Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

typodupeerror

## Comment Re:The proper measure involves calculus (Score 1)188188

It's been about a year I think since I posted to slashdot. I forgot the obnoxious way it handles line breaks. And then like an evil person I not only didn't use preview, I also have now replied to my own post. May the slashdot gods have mercy on my soul.

## Comment The proper measure involves calculus (Score 1)188188

Time/Money is a poor metric for reasons many have posted. I think my formula is pretty decent. It is a pretty good approximation of my actual feelings about a game. Let f(t) be the function of fun over the course of a game. Let E be the constant that represents my average entertainment during my freetime (when I could choose to play a video game or not). Then the value of a game to me is the (integral on t of (f() - E)) / (cost of the game + small constant) + various bonus constants. These various constants tip the scales a bit but don't generally massively change the overall value. They include positive bonuses for: * Open Source * Cross Platform * "Independently" developed Games that have done very well by this metric: * Civilization I, II, IV, Alpha Centauri, the original Colonization * Half Life (original) + free Counterstrike and Day of Defeat mods * Dwarf Fortress (bay12games.com) * Company of Heroes * Starcraft and Warcraft II

## Comment Illegal until proven safe? (Score 1)223223

In cases like this the onus is always on the person that's arguing that it's safe. Basically because the harm of not doing is far less than the possible harm of doing in most cases.

Your posting history seems to indicate that you are a reasonable and intelligent person, so I have to assume that you mean something very specific by "cases like this". Because if "cases like this" is interpreted as even a somewhat general thing then you seem to be saying that by default any (physiologically altering?) substance should be illegal until it has been proven to be safe for several decades.

I think rather the opposite: that a substance should only be made illegal if it is proven to be harmful--and what is more, it should only be made illegal if it directly harms a person other than a person consenting to be harmed by it.

I'd like clarification on what cases you think should be illegal by default. Maybe you could suggest a blanket law that would define a class of things as illegal for intake until they are approved?

Disclaimer: I have never tried marijuana or any other illegal drug.

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.

Working...