There should be parental supervision, education, and monitoring. Why? Two reasons. First, parents are completely responsible for their child's safety. That includes things like giving out her name, address, even state to strangers. Perhaps it's a surprise that children... even kids twice her age, do not tend to use good judgement.
That judgement is learned, generally through the parents. And yes, you'll see lots of adults using their parents' poor judgement.
The second reason is that it helps prevent parent ignorance. If the parents participate in her "computer experience" they will become experienced, too. The younger kid had to endure safe-surf software because the parents didn't want to surf with the kid.
What gets me is that a 7-yo actually feels the need to hide things from her parents. This can be from watching her brother and deciding his frustration was bad, or it could be because she doesn't trust them so much.
How does the Open Gaming License affect WotC's view on computer programs? Does Wizards consider the actual rules, the type of map, the genre, the number of d20's, etc to be their IP?
In other words, if some enterprising hotshot programmer wrote a program that might somehow compete with Wizards or silently incorporated some of the D&D rules, should he expect retaliation and C&D letters, or would Wizards consider it free marketing for them?
What they do is ignore the period of time that Wizards of the Coast has owned the D&D brand. *TSR* was certainly capable of producing a radical revision to the rules only every 8 to 10 years. Thus far, Wizards of the Coast (Hasbro) has NEVER managed to meet that standard.
If it wasn't for WotC, it would be infinity years before TSR's next release.
I'm not sure why you're concentrating on the time between releases. 3.5 has been out a few years, and nobody is forcing anyone to change. There's a plethora of material out for 3.5, so if you don't want to change your rules... don't.
I highly doubt the fuel is plutonium. Unfortunately, I don't remember the actual name (starts with a 'q'?), but it's highly poisonous and can contaminate things. However, it'd probably burn up when the satellite hit the atmosphere.
If the sat came down the size of a bus, it'd probably hit the ocean (or ground). If it came down fragmented, it'd probably burn up. I just hope that this action won't cause must more junk in space. However, since nobody has ever been harmed by a man-made object falling from space, this course of action seems rather... suspicious.
the game's violent content, which includes "many graphic torture scenes and murders," should have garnered an "adults only" rating. G = Guantanamo (insert favorite Iraq war/torture joke here)
Frankly, I'll urge the ESRB to not bend under corporate pressure when the congressmen stop bending under corporate pressure.
He really pissed off someone, so unless the last name of this subordinate was Balmer I fairly sure it involves money somewhere. Maybe the last name was Balmer, and he broke it off? Then, jilted Steve fired him?
Keeping the moon "pristine" is not a flawed philosophy. It's valid, but any sort of ecological basis is certainly flawed... there's little ecology to be preserved on the moon. In 100,000 years or so, it might even be torn apart by tidal forces and become a ring around the earth.
The valid basis is one the article scorned. That basis is "beauty," not some fear of technology. It's based on the natural tendency of people to exploit, and to destroy. And especially destructive are those seeking riches, either physical or spiritual. History will support this.
The destruction of species often has little effect on me. Would I care if the spotted owl suddenly disappeared? Not really. But the spotted owl is really just a pumped up victim for the habitat that was being destroyed. And the people that live and love the area want everyone's grandchildren to be able to see and appreciate it, and want to preserve the beauty of that habitat.
Would I care if the moon suddenly became less beautiful? Yes. Yes I would. If I have to look up and see the moon obscured in never-settling dust from mining, the childhood memories I had of looking at the craters in clear view with a 100x telescope could never be experienced by the next couple generations. And I suspect that's the real "environmental" reasons. Some things are more important to people than making a buck.
In the end, a few things are clear: Users of advertisement-skipping technology are essentially engaged in theft of resources. In the end, this is not so clear. TFA's conclusion has no support, just a bunch of "this is how it should be" comments, then the dramatic accusation of theft. TFA fails to mention that there's no requirement to view the webpage as they expect you to view it.
The analogy to TV is not a good one, either, if they want to show it's theft of services. For instance, if I turn down the sound on my TV during commmercials, should the TV manufacturers be sued because I'm not listening to the commercials?
I might use different browsers or a computer without sound. Or a browser without tables, or a browser without pictures. The lack of configuration, intrusiveness, and excessive catering to advertisers is exactly why I don't use Flash, either. Should elinks be sued, too, for not having any of those? In an evil world, I could see Microsoft backing this lawsuit, too.
When a webpage is put online, the protocol instructs browsers to make several requests for other parts of the page. Simply not making those requests is like ignoring the "call 1-800-555-5555" repeated at the end of a commercial. Is not calling that number theft? Or perhaps it's like fast forwarding your time-lapsed show. But none of these examples are considered "theft".
Once you are over 10,000 feet, many devices can be used. That is the case here.
From everything I've seen, devices in standby mode (but not using any RF) can be left in the standby mode on takeoff, such as PDAs. Most people who have iphones don't even know how to turn it completely off anyway, but airplane mode and standby are acceptable for takeoff/landing.
But after 10,000 feet, another class of devices can be used, such as active sound-cancelling headphones and ipods and certain electronic games. At this point, you can turn on the iphone and use the other functions, as long as it's kept in airplane mode.
Way to pounce on a semantic argument and completely miss the point. Hint: read the Subject line.
Airplane mode doesn't solve the issue. If you take a hammer to the device, that'll also disable roaming. But like airplane mode, it disables a lot more than just roaming.
Again, there is no way to disable roaming without crippling the device more or less. Airplane mode is not a solution anymore than turning the device completely off anymore than hitting it with a hammer. You lose functionality unrelated to roaming in all of those cases. And no amount of documentation will solve this whether it's the fingertips pamphlet or my missing user's manual. Only software upgrades that enable wifi and bluetooth, but warn before enabling roaming data can solve this.
Also, you can't watch youtube with a wifi connection either. The youtube button forces connection through the Edge network for some bizarre reason, which also would force roaming.
Uh, I call BS on everything you wrote. A similar thing happened to me, and I did not specifically activate international roaming. Secondly, there are settings to check email periodically, up to every 15 minutes. And this happens automatically, while the phone is sleeping. Go to settings -> mail -> autocheck, and look at the timer.
Hey Coward, the manual is from Apple. It's a 4 page pamphlet the size of a credit card, and does not discuss any of this.
Apple's philosophy is to make intuitive interfaces. And it is very intuitive. But there is simply no mode available which disables roaming without crippling the device. Such as turning it completely off, or turning the radio completely off (even for non-roaming, such as wifi).
To turn it off all you have to do is hold down the standby button for a few seconds then then hit the off button when it asks you if you really want to turn the phone off. Right, but completely wrong. Why would they bring 3 bricks with them? If it's off, you can't take pictures, can't use the calendar, and can't use the maps.
The right answer is to put it in airplane mode, which turns off the radio. But this also disables legitimate local wifi (which doesn't roam) and bluetooth.
The really right answer is software from apple which gives a different mode: Never Roam but doesn't require the radio to be disabled.
I submitted a journal article for the same thing, and will be contesting the bill. Fortunately, that one was only $500, not 10x that. I was hoping to prevent this from happening to someone else, and considered submitting an "Ask Slashdot" about it.
The biggest issue is the fact that, although you can disable the radio completely, you cannot use wifi or bluetooth (both local, non-roaming) if you do so. There is no setting for "Never Roam" without losing functionality unrelated to roaming.
In addition, "Fair Use" is an admission of copyright violation, but one that is excusable. You are granted copyrights on your original works in a fixed medium, and Fair Use gives certain allowances where violating that copyright may not be prosecuted.
This is clearly an attempt by Microsoft to encourage people to buy more music to listen to while waiting to download the the upgrade to Vista SP1. Clearly, it's really the RIAA trying to prevent music lovers from pirating music!/tinfoilhat
Is there something I'm missing? Nope, it's something everyone else has been missing and apparently what's obvious to sysadmins is not obvious to the world. I do like the relatime option, though.
atime updates actually help a LOT in some circumstances. I use it to help with security checks (even though you can hack the atime record), to help debug (what input file caused it to hang?), and all sorts of things where it's useful to know when a file was read.
I could cope with not having them, but in many cases I love the extra information atime gives.
This has interesting economics, clearly designed to help Amazon, but might also help smaller artists. I think I like it, but not sure.
There's no such thing as supply and demand in this model. There's only demand, and the supply is endless. So why does an infinite supply with a finite demand not equate to free? Bandwidth? They certainly can get some advertisement into the pages of popular sound downloads.
This seems almost backwards... you'd think it'd be cheaper to d/l a popular song and make up pagehits with ads, but perhaps this makes smaller artists get more exposure.
Slashdot Mirror
That judgement is learned, generally through the parents. And yes, you'll see lots of adults using their parents' poor judgement.
The second reason is that it helps prevent parent ignorance. If the parents participate in her "computer experience" they will become experienced, too. The younger kid had to endure safe-surf software because the parents didn't want to surf with the kid.
What gets me is that a 7-yo actually feels the need to hide things from her parents. This can be from watching her brother and deciding his frustration was bad, or it could be because she doesn't trust them so much.
How does the Open Gaming License affect WotC's view on computer programs? Does Wizards consider the actual rules, the type of map, the genre, the number of d20's, etc to be their IP?
In other words, if some enterprising hotshot programmer wrote a program that might somehow compete with Wizards or silently incorporated some of the D&D rules, should he expect retaliation and C&D letters, or would Wizards consider it free marketing for them?
If it wasn't for WotC, it would be infinity years before TSR's next release.
I'm not sure why you're concentrating on the time between releases. 3.5 has been out a few years, and nobody is forcing anyone to change. There's a plethora of material out for 3.5, so if you don't want to change your rules... don't.
I highly doubt the fuel is plutonium. Unfortunately, I don't remember the actual name (starts with a 'q'?), but it's highly poisonous and can contaminate things. However, it'd probably burn up when the satellite hit the atmosphere.
If the sat came down the size of a bus, it'd probably hit the ocean (or ground). If it came down fragmented, it'd probably burn up. I just hope that this action won't cause must more junk in space. However, since nobody has ever been harmed by a man-made object falling from space, this course of action seems rather... suspicious.
The more correct version is "Geeks are people who convert coffee into code, hardware, and proofs."
Frankly, I'll urge the ESRB to not bend under corporate pressure when the congressmen stop bending under corporate pressure.
Keeping the moon "pristine" is not a flawed philosophy. It's valid, but any sort of ecological basis is certainly flawed... there's little ecology to be preserved on the moon. In 100,000 years or so, it might even be torn apart by tidal forces and become a ring around the earth.
The valid basis is one the article scorned. That basis is "beauty," not some fear of technology. It's based on the natural tendency of people to exploit, and to destroy. And especially destructive are those seeking riches, either physical or spiritual. History will support this.
The destruction of species often has little effect on me. Would I care if the spotted owl suddenly disappeared? Not really. But the spotted owl is really just a pumped up victim for the habitat that was being destroyed. And the people that live and love the area want everyone's grandchildren to be able to see and appreciate it, and want to preserve the beauty of that habitat.
Would I care if the moon suddenly became less beautiful? Yes. Yes I would. If I have to look up and see the moon obscured in never-settling dust from mining, the childhood memories I had of looking at the craters in clear view with a 100x telescope could never be experienced by the next couple generations. And I suspect that's the real "environmental" reasons. Some things are more important to people than making a buck.
Maybe it's purple?
Narrator: In the frozen land of nVidia, they were forced to eat 900 pages of ATI documentation.
Slashdot: Yay!
The analogy to TV is not a good one, either, if they want to show it's theft of services. For instance, if I turn down the sound on my TV during commmercials, should the TV manufacturers be sued because I'm not listening to the commercials?
I might use different browsers or a computer without sound. Or a browser without tables, or a browser without pictures. The lack of configuration, intrusiveness, and excessive catering to advertisers is exactly why I don't use Flash, either. Should elinks be sued, too, for not having any of those? In an evil world, I could see Microsoft backing this lawsuit, too.
When a webpage is put online, the protocol instructs browsers to make several requests for other parts of the page. Simply not making those requests is like ignoring the "call 1-800-555-5555" repeated at the end of a commercial. Is not calling that number theft? Or perhaps it's like fast forwarding your time-lapsed show. But none of these examples are considered "theft".
Once you are over 10,000 feet, many devices can be used. That is the case here.
From everything I've seen, devices in standby mode (but not using any RF) can be left in the standby mode on takeoff, such as PDAs. Most people who have iphones don't even know how to turn it completely off anyway, but airplane mode and standby are acceptable for takeoff/landing.
But after 10,000 feet, another class of devices can be used, such as active sound-cancelling headphones and ipods and certain electronic games. At this point, you can turn on the iphone and use the other functions, as long as it's kept in airplane mode.
Way to pounce on a semantic argument and completely miss the point. Hint: read the Subject line.
Airplane mode doesn't solve the issue. If you take a hammer to the device, that'll also disable roaming. But like airplane mode, it disables a lot more than just roaming.
Again, there is no way to disable roaming without crippling the device more or less. Airplane mode is not a solution anymore than turning the device completely off anymore than hitting it with a hammer. You lose functionality unrelated to roaming in all of those cases. And no amount of documentation will solve this whether it's the fingertips pamphlet or my missing user's manual. Only software upgrades that enable wifi and bluetooth, but warn before enabling roaming data can solve this.
Also, you can't watch youtube with a wifi connection either. The youtube button forces connection through the Edge network for some bizarre reason, which also would force roaming.
Uh, I call BS on everything you wrote. A similar thing happened to me, and I did not specifically activate international roaming. Secondly, there are settings to check email periodically, up to every 15 minutes. And this happens automatically, while the phone is sleeping. Go to settings -> mail -> autocheck, and look at the timer.
Hey Coward, the manual is from Apple. It's a 4 page pamphlet the size of a credit card, and does not discuss any of this.
Apple's philosophy is to make intuitive interfaces. And it is very intuitive. But there is simply no mode available which disables roaming without crippling the device. Such as turning it completely off, or turning the radio completely off (even for non-roaming, such as wifi).
The right answer is to put it in airplane mode, which turns off the radio. But this also disables legitimate local wifi (which doesn't roam) and bluetooth.
The really right answer is software from apple which gives a different mode: Never Roam but doesn't require the radio to be disabled.
I submitted a journal article for the same thing, and will be contesting the bill. Fortunately, that one was only $500, not 10x that. I was hoping to prevent this from happening to someone else, and considered submitting an "Ask Slashdot" about it.
The biggest issue is the fact that, although you can disable the radio completely, you cannot use wifi or bluetooth (both local, non-roaming) if you do so. There is no setting for "Never Roam" without losing functionality unrelated to roaming.
Very annoying indeed!
In addition, "Fair Use" is an admission of copyright violation, but one that is excusable. You are granted copyrights on your original works in a fixed medium, and Fair Use gives certain allowances where violating that copyright may not be prosecuted.
haha, they now added "Copyright: Getty Images" to the page after shopping out the watermarks.
Yeah, that site reeks of amateurism.
... and it spreads into the geek population through repeat slashdot articles like this one!
I'm also glad they told me it was an underwater current. I was afraid it might be some other sort of above-water current connecting 3 oceans.
atime updates actually help a LOT in some circumstances. I use it to help with security checks (even though you can hack the atime record), to help debug (what input file caused it to hang?), and all sorts of things where it's useful to know when a file was read.
I could cope with not having them, but in many cases I love the extra information atime gives.
This has interesting economics, clearly designed to help Amazon, but might also help smaller artists. I think I like it, but not sure.
... you'd think it'd be cheaper to d/l a popular song and make up pagehits with ads, but perhaps this makes smaller artists get more exposure.
There's no such thing as supply and demand in this model. There's only demand, and the supply is endless. So why does an infinite supply with a finite demand not equate to free? Bandwidth? They certainly can get some advertisement into the pages of popular sound downloads.
This seems almost backwards