But I've gotta say, if this is disappointing as Fallout 3 could have been if I hadn't already expected it to be a load of crap, I will be... uh... disappointed.
Case in point: Fallout 2. Best game evarr, yet way too long. These two characteristics are not mutually exclusive. The too-longness contributes to the awesomeness.
This is just another crap idea by game publishing execs looking to save a few bucks and push product out the door faster.
Kind of a twit statement. It's illegal because it needs to be illegal. Or do you think it's ok to let strangers make prank 911 phone calls and death threats from your phone?
Just don't buy it, then. There's no shortage of quality titles out there, anyway. Replay a classic and send Blizzard the message that they won't be getting your dollars.
Lol. So I'm to give a lecture on basic Constitutional jurisprudence to someone who can't even bother to look up "First Amendment" on Wikipedia and discover that he's blowing hot air out of his ass?
Enjoy ignorance, bro. And, nice double post! Getting a little over-excited, were we?
Honestly the first thing I thought after reading TFA was every public email provider responding in unison,
"Oh sure, we can do that for you, but please don't sue us into the ground and report us to the FBI, the FCC, the DOJ, the New York Times and your congressman for violating your free-speech/contractual/4th amendment/etc. rights"
... any player out there that is capable of punching these jerkhats right in the junk. Much as cable companies suck, I'm shocked by how poor Netflix's billing practices are and even more shocked that they're legal.
For reference, the only way to cancel your account, without paying for extra membership time that you're not able to use, is to cancel your account ON THE REBILL DATE but BEFORE THEY REBILL.
Yeah, you heard right. If you cancel your subscription, they immediately stop providing the streaming service, but still charge you for the whole month. You can't simply tell them to refrain from rebilling you when next billing cycle comes. If you wait until the billing cycle ends, you're taking the risk that they'll bill you for a whole extra month that you don't want.
There is no customer service for billing issues. You cannot even talk to anybody that has the authority to issue you any form of refund. This company is like Sprint, only without the same level of honesty and good manners.
making it sound like the police were going to tap into people's iPhones and implant and operate an app that surreptitiously photographed them and recognized their face
What a stupid and naive comment based on an entitlement mentality. Shit happens.
"The one that hurts people or the one that helps people"? I guess the sky in your world isn't blue, since everything must be so black and white.
Identifying what, exactly, the article is supposed to be saying about microtransactions? I was unable to identify any relevant statement other than that they may or may not be evil for some reasons not apparently mentioned.
some techie twit who has no credentials to give an informed opinion on the law, and who probably hates copyright law and would be delighted by the opportunity to attack or undermine it, informs us that the photographer who arranged this situation, or even stumbled into it, who owns the camera, appears in the pictures with the monkeys, and delivered the pictures for publication "almost certainly does not hold the copyrights on those images, and has no legal right to then sell, license or assign them", and is subsequently somehow surprised to receive a takedown notice from the news agency the photographer works for.
This is somehow news among other techie twits who can't be bothered to think intelligently about the law.
Somehow, the sheer idiocy of the above is not the featured story on Slashdot.
It's not like people who go around ranting about "US war criminals" needs to listen to anything anyone says, not least judges. Just repeating the claim ad nauseam works wonders.
If you read the above post carefully and aren't a fuckwit, you can see that the poster certainly was not suggesting that the US should respond with "acts of terror".
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to look up "refute" in the dictionary, since it clearly doesn't mean what you think it means.
Hi, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
But I've gotta say, if this is disappointing as Fallout 3 could have been if I hadn't already expected it to be a load of crap, I will be... uh... disappointed.
and that's the way it's supposed to be.
Case in point: Fallout 2. Best game evarr, yet way too long. These two characteristics are not mutually exclusive. The too-longness contributes to the awesomeness.
This is just another crap idea by game publishing execs looking to save a few bucks and push product out the door faster.
Kind of a twit statement. It's illegal because it needs to be illegal. Or do you think it's ok to let strangers make prank 911 phone calls and death threats from your phone?
Shoot for the stars, boys!
Wait, wait, don't tell me; let me guess.
Not enough welfare and other free public benefits in Great Britain?
Just don't buy it, then. There's no shortage of quality titles out there, anyway. Replay a classic and send Blizzard the message that they won't be getting your dollars.
"It's a fair cop, but society is to blame for failing to lift me up."
Lol. So I'm to give a lecture on basic Constitutional jurisprudence to someone who can't even bother to look up "First Amendment" on Wikipedia and discover that he's blowing hot air out of his ass?
Enjoy ignorance, bro. And, nice double post! Getting a little over-excited, were we?
Uh, yeah. You seem pretty ignorant.
In this thread: fucktarded comment is repeatedly upmodded by other fucktards.
59:75:70:2c:20:74:68:61:74:27:73:20:70:65:65:20:61:6c:6c:20:72:69:67:68:74:21
parents underrated
Honestly the first thing I thought after reading TFA was every public email provider responding in unison,
"Oh sure, we can do that for you, but please don't sue us into the ground and report us to the FBI, the FCC, the DOJ, the New York Times and your congressman for violating your free-speech/contractual/4th amendment/etc. rights"
... any player out there that is capable of punching these jerkhats right in the junk. Much as cable companies suck, I'm shocked by how poor Netflix's billing practices are and even more shocked that they're legal.
For reference, the only way to cancel your account, without paying for extra membership time that you're not able to use, is to cancel your account ON THE REBILL DATE but BEFORE THEY REBILL.
Yeah, you heard right. If you cancel your subscription, they immediately stop providing the streaming service, but still charge you for the whole month. You can't simply tell them to refrain from rebilling you when next billing cycle comes. If you wait until the billing cycle ends, you're taking the risk that they'll bill you for a whole extra month that you don't want.
There is no customer service for billing issues. You cannot even talk to anybody that has the authority to issue you any form of refund. This company is like Sprint, only without the same level of honesty and good manners.
underrated
making it sound like the police were going to tap into people's iPhones and implant and operate an app that surreptitiously photographed them and recognized their face
What a stupid and naive comment based on an entitlement mentality. Shit happens. "The one that hurts people or the one that helps people"? I guess the sky in your world isn't blue, since everything must be so black and white.
Of course Google is spying for the NSA. There, now you know. Then again, Google is probably also spying on the NSA.
Old security trick; not hard. That way the data this app generates is useless unless it can also actually read what each key pressed says.
Identifying what, exactly, the article is supposed to be saying about microtransactions? I was unable to identify any relevant statement other than that they may or may not be evil for some reasons not apparently mentioned.
some techie twit who has no credentials to give an informed opinion on the law, and who probably hates copyright law and would be delighted by the opportunity to attack or undermine it, informs us that the photographer who arranged this situation, or even stumbled into it, who owns the camera, appears in the pictures with the monkeys, and delivered the pictures for publication "almost certainly does not hold the copyrights on those images, and has no legal right to then sell, license or assign them", and is subsequently somehow surprised to receive a takedown notice from the news agency the photographer works for.
This is somehow news among other techie twits who can't be bothered to think intelligently about the law.
Somehow, the sheer idiocy of the above is not the featured story on Slashdot.
It's not like people who go around ranting about "US war criminals" needs to listen to anything anyone says, not least judges. Just repeating the claim ad nauseam works wonders.
If you read the above post carefully and aren't a fuckwit, you can see that the poster certainly was not suggesting that the US should respond with "acts of terror".
Underrated comment. I chuckled.