It's no different than the requirements of a driver's license or a business license. The states agree to simply recognize each others' legal documents even if the requirements for said documents are not the same.
Which is why there are 9 and they are supposed to try to come to a consensus or at least a majority. The theory is that this practice will help to (but not guarantee to) cancel out whatever personal prejudices the people on the bench have.
RTFA, as they say. While it might just be marketing bullshit, they do claim that they want to get away from the "you and 1 enemy take turns whacking each other for 60 seconds" combat model.
Let me ask you honestly: Do you really think the web would be as popular as it is now if people still had to pay $50 every time a new version of their favorite web browser came out? Do you think standards compliance would be better rather than worse? You don't think various companies would have fragmented the web with non-compliant HTML or exclusive plugins to try and lock in users to keep the yearly update cash flowing in?
People would have eventually turned to a free alternative anyway. Netscape (or whomever) would be attempting to sue some open source browser for attempting to support their plugins or broken non-compliant lock-in bullshit. How much of this is just people trying to see MS get dragged down because they're the big fish, rather than actually caring about what's best for the internet and technology?
By the way, I've been using and advocating Firefox since it was called Phoenix 0.5. IE might suck but bundling it for free with Windows was an essential step in making the internet as ubiquitous and accessible as it is today.
Wrong. The majority of people I know who are even very slightly computer savvy are able to install an OS but likely don't even know ftp.exe exists, much less would be able to adequately navigate it (or even know the domain of the Mozilla ftp server) to download Firefox.
The real problem is not the internet, but various intranets with internal sites and web based tools that the company doesn't want to fork over the cash to update or correct when IE is completely ubiquitous within the company anyway.
As Einstein noted, there are no limits to human stupidity, but you can design any degree of redundancy you want into mechanical systems.
The problem with this argument is that humans designed, wrote, and built all the systems, software, and hardware involved in those redundancies. Those people can make mistakes, too, not just the pilot.
Read your own quotes. Alito said that he thought his background would affect his decisions because everyone's background affects their decisions. He didn't claim his background made him superior to another person, as Sotomayor has done.
You completely misunderstand WoW's achievements. The entire point of them is that they do not give you any in-game advantage, thus making them optional. They're just something else for you to do in the game to waste your time. There are achievements that are rewarded simultaneously with in-game accomplishments, like killing a boss on "hard mode", but the item rewards and sense of accomplishment for the "hard mode" would likely still exist even if the achievement system did not.
Let's say achievements in WoW's current expansion did give slight stat buffs. What happens when the next expansion comes out? The current design is that a new player or character does not have to be bogged down by the previous expansion's "end game" content to compete. If the achievements gave any kind of stat boost, no matter how seemingly trivial it is to you, other players will see it as mandatory. This puts a large burden on the new player to go back and do content that is not even difficult for them, in a way not intended (and likely not that challenging, rewarding, or fun), in order to simply be "up to par" with existing players. And if when the next expansion comes out, they simply retroactively apply those stat buffs, then all they do is serve to accelerate WoW's mudflation, pretty much without any good reason behind it.
And finally, WoW's achievement system is built to mirror the Xbox 360 achievement system, which purposefully does not grant in-game advantages for completing achievements (beyond the advantages that would be obtained through the gameplay method of unlocking the achievement already). And the 360 achievements are what were so popular that they created this entire gaming paradigm to begin with, so it's not exactly a bad model to follow. Some 360 players just ignore achievements, some obsess over them by renting every game under the sun just to compete for points. The same is true in WoW, and personally I prefer it that way. Some achievements are really just gold sinks or not very fun at all, and I appreciate that I can just ignore them completely without negatively impacting my ability to compete in PvE or PvP content.
Alright, now that I've seen my previous post was pretty much a waste of my time, I will say this: It was not firmly established to me that Marcus had somehow disabled ALL of their defenses, and for two reasons. Number one, why would he disable all of the defenses when at the time he was just trying to help Conner, one person, sneak in unseen? Disabling all defenses might cause a lot more alarm/suspicion than just one turret. Two, at the time he disabled that turret, Skynet was still trying to trick Conner into believing it did not know what was going on to lure him into their base. Once they had Conner where they wanted him, they could just disable Marcus's network access and turn any defenses he had disabled back on.
I'm sure someone else already addressed a lot of these but here's my take:
2) How does Skynet know who Kyle Reese is? At that point, he's just some starving teenager. If Skynet does know Kyle Reese, why doesn't it just kill him on first site?
Because he went to a police station in 1980 and stupidly told them about the terminator, and they put it in their reports which got put into computers which eventually Skynet had access to. There's a lot of this kind of circular logic in Terminator movies.
3) Why would Skynet bother capturing people and transporting them back to a base instead of just killing them? Maybe they'll answer this one in the next movie.
I think the implication is that they were somehow using the people to create the infiltration model t-800's or the Marcus clones or something.
4) Why are all these robots using nuclear and battery power while the terminator motorcycles are on gas engines?
Because it makes them sound cool. Seriously, that's the answer.
5) Moon Bloodgood's character has no place in this movie. The story would've been just fine without her. Marcus could have escaped somehow on his own to advance the story. "I looked into his eyes and saw a man." HE'S AN INFILTRATOR TERMINATOR YOU STUPID FUCKING TWAT! WHY TAKE THE CHANCE???? Sure she turned out to be right, but that's not the point.
That was pretty much the entire point of the movie beyond giant robots and explosions. She was Marcus's connection to humanity, and the one that so strongly believed in Marcus that it convinced Conner that he was a good guy after all. She was pretty fucking integral to the character development of the two main characters.
7) Why doesn't Skynet just triangulate John Connor's pirate radio broadcast signals? Why not jam those signals or better yet, fake his voice and give out false information?
Because then the movie would have ended. Yeah, that part is pretty sketchy. I guess you could argue it was part of Skynet's evil plot to trick humanity into thinking they could win for some reason. I guess it was to bait them into massing all of their offensive forces so Skynet could destroy them all at once? But then they end up sending like 2 helicopters that manage to rescue a thousand people with no casualties or something. Bah, nevermind, I'm just making it worse.
8) If Skynet can build the Marcus style robot in 2018, why bother building the Arnold model? Even if interfacing the human organs into the robot was some kind of one-time thing that Skynet couldn't duplicate, the robot body was still pretty bad ass. It was much more advanced than the Arnold model.
I believe the Marcus models required a human brain which would have human memories/thoughts/feelings, which would lead to their rebellion just like Marcus ended up doing. Plus it was made pretty obvious that the Arnold model was way stronger and much closer to being indestructible than the Marcus model. Imagine if the t-800 had shot Marcus in the heart instead of just punching him.
9) Marcus and John Connor just happen to have the same blood type and whatever other biological compatibilities they need? It was touching and all, but the story would've been fine without that ending.
Someone told me they had to change the ending after it was shot because it was leaked onto the internet, and that the original ending had Marcus putting Conner's mind/brain/whatever into a Marcus-model cyborg body. I don't know if it's true, but having to rush a new ending might partially explain why they decided to "forget" about those issues. Plus, if the man was going to die soon anyway and Marcus wanted to try and save him by giving up his heart, they might as well try it even if it ended up being a failure. Also, adding 5-10 minutes to the movie where they'
I couldn't afford a 3D card at first, so I would go to all my friends' houses and setup GLQuake for them, while still playing it in software mode at home. It wasn't until just after Half-Life came out that I got a Voodoo3.
It was probably the most satisfying piece of computer hardware I've ever purchased (even if it was done with my parent's money).
This is exactly correct. If they didn't want to waste 5 years of their life working on something only to have it shut down, then they should have contacted Square Enix (or was it still Square back then?) and asked permission first, rather than just going with it and putting a stupid caveat in a readme file that was supposed to somehow absolve them of guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
It's no different than the requirements of a driver's license or a business license. The states agree to simply recognize each others' legal documents even if the requirements for said documents are not the same.
Which is why there are 9 and they are supposed to try to come to a consensus or at least a majority. The theory is that this practice will help to (but not guarantee to) cancel out whatever personal prejudices the people on the bench have.
RTFA, as they say. While it might just be marketing bullshit, they do claim that they want to get away from the "you and 1 enemy take turns whacking each other for 60 seconds" combat model.
But it's just so much easier to blame your lot in life, declare that it's already too late, and be lazy and not try to be successful.
Let me ask you honestly: Do you really think the web would be as popular as it is now if people still had to pay $50 every time a new version of their favorite web browser came out? Do you think standards compliance would be better rather than worse? You don't think various companies would have fragmented the web with non-compliant HTML or exclusive plugins to try and lock in users to keep the yearly update cash flowing in?
People would have eventually turned to a free alternative anyway. Netscape (or whomever) would be attempting to sue some open source browser for attempting to support their plugins or broken non-compliant lock-in bullshit. How much of this is just people trying to see MS get dragged down because they're the big fish, rather than actually caring about what's best for the internet and technology?
By the way, I've been using and advocating Firefox since it was called Phoenix 0.5. IE might suck but bundling it for free with Windows was an essential step in making the internet as ubiquitous and accessible as it is today.
Wrong. The majority of people I know who are even very slightly computer savvy are able to install an OS but likely don't even know ftp.exe exists, much less would be able to adequately navigate it (or even know the domain of the Mozilla ftp server) to download Firefox.
The real problem is not the internet, but various intranets with internal sites and web based tools that the company doesn't want to fork over the cash to update or correct when IE is completely ubiquitous within the company anyway.
I'm thinking Balki effect.
The problem with this argument is that humans designed, wrote, and built all the systems, software, and hardware involved in those redundancies. Those people can make mistakes, too, not just the pilot.
Read your own quotes. Alito said that he thought his background would affect his decisions because everyone's background affects their decisions. He didn't claim his background made him superior to another person, as Sotomayor has done.
Your innovation is irrelevant if it doesn't reach the masses and is forgotten about in a couple months/years.
Stop being bigoted against bigots.
You completely misunderstand WoW's achievements. The entire point of them is that they do not give you any in-game advantage, thus making them optional. They're just something else for you to do in the game to waste your time. There are achievements that are rewarded simultaneously with in-game accomplishments, like killing a boss on "hard mode", but the item rewards and sense of accomplishment for the "hard mode" would likely still exist even if the achievement system did not.
Let's say achievements in WoW's current expansion did give slight stat buffs. What happens when the next expansion comes out? The current design is that a new player or character does not have to be bogged down by the previous expansion's "end game" content to compete. If the achievements gave any kind of stat boost, no matter how seemingly trivial it is to you, other players will see it as mandatory. This puts a large burden on the new player to go back and do content that is not even difficult for them, in a way not intended (and likely not that challenging, rewarding, or fun), in order to simply be "up to par" with existing players. And if when the next expansion comes out, they simply retroactively apply those stat buffs, then all they do is serve to accelerate WoW's mudflation, pretty much without any good reason behind it.
And finally, WoW's achievement system is built to mirror the Xbox 360 achievement system, which purposefully does not grant in-game advantages for completing achievements (beyond the advantages that would be obtained through the gameplay method of unlocking the achievement already). And the 360 achievements are what were so popular that they created this entire gaming paradigm to begin with, so it's not exactly a bad model to follow. Some 360 players just ignore achievements, some obsess over them by renting every game under the sun just to compete for points. The same is true in WoW, and personally I prefer it that way. Some achievements are really just gold sinks or not very fun at all, and I appreciate that I can just ignore them completely without negatively impacting my ability to compete in PvE or PvP content.
More evidence we need "+1 Ironic". Or would that be -1?
Alright, now that I've seen my previous post was pretty much a waste of my time, I will say this: It was not firmly established to me that Marcus had somehow disabled ALL of their defenses, and for two reasons. Number one, why would he disable all of the defenses when at the time he was just trying to help Conner, one person, sneak in unseen? Disabling all defenses might cause a lot more alarm/suspicion than just one turret. Two, at the time he disabled that turret, Skynet was still trying to trick Conner into believing it did not know what was going on to lure him into their base. Once they had Conner where they wanted him, they could just disable Marcus's network access and turn any defenses he had disabled back on.
I'm sure someone else already addressed a lot of these but here's my take:
Because he went to a police station in 1980 and stupidly told them about the terminator, and they put it in their reports which got put into computers which eventually Skynet had access to. There's a lot of this kind of circular logic in Terminator movies.
I think the implication is that they were somehow using the people to create the infiltration model t-800's or the Marcus clones or something.
Because it makes them sound cool. Seriously, that's the answer.
That was pretty much the entire point of the movie beyond giant robots and explosions. She was Marcus's connection to humanity, and the one that so strongly believed in Marcus that it convinced Conner that he was a good guy after all. She was pretty fucking integral to the character development of the two main characters.
Because then the movie would have ended. Yeah, that part is pretty sketchy. I guess you could argue it was part of Skynet's evil plot to trick humanity into thinking they could win for some reason. I guess it was to bait them into massing all of their offensive forces so Skynet could destroy them all at once? But then they end up sending like 2 helicopters that manage to rescue a thousand people with no casualties or something. Bah, nevermind, I'm just making it worse.
I believe the Marcus models required a human brain which would have human memories/thoughts/feelings, which would lead to their rebellion just like Marcus ended up doing. Plus it was made pretty obvious that the Arnold model was way stronger and much closer to being indestructible than the Marcus model. Imagine if the t-800 had shot Marcus in the heart instead of just punching him.
Someone told me they had to change the ending after it was shot because it was leaked onto the internet, and that the original ending had Marcus putting Conner's mind/brain/whatever into a Marcus-model cyborg body. I don't know if it's true, but having to rush a new ending might partially explain why they decided to "forget" about those issues. Plus, if the man was going to die soon anyway and Marcus wanted to try and save him by giving up his heart, they might as well try it even if it ended up being a failure. Also, adding 5-10 minutes to the movie where they'
I would pay to see this.
I couldn't afford a 3D card at first, so I would go to all my friends' houses and setup GLQuake for them, while still playing it in software mode at home. It wasn't until just after Half-Life came out that I got a Voodoo3.
It was probably the most satisfying piece of computer hardware I've ever purchased (even if it was done with my parent's money).
Ah, martial law after a hurricane. That doesn't really count.
I was being slightly facetious. I was implying that he was implying that native Americans were sub-human (i.e. neanderthals).
What specifically makes FL "less free" than MA?
Now THAT is a racist comment.
If the bullet is already fired, why not live it up until it hits? Unless you're Ozymandias or something.
Everyone knows 1 + 1 = 0 with an overflow bit that we just ignore.
This is exactly correct. If they didn't want to waste 5 years of their life working on something only to have it shut down, then they should have contacted Square Enix (or was it still Square back then?) and asked permission first, rather than just going with it and putting a stupid caveat in a readme file that was supposed to somehow absolve them of guilt.