Seriously, no one gets anything done in any job with their manager looking over their shoulder. Just think about it, every time the boss wanders into your office you stop what you're doing. And if you didn't, they'd start in with 'advice' until your productivity was shot to hell anyway. key-loggers and such are another great example. Any place I've ever been that used key-logging people spent more time trying to either get around it, or do the bare minimum WPM than they did in actual honest work. An invention that lets a boss micro-manage every employee on a second-by-second basis is going to bring our society grinding to a halt.
Man I'm tired of this logic. Yes, you're right, but for almost a full decade the users and Livejournal had something of a tacit agreement about who was responsible for what. Then Lj was sold, and the new owners have engaged in screwover after screwover. I don't really are about the Lj issue itself, it's the right-wing neo-fascist Warriors for Innocence who are using this as their first salvo in 'cleansing' the internet of the 'gay agenda' that I'm bothered by, but your logic is getting repeated ad nauseum by every Tom, Dick, and Harry who doesn't bother with a blog of their own. This *is* a problem, because prior to now Livejournal and their Users, who create all of the content in the User-Created Content website that is Livejournal, had an understanding. That understanding has been violated. Does Livejournal/Six Apart have that right? Yes, they do. Does it still suck like some sort of barely-human sub-social pig-creature suckling at the warm teat of capitalism? Yes, yes it does. It was a lousy way to treat their users, and they deserve every bit of backlash they get from it.
I will agree that anyone that talks about 'Freedom of speech' is a whackjob, except in relation to where Lj says they did it because having incest as an interest would be ZMORG illegalz. If Lj wants to ban it from their servers they can, but just like idiots can't claim free-speech on private property, Livejournal can't claim they're doing it because it's 'illegalz'. They're doing it because they don't like the subject and want to censor it. Fine. Well within their rights. But they need to man up about it.
Well, I maintain that video games are the equal of any other form of entertainment out there, be it books or movies, however I can understand wanting to limit the amount of time spent in relatively unproductive pursuits. However, it doesn't sound like you were inclined towards violent video games to begin with. As you said, you made a choice about video games. I freely admit, that to a limited extent, the entertainment a person indulges in can shape their viewpoints. However, I think the largest portion of the shaping is made by the *choices* that person makes, including the very choice of what media to indulge in. In the end, in my opinion at least, it still isn't the video games, it is whatever led that person to choose that type of video game.
I'll give you an example of sorts. I apologize that it isn't a very clear example, but it's an image that has stuck with me. Also, I get the feeling its a memory we might share. I was young when Frank Miller first came on the scene, I remember when he took the helm of DareDevil. Before then most of the heros were either still uberamerican boy scouts, or 'anti-heros' whose only claim to fame was the sort of aggressive macho posturing of teen jocks. I just remember reading, "And the Kingpin had shown him...that a man without hope...was a man without fear." And thinking, "Yes, by god." After that I definitely made a choice about the type of comics I read, and they were certainly darker, more cynical, even more violent, but I don't think they changed the path my behaviour was going to take, instead they reflected it. Not sure I made any sense at all with that story. Sorry.
If you quit playing video games, why are you trolling articles in the Game catagory? Also, your logic is faulty, to some extent. While I can understand your viewpoint, there is also the question of why you wanted to play video games in the first place, and what prompted you to quit. If you experienced a life-changing decision that removed your desire to play video games (assuming you were actually a gamer, and not just someone who played a video game every now and then), isn't it more likely that this life-altering moment has more to do with your peace of mind than what entertainment you take part in?
And for everyone decrying the 20 minute thing, while I agree this doesn't count for much as a behaviorial study, behavior is a culmination of environmental factors. You will never be able to scientifically test for behavior, in my personal opinion. Which translates as: If it really is a behavior problem, it's still the damn parents fault.
As an initial series of tests on physiological effects of violent video games, I think this was a good start.
Honestly, QoS helps a *lot*. What the telcos aren't mentioning is that the reason it's needed is that their networks are a patchwork of incremental upgrades and bought out regional networks that they've never bothered to actually integrate, just slapped a new logo on. In point of fact, you're probably lucky if you're not running on copper that Ma Bell laid down. Heck, if it wasn't for the fact that they'd have to pay her, they'd still have Ethel running the switchboards. I'm all in favor of companies keeping prices down by keeping costs down, but they go way past that. For one thing, they're hardly keeping prices down, and for another, slashing your maintenance and repair budget year after year, and investing in only minimal upgrades rather than actually overhauling are hardly ways to offer quality service of any sort. In point of fact, they're policies that probably end up costing more in the long run, but what does that matter as long as a corporate CEO can show a profit for the past year he's been in office? Especially since he wont usually hold that office for more than five years before retiring obscenely wealthy? Same problem we have with presidents. With the exception that they generally start out obscenely wealthy and get more so. Wait, no, that's about the same too.
*cough*
Sorry, something pressed my bitter-button today.
"The cell phone conversation is not dropped when the switch between cellular network and WiFi hotspot takes place."
Speaking as ex tech-support for an VOIP service that will remain anonymous, allow me to say that half the time American VOIP service over anything except fiber-optic can't manage to maintain a phone call period. =p I'm not sure I believe the Japanese firms are really doing it any better, but they do have a better infrastructure set up, so maybe it does work halfway decently.
It might help if the half of America that jumped on VOIP because it was cheap would at least update the rest of their technology along with it. No matter how good the connection your ISP is giving you is, if you're still using a modem and router that would manage higher data transmission rates if converted to carrier pigeon roosts, your overall experience will be lousy. And wiring. Ma Bell laid copper wire may be good enough for the telecomms to still wring a profit out of, but it's probably not helping your connection any. Nor are the cords that have been hidden behind your desk getting chewed by cats for the last ten years. Also, interference from large stacks of electronics piled on your desk, certain brands of laptop and ginormous desktop monitors, halogen lights, and having metals like a fridge, or say, wall full of plumbing between your wireless router and where-ever you're trying to use equipment. Allright, I'm going to shut up now. Suffice to say, I could go on for two more pages at least. It's a good technology with 'a lot of potential', but as for something for widespread daily use? That marriage of consumer and product will be about as good as the one to the girl with the 'nice personality'. If they were lying about the personality. =p
And then there's cell phones. Never did the tech support for those, but I saw it. "Your cell phone isn't working? Hmmm, let me check a few things." *Anonymous network down across the entire southwest* "Well, it might be a network problem, we'll get you back up as soon as possible. What? No, only a few people affected I'm sure."
Ah, the lies, the horrible, horrible lies.....
*cough* Sorry, my therapist said I was over it....
Reading through the replies, I see a lot of making fun of these guys screen names, but not a lot of mention of the fact that the media felt the need to include that info.
I mean, really, WTF? I don't know about the rest of you, but I've got a good half-dozen or so current screen names for various uses. All I can possibly see in that little tidbit of flavor text is the usual media 'all haxxors are evil and use wierd techno-jargon that real human beings can't understand, and strange code-names just like terrorists'. Giving the public their 'screen name' is just...pointless, except perhaps to help perpetuate an image of pasty-skinned teens sitting in dark basements. Which may or may not be true, it just strikes me as disturbing.
Seeing as how companies base at least some decisions on what the customer wants, allow me to go on record here as saying if google gives me free internet, I will gladly have as many little google babies to support their googmatrix as they want.
Let's face it, they're google. If it's on the internet and they care, they'll read it. Google is already watching you, comrade. Embrace it.
I don't think it's all that bad of a move. First off, both the Xbox 2 (Quick, give it a name with a 3 in it or it'll look bad compared to Sony...feh.) and the PS3 were rushed due to competition with each other. If the Xbox fails because of that, and because they rushed to undercut even Sony's timetable, then it clearly makes sense. Above and beyond that, though, Sony is really more about franchise loyalty and the flavor of games produced for it, and they have plenty of games slated all the way through next year for the PS2. They're not going to lose their core audience to Xbox. Most Playstation fans who want a game that comes out on XBox will wait and buy it for their actual computer. Meanwhile, if they did delay, the PS3 might actually manage to live up to part of it's hype, something I don't have a lot of hope for given the release-date war between Sony and Microsoft. Eventually it reached some obscure level of corporate triple-dog-dare, and Sony called them on it. If they succeed Sony will have to launch, if not they can stand their laughing and calling MS a dumbass for trying it. I can only imagine the screams of pain from engineers everytime MS and Sony's marketing teams released a revised release date.
I was going to comment on that, too. Although I was looking at the fact that Japan is reported to have 20-25 mbs broadband connections. (I shudder deliciously to imagine what their fiber speeds are like)
Actually, I just read the article on this on FARK and the process the guy is describing is kind of fascinating. Basically, since the TV is controlled by the IR signal from the remote, almost anything the hotel has accessible, is accessible through IR (and the program this guy wrote). Up to and including, appearantly some hotels mini-bars are controllable by IR remote (locking due to local prohibitions, or so the maid can restock them, etc).
It's actually this sort of hacking, not PC hacking that I think has the possibility of causing the largest backlash in coming years. As more and more things become complicated pieces of electronic equipment. (Ferinstance: Hotel mini-bars) and computers become more powerful and portable, it's going to become more and more possible to interface with all sorts of equipment. Stealing some guys tax records off his hard drive is bad, but in most cases people just don't viscerally respond to it. Identity theft, no matter how terrifying credit card companies try to make it, just doesn't strike as much of a cord with people. But being able to walk away with free booze, that's something. Or let's say wireless becomes more prevalent in small scale communications. In some buildings, say a grocery store, or school, there's probably going to come a point where it will be cheaper to rig up some form of wireless PA system, rather than running new wires or whatever. With the proper effort, any standardized communication system can be hijacked. Now, admittedly, if it was me, I'd be in the grocery store whispering, "Snausages!" in varying tones of voice over the PA, but I can see all sorts of ways things could go. Suffice to say, hacking computers to most people is still just so much techno-magic. When it has a physical effect that can be directly observed, that will make it something much different.
(another possible example, let's say they go to RFID tagging cars, and priority tag police cruisers or other emergency vehicles for getting through traffic lights and whatnot, well, there's another easily imagined opportunity.)
Sorry, I'm babbling.
In short, when computers are illegal, on criminals will have computers. Okay, I'm done.
I don't know whether I think it'll work or not. I agree with many of the points made so far, that the deployment seems awfully fast for a project of this nature, that it's not really space travel (really, it's kind of an inverse bungie jump. We throw you up really high, then you fall back down.) all that sort of stuff. However, and here's where I think this maybe has half a chance, my dad, and myself to a lesser extent, held onto the dream of space flight for most of his life. Eventually it reached a point though where it seemed pretty clear that it wasn't going to reach a point where he would ever achieve the dream himself. I remember the look on his face when he admitted that fact out loud for the first time. I don't know what I think of the chances of this really working, but I know if it did, if I could ever afford to, I'd buy my dad a ticket. And maybe myself, too. To the current generation maybe this seems mostly like a cheap stunt or gimmick, and I guess it probably is, but I think it's more important than that. A lot more important. It's about reminding an entire generation, who are now the one's in power, that when they were children they grew up believing that the dream of spaceflight was their birthright. Without the cold war to keep it going, I think that's about the most important thing that could happen for space exploration.
"up to date on trends that affect oil"
And yet, you not only post anonymously, you completely skip mentioning Iceland's attempts at harnessing geo-thermal to create an actually clean hydrogen economy. I'm impressed. Whether or not Iceland ever actually succeeds, I'd think it deserves at least a mention.
True, but there were other things that kept people tied to a company town, (debt to the company store, for instance, or the closer family ties of the time before cars allowed people to spread out so much) whereas the ability to move goods improving profit had already been proved by trains. And at first, it seemed like the internet was the same thing, with the pell-mell rush to e-commerce of the dot-com boom. But that never truly materialized, and the possibilities of inroads into maximum profitability seem to increase constantly.
It seems to me, that lawmakers are having to rush to catch up with the internet in much the same way the automobile revolution caught them with their pants down. Early on their were laws restricting cars to 4 miles per hour in some cities and townships, and at least one place where a person had to walk in front of the car with a lantern to warn people. Traffic law went through a lot of permutations as society tried to deal with the sudden ability for people and goods to be moved from place to place with ease. I think that's a pretty fair analogy of where we are at now with intellectual property. Except the analogy breaks down when confronted with the fact that there are companies in position to achieve, or at least maintain, obscene profit levels by preventing the expansion of intellectual traffic flow.
I can believe it was only ten dollars. If nothing else the precedent that they caved and gave him any money at all is probably worth far more than the legal battle he would have lost if he'd actually had to go toe-to-toe with them.
While I can appreciate the innate fanboy urge to persecute anyone who fails to properly respect the Truth of his or her personal religion-replacement, I'd usually rather hear about what could have been done to make a work better rather than why a particular work is bad. Getting published isn't easy, and between editors, fact checks, and other people involved in the process, the final product may not always bear a lot of relation to what you originally meant. The original story of A Clockwork Oarnge versus the American version of the story used for the movie is a good example of that. While I personally don't care for the original version (feeling that it's a bit excessively...British, I suppose) I was interested in how the last chapters radically alter the meaning of the story.
And speaking of which, I feel that the book being reviewed that started all of this could have done with a bit more representation of Kubrick's work if it wanted to talk about philosophy in sci-fi.
Just in case anyone thought I wasn't the kettle when I made fun of people's personal hobby horses earlier.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, no one gets anything done in any job with their manager looking over their shoulder. Just think about it, every time the boss wanders into your office you stop what you're doing. And if you didn't, they'd start in with 'advice' until your productivity was shot to hell anyway. key-loggers and such are another great example. Any place I've ever been that used key-logging people spent more time trying to either get around it, or do the bare minimum WPM than they did in actual honest work. An invention that lets a boss micro-manage every employee on a second-by-second basis is going to bring our society grinding to a halt.
Man I'm tired of this logic. Yes, you're right, but for almost a full decade the users and Livejournal had something of a tacit agreement about who was responsible for what. Then Lj was sold, and the new owners have engaged in screwover after screwover. I don't really are about the Lj issue itself, it's the right-wing neo-fascist Warriors for Innocence who are using this as their first salvo in 'cleansing' the internet of the 'gay agenda' that I'm bothered by, but your logic is getting repeated ad nauseum by every Tom, Dick, and Harry who doesn't bother with a blog of their own. This *is* a problem, because prior to now Livejournal and their Users, who create all of the content in the User-Created Content website that is Livejournal, had an understanding. That understanding has been violated. Does Livejournal/Six Apart have that right? Yes, they do. Does it still suck like some sort of barely-human sub-social pig-creature suckling at the warm teat of capitalism? Yes, yes it does. It was a lousy way to treat their users, and they deserve every bit of backlash they get from it. I will agree that anyone that talks about 'Freedom of speech' is a whackjob, except in relation to where Lj says they did it because having incest as an interest would be ZMORG illegalz. If Lj wants to ban it from their servers they can, but just like idiots can't claim free-speech on private property, Livejournal can't claim they're doing it because it's 'illegalz'. They're doing it because they don't like the subject and want to censor it. Fine. Well within their rights. But they need to man up about it.
Well look around you, not everyone who has the ability to talk, should. Okay. You first.
Well, I maintain that video games are the equal of any other form of entertainment out there, be it books or movies, however I can understand wanting to limit the amount of time spent in relatively unproductive pursuits. However, it doesn't sound like you were inclined towards violent video games to begin with. As you said, you made a choice about video games. I freely admit, that to a limited extent, the entertainment a person indulges in can shape their viewpoints. However, I think the largest portion of the shaping is made by the *choices* that person makes, including the very choice of what media to indulge in. In the end, in my opinion at least, it still isn't the video games, it is whatever led that person to choose that type of video game.
I'll give you an example of sorts. I apologize that it isn't a very clear example, but it's an image that has stuck with me. Also, I get the feeling its a memory we might share. I was young when Frank Miller first came on the scene, I remember when he took the helm of DareDevil. Before then most of the heros were either still uberamerican boy scouts, or 'anti-heros' whose only claim to fame was the sort of aggressive macho posturing of teen jocks. I just remember reading, "And the Kingpin had shown him...that a man without hope...was a man without fear." And thinking, "Yes, by god." After that I definitely made a choice about the type of comics I read, and they were certainly darker, more cynical, even more violent, but I don't think they changed the path my behaviour was going to take, instead they reflected it. Not sure I made any sense at all with that story. Sorry.
If you quit playing video games, why are you trolling articles in the Game catagory? Also, your logic is faulty, to some extent. While I can understand your viewpoint, there is also the question of why you wanted to play video games in the first place, and what prompted you to quit. If you experienced a life-changing decision that removed your desire to play video games (assuming you were actually a gamer, and not just someone who played a video game every now and then), isn't it more likely that this life-altering moment has more to do with your peace of mind than what entertainment you take part in?
And for everyone decrying the 20 minute thing, while I agree this doesn't count for much as a behaviorial study, behavior is a culmination of environmental factors. You will never be able to scientifically test for behavior, in my personal opinion. Which translates as: If it really is a behavior problem, it's still the damn parents fault.
As an initial series of tests on physiological effects of violent video games, I think this was a good start.
Honestly, QoS helps a *lot*. What the telcos aren't mentioning is that the reason it's needed is that their networks are a patchwork of incremental upgrades and bought out regional networks that they've never bothered to actually integrate, just slapped a new logo on. In point of fact, you're probably lucky if you're not running on copper that Ma Bell laid down. Heck, if it wasn't for the fact that they'd have to pay her, they'd still have Ethel running the switchboards. I'm all in favor of companies keeping prices down by keeping costs down, but they go way past that. For one thing, they're hardly keeping prices down, and for another, slashing your maintenance and repair budget year after year, and investing in only minimal upgrades rather than actually overhauling are hardly ways to offer quality service of any sort. In point of fact, they're policies that probably end up costing more in the long run, but what does that matter as long as a corporate CEO can show a profit for the past year he's been in office? Especially since he wont usually hold that office for more than five years before retiring obscenely wealthy? Same problem we have with presidents. With the exception that they generally start out obscenely wealthy and get more so. Wait, no, that's about the same too. *cough* Sorry, something pressed my bitter-button today.
"The cell phone conversation is not dropped when the switch between cellular network and WiFi hotspot takes place."
Speaking as ex tech-support for an VOIP service that will remain anonymous, allow me to say that half the time American VOIP service over anything except fiber-optic can't manage to maintain a phone call period. =p
I'm not sure I believe the Japanese firms are really doing it any better, but they do have a better infrastructure set up, so maybe it does work halfway decently.
It might help if the half of America that jumped on VOIP because it was cheap would at least update the rest of their technology along with it. No matter how good the connection your ISP is giving you is, if you're still using a modem and router that would manage higher data transmission rates if converted to carrier pigeon roosts, your overall experience will be lousy.
And wiring. Ma Bell laid copper wire may be good enough for the telecomms to still wring a profit out of, but it's probably not helping your connection any. Nor are the cords that have been hidden behind your desk getting chewed by cats for the last ten years.
Also, interference from large stacks of electronics piled on your desk, certain brands of laptop and ginormous desktop monitors, halogen lights, and having metals like a fridge, or say, wall full of plumbing between your wireless router and where-ever you're trying to use equipment.
Allright, I'm going to shut up now. Suffice to say, I could go on for two more pages at least.
It's a good technology with 'a lot of potential', but as for something for widespread daily use? That marriage of consumer and product will be about as good as the one to the girl with the 'nice personality'. If they were lying about the personality. =p
And then there's cell phones. Never did the tech support for those, but I saw it.
"Your cell phone isn't working? Hmmm, let me check a few things."
*Anonymous network down across the entire southwest*
"Well, it might be a network problem, we'll get you back up as soon as possible. What? No, only a few people affected I'm sure."
Ah, the lies, the horrible, horrible lies.....
*cough* Sorry, my therapist said I was over it....
*He lied too!!!!*
Reading through the replies, I see a lot of making fun of these guys screen names, but not a lot of mention of the fact that the media felt the need to include that info.
I mean, really, WTF? I don't know about the rest of you, but I've got a good half-dozen or so current screen names for various uses. All I can possibly see in that little tidbit of flavor text is the usual media 'all haxxors are evil and use wierd techno-jargon that real human beings can't understand, and strange code-names just like terrorists'. Giving the public their 'screen name' is just...pointless, except perhaps to help perpetuate an image of pasty-skinned teens sitting in dark basements. Which may or may not be true, it just strikes me as disturbing.
Seeing as how companies base at least some decisions on what the customer wants, allow me to go on record here as saying if google gives me free internet, I will gladly have as many little google babies to support their googmatrix as they want.
Let's face it, they're google. If it's on the internet and they care, they'll read it. Google is already watching you, comrade. Embrace it.
The requested URL (hardware/05/08/13/2257212.shtml?tid=222) was not found.
Ha! Found it!
In order to perhaps apply some relevance, perhaps you should consider turning your rant into a podcast....
I find it interesting that Cnet is the second link about this, after the Google/Cnet snub a bit ago.
I don't think it's all that bad of a move. First off, both the Xbox 2 (Quick, give it a name with a 3 in it or it'll look bad compared to Sony...feh.) and the PS3 were rushed due to competition with each other. If the Xbox fails because of that, and because they rushed to undercut even Sony's timetable, then it clearly makes sense. Above and beyond that, though, Sony is really more about franchise loyalty and the flavor of games produced for it, and they have plenty of games slated all the way through next year for the PS2. They're not going to lose their core audience to Xbox. Most Playstation fans who want a game that comes out on XBox will wait and buy it for their actual computer. Meanwhile, if they did delay, the PS3 might actually manage to live up to part of it's hype, something I don't have a lot of hope for given the release-date war between Sony and Microsoft. Eventually it reached some obscure level of corporate triple-dog-dare, and Sony called them on it. If they succeed Sony will have to launch, if not they can stand their laughing and calling MS a dumbass for trying it. I can only imagine the screams of pain from engineers everytime MS and Sony's marketing teams released a revised release date.
I was going to comment on that, too. Although I was looking at the fact that Japan is reported to have 20-25 mbs broadband connections. (I shudder deliciously to imagine what their fiber speeds are like)
Actually, I just read the article on this on FARK and the process the guy is describing is kind of fascinating. Basically, since the TV is controlled by the IR signal from the remote, almost anything the hotel has accessible, is accessible through IR (and the program this guy wrote). Up to and including, appearantly some hotels mini-bars are controllable by IR remote (locking due to local prohibitions, or so the maid can restock them, etc). It's actually this sort of hacking, not PC hacking that I think has the possibility of causing the largest backlash in coming years. As more and more things become complicated pieces of electronic equipment. (Ferinstance: Hotel mini-bars) and computers become more powerful and portable, it's going to become more and more possible to interface with all sorts of equipment. Stealing some guys tax records off his hard drive is bad, but in most cases people just don't viscerally respond to it. Identity theft, no matter how terrifying credit card companies try to make it, just doesn't strike as much of a cord with people. But being able to walk away with free booze, that's something. Or let's say wireless becomes more prevalent in small scale communications. In some buildings, say a grocery store, or school, there's probably going to come a point where it will be cheaper to rig up some form of wireless PA system, rather than running new wires or whatever. With the proper effort, any standardized communication system can be hijacked. Now, admittedly, if it was me, I'd be in the grocery store whispering, "Snausages!" in varying tones of voice over the PA, but I can see all sorts of ways things could go. Suffice to say, hacking computers to most people is still just so much techno-magic. When it has a physical effect that can be directly observed, that will make it something much different. (another possible example, let's say they go to RFID tagging cars, and priority tag police cruisers or other emergency vehicles for getting through traffic lights and whatnot, well, there's another easily imagined opportunity.) Sorry, I'm babbling. In short, when computers are illegal, on criminals will have computers. Okay, I'm done.
I don't know whether I think it'll work or not. I agree with many of the points made so far, that the deployment seems awfully fast for a project of this nature, that it's not really space travel (really, it's kind of an inverse bungie jump. We throw you up really high, then you fall back down.) all that sort of stuff. However, and here's where I think this maybe has half a chance, my dad, and myself to a lesser extent, held onto the dream of space flight for most of his life. Eventually it reached a point though where it seemed pretty clear that it wasn't going to reach a point where he would ever achieve the dream himself. I remember the look on his face when he admitted that fact out loud for the first time. I don't know what I think of the chances of this really working, but I know if it did, if I could ever afford to, I'd buy my dad a ticket. And maybe myself, too. To the current generation maybe this seems mostly like a cheap stunt or gimmick, and I guess it probably is, but I think it's more important than that. A lot more important. It's about reminding an entire generation, who are now the one's in power, that when they were children they grew up believing that the dream of spaceflight was their birthright. Without the cold war to keep it going, I think that's about the most important thing that could happen for space exploration.
"nationwide ban of"
Words that are almost always an entirely bad idea. Especially when such idiocy includes "public and private".
I mean, really. What about bartender college? When will the insanity end?!!?!?one!?!11!?
And all those poor deprived freshmen! What about the children! Wont somebody please think of the children!
Back to my original statement, people proposing nation-wide morality bans should be banned from all public and private institutions of conversation.
Well...sure! If I ever see a large order for hand-knit sweaters for damned souls I'll start expecting it.
In regards to an episode of Charlie Rose discussing Japan's recent expansions. Link to my eventual comedtary:1 02743.html#cutid1/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/devilindupriest/
"up to date on trends that affect oil" And yet, you not only post anonymously, you completely skip mentioning Iceland's attempts at harnessing geo-thermal to create an actually clean hydrogen economy. I'm impressed. Whether or not Iceland ever actually succeeds, I'd think it deserves at least a mention.
True, but there were other things that kept people tied to a company town, (debt to the company store, for instance, or the closer family ties of the time before cars allowed people to spread out so much) whereas the ability to move goods improving profit had already been proved by trains. And at first, it seemed like the internet was the same thing, with the pell-mell rush to e-commerce of the dot-com boom. But that never truly materialized, and the possibilities of inroads into maximum profitability seem to increase constantly.
It seems to me, that lawmakers are having to rush to catch up with the internet in much the same way the automobile revolution caught them with their pants down. Early on their were laws restricting cars to 4 miles per hour in some cities and townships, and at least one place where a person had to walk in front of the car with a lantern to warn people. Traffic law went through a lot of permutations as society tried to deal with the sudden ability for people and goods to be moved from place to place with ease. I think that's a pretty fair analogy of where we are at now with intellectual property.
Except the analogy breaks down when confronted with the fact that there are companies in position to achieve, or at least maintain, obscene profit levels by preventing the expansion of intellectual traffic flow.
I can believe it was only ten dollars. If nothing else the precedent that they caved and gave him any money at all is probably worth far more than the legal battle he would have lost if he'd actually had to go toe-to-toe with them.
How many of them got slashdotted?
While I can appreciate the innate fanboy urge to persecute anyone who fails to properly respect the Truth of his or her personal religion-replacement, I'd usually rather hear about what could have been done to make a work better rather than why a particular work is bad. Getting published isn't easy, and between editors, fact checks, and other people involved in the process, the final product may not always bear a lot of relation to what you originally meant. The original story of A Clockwork Oarnge versus the American version of the story used for the movie is a good example of that. While I personally don't care for the original version (feeling that it's a bit excessively...British, I suppose) I was interested in how the last chapters radically alter the meaning of the story.
And speaking of which, I feel that the book being reviewed that started all of this could have done with a bit more representation of Kubrick's work if it wanted to talk about philosophy in sci-fi.
Just in case anyone thought I wasn't the kettle when I made fun of people's personal hobby horses earlier.