (with additional rules and abilties) are layered over that. For example, the primary "campaign" setting for it is the cyberpunk Night's Edge world, but I'm also working on a spell system for a fantasy setting. I believe this is also the way GURPS works, though I have to admit I've never played it.
What really makes me scratch my head is why adult-oriented sites provide links to the various censorware sites. Webmasters, particuarly adult webmasters, should be the LAST people on the planet to lend legitimacy to these snake-oil salesmen and wanna-be thought police.
Why, for the same reason strange and bizarre things are always done: fear of lawsuits. Adult sites are under constant threat of lawsuits from parents. Those parents will blame the sites for every antisocial behavior of their unsupervised children. (We all know how nudity turns children into murderous psychopaths.) So as a defense, these sites can say "But why didn't you use some kind of filter software? Look, we even provide a link to it!" Adult sites don't make any money off of children anyway (no credit cards!) and the adults who regularly visit those sites aren't going to be using filters in the first place (they don't download their porn at the local library). Really, what have they got to lose? As long as filter programs exist, they don't have to worry about the government just up and banning adult sites completely (or they hope).
You were welcome to conduct your own analysis of Symantec's blocked site list. Peacefire made their software freely available and posted a link to the URL database on Symantec's server... until Symantec rendered their link useless. Kind of makes it hard for anyone to counter Peacefire's numbers, and it was Symantec's decision to do so.
Maybe they do have something to hide?
Did you read Peacefire's site? According to them:
We found that portions of the Web sites of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU.org), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF.org), the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT.org), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC.org), and the Censorware Project (Censorware.org) were blocked by I-Gear in its "pornography" category. On the other hand, none of the major pro-censorship groups (enough.org, frc.org, afa.net, fotf.org, etc.) had portions of their Web sites blocked.
"I don't trust that Peacefire is telling the truth," Taylor said. "It's all part of the cyberpunk revolution. They don't like the government telling them that they don't have free access to the Internet. It's like 'Lord of the Flies,' and they think they have the conch."
Oh, God, what an idiot. There are so many things wrong with that statement, I don't know where to begin!
...from what I understand, Gibson doesn't know much about actual computer hardware or software and based on last night's show, I'd have to judge that to be the case.
Was anything explained here? How exactly were the "images" generated? Holograms? Special goggles and renderers? What? Star Trek's had some silly hologram eps, but this was just lame. A runaway computer program? That's what the reset button is for. A programmed character "magically" moving itself from one computer into another, incorporating into software she wasn't apparently even programmed for?
The whole thing bottomed out the moment Scully stepped into the arena and just went downhill from there.
He claimed that the only way it worked was that the union guys let everyone know on Detroit's west side that they would be hurt if they sought to replace a worker fired because of the union. I don't see how programmers, geeks, etc. could effectivly threaten/scare their peers into not becoming a scab.
Why not? Granted, it's not really the traditional realm of the white-collar worker, but I don't see any reason why it would be impossible. I'm not condoning it, it's blatantly illegal, but are geeks any less protective of their physical selves than steel and auto workers?
My company gets as many good resumes a month as we have tech employees. We all know that we're expendable.
And yet while it can be a relatively simple task to instruct an assembly line worker in the details of his/her station, playing catch-up on an IT project is rarely so easy. In the realm of programming, it can days or weeks to begin to understand the complexities of a large project. What, you don't think some people have job security just because they're the only ones who understand the thing they're working on? Accidentally "lose" the documentation, and maybe your employer will start to see how valuable you are.
I'm a contract programmer paid hourly, I work 9 to 5 with an hour for lunch. I've only worked 1 weekend because of an impending deadline, and that was 18 months and 2 contracts ago. That's it.
If an employer told me I'd have to put in 50 or 60 hours a week, I'd laugh so hard I'd puke. Not only would this leave me zero personal time (I feel I don't have enough as it is), but I also know that it would burn me out. I have a hard enough time sitting in front of a computer for the time I already work. My wife left a administrative assistant job at Haht Software because they expected her to work those kinds of hours, and she was salary so no overtime for her. You're damn right I supported her decision to leave.
This is not a matter of work ethic, but simply a matter of knowing the boundary between your work and your personal life. I am an individual and I belong to myself, not some company. As a result, my time will not be monopolized by my employer. Any company that doesn't understand this will be looking for a new programmer.
Slashdot Mirror
- If cops and hardened criminals are the only ones with easy access to guns, one thing is gained: The "normal citizen" who goes nuts one day, will *not* simply have to walk by the nearest gun shop before gunning down his coworkers (or classmates)
While tragic, the instances you cite are statistically very very rare. That's why, even in the midst of all such occurrences that have happened over the past couple of years, murder rates are at a 30 year low.Besides your gain, one thing is lost: the millions of acts of self-defense using a gun that occur each year in America. The normal unarmed citizen against even an unarmed criminal does not result in a level playing field, and citizens have absolutely no reason to expect the police to protect them. Unfortunately, their job is to clean up the mess afterwards. So how do you propose that people protect themselves against larger felons who have had years to learn to use their size to their advantage? Pepper spray that's even harder to use than a gun and often proves ineffective even when a good hit is achieved? Kung Fu? Harsh language?
Your entire position is that "you can only defend yourself after you've been shot". Read it again. Do you realize now how incredibly ludicrous that is? It doesn't bother you that there are (depnding on the source) somewhere between 100 thousand and 3 million defensive gun uses in America each and every year? Or that 99% of defensive gun uses don't involve a shot being fired from either side? Or that a 120 lb woman doesn't have any other defense from a 250 lb man armed or not? Doesn't it seem shocking that American criminals are afraid to do home invasions because they know they're likely to get shot? Or that carjackers focus on vehicles with out-of-state license plates in states with concealed carry laws?
What really demolishes your argument are the document self-defense uses of guns by people who actually have been shot. Have you ever been shot? Why don't you talk to people who have been and still managed to defend themselves before you go blathering on about how impossible it is. Wow, it must really suck to be so amazingly wrong.
- See numerous countries which have had guerilla led coups, or long running guerilla campaigns for examples. All of which leading to long running misery and suffering for the ordinary person
A coup is an overthrow of the government by a person in a position of authority without the consent of the people (otherwise it's a "revolution"). Generally this refers to the military... which means you're suggesting that countries disarm their own militaries?You can't vote people out. You can only vote other people in, and only when the proper time comes around. You seem to think that someone is going to run under the platform "I am a Nazi, elect me." Here's a clue for you... sometimes politicians lie. No, really! It's true!
For starters, there's no way that you could disarm American police. You apparently believe that armed police beget armed criminals. Who knows, maybe you're right, but that still doesn't change the fact that criminals are dangerous and no police officer in even a medium sized city would consider going unarmed on the beat. Any attempt to disarm America's police force would result in a massive strike or walk-out. Suddenly we'd have no police at all. Do you think that would cut down on crime? If you have a gun for self-protection, you keep it near you. Chances are, if you didn't wake up before the burglar found your gun, he could have simply tied you up or killed you in your sleep. But then home invasions are much less common in the United States than the UK, where they have been on the rise. Why? Because burglars are deathly afraid of armed targets. Most American home invasions do that happen occur while the occupant is away. On the other hand, estimates for the number of defensive gun uses ranges anyway from 100 thousand to 3 million, depending on the source, and most of these (99%) don't even involve a shot being fired. I know my neighbor has a gun. I helped him pick it out. Why would that knowledge bother me? For ten thousand years before the creation of firearms, men have found ways to murder each other. Instead of trying to stop people from protecting themselves, maybe you need to start investigating "Why?"
However, what we have here is censorship because of the fear of governmental action. Outcast's provider is afraid of UK's civil courts, and with good reason. The problem lies with Britain's stifling libal laws. The end result is that NetBenefit is not acting because it is morally opposed to any of Outcast's content, but because they know they will be held responsible in the eyes of the court, with no defense.
Because the cause is legislature, what we are looking at is, in fact, governmentally sponsored censorship. Play all the word games you like, you can't escape that simple truth.
You're never safe from encroachment upon inalienable human rights, no matter where you are. The protection of your God-given rights is a continual fight that will never be won, because as long as there are men who seek to be free, there will be others who desire to enslave them. Human nature will never be stamped out in the foreseeable future. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
No, Slashdot is all about hot grits, ninjas, and petrified Natalie Portmans. Where have you been?
I mean the page was on AOL for crying out loud! How big a clue do you guys need?
...I'm right in the middle of playing the first Baldur's Gate myself, so I recognized the name immediately. Call me slow, but I knew I didn't have the time to engage in what I accurately predicted would be a obsessive game when I first received it for Christmas. You know, I was right. Problem is, I still really don't have the time, what with helping to organize North Carolina's biggest LAN party and all.
I commented to my wife that Russel Crowe seemed really pissed when he was up, announcing an award. Did he already know he was going to lose? (Probably.)
- The Associated Students and San Francisco City College have also been named in the lawsuit.
The guy is suing the college for actions that are in no way affiliated with the school itself. This reflects the strange "Why sue one person when you can sue everyone?" attitude that seems to have afflicted American lawyers and litigants lately. It's also a sure sign that someone is completely full of shit.Pay per play? Didn't we already thoroughly trash this idea?
White Wolf has always been a crap system. Simple, maybe, but it throws realism and common sense right out the door as bad as anything TSR has ever made.
Actually, I think was the Monster Manual II, but I can't be sure.
I hope to finish it someday and give it a better name. Until then, it is simply the Rebel Programmers Society Role-Playing System.
It sounds to me that this is basically what TSR is interested in doing, so they're obviously not the first to do so.
It's definitely pronounced "Sass".
- If Washington, who has the toughest anti-spam laws, can't convinct this guy, what good are the laws at all?
Well, uh, that's kind of the point. The judge decided that the law was so tough that it was "unduly restrictive and burdensome".Mind you, I'm not saying that I agree with the judge's decision.
- What really makes me scratch my head is why adult-oriented sites provide links to the various censorware sites. Webmasters, particuarly adult webmasters, should be the LAST people on the planet to lend legitimacy to these snake-oil salesmen and wanna-be thought police.
Why, for the same reason strange and bizarre things are always done: fear of lawsuits. Adult sites are under constant threat of lawsuits from parents. Those parents will blame the sites for every antisocial behavior of their unsupervised children. (We all know how nudity turns children into murderous psychopaths.) So as a defense, these sites can say "But why didn't you use some kind of filter software? Look, we even provide a link to it!" Adult sites don't make any money off of children anyway (no credit cards!) and the adults who regularly visit those sites aren't going to be using filters in the first place (they don't download their porn at the local library). Really, what have they got to lose? As long as filter programs exist, they don't have to worry about the government just up and banning adult sites completely (or they hope).Maybe they do have something to hide?
Did you read Peacefire's site? According to them:
And the pro-censorship response?
Oh, God, what an idiot. There are so many things wrong with that statement, I don't know where to begin!
Someone needs to inform my fellow Americans that Pakistan is a nuclear power, not what I'd call a "third world" country.
Was anything explained here? How exactly were the "images" generated? Holograms? Special goggles and renderers? What? Star Trek's had some silly hologram eps, but this was just lame. A runaway computer program? That's what the reset button is for. A programmed character "magically" moving itself from one computer into another, incorporating into software she wasn't apparently even programmed for?
The whole thing bottomed out the moment Scully stepped into the arena and just went downhill from there.
Sorry, but it's true. Time to face up to the truth. You too, Mojo.
How is including news & email readers with Navigator any different than including Internet Explorer with Windows?
- He claimed that the only way it worked was that the union guys let everyone know on Detroit's west side that they would be hurt if they sought to replace a worker fired because of the union. I don't see how programmers, geeks, etc. could effectivly threaten/scare their peers into not becoming a scab.
Why not? Granted, it's not really the traditional realm of the white-collar worker, but I don't see any reason why it would be impossible. I'm not condoning it, it's blatantly illegal, but are geeks any less protective of their physical selves than steel and auto workers?- My company gets as many good resumes a month as we have tech employees. We all know that we're expendable.
And yet while it can be a relatively simple task to instruct an assembly line worker in the details of his/her station, playing catch-up on an IT project is rarely so easy. In the realm of programming, it can days or weeks to begin to understand the complexities of a large project. What, you don't think some people have job security just because they're the only ones who understand the thing they're working on? Accidentally "lose" the documentation, and maybe your employer will start to see how valuable you are.If an employer told me I'd have to put in 50 or 60 hours a week, I'd laugh so hard I'd puke. Not only would this leave me zero personal time (I feel I don't have enough as it is), but I also know that it would burn me out. I have a hard enough time sitting in front of a computer for the time I already work. My wife left a administrative assistant job at Haht Software because they expected her to work those kinds of hours, and she was salary so no overtime for her. You're damn right I supported her decision to leave.
This is not a matter of work ethic, but simply a matter of knowing the boundary between your work and your personal life. I am an individual and I belong to myself, not some company. As a result, my time will not be monopolized by my employer. Any company that doesn't understand this will be looking for a new programmer.