The project is considered a failure due to the mass number of cowardly robots forgetting to fire their weapons, instead shouting "NO DISSEMBLE!!!" Ok, this is funnier than you think it is.
Why game companies think they can pinpoint a release date when more then 65% of commercial aps that go through (apparently) little to no QA can't even hit their deadlines is amazing to me. They don't think they can. But they hope they can get close. They have to get a manufacturing slot for their game reserved 6 months in advance. They have to line up advertising in print, TV, and online months in advance. For some games "it will be done when it's done" works because it will get the press (and bought) when it's done. Most others do not have that luxury.
It's not the game company driving the dates, it's the rest of the industry pushing the game company.
I hear they also hate games that start with 'M' so that'll have to go.
Seriously, that was a remarkably silly list. Retail only? What, who said that? And wouldn't an avid gamer want the extra content/visuals in Gaiden? And Oblivion looks far better on my buddies PS3 than it does on my PC.
My method was to go to IGN and count the 8s and 9s in their review section. I did notice there were many duplicates for AU and UK and tried to skip them but honestly I wasn't very careful and I have had [hic] a beer or two.
Being more careful this time I get 16 at 8-9 and 3 at 9+. So 19, not 22. Whoops. But still, anybody who says "my PS3 collects dust because there are no good games" has their head firmly up their ass.
I want some games to play on this effing over-expensive monolithic black tablet taking up all the space on my desk - it's been sitting there turned off for about two months now! There are 22 games listed at ign.com reviewed at 8 or higher.
There are another 24 in the seven range.
May I suggest visiting a store where they sell games? They have them both online and at your local mall. I've heard games are also available at larger retailers.
unless you want to spend the next 6 months explaining to your auditors how your homegrown solution works and then the next 6 months building something new that your auditors do understand (or worse, like losing your job). I dunno, I can lose my job WAY faster than 6 months.
Thank you for tacitly confirming that you are, in fact, a registered GOP member. You are really hilarious. No idea where you got that! But you... you are either a poor Dem shill or a Gop shill trying to make the Dems look bad. Or you are completely crazy. I'm leaning towards the crazy but would take any of the three.
Anyways, this is dropping off my user page so I won't be able to see many more responses. If you want to keep attacking me (and I completely support the amusement involved in you doing so!) then go ahead.
"A" different time? More like "all time from now on"- not such a subtle distinction. A radar gun isn't logging and recording people all day, and if you look up and don't see a helicopter, it's not like one can fly over later and take a picture of what you're doing right now. These only work where there are cop cars or cameras. That certainly isn't "all places". If you don't see a cop car or camera (and yeah, I would want the cameras marked like stoplight cameras are now...) then you aren't being observed either.
You can't get a speeding ticket without a radar gun measurement backing it up. Cops can pace you instead of using radar guns. Believe me, I've gotten my share of speeding tickets and not all were radar.
Using a radar gun is just more efficient and by your argument it's got to go.
If it were a radar gun that lets me type in your name and shows me a list of everywhere you've been for the past few years and all of the occasions when your car momentarily passed over the speed limit, well then maybe you'd have a point. Well, it just provides a vantage point you can get from a different time rather than a different place. Hell, helicopters are worse because they can see in your backyard!
When dealing with the government attempting to gain knowledge about you, or even a friend gaining/spreading personal knowledge about you, it's a completely different class of knowledge. The knowledge that the quote refers is non-personal knowledge wanted for personal reasons. In the knowledge you refer to it's personal knowledge that is being sought. You have created an entirely arbitrary and inaccurate distinction. You are driving on a public road, shared with other drives doing the same, and have badged your car with an id tag for the privilege. An id tag whose purpose is to allow your vehicle's location to be tracked for the purpose of law enforcement. Keep in mind that this doesn't track who is driving, so it can't solely prove you're guilty of some crime.
I'm pretty anti-state as well and don't particularly like it. But unfortunately I don't see this as overstepping any existing boundaries.
For example, I doubt I could find a document that says you have the right to breathe freely. Yet I suspect you would argue that you do. I suppose breathing would fall under "Life". As in "Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness."
The information referred to in the quote generally refers to creative works, music, movies, source code, stuff that if it were free would theoretically be to the overall benefit of society. I see, so the quote should be: "Information that I want to be free, wants to be free." Can we get anymore hypocritical here?
Fourth. Ammendment. Ok, let's have a look-see.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Well, I don't see that looking at my car in public has anything at all to do with this. Nothing has been searched. Or even seized.
Moron. Ah. The name calling has begun. Thanks for making my argument.
that could discern all human activity in the home. In. The. Home.
We're talking about things clearly visible with the naked eye here. Entirely visible to any officer without any technological aid. Less technological aid than rendered by a flashlight or binoculars.
Nope. As long as it's one cop following one person and the person can see the cop, it doesn't matter. So cops are only allowed to follow people who can see them? Undercover officers everywhere are now out of a job.
Fascism begins when the efficiency of the Government becomes more important than the Rights of the People. Please clarify where my right not to be seen or recorded in public is laid out.
Efficiency is often used to define legal boundaries in court decisions relating to the Fourth Amendment. That doesn't make my argument "vacuous". In fact, if efficiency is the only criteria then all other arguments are vacuous.
if I'm not doing anything wrong... I've got nothing to fear, right?" That went along with the "cop can already see me walking around in public"... ie... the comment quoted above is a non-sequitur because we are already talking about something public. Basically I do not see this an argument for or against which is why it was followed by "Sorry...". I apologize that this was unclear.
Why do you believe that being "in public" means it's OK for us to be tracked, watched, and scrutinized? Because it already is ok. They are just doing it more efficiently. If they want to track, watch, and scrutinize they already can.
I'm not comfortable with that. Why are you? I'm not comfortable with it honestly. I'm also not comfortable sending every single financial transaction I make during the year into the government every April 15th, but I do that too.
And to be honest, I do have stuff to hide. But just because it makes me uncomfortable doesn't mean it's wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
(Unless the pun was intended!)
It's not the game company driving the dates, it's the rest of the industry pushing the game company.
I hear they also hate games that start with 'M' so that'll have to go.
Seriously, that was a remarkably silly list. Retail only? What, who said that? And wouldn't an avid gamer want the extra content/visuals in Gaiden? And Oblivion looks far better on my buddies PS3 than it does on my PC.
My method was to go to IGN and count the 8s and 9s in their review section. I did notice there were many duplicates for AU and UK and tried to skip them but honestly I wasn't very careful and I have had [hic] a beer or two.
Here for the 8-9 for example.
Being more careful this time I get 16 at 8-9 and 3 at 9+. So 19, not 22. Whoops. But still, anybody who says "my PS3 collects dust because there are no good games" has their head firmly up their ass.
Yeah, you might think that, but you're wrong!
Ok, you've gotta reply in another thread off my user page cause I'm seriously like two posts from the bottom here.
There are another 24 in the seven range.
May I suggest visiting a store where they sell games? They have them both online and at your local mall. I've heard games are also available at larger retailers.
Good luck in your search!
If you mean what you say you'll be buying a TV in the fall.
Anyways, this is dropping off my user page so I won't be able to see many more responses. If you want to keep attacking me (and I completely support the amusement involved in you doing so!) then go ahead.
I see what you're saying now. But the original meme doesn't specify that.
Using a radar gun is just more efficient and by your argument it's got to go. If it were a radar gun that lets me type in your name and shows me a list of everywhere you've been for the past few years and all of the occasions when your car momentarily passed over the speed limit, well then maybe you'd have a point. Well, it just provides a vantage point you can get from a different time rather than a different place. Hell, helicopters are worse because they can see in your backyard!
I'm pretty anti-state as well and don't particularly like it. But unfortunately I don't see this as overstepping any existing boundaries.
You just made yourself look pretty stupid.
And solving crime isn't beneficial to society?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Well, I don't see that looking at my car in public has anything at all to do with this. Nothing has been searched. Or even seized. Moron. Ah. The name calling has begun. Thanks for making my argument.
We're talking about things clearly visible with the naked eye here. Entirely visible to any officer without any technological aid. Less technological aid than rendered by a flashlight or binoculars.
Your example simple does not apply.
Yeah, I saw that shortly after I hit submit as well.
But I'm drunk. What's you excuse?
Fascism begins when the efficiency of the Government becomes more important than the Rights of the People. Please clarify where my right not to be seen or recorded in public is laid out.
Why do you believe that being "in public" means it's OK for us to be tracked, watched, and scrutinized? Because it already is ok. They are just doing it more efficiently. If they want to track, watch, and scrutinize they already can.
I'm not comfortable with that. Why are you? I'm not comfortable with it honestly. I'm also not comfortable sending every single financial transaction I make during the year into the government every April 15th, but I do that too.
And to be honest, I do have stuff to hide. But just because it makes me uncomfortable doesn't mean it's wrong.
And since this has always been publicly available... it is just information demanding to be released from it's bonds.
And if I'm walking on the street an officer can see me... but if I'm not doing anything wrong... I've got nothing to fear, right?
Sorry, cars = walking around in public. The information has always been there, and they could have recorded it if they liked. So it's nothing new.