Category: Very cool sites
meebo.com
I've been looking for a way to sign on to IM when I'm not at my own machine for the last couple of months, and the different IM providers seem to be hell-bent on making that as hard as possible. They want you to install their client on every machine in the world... (don't believe me? try searching for a web-enabled IM login from the site of one of the services.)
Meebo is the web equivalent of Trillain (but much lighter, of course)and allows you to sign on to multiple services at once.
Finally!
Thursday, December 28, 2006
Friday, August 11, 2006
Very cogent analysis of a messy subject. It's unfortunate that our own government seems incapable of "getting the joke."
gamesindustry.biz
Daily Update
10/08/2006
If you walk into a store in the United Kingdom to pick up a copy of Capcom's eagerly awaited Xbox 360 title Dead Rising, you'll find that the methods of dispatching zombies available to you in the game are somewhat, well, unadulterated. Smashing undead skulls into the floor and lopping heads off with well placed scythe slashes are only two of the many, many carnage related options which will be open to players of the game, which borrows many of its cues from classic zombie movies such as Dawn of the Dead.
The interesting thing about this level of violence and gore isn't that it's present in the first place - after all, zombie films and other horror and action movies have been blowing apart the undead in showers of claret for decades, and "decency" campaigners seem to have given up on moaning about escapist fantasy movies quite some time ago. No, what's interesting is that despite the game having a rocky time with censorship and ratings boards elsewhere in the world, in Britain it will be released entirely uncensored, with not a single change to the content.
That's a situation which movie aficionados have gradually become used to in this country; the British Board of Film Classification, empowered by the excellent if sometimes weakly enforced age rating system which is applied to media in the UK, has been passing more and more films without cuts. Instead, films are rated 18, and the board takes the view that if content is not clearly going to be harmful to adults, then adults should be permitted to view or experience it.
Now the BBFC is applying the same logic to videogames - and the straightforward, reasonable point of view expressed by the board brings a breath of fresh air to the debate over videogame violence and censorship, which has become increasingly bogged down in rhetoric and embarrassing public spats between key proponents on both sides in the last year or so.
You can read the board's full comments on why they're passing Dead Rising as an 18-rated game, uncut, in this news story - but suffice it to say that the guardians at the gates of Britain's sensitive minds not only regard claims that videogames turn people into killers with a sceptical eye, but they also, crucially, get the joke. Their statement to us not only acknowledges that the game is aimed at an adult audience (a fact commonly missed in discussions about violent videogames), but also that the violence has a fantasy element and crucially, that the game has "a sense of humour, albeit a macabre one."
Herein, perhaps, lies the clearest sign we've seen in quite some time that the tide is turning in favour of interactive media. The key problem faced by games for years has been that they are widely seen as being a form of entertainment which was aimed at children and which was both straightforward and unsubtle. When a newspaper talks about a film featuring a violent or sexual scene, readers automatically assume that this falls into the context of the film; when we talk about games featuring similar scenes, many people automatically assume that this game is an outright "violence simulator" or "sex simulator", because they cannot conceive of a game having complex narrative, satire, humour or subtlety.
In acknowledging the humour which drives Dead Rising, the BBFC acknowledges the maturity of the videogaming medium. In granting it an 18 rating - described by a spokesperson as "a fairly straightforward 18" - it acknowledges it as entertainment for adults. In making these viewpoints public, as much as in granting the rating in the first place, it shows us how far the perception of videogames in the British political establishment has come.
We welcome, of course, the opportunity to enjoy Dead Rising as its creators intended - an experience no more harmful, and possibly even more fun, than spending an evening with friends watching cult classic George A Romero films. More than that, however, we welcome the implicit confirmation of the BBFC's view that games deserve equal treatment to their counterparts in film. The censorship debate will roll on regardless, of course - especially in the USA where much of it focuses on the ability to ban the sale of violent games to minors, something which the UK has already done for years - but the end of this long dark tunnel is more clearly in sight than ever before.
gamesindustry.biz
Daily Update
10/08/2006
If you walk into a store in the United Kingdom to pick up a copy of Capcom's eagerly awaited Xbox 360 title Dead Rising, you'll find that the methods of dispatching zombies available to you in the game are somewhat, well, unadulterated. Smashing undead skulls into the floor and lopping heads off with well placed scythe slashes are only two of the many, many carnage related options which will be open to players of the game, which borrows many of its cues from classic zombie movies such as Dawn of the Dead.
The interesting thing about this level of violence and gore isn't that it's present in the first place - after all, zombie films and other horror and action movies have been blowing apart the undead in showers of claret for decades, and "decency" campaigners seem to have given up on moaning about escapist fantasy movies quite some time ago. No, what's interesting is that despite the game having a rocky time with censorship and ratings boards elsewhere in the world, in Britain it will be released entirely uncensored, with not a single change to the content.
That's a situation which movie aficionados have gradually become used to in this country; the British Board of Film Classification, empowered by the excellent if sometimes weakly enforced age rating system which is applied to media in the UK, has been passing more and more films without cuts. Instead, films are rated 18, and the board takes the view that if content is not clearly going to be harmful to adults, then adults should be permitted to view or experience it.
Now the BBFC is applying the same logic to videogames - and the straightforward, reasonable point of view expressed by the board brings a breath of fresh air to the debate over videogame violence and censorship, which has become increasingly bogged down in rhetoric and embarrassing public spats between key proponents on both sides in the last year or so.
You can read the board's full comments on why they're passing Dead Rising as an 18-rated game, uncut, in this news story - but suffice it to say that the guardians at the gates of Britain's sensitive minds not only regard claims that videogames turn people into killers with a sceptical eye, but they also, crucially, get the joke. Their statement to us not only acknowledges that the game is aimed at an adult audience (a fact commonly missed in discussions about violent videogames), but also that the violence has a fantasy element and crucially, that the game has "a sense of humour, albeit a macabre one."
Herein, perhaps, lies the clearest sign we've seen in quite some time that the tide is turning in favour of interactive media. The key problem faced by games for years has been that they are widely seen as being a form of entertainment which was aimed at children and which was both straightforward and unsubtle. When a newspaper talks about a film featuring a violent or sexual scene, readers automatically assume that this falls into the context of the film; when we talk about games featuring similar scenes, many people automatically assume that this game is an outright "violence simulator" or "sex simulator", because they cannot conceive of a game having complex narrative, satire, humour or subtlety.
In acknowledging the humour which drives Dead Rising, the BBFC acknowledges the maturity of the videogaming medium. In granting it an 18 rating - described by a spokesperson as "a fairly straightforward 18" - it acknowledges it as entertainment for adults. In making these viewpoints public, as much as in granting the rating in the first place, it shows us how far the perception of videogames in the British political establishment has come.
We welcome, of course, the opportunity to enjoy Dead Rising as its creators intended - an experience no more harmful, and possibly even more fun, than spending an evening with friends watching cult classic George A Romero films. More than that, however, we welcome the implicit confirmation of the BBFC's view that games deserve equal treatment to their counterparts in film. The censorship debate will roll on regardless, of course - especially in the USA where much of it focuses on the ability to ban the sale of violent games to minors, something which the UK has already done for years - but the end of this long dark tunnel is more clearly in sight than ever before.
Thursday, June 22, 2006
IRAQ INDEX
Tracking Reconstruction and Security
in Post-Saddam Iraq
The Iraq Index is a statistical compilation of economic, public opinion, and security data. This resource will provide updated information on various criteria, including crime, telephone and water service, troop fatalities, unemployment, Iraqi security forces, oil production, and coalition troop strength.
Iraq Index
Tracking Reconstruction and Security
in Post-Saddam Iraq
The Iraq Index is a statistical compilation of economic, public opinion, and security data. This resource will provide updated information on various criteria, including crime, telephone and water service, troop fatalities, unemployment, Iraqi security forces, oil production, and coalition troop strength.
Iraq Index
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Thursday, January 26, 2006
bit-tech.net | MPAA illegally copies movies:
MPAA illegally copies movies
Posted 10:41 - 25 January 2006 - by Wil Harris
Oh the irony. The MPAA is being forced to justify its actions today, after reports emerged that it has been engaging in unauthorised copying of movies.
The movie in question is called This movie has not yet been rated, and is a documentary featuring examining the actions and the structure of the MPAA. The MPAA itself is a collection of anonymous individuals who are solely responsible for the ratings of films in the USA, yet have little-to-no accountability. The documentary attempts to find out who these people are, and then examines the attitudes of the association to things such as sex v violence, heterosexual v homosexual content, the treatment of indie films v the preference allegedly given to big studios.
By way of justification, the MPAA said that the spying and intrusion on its employees warranted it distributing copies of the movie to its employees.
Here's a quote from the Ars story:
'Director Kirby Dick submitted the film for rating in November. After receiving the movie, the MPAA subsequently made copies without Dick's permission. Dick had specifically requested in an e-mail that the MPAA not make copies of the movie. The MPAA responded by saying that 'the confidentiality of your film is our first priority.'
Dick later learned that the MPAA made copies of the film to distribute them to its employees, despite the MPAA's stance on unauthorized copying.'
Hands up if you hate American monopolists? Yeah, us too. Over in the UK, we have the British Board of Film Classification, an open and identifiable body that has a reputation for being progressive and friendly with its ratings. Then again, it doesn't have to deal with the American schizophrenic attitude to sex, which must help.
What do you make of the MPAA's actions? Are they acting responsibily for the good of their members, or are they swiftly making themselves into a laughing stock? Answers on a postcard please, or alternatively, in our forum. "
MPAA illegally copies movies
Posted 10:41 - 25 January 2006 - by Wil Harris
Oh the irony. The MPAA is being forced to justify its actions today, after reports emerged that it has been engaging in unauthorised copying of movies.
The movie in question is called This movie has not yet been rated, and is a documentary featuring examining the actions and the structure of the MPAA. The MPAA itself is a collection of anonymous individuals who are solely responsible for the ratings of films in the USA, yet have little-to-no accountability. The documentary attempts to find out who these people are, and then examines the attitudes of the association to things such as sex v violence, heterosexual v homosexual content, the treatment of indie films v the preference allegedly given to big studios.
By way of justification, the MPAA said that the spying and intrusion on its employees warranted it distributing copies of the movie to its employees.
Here's a quote from the Ars story:
'Director Kirby Dick submitted the film for rating in November. After receiving the movie, the MPAA subsequently made copies without Dick's permission. Dick had specifically requested in an e-mail that the MPAA not make copies of the movie. The MPAA responded by saying that 'the confidentiality of your film is our first priority.'
Dick later learned that the MPAA made copies of the film to distribute them to its employees, despite the MPAA's stance on unauthorized copying.'
Hands up if you hate American monopolists? Yeah, us too. Over in the UK, we have the British Board of Film Classification, an open and identifiable body that has a reputation for being progressive and friendly with its ratings. Then again, it doesn't have to deal with the American schizophrenic attitude to sex, which must help.
What do you make of the MPAA's actions? Are they acting responsibily for the good of their members, or are they swiftly making themselves into a laughing stock? Answers on a postcard please, or alternatively, in our forum. "
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
I've had a problem ever since I started using my work computer with some of my programs trying to load two copies at startup. It became obvious because I use Trillian and it will actually load twice, unlike most others that just ignored the second attempt to load. I found the solution in the Trillian Forums:
Trillian Discussion Forums - Trillian starts twice. Two icons in tray.:
timstyles
Junior Member
"I've found out why Windows runs everything in my startup menu twice. I had previously deleted the Startup folder in my user directory (C:\Documents and Settings\\Start Menu\Programs\Startup) and put program shortcuts in the common directory (C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Startup).
There are two pairs of keys in the registry which point to these two folders. When one folder is deleted, the keys which pointed to it are modified to point to the remaining folder. The result is that both pairs of keys point to the same folder and things in it get started twice.
[...]
Note - you have to recreate the folder C:\Documents and Settings\\Start Menu\Programs\Startup if you deleted it, or the key will just change back.
hammo1j
Junior Member
[...]
People should go to:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\User Shell Folders
And change the %ALLUSERSPROFILE% to
%USERPROFILE% on the entries which will obviously have been modified from this setting.
If you reboot the machine the changes will be automatically propagated to the other directory.
ME:
Thanks to both for the instructions!
Trillian Discussion Forums - Trillian starts twice. Two icons in tray.:
timstyles
Junior Member
"I've found out why Windows runs everything in my startup menu twice. I had previously deleted the Startup folder in my user directory (C:\Documents and Settings\
There are two pairs of keys in the registry which point to these two folders. When one folder is deleted, the keys which pointed to it are modified to point to the remaining folder. The result is that both pairs of keys point to the same folder and things in it get started twice.
[...]
Note - you have to recreate the folder C:\Documents and Settings\
Junior Member
People should go to:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\User Shell Folders
And change the %ALLUSERSPROFILE% to
%USERPROFILE% on the entries which will obviously have been modified from this setting.
If you reboot the machine the changes will be automatically propagated to the other directory.
ME:
Thanks to both for the instructions!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)