Words like Stygian.. I mean fuck you, if you know what that means.
Sometimes, when someone manages to escape from the Abyss alive, the weight of memory is too much for them and they jump to river Styx to purge themselves of it. The discarded memory becomes a kind of monster called a "Stygian Memory", and it tries to find some other unfortunate bastard to rebind to and torment.
And the funny thing is, I've never actually played D&D !-(
What I don't get is how so much of the argument to keep Pluto as a planet hinges around nostalgia, and "keeping the textbooks the same." How is that science? Things change; science marches on.
Whether a ball of rock, gas or liquid is called a planet, planetoid, or an asteroid is not science by any stretch of imagination. We are talking about arbitrary limits, so why not put them where it's convenient: where people expect them to be. So, let's call Pluto a planet, so we don't need to change our textbooks; it's not like it makes any difference to science.
So far as controversy, so what if there is? People can kick and spit all they like, but they can't change a scientific definition by protesting.
But you can change an arbitrary definition by protesting.
What if I got a whole bunch of people together and said that the Bohr model of the atom is the correct one, because its easier to draw. Oh, and it's traditional! Down with change!
Bohr model is demonstratably incorrect. It is, however, impossible to devise any experiment whatsoever that would conclusively prove that some particular definition of the word "planet" (or anything else for that matter) is incorrect. Planet is whatever people mean when they say planet.
Now if they decide that a better definition of a planet would include Pluto (which it might, I don't really know much about the actual scientific arguments), we'll have to change the textbooks anyway! But do we really want like 40 "planets" in our solar system just so we can keep Pluto? Seems pretty stupid to me.
Or we could just agree to call all bodies in freefall "unfixed masses" in scientific context and let "planet" be the popular layman word for nine specific unfixed masses, as well as any other that happen to acquire the usage as we explore neighbouring solar systems, however long that may take. Problem solved, science has been improved by removing the artificial division to planets and non-planets, and the unwashed masses can keep calling Pluto a planet without fear of being forcefully shampooed by the semantic police.
If public money is used to push certain products, outcomes are presented for public use but you are not allowed use it, even though they paid for a portion of it; I think lots of companies probably would have a beef with it.
You mean like I'm not allowed to use Windows XP despite having paid a portion of the school's copy ?
Free, open-source games will always be relegated to the corners of the gaming industry. They lack the marketing and dedicated resources that a "professional" gaming company offers.
For most traditional game types this is true. Growing the userbase from nothing to large quickly requires a huge budget. Viral marketing works, but it works exponentially, which means that growth is very slow in years, and most games just aren't interesting enough to survive that long.
However, MMOGs are different in three ways. First, they have the potential to stay interesting for years, since the players make more content ("social" content - guilds and such - and sometimes also graphical or gameplay content). Second, because of this, they become the more interesting the older they become. And third, the players have a vested interest to get their RL friends to start playing, since it gives them either in-game allies or at least familiar people to play with.
Finally, the lack of need for a central server means that such a game can survive just fine in the corners of gaming industry. All it takes is two people willing to play; that's sufficient. You don't need a minimum of 10 000 or 100 000 players for it to be profitable. Consequently, such a game cannot be driven out of the market, which means that the engine will be ever improved and the content available to it will grow, making it more and more competitive.
You misunderstand what I'm saying. Online socializing in general has set the stage for MMOGs to succeed based on cultural differences in today's youth from yesterday's youth. This is why I forecast continued growth, in the mid-term, for the MMOG industry -- the tappable market is still growing.
And you misunderstand what I'm saying. MMOGs will be succesful, but the current model is unsustainable, since once distributed MMOG technology is advanced to the point of working well it is far superior to the current model. And distributed model allows for free - as in beer and speech - games, which will drive the current industry into the grave, since no one will pay to play an MMOG if they can play one for free.
I'm not arguing that MMOGs are going to die; I'm simply arguing that you can't keep on making money just for running the server once technology removes the need for one.
It's a bit like selling air on a just-colonized planet that's being terraformed: the population grows, so the market grows, but once the planet gains a breathable atmosphere the need for air will keep growing but your ability to get any money from it will disappear. Demand alone doesn't make a market, it takes a limited supply to rise prices above zero.
Of course the industry could simply switch to building and selling cool personalized avatars and other content to players of this free MMOG and make a killing since they no longer need to run the server and upkeep the server and client programs. However, seeing the antics of RIAA and MPAA makes it hard to believe content producers capable of either reason, logic or the slightest business sense.
The funny thing is, this has already been done. Guild Wars runs on pretty much the exact same premise that you propose, however its success has been on a level far below WoW. Would it be plausible on that scale? I don't really know, but I personally don't see it as being probable. MMOs use a much larger amount of horsepower than Gnutella/LimeWire et al.
I was unaware that Guild Wars was open-sourced and without central servers.
On a different note, MMO servers do very little aside from math work now anyway. Dice rolls and storage of character info is about it, most other things are handled on the client.
The main benefit of using a central server is having a cohesive, authoritative snapshot of the state of the gameworld and the rules that govern how that state may be changed. The only thing left after that is the UI, and that's all the client can do in this model.
Your analogy to Napster falls apart with games, IMO. With Napster (or Gnutella or what have you), it was easy for a user to take existing content and say, "Hey everyone, come get it." But with games, what game studio is going to make a game that can be played without a fair deal of server-side "check-ins" or whatnot? Basically, the gaming industry will use DRM to ensure that you can't throw together your own gaming server.
Which is why I think that such games rise from open source movement. The successful open-sourced games (Nethack, Battle of Westnoth) have in common their replay value, which in turn allows the iterative development method to be used succesfully; MMORPGs have been shown to also incorporate this feature, so once the problem of needing a central server has been solved, there's nothing stopping Free software from overtaking them.
However, I don't think the MMOG industry is going anywhere anytime soon. It's natural outgrowth of the online socializing that today's youth has grown up with -- I expect more variety, but don't see any shrinkage for quite a long time.
But online chat isn't an industry. Or did you pay to chat in IRC or with an instant messenger ?
Online gaming is here to stay. However, in order for it to stay an industry, it must make money. Currently this is easily done, since the games require centralized servers and this in turn leads naturally to such things as monthly fees. But what if the underlaying technology was to change ?
The system is currently basically the old central mainframe / dumb terminal -setup. The servers take care of all the processing, and the client program just reads user input and gives output. A glorified MUD. Unfortunately, it is not scalable.
The number of simultaneous players is rising constantly, and the server size can't be increased forever. So, in time, more and more of the actual processing needs to be offloaded to the client machines. The main problem is that the server needs to prevent cheating somehow; the easiest ways of doing this include using DRM or simply offloading the task to several clients at once and comparing the results. Eventually this system would resemble the Napster of old, where all the actual interesting things were on people's computers, and the servers basically just coordinated the whole thing. At this point people would propably also connect directly to each other to decrease lag.
So, what happens when someone introduces the Gnutella of MMORPGs ? A system which doesn't need a central server to function. The players would run "servents", each of which would not only provide the user interface but also run a tiny area of the gameworld. Walk to the edge of the current area, and your servent connects to another servent. Enough people concentrate to an area, and the servent running divides parts of it to nearby ones; an area is empty enough, and the servent asks other servents for more areas to run.
Such an MMORPG would have no need for monthly fees. It's running costs would be divided between its players in their electrical and bandwidth bills. It would mean the end of the industry, not because MMORPGs themselves became unpopular, but because the model of monthly fees would be unmaintainable - you don't need a central server to play, so you don't need to pay anyone to run one either.
Of course content makers would stand to make a killing selling cool new models, but that's how it should be. And of course this MMORPG with no central controlling entity would likely have some rather unwholesome areas, but then again, that's how it should be, IMHO:).
No, it usually ends in the girl and the new guy being happy for a while, while the old guy makes such a pest of himself complaining to his buddies that they suspect she might have had the right idea when she ditched that whining cry-baby.
If you cry you're a whining crybaby, if you don't you're insensitive. Kinda explains why sex drive needs to be as strong as it is to ensure the survival of human race. I sure wouldn't have anything to do with the damn thing if women weren't so... full of mathemathically interesting curves;).
But I wonder if a woman that's been ditched for another and is crying about it gets called a crybaby ?
But of course men are useless when you bring them problems they can't fix; if that sounds rendundant to you, then clearly you're a man.
And if a self-obvious statement seemd like s great insight to you, then clearly you're a blond.
Your point certainly could have been made without childish insults, no matter which side is more correct.
Apparently some people have trouble getting the point even when it's demonstrated to them. I guess that makes you a bit slow in the uptake, eh, Nameless One ? Go back to being sodomized by balors in Hades where you belong, you cowardly Blood War refuse. Disembodied lich skulls have a better-looking face than you. The sight of you would make a succubus celibate; hell, the sight of you would make a succubus swear off evil and become a paladin just to oppose such hideous monstrosity as you are.
Sincerely, and in the hopes that this was enough to finally drive the point home, Slashdot Registered User 717540 AKA Ultranova.
If you truly have a runaway process, it will use up all of your swap, no matter how much swap you've got.
Not true. I have 1 gig of physical memory, 5 gigs of swap space, and a 32-bit processor (and 3/1 memory split in the kernel). In this setup the application only has 3 gigs worth of accessible address space, and if it uses it all, the system still has 3 gigs of virtual memory available for other use.
Of course the darn thing could be forking child processes...
If you have little or no swap configured, and a buggy process starts endlessly allocating/leaking more and more memory, then memory will fill up, the swap space (if any) will quickly become exhausted, the buggy process will be terminated, and the rest of the system will continue on its merry way. If you have large amounts of swap space, on the other hand, your system may spend hours or days in a sort of 'near-death experience', where all processes are technically still running, they are all constantly being paged on and off the disk, resulting in a computer that is running too slow to be usable. During that period, the computer is just as useless as if there had been a complete BSOD system crash.
But if the process leaks memory, then the leaked memory is not accessed afterwards (by definition of being leaked), so the system would soon start swapping it out, instead of swapping out actual constantly accessed memory of other running proceses. In other words, the new allocations push old ones to swap.
Or you could set limitations to process memory usage. That should stop the process right on its tracks.
No, the people who are complaining the most and trying to find software to break DRM protections are the people who don't want to pay for the latest CD they heard on the radio. That is all that this discussion is about.
No. You only need to break the DRM in the CD (well, actually, a disk that looks a bit like CD, since a "CD" can't have DRM by CD format definition, so something that has DRM is not a valid CD) if you have the CD yourself. If you simply want to download the songs, you get them as mp3's. No reason for you to break anything, then; it's already been done for you.
Slashdot, where you get modded down as redundant for stating an opposing viewpoint... Independent thought anyone?
Well, Slashdot doesn't have "-1 Does Not Make Sense" -mod, and "-1 Overrated" isn't metamoderated, so people pick what they feel is most descriptive while still letting others double-check their mods.
Job security and ego is everywhere. Some people think if others can understand their work, they become less important/useful.
And these people are, sadly, correct. If others can understand their work, then the Indians can likely do it cheaper. Consequently they get fired and their job outsourced.
The lesson here is that people want and need job security, and will take steps to create it themselves if it won't be provided to them, no matter how much harm it causes to the field or firm they work in.
I'm sure that some people will now post how you can switch jobs like socks and pick the best when you're amongst the best in your field, but the sad truth is that most people will never be amongst the best (by the definition of "best"). They still have children and need to feed them and feed them, and need a reliable source of income for that. So if such a person gets a chance of making himself irreplacable, at the expense of making his workplace less efficient... Well, what would you pick, your children or your job ?
If you want to get rid of this kind of behavior, give people other ways of insuring their continued employment. And if you insist on cutthroat competition, don't be surprised when people start using armored collars.
Sure, but that doesn't conflict with claiming that we were meant for something specific. For example, a needle is meant for sewing, but it works fine for poking people's eyes out too.
You're making yourself sound like a theist.
You're making it sound like you thought there was something wrong with that. Which, combined with your previous unproven claims being stated as truth makes you sound like an atheist.
Now let's see if an article about SIGGRAPH turns into another religious war...
Re:Disclaiming digital restrictions
on
30 Days of DRM
·
· Score: 1
And what would prevent you from applying DRM to the music on behalf of your band?
The price, of course. You can't allow people to just record sound to the DRM'd format on their own, since that allows for the analog hole; no, you're going to need to have Apple sign it. And both Apple and the RIAA will benefit from making the signing price high: Apple in the form of increased profits, the RIAA from locking out competition.
So he was. However, anarchy doesn't lead to freedom, it leads to the rule of the strongest. That's how the government V hated so much had come about, and destroying it would simply cause another one to rise from the chaos and be hailed as heros for securing people's lives, at least in the beginning.
V had a long conversation with a statue of justice on top of a courthouse. He told it he had once loved justice but was now in love with anarchy, thinking it would lead to freedom. What he didn't realize is that freedom requires justice; you won't remain free for long if anyone can oppress you with impunity.
In order to be free from oppression, you need a system of laws to protect you. Absolute freedom isn't, or at least won't stay for long. There lies the paradox which V failed to understand.
"They" have to keep the public in a state of fear so they can control us and our reactions to the loss of our freedoms. V for Vendetta made this point very well.
"V" was an idiot who kept on dreaming about anarchy, not realizing that he was already living in an anarchy. Namely, he was living in stage three of anarchy, where one of the gangs fighting for power had won and, since there was nothing stopping them, had created a tyranny.
What V showed very well was that anarchy never leads to freedom, it leads to dictatorship, since there are no laws to stop anyone from achieving it.
If you've just planted a cunningly-disguised bomb, and someone finds it, you don't jump up and say "it's mine".
Unless you are trying to keep them from trying to examine it further and realizing that it is, in fact, a disguised bomb and not an iPod.
Of course if you disguise something as something else and someone starts examining it closely, you try to distract them. That's the only logical course of action. Well, apart from going to bathroom and just blowing up the thing instead of leaving it there to blow up a little later, since you're going to die anyway.
If a guy is unlucky enough to be a pedophile, he is expected to avoid sexual satisfaction as to avoid harm to children. You can't expect something that's probably genetic or in any case not in the control of the person to be controlled (i.e aroused by child porn) but you can expect him to do whatever is necessary to not act upon those urges.
The pictures of the WTC are not the encouragement for such acts, and are not problematic - so you cannot compare them with the images that required child abuse and made only for those who seek to view them.
This is illogical. In times of war, news and films of victories were used as propaganda all the time. For example, the picture of Saddam's statue being brought down was used as propaganda. So I'm sure that Al-Qaida is even now using their great victory as propaganda to boost the morals of their recruits.
Heck, I'm sure that there's people who jerk off to the video of WTC falling down. Wouldn't be anywhere near the nastiest shit I've come accross...
The truth is once the FBI gets interested in this guy and supeneas ISP logs, they can start looking at what he's actually downloading,
Irrelevant, since once you gain control of a computer you can make it download anything you want.
when the pics are downloaded,
Irrelevant, since there's no way to know when the hacker first gained access to the computer.
when the 'puter was accessed through the subseven backdoor and what the timestamps on the illegal material is;
Irrelevant, because
The computer is able to run timed jobs; that is, the hacker can tell it to download child porn two hours after the hacker disconnects and
There's no way to know how the hacker gained access to the computer; even if there's evidence to one method, the hacker could have used another and simply planted evidence pointing to the first. Specifically, this guy could have gotten a virus or trojan which contacted the hacker (indirectly, of course) for instructions, removing any trace of inbound connections.
The Gov can throw a lot of resources into a prosecution and even an ER doctor is going to get bled dry by expert witnesses at $300.00/hr to counter the governments experts.
So basically guilt and innocence are based on how much money the accused has. I'm starting to think that US courts deserve to be held in contempt.
Slashdot Mirror
No worries, Jupiter's working hard to fix it, but unfortunately the results will only be suitable for demiplanets ;).
Sometimes, when someone manages to escape from the Abyss alive, the weight of memory is too much for them and they jump to river Styx to purge themselves of it. The discarded memory becomes a kind of monster called a "Stygian Memory", and it tries to find some other unfortunate bastard to rebind to and torment.
And the funny thing is, I've never actually played D&D !-(
Whether a ball of rock, gas or liquid is called a planet, planetoid, or an asteroid is not science by any stretch of imagination. We are talking about arbitrary limits, so why not put them where it's convenient: where people expect them to be. So, let's call Pluto a planet, so we don't need to change our textbooks; it's not like it makes any difference to science.
But you can change an arbitrary definition by protesting.
Bohr model is demonstratably incorrect. It is, however, impossible to devise any experiment whatsoever that would conclusively prove that some particular definition of the word "planet" (or anything else for that matter) is incorrect. Planet is whatever people mean when they say planet.
Or we could just agree to call all bodies in freefall "unfixed masses" in scientific context and let "planet" be the popular layman word for nine specific unfixed masses, as well as any other that happen to acquire the usage as we explore neighbouring solar systems, however long that may take. Problem solved, science has been improved by removing the artificial division to planets and non-planets, and the unwashed masses can keep calling Pluto a planet without fear of being forcefully shampooed by the semantic police.
You mean like I'm not allowed to use Windows XP despite having paid a portion of the school's copy ?
For most traditional game types this is true. Growing the userbase from nothing to large quickly requires a huge budget. Viral marketing works, but it works exponentially, which means that growth is very slow in years, and most games just aren't interesting enough to survive that long.
However, MMOGs are different in three ways. First, they have the potential to stay interesting for years, since the players make more content ("social" content - guilds and such - and sometimes also graphical or gameplay content). Second, because of this, they become the more interesting the older they become. And third, the players have a vested interest to get their RL friends to start playing, since it gives them either in-game allies or at least familiar people to play with.
Finally, the lack of need for a central server means that such a game can survive just fine in the corners of gaming industry. All it takes is two people willing to play; that's sufficient. You don't need a minimum of 10 000 or 100 000 players for it to be profitable. Consequently, such a game cannot be driven out of the market, which means that the engine will be ever improved and the content available to it will grow, making it more and more competitive.
And you misunderstand what I'm saying. MMOGs will be succesful, but the current model is unsustainable, since once distributed MMOG technology is advanced to the point of working well it is far superior to the current model. And distributed model allows for free - as in beer and speech - games, which will drive the current industry into the grave, since no one will pay to play an MMOG if they can play one for free.
I'm not arguing that MMOGs are going to die; I'm simply arguing that you can't keep on making money just for running the server once technology removes the need for one.
It's a bit like selling air on a just-colonized planet that's being terraformed: the population grows, so the market grows, but once the planet gains a breathable atmosphere the need for air will keep growing but your ability to get any money from it will disappear. Demand alone doesn't make a market, it takes a limited supply to rise prices above zero.
Of course the industry could simply switch to building and selling cool personalized avatars and other content to players of this free MMOG and make a killing since they no longer need to run the server and upkeep the server and client programs. However, seeing the antics of RIAA and MPAA makes it hard to believe content producers capable of either reason, logic or the slightest business sense.
I was unaware that Guild Wars was open-sourced and without central servers.
The main benefit of using a central server is having a cohesive, authoritative snapshot of the state of the gameworld and the rules that govern how that state may be changed. The only thing left after that is the UI, and that's all the client can do in this model.
Which is why I think that such games rise from open source movement. The successful open-sourced games (Nethack, Battle of Westnoth) have in common their replay value, which in turn allows the iterative development method to be used succesfully; MMORPGs have been shown to also incorporate this feature, so once the problem of needing a central server has been solved, there's nothing stopping Free software from overtaking them.
But online chat isn't an industry. Or did you pay to chat in IRC or with an instant messenger ?
Online gaming is here to stay. However, in order for it to stay an industry, it must make money. Currently this is easily done, since the games require centralized servers and this in turn leads naturally to such things as monthly fees. But what if the underlaying technology was to change ?
The system is currently basically the old central mainframe / dumb terminal -setup. The servers take care of all the processing, and the client program just reads user input and gives output. A glorified MUD. Unfortunately, it is not scalable.
The number of simultaneous players is rising constantly, and the server size can't be increased forever. So, in time, more and more of the actual processing needs to be offloaded to the client machines. The main problem is that the server needs to prevent cheating somehow; the easiest ways of doing this include using DRM or simply offloading the task to several clients at once and comparing the results. Eventually this system would resemble the Napster of old, where all the actual interesting things were on people's computers, and the servers basically just coordinated the whole thing. At this point people would propably also connect directly to each other to decrease lag.
So, what happens when someone introduces the Gnutella of MMORPGs ? A system which doesn't need a central server to function. The players would run "servents", each of which would not only provide the user interface but also run a tiny area of the gameworld. Walk to the edge of the current area, and your servent connects to another servent. Enough people concentrate to an area, and the servent running divides parts of it to nearby ones; an area is empty enough, and the servent asks other servents for more areas to run.
Such an MMORPG would have no need for monthly fees. It's running costs would be divided between its players in their electrical and bandwidth bills. It would mean the end of the industry, not because MMORPGs themselves became unpopular, but because the model of monthly fees would be unmaintainable - you don't need a central server to play, so you don't need to pay anyone to run one either.
Of course content makers would stand to make a killing selling cool new models, but that's how it should be. And of course this MMORPG with no central controlling entity would likely have some rather unwholesome areas, but then again, that's how it should be, IMHO :).
If you cry you're a whining crybaby, if you don't you're insensitive. Kinda explains why sex drive needs to be as strong as it is to ensure the survival of human race. I sure wouldn't have anything to do with the damn thing if women weren't so... full of mathemathically interesting curves ;).
But I wonder if a woman that's been ditched for another and is crying about it gets called a crybaby ?
And if a self-obvious statement seemd like s great insight to you, then clearly you're a blond.
Singerely,
Ultra Nova
In a cynical mood tonight.
Apparently some people have trouble getting the point even when it's demonstrated to them. I guess that makes you a bit slow in the uptake, eh, Nameless One ? Go back to being sodomized by balors in Hades where you belong, you cowardly Blood War refuse. Disembodied lich skulls have a better-looking face than you. The sight of you would make a succubus celibate; hell, the sight of you would make a succubus swear off evil and become a paladin just to oppose such hideous monstrosity as you are.
Sincerely, and in the hopes that this was enough to finally drive the point home,
Slashdot Registered User 717540
AKA Ultranova.
Not true. I have 1 gig of physical memory, 5 gigs of swap space, and a 32-bit processor (and 3/1 memory split in the kernel). In this setup the application only has 3 gigs worth of accessible address space, and if it uses it all, the system still has 3 gigs of virtual memory available for other use.
Of course the darn thing could be forking child processes...
But if the process leaks memory, then the leaked memory is not accessed afterwards (by definition of being leaked), so the system would soon start swapping it out, instead of swapping out actual constantly accessed memory of other running proceses. In other words, the new allocations push old ones to swap.
Or you could set limitations to process memory usage. That should stop the process right on its tracks.
No. You only need to break the DRM in the CD (well, actually, a disk that looks a bit like CD, since a "CD" can't have DRM by CD format definition, so something that has DRM is not a valid CD) if you have the CD yourself. If you simply want to download the songs, you get them as mp3's. No reason for you to break anything, then; it's already been done for you.
Well, Slashdot doesn't have "-1 Does Not Make Sense" -mod, and "-1 Overrated" isn't metamoderated, so people pick what they feel is most descriptive while still letting others double-check their mods.
And these people are, sadly, correct. If others can understand their work, then the Indians can likely do it cheaper. Consequently they get fired and their job outsourced.
The lesson here is that people want and need job security, and will take steps to create it themselves if it won't be provided to them, no matter how much harm it causes to the field or firm they work in.
I'm sure that some people will now post how you can switch jobs like socks and pick the best when you're amongst the best in your field, but the sad truth is that most people will never be amongst the best (by the definition of "best"). They still have children and need to feed them and feed them, and need a reliable source of income for that. So if such a person gets a chance of making himself irreplacable, at the expense of making his workplace less efficient... Well, what would you pick, your children or your job ?
If you want to get rid of this kind of behavior, give people other ways of insuring their continued employment. And if you insist on cutthroat competition, don't be surprised when people start using armored collars.
And you know this how ?
Sure, but that doesn't conflict with claiming that we were meant for something specific. For example, a needle is meant for sewing, but it works fine for poking people's eyes out too.
You're making it sound like you thought there was something wrong with that. Which, combined with your previous unproven claims being stated as truth makes you sound like an atheist.
Now let's see if an article about SIGGRAPH turns into another religious war...
The price, of course. You can't allow people to just record sound to the DRM'd format on their own, since that allows for the analog hole; no, you're going to need to have Apple sign it. And both Apple and the RIAA will benefit from making the signing price high: Apple in the form of increased profits, the RIAA from locking out competition.
I read the comic, but haven't seen the movie.
So he was. However, anarchy doesn't lead to freedom, it leads to the rule of the strongest. That's how the government V hated so much had come about, and destroying it would simply cause another one to rise from the chaos and be hailed as heros for securing people's lives, at least in the beginning.
V had a long conversation with a statue of justice on top of a courthouse. He told it he had once loved justice but was now in love with anarchy, thinking it would lead to freedom. What he didn't realize is that freedom requires justice; you won't remain free for long if anyone can oppress you with impunity.
In order to be free from oppression, you need a system of laws to protect you. Absolute freedom isn't, or at least won't stay for long. There lies the paradox which V failed to understand.
"V" was an idiot who kept on dreaming about anarchy, not realizing that he was already living in an anarchy. Namely, he was living in stage three of anarchy, where one of the gangs fighting for power had won and, since there was nothing stopping them, had created a tyranny.
What V showed very well was that anarchy never leads to freedom, it leads to dictatorship, since there are no laws to stop anyone from achieving it.
Not true, the world has plenty of wolfs as well. That's the problem actually, nothing stops the wolfs from having a feast.
I'll leave to the reader to figure out if the wolfs wear, turbans, suits or both.
Unless you are trying to keep them from trying to examine it further and realizing that it is, in fact, a disguised bomb and not an iPod.
Of course if you disguise something as something else and someone starts examining it closely, you try to distract them. That's the only logical course of action. Well, apart from going to bathroom and just blowing up the thing instead of leaving it there to blow up a little later, since you're going to die anyway.
Turbine. Fans are soooo yesterday tech.
This is illogical. In times of war, news and films of victories were used as propaganda all the time. For example, the picture of Saddam's statue being brought down was used as propaganda. So I'm sure that Al-Qaida is even now using their great victory as propaganda to boost the morals of their recruits.
Heck, I'm sure that there's people who jerk off to the video of WTC falling down. Wouldn't be anywhere near the nastiest shit I've come accross...
Well, outsourcing's popular nowadays, isn't it ? And I doubt anyone can claim that US government was not competent in matters of corruption.
Irrelevant, since once you gain control of a computer you can make it download anything you want.
Irrelevant, since there's no way to know when the hacker first gained access to the computer.
Irrelevant, because
So basically guilt and innocence are based on how much money the accused has. I'm starting to think that US courts deserve to be held in contempt.