Why stop there? Just print anything you need. Food, homes, clean air, world peace, immortality serum. At that point, the world is pretty much your oyster.
Sorry, I meant to say "almost all". I think I must have deleted something when I was proofreading the sentence. All the games on their website are available free, and the PhoneStory game that the fuss is about is not one of the ones advertised on their website.
A publicity stunt? I guess so, although the developers are independently funded, all their games are free, and they've been around for a while. They essentially produce donationware, so it's not of financial benefit to the developers. Their site is here: http://www.molleindustria.org/en/home. I recognized Every day the same dream, McDonalds Videogame, and Oiligarchy.
A friend pointed out to me MIT Press published a book that discusses most of the games in a political context: Newsgames: Journalism at Play by Ian Bogost et al, 2010.
Clauses 15.2 and 16.1 (15.2 Apps that depict violence or abuse of children will be rejected, 16.1 Apps that present excessively objectionable or crude content will be rejected) are not being contested by Molleindustria, rather they are contesting points 21.1 and 21.2, which refer to in-app donation collection methods. The response from game studio is as follows:
We are currently considering two steps:
* Produce a new version of Phone Story that depicts the violence and abuse of children involved in the electronic manufacturing supply chain in a non-crude and non-objectionable way.
* Release a version for the Android market and jailbroken ios devices.
Ducks as a group exist prior to the existence of a duck that claims to be a cat. The basis on which one determines whether a duck is a duck is not based on what the duck claims to be, but rather aspects of phenotype or genotype. The adherence to, or confirmation of, political disposition does not have externally verifiable truths, and thus can't be assessed on the same basis. I do agree with you though: Anonymous does have tendencies. They are very broad, and they emerge out of the tendency to associate in such a group structure. Allegiance to a prior power is one thing that seems to exclude individuals from being able to legitimately claim to be a part of Anonymous (see the Phelps family 'false flag' instigation event - probably on wikipedia). I think that finding some conceptual structure within Anon won't emerge from their conversations, but by examining their behavior over time - something Slashdot thankfully helps us to do.
I think that process is unofficially in practice (at least where I'm from) due to the fact that the amount of paperwork that the police have to go through when dealing with a charge, they're not about to bust a person smoking weed in their own home, or with a small amount of weed on their person, but if they suspect that they've found a dealer then its more worth their while.
Aside from the fact that OP seems to support decriminalization, by saying:
what I can and cannot put in my body.
It's not your fucking business, or anybody else's.
what you're forgetting is that whoever this erroneous concept would apply to wouldn't have a choice in having it in their body, because their genome would be modified before their birth.
I once worked for a shitty sysadmin who had a ringtone of the sound of his children crying. He once also castigated an intern for downloading "over 50 terabytes this morning!" on a 256kbps connection. Needless to say, he was a worthless human being.
Arts have been profitable for centuries - in early forms it was often through commission, later it was through "traditional" production, and recently it has been through mass media and new media industrial production levels. If the costs of producing art were less than the return, then we'd either have a lot of artists starve to death, or no art. Clearly not the case.
Certainly, a financial component doesn't assess the success of art qua art, but it does have some indication of how distributed an artwork may be, which may be an indication of some degree of comparitive success within a particular media format.
The fraud fighter said he plans to spend his upcoming free time finishing a house he started building in 1999, and spending more time with his wife and family, which includes two cats and three geese.
he seems to be doing pretty well for a man that has been living in a half complete house for over a decade, especially considering he must spend a fair amount of time separating the constant warner-bros-esque geese/cat fights that must constantly break out.
I love that your rhetorical question poses the question that maybe - just maybe - there is actually someone out there who is so hot that they're worth contracting HIV from.
... New Zealand doesn't have an official governing constitution in the same way that the United States, or most other nations do. New Zealand is a constitution monarchy, and has no defining charter that regulates rulership. The closest national document(s) that we have is the Treaty of Waitangi. If you know anything about the Treaty of Waitangi, then you'll be aware that legal and governmental problems in New Zealand have existed right from the start.
What I consider to be worse is the fact that both of our major political parties, the marginally centrist-right National, and marginally centrist-left Labour, had agreed to implement it without complaint. Despite the tendencies that each party has in terms of economic regulation, both seem to have the same position regarding personal liberites - not to mention that both parties seem to know very little about the non-commercial functions of the Internet in general.
My personal preference for boxed media is the fact that my country (New Zealand) has universally abysmal bandwidth speeds. Using broadband the best speeds I can get on a connection to a website in the United States is about 30kbps. Modern games are getting larger and larger, while my access to the Internet remains relatively unchanged. Sure, there are other plans, but they are generally financially crippling, or offer little in the way of improvements. While this situation continues in this way, I have no reason to want to buy downloadable games online, and boxed sets will always win the day.
Slashdot Mirror
Why stop there? Just print anything you need. Food, homes, clean air, world peace, immortality serum. At that point, the world is pretty much your oyster.
Sorry, I meant to say "almost all". I think I must have deleted something when I was proofreading the sentence. All the games on their website are available free, and the PhoneStory game that the fuss is about is not one of the ones advertised on their website.
A publicity stunt? I guess so, although the developers are independently funded, all their games are free, and they've been around for a while. They essentially produce donationware, so it's not of financial benefit to the developers. Their site is here: http://www.molleindustria.org/en/home. I recognized Every day the same dream, McDonalds Videogame, and Oiligarchy.
A friend pointed out to me MIT Press published a book that discusses most of the games in a political context: Newsgames: Journalism at Play by Ian Bogost et al, 2010.
Clauses 15.2 and 16.1 (15.2 Apps that depict violence or abuse of children will be rejected, 16.1 Apps that present excessively objectionable or crude content will be rejected) are not being contested by Molleindustria, rather they are contesting points 21.1 and 21.2, which refer to in-app donation collection methods. The response from game studio is as follows:
We are currently considering two steps:
* Produce a new version of Phone Story that depicts the violence and abuse of children involved in the electronic manufacturing supply chain in a non-crude and non-objectionable way.
* Release a version for the Android market and jailbroken ios devices.
From the publisher's website. http://phonestory.org/banned.html
Ducks as a group exist prior to the existence of a duck that claims to be a cat. The basis on which one determines whether a duck is a duck is not based on what the duck claims to be, but rather aspects of phenotype or genotype. The adherence to, or confirmation of, political disposition does not have externally verifiable truths, and thus can't be assessed on the same basis. I do agree with you though: Anonymous does have tendencies. They are very broad, and they emerge out of the tendency to associate in such a group structure. Allegiance to a prior power is one thing that seems to exclude individuals from being able to legitimately claim to be a part of Anonymous (see the Phelps family 'false flag' instigation event - probably on wikipedia). I think that finding some conceptual structure within Anon won't emerge from their conversations, but by examining their behavior over time - something Slashdot thankfully helps us to do.
I think that process is unofficially in practice (at least where I'm from) due to the fact that the amount of paperwork that the police have to go through when dealing with a charge, they're not about to bust a person smoking weed in their own home, or with a small amount of weed on their person, but if they suspect that they've found a dealer then its more worth their while.
what you're forgetting is that whoever this erroneous concept would apply to wouldn't have a choice in having it in their body, because their genome would be modified before their birth.
F5, F5, F5, F5!
I just come here and hit F5 as fast as I can, just in case I miss something.
I once worked for a shitty sysadmin who had a ringtone of the sound of his children crying. He once also castigated an intern for downloading "over 50 terabytes this morning!" on a 256kbps connection. Needless to say, he was a worthless human being.
But even I know that you'll get better Internet access to porn by not using a terrible provider like Optus.
Arts have been profitable for centuries - in early forms it was often through commission, later it was through "traditional" production, and recently it has been through mass media and new media industrial production levels. If the costs of producing art were less than the return, then we'd either have a lot of artists starve to death, or no art. Clearly not the case.
Certainly, a financial component doesn't assess the success of art qua art, but it does have some indication of how distributed an artwork may be, which may be an indication of some degree of comparitive success within a particular media format.
he seems to be doing pretty well for a man that has been living in a half complete house for over a decade, especially considering he must spend a fair amount of time separating the constant warner-bros-esque geese/cat fights that must constantly break out.
I think you're confusing it with Thighland. One's a nation, the other's a fantasy in your head.
A freely communicating populace, with the right to self-determination.
I love that your rhetorical question poses the question that maybe - just maybe - there is actually someone out there who is so hot that they're worth contracting HIV from.
In this case, I would've tried the magic spell option. I roll natural 20s, see.
Yeah, and they'd pilot a vehicle called the Australian National Uranus Spacecraft. It's practically recursive.
Given the topic of the article, the obligatory position would be 20th post.
Pffffff... The gay bomb was declassified years ago.
... New Zealand doesn't have an official governing constitution in the same way that the United States, or most other nations do. New Zealand is a constitution monarchy, and has no defining charter that regulates rulership. The closest national document(s) that we have is the Treaty of Waitangi. If you know anything about the Treaty of Waitangi, then you'll be aware that legal and governmental problems in New Zealand have existed right from the start.
I think he's just trying to say he doesn't like being misrepresented on wikipedia as a crazy nutcase. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac_Killer
What I consider to be worse is the fact that both of our major political parties, the marginally centrist-right National, and marginally centrist-left Labour, had agreed to implement it without complaint. Despite the tendencies that each party has in terms of economic regulation, both seem to have the same position regarding personal liberites - not to mention that both parties seem to know very little about the non-commercial functions of the Internet in general.
Other groups have made Mobius-like organic molecules but never out of carbon sheets.
I perfected it for paper. Years ago. I'm sure we all have.
My personal preference for boxed media is the fact that my country (New Zealand) has universally abysmal bandwidth speeds. Using broadband the best speeds I can get on a connection to a website in the United States is about 30kbps. Modern games are getting larger and larger, while my access to the Internet remains relatively unchanged. Sure, there are other plans, but they are generally financially crippling, or offer little in the way of improvements. While this situation continues in this way, I have no reason to want to buy downloadable games online, and boxed sets will always win the day.