This will go one of two ways: it will either be the highest-value target for enemy spy agencies in history ("Your enemy's information, delivered" to paraphrase AT&T) or it will end up as a nothing-really-here honeypot.
Which means less pork to ladle out in key congressional districts, and a smaller effort required, which means NASA bureaucrats can't hike their status using Parkinson's Law.
We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic man. Oscar Pistorius will be that man. Better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster.
Shooting themselves in the foot? I think they're aiming a few feet higher than that. Unlikely to cause much damage though. You can't blow out the brains you either don't have or aren't using.
I don't insist that it ruins YOUR experience. I merely state that it is as much a part of the game experience as playing the game and, as such, must be accounted for in reviewing the game.
Re:Why no mention?
on
BioShock Review
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
How do I put this delicately? Being treated as a "guest in Bubba's palace" by the invasive DRM is NOT a "you problem" if it spoils the gameplay. It's just as much a part of the game as the action, and a major reason why over the years, I've gone to games less and less for entertainment and fun.
"just because he's in violent games doesn't mean he wants those games being played by minors"
The problem is, as the court noted, just WHICH minors are you talking about?
The ones banned by NC-17? The ones banned by R? The ones banned by PG-13?
Every single bill that's been struck down makes NO differentiation between seventeen-year-olds and three-year-olds. After all, they're both "under 18."
By the way, you might not want to buy "Peter Rabbit" for little Timmy the five-year-old, it does, after all, laud the attempted burglary of a cabbage patch.
Given the Sony rootkit(tm) I will never again willingly give them a dime. So can somebody please explain why this is supposed to be a: interesting and b: relevant?
Thing is, it transpired at the original trial that just a few hours before he murdered the teacher he had been view violent pornographic material on the internet. This is the background to the new law. Ah. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Excuse me, but my exact words were "*close* to a monopoly." Over 70% of the market counts as "close." The only saving grace is that (so far) Apple hasn't abused the power the studio-insisted-upon DCD gave them over the future of the music market. Steve Jobs just let them go forth and hang themselves with their own greed.
Let's see: Universal is unhappy with Jobs' position on pricing and want to have their OWN Digital-Consumer-Disablement crippled service with higher prices than Apple and, since Apple won't license the DCD, it will have to be incompatible with the iPod, which is as close to a player monopoly as you can get without the Feds landing on you with an army of antitrust lawyers.
Given the history of regulatory agencies (see the history of the Interstate Commerce Commission for starters), just how long will it be before the new regulators end up captive to the industries they regulate?
There's a line in the movie "Absence of Malice" which sums up the problem of government regulators very neatly, even if it wasn't intended that way: "Have you given any thought to what you'll do after government service?"
Slashdot Mirror
This will go one of two ways: it will either be the highest-value target for enemy spy agencies in history ("Your enemy's information, delivered" to paraphrase AT&T) or it will end up as a nothing-really-here honeypot.
Which means less pork to ladle out in key congressional districts, and a smaller effort required, which means NASA bureaucrats can't hike their status using Parkinson's Law.
Been done for a very long time. See Politician.
Which tells you just who really runs Mattel/Hasbro, and it isn't the CEO or stockholders, it's the lawyers.
On the other hand, given that the company hasn't produced anything new in years that was worth paying attention to, this comes as a surprise how?
We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic man. Oscar Pistorius will be that man. Better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster.
Sue $BRAND_NAME because $PROPRIETARY_PRODUCT_A won't play games/music/movies/books meant for $PROPRIETARY_PRODUCT_B
The number of combinations of the above that can be implemented is limited only by some lawyer's imagination.
And the answer is always: "FO"
So we're going to see "Ron Jeremy 2008"?
Score another prediction for science fiction.
The quote is from the "Star Trek" episode "Mirror, Mirror."
Any predictions on how long before somebody builds an agony booth?
"The agony booth is a most effective means of discipline."--Spock
Shooting themselves in the foot? I think they're aiming a few feet higher than that. Unlikely to cause much damage though. You can't blow out the brains you either don't have or aren't using.
I don't insist that it ruins YOUR experience. I merely state that it is as much a part of the game experience as playing the game and, as such, must be accounted for in reviewing the game.
How do I put this delicately? Being treated as a "guest in Bubba's palace" by the invasive DRM is NOT a "you problem" if it spoils the gameplay. It's just as much a part of the game as the action, and a major reason why over the years, I've gone to games less and less for entertainment and fun.
I have a truly marvelous proof of this proposition which this 50TB hard drive is too small to contain.
"just because he's in violent games doesn't mean he wants those games being played by minors"
The problem is, as the court noted, just WHICH minors are you talking about?
The ones banned by NC-17? The ones banned by R? The ones banned by PG-13?
Every single bill that's been struck down makes NO differentiation between seventeen-year-olds and three-year-olds. After all, they're both "under 18."
By the way, you might not want to buy "Peter Rabbit" for little Timmy the five-year-old, it does, after all, laud the attempted burglary of a cabbage patch.
"I vas just doing it for the money." Now he's a "public servant." Makes a big difference in attitudes.
[sneers]
You have no chance to survive!
Make your time!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
all these worlds are yours
except mars
attempt no landing there
Some of this stuff and viagra.
I did not have sexual relations while watching that DVD!
Given the Sony rootkit(tm) I will never again willingly give them a dime. So can somebody please explain why this is supposed to be a: interesting and b: relevant?
Thank you.
Excuse me, but my exact words were "*close* to a monopoly." Over 70% of the market counts as "close." The only saving grace is that (so far) Apple hasn't abused the power the studio-insisted-upon DCD gave them over the future of the music market. Steve Jobs just let them go forth and hang themselves with their own greed.
Legally.
Let's see: Universal is unhappy with Jobs' position on pricing and want to have their OWN Digital-Consumer-Disablement crippled service with higher prices than Apple and, since Apple won't license the DCD, it will have to be incompatible with the iPod, which is as close to a player monopoly as you can get without the Feds landing on you with an army of antitrust lawyers.
They think this is good for them HOW?
Given the history of regulatory agencies (see the history of the Interstate Commerce Commission for starters), just how long will it be before the new regulators end up captive to the industries they regulate?
There's a line in the movie "Absence of Malice" which sums up the problem of government regulators very neatly, even if it wasn't intended that way: "Have you given any thought to what you'll do after government service?"