It will favour zealots in both directions, which should mostly even out assuming zealotry is roughly as common in both directions. Also, I don't know of any less zealot-based approach except forced participation - which seems worse.
Citizen conventions typically consists of randomly selected citizens. This one consists of 150 randomly selected citizens using a statistical procedure (sortition, a variant of stratified sampling) to make it represent the whole.
Maybe people turn on ban lines because they're tired of users who want to impose their own idea of "fun" and "harmless pranks" on them. You don't get to dictate how other people use SL. Either they'll want to interact with you or they won't, and just like in Real Life don't be an annoying asshole and "no means no". So when a friend and I are standing on their Mainland parcel discussing the build they want to do and some jackass kept walking around us and bumping into us, then yes, that asshole first of all gets yelled at in local chat and then gets blocked/banned from the parcel. Because they're an annoying jackass who does not get to impose their idea of "fun" on us or dictate how we should use SL. We have things we want to do in SL, we are not in SL to amuse narcissistic creeps who thinks the entire (virtual) world revolves around them.
The problem I'm trying to outline is that you can only find social interaction in specific places in SL while everywhere else serves as a cozy bubble for anti-social people who don't wish to have social interaction in a game made for social interaciton (among other things).
How is it a problem? Maybe people like having their own spaces to interact privately with their friends or to work on builds, and then go to the bars/clubs when they feel like socializing and meeting new people? Like...you know...the real world? *gasp!* I have friends from around the world, so SL is a way for us to meet up "face to face" and socialize. When I'm sitting on my couch in the real world having a conversation with a friend, should I have to put up with some jerk who barges into my house and demands attention? No? Well I shouldn't have to put up with jerks in my virtual house either. Go to a club if you want to socialize with strangers and stay out of people's private parcels/houses unless you're invited. And maybe if you stop with the "harmless pranks" and use some common courtesy, people would be willing to interact with you in SL.
And what's wrong with cozy bubbles anyway? I don't recall anything in the SL TOS that said I am required to socialize with anyone. If I want to pay for a parcel and spend the entirety of my time in SL building things without talking to anyone else, I can do that. I am not required to make SL a safe space for entitled extroverts.
Also, if you're unable to find anything to do in SL, you're not putting any effort into looking. There's announcements of events whenever you open the viewer (SL Viewer and Firestorm). You can go to the destinations tab to find themed sims and events. You can search for things you're interested in to find groups/sims -- Steampunk alone has at least four large communities. It's not the responsibility of other random SL participants to entertain you, put some effort into finding areas/groups that fit what you want to do in SL, and if you can't find anything that fits you, make it yourself. Form a group and/or rent land to create what you like. SL is supposed to be user-created, after all.
Also, Netflix runs ads for its own content before shows and after shows.
What do you use for watching Netflix? We use an AppleTV and I've never seen this. I just tried it out, played an episode of Daredevil (one of their original series). The episode began playing immediately, no ads. I fast-forwarded to the end. The credits minimized to the left, and on the right it showed the info for the next Daredevil episode and a countdown timer for it to auto-play (if you consider that an ad, that is being really nitpicky). To see the credits in fullscreen, just select them and click.
The FAQ on the website says this:
Does Google own the intellectual property created during the competition?
No. Google is not requiring any IP or licenses be granted except a non-exclusive license to be used only for the purpose of testing the inverter and publicizing the prize. We want entrants to benefit themselves through the advancements they make in order to help grow an advanced power electronics ecosystem.
It also links to the detailed terms and conditions, which I've not read.
From the FAQ:
Does Google own the intellectual property created during the competition?
No. Google is not requiring any IP or licenses be granted except a non-exclusive license to be used only for the purpose of testing the inverter and publicizing the prize. We want entrants to benefit themselves through the advancements they make in order to help grow an advanced power electronics ecosystem.
It isn't a constitutional free speech issue, but it is still an issue of being able to speak freely.
What? Twitter is not preventing you from "speaking freely". They just don't want you to do it in their private business. You can go set up your own social network on your own server and "speak freely" all the hate you want.
Twitter is under no obligation, legally or morally, to provide a soap box for bigots and extremists. Just as a grocery store is within its rights, legally and morally, to kick out a person who is running up and down the aisles ranting racist shit. And a newspaper is under no obligation, legally or morally, to print a paranoid call to violence in its Letters to the Editor.
Everyone loves to pick on the SJWs (ok, admittedly they sometimes make it too easy), but there are a helluva lot of people on the other side with just as much of a Special Snowflake Syndrome, who think that everyone owes them a platform (for free!) to spew whatever hateful shit they want.
It could be that he's gotten his PhDs the old-school way: Doing his research in the field and then presenting to a committee, not guided research. (I don't care enough to look it up, I just want to make sure that people that read the thread know that this option exists.)
We wouldn't need overburdening regulation if these dumbasses would act like adults with more than two brain cells to rub together. This is why we can't have nice things.
I'm also a (newbie) pilot. I wouldn't be opposed to having to pass a safety course and getting a license (similar to a driver's license) if it keeps (most) idiots from ruining the hobby for the rest of us. Or at least allows the same punishments that car drivers get for reckless driving, because the drone pilot can no longer use "I didn't know the rules" as an excuse.
I watched the announcement and I don't remember any mention of other consoles, why you should buy an AppleTV over other consoles, or how games are better on an AppleTV versus other consoles. It was more 'You can already play cool games on your iPad and now you can play them on your TV! With friends! And motion control!"
At most, Apple may be going after the audience who bought a Wii as their first console because of the casual party and sports games. It's not competing with the PS4 or Xbox, instead it's picking up the casual gamers left behind when the Wii fizzled. Those people won't buy a PS4, but they'd get a cheap set-top box that displays their movies and photos and now also let's them play motion-controlled bowling with friends. Yes, they're also offering combat games like Warhammer, but it's still aimed at people who are happy playing combat games on iPads, not Xboxes.
I just don't see the AppleTV being marketed as a gaming platform, it's an entertainment center that has games as one of its features. If you're more than a casual gamer, you'll play most games on your desktop or have a PS4/Xbox on the shelf next to it.
... but I'm not sure whether it counts. I was the last regular employee left when a company was being shut down, and part owner of that company.
You got an extra zero in there, right? As in 7 years sounds about right?
I know some authors protest that seven years is too long, and the majority of income is made in the first three years and after five it would be advantageous to have the works available in the public domain (but the publishers don't want the competition from previously released works), but I think that varies from author to author, so doing a compromise of seven seems reasonable - we can experiment with shortening it further after having seen what happen when we cut it to seven.
Anwar al-Awlaki - intentionally executed without trial.
Samir Khan - unintentionally executed as part of the execution of Anwar al-Awlaki.
Jude Kenan Mohammad - intentionally executed. Had previously been convicted of terrorism conspiracy, but not to a sufficient degree to actually be imprisoned.
Abdulrahman al-Awlaki - 16 year old with no personal involvement in terrorism, but who had a father (Anwar al-Awlaki) who was involved. Robert Gibbs, former White House press secretary, stated that he "should have had a more responsible father." Unclear at what level the execution was a mistake.
Three of the four are arguably "bad guys" - but they should still have gotten a proper trial, so we could determine if they are. The last one doesn't even seem to be a bad guy, just somebody that happened to be born to an unfortunate father.
Center meeting at 4pm in 2C-543.
