What "difficulty?" I didn't actually try to make you feel good about your dancing around that embarrassing failed attempt at pedantry. Nor did I try to help you sell your sad copout claim of "but I guess that it is just an uncommon usage" (protip: it's not at all.) In fact the opposite could be claimed -- so I guess I wouldn't really be the best person to ask how difficult that might be.
I did, and there weren't any "very interesting titles coming from E3" other than the Wii ones. I guess you can't think of any that stand out either, or you'd mention them.
Moreover, clearly you don't even really understand how the wiimote works -- it's not gyroscopic at all, at least not the pointing part. Stop trying to compare it to that godawful Gyration product for the PC. It is nothing like the wii controller.
That, lacking an objective disinterested observer and/or a universal reference, it's impossible to be sure which of us is the lunatic. Frankly, I don't care; I'm having fun.
I'm kind of surprised I had to spell it out for someone like you who clearly thinks so highly of his own opinions. Hey, how about that -- it turns out you're boring and slow.
Wait. Because one element of a computer system can cost as much as the rest, anyone whose priorities are such that they're willing to spend that much is a lunatic? And this pompous, unfounded, non-sequitir of a claim is insightful?
Huh, well. I guess I'm a lunatic then, since I've spent $300+ on video cards several times over the last decade. What's worse is I'm perfectly happy being a lunatic and somehow, despite my lunacy, I'm able to keep a good job that provides the means to repeatedly act on my insane hardware-buying impulses. I'm so fucking crazy that I can't even realize it; I actually think that I bought what I wanted so I can play the games I love at high resolutions with maximal detail and effect (BF2.) I truly have no remorse about my lunacy -- I am, in fact, so deluded as to think a $300, $500, or even $1000 GPU can be worth the cost, and that the relative costs of video cards and the rest of my system are totally irellevant! I'm completely incapable of seeing what must be to you a glaringly obvious correlation between video card expense and sanity. Oh man I'm truly too far gone; there's no help for me!
I mean, here I am with 175 hours logged in BF2 using my >$300 video card in the year or so since it came out, and that works out to almost $2/hour for me to play what I think is an incredibly fun game, whenever I like, with 63 of my closest friends. Surely my insanity knows no bounds, and this subjective choice of mine is completely unacceptable. If I were less crazy, I would have consulted with someone like you to ascertain the best way to spend my $300 in discretionary income that I wasted on a video card. I mean, it's clear from your incredible logical deduction that you are a wise sage with an objectively-flawless set of priorities that should be emulated by all others. My mind reels in wonder when I try to speculate on what item you'd have pointed me to instead of my frivolous (and batshit insane!) decision to buy a $300 video card! Would you have suggested 75 chai lattes? 600 newspapers? 10 detailed D&D figurines? 60 issues of Time magazine? 30 pairs of grey sweatpants? 20 anime T-shirts? 15 discounted DVDs? 6 fleshlights? My mind boggles, as I am utterly incapable of guessing the nature of the light you doubtlessly could have shown me, had I only bothered to ask!
Anyone less crazy than me would instantly recognize that a video card actually does very little for a computer system and that GPUs are simple, easily-designed and manufactured items with far less complexity and R&D expense required than, say, a case, power supply, motherboard, RAM, mouse, or keyboard. It's absolutely unthinkable that a sane person would place so much emphasis on the image-generation capabilities of a computer system when everyone knows computers are for email, word processing, spreadsheets, and the occasional game of solitaire or minesweeper! How can I be so feeble-minded as to believe that any computer should ever have more video-processing power than a Voodoo2?
I hope you're sitting down (on your no-frills, unpadded, folding computer chair) because this may terrify you: I'd still think it was a bargain at twice the price! And there are many others just like me -- Boo!
While I don't know the GP AC from Adam and he could be lying about seeing such things personally (in fact, that seems likely) but I've seen Hatsumi on video too, and he delivers what the AC claims. Buy anything here with Hatsumi or Takamatsu in the title and you can see it too. Could be faked, I guess, but I don't think so -- that would be really good special effects for back then.
If you're not talking about rights then you're posting in the wrong thread. Keep clicking "parent" until you can't anymore and you'll see the inane and completelhy unsupported claim that:
[National ID would] do almost nothing but enable the governement to trample individual rights. This is a Very Bad Thing; the less data on me the government has, the happier I'll be; not because I'm a terrorist, but simply because I think that my civil rights are important.
So, you know -- try to keep up, OK? In any case, your point is still debatable and irrelevant. It's also plain old silly. "sleep ruff?" Is that a bestiality/furry thing? How the hell does your neighborhood dictate your abililty to keep an ID? You're just complaining with empty bullshit claims.
Bullshit. Whether or not we try to catch and deport them they cost citizens and legal aliens billions in fraudulent welfare payments, healthcare (which they can't afford so we all pay for with increased premiums,) education, translation services, crime, etc. Moreover, the illegals suffer because they get abused/mistreated and often don't feel comfy seeking help from authorities. Note that we don't really try to catch or deport illegals very often as it is now, and yet we still waste billions on these criminals.
Okey dokey then, better start getting rid of drivers' licenses then, since we appear to be on that "slippery slope" already, and we're doing it in an insecure, inconsistent, and commonly-forged way.
Yours is the fourth post I've seen in this thread claiming the ability to provide "ample," "a host," or "a few" of the ways that a national ID will allow the government to "trample rights."
Yours is also the fourth I've seen that failed to list even one.
Illegal immigrants cost citizens and legal aliens money because of the increased cost of law enforcement to protect and serve them, as well as detain them, determine they're illegal, call DHS, wait, realize ICE isn't coming, realize they can do nothing, then let them go.
They wouldn't cost us anything if they weren't here.
(Are you really that dumb or were you just messing with me?)
Ok, [entitlement expenses on illegal immigrants] is a problem, arguably, but how -- specifically -- will an ID card do anything to remedy them? And keep in mind that "billions" is a trivially small (and very vague) number when compared to the US GDP.
It will help identify those who should be deported instead of paid for not working.
Presumably you're inferring that the money "wasted" on these services is on illegal immigrants. No,
I'm implying that, and you're inferring it, correctly.
Clearly it would be immoral and counterproductive to withhold a), b), or d) from anyone, regardless of their immigrant status. At least, if you believe in the programs to begin with -- namely welfare.
No it would be neither. It's perfectly moral to enforce national borders and to take care of citizens with priority over illegal aliens. There's nothing counterproductive about throwing the criminals out instead of paying them to stay illegally.
I don't believe people born outside of the US are any more or less deserving of welfare than someone born here, but there's a strong argument to be made that they're more deserving, especially if you believe in the principles behind welfare.
Good for you. I diagree. Fortunately, most of American agrees with me. Citizens and legal aliens first. Sorry if that jars your commie-bone or something.
Requiring people to present an ID to be eligible to receive emergent medical services would open a very large can of worms, and it wouldn't take very many lawsuits to counter the cost savings. I won't even get into the public health ramifications of letting people with contagious conditions go untreated.
Life-saving treatment will contine to be free for anyone. Hippocrates and all that. Then kick them out once we save their lives.
As for 1.c, education benefits everyone, not merely the recipient. It's likely that the children receiving that education are legal citizens anyway, since they were probably born here. Even if the children are illegal immigrants, I find it hard to believe that the immediate cost savings would outweigh the long term effects. Ignorance benefits no one.
Your argument assumes those criminals we should educate are allowed to stay here. Kick them out and it's not a problem.
I'm not really sure where you're going with 1.d, but whether you mean protecting illegal immigrant victims, or prosecuting illegal immigrant offenders, an ID wouldn't change either of those, nor would it benefit society to create a group of unprotected residents, or to turn criminals loose across the border so that they can slip back in. Crime is its own problem, regardless of the migrant status of the criminal. IDs will not stop crime.
Kick them out.
Anticounterfeiting, as with any anti-crime technology, is just an arms race. Shifting the reponsibility to the Federal government does nothing to counter that. The Federal government doesn't have any access to some special ID-making technology that isn't available to states, but even if they did, it would not change the nature of the arms race; it would merely be an incremental change. Additionally, if there is only one system, we would lose the benefit of "trial grounds," if you will, wherein one state can experiment with a system which, if successful, can be adopted by other states. State programs are also more versatile and flexible than their Federal counterparts, and usually run with a greater measure of efficiency.
Yep, and we've won arms races before. We just upgraded our paper money so North Korea couldn't counterfeit it as easily. We can make it very hard and very expensive to make a passable fake, and we can centralize authentication. On-line multiplayer game piracy levels show that's not hard.
Because illegal immigrants are coming through the borders passing as citizens? Or because
Just consider it. A single database with an ID number for every citizen in the united states. At that point it is so, SO very easy to start associating things:
* Library Records
* Internet History
* Criminal Records
* Taxes
* Credit Card Purchases
* Driving Records
But that's not even the beginning. What happens when we start using this thing on a day-to-day convenience level?
* Swipe it at the metro
* Swipe it at the grocery store
* Wave it through the toll booths
This is kinda silly. When's the last time you showed your driver's license to your ISP? Or used it at the metro? Or in the grocery store (unless you're one of those freaks that still uses checks?) Or at a toll booth.
We don't show ID in those cases now and there's no reason to think we'll have to with a national ID (and this proposal certainly doesn't call for it, so you'll have a chance to dissent if/when that is proposed.)
You "associations" FUD loses a lot of it's oomph when you take those out of the mix.
That's irrelevant; nothing is inherently secure. Proper encryption and key management can make a secure smart card. How, exactly, do you think will it make "identity theft and creating fake IDs a lot easier?" It's currently trivial, since there's no consistent ID nation-wide. How can it get worse?
OK, since you won't bother to read it for yourself, the reasons in support of a national ID card are: (1) we waste billions of dollars on (a) welfare (b) healthcare (c) education (d) law enforcement for people who have no right to any of those services; (2) a national ID could be made more secure and harder to forge than the varied state ID's used now; and (3) it would aid immigration control and law enforcement.
Now, what were those "rights" that a national ID card would "trample," exactly?
I agree: if you are "required to provide an ID upon arbitrary request of a government official, absent any suspicion" then that would be a violation of your rights. But this isn't about that. It's about making a better (than drivers' licenses and SSNs) form of ID that would be required in specific (not arbitrary) cases. Such as when you apply for welfare, get a job, get healthcare, etc.
It's silly to say a national ID card implies that you'll have to produce and show it at arbitrary or random times. You know why we want (need) this. You're just ebing difficult and complaining about something entirely unrelated.
What kind of rights, exactly, to ID cards facilitate the "trampling of?" Do those rights include the "right" to get welfare, healthcare, and other entitlements despite being an illegal alien and/or a wanted criminal?
Yes, I have and I got a Motorola V3C. I guess you live somewhere very different from me (New England) or you haven't looked hard. The V3C is free after rebate at Verizon. Cingular too, I believe. It also plays music and video and has a 1.3MP camera and Bluetooth. Great phone. Nothing wrong with having all those features -- they don't seem to take up much space and you can save battery by disabling or not using them.
Thanks to you and the other two of you for fulfilling my prophecy:)
Slashdot Mirror
Australian is a race now?
What "difficulty?" I didn't actually try to make you feel good about your dancing around that embarrassing failed attempt at pedantry. Nor did I try to help you sell your sad copout claim of "but I guess that it is just an uncommon usage" (protip: it's not at all.) In fact the opposite could be claimed -- so I guess I wouldn't really be the best person to ask how difficult that might be.
P.S. Ironic doesn't mean what you think it does.
I did, and there weren't any "very interesting titles coming from E3" other than the Wii ones. I guess you can't think of any that stand out either, or you'd mention them.
It scans fine and is not at all uncommon; just admit you're wrong and move on.
There's nothing more pathetic than a failed pedant grasping at straws.
Such as?
Clearly you've never used a wiimote.
Moreover, clearly you don't even really understand how the wiimote works -- it's not gyroscopic at all, at least not the pointing part. Stop trying to compare it to that godawful Gyration product for the PC. It is nothing like the wii controller.
there must be a lot of interesting news for virtually every platform from E3
Well, you'd think that would be the case, but you'd be wrong. Really. It's all about the wii this year, friend.
You misspelled "troll."
That, lacking an objective disinterested observer and/or a universal reference, it's impossible to be sure which of us is the lunatic. Frankly, I don't care; I'm having fun.
I'm kind of surprised I had to spell it out for someone like you who clearly thinks so highly of his own opinions. Hey, how about that -- it turns out you're boring and slow.
Wait. Because one element of a computer system can cost as much as the rest, anyone whose priorities are such that they're willing to spend that much is a lunatic? And this pompous, unfounded, non-sequitir of a claim is insightful?
Huh, well. I guess I'm a lunatic then, since I've spent $300+ on video cards several times over the last decade. What's worse is I'm perfectly happy being a lunatic and somehow, despite my lunacy, I'm able to keep a good job that provides the means to repeatedly act on my insane hardware-buying impulses. I'm so fucking crazy that I can't even realize it; I actually think that I bought what I wanted so I can play the games I love at high resolutions with maximal detail and effect (BF2.) I truly have no remorse about my lunacy -- I am, in fact, so deluded as to think a $300, $500, or even $1000 GPU can be worth the cost, and that the relative costs of video cards and the rest of my system are totally irellevant! I'm completely incapable of seeing what must be to you a glaringly obvious correlation between video card expense and sanity. Oh man I'm truly too far gone; there's no help for me!
I mean, here I am with 175 hours logged in BF2 using my >$300 video card in the year or so since it came out, and that works out to almost $2/hour for me to play what I think is an incredibly fun game, whenever I like, with 63 of my closest friends. Surely my insanity knows no bounds, and this subjective choice of mine is completely unacceptable. If I were less crazy, I would have consulted with someone like you to ascertain the best way to spend my $300 in discretionary income that I wasted on a video card. I mean, it's clear from your incredible logical deduction that you are a wise sage with an objectively-flawless set of priorities that should be emulated by all others. My mind reels in wonder when I try to speculate on what item you'd have pointed me to instead of my frivolous (and batshit insane!) decision to buy a $300 video card! Would you have suggested 75 chai lattes? 600 newspapers? 10 detailed D&D figurines? 60 issues of Time magazine? 30 pairs of grey sweatpants? 20 anime T-shirts? 15 discounted DVDs? 6 fleshlights? My mind boggles, as I am utterly incapable of guessing the nature of the light you doubtlessly could have shown me, had I only bothered to ask!
Anyone less crazy than me would instantly recognize that a video card actually does very little for a computer system and that GPUs are simple, easily-designed and manufactured items with far less complexity and R&D expense required than, say, a case, power supply, motherboard, RAM, mouse, or keyboard. It's absolutely unthinkable that a sane person would place so much emphasis on the image-generation capabilities of a computer system when everyone knows computers are for email, word processing, spreadsheets, and the occasional game of solitaire or minesweeper! How can I be so feeble-minded as to believe that any computer should ever have more video-processing power than a Voodoo2?
I hope you're sitting down (on your no-frills, unpadded, folding computer chair) because this may terrify you: I'd still think it was a bargain at twice the price! And there are many others just like me -- Boo!
While I don't know the GP AC from Adam and he could be lying about seeing such things personally (in fact, that seems likely) but I've seen Hatsumi on video too, and he delivers what the AC claims. Buy anything here with Hatsumi or Takamatsu in the title and you can see it too. Could be faked, I guess, but I don't think so -- that would be really good special effects for back then.
If you're not talking about rights then you're posting in the wrong thread. Keep clicking "parent" until you can't anymore and you'll see the inane and completelhy unsupported claim that:
[National ID would] do almost nothing but enable the governement to trample individual rights. This is a Very Bad Thing; the less data on me the government has, the happier I'll be; not because I'm a terrorist, but simply because I think that my civil rights are important.
So, you know -- try to keep up, OK? In any case, your point is still debatable and irrelevant. It's also plain old silly. "sleep ruff?" Is that a bestiality/furry thing? How the hell does your neighborhood dictate your abililty to keep an ID? You're just complaining with empty bullshit claims.
Bullshit. Whether or not we try to catch and deport them they cost citizens and legal aliens billions in fraudulent welfare payments, healthcare (which they can't afford so we all pay for with increased premiums,) education, translation services, crime, etc. Moreover, the illegals suffer because they get abused/mistreated and often don't feel comfy seeking help from authorities. Note that we don't really try to catch or deport illegals very often as it is now, and yet we still waste billions on these criminals.
(Oh, sorry. You really are retarded.)
Okey dokey then, better start getting rid of drivers' licenses then, since we appear to be on that "slippery slope" already, and we're doing it in an insecure, inconsistent, and commonly-forged way.
Yours is the fourth post I've seen in this thread claiming the ability to provide "ample," "a host," or "a few" of the ways that a national ID will allow the government to "trample rights."
Yours is also the fourth I've seen that failed to list even one.
Illegal immigrants cost citizens and legal aliens money because of the increased cost of law enforcement to protect and serve them, as well as detain them, determine they're illegal, call DHS, wait, realize ICE isn't coming, realize they can do nothing, then let them go.
They wouldn't cost us anything if they weren't here.
(Are you really that dumb or were you just messing with me?)
Ok, [entitlement expenses on illegal immigrants] is a problem, arguably, but how -- specifically -- will an ID card do anything to remedy them? And keep in mind that "billions" is a trivially small (and very vague) number when compared to the US GDP.
It will help identify those who should be deported instead of paid for not working.
Presumably you're inferring that the money "wasted" on these services is on illegal immigrants. No,
I'm implying that, and you're inferring it, correctly.
Clearly it would be immoral and counterproductive to withhold a), b), or d) from anyone, regardless of their immigrant status. At least, if you believe in the programs to begin with -- namely welfare.
No it would be neither. It's perfectly moral to enforce national borders and to take care of citizens with priority over illegal aliens. There's nothing counterproductive about throwing the criminals out instead of paying them to stay illegally.
I don't believe people born outside of the US are any more or less deserving of welfare than someone born here, but there's a strong argument to be made that they're more deserving, especially if you believe in the principles behind welfare.
Good for you. I diagree. Fortunately, most of American agrees with me. Citizens and legal aliens first. Sorry if that jars your commie-bone or something.
Requiring people to present an ID to be eligible to receive emergent medical services would open a very large can of worms, and it wouldn't take very many lawsuits to counter the cost savings. I won't even get into the public health ramifications of letting people with contagious conditions go untreated.
Life-saving treatment will contine to be free for anyone. Hippocrates and all that. Then kick them out once we save their lives.
As for 1.c, education benefits everyone, not merely the recipient. It's likely that the children receiving that education are legal citizens anyway, since they were probably born here. Even if the children are illegal immigrants, I find it hard to believe that the immediate cost savings would outweigh the long term effects. Ignorance benefits no one.
Your argument assumes those criminals we should educate are allowed to stay here. Kick them out and it's not a problem.
I'm not really sure where you're going with 1.d, but whether you mean protecting illegal immigrant victims, or prosecuting illegal immigrant offenders, an ID wouldn't change either of those, nor would it benefit society to create a group of unprotected residents, or to turn criminals loose across the border so that they can slip back in. Crime is its own problem, regardless of the migrant status of the criminal. IDs will not stop crime.
Kick them out.
Anticounterfeiting, as with any anti-crime technology, is just an arms race. Shifting the reponsibility to the Federal government does nothing to counter that. The Federal government doesn't have any access to some special ID-making technology that isn't available to states, but even if they did, it would not change the nature of the arms race; it would merely be an incremental change. Additionally, if there is only one system, we would lose the benefit of "trial grounds," if you will, wherein one state can experiment with a system which, if successful, can be adopted by other states. State programs are also more versatile and flexible than their Federal counterparts, and usually run with a greater measure of efficiency.
Yep, and we've won arms races before. We just upgraded our paper money so North Korea couldn't counterfeit it as easily. We can make it very hard and very expensive to make a passable fake, and we can centralize authentication. On-line multiplayer game piracy levels show that's not hard.
Because illegal immigrants are coming through the borders passing as citizens? Or because
You misspelled "yes."
Just consider it. A single database with an ID number for every citizen in the united states. At that point it is so, SO very easy to start associating things:
* Library Records
* Internet History
* Criminal Records
* Taxes
* Credit Card Purchases
* Driving Records
But that's not even the beginning. What happens when we start using this thing on a day-to-day convenience level?
* Swipe it at the metro
* Swipe it at the grocery store
* Wave it through the toll booths
This is kinda silly. When's the last time you showed your driver's license to your ISP? Or used it at the metro? Or in the grocery store (unless you're one of those freaks that still uses checks?) Or at a toll booth.
We don't show ID in those cases now and there's no reason to think we'll have to with a national ID (and this proposal certainly doesn't call for it, so you'll have a chance to dissent if/when that is proposed.)
You "associations" FUD loses a lot of it's oomph when you take those out of the mix.
That's irrelevant; nothing is inherently secure. Proper encryption and key management can make a secure smart card. How, exactly, do you think will it make "identity theft and creating fake IDs a lot easier?" It's currently trivial, since there's no consistent ID nation-wide. How can it get worse?
Thanks for that; I wish some of the tinfoil-hat crowd here would calm down and read this. I do have one question:
;)
Note that in Spain you have one name and two surnames (one from each parent), making coincidences slightly more unusual.
Doesn't that make names double in length every generation? How large is your ID card, in square cm?
OK, since you won't bother to read it for yourself, the reasons in support of a national ID card are: (1) we waste billions of dollars on (a) welfare (b) healthcare (c) education (d) law enforcement for people who have no right to any of those services; (2) a national ID could be made more secure and harder to forge than the varied state ID's used now; and (3) it would aid immigration control and law enforcement.
Now, what were those "rights" that a national ID card would "trample," exactly?
I agree: if you are "required to provide an ID upon arbitrary request of a government official, absent any suspicion" then that would be a violation of your rights. But this isn't about that. It's about making a better (than drivers' licenses and SSNs) form of ID that would be required in specific (not arbitrary) cases. Such as when you apply for welfare, get a job, get healthcare, etc.
It's silly to say a national ID card implies that you'll have to produce and show it at arbitrary or random times. You know why we want (need) this. You're just ebing difficult and complaining about something entirely unrelated.
What kind of rights, exactly, to ID cards facilitate the "trampling of?" Do those rights include the "right" to get welfare, healthcare, and other entitlements despite being an illegal alien and/or a wanted criminal?
Yes, I have and I got a Motorola V3C. I guess you live somewhere very different from me (New England) or you haven't looked hard. The V3C is free after rebate at Verizon. Cingular too, I believe. It also plays music and video and has a 1.3MP camera and Bluetooth. Great phone. Nothing wrong with having all those features -- they don't seem to take up much space and you can save battery by disabling or not using them.
:)
Thanks to you and the other two of you for fulfilling my prophecy