I do online multiplayer. I don't pay a subscription.
I play Guild Wars 2, can I get that on xbox? I play World of Tanks, can I get that on Xbox? I play Euro Truck Simulator 2, can I get that on Xbox? I play Hexcells Infinite, can I get that on Xbox? I play Dwarf Fortress, can I get that on Xbox?
Doesn't seem to me like the Xbox is any fucking use at all for games.
Thing is, it's pretty easy to think of, and viable with current technology.
Designing, procuring, building and deploying without detection is about the only real barrier between major metropolitan areas and a serious terrorist incident.
Planning how to detect and thwart such an attack is pretty sensible if your job is national defense. That's not fear, that's risk recognition and mitigation.
Ouch. That's a lot of cash for basically being an Internet troll.
Rather than compare to myself, lets compare to Tarn Adams, who's actually delivering a game that entire genres are measured against. How the hell is Zoe worth more than him?
Personally I think the stated aims of the site are actually worthwhile and worth supporting.
What I'd test is the implementation: Let's see them support the people being doxxed by militant feminists that target people trying to highlight failures in journalistic ethics.
I think I'm with you on this. It would be silly for someone like the NYPD to not have a unit equipped with these, as they can make a massive difference in a hostage type scenario - and those are sufficiently frequent to justify the investment.
That's a long way from unfettered use, which will be the more likely outcome..
Yet for all but low light/high zoom situations, your photos will be better.
Only a tenth of my photography is high zoom. Half of it is low-light. Some of it is high shutter speed. Half of it gets post processing that may pull/push, change colour balance, probably crop (due to my shite framing) and otherwise tweak the photograph. The rest is a mix of snapshots I could use my phone for and photographs that came out of the camera already looking good.
Could I use a smartphone camera for all that lot? No. Does that make me a mainframe programmer? No.
I think that makes you a prejudiced blinkered idiot.
How about handling it sensitively. After all, someone cares enough to think that you need to know and be involved.
Did lower management tiers fail them, are they talking shit or did they just skip the chain of command? For the former you absolutely want to be nice to the individual, they've just helped you realise that you have a problem. For the latter two options it's pretty easy to diplomatically steer them back towards the appropriate channels without being a complete cunt about it.
Can you come up with a reasonable scenario in which being a twat _is_ the correct action, in a business environment?
Even if self-driving cars were a technically solved problem, the economics do not stack up, unless someone magically finds a way of making them cheap enough
Well, what I'd do is buy a car and drive it around picking up people from where they are and taking them to where they want to be. I'd charge them a small sum for this service.
You see, that's profitable now. With a self-driving car I wouldn't even need to use my own time driving it, so I could still go out and do my normal job.
The economics are kind of working in my favour. Unless of course everybody else owns a self-driving car, in which case the demand will be far too low to make money offering transportation services. In which case taxis are also going to be in trouble.
Within a decade? Unlikely, but not impossible. Within two decades? Almost certain.
Given I've already told you in this thread that I've contacted my MP to raise concerns over surveillance powers available to the security service your continued claims that I'm an apologist merely expose your own ignorance and blindness to bitter realities.
Do I give a fuck whether a problem is for MI5, MI6, SOCA, Scotland Yard, GCHQ or the boy fucking scouts? No. Do I want ubiquitous surveillance? No. Do I acknowledge the difficulty in tracking and measuring the risk of several thousand people? Yes. Does that excuse the mistakes in managing known or perceived risks, resulting in the Menezes and Rigby killings? Hell no. Is the answer to pretend that the collective security services don't need the ability to monitor communications? Join the real world you idiotic twat.
Shit, you're talking utter lunacy, completely disregarding other threats (e.g. there's a bunch of wankers in Ireland still resorting to violence as their preferred form of politics) and frankly I'm not responding further, you clearly have no desire to listen to sense or reason, and blithely ignore simple facts. You're a cunt and I shall treat you like one - e.g. by finally addressing the problem at hand, which is you.
And to the rest of the world it's an unfamiliar term impossible to properly research online due to the poisoned partisan postings by every cunt in the US with an opinion.
Maybe Mann should've picked a term we can fucking understand.
You have a very naive view of the effort needed to track and monitor several thousand people.
There are estimates of over 2000 British people fighting for ISIS. That doesn't include anybody being naughty elsewhere in the world, or in the UK.
You think it's possible to keep tabs on all 2000 when they return to the UK just by monitoring their twitter feeds? You accuse the security services of incompetence and you clearly don't have even the most basic of clues about what they do.
By the way, I'd appreciate you not calling me an apologist. Just because you lack reading comprehension doesn't mean I'm saying the things you seem to think I'm saying.
And yet several of the people leaving the UK to go and fight for ISIS _are_ going from "browsing radical sites" to "crucifying the unbeliever"
It's not a slippery slope, it's a fucking conveyer belt.
Even if you do know someone went to Chechnya, that's not actually illegal. You want a team of 8 people tracking that individual 24/7 just in case they're being naughty?
Slashdot Mirror
I do online multiplayer. I don't pay a subscription.
I play Guild Wars 2, can I get that on xbox? I play World of Tanks, can I get that on Xbox? I play Euro Truck Simulator 2, can I get that on Xbox? I play Hexcells Infinite, can I get that on Xbox? I play Dwarf Fortress, can I get that on Xbox?
Doesn't seem to me like the Xbox is any fucking use at all for games.
Thing is, it's pretty easy to think of, and viable with current technology.
Designing, procuring, building and deploying without detection is about the only real barrier between major metropolitan areas and a serious terrorist incident.
Planning how to detect and thwart such an attack is pretty sensible if your job is national defense. That's not fear, that's risk recognition and mitigation.
Ouch. That's a lot of cash for basically being an Internet troll.
Rather than compare to myself, lets compare to Tarn Adams, who's actually delivering a game that entire genres are measured against. How the hell is Zoe worth more than him?
Could you please stop stalking BarbaraHudson.
Some of her posts are nonsense, some have good points, some are inflammatory, some are insightful. Much like every other poster on here.
Except you. You're adding no value. Go away.
Personally I think the stated aims of the site are actually worthwhile and worth supporting.
What I'd test is the implementation: Let's see them support the people being doxxed by militant feminists that target people trying to highlight failures in journalistic ethics.
I think I'm with you on this. It would be silly for someone like the NYPD to not have a unit equipped with these, as they can make a massive difference in a hostage type scenario - and those are sufficiently frequent to justify the investment.
That's a long way from unfettered use, which will be the more likely outcome..
Will you stop spouting that inane irrelevant bullshit.
Illegal activity has fuck all to do with this attempt at legalising hacking.
It's still illegal in the UK and if the FBI hack my computer then I will initiate legal action against them for it.
I have Virgin Media broadband, I don't have any line rental and I see my 150Mbps connection drop to around 80Mbps occasionally at peak.
You bought the wrong service.
The new Pentax 645z is bloody gorgeous, and (by medium format standards) relatively affordable.
The camera alone though weighs more than my camera and any three of my lenses. Some serious compromises needed to get that quality..
Yet for all but low light/high zoom situations, your photos will be better.
Only a tenth of my photography is high zoom. Half of it is low-light. Some of it is high shutter speed. Half of it gets post processing that may pull/push, change colour balance, probably crop (due to my shite framing) and otherwise tweak the photograph. The rest is a mix of snapshots I could use my phone for and photographs that came out of the camera already looking good.
Could I use a smartphone camera for all that lot? No. Does that make me a mainframe programmer? No.
I think that makes you a prejudiced blinkered idiot.
Sony sell NX mount lenses?
decided to try cameras on a lark, and managed to out-class the leaders on a first attempt
Sigh. So the sixteen ILC cameras they've released in the last five years don't count?
Yeah, 90mm was the traditional portrait lens.
I'm weird, I like wide angle shots for portraits. Probably why I'm not as good as the pros :)
How about handling it sensitively. After all, someone cares enough to think that you need to know and be involved.
Did lower management tiers fail them, are they talking shit or did they just skip the chain of command? For the former you absolutely want to be nice to the individual, they've just helped you realise that you have a problem. For the latter two options it's pretty easy to diplomatically steer them back towards the appropriate channels without being a complete cunt about it.
Can you come up with a reasonable scenario in which being a twat _is_ the correct action, in a business environment?
Most leaders are "arrogant assholes".
Maybe, but not most of the great ones.
Fuck me, I hope you don't have children.
At the age of six I was walking to and from school alone, in a foreign country.
I feel 10 is just too prime a target for a number of peds
I personally fear you irrationality and paranoia. Get a fucking life and learn how to do some proper risk assessment.
Oh right, so the fact that it's not Jewish lives being ruined makes it ok?
Racist prick.
Because, you lumbering imbecilic drivel-headed baboon faced cocksmoker, the fucking drilling is to enable the fucking fracking.
Without fracking, there is no need to drill. Any impacts from drilling are directly attributable to fracking.
Now go away.
Even if self-driving cars were a technically solved problem, the economics do not stack up, unless someone magically finds a way of making them cheap enough
Well, what I'd do is buy a car and drive it around picking up people from where they are and taking them to where they want to be. I'd charge them a small sum for this service.
You see, that's profitable now. With a self-driving car I wouldn't even need to use my own time driving it, so I could still go out and do my normal job.
The economics are kind of working in my favour. Unless of course everybody else owns a self-driving car, in which case the demand will be far too low to make money offering transportation services. In which case taxis are also going to be in trouble.
Within a decade? Unlikely, but not impossible. Within two decades? Almost certain.
Given I've already told you in this thread that I've contacted my MP to raise concerns over surveillance powers available to the security service your continued claims that I'm an apologist merely expose your own ignorance and blindness to bitter realities.
Do I give a fuck whether a problem is for MI5, MI6, SOCA, Scotland Yard, GCHQ or the boy fucking scouts? No. Do I want ubiquitous surveillance? No. Do I acknowledge the difficulty in tracking and measuring the risk of several thousand people? Yes. Does that excuse the mistakes in managing known or perceived risks, resulting in the Menezes and Rigby killings? Hell no. Is the answer to pretend that the collective security services don't need the ability to monitor communications? Join the real world you idiotic twat.
Shit, you're talking utter lunacy, completely disregarding other threats (e.g. there's a bunch of wankers in Ireland still resorting to violence as their preferred form of politics) and frankly I'm not responding further, you clearly have no desire to listen to sense or reason, and blithely ignore simple facts. You're a cunt and I shall treat you like one - e.g. by finally addressing the problem at hand, which is you.
Then how the hell do I get every car I own to skid sideways even though it has traction control AND stability control.
And to the rest of the world it's an unfamiliar term impossible to properly research online due to the poisoned partisan postings by every cunt in the US with an opinion.
Maybe Mann should've picked a term we can fucking understand.
You have a very naive view of the effort needed to track and monitor several thousand people.
There are estimates of over 2000 British people fighting for ISIS. That doesn't include anybody being naughty elsewhere in the world, or in the UK.
You think it's possible to keep tabs on all 2000 when they return to the UK just by monitoring their twitter feeds? You accuse the security services of incompetence and you clearly don't have even the most basic of clues about what they do.
By the way, I'd appreciate you not calling me an apologist. Just because you lack reading comprehension doesn't mean I'm saying the things you seem to think I'm saying.
And yet several of the people leaving the UK to go and fight for ISIS _are_ going from "browsing radical sites" to "crucifying the unbeliever"
It's not a slippery slope, it's a fucking conveyer belt.
Even if you do know someone went to Chechnya, that's not actually illegal. You want a team of 8 people tracking that individual 24/7 just in case they're being naughty?
It might be possible to stop more of them with greater powers.
The obvious challenge being that the greater the powers, the greater the number of people willing to take up arms to defend against them.