Um, it's entirely possible to clock the cpu/gpu power. That and most games are not dead set on cpu clock cycles but instead vertical refresh or timers.
So it's possible that many games would run just fine provider the timers interrupted at the same interval.
But even if the games didn't, there isn't a reason they couldn't divide the clock down to "Wii 1.0" speeds.
Why is what he says gospel, and what the government says [or common sense indicates] a filthy lie?
All I'm saying is it's possible that he's lying to make his case look better. That the more likely scenario is that he was using a non-canadian passport.
Because last I checked, Americans don't deport Canadians to Syria.
Who's gonna say otherwise? Of course he'll say anything that makes his side of the story look better. He was suing us!!!
I'm sure plenty of former Syrians fly and travel to the states. So I really doubt this was some huge conspiracy.
Anyways, I stand by my point. If he wants Canada to shelter him and his family, he should be proud enough to renounce his Syrian citizenship. Otherwise he's just a fare weather citizen. Taking advantage of the Canadian people when it suits him.
I dunno. I don't think searching carry on as a huge violation. Nor really a violation anyways. I don't have to fly. I could take a train, or drive myself. I CHOOSE to take a plane. Thus for my safety and the safety of others I respect the security requirements.
You might as well argue that the NSA and other DOD agencies doing background checks on employees is an "undue privacy violation."
You have every right to free assembly [protest]. It's when it infringes on my rights [my own free association for example] that you need a "permit" to temporarily suspend [or hamper] others rights.
It's called civilized society.
Should point out that your right to free association ends as soon as you touch private property. If some corporation or government installation doesn't want people protesting or loitering or whatever, that's THEIR right.
I never said it's impossible for the states to slip on the slippery slope. My contention is that there are enough good people, and people not sensationalized by the rhetoric that it shouldn't matter. Look at how public opinion swayed against Bush when more and more people started believing what he was doing was wrong. It's not like people are clamouring to allow Bush to run indefinitely for the betterment of the Reich or something.
That you're even allowed to sit here and question the system, proves that it's unlike the SS era. In the SS era, you would have been beaten in the streets for your blatent act of sedition.
See I wouldn't get deported to Syria [or whatever] because I'm not a traitor. I fly with my Canadian passport [the only one I have]. Even if I did get citizenship in another country, I would fly under the colours of my adopted home.
If he didn't want to get treated like he was a Syrian, he shouldn't have used his Syrian papers. Really that simple.
And at the end of the day, it wasn't Canada who tortured [or deported] him. So why are we paying for it, as if paying out money will all of a sudden make him happy or functional.
You have no right to fly. You have the right to free association. so walk. Flying is not a right. Neither is driving for that matter.
You're not giving up freedoms since you didn't have it in the first place. Just like smoking isn't a right either (hence the bans on it).
And how do you EVER justify a search in your mind? I mean if we never look for weapons or dangerous goods, how are we supposed to find them? Be psychic?
No, I didn't say Syria should torture people. I said he deserved to get deported because he was a traitor (flying under different colours), and I don't deserve to pay for it, since not only was it not Canada's fault, it wasn't mine either.
Let me re-iterate something for you. Canada is *not* paying for this guy. I am. So are all tax-payers. so because some jerk was flying around using the apparently wrong ID, got deported to his motherland, tortured, and then was able to return (imagine that), I have to pay for it?
Why isn't Syria paying for it? Oh that's right, BECAUSE HE FLED SYRIA AND IS SEEKING SHELTER IN CANADA.
So not only do we have to defend immigrants, but pay for their abuses at the hands of other governments?
Where does it end? Do we pay out for refugees whom we didn't import "soon enough?"
Well I'm actually for reducing the # of people anyways, as i find planes are too cramped for todays bipedal humanoid (e.g. we're not all 5ft tall anymore).
That said, people are bringing too much shit as carry on anyways. Heaven forbid they check their clothing, I mean, mon dieu, they might be without their designer clothing for a whole flight, OH. MY. GOD.
All I bring on with me is a knapsack that holds my gameboy, papers, wallet, and occasionally a book or something. The rest is all checked since like fuck I want to lug it around an airport. It takes all of 30 seconds to rifle through my bag to see that there is no weapon in it.
I guess I'm just the smartest person in the world to figure that out...
"One side of the story"? What possible side could he have that justifies FUCKING TORTURE?
He was Syrian? How's that any different from a stowaway getting caught and sent back?
The fact that he tried to sue for 400M at first strongly suggests he just wanted to cash in on it. After all, it's not Harper who pays for it. It's me, and everyone else who pays taxes. Why should I pay more taxes so jerks who fly around with the wrong documentation have a nice retirement plan when the shit hits the fan?
Hey fuck off. I've been SSSS'ed before. I've been pat down, had my luggage torn open in front of me. I've been questioned by Customs (IIII'ed). I've been held by armed border guards at a land crossing before (while they searched by car in detail).
If you think it's only the Muslims who get searched, pulled aside, etc, you're full of shit.
The point is, even though I've been searched a half dozen times, I don't look at it as a failure of the system. For every time I've been searched I've crossed 5 or 6 times. It's the most cost effective solution, random screening. The problem is, whenever you screen a Muslim, all of a sudden it's a hate crime. You know what? Fuck you.
He failed to produce the passport. I'm 100% certain if he had a valid canadian passport and presented it to the customs officer, he would have been allowed in or sent back to Canada. What you're getting is one side of the story. The side where he did no wrong, and it's all everyone elses fault that he fucked up.
Dual citizenship basically means you're not loyal to either, nor subscribe to their customs, culture, values, or rights. you can't both be American and Canadian, at least in spirit since while similar are very different nations in terms of laws and rights.
And it's not our fault that his own government tortured him. It just isn't. Yet I as a tax payer have to pay this guy, this guy who loves Canada so much he went as far as to NOT GIVE UP his Syrian citizenship. Fuck him, fuck him in the asshole. He should have sued the Syrian government since they're the ones who wronged him. Or at the very least, the Americans since they're the ones who actually deported him.
I never said it's right, but you have to get off your soap box and allow for the possibility that the USA is not a police state. It just looks better on TV if you use hyperbole to make your point.
If you really wanna take a hard look at human rights violations why not turn your introspective eyes to what is happening in Afghanistan, Rwanda, the Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, etc.
That's not to excuse anything the states does. But torturing/questioning a detainee, as wrong as it might be (and I'd argue that more often than not it isn't) is at least better than a firing squad. We can't "not" question criminals or their associates. It isn't like they have a quota to keep up either.
Bah, this is tiring. The point is, the goal should be to improve the system, not eliminate the system. Questioning someone who is shopping around for dirty bomb components, is not exactly what I would call "a threat to freedom." Sure innocents get caught in the net, but it's what you do with them in the net that history will write about. And if you can't see that, it's because you're so dead set at screaming INJUSTICE INJUSTICE just to get attention. I'd love to see you run DHS for a year and see how well you do.
Actually, more thorough searching would have found the box cutters and what not.
And no amount of defense, security, or privacy will make you ultimately safe. I've said this in gun control threads before, but ultimately, if I wanted to kill you, I mean just plain ol dead set to accomplish the goal, there isn't anything you can really do about it. A.30 round from 300 meters as you walk out your front door is all it takes, or if I feel real personal, a knife through the jugular.
Point is, we want to keep the minimum threshold high for crimes. That's the point. make it so the casual observer cannot get away with [or carry out] crimes and you just eliminated 90% or more of the problem. If all it took to get a gun was $150 and to walk into a shop, what's to stop any idiot in a dispute from getting one? Now there are plenty of illegal guns, but for most people the waiting period and registration and all that is just enough hassle to stop them from casually picking up a gun and dispatching whomever annoys them.
Similarly, screening baggage, actually going through it with your bare hands, makes it very hard to sneak anything of consequence on board.
Slashdot Mirror
It's part of the specs I reckon, check out the HTTP specs, same deal. You can't just send \n\n for two lines.
You can challenge a law without breaking it.
And there is a difference between getting caught up in an asinine law, and going out of your way to break the law.
Tom
Um, it's entirely possible to clock the cpu/gpu power. That and most games are not dead set on cpu clock cycles but instead vertical refresh or timers.
So it's possible that many games would run just fine provider the timers interrupted at the same interval.
But even if the games didn't, there isn't a reason they couldn't divide the clock down to "Wii 1.0" speeds.
Tom
well if "don't break the law" is harshing your buzz, maybe you have another idea? Like "don't follow the law" or "don't follow certain laws?"
Tom
So you propose lawlessness?
Gotcha. Oh wait, you wants laws, but just the ones you agree with. Who the hell hired you to be mr. law smarty pants?
Why is what he says gospel, and what the government says [or common sense indicates] a filthy lie?
All I'm saying is it's possible that he's lying to make his case look better. That the more likely scenario is that he was using a non-canadian passport.
Because last I checked, Americans don't deport Canadians to Syria.
Tom
Ok, well 100 of my friends want to "peacefully assemble" in front of your door and stop you from leaving your house.
I can see now, that freedom in your world comes at a price, it's called civility.
You mean the "free speech" zones?
Well, nowhere does it say the government HAS to grant the permit to protest on public property. Sorry, them's the breaks.
If you don't like the way it was handled locally, don't vote the same asshat people in next go around. Sluh.
Yeah but I meant get a satellite feed, not through the carriers bandwidth, cuz basically that means you need a cell tower nearby
XM in cell phone? Prolly kill the batteries though ...
Would be fun though.
Who's gonna say otherwise? Of course he'll say anything that makes his side of the story look better. He was suing us!!!
I'm sure plenty of former Syrians fly and travel to the states. So I really doubt this was some huge conspiracy.
Anyways, I stand by my point. If he wants Canada to shelter him and his family, he should be proud enough to renounce his Syrian citizenship. Otherwise he's just a fare weather citizen. Taking advantage of the Canadian people when it suits him.
Tom
I dunno. I don't think searching carry on as a huge violation. Nor really a violation anyways. I don't have to fly. I could take a train, or drive myself. I CHOOSE to take a plane. Thus for my safety and the safety of others I respect the security requirements.
You might as well argue that the NSA and other DOD agencies doing background checks on employees is an "undue privacy violation."
You have every right to free assembly [protest]. It's when it infringes on my rights [my own free association for example] that you need a "permit" to temporarily suspend [or hamper] others rights.
It's called civilized society.
Should point out that your right to free association ends as soon as you touch private property. If some corporation or government installation doesn't want people protesting or loitering or whatever, that's THEIR right.
Well why would I get deported to Syria or any other nation? I don't get your line of hubris.
It's funny that the people talking about how oppressive the US government is are the same people not wanting to listen to dissenting opinions.
I never said it's impossible for the states to slip on the slippery slope. My contention is that there are enough good people, and people not sensationalized by the rhetoric that it shouldn't matter. Look at how public opinion swayed against Bush when more and more people started believing what he was doing was wrong. It's not like people are clamouring to allow Bush to run indefinitely for the betterment of the Reich or something.
That you're even allowed to sit here and question the system, proves that it's unlike the SS era. In the SS era, you would have been beaten in the streets for your blatent act of sedition.
See I wouldn't get deported to Syria [or whatever] because I'm not a traitor. I fly with my Canadian passport [the only one I have]. Even if I did get citizenship in another country, I would fly under the colours of my adopted home.
If he didn't want to get treated like he was a Syrian, he shouldn't have used his Syrian papers. Really that simple.
And at the end of the day, it wasn't Canada who tortured [or deported] him. So why are we paying for it, as if paying out money will all of a sudden make him happy or functional.
You have no right to fly. You have the right to free association. so walk. Flying is not a right. Neither is driving for that matter.
You're not giving up freedoms since you didn't have it in the first place. Just like smoking isn't a right either (hence the bans on it).
And how do you EVER justify a search in your mind? I mean if we never look for weapons or dangerous goods, how are we supposed to find them? Be psychic?
Tom
No, I didn't say Syria should torture people. I said he deserved to get deported because he was a traitor (flying under different colours), and I don't deserve to pay for it, since not only was it not Canada's fault, it wasn't mine either.
Let me re-iterate something for you. Canada is *not* paying for this guy. I am. So are all tax-payers. so because some jerk was flying around using the apparently wrong ID, got deported to his motherland, tortured, and then was able to return (imagine that), I have to pay for it?
Why isn't Syria paying for it? Oh that's right, BECAUSE HE FLED SYRIA AND IS SEEKING SHELTER IN CANADA.
So not only do we have to defend immigrants, but pay for their abuses at the hands of other governments?
Where does it end? Do we pay out for refugees whom we didn't import "soon enough?"
Well I'm actually for reducing the # of people anyways, as i find planes are too cramped for todays bipedal humanoid (e.g. we're not all 5ft tall anymore).
...
That said, people are bringing too much shit as carry on anyways. Heaven forbid they check their clothing, I mean, mon dieu, they might be without their designer clothing for a whole flight, OH. MY. GOD.
All I bring on with me is a knapsack that holds my gameboy, papers, wallet, and occasionally a book or something. The rest is all checked since like fuck I want to lug it around an airport. It takes all of 30 seconds to rifle through my bag to see that there is no weapon in it.
I guess I'm just the smartest person in the world to figure that out
"One side of the story"? What possible side could he have that justifies FUCKING TORTURE?
He was Syrian? How's that any different from a stowaway getting caught and sent back?
The fact that he tried to sue for 400M at first strongly suggests he just wanted to cash in on it. After all, it's not Harper who pays for it. It's me, and everyone else who pays taxes. Why should I pay more taxes so jerks who fly around with the wrong documentation have a nice retirement plan when the shit hits the fan?
Hey fuck off. I've been SSSS'ed before. I've been pat down, had my luggage torn open in front of me. I've been questioned by Customs (IIII'ed). I've been held by armed border guards at a land crossing before (while they searched by car in detail).
If you think it's only the Muslims who get searched, pulled aside, etc, you're full of shit.
The point is, even though I've been searched a half dozen times, I don't look at it as a failure of the system. For every time I've been searched I've crossed 5 or 6 times. It's the most cost effective solution, random screening. The problem is, whenever you screen a Muslim, all of a sudden it's a hate crime. You know what? Fuck you.
Tom
He failed to produce the passport. I'm 100% certain if he had a valid canadian passport and presented it to the customs officer, he would have been allowed in or sent back to Canada. What you're getting is one side of the story. The side where he did no wrong, and it's all everyone elses fault that he fucked up.
Dual citizenship basically means you're not loyal to either, nor subscribe to their customs, culture, values, or rights. you can't both be American and Canadian, at least in spirit since while similar are very different nations in terms of laws and rights.
And it's not our fault that his own government tortured him. It just isn't. Yet I as a tax payer have to pay this guy, this guy who loves Canada so much he went as far as to NOT GIVE UP his Syrian citizenship. Fuck him, fuck him in the asshole. He should have sued the Syrian government since they're the ones who wronged him. Or at the very least, the Americans since they're the ones who actually deported him.
Tom
I never said it's right, but you have to get off your soap box and allow for the possibility that the USA is not a police state. It just looks better on TV if you use hyperbole to make your point.
If you really wanna take a hard look at human rights violations why not turn your introspective eyes to what is happening in Afghanistan, Rwanda, the Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, etc.
That's not to excuse anything the states does. But torturing/questioning a detainee, as wrong as it might be (and I'd argue that more often than not it isn't) is at least better than a firing squad. We can't "not" question criminals or their associates. It isn't like they have a quota to keep up either.
Bah, this is tiring. The point is, the goal should be to improve the system, not eliminate the system. Questioning someone who is shopping around for dirty bomb components, is not exactly what I would call "a threat to freedom." Sure innocents get caught in the net, but it's what you do with them in the net that history will write about. And if you can't see that, it's because you're so dead set at screaming INJUSTICE INJUSTICE just to get attention. I'd love to see you run DHS for a year and see how well you do.
Tom
Actually, more thorough searching would have found the box cutters and what not.
.30 round from 300 meters as you walk out your front door is all it takes, or if I feel real personal, a knife through the jugular.
And no amount of defense, security, or privacy will make you ultimately safe. I've said this in gun control threads before, but ultimately, if I wanted to kill you, I mean just plain ol dead set to accomplish the goal, there isn't anything you can really do about it. A
Point is, we want to keep the minimum threshold high for crimes. That's the point. make it so the casual observer cannot get away with [or carry out] crimes and you just eliminated 90% or more of the problem. If all it took to get a gun was $150 and to walk into a shop, what's to stop any idiot in a dispute from getting one? Now there are plenty of illegal guns, but for most people the waiting period and registration and all that is just enough hassle to stop them from casually picking up a gun and dispatching whomever annoys them.
Similarly, screening baggage, actually going through it with your bare hands, makes it very hard to sneak anything of consequence on board.