Players with superior input devices do better. More as this story develops.
I believe this is very much old news however unless I am misreading the article, the focus is comparing teamwork/cooperation/non-combat roles and not kills or aiming accuracy. Also worth noting that the survey counts the number of individual team based actions instead of factoring in populations of the three platforms; however according to ve3d.ign.com, PC players only make up 16% of the total sales of this game.
No, because the people that watch Fox news think that every other news network is part of some secret hidden political agenda and therefor it's real.
True. Most news networks don't even try to hide their political agenda.
Amusingly enough if I want a more honest opinion of any international matter I actually turn to Chinese news. Their translators maybe aren't good enough at English to sensationalise or ad lib the facts but I rather like the Xinhua's dry delivery of facts. I've seen too many politically motived fairytales in BBC, NBC and FOX to really trust them for anything more than gossip or entertainment. Not saying that I trust Xinhua much either but it's nice to read strangely phrased news that isn't dowsed in patriotism (their own non-international news of course drips with National pride and should not be avoided)
Also to claim amazon or google or whoever has some kind of monopoly is ridiculous.
Amazon has an estimated international 90% market share of e-books and google has over 86% of search market share. Although you are right this is not 'exclusive control' as the word monopoly implies, the fact that a company has the power to censor 90% of any market is troubling. The good news is that both companies hold on the market are declining, sometimes fast as seen in both links below.
Anyone else find it particularly ironic that many of the biggest diplomatic gaffs came from diplomats of all people. Makes one wonder what the entry requirements are for a career in diplomacy.
As you and many others perhaps have falsely presumed, this may be some kind of attack on SUV's or American culture. That is just bad journalism and media manipulation to make a bland article more interesting. The ban specifically targets any vehicle which crosses a certain Co2 threshold per km travelled. Of course the author chose to headline SUV's and feature a massive SUV picture in order to falsely manipulate you into believing its an attack on US culture and judging by many posts here its clearly worked. The article also makes it very unclear if London's congestion charges or these new French ban on high emission vehicles is the cause of the buying of thousands of new electric cars.
My guess is that bank of america merely has the inside scoup and wikileaks is about to be declared official terrorists.
From the Cambridge English Dictionary : terrorist noun/ter..rst//-.st/ [C]
someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes.
I suspect Wikileaks has not carried out threats of, or acts of violence. Perhaps some clarification on the word 'terrorist' is required, especially when they slap it on anyone that negatively affects their approval ratings or profit margins.
Of course. CGI effects have become so good that they can fool most anyone who is not specifically expecting or looking for them.
Couldn't disagree more with this statement.
I blame CGI over-stimulation and usually it looks just a little crap and cartoony like its become more of an imaginative crutch. Imagine Aliens done with CGI or compare the atmosphere of the Original Star wars trilogy with the three prequels.
One of the few films that actually used CGI well was in my opinion, åt den Rätte Komma In (Let the Right One In). There were times, a subtle glint that implied cat-like low light eyesight or jumping a short distance and falling every so slightly too slow towards the ground, it was subtle and made the audience gasp because they weren't sure if it was special effects or not. Though of course the overdone CGI cats later in the film almost completely ruined the whole thing and looked only slightly more convincing than Tom and Jerry. These days the majority of effects are so obvious they become almost self defeating and blatantly fake.
Michael Moore went through a mass character assassination to similar to Julian Assange. Note that as the stream of negative publicity backfired as the ulterior motives were exposed and people stopped swallowing so much shit, the pictures attached to news articles changed from an seedy looking, sneering, oily Gollum lookalike into a reasonably normal looking guy. They could both be asshats or great guys, I have no idea but I certainly don't intend to allow two faced news rag peddlers dictate my opinions of anyone.
Lacking the opportunity to meet these people within my normal social circles, I prefer to form my own opinions based upon unedited and unbiased interviews of a reasonable enough length to prevent any contextual manipulation. Sadly that's not how the news will ever portray someone, it doesn't sell so well.
The women then withdrew consent, appealing to him to stop. Assange did not stop.
I have two questions for you Thaeatetus. Where did you find these statements from Assange's lawer (who's name you failed to even mention) and do you get dental coverage working in the CIA?
When in Rome! You have to deal with the laws where you reside. Placing your culture's more's on another culture is one of the things that causes such strife in the world. Sweden is a country with the laws created by their people - not American laws.
From the Dailymail article. "The two women then instructed Claes Borgstrom, a so-called ‘gender lawyer’ who is a leading supporter of a campaign to extend the legal definition of rape to help bring more rapists to justice.
As a result, in September the case was reopened by the authorities, and last month Interpol said Assange was wanted for ‘sex crimes’ ".
There is a difference between breaking the law and breaking a future law that does not yet exist or is not properly defined. Unless I am reading this wrong, it appears to be one of those cases.
The secrets necessary to allow a vicitim of Stalin's repression to escape from under his thumb, into the west, and to help combat Stalinism... just too bad, huh?
Don't know which leaked documents you been reading but they sure sound a lot more interesting than the housewife bitchery coming from the staggeringly un-diplomatic diplomats that I've been reading.
I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche
This is something a lot of people are trumpeting. I am not defending the guy I would just like to see some examples of him being like this before I form my own opinion. Something I hope other people are willing to do as well. Care to link some interviews etc where he is behaving in this manner?
All this outcry has done little except prove the exceedingly dubious moral fibre of very powerful elected political figures the world over. People who brag openly about transparency one day and murder to prevent it another day. I'm no longer convinced the Russian rules are really that different from our own.
Of course working on the assumption that Dark Matter even exists. Unless I am mistaken there is no actual direct evidence to its existence and it is used mostly to explain phenomena not fully understood. It may be the modern equivalent of luminiferous ether and disproved in the future.
Not to sound insensitive to your friends death, but to me the larger question is...WHAT in the world was she doing in Afghanistan??
Not a friend I must stress, just someone from my school I knew only in passing a fairly long while ago. She was a UN aid worker if I am not mistaken, certainly not a job without perils and she would have known the risks involved.
Although I can see how this weapon would be very useful for taking out snipers behind cover, I cannot help but feel that more grenades in an urban environment is not a good thing. A girl from my school, Linda Norgrove was recently killed during a hostage situation in Afghanistan where US soldiers allegedly killed her with grenades in a botched rescue attempt. Although the solders claimed she was killed by a suicide vest an autopsy revealed she was killed by US army grenades and investigations into what actually happened are still under way.
I'm all for the "information wants to be free" mantra, but when it can come to a considerable cost to others, the disclosure can't wipe their hands completely of responsibility. Airing a politician's dirty laundry is one thing, but releasing documents that may have names of people that may be endangered unawares should be handled with some discretion.
You seem to forget that the owners of this information prior to the leak felt it did not need to be handled with any form of discretion at all. Apparently 3 million army personnel all had access to this information, even the lowest of army privates. I don't know why they even pretend to be surprised it leaked, I'm only surprised it took this long.
So the USA suppresses information that china's government engaged in illegal hacking, and the USA is behind the DDOS attack on wikileaks. Why can't China be behind it after a US agent tells a chinese agent what is happening.
I know because China is good and the USA is bad.
Well it would take incompetence of monumental magnitude if the DDOS attacks came directly from government networks. The very logical choice would be to look at where has been a threat of cyber attacks recently in the news and pay some criminals from that country. Really the huge motive and endless press releases begging or emotionally blackmailing wikileaks not to release the documents sure makes it clear in most peoples minds who is really behind the DDOS attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
Players with superior input devices do better. More as this story develops.
I believe this is very much old news however unless I am misreading the article, the focus is comparing teamwork/cooperation/non-combat roles and not kills or aiming accuracy. Also worth noting that the survey counts the number of individual team based actions instead of factoring in populations of the three platforms; however according to ve3d.ign.com, PC players only make up 16% of the total sales of this game.
No, because the people that watch Fox news think that every other news network is part of some secret hidden political agenda and therefor it's real.
True. Most news networks don't even try to hide their political agenda.
Amusingly enough if I want a more honest opinion of any international matter I actually turn to Chinese news. Their translators maybe aren't good enough at English to sensationalise or ad lib the facts but I rather like the Xinhua's dry delivery of facts. I've seen too many politically motived fairytales in BBC, NBC and FOX to really trust them for anything more than gossip or entertainment. Not saying that I trust Xinhua much either but it's nice to read strangely phrased news that isn't dowsed in patriotism (their own non-international news of course drips with National pride and should not be avoided)
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english2010/
All I have is my wife and a bottle of bourbon?
All *I* have is tap water and no wife
You got rid of your wife for the staggeringly cheap price of 1 bottle of bourbon? Bargain!
Also to claim amazon or google or whoever has some kind of monopoly is ridiculous.
Amazon has an estimated international 90% market share of e-books and google has over 86% of search market share. Although you are right this is not 'exclusive control' as the word monopoly implies, the fact that a company has the power to censor 90% of any market is troubling. The good news is that both companies hold on the market are declining, sometimes fast as seen in both links below.
http://chitika.com/research/2010/search-market-share-microhoo-making-headway/
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-18438_7-20012381-82.html
Anyone else find it particularly ironic that many of the biggest diplomatic gaffs came from diplomats of all people. Makes one wonder what the entry requirements are for a career in diplomacy.
As you and many others perhaps have falsely presumed, this may be some kind of attack on SUV's or American culture. That is just bad journalism and media manipulation to make a bland article more interesting. The ban specifically targets any vehicle which crosses a certain Co2 threshold per km travelled. Of course the author chose to headline SUV's and feature a massive SUV picture in order to falsely manipulate you into believing its an attack on US culture and judging by many posts here its clearly worked. The article also makes it very unclear if London's congestion charges or these new French ban on high emission vehicles is the cause of the buying of thousands of new electric cars.
My guess is that bank of america merely has the inside scoup and wikileaks is about to be declared official terrorists.
From the Cambridge English Dictionary : terrorist noun /ter..rst//-.st/ [C]
someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes.
I suspect Wikileaks has not carried out threats of, or acts of violence. Perhaps some clarification on the word 'terrorist' is required, especially when they slap it on anyone that negatively affects their approval ratings or profit margins.
Of course. CGI effects have become so good that they can fool most anyone who is not specifically expecting or looking for them.
Couldn't disagree more with this statement.
I blame CGI over-stimulation and usually it looks just a little crap and cartoony like its become more of an imaginative crutch. Imagine Aliens done with CGI or compare the atmosphere of the Original Star wars trilogy with the three prequels.
One of the few films that actually used CGI well was in my opinion, åt den Rätte Komma In (Let the Right One In). There were times, a subtle glint that implied cat-like low light eyesight or jumping a short distance and falling every so slightly too slow towards the ground, it was subtle and made the audience gasp because they weren't sure if it was special effects or not. Though of course the overdone CGI cats later in the film almost completely ruined the whole thing and looked only slightly more convincing than Tom and Jerry. These days the majority of effects are so obvious they become almost self defeating and blatantly fake.
I despise Moore as a person. .
Michael Moore went through a mass character assassination to similar to Julian Assange. Note that as the stream of negative publicity backfired as the ulterior motives were exposed and people stopped swallowing so much shit, the pictures attached to news articles changed from an seedy looking, sneering, oily Gollum lookalike into a reasonably normal looking guy. They could both be asshats or great guys, I have no idea but I certainly don't intend to allow two faced news rag peddlers dictate my opinions of anyone.
Lacking the opportunity to meet these people within my normal social circles, I prefer to form my own opinions based upon unedited and unbiased interviews of a reasonable enough length to prevent any contextual manipulation. Sadly that's not how the news will ever portray someone, it doesn't sell so well.
The women then withdrew consent, appealing to him to stop. Assange did not stop.
I have two questions for you Thaeatetus. Where did you find these statements from Assange's lawer (who's name you failed to even mention) and do you get dental coverage working in the CIA?
but saying sex without a condom is rape is pretty absurd.
If you are a man with a woman and she insists on not using a condom, can you later have her charged with rape?
When in Rome! You have to deal with the laws where you reside. Placing your culture's more's on another culture is one of the things that causes such strife in the world. Sweden is a country with the laws created by their people - not American laws.
From the Dailymail article.
"The two women then instructed Claes Borgstrom, a so-called ‘gender lawyer’ who is a leading supporter of a campaign to extend the legal definition of rape to help bring more rapists to justice. As a result, in September the case was reopened by the authorities, and last month Interpol said Assange was wanted for ‘sex crimes’ ".
There is a difference between breaking the law and breaking a future law that does not yet exist or is not properly defined. Unless I am reading this wrong, it appears to be one of those cases.
"Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?" Joseph Stalin
The secrets necessary to allow a vicitim of Stalin's repression to escape from under his thumb, into the west, and to help combat Stalinism ... just too bad, huh?
Don't know which leaked documents you been reading but they sure sound a lot more interesting than the housewife bitchery coming from the staggeringly un-diplomatic diplomats that I've been reading.
No matter how you want to spin it, spamming clearly isn't as big crime as rape, violence or killing someone..
Yes agreed, lets consider a 1 second jail time for a spam offence. Now how many incidents of this 'crime' has he committed?
Honestly, I don't know what you get out of paying for these that you don't get out of free solutions.
Besides would you really be comfortable paying crooks for your internet security?
I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche
This is something a lot of people are trumpeting. I am not defending the guy I would just like to see some examples of him being like this before I form my own opinion. Something I hope other people are willing to do as well. Care to link some interviews etc where he is behaving in this manner?
'The Russianvs play by different rules'
All this outcry has done little except prove the exceedingly dubious moral fibre of very powerful elected political figures the world over. People who brag openly about transparency one day and murder to prevent it another day. I'm no longer convinced the Russian rules are really that different from our own.
Of course working on the assumption that Dark Matter even exists. Unless I am mistaken there is no actual direct evidence to its existence and it is used mostly to explain phenomena not fully understood. It may be the modern equivalent of luminiferous ether and disproved in the future.
Those whose hearts are about to stop beating due to pissing off too many "important" people.
Don't know why he thinks he will be safe in the UK. Look what happened to the last government whistleblower. http://www.prisonplanet.com/022304kellywasmurdered.html
Not to sound insensitive to your friends death, but to me the larger question is...WHAT in the world was she doing in Afghanistan??
Not a friend I must stress, just someone from my school I knew only in passing a fairly long while ago. She was a UN aid worker if I am not mistaken, certainly not a job without perils and she would have known the risks involved.
Although I can see how this weapon would be very useful for taking out snipers behind cover, I cannot help but feel that more grenades in an urban environment is not a good thing. A girl from my school, Linda Norgrove was recently killed during a hostage situation in Afghanistan where US soldiers allegedly killed her with grenades in a botched rescue attempt. Although the solders claimed she was killed by a suicide vest an autopsy revealed she was killed by US army grenades and investigations into what actually happened are still under way.
I'm all for the "information wants to be free" mantra, but when it can come to a considerable cost to others, the disclosure can't wipe their hands completely of responsibility. Airing a politician's dirty laundry is one thing, but releasing documents that may have names of people that may be endangered unawares should be handled with some discretion.
You seem to forget that the owners of this information prior to the leak felt it did not need to be handled with any form of discretion at all. Apparently 3 million army personnel all had access to this information, even the lowest of army privates. I don't know why they even pretend to be surprised it leaked, I'm only surprised it took this long.
Why worry about nukes when with a flick of a switch they can turn off the worlds tech support.
So the USA suppresses information that china's government engaged in illegal hacking, and the USA is behind the DDOS attack on wikileaks. Why can't China be behind it after a US agent tells a chinese agent what is happening.
I know because China is good and the USA is bad.
Well it would take incompetence of monumental magnitude if the DDOS attacks came directly from government networks. The very logical choice would be to look at where has been a threat of cyber attacks recently in the news and pay some criminals from that country. Really the huge motive and endless press releases begging or emotionally blackmailing wikileaks not to release the documents sure makes it clear in most peoples minds who is really behind the DDOS attacks.