For one, the console versions take an eternity to load by all accounts. The PC version loads each level in about 8-10 seconds (my pc is nothing special, it's been 3-4 years since I've changed any parts).
I'd give it a 6.5 or 7. The bit in the review about killing the rape victims was spot on. It wasn't funny at all. It went from crass to disgustingly callous.
But setting that aside, the ancient gameplay is strangely refreshing in comparison to the bevy of modern military shooters that have flooded the market. It's a game from a different era in gaming, for better or for worse. It takes you through a pretty entertaining variety of levels that military shooters will never attempt to do.
The combat feels good. The weapons feel good. The humor aside from the situation mentioned above, is the kind of low-brow humor you expect. The graphics are subpar as you might expect, but older gamers, particularly those who have played Duke3D, should have no problem with less-than-bleeding edge graphics. Haven't run into any bugs on the PC version.
I am definitely getting a strange sense of nostalgic value here, even though the Duke Nukem experience is fairly limited. It's really the old gameplay design that is driving the nostalgia. As I play, I think to myself, "Yeah, 13 years ago, this was what they thought would be awesome to have in a game." I particularly enjoy these throwback areas. There are some modern design conventions brought to the table, for better or for worse. 2-weapon limit, regenerating health, good checkpoint placement, player path indicators in level design (such as putting a bright lamppost next to the path out of the area).
Older players from the Duke3D era should get some enjoyment here. Newer players will probably just get tripped up on all the cludgy game design they haven't seen before, but older gamers still remember and have developed a thicker skin against. To be frank, the game is not good, but there is still fun to be had here.
Now that Gearbox has finally put this beast to rest, I wonder what they could do with the license starting from scratch?
For the most part, "rights" are what we wish to have. In reality, you have no rights besides what you can hold on to.
There's no right to not get killed. You have to protect yourself by perpetuating a social norm that frowns upon murder, and supporting law and enforcement that presents a sufficient threat to discourage murder.
There's no freedom of speech unless you (or your group) can prevent someone else from stopping you.
Everybody has ideas on how the world "ought to be", and we affirm these "oughts" by declaring them to be "rights". This is part of how we secure our rights, by convincing everyone else to help protect them as a group. However, as soon as the people who want to take away rights are allowed to gain more power than the people who want to keep those rights, those rights are gone. Semantic definitions of "rights" won't protect freedoms, only power.
Malthus's predictions failed to come about because he compared a linear growth in Supply to a geometric growth in demand which would eventually overtake supply in his model. He failed to account for future technological advancement shifting the supply curve, which has thus far prevented malthusian scenarios from coming about on a global scale.
However, while many have their ideas on how technological advancement is created, and believe they understand some contributing factors that help induce technological advancement, it's still a huge unknown aspect of economic growth.
Essentially, we're dependent on the reliable but terribly unspecific prediction that "technology will advance". We are confident that the fate of the world will not end the way Malthus predicts, because history has shown that technology will keep coming to prevent it.
The more pressing concern is, will the technological advancement "soon enough" to prevent significant disaster?
For instance, peak oil will not destroy mankind, because increasing costs of oil-based technology will fuel research and advancement of alternatives(necessity is the mother of invention). However, if estimates of the levels of available oil are too far off, a sudden spike in oil prices would disrupt economies that have yet to develop the alternatives to the necessary extent to prevent severe suffering. Eventually the world would adapt and even thrive, but there would be terrible suffering if a sudden shift occured.
The equivalency of the buying and selling conditions depends on the locations of both houses, since the topic indicates the need for air travel, the distance between the houses is probably quite significant.
Even though the housing market overall is down, there are particular locations which haven't fallen as much, and are enjoying a much faster recovery, while others are recovering slower, or even continuing to lose value.
I like your distinction, it sums things up quite nicely.
From now on, I'll call anyone who has played any kind of electronic entertainment "gamers", and anyone who is actively engaged in gaming, and digesting related news "gaming enthusiasts".
If there are "casual" gamers who are "hardcore" about their games, they'd certainly belong in the category of gaming enthusiasts. However, the vast majority who only dabble in gaming as a way of passing time, wouldn't fall into the category.
Gaming enthusiast as a term would provides a meaningful distinction for the purpose of communication, while avoiding the perjorative associations linked to the more commonly used terms of "casual" and "hardcore".
Instead of memorizing passwords for everything I log into, I just memorize 1 process for every site.
For example, if I just translate every other letter into it's numbered position in the alphabet, and capitalize on the 3rd letter. Extend the length as needed with the alphabet if the site has a short name. This way you'd have a reasonably strong and individualized password for every site that won't be hard to remember since I repeat it on each site.
Obviously, this isn't the actual process I use, but it's just one way it could be done.
The other drawback is that PC interfaces are designed for a keyboard/trackpad.
There are enough controllers on the couch already. I even have a Logitech DiNovo mini remote for my media PC. It's a minikeyboard with an integrated trackpad about the size of a hand.
But I still need to swipe the mouse all over the place to control netflix, or arrowkey my way through a file-tree. Roku and Netflix on the media boxees are designed to throw the content at you immediately, with only a couple arrow keys presses to navigate.
Bottom line is that there is a market for purpose-driven design. Iphones and Ipads aren't all-purpose workhorses, but they let consumers do what they want, and easily. People are willing to pay for "simple", not because they don't like having features, but because they don't want clutter getting in the way of what they really want to be doing (Watching video rather than navigating menus or tweaking options). That said, I/don't/ want such simplified interfaces on my PC because it will ultimately end up restricting my access to niche featuresets that I will frequently use, while others will not.
Ideally, a video player should just play videos, with as little interfacing as possible. All videos should play automatically, with the absolute minimum of input from the user. PCs are multi-purpose machines, and are great for multi-purpose use.
To that end, I have an ipod for music. An ipod dock to play Pandora for the kitchen. Game consoles for netflix. A media PC for playing media from the web, and a desktop PC for actually using the web and doing all the other tasks that are best done on a desktop. A tool for each task, rather than trying to cram a single tool into fitting many different roles.
A slim budget PC could replace all of those devices and do more, but I don't want those devices to be doing more. I want to "do more" on my actual PC instead.
Where I/do/ want integration is in my controller. I want to control my ipod dock, receiver, tv, wii, xbox360, media pc, and pc, from a single controller, with full control, and without feeling restricted by the controller's limitations. I don't mind having all those devices sitting in their allotted space, but I do mind having to grab a different controller for each one. Today's universal remotes will only remove a few of the controllers I need.
The 2k-4k resolution bit is the insane part. That's a/lot/ of data and it'll take quite a bit more than 10 years to get source material for that kind of resolution. Running 1080p on a tablet would be plenty amazing.
The rest doesn't require any major leaps.
Using a TV/entertainment center by connecting a portable device isn't that radical. He's just expecting the ability to do it wirelessly and we do have HD wireless video connections already being demoed at trade shows. A tablet PC set into a powered but otherwise wireless broadcast dock on an endtable would accomplish this just fine. The big technical achievements required here involve slimming the tablet PC and increasing the speed, but without specifying some high benchmark of improvement, it is very reasonable to expect that we will see slimmer/faster tablets within 10 years. I'm sure the Ipad 3 will arrive by next summer, and would be slimmer/faster, if only marginally so.
Putting the image on a wall instead of a TV just requires an HD projector.
Per your link, the enemy in Home Front is not China, it's North Korea.
"The antagonists in Homefront were originally intended to be Chinese, but were later replaced by a unified Korea for two reasons: a possible backlash by the Chinese Ministry of Culture and the reality of economic interdependence between America and China that made the Chinese "not that scary"[8] said Tae Kim, a former CIA field agent and consultant on the game's backstory."
China is just one of 3 factions in multiplayer (yellow guys vs. brown guys vs. white/back guys). They're not designated as "bad guys", they're just one of the two sides that you're randomly assigned to on each map.
The brown team and the white/back team could just as easily be interpreted as the "bad guy" in this game if you want to identify one of them as such.
No, the point remains valid. If he wanted to commit rape, he should be smart enough to choose his timing and targets more carefully. He'd be better off attacking someone he has power over, or attacking from a position of anonymity(I'm assuming he wants to rape for the power trip, since he could easily buy better-looking hookers if he wanted to. It doesn't make sense for him to do it in a hotel room he booked with all his personal information. The guy is too smart to be running around naked, attacking the first woman he sees with absolutely no thought given to how he could escape the consequences.
My suspicion is that he probably tried to pay her for sex and they got into an argument over the price afterwards. Maybe he didn't want to pay, or she wanted more, whatever. Either way, he's managed to ruin himself.
The future is where retail games come with a single-use unlock code tied to an online account. If the game is sold used, the next owner will need to pay for a new unlock code at a cost somewhere below full-retail (I'd guess maxing out at $15-20, possibly scaling prices according to the current demand)
Sure, there will be problems and outcry over the unlock mechanic. There will also be reduced sales since those who buy new can't offset the initial cost with money from reselling the game.
But people will still buy that game new (a few loud forum-goers and your local buddies do not represent the average consumer who won't know or care). People will still sell that game used, and people will still buy that game used because it'll still be cheaper than paying full price. The developer/publisher will get a relatively HUGE amount of money from these transactions because right now they get nothing on the used game sale. Also, they will be able to see how much money they are making on used game unlocks, and they won't be able to see how much money they've lost in first-purchases, so it'll just look like all upside and no downside.
Thus, this structure will quickly expand and become an industry standard. It'll probably start with Activision on a Madden or a Call of Duty. These products enjoy the equivalent of monopoly power because of the status they've attained (Apple products enjoy huge margins because they've created enormous demand). They have the market power to start this, and survive the shift. The only alternative is proliferation of the Steam model, and price discounts scaling to match demand.
One way or another, they/will/ get money on used game sales. They have the power, and the market is willing, even if the niche of hardcore gamers are not.
Nobody owes them money without a government establishing and enforcing contract law upon which their businesses are built.
A government provides education to develop their employees. Police to protect them and their employees from a lawless societies. Their position of power at the apex of the economy means they receive small indirect benefits from benefits conferred upon all related parties.
Imagine trying to run Microsoft and Berkshire from a government-free place like Somalia. Can you imagine trying to get money from a Somalian warlord because he was stuck with the wrong end of a futures contract? Or asking him to pay for his Windows licenses? There isn't enough infrastructure and order to support such entities without a highly ordered society. There are theoretically other ways to develop such order, but practically speaking, such order develops from stable government.
I feel that there's a market for added security credit cards.
Not being able to buy things online is a pretty significant inconvenience, but putting your information in the hands of vendors with completely unknown security measures means you're gambling everytime you buy from someone new.
I love the virtual credit card numbers offered by citibank and discover. I wish someone would take this service to the next level with purchase approval cards. The card gets swiped, the owner gets texted, and replies to the text with a blank message (purchases over a dollar limit requiring a password reply). Then the purchase gets approved. Naturally, this wouldn't be something you'd use at the grocery store, and yes there may be cases where someone steals your physical phone in addition to your credit card info. But it would serve a useful purpose as a supplementary card that can be used for transactions where you feel that you can't trust the other party to handle your credit card number.
It's just disturbing how little stands in their way once they get the credit card number. They're just so terribly simply to obtain, and they don't need anything else after they see it. I've had to book hotels where they only accepted reservation through/faxes/ of your credit card number. Best I could do there was call the manager to make sure she was standing next to the fax when it went through.
Can someone explain to me what a "ladyboy" is and what the appeal of them is? From the very grief glimpses I've seen from movies, aren't they just feminine men in women's clothes? And unless I'm remembering incorrectly, there appeared to be crowds of men in the club, and composed of a mix of straight/gay guys.
So my confusion is this: For straight guys, wouldn't they prefer a female hooker? For gay guys, wouldn't they prefer a male hooker?
Or are ladyboys also fulfilling social cravings? Like a geisha or a hostess in one of those japanese cafes?
He was hired no problem by PWC, I imagine the other three big 4 accounting firms are using the same hiring process since they're all carbon copies of each other in virtually all other aspects.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I'm almost done with it.
For one, the console versions take an eternity to load by all accounts. The PC version loads each level in about 8-10 seconds (my pc is nothing special, it's been 3-4 years since I've changed any parts).
I'd give it a 6.5 or 7. The bit in the review about killing the rape victims was spot on. It wasn't funny at all. It went from crass to disgustingly callous.
But setting that aside, the ancient gameplay is strangely refreshing in comparison to the bevy of modern military shooters that have flooded the market. It's a game from a different era in gaming, for better or for worse. It takes you through a pretty entertaining variety of levels that military shooters will never attempt to do.
The combat feels good. The weapons feel good. The humor aside from the situation mentioned above, is the kind of low-brow humor you expect. The graphics are subpar as you might expect, but older gamers, particularly those who have played Duke3D, should have no problem with less-than-bleeding edge graphics. Haven't run into any bugs on the PC version.
I am definitely getting a strange sense of nostalgic value here, even though the Duke Nukem experience is fairly limited. It's really the old gameplay design that is driving the nostalgia. As I play, I think to myself, "Yeah, 13 years ago, this was what they thought would be awesome to have in a game." I particularly enjoy these throwback areas. There are some modern design conventions brought to the table, for better or for worse. 2-weapon limit, regenerating health, good checkpoint placement, player path indicators in level design (such as putting a bright lamppost next to the path out of the area).
Older players from the Duke3D era should get some enjoyment here. Newer players will probably just get tripped up on all the cludgy game design they haven't seen before, but older gamers still remember and have developed a thicker skin against. To be frank, the game is not good, but there is still fun to be had here.
Now that Gearbox has finally put this beast to rest, I wonder what they could do with the license starting from scratch?
For the most part, "rights" are what we wish to have. In reality, you have no rights besides what you can hold on to.
There's no right to not get killed. You have to protect yourself by perpetuating a social norm that frowns upon murder, and supporting law and enforcement that presents a sufficient threat to discourage murder.
There's no freedom of speech unless you (or your group) can prevent someone else from stopping you.
Everybody has ideas on how the world "ought to be", and we affirm these "oughts" by declaring them to be "rights". This is part of how we secure our rights, by convincing everyone else to help protect them as a group. However, as soon as the people who want to take away rights are allowed to gain more power than the people who want to keep those rights, those rights are gone. Semantic definitions of "rights" won't protect freedoms, only power.
Malthus's predictions failed to come about because he compared a linear growth in Supply to a geometric growth in demand which would eventually overtake supply in his model. He failed to account for future technological advancement shifting the supply curve, which has thus far prevented malthusian scenarios from coming about on a global scale.
However, while many have their ideas on how technological advancement is created, and believe they understand some contributing factors that help induce technological advancement, it's still a huge unknown aspect of economic growth.
Essentially, we're dependent on the reliable but terribly unspecific prediction that "technology will advance". We are confident that the fate of the world will not end the way Malthus predicts, because history has shown that technology will keep coming to prevent it.
The more pressing concern is, will the technological advancement "soon enough" to prevent significant disaster?
For instance, peak oil will not destroy mankind, because increasing costs of oil-based technology will fuel research and advancement of alternatives(necessity is the mother of invention). However, if estimates of the levels of available oil are too far off, a sudden spike in oil prices would disrupt economies that have yet to develop the alternatives to the necessary extent to prevent severe suffering. Eventually the world would adapt and even thrive, but there would be terrible suffering if a sudden shift occured.
The equivalency of the buying and selling conditions depends on the locations of both houses, since the topic indicates the need for air travel, the distance between the houses is probably quite significant.
Even though the housing market overall is down, there are particular locations which haven't fallen as much, and are enjoying a much faster recovery, while others are recovering slower, or even continuing to lose value.
I like your distinction, it sums things up quite nicely.
From now on, I'll call anyone who has played any kind of electronic entertainment "gamers", and anyone who is actively engaged in gaming, and digesting related news "gaming enthusiasts".
If there are "casual" gamers who are "hardcore" about their games, they'd certainly belong in the category of gaming enthusiasts. However, the vast majority who only dabble in gaming as a way of passing time, wouldn't fall into the category.
Gaming enthusiast as a term would provides a meaningful distinction for the purpose of communication, while avoiding the perjorative associations linked to the more commonly used terms of "casual" and "hardcore".
There is a lower level of stigma, but it is still far from acceptable in my social circles and especially my workplace.
It's ok to mention that you have a game or two for the Wii or tried Kinect while visiting a friend.
It's not ok to expose yourself as someone who actively wastes their personal time on something like gaming.
Work filter blocks 3 categories, Porn, Gambling, and Gaming websites. Sports is acceptable however, and people are encouraged to follow it.
Instead of memorizing passwords for everything I log into, I just memorize 1 process for every site.
For example, if I just translate every other letter into it's numbered position in the alphabet, and capitalize on the 3rd letter. Extend the length as needed with the alphabet if the site has a short name. This way you'd have a reasonably strong and individualized password for every site that won't be hard to remember since I repeat it on each site.
Obviously, this isn't the actual process I use, but it's just one way it could be done.
*facepalm* Goddammit, jumped the gun and grabbed the original vote! Looks like the site hasn't been updated with the vote on the extension.
See which way your congressman voted on this issue:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313#position
Spoiler: Feingold (D-WI) voted Nay, and Landrieu (D-LA) did not vote. The other 98 voted Yea.
Posting to undo moderation.
Yeah, it's a little *meow* odd to find the word ladyboy inserted into all 6 of the posts in your profile. Is this some kind of inside joke?
Same here. We just raise an open palm, with a bent elbow.
The other drawback is that PC interfaces are designed for a keyboard/trackpad.
There are enough controllers on the couch already. I even have a Logitech DiNovo mini remote for my media PC. It's a minikeyboard with an integrated trackpad about the size of a hand.
But I still need to swipe the mouse all over the place to control netflix, or arrowkey my way through a file-tree. Roku and Netflix on the media boxees are designed to throw the content at you immediately, with only a couple arrow keys presses to navigate.
Bottom line is that there is a market for purpose-driven design. Iphones and Ipads aren't all-purpose workhorses, but they let consumers do what they want, and easily. People are willing to pay for "simple", not because they don't like having features, but because they don't want clutter getting in the way of what they really want to be doing (Watching video rather than navigating menus or tweaking options). That said, I /don't/ want such simplified interfaces on my PC because it will ultimately end up restricting my access to niche featuresets that I will frequently use, while others will not.
Ideally, a video player should just play videos, with as little interfacing as possible. All videos should play automatically, with the absolute minimum of input from the user. PCs are multi-purpose machines, and are great for multi-purpose use.
To that end, I have an ipod for music. An ipod dock to play Pandora for the kitchen. Game consoles for netflix. A media PC for playing media from the web, and a desktop PC for actually using the web and doing all the other tasks that are best done on a desktop. A tool for each task, rather than trying to cram a single tool into fitting many different roles.
A slim budget PC could replace all of those devices and do more, but I don't want those devices to be doing more. I want to "do more" on my actual PC instead.
Where I /do/ want integration is in my controller. I want to control my ipod dock, receiver, tv, wii, xbox360, media pc, and pc, from a single controller, with full control, and without feeling restricted by the controller's limitations. I don't mind having all those devices sitting in their allotted space, but I do mind having to grab a different controller for each one. Today's universal remotes will only remove a few of the controllers I need.
Last I checked Citibank and Discover, are the only credit card companies that offer these services.
What other credit cards have you heard of that offer this?
The 2k-4k resolution bit is the insane part. That's a /lot/ of data and it'll take quite a bit more than 10 years to get source material for that kind of resolution. Running 1080p on a tablet would be plenty amazing.
The rest doesn't require any major leaps.
Using a TV/entertainment center by connecting a portable device isn't that radical. He's just expecting the ability to do it wirelessly and we do have HD wireless video connections already being demoed at trade shows. A tablet PC set into a powered but otherwise wireless broadcast dock on an endtable would accomplish this just fine. The big technical achievements required here involve slimming the tablet PC and increasing the speed, but without specifying some high benchmark of improvement, it is very reasonable to expect that we will see slimmer/faster tablets within 10 years. I'm sure the Ipad 3 will arrive by next summer, and would be slimmer/faster, if only marginally so.
Putting the image on a wall instead of a TV just requires an HD projector.
Per your link, the enemy in Home Front is not China, it's North Korea.
"The antagonists in Homefront were originally intended to be Chinese, but were later replaced by a unified Korea for two reasons: a possible backlash by the Chinese Ministry of Culture and the reality of economic interdependence between America and China that made the Chinese "not that scary"[8] said Tae Kim, a former CIA field agent and consultant on the game's backstory."
China is just one of 3 factions in multiplayer (yellow guys vs. brown guys vs. white/back guys). They're not designated as "bad guys", they're just one of the two sides that you're randomly assigned to on each map.
The brown team and the white/back team could just as easily be interpreted as the "bad guy" in this game if you want to identify one of them as such.
No, the point remains valid. If he wanted to commit rape, he should be smart enough to choose his timing and targets more carefully. He'd be better off attacking someone he has power over, or attacking from a position of anonymity(I'm assuming he wants to rape for the power trip, since he could easily buy better-looking hookers if he wanted to. It doesn't make sense for him to do it in a hotel room he booked with all his personal information. The guy is too smart to be running around naked, attacking the first woman he sees with absolutely no thought given to how he could escape the consequences.
My suspicion is that he probably tried to pay her for sex and they got into an argument over the price afterwards. Maybe he didn't want to pay, or she wanted more, whatever. Either way, he's managed to ruin himself.
The future is where retail games come with a single-use unlock code tied to an online account. If the game is sold used, the next owner will need to pay for a new unlock code at a cost somewhere below full-retail (I'd guess maxing out at $15-20, possibly scaling prices according to the current demand)
Sure, there will be problems and outcry over the unlock mechanic. There will also be reduced sales since those who buy new can't offset the initial cost with money from reselling the game.
But people will still buy that game new (a few loud forum-goers and your local buddies do not represent the average consumer who won't know or care). People will still sell that game used, and people will still buy that game used because it'll still be cheaper than paying full price. The developer/publisher will get a relatively HUGE amount of money from these transactions because right now they get nothing on the used game sale. Also, they will be able to see how much money they are making on used game unlocks, and they won't be able to see how much money they've lost in first-purchases, so it'll just look like all upside and no downside.
Thus, this structure will quickly expand and become an industry standard. It'll probably start with Activision on a Madden or a Call of Duty. These products enjoy the equivalent of monopoly power because of the status they've attained (Apple products enjoy huge margins because they've created enormous demand). They have the market power to start this, and survive the shift. The only alternative is proliferation of the Steam model, and price discounts scaling to match demand.
One way or another, they /will/ get money on used game sales. They have the power, and the market is willing, even if the niche of hardcore gamers are not.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet
Nobody owes them money without a government establishing and enforcing contract law upon which their businesses are built.
A government provides education to develop their employees. Police to protect them and their employees from a lawless societies. Their position of power at the apex of the economy means they receive small indirect benefits from benefits conferred upon all related parties.
Imagine trying to run Microsoft and Berkshire from a government-free place like Somalia. Can you imagine trying to get money from a Somalian warlord because he was stuck with the wrong end of a futures contract? Or asking him to pay for his Windows licenses? There isn't enough infrastructure and order to support such entities without a highly ordered society. There are theoretically other ways to develop such order, but practically speaking, such order develops from stable government.
Where your tax dollars go (last chart at the bottom):
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/top-ten-tax-charts/
I feel that there's a market for added security credit cards.
Not being able to buy things online is a pretty significant inconvenience, but putting your information in the hands of vendors with completely unknown security measures means you're gambling everytime you buy from someone new.
I love the virtual credit card numbers offered by citibank and discover. I wish someone would take this service to the next level with purchase approval cards. The card gets swiped, the owner gets texted, and replies to the text with a blank message (purchases over a dollar limit requiring a password reply). Then the purchase gets approved. Naturally, this wouldn't be something you'd use at the grocery store, and yes there may be cases where someone steals your physical phone in addition to your credit card info. But it would serve a useful purpose as a supplementary card that can be used for transactions where you feel that you can't trust the other party to handle your credit card number.
It's just disturbing how little stands in their way once they get the credit card number. They're just so terribly simply to obtain, and they don't need anything else after they see it. I've had to book hotels where they only accepted reservation through /faxes/ of your credit card number. Best I could do there was call the manager to make sure she was standing next to the fax when it went through.
Can someone explain to me what a "ladyboy" is and what the appeal of them is? From the very grief glimpses I've seen from movies, aren't they just feminine men in women's clothes? And unless I'm remembering incorrectly, there appeared to be crowds of men in the club, and composed of a mix of straight/gay guys.
So my confusion is this:
For straight guys, wouldn't they prefer a female hooker?
For gay guys, wouldn't they prefer a male hooker?
Or are ladyboys also fulfilling social cravings? Like a geisha or a hostess in one of those japanese cafes?
My CPA friend was arrested for murder.
He was hired no problem by PWC, I imagine the other three big 4 accounting firms are using the same hiring process since they're all carbon copies of each other in virtually all other aspects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Crossroads
See Crossroads GPS. Not required to report contributors.