I hate to go off topic, but that's what Liberal America specializes in. Trying *sooo* hard to make sure women and minorities are being treated equal, to the point of treating them "special!" And only in the most condescending ways...
While I realize what you say is technically true, my claim is that what is happening physically has little to do with what is going on inside the gamers mind. The mind is involved in a phantasy, where you "are" the character in the game. What you're doing outside the game doesn't matter.
You ever watch a kid playing an RPG that allows for both "good" and "bad" actions? Some kids will always pick the "good" path because they actually feel bad about doing the 'bad' things. Others will pick the "bad" items. Sometimes because it's a "release" to do things one can't normally do. Othertimes I'm not so sure... This has nothing to do with your stale and sterile "just pushing buttons."
This is where the similarity between video games, movies and books disappears. In all three mediums the mind is playing a fantasy. In *one* of them the mind is an active participant that makes choices in the world it's playing in.
This is not to say I believe the bill is good and should be passed, but the question was asked as to what the difference is for video games. This is it. This issue must be addressed. Many many people have the ablility to separate reality from fantasy, even fantasy they take active part in.
While I agree with you in principle, you don't really believe what you just said do you? When playing a FPS are you really thinking "I'm gonna move the joystick to the left then press the 'A' button!" Or are you thinking "I'm gonna whack that biatch!"
Otherwise killing somebody with a gun is only "pointing an inanimate object and pulling a trigger."
You ever talk with an english speaking "new computer user?" The words may be in english, but they may as well be foreign. Especially since many words are used in ways that "newbies" don't expect (pop-up? browser? web?). Getting through the jargon is just as difficult for english speakers I think.
It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong, and I am NOT a big man.
That's my point. People get angry when their "worldview" is turned upside-down. Not everybody deals with that as gracefully as Einstein. And to get things to change drastically it is sometimes necessary for a new generation to take over from the old.
400 years. Just imagine all the "cotton farm" slave-holders still alive today and in their prime. There would be even *more* of a difference between young and old.
I'm not saying it would be worse, nor am I saying it would be better, just that I don't think anyone can accurately predict what it would be like. Either way it would be interesting.
Imagine if Einstein were still alive today, bright as ever!
And still denying quantum mechanics works...
Out with the old and in with the new. If people lived hundreds of years it would take considerably longer to rid the world of things like racism. Humans are amazingly adept at holding grudges and are pretty bad about admitting fault or wrong-doing. Major change takes a generation or two typically. The old are much less likely to change their ways...
That's an aweful lot of handwaving for such a short post. Near as I can tell you're saying "yes but those were wrong, *this* is right though!"
There's a pretty obvious difference between objecting to things which actually harm people, and objecting to things which help people for reasons unrelated to the well-being of people.
Aye, but can you be so sure that "harm people" is the same for all parties involved? You know, not everybody who disagrees with stem-cell research and/or abortion does so out of blind allegiance to religion. And even those that do it *for* religious reasons still aren't wrong simply because they're religious.
But I have noticed that the "tech elite" tend to just disregard any reasons opposing theirs. Especially if they don't understand the oppositions POV...
Torturing humans for scientific research was controversial. Testing products on people was controversial. Using jews to test crash helmets was controversial. Yesterdays scientific advancement is todays human rights violatoin. Morality wins in the long run because it's right.
I'm glad you make the general distinction between the discussed procedure and other methods. But I hope you can also make the distinction between a collection of dividing cells in a dish and a human being. I'll stop here, because we might as well just play a recording.
Out of curiosity... If you're an athiest, and thus do not believe in a soul. What are you but for a collection of dividing cells? Is the only difference between you and a blastocycst the dish?
Or if an angsty teenage girl tells an angsty teenage boy that they're "just like Romeo and Juliet", then the boy will at least know that the world is so fucked up that they're better off committing suicide.
I think you may have found the silver lining...
However, if anything I think kids should be watching movie adaptations of Shakespeare. Shakespeare wrote plays. There were intended to be acted out, not read. I've never liked reading it so much as watching it. Especiallly those directed by Kenneth Branagh.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to go off topic, but that's what Liberal America specializes in. Trying *sooo* hard to make sure women and minorities are being treated equal, to the point of treating them "special!" And only in the most condescending ways...
I think they're amazed even more when they find out no more than two people can connect to a machine at a time before they hit 'licensing' issues...
And a Merry Christmas to you too! Nothing like Christmas cheer... :-)
And for any Boston liberals, please replace "Christmas" with "Holiday" or "Kwanza" at your discretion.
Heh. Whoops! Not even sure where *that* typo came from. :-)
While I realize what you say is technically true, my claim is that what is happening physically has little to do with what is going on inside the gamers mind. The mind is involved in a phantasy, where you "are" the character in the game. What you're doing outside the game doesn't matter.
You ever watch a kid playing an RPG that allows for both "good" and "bad" actions? Some kids will always pick the "good" path because they actually feel bad about doing the 'bad' things. Others will pick the "bad" items. Sometimes because it's a "release" to do things one can't normally do. Othertimes I'm not so sure... This has nothing to do with your stale and sterile "just pushing buttons."
This is where the similarity between video games, movies and books disappears. In all three mediums the mind is playing a fantasy. In *one* of them the mind is an active participant that makes choices in the world it's playing in.
This is not to say I believe the bill is good and should be passed, but the question was asked as to what the difference is for video games. This is it. This issue must be addressed. Many many people have the ablility to separate reality from fantasy, even fantasy they take active part in.
I have never seen a TV production of any of his works that comes close to seeing it performed live.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097499/
While I agree with you in principle, you don't really believe what you just said do you? When playing a FPS are you really thinking "I'm gonna move the joystick to the left then press the 'A' button!" Or are you thinking "I'm gonna whack that biatch!"
Otherwise killing somebody with a gun is only "pointing an inanimate object and pulling a trigger."
I never really understood why people always have to mention Gentoo already has it.
c id=14137480
For the same reason other people mention their distro has it?
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169644&
Only people like you don't bitch about it when *they* do it...
You ever talk with an english speaking "new computer user?" The words may be in english, but they may as well be foreign. Especially since many words are used in ways that "newbies" don't expect (pop-up? browser? web?). Getting through the jargon is just as difficult for english speakers I think.
Not sure if you're joking, but the HST is named after a person...
True... But at this point the posts pointing out the dupes are more annoying than the dupes themselves.
Are you sure it's not the smug superiority you feel from pointing out others mistakes?
Also all too often a "geek trait" as well...
"Karma whore!" is the whiney cry of those who wish they'd posted earlier.
I don't care what wikipedia says. Relevant insightful posts are bad now?
It depends on the state actually. Massachusetts requires a plate on all cars, even new ones. New Hampshire, on the other hand, does not.
It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong, and I am NOT a big man.
That's my point. People get angry when their "worldview" is turned upside-down. Not everybody deals with that as gracefully as Einstein. And to get things to change drastically it is sometimes necessary for a new generation to take over from the old.
400 years. Just imagine all the "cotton farm" slave-holders still alive today and in their prime. There would be even *more* of a difference between young and old.
I'm not saying it would be worse, nor am I saying it would be better, just that I don't think anyone can accurately predict what it would be like. Either way it would be interesting.
Point out where I said "extending life is the wrong thing to do" please?
Imagine if Einstein were still alive today, bright as ever!
And still denying quantum mechanics works...
Out with the old and in with the new. If people lived hundreds of years it would take considerably longer to rid the world of things like racism. Humans are amazingly adept at holding grudges and are pretty bad about admitting fault or wrong-doing. Major change takes a generation or two typically. The old are much less likely to change their ways...
That's an aweful lot of handwaving for such a short post. Near as I can tell you're saying "yes but those were wrong, *this* is right though!"
There's a pretty obvious difference between objecting to things which actually harm people, and objecting to things which help people for reasons unrelated to the well-being of people.
Aye, but can you be so sure that "harm people" is the same for all parties involved? You know, not everybody who disagrees with stem-cell research and/or abortion does so out of blind allegiance to religion. And even those that do it *for* religious reasons still aren't wrong simply because they're religious.
But I have noticed that the "tech elite" tend to just disregard any reasons opposing theirs. Especially if they don't understand the oppositions POV...
Why, just the other day I was wondering if there is a way to validate the legality of the content on my DVD products at home!
Gawd I hate PR drivel...
Torturing humans for scientific research was controversial. Testing products on people was controversial. Using jews to test crash helmets was controversial. Yesterdays scientific advancement is todays human rights violatoin. Morality wins in the long run because it's right.
Learn to see both sides you must...
Translation:
As soon as everybody realizes I'm right the world will be better off
Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't understand the subject as well as you do.
I'm glad you make the general distinction between the discussed procedure and other methods. But I hope you can also make the distinction between a collection of dividing cells in a dish and a human being. I'll stop here, because we might as well just play a recording.
Out of curiosity... If you're an athiest, and thus do not believe in a soul. What are you but for a collection of dividing cells? Is the only difference between you and a blastocycst the dish?
http://www.illwillpress.com/vault.html
I suggest "Small, Medium, Large" and "Coffee house propaganda."
Or if an angsty teenage girl tells an angsty teenage boy that they're "just like Romeo and Juliet", then the boy will at least know that the world is so fucked up that they're better off committing suicide.
I think you may have found the silver lining...
However, if anything I think kids should be watching movie adaptations of Shakespeare. Shakespeare wrote plays. There were intended to be acted out, not read. I've never liked reading it so much as watching it. Especiallly those directed by Kenneth Branagh.
So we should kill Bill Gates and redistribute his wealth to the world?
The needs of the many afterall...