Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:They do have a point (Score 1) 516

by jaigg (#38304268) Attached to: Red Cross Debates If Virtual Killing Violates International Humanitarian Law
I wasn't aware that their were positive aspects of war. They are video games with games being the operative word. Criticize the games all you want, hell make a humanitarian game or a war game from the POV of the innocent bystander but to use this an excuse for censorship (which is basically what it would be if the makers of the games were in any way libel) is ridiculous. Also if descriptions in video games shape your perception of the real world than you have problems.. The word game alone should be ebough for even the least intelligent person to know it's not real, has no bearing on reality and is not to be taken as a commentary on said reality. Reality shapes our perception of video games not the other way around, again unless you are a moron or 5 in which case you should not be playing these types of games at all.

Comment: Re:Google 'international red cross call of duty' M (Score 1) 516

by jaigg (#38304172) Attached to: Red Cross Debates If Virtual Killing Violates International Humanitarian Law
So when a driving simulator (classroom version) is used to teach kids to drive, anything those kids do in the future while driving should be a direct reflection of the simulator, it's designer and the teacher. Your argument is specious,

Comment: PLLLLLLBBBBBBBTTTTTTTT (raspberries) (Score 1) 516

by jaigg (#38304126) Attached to: Red Cross Debates If Virtual Killing Violates International Humanitarian Law
All right Red Cross we'll add your humanitarian efforts into the game. How about we give the gamers 100 million fake dollars to buy aid, but everytime they get that money say after every mission 90+ million of it gets taken for administrative costs another 2 or 3 million goes to pay of leaders in the area in question to allow the red cross there and then the remaining 7 or 8 million can buy food and water to be doled out to those remaining. Of course after the money is spent there is a 6 month processing time that plays out real time in the game. Of course gamers will also have to have the ability to misappropriate that money to their families, big business and their own pockets. Does that sound real enough?

Comment: Re:Red Cross and Geneva Convention (Score 1) 516

by jaigg (#38304098) Attached to: Red Cross Debates If Virtual Killing Violates International Humanitarian Law
Maybe those unenlightened parents are the problem not the video games. I don't care if Ghadafi's kids played video games, I care that they watched their father use threats, violence, fear and lies to control an entire country and then decided to follow his example. So again maybe it's time to put the onus back on the parents....some educated people just seem to miss the point. Sometimes your perception of the "broader situation" is the problem, not every little issue effects the social fabric of our society.

Comment: Re:Tegra (Score 2) 218

by jaigg (#38266524) Attached to: First Quad-Core Android Tablet Reviewed
Apple didn't invent anything, they took existing ideas and marketed them better than anyone else had. They may have improved some of these things but they didn't invent a single one of them. There were smart phones and touch screens before the Iphone, there were tablets before the Ipad, MP3 players before the Ipod. Apple is a great marketing company but their electronics are purposely weak and closed so they can release new ones bi annually. They are marketing geniuses, I just can't stress that enough but their technology is weak, old, past it's prime, obsolete say it however you want but Apple makes inferior products with spectacular marketing campaigns.

"Bureaucracy is the enemy of innovation." -- Mark Shepherd, former President and CEO of Texas Instruments

Working...