Aren't most indie games made by guys who think their ideas are underrepresented and underappreciated in mainstream gaming?
I dunno, but as a gamer, it's my firm opinion that the right ideas are under-represented in gaming. The right ideas being embodied in Mechassault v1, and to a lesser extent, v2. They had *everything* right in v1, based on the tech of the day. Redo it with no changes except more polys and perhaps some additional environments and put the damn online gaming system back up... I'd pay $500 for that game. Hell, I'd even buy the new XBox POS to play it, and literally NOTHING else could make me do that.
I own all manner of mech games from Steel Battalion (the one with the mongo controller) to Japanese manga weirdness, and Mechassault is the one that nails playability to the wall.
Can't say I'm in the least tweaked by hand-drawn stuff, though. The more real it looks, the better I like it.
No, it involves a search of *their* house or person or computer or whatever, and they, as congress has long recognized, have obligations to keep *our* stuff private. You're *really* missing the point.
You think it's ok for the bank to just hand out your financial data? You're wrong. It's not ok. It's never been ok. It never will be ok; and these idiots are WAY out of line.
The problem with this situation is that none of the things being seized fall under 'persons, houses, papers, or effects'.
I think that's a very naive statement. Your papers are those things that record your thoughts, actions, legal obligations, correspondence, etc. Your bank records are your papers. Your heating bills are your papers. No one has any right to that information but you and the institution you're dealing with, and if the institution gives it up in any form but aggregated, non-specific statistics, I'd say they violated your confidence. Data about actions you take with another entity is clearly personal and only those involved can make the decision to go public with that information. Here, the phone company has been coerced: do this or jail, fines, etc. Notice when they've been trying to coerce Google, google has been saying, "this is wrong" and trying to fight said taking (and it IS a taking) in the courts?
If the phone company had done this voluntarily, I'd say, trash our phones. But it's not them. It's the feds. Unfortunately, with a population of idiots, quislings and sheep, that's not going to get fixed any time soon.
If you wish to maintain your privacy, we now have concrete confirmation that the telephone is not to be used. Something else to keep in mind is that what is not a crime today, may be a crime tomorrow, and neither the feds or the states have shown restraint when inflicting ex post facto laws upon the citizens.
"no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation"
It's long past time to divest Judge Rubberstamp of his position. The government does not have probable cause for such a search.
Congressperson Rubberstamp should go as well. Unfortunately, the populace is stupid, and so we will continue to see such erosion of privacy based upon the flimsiest of disingenuous excuses.
It's what authorizes legitimate government. Anyone think this is authorized? 4th amendment? Anyone?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
A shipment and/or payment module can (should) be designed to be configurable. As in (simplified) "Enter shipping charges here" or "Enter phone number and handshake options for payment processor here." That doesn't mean adding a completely different module such as "collect tax for other states" or "background check on purchaser" is in any way supported or otherwise "easy."
Are you suggesting that peoples photos + criminal records are open to the public? Maybe that is the case where you are from, but I'm quite sure it's not like that in most places.
I'm from the USA; this is a US site. Hence my statement: Yes, they are open to the public. They can be searched by any one, any time. And they are. Employers, insurance companies, dating sites, and a whole host of other institutions do this as a matter of course. You want to do it yourself, google it, and have a party, there's nothing stopping you.
Again, are you trying to suggest that that doesn't already happen???
Yes. Here's the (obvious) difference. Google glass is on your head; its computer is online; it has access to the camera (in some senses, it *is* the camera); from there to indicating who you are is one short burst off to a FR database and one back. Given the capability in general, automating it is likely trivial. That's what's different. Now all manner of information about you is right there, right now, and that too is different. If it turns out that said information is used to create an un-level playing field, this, I suggest, is entirely a bad thing; just as it's use by less intrusive cousins -- employment, insurance, schools -- is destructive and bad for society at large as well as the individual being discriminated against, as are the more individual level problems of spitburgers, personal and family harassment, and the general opportunity to reinvent yourself. In a world where every mistake follows you everywhere, there's going to be a lot of unnecessary pain.
Integrating TaxCloud.net into a cart is supposed to be no more painful than integrating a payment processor or a shipping rate service.
When someone else assures you across the board that integrating something of theirs is [some level of difficult], into something of yours, where they know exactly nothing about your situation, work load, code, or available resources, you can be absolutely certain they have no idea whatsoever what they're talking about.
Further, for systems that implement home-grown shipping and payment, even the context is meaningless. "no more difficult" could be extremely difficult.
There are systems out there for whom the developers aren't even available any longer.
Whenever the government decides they're going to make every business, everywhere, do something, the load will neither be equal nor fair, and further, it may be fatal to the business for any number of reasons.
No, you're missing two things. One is the concept that the perfect mate -- not the perfect person, which is nonsense -- has flaws, as we all do. The other is that perfection as a mate isn't necessarily a permanent characteristic, because people also change.
Well, it's thor vs loki all right, but pretty much every expectation that would hand you, you can discard.:)
It's one of my favorite Laumer books, and that's really saying something, because I like a lot of his stuff quite well. Highly recommend The Long Twilight if you can find a copy.
Nah, "Outlander" was a fantasy ripoff of Keith Laumer's SF "The Long Twilight" (and Laumer's book was WAY better), but Laumer's book was probably a ripoff of Beowulf, lol.
If you see this as a "hard boiled detective" story - and it's exactly that flavor of noir - then a voiceover is natural. Plus, the end of the voiceover, to the effect of "who knows how much time any of us really has", adds the idea that Decker has decided he doesn't care whether he's a replicant, and that's a perfect insight for his character.
Nah, it doesn't suck, it just becomes... vague, and loses some of that old time feel, which I think is one of its key appealing factors. No question for me, the narrated version is by *far* the best version, but there's no down side to having multiple versions out there, something for everyone. If people want to imagine the movie is full of meaning and contemplate abstractions, they can. For others, it's just a terrific SF ride into a mostly possible future. Since most movies fail miserably at the latter, I have zero complaints with Blade Runner, which pulls it off almost perfectly.
I like the voiceover version the best by far. It steers the movie more cleanly. I'm there to be entertained, not to think. It's (mostly) SF, not reality. As for rate, it's one of my absolute favorites.
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno, but as a gamer, it's my firm opinion that the right ideas are under-represented in gaming. The right ideas being embodied in Mechassault v1, and to a lesser extent, v2. They had *everything* right in v1, based on the tech of the day. Redo it with no changes except more polys and perhaps some additional environments and put the damn online gaming system back up... I'd pay $500 for that game. Hell, I'd even buy the new XBox POS to play it, and literally NOTHING else could make me do that.
I own all manner of mech games from Steel Battalion (the one with the mongo controller) to Japanese manga weirdness, and Mechassault is the one that nails playability to the wall.
Can't say I'm in the least tweaked by hand-drawn stuff, though. The more real it looks, the better I like it.
No, it involves a search of *their* house or person or computer or whatever, and they, as congress has long recognized, have obligations to keep *our* stuff private. You're *really* missing the point.
You think it's ok for the bank to just hand out your financial data? You're wrong. It's not ok. It's never been ok. It never will be ok; and these idiots are WAY out of line.
Also, congress knows this and has even written legislation to support it.
I think that's a very naive statement. Your papers are those things that record your thoughts, actions, legal obligations, correspondence, etc. Your bank records are your papers. Your heating bills are your papers. No one has any right to that information but you and the institution you're dealing with, and if the institution gives it up in any form but aggregated, non-specific statistics, I'd say they violated your confidence. Data about actions you take with another entity is clearly personal and only those involved can make the decision to go public with that information. Here, the phone company has been coerced: do this or jail, fines, etc. Notice when they've been trying to coerce Google, google has been saying, "this is wrong" and trying to fight said taking (and it IS a taking) in the courts?
If the phone company had done this voluntarily, I'd say, trash our phones. But it's not them. It's the feds. Unfortunately, with a population of idiots, quislings and sheep, that's not going to get fixed any time soon.
If you wish to maintain your privacy, we now have concrete confirmation that the telephone is not to be used. Something else to keep in mind is that what is not a crime today, may be a crime tomorrow, and neither the feds or the states have shown restraint when inflicting ex post facto laws upon the citizens.
"Would you please provide X" is not an "ask" when it is followed by a directly associated "or you'll go to jail."
Coercion is not "agreement."
It's long past time to divest Judge Rubberstamp of his position. The government does not have probable cause for such a search.
Congressperson Rubberstamp should go as well. Unfortunately, the populace is stupid, and so we will continue to see such erosion of privacy based upon the flimsiest of disingenuous excuses.
It's what authorizes legitimate government. Anyone think this is authorized? 4th amendment? Anyone?
A shipment and/or payment module can (should) be designed to be configurable. As in (simplified) "Enter shipping charges here" or "Enter phone number and handshake options for payment processor here." That doesn't mean adding a completely different module such as "collect tax for other states" or "background check on purchaser" is in any way supported or otherwise "easy."
I'm from the USA; this is a US site. Hence my statement: Yes, they are open to the public. They can be searched by any one, any time. And they are. Employers, insurance companies, dating sites, and a whole host of other institutions do this as a matter of course. You want to do it yourself, google it, and have a party, there's nothing stopping you.
Yes. Here's the (obvious) difference. Google glass is on your head; its computer is online; it has access to the camera (in some senses, it *is* the camera); from there to indicating who you are is one short burst off to a FR database and one back. Given the capability in general, automating it is likely trivial. That's what's different. Now all manner of information about you is right there, right now, and that too is different. If it turns out that said information is used to create an un-level playing field, this, I suggest, is entirely a bad thing; just as it's use by less intrusive cousins -- employment, insurance, schools -- is destructive and bad for society at large as well as the individual being discriminated against, as are the more individual level problems of spitburgers, personal and family harassment, and the general opportunity to reinvent yourself. In a world where every mistake follows you everywhere, there's going to be a lot of unnecessary pain.
*net buyers and retailers, of course
No worries for buyers. Plenty of worries for retailers. Same thing here in Montana.
When someone else assures you across the board that integrating something of theirs is [some level of difficult], into something of yours, where they know exactly nothing about your situation, work load, code, or available resources, you can be absolutely certain they have no idea whatsoever what they're talking about.
Further, for systems that implement home-grown shipping and payment, even the context is meaningless. "no more difficult" could be extremely difficult.
There are systems out there for whom the developers aren't even available any longer.
Whenever the government decides they're going to make every business, everywhere, do something, the load will neither be equal nor fair, and further, it may be fatal to the business for any number of reasons.
No, you're missing two things. One is the concept that the perfect mate -- not the perfect person, which is nonsense -- has flaws, as we all do. The other is that perfection as a mate isn't necessarily a permanent characteristic, because people also change.
Well, I suppose the lawyers will be happy to hear that.
Well, it's thor vs loki all right, but pretty much every expectation that would hand you, you can discard. :)
It's one of my favorite Laumer books, and that's really saying something, because I like a lot of his stuff quite well. Highly recommend The Long Twilight if you can find a copy.
Sez you. However, no one cares what you sez. Also, TV is a wasteland.
Can you count on that?
The bible is *definitely* a steaming pile of shit. Worse, it pretends to be reality, and in that guise does immense harm.
Nah, "Outlander" was a fantasy ripoff of Keith Laumer's SF "The Long Twilight" (and Laumer's book was WAY better), but Laumer's book was probably a ripoff of Beowulf, lol.
Best comment on the whole damn page. Kudos.
I'd pick Jason Statham, myself. He's got all the worthy characteristics of Harrison Ford, plus he can act, and actually performs good action scenes.
No one is forcing you to do anything. Your analysis is full retard.
Nah, it doesn't suck, it just becomes... vague, and loses some of that old time feel, which I think is one of its key appealing factors. No question for me, the narrated version is by *far* the best version, but there's no down side to having multiple versions out there, something for everyone. If people want to imagine the movie is full of meaning and contemplate abstractions, they can. For others, it's just a terrific SF ride into a mostly possible future. Since most movies fail miserably at the latter, I have zero complaints with Blade Runner, which pulls it off almost perfectly.
I like the voiceover version the best by far. It steers the movie more cleanly. I'm there to be entertained, not to think. It's (mostly) SF, not reality. As for rate, it's one of my absolute favorites.