There will be an external beta sign up page made available "soon"."
Link to Original Source
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
You may be expressing that you believe that all games that have previously been refused classification would still be, but one of my professional acquaintances performs some of classifications. They have no hidden agenda whatsoever. They simply classify the content as they would any other content - to the best of their ability, of course. If they believe the media in a game exceeds the MA15+ classification, at present they're forced to simply refuse classification. With an R18 rating, they could slap R18 on it an be done with. As long as it's content which would get an R18 rating in any other medium, it will here. Sometimes they let games get through with the incorrect rating (they're only human, and don't play the entire games - publishers actually have to identify themselves which scenes they believe are the most violent, etc, and present those) and those get revisited and reclassified. The classifiers are not out to ban anything - they just use the classification tools available to them.
This doesn't mean X-rated content would be allowed, however. (In most of Aus, there's no X-rating, either). So no hardcore porn games would be allowed in. Excessive violence falls under R18, with the exception of snuff - except in games it's computer graphics and not considered snuff. Oh, also no beastiality or child porn, as they're illegal.
That is exactly my fear, that the new legislation will simply move the existing MA15+ content to R18.
There's been zero transparency from the government on their intentions and to my cynical mind Mr Rau's pronouncement on the subject looks designed to deliberately fail - and then afterwards he can spread his hands and say "It's not my fault none of the other AG's wanted R18".
The liberal government did basically the same thing to stop us getting out from underneath the monarchy about a decade ago. Rather than make it a straight debate about republic vs monarchy, they clouded the issue with arguments about the specific type of government that would replace the current system.
As much as I respect the honesty and integrity of your unnamed friend at the ARB, I don't trust the politicians as far as I can throw them.
Actually it's about the worst answer.
My advice for the OP, let the wife choose. Pick about 5 different models that you know are good (Dell Latitude, Lenovo Thinkpad, Asus and Toshiba, wife will probably like the look of the Asus) put some pictures into a document and let her pick which one she wants. That way the onus is on her to like it, having her make the decision reduces the likelihood that she'll turn around and blame you for any issues (as she is currently doing with the Mac).
As much as I hate to admit it, 10 years of marriage backs this up.
No matter how much you will save, no matter how hard you try, not matter how good the outcome: Buy her the new shiny and make it HER choice.
The whole point of the Australian government is Representative Democracy.
By my rough calculations, 75% of our politicians should be self righteous, arrogant busy-bodies who think they know better than me regardless of anything so trivial as reality.
As an atheist, I can appreciate the sentiment, but as a realist I see the fact that all our leading politicians are currently zealots as simply an aberration that even those nominally religious abhor.
I would argue that encouraging participants to read the entire conversation and then respond once to all the previous discussion is a good thing.
Why deal with 4 separate single line responses?
If they are on diverging topics, surely they shouldn't be under the same thread any more?
The failure of participants to correctly quote is no more a fault of gmails than top posting is a fault of outlook.
The only other MUA (besides gmail) I have discovered that does it correctly is sup http://sup.rubyforge.org/
It's command line (which isn't a complete deal breaker for me, failure to render html or show inline images aside) but it stores all it's meta data (read, deleted etc) in it's own internal databases which are not reflected on your IMAP server (which IS a deal breaker for me).
I've been tempted to start hacking on the source, and if it was written in a language I knew I'd have already done it.
Every single time I see this discussion, someone pipes up to say "but thunderbird DOES do threads!".
That it does. And that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion at hand.
Conversation view as provided by gmail gives you a single page for each entire conversation AND it inserts your replies online as appropriate.
There's several other features that make conversation view work so well, but you'll have to actually try gmail to understand what we are talking about.
One that's smart enough to realise that if you do away with the ticketing system (ticket creation, distribution, ticket machines on busses, policing people not using tickets) the entire bus system can be run for the same money the local government subsidizes the system ANYWAY.
And because the entire system is free, more people use it, reducing congestion on busy city street.
Who loses out on this deal?
People who pay tax and don't use the bus. But at least when they are driving, their roads are easier to navigate.
NAEV is lots of fun, 2D top down elite clone (actually an Escape Velocity
Internet Explorer may not have been in the kernel, but key components of it were shared with the file manager and the windowing/desktop manager.
That's why it loaded so quickly.
That's why it ran so quickly.
That's why if you crashed it badly enough you ended up looking at your wallpaper with no icons, no start bar and (if you didn't know how to bring up the task manager) no clue as to how to make the computer "work" again without rebooting.
Well the article talks about electrical consumption and total energy, so I would assume that part of that total energy need is currently being met in a way that is not electrical.
Cars for example mostly run on petro-chemicals right now, but if they were suddenly all electric, it would substantially add to our electrical consumption without really altering our total energy usage.
There are new messages.