Wow... that's a pretty crappy reason to act in a moral fashion.
It's odd that you are so surprised by this and that you find it a "pretty crappy" reason as it is exactly how young humans are trained to behave properly.
Frankly, I pity you... apparently you don't do the right thing because you believe in it... you do the right thing because you're afraid to do otherwise.
You don't have to pity me; you're wrong in your mystifyingly baseless assumption.
Is this supposed to imply you'd EXPECT such behaviour from those of us with no belief in a higher power?! Or even consider it to be more likely?
Atheists are, in general, far LESS likely to tend towards extreme terrorist acts than religious people, for the simple fact that we are pretty well convinced that when we die it's GAME OVER - no afterlife - NOTHING is worth dying for.
This kind of behavior is absolutely expected of atheists.
Atheists are, in general, JUST AS likely (if not more so) to tend towards extreme terrorist acts than religious people, for the simple fact that they are pretty well convinced that when they die it's GAME OVER - no afterlife - NO final judgment for their actions.
Honestly, who cares what these people think about gaming consoles. What's next? Reporting on what Hamas or Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization thinks about the XBox 360?
What will kill WoW, in the MMORPG market, is a game where much the content is generated three ways: carefully designed by the developers, randomly generated by the game, and created by the players themselves.
Imagine a game where you can design you own swords and armor, or build your own houses. Players can build their own cities, running markets and shops (perhaps the shopkeep can be one of their 'alts', or their player when they are not online) -- even set up their own questgivers (perhaps you need some number of rare items to build your own magic device). Toss in the random spawning of troll villages in the boonies, or brigands on well travelled roads, and combine that with an epic main storyline created by the game designers with the usual castles and quests.
Until we get a game with more dynamic content -- mainly, random and user generated -- I can't really see anything displacing WoW. That game just does to many things right, and not one of its competitors appears to be building on that.
Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement.
I almost believed you weren't a shill for some advertising or marketing agency until I read that hilarious line. "If we didn't have ads plastered everywhere, we'd have COMMUNISM!!!1!"
Ads are not so much a product of a free capitalist society as they are a symptom of a culture that values money over things like time, aesthetics, and integrity.
People need to grow up and face the simple reality that IP is the only thing that secures an information-based economy.
I agree. And the sooner we all come to realize that fact, the sooner we can move away from this house of cards and move back to a solid goods-and-service-based economy (you know, actually *working* for money).
The concept of IP secures an information-based economy like covering your eyes protects you from an assailant.
If you don't vote, you have no right to complain about the government in power.
That's just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. So, in order to have a right to complain about the government in power, you have to actively support the scam* that it created to sustain its power?
(*the concept of voting, itself, is not a scam, but American elections are)
It's too bad the publishers are planning on ruining Spore this way. I was really looking forward to playing that game. And, from the looks of it, Spore was going to be such a ground-breaking game, too.
In my mind, electronic tabulation has its advantages: it can aggregate data quickly is the big one, allowing precincts to report quickly.
We use paper ballots counted by hand in Canadian federal elections. After the polls close that same evening, we get a running tally on TV of the votes from the polling stations across the country. The winner is discovered by the end of the night.
corruption is a problem of opportunity, not of character
Corruption most certainly IS a problem of character, and a statement like the one above sounds like it was made by someone trying to rationalize away their own lack thereof (no personal offense, but that *is* what it sounds like).
The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.
Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author's expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.
Some material prepared in connection with a game may be subject to copyright if it contains a sufficient amount of literary or pictorial expression. For example, the text matter describing the rules of the game, or the pictorial matter appearing on the gameboard or container, may be registrable.
You don't want McCain to become president? Vote for the person running against him that can actually win. You don't like any of the three? Find the one you can deal with for the next four years and vote for that one.
Insightful? It only takes an exaggeration of the issues (e.g. each candidate with a chance of winning wants to kill a different member of your family...) to show how woefully wrong this kind of "voting logic" is. Finding one candidate you can "deal with" among the ones who have the best chance of winning and voting for him is tantamount to giving up in democracy completely.
Slashdot Mirror
It's odd that you are so surprised by this and that you find it a "pretty crappy" reason as it is exactly how young humans are trained to behave properly.
You don't have to pity me; you're wrong in your mystifyingly baseless assumption.
When reached for comment, the "hacker" had this to say:
Slashdot really need a way to prevent idiots from getting mod points.
What are you talking about? There's still a chance Obama could be assassinated before he officially wins the party nomination.
This kind of behavior is absolutely expected of atheists.
Atheists are, in general, JUST AS likely (if not more so) to tend towards extreme terrorist acts than religious people, for the simple fact that they are pretty well convinced that when they die it's GAME OVER - no afterlife - NO final judgment for their actions.
-1, Offtopic.
Also, buy a dictionary.
Tree-spiking, piracy (the APL Jade in 2002), arson, etc.
So you think we should listen to eco-terrorists?
Honestly, who cares what these people think about gaming consoles. What's next? Reporting on what Hamas or Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization thinks about the XBox 360?
What will kill WoW, in the MMORPG market, is a game where much the content is generated three ways: carefully designed by the developers, randomly generated by the game, and created by the players themselves.
Imagine a game where you can design you own swords and armor, or build your own houses. Players can build their own cities, running markets and shops (perhaps the shopkeep can be one of their 'alts', or their player when they are not online) -- even set up their own questgivers (perhaps you need some number of rare items to build your own magic device). Toss in the random spawning of troll villages in the boonies, or brigands on well travelled roads, and combine that with an epic main storyline created by the game designers with the usual castles and quests.
Until we get a game with more dynamic content -- mainly, random and user generated -- I can't really see anything displacing WoW. That game just does to many things right, and not one of its competitors appears to be building on that.
Great. Yet another way I can fail to have sex.
An off-topic, ill-reasoned rant against "religion" being modded "troll"? On Slashdot?!
You must be new here. That is *the* way to boost your karma around here without having to make any real contribution to the community.
I almost believed you weren't a shill for some advertising or marketing agency until I read that hilarious line. "If we didn't have ads plastered everywhere, we'd have COMMUNISM!!!1!"
Ads are not so much a product of a free capitalist society as they are a symptom of a culture that values money over things like time, aesthetics, and integrity.
I think you mean this is the end.
I agree. And the sooner we all come to realize that fact, the sooner we can move away from this house of cards and move back to a solid goods-and-service-based economy (you know, actually *working* for money).
The concept of IP secures an information-based economy like covering your eyes protects you from an assailant.
That's just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. So, in order to have a right to complain about the government in power, you have to actively support the scam* that it created to sustain its power?
(*the concept of voting, itself, is not a scam, but American elections are)
It's too bad the publishers are planning on ruining Spore this way. I was really looking forward to playing that game. And, from the looks of it, Spore was going to be such a ground-breaking game, too.
And...? Are you trying to say the US doesn't scale up it's electoral system with the population?
Who's with me in gathering together a "coalition of the willing" among democratic nations for the purpose of bringing democracy to the U.S.?
We use paper ballots counted by hand in Canadian federal elections. After the polls close that same evening, we get a running tally on TV of the votes from the polling stations across the country. The winner is discovered by the end of the night.
You don't need computers to quickly count votes.
It's really easy actually. I'll get it started:
Corruption most certainly IS a problem of character, and a statement like the one above sounds like it was made by someone trying to rationalize away their own lack thereof (no personal offense, but that *is* what it sounds like).
Third parties are already allowed, by law, to publish products using the rules developed by WotC
From the US Copyright Law Factsheet on Games:
Sure, if you eat too much of it.
Insightful? It only takes an exaggeration of the issues (e.g. each candidate with a chance of winning wants to kill a different member of your family...) to show how woefully wrong this kind of "voting logic" is. Finding one candidate you can "deal with" among the ones who have the best chance of winning and voting for him is tantamount to giving up in democracy completely.