It would depend on each individual contract as well as the songs that they are putting up on iTunes. One article I read seemed to imply that the Sony artists were putting up songs on iTunes that were not from Sony records, but some may be, and that Sony was planning on breaking off their relations with artists who put songs on iTunes. It seemed to imply that what the artists are doing is not technically in violation of their contracts, but Sony sure as hell wasn't happy about it. Ultimately it'll probably come down to a case by case basis for each artist.
So you're saying that an embryo, or more specifically a blastocyst, is not a body because it's just a ball of cells? What are you or I but masses of cells, ableit ones far more specially configured than a blastocyst? At what point do you decide that an arbitrary mass of cells is no longer just a mass of cells but is a "body"?
Regardless, whether or not you call a blastocyst a body or not is moot. You still have not addressed the fundamental question, which is: What is it about human life that makes it worthy of the protection of law? The only consistent rule I've ever been able to come up with is that any human life is worthy of the protection of law. A blastocyst is genetically human and is scientifically living, and therefore I see no reason why it does not deserve the same lawful protection that you or I receive.
The only ones who still think its wrong are pro-lifers that think masturbating is unethical because it kills potential life, and uneducated people. I hope you are simply in the second group.
Wow, what do you know...I fall into neither. The greatest flaw in any logical argument is to assume that the only way anyone could not agree with you is if they are stupid. In addition, your claim is completely unfounded and backed up by no form of rational argument whatsoever. For the record, the reason masturbation is considered a sin has nothing to do with potential life. It has to do with the corruption of a person's healthy sexualtiy that people believe accompanies masturbation. At least try to get your facts right before resorting to baseless ad hominem attacks.
And since when do the ends not justify the means? If I saw a man armed with a gun entering my house I sure would kill him instead of letting him kill my family. I think that the ends (saving my family) definetly justify the means (killing a man)
And you have just fallen into the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. You say the ends are good, they were brought about by the means, which in this case happen to be justified, therefore the ends justify the means. The reason it is justifiable to kill a man trying to kill you is not because it so happens that the outcome of you killing the man, i.e. you surviving, is good. Rather it is justifiable to kill a man trying to kill you because of the fundamental nature of human rights. It is a very complex argument and one that should not occur right now, so hopefully this counter-example will demonstrate how the ends do not justify the means. Let's say a man is trying to kill you in public and you have a gun. Are you justified in trying to shoot him? Clearly yes. Now, say you miss, hit an innocent bystander, and the guy trying to kill you succeeds. The end was bad, two innocent people died, but the means were still completely justified. Therefore the only logical explanation is that the justification for the means is not connected to the end.
Flamebait -- Flamebait refers to comments whose sole purpose is to insult and enrage. If someone is not-so-subtly picking a fight (racial insults are a dead giveaway), it's Flamebait.
Disagreeing with me does not make me flamebait. This, however, is: Learn to fucking mod, jackasses. Moderation is NOT a tool to spread your personal political beliefs. If you have a problem with what someone posts, reply. Don't abuse the mod system.
a) Embryos don't have bodies? No, they just have bodies that are different from yours or mine. In the same way that my body is different from that of a newborn child or a 90 year old man. An embryo is living and is genetically human and that makes a lot of people uncomfortable treating them as things. The best argument is that they don't have minds, but this is an argument in the much larger and abstract argument of what is it that makes human beings worthy of protection under law. Is being a living human being enough? Does it require conciousness? If so what is consciousness? Can you prove if someone has or does not have consciousness? Again, a question we don't have a real answer to.
b) This begs the question of whether or not it was ethical to create the embryos in the first place knowing that most of them were going to be thrown away. Now we're back at the question in 'a', what makes a human being worthy of protection? And besides, starving kids in Africa are going to die anyway, why not harvest their organs? Think of all the good we could do! Hell, you and I are going to die some day. Killing you or I now isn't going to result in any loss of life that wasn't going to be lost anyway, so obviously there would be absolutely nothing wrong with scientists killing us to study us as long as it would benefit society!
There are still a lot of unanswered questions and grey areas when it comes to embryonic stem cell research that no one can answer. The only reason people choose to gloss over these and support embryonic stem cell research is because they are blinded by the potential benefit we might derive. I know it's cliche, but the ends do not justify the means. Unfortunately it seems a lot of people in America have forgotten that.
when are they going to start seeing money coming back in?
As soon as they drive Sony and Nintendo out of business. MS's goal right now is not profit, it is increasing market share. Once they get a significant enough market share they can strongarm developers into exclusives and start jacking up the price of the console, games, and royalties while lowering the cost to manufacture (and quality of) their console and games because of a lack of significant opposition, thereby recouping their early losses. MS isn't out to make money on the XBox tomrrow or next year. They're planning for the future.
It's all fine and dandy until all the publishers decide they don't want to bother with real books anymore and students no longer have a choice. They couldn't do that now, there'd be way too much of a backlash, but after getting students acclimated to the idea of limited use e-books for 10 years or so they could convince people that limited access is perfectly normal and acceptable and that expecting to have unlimited access to information you pay for is not only morally wrong but criminal (thank you Mr. DMCA). At that point the consumer not only gets screwed, but the publishers make more profits AND control the flow of information, and worst of all most people would probably think that that's the way it's supposed to be.
I'm confused...is this supposed to be directed at me? If not then nevermind this post, but if so I don't understand where you're coming from. My point was that there is a problem, but its with the entire tech field, not just game programming. I didn't say anything about why there aren't as many minorities in tech fields, just that there are.
I wonder how the ratio of minority programmers in video games compres to the ratio of minority programmers in non-video game jobs. In my class of 40-50 CS/CE students, I know of two blacks and no hispanics. Maybe the problem isn't with the video game industry, but with the entire programming field itself.
And all the regular soundtrack songs that have been remixed and posted on OC aren't real songs? There's no legal implications with these songs that aren't in any other song they have up. You are right in some respect though, mainstream artists may be more legally defensive of their songs than the creator of a game soundtrack.
Err...if I'm not mistaken, shouldn't that be the other way around? Xrays, which have much higher frequency than radio waves, pass easily through most solid objects, and gamma rays which are even higher pass even more easily.
Re:Windows programming is purposely vague..
on
Visual Studio Hacks
·
· Score: 1
MSDN is pretty useful, but it is also woefully lacking in detail in some areas. Several times I've had to resort to crawling through 10+ pages of google searches to find information that should have been in the MSDN that wasn't. For example, in VB6 a ListView object must have focus in order for a manual call to StartLabelEdit to work. It took me forever to figure out why the method, which was called by clicking on a button elsewhere on the form thus taking focus away from the ListView, wouldn't work.
Mayhaps the reason the Chinese government does not just ban all video games, or video games with pk elements, is because they know there is a significant influx of foreign money due to gold/item farming in mmorpgs which are a significant portion of games with pk elements.
I almost wonder if rumors like this are not leaked by the company behind the game on purpose, but diffused through several layers. This way Sony can judge people's reactions to the rumor while maintaining deniability. If people seem to not care they can go ahead, but if there's a lot of negative reaction they can always add the slot on there and save face by denying that they ever intended the PS3 to lack a PS2/PS1 memory card slot.
Slashdot Mirror
Well it does suck (above 100 ms), but I was being facetious.
Here
Sorry for the doublepost, shoulda linked the article in the first place.
It would depend on each individual contract as well as the songs that they are putting up on iTunes. One article I read seemed to imply that the Sony artists were putting up songs on iTunes that were not from Sony records, but some may be, and that Sony was planning on breaking off their relations with artists who put songs on iTunes. It seemed to imply that what the artists are doing is not technically in violation of their contracts, but Sony sure as hell wasn't happy about it. Ultimately it'll probably come down to a case by case basis for each artist.
Pff, maybe you wouldn't be able to. Us Road Runner subscribers would be blazing away with 600 ms ping times.
And this is why we need game manufacturers that have the balls to countersue for libel, extortion, and fraud. I can only hope...
So you're saying that an embryo, or more specifically a blastocyst, is not a body because it's just a ball of cells? What are you or I but masses of cells, ableit ones far more specially configured than a blastocyst? At what point do you decide that an arbitrary mass of cells is no longer just a mass of cells but is a "body"?
Regardless, whether or not you call a blastocyst a body or not is moot. You still have not addressed the fundamental question, which is: What is it about human life that makes it worthy of the protection of law? The only consistent rule I've ever been able to come up with is that any human life is worthy of the protection of law. A blastocyst is genetically human and is scientifically living, and therefore I see no reason why it does not deserve the same lawful protection that you or I receive.
The only ones who still think its wrong are pro-lifers that think masturbating is unethical because it kills potential life, and uneducated people. I hope you are simply in the second group.
Wow, what do you know...I fall into neither. The greatest flaw in any logical argument is to assume that the only way anyone could not agree with you is if they are stupid. In addition, your claim is completely unfounded and backed up by no form of rational argument whatsoever. For the record, the reason masturbation is considered a sin has nothing to do with potential life. It has to do with the corruption of a person's healthy sexualtiy that people believe accompanies masturbation. At least try to get your facts right before resorting to baseless ad hominem attacks.
And since when do the ends not justify the means? If I saw a man armed with a gun entering my house I sure would kill him instead of letting him kill my family. I think that the ends (saving my family) definetly justify the means (killing a man)
And you have just fallen into the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. You say the ends are good, they were brought about by the means, which in this case happen to be justified, therefore the ends justify the means. The reason it is justifiable to kill a man trying to kill you is not because it so happens that the outcome of you killing the man, i.e. you surviving, is good. Rather it is justifiable to kill a man trying to kill you because of the fundamental nature of human rights. It is a very complex argument and one that should not occur right now, so hopefully this counter-example will demonstrate how the ends do not justify the means. Let's say a man is trying to kill you in public and you have a gun. Are you justified in trying to shoot him? Clearly yes. Now, say you miss, hit an innocent bystander, and the guy trying to kill you succeeds. The end was bad, two innocent people died, but the means were still completely justified. Therefore the only logical explanation is that the justification for the means is not connected to the end.
Flamebait -- Flamebait refers to comments whose sole purpose is to insult and enrage. If someone is not-so-subtly picking a fight (racial insults are a dead giveaway), it's Flamebait.
Disagreeing with me does not make me flamebait. This, however, is: Learn to fucking mod, jackasses. Moderation is NOT a tool to spread your personal political beliefs. If you have a problem with what someone posts, reply. Don't abuse the mod system.
a) Embryos don't have bodies? No, they just have bodies that are different from yours or mine. In the same way that my body is different from that of a newborn child or a 90 year old man. An embryo is living and is genetically human and that makes a lot of people uncomfortable treating them as things. The best argument is that they don't have minds, but this is an argument in the much larger and abstract argument of what is it that makes human beings worthy of protection under law. Is being a living human being enough? Does it require conciousness? If so what is consciousness? Can you prove if someone has or does not have consciousness? Again, a question we don't have a real answer to.
b) This begs the question of whether or not it was ethical to create the embryos in the first place knowing that most of them were going to be thrown away. Now we're back at the question in 'a', what makes a human being worthy of protection? And besides, starving kids in Africa are going to die anyway, why not harvest their organs? Think of all the good we could do! Hell, you and I are going to die some day. Killing you or I now isn't going to result in any loss of life that wasn't going to be lost anyway, so obviously there would be absolutely nothing wrong with scientists killing us to study us as long as it would benefit society!
There are still a lot of unanswered questions and grey areas when it comes to embryonic stem cell research that no one can answer. The only reason people choose to gloss over these and support embryonic stem cell research is because they are blinded by the potential benefit we might derive. I know it's cliche, but the ends do not justify the means. Unfortunately it seems a lot of people in America have forgotten that.
Anyone who's ever performed cunnilingus while kneeling on a hardwood floor can attest to the validity of this representation.
Weeeell that pretty much excludes everyone who would actually be reading this article. ^_^
On a side note...what...the...fuck? Just....what the fuck....yeah I got nothin else.
when are they going to start seeing money coming back in?
As soon as they drive Sony and Nintendo out of business. MS's goal right now is not profit, it is increasing market share. Once they get a significant enough market share they can strongarm developers into exclusives and start jacking up the price of the console, games, and royalties while lowering the cost to manufacture (and quality of) their console and games because of a lack of significant opposition, thereby recouping their early losses. MS isn't out to make money on the XBox tomrrow or next year. They're planning for the future.
It's all fine and dandy until all the publishers decide they don't want to bother with real books anymore and students no longer have a choice. They couldn't do that now, there'd be way too much of a backlash, but after getting students acclimated to the idea of limited use e-books for 10 years or so they could convince people that limited access is perfectly normal and acceptable and that expecting to have unlimited access to information you pay for is not only morally wrong but criminal (thank you Mr. DMCA). At that point the consumer not only gets screwed, but the publishers make more profits AND control the flow of information, and worst of all most people would probably think that that's the way it's supposed to be.
I'm confused...is this supposed to be directed at me? If not then nevermind this post, but if so I don't understand where you're coming from. My point was that there is a problem, but its with the entire tech field, not just game programming. I didn't say anything about why there aren't as many minorities in tech fields, just that there are.
According to the 2000 US Census, America is 69.1% white non-hispanic, 12.1% black non-hispanic, and 12.5% hispanic.
I wonder how the ratio of minority programmers in video games compres to the ratio of minority programmers in non-video game jobs. In my class of 40-50 CS/CE students, I know of two blacks and no hispanics. Maybe the problem isn't with the video game industry, but with the entire programming field itself.
Ugh, now that WOULD be scary...
And all the regular soundtrack songs that have been remixed and posted on OC aren't real songs? There's no legal implications with these songs that aren't in any other song they have up. You are right in some respect though, mainstream artists may be more legally defensive of their songs than the creator of a game soundtrack.
Err...if I'm not mistaken, shouldn't that be the other way around? Xrays, which have much higher frequency than radio waves, pass easily through most solid objects, and gamma rays which are even higher pass even more easily.
Dear US Copyright office:
zOMGWTFBBQ! J00 R NOT 1337! E4T SH17 4ND D13!
T3H 1337-533K1N9 Mi55i13!
MSDN is pretty useful, but it is also woefully lacking in detail in some areas. Several times I've had to resort to crawling through 10+ pages of google searches to find information that should have been in the MSDN that wasn't. For example, in VB6 a ListView object must have focus in order for a manual call to StartLabelEdit to work. It took me forever to figure out why the method, which was called by clicking on a button elsewhere on the form thus taking focus away from the ListView, wouldn't work.
Mayhaps the reason the Chinese government does not just ban all video games, or video games with pk elements, is because they know there is a significant influx of foreign money due to gold/item farming in mmorpgs which are a significant portion of games with pk elements.
I almost wonder if rumors like this are not leaked by the company behind the game on purpose, but diffused through several layers. This way Sony can judge people's reactions to the rumor while maintaining deniability. If people seem to not care they can go ahead, but if there's a lot of negative reaction they can always add the slot on there and save face by denying that they ever intended the PS3 to lack a PS2/PS1 memory card slot.
Just like they copied free web e-mail? And personalized RSS feed homepages? Or searching the internets? ..oh wait...
Let's face it, in the digital world, stealing ideas goes both ways. All that really matters is who implements those ideas better.
The motorcycle one was called Full Throttle. Played it way back in the day. Came with our first CD-ROM drive as a matter of fact.
A fraction? Have you seen how much textbooks cost nowadays? I mean technically you are right though, 1/2 is a fraction.
Where did they do this experiment--Mars?
Well yeah, where else are they gonna manage to open up the portal to Hell?