If it's their fault, who says they have to live with it. With your description the next logical solution is to wipe them out.
I don't care what your previous generations do that was good or bad. You can't be expected to be murdered and raped because of something someone else did.
If you make your life an open book, with that same logic, I will point to the page that says (retardedly) that you deserve to be raped or killed.
Sadly, If you look closer at Africa, you will notice this behavior in other places where the outside influences were not like this.
Games like DAoC and Planet Side can already support hundreds (100 - 300) people at the same time with sides trying to fight each other. (Limit is no longer video cards)
Other MMOs have failed miserably and have added something called "instancing" where they even instance peaceful zones. These type of crappy games with crappy programmers will not benefit from anything.
Pure first person shooters (Battlefield, quake) tend to limit it to 64 or 32, because they want to be more precise and send more detailed packets to show what the character is doing. They also register hits differently, as there are primarily ranged attacks, instead of hand to hand (Planetside followed the MMO model here and no the FPS model, though it could be classified as an FPS no problem).
In short, I believe an MMO that already has good networking support (i.e. smart networking coders) can utilize this and gain benefit.
I too have seen them, but I try to consider the source. The media wants me to think they are unjustified, especially when they show me 5 seconds of the 5 minute video.
Luckily the courts seem to handle these fine... so when the juries are given all the evidence, they make a better decision.
scenario: Instead of a knife the homeowner gets out a gun (who cares what kind, pistol, shotgun, rifle). He goes outside and...
I stopped it right there, because at that point, the officer would have already seen the homeowner the second he opened the door and yelled POLICE repeatedly, more than one officer would have joined in, and if they had seen a gun or a weapon they would be telling him to drop it.
The decision is his, he knows the people outside are police, he is holding a gun without it being pointed at anyone.
I would say that even in your extreme circumstances, a death or even a shooting would be unlikely.
This is because a SWAT team member
A) Isn't any old Joe B) Has been on the police force for probably 5+ years C) Has been on the SWAT team for more than 2 if he's in front where a split decision will most likely be made
Numbers 3 and 4 don't even matter, they treat every person on a call like they have done that, as well they should.
"Even better, because the cops never, ever admit they're wrong, ever, the person then ends up framed for some bogus crime so the shooting seems justified."
That seems laughable, what cops are you talking about? Certainly not SWAT team members. This isn't the movies.
If the guy were to come outside with a gun, which would be the worst case scenario, he would quickly put it down when the police yelled POLICE repeatedly, as they are trained to do.
So what if it has been "pirated more than bought"... at this point every album in the world is probably "pirated more than bought".
The difference is, those bands do not make near the money off of an album sale like radiohead (and a few others). Doing it in this model has FAR less overhead (bandwidth, site creation, music creation (which, I might add in a sub-parentheses, is CHEAPER than ever before) in cost, and the profit is ALL yours!
Radiohead has already made far more money than they would have with 5x (and possibly more) as many album sales with a record company, and people are trying to give the impression that it failed? I don't even listen to Radiohead and I think that is retarded.
In addition to all of that, we are talking about them right now! Free publicity, and if you remotely like what they are doing, you can go download their music for FREE right now! THEN, IF you like it, you can give them some money for it! They are leaving the option open to you... and you don't like it?! What... do you just like to complain?!
Jobs that don't require a computer or customer information? I completely agree.
Having to pay more to comply if your business is in a related "area" will hurt a small business.
It will hurt a large business too. I previously worked for a multinational company that had 3 core IT groups, one in each region of the world.
The European group had far lower output and had more people than the other groups, even though the workload was similar (or less). They would interpret the "data protection" slightly differently than everyone else and use it as a political card when they needed to.
The amount of money wasted by the changes to an efficient design to an inefficient one to meet (their new) requirements that did not make the the actual customers data any safer was enormous. It was not about making the data "safer".
The company started to learn the same thing, and they now have less than half of the staff. Some of those guys were good, and I don't believe the changes were all political.
I'm all for having the basics down and some general common sense.
On a separate note, credit card companies do not allow you to charge / advertise / use their credit cards unless you have implemented their processes. This includes encryption, storage and other things. If you are using credit cards, you should already be doing this.
GB gets asked harder questions every day. That guys questions were wimpy, and he was pro-kerry (was?).
It's hard to tell what was said to him by the police, a simple "Calm down and he will answer the question" may have worked, and turning off the mic remotely would have helped as well.
The guy was a little "enthused" but at least he wasn't making up things.
The only good suggestion for the authors comment has been to buy it from somewhere else. That will solve his problem.
Every other suggestion has some fun downside, assuming the author wants to see it near the format he was around the time he was.
Watch for free on regular TV - it will be in lower quality, and they may not get the signal all that well, and they may not even have that channel.
Buy the DVD - this one is great, if you want to watch the episodes 6 months - 1 year after your friends tell you about it.
Watch on the website - the little window is quite small, much lower quality.
Go to a friends house! - this really works, of course, it's not quite the same. This could be said about anything like... I don't have a car! what/?!?! go to your friends house!! He has a car! yay! A PS3 is too expensive for my budget! what?!?!? go to your friends house!! he has a PS3!!
Slashdot Mirror
If it's their fault, who says they have to live with it. With your description the next logical solution is to wipe them out.
I don't care what your previous generations do that was good or bad. You can't be expected to be murdered and raped because of something someone else did.
If you make your life an open book, with that same logic, I will point to the page that says (retardedly) that you deserve to be raped or killed.
Sadly, If you look closer at Africa, you will notice this behavior in other places where the outside influences were not like this.
Games like DAoC and Planet Side can already support hundreds (100 - 300) people at the same time with sides trying to fight each other. (Limit is no longer video cards)
Other MMOs have failed miserably and have added something called "instancing" where they even instance peaceful zones. These type of crappy games with crappy programmers will not benefit from anything.
Pure first person shooters (Battlefield, quake) tend to limit it to 64 or 32, because they want to be more precise and send more detailed packets to show what the character is doing. They also register hits differently, as there are primarily ranged attacks, instead of hand to hand (Planetside followed the MMO model here and no the FPS model, though it could be classified as an FPS no problem).
In short, I believe an MMO that already has good networking support (i.e. smart networking coders) can utilize this and gain benefit.
hear my speaking if I am near them. If they do, it's on!
I too have seen them, but I try to consider the source. The media wants me to think they are unjustified, especially when they show me 5 seconds of the 5 minute video.
Luckily the courts seem to handle these fine... so when the juries are given all the evidence, they make a better decision.
scenario: Instead of a knife the homeowner gets out a gun (who cares what kind, pistol, shotgun, rifle). He goes outside and ...
I stopped it right there, because at that point, the officer would have already seen the homeowner the second he opened the door and yelled POLICE repeatedly, more than one officer would have joined in, and if they had seen a gun or a weapon they would be telling him to drop it.The decision is his, he knows the people outside are police, he is holding a gun without it being pointed at anyone.
Agreed, why does it need to be so biased if it was so wrong?
The lack of reporting made me sick.
Or, they might simply go "who did they shoot dispatch?" and find out all of the officers are fine and realize it is some sort of prank.If the bogus orders were "the people inside the house just shot a cop!" then unquestionably the trigger fingers would have been quite a bit happier.
I would keep that one out of the master plan.
I would say that even in your extreme circumstances, a death or even a shooting would be unlikely.
This is because a SWAT team member
A) Isn't any old Joe
B) Has been on the police force for probably 5+ years
C) Has been on the SWAT team for more than 2 if he's in front where a split decision will most likely be made
Numbers 3 and 4 don't even matter, they treat every person on a call like they have done that, as well they should.
"Even better, because the cops never, ever admit they're wrong, ever, the person then ends up framed for some bogus crime so the shooting seems justified."
That seems laughable, what cops are you talking about? Certainly not SWAT team members. This isn't the movies.
If the guy were to come outside with a gun, which would be the worst case scenario, he would quickly put it down when the police yelled POLICE repeatedly, as they are trained to do.
When it clearly hasn't.
So what if it has been "pirated more than bought"... at this point every album in the world is probably "pirated more than bought".
The difference is, those bands do not make near the money off of an album sale like radiohead (and a few others). Doing it in this model has FAR less overhead (bandwidth, site creation, music creation (which, I might add in a sub-parentheses, is CHEAPER than ever before) in cost, and the profit is ALL yours!
Radiohead has already made far more money than they would have with 5x (and possibly more) as many album sales with a record company, and people are trying to give the impression that it failed? I don't even listen to Radiohead and I think that is retarded.
In addition to all of that, we are talking about them right now! Free publicity, and if you remotely like what they are doing, you can go download their music for FREE right now! THEN, IF you like it, you can give them some money for it! They are leaving the option open to you... and you don't like it?! What... do you just like to complain?!
Anything that is small and has nothing to lose will have testicles.
Jobs that don't require a computer or customer information? I completely agree.
Having to pay more to comply if your business is in a related "area" will hurt a small business.
It will hurt a large business too. I previously worked for a multinational company that had 3 core IT groups, one in each region of the world.
The European group had far lower output and had more people than the other groups, even though the workload was similar (or less). They would interpret the "data protection" slightly differently than everyone else and use it as a political card when they needed to.
The amount of money wasted by the changes to an efficient design to an inefficient one to meet (their new) requirements that did not make the the actual customers data any safer was enormous. It was not about making the data "safer".
The company started to learn the same thing, and they now have less than half of the staff. Some of those guys were good, and I don't believe the changes were all political.
I'm all for having the basics down and some general common sense.
On a separate note, credit card companies do not allow you to charge / advertise / use their credit cards unless you have implemented their processes. This includes encryption, storage and other things. If you are using credit cards, you should already be doing this.
And booby traps, got em both. Should never have to use them though.
I figure I'm ok since it says US on it.
Usually you burn a CD and just put it in the drive. The appliance handles it from there.
Free Heroin!
And thus ends the fiasco.
The first communication program I wrote (Secure one to one) did just that. It's a great idea.
It just doesn't work.
GB gets asked harder questions every day. That guys questions were wimpy, and he was pro-kerry (was?).
It's hard to tell what was said to him by the police, a simple "Calm down and he will answer the question" may have worked, and turning off the mic remotely would have helped as well.
The guy was a little "enthused" but at least he wasn't making up things.
Turn to page 46, what is the first letter of the first word in the second paragraph? Bring back photocopying!
The only good suggestion for the authors comment has been to buy it from somewhere else. That will solve his problem.
Every other suggestion has some fun downside, assuming the author wants to see it near the format he was around the time he was.
Watch for free on regular TV - it will be in lower quality, and they may not get the signal all that well, and they may not even have that channel.
Buy the DVD - this one is great, if you want to watch the episodes 6 months - 1 year after your friends tell you about it.
Watch on the website - the little window is quite small, much lower quality.
Go to a friends house! - this really works, of course, it's not quite the same. This could be said about anything like... I don't have a car! what/?!?! go to your friends house!! He has a car! yay! A PS3 is too expensive for my budget! what?!?!? go to your friends house!! he has a PS3!!
If they changed the name to RealPoo, would you? or does a double negative not make a positive?
it becomes mine "Well it becomes ours." "How is that not stealing?" A great quote.
What if your bike was in my house?