So glad there is a separate venue for such utterly misanthropic, self-important types like you.
So... he's the one who's self-important for saying "be polite to other patrons," not you for insisting that you have some imaginary right to ignore the rules of a property owner and piss off the other patrons.
If they ever make Mental Gymnastics an Olympic event, you should definitely throw your hat in that ring. I mean, you managed to get geekoid and myself to agree on something, and that's no easy feat, so medaling in the Cognitive Dissonance field should be a sure thing for you.
Perhpas 4.30 is 1 minute after the film finishes, so I need to leave as soon as the film finishes, and the North side is not the normal side for driving home?
Then you should discuss that with your spouse prior to arrival, or excuse yourself from the theater before pulling out your phone. Have a little respect for the people around you.
As stated before the snobbery from people sticking up for this chain is really funny.
And the snobbery from people who think they should be able to break the property owner's rules and annoy other patrons because "reasons" isn't?
No, I guess it's not funny... sad and pathetic, maybe, but definitely not funny.
Maybe instead of impulse control, given that many people have a legitimate need to check a phone, people could stop being so petty and bothered by something so minor?
Then leave the frickin' room first if you're so goddamned important that you can't go 2 hours without checking your texts and emails*.
Personally, I don't find it petty at all to expect that the other people who also paid $16 to see this movie are going to actually watch it (and thus, let me watch undistracted), rather than play with their toys.
* In my experience, about 99.9% of the people who say they "have a legitimate need to check a phone" while in a movie theater are, in fact, not important at all, and are just making excuses to justify their bad behavior.
You have to remember the Alamo is full of self righteous douche bag hipsters.
I don't know if you noticed, but that statement is hilariously ironic juxtaposed against all the comments from Glassholes about how they feel entitled to wear their toys every where they go, regardless of the property owner's wishes.
Yea, the other movie patrons are the "self righteous douchebags," not the asshat who refuses to remove the video camera from his face...
Providing special audio devices for the hard of hearing is a reasonable accommodation.
"You have to let me wear this recording device because I didn't bring a spare set of prescription lenses" is not a 'reasonable accommodation,' it's narcissistic bullshit.
Get over yourself, and respect the rights of property owners, or don't set foot on their property.
The biggest single issue with 'banning' glass is that if/when it ever becomes remotely mainstream there will be a proportion of users (likely significant) who wear prescription glasses and who have no intention of carrying a spare 'non-glass' pair everywhere.
... and whose fault is that? Not the private property owner who sets the rules.
Sounds to me like it's only going to be an issue for people who intentionally refuse to be prepared.
4 - a lot of the people who get into law enforcement do so because either A) they were bullies in school and never grew out of it, or B) they got bullied in school and want revenge on society.
From reading TFA, it seems the author bases his entire premise, essentially, on the plot of a 1920's era play (in which, IMO, the "robots" are actually an allegory for some group of humans, ie communists or some such). Bit dated thinking, if you ask me.
On a related note, I've been playing Watch_Dogs since launch day, and the parallels between the fictional ctOS system and the very real NSA programs are terrifyingly apparent. AI is not a necessity for killbots - a human could program a murderous machine quite easily these days. Tap into the massive identification databases the governments of the world are building, and you've got yourself an automated hunter-killer.
Am I the only one who finds it hilariously ironic that a lot of the people who insist that the future of work is everyone having a "creative" job (i.e., humanities) are the same people mocking humanities majors for having useless educations?
Toyota tried to cover up what happened repeatedly by claiming it was the mat, the brake pedal.. Anything but the real cause.
And that real cause was? Verified by empirical data?
I mean, if you're going to accuse someone of a conspiracy, you should probably have at least something factual to back yourself up with... unless you want us thinking you're a loon.
Real mature, intellectual insight you've got there.
If this attitude is indicative of the general theme of anti-gunnery (and, from my experience, it is), then I can't imagine why anyone would ever listen to a work you guys have to say.
I bet I could get a completely opposite answer if I polled, say, 100 members of a Texas gun club, instead of 100 students of a Connecticut liberal arts college, as the original pollsters did.
Let this be a lesson to you, regarding why you should take any poll result with a heaping helping of sodium chloride.
Slashdot Mirror
Instead of banning the devices, they could have provided extra services through them. Closed captioning, for example.
I think that constantly having to refocus from looking 15' away to 1" away would be a one-way ticket to some serious eye strain.
So glad there is a separate venue for such utterly misanthropic, self-important types like you.
So... he's the one who's self-important for saying "be polite to other patrons," not you for insisting that you have some imaginary right to ignore the rules of a property owner and piss off the other patrons.
If they ever make Mental Gymnastics an Olympic event, you should definitely throw your hat in that ring. I mean, you managed to get geekoid and myself to agree on something, and that's no easy feat, so medaling in the Cognitive Dissonance field should be a sure thing for you.
Yes and yes.
Also they serve beer.
Sounds like my kind of theater experience! Wish they'd open one around here.
Perhpas 4.30 is 1 minute after the film finishes, so I need to leave as soon as the film finishes, and the North side is not the normal side for driving home?
Then you should discuss that with your spouse prior to arrival, or excuse yourself from the theater before pulling out your phone. Have a little respect for the people around you.
As stated before the snobbery from people sticking up for this chain is really funny.
And the snobbery from people who think they should be able to break the property owner's rules and annoy other patrons because "reasons" isn't?
No, I guess it's not funny... sad and pathetic, maybe, but definitely not funny.
Maybe instead of impulse control, given that many people have a legitimate need to check a phone, people could stop being so petty and bothered by something so minor?
Then leave the frickin' room first if you're so goddamned important that you can't go 2 hours without checking your texts and emails*.
Personally, I don't find it petty at all to expect that the other people who also paid $16 to see this movie are going to actually watch it (and thus, let me watch undistracted), rather than play with their toys.
* In my experience, about 99.9% of the people who say they "have a legitimate need to check a phone" while in a movie theater are, in fact, not important at all, and are just making excuses to justify their bad behavior.
You have to remember the Alamo is full of self righteous douche bag hipsters.
I don't know if you noticed, but that statement is hilariously ironic juxtaposed against all the comments from Glassholes about how they feel entitled to wear their toys every where they go, regardless of the property owner's wishes.
Yea, the other movie patrons are the "self righteous douchebags," not the asshat who refuses to remove the video camera from his face...
Dude - it's their property. Respect their rules or GTFO.
Wheelchair ramps are a reasonable accommodation.
Providing special audio devices for the hard of hearing is a reasonable accommodation.
"You have to let me wear this recording device because I didn't bring a spare set of prescription lenses" is not a 'reasonable accommodation,' it's narcissistic bullshit.
Get over yourself, and respect the rights of property owners, or don't set foot on their property.
The biggest single issue with 'banning' glass is that if/when it ever becomes remotely mainstream there will be a proportion of users (likely significant) who wear prescription glasses and who have no intention of carrying a spare 'non-glass' pair everywhere.
... and whose fault is that? Not the private property owner who sets the rules.
Sounds to me like it's only going to be an issue for people who intentionally refuse to be prepared.
You missed one:
4 - a lot of the people who get into law enforcement do so because either A) they were bullies in school and never grew out of it, or B) they got bullied in school and want revenge on society.
... only assholes totally trying to stretch laws way past stupid over-reach will try to arrest someone on something that flimsy.
Have you ever met an American LEO?
"Assholes trying to stretch laws" is a fitting description.
Right - and any cash they happened to have laying around would also be seized under RICO, one of the most unconstitutional laws ever upheld.
Gotta be said at this point:
Yo, Dawg! I heard you like [REDACTED], so I [REDACTED] in your [REDACTED] so you can [REDACTED] while you [REDACTED]!
huge state databases being built to track children for more than two decades, from as early as infancy through the start of their careers
2 decades? Try the rest of their lives.
Get 'em young, make 'em yours before they learn what "dissent" means.
I tried, honestly, but it's all bullshit.
Yea, here's the TL;DR version:
"Killer robots can't happen because people have made movies about them, and movies are fiction."
From reading TFA, it seems the author bases his entire premise, essentially, on the plot of a 1920's era play (in which, IMO, the "robots" are actually an allegory for some group of humans, ie communists or some such). Bit dated thinking, if you ask me.
On a related note, I've been playing Watch_Dogs since launch day, and the parallels between the fictional ctOS system and the very real NSA programs are terrifyingly apparent. AI is not a necessity for killbots - a human could program a murderous machine quite easily these days. Tap into the massive identification databases the governments of the world are building, and you've got yourself an automated hunter-killer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
Your understanding of the term "humanities" is woefully incomplete. Probably because you didn't take enough of them.
Am I the only one who finds it hilariously ironic that a lot of the people who insist that the future of work is everyone having a "creative" job (i.e., humanities) are the same people mocking humanities majors for having useless educations?
Toyota tried to cover up what happened repeatedly by claiming it was the mat, the brake pedal.. Anything but the real cause.
And that real cause was? Verified by empirical data?
I mean, if you're going to accuse someone of a conspiracy, you should probably have at least something factual to back yourself up with... unless you want us thinking you're a loon.
Didn't mean to disparage the Chinese, was pointing out that it's not like gunpowder is some newfangled technology that's easy to regulate and control.
Side note - the mechanical clock in the second link is pretty cool, I'd love to see someone recreate it.
Carbon + Sulphur + Salt Peter, right?
Hey, if the Chinese could figure it out 2000 years ago...
Suck my gun nutz retard.
Real mature, intellectual insight you've got there.
If this attitude is indicative of the general theme of anti-gunnery (and, from my experience, it is), then I can't imagine why anyone would ever listen to a work you guys have to say.
Buy it straight from DAVID and it comes with the software
$529USD is actually a pretty good deal for the kit, considering that the software alone retails for around $360.
Unless, of course, it were FBI informants committing the crime...
In recent polling, 90% of Americans (including NRA members) said they wanted better background checks for gun licensing.
Proven bunk
I bet I could get a completely opposite answer if I polled, say, 100 members of a Texas gun club, instead of 100 students of a Connecticut liberal arts college, as the original pollsters did.
Let this be a lesson to you, regarding why you should take any poll result with a heaping helping of sodium chloride.