I have to agree with pretty much everything you said. But with regards to minors, something still doesn't sit right with me.
I do wonder though if 'local governments' would be small enough to decide 'what speech is valued and what isn't', especially in this case for a small community. I know the tiny town I live in has some ridiculous 'laws' that would never fly at the state or federal level.
Who are you to say expression through a video game is not speech?
Who are you to say it is?
I was simply asking why.
Stop bringing minors into this. Whether it's speech or not has nothing to do with "save the children" bullshit. Frankly I'd look squarely at the parents who allow their kids to have the 100s of dollars required to buy these games.
No I wont, considering that was a key basis of the case.
Um, I don't know where you buy your games, but you can get GTA:SA for $35 now.
But I guess in your eyes anything that's offensive can't possibly be speech right?
Well it isn't clear to me. Maybe I wasn't specific enough. How are video games speech? What we are both doing right now I would consider speech, expressing our opinions. Walking up and down the street with placards I would consider speech. But a company producing a game, or really anything else and selling it to a minor, how is that speech? Heck, take the part about the minor out and it is still a valid question.
I am not saying anything should or shouldn't be banned. And I hardly think not allowing a minor to buy a product is banning anything. I am simply inquiring how the right to sell a video game violent or not, to a minor is considered protected under the First Amendment.
I really don't have a dog in this fight, just curious on the constitutional grounds.
Can someone explain to me how the right to sell a video game with violence or really selling anything to a minor is protected by the First Amendment?
Freedom of Speech?
Maybe freedom to make a buck, but I don't see the constitutional angle.
Sorry, don't see this as a solution for anything.
Right now we have the tree huggers complaining about us using fossil fuels in our evil SUVs. At the same time other leftist groups complaining that farmers are growing grain to feed to cows so we can eat meat. If that food was used for direct human consumption it could help end world hunger, or something like that.
With biodiesel the argument would be we are growing food to power our evil SUVs instead of feeding people. Some people would not like it.
How about the automatic toilets just flushing less often? This would work well with the automatic walkup male urinals. Hockey game I went to last year was standing 10 people deep waiting for a urinal during intermission. Instead of flushing after every piss, they could flush after every second or third piss.
Put it on some sort of timer.
The average user doesn't even know about window updates. The average user is willing to pay me $100 plus cost of parts to fix their 6 year old computer running Windows 98 instead of buying a new computer with XP for $400.
How can anyone on/. really suggest that changing Windows to whatever is going to solve the problem, when the article doesn't say what the problem is? Does anyone actually think that the IT people are competent enough to setup and run a non-windows operation system if they can't even get windows to run right?
Whatever happened to just keeping an attendance book?
Instead of spending the continually increasing spending in education on technology crap that really is not needed, how about increasing teacher salaries to attract higher quality teachers.
It does not take much 'scanning' when the parties were sending the emails around the company. It has been my experience with law firms when it comes to email, they do not F-around. Maybe the economy would be a little better if employees wouldn't use company resources to stage virtual cat fights.
The real ones are much better.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine that, a patch for a piece of software in beta. Why am I suppose to care?
Sit on your ass doing anything for 20 straight day would kill you. Which means I HAVE to get up out of this chair in about 6 hours.
I have to agree with pretty much everything you said. But with regards to minors, something still doesn't sit right with me. I do wonder though if 'local governments' would be small enough to decide 'what speech is valued and what isn't', especially in this case for a small community. I know the tiny town I live in has some ridiculous 'laws' that would never fly at the state or federal level.
Who are you to say it is? I was simply asking why.
Stop bringing minors into this. Whether it's speech or not has nothing to do with "save the children" bullshit. Frankly I'd look squarely at the parents who allow their kids to have the 100s of dollars required to buy these games.
No I wont, considering that was a key basis of the case. Um, I don't know where you buy your games, but you can get GTA:SA for $35 now.
But I guess in your eyes anything that's offensive can't possibly be speech right?
Where did I ever say I was offended by anything?
Well it isn't clear to me.
Maybe I wasn't specific enough. How are video games speech?
What we are both doing right now I would consider speech, expressing our opinions.
Walking up and down the street with placards I would consider speech.
But a company producing a game, or really anything else and selling it to a minor, how is that speech?
Heck, take the part about the minor out and it is still a valid question.
I am not saying anything should or shouldn't be banned. And I hardly think not allowing a minor to buy a product is banning anything.
I am simply inquiring how the right to sell a video game violent or not, to a minor is considered protected under the First Amendment.
I really don't have a dog in this fight, just curious on the constitutional grounds.
Can someone explain to me how the right to sell a video game with violence or really selling anything to a minor is protected by the First Amendment? Freedom of Speech? Maybe freedom to make a buck, but I don't see the constitutional angle.
This article has nothing to do with the US and yet there are a good amount of US criticizing going on.
The only reason your modded as insightful is because you take a shot at 'whining American conservatives' and that plays well to the Slashdot crowd.
I bet if the open source programmers promised to code in French only, the government wouldn't mind as much.
Sorry, don't see this as a solution for anything. Right now we have the tree huggers complaining about us using fossil fuels in our evil SUVs. At the same time other leftist groups complaining that farmers are growing grain to feed to cows so we can eat meat. If that food was used for direct human consumption it could help end world hunger, or something like that. With biodiesel the argument would be we are growing food to power our evil SUVs instead of feeding people. Some people would not like it.
I spent all that time running seti@home for nothing!
How about the automatic toilets just flushing less often? This would work well with the automatic walkup male urinals. Hockey game I went to last year was standing 10 people deep waiting for a urinal during intermission. Instead of flushing after every piss, they could flush after every second or third piss. Put it on some sort of timer.
I always thought it should be done by drawing. Anyone that wants to be a justice buy a $1 lotto ticket, the winner gets the job.
The average user doesn't even know about window updates. The average user is willing to pay me $100 plus cost of parts to fix their 6 year old computer running Windows 98 instead of buying a new computer with XP for $400.
How can anyone on /. really suggest that changing Windows to whatever is going to solve the problem, when the article doesn't say what the problem is? Does anyone actually think that the IT people are competent enough to setup and run a non-windows operation system if they can't even get windows to run right?
Whatever happened to just keeping an attendance book?
Instead of spending the continually increasing spending in education on technology crap that really is not needed, how about increasing teacher salaries to attract higher quality teachers.
17+ = 15 ? Thats some good math you got going on there.
It does not take much 'scanning' when the parties were sending the emails around the company. It has been my experience with law firms when it comes to email, they do not F-around. Maybe the economy would be a little better if employees wouldn't use company resources to stage virtual cat fights. The real ones are much better.