They failed to have a leaking infrastructure which open allows anyone to leak, and is perceived as having an expectation of publication. If they regularly did leak-based exposes, Manning might have gone to them first.
While many People who said Embarassing Things about the government haven't been killed, keep in mind that very recently we had a senator shot at a political rally, after having been listed as a "target" by one of the leaders of the Tea Party. I say "target" that in quotes because the icons used were crosshairs, but it wasn't a clear "Man these people should die". However, some nutjob DID interpret it that way, and people were hurt.
If I were Assange, I'd be very afraid of similarly motivated (and insane) attackers who would act on the belief that killing him would make us safer, or avenge our national honor, or something. I doubt the CIA or any other three letter agency would have him assassinated, but never underestimate the motivated crazy person that might be out there.
His point was that many people consider soldiers to be heroes, a-priori based on them having chosen to go defend our freedoms (or kill terrorists). In reality, some soldiers are heroic, many are ethical, and some are decidedly un-heroic. He was pointing out that we cannot assume that someone is a Real Hero just because they're a soldier, even if many of the soldiers _are_ worthy of our respect and accolades.
DMs certainly can "direct" their player characters.
DM: You're in a bar, a fight breaks out. Player: I tumbe over the table, sloshing my steaming drink into the orc's face and pinning the shifty-looking elf's hand to the table with my dagger.
The DM can choose to react in many ways. Here's some wildly different examples.
1) Awesome. Roll some to-hits, use a karma die, whatever. Rule of Cool, baby. "The Orc staggers backwards, cursing loudly. He's mad at you now, but you did a small bit of damage. You miss the elf's hand, but pin his sleeve to the table. He spends the next round pulling the dagger out instead of attacking you." -- This let's the player Do Cool Stuff and still have consequences. In this case, the DM and player are collaborating to tell a story.
2) Let's see... you'll need to make an acrobatics check (you're trained, so it's only at a -2 penalty), and you'll need to treat it as a double attack, so -8 and -4 to the rolls since you're not ambidextrous. Also, throwing your drink is a ranged attack in melee range, so let's roll up some attacks of opportunity... -- This is GM-speak for "I didn't want you to do that, let's see if you either die or do what I want first." In this case, the DM is acting as the player's adversary. They could just as easily say things like "sorry the chandelier is too high to reach", or "The Duke is immune to poisons".
Rather than a "Dungeon Master", which has a leadership connotation that clearly the prisons have a problem with, they should play one of the RPGs with a "Storyteller". Here, the clear role (per the name,and per the RPG design) is to help drive the story, and so on. This way,they can pitch it as a group storytelling session. We nerds know that this is exactly what happens in most D&D games, but using a system whose very role names reinforce this "group storytelling" concept would do that.
I'm sure they could play star wars, or Fudge, or anything like that. Prison guards will punish them just the same, but this time when they appeal one would hope they would be able to say they were congregating for structured storytelling. There's no mastery envolved, only a referee. This would, of course, depend on rational and informed judges.
Heros are real people (with flaws) who choose to do something amazing, by choice or by accident, and often because they feel it's necessary or self-serving.
Crickey, you're complaining that you can't carry a handgun when driving from your house to the local shops ("the laws prevent most people from being able to protect themselves while in transit")?
Sounds like the wild west to me if you need to carry a gun to safely buy a pint of milk from your corner store...
If you are looking to be armed in order to protect others around you (or you yourself), carrying at the supermarket, liquor store, or other public venue makes more sense (in some ways) than having it at home. Criminals are far more likely to rob a store than they are to pick your house, as it's a place that is widely known to have money laying about in easily accessible (by clerks) drawers.
If you need the gun to buy groceries safely, then yes: it's a pretty wild and lawless place. Ganglands might fit that, I don't know. However, there's nothing wrong with being prepared for the possibility.
Only if both the pilot and the co-pilot are blinded, or if the pilot is blinded while landing. Presumably a couple seconds after he says "Oh, shit!", the co-pilot would take over under normal circumstances.
While I like (I think?) the idea of him being wirelessly in-touch with the Matrix, I think that having a six inch metal spike inserted into your head does not count as "wireless".
Civil disobedience is still criminal - it's just done with knowledge and acceptance of the penalties, and normally with the goal of highlighting (or simply not obeying) a law that is seen as unjust.
That's a really good point -- Borderlands does seem to really capture the same spirit of humor+gore as Duke. Perhaps that's why I've enjoyed it so much.
If he had it on a thumb drive (and he could have), he could have snail mailed it someplace, or done a dead drop - who knows. The breach was done as soon as he burned the discs.
Slashdot Mirror
Being drug kingpins, they'd likely just kill the researches when they were done, or send them to New Reno.
They failed to have a leaking infrastructure which open allows anyone to leak, and is perceived as having an expectation of publication. If they regularly did leak-based exposes, Manning might have gone to them first.
Aha! another variation of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy! :)
While many People who said Embarassing Things about the government haven't been killed, keep in mind that very recently we had a senator shot at a political rally, after having been listed as a "target" by one of the leaders of the Tea Party. I say "target" that in quotes because the icons used were crosshairs, but it wasn't a clear "Man these people should die". However, some nutjob DID interpret it that way, and people were hurt.
If I were Assange, I'd be very afraid of similarly motivated (and insane) attackers who would act on the belief that killing him would make us safer, or avenge our national honor, or something. I doubt the CIA or any other three letter agency would have him assassinated, but never underestimate the motivated crazy person that might be out there.
His point was that many people consider soldiers to be heroes, a-priori based on them having chosen to go defend our freedoms (or kill terrorists). In reality, some soldiers are heroic, many are ethical, and some are decidedly un-heroic. He was pointing out that we cannot assume that someone is a Real Hero just because they're a soldier, even if many of the soldiers _are_ worthy of our respect and accolades.
TODO: Correctly identify faking. ;)
DMs certainly can "direct" their player characters.
DM: You're in a bar, a fight breaks out.
Player: I tumbe over the table, sloshing my steaming drink into the orc's face and pinning the shifty-looking elf's hand to the table with my dagger.
The DM can choose to react in many ways. Here's some wildly different examples.
1) Awesome. Roll some to-hits, use a karma die, whatever. Rule of Cool, baby. "The Orc staggers backwards, cursing loudly. He's mad at you now, but you did a small bit of damage. You miss the elf's hand, but pin his sleeve to the table. He spends the next round pulling the dagger out instead of attacking you."
-- This let's the player Do Cool Stuff and still have consequences. In this case, the DM and player are collaborating to tell a story.
2) Let's see ... you'll need to make an acrobatics check (you're trained, so it's only at a -2 penalty), and you'll need to treat it as a double attack, so -8 and -4 to the rolls since you're not ambidextrous. Also, throwing your drink is a ranged attack in melee range, so let's roll up some attacks of opportunity...
-- This is GM-speak for "I didn't want you to do that, let's see if you either die or do what I want first." In this case, the DM is acting as the player's adversary. They could just as easily say things like "sorry the chandelier is too high to reach", or "The Duke is immune to poisons".
Rather than a "Dungeon Master", which has a leadership connotation that clearly the prisons have a problem with, they should play one of the RPGs with a "Storyteller". Here, the clear role (per the name,and per the RPG design) is to help drive the story, and so on. This way,they can pitch it as a group storytelling session. We nerds know that this is exactly what happens in most D&D games, but using a system whose very role names reinforce this "group storytelling" concept would do that.
I'm sure they could play star wars, or Fudge, or anything like that. Prison guards will punish them just the same, but this time when they appeal one would hope they would be able to say they were congregating for structured storytelling. There's no mastery envolved, only a referee. This would, of course, depend on rational and informed judges.
Kinda like that cow-obsessed woman in the HBO movie "Temple Grandin".
And by "that cow-obsessed woman", you mean the woman named Temple Grandin? :)
Thank you for your polite and constructive addition to this discussion.
Heros are real people (with flaws) who choose to do something amazing, by choice or by accident, and often because they feel it's necessary or self-serving.
What if you were to lease the parts?
Or whose records were "lost" in a "freak backup accident".
You mean, problems other than telefragging? :)
I'd much prefer to see them live with the consequences of their actions, as it then gets to set some legal precedents.
Perhaps you're looking for the Oi! Llamas! theme?
Crickey, you're complaining that you can't carry a handgun when driving from your house to the local shops ("the laws prevent most people from being able to protect themselves while in transit")?
Sounds like the wild west to me if you need to carry a gun to safely buy a pint of milk from your corner store...
If you are looking to be armed in order to protect others around you (or you yourself), carrying at the supermarket, liquor store, or other public venue makes more sense (in some ways) than having it at home. Criminals are far more likely to rob a store than they are to pick your house, as it's a place that is widely known to have money laying about in easily accessible (by clerks) drawers.
If you need the gun to buy groceries safely, then yes: it's a pretty wild and lawless place. Ganglands might fit that, I don't know. However, there's nothing wrong with being prepared for the possibility.
Only if both the pilot and the co-pilot are blinded, or if the pilot is blinded while landing. Presumably a couple seconds after he says "Oh, shit!", the co-pilot would take over under normal circumstances.
Honestly, I've really enjoyed him in other movies, even non-action ones like the Lake House (if I am remembering the name right).
While I like (I think?) the idea of him being wirelessly in-touch with the Matrix, I think that having a six inch metal spike inserted into your head does not count as "wireless".
Civil disobedience is still criminal - it's just done with knowledge and acceptance of the penalties, and normally with the goal of highlighting (or simply not obeying) a law that is seen as unjust.
I've never seen that word used as a verb before. O_O
Inherit, IPO, or run a defense contractor?
That's a really good point -- Borderlands does seem to really capture the same spirit of humor+gore as Duke. Perhaps that's why I've enjoyed it so much.
If he had it on a thumb drive (and he could have), he could have snail mailed it someplace, or done a dead drop - who knows. The breach was done as soon as he burned the discs.