You've brought in every irrelevant thing into the argument, from Wittgenstein's Tractatus to my sig in an attempt to distract from the actual argument I brought up the Tractatus merely as a means to point out that your accusations to the contrary notwithstanding, i was quite familar with the process of deductive reasoning, but disagreed with you on the criteria for determining something as fact. pretty straight forward, on topic, and relevant to the argument you were presenting, ad hominem though it was. I brought up your sig merely to imply that you yourself might be prone to trolling, if you'd been modded flamebait and troll enough to have a 'dont mod me troll just because you disagree with me' statement in your sig. Given your consistent flaming of me as troll rather than responding to argument i feel this is relevant.
Give it a rest. I already admitted I used the term piracy incorrectly No, you responded that I was full of it. You then later said that you'd already clarified the lending != piracy point when in fact you hadn't. Hardly my fault you dont recognize this.
You completely and repeatedly choose to ignore this point while harping on about piracy isn't lending. Yes, but lending to someone who commits piracy makes you an accomplice to that piracy I didnt respond to that point because it seemed pretty self-evidently correct. If you hadn't started your tirade with a blatantly false statement, just to really start things off with a nice STFU tone, we wouldnt have a problem.
- GP is afraid of being kicked out of the academy and losing his movies (it seems he's more afraid of this than criminal charges as he doesn't bring those up)
Basically I addressed exactly what the GP said he was afraid of not some hypothetical. GP is afraid of something that is one of many possibilities happening, seems pretty hypothetical to me. He didnt say that his mother had actually further lent out the discs, nor that her friends had actually copied them. He was afraid of a hypothetical situation coming true. I'm still not entirely sure why this is confusing.
NOW FUCK OFF AND STOP WASTING MY TIME YOU TROLL The only person wasting your time is you. Dont want it wasted, stop posting. Not like I'm twisting your arm and forcing you to repeatedly post vitriol-ridden, point-missing bullshit.
Wittgenstein's Tractatus? Please. You're so full of yoruself. You've tried to dazzle and confuse with your purportedly wide knowledge, but fail to actually counter-argue the point. (Plenty of personal attacks though). hardly wide knowledge. its actually a very short and simple read. but it has shaped the way i approach what is knowable, and is actually a direct response to your critique of my deductive reasoning skills. It should be neither dazzling nor confusing, as it is a very straightforward idea which, as i mentioned is very much in line with the scientific method which we use to gain knowledge of the world around us.
The GP said outright that he was afraid one of his mother's friends would copy the DVD. This is called piracy. It doesn't matter what books you've read or what terms you apply to it. The GP was afraid of being implicated in piracy and therefore being ejected from the association. Afraid of being implicated in potential piracy and actually committing piracy are two very different things, a distinction which seems to evade you.
Straw man 1: syousef's main point was thatd lending is piracy. Lending clearly is not piracy. Therefore syousef is an asshole and doesn't know what he's talking about. I did not allege that you said lending is piracy, i quoted your comment saying that lending is piracy. This is not overstating an opponents position to more easily knock it down, its directly responding to exactly what you said. again, here it is:
The things is by lending your elderly mother those disks you're commiting piracy. Where in this comment are you saying anything other than lending = piracy?
While I may have misapplied the term, that certainly wasn't my main point, nor was it crucial to my main point. Yet you keep attacking the point even after I'd conceded it. I must be missing the part where you conceded anything, for all the other parts where you not only failed to concede that you had misspoke, but rather just continue to talk about some hypothetical situation that GP was afraid of that would be piracy. But of course had not actually happened. I'm certainly not here to say that if GP's mother lent the discs to friends who copied them and distributed said copies that wouldnt be piracy. saying that would be as wrong as saying that by lending the discs GP himself was committing piracy.
Straw man 2: Find it your damned self. Hrm, you initially followed your second accusation of straw man with saying that GP had mentioned piracy first and therefore accusing you of misusing the term was a straw man. This simply is not the case. You misspoke, and have been unwilling to recognize this fact. Its actually the same non-straw man as no. 1, when it comes down to it. You said that lending is piracy, when it clearly is not.
Now why is it that I don't think that's a genuine apology especially given that you continue to whine... You probably think that because its not an apology of any sort. Its an admission of culpability. I'm also not sure how I can be said to have continued to do anything after that, as it was the final line of my comment. You seem to think that sarcasm is whining. it isnt.
Translation: I can dish it out but I can't take it. Again, sarcasm != whining. I just thought I'd point out how ridiculous you sound. But of course, its much easier to simply call my responses whining and ignore them than address them, so i can understand where you're coming from.
or more, since we actually know how to use them well. that's what I'm afraid of, the internet-stalking generation getting to use said skills to pay the bills.
Oh so you've never heard of deductive reasoning, troll? How do you think we know most of what we know about the world around us? Because some magical person walked up and spelt it out? I most certainly have heard of deductive reasoning. I just took the final line of Wittgenstein's Tractatus very much to heart. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent. However confident in my analytical reasoning skills I may be, something making perfect logical sense to me in no way makes it fact. I find this way of thinking to be infinitely superior to one that cant tell the difference between reason and demonstrated fact, and i think that the scientific method would agree with me. First hypothesize, then test the hypothesis, then draw conclusions. Basically what I've been trying to say all along is that you seem to skip the middle step. if this has been unclear, i apologize.
Then you have the gaul to tell me you're not sure I don't understand what a strawman is because you can't see one in your pathetic rant. I have the gall to tell you that you dont know what a straw man is, because you misapplied the term both times you accused me of creating one, and yet had time to commit the fallacy yourself. Seems fairly self-evident to me. I have never once ascribed intention to any of your actions, nor sought to overstate your position for the purpose of more dramatically bringing it down. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly misstated something i said and then repeatedly and dramatically used said misstatement as the anchor of your argument. That is about as textbook a definition of straw man as I've ever seen on/.
You mean like calling me an asshole and telling me to get off my high horse. Stop playing the fucking victim. It's pathetic. Yes, i mean exactly like that. Did it feel different, laying into me for something i actually said? Of course by omitting the first part of that quoted sentence, you obviate the awkwardness of admitting that you were wrong, that I never said Terms of Service, and that your tirade on the subject was just you being a huge asshole. Well done.
Purposefully missing the point then abusing someone for getting their semantics right makes you a vulgar little troll. Get it? *sigh* If you really want to stand behind that comment, you should realize that it applies equally to you, but at least I was right about the semantics. Though, i don't really have any real response to this beyond I believe it is you, sir, who are missing the point.
Do you fucking understand the meaning of the word troll, shit for brains?
apparently not, perhaps you should try explaining it again, maybe this time with more invective, personal slander, and cursing, it wasn't quite meta enough that time.
Well, I do know what troll means. My favorite part of the wikipedia article is this:
The term troll is highly subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. The term is often erroneously used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument fallacy ad hominem.
Often, calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's motives. Regardless of the circumstances, controversial posts may attract a particularly strong response from those unfamiliar with the robust dialogue found in some online, rather than physical, communities Hmmmm term troll often used to discredit opposition via fallacy ad hominem... sounds familiar. Granted, I did call you an asshole first. mea culpa.
The ONLY logical conclusion is that it's against the terms of use
this is true, which is why I also assumed as much. But there's a difference between assuming something and acting as if its fact. Pretty simple. You never know, there may be a clause in the terms of use explicitly allowing family members access. I wouldn't assume there is one, but it wouldn't surprise me either.
(not terms of service - if you're going to be pedantic about abusing me over minute detail at least get the detail right yourself).
Go ahead and search my comment for the word "service." You will find that it does not appear. You will also notice that the section of my comment you quoted uses the phrase "terms of use" not terms of service. You pulled terms of service out of your ass, and then layed in to me for misusing them. Which I didnt. I'd write this off as an honest mistake, but it really seems to be how you roll. find something i *actually* said to curse me out for, eh?
Oh boo fucking hoo you dishonest prat. Try saying it without calling me an "asshole" and telling me to get off my high horse. You're a troll.
Yes, I should have been more specific. All I was trying to say when pointing out that you had misused the term piracy was that lending != piracy. I entirely meant that you were being an asshole, and needed to get the fuck off your high horse. That doesnt make me a troll, that makes me vulgar. Both points were valid, and have clearly sparked a lively debate. Also, I fail to see the relevance of slandering my honesty. but clearly not understanding this point is what makes me a troll and you not...
and yet you're just as lax with your own language. Again you're a troll.
I'm not lax with my own language, as I pointed out above. You attributed a comment to me i did not make, and took me to task for it. Go you!
Huh? Nice straw man. I'm posting a response to the details he gave me
I'm not sure you understand what a straw man actually is. Since correcting misused terminology apparently makes one a troll now, I'll simply reiterate that I feel you went beyond the reasonable reach of assumption in taking GP to task for lending out the pre-release dvds. Even prefacing your statement with "isnt that against the terms of use, because if so, you're being really stupid for the following reasons," would have alleviated my concerns, but no, much more fun to just treat your own reasoning as fact and proceed from there.
I suppose what you expected was chocolates and flowers when calling someone an asshole and telling them to get off their high horse. Idiot.
damn, were flowers and chocolates an option?
"Faulty use of piracy". Well how about your "faulty use of terms of service". No, you understood the meaning and intent of my message and instead of responding like a rational human being you choose to be abusive and fixate on the technical misuse of a term.
Well, i guess we disagree there. See, to me, briefly correcting terminology and letting someone know they're being a self-righteous asshole is a more rational human response than ripping in to someone for my assumption about the implication of something they said without first ascertaining the veracity of that assumption. I will again point out that I never used Terms of Service instead of Terms of Use.
What exactly is it that I'm suppose to be unable to handle? Your feeble argumentative skills or your complete lack of social skill? Don't make me laugh you pathetic little troll.
Uh... me calling you an asshole and telling you to fuck off. I'd say, 'but clearly you can handle it,' but methinks the lady doth protest too much. Nothing says "i am totally handling this" like resorting to Bond Villain language.
More straw men. It wasn't me that first mentioned piracy. The GP said that he was afraid his mother would lend to friends who would copy.
He's violating the conditions of being given those disks is he? I also *assumed* that such lending would *probably* break the terms on which he receives them, but unless you have a copy of his terms of use in front of you, or would like to toss a link I'm going to go ahead and not presume anything about what those terms might actually be. At the very least, and all i was trying to say, lending is not piracy. lending is lending. if lending is prohibited, then clearly he's a jerk for breaking the terms of use. But dont get all uppity at him for doing something he's not. Its not just linguistic squabbling on my part, you are inappropriately using narrowly defined terms, and that's bullshit argument.
If he thinks these conditions aren't reasonable well then perhaps he ought to complain to the powers that be in the industry he's part of Because clearly complaining to the powers that be in his industry is mutually exclusive with posting a rant on/. I mean, if he'd already made his objections heard, he'd have no reason to chime in on a/. discussion, right? Of course not. once again, you're deriding him for doing or not doing something which you have no way of knowing he has or hasnt done. what exactly is the point of that? I mean, apart from it being easier than taking issue with something that was *actually* said, of course.
So how about you stop your trolling long enough to get the mud out of your ears and the shit out of our brains, and perhaps learn some social skills so that you don't come across as an anal trolling git with the social skills of a hungry grizzly bear. Or more succinctly: Grow the fuck up
Hrm, anal trolling git... that's a new one. Well, i do apologize for taking issue with the toolishness with which you were taking GP to task. Clearly, i should have, like you, responded not to something you actually said, but some implication of what you said that I had no way of knowing or verifying and then taken you to task for that. Man, what was I thinking? As for this talk of trolling and social skills, well, i dunno. You posted a rant against a guy predicated on a faulty use of piracy. you were being an asshole. I pointed out both things. Can't handle it? Fuck off. Saying that Lending != Piracy isnt being anal, its pointing out a fact. Calling you an asshole is, well, just how i saw it. Simply my opinion, but based on the way you were conducting yourself in the discussion. It is, of course, absolutely hiLARious that your response ends with what is essentially 'stfu TROLL' given your sig. From the particular way in which you seem to think it best to disagree with something, I'm entirely unsurprised you've found it necessary to have a sig like that.
so i will again, say, get the fuck off your high horse, or at least try to avoid calling someone a troll when they are merely correcting your previous troll, it just seems...disingenuous. cheers
The social and scientific benefits of publicly funded space exploration are well worth losing the economic benefit of privatization. unless you think that sending richers into low orbit has the same social and scientific benefit as conducting real investigations into the nature and origins of the cosmos.
see the problem is that you're trying to bring logic into it. If we were going to let logic be involved in the ethanol debate, then we'd never have started subsidizing corn for its production in the first place. *but* of course the first primary is in iowa... and iowa is where the majority of the ethanol corn production is... you see where I'm going with this.
My favorite part of all of this is that your argument basically consists of an unsupported claim that hubble accomplishes nothing more than taking pretty pictures, followed by what is essentially an exploration of the opportunity cost of funding hubble's repairs. Exactly what kind of argument is that? Of course $350 million could be well spent on other areas of research, that's not an argument against the repairs, that's the inherent nature of the decision. By choosing A, you necessarily lose out on options B, C, D, etc. What you have not done, at all, in either of your posts here is offer a single reason that hubble is undeserving of these funds. Clearly, you think hubble is a wast of money. Clearly its a lot of money and other areas of research could benefit from getting it instead....and?
Though I understand your complaints, just consider how fucking retarded iron chef america would be if they started upping the drama and instigating rivalries and shit like that. Drumroll... some sweaty italian dude is sharpening knives in slo-mo, grimacing and looking at a picture of mario batalli... The chairman's voiceover starts... "If memory serves, Iron Chef Batalli has only one true rival..." followed by 5 minutes of completely fucking useless b-roll giving sweaty italian dude's back-story, and the origins of this non-existent rivalry, all leading up to the challenger triumphantly entering kitchen stadium and throwing the gauntlet at batalli, who, instead of being his regular goofy, sarcastic, chill yet bitterly competitive self will have to be somber and treat the entire affair as an affront to his honor. Alton Brown will have to stop knowing anything about food, and will instead serve as an affable but douchey host constantly asking the real food expert/partial sponsor of the show, Doc Hattori (who was only on the fucking show because his culinary school provided the sous chefs) Kevin Brauch will have to stop being able to complete coherent sentences, like Otah, and a strict All Oral-Sex Double-Entendre ruled will have to be placed on on the judging commentary (If Lower-House member what's his face ever encountered a food that didnt feel good sliding down his throat, he never mentioned it) Then, once the judgment has been handed down, and the victor declared, instead of being able rest easy that his or her best efforts were put forth but the victor was better, the loser must hang his or her head in defeat, ashamed of the dishonor suffered, and apologize to his/her fans and family. In short, it would all seem kinda dumb in the american cultural context. Yes, the drama and cheese and the overblown rivalries were great in the original, but only insofar as they were quintessentially japanese. The american remake is its own thing and working w/in a different cultural context and does a pretty good job of it. Good chefs get together and make some really good looking food, its judged, fun is generally had by all. That's the point, not "LOL, japanese culture is hilarious to my western sensibilities."
As a side-note, I am prejudiced, justifiably in my opinion, against the 'the drama and whatnot is the whole point of the show' proposition after almost coming to blows with a friend who took it all so seriously that he cursed me out as being 'naive and closed-minded' for pointing out that not only was there no such thing as the Gourmet Academy, but that Chairman Kaga was in fact an actor, not an eccentric foodie putting on a show for his own amusement. If you want absurdist drama, watch daytime television. If you want to watch a show where chefs compete, watch iron chef.
I think that the opening, with the creation of the world through the orchestra of the Valar would probably be one of the most epic and impressive audiovisual entertainments ever, if done right.
*shrug* readily available to people who actually click through, which isn't that many. Lt.Col. Bush stated that the officer in question was doing his job when he made these edits. That there were other random edits made from same address just means that this officer, like the rest of us with an internet connectin at work, gets bored and does some random surfing. The degree or thoroughness of the editing doesn't really change that an organization employed someone to paint itself in a better light, which is sleazy. That wikipedia is so rife with this sort of thing lately that we only seem bothered when someone or some group we already dont like does it is another matter.
its not about government workers we dont like, its about them doing things that we dont like. I'd be pretty pissed if my employers were doing shit like this, and i generally like them.
its one thing to publish propaganda. its another to try to warp supposedly neutral repositories of information.
sarcasm and shouts of 'wikipedia sucks' aside, that's not really the issue. the issue is that a very unpopular organization is engaging in a spin campaign, attempting to post erroneous information on supposedly neutral websites. this is sleazy coming from any organization. I'd be pissed if *my* employers were engaged in such actions. Why is it unreasonable to be pissed when an organization that is engaged in the systematic disregarding of human rights and dignity tries to paint itself as being anything else?
nono, i think he's right. Colbert's been saying for quite some time that the facts have an anti-US bias. Wikileaks contains facts, and is therefore by the transitive property operating with an anti-US bias. thats math, you cant argue with that.
I wasn't saying that you did say the PS3 was innovative, in fact I very pointedly criticising you for saying that what hardcore gamers didnt like about the wii is that it isnt innovative, but then were silent on the innovation angle while praising the PS3. this struck me as at least sloppy argument, for if hardcore gamers are turned off by the the lack of innovation in the wii, then why are they so turned on by Halo 3? I think we just fundamentally disagree about the role of the controller in the gaming experience. I find the wiimote to be fantastically innovative. Motion-based and other non-standard controllers are nothing new, granted, but the wiimote is the first to do such a good job of allowing seamless integration of motion into the game. (well into a well-designed game. I found Red Steel to be almost unplayable poorly exectuted in this dept.) One controller that can act as steering wheel, baseball bat, and gun, and do all with reasonable accuracy, based on movement rather than buttons. You call it laggy. fine, there's a split second of lag, and i totally accept not wanting to just deal with it. I can deal with it, but that's obviously not reason for you to. I think the versatility of the mote is what really makes it for me. Just take the number of different bowling rolls possible in wii sports. everybody rolls different. everybody feels the motion capture differently. It makes the experience much more organic than a 'push L1 to do this move' arrangement. And i think that is a very innovative thing to add to a game, even if the rest of the game mechanics are different. but its not a silver bullet. I played NFS: Carbon on a friend's 360 and just gave my wii copy away. it was no longer worth playing. these things happen. I personally agree that there shouldn't be a console'winner.' except maybe between the 360 and PS3. they do pretty much the same things. shrug
I agree, good games do not necessarily need to be innovative. What i was getting at was you level a criticism against the wii, that its games aren't all that innovative, that interesting control-scheme != gaming innovation.
You can't tell me anything in Rayman hasn't been done in numerous arcades and other machines. Ditto with the majority of the rest of the library. They use the wii mote either as a really clumsy mouse, a sort of slow light gun, replace button mashing with vigorous shaking etc.. Some do it better then others but it isn't all that new. The under lying game play is old, as old as gaming. Thats what we object to the shallowness and sense of deja vu And yet the PS3 is spared from this criticism. Which is silly. You start talking about innovation, but then when pressed say that its not about innovation. so what exactly are you saying? How are the games in the PS3 library not subject to the same "as old as gaming" criticism?
hrm, fair enough, though i hardly think that my interpretation of 'wii=super not innovative and all of its games have been done before but have now been reworked for new control scheme' as you disliking it isn't that huge of a reach. Yes, metroid is an FPS that uses the mote and nunchuk as a mouse and keyboard. And, honestly, improves upon mouse and keyboard imo. If you'd rather play on a keyboard, go ahead, but having the first point and shoot FPS setup can hardly be called noninnovative.
I'm glad that you have PS3 games that are holding your attention, but what about them is innovative? I enjoy mario party 8, but its the same game again, and takes 0 advantage of the wiimote.
actually, i think you've got it flipped thinking that he has it flipped. Tho i agree some games are just other games clumsily adapted to the wiimote (NFS: Carbon is a prime example of this imo) but sports, play, warioware, metroid, and mario all have gameplay that is inseparable from the control scheme. I would *love* to play a more hardcore fps on the metroid control scheme, its the best fps interface i've ever used. but that doesnt make corruption's gameplay any more shallow and already-done than, say gears of war or halo 3. You really are the first person I've heard say they didnt like the wii because it wasn't original enough. What exactly about any of your PS3 games is so innovative?
wait, so pirate bay *isn't* making any money? well, bless their hearts, how robin hood of them to facilitate stealing from the rich with no thought to compensation for themselves./sarcasm
...of weirdbeard's wii is going to be somewhat crazy. Guitar Hero III Mario Galaxy Geometry Wars Galaxies the zelda-zapper game thing, Mario Kart (whenever it actaully comes out)
yeah, this really sounds like the bubble is going to burst... how is early fall supposed to be anything other than slow for any sector of retail? Its the lull before the late-fall --> christmas shopping season.
Japan can buy less videogames all it wants, that doestn change the fact that i'll be spending like $350 on games in the next few months, and thats ignoring virtual console games. This is a bunch of FUD
Slashdot Mirror
or more, since we actually know how to use them well.
that's what I'm afraid of, the internet-stalking generation getting to use said skills to pay the bills.
apparently not, perhaps you should try explaining it again, maybe this time with more invective, personal slander, and cursing, it wasn't quite meta enough that time.
Well, I do know what troll means. My favorite part of the wikipedia article is this:
The term troll is highly subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. The term is often erroneously used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument fallacy ad hominem. Often, calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's motives. Regardless of the circumstances, controversial posts may attract a particularly strong response from those unfamiliar with the robust dialogue found in some online, rather than physical, communities Hmmmm term troll often used to discredit opposition via fallacy ad hominem... sounds familiar. Granted, I did call you an asshole first. mea culpa.The ONLY logical conclusion is that it's against the terms of use
this is true, which is why I also assumed as much. But there's a difference between assuming something and acting as if its fact. Pretty simple. You never know, there may be a clause in the terms of use explicitly allowing family members access. I wouldn't assume there is one, but it wouldn't surprise me either.
(not terms of service - if you're going to be pedantic about abusing me over minute detail at least get the detail right yourself).
Go ahead and search my comment for the word "service." You will find that it does not appear. You will also notice that the section of my comment you quoted uses the phrase "terms of use" not terms of service. You pulled terms of service out of your ass, and then layed in to me for misusing them. Which I didnt. I'd write this off as an honest mistake, but it really seems to be how you roll. find something i *actually* said to curse me out for, eh?
Oh boo fucking hoo you dishonest prat. Try saying it without calling me an "asshole" and telling me to get off my high horse. You're a troll.
Yes, I should have been more specific. All I was trying to say when pointing out that you had misused the term piracy was that lending != piracy. I entirely meant that you were being an asshole, and needed to get the fuck off your high horse. That doesnt make me a troll, that makes me vulgar. Both points were valid, and have clearly sparked a lively debate. Also, I fail to see the relevance of slandering my honesty. but clearly not understanding this point is what makes me a troll and you not...
and yet you're just as lax with your own language. Again you're a troll.
I'm not lax with my own language, as I pointed out above. You attributed a comment to me i did not make, and took me to task for it. Go you!
Huh? Nice straw man. I'm posting a response to the details he gave me
I'm not sure you understand what a straw man actually is. Since correcting misused terminology apparently makes one a troll now, I'll simply reiterate that I feel you went beyond the reasonable reach of assumption in taking GP to task for lending out the pre-release dvds. Even prefacing your statement with "isnt that against the terms of use, because if so, you're being really stupid for the following reasons," would have alleviated my concerns, but no, much more fun to just treat your own reasoning as fact and proceed from there.
I suppose what you expected was chocolates and flowers when calling someone an asshole and telling them to get off their high horse. Idiot.
damn, were flowers and chocolates an option?
"Faulty use of piracy". Well how about your "faulty use of terms of service". No, you understood the meaning and intent of my message and instead of responding like a rational human being you choose to be abusive and fixate on the technical misuse of a term.
Well, i guess we disagree there. See, to me, briefly correcting terminology and letting someone know they're being a self-righteous asshole is a more rational human response than ripping in to someone for my assumption about the implication of something they said without first ascertaining the veracity of that assumption. I will again point out that I never used Terms of Service instead of Terms of Use.
What exactly is it that I'm suppose to be unable to handle? Your feeble argumentative skills or your complete lack of social skill? Don't make me laugh you pathetic little troll.
Uh... me calling you an asshole and telling you to fuck off. I'd say, 'but clearly you can handle it,' but methinks the lady doth protest too much. Nothing says "i am totally handling this" like resorting to Bond Villain language.
More straw men. It wasn't me that first mentioned piracy. The GP said that he was afraid his mother would lend to friends who would copy.
mo
Hrm, anal trolling git... that's a new one. Well, i do apologize for taking issue with the toolishness with which you were taking GP to task. Clearly, i should have, like you, responded not to something you actually said, but some implication of what you said that I had no way of knowing or verifying and then taken you to task for that. Man, what was I thinking? As for this talk of trolling and social skills, well, i dunno. You posted a rant against a guy predicated on a faulty use of piracy. you were being an asshole. I pointed out both things. Can't handle it? Fuck off. Saying that Lending != Piracy isnt being anal, its pointing out a fact. Calling you an asshole is, well, just how i saw it. Simply my opinion, but based on the way you were conducting yourself in the discussion. It is, of course, absolutely hiLARious that your response ends with what is essentially 'stfu TROLL' given your sig. From the particular way in which you seem to think it best to disagree with something, I'm entirely unsurprised you've found it necessary to have a sig like that.
so i will again, say, get the fuck off your high horse, or at least try to avoid calling someone a troll when they are merely correcting your previous troll, it just seems...disingenuous. cheers
no by lending the discs to his elderly mother, he's committing an act of lending.
Get the fuck off your high horse, or at least be more accurate in your terminology when being an asshole.
The social and scientific benefits of publicly funded space exploration are well worth losing the economic benefit of privatization.
unless you think that sending richers into low orbit has the same social and scientific benefit as conducting real investigations into the nature and origins of the cosmos.
see the problem is that you're trying to bring logic into it.
If we were going to let logic be involved in the ethanol debate, then we'd never have started subsidizing corn for its production in the first place. *but* of course the first primary is in iowa... and iowa is where the majority of the ethanol corn production is... you see where I'm going with this.
My favorite part of all of this is that your argument basically consists of an unsupported claim that hubble accomplishes nothing more than taking pretty pictures, followed by what is essentially an exploration of the opportunity cost of funding hubble's repairs. Exactly what kind of argument is that? Of course $350 million could be well spent on other areas of research, that's not an argument against the repairs, that's the inherent nature of the decision. By choosing A, you necessarily lose out on options B, C, D, etc. ...and?
What you have not done, at all, in either of your posts here is offer a single reason that hubble is undeserving of these funds. Clearly, you think hubble is a wast of money. Clearly its a lot of money and other areas of research could benefit from getting it instead.
Though I understand your complaints, just consider how fucking retarded iron chef america would be if they started upping the drama and instigating rivalries and shit like that.
Drumroll... some sweaty italian dude is sharpening knives in slo-mo, grimacing and looking at a picture of mario batalli... The chairman's voiceover starts... "If memory serves, Iron Chef Batalli has only one true rival..." followed by 5 minutes of completely fucking useless b-roll giving sweaty italian dude's back-story, and the origins of this non-existent rivalry, all leading up to the challenger triumphantly entering kitchen stadium and throwing the gauntlet at batalli, who, instead of being his regular goofy, sarcastic, chill yet bitterly competitive self will have to be somber and treat the entire affair as an affront to his honor.
Alton Brown will have to stop knowing anything about food, and will instead serve as an affable but douchey host constantly asking the real food expert/partial sponsor of the show, Doc Hattori (who was only on the fucking show because his culinary school provided the sous chefs) Kevin Brauch will have to stop being able to complete coherent sentences, like Otah, and a strict All Oral-Sex Double-Entendre ruled will have to be placed on on the judging commentary (If Lower-House member what's his face ever encountered a food that didnt feel good sliding down his throat, he never mentioned it) Then, once the judgment has been handed down, and the victor declared, instead of being able rest easy that his or her best efforts were put forth but the victor was better, the loser must hang his or her head in defeat, ashamed of the dishonor suffered, and apologize to his/her fans and family.
In short, it would all seem kinda dumb in the american cultural context. Yes, the drama and cheese and the overblown rivalries were great in the original, but only insofar as they were quintessentially japanese. The american remake is its own thing and working w/in a different cultural context and does a pretty good job of it. Good chefs get together and make some really good looking food, its judged, fun is generally had by all. That's the point, not "LOL, japanese culture is hilarious to my western sensibilities."
As a side-note, I am prejudiced, justifiably in my opinion, against the 'the drama and whatnot is the whole point of the show' proposition after almost coming to blows with a friend who took it all so seriously that he cursed me out as being 'naive and closed-minded' for pointing out that not only was there no such thing as the Gourmet Academy, but that Chairman Kaga was in fact an actor, not an eccentric foodie putting on a show for his own amusement. If you want absurdist drama, watch daytime television. If you want to watch a show where chefs compete, watch iron chef.
eh... I'll just book when i get back.
I think that the opening, with the creation of the world through the orchestra of the Valar would probably be one of the most epic and impressive audiovisual entertainments ever, if done right.
*shrug*
readily available to people who actually click through, which isn't that many.
Lt.Col. Bush stated that the officer in question was doing his job when he made these edits. That there were other random edits made from same address just means that this officer, like the rest of us with an internet connectin at work, gets bored and does some random surfing. The degree or thoroughness of the editing doesn't really change that an organization employed someone to paint itself in a better light, which is sleazy.
That wikipedia is so rife with this sort of thing lately that we only seem bothered when someone or some group we already dont like does it is another matter.
its not about government workers we dont like, its about them doing things that we dont like.
I'd be pretty pissed if my employers were doing shit like this, and i generally like them.
its one thing to publish propaganda. its another to try to warp supposedly neutral repositories of information.
sarcasm and shouts of 'wikipedia sucks' aside, that's not really the issue.
the issue is that a very unpopular organization is engaging in a spin campaign, attempting to post erroneous information on supposedly neutral websites. this is sleazy coming from any organization. I'd be pissed if *my* employers were engaged in such actions. Why is it unreasonable to be pissed when an organization that is engaged in the systematic disregarding of human rights and dignity tries to paint itself as being anything else?
nono, i think he's right. Colbert's been saying for quite some time that the facts have an anti-US bias.
Wikileaks contains facts, and is therefore by the transitive property operating with an anti-US bias.
thats math, you cant argue with that.
not from microsoft, it doesnt. you're confusing monopolists with real businesspeople (drug dealers).
I wasn't saying that you did say the PS3 was innovative, in fact I very pointedly criticising you for saying that what hardcore gamers didnt like about the wii is that it isnt innovative, but then were silent on the innovation angle while praising the PS3. this struck me as at least sloppy argument, for if hardcore gamers are turned off by the the lack of innovation in the wii, then why are they so turned on by Halo 3?
I think we just fundamentally disagree about the role of the controller in the gaming experience. I find the wiimote to be fantastically innovative. Motion-based and other non-standard controllers are nothing new, granted, but the wiimote is the first to do such a good job of allowing seamless integration of motion into the game. (well into a well-designed game. I found Red Steel to be almost unplayable poorly exectuted in this dept.) One controller that can act as steering wheel, baseball bat, and gun, and do all with reasonable accuracy, based on movement rather than buttons. You call it laggy. fine, there's a split second of lag, and i totally accept not wanting to just deal with it. I can deal with it, but that's obviously not reason for you to. I think the versatility of the mote is what really makes it for me. Just take the number of different bowling rolls possible in wii sports. everybody rolls different. everybody feels the motion capture differently. It makes the experience much more organic than a 'push L1 to do this move' arrangement. And i think that is a very innovative thing to add to a game, even if the rest of the game mechanics are different. but its not a silver bullet. I played NFS: Carbon on a friend's 360 and just gave my wii copy away. it was no longer worth playing. these things happen.
I personally agree that there shouldn't be a console'winner.' except maybe between the 360 and PS3. they do pretty much the same things. shrug
hrm, fair enough, though i hardly think that my interpretation of 'wii=super not innovative and all of its games have been done before but have now been reworked for new control scheme' as you disliking it isn't that huge of a reach.
Yes, metroid is an FPS that uses the mote and nunchuk as a mouse and keyboard. And, honestly, improves upon mouse and keyboard imo. If you'd rather play on a keyboard, go ahead, but having the first point and shoot FPS setup can hardly be called noninnovative.
I'm glad that you have PS3 games that are holding your attention, but what about them is innovative? I enjoy mario party 8, but its the same game again, and takes 0 advantage of the wiimote.
actually, i think you've got it flipped thinking that he has it flipped. Tho i agree some games are just other games clumsily adapted to the wiimote (NFS: Carbon is a prime example of this imo) but sports, play, warioware, metroid, and mario all have gameplay that is inseparable from the control scheme. I would *love* to play a more hardcore fps on the metroid control scheme, its the best fps interface i've ever used. but that doesnt make corruption's gameplay any more shallow and already-done than, say gears of war or halo 3.
You really are the first person I've heard say they didnt like the wii because it wasn't original enough. What exactly about any of your PS3 games is so innovative?
wait, so pirate bay *isn't* making any money? well, bless their hearts, how robin hood of them to facilitate stealing from the rich with no thought to compensation for themselves. /sarcasm
...of weirdbeard's wii is going to be somewhat crazy.
Guitar Hero III
Mario Galaxy
Geometry Wars Galaxies
the zelda-zapper game thing,
Mario Kart (whenever it actaully comes out)
yeah, this really sounds like the bubble is going to burst...
how is early fall supposed to be anything other than slow for any sector of retail?
Its the lull before the late-fall --> christmas shopping season.
Japan can buy less videogames all it wants, that doestn change the fact that i'll be spending like $350 on games in the next few months, and thats ignoring virtual console games.
This is a bunch of FUD
I still think that Ryan Reynolds would be perfect for a young kirk. Same handsome yet roundish face, aptitude for. silly. line. delivery.