What does agency mean here? My assumption is it refers only to parts of government - possibly specifically only the federal government - and is not applicable to private corporations.
Who owns the private corporations that make these voting machines?
A friend of mine sent me a link to a very scary article. (I have no more verified the information in this article than I have that of the NYTimes.)
I find the idea that those running for public offices have or have had even partial ownership of the corporations producing these voting machines to be pretty frightening. There are many close elections in various states during every round of elections. All it would take to hijack a number of elections is code sending every 10th vote cast for your candidate to go to the candidate of the opposing party. With no paper trail, or public means of verification (and by public I don't mean the "independent" paid consultants this corporations hires to tell you it's safe) how do you know where your vote is going?
It's true that I'm picking on this film & basing my initial reaction to this film on very little information. It's kind of like how people have hunches, without having all the facts. It ain't scientific, but so what?
It's also true that you're doing the exact same thing when you call me an idiot after reading a single post of mine. I find that amusing.
OK, the Mary Poppins crack is maybe a bit out of line, but look at the jump she does early in the trailer. It looks like she's skipping through the puddles. That straight legged landing looks like it was produced by the Mary Poppins Flight Simulator(tm).
I like Kate Beckinsale as much as the next guy (probably more actually), but I don't see her as an action star. Maybe they should've gotten the Jurassic park graphics team to model her for the action sequences.
And to all those that say in response to critical posts, "Lighten Up. It's just a movie. Noone made you watch the trailer.", I say, "Lighten up. It's just a critical post. Noone made you read someone else's critical post."
Thank you to all the critical posters out there. I'll probably end up seeing this film despite my misgivings, but having it ripped beforehand keeps my expectations low, which increases the chances that I'll actually enjoy it when I see it.
"The hills are alive with the sound of Rasputina..."
His inventory list includes a T34, M26 Pershing, T72, Chieftain - that's an impressive list. And the one I really can't believe: an "IS-3M" - that's gotta be a Joseph Stalin 3, no? Those things were monsters.
"I don't consider being able to drive full tilt at a wall and bounce off to be a hallmark of realism." -Rob Simpson
Point taken, both of you. GT3 would be more realistic if the cars could break/crash. And possibly more fun.
However, they had to draw the line somewhere (What do you want, a sim that throws you through a plate glass window when you crash?).
Most people probably want to focus on driving not crashing. And ultimately the game does penalize you when you bump or scrape by lowering your speed, which equates to lost time which causes you to lose races. You'd never get a license for the higher end races slamming into walls.
Now on the turning complaint gl4ss made, I haven't played it with a steering column type control thing, so maybe I only have the primitive screwhead's perspective on that.
Still, for a known commercial game it delivers much more realism than most of the driving games out there.
OK, so as far as I know it's only available on the PS2, but Gran Turismo 3 is so realistic it hurts.
In GT3 you have to get different levels of licenses to drive in the different classes of races and even getting the early licenses is challenging. You make $$ from winning races (highly ghetto races to start with) and as you get enough you buy better cars and mod them. There are so many mods; I have no clue what most of them are, but the game handily gives you before & after horsepower figures (for the power related mods) in your current vehicle.
And the racing is awesome. Great graphics, great sense of speed, but most importantly every little thing you do with the controls has an impact. Some cars handle it better when you take a short cut through dirt and grass on the side of the road than others. The rear wheel drives are soo hard not to spin out. Each car is different in it's feel and road handling, etc.
Anyway, are there problems with the game industry? Yes, of course. However, it's preposterous to suggest that there are no good games out there.
And if you think there are no good driving sims, you must be playing the wrong ones. Unless you're looking for a good non-racing driving sim ("Supermarket & Back: Station Wagon III"). If that's the case I can't help you.
"I'd MUCH rather play 3 excellent 10-hour games instead of one 30-hour one."
There's no question that quality should come before quantity, but we also shouldn't be giving game developers the message that no game should be more than 10 hours.
What do you think - if they make the games shorter they'll charge us less? If you don't have time to play a 40 hour game this month, then play half of it now and half of it next month.
This reminds me of the diet craze, due to which in certain stores you now pay almost twice as much for half the calories. If you don't need that much, don't eat as often. Don't get the industry to charge all of us more for less product.
Slashdot Mirror
(a) Each agency shall make available...
What does agency mean here? My assumption is it refers only to parts of government - possibly specifically only the federal government - and is not applicable to private corporations.
Who owns the private corporations that make these voting machines?
A friend of mine sent me a link to a very scary article. (I have no more verified the information in this article than I have that of the NYTimes.)
I find the idea that those running for public offices have or have had even partial ownership of the corporations producing these voting machines to be pretty frightening. There are many close elections in various states during every round of elections. All it would take to hijack a number of elections is code sending every 10th vote cast for your candidate to go to the candidate of the opposing party. With no paper trail, or public means of verification (and by public I don't mean the "independent" paid consultants this corporations hires to tell you it's safe) how do you know where your vote is going?
Why aren't these voting machines open source?
It's true that I'm picking on this film & basing my initial reaction to this film on very little information. It's kind of like how people have hunches, without having all the facts. It ain't scientific, but so what?
It's also true that you're doing the exact same thing when you call me an idiot after reading a single post of mine. I find that amusing.
OK, the Mary Poppins crack is maybe a bit out of line, but look at the jump she does early in the trailer. It looks like she's skipping through the puddles. That straight legged landing looks like it was produced by the Mary Poppins Flight Simulator(tm).
I like Kate Beckinsale as much as the next guy (probably more actually), but I don't see her as an action star. Maybe they should've gotten the Jurassic park graphics team to model her for the action sequences.
And to all those that say in response to critical posts, "Lighten Up. It's just a movie. Noone made you watch the trailer.", I say, "Lighten up. It's just a critical post. Noone made you read someone else's critical post."
Thank you to all the critical posters out there. I'll probably end up seeing this film despite my misgivings, but having it ripped beforehand keeps my expectations low, which increases the chances that I'll actually enjoy it when I see it.
"The hills are alive with the sound of Rasputina..."
Is this for real?
His inventory list includes a T34, M26 Pershing, T72, Chieftain - that's an impressive list. And the one I really can't believe: an "IS-3M" - that's gotta be a Joseph Stalin 3, no? Those things were monsters.
I wonder if this guys gives tours...
"cars don't break in gt3.." -gl4ss
"I don't consider being able to drive full tilt at a wall and bounce off to be a hallmark of realism." -Rob Simpson
Point taken, both of you. GT3 would be more realistic if the cars could break/crash. And possibly more fun.
However, they had to draw the line somewhere (What do you want, a sim that throws you through a plate glass window when you crash?).
Most people probably want to focus on driving not crashing. And ultimately the game does penalize you when you bump or scrape by lowering your speed, which equates to lost time which causes you to lose races. You'd never get a license for the higher end races slamming into walls.
Now on the turning complaint gl4ss made, I haven't played it with a steering column type control thing, so maybe I only have the primitive screwhead's perspective on that.
Still, for a known commercial game it delivers much more realism than most of the driving games out there.
OK, so as far as I know it's only available on the PS2, but Gran Turismo 3 is so realistic it hurts.
In GT3 you have to get different levels of licenses to drive in the different classes of races and even getting the early licenses is challenging. You make $$ from winning races (highly ghetto races to start with) and as you get enough you buy better cars and mod them. There are so many mods; I have no clue what most of them are, but the game handily gives you before & after horsepower figures (for the power related mods) in your current vehicle.
And the racing is awesome. Great graphics, great sense of speed, but most importantly every little thing you do with the controls has an impact. Some cars handle it better when you take a short cut through dirt and grass on the side of the road than others. The rear wheel drives are soo hard not to spin out. Each car is different in it's feel and road handling, etc.
Anyway, are there problems with the game industry? Yes, of course. However, it's preposterous to suggest that there are no good games out there.
And if you think there are no good driving sims, you must be playing the wrong ones. Unless you're looking for a good non-racing driving sim ("Supermarket & Back: Station Wagon III"). If that's the case I can't help you.
"I'd MUCH rather play 3 excellent 10-hour games instead of one 30-hour one."
There's no question that quality should come before quantity, but we also shouldn't be giving game developers the message that no game should be more than 10 hours.
What do you think - if they make the games shorter they'll charge us less? If you don't have time to play a 40 hour game this month, then play half of it now and half of it next month.
This reminds me of the diet craze, due to which in certain stores you now pay almost twice as much for half the calories. If you don't need that much, don't eat as often. Don't get the industry to charge all of us more for less product.