So "disagree with the obvious majority opinion" is "mostly tolling"?
No, that's not what I said or meant. To clarify: some people disagree with the idea that the RIAA act maliciously and to the detriment of everyone. Of the dissenting posts I've read, a large amount are highly vitriolic and vindictive. They make no arguments and repeat the same accusations ceaselessly.
Not all posts which dissent from common belief about the RIAA here are trolls, but the majority come off that way.
"I hate the RIAA as much as anyone else on this forum" doesn't imply "everyone hates the RIAA on this forum". It means that nobody here hates the RIAA more than he does. There's no group think here; some people disagree with the obvious majority opinion, as you probably know, but I think they're mostly trolling. Even people who dislike the RIAA here disagree as to why and how much. Personally I dislike them because I enjoy free music and don't want to get sued.
I watched that video and it makes some interesting points but I have a question now:
how is an oligarchy different from a republic? The laws which govern a republic have to come from somewhere; in the case of the U.S. constitution, they came from the founding fathers, a small group of elites, right? If I understand correctly (and I probably don't so help me out), an oligarchy is ruled by a small group of elites, and a republic is ruled by a small group of dead elites. Please discuss!
So true. We'll all just stop eating the things that cause car accidents, explosions, falls, natural disasters, heavy machinery accidents, house fires, electrical accidents, accidental drownings, and stray bullets.
Some tax money will always go to health care. Personal responsibility is not a universal panacea, and we live in a society so that it doesn't *have* to be.
Encouraging personal responsibility, however, is a good idea, which is why some sort of tax on unhealthy behavior kind of makes sense. It needs to be reworked, so that's it's better targeted, but the principle is fairly sound. Your reflexive anti-tax attitude is not.
I was thinking the same thing; yes, it seems a little fascistic, and a it would be a lot harder to enforce, but a targeted tax based on body weight as measured by your GP makes the most sense. If we *must* tax people in the name of behavior modification, we at least oughtta target it correctly.
Yeah I wasn't really saying anything that contradicts you. I was replying to an assertion of "my body, my decision, gtfo of my business" which I took to read "mandatory suicide prevention efforts infringe my rights". I was trying to reply that nobody's going to stop you unless you make your intentions known, so if you want to make your own choice all you have to do is shut your mouth. If you can't do that, you drag other people in, and any infringement of your rights is your own fault.
Then keep your death wish to yourself. But if you go around making it plain that you intend to take your own life, you make it other peoples' business. Since many people presenting as suicidal are beyond the capability to make a logical decision (people often come to deeply regret suicide attempts), confessing suicidal tendencies to other people puts them in the position of choosing between saving a life (at least temporarily), and potentially watching a preventable and tragic death. Regardless of what you want, it's inhumane to confess your shit to another person and then expect them to take any action other than the one that preempts exposure to guilt over a life lost.
It's cool but kind of broken. I tried leisure suit larry for a few minutes and spent most of that time levitating, crawling gregor-samsa-like across the walls, and running in place in front of doorways extremely slowly or quickly.
Also, skip the multiplayer; I set my avatar to dog in leisure suit larry and someone else said "Lick dog's balls" which was like, thanks but no thanks Larry.
The problem I had with mirror's edge is that it seemed like the developers thought they'd get a free pass because they did something innovative. It worked pretty well sometimes, but innovation by itself wasn't enough to make the game fun, in my opinion.
Which doesn't improve things that much, but it kind of gives you an idea of what he's talking about. Like when GTAIII-type sandbox gaming was something of a "new" innovation, so everyone incorporated this new innovation into their products until it really wasn't new or innovative at all anymore
Chairman Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive [etc.]
Well, economists differ a little on this I guess. Another viewpoint is that unless we increase spending, demand will continue to plummet, businesses will continue to scale back production, (etc. etc., I'm no economist) and ultimately your kids will be left poor. It's all a little byzantine, so I can't really speak to the veracity of either argument, but it's not entirely black-and-white as you say.
Rahm and Obama are using Blagojevich and trying to cut his head off to keep him away
That's interesting. Do you have a source for that? Well, either way, if/when Blagojevich is indicted I expect he'll be rather vocal about anyone who put him in that situation.
An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state
This probably has more to do with the fact that the U.S. economy has been crumbling, and there's no conceivable way to pin that failure entirely on Obama, since it predates his presidency. Which isn't to say I blame the previous administration; the economy is fucking complicated. Shit happens. Besides, a good chunk of those G20 countries are socialist themselves. Socialism doesn't freak them out like it freaks out Americans.
As the US nationalizes (read: rations healthcare) to the least common denominator
The evidence suggests that health care tends to be better and cheaper in developed countries employing socialism. Not always.
I'm not saying your all wrong, and your skepticism is admirable (if a little over-focused on one side of the political landscape). I'll reply to more later when I have the time.
things as harmless looking as a box of chocolates or a book can be deadly ordinance if rigged up properly.
That's exactly the point. Normal people can't actually tell a book or anything else from a bomb, so unless there's a credible threat (a phoned-in threat, or a tip with some real substance and technical detail to it) it really is a waste of time and resources to investigate every little suspicion. If this had been a bomb, it's unlikely that anyone would have suspected as much just by looking at it.
where the RIAA goes wrong is using CD sales as its only metric for profitability.
I wonder; is this really a mistake? Either the music industry is truly ignorant and incorrigibly stubborn, or they've realized that they can make a better case for subsidies/bailout/public sympathy/whatever if they can be all "ohhh, my cd sales"
Actually the dialogue system kind of bothered me. I appreciate that they wanted to save screen real-estate, but I like to be in control of what my character is going to say, or at least to know it before hand. In Mass Effect, I often found myself misreading the tone of the 2 or 3 word summaries of dialogue choices. It made it much harder for me to relate to Sheppard, since he was always adding emotions or inferences to the dialogue that I didn't expect or see as appropriate.
I'd like to preface this question by admitting that I really know nothing about how consumer broadband (or p2p protocols) work.
How come bandwidth doesn't split exactly equally between individuals using the network? How does it happen that a bittorrent user slows down all the other users, as opposed to the other users slowing him down until everyone has exactly the same bandwidth? That seems the most equitable solution. Is it technologically unfeasible? why?
Thanks for taking the time to educate an internet ignoramus.
monopoly board, now with [...] underlying family issues
Actually, if monopoly taught me anything, it's that the guy who gets the most land the earliest dominates everyone else, including family. Sorry dad, you landed on Boardwalk. Cough it up.
I see it as backlash against a lot of anti-sony sentiment out there; to say that the PS3 is pretty good (and I'm sure it's pretty damn good) isn't enough to counteract the bile spewed in various flame wars across the internet. A moderate statement of that nature simply sinks in a sea of venomous discontent.
P.S. I only own a 360 and I've been happy with it thus far but I would have a ps3 too if I could scrounge up the cash.
Slashdot Mirror
it's cool, guy. You're still invited to our birthday party.
this post... the layout of the text, the sensual prose... truly, it must be art!
On the other hand, look how guy uses the word really four times in a single sentence. It cannot be art!
K I debated art because of your post so your post is art now. I expect an offer from the louvre will follow shortly.
So "disagree with the obvious majority opinion" is "mostly tolling"?
No, that's not what I said or meant. To clarify: some people disagree with the idea that the RIAA act maliciously and to the detriment of everyone. Of the dissenting posts I've read, a large amount are highly vitriolic and vindictive. They make no arguments and repeat the same accusations ceaselessly.
Not all posts which dissent from common belief about the RIAA here are trolls, but the majority come off that way.
This isn't an example of group-think.
"I hate the RIAA as much as anyone else on this forum" doesn't imply "everyone hates the RIAA on this forum". It means that nobody here hates the RIAA more than he does. There's no group think here; some people disagree with the obvious majority opinion, as you probably know, but I think they're mostly trolling. Even people who dislike the RIAA here disagree as to why and how much. Personally I dislike them because I enjoy free music and don't want to get sued.
If I never paid attention to the ads, what's the difference?
I watched that video and it makes some interesting points but I have a question now:
how is an oligarchy different from a republic? The laws which govern a republic have to come from somewhere; in the case of the U.S. constitution, they came from the founding fathers, a small group of elites, right? If I understand correctly (and I probably don't so help me out), an oligarchy is ruled by a small group of elites, and a republic is ruled by a small group of dead elites. Please discuss!
So true. We'll all just stop eating the things that cause car accidents, explosions, falls, natural disasters, heavy machinery accidents, house fires, electrical accidents, accidental drownings, and stray bullets.
Some tax money will always go to health care. Personal responsibility is not a universal panacea, and we live in a society so that it doesn't *have* to be.
Encouraging personal responsibility, however, is a good idea, which is why some sort of tax on unhealthy behavior kind of makes sense. It needs to be reworked, so that's it's better targeted, but the principle is fairly sound. Your reflexive anti-tax attitude is not.
I was thinking the same thing; yes, it seems a little fascistic, and a it would be a lot harder to enforce, but a targeted tax based on body weight as measured by your GP makes the most sense. If we *must* tax people in the name of behavior modification, we at least oughtta target it correctly.
Yeah I wasn't really saying anything that contradicts you. I was replying to an assertion of "my body, my decision, gtfo of my business" which I took to read "mandatory suicide prevention efforts infringe my rights". I was trying to reply that nobody's going to stop you unless you make your intentions known, so if you want to make your own choice all you have to do is shut your mouth. If you can't do that, you drag other people in, and any infringement of your rights is your own fault.
Then keep your death wish to yourself. But if you go around making it plain that you intend to take your own life, you make it other peoples' business. Since many people presenting as suicidal are beyond the capability to make a logical decision (people often come to deeply regret suicide attempts), confessing suicidal tendencies to other people puts them in the position of choosing between saving a life (at least temporarily), and potentially watching a preventable and tragic death. Regardless of what you want, it's inhumane to confess your shit to another person and then expect them to take any action other than the one that preempts exposure to guilt over a life lost.
It's cool but kind of broken. I tried leisure suit larry for a few minutes and spent most of that time levitating, crawling gregor-samsa-like across the walls, and running in place in front of doorways extremely slowly or quickly.
Also, skip the multiplayer; I set my avatar to dog in leisure suit larry and someone else said "Lick dog's balls" which was like, thanks but no thanks Larry.
The problem I had with mirror's edge is that it seemed like the developers thought they'd get a free pass because they did something innovative. It worked pretty well sometimes, but innovation by itself wasn't enough to make the game fun, in my opinion.
but ME shows how it can be done right.
By counterexample?
having frustrating disarm techniques on top of easily getting lost and losing your footing, made the title soon faded into obscurity for me.
Having poor grammar on top of frequently using inappropriate adjectives and losing my interest, made the article soon faded into obscurity for ME.
the âoenewestâ ideas put into games[...]
Which doesn't improve things that much, but it kind of gives you an idea of what he's talking about. Like when GTAIII-type sandbox gaming was something of a "new" innovation, so everyone incorporated this new innovation into their products until it really wasn't new or innovative at all anymore
Chairman Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive [etc.]
Well, economists differ a little on this I guess. Another viewpoint is that unless we increase spending, demand will continue to plummet, businesses will continue to scale back production, (etc. etc., I'm no economist) and ultimately your kids will be left poor. It's all a little byzantine, so I can't really speak to the veracity of either argument, but it's not entirely black-and-white as you say.
Rahm and Obama are using Blagojevich and trying to cut his head off to keep him away
That's interesting. Do you have a source for that? Well, either way, if/when Blagojevich is indicted I expect he'll be rather vocal about anyone who put him in that situation.
An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state
This probably has more to do with the fact that the U.S. economy has been crumbling, and there's no conceivable way to pin that failure entirely on Obama, since it predates his presidency. Which isn't to say I blame the previous administration; the economy is fucking complicated. Shit happens.
Besides, a good chunk of those G20 countries are socialist themselves. Socialism doesn't freak them out like it freaks out Americans.
As the US nationalizes (read: rations healthcare) to the least common denominator
The evidence suggests that health care tends to be better and cheaper in developed countries employing socialism. Not always.
I'm not saying your all wrong, and your skepticism is admirable (if a little over-focused on one side of the political landscape). I'll reply to more later when I have the time.
things as harmless looking as a box of chocolates or a book can be deadly ordinance if rigged up properly.
That's exactly the point. Normal people can't actually tell a book or anything else from a bomb, so unless there's a credible threat (a phoned-in threat, or a tip with some real substance and technical detail to it) it really is a waste of time and resources to investigate every little suspicion. If this had been a bomb, it's unlikely that anyone would have suspected as much just by looking at it.
where the RIAA goes wrong is using CD sales as its only metric for profitability.
I wonder; is this really a mistake? Either the music industry is truly ignorant and incorrigibly stubborn, or they've realized that they can make a better case for subsidies/bailout/public sympathy/whatever if they can be all "ohhh, my cd sales"
Actually the dialogue system kind of bothered me. I appreciate that they wanted to save screen real-estate, but I like to be in control of what my character is going to say, or at least to know it before hand. In Mass Effect, I often found myself misreading the tone of the 2 or 3 word summaries of dialogue choices. It made it much harder for me to relate to Sheppard, since he was always adding emotions or inferences to the dialogue that I didn't expect or see as appropriate.
FUCKING SKELETON!
I take it you mean "posts as AC to savagely mock himself"
I'd like to preface this question by admitting that I really know nothing about how consumer broadband (or p2p protocols) work.
How come bandwidth doesn't split exactly equally between individuals using the network? How does it happen that a bittorrent user slows down all the other users, as opposed to the other users slowing him down until everyone has exactly the same bandwidth? That seems the most equitable solution. Is it technologically unfeasible? why?
Thanks for taking the time to educate an internet ignoramus.
we are beginning to see the effect of the better capabilities of the PS2
yes, the PS2 will trounce all other current generation systems.
p.s.
In all honestly I think it does in a lot of ways. I have a 360 but the ps2 is the only system I brought to college.
monopoly board, now with [...] underlying family issues
Actually, if monopoly taught me anything, it's that the guy who gets the most land the earliest dominates everyone else, including family. Sorry dad, you landed on Boardwalk. Cough it up.
I see it as backlash against a lot of anti-sony sentiment out there; to say that the PS3 is pretty good (and I'm sure it's pretty damn good) isn't enough to counteract the bile spewed in various flame wars across the internet. A moderate statement of that nature simply sinks in a sea of venomous discontent.
P.S. I only own a 360 and I've been happy with it thus far but I would have a ps3 too if I could scrounge up the cash.