Number one on your list is exactly what I stated in my own post: that it'll never happen because too many people love being consumerist idiots. Number two is slightly true, except for the fact that most of these corporations wouldn't be able to handle earning $0 (while losing money on electric fees, water fees, and costs of having their managers on duty in case anyone does come in) for a full week. If it happened at one store, they could handle it. If every single store they own suddenly pulled in no revenue, they would be up shit creek. It's just how our system is setup. Three is unfortunately true, but only slightly so. Grocery stores would problem enjoy a pretty hefty profit, but most retail shops would just resume their usual profits. If people went a week without all the crap they usually have, they'd be surprised how little they actually wanted. The fourth is just silly, assuming that the corporations wouldn't panic after a week, or that the managers would ditch their job when they knew that the corporate offices would fire them in a heartbeat for doing so.
You ACs are like ostriches with your heads up your ass.
All snide, childish remarks aside...
Should we ban all cars because they are all capable of speeding-and many do? I mean, sure there are legal users, but when someone misuses something we should punish the good folks too! All in the name of the economic good; who cares about that FOSS stuff anyway?
Except that the government is corrupt and is currently letting crap like this happen because of the money they get.
The boycott is a little more devious.
If no one purchased anything for a week, it would shatter the economy. Stores nationwide would suffer from a week of not only having no employees, but of having no profit. If the people then pointed at the ISPs and said "we're doing it because of them", what do you think would happen?
The only problem is that the majority of the US has either one or two ISP options; whenever a smaller one comes along it gets either bought out or put out of business by the larger corporations that own all of the infrastructure. Leaving is reduced to two options: Pick the other abuser, or have no internet.
And how exactly are you planning on stopping corruption? Send in a good person who pretends to be corrupt and hope they don't get actually corrupted when offered millions to keep things the same?
I'm starting to lose it. I mean, seriously, why do we put up with this shit? Why? Can we not all elect to just stop everything until corporations realize they can't pull bullshit like this?
Think about it. If everyone just flat out boycotted doing anything for even a week. If an entire nation stopped going to work, if they just ate whatever was in their fridge and spent time taking walks, talking with their friends, and just flat out relaxing, what the hell could corporations do besides finally realize they can't bend us over and rape us?
The mere notion of not checking the internet, not watching TV, and not buying corporate crap on a daily basis. That's what's keeping us from having any control. Maybe a small fraction of the country elects to avoid every corrupt corporation like the plague. Maybe. Maybe a large percent of the population would avoid these corrupt corporations if they had a choice. What remain is that enough people don't give a shit about anything except for living their consumerist lives. So long as that >50% of the population continues to let corporations do whatever they want out of sheer willful ignorance ("I'd do something if I could, but in truth I'd never dream of selling my ipod, let alone not buying a Big Mac every week!"), corporation will continue to do whatever they want. So long as it's profitable to the congress folk, those corporations will get away with bloody murder.
I just don't know how much more I can take before I lose it.
Pretty much the problem with Ebert's statement is that games aren't art because they have a goal. By saying this, he's claiming that the art within the game and the experience itself is not art. This is an aging way of looking at games. In the early years of video games, there was no story (I'm talking early years), and the art was based on place markers. Emotions were reduced to euphoria for having the high score and dismay for failing.
The art is not just in the actual art, but in the experience as a whole. If the story is incredible and you're compelled to feel for Y, then T would be scary. If there's no story, and your goal is to just get to the end of the game without being killed by T, then it's not scary at all; unless they had it jump out randomly (even then, that's just a cheap effect that's overused by Hollywood). In Silent Hill, they could make something terrifying just by seeing it, even if the danger was minimal or even nonexistent.
Art enhances the experience; Ebert's saying it's not art. So, I say we sit the man down and have him play Polygonal Alphabet Silent Hill and then have him play normal Silent Hill, and see if he can find any differences.
As someone who is currently in the Game Art and Animation major, I just have this to say: Go fuck yourself.
Paper Mario isn't art? Silent Hill isn't art? Pikmin isn't art? Dead Space isn't art? Fable isn't art? There's so many games that have an amazing art direction. So, just because that art is placed in an environment that sets goals, it isn't art anymore? Pikmin would be the exact same experience if we replaced it with Atari graphics? Silent Hill would be just as scary if Pyramid Head was nothing more than a capital T chasing your character that looks like a Y?
Can the artifacts please either die or off or evolve? Please? It's really hindering the progress of the new generation when the old generation is brainwashing the current generation into believing crap like that. Sheesh.
Disclaimer: Yes, I know that many of you are in the current generation. I'm not talking about people who get it; I'm talking about the average 'Murican that believes whatever Fox News spits out.
I hate self-replying, but in my exhaustion I failed to notice that it was not from a credited journalist. Damn. Well, if you want me to, I can go hunting for another source -sigh-. Damn, I really hate mucking up.
Citation needed that proves that the majority of Christians are against the filter, further citation needed that proves that the majority of government-folk are not Christians that staunchly support this.
I'm getting a little sick of how whenever someone is part of offending group A, they believe that this somehow makes the offending group any less offending. The Christian lobby still does, uh, lobby. Are you part of the Christian lobby? No? Thought not. The simple truth is that a lot of what goes into western law is bastardized Christian lunacy, or is at least packaged in a way that pleases Christian morals. At no point did OP state that you specifically were the cause of it. Furthermore, their point is not invalidated just because a Christian is against what they said.
Again, they are flying in a well-armed chopper. Are you saying that after they successfully slaughtered all of those guys who frantically scrambled in each direction they would be completely incapable of taking out three unarmed guys as well as the van?
There was a lot of assumption done. A lot of assumption. None of which benefited anyone. It was seriously more damaging to them to leave three survivors? They had superior numbers, superior weaponry, and literally no way to be hit by those in the van. It was literally 100% impossible for them to wait and see if just the wounded man was taken away? You really want to argue the semantics of this with me? After they covered it up for 3 bloody years, you seriously feel that they were justified at all? According to their actions on the cover up, they sure as hell disagree with you.
Remember, you are watching the video at 320p youtube quality. The people that actually did the killing? They were there. They had multiple views. They had a ground view, too. It might be a small comfort to you that they reacted quickly, but it sure as hell doesn't comfort me, or justify this. They slaughtered civilians, they had no remorse for blowing holes into kids. When people fled, they filled them with lead. If the guys doing the firing had waited for a split second when they came around the building, anyone on board could have noticed that it was just a camera. Hell, in the split second before the bullets started flying, I was able to positively ID it. On a low quality video. No squinting necessary. They had the high-def experience. No excuse, especially not when they hit the van.
I'm sure that if you saw someone that you could clearly recognize as a civilian just a short drive away, and you saw the "good guys" hovering above, you would think you could drive up and get them to a hospital.
But maybe that's just me. Maybe you'd stay out of harm's way and watch the poor guy bleed to death because you're suspicious of the Americans. Hell, this'll probably be used by terrorist recruiters. "Oh, you think the Americans are here to save you? Look at this! A family tried to save a wounded man, and they shot down the entire family and the wounded man! They justified it by calling it a battle zone!"
There is zero justification for being pumped full of adrenaline and begging to shoot at a vehicle that picked up a wounded man. They seriously couldn't wait half a second to see if the vehicle actually picked up any bodies or weapons?
Re:They also left out a good deal of context
on
How Did Wikileaks Do It?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
This is plus five INFORMATIVE? mypetjawa is a site dedicated to catching Muslim terrorists that it calls "Jawa" (aka, a racial slur). Their decision that the video was a hoax was because someone had an AK-47, therefore the soldiers were totally justified. Are there really 5 conservatives that couldn't RTFA linked by this AC? Jesus Christ people.
If someone tells you that a place is bad, but then you find out that person lies 10% of the time, will you still believe them every time that they say a place is bad?
That'd be like going to a place that has been known to randomly kick people in the balls. I mean, they don't always kick people in the balls, so why possibly believe they will ever kick you in the balls?
Hi, non-fan of Star Wars here. Lucas still sucks and makes horrible movies. His cult fan following only makes that even worse. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
Yeah, I made the mistake of fact checking after posting; d'oh! Interestingly enough, after looking up my town on the sex offender list, I got 10 responses. 5 of them were rather vague, one of them had no information available, and the rest were very specific.
So...shouldn't we put rapists on the same sex offender list, then? All of them are non-consensual, many of them murder their witness. Rapists aren't put to death in prison, which means they could just as easily go back at it. How do you tell the difference between someone who just wants to fuck another adult and someone who wants to fuck then murder another adult?
Just playing devil's advocate. As an aside, most teenagers start having sex at 14, 15, 16 years of age with other teenagers. Chances are all of those teens fucking each other will grow up and continue fucking. Sure, there's always someone who is raping someone, always someone who is taking advantage of someone. The downside is that if someone turns 18 before their girlfriend/boyfriend does, they get to enjoy being permanently associated with the 80 year old down the road that gouged out 4 year old's eyeballs and raped them to death. I'd much rather let the cases where both sides consent slide then force these fringe cases to suffer in the name of "the children".
Well obviously the depth of the coffee is how much time as passed (ie one unit above the boiling water would be one unit of time passed). But actually implementing something like that which allowed you to see all possible locations in space in relation to time would be a huge eye sore, unless it was something that activated only for specific objects and only when the player activated it.
How are you defining the rotation? If it's entirely based on time alone, then warping time would be a "rotation" in the sense that you can go from time point "0" (normal flow), slow time down to point "-1" (slowed time), then swing back around to normal flow (point "0"). You can manipulate the world and the other three dimensions at each point during this.
Alright: give me 30 billion dollars so I stand half a fucking chance against Disney. Our government laughs so hard that it pisses itself every time a concerned citizen begs for more reasonable copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
It's all a pipe dream anyway.
All snide, childish remarks aside...
Should we ban all cars because they are all capable of speeding-and many do? I mean, sure there are legal users, but when someone misuses something we should punish the good folks too! All in the name of the economic good; who cares about that FOSS stuff anyway?
The boycott is a little more devious.
If no one purchased anything for a week, it would shatter the economy. Stores nationwide would suffer from a week of not only having no employees, but of having no profit. If the people then pointed at the ISPs and said "we're doing it because of them", what do you think would happen?
The only problem is that the majority of the US has either one or two ISP options; whenever a smaller one comes along it gets either bought out or put out of business by the larger corporations that own all of the infrastructure. Leaving is reduced to two options: Pick the other abuser, or have no internet.
And how exactly are you planning on stopping corruption? Send in a good person who pretends to be corrupt and hope they don't get actually corrupted when offered millions to keep things the same?
but I have faith a free market system will work it out.
Ha ha! Ha! That's funny.
Think about it. If everyone just flat out boycotted doing anything for even a week. If an entire nation stopped going to work, if they just ate whatever was in their fridge and spent time taking walks, talking with their friends, and just flat out relaxing, what the hell could corporations do besides finally realize they can't bend us over and rape us?
The mere notion of not checking the internet, not watching TV, and not buying corporate crap on a daily basis. That's what's keeping us from having any control. Maybe a small fraction of the country elects to avoid every corrupt corporation like the plague. Maybe. Maybe a large percent of the population would avoid these corrupt corporations if they had a choice. What remain is that enough people don't give a shit about anything except for living their consumerist lives. So long as that >50% of the population continues to let corporations do whatever they want out of sheer willful ignorance ("I'd do something if I could, but in truth I'd never dream of selling my ipod, let alone not buying a Big Mac every week!"), corporation will continue to do whatever they want. So long as it's profitable to the congress folk, those corporations will get away with bloody murder.
I just don't know how much more I can take before I lose it.
The art is not just in the actual art, but in the experience as a whole. If the story is incredible and you're compelled to feel for Y, then T would be scary. If there's no story, and your goal is to just get to the end of the game without being killed by T, then it's not scary at all; unless they had it jump out randomly (even then, that's just a cheap effect that's overused by Hollywood). In Silent Hill, they could make something terrifying just by seeing it, even if the danger was minimal or even nonexistent.
Art enhances the experience; Ebert's saying it's not art. So, I say we sit the man down and have him play Polygonal Alphabet Silent Hill and then have him play normal Silent Hill, and see if he can find any differences.
Paper Mario isn't art? Silent Hill isn't art? Pikmin isn't art? Dead Space isn't art? Fable isn't art? There's so many games that have an amazing art direction. So, just because that art is placed in an environment that sets goals, it isn't art anymore? Pikmin would be the exact same experience if we replaced it with Atari graphics? Silent Hill would be just as scary if Pyramid Head was nothing more than a capital T chasing your character that looks like a Y?
Can the artifacts please either die or off or evolve? Please? It's really hindering the progress of the new generation when the old generation is brainwashing the current generation into believing crap like that. Sheesh.
Disclaimer: Yes, I know that many of you are in the current generation. I'm not talking about people who get it; I'm talking about the average 'Murican that believes whatever Fox News spits out.
I hate self-replying, but in my exhaustion I failed to notice that it was not from a credited journalist. Damn. Well, if you want me to, I can go hunting for another source -sigh-. Damn, I really hate mucking up.
I'm getting a little sick of how whenever someone is part of offending group A, they believe that this somehow makes the offending group any less offending. The Christian lobby still does, uh, lobby. Are you part of the Christian lobby? No? Thought not. The simple truth is that a lot of what goes into western law is bastardized Christian lunacy, or is at least packaged in a way that pleases Christian morals. At no point did OP state that you specifically were the cause of it. Furthermore, their point is not invalidated just because a Christian is against what they said.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2778257.htm
Enjoy your citation.
There was a lot of assumption done. A lot of assumption. None of which benefited anyone. It was seriously more damaging to them to leave three survivors? They had superior numbers, superior weaponry, and literally no way to be hit by those in the van. It was literally 100% impossible for them to wait and see if just the wounded man was taken away? You really want to argue the semantics of this with me? After they covered it up for 3 bloody years, you seriously feel that they were justified at all? According to their actions on the cover up, they sure as hell disagree with you.
Remember, you are watching the video at 320p youtube quality. The people that actually did the killing? They were there. They had multiple views. They had a ground view, too. It might be a small comfort to you that they reacted quickly, but it sure as hell doesn't comfort me, or justify this. They slaughtered civilians, they had no remorse for blowing holes into kids. When people fled, they filled them with lead. If the guys doing the firing had waited for a split second when they came around the building, anyone on board could have noticed that it was just a camera. Hell, in the split second before the bullets started flying, I was able to positively ID it. On a low quality video. No squinting necessary. They had the high-def experience. No excuse, especially not when they hit the van.
But maybe that's just me. Maybe you'd stay out of harm's way and watch the poor guy bleed to death because you're suspicious of the Americans. Hell, this'll probably be used by terrorist recruiters. "Oh, you think the Americans are here to save you? Look at this! A family tried to save a wounded man, and they shot down the entire family and the wounded man! They justified it by calling it a battle zone!"
There is zero justification for being pumped full of adrenaline and begging to shoot at a vehicle that picked up a wounded man. They seriously couldn't wait half a second to see if the vehicle actually picked up any bodies or weapons?
This is plus five INFORMATIVE? mypetjawa is a site dedicated to catching Muslim terrorists that it calls "Jawa" (aka, a racial slur). Their decision that the video was a hoax was because someone had an AK-47, therefore the soldiers were totally justified. Are there really 5 conservatives that couldn't RTFA linked by this AC? Jesus Christ people.
If someone tells you that a place is bad, but then you find out that person lies 10% of the time, will you still believe them every time that they say a place is bad?
That'd be like going to a place that has been known to randomly kick people in the balls. I mean, they don't always kick people in the balls, so why possibly believe they will ever kick you in the balls?
Hi, non-fan of Star Wars here. Lucas still sucks and makes horrible movies. His cult fan following only makes that even worse. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3512887/Star_Wars_3__Backstroke_of_The_West_(ROTS_mistranslation)
http://www.rifftrax.com/
Yeah, I made the mistake of fact checking after posting; d'oh! Interestingly enough, after looking up my town on the sex offender list, I got 10 responses. 5 of them were rather vague, one of them had no information available, and the rest were very specific.
Just playing devil's advocate. As an aside, most teenagers start having sex at 14, 15, 16 years of age with other teenagers. Chances are all of those teens fucking each other will grow up and continue fucking. Sure, there's always someone who is raping someone, always someone who is taking advantage of someone. The downside is that if someone turns 18 before their girlfriend/boyfriend does, they get to enjoy being permanently associated with the 80 year old down the road that gouged out 4 year old's eyeballs and raped them to death. I'd much rather let the cases where both sides consent slide then force these fringe cases to suffer in the name of "the children".
I think my brain just exploded. Never was good with the 4th dimension.
Well obviously the depth of the coffee is how much time as passed (ie one unit above the boiling water would be one unit of time passed). But actually implementing something like that which allowed you to see all possible locations in space in relation to time would be a huge eye sore, unless it was something that activated only for specific objects and only when the player activated it.
How are you defining the rotation? If it's entirely based on time alone, then warping time would be a "rotation" in the sense that you can go from time point "0" (normal flow), slow time down to point "-1" (slowed time), then swing back around to normal flow (point "0"). You can manipulate the world and the other three dimensions at each point during this.
Alright: give me 30 billion dollars so I stand half a fucking chance against Disney. Our government laughs so hard that it pisses itself every time a concerned citizen begs for more reasonable copyright.