The oldest sections of Manhattan (at the south end) are laid out hodgepodge because there was really no planning there. Horse and carts didn't guarantee logically laid out streets. More likely they were laid out by what land was least muddy in the rain or some other parameter that old cities seemed to use. e.g. some wide boulevards in some cities are wide because when it would rain and the cart track got too muddy they would travel beside it until it too got too muddy, and then they would make a new path beside it... and so on... until the first track finally returned to a state that it can be driven on. Buildings would be built far enough apart to allow this and then paved over into wide boulevards when cars came. No better reason than that. Ad hoc planning. South Manhattan was like that. Then they hired some surveyor (can't remember his name) and he laid out a grid pattern over all the remaining unurbanized (farms etc.) land; on which any expansion of the city would be built on. It just happened that the city was built at the cross over time between WTF urban planning and some sort of rational planning.
I think this top post should NOT be marked flamebait (so that it drops below the thresholds many of us set to ignore). While I don't agree with it at all, it is a point that many people believe and should be debated, not shouted down just because you don't like it. How about keeping it up and showing why it is bullshit by making valid points for a change?
I see you have been reading Japanese school books. The atomic bombs, and the threat of additional atom bombs (they feared Tokyo would be next), allowed the more moderate members (none were very moderate) of Japans leaders to be able to overrule the hardline leaders in order to sue for peace per the Potsdam Declaration. The hardliners didn't like many of the conditions of the declaration but had to acknowledge that they could not defend Japan given the nature of the atom bombs.
-1:willfully wishing history happened in a more "politically correct" way
The bombs (atomic or conventional) dropped on Japan were not from acts of terrorism. They were a direct result of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor, and the unwillingness of the Japanese to surrender even in the face of superior forces that had already captured part of the Japanese territory proper (Okinawa); and the strong intelligence stating that they would not surrender to any conventional forces. (Never mind that they had attacked and terrorized China, Vietnam, Burma, The Philippines, and many other countries, murdering innocent civilians in mass killings and with chemical weapons, and were originally intent on invading other countries like Australia until they were stopped by the U.S.) Why the hell should any more American lives (or any other nations sons and daughters) have been sacrificed to stop a then blood thirsty military autocracy like Japan then was. They reaped what they sowed. And FYI, less people were killed in the atomic bomb attacks than in 'conventional' fire bomb raids like in Dresden, Tokyo, and other places. But this is what happens when the people of those countries support their mass murdering regimes that killed millions in organized fashion. And that goes for both Germany (who have owned up to their crimes) and Japan (who are constantly trying to rewrite the history books they teach their children with to say that Japan did no wrong in WWII... kind of like Texas republicans and the civil rights movement).
And the point of administering a test is to make sure the students grasp the concepts taught, it is NOT a test on how well the school or teacher can block the students from cheating. The teacher does not need to apologize for setting his test policies (which are pretty much universally posted at the beginning of each semester by the professor/instructor so the students can't complain about 'not knowing'... take some fucking responsibility). If a student doesn't understand that they need to be able to pass the material with a bare minimum of help (even if that includes PRINTED notes) they are stupid and deserve a failing mark. Never mind assuming that you cannot use a networked device in a final examine (only a moron would assume otherwise), KNOW that you cannot. As for a dictionary, there are excellent PRINTED foreign language dictionaries that people can buy in every city and town on the fucking planet. Again, if a student can't figure out how to use a printed foreign language dictionary they are too fucking stupid to receive a passing grade. Besides which, if you go to school in a country that has as a native language something other than what you grew up with, you should be expected to learn that language. Why the fuck should the rest of the school have to bend over backward to accommodate you? Enough fucking political correctness. And if you think that is too harsh, you spring the money and start your own 'Babel University' where everyone speaks a different language and no-one knows what the fuck everyone else is talking about. I'm sure the students there will have a high placement rate. Give your head a shake and get a fucking grip for fuck's sake.
Personally I'm starting to think that students should need to take one semester without any computers or networked devices at all and pass all courses before they are allowed to graduate. Learn how to do things on your own, thinking on your own without needing the opinions of others on facebook or twitter, or whatever social networking site of the day is in use. Not every class requires a computer and I think it would help improve critical thinking, independent thought, and methodical thinking/problem solving that old fashioned book research in libraries entails.
The movie or play the actor is in generates the money. The team the player plays on generates the money. There are very few actors or athletes that aren't replaceable. For every actor or athlete that is discovered, there are usually several others just as capable that slipped through the cracks. Just like artists. In the end, it is just the luck of the draw who makes it through. Some times I admit, it is how well people promote themselves. Regardless, except for the very rare Tiger Woods out there, few of these people can't be replaced quickly and fade from the collective memory of the masses that they entertain. I don't see people pining that Curt Cobain is gone, or Heath Ledger, or even through retirement like Michael Jordan. Others have replaced them. And since you bring money in to it, the combined yearly salary of the NBA could probably ensure that everyone in the United States had at least one medical checkup in that year. There is more money lost in productivity because of preventable sickness than those NBA salaries. That is a ridiculous waste of money. Entertainment is a valuable industry but given that for centuries we didn't have professional sports where athletes made more money in a year than a handful of people would make in a lifetime; similarly for the movie industry and actors, they aren't a necessity and not worth the money spent on them. At least with sports, when the athletes went on strike, and tickets went up higher than the average fan could afford to take his/her family to a game, I stopped watching. It isn't much, but it is my way of saying fuck them, one less viewer for television ratings.
I wish there were a way that we could take actors, news-people, and sports figures with good gigs who insist on complaining, and have them work at a real job for a couple of years. Take anything you see on the show 'Dirty Jobs' and have them do that for a couple years. Then tell them if they insist on telling the world how hard they have it once back at their easy job, permanently install them in the real world with the rest of us.
This does not hold in every state, or even a majority of states. The article you link to points out the various exceptions. Many places will make sure they have a valid reason for letting a person go to avoid lawsuits, regardless; especially in the many states that have exceptions to this general rule.
And that is why I never said 'ban the game'. However I did say and still continue to find it repugnant that it is being offered with the 'Taliban' option. People can say what they want about the American, Canadian, British, and Dutch combat troops that have fought and died in Afghanistan, but what is offered is better than what they had (never mind that Afghanistan was a rogue state openly supporting terrorist groups). Granted, they may not be smart enough to ever 'get it'... i.e. they don't understand that life can be better if they've never been exposed to a better way of life. But to offer a game up that allows insensitive clods to get their jollies trying to 'kill' Americans, Canadians, British, and Dutch troops is disgusting to me. And what I was getting at is that while the company acts like they are being sensitive by pulling the games from the shelves on U.S. army bases, they aren't elsewhere. This tells me that good taste and sensitivity are trumped by money ultimately now-a-days. A sad state of affairs. Society needs social lubricant in order for us all to get along. That used to be accomplished by manners and decorum/class, the latter incorporating sensitivity to others feelings. This is disappearing and I believe the release of this games 'features' is a symptom. That is what really bothers me. That and the fact that so many people don't get this. Perhaps in years to come when the raw edges have worn off this would be an interesting addition; especially if it allowed better research to provide accurate historic representation. But not while it is still going on. That is my opinion based on personal experience with family who have fought in war. Regards.
And that is the crux of what the issue is. People not understanding that because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. That is where good taste and understanding comes in. You wouldn't want people coming to your mothers funeral or following you around for a couple days after and telling 'yo momma' jokes. They legally can, it doesn't mean that they should or that it wouldn't be tasteless. People need to get along and that includes being sensitive to others. This goes for businesses as well as people. The tendency towards increasing and extreme selfishness today is, I think, a major reason for societies ills, from crime to the economy.
See if you can float a game to investors where the objective is to kill the crew on a commercial airliner and fly them into civilian structures in... never mind America... in Europe or Canada, or even in Saudi Arabia or Dubai. I think you would be labeled as the fucking wanker that you are.
You're missing the point. The fact they are making the games is disrespectful. But I guess respect is a victim of modern times. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But I suspect that this is beyond you or most these days. People cry foul when Wall Street types make a ton of money for doing nothing; but this is just an extrapolation of your attitude: Just because it is wrong to take money for doing absolutely nothing to help you clients profit (which is what your job is supposed to accomplish) doesn't mean I can't take a 10 million dollar bonus, but I can so I will. It is all the same thing. Both situations are an exhibit of a total lack of class.
Gee, and just think, if it wasn't for those damned Americans we could all be wearing German jack boots now. They ruined it for all of us. I guess the South Koreans and people in Taiwan are pretty pissed off at America too. Eastern Europe must be really angry with America since America was the biggest roadblock to Soviet Russia making all of Europe just like them. Hell if it wasn't for American forces helping in NATO at least the Berlin wall could have stayed up. Yep, damn those American bastards for outlasting the Soviets. [/sarcasm] By the way, name democracies that were toppled by America. Real democracies, not those that were democracies in name only, like [insert list of dictatorships that you seem to support]. I agree with anyone who slams America for getting into Vietnam and Iraq. But other than that you're talking out your ass. As for Iraq, I suspect the people who were gassed or otherwise abused by Saddam Hussein might beg to differ with your or my feelings on the subject. Personally I think Iraq forced a loss of focus on the real issue, the rogue state of Afghanistan. I was not sad to see Hussein go, but sure didn't like the timing or piss poor management of the whole thing.
And the Japanese are still trying to rewrite history so as to make it look like they were victims and didn't perpetrate war crimes like using poison gas in China and murdering two or three times the people the Germans murdered in death camps and as slave laborers. The people allowed fanatics to run the country just as did Germany. The bombing of Japanese cities was brought on themselves. Besides, more people were killed in the incendiary attacks on Tokyo than in Hiroshima (and about as many in Dresden). Why is the fact that it was a nuclear bomb that makes it more terrible than what was done in Tokyo?
Try critical reading... I'm not talking about 911. I'm talking about the fact that people gave some time between the event a when they tried to capitalize off of it. Idiot.
A few years have passed since WWII to let the raw emotions ease. I am very sure that if games like this existed at the time, there would be a near riot if a company tried to release one where you got to play the German side just after WWII (never mind while it is was ongoing as is the case now). My father was a veteran of that war (front of the front line combat from France to Germany) and he had strong feelings many years after the war. They eased somewhat later in life, but he still had issues about what he saw and did. Except for one he told my mother, he would only tell us stories where no one was hurt even though combat was going on (e.g. How many guys can you fit under a Bren Gun Carrier? Eight, as long as they are being mortared at the time. How far can a guy throw a dud 88 shell when it crashes through the stone wall of the house you are in? A long, long way... while shitting bricks at the same time.). He buried his rifle and side arm very shortly after armistice was signed (while still in the army in Europe) and refused to carry or use a weapon after that. They busted him from Staff Sargent all the way to Private after he refused to tell them where he buried them and refused to carry a weapon. It is easy to sit in a chair in front of a computer and pass judgment. The same as it is to compare society's feelings at the time events happened 65 to 71 years ago to how they feel about them today (and some folks still feel as strongly and think playing the German side is repugnant).
I guess the term "too soon" counted in the days following 911, but guys on the front lines don't deserve this same respect? How about let it lay for a few years before adding the Taliban as an option if they must at all. Personally, I find it a bit repugnant. I'm curious, do they allow the Taliban characters they play to throw acid in the faces of girls who dare go to school, or execute them for showing their faces? If this company was really serious about this and not just going through the motions, they would pull the game from the shelves until this disrespectful option is removed.
Slashdot Mirror
Chuck Berry would like that (last two or three paragraphs).
The oldest sections of Manhattan (at the south end) are laid out hodgepodge because there was really no planning there. Horse and carts didn't guarantee logically laid out streets. More likely they were laid out by what land was least muddy in the rain or some other parameter that old cities seemed to use. e.g. some wide boulevards in some cities are wide because when it would rain and the cart track got too muddy they would travel beside it until it too got too muddy, and then they would make a new path beside it... and so on... until the first track finally returned to a state that it can be driven on. Buildings would be built far enough apart to allow this and then paved over into wide boulevards when cars came. No better reason than that. Ad hoc planning. South Manhattan was like that. Then they hired some surveyor (can't remember his name) and he laid out a grid pattern over all the remaining unurbanized (farms etc.) land; on which any expansion of the city would be built on. It just happened that the city was built at the cross over time between WTF urban planning and some sort of rational planning.
I think this top post should NOT be marked flamebait (so that it drops below the thresholds many of us set to ignore). While I don't agree with it at all, it is a point that many people believe and should be debated, not shouted down just because you don't like it. How about keeping it up and showing why it is bullshit by making valid points for a change?
I see you have been reading Japanese school books. The atomic bombs, and the threat of additional atom bombs (they feared Tokyo would be next), allowed the more moderate members (none were very moderate) of Japans leaders to be able to overrule the hardline leaders in order to sue for peace per the Potsdam Declaration. The hardliners didn't like many of the conditions of the declaration but had to acknowledge that they could not defend Japan given the nature of the atom bombs.
-1:willfully wishing history happened in a more "politically correct" way
The bombs (atomic or conventional) dropped on Japan were not from acts of terrorism. They were a direct result of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor, and the unwillingness of the Japanese to surrender even in the face of superior forces that had already captured part of the Japanese territory proper (Okinawa); and the strong intelligence stating that they would not surrender to any conventional forces. (Never mind that they had attacked and terrorized China, Vietnam, Burma, The Philippines, and many other countries, murdering innocent civilians in mass killings and with chemical weapons, and were originally intent on invading other countries like Australia until they were stopped by the U.S.) Why the hell should any more American lives (or any other nations sons and daughters) have been sacrificed to stop a then blood thirsty military autocracy like Japan then was. They reaped what they sowed. And FYI, less people were killed in the atomic bomb attacks than in 'conventional' fire bomb raids like in Dresden, Tokyo, and other places. But this is what happens when the people of those countries support their mass murdering regimes that killed millions in organized fashion. And that goes for both Germany (who have owned up to their crimes) and Japan (who are constantly trying to rewrite the history books they teach their children with to say that Japan did no wrong in WWII... kind of like Texas republicans and the civil rights movement).
Intellectual masturbation. Terrorists terrorize. Criminals victimize. all terrorists are criminals but not all criminals are terrorists.
And the point of administering a test is to make sure the students grasp the concepts taught, it is NOT a test on how well the school or teacher can block the students from cheating. The teacher does not need to apologize for setting his test policies (which are pretty much universally posted at the beginning of each semester by the professor/instructor so the students can't complain about 'not knowing'... take some fucking responsibility). If a student doesn't understand that they need to be able to pass the material with a bare minimum of help (even if that includes PRINTED notes) they are stupid and deserve a failing mark. Never mind assuming that you cannot use a networked device in a final examine (only a moron would assume otherwise), KNOW that you cannot. As for a dictionary, there are excellent PRINTED foreign language dictionaries that people can buy in every city and town on the fucking planet. Again, if a student can't figure out how to use a printed foreign language dictionary they are too fucking stupid to receive a passing grade. Besides which, if you go to school in a country that has as a native language something other than what you grew up with, you should be expected to learn that language. Why the fuck should the rest of the school have to bend over backward to accommodate you? Enough fucking political correctness. And if you think that is too harsh, you spring the money and start your own 'Babel University' where everyone speaks a different language and no-one knows what the fuck everyone else is talking about. I'm sure the students there will have a high placement rate. Give your head a shake and get a fucking grip for fuck's sake.
Personally I'm starting to think that students should need to take one semester without any computers or networked devices at all and pass all courses before they are allowed to graduate. Learn how to do things on your own, thinking on your own without needing the opinions of others on facebook or twitter, or whatever social networking site of the day is in use. Not every class requires a computer and I think it would help improve critical thinking, independent thought, and methodical thinking/problem solving that old fashioned book research in libraries entails.
The movie or play the actor is in generates the money. The team the player plays on generates the money. There are very few actors or athletes that aren't replaceable. For every actor or athlete that is discovered, there are usually several others just as capable that slipped through the cracks. Just like artists. In the end, it is just the luck of the draw who makes it through. Some times I admit, it is how well people promote themselves. Regardless, except for the very rare Tiger Woods out there, few of these people can't be replaced quickly and fade from the collective memory of the masses that they entertain. I don't see people pining that Curt Cobain is gone, or Heath Ledger, or even through retirement like Michael Jordan. Others have replaced them. And since you bring money in to it, the combined yearly salary of the NBA could probably ensure that everyone in the United States had at least one medical checkup in that year. There is more money lost in productivity because of preventable sickness than those NBA salaries. That is a ridiculous waste of money. Entertainment is a valuable industry but given that for centuries we didn't have professional sports where athletes made more money in a year than a handful of people would make in a lifetime; similarly for the movie industry and actors, they aren't a necessity and not worth the money spent on them. At least with sports, when the athletes went on strike, and tickets went up higher than the average fan could afford to take his/her family to a game, I stopped watching. It isn't much, but it is my way of saying fuck them, one less viewer for television ratings.
I wish there were a way that we could take actors, news-people, and sports figures with good gigs who insist on complaining, and have them work at a real job for a couple of years. Take anything you see on the show 'Dirty Jobs' and have them do that for a couple years. Then tell them if they insist on telling the world how hard they have it once back at their easy job, permanently install them in the real world with the rest of us.
This does not hold in every state, or even a majority of states. The article you link to points out the various exceptions. Many places will make sure they have a valid reason for letting a person go to avoid lawsuits, regardless; especially in the many states that have exceptions to this general rule.
I was thinking more like HAL.
Ahhhhh.... you probably lick your own ass too. [raspberry]
Sarcasm^2
And that is why I never said 'ban the game'. However I did say and still continue to find it repugnant that it is being offered with the 'Taliban' option. People can say what they want about the American, Canadian, British, and Dutch combat troops that have fought and died in Afghanistan, but what is offered is better than what they had (never mind that Afghanistan was a rogue state openly supporting terrorist groups). Granted, they may not be smart enough to ever 'get it'... i.e. they don't understand that life can be better if they've never been exposed to a better way of life. But to offer a game up that allows insensitive clods to get their jollies trying to 'kill' Americans, Canadians, British, and Dutch troops is disgusting to me. And what I was getting at is that while the company acts like they are being sensitive by pulling the games from the shelves on U.S. army bases, they aren't elsewhere. This tells me that good taste and sensitivity are trumped by money ultimately now-a-days. A sad state of affairs. Society needs social lubricant in order for us all to get along. That used to be accomplished by manners and decorum/class, the latter incorporating sensitivity to others feelings. This is disappearing and I believe the release of this games 'features' is a symptom. That is what really bothers me. That and the fact that so many people don't get this. Perhaps in years to come when the raw edges have worn off this would be an interesting addition; especially if it allowed better research to provide accurate historic representation. But not while it is still going on. That is my opinion based on personal experience with family who have fought in war. Regards.
Now you are being purposely obtuse.
And that is the crux of what the issue is. People not understanding that because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. That is where good taste and understanding comes in. You wouldn't want people coming to your mothers funeral or following you around for a couple days after and telling 'yo momma' jokes. They legally can, it doesn't mean that they should or that it wouldn't be tasteless. People need to get along and that includes being sensitive to others. This goes for businesses as well as people. The tendency towards increasing and extreme selfishness today is, I think, a major reason for societies ills, from crime to the economy.
Granny's Pearls of Wisdom. For those who never saw Java Ranch.
See if you can float a game to investors where the objective is to kill the crew on a commercial airliner and fly them into civilian structures in ... never mind America... in Europe or Canada, or even in Saudi Arabia or Dubai. I think you would be labeled as the fucking wanker that you are.
You're missing the point. The fact they are making the games is disrespectful. But I guess respect is a victim of modern times. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But I suspect that this is beyond you or most these days. People cry foul when Wall Street types make a ton of money for doing nothing; but this is just an extrapolation of your attitude: Just because it is wrong to take money for doing absolutely nothing to help you clients profit (which is what your job is supposed to accomplish) doesn't mean I can't take a 10 million dollar bonus, but I can so I will. It is all the same thing. Both situations are an exhibit of a total lack of class.
Nice try, I said democracies that weren't democracies in name only. I'm still waiting.
Gee, and just think, if it wasn't for those damned Americans we could all be wearing German jack boots now. They ruined it for all of us. I guess the South Koreans and people in Taiwan are pretty pissed off at America too. Eastern Europe must be really angry with America since America was the biggest roadblock to Soviet Russia making all of Europe just like them. Hell if it wasn't for American forces helping in NATO at least the Berlin wall could have stayed up. Yep, damn those American bastards for outlasting the Soviets. [/sarcasm] By the way, name democracies that were toppled by America. Real democracies, not those that were democracies in name only, like [insert list of dictatorships that you seem to support]. I agree with anyone who slams America for getting into Vietnam and Iraq. But other than that you're talking out your ass. As for Iraq, I suspect the people who were gassed or otherwise abused by Saddam Hussein might beg to differ with your or my feelings on the subject. Personally I think Iraq forced a loss of focus on the real issue, the rogue state of Afghanistan. I was not sad to see Hussein go, but sure didn't like the timing or piss poor management of the whole thing.
And the Japanese are still trying to rewrite history so as to make it look like they were victims and didn't perpetrate war crimes like using poison gas in China and murdering two or three times the people the Germans murdered in death camps and as slave laborers. The people allowed fanatics to run the country just as did Germany. The bombing of Japanese cities was brought on themselves. Besides, more people were killed in the incendiary attacks on Tokyo than in Hiroshima (and about as many in Dresden). Why is the fact that it was a nuclear bomb that makes it more terrible than what was done in Tokyo?
Try critical reading... I'm not talking about 911. I'm talking about the fact that people gave some time between the event a when they tried to capitalize off of it. Idiot.
A few years have passed since WWII to let the raw emotions ease. I am very sure that if games like this existed at the time, there would be a near riot if a company tried to release one where you got to play the German side just after WWII (never mind while it is was ongoing as is the case now). My father was a veteran of that war (front of the front line combat from France to Germany) and he had strong feelings many years after the war. They eased somewhat later in life, but he still had issues about what he saw and did. Except for one he told my mother, he would only tell us stories where no one was hurt even though combat was going on (e.g. How many guys can you fit under a Bren Gun Carrier? Eight, as long as they are being mortared at the time. How far can a guy throw a dud 88 shell when it crashes through the stone wall of the house you are in? A long, long way... while shitting bricks at the same time.). He buried his rifle and side arm very shortly after armistice was signed (while still in the army in Europe) and refused to carry or use a weapon after that. They busted him from Staff Sargent all the way to Private after he refused to tell them where he buried them and refused to carry a weapon. It is easy to sit in a chair in front of a computer and pass judgment. The same as it is to compare society's feelings at the time events happened 65 to 71 years ago to how they feel about them today (and some folks still feel as strongly and think playing the German side is repugnant).
I guess the term "too soon" counted in the days following 911, but guys on the front lines don't deserve this same respect? How about let it lay for a few years before adding the Taliban as an option if they must at all. Personally, I find it a bit repugnant. I'm curious, do they allow the Taliban characters they play to throw acid in the faces of girls who dare go to school, or execute them for showing their faces? If this company was really serious about this and not just going through the motions, they would pull the game from the shelves until this disrespectful option is removed.
Truly, news for nerds.