I think even if the controller degenerates, it will still be, in essence, a pointer.
And that's pretty damn cool, even if it's not a "swing your sword, round and round now dosido!"
Seriously - it's basicaly mouse-based interfaces on a console. That's good stuff.
I agree! Thank Science we've had 12 years of budget cuts and tax cuts, enabling our government to pay down some of the debt and shrink the governmental beauracracy to reasonable sizes!
Those damn liberals are probably going to commit tons of funding and manpower tilting at windmills. Heyyy wait a minute. . .
Or you could look at it tinged by reality and realize split Executive and Legislative branches, not party dominance, is what keeps government small and budgets manageable.
But when you've got a plot device that is dependent on Premise A, and you violate that premise when convenient, it bugs me. I'm still watching the show, and honestly enjoying it. I wish they'd move it a touch faster (and they could) but that's network serials nowadays. They're almost Dickensian, paid by the word.
I don't know, the gaffe bugs me. If it had been basic conversational English I would have swallowed it easier (ok his buddy's teaching him the basics), or if he'd had trouble making himself understood. But it reeked of crappy plot device and it shouldn't have made it on the air. Period.
Not when Hiro went back in time and met Peter. That's obviously fine. I'm talking about when the Congressional Candidate (Peter's brother) flew in after escaping from the cheerleader's dad.
He speaks broken english to him, able to communicate exactly what he wants to ("your secret is safe with me, can I get a ride?") even though up to then it was a major plot point that he COULDN'T speak English and that's why the junkie kept hanging up on him.
That's a major fucking hole, and it bugs me that anyone let it through. It's tougher to write in a translator, sure, but instead of doing that they compromise the entire plotline? Weaksauce.
The only thing that could explain it is the time rift, and that's still deus ex machina. The writing is passable for an X-Men lookalike but I wouldn't say it's solid.
I hate to explain a joke, but "Well, there would still be pulsating tubes shooting into caverns, but I'm not sure if any of your other adjectives would still work." was the whole fucking point . . . he was wink wink nudge nudging.
That Hiro couldn't speak English, but then when his buddy leaves him and he meets the Congressional candidate he can spit out exactly what he needs to say IN ENGLISH?
Horrible writing flaw. I'm still watching it because it's X-Men on TV (but I don't know the plotline!) but that piece of writing seemed really fucking lazy to me and bodes ill for the series.
There's still revenue generated from their printers and servers, of course, but they've been working hard for the past decade to really pump up their professional consulting services.
They're not horrible; same thing every consulting firm deals with which is attracting and retaining talent. Some divisions are better than others.
Yes, I'm wearing the chains of bias. Similar to the chains the white man placed on the black man in the 19th century, these chains prevent me from running.
There's a marked difference between bias and propaganda.
Here, you make the call, is this bias?
When Rep Foley was being scandalized by the press, Fox News' label of party affiliation on day 1 was D (that's for Democrat, just in case you only watch Fox News)
That's one incident in a whole slew of incidents of propaganda. Not bias. Not letting preconceptions color their news reporting, but outright blatant lies and manipulation for the Republicans' gain. Attempts to mislead and misinform.
It's more dangerous and subversive than anything Abbie Hoffman printed, that's certain.
My point was more that you set out a definition of "the most workable" viewpoint of moral relativism and then set it up as a paralyzed, do-nothing world view that views slavery as OK and a nuclear N Korea as "the breaks".
My point was I think your idea of a workable relativism is quite the opposite, and is an easily refutable straw man unrelated to a real morally relativistic worldview.
Relativism is a bit paradoxiacal - as it's not ABSOLUTELY relative, as all things, including relativism, are relative.;)
I've played the game for a few hours. While you can't hit girls and get away with it (mostly - you CAN get away with it but it's really tough to do) you're a bully in a school of bullies.
You're not helping the little guy in any meaningful way, except in side montages propelling the plot forward.
You're beating people up all the time. You can humiliate them and while it raises your threat level incrementally, it doesn't impact the game through the first 2 chapters at all.
Frankly, I think both sides are guilty of lack of investigation. It's not a Columbine simulator, but there's mud to be slung.
My big beef is load times. A lot of time you're going from the outdoor zone into the main school building (or another peripheral bldg) and it's
Always
Loading
Which can be a pain in the ass. It will really depend on if it drops off past chapter 1. Chapter 2 I just started (which according to most reviews is where the game officially "starts") and it's pretty neat.
The school classes you must attend are all minigames, some good some bad. (Art is very similar to the arcade classic Qix . . . and is much fun)
I can't give any sort of definitive review at this point because it feels like I'm at that point with a lot of games where I've gotten a good 4 hours of play out of it that has been fun, but it could swing either to Really Annoying and Repetitive or Fantastically Cool Game.
So far it seems to be a really big hit if you like minigames. There's a shitload of them.
And as an aside, the whole "you're helping little kids fight back" P.C. line is total bullshit. You're pretty much a bully in the game through the first act, and if the fighting moves and the like are any indicator, that's the case through the whole game.
And if you say all warfare is equally evil, you are guilty of moral relativism. That I think was the point.
I thought that would be absolutism. What's wrong is wrong.
Moral relativism, I've always thought, was the idea that an action could be right or could be wrong depending on a variety of factors. The action's moral value is dependent upon a variety of factors, not the action in a vacuum.
A cursory google search turned up a class action suit against Glaxo and a whole slew of links associated with it and Paxil. Mostly lawyers attempting to cash in, but the link above was one that wasn't lawsuit-oriented. I think. TBH I didn't read any of it but the headline.
Stating that all of them are addictive was hyperbole, spurred by cynicism towards our drug-makers.
I'm allowed to be uninformed, that's what the IANAD tag gets me!
Additionally, I don't set policy or have any influence on either policy-making/research so. . . here's to ignorance! *quaffs Serotonin Uptake Inhibitor Potion +3*
(thanks for the clarifications on my post - I'm not a doctor nor do I pretend to have more than a passing knowledge of pharmaceuticals. I do agree 100% with your post that we need to do more research on MDMA and remove the bias presented towards some drugs (i.e. untaxed drugs) particularly when it comes to the brain.)
That's the whole point of Paxil, Prozac, and Wellbutrin I believe.
IANAD but they're all called "seratonin uptake inhibitors" and the gist is they stop your brain from reabsorbing seratonin and therefore increasing the constant level found in your brain.
If you want to get really wacky, you can take MDMA (ecstasy) and have ALL of your seratonin flood into the brain at once, getting tracers, a "bulletproof" feeling, and (to quote Ali G) the desire to dance like a prick.
Finally, a more reliable way to increase your seratonin levels is through eating right and daily exercise. I'd lean much more heavily on this method rather than any sort of drug for this, as messing with the brain directly is a bit. . . ponderous. Lots of side effects from Paxil/Prozac/et al and they're ALL addictive. Even when they say they're not. Paxil claimed to be non-addictive for a while, and it was on the market for over 2 years before the drugco went "oops, looks like it is addictive! Our bad! But look at its profitability!"
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously - it's basicaly mouse-based interfaces on a console. That's good stuff.
Those damn liberals are probably going to commit tons of funding and manpower tilting at windmills. Heyyy wait a minute. . .
Or you could look at it tinged by reality and realize split Executive and Legislative branches, not party dominance, is what keeps government small and budgets manageable.
How do you know my router's IP address!?!
I don't know, the gaffe bugs me. If it had been basic conversational English I would have swallowed it easier (ok his buddy's teaching him the basics), or if he'd had trouble making himself understood. But it reeked of crappy plot device and it shouldn't have made it on the air. Period.
He speaks broken english to him, able to communicate exactly what he wants to ("your secret is safe with me, can I get a ride?") even though up to then it was a major plot point that he COULDN'T speak English and that's why the junkie kept hanging up on him.
That's a major fucking hole, and it bugs me that anyone let it through. It's tougher to write in a translator, sure, but instead of doing that they compromise the entire plotline? Weaksauce.
The only thing that could explain it is the time rift, and that's still deus ex machina. The writing is passable for an X-Men lookalike but I wouldn't say it's solid.
Leave the jokes to the professionals.
Horrible writing flaw. I'm still watching it because it's X-Men on TV (but I don't know the plotline!) but that piece of writing seemed really fucking lazy to me and bodes ill for the series.
(and to some of us big city folk, that's just asking way too much of anyone. Let me serve in Iraq, please.)
They're not horrible; same thing every consulting firm deals with which is attracting and retaining talent. Some divisions are better than others.
There's a marked difference between bias and propaganda.
Here, you make the call, is this bias?
When Rep Foley was being scandalized by the press, Fox News' label of party affiliation on day 1 was D (that's for Democrat, just in case you only watch Fox News)
That's one incident in a whole slew of incidents of propaganda. Not bias. Not letting preconceptions color their news reporting, but outright blatant lies and manipulation for the Republicans' gain. Attempts to mislead and misinform.
It's more dangerous and subversive than anything Abbie Hoffman printed, that's certain.
I mean, who can forget his latest "list of stuff that's irritating" or his other "list of annoying people"?
Or how about his "list of language he deliberately misinterprets for mildly amusing consequences"?
Carlin's act died a horrible death when he started playing Vegas 4 nights a week and letting that be his testing ground for new material.
Nothing he's done has been any good since Back In Town. Just lists of crap and his general nihilism.
My point (which you seem to have missed entirely) was that the whole apologetic "you're FIGHTING the bullies!" is a bullshit story.
I made no judgement on whether the content of violence in Bully is excessive or whatnot, simply that the whole battlecry of the GP is off base.
My point was I think your idea of a workable relativism is quite the opposite, and is an easily refutable straw man unrelated to a real morally relativistic worldview.
Relativism is a bit paradoxiacal - as it's not ABSOLUTELY relative, as all things, including relativism, are relative. ;)
IANA philosopher. Which is probably obvious.
I've played the game for a few hours. While you can't hit girls and get away with it (mostly - you CAN get away with it but it's really tough to do) you're a bully in a school of bullies.
You're not helping the little guy in any meaningful way, except in side montages propelling the plot forward.
You're beating people up all the time. You can humiliate them and while it raises your threat level incrementally, it doesn't impact the game through the first 2 chapters at all.
Frankly, I think both sides are guilty of lack of investigation. It's not a Columbine simulator, but there's mud to be slung.
Always
Loading
Which can be a pain in the ass. It will really depend on if it drops off past chapter 1. Chapter 2 I just started (which according to most reviews is where the game officially "starts") and it's pretty neat.
The school classes you must attend are all minigames, some good some bad. (Art is very similar to the arcade classic Qix . . . and is much fun)
I can't give any sort of definitive review at this point because it feels like I'm at that point with a lot of games where I've gotten a good 4 hours of play out of it that has been fun, but it could swing either to Really Annoying and Repetitive or Fantastically Cool Game.
So far it seems to be a really big hit if you like minigames. There's a shitload of them.
And as an aside, the whole "you're helping little kids fight back" P.C. line is total bullshit. You're pretty much a bully in the game through the first act, and if the fighting moves and the like are any indicator, that's the case through the whole game.
It's pretty easy to make absolutism sound indefensible as well.
I believe the GP was riffing on Bush's quote about the Constitution where he said the exact same thing.
I thought that would be absolutism. What's wrong is wrong.
Moral relativism, I've always thought, was the idea that an action could be right or could be wrong depending on a variety of factors. The action's moral value is dependent upon a variety of factors, not the action in a vacuum.
Grade The Professors rated him as "repugnant personality". . . and it was true.
What company is going to do that?
isn't that hyperglycemia or somesuch?
Film at 11.
A cursory google search turned up a class action suit against Glaxo and a whole slew of links associated with it and Paxil. Mostly lawyers attempting to cash in, but the link above was one that wasn't lawsuit-oriented. I think. TBH I didn't read any of it but the headline.
Stating that all of them are addictive was hyperbole, spurred by cynicism towards our drug-makers.
Additionally, I don't set policy or have any influence on either policy-making/research so. . . here's to ignorance! *quaffs Serotonin Uptake Inhibitor Potion +3*
(thanks for the clarifications on my post - I'm not a doctor nor do I pretend to have more than a passing knowledge of pharmaceuticals. I do agree 100% with your post that we need to do more research on MDMA and remove the bias presented towards some drugs (i.e. untaxed drugs) particularly when it comes to the brain.)
I still think anti-deps are over-prescribed.
IANAD but they're all called "seratonin uptake inhibitors" and the gist is they stop your brain from reabsorbing seratonin and therefore increasing the constant level found in your brain.
If you want to get really wacky, you can take MDMA (ecstasy) and have ALL of your seratonin flood into the brain at once, getting tracers, a "bulletproof" feeling, and (to quote Ali G) the desire to dance like a prick.
Finally, a more reliable way to increase your seratonin levels is through eating right and daily exercise. I'd lean much more heavily on this method rather than any sort of drug for this, as messing with the brain directly is a bit. . . ponderous. Lots of side effects from Paxil/Prozac/et al and they're ALL addictive. Even when they say they're not. Paxil claimed to be non-addictive for a while, and it was on the market for over 2 years before the drugco went "oops, looks like it is addictive! Our bad! But look at its profitability!"
Legalized drug dealers, indeed.