Forum home The potting shed
This Forum will close on Wednesday 27 March, 2024. Please refer to the announcement on the Discussions page for further detail.

🐧🐧CURMUDGEONS' CORNER XXI🐧🐧

1890891893895896958

Posts

  • B3B3 Posts: 27,505
    Down the toilet, not down the vegetarian, I assume.
    In London. Keen but lazy.
  • ButtercupdaysButtercupdays Posts: 4,546
    Too much paper is the usual culprit. Our downstairs loo has a low gradient pipe and blocks at least once a year. We live off grid with our own spring and drainage, so sometimes need to ration water, which makes things tricky.
    I have become an adept with the drain rods, an unpleasant but oddly satisfying task that no-one else is prepared to contemplate.  Saves money all round!
  • steveTusteveTu Posts: 3,219
    Radio 4 - Talking about violence towards women in virtual games. I find this difficult to get my head around. I've played board games all my life - some times people cheat - I have bee defrauded playing Monopoly. Is that then a crime? Loads of people play violent online games where the object (or pleasure to some) of the game is to kill. Are they muderers? Is that then a crime? Where is the line? Is it OK to kill a computer generated and controlled 'being' BUT not OK to abuse a computer generated BUT human controlled 'being'? What a minefield... 
    I totally understand why the woman was upset. Absolutely. But where does a criminal act start and end? When I was defrauded in Monopoly - could I have sued the other player? If I (as a real person playing real people) can play a board game and it is judged just a game - why not VR?
    Who will define the rules for VR - and what then does this portend for AI?
    UK - South Coast Retirement Campus (East)
  • B3B3 Posts: 27,505
    I think the issue is that a bunch of perverts used a young girl's avatar to portray her as the victim of gang rape. 
    In London. Keen but lazy.
  • steveTusteveTu Posts: 3,219
    edited 3 January
    But is that then worse then being in game where the object is to kill the other's avatar? Is the difference then in what the 'purpose' of the game/environment is? I get upset when people cheat in Monopoly - they break the rules. The scope then for breaking the rules is then vastly more if the scope of the 'game' is bigger. But still, is it a crime?

    What I failed to understand from the article was what the game (or environment) was designed for. It would be insane to have in the rules on Monopoly a rule that said '...now physically attack the current winner with a piece of lead piping (see what I did there?) and steal all their money...' wouldn't it? So how on earth is there an environment in VR where sexual assault (physical or verbal) is even allowed? Why have the avatars got a gender at all? I despair at what people class as entertainment - but hey, who am I to judge, I like watching Spurs.

    UK - South Coast Retirement Campus (East)
  • B3B3 Posts: 27,505
    steveTu said:
    But is that then worse then being in game where the object is to kill the other's avatar? 

    I think you would need someone born this century to explain it properly. As I understand it, avatars are very personal to younger generations.
    In London. Keen but lazy.
  • BenCottoBenCotto Posts: 4,718
    edited 3 January
    For the second time in a fortnight we received flowers from Eflorist with no gift message inside. I emailed last time and they said the flowers were from Sandra but we not allowed to know if it was Sandra from Felixstowe or Sandra from Paris. You’re then in a bind. Do you take a punt just on one and thank them for the flowers they might, or might not, have sent. 

    I hope second time, when they eventually get round to spilling the beans, it is someone with an unusual first name.
    Rutland, England
  • B3B3 Posts: 27,505
    last birthday, I got a bunch of flowers from ' my favourite little brother'. Seeing as I call all three of them that, it was a bit of a problem.
    In London. Keen but lazy.
  • BenCottoBenCotto Posts: 4,718
    edited 3 January
    BenCotto said:
    For the second time in a fortnight we received flowers from Eflorist with no gift message inside. I emailed last time and they said the flowers were from Sandra but we not allowed to know if it was Sandra from Felixstowe or Sandra from Paris. You’re then in a bind. Do you take a punt just on one and thank them for the flowers they might, or might not, have sent. 

    I hope second time, when they eventually get round to spilling the beans, it is someone with an unusual first name.
    I have just had an email from Eflorist asking me to contact the sender and tell them to get in touch with the company! I think somebody has been eating the fruit of the stupid tree … and it’s not me. A follow up message said that they tried to phone the sender but got no reply so have emailed them asking their permission to release their name to us. Assuming the flowers were not intentionally sent anonymously then surely the permission is already given.

    Edit. A friend has just emailed to say the flowers were from her and she thinks she may have omitted to include an accompanying message. Maybe. But I’m not too inclined to let Eflorist off the hook.
    Rutland, England
  • KT53KT53 Posts: 9,016
    Our local council put notices on all the dustbins giving the revised days for collections over Christmas & New Year.  They added the very useful note "If you are unable to read this please visit our website"!
Sign In or Register to comment.