Statements like that probably mean he had hollow points in his pistols- aka, the same ammunition cops use. That phrase sounds VERY flaky. Given how badly the media has fucked up the details on this case (remember when the shooter was a 24 year old, there might have been a second shooter, and a younger brother was hiding in the woods? Remember when his mother was a kindergarten teacher at the school? All initially reported and totally untrue)
As a new Wii-U owner, I'm pretty sure this console is super lots about the gamepad. To the point where I'm a bit worried that they've put so much effort into the porting of games that don't have a shiny interface pad. Nintendo has defined THEIR OWN SPACE again, and as before, they will have a hard time filling it.
The pad is pretty magnificent to look upon, and I'm pretty sure a decent amount of the launch price attempts to offset such a pricey addition.
The problem is: if you make a top shelf game for Xbox and Sony, porting it to the Wii-U will leave you with this big piece of underutilized or unused hardware. The less creative will just put their pause screen options there (possibly taking them from the main screen), but even the most creative will have to spend dev dollars to make use of the screen, or look like they don't care much about it. If you instead choose to make a game for the Wii-U, one that makes good use of the screen, you probably won't be able to put it anywhere else.
Nintendo like, ALWAYS does this. They basically assume that some of the best names in gaming (of which they are one) will gather together and support whatever their new hardware idea is, and work that into their design. But in practice, many of the big players aren't willing to gamble on that.
Summary: The pad is a huge part of this experience. Ninja Gaiden whatever isn't improved by the pad. If F-Zero WhateverX doesn't come out with an engine tweaking function on the pad, or the ability to rebalance shields or something, then the bad will be called a "gimmick" and then everyone will just talk about the Wii-U's CPU/GPU and other stuff it can't really compete on anyway.
Is it delusion to modify the appearance of something, if only the appearance is reality? If everyone wants to, of their own free will, opt into a reality where I'm model-hot, sign me up. You all have my permission to view me as something about as hot as Brad Pitt in his prime, if that technology exists and people want to use it that would be fantastic.
Is to not give your DNA out. Sure, one possibility is that this guy decided "well, whatever, they won't catch me", and gave his DNA with the assumption that the test couldn't POSSIBLY work. That's possible.
The article discusses this as if it were fact. What if this is a screw-up? What it was his DNA there for a different reason? I mean, what's the confidence on these tests? Everyone is taught in school that everyone's DNA is unique, but our ability to test doesn't magically do a file-diff, and there's room for error. It doesn't go on for seventeen digits of significance or anything, and with thousands of dice being rolled, who knows?
What about the possibility that this guy gave his DNA knowing that he didn't do it?
I know we shouldn't underestimate the stupidity of criminals, but it seems pretty dumb to give your DNA when the police come around looking to convince you, especially when you could claim non participation for a NUMBER of reasons (or just sell everything over the course of the over a decade this took, and leave for somewhere else). His actions were of a man who believed he was innocent.
Ever since I saw a Nokia product placed in Star Trek- which implies than Nokia will live through a eugenic revolution, a mass die off, an age of darkness, and the transition to a post commerce, post scarcity society- I've wanted them to go under in my lifetime. The arrogance, and how jarring that dumb moment was, clashed together. I want the product dead and the name buried!
First, it implies that the odds of YOUR vote deciding are miniscule. Actually, they are 0. I mean, literally 0. Take an election where only 21 people show up. The vote is 11-10. YOUR VOTE MADE THE DIFFERENCE... Actually, all 11 people who voted will say that. Did they ALL make the difference? Or was your vote 1/11th of the decision? What about if Florida had come down to one vote, would all of those millions of voters have been the vote that decided? Would your vote be one whatever millionth of the decision?...and if so, isn't that what we have now, in an election that doesn't come down to a single vote (or very few)?
There's never one vote that decides. THAT IS THE FUCKING POINT OF VOTING. It is to gather AGGREGATE information and eventually enact that into social policy. You can certainly criticize the manner in which we choose to do it, but bitching that one vote doesn't make the difference is like complaining that you can't divide by zero.
Second, politicians look at the numbers of voters. If 5% of Americans voted Libertarian, you would see the Democrats back even FURTHER away from gun control, and the Republicans would talk less about the war on drugs. Major policies would be enacted based on that 5% vote (the Libertarian vote has never been much more than 1%, and even then it has been influential). So, of course, have the Greens. Do you REALLY think the Democratic party didn't listen to shouts of "Al Gore, corporate whore!"? Do you think Nader didn't change very much what policies they backed and who they nominated? It's not because "Nader needs to win", it's because your vote matters for SECOND ORDER REASONS.
So, that article is shit. And that's why- it think voting is some magical genie, when in fact you are providing valuable information to all members of society.
While I would love a stand-up desk, I simply can't find such a thing in any style I would like (wood, with frigging drawers, preferably a return desk)- not some horribly naked looking Ikea thing that would make my grandfather roll his eyes.
Does anyone have a suggestion for that? I don't want cinder blocks, planks, or anything ghetto like that. I live in a house, not a workshop!
Fucking shit the last time I had to grab tinyturdware in order to have a useable GUI, it was before Win95. Now I need a list of downloadable crap that ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE THE BASELINE SUCKS ASS, and I don't even know the list. Maybe there's something to browse?
Whatever, fuck it, and if you defend it, fuck you too. The sheer attitude of the devs is so hard to explain. It's like, they build it for some lowest common denominator that doesn't even exist, and then if you don't like that you must be some kind of problem case so go get a dumb extension? I guess it's good that they have those now, when I left that GUI they sure as shit didn't, they just had a bunch of goddamned attitude.
Fuck it. Just fuck it. GNOME is a lost fucking cause until it gets forked by devs that don't have their heads so far up their asses that they are topologically equivalent to a fucking klein bottle.
"Look, you have to think where the Founding Fathers' heads were when they penned the second amendment. Having just got off a war with an oppressive government, they wanted to guarantee that citizens could revolt again should the need ever arise. Back then, the average citizen's armaments were the same ones used by the military. These days if you tried to revolt with the pea shooters you're still allowed to buy, the military could just kill you with a hellfire missile launched from a drone 20 miles away."
I *GUESS* I can get behind your idea to sell Hellfire missiles and kill-drones to American citizens, but it just seems a bit unnecessary...
This is true HOWEVER- because this is a moderately large part of our defense against tyranny, we should be concerned about increasing automation of the warfighter. If we eventually hit a level of technology where a general's orders can be executed by robot fighters, you can see how this would be a concern.
Of course, we are at minimum decades away from such a sci-fi scenario.
But GP also misses something- if the US Gov't "went All Saddam Hussein" on us, there would be no way they would take out every gun owner in the land. There's way more guns than people in the US, and we've successfully fought off gun registries time and time again. Everyone would be "a gun owner".
More importantly, if you want to play the games accurately, you should use the controllers- or at least, that's one school of thought on it, and one that needs the most support to be realized.
It's not racism. It's either an employee correctly refusing to violate a (imo silly if it applies to consumer electronics) law, or the same employee INCORRECTLY doing same (pretty damned sure it's the second- the article implies that). Either way, it's clear that the employee's stated reason is not based on race.
Also unlike the summary states, she told the employee that it was a gift for her cousin, who is an Iranian citizen. It wasn't just "because she was speaking Farsi".
And no, I'm no Applepologist. But this doesn't look like it is the story that is being presented.
Darwin awards aren't given to people whose exposure to danger is consciously undertaken, and most certainly not those for whom the risk was for the betterment of society- for instance, coal mine workers, soldiers, infectious agent researchers, and of course, scientists.
War is morally neutral too- again, like violence, you can have just or unjust wars. If you are a pacifist, say so, but it doesn't excuse being opposed to medicine because it will ease the suffering of individuals that you personally don't approve of.
I mean, do you fucking think for ONE GODDAMNED SECOND that the people in charge are like "well, no, we don't want to go to war, because our soldiers may experience PTSD". You think that's holding them back? It's not like THEY are the ones to make that sacrifice. The correct ways to eliminate unnecessary wars involve education, empathy, transparency, and I would argue a spirit of brotherly love, even with those who share different values. It sure as fuck isn't "Maybe the men serving the nations could suffer more? That's cool, right? I mean, they are willing to sacrifice themselves for vague concepts like "country" and in some cases the financial interest of fucking organizations, maybe they could sacrifice even MORE somehow, and that would make tragedies less likely to happen."
1)- War isn't always wrong. 2)- Violence isn't always wrong. 3)- Abolition of suffering is always moral. 4)- Principles aside, your opinion is empty practically as well.
If you think I'm being a bit over the top, or maybe coming across rude, it is because I despise everything you've said in this thread here with every ounce of my being, and disagree with it profoundly.
Slashdot Mirror
Statements like that probably mean he had hollow points in his pistols- aka, the same ammunition cops use. That phrase sounds VERY flaky. Given how badly the media has fucked up the details on this case (remember when the shooter was a 24 year old, there might have been a second shooter, and a younger brother was hiding in the woods? Remember when his mother was a kindergarten teacher at the school? All initially reported and totally untrue)
As a new Wii-U owner, I'm pretty sure this console is super lots about the gamepad. To the point where I'm a bit worried that they've put so much effort into the porting of games that don't have a shiny interface pad. Nintendo has defined THEIR OWN SPACE again, and as before, they will have a hard time filling it.
The pad is pretty magnificent to look upon, and I'm pretty sure a decent amount of the launch price attempts to offset such a pricey addition.
The problem is: if you make a top shelf game for Xbox and Sony, porting it to the Wii-U will leave you with this big piece of underutilized or unused hardware. The less creative will just put their pause screen options there (possibly taking them from the main screen), but even the most creative will have to spend dev dollars to make use of the screen, or look like they don't care much about it. If you instead choose to make a game for the Wii-U, one that makes good use of the screen, you probably won't be able to put it anywhere else.
Nintendo like, ALWAYS does this. They basically assume that some of the best names in gaming (of which they are one) will gather together and support whatever their new hardware idea is, and work that into their design. But in practice, many of the big players aren't willing to gamble on that.
Summary: The pad is a huge part of this experience. Ninja Gaiden whatever isn't improved by the pad. If F-Zero WhateverX doesn't come out with an engine tweaking function on the pad, or the ability to rebalance shields or something, then the bad will be called a "gimmick" and then everyone will just talk about the Wii-U's CPU/GPU and other stuff it can't really compete on anyway.
You should look into why nations sign the NPT to begin with. Hint: there's more to it than just "As a non-nuclear state, I won't seek nukes."
Super, and what ancient super weapon is the ark of the covenant? Or the spear of Zeus?
Or does just that one religion have the answer, because it's the One True One? :/
Is it delusion to modify the appearance of something, if only the appearance is reality? If everyone wants to, of their own free will, opt into a reality where I'm model-hot, sign me up. You all have my permission to view me as something about as hot as Brad Pitt in his prime, if that technology exists and people want to use it that would be fantastic.
Is to not give your DNA out. Sure, one possibility is that this guy decided "well, whatever, they won't catch me", and gave his DNA with the assumption that the test couldn't POSSIBLY work. That's possible.
The article discusses this as if it were fact. What if this is a screw-up? What it was his DNA there for a different reason? I mean, what's the confidence on these tests? Everyone is taught in school that everyone's DNA is unique, but our ability to test doesn't magically do a file-diff, and there's room for error. It doesn't go on for seventeen digits of significance or anything, and with thousands of dice being rolled, who knows?
What about the possibility that this guy gave his DNA knowing that he didn't do it?
I know we shouldn't underestimate the stupidity of criminals, but it seems pretty dumb to give your DNA when the police come around looking to convince you, especially when you could claim non participation for a NUMBER of reasons (or just sell everything over the course of the over a decade this took, and leave for somewhere else). His actions were of a man who believed he was innocent.
"I for one would love to see Quentin Tarantino write and direct a Star Wars movie."
Are you sure? Because it would probably involve Uma Thurman's feet.
Ever since I saw a Nokia product placed in Star Trek- which implies than Nokia will live through a eugenic revolution, a mass die off, an age of darkness, and the transition to a post commerce, post scarcity society- I've wanted them to go under in my lifetime. The arrogance, and how jarring that dumb moment was, clashed together. I want the product dead and the name buried!
The reason that article is loopy is twofold.
First, it implies that the odds of YOUR vote deciding are miniscule. Actually, they are 0. I mean, literally 0. ...and if so, isn't that what we have now, in an election that doesn't come down to a single vote (or very few)?
Take an election where only 21 people show up. The vote is 11-10. YOUR VOTE MADE THE DIFFERENCE...
Actually, all 11 people who voted will say that. Did they ALL make the difference? Or was your vote 1/11th of the decision? What about if Florida had come down to one vote, would all of those millions of voters have been the vote that decided? Would your vote be one whatever millionth of the decision?
There's never one vote that decides. THAT IS THE FUCKING POINT OF VOTING. It is to gather AGGREGATE information and eventually enact that into social policy. You can certainly criticize the manner in which we choose to do it, but bitching that one vote doesn't make the difference is like complaining that you can't divide by zero.
Second, politicians look at the numbers of voters. If 5% of Americans voted Libertarian, you would see the Democrats back even FURTHER away from gun control, and the Republicans would talk less about the war on drugs. Major policies would be enacted based on that 5% vote (the Libertarian vote has never been much more than 1%, and even then it has been influential). So, of course, have the Greens. Do you REALLY think the Democratic party didn't listen to shouts of "Al Gore, corporate whore!"? Do you think Nader didn't change very much what policies they backed and who they nominated? It's not because "Nader needs to win", it's because your vote matters for SECOND ORDER REASONS.
So, that article is shit. And that's why- it think voting is some magical genie, when in fact you are providing valuable information to all members of society.
So go fucking vote. And vote your heart.
Shouldn't we have a Newton up there instead of the Einstein?
This is the alchemy section right?
They call it the Xbox 360 because when you see it, you turn 360 degrees and walk right back the way you came!
Standing desks go back like a century.
Dick Cheney also had a standing desk!
While I would love a stand-up desk, I simply can't find such a thing in any style I would like (wood, with frigging drawers, preferably a return desk)- not some horribly naked looking Ikea thing that would make my grandfather roll his eyes.
Does anyone have a suggestion for that? I don't want cinder blocks, planks, or anything ghetto like that. I live in a house, not a workshop!
It's not at all unreasonable to ban players for exploiting.
What the fuck is a static workspaces extension?
Fucking shit the last time I had to grab tinyturdware in order to have a useable GUI, it was before Win95. Now I need a list of downloadable crap that ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE THE BASELINE SUCKS ASS, and I don't even know the list. Maybe there's something to browse?
Whatever, fuck it, and if you defend it, fuck you too. The sheer attitude of the devs is so hard to explain. It's like, they build it for some lowest common denominator that doesn't even exist, and then if you don't like that you must be some kind of problem case so go get a dumb extension? I guess it's good that they have those now, when I left that GUI they sure as shit didn't, they just had a bunch of goddamned attitude.
Fuck it. Just fuck it. GNOME is a lost fucking cause until it gets forked by devs that don't have their heads so far up their asses that they are topologically equivalent to a fucking klein bottle.
Great idea. Except for the whole "couldn't help in WWII" thing.
Hey wait, we were ATTACKED in that war! That counts as a war on our soil... but I guess we "don't count" them.
Dogs also make excellent pillows!
"Look, you have to think where the Founding Fathers' heads were when they penned the second amendment. Having just got off a war with an oppressive government, they wanted to guarantee that citizens could revolt again should the need ever arise. Back then, the average citizen's armaments were the same ones used by the military. These days if you tried to revolt with the pea shooters you're still allowed to buy, the military could just kill you with a hellfire missile launched from a drone 20 miles away."
I *GUESS* I can get behind your idea to sell Hellfire missiles and kill-drones to American citizens, but it just seems a bit unnecessary...
This is true HOWEVER- because this is a moderately large part of our defense against tyranny, we should be concerned about increasing automation of the warfighter. If we eventually hit a level of technology where a general's orders can be executed by robot fighters, you can see how this would be a concern.
Of course, we are at minimum decades away from such a sci-fi scenario.
But GP also misses something- if the US Gov't "went All Saddam Hussein" on us, there would be no way they would take out every gun owner in the land. There's way more guns than people in the US, and we've successfully fought off gun registries time and time again. Everyone would be "a gun owner".
Begun, the Clone Races have!
SNES controllers are, IMO, very comfortable.
More importantly, if you want to play the games accurately, you should use the controllers- or at least, that's one school of thought on it, and one that needs the most support to be realized.
It's not racism. It's either an employee correctly refusing to violate a (imo silly if it applies to consumer electronics) law, or the same employee INCORRECTLY doing same (pretty damned sure it's the second- the article implies that). Either way, it's clear that the employee's stated reason is not based on race.
Also unlike the summary states, she told the employee that it was a gift for her cousin, who is an Iranian citizen. It wasn't just "because she was speaking Farsi".
And no, I'm no Applepologist. But this doesn't look like it is the story that is being presented.
Darwin awards aren't given to people whose exposure to danger is consciously undertaken, and most certainly not those for whom the risk was for the betterment of society- for instance, coal mine workers, soldiers, infectious agent researchers, and of course, scientists.
http://www.darwinawards.com/rules/rules2.html
Anyway, I do find myself hoping that Alan Turing's death was accidental instead of deliberate.
War is morally neutral too- again, like violence, you can have just or unjust wars. If you are a pacifist, say so, but it doesn't excuse being opposed to medicine because it will ease the suffering of individuals that you personally don't approve of.
I mean, do you fucking think for ONE GODDAMNED SECOND that the people in charge are like "well, no, we don't want to go to war, because our soldiers may experience PTSD". You think that's holding them back? It's not like THEY are the ones to make that sacrifice. The correct ways to eliminate unnecessary wars involve education, empathy, transparency, and I would argue a spirit of brotherly love, even with those who share different values. It sure as fuck isn't "Maybe the men serving the nations could suffer more? That's cool, right? I mean, they are willing to sacrifice themselves for vague concepts like "country" and in some cases the financial interest of fucking organizations, maybe they could sacrifice even MORE somehow, and that would make tragedies less likely to happen."
1)- War isn't always wrong.
2)- Violence isn't always wrong.
3)- Abolition of suffering is always moral.
4)- Principles aside, your opinion is empty practically as well.
If you think I'm being a bit over the top, or maybe coming across rude, it is because I despise everything you've said in this thread here with every ounce of my being, and disagree with it profoundly.
Rofl fantastic. You're opposed to medicine because it will make people more willing to fight as well, right?
Violence is morally neutral. Like all tools, it is how you use it.