But if you watch the video, you can see the gun follow the head piece, right before he puts it on and even during some of the other scenes. Maybe it's different now (and I hope it is.)
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 1
I understand that restricting new users is bad... but limiting where they post I don't feel is necessarily terrible. (ie: not first, unless subscribed)
Alone those lines, if you start whitelisting (or blacklisting) certain IP ranges you'll bump right up against another wall that has far greater detriment. I can see the headlines now: "Slashdot Limits Incoming Connections from Microsoft Domains"
What bothers me is that the headset looks like it turns your character based on your head position in the video. It should be like a free look so you can be pointed down a hallway and looking around.
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 1
I was speaking mainly of the new accounts. ACs were a secondary thought. Restricting new accounts a little more was my point. I was talking to an AC so I referred to them more directly. Sorry.
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 1
You can anon post all you like, in replies... but this spamming is getting to the point where thread starting by new accounts is just silly. I'm not against ACs or the ability to AC post. But limiting them from replying to the main story is not going to impact the ability for ACs to engage.
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Severely limiting new/anonymous accounts in any way would benefit the majority of threads. I still don't understand how new/anonymous accounts can start threads.
Un-luck of the draw. If we arrested everyone that said they'd come back to work "postal" the jails would be even more full. If they had gotten his letter, they could have investigated it to see if it was true, but I don't see a need to arrest everyone making rude comments.
There's a difference between "saying" and "doing".
I can say I'm going to give you a million dollars and I can actually give you a million dollars. I can say I'm going to run you over on the sidewalk and I can actually run you over on the sidewalk.
One of these things (doing/saying) is wrong. In England, apparently both are wrong.
You do realize that people say things they don't actually intend on doing, right? I suppose I'd be arrested for threatening harm to someone by telling them to "break a leg" in modern day England.
It's done in humor. For instance, you're not going to actually anally rape someone with a spiked jackhammer... it's something over the top that nobody would actually expect someone to do.
Semi-Automatic handguns are not "accidentally" converted to automatics. I'm sorry, but you usually have to disassemble the trigger mechanism and file certain parts to do that.
The only way I can see that being an accident is if you routinely use a file to clean your weapon.
Sorry. My half ass approach to writing up a response led to me leave in words where they make no sense. Remove: first 'they' in "goods and they if they aren't"
Criminals are lazy. (Only the rare criminal is not.) They want easily acquired goods and they if they aren't willing to work for those goods, what makes you think they will work to make tools when they can usually steal them?
If you had access to a bicycle in a store (or down the street where you can easily take it) or you were forced to make your own, which would you do? Now, what would a criminal do?
I'm pretty pro-gun, but you don't hear of them using homemade weapons because machines weapons are generally easy to get. If they were not, people would be building more pipe bombs and other easy to assemble/deploy weapons. In countries where guns are not as prevalent people resort to other tools to perform crimes. Sadly, as much as guns are portrayed as deadly, other homemade weapons can be far more deadly.
So you are going to criminalize thought crimes? Is it better to hold back all your anger until you snap and take out everyone in your office or is it better to get it off your chest and let people tell you it's wrong? If you criminalize hate speech people will hold on to it until they can no longer take it.
So pretty much all the people on XBox Live would be called up on arrest charges for annoying people... in that some are actually trying to annoy others.
They'd just do what some of the games are doing now... not include that it requires something in the specs. One example off the top of my head: Age of Empires Online states nowhere that you need Windows Live / GFWL to play. Other games like Fable state explicitly that they need a Windows Live account.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying to prevent posting whatsoever. I'm saying limit the position of the posts. (ie: no firsts, no thread starter.)
sometimes you use more power than the panels can provide (especially if you have a garage)
What does the garage have to do with it?
But if you watch the video, you can see the gun follow the head piece, right before he puts it on and even during some of the other scenes. Maybe it's different now (and I hope it is.)
I understand that restricting new users is bad... but limiting where they post I don't feel is necessarily terrible. (ie: not first, unless subscribed)
Alone those lines, if you start whitelisting (or blacklisting) certain IP ranges you'll bump right up against another wall that has far greater detriment. I can see the headlines now: "Slashdot Limits Incoming Connections from Microsoft Domains"
What bothers me is that the headset looks like it turns your character based on your head position in the video. It should be like a free look so you can be pointed down a hallway and looking around.
I was speaking mainly of the new accounts. ACs were a secondary thought. Restricting new accounts a little more was my point. I was talking to an AC so I referred to them more directly. Sorry.
Bandwagon.
Maybe we'll get more than two choices that way.
You can anon post all you like, in replies... but this spamming is getting to the point where thread starting by new accounts is just silly. I'm not against ACs or the ability to AC post. But limiting them from replying to the main story is not going to impact the ability for ACs to engage.
Severely limiting new/anonymous accounts in any way would benefit the majority of threads. I still don't understand how new/anonymous accounts can start threads.
Sure, but the kid in this article wasn't standing over the swimmer in a pool when he posted his twit either.
If you say so... ;)
Un-luck of the draw. If we arrested everyone that said they'd come back to work "postal" the jails would be even more full. If they had gotten his letter, they could have investigated it to see if it was true, but I don't see a need to arrest everyone making rude comments.
There's a difference between "saying" and "doing".
I can say I'm going to give you a million dollars and I can actually give you a million dollars.
I can say I'm going to run you over on the sidewalk and I can actually run you over on the sidewalk.
One of these things (doing/saying) is wrong. In England, apparently both are wrong.
You do realize that people say things they don't actually intend on doing, right? I suppose I'd be arrested for threatening harm to someone by telling them to "break a leg" in modern day England.
It's done in humor. For instance, you're not going to actually anally rape someone with a spiked jackhammer... it's something over the top that nobody would actually expect someone to do.
Semi-Automatic handguns are not "accidentally" converted to automatics. I'm sorry, but you usually have to disassemble the trigger mechanism and file certain parts to do that.
The only way I can see that being an accident is if you routinely use a file to clean your weapon.
Which is the point of the conversation, correct? To determine if Gun Control/Patent laws are relevant in this day and age:
"Will 3D printing be to the Anti-gray-market-alliance what online porn became to neighborhood blue laws?"
Ease of access and will eventually make the gun laws useless.
You don't see box art in Steam.
And it appears as though they finally added a "3rd-party DRM" section to the game details.
Sorry. My half ass approach to writing up a response led to me leave in words where they make no sense. Remove: first 'they' in "goods and they if they aren't"
Criminals are lazy. (Only the rare criminal is not.) They want easily acquired goods and they if they aren't willing to work for those goods, what makes you think they will work to make tools when they can usually steal them?
If you had access to a bicycle in a store (or down the street where you can easily take it) or you were forced to make your own, which would you do? Now, what would a criminal do?
I'm pretty pro-gun, but you don't hear of them using homemade weapons because machines weapons are generally easy to get. If they were not, people would be building more pipe bombs and other easy to assemble/deploy weapons. In countries where guns are not as prevalent people resort to other tools to perform crimes. Sadly, as much as guns are portrayed as deadly, other homemade weapons can be far more deadly.
So you are going to criminalize thought crimes? Is it better to hold back all your anger until you snap and take out everyone in your office or is it better to get it off your chest and let people tell you it's wrong? If you criminalize hate speech people will hold on to it until they can no longer take it.
So pretty much all the people on XBox Live would be called up on arrest charges for annoying people... in that some are actually trying to annoy others.
I have friends that would send those tweets to people in jest... I couldn't imagine being arrested because of it.
They'd just do what some of the games are doing now... not include that it requires something in the specs. One example off the top of my head: Age of Empires Online states nowhere that you need Windows Live / GFWL to play. Other games like Fable state explicitly that they need a Windows Live account.