I encode my wallet file using touch tones and pressed a recording of it onto vinyl. The smoothness on the waveform of the 3/6/9 keys adds a certain warmth to my financial transactions.
Actually, its ridiculous that you would understate the situation like that.
You should have picked a different quote to reply to, then, because that's exactly what your comment is saying we should be "standing up and acting like free men" in the face of.
It's ridiculous that it's gotten to the point where you should act non-threatening and nice to people? While there is a degree of absurdity in the fact that a dude with a paper badge has authority over you, if all you have to do to avoid the wrath of that authority is not be a dick I'd say it's not a big deal. Why not save your protest for someone who can the policy you disagree with, rather than manifesting your civil disobedience as sarcastic remarks to the guy who is power tripping on his menial job?
I've yet to have a problem connecting and I'm enjoying the game. I don't know if I'd rate it five stars, but I don't think it's unreasonable that some people would.
USWest 1. I did have a bug where I was forced to enter the tutorial on my second time logging in, after having already completed it the first time I logged in, but once it starts you can back out of it to effectively skip it. I'm going to be annoyed if I have to do that again.
Forgive me, I'm not seeing in the article where people are having "saved games can't be loaded" problems. If people are unable to load saves, that's a legitimate qualm with the game. It should go without saying. But all I'm seeing from the article is that some people had problems downloading the game at the moment it launched, which has been a problem with most games distributed online, yet I don't recall L4D2's shoddy launch being frontpage material.
Thats funny because my friends, myself, and many others had that same sort of feature in SimCity 4 without a central server.
Not in the way SC5 has it. The cities interact with each other in a way greater than dumb road and pipe connections with neighbors that may or may not exist.
I've logged 10 hours in the game already without issue. I guess with all the hate people had for the game before anyone had even played it, it's not surprising people are trying to drum up controversy that's more than the obvious "I don't like that the game is always online."
And while I'm on the subject, the "regions" aspect of the game is damn fun. You have to build your city with surrounding cities in mind -- taking a city that is successful in one region and plopping it down in another wouldn't necessarily work very well. It's not like they just tossed always-online DRM onto a reskinned SC4; the always-online requirement is fundamental to gameplay.
"Ohh no, the startup I've been storing my pictures with has been bought out by a company that changed its ToS to include terms someone on the internet told me not to agree with. The best way to solve this problem is by storing my pictures with another startup that doesn't have such a disagreeable ToS. Problem solved forever."
They made the mistake of giving out beta access to that game with a $5 preorder, so I got away without buying it. I'd still rank that among the worst $5 I've ever spent, and I've bought Powerball tickets.
The agency has no proof that electronic devices can harm a plane's avionics, but it still perpetuates such claims, spreading irrational fear among millions of fliers.
The null hypothesis here is that electronic devices may or may not harm a plane's avionics. The FAA is taking the safe approach and not allowing those devices to be used during takeoff and landing. The author, however, is attempting to assert that electronics do not harm a plane's avionics. Unless one can come up with a way to prove all electronics will not harm a plane's avionics, I don't think the FAA should change its opinion on the matter.
The rules illustrate why we shouldn't let the government regulate the internet: Government regulations are nearly always outdated and too cautious.
When trying to argue in favor of Net Neutrality, I'd hear this one a lot. "The FCC wants Net Neutrality. This is the same FCC that fines networks for showing part of a breast during the Superbowl. Therefore, Net Neutrality is bad." I always wondered why people weren't embarrassed to be told that they've made a fallacious argument; but by the same logic they applied to Net Neutrality, I guess they just assume that if the New York Times does it, it must be OK.
This is not censorship. This is an owner of a website choosing what content it hosts. The first amendment protects your right to say whatever you want, but does not guarantee your access to someone else's soap box. Save your cries of censorship for when the government starts seizing domains of websites who choose to host these files.
I've decided to take a more optimistic view of the situation. Sure, we make have congressmen who are or are pandering to people who have forgotten most of their outdated high-school education; but at least we haven't elected Honey Boo Boo.
I would hope that the Senator knows better; this is simply pandering at its finest. What better way to garner votes from dimwitted parents than to tell them we're going to use science to prove that you're smarter than judges? Add a splash of exploiting a national tragedy and "think of the children" and the constituents are going to love you.
It's like we have a bunch of people running the country that are at the intellectual level of mediocre high school students practicing to be adults through mock trials and model united nations.
It's almost like our government is a reflection of its electorate.
Slashdot Mirror
The two aren't mutually exclusive.
I encode my wallet file using touch tones and pressed a recording of it onto vinyl. The smoothness on the waveform of the 3/6/9 keys adds a certain warmth to my financial transactions.
I'm always on the lookout for people who think that is a good argument; I've got to sell this rock that keeps tigers away.
Actually, its ridiculous that you would understate the situation like that.
You should have picked a different quote to reply to, then, because that's exactly what your comment is saying we should be "standing up and acting like free men" in the face of.
*someone who can change the policy Words are hard.
It's ridiculous that it's gotten to the point where you should act non-threatening and nice to people? While there is a degree of absurdity in the fact that a dude with a paper badge has authority over you, if all you have to do to avoid the wrath of that authority is not be a dick I'd say it's not a big deal. Why not save your protest for someone who can the policy you disagree with, rather than manifesting your civil disobedience as sarcastic remarks to the guy who is power tripping on his menial job?
I've yet to have a problem connecting and I'm enjoying the game. I don't know if I'd rate it five stars, but I don't think it's unreasonable that some people would.
USWest 1. I did have a bug where I was forced to enter the tutorial on my second time logging in, after having already completed it the first time I logged in, but once it starts you can back out of it to effectively skip it. I'm going to be annoyed if I have to do that again.
Nope. I assumed the reader would be smart enough to figure that out.
You haven't seen all the complaints of how idiotic and unappealing the region stuff is?
No. I've been too busy enjoying the game, region stuff and all.
Forgive me, I'm not seeing in the article where people are having "saved games can't be loaded" problems. If people are unable to load saves, that's a legitimate qualm with the game. It should go without saying. But all I'm seeing from the article is that some people had problems downloading the game at the moment it launched, which has been a problem with most games distributed online, yet I don't recall L4D2's shoddy launch being frontpage material.
Thats funny because my friends, myself, and many others had that same sort of feature in SimCity 4 without a central server.
Not in the way SC5 has it. The cities interact with each other in a way greater than dumb road and pipe connections with neighbors that may or may not exist.
I've logged 10 hours in the game already without issue. I guess with all the hate people had for the game before anyone had even played it, it's not surprising people are trying to drum up controversy that's more than the obvious "I don't like that the game is always online."
And while I'm on the subject, the "regions" aspect of the game is damn fun. You have to build your city with surrounding cities in mind -- taking a city that is successful in one region and plopping it down in another wouldn't necessarily work very well. It's not like they just tossed always-online DRM onto a reskinned SC4; the always-online requirement is fundamental to gameplay.
Clearly you've never had a grilled banana.
Agreed. And eating a banana makes more sense than riding a roller coaster. @:3
"Ohh no, the startup I've been storing my pictures with has been bought out by a company that changed its ToS to include terms someone on the internet told me not to agree with. The best way to solve this problem is by storing my pictures with another startup that doesn't have such a disagreeable ToS. Problem solved forever."
Strawmanning is fun sometimes.
They made the mistake of giving out beta access to that game with a $5 preorder, so I got away without buying it. I'd still rank that among the worst $5 I've ever spent, and I've bought Powerball tickets.
Where else am I going to get $25 for my copy of Duke Nukem Forever?
I wonder how many tokens I'd get for my copy of Bible Adventures.
The agency has no proof that electronic devices can harm a plane's avionics, but it still perpetuates such claims, spreading irrational fear among millions of fliers.
The null hypothesis here is that electronic devices may or may not harm a plane's avionics. The FAA is taking the safe approach and not allowing those devices to be used during takeoff and landing. The author, however, is attempting to assert that electronics do not harm a plane's avionics. Unless one can come up with a way to prove all electronics will not harm a plane's avionics, I don't think the FAA should change its opinion on the matter.
The rules illustrate why we shouldn't let the government regulate the internet: Government regulations are nearly always outdated and too cautious.
When trying to argue in favor of Net Neutrality, I'd hear this one a lot. "The FCC wants Net Neutrality. This is the same FCC that fines networks for showing part of a breast during the Superbowl. Therefore, Net Neutrality is bad." I always wondered why people weren't embarrassed to be told that they've made a fallacious argument; but by the same logic they applied to Net Neutrality, I guess they just assume that if the New York Times does it, it must be OK.
This is not censorship. This is an owner of a website choosing what content it hosts. The first amendment protects your right to say whatever you want, but does not guarantee your access to someone else's soap box. Save your cries of censorship for when the government starts seizing domains of websites who choose to host these files.
I've decided to take a more optimistic view of the situation. Sure, we make have congressmen who are or are pandering to people who have forgotten most of their outdated high-school education; but at least we haven't elected Honey Boo Boo.
It's like we have a bunch of people running the country that are at the intellectual level of mediocre high school students practicing to be adults through mock trials and model united nations.
It's almost like our government is a reflection of its electorate.
So if you wrote and executed the trojan from "Superman 3" you'd concurrently serve a few million eight second sentences?
is it still considered a "hack" when all the attacker did was guess the password from common (public domain) knowledge??
Yes, much like a golf cart is still considered a vehicle.