Moreover, it released at a time when the games line-up for the PS4 and XB1 was, around a year after their launch, still very disappointing. Aside from a handful of launch-exclusives, their lineups were mostly composed of games initially developed for the PS3/360 and hastily ported across to the new hardware, or outright messy failures like Watch_Dogs. Compared to these, Shadow of Mordor was a very attractive proposition.
I played both games on my PS3. I liked Watch_Dogs, despite the lame revenge plot. It would have been nice if it had given you the ability to make some moral choices--for instance there was a "home invasion" quest where you discover a man lying unconscious/dead. It would have been nice if you could have called 9-1-1 or let his son who left a message know about it. Or if you could have taken credit for breaking up the human trafficking ring & serial killer.
On the other hand, Shadow of Mordor was a fun game, but nearly unplayable on on the PS3. You'd perform some action then suddenly get a loading screen that took a couple of minutes, followed by a 3 second in-game animation, followed by another 2 minute load screen that returned you to the action. I gave up after about 10 hours of play. I will probably purchase both again if I get a PS4, because my understanding is that the PS4 version of both are significantly better in all regards.
Cutting employees is a sure sign of a company in trouble, so why does the stock go up?
Cutting employees doesn't always mean a company is in trouble. Suppose they improved their production process so they are able to be 30% more efficient. Increases in efficiency often mean that fewer people are needed in the process.
Even with the fixation on quarterly results it doesn't make much sense to me. Are these all investors hoping that they will find another idiot to offload the stock to before it crashes?
Before Facebook, did they used to sue paper and pencil manufacturers for the same thing?
No, they don't have the fat loot FB has. If they're suing FB though, why stop there? Why not sue the ISPs for providing connections to Hamas. They couldn't use FB if they couldn't connect!
I go deer hunting for a week once a year. Out in the woods in a remote area that has virtually no signal. My boss & coworkers know that they can't call me or email me for any immediate feedback. My phone seems to be able to fetch email, update notifications, etc. at around 2 AM in the morning or so. Not entirely sure why, but the moon & stars must be in just the right alignment. It's pretty nice to be able to unplug & enjoy nature for an extended period of time.
I'm a CIS adjunct, so it changes from semester to semester for me. This summer semester, I'm teaching advanced web design, so that includes JavaScript. Fall Semester will be web programming w/databases, so it will be either PHP w/MySQL or ASP.NET w/MS SQL--haven't decided yet, though I'd prefer PHP. Spring semester is usually an intro to programming course, and is either Java or Visual Basic, depending on where I'm teaching.I also used to teach Unix Shell Scripting & DOS batch files, but those courses were discontinued.
I just remember the term becoming very popular in the 80s and so assumed it was Reagan (considering how crazy Nancy was with her anti-drug campaigns).
I'm 100% in favor of drug legalization. Yes, even cocaine, heroin & meth. However, I don't consider "Just say no" to have been a bad thing. I don't think drug use is good, but I think the effects of the war on drugs both in terms of cost to taxpayers and the loss of civil liberties is much worse.
Again, something is by definition not "revisionist" if that's how people viewed it at the time (rightly or wrongly). I'm sorry, but I can't really hold a conversation with someone who insists on using their own personal definitions of words, like the Mad Hatter.
It's how the media tried to spin it, but not what actually happened, so yes, it is trying to change the narrative and therefore revisionist. I can't really hold a conversation with someone who is intentionally obtuse.
Which is why you should give 2 weeks notice. If you give 2 weeks and they decide to let you go right then and perp-walk you to the door, then by law they must pay you for those 2 weeks (at least in my state).
Which state is that? I want to move there!
Step 1: Get job
Step 2: Put in 2 weeks notice
Step 3: Get perp-walked to the door
Step 4: Enjoy 2 week's paid vaction
Step 5: Repeat
The last several places I've worked at had a clause in the contract similar to "If you fail to appear for work for x days without notice, you will have been considered to abandon your position." So yeah, it is 'a thing.'
"sexual harassment in the workplace"... "female victims of her husband" You make it sound like Clinton was a serial rapist or something. It was consensual and completely legal. There was never any debate over that. Clinton lied about it under oath. That was the problem.
You make it sound like Clinton is blameless. Clinton lied under oath in regard to a sexual harassment case in which he was being sued. The fact that some people continuously try to make it sound like he lied under oath about something completely irrelevant is the problem.
Interesting that you'd use the word "revisionist". You see, I was a voter back when this happened. I used the exact same logic then I'm using now, and I was far from alone. Back then, there were still a lot of people that felt that a man's sexual peccadillos should be off-limits in a political discussion. It was a different age.
No, it wasn't. I was a voter back then too. I voted for Clinton in 1992--the last time I ever voted for a D or R for president. The argument I've made has been around since then and is a matter of fact; the "argument" you're making is there to confuse the issue. Yes revisionists like yourself are trying to make it sound like Bill Clinton was impeached for having a fling with an intern as opposed to committing perjury in a civil trial under oath in order to win his case.
Psychological projection seems to be the logical tool of this decade. Just look at Trump calling everyone else "the real racist". So at a guess, I'd say that's what you're doing here; desperately trying to cover your revisionist argument by calling any other argument "revisionist.", whether that makes any logical sense or not.
He lied under oath about having an affair. Something that by all rights should not have been asked of him in the first place (outside of a divorce proceeding)
Revisionist historians like to ignore the reason that Clinton was being asked about his affair with Lewinsky was because he was being sued for sexual harassment, and the questioning was appropriate to establishing a pattern of predatory sexual behavior on his part.
If you think Clinton should be charged, then at least sign the petition It will likely only result in a mealy-mouthed platitude, but at least it is one way to communicate our disapproval.
More likely it will just land you on the 2016 Enemies List.
Who the hell would moderate my comment as "Troll"? The original post seemed to be making the point that Trump is the only alternative to Hillary. I pointed out that is not the case.
The validity of your post is not of concern to partisan moderators during an election year. Particularly if you recommend not supporting the D/R duopoly.
Our only hope is that these two burn each other to the ground in the general election. They both get incinerated by a random bolt of lightning and we have an empty chair as president for the next four years.
I'm not a scientist but this pear-shaped atom probably points back to the origin point of the Big Bang. It might be possible find the precise galactic center from where everything got spewed out into the cosmos?
No, they all point toward Brexit, and that's why we can't have nice things, such as time travel!
"What is the EU?" and "What happens if we leave the EU?" The former was the second top UK question on the EU after the results were officially announced.
Seriously, shouldn't they have been asking this before they voted?
It's obvious. Brexit will be blamed for Global Warming & Mass Shootings.
I favor voting for the worst candidate as a means of speeding up the demise. The faster we get to a reboot the better. Granted with the two candidates up for POTUS this go around even that is a hard call:-(
If that's your goal, vote for Hillary Clinton. I think Trump would by and large be highly ineffective, whereas Clinton would be able to mostly implement her agenda. It is likely that the Dems will retake the senate, so she'll be able to get 2 or 3 nominees put in to the Supreme Court. That will put us on the fast track toward totalitarianism.
Slashdot Mirror
Moreover, it released at a time when the games line-up for the PS4 and XB1 was, around a year after their launch, still very disappointing. Aside from a handful of launch-exclusives, their lineups were mostly composed of games initially developed for the PS3/360 and hastily ported across to the new hardware, or outright messy failures like Watch_Dogs. Compared to these, Shadow of Mordor was a very attractive proposition.
I played both games on my PS3. I liked Watch_Dogs, despite the lame revenge plot. It would have been nice if it had given you the ability to make some moral choices--for instance there was a "home invasion" quest where you discover a man lying unconscious/dead. It would have been nice if you could have called 9-1-1 or let his son who left a message know about it. Or if you could have taken credit for breaking up the human trafficking ring & serial killer.
On the other hand, Shadow of Mordor was a fun game, but nearly unplayable on on the PS3. You'd perform some action then suddenly get a loading screen that took a couple of minutes, followed by a 3 second in-game animation, followed by another 2 minute load screen that returned you to the action. I gave up after about 10 hours of play. I will probably purchase both again if I get a PS4, because my understanding is that the PS4 version of both are significantly better in all regards.
Cutting employees is a sure sign of a company in trouble, so why does the stock go up?
Cutting employees doesn't always mean a company is in trouble. Suppose they improved their production process so they are able to be 30% more efficient. Increases in efficiency often mean that fewer people are needed in the process.
Even with the fixation on quarterly results it doesn't make much sense to me. Are these all investors hoping that they will find another idiot to offload the stock to before it crashes?
Unless they're paying dividends, then yes.
The Patriot act should be getting repealed, not expanded.
FTFY.
Before Facebook, did they used to sue paper and pencil manufacturers for the same thing?
No, they don't have the fat loot FB has. If they're suing FB though, why stop there? Why not sue the ISPs for providing connections to Hamas. They couldn't use FB if they couldn't connect!
Coincidentally, I do hunt in the U.P. on Thanksgiving Weekend! :-D
I go deer hunting for a week once a year. Out in the woods in a remote area that has virtually no signal. My boss & coworkers know that they can't call me or email me for any immediate feedback. My phone seems to be able to fetch email, update notifications, etc. at around 2 AM in the morning or so. Not entirely sure why, but the moon & stars must be in just the right alignment. It's pretty nice to be able to unplug & enjoy nature for an extended period of time.
Seems more likely to be a fad, especially when things like this happen. How many people are going to get mugged trying to catch 'em all?
I'm a CIS adjunct, so it changes from semester to semester for me. This summer semester, I'm teaching advanced web design, so that includes JavaScript. Fall Semester will be web programming w/databases, so it will be either PHP w/MySQL or ASP.NET w/MS SQL--haven't decided yet, though I'd prefer PHP. Spring semester is usually an intro to programming course, and is either Java or Visual Basic, depending on where I'm teaching.I also used to teach Unix Shell Scripting & DOS batch files, but those courses were discontinued.
Art Bell's broadcasts in Prey were one of the highlights of the game!
If the same thing happened when LBJ declared the war on poverty, I wouldn't want to hang around an unemployment office.
Well, there's a lot more poor people now than there were back then, so you can kind of say that it did.
I just remember the term becoming very popular in the 80s and so assumed it was Reagan (considering how crazy Nancy was with her anti-drug campaigns).
I'm 100% in favor of drug legalization. Yes, even cocaine, heroin & meth. However, I don't consider "Just say no" to have been a bad thing. I don't think drug use is good, but I think the effects of the war on drugs both in terms of cost to taxpayers and the loss of civil liberties is much worse.
Again, something is by definition not "revisionist" if that's how people viewed it at the time (rightly or wrongly). I'm sorry, but I can't really hold a conversation with someone who insists on using their own personal definitions of words, like the Mad Hatter.
It's how the media tried to spin it, but not what actually happened, so yes, it is trying to change the narrative and therefore revisionist. I can't really hold a conversation with someone who is intentionally obtuse.
Which is why you should give 2 weeks notice. If you give 2 weeks and they decide to let you go right then and perp-walk you to the door, then by law they must pay you for those 2 weeks (at least in my state).
Which state is that? I want to move there!
Step 1: Get job
Step 2: Put in 2 weeks notice
Step 3: Get perp-walked to the door
Step 4: Enjoy 2 week's paid vaction
Step 5: Repeat
job abandoning
you made that up. its not 'a thing'.
The last several places I've worked at had a clause in the contract similar to "If you fail to appear for work for x days without notice, you will have been considered to abandon your position." So yeah, it is 'a thing.'
"sexual harassment in the workplace"... "female victims of her husband" You make it sound like Clinton was a serial rapist or something. It was consensual and completely legal. There was never any debate over that. Clinton lied about it under oath. That was the problem.
You make it sound like Clinton is blameless. Clinton lied under oath in regard to a sexual harassment case in which he was being sued. The fact that some people continuously try to make it sound like he lied under oath about something completely irrelevant is the problem.
Interesting that you'd use the word "revisionist". You see, I was a voter back when this happened. I used the exact same logic then I'm using now, and I was far from alone. Back then, there were still a lot of people that felt that a man's sexual peccadillos should be off-limits in a political discussion. It was a different age.
No, it wasn't. I was a voter back then too. I voted for Clinton in 1992--the last time I ever voted for a D or R for president. The argument I've made has been around since then and is a matter of fact; the "argument" you're making is there to confuse the issue. Yes revisionists like yourself are trying to make it sound like Bill Clinton was impeached for having a fling with an intern as opposed to committing perjury in a civil trial under oath in order to win his case.
Psychological projection seems to be the logical tool of this decade. Just look at Trump calling everyone else "the real racist". So at a guess, I'd say that's what you're doing here; desperately trying to cover your revisionist argument by calling any other argument "revisionist.", whether that makes any logical sense or not.
Honestly, I see absolutely NOTHING "drool-worthy" in the desktop environments that Linux users suffer with.
That's why I use the command line.
So you're posting with Lynx? How does moderation/meta-moderation work with that, I wonder?
He lied under oath about having an affair. Something that by all rights should not have been asked of him in the first place (outside of a divorce proceeding)
Revisionist historians like to ignore the reason that Clinton was being asked about his affair with Lewinsky was because he was being sued for sexual harassment, and the questioning was appropriate to establishing a pattern of predatory sexual behavior on his part.
If you think Clinton should be charged, then at least sign the petition
It will likely only result in a mealy-mouthed platitude, but at least it is one way to communicate our disapproval.
More likely it will just land you on the 2016 Enemies List.
Who the hell would moderate my comment as "Troll"? The original post seemed to be making the point that Trump is the only alternative to Hillary. I pointed out that is not the case.
The validity of your post is not of concern to partisan moderators during an election year. Particularly if you recommend not supporting the D/R duopoly.
Our only hope is that these two burn each other to the ground in the general election. They both get incinerated by a random bolt of lightning and we have an empty chair as president for the next four years.
Random bolt of lighting would get my vote!
I'm not a scientist but this pear-shaped atom probably points back to the origin point of the Big Bang. It might be possible find the precise galactic center from where everything got spewed out into the cosmos?
No, they all point toward Brexit, and that's why we can't have nice things, such as time travel!
From TFA:
"What is the EU?" and "What happens if we leave the EU?" The former was the second top UK question on the EU after the results were officially announced.
Seriously, shouldn't they have been asking this before they voted?
It's obvious. Brexit will be blamed for Global Warming & Mass Shootings.
Satire of an identifiable person or organization (real entity rule)
Unless that person is Donald Trump, apparently.
I favor voting for the worst candidate as a means of speeding up the demise. The faster we get to a reboot the better. Granted with the two candidates up for POTUS this go around even that is a hard call :-(
If that's your goal, vote for Hillary Clinton. I think Trump would by and large be highly ineffective, whereas Clinton would be able to mostly implement her agenda. It is likely that the Dems will retake the senate, so she'll be able to get 2 or 3 nominees put in to the Supreme Court. That will put us on the fast track toward totalitarianism.