Actually, I wasn't being the least bit hypocritical. In the instance you cite, I had posted an opinion of mine and some jackass had responded with a comment that, while attempting to discuss the matter, also contained a rather rude tone to it. To this I informed him that I didn't have the time or inclination to get wrapped up in anything but a civil discussion of the issue. Now, today I posted my opinion (see original parent) without any hint of hostility towards anyone. This jackass replied with a comment which showed that he had not read my comment for intent and meaning but instead wanted to only refute something which was posted. These types of people are useless and only post on Slashdot to fuel their own egos. They want to make people look bad by nit picking and/or ignoring a poster's actual post. So, I responded with hostility. You call this hypocrisy because you are an untrained idiot that doesn't understand how to read in context.
The quote you cite was a call to settle down to someone who was being hostile towards me without cause. I was being hostile (see above) in response to hostility directed towards me. You cannot possibly understand any of this because you are dim-witted and, in all likelihood, have a small penis.
In your post you made a few mistakes. I will point them out now. I don't believe Ritalin is prescribed to cure hypocrisy. Furthermore, if you're claiming that my hostility stemmed from some temporary imbalance, you are mistaken and you should have known this. The parent to which you responded to cites my posting history which you obviously consulted. Clearly you must know that I do not normally post ego-stroking comments for jackasses. Now, your Ritalin crack probably would have been better phrased as a reference to Prozac - that way you can say my rather angry post was a result of lack of medication. But this doesn't make sense either because my past posts do not show any signs of some type of drug-induced happiness. You may wish to consult this article for some information about Ritalin that you should consider before any future posts concerning it. Your implication that I am fat was well-worded, except for a missing "a", but due to the Ritalin issue in the same sentence it lost some of its flavor. Your work needs improvement. You've got potential but you need to apply it.
For instance, this post suffers from another grammatical issue. You may think that these types of issue do not matter in an online forum and, for the most part, you are correct. But when you are attempting to lob insults at others, leaving a dangling preposition will merely serve to open you up to insults. I do think the phrase "we be some funny shit" is amusing BUT it is not working in the context you placed it in. Here is your homework for this evening: You must post five comments which pose as serious responses but have a very small reference to Jews controlling the strings of the puppet we call America. Don't be over-the-top about it because then you'll come off as a whack-job. Be subtle. And while I normally don't encourage the racist schtick, I think it might be a good start for you. I hope this helps!
Why is it sad that you are interested in Microsoft's forthcoming product? Bill Gates gives lots of money to charity and has plans to dissolve most of his wealth this way before he departs. Furthermore, MS comes up with a great idea and you can bet there will be plenty of copycats. Look at all these companies who ripped off 'talk' and 'write'.
No, I haven't. I've got better things to do with my life. And you obviously didn't read the full text of my fucking comment, did you? Before you go and get snide in your reply - check out the full text of what I said. I noted that such behavior is not beyond the realm of possibility but I hoped that it remained on the fringe. I am speaking for well-adjusted people who play games for fun, not profit. Got it dickhead?
But why would someone buy such a thing from you? The point of a game (even an online one) is to have fun and relax. At least, that's the way I treat games and that's the way I think people should treat them. So if there exists a person, let's name him Richard, - well if Richard wants to pay five-hundred dollars for an item in a game, then Richard is living a very sad life. The items within the game are only of interest to players in the game so rather than play the game and pursue the item he wants, Richard just buys it. What's the point? It's like people who use cheat codes whenever they play a game - what's the point?
People are very confusing animals and I suppose the transaction you describe could occur but, hopefully, it will always remain on the fringe of normal society.
Re:I don't see this lasting, at least not with RTC
on
Deathmatch for Dollars?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't think the fact that the servers are being hosted there should raise many suspicions - it's a form of gambling. Where do you want them to have the servers? Certainly they can't place the servers within the U.S., even where gambling is allowed, because the laws currently in place regulating Internet gambling are rather vague and would really just serve as an unneccescary risk to the company. Honestly, this is a form of "illegal internet gambling" as you put it, as there are laws against this type of gambling. What suspicions should be raised by the location of the servers? I knew before I found out where the servers were that this was about gambling. And I don't see money laundering, drug traffiking, and organized crime being too involved at this stage of the game. Besides, who needs real drugs when you can get your gambling fix?
I would assume that there will be a mod to Wolfenstein to allow for a free for all mode. Obviously they're not using the team mode, as is evidenced by how they describe the model - so why bring it up?
Again, there's not going to be teamplay. Don't get so hung up on the free for all mode - it's not the issue here. The issue is that computer games, which are supposed to be an enjoyable pursuit, are being taken to a level that I don't think people should take them to. I enjoy playing games for fun. This has the potential to cripple an entire generation of gamers - making them even more socially inept than current shut-ins already are. Gambling is bad, mmmk?
"This is the same diff as MS giving computers to libraries all over the world."
Sorry, it's not. A Computer Scientist worth any salt can adapt to new technologies and new paradigms as they are introduced. You are arguing that because perhaps they'll use some type of automated code checking developed by Microsoft in these courses (which is not guaranteed, it may be more about software engineering and how the development process can lead to secure code) then the students will be locked into this software. During my undergraduate and graduate days in the field of Computer Science, new technologies, programs, languages, ideas, etc. sprang up all the time. A good student is expected to be able tp pick these things up overnight - it's part of the territory. I think people that only know how to work within a UNIX environment are just as crippled as those who only know how to work within an MS environment.
Now, the difference between an MS course for CS people and MS donating computers to libraries is that CS people make their living working with computers - the theory is of interest to us, the individual tools are just a means to an end that can be replaced with a different tool if that one is better. Whereas, average library user X just wants to get a simple task done and doesn't want to waste any time learning how to open up a webpage within OS X. There's a huge difference between stuffing MS into libraries for public consumption and MS leading a course on secure software development.
Replying to your own posts is tantamount to entering a rest stop bathroom on the highway, sucking fifteen dicks, looking up to see your father is next in line (with a slightly shocked look in his face but hard dick, nevertheless, in hand) and going to town on him with increased vigor. You have obvious experience with both.
I believe the article was attempting to highlight what types of games aren't leading sales charts these days. Citing the fact that people still play old games does nothing to refute this argument. Certainly, fighters are popular in a ranking of what old arcade games are being played. Do you know the reasons for this? Well, it's because the games that dominated that era were FIGHTING GAMES. This isn't anything extraordinary - there are a lot of good fighting games that can be played on an emulator for old arcade games. How many games like The Sims show up on that list? None - and why? Does it mean no one plays games like the Sims? No, it's because games like the Sims didn't appear in arcades from yesteryear.
Obviously you didn't understand what I was saying. I wasn't saying they were unknowns that had walked in off the street. The point I was making was that the actors used weren't part of the Hollywood elite who can open a July 4th movie and command top dollar. The kid that asked the question was asking it like the other actors would cause a major stir - which I doubt. But you wanted to post some links and ignore what I actually said, so go right ahead - if that's what you need to do with your life.
Yeah, these kiddies weren't exactly hard-hitting were they? I have a quarrel with Oliver, 14 who asked, "Did you feel intimidated working with such a high profile cast?" Pardon me, but the cast of LOTR was high profile? I didn't think they had any real big names in there. Sure, Ian McKellen was quite well respected but that's different than high profile. He certainly doesn't draw the kind of attention that $CURRENT_HOLLYWOOD_STAR does or the attention that $FORMER_HOLLYWOOD_STAR and Sylvester Stallone did. Or is Oliver referring to the behavior of the cast while out and about in public? Ah, the mind of a 14 year old...a very strange place to be indeed.
It seems like the patent pursuit is stemming from failed or failing companies or tiny companies looking to blow up overnight but this article points out that HP is getting into the business. Hmm, has HP's stock tanked?
"I've bought almost every Gameboy released in the U.S. since its inception:"
Good thing you modified that statement with the 'almost.' Because I've got a Gameboy and I know a few of my friends who bought one so obviously you haven't bought ALL the Gameboys released.
If Stallman wants to speak, he shouldn't be allowed to. I have always found him to be such an unappetizing human being with his holier than thou attitude that even when I agree with what he is trying to say, I am annoyed. Imagine what people who don't even understand the issue think when they're confronted with him. His radicalism hurts the cause because he tries to make everything into some sort of quasi-religious debate. That is the wrong approach as it won't stand up against the argument from the other side of the aisle - namely an argument based on faulty logic, faulty studies, and further incorrect data. The arguments need to be made using someone with an ability to speak rationally and discuss something in a civil manner. Stallman can do neither of these.
The "MS Tax" is the additional charge a consumer is forced to pay for an MS operating system when purchasing a new computer. It is called a tax because there is no way around it. If you don't want Windows on your computer and have no plan of using it, you are still forced to pay for it if you buy from Compaq or Gateway or whatever (whatever companies are still being forced into doing this for better bulk deals.) Now, since Neverwinter Nights has been released only for a Windows environment, if you want to play it - you have to have Windows but this is not through some cohersion by Microsoft (as far as I know) and it is merely a matter of economics. There is no reason that you have to play Neverwinter Nights and it is your choice to install an OS that will run Neverwinter Nights.
You're mad at Microsoft because Neverwinter Nights has only been released on a Microsoft OS? Does that make sense in your head?
Alright, I'll bite. Often times the courts are used as a means to reforming a company. In this case, the 2.6 million was due to the fact that McDonalds was negligent and had prior knowledge that their business practice was unsafe. In this case, if McDonalds is hit for a fine of some trivial amount then they will simply pay it and continue operations as usual.
Also note that I was not attempting to justify the amount of money paid (I'm not going to get into a discussion about pain and suffering claims with "people" on Slashdot - especially people who post AC). I was pointing out that while the parent was trying to pass the lawsuit off as frivilous and unwarranted, there was more to the case than was in the headlines. My actual post has very little to do with the damages but rather the reasons that the lawsuit was brought to trial and was not dismissed as being a waste of the courts time. You missed that because you got so wrapped up in trying to refute me.
It appears that we can't trust society with information. I'm tired of everyone citing the infamous hot coffee case as the shining example of a frivolous lawsuit.
In the case that you're "citing" (I use quotes because you obviously don't know any of the facts.) the coffee was served at 180 F. This is quite a bit hotter than one expects to receive coffee at. For a fun experiment, try brewing some coffee and taking the temperature of it. Your experiment won't yield coffee at this temperature. Second of all, the McDonalds outlet had received over 700 complaints about their coffee being too hot. Other McDonalds have not and do not receive this many complaints about their coffee. It was partially because of these complaints that McDonalds was found negligent - they had plenty of information that the coffee was too hot but chose to ignore it because it was considered better for business to keep the coffee hot at all times so fewer fresh pots would have to be made. Furthermore, the woman in question (79 years old when the incident occured - your typical "victim" looking to get rich quick, right? Oh wait, she'd never filed a lawsuit before in her life.) received third degree burns on her groin, thighs, and buttocks. These burns required skin grafts and an extended stay in the hospital. The woman racked up medicals bill as a result of this. The award was also reduced from the original 2.6 million dollar settlement to 480,000 dollars.
Understanding law isn't quite as easy as just reading some headlines Mohammed.
"Isn't it true to say that ALL OSes are equally as vulnerable?"
Not exactly. There are many factors which influence how vulnerable a given OS is. [Ignoring the fact that the bug is a bug within IIS, not an OS.] Installed user base plays a big role in how vulnerable a piece of software is. For instance, when was the last time you heard about a BeOS or MS-DOS 4.0 exploit? This is because people need to be actively using the systems in order to have them exploited. Another factor that plays a role is the development process in place at the company who develops the software. Code reviews can and do help to avoid bugs. Software has bugs - the goal is to reduce them. For instance, a CMM level 5 company is much better prepared to write bug-free software than a CMM level 2 company. These factors make the equality you suggest false.
Hmm, yeah - I think we're watching different channels. I pretty much stick to ESPN, Fox News and TechTV although I occassionally watch some junk on the networks if I feel like sitting on the couch and farting a lot.
On a related-video games on TV-note, I do watch Extended Play on TechTV (which, in case you've not seen, is a show that has video game reviews) and I really enjoy that. The host is a bit of a clown but I get around that by pretending he doesn't exist. But do you think a show like that would make it on a network? I don't really know. I think the networks don't believe it would get any ratings. But, Siskel and Ebert (minus the dead one, plus the replacement) have a show that's on a network and I guess that must get ratings. So, why couldn't a video game show succeed? Oh well, I'm happy with TechTV.
Ha, that line about Siskel and Ebert was pretty fun. I crack myself up.
Well measuring pop culture is a really hard problem (we're talking NP here) and I don't think there are any "good" ways of doing it. We can discuss what seems to be popular based on indicators but without having some way of observing all people at all times - it's hard to really know what is popular and what isn't. Economically, video games are obviously a huge part of pop culture because they are a very large industry. But I think that if you asked the average scumbag on the street which was a bigger part of pop culture, movies or video games (again, I don't really know how you go about measuring such a thing), he would say movies. I believe that there's a perception that video games are small market while movies, television, music, etc. are big market. Of course, this perception may have to do with the fact that people become famous from being in a movie or on television or releasing music - but who wants to look at the people from Id?
I think that this perception is what the article summary was talking about. Video games are a part of pop culture but people think they play a much smaller role than they do.
Interesting analogy with the butler there; very true. No one wants to solder anymore! - those wimps
Mario Brothers Was Crap
on
Lucky Wander Boy
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think that video games have penetrated (ha ha, I said "penetrated) popular culture to an extent BUT the inroads haven't led to the assault and basic water-logged state of music and movies. Yes, video games make more money than movies but when you're watching television how often do you see commercials for video games? I hardly ever see them. I mean, the only commercials I really remember seeing lately are the ones for GTA and a few for some sports games. Compare this to how often you see commercials for movies - all the goddamned time - and you'll begin to see my main point, which I will get to after a dramatic interlude.
Dramatic Interlude
It seems that video games occupy a certain space of popular culture and that it is only slowly expanding beyond that. The geek influences are still in place even though they're mass market items. When I am interested in a new video game or a new system, I don't check the mainstream news outlets, I go to a video game website or read a video game magazine. Comparing this to when I want to read a review of a new movie - just open the newspaper or just watch the trailer on TV and judge it from that. Video games have clearly broken out of the niche of being a toy for kids BUT the marketing of them seems to be stuck in a limited circle. Of course, maybe this is a good thing - perhaps it's the fact that people are interested enough in video games to seek out information about them, without huge marketing budgets pushing them down our throats, that shows just why the video game industry pulls in so much more money.
Oh also, the Mario Brothers movie was crap. I think that stunning pile of dog feces shows that a lot of people outside of the video game industry just don't get it - they don't have the ability to translate because their heads are stuck in Hollywood mode. All they did for that wretched mistake was take the basic characters from the game (two Italians, one wearing red, the other wearing green) and throw them into a run of the mill crap movie. There was no real use of the dynamics of the games. Video games are different.:D
Let's pretend Microsoft always tells the truth. Therefore, we can easily see that the solution to this problem is that the FBI and any other Nazi outbacks should stop their investigations into any online file traders. Online file trading, be it for music, movies, or software, on P2P networks is not a monetary transaction. When you prevent people from getting the goods for free [couple this with the fact that buying legitimate goods is vastly overpriced: 20 bucks for a fucking cd? Suck MY dick!] they will then turn to the next best thing - cheap copies from the Far East. So, by going after warez groups online, who aren't making profits and are merely trying to pirate overpriced crap, the FBI is funding terrorism. It is because they are driving the warez groups out of town that the Asian market is opening up and funneling money to terrorism.
Slashdot Mirror
The quote you cite was a call to settle down to someone who was being hostile towards me without cause. I was being hostile (see above) in response to hostility directed towards me. You cannot possibly understand any of this because you are dim-witted and, in all likelihood, have a small penis.
In your post you made a few mistakes. I will point them out now. I don't believe Ritalin is prescribed to cure hypocrisy. Furthermore, if you're claiming that my hostility stemmed from some temporary imbalance, you are mistaken and you should have known this. The parent to which you responded to cites my posting history which you obviously consulted. Clearly you must know that I do not normally post ego-stroking comments for jackasses. Now, your Ritalin crack probably would have been better phrased as a reference to Prozac - that way you can say my rather angry post was a result of lack of medication. But this doesn't make sense either because my past posts do not show any signs of some type of drug-induced happiness. You may wish to consult this article for some information about Ritalin that you should consider before any future posts concerning it. Your implication that I am fat was well-worded, except for a missing "a", but due to the Ritalin issue in the same sentence it lost some of its flavor. Your work needs improvement. You've got potential but you need to apply it.
For instance, this post suffers from another grammatical issue. You may think that these types of issue do not matter in an online forum and, for the most part, you are correct. But when you are attempting to lob insults at others, leaving a dangling preposition will merely serve to open you up to insults. I do think the phrase "we be some funny shit" is amusing BUT it is not working in the context you placed it in. Here is your homework for this evening: You must post five comments which pose as serious responses but have a very small reference to Jews controlling the strings of the puppet we call America. Don't be over-the-top about it because then you'll come off as a whack-job. Be subtle. And while I normally don't encourage the racist schtick, I think it might be a good start for you. I hope this helps!
Why is it sad that you are interested in Microsoft's forthcoming product? Bill Gates gives lots of money to charity and has plans to dissolve most of his wealth this way before he departs. Furthermore, MS comes up with a great idea and you can bet there will be plenty of copycats. Look at all these companies who ripped off 'talk' and 'write'.
No, I haven't. I've got better things to do with my life. And you obviously didn't read the full text of my fucking comment, did you? Before you go and get snide in your reply - check out the full text of what I said. I noted that such behavior is not beyond the realm of possibility but I hoped that it remained on the fringe. I am speaking for well-adjusted people who play games for fun, not profit. Got it dickhead?
People are very confusing animals and I suppose the transaction you describe could occur but, hopefully, it will always remain on the fringe of normal society.
I would assume that there will be a mod to Wolfenstein to allow for a free for all mode. Obviously they're not using the team mode, as is evidenced by how they describe the model - so why bring it up?
Again, there's not going to be teamplay. Don't get so hung up on the free for all mode - it's not the issue here. The issue is that computer games, which are supposed to be an enjoyable pursuit, are being taken to a level that I don't think people should take them to. I enjoy playing games for fun. This has the potential to cripple an entire generation of gamers - making them even more socially inept than current shut-ins already are. Gambling is bad, mmmk?
Congrats on keeping poor company. I wish you luck in your future pursuits of being an AC and offering up vapid responses.
Now, the difference between an MS course for CS people and MS donating computers to libraries is that CS people make their living working with computers - the theory is of interest to us, the individual tools are just a means to an end that can be replaced with a different tool if that one is better. Whereas, average library user X just wants to get a simple task done and doesn't want to waste any time learning how to open up a webpage within OS X. There's a huge difference between stuffing MS into libraries for public consumption and MS leading a course on secure software development.
By the way, Microsoft is cool.
That's all I have to say about you.
Obviously you didn't understand what I was saying. I wasn't saying they were unknowns that had walked in off the street. The point I was making was that the actors used weren't part of the Hollywood elite who can open a July 4th movie and command top dollar. The kid that asked the question was asking it like the other actors would cause a major stir - which I doubt. But you wanted to post some links and ignore what I actually said, so go right ahead - if that's what you need to do with your life.
Yeah, these kiddies weren't exactly hard-hitting were they? I have a quarrel with Oliver, 14 who asked, "Did you feel intimidated working with such a high profile cast?" Pardon me, but the cast of LOTR was high profile? I didn't think they had any real big names in there. Sure, Ian McKellen was quite well respected but that's different than high profile. He certainly doesn't draw the kind of attention that $CURRENT_HOLLYWOOD_STAR does or the attention that $FORMER_HOLLYWOOD_STAR and Sylvester Stallone did. Or is Oliver referring to the behavior of the cast while out and about in public? Ah, the mind of a 14 year old...a very strange place to be indeed.
It seems like the patent pursuit is stemming from failed or failing companies or tiny companies looking to blow up overnight but this article points out that HP is getting into the business. Hmm, has HP's stock tanked?
All that's left on Sci Fi??? What about the old Quantum Leap episodes?! Those rule! Dr. Sam Beckett kicks ass!
Next time, don't go Microsoft bashing when the problem actually lies with Bioware.
You're mad at Microsoft because Neverwinter Nights has only been released on a Microsoft OS? Does that make sense in your head?
Alright, I'll bite. Often times the courts are used as a means to reforming a company. In this case, the 2.6 million was due to the fact that McDonalds was negligent and had prior knowledge that their business practice was unsafe. In this case, if McDonalds is hit for a fine of some trivial amount then they will simply pay it and continue operations as usual.
Also note that I was not attempting to justify the amount of money paid (I'm not going to get into a discussion about pain and suffering claims with "people" on Slashdot - especially people who post AC). I was pointing out that while the parent was trying to pass the lawsuit off as frivilous and unwarranted, there was more to the case than was in the headlines. My actual post has very little to do with the damages but rather the reasons that the lawsuit was brought to trial and was not dismissed as being a waste of the courts time. You missed that because you got so wrapped up in trying to refute me.
Congrats, you failed.
In the case that you're "citing" (I use quotes because you obviously don't know any of the facts.) the coffee was served at 180 F. This is quite a bit hotter than one expects to receive coffee at. For a fun experiment, try brewing some coffee and taking the temperature of it. Your experiment won't yield coffee at this temperature. Second of all, the McDonalds outlet had received over 700 complaints about their coffee being too hot. Other McDonalds have not and do not receive this many complaints about their coffee. It was partially because of these complaints that McDonalds was found negligent - they had plenty of information that the coffee was too hot but chose to ignore it because it was considered better for business to keep the coffee hot at all times so fewer fresh pots would have to be made. Furthermore, the woman in question (79 years old when the incident occured - your typical "victim" looking to get rich quick, right? Oh wait, she'd never filed a lawsuit before in her life.) received third degree burns on her groin, thighs, and buttocks. These burns required skin grafts and an extended stay in the hospital. The woman racked up medicals bill as a result of this. The award was also reduced from the original 2.6 million dollar settlement to 480,000 dollars.
Understanding law isn't quite as easy as just reading some headlines Mohammed.
More hoops for morons to jump through = better chance that some of the non-morons will catch the morons at their work.
Furthermore, there is a difference between "to" and "too".
On a related-video games on TV-note, I do watch Extended Play on TechTV (which, in case you've not seen, is a show that has video game reviews) and I really enjoy that. The host is a bit of a clown but I get around that by pretending he doesn't exist. But do you think a show like that would make it on a network? I don't really know. I think the networks don't believe it would get any ratings. But, Siskel and Ebert (minus the dead one, plus the replacement) have a show that's on a network and I guess that must get ratings. So, why couldn't a video game show succeed? Oh well, I'm happy with TechTV.
Ha, that line about Siskel and Ebert was pretty fun. I crack myself up.
I think that this perception is what the article summary was talking about. Video games are a part of pop culture but people think they play a much smaller role than they do.
Interesting analogy with the butler there; very true. No one wants to solder anymore! - those wimps
Dramatic Interlude
It seems that video games occupy a certain space of popular culture and that it is only slowly expanding beyond that. The geek influences are still in place even though they're mass market items. When I am interested in a new video game or a new system, I don't check the mainstream news outlets, I go to a video game website or read a video game magazine. Comparing this to when I want to read a review of a new movie - just open the newspaper or just watch the trailer on TV and judge it from that. Video games have clearly broken out of the niche of being a toy for kids BUT the marketing of them seems to be stuck in a limited circle. Of course, maybe this is a good thing - perhaps it's the fact that people are interested enough in video games to seek out information about them, without huge marketing budgets pushing them down our throats, that shows just why the video game industry pulls in so much more money.
Oh also, the Mario Brothers movie was crap. I think that stunning pile of dog feces shows that a lot of people outside of the video game industry just don't get it - they don't have the ability to translate because their heads are stuck in Hollywood mode. All they did for that wretched mistake was take the basic characters from the game (two Italians, one wearing red, the other wearing green) and throw them into a run of the mill crap movie. There was no real use of the dynamics of the games. Video games are different. :D
Let's pretend Microsoft always tells the truth. Therefore, we can easily see that the solution to this problem is that the FBI and any other Nazi outbacks should stop their investigations into any online file traders. Online file trading, be it for music, movies, or software, on P2P networks is not a monetary transaction. When you prevent people from getting the goods for free [couple this with the fact that buying legitimate goods is vastly overpriced: 20 bucks for a fucking cd? Suck MY dick!] they will then turn to the next best thing - cheap copies from the Far East. So, by going after warez groups online, who aren't making profits and are merely trying to pirate overpriced crap, the FBI is funding terrorism. It is because they are driving the warez groups out of town that the Asian market is opening up and funneling money to terrorism.