Definitely. This deserves to be all over the media. Lots of big people in the DoJ need to be fired over this, and hopefully charged with some serious crimes. Investigation corruption in the immigration service seems also very necessary.
Cisco and the DoJ owe Adekeye at least a year of his life back.
I know the system gets abused, but this is the most outrageous and despicable example I've seen in some time.
Canadians are smart enough to see that Cisco is the bigger criminal here. Had Cisco actually has a case with respect to corporate espionage, they should have stuck with that, instead of stooping to this level of corruption and abuse. But they probably didn't have a case anyway, considering that they effectively lost the civil settlement.
The real crooks here aren't just Cisco, but also the US government that allowed itself on multiple occasions to be used as Cisco's puppets, using lies and deception in order to abuse the immigration, as well as civil and criminal process to ruin this man's ability to defend himself or run his business.
If anyone still doubted that the US government is in the pockets of the big corporations, then surely this is the definitive evidence that should convince them. The US justice department and immigration service are clearly corrupt and need to be purged of everybody involved in this, and who knows how many other similar matters. This is utterly disgusting.
But shouldn't findings like these lead the movie and recording to figure out that perhaps they shouldn't be fighting their best customers?
Or maybe that's why the MPAA/RIAA want to keep this secret: they need funding from their respective industries in order to exist at all, and their existence now mainly revolves around scaring people and silly lawsuits. They can't afford to have their clients figure out that they're wasting money on hurting their best customers.
China is already starting to develop its own brand of imperialism. They're buying lots of dirt cheap land in Africa in order to guarantee their own food supply, for example. Not to mention the amount of stuff in the US and Europe that they already own. China is every bit as corporatist as the US.
Incompetent developers. I haven't read everything, but my impression is that Anonymous and LulzSec simply used SQL injection for many of their cracks, which is something that any competent web developer should know how to prevent without even trying.
Of course there's no such thing as "the average American", but it's indisputable that as a group, Americans have allowed these principles of justice to be eroded, haven't called for the impeachment of the people responsible for it, and have voted them back into office.
It's not quite as bad that a million innocents are locked up or shot, but the past 10 years have shown an increasing tendency to stomp over civil and human rights, and not much has been done to change that direction. If the average American honesty believed that to be wrong, he'd have a different government now.
But more importantly, it's not proof of one's non-existence. And considering there are other, less official sources describing him, the case for his existence is quite a bit better than that of most people living at that time.
Because it is far better to let a million guilty people go free than to convict a single innocent person (or, to let stand one bad law).
That's your opinion. The average American clearly believes it's better to lock up or kill a million innocents than have one guilty person go free. Without a trial, if possible.
I'm probably confusing Agincourt with Crecy, which I'm more familiar with. They're very similar battles, but I guess it makes sense that by the time of Agincourt, the French had picked up some of the English tactics.
Fair enough. I disagree, though. I think the requirement that planets clear their orbit is a sensible one, and I think ending up with potentially hundreds of planets, almost all of which are KBOs, degrades the clearly different nature of the 8 major planets. I think the distinction between a major planet and a dwarf planet is a useful one.
Note that Ceres would also be a planet according to this definition. Possibly Vesta too (it's not yet proven whether it's mostly-spherical shape is due to gravity).
That's a lousy solution. The current definition is much better: a planet has to clear its orbit of most other objects. All 8 planets have done that. All objects that were once considered planets but lost that status (Pallas, Juno, Vesta, Ceres, Pluto, and possibly others), all lost it because people discovered more and more similar objects in similar orbits.
5. Overheating is what is going to exhaust you. You're wearing not just armor, but heavy padding as well. The number one factor an SCA medic sees at a large battle is overwhelmingly heat exhaustion/heatstroke/dehydration.
Note that this depends quite a bit on the climate. There's a good reason why armour got lighter the further south you got. Also keep in mind that much of the US lies at the same latitude as the Mediteranean.
In the end, though, armour wasn't meant to be comfortable. It was meant to keep you alive, or at least make you somewhat harder to kill.
You're both partially wrong. Yes, knights rode on horses for much of the middle ages, but in sieges they often fought on foot (because a horse isn't much use against a wall), and during the 100 Years War, England also often had knights fight on foot during field battles.
Also, heavy infantry like halberdiers and some swordsmen often did wear armour. Not the kind of armour that a mounted knight would wear, but pretty heavy armour nonetheless.
It's somewhat sensible to use reenactors instead of random people from the street, but reenactors are hobbyists, and not real medieval soldiers. A knight trained to fight in armour would probably be quite a bit stronger and tougher than your average reenactor.
The folks who could afford full armor could also afford horses.
You touch upon a very questionable claim by TFA. It says the inability to run for very long might have influenced battles like Agincourt, but the French (who lost there) had all there knights on horseback. The English knights (who won) were on foot. They still weren't running very much, because they were relying mostly on their longbows and letting the French come to them (who were hindered by mud and stakes in the ground), so to what extend fatigue from running in armour is relevant is highly questionable.
That doesn't change the fact that many other battles did feature lots of armoured foot soldiers walking all across the battlefield. It's just that Agincourt seems like a poor example to me.
From what I understand, it refers to the size of the budget. Or at least the size of its marketing budget. It seems to have little relation to the quality of the game experience.
"If it feels like's it's "too long" then it's not a "AAA" game, it's just a crap game that somebody spent too much marketing money on."
I thought AAA meant: Too much marketing money was spent on this. I have no idea what else distinguishes AAA games from other games. (What other classifications are there in this scheme anyway? It sounds silly.)
if it's got replayability value, it would be good.
it's just that boring games are boring. if there's MAGIC in it, it doesn't matter one flying fuck if it takes 1000h to play it.
That's exactly what I thought when I saw the title. There's no such thing as "too long". There's only "too boring". A good game will make you forget the time, which causes its own brand of problems, obviously, but I'll never blame the game for that. I'll just love it more.
Slashdot Mirror
Definitely. This deserves to be all over the media. Lots of big people in the DoJ need to be fired over this, and hopefully charged with some serious crimes. Investigation corruption in the immigration service seems also very necessary.
Cisco and the DoJ owe Adekeye at least a year of his life back.
I know the system gets abused, but this is the most outrageous and despicable example I've seen in some time.
Canadians are smart enough to see that Cisco is the bigger criminal here. Had Cisco actually has a case with respect to corporate espionage, they should have stuck with that, instead of stooping to this level of corruption and abuse. But they probably didn't have a case anyway, considering that they effectively lost the civil settlement.
The real crooks here aren't just Cisco, but also the US government that allowed itself on multiple occasions to be used as Cisco's puppets, using lies and deception in order to abuse the immigration, as well as civil and criminal process to ruin this man's ability to defend himself or run his business.
If anyone still doubted that the US government is in the pockets of the big corporations, then surely this is the definitive evidence that should convince them. The US justice department and immigration service are clearly corrupt and need to be purged of everybody involved in this, and who knows how many other similar matters. This is utterly disgusting.
But shouldn't findings like these lead the movie and recording to figure out that perhaps they shouldn't be fighting their best customers?
Or maybe that's why the MPAA/RIAA want to keep this secret: they need funding from their respective industries in order to exist at all, and their existence now mainly revolves around scaring people and silly lawsuits. They can't afford to have their clients figure out that they're wasting money on hurting their best customers.
China is already starting to develop its own brand of imperialism. They're buying lots of dirt cheap land in Africa in order to guarantee their own food supply, for example. Not to mention the amount of stuff in the US and Europe that they already own. China is every bit as corporatist as the US.
Incompetent developers. I haven't read everything, but my impression is that Anonymous and LulzSec simply used SQL injection for many of their cracks, which is something that any competent web developer should know how to prevent without even trying.
Of course there's no such thing as "the average American", but it's indisputable that as a group, Americans have allowed these principles of justice to be eroded, haven't called for the impeachment of the people responsible for it, and have voted them back into office.
It's not quite as bad that a million innocents are locked up or shot, but the past 10 years have shown an increasing tendency to stomp over civil and human rights, and not much has been done to change that direction. If the average American honesty believed that to be wrong, he'd have a different government now.
Does ARMA train in period armour? Most HEMA schools (including mine) tend to train without armour, and spar with modern, lighter armour.
But more importantly, it's not proof of one's non-existence. And considering there are other, less official sources describing him, the case for his existence is quite a bit better than that of most people living at that time.
Because it is far better to let a million guilty people go free than to convict a single innocent person (or, to let stand one bad law).
That's your opinion. The average American clearly believes it's better to lock up or kill a million innocents than have one guilty person go free. Without a trial, if possible.
Yes? We know of Pontius, do we not? A man of considerably less stature, and ability, and magic, than Jesus was supposed to have.
But far more political power, which is what really counts. Leaders and kings get recorded. Folk heroes don't.
I'm probably confusing Agincourt with Crecy, which I'm more familiar with. They're very similar battles, but I guess it makes sense that by the time of Agincourt, the French had picked up some of the English tactics.
It is a known fact that plate armour and leathers were only worn when in hand-to-hand combat, and chainmail was worn to stop arrows or bolts.
That'd be silly. Mail is awful at stopping arrows, but pretty good at deflecting sword blows.
Also, it's awfully inconvenient to change your armour in the middle of a battle.
Fair enough. I disagree, though. I think the requirement that planets clear their orbit is a sensible one, and I think ending up with potentially hundreds of planets, almost all of which are KBOs, degrades the clearly different nature of the 8 major planets. I think the distinction between a major planet and a dwarf planet is a useful one.
Note that Ceres would also be a planet according to this definition. Possibly Vesta too (it's not yet proven whether it's mostly-spherical shape is due to gravity).
Is Charon round enough to be a Dwarf Planet?
That's a lousy solution. The current definition is much better: a planet has to clear its orbit of most other objects. All 8 planets have done that. All objects that were once considered planets but lost that status (Pallas, Juno, Vesta, Ceres, Pluto, and possibly others), all lost it because people discovered more and more similar objects in similar orbits.
The legs themselves are rather vital if you want to run away from danger. Disabling someone's leg is very effective in combat.
5. Overheating is what is going to exhaust you. You're wearing not just armor, but heavy padding as well. The number one factor an SCA medic sees at a large battle is overwhelmingly heat exhaustion/heatstroke/dehydration.
Note that this depends quite a bit on the climate. There's a good reason why armour got lighter the further south you got. Also keep in mind that much of the US lies at the same latitude as the Mediteranean.
In the end, though, armour wasn't meant to be comfortable. It was meant to keep you alive, or at least make you somewhat harder to kill.
You're both partially wrong. Yes, knights rode on horses for much of the middle ages, but in sieges they often fought on foot (because a horse isn't much use against a wall), and during the 100 Years War, England also often had knights fight on foot during field battles.
Also, heavy infantry like halberdiers and some swordsmen often did wear armour. Not the kind of armour that a mounted knight would wear, but pretty heavy armour nonetheless.
It's somewhat sensible to use reenactors instead of random people from the street, but reenactors are hobbyists, and not real medieval soldiers. A knight trained to fight in armour would probably be quite a bit stronger and tougher than your average reenactor.
The folks who could afford full armor could also afford horses.
You touch upon a very questionable claim by TFA. It says the inability to run for very long might have influenced battles like Agincourt, but the French (who lost there) had all there knights on horseback. The English knights (who won) were on foot. They still weren't running very much, because they were relying mostly on their longbows and letting the French come to them (who were hindered by mud and stakes in the ground), so to what extend fatigue from running in armour is relevant is highly questionable.
That doesn't change the fact that many other battles did feature lots of armoured foot soldiers walking all across the battlefield. It's just that Agincourt seems like a poor example to me.
From what I understand, it refers to the size of the budget. Or at least the size of its marketing budget. It seems to have little relation to the quality of the game experience.
"If it feels like's it's "too long" then it's not a "AAA" game, it's just a crap game that somebody spent too much marketing money on."
I thought AAA meant: Too much marketing money was spent on this. I have no idea what else distinguishes AAA games from other games. (What other classifications are there in this scheme anyway? It sounds silly.)
if it's got replayability value, it would be good.
it's just that boring games are boring. if there's MAGIC in it, it doesn't matter one flying fuck if it takes 1000h to play it.
That's exactly what I thought when I saw the title. There's no such thing as "too long". There's only "too boring". A good game will make you forget the time, which causes its own brand of problems, obviously, but I'll never blame the game for that. I'll just love it more.