That's probably because they couldn't find a "-1, Unrealistic" mod. I get your point about defensive driving, but the plain truth is that a) taking measures for minimizing risk are not always practical, and b) accidents can occur no matter what, since you can never eliminate risk, only reduce it and try to minimize its impact. My wife and I have each separately been in serious accidents which could not realistically be avoided.
I could never figure out why the Mako survive any drop at all (from mountains, speeding spaceships), but you would die if you fell off the path on Noveria.
Re:I actually kind of miss the old combat system
on
Review: Mass Effect 2
·
· Score: 1
I wish there were camera position options (1st person, behind, over the shoulder, etc). I tend to prefer 1st person, but OTOH, from over the shoulder, it is easier to see if an enemy has gotten beside/behind you in a blind spot.
Guns are legally used for self-defense over 2 million times per year in the US, most of which do not involve firing the weapon. The death toll of innocent victims would be far higher if guns were banned.
1 - This is a gun from Europe.
2 - It is mentioned in this forum not because it is a firearm, but because it contains technology.
3 - In the US, the highest law of the land explicitly confirms our right to own and carry firearms. With all due respect, who the fuck are you to judge?
4 - For a normal civilian society in peace, the right to self-defense is sacred. Attempts to ban the means to do so are just bad and repulsive.
5 - Oh, and I think the Swiss would also like a word with you - funny how the gun banners like to forget about a modern European state magically experiencing gun ownership, peace, and a low crime rate simultaneously.
If I had kids I could understand the value of this.
So, you don't have kids, and you think yourself qualified to speak about kids. I'm guessing you don't own firearms either, yet you feel qualified to speak about them as well. Are there any other topics you would like to talk out of your ass about?
The targets mummy after you shoother she will get up and walk again won't she?
What hand do most people shoot with?* Their dominant hand, of course. What hand to most people wear their watch? The other one. Ergo, in any one-handed shooting, the watch is likely going to be outside the 20cm range of the gun. Stuuuuupiiiiid.
* Yes, ideally you should use a handgun in a two-handed grip, which would put the watch and gun close together. But in many self-defense situations, that simply isn't going to be practical.
One could also argue that the criminalization of simulated child porn does harm by driving its market underground with the real stuff. To use your gateway-drug metaphor, legalized, it might offer a methadone-like alternative (distasteful, but better than the real thing). But when simulated CP is criminalized in the same way real child porn is, there is no incentive for the pedo to choose cartoon over the real thing. So in a classical supply/demand setting, no substitution can occur. That shifts any demand for sim CP to real CP. If consuming real CP does harm, then shifting demand away from alternatives increases the amount of harm done.
Given:
Pedos can't be "cured", so demand is relatively constant/flat.
Simulation (cartoon drawing/computer rendering) requires far less resources and risk to produce than real CP, hence supply can potentially be cheaper. (Supply curve for sim CP shifts to the right, increases chance of substitution)
I'm not supporting simulated CP, just saying that by treating it the same, they may inadvertently be doing more harm than good.
I agree with your point, but still feel the need to play devil's advocate. In the law, we regularly speculate about an individual's thoughts and intentions, and criminalize or excuse their actions based on presumed intent.
We criminalize actions that indicate that a "real" crime may follow. If I get caught with a small amount of illegal narcotics, I get charged with possession. If I am caught with a large cache of drugs, I get charged with intent to distribute, regardless of my actual actions or intentions. My behavior (possession of a large amount of drugs) is used to presume what my thoughts are (gonna sell this shit and make some $$$), which is used to presume what my next actions would be (actual distribution).
Similarly, we decriminalize other actions based on intent. Homicide may be justified if the subject can show that the victim was attacking or threatening to kill the subject. The intent of the dead "victim" to do harm, and the intent of the subject only to defend themselves are mitigating factors.
What is questionable is whether we can conclude that viewing cartoon child porn actually indicates intent to view real CP or molest real children in the future.
I cannot read your post without laughing at the juxtaposition of your post and your sig. Do you really think that being caught with digital erotica of a child 1 year less than the age of consent wherever you are merits execution and dismemberment in a self-financing police state? Do you really wish to have the same standard applied to you?
Hmm.. I tried the IE only link with Firefox on linux, but got nowhere. Maybe there is a patch or two I'm missing. Either way, my point was more or less the same as your last one... there's no good excuse for a large, prominent tech company (not named Microsoft) to do anything IE centric.
Your joke brings up a serious point... any game tied to a particular server, much like DRMed music, is useless if/when the server's owners decide to pull the plug, or go belly-up, or are bought by another company who decides to pull the plug, etc. If you buy content that is booby-trapped like this, you can expect your content to arbitrarily go away someday.
I wonder if this would also curb the used game market. If a game registered to one owner cannot subsequently be re-registered to another, the game can't be resold. If you fund your gaming by selling old games for $$ off your next one, the effective price of a new game just went up. Thanks Ubisoft, I'm sure that's just what your customers wanted.
Actually, fire is a significant danger in Antarctica. There is little liquid water to fight a fire with, and if fire destroys your shelter, you are screwed.
So? If I paid for a 16GB player instead of a 8GB player, maybe that's because I want to hold 16GB of audio, not a couple gigs of audio plus 12GB of spammy marketing drivel.
I didn't say she denied it, I said she didn't like to admit it. Give me some credit for knowing her better than you know me.;)
And yes, I admit there are functional reasons why the Mac made sense as her school computer over the alternatives, which is the major reason I agreed to fork over a premium for it.
She wanted it because it's cool. She received it because it's a good solution for her needs.
That depends how tribal and territorial the cockroaches become. I figure that all we need to start a cockroach war is create a two different tribes with social hierarchy and resource scarcity, and war will inevitably follow. Oh, and if that scifi plot goes anywhere, remember to split the royalties with me.
Reminds me of that joke about the guy arrested for eating a bald eagle. It ends with "Well Your Honor, it tasted like a cross between a whooping crane and a spotted owl."
Wouldn't it be ironic if they were living their gay lifestyle out in the open, but had to hide their penchant for Apple in the closet because they work for MS?
That depends on the "you" doing the buying. My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do. That, and she hates Windows. With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.
I think this means we are a stubborn infestation, successfully resisting the Universe's attempts to exterminate us thus far. The Universe realized that we are harder to kill than cockroaches, and concluded that the only way to wipe us out is to place the means of our destruction in our own hands. Now, it's just a waiting game.
Slashdot Mirror
That's probably because they couldn't find a "-1, Unrealistic" mod. I get your point about defensive driving, but the plain truth is that a) taking measures for minimizing risk are not always practical, and b) accidents can occur no matter what, since you can never eliminate risk, only reduce it and try to minimize its impact. My wife and I have each separately been in serious accidents which could not realistically be avoided.
I could never figure out why the Mako survive any drop at all (from mountains, speeding spaceships), but you would die if you fell off the path on Noveria.
I wish there were camera position options (1st person, behind, over the shoulder, etc). I tend to prefer 1st person, but OTOH, from over the shoulder, it is easier to see if an enemy has gotten beside/behind you in a blind spot.
You beat me to it. Well played, sir.
Wow, a troll on slashdot posting as AC ... I am shocked - SHOCKED I tell you.
Guns are legally used for self-defense over 2 million times per year in the US, most of which do not involve firing the weapon. The death toll of innocent victims would be far higher if guns were banned.
1 - This is a gun from Europe.
2 - It is mentioned in this forum not because it is a firearm, but because it contains technology.
3 - In the US, the highest law of the land explicitly confirms our right to own and carry firearms. With all due respect, who the fuck are you to judge?
4 - For a normal civilian society in peace, the right to self-defense is sacred. Attempts to ban the means to do so are just bad and repulsive.
5 - Oh, and I think the Swiss would also like a word with you - funny how the gun banners like to forget about a modern European state magically experiencing gun ownership, peace, and a low crime rate simultaneously.
If I had kids I could understand the value of this.
So, you don't have kids, and you think yourself qualified to speak about kids. I'm guessing you don't own firearms either, yet you feel qualified to speak about them as well. Are there any other topics you would like to talk out of your ass about?
The targets mummy after you shoother she will get up and walk again won't she?
I find your lack of coherence amusing.
You joke, but that's just what people will do to circumvent the inconvenience of this stupid thing.
What hand do most people shoot with?* Their dominant hand, of course. What hand to most people wear their watch? The other one. Ergo, in any one-handed shooting, the watch is likely going to be outside the 20cm range of the gun. Stuuuuupiiiiid.
* Yes, ideally you should use a handgun in a two-handed grip, which would put the watch and gun close together. But in many self-defense situations, that simply isn't going to be practical.
One could also argue that the criminalization of simulated child porn does harm by driving its market underground with the real stuff. To use your gateway-drug metaphor, legalized, it might offer a methadone-like alternative (distasteful, but better than the real thing). But when simulated CP is criminalized in the same way real child porn is, there is no incentive for the pedo to choose cartoon over the real thing. So in a classical supply/demand setting, no substitution can occur. That shifts any demand for sim CP to real CP. If consuming real CP does harm, then shifting demand away from alternatives increases the amount of harm done.
Given:
Pedos can't be "cured", so demand is relatively constant/flat.
Simulation (cartoon drawing/computer rendering) requires far less resources and risk to produce than real CP, hence supply can potentially be cheaper. (Supply curve for sim CP shifts to the right, increases chance of substitution)
I'm not supporting simulated CP, just saying that by treating it the same, they may inadvertently be doing more harm than good.
Yeah. Not just CP, but borderline bestiality as well! I can't imagine how they've gotten away with it this long.
I agree with your point, but still feel the need to play devil's advocate. In the law, we regularly speculate about an individual's thoughts and intentions, and criminalize or excuse their actions based on presumed intent.
We criminalize actions that indicate that a "real" crime may follow. If I get caught with a small amount of illegal narcotics, I get charged with possession. If I am caught with a large cache of drugs, I get charged with intent to distribute, regardless of my actual actions or intentions. My behavior (possession of a large amount of drugs) is used to presume what my thoughts are (gonna sell this shit and make some $$$), which is used to presume what my next actions would be (actual distribution).
Similarly, we decriminalize other actions based on intent. Homicide may be justified if the subject can show that the victim was attacking or threatening to kill the subject. The intent of the dead "victim" to do harm, and the intent of the subject only to defend themselves are mitigating factors.
What is questionable is whether we can conclude that viewing cartoon child porn actually indicates intent to view real CP or molest real children in the future.
I cannot read your post without laughing at the juxtaposition of your post and your sig. Do you really think that being caught with digital erotica of a child 1 year less than the age of consent wherever you are merits execution and dismemberment in a self-financing police state? Do you really wish to have the same standard applied to you?
Hmm .. I tried the IE only link with Firefox on linux, but got nowhere. Maybe there is a patch or two I'm missing. Either way, my point was more or less the same as your last one ... there's no good excuse for a large, prominent tech company (not named Microsoft) to do anything IE centric.
I wish I could independently confirm that, but Oracle's "Careers" page requires IE. Doh!
Your joke brings up a serious point ... any game tied to a particular server, much like DRMed music, is useless if/when the server's owners decide to pull the plug, or go belly-up, or are bought by another company who decides to pull the plug, etc. If you buy content that is booby-trapped like this, you can expect your content to arbitrarily go away someday.
I wonder if this would also curb the used game market. If a game registered to one owner cannot subsequently be re-registered to another, the game can't be resold. If you fund your gaming by selling old games for $$ off your next one, the effective price of a new game just went up. Thanks Ubisoft, I'm sure that's just what your customers wanted.
Actually, fire is a significant danger in Antarctica. There is little liquid water to fight a fire with, and if fire destroys your shelter, you are screwed.
So? If I paid for a 16GB player instead of a 8GB player, maybe that's because I want to hold 16GB of audio, not a couple gigs of audio plus 12GB of spammy marketing drivel.
I didn't say she denied it, I said she didn't like to admit it. Give me some credit for knowing her better than you know me. ;)
And yes, I admit there are functional reasons why the Mac made sense as her school computer over the alternatives, which is the major reason I agreed to fork over a premium for it.
She wanted it because it's cool. She received it because it's a good solution for her needs.
That depends how tribal and territorial the cockroaches become. I figure that all we need to start a cockroach war is create a two different tribes with social hierarchy and resource scarcity, and war will inevitably follow. Oh, and if that scifi plot goes anywhere, remember to split the royalties with me.
Reminds me of that joke about the guy arrested for eating a bald eagle. It ends with "Well Your Honor, it tasted like a cross between a whooping crane and a spotted owl."
Wouldn't it be ironic if they were living their gay lifestyle out in the open, but had to hide their penchant for Apple in the closet because they work for MS?
That depends on the "you" doing the buying. My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do. That, and she hates Windows. With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.
I think this means we are a stubborn infestation, successfully resisting the Universe's attempts to exterminate us thus far. The Universe realized that we are harder to kill than cockroaches, and concluded that the only way to wipe us out is to place the means of our destruction in our own hands. Now, it's just a waiting game.