Now, if it had a bunch of glowing lights attached to it, kind of like a Lite Brite, you really have no choice but to skip directly to "evacuate the planet".
Someone mod this up. Aside from some formatting issues, this comment is a great explaining of why dumping would ever happen, and why it can be anticompetitive.
Re:Who needs privacy when people are so predictabl
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 1
Yeah. Sounds like someone hasn't been getting enough melange.
Then that is these trade groups' problem: having made their bed, now they must lie in it. This isn't The Trial, it's quite simply inconceivable that anyone would think it is a good idea. Way to go California, for trying to make one of Kafka's demented visions a reality...
He was offered essentially the same deal he took just now -- confess, show us the body -- and the deal would have been for 3 years. They were willing to go down to voluntary manslaughter. Hans decided no, he thought he could blow smoke up the jury's ass.
3 years, compared to 15-to-life, is really lenient.
In fact, a number of producers were successfully prosecuted for exactly this. They sued, it went all the way to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said "we already ruled this is legal. It is well settled law that the government cannot use otherwise-perfectly-legal means to accomplish an unconstitutional objective."
Put another way: it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race. Suppose a riot broke out, and the government arrested only the black rioters. Should that be legal? No. Since selling [prawn]* is legal, enforcing antiprostitution laws only on the [prawn]ographers suffers from essentially the same problem.
True story: For awhile I roomed with a guy who plays WoW. Since the apartment's rather small, we both had our computers in the living room. He would come home, start playing, then go to sleep. Every day. But that's not the worst of it; no, what he had to do to keep up with his friends is the bad part. See, they played some when he wasn't on; in order to keep up, therefore, he had to play when they weren't on.
This apparently was too much for him; occasionally, I'd hear him say "This is getting kind of old." Not old enough for him to stop playing, of course. No, that would be madness. So then a couple hours later he literally cries out in agony "Oh god, this is SO BOOORING!" -- and then he keeps playing.
After the second time he did this, I couldn't contain myself anymore. "Good GOD, man!" Totally oblivious, he turns to me, and he says "Huh?"
"Listen to yourself talk, man!" And he kind of did a double take for a second, then he says "Wow. Uh. That was bad." So I asked him why he didn't just -- stop. And he explains about having to stay at his friends' level, and how he needed to level X skill but had to grind Y in order to grind Z so he could grind X.
It wasn't a game anymore. World of Warcraft had become his second job. One that he was paying $15 a month for the privilege of being allowed to do.
She did get dumped for WoW. Like you said, it might have been something else, sure. But it wasn't. She got dumped, not because of WoW but because of issues; but this doesn't change the fact instead of telling her something like "I'm sorry, but you're nuts, and I can't take it. I'm leaving" he chose to hide behind something else.
This may be a fairly common tactic (I wouldn't know), but it's still not the nicest way to break up with somebody. And it does mean that it's not entirely unfair to feel like she got dumped for WoW. Yes, she might feel that the problem is with the game -- because he deliberately fostered this impression. (Technically it's even 100% true he likes the game more than her. Isn't it?) That WoW is not even another person just makes the illusionary jealousy even more humiliating.
But all this covers up the main design flaw: no main deflector dish. This leaves you without a backup to route stuff thru in the event of a problem. Snakes on a plane? Plot holes the size of Amelia Earhart's plane (as seen in an episode of Voyager, no less)? No problem, route them thru the main deflector dish, that'll show them. But an iPod can be brought low by a battery, because it has nowhere to dump all that excess charge.
It makes perfect sense. Nobody wanted the donut holes, they don't want the bullet holes either.
Re:Can Oscar's be given posthumously?
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 1
Yes. I actually had the same thought. See, trailers, have to be appropriate for all audiences, and they also try hard to avoid spoilers. (At least, there have been a handful of times trailers had spoilers, but they got dumped on every time.) Most of the scenes that really showcase the Joker's, well, Jokerness in this movie are either a) full of plot spoilers, or b) far too brutal to actually put in a trailer.
Short version: this is the best villain character in any movie I've seen in a very long time.
> [P]roblem is that E3 was always supposed to be a industry only sort of thing. To help show off the new & upcoming stuff
> to get retailers interested to buy up these new games for the holidays. But people posing as journalists kept getting in
> and with the internet it just got out of hand.
Except that when the guys running the show actually took steps to return E3 to what it was "always supposed to be", it collapsed. It seems to me that the real problem was everybody thought E3 was supposed to be what you're describing, less a spectacle than a trade show, when in actuality E3 really WAS about the spectacle. It was about generating hype and buzz, and getting interest directed at a title not by selling it to retailers (as claimed) but by making a name for the title among gamers. E3 got people's attention, the way all carnival sideshows do. All that other stuff happening in the meetings, that was all important, but the soul of the show was... the show. Otherwise why did removing the glitz kill the show?
Not that E3 didn't have problems. It WAS getting out of hand. But I think tbe real problem is nobody recognized the purpose of E3 had shifted, so when they tried to fix it, they broke it. E3 had become a glitzy hypnotic attention-grabber for every gamer who speaks English, across the whole world. All those retailers, etc? They looked to E3 to make decisions because they were following the crowd, not because they were the crowd.
It's not unheard of for inmates to do this kind of thing -- repeatedly file frivolous lawsuits. See, prisoners are indigent, so they get to sue basically for free, but they can *see* the havoc they cause on everyone else who has to deal with their mess. What do they care, they're in jail for the rest of their life anyway. What have they got to lose?
Giving them access to the courts is done on purpose, to prevent excesses in the prison system. (Not that this is particularly effective, but that's the theory -- imagine if no prisoner could ever sue the prison system because he couldn't sue while incarcerated. Scary stuff.) Unfortunately, some of them found out that they can do the equivalent of griefing/trolling and there are no real repercussions. They have nothing to lose (or near enough) and they can cause people some pain and get back at the system. So some do.
Dude was making six figures, and was about to get fired for misconduct? Then losing his job wasn' enough, he had to do this, so now he's going to jail? Sounds to me like the one who killed the golden goose is the perpetrator.
I especially like how he says Yahoo's claim that MS isn't really interested can't be disingenuous, cause it could lead to trouble -- then accuses Google of the same sort of misbehavior. And doesn't address the apparent discrepancy. So yeah, it's interesting food for thought, but I don't think as a whole the article holds up under its own weight.
Hans Reiser was one of the core developers, he's going to jail for at least 15 years. It's named ReiserFS, it was built on his reputation. Most of the rest of the core developers (if any) will leave for fear of taint by association. This means there is now a substantially greater risk that it will become an orphaned project.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, if it had a bunch of glowing lights attached to it, kind of like a Lite Brite, you really have no choice but to skip directly to "evacuate the planet".
This is the problem with laws. Every lawyer everywhere gets paid enormous amounts of money to drive trucks thru pigeonholes.
Someone mod this up. Aside from some formatting issues, this comment is a great explaining of why dumping would ever happen, and why it can be anticompetitive.
Yeah. Sounds like someone hasn't been getting enough melange.
Then that is these trade groups' problem: having made their bed, now they must lie in it. This isn't The Trial, it's quite simply inconceivable that anyone would think it is a good idea. Way to go California, for trying to make one of Kafka's demented visions a reality ...
He was offered essentially the same deal he took just now -- confess, show us the body -- and the deal would have been for 3 years. They were willing to go down to voluntary manslaughter. Hans decided no, he thought he could blow smoke up the jury's ass.
3 years, compared to 15-to-life, is really lenient.
In fact, a number of producers were successfully prosecuted for exactly this. They sued, it went all the way to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said "we already ruled this is legal. It is well settled law that the government cannot use otherwise-perfectly-legal means to accomplish an unconstitutional objective."
Put another way: it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race. Suppose a riot broke out, and the government arrested only the black rioters. Should that be legal? No. Since selling [prawn]* is legal, enforcing antiprostitution laws only on the [prawn]ographers suffers from essentially the same problem.
* -- silly net filter
True story: For awhile I roomed with a guy who plays WoW. Since the apartment's rather small, we both had our computers in the living room. He would come home, start playing, then go to sleep. Every day. But that's not the worst of it; no, what he had to do to keep up with his friends is the bad part. See, they played some when he wasn't on; in order to keep up, therefore, he had to play when they weren't on.
This apparently was too much for him; occasionally, I'd hear him say "This is getting kind of old." Not old enough for him to stop playing, of course. No, that would be madness. So then a couple hours later he literally cries out in agony "Oh god, this is SO BOOORING!" -- and then he keeps playing.
After the second time he did this, I couldn't contain myself anymore. "Good GOD, man!" Totally oblivious, he turns to me, and he says "Huh?"
"Listen to yourself talk, man!" And he kind of did a double take for a second, then he says "Wow. Uh. That was bad." So I asked him why he didn't just -- stop. And he explains about having to stay at his friends' level, and how he needed to level X skill but had to grind Y in order to grind Z so he could grind X.
It wasn't a game anymore. World of Warcraft had become his second job. One that he was paying $15 a month for the privilege of being allowed to do.
She did get dumped for WoW. Like you said, it might have been something else, sure. But it wasn't. She got dumped, not because of WoW but because of issues; but this doesn't change the fact instead of telling her something like "I'm sorry, but you're nuts, and I can't take it. I'm leaving" he chose to hide behind something else.
This may be a fairly common tactic (I wouldn't know), but it's still not the nicest way to break up with somebody. And it does mean that it's not entirely unfair to feel like she got dumped for WoW. Yes, she might feel that the problem is with the game -- because he deliberately fostered this impression. (Technically it's even 100% true he likes the game more than her. Isn't it?) That WoW is not even another person just makes the illusionary jealousy even more humiliating.
But all this covers up the main design flaw: no main deflector dish. This leaves you without a backup to route stuff thru in the event of a problem. Snakes on a plane? Plot holes the size of Amelia Earhart's plane (as seen in an episode of Voyager, no less)? No problem, route them thru the main deflector dish, that'll show them. But an iPod can be brought low by a battery, because it has nowhere to dump all that excess charge.
I'm sorry, what were we talking about? I can't be bothered to read all that ...
If you're so confident, why don't you try it, then tell us what happens?
Stay the patient course
Of little worth is your ire
The server is down
Except for the fact the motion to disqualify the class (what happened yesterday) was made last year, you might have a point.
I prefer asinkronous pier to pier, myself.
It makes perfect sense. Nobody wanted the donut holes, they don't want the bullet holes either.
Yes. I actually had the same thought. See, trailers, have to be appropriate for all audiences, and they also try hard to avoid spoilers. (At least, there have been a handful of times trailers had spoilers, but they got dumped on every time.) Most of the scenes that really showcase the Joker's, well, Jokerness in this movie are either a) full of plot spoilers, or b) far too brutal to actually put in a trailer.
Short version: this is the best villain character in any movie I've seen in a very long time.
Well, yeah. It kind of loses something if Two Fathe would be thtanding aroung going "stwike him, centuwion, vewy woughwy".
> [P]roblem is that E3 was always supposed to be a industry only sort of thing. To help show off the new & upcoming stuff
... the show. Otherwise why did removing the glitz kill the show?
> to get retailers interested to buy up these new games for the holidays. But people posing as journalists kept getting in
> and with the internet it just got out of hand.
Except that when the guys running the show actually took steps to return E3 to what it was "always supposed to be", it collapsed. It seems to me that the real problem was everybody thought E3 was supposed to be what you're describing, less a spectacle than a trade show, when in actuality E3 really WAS about the spectacle. It was about generating hype and buzz, and getting interest directed at a title not by selling it to retailers (as claimed) but by making a name for the title among gamers. E3 got people's attention, the way all carnival sideshows do. All that other stuff happening in the meetings, that was all important, but the soul of the show was
Not that E3 didn't have problems. It WAS getting out of hand. But I think tbe real problem is nobody recognized the purpose of E3 had shifted, so when they tried to fix it, they broke it. E3 had become a glitzy hypnotic attention-grabber for every gamer who speaks English, across the whole world. All those retailers, etc? They looked to E3 to make decisions because they were following the crowd, not because they were the crowd.
Yeah, we'll have our own games. With DRM. And hookers! In fact, forget the DRM ...
As if you would need anything so nefarious as a secret chemical. Why you think the net was born? Porn Porn Porn!
It's not unheard of for inmates to do this kind of thing -- repeatedly file frivolous lawsuits. See, prisoners are indigent, so they get to sue basically for free, but they can *see* the havoc they cause on everyone else who has to deal with their mess. What do they care, they're in jail for the rest of their life anyway. What have they got to lose?
Giving them access to the courts is done on purpose, to prevent excesses in the prison system. (Not that this is particularly effective, but that's the theory -- imagine if no prisoner could ever sue the prison system because he couldn't sue while incarcerated. Scary stuff.) Unfortunately, some of them found out that they can do the equivalent of griefing/trolling and there are no real repercussions. They have nothing to lose (or near enough) and they can cause people some pain and get back at the system. So some do.
Dude was making six figures, and was about to get fired for misconduct? Then losing his job wasn' enough, he had to do this, so now he's going to jail? Sounds to me like the one who killed the golden goose is the perpetrator.
I especially like how he says Yahoo's claim that MS isn't really interested can't be disingenuous, cause it could lead to trouble -- then accuses Google of the same sort of misbehavior. And doesn't address the apparent discrepancy. So yeah, it's interesting food for thought, but I don't think as a whole the article holds up under its own weight.
Hans Reiser was one of the core developers, he's going to jail for at least 15 years. It's named ReiserFS, it was built on his reputation. Most of the rest of the core developers (if any) will leave for fear of taint by association. This means there is now a substantially greater risk that it will become an orphaned project.