If you're so concerned with pathologically violent people, why not simply screen for them at various reasonable points? You provide mental health services at school to disturbed kids and training for teachers on how to recognize and deal with them. You screen people who have violent run-ins with other people before they go onto bigger and badder things. You run a public education campaign so people can recognize when their associates and familiy members need help -- maybe a few people will recognize they need help themselves.
The problem with screening for these kids that do these types of things is that they are very intelligent, but emotionally underdeveloped. They are smart enough to say the things that they need to in front of teachers and parents. The parents would have to be very smart and be able to monitor their child's activities without the child's knowledge. The only thing is that most of these children that do go crazy and shoot up their school seemed to be normal to their parents, so the parents didn't see a need to invade their child's privacy.
In recent years, schools have had their curriculum shifted to cover the materials that are on the standardized
tests. In increasing amounts, due to schools' funding being dependent on students' performance on the standardized
tests, the curriculum has become simply memorize these facts, which you will be tested on at the end of the year.
There is no incentive to excel for most students, there is very little critical thinking taught.
I believe that this change has caused many of the students who are less likely to go to college ever to become
completely disenfranchised with High School. They see, and in my opinion, accurately, that High school has nothing
left to teach them, because after spending eight years learning how to memorize crap, and spit it back out on a test,
how much more can they teach you?
See... the point is it didn't just stop working... their accounts got canceled because they were accused of cheating. If it suddenly stopped working in cedega, and Blizz wouldn't help them get it running that's one thing, this is totally different.
I find it quite amusing that you are unwilling to leave your name attached to these posts. Also, I don't quite understand your reaction to my posts, it really seems that you just like to argue with people.
In one breath you claim you didn't defend the crazy claims of the "air car" people.
In the next you assert
I do, however think that they have people evaluating the items that they put on their shows that are at least, if not more qualified than the general population of/.
Then you go on to bring in the idea of "alarmist propaganda as part of a larger goal of the company to spread Al Gore's version of global warming and it's effects." out of left field.
You keep replying as if I am asserting that this is not a flawed idea. If I state it more plainly, maybe you will understand me. I make no assertion as to the feasability of these engines that use air as a fuel. I did however see the exact car mentioned in alienw's post on a televison program. The people who produced the television apparently think that this is a feasable idea. The only assertion that I made was that from the demonstration given, it sounded like it was air powered. I then stated that the network has fact checkers, and that I believe at least some of them are more qualified than the general population here. My intentions in making that statement was not to wholly validate the "air car" people, or to say that if it was on the network, it must be true (illuistrated by the fact that I later called into question wether or not the network has an extremist environmentalist agenda, which you were unable to understand), rather to say that if this is a scam, they, through demonstration, as well as other information, have managed to convince some people who have more information available to them about this specific application than either you or me (again note that I called into question wether or not the network has ulterior motives for painting environmentally friendly technologies in a good light).
The simple fact is that medium-chain hydrocarbons are used as vehicle fuel due to their energy density. Nothing else comes close. Almost any technology which is developed to allow vehicles to reasonably use lower-density energy storage mediums can be translated to ICE based platforms.
Not to mention the fundamental point of alienw's post. Air is a horrible energy storage medium, in terms of efficiency (compression costs), energy density (tank size and weight per unit of energy), and practicality (massive heat exchangers to prevent "fuel" line freezing, difficulty refueling safe and quick).
Those are very good points. On the show, they did not touch on those areas, and as I do not have the knowlege to make any I can not offer any counterpoints. I am simply providing information that I received from the show that I watched, which only demonstrated the technology, and offered less information on the engine than is available on the companiy's website.
I replied because of the impression that I was given by the show, that both of the technologies, while not as powerful as gasoline, or other fuels, were feasable. One stated that you could get about 300 miles from one full tank of air.
I didn't respond to his math, or state that the whole thing wasn't a scam. However, all I stated was that I _saw_ this exact company with this exact car on the show. While I know that the Science channel may not be the most accurate place to receive scientific information, as well as the fact that they themselves could be tricked by a company trying to use the promise of an air-powered car to scam money from investors, I do, however think that they have people evaluating the items that they put on their shows that are at least, if not more qualified than the general population of/.
Now, an argument could be placed that this type of thing is alarmist propaganda as part of a larger goal of the company to spread Al Gore's version of global warming and it's effects. I would be more apt to agree to that, given that I saw a show, just today, on global warming, followed by "What happens when the oil runs out."
I'm not saying that it is absolute proof that the idea is not a scam, but I did see this air car on either 'Discoveries this week' or 'Beyond Tomorrow' on the Science channel. They had two different companies with air powered cars, and the other one looked (technologically) slightly better. I believe that I did see them drive both, and it sure did sound like air powered.
To make this work and be cost effective in reality these things have to continue to be cheap to run. A few things the article doesn't mention are:
Does it require electricity, if so how much?
Do the chemicals used in the condensation need to be replenished? If so, how often, how much potable water can be generated per load of chemicals, what is the cost of the chemicals?
... but it didn't 'make' the experience either. From the beginning of rumble with StarFox 64, to the more recent games, the best (IMHO) implementation of the rumble feature is in driving games, where riding over the bumps feels right (or maybe the earth-shaking commonly present in Final Fantasy games:P.) Otherwise you get a tactile sensation that coorelates to some action on the screen that is not proportional. You get shot, you feel a buzz. You die, the damn thing vibrates hard for 3 seconds. Most games also have an on screen indication at all of the points that the controller vibrates (except for simulation as in the driving games.)
Your analogy is a layer too deep. That would be compared to someone not knowing how to code a program, but still able to execute one. A better analogy would be, "My Mother doesn't know what PCV stands for in PCV Valve (positive crankcase ventilation), but she can still drive her car."
OTOH if the electronics industry were like the pharmacutical industry, we would have (at least) two names for every piece of electronics, one that is useful and descriptive (chemical), and one that is interesting and distinguishing (brand name). But wait, we already do don't we? For some reason, they are so much more interchangable in the electronics industry. MP3 player = IPod = Zune.
As far as acronyms go, the more complex the item, the harder it gets to usefully describe it in a short way.
Maybe, though, the article misses the point of Jargon the language, esp. the vocabulary, peculiar to a particular trade, profession, or group. The article should be about people joining a group, but don't care enough, or don't have the capacity to understand exactly what they are doing.
I really hope that is not all you consider when choosing games. Not all new games push the envelope in hardware requirements. DEFCON for example:
Recommended: Windows 98/ME/2000/XP, P3-600-Geforce 2, 128 Mb RAM, 60 Mb Hard Disk, Internet connection for multiplayer games
A 4 - 5 year old computer could meet those requirements. Now I haven't played it yet, but I do intend to at least download the demo, as it sounds like a really fun game.
Now for a recent game that raises the hardware bar a little further, but has not gotten good reviews. Prey:
CPU Speed: Intel Pentium 4 2.5Ghz / AMD Athlon XP 2500+ processor
RAM: 1GB system RAM
Video Card: ATI Radeon X800 series or higher video card with latest manufacturer drivers
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi series sound card
Internet: Broadband internet connection or LAN required for multiplayer
With those reccomended requirements, I could see some 1 year old computers that could run that. Some people may love the game, but by and large many people hold it as the same old FPS, not particularly challenging or entertaining.
Also, you really missed the parent's point in saying that ingame screenshots don't print well on the box. I don't know how many great looking games I've seen screenshots of on the box and thought to myself, "If I were them I wouldn't want that crappy looking picture on my box."
Or notice that the divider between the current folder's messages and the preview pane can be resized simply by placing the mouse over the grey bar that divides the two.
You mistyped. YEARS ago Yahoo had free POP access. They stopped offering it for free when they realized that they wouldn't be able to pay for it with decreasing advertising revenue. I actually read the notice that they put up that had that information in it, but am unable to find it now.
However, they did move the POP access and the Forwarding under Yahoo! Mail Plus. Which costs $20/mo.
I for one would like some refrences to back up your information. What I have noticed, in the past whenever yahoo has redesigned their front page (twice that I can remember specifically), they label it as 'Beta'. Typing 'yahoo mail beta' in the yahoo search box, the first result has the tagline:
New beta version of Yahoo! Mail that features an updated interface, RSS feeds, tabbed mesages, SpamGuard, and accessibility over mobile phones.
Looking around Google's website, and the help system within GMail, I can't find any reference to GMail as beta, beside the small text at the bottom of the GMail icon. Now, not being a marketing expert I could be wrong, but most companies love to make their product names stand out with color, large text, and intersting pictures/symbols composing part of the name. Notice on the GMail icon, that 'GMail' is large, colored, and has an envelope comprising the 'm'. Notice that 'beta' is small, a dark color, and below, almost as a subscript.
Or, I could just be an idiot who likes to argue points with no supporting evidence.
Been to Chuck E. Cheese's on their birthday. Or for that matter, any number of similar places, where there was a stage, a worker with a microphone standing off stage, controlling the animatronic character.
Arthur C. Clarke wrote a short story that had the telephone networks becoming self aware when the network became sufficently complex. It's possible I tell you, the telephone networks just don't have the bandwi....... ...... ..... NOTHING TO SEE HERE. MOVE ALONG./eof
I would assume that I'm not too far off from others when I say that I don't particularly enjoy these features inserted into the movies. Also, how is the end result of this different from what DVD could do? The technology is better, and more interesting, but for which applications could they be used that truly make the users' experience better?
The PIP is neat, but I for one have never sat all the way through a movie a second time to hear the commentary. This just adds a small box with video content to that. Is there really a demand for this? How does that spell interactive? All this mixing of different streams does is stop the disc from having to seek when you activate a feature, but the net effect is still pulling the person out of the movie, and putting them somewhere else. The other issue is the 'twitch factor' involved in activating these features. If you miss the activation button when it pops up onto the screen, you have to rewind it. You'd probably have to be sitting with the remote in your hand, and have to expect the button to catch it.
Alternatly I don't see a problem with the special features menu present on DVDs. It has a description of the content, that I can choose to watch, not interrupting the movie. I'm sure that the PIP feature could be used nicely in that context, choose scene to watch, choose which part is in PIP box (Scene, or Behind the Scenes).
I think that you are right to a degree. I believe that the part of the picture that you are missing is the fact that there is no significant 40+ age group of gamers. It is my belief that as the average age of gamers increases, acceptance of video games as a part of culture will increase. I will also say that there are distinct communities, within the gaming community that, in comparing themselves to other groups, or the community at large, consider themselves 'Highbrow'.
There is also a present-day example in World of Warcraft. As an avid player, I will recuse myself from arguing this point too much, but WoW has become a significant part of worldwide culture. I think that with active subscription numbers of over 6 million, it becomes very hard to discount. C|net has labeled WoW the new golf. That, however could be argued to be a media outlet that represents a small subsection of people, that:
Didn't play golf already.
Already played video games.
I will admit that part of the fallacy of my argument is the fact that you are referring to American culture, of which video games are not considered a part of, and I am using numbers that include worldwide subscriptions, including places like Korea, and China, where video games are considered a part of culture. However, it is my contention that there is a trend of WoW subscriptions, that is increasing in places like The United States, and countries in Europe. It is also my belief that, in the future people will reflect on their experiences of and within WoW, as older generations now enjoy their 'Highbrow' culture.
If there were any book universe/world that I would wish our world was more like, it would have to be Dune for me. With all it's downfalls, I think we may all be a little better off loosing our water-fat and being a little more like the Fremen.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with screening for these kids that do these types of things is that they are very intelligent, but emotionally underdeveloped.
They are smart enough to say the things that they need to in front of teachers and parents. The parents would have to be very smart
and be able to monitor their child's activities without the child's knowledge. The only thing is that most of these children that do go crazy
and shoot up their school seemed to be normal to their parents, so the parents didn't see a need to invade their child's privacy.
Really, if you don't like it, provide your own solution.
In recent years, schools have had their curriculum shifted to cover the materials that are on the standardized
tests. In increasing amounts, due to schools' funding being dependent on students' performance on the standardized
tests, the curriculum has become simply memorize these facts, which you will be tested on at the end of the year.
There is no incentive to excel for most students, there is very little critical thinking taught.
I believe that this change has caused many of the students who are less likely to go to college ever to become
completely disenfranchised with High School. They see, and in my opinion, accurately, that High school has nothing
left to teach them, because after spending eight years learning how to memorize crap, and spit it back out on a test,
how much more can they teach you?
Damn you, I was going to post that, and I read down to the bottom to check if anyone else did first.
See... the point is it didn't just stop working... their accounts got canceled because they were accused of cheating. If it suddenly stopped working in cedega, and Blizz wouldn't help them get it running that's one thing, this is totally different.
Ohh... do you think that I could get a trademark on "G/CPU" and then try and auction it off to the two compaines?
You keep replying as if I am asserting that this is not a flawed idea. If I state it more plainly, maybe you will understand me. I make no assertion as to the feasability of these engines that use air as a fuel. I did however see the exact car mentioned in alienw's post on a televison program. The people who produced the television apparently think that this is a feasable idea. The only assertion that I made was that from the demonstration given, it sounded like it was air powered. I then stated that the network has fact checkers, and that I believe at least some of them are more qualified than the general population here. My intentions in making that statement was not to wholly validate the "air car" people, or to say that if it was on the network, it must be true (illuistrated by the fact that I later called into question wether or not the network has an extremist environmentalist agenda, which you were unable to understand), rather to say that if this is a scam, they, through demonstration, as well as other information, have managed to convince some people who have more information available to them about this specific application than either you or me (again note that I called into question wether or not the network has ulterior motives for painting environmentally friendly technologies in a good light).
Those are very good points. On the show, they did not touch on those areas, and as I do not have the knowlege to make any I can not offer any counterpoints. I am simply providing information that I received from the show that I watched, which only demonstrated the technology, and offered less information on the engine than is available on the companiy's website.
http://www.beyondtomorrow.com.au/stories/ep17/auss ieaircar.html
While the synopsis is the same as the last link, the link to the Austrailian company's site is below the pictures, rather than the French "Air Car".
http://www.beyondtomorrow.com.au/stories/ep17/fren chaircar.html
I replied because of the impression that I was given by the show, that both of the technologies, while not as powerful as gasoline, or other fuels, were feasable. One stated that you could get about 300 miles from one full tank of air.
/.
I didn't respond to his math, or state that the whole thing wasn't a scam. However, all I stated was that I _saw_ this exact company with this exact car on the show. While I know that the Science channel may not be the most accurate place to receive scientific information, as well as the fact that they themselves could be tricked by a company trying to use the promise of an air-powered car to scam money from investors, I do, however think that they have people evaluating the items that they put on their shows that are at least, if not more qualified than the general population of
Now, an argument could be placed that this type of thing is alarmist propaganda as part of a larger goal of the company to spread Al Gore's version of global warming and it's effects. I would be more apt to agree to that, given that I saw a show, just today, on global warming, followed by "What happens when the oil runs out."
I'm not saying that it is absolute proof that the idea is not a scam, but I did see this air car on either 'Discoveries this week' or 'Beyond Tomorrow' on the Science channel. They had two different companies with air powered cars, and the other one looked (technologically) slightly better. I believe that I did see them drive both, and it sure did sound like air powered.
... but it didn't 'make' the experience either. From the beginning of rumble with StarFox 64, to the more recent games, the best (IMHO) implementation of the rumble feature is in driving games, where riding over the bumps feels right (or maybe the earth-shaking commonly present in Final Fantasy games :P.) Otherwise you get a tactile sensation that coorelates to some action on the screen that is not proportional. You get shot, you feel a buzz. You die, the damn thing vibrates hard for 3 seconds. Most games also have an on screen indication at all of the points that the controller vibrates (except for simulation as in the driving games.)
Your analogy is a layer too deep. That would be compared to someone not knowing how to code a program, but still able to execute one. A better analogy would be, "My Mother doesn't know what PCV stands for in PCV Valve (positive crankcase ventilation), but she can still drive her car."
OTOH if the electronics industry were like the pharmacutical industry, we would have (at least) two names for every piece of electronics, one that is useful and descriptive (chemical), and one that is interesting and distinguishing (brand name). But wait, we already do don't we? For some reason, they are so much more interchangable in the electronics industry. MP3 player = IPod = Zune.
As far as acronyms go, the more complex the item, the harder it gets to usefully describe it in a short way.
Maybe, though, the article misses the point of Jargon the language, esp. the vocabulary, peculiar to a particular trade, profession, or group. The article should be about people joining a group, but don't care enough, or don't have the capacity to understand exactly what they are doing.
A 4 - 5 year old computer could meet those requirements. Now I haven't played it yet, but I do intend to at least download the demo, as it sounds like a really fun game.
Now for a recent game that raises the hardware bar a little further, but has not gotten good reviews. Prey:
With those reccomended requirements, I could see some 1 year old computers that could run that. Some people may love the game, but by and large many people hold it as the same old FPS, not particularly challenging or entertaining.
Also, you really missed the parent's point in saying that ingame screenshots don't print well on the box. I don't know how many great looking games I've seen screenshots of on the box and thought to myself, "If I were them I wouldn't want that crappy looking picture on my box."
Or notice that the divider between the current folder's messages and the preview pane can be resized simply by placing the mouse over the grey bar that divides the two.
You mistyped. YEARS ago Yahoo had free POP access. They stopped offering it for free when they realized that they wouldn't be able to pay for it with decreasing advertising revenue. I actually read the notice that they put up that had that information in it, but am unable to find it now.
However, they did move the POP access and the Forwarding under Yahoo! Mail Plus. Which costs $20/mo.
Looking around Google's website, and the help system within GMail, I can't find any reference to GMail as beta, beside the small text at the bottom of the GMail icon. Now, not being a marketing expert I could be wrong, but most companies love to make their product names stand out with color, large text, and intersting pictures/symbols composing part of the name. Notice on the GMail icon, that 'GMail' is large, colored, and has an envelope comprising the 'm'. Notice that 'beta' is small, a dark color, and below, almost as a subscript.
Or, I could just be an idiot who likes to argue points with no supporting evidence.
Been to Chuck E. Cheese's on their birthday. Or for that matter, any number of similar places, where there was a stage, a worker with a microphone standing off stage, controlling the animatronic character.
Sad, sheltered little men...
Arthur C. Clarke wrote a short story that had the telephone networks becoming self aware when the network became sufficently complex. It's possible I tell you, the telephone networks just don't have the bandwi....... /eof
......
.....
NOTHING TO SEE HERE. MOVE ALONG.
I would assume that I'm not too far off from others when I say that I don't particularly enjoy these features inserted into the movies. Also, how is the end result of this different from what DVD could do? The technology is better, and more interesting, but for which applications could they be used that truly make the users' experience better?
The PIP is neat, but I for one have never sat all the way through a movie a second time to hear the commentary. This just adds a small box with video content to that. Is there really a demand for this? How does that spell interactive? All this mixing of different streams does is stop the disc from having to seek when you activate a feature, but the net effect is still pulling the person out of the movie, and putting them somewhere else. The other issue is the 'twitch factor' involved in activating these features. If you miss the activation button when it pops up onto the screen, you have to rewind it. You'd probably have to be sitting with the remote in your hand, and have to expect the button to catch it.
Alternatly I don't see a problem with the special features menu present on DVDs. It has a description of the content, that I can choose to watch, not interrupting the movie. I'm sure that the PIP feature could be used nicely in that context, choose scene to watch, choose which part is in PIP box (Scene, or Behind the Scenes).
There is also a present-day example in World of Warcraft. As an avid player, I will recuse myself from arguing this point too much, but WoW has become a significant part of worldwide culture. I think that with active subscription numbers of over 6 million, it becomes very hard to discount. C|net has labeled WoW the new golf. That, however could be argued to be a media outlet that represents a small subsection of people, that:
I will admit that part of the fallacy of my argument is the fact that you are referring to American culture, of which video games are not considered a part of, and I am using numbers that include worldwide subscriptions, including places like Korea, and China, where video games are considered a part of culture. However, it is my contention that there is a trend of WoW subscriptions, that is increasing in places like The United States, and countries in Europe. It is also my belief that, in the future people will reflect on their experiences of and within WoW, as older generations now enjoy their 'Highbrow' culture.
If there were any book universe/world that I would wish our world was more like, it would have to be Dune for me. With all it's downfalls, I think we may all be a little better off loosing our water-fat and being a little more like the Fremen.
Or we can plant a thumper (they are attracted to rythmic vibrations), and use hooks and ropes to climb to the tops of their backs.