I like the.32 semiautomatic rounds fired through your front fenderwell as I'm forced to pass people like you on the right. Usually takes all the piss and vinegar right out of little anonymous cowards like you really quickly.
In rush hour situations, when all lanes are "filled to capacity", it's rather difficult to tailgate anyone, genius. It's bumper-to-bumper all around.
Use a little common sense...the devices in TFA aren't being deployed into rush hour gridlock, and nothing I spoke about in my post applies in that situation either. I didn't think it necessary to explicitly spell that out, but thanks for proving once again that my presumption of general human intelligence tends toward the naively optimistic.
...it's either idiots who were never properly instructed on driving/passing etiquette, or assholes who just refuse to get the fuck out of the way.
Lesson 1: The leftmost lane is for passing. All those signs on the freeways that read SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT weren't painted and posted for your edification...they're the law. When you just drive along in this lane, you are just as guilty of criminal activity as someone exceeding the posted speed limit.
Lesson 2: Someone blipping their high beams a couple times as they approach you is NOT being a prick. They're politely informing you in the most expeditious manner available (it's not like they can walk up and tap on your window, you know) that you are obstructing the flow of traffic.
The fact that they had to flash their lights at you in the first place is a testament against you. It means that you either didn't have enough situational awareness to spot their approach before they flashed you, or that you saw them coming and (for whatever reason) you decided that you weren't going to move aside. At this point, you're looking like an idiot, or a prick, or both.
So, what to do now? The ball is in your court...either speed up or move aside and let them pass.
I simply cannot understand why some people refuse to yield the way. You don't get brownie points for trying to prevent other drivers from speeding. Furthermore, you have absolutely NO idea what is motivating the driver behind you...there could be a medical emergency involved, and your prissy ass might be impeding their progress to a hospital. Why take the risk to yourself, your vehicle, and possibly others' lives? If you just get the fuck out of the way already, the tailgating "problem" disappears.
Long rant cut short: there is NO SUCH THING as a tailgater. There are only pious, self-righteous assholes who refuse to get out of the way of people who have the audacity to move faster than them.
I couldn't have cared less about the default theme or first-use page...seriously, people, grab a clue regarding priorities.
However, after a couple days' usage, I found two issues in FF2.0 that led me to uninstall it and go back to FF1.5:
1 - Broken "back" browser function:
Basically, when I hit the "back" button, I expect to be taken not only to the page I was previously viewing, but to the same location of that page. With FF2, every time I use the "back" button, I get taken to the top of the previous page. Extremely annoying.
2 - Reduced image filtering function:
This one was (and still is) my favorite feature of Mozilla/Firefox 1.x. I like the ability to select the content checkbox that displays images ONLY from the originating website, with the exception of my personal whitelist. That checkbox vanished in 2.0, and this alone was enough to make me uninstall it.
While these may sound like trivial issues to some, they're a major component of my everyday end-user experience with a browser...and FF 2.0 offered nothing in the way of improvements that would even come close to offsetting this setback to my experience.
Enterprise Single Sign-On is what you're after. It's long been the holy grail of enterprise security vendors, and it's still not quite perfect...but the Tivoli solution's Kiosk Adapter integrates with extended authentication mechanisms from many vendors (smartcards, biometrics, etc), doesn't require a GINA replacement, and provides fast user switching in domain environments. You can also define session lockout and shutdown behavior on a per-application basis.
Disclaimer: Yes, I work for IBM/Tivoli...take that as you will. While that means I know what our solutions are capable of, it also means I have an interest in their success. But I'm an SE, so don't ask me about costs...;)
You mean they actually want someone to *analyze* their helpdesk business? In other words, the job title precisely describes the work description? No way.
eBay has a fairly clear policy regarding pre-sale auctions...I'd imagine any PS3 listing that get pulled probably don't satisfy their requirements.
From the eBay rules site: Pre-sale listings are those that describe items for sale that are not in the control or possession of the seller at the time of the listing. These listings generally consist of items that are sold in advance of a delivery date to the public.
eBay permits Pre-sale listings only on a limited basis. The seller must guarantee that the item will be available for shipping within 30 days from the date of purchase (i.e., the day the listing ends or the date the item is purchased from a store front listing). The seller must also clearly indicate within the listing the fact that the item is a pre-sale item with a delivery date that indicates the item will be shipped by the 30th day from the end date of the listing. Additionally, this text must be no less than the default font size of the eBay Sell-Your-Item form. Currently, the default font size is HTML font size 3.
Violations of this policy may result in a range of actions, including:
* Listing cancellation
* Limits on account privileges
* Account suspension
* Forfeit of eBay fees on cancelled listings
* Loss of PowerSeller status
Here, let me translate your sentiments from the first paragraph into an example that might illustrate just how frightening your viewpoint really is:
Lots of children with new crayons like to color all over the pages of their books, not bothering to stay within the rigid boundaries of the outlines. Even lots of grown-up artists follow these impulses. But everyone knows the "right" way to do it is to color only inside the lines and only draw things that really exist in the really real world. Yet these incorrigibles always explain their inability to conform to a nice, inside-the-lines, style of art to "abstract impressions" or their individual "artistic expression" or some other "dumb justification." For shame.
Heaven knows, there are lots of ways they could express themselves without straying from the rigidly defined rules of solid lines, right?
And anytime you find yourself a bit confused as to how you're supposed to think or act, don't bother to use your own brain! Why bother, when it's so easy to let someone else do the thinking for you and spoon-feed you nice conformist beliefs and opinions!
I'm sure I've made my points. Most intelligent people don't care to have others think for them, especially not game publishers whose primary focus involves separating them from their money...and just because an idea is codified into law by our ignorant, Luddite, bought-and-paid-for legislators doesn't make it right. And when you KNOW this to be the case, civil disobedience of these laws is your moral obligation as a responsible citizen.
In that case, you can be told that what you've done is illegal and safely ignore such judgements while continuing to engage in illegal activities.
And to keep everyone's mind off what you're doing, you can make a show out of attempting to have such pesky laws amended in your favor. Irrelevant, of course, since you get to keep doing whatever you want anyhow.
I despise the government of this country on so many levels, I'm not even going to begin enumerating them. We waste more time and money doing stupid shit that serves no more practical purpose than to piss everyone off than I care to think about. This is just par for the fucking course.
And people wonder why the RIAA/MPAA think it's a sensible business model to strongarm everyone and their mother to force everything through established channels which they maintain a stranglehold on...look what they're using for their example. Disgusting.
...but someone please explain why these marketing genuises are complaining about the tribulations of their "pay per click" commission structure?
That just sounds like a moronic compensation paradigm to me. Here's a novel idea: how about you implement a "pay per transaction" model? Instead of paying chump change for each (probably) meaningless click, offer nothing for them but provide a more sustantial payout for clicks that actually result in a purchase! Yes, I'm aware there are technological issues around associating referral identifiers that far through the transaction cycle...but surely these would be cheaper/easier to address than the legal bullshit involved in attempting to devise some codifiable standard for ascertaining "clicker intent."
Just don't be surprised when you get sued by the RSAA [Retail Sales Associates Association] for infringing on their trademarked commission model.
AFAIK, Notes was the single big piece missing to allow desktop transition to Linux inside IBM. I would bet that the more geeky IBM employees that were stuck on Windows because of Notes will change.
Actually, the "geekier" employees at IBM have been running a Linux desktop for some time now. The internal IBM community that has deployed this "OpenClient" is largely responsible for testing and development feedback that has led directly to the public availability of Notes 7.x under Linux.
The earlier versions of the Linux desktop offered Notes 6 running under Wine, and I can say after more than six months since the change, the Eclipse-based native plugin model performs much more reliably that the Wine emulation version did. Of course, my T41 has 2GB RAM in it, so memory swapping to HD isn't an issue for me.
All told, I believe that this release, coupled with the recent MS announcement that they will provide ODF filters for Office 2007, could signal the beginning of the end of corporate reliance upon an MS desktop.
I'm sure the entire IBM corporation and its 300K+ employees intended to personally slight the linux user community with the use of this atrociously snobby and exclusive Flash 8 thingamabobber.
You could have at least taken a potshot at Macromedia for not having released a Flash 8 plugin for linux yet. They would seem to be the ones who have left you hanging out to dry.
From my customers, and it's a very valid complaint.
My big blue employer sells a nifty little piece of client software that not only creates and stores these random-assed passwords for you, it also plugs them in with your username when apps/sites prompt you for them.
It's a clever little product, but my only complaint with it is that it's for Windoze only, and I've been running a Linux desktop for quite some time now.
I work for Big Blue and have a T41 Thinkpad as my primary workstation. It's loaded with 2GB RAM and runs the standard OpenClient build, based on RHEL 3 Workstation.
Because I use a couple of apps that only run on M$IE, I loaded VMWare WS 5.5 and setup an XP guest...never saw ANY discernible performance impact. Later on, we solved the app dependency using the native Linux Citrix ICA client, but I still use VM for demos and training modules. This past week, we held a 3-day product training session that used 3 images: a Win2k3 AD Domain Controller guest (512 MB), an XP guest (384 MB), and a Win2K Pro guest (256 MB), all running simultaneously.
My T41 never stuttered, not even when using my native apps in the host OS...including our Workplace Client built on Eclipse running the Notes7 plugin, which has a 600MB footprint.
Your criticism may seem to be logically sound, except for the fact that it's premised on a fallacious and flawed assumption, i.e. that the RIAA itself behaves in a logical and rational manner.;-)
Can we please not make these "Macs are more expensive" posts anymore? I mean, this is seriously old. We've all seen the articles showing that comparing like with like often comes out equal or with the Macs cheaper. Certain Mac models are more expensive than comparable Dell (or Levono) models, and vice versa. Get over it.
Spoken like a true fanboy who knows he's wrong, knows why, and just doesn't have any other rebuttal besides, "I'm tired of hearing it."
Don't shoot the messenger, pal. It's not his fault you overpaid for the hardware in a proprietary system created by a company that knows no limit in maintaining a stranglehold on its "technology." If the truth bothers you so much, perhaps you shouldn't have (over)paid for a Mac.
My wife and I had the misfortune of staying in the Marquis last March...at the same time (unbeknownst to us) as some African-American sorority was holding its national alumni conference, AND the same time as some national junior-high cheerleading convention.
The hotel lobby was under "renovation" (read: destroyed), and they had just installed this newfangled elevator control system for 7 of the eight elevators in the atrium tower. You punch your desired floor into the external keypad and after a few seconds it flashes the car you should wait for (this is when it was working "properly," and not just displaying XXX after any entry). Needless to say, this was an unmitigated disaster...I mean a bona fide clusterfuck.
We were up around the 25th floor or so, and I have NEVER had to wait so long for an elevator to come to my floor to carry me down. Several times the wait was in excess of 5 minutes, and once it took more than 10. We had the best success riding in the ONE elevator car that still contained a traditional control panel and was staffed by a hotel employee.
Though this was not the only reason we will never stay in the Marriott Marquis again, it was a considerable contributing factor.
Instead of trying to wring a cheap laugh out of the situation, you might hop on over to http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.asp x and see if your Congressman sits on the Judiciary Committee where this has been introduced.
If so, write them a note voicing your displeasure with H.R. 4569. If not, write to YOUR representative (http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Be tactful. Be succint. Don't be a flaming jerkass. Here's what I sent to my representative...feel free to plagiarize:
Mr. Carter,
I am aware that you are not a sitting member of the Judiciary Committee, but I am writing you in the hopes that you will discuss upcoming legislation with fellow Texas representatives Lamar Smith, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Louie Gohmert.
It has recently come to my attention that the House Judiciary Chairman has introduced a bill (H.R. 4569) into committee that embodies, in my opinion, an appalling attempt by a private industry to subvert the legislative process in order to protect its archaic business model.
As I'm sure you're well aware, the United States Congress exists to serve the liberty and security of its citizens, and not to guarantee the existence of any public corporation or private industry against the winds of change and innovation. Legislation such as this proposed "Digital Transition Content Security Act of 2005" is not crafted with the interest of the American consumer in mind, but rather with the intent to protect an existing content delivery and distribution model by criminalizing techonological innovations in this digital era.
An Act such as this one effectively deprives American consumers of their Fair Use rights as provided under existing U.S. intellectual property laws, and by extension, damages our economic stability by stifling the innovative forces that have kept America at the forefront of technological development. Furthermore, forcing U.S. manufacturers to adopt specific technology into all of their products places them at a distinct economic disadvantage in the world marketplace, and this country can ill afford the further loss of exportable goods.
Please do not be misled by the entertainment industry contentions that they are "losing" millions of dollars in revenue annually due to digital copyright infringements. Any first-year college student with a logic course on his transcript knows this is a fallacy of the most obvious variety. One cannot substantiate the presumption that every "pirated" copy of a protected work necessarily translates to the "loss" of one retail sale. One honestly cannot even translate it to the loss of one potential sale. It doesn't take an MBA to realize that the industry's claim of "lost revenue" is truly nothing more than "potential, unrealized revenue possibilities." That is to say, they display a best-case sales scenario and blame digital piracy for the shortfall that reality presents.
I urge you to voice your disapproval for H.R. 4569 to your fellow Texas legislators on the Judiciary Committee. This bill does NOT represent the interests of the citizens of Texas, nor of the U.S.A. as a whole. A vote for this bill would be a vote against the Fair Use rights of the taxpaying people of this economy and a vote against the spirit of innovation that made this great nation the undisputed superpower in the world today. I place my trust in you, and know that you will make the best decision in the present and future interests of the *people* whom you represent by voting down such special interest legislation as H.R. 4569.
Respectfully,
[real name omitted]
Comments and criticism welcome, flames redirected to/dev/null
As with the other PoP titles, this is a PC game that was ported in development for other platforms. The Xbox, of course, being really easy to port as it's pretty much a PC.
On another note: YEAAAAH...I just bought an Xbox! And sold it at a 200% profit on eBay!
Slashdot Mirror
I like the .32 semiautomatic rounds fired through your front fenderwell as I'm forced to pass people like you on the right. Usually takes all the piss and vinegar right out of little anonymous cowards like you really quickly.
In rush hour situations, when all lanes are "filled to capacity", it's rather difficult to tailgate anyone, genius. It's bumper-to-bumper all around.
Use a little common sense...the devices in TFA aren't being deployed into rush hour gridlock, and nothing I spoke about in my post applies in that situation either. I didn't think it necessary to explicitly spell that out, but thanks for proving once again that my presumption of general human intelligence tends toward the naively optimistic.
...it's either idiots who were never properly instructed on driving/passing etiquette, or assholes who just refuse to get the fuck out of the way.
Lesson 1: The leftmost lane is for passing. All those signs on the freeways that read SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT weren't painted and posted for your edification...they're the law. When you just drive along in this lane, you are just as guilty of criminal activity as someone exceeding the posted speed limit.
Lesson 2: Someone blipping their high beams a couple times as they approach you is NOT being a prick. They're politely informing you in the most expeditious manner available (it's not like they can walk up and tap on your window, you know) that you are obstructing the flow of traffic.
The fact that they had to flash their lights at you in the first place is a testament against you. It means that you either didn't have enough situational awareness to spot their approach before they flashed you, or that you saw them coming and (for whatever reason) you decided that you weren't going to move aside. At this point, you're looking like an idiot, or a prick, or both.
So, what to do now? The ball is in your court...either speed up or move aside and let them pass.
I simply cannot understand why some people refuse to yield the way. You don't get brownie points for trying to prevent other drivers from speeding. Furthermore, you have absolutely NO idea what is motivating the driver behind you...there could be a medical emergency involved, and your prissy ass might be impeding their progress to a hospital. Why take the risk to yourself, your vehicle, and possibly others' lives? If you just get the fuck out of the way already, the tailgating "problem" disappears.
Long rant cut short: there is NO SUCH THING as a tailgater. There are only pious, self-righteous assholes who refuse to get out of the way of people who have the audacity to move faster than them.
I couldn't have cared less about the default theme or first-use page...seriously, people, grab a clue regarding priorities.
However, after a couple days' usage, I found two issues in FF2.0 that led me to uninstall it and go back to FF1.5:
1 - Broken "back" browser function:
Basically, when I hit the "back" button, I expect to be taken not only to the page I was previously viewing, but to the same location of that page. With FF2, every time I use the "back" button, I get taken to the top of the previous page. Extremely annoying.
2 - Reduced image filtering function:
This one was (and still is) my favorite feature of Mozilla/Firefox 1.x. I like the ability to select the content checkbox that displays images ONLY from the originating website, with the exception of my personal whitelist. That checkbox vanished in 2.0, and this alone was enough to make me uninstall it.
While these may sound like trivial issues to some, they're a major component of my everyday end-user experience with a browser...and FF 2.0 offered nothing in the way of improvements that would even come close to offsetting this setback to my experience.
...and buy her a diamond already, ya cheap ass. ;-)
Enterprise Single Sign-On is what you're after. It's long been the holy grail of enterprise security vendors, and it's still not quite perfect...but the Tivoli solution's Kiosk Adapter integrates with extended authentication mechanisms from many vendors (smartcards, biometrics, etc), doesn't require a GINA replacement, and provides fast user switching in domain environments. You can also define session lockout and shutdown behavior on a per-application basis.
;)
Disclaimer: Yes, I work for IBM/Tivoli...take that as you will. While that means I know what our solutions are capable of, it also means I have an interest in their success. But I'm an SE, so don't ask me about costs...
You mean they actually want someone to *analyze* their helpdesk business?
In other words, the job title precisely describes the work description?
No way.
...but that would have presumed this asshat possesses a spine to rip out.
eBay has a fairly clear policy regarding pre-sale auctions...I'd imagine any PS3 listing that get pulled probably don't satisfy their requirements.
From the eBay rules site:
Pre-sale listings are those that describe items for sale that are not in the control or possession of the seller at the time of the listing. These listings generally consist of items that are sold in advance of a delivery date to the public.
eBay permits Pre-sale listings only on a limited basis. The seller must guarantee that the item will be available for shipping within 30 days from the date of purchase (i.e., the day the listing ends or the date the item is purchased from a store front listing). The seller must also clearly indicate within the listing the fact that the item is a pre-sale item with a delivery date that indicates the item will be shipped by the 30th day from the end date of the listing. Additionally, this text must be no less than the default font size of the eBay Sell-Your-Item form. Currently, the default font size is HTML font size 3.
Violations of this policy may result in a range of actions, including:
* Listing cancellation
* Limits on account privileges
* Account suspension
* Forfeit of eBay fees on cancelled listings
* Loss of PowerSeller status
Here, let me translate your sentiments from the first paragraph into an example that might illustrate just how frightening your viewpoint really is:
Lots of children with new crayons like to color all over the pages of their books, not bothering to stay within the rigid boundaries of the outlines. Even lots of grown-up artists follow these impulses. But everyone knows the "right" way to do it is to color only inside the lines and only draw things that really exist in the really real world. Yet these incorrigibles always explain their inability to conform to a nice, inside-the-lines, style of art to "abstract impressions" or their individual "artistic expression" or some other "dumb justification." For shame.
Heaven knows, there are lots of ways they could express themselves without straying from the rigidly defined rules of solid lines, right?
And anytime you find yourself a bit confused as to how you're supposed to think or act, don't bother to use your own brain! Why bother, when it's so easy to let someone else do the thinking for you and spoon-feed you nice conformist beliefs and opinions!
I'm sure I've made my points. Most intelligent people don't care to have others think for them, especially not game publishers whose primary focus involves separating them from their money...and just because an idea is codified into law by our ignorant, Luddite, bought-and-paid-for legislators doesn't make it right. And when you KNOW this to be the case, civil disobedience of these laws is your moral obligation as a responsible citizen.
In that case, you can be told that what you've done is illegal and safely ignore such judgements while continuing to engage in illegal activities.
And to keep everyone's mind off what you're doing, you can make a show out of attempting to have such pesky laws amended in your favor. Irrelevant, of course, since you get to keep doing whatever you want anyhow.
According to today's Austin American Statesman article , the other 16,000+ CPUs in this machine will be AMD Opterons.
And, the article also confirms that the machine will indeed be running Linux.
Yes, it is, in fact, running Linux.
I despise the government of this country on so many levels, I'm not even going to begin enumerating them. We waste more time and money doing stupid shit that serves no more practical purpose than to piss everyone off than I care to think about. This is just par for the fucking course.
And people wonder why the RIAA/MPAA think it's a sensible business model to strongarm everyone and their mother to force everything through established channels which they maintain a stranglehold on...look what they're using for their example. Disgusting.
Well said.
What's truly sad is that your enumeration of abuses is far from comprehensive.
...but someone please explain why these marketing genuises are complaining about the tribulations of their "pay per click" commission structure?
That just sounds like a moronic compensation paradigm to me. Here's a novel idea: how about you implement a "pay per transaction" model? Instead of paying chump change for each (probably) meaningless click, offer nothing for them but provide a more sustantial payout for clicks that actually result in a purchase! Yes, I'm aware there are technological issues around associating referral identifiers that far through the transaction cycle...but surely these would be cheaper/easier to address than the legal bullshit involved in attempting to devise some codifiable standard for ascertaining "clicker intent."
Just don't be surprised when you get sued by the RSAA [Retail Sales Associates Association] for infringing on their trademarked commission model.
AFAIK, Notes was the single big piece missing to allow desktop transition to Linux inside IBM. I would bet that the more geeky IBM employees that were stuck on Windows because of Notes will change.
Actually, the "geekier" employees at IBM have been running a Linux desktop for some time now. The internal IBM community that has deployed this "OpenClient" is largely responsible for testing and development feedback that has led directly to the public availability of Notes 7.x under Linux.
The earlier versions of the Linux desktop offered Notes 6 running under Wine, and I can say after more than six months since the change, the Eclipse-based native plugin model performs much more reliably that the Wine emulation version did. Of course, my T41 has 2GB RAM in it, so memory swapping to HD isn't an issue for me.
All told, I believe that this release, coupled with the recent MS announcement that they will provide ODF filters for Office 2007, could signal the beginning of the end of corporate reliance upon an MS desktop.
I'm sure the entire IBM corporation and its 300K+ employees intended to personally slight the linux user community with the use of this atrociously snobby and exclusive Flash 8 thingamabobber.
You could have at least taken a potshot at Macromedia for not having released a Flash 8 plugin for linux yet. They would seem to be the ones who have left you hanging out to dry.
From my customers, and it's a very valid complaint.
My big blue employer sells a nifty little piece of client software that not only creates and stores these random-assed passwords for you, it also plugs them in with your username when apps/sites prompt you for them. It's a clever little product, but my only complaint with it is that it's for Windoze only, and I've been running a Linux desktop for quite some time now.
I work for Big Blue and have a T41 Thinkpad as my primary workstation. It's loaded with 2GB RAM and runs the standard OpenClient build, based on RHEL 3 Workstation.
Because I use a couple of apps that only run on M$IE, I loaded VMWare WS 5.5 and setup an XP guest...never saw ANY discernible performance impact. Later on, we solved the app dependency using the native Linux Citrix ICA client, but I still use VM for demos and training modules. This past week, we held a 3-day product training session that used 3 images: a Win2k3 AD Domain Controller guest (512 MB), an XP guest (384 MB), and a Win2K Pro guest (256 MB), all running simultaneously.
My T41 never stuttered, not even when using my native apps in the host OS...including our Workplace Client built on Eclipse running the Notes7 plugin, which has a 600MB footprint.
Your criticism may seem to be logically sound, except for the fact that it's premised on a fallacious and flawed assumption, i.e. that the RIAA itself behaves in a logical and rational manner. ;-)
Can we please not make these "Macs are more expensive" posts anymore? I mean, this is seriously old. We've all seen the articles showing that comparing like with like often comes out equal or with the Macs cheaper. Certain Mac models are more expensive than comparable Dell (or Levono) models, and vice versa. Get over it.
Spoken like a true fanboy who knows he's wrong, knows why, and just doesn't have any other rebuttal besides, "I'm tired of hearing it."
Don't shoot the messenger, pal. It's not his fault you overpaid for the hardware in a proprietary system created by a company that knows no limit in maintaining a stranglehold on its "technology." If the truth bothers you so much, perhaps you shouldn't have (over)paid for a Mac.
My wife and I had the misfortune of staying in the Marquis last March...at the same time (unbeknownst to us) as some African-American sorority was holding its national alumni conference, AND the same time as some national junior-high cheerleading convention.
The hotel lobby was under "renovation" (read: destroyed), and they had just installed this newfangled elevator control system for 7 of the eight elevators in the atrium tower. You punch your desired floor into the external keypad and after a few seconds it flashes the car you should wait for (this is when it was working "properly," and not just displaying XXX after any entry). Needless to say, this was an unmitigated disaster...I mean a bona fide clusterfuck.
We were up around the 25th floor or so, and I have NEVER had to wait so long for an elevator to come to my floor to carry me down. Several times the wait was in excess of 5 minutes, and once it took more than 10. We had the best success riding in the ONE elevator car that still contained a traditional control panel and was staffed by a hotel employee.
Though this was not the only reason we will never stay in the Marriott Marquis again, it was a considerable contributing factor.
Instead of trying to wring a cheap laugh out of the situation, you might hop on over to http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.asp x and see if your Congressman sits on the Judiciary Committee where this has been introduced.
/dev/null
If so, write them a note voicing your displeasure with H.R. 4569. If not, write to YOUR representative (http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Be tactful. Be succint. Don't be a flaming jerkass. Here's what I sent to my representative...feel free to plagiarize:
Mr. Carter,
I am aware that you are not a sitting member of the Judiciary Committee, but I am writing you in the hopes that you will discuss upcoming legislation with fellow Texas representatives Lamar Smith, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Louie Gohmert.
It has recently come to my attention that the House Judiciary Chairman has introduced a bill (H.R. 4569) into committee that embodies, in my opinion, an appalling attempt by a private industry to subvert the legislative process in order to protect its archaic business model.
As I'm sure you're well aware, the United States Congress exists to serve the liberty and security of its citizens, and not to guarantee the existence of any public corporation or private industry against the winds of change and innovation. Legislation such as this proposed "Digital Transition Content Security Act of 2005" is not crafted with the interest of the American consumer in mind, but rather with the intent to protect an existing content delivery and distribution model by criminalizing techonological innovations in this digital era.
An Act such as this one effectively deprives American consumers of their Fair Use rights as provided under existing U.S. intellectual property laws, and by extension, damages our economic stability by stifling the innovative forces that have kept America at the forefront of technological development. Furthermore, forcing U.S. manufacturers to adopt specific technology into all of their products places them at a distinct economic disadvantage in the world marketplace, and this country can ill afford the further loss of exportable goods.
Please do not be misled by the entertainment industry contentions that they are "losing" millions of dollars in revenue annually due to digital copyright infringements. Any first-year college student with a logic course on his transcript knows this is a fallacy of the most obvious variety. One cannot substantiate the presumption that every "pirated" copy of a protected work necessarily translates to the "loss" of one retail sale. One honestly cannot even translate it to the loss of one potential sale. It doesn't take an MBA to realize that the industry's claim of "lost revenue" is truly nothing more than "potential, unrealized revenue possibilities." That is to say, they display a best-case sales scenario and blame digital piracy for the shortfall that reality presents.
I urge you to voice your disapproval for H.R. 4569 to your fellow Texas legislators on the Judiciary Committee. This bill does NOT represent the interests of the citizens of Texas, nor of the U.S.A. as a whole. A vote for this bill would be a vote against the Fair Use rights of the taxpaying people of this economy and a vote against the spirit of innovation that made this great nation the undisputed superpower in the world today. I place my trust in you, and know that you will make the best decision in the present and future interests of the *people* whom you represent by voting down such special interest legislation as H.R. 4569.
Respectfully,
[real name omitted]
Comments and criticism welcome, flames redirected to
As with the other PoP titles, this is a PC game that was ported in development for other platforms. The Xbox, of course, being really easy to port as it's pretty much a PC.
On another note: YEAAAAH...I just bought an Xbox! And sold it at a 200% profit on eBay!