Over here in the UK I'm pretty sure they passed laws to stop people from doing this kind of thing. I think anything over about 20p in low denominations isn't considered legal tender.
People used to get wheelbarrows of the things to pay council tax, only to be told it wasn't going to be taken, and they were stuck with the coins.
And if you had a key to your friend's house, or they invited you in, your boss could ask you to rummage through all their stuff and take photos. You could chip in with some personal stories too...I mean your friend should expect it, it's your job on the line.
"Being told that artificial barriers have been erected to separate them from what they've paid for will not go down well."
The BBC are in a difficult position with this, do they go to the cost/length of supporting that 0.8% of the market? Will the other 99.2% want their license fee money spent on supporting this product? I'm pretty sure that if the BBC didn't want to support it they could come up with an economically justifiable argument to do so; and they'd get away with it because the majority of license-fee payers simply aren't going to care.
Anyhow with Mac support coming later this year I would think that Linux support would come soon after.
This is certainly a plausible explanation; although I'm not convinced Mormonism is shaking its cult association because Joseph Smith has been dead for long enough. I'd rather put it down to a more concerted effort by the group to deliberately shift public perception away from this label.
I confess to not having put much thought into this, and it is difficult to create a concrete comparison; maybe when we compare Jonestown cult and contemporary Christianity the differences are obvious, but things are less clear cut (deliberately so, I believe) when observing Scientology or Mormonism.
I guess at the end of the day it comes down to public perception and the labels society wants to brand things with. We don't traditionally associate everyday religion with cultish behavior like social exclusion, mystery texts and finical extortion (note: not arguing that these things don't happen to religion, merely the conception of them in a cult context is different).
There may be a fine line between defining cult and religion, but public perception of one is significantly more damaging than the other - Scientology so desperately want to escape the word 'cult'.
Apologies for the confusion, I meant doesn't make sense in this context; I'm aware of the epithet, but assumed it was always connected to Jupiter (eg. deus sanctus optimus maximus), unsure if it had a common Latin usage outside of this and was attributable to nouns in general. If it does, sorry, my bad.
'Optimus Maximus' dosen't make a whole lot of sense; both adjectives are superlatives: Optimus from bonus, bona -um, and Maximus from magnus, magna -um. So you end up with something like: The (very) best, (very) biggest keyboard. It is pleonasmus (redundancy), but I'm unconvinced that literary devices played a large part in naming their keyboard...
Sure, and what if someone I was cared about was dying from hantavirus, do we wipe out all the rats? When does this end, how many species is it 'ok' to obliterate because they are disease-carrying? Lots of domestic wildlife can carry TB, so I guess they must go too. Oh, and what about poisonous snakes, spiders, jellyfish, I guess the ecosystem can recover if we want to bump them off, because they kill people too. Not even to mention other humans that carry contagious diseases...
This science leads us down a dangerous and unknown path, a collapse in the eco-system has horrific consequences.
Nope, opera is the plural of opus, operis (neuter). But it's also a feminine singular (opera, operae). They do both mean work, but in slightly different ways.
"Why he would expect a large number of Linux-based visitors to the site when the media downloads are Windows XP only is not clear."
It should be clarified that he was talking about the root bbc.co.uk site NOT the iPlayer site, so it is clearer why the would expect Linux users to visit the site.
"4. How the heck do I know it's not gonna be shared on P2P networks by my 6 year old step sister??? "
But surely this software proves how easy it is to change such details anyway...there's no reasonable way you can use a plain text, easily changed header as evidence for any prosecution...otherwise I could load up a load of songs with people I don't like and stick them on P2P.
I fear that there's a lot of bandwagon jumping for both sides to create an argument that may possible not exist. The BBFC has a fairly long tradition of censoring films that are 'too violent' (think back to the old video nasties era), they're often an unpredictable judge of what is and is not acceptable for today's society. I suspect that they're still unsure about how to approach violence to video games in the same way they were towards the slasher/horror films of the 70/80s.
I'm not convinced there is a great conspiracy here where the BBFC is taking a side in the video game violence debate, no statement coming from them has ever taken that direction. Its more likely that the game contravenes their own code towards such matters and they have no choice but to ban the game. The Mary Whitehouse's of this world are taking this as some kind of victory, but its nonsense: there may be no political message hidden here. Questions more pertinent to this case are about the BBFC's censorship policies and regulation, and if they remain culturally in-tune with society. I don't take this as a statement of 'video games make you violent so they must be banned'.
I confess to not having watched it, I resort to Wikipedia which states that it had ' lackluster ratings'...I'm not too sure what that means but it can't be good...
Now what producer sat back and, with a knowing nod, thought 'Yeah, here comes our second season'. Low ratings are normally coupled with the threat of cancellation, so why would you use such an extreme cliffhanger?
I'm also consistantly suprised that fans are shocked when a low-rating show is cancelled and make a huge fuss, now maybe if they cared enough to do it when there was a chance of getting more people to watch it (i.e when it was STILL on air).
What will be interesting is how they come across, Gates has always struck me as lacking heavily in charisma; which just happens to be Jobs strong point. In fact, I'm suprised that Microsoft shuffle Gates out quite so much, apart from being a very notable computing figure he never seems to be a good promoter of tech.; partly because he brings out resentment in many people and partly because he sums up the typical mainstream concept of 'Geekness' and all the ideas of inaccessability that conjures up...
Jobs on the other hand is gives off (regardless of if it is true or not) a degree of approachability and dramatic flair (but, some would argue, at a hinderence of reality and pesky fact).
So I'm not going to be too interested in what they say, but how they say, and most interestingly of all how they play it against each other. Although I can't shake the feeling that they will be slapping each other on the back....
Your example is interesting, but not really decisive. A counter-argument could be thus: Programming is a 'craft' like woodwork or building a house, now I could read books and spend years learning how to build a house and maybe I could put it into practice. I could learn from building that house and perhaps build a better house. But what I couldn't necessarily do is innovate a whole new and better way of living. Now it could be argued that people are born with is an innate creativity to approach the problem differently, an artist does not become brilliant through imitation but by innovation. That dosen't mean education isn't important but there's a spark to take that and run with it that dosen't exist for everyone.
I'm working from memory here and I can't find an exact quote reference, but didn't Gates come out in support of the Dreamcast as the gaming console of that generation (I'm guessing, like you say, with a vested interest in the inclusion of their own tech). I'm guessing was a similar situation to OS/2, didn't work out with finances and they took it in the X-Box direction.
I don't even think they're trying to silence him, it seems like the main aim was to cause great embarrassment to the reporter, and thus undermine his whole argument/report (by making him appear as an aggressor).
The problem is the BBC has been rather open about the whole thing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6650545 .stm) showing the video and its context quite freely. It seems they've underestimated their standing here, the BBC as a respected international news organisation and Scientology, perceived as a cult by many. By drawing our attention to this and their 'Psychiatry: Industry of Death' exhibition seem to quite successfully be promoting this current image...
Surely it's simply 'Nintendo to continue known franchises on Wii this year'?
I'm not arguing its not newsworthy, it's great new for Wii players everywhere (unfortunatly I am not one at the moment), but its a little like saying 'Microsoft Announce Halo 3 for Xbox 360 this year'. I'm as excited as anyone to see where Nintendo are taking their innovation, but I fear people are getting a little over-zealous in their attitudes; lest we forget the real (and non-established) areas of gaming the Wii could take us into.
Slashdot Mirror
People used to get wheelbarrows of the things to pay council tax, only to be told it wasn't going to be taken, and they were stuck with the coins.
If 'All roads lead to Rome', then 'All Wikipedia Articles lead to the United Kingdom' should do it. And pretty catchy too...
And if you had a key to your friend's house, or they invited you in, your boss could ask you to rummage through all their stuff and take photos. You could chip in with some personal stories too...I mean your friend should expect it, it's your job on the line.
It sounds a little like blogging is a commercial sham, they know its a bubble market, and live in terror that someone else might find out.
Sorry, I meant Linux. The BBC stats and comment on iPlayer (including coming Mac support) can be found here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/02/iplayer_choices.html
The BBC are in a difficult position with this, do they go to the cost/length of supporting that 0.8% of the market? Will the other 99.2% want their license fee money spent on supporting this product? I'm pretty sure that if the BBC didn't want to support it they could come up with an economically justifiable argument to do so; and they'd get away with it because the majority of license-fee payers simply aren't going to care.
Anyhow with Mac support coming later this year I would think that Linux support would come soon after.
I confess to not having put much thought into this, and it is difficult to create a concrete comparison; maybe when we compare Jonestown cult and contemporary Christianity the differences are obvious, but things are less clear cut (deliberately so, I believe) when observing Scientology or Mormonism.
I guess at the end of the day it comes down to public perception and the labels society wants to brand things with. We don't traditionally associate everyday religion with cultish behavior like social exclusion, mystery texts and finical extortion (note: not arguing that these things don't happen to religion, merely the conception of them in a cult context is different).
There may be a fine line between defining cult and religion, but public perception of one is significantly more damaging than the other - Scientology so desperately want to escape the word 'cult'.
Apologies for the confusion, I meant doesn't make sense in this context; I'm aware of the epithet, but assumed it was always connected to Jupiter (eg. deus sanctus optimus maximus), unsure if it had a common Latin usage outside of this and was attributable to nouns in general. If it does, sorry, my bad.
'Optimus Maximus' dosen't make a whole lot of sense; both adjectives are superlatives: Optimus from bonus, bona -um, and Maximus from magnus, magna -um. So you end up with something like: The (very) best, (very) biggest keyboard. It is pleonasmus (redundancy), but I'm unconvinced that literary devices played a large part in naming their keyboard...
This science leads us down a dangerous and unknown path, a collapse in the eco-system has horrific consequences.
Nope, opera is the plural of opus, operis (neuter). But it's also a feminine singular (opera, operae). They do both mean work, but in slightly different ways.
Surely it's in English, with Swedish subtitles?
It should be clarified that he was talking about the root bbc.co.uk site NOT the iPlayer site, so it is clearer why the would expect Linux users to visit the site.
But surely this software proves how easy it is to change such details anyway...there's no reasonable way you can use a plain text, easily changed header as evidence for any prosecution...otherwise I could load up a load of songs with people I don't like and stick them on P2P.
I'm not convinced there is a great conspiracy here where the BBFC is taking a side in the video game violence debate, no statement coming from them has ever taken that direction. Its more likely that the game contravenes their own code towards such matters and they have no choice but to ban the game. The Mary Whitehouse's of this world are taking this as some kind of victory, but its nonsense: there may be no political message hidden here. Questions more pertinent to this case are about the BBFC's censorship policies and regulation, and if they remain culturally in-tune with society. I don't take this as a statement of 'video games make you violent so they must be banned'.
Why do they photocopy them?
Now what producer sat back and, with a knowing nod, thought 'Yeah, here comes our second season'. Low ratings are normally coupled with the threat of cancellation, so why would you use such an extreme cliffhanger?
I'm also consistantly suprised that fans are shocked when a low-rating show is cancelled and make a huge fuss, now maybe if they cared enough to do it when there was a chance of getting more people to watch it (i.e when it was STILL on air).
Wait...what do you mean comm-badges aren't cool, and you don't want to wear one?
Jobs on the other hand is gives off (regardless of if it is true or not) a degree of approachability and dramatic flair (but, some would argue, at a hinderence of reality and pesky fact).
So I'm not going to be too interested in what they say, but how they say, and most interestingly of all how they play it against each other. Although I can't shake the feeling that they will be slapping each other on the back....
Your example is interesting, but not really decisive. A counter-argument could be thus: Programming is a 'craft' like woodwork or building a house, now I could read books and spend years learning how to build a house and maybe I could put it into practice. I could learn from building that house and perhaps build a better house. But what I couldn't necessarily do is innovate a whole new and better way of living. Now it could be argued that people are born with is an innate creativity to approach the problem differently, an artist does not become brilliant through imitation but by innovation. That dosen't mean education isn't important but there's a spark to take that and run with it that dosen't exist for everyone.
I'm working from memory here and I can't find an exact quote reference, but didn't Gates come out in support of the Dreamcast as the gaming console of that generation (I'm guessing, like you say, with a vested interest in the inclusion of their own tech). I'm guessing was a similar situation to OS/2, didn't work out with finances and they took it in the X-Box direction.
The problem is the BBC has been rather open about the whole thing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6650545 .stm) showing the video and its context quite freely. It seems they've underestimated their standing here, the BBC as a respected international news organisation and Scientology, perceived as a cult by many. By drawing our attention to this and their 'Psychiatry: Industry of Death' exhibition seem to quite successfully be promoting this current image...
Ford: "What happened?"
Arthur: "A sign lit up saying 'Please do not press this button again.'"
(Douglas Adams)
Then again, this would make really want to push the button...
I'm not arguing its not newsworthy, it's great new for Wii players everywhere (unfortunatly I am not one at the moment), but its a little like saying 'Microsoft Announce Halo 3 for Xbox 360 this year'. I'm as excited as anyone to see where Nintendo are taking their innovation, but I fear people are getting a little over-zealous in their attitudes; lest we forget the real (and non-established) areas of gaming the Wii could take us into.
It makes me feel, y'know, cultured.