'Demographics have shown that not only are FireFox users a somewhat small percentage of the internet, they actually are even smaller in terms of online spending, therefore blocking FireFox seems to have only minimal financial drawbacks, whereas ending resource theft has tremendous financial rewards for honest, hard-working website owners and developers.'
So those who use Firefox will need to find a different way to access the page (and if they are determined to they will). How will this encourage anyone who is inconvenienced by this to actually view an ad or buy a product advertised in the ad? Not only will this inconvenience the user in the future it will also mess up any statistics gathered from web browsers (either from faked browser identification or from users switching to another browser to simply view the page).
In the end this will do nothing more then hurt the owner of the web page and further annoy those who surf the net.
'Demographics have shown that not only are FireFox users a somewhat small percentage of the internet, they actually are even smaller in terms of online spending, therefore blocking FireFox seems to have only minimal financial drawbacks, whereas ending resource theft has tremendous financial rewards for honest, hard-working website owners and developers.'
So those who use Firefox will need to find a different way to access the page (and if they are determined to they will). How will this encourage anyone who is inconvenienced by this to actually view an ad or buy a product advertised in the ad? Not only will this inconvenience the user in the future it will also mess up any statistics gathered from web browsers (either from faked browser identification or from users switching to another browser to simply view the page).
In the end this will do nothing more than hurt the owner of the web page and further annoy those who surf the net.
Oops... submit instead of preview... fixed formatting:/
It's always been easy to place blame on something yes, but it usually involves placing blame on something that isn't well understood, researched or generally accepted by society.
Imitating what we see and do is something that exists on the micro level.. yes we've all learnt as a child and we imitate what we see. But you don't see three year olds acting as a leader for groups of people and they probably wont be a factor in changing society as a whole.
As we interact and form society's we decide whether or not an action/idea is accepted. What we've learnt through school and personal life lessons often comes from example. As we gather more examples and reasons to support or disprove our beliefs we can enhance our conscience.
This can be why we can look at some societies and think "Wow, what the heck are they thinking!? That's so wrong?" But they may look at us thinking the same thing. As we grew up in different societies we were brought up differently, and sometimes there's conflicts of interest as a result.
Violence in video games is easy to blame since it's effects are not well understood and more research needs to be done. Yes, some people may feel like they need to act out on violence they see but other people have learnt the difference between fiction and reality.
Remember that those we elect also have the ability to relay their message to many people. Many leaders prefer to relay messages that society can relate with so they may stay in power. It's easy to say something people can agree with opposed to a conflict idea. With conflict, those who elected the leader remember it when it's time to vote for a new leader, and it's quite likely they'll remember more of the (bad/conflicting things) than the good.
More research needs to be done on video game violence before society as a whole will begin to shift the blame away from it. Did you hear about the study conducted that shows playing first person shooters improves reaction times more than those who play Tetris? Funny how research that shows there's benefits to playing violent video doesn't get as much attention. But that is partly due to it conflicting with society's beliefs that violent games are evil, and as a result companies aren't as willing to fund research that examines the benefits of violent games.
It's always been easy to place blame on something yes, but it usually involves placing blame on something that isn't well understood, researched or generally accepted by society.
Imitating what we see and do is something that exists on the micro level.. yes we've all learnt as a child and we imitate what we see. But you don't see three year olds acting as a leader for groups of people and they probably wont be a factor in changing society as a whole.
As we interact and form society's we decide whether or not an action/idea is accepted. What we've learnt through school and personal life lessons often comes from example. As we gather more examples and reasons to support or disprove our beliefs we can enhance our conscience.
This can be why we can look at some societies and think "Wow, what the heck are they thinking!? That's so wrong?" But they may look at us thinking the same thing. As we grew up in different societies we were brought up differently, and sometimes there's conflicts of interest as a result.
Violence in video games is easy to blame since it's effects are not well understood and more research needs to be done. Yes, some people may feel like they need to act out on violence they see but other people have learnt the difference between fiction and reality.
Remember that those we elect also have the ability to relay their message to many people. Many leaders prefer to relay messages that society can relate with so they may stay in power. It's easy to say something people can agree with opposed to a conflict idea. With conflict, those who elected the leader remember it when it's time to vote for a new leader, and it's quite likely they'll remember more of the (bad/conflicting things) than the good.
More research needs to be done on video game violence before society as a whole will begin to shift the blame away from it.
Did you hear about the study conducted that shows playing first person shooters improves reaction times more than those who play Tetris? Funny how research that shows there's benefits to playing violent video doesn't get as much attention. But that is partly due to it conflicting with society's beliefs that violent games are evil, and as a result companies aren't as willing to fund research that examines the benefits of violent games.
Actually, I recall CCP working closely with Transgaming in the past to introduce and maintain Linux support. Currently this was being offered through Cedega.
If someone subscribes to a satellite/cable service they should be responsible for regulating what children watch. Most satellites I've seen (I don't have much experience with cable) allows you to lock channels. Sure it's a hassle, but if you have kids in the house and you still want those channels you need to take responsibility... instead of letting someone else lock them for you.
It's bad enough there's not much worth watching on TV anymore as it is. In the event I actually want to sit down and watch something, I don't want an extra hurdle such as "You can only watch this show between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM".
No wonder everyone is moving away from TV and to the Internet... less regulation and more choices.
Also, what about time shifting on satellite? Does this mean all the violent shows played in another timezone become blackedout during times when children can access the channel?
/On second thought, do whatever... I prefer the internet anyways
Customer: "I clicked 'Cancel'." Tech Support: "YOU CLICKED 'CANCEL'???" Customer: "That's what I was supposed to do, right?" Tech Support: "No, you were supposed to click 'OK'." Customer: "I thought you said to click 'Cancel'." Tech Support: "NO. I said to click 'OK'." Customer: "Oh." Tech Support: "Now we have to start over." Customer: "Why?" Tech Support: "Because you clicked 'Cancel'." Customer: "Wasn't I supposed to click 'Cancel'?" Tech Support: "No. Forget that. Let's start from the top." Customer: "Ok." I spent the next fifteen minutes re-constructing the carefully crafted setup for this lady's unique computer.
Tech Support: "All right. Now, are you ready to click 'OK'?" Customer: "Yes." Tech Support: "Great. Now click 'OK'." Pause.
Customer: "I clicked 'Cancel'." And people wonder why my mouse pad has a target on it labeled "BANG HEAD HERE."
*cut to Peter with the Justice League* Peter Griffin: Sorry, Wonder Woman, I got three kings. Now let's see your pair. *Wonder Woman sighs, then removes her bustier* Peter Griffin: *laughs* All right! *looks offscreen* Peter Griffin: Robin, what are you looking at me for? Look at her.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell that to my phone.
I like playing Pyro in capture maps especially when I'm defending. They can be very effective close range but really suffer in large areas.
:)
Although... I played in a server today where half the server were pyro's (about half and half on each team). It was carnage and a lot of fun
So those who use Firefox will need to find a different way to access the page (and if they are determined to they will). How will this encourage anyone who is inconvenienced by this to actually view an ad or buy a product advertised in the ad? Not only will this inconvenience the user in the future it will also mess up any statistics gathered from web browsers (either from faked browser identification or from users switching to another browser to simply view the page).
In the end this will do nothing more then hurt the owner of the web page and further annoy those who surf the net.
/Apologies for the repost... fixed formatting :s
'Demographics have shown that not only are FireFox users a somewhat small percentage of the internet, they actually are even smaller in terms of online spending, therefore blocking FireFox seems to have only minimal financial drawbacks, whereas ending resource theft has tremendous financial rewards for honest, hard-working website owners and developers.' So those who use Firefox will need to find a different way to access the page (and if they are determined to they will). How will this encourage anyone who is inconvenienced by this to actually view an ad or buy a product advertised in the ad? Not only will this inconvenience the user in the future it will also mess up any statistics gathered from web browsers (either from faked browser identification or from users switching to another browser to simply view the page). In the end this will do nothing more than hurt the owner of the web page and further annoy those who surf the net.
Next time they should use the password 87654321.
It's always been easy to place blame on something yes, but it usually involves placing blame on something that isn't well understood, researched or generally accepted by society.
Imitating what we see and do is something that exists on the micro level.. yes we've all learnt as a child and we imitate what we see. But you don't see three year olds acting as a leader for groups of people and they probably wont be a factor in changing society as a whole.
As we interact and form society's we decide whether or not an action/idea is accepted. What we've learnt through school and personal life lessons often comes from example. As we gather more examples and reasons to support or disprove our beliefs we can enhance our conscience.
This can be why we can look at some societies and think "Wow, what the heck are they thinking!? That's so wrong?" But they may look at us thinking the same thing. As we grew up in different societies we were brought up differently, and sometimes there's conflicts of interest as a result.
Violence in video games is easy to blame since it's effects are not well understood and more research needs to be done. Yes, some people may feel like they need to act out on violence they see but other people have learnt the difference between fiction and reality.
Remember that those we elect also have the ability to relay their message to many people. Many leaders prefer to relay messages that society can relate with so they may stay in power. It's easy to say something people can agree with opposed to a conflict idea. With conflict, those who elected the leader remember it when it's time to vote for a new leader, and it's quite likely they'll remember more of the (bad/conflicting things) than the good.
More research needs to be done on video game violence before society as a whole will begin to shift the blame away from it. Did you hear about the study conducted that shows playing first person shooters improves reaction times more than those who play Tetris? Funny how research that shows there's benefits to playing violent video doesn't get as much attention. But that is partly due to it conflicting with society's beliefs that violent games are evil, and as a result companies aren't as willing to fund research that examines the benefits of violent games.
It's always been easy to place blame on something yes, but it usually involves placing blame on something that isn't well understood, researched or generally accepted by society. Imitating what we see and do is something that exists on the micro level.. yes we've all learnt as a child and we imitate what we see. But you don't see three year olds acting as a leader for groups of people and they probably wont be a factor in changing society as a whole. As we interact and form society's we decide whether or not an action/idea is accepted. What we've learnt through school and personal life lessons often comes from example. As we gather more examples and reasons to support or disprove our beliefs we can enhance our conscience. This can be why we can look at some societies and think "Wow, what the heck are they thinking!? That's so wrong?" But they may look at us thinking the same thing. As we grew up in different societies we were brought up differently, and sometimes there's conflicts of interest as a result. Violence in video games is easy to blame since it's effects are not well understood and more research needs to be done. Yes, some people may feel like they need to act out on violence they see but other people have learnt the difference between fiction and reality. Remember that those we elect also have the ability to relay their message to many people. Many leaders prefer to relay messages that society can relate with so they may stay in power. It's easy to say something people can agree with opposed to a conflict idea. With conflict, those who elected the leader remember it when it's time to vote for a new leader, and it's quite likely they'll remember more of the (bad/conflicting things) than the good. More research needs to be done on video game violence before society as a whole will begin to shift the blame away from it. Did you hear about the study conducted that shows playing first person shooters improves reaction times more than those who play Tetris? Funny how research that shows there's benefits to playing violent video doesn't get as much attention. But that is partly due to it conflicting with society's beliefs that violent games are evil, and as a result companies aren't as willing to fund research that examines the benefits of violent games.
Actually, I recall CCP working closely with Transgaming in the past to introduce and maintain Linux support. Currently this was being offered through Cedega.
If someone subscribes to a satellite/cable service they should be responsible for regulating what children watch. Most satellites I've seen (I don't have much experience with cable) allows you to lock channels. Sure it's a hassle, but if you have kids in the house and you still want those channels you need to take responsibility... instead of letting someone else lock them for you.
It's bad enough there's not much worth watching on TV anymore as it is. In the event I actually want to sit down and watch something, I don't want an extra hurdle such as "You can only watch this show between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM".
No wonder everyone is moving away from TV and to the Internet... less regulation and more choices.
Also, what about time shifting on satellite? Does this mean all the violent shows played in another timezone become blackedout during times when children can access the channel?
Definately a good way to waste a couple hours by reading through that. This is my favourite one for support calls:
I had this conversation recently with a lady who swore she had been using computers since forever.
Tech Support: "All right. Now click 'OK'."
Customer: "Click 'OK'?"
Tech Support: "Yes, click 'OK'."
Customer: "Click 'OK'?"
Tech Support: "That's right. Click 'OK'."
Customer: "So I click 'OK', right?"
Tech Support: "Right. Click 'OK'."
Pause.
Customer: "I clicked 'Cancel'."
Tech Support: "YOU CLICKED 'CANCEL'???"
Customer: "That's what I was supposed to do, right?"
Tech Support: "No, you were supposed to click 'OK'."
Customer: "I thought you said to click 'Cancel'."
Tech Support: "NO. I said to click 'OK'."
Customer: "Oh."
Tech Support: "Now we have to start over."
Customer: "Why?"
Tech Support: "Because you clicked 'Cancel'."
Customer: "Wasn't I supposed to click 'Cancel'?"
Tech Support: "No. Forget that. Let's start from the top."
Customer: "Ok."
I spent the next fifteen minutes re-constructing the carefully crafted setup for this lady's unique computer.
Tech Support: "All right. Now, are you ready to click 'OK'?"
Customer: "Yes."
Tech Support: "Great. Now click 'OK'."
Pause.
Customer: "I clicked 'Cancel'."
And people wonder why my mouse pad has a target on it labeled "BANG HEAD HERE."
*cut to Peter with the Justice League*
Peter Griffin: Sorry, Wonder Woman, I got three kings. Now let's see your pair.
*Wonder Woman sighs, then removes her bustier*
Peter Griffin: *laughs* All right!
*looks offscreen*
Peter Griffin: Robin, what are you looking at me for? Look at her.