The funniest thing was I wasn't asking for any sympathy, or if anybody even cared. I was just sharing an experience. It sounds like YOU are the one needing to return to MySpace, because most people who say crap like " whiner!" are usually people who can't handle life, has a lot of problems, and are generally very depressed people. To deal with it they call everybody else whiners for actually sharing their experiences. You know what you are? Weak.
You don't even have to go that far with it. The first amendment does not protect against threats. Your rights end when they infringe on others' rights, and if someone feels threatened because of your words, actions, or "art", then your first amendment is not going to protect you. It's like if I came to your house and said "I'm going to kill your wife and then rape your daughter". I really hope that me saying "But I have free speech" wouldn't get me out of that situation.
I've come across a similar problem. It doesn't involve threats, but I once made a satirical website targetted at a group of people at school I severely dislike. There was no threats involved, and I didn't really directly insult them at all. All I did was retell certain events how they happened so that everybody could read how foolish these people are. So one day said group threatens me at school and tries to cause some big scene in my Honors American History class. I didn't give a crap, I knew they couldn't back up any threat, but guess where I'm stuck the next day of school? I'm stuck in the guidance counseler's office (a lot of my friends were stuck in there too. Basically anybody mentioned in my site besides said group). I was accused of being a neo-nazi, cultist, and a threat to the entire student body. Then I found out why I was put in there. One of the members of said group lied to the guidance office and said that I made a bunch of threats to them and that they were "fearful that I might have developed a psychological condition they read about in their psychology book". Ok, this person who did this happens to be one of those christian zealots who claims they are holier than everybody else. The guidance counseler is a preacher at a local church.
It's funny too, because my site caused no disturbances (they caused the disturbance on purpose because they are attention whores and they were trying to get me in trouble because they hate me) and I caused no damage at all. Those stories usually involved crap they had done to me in the past, so I was not writing anything inflamatory or hate-related. There were just accounts of how I got screwed. And then I get screwed yet again. An aside here: they have targetted and destroyed two websites created by people at our school by paying an admin off on one of the boards and utter spamming on another one. Yet, only one of them ever got in any kind of trouble at all, and all it was was one day in in-school-suspension. I get called a fucking neo-nazi. I was the damn victim. All I was trying to do is voice how I had been treated and I get treated even worse. I see them all as cowards and low-lifes. They have to lie to people in staff positions to handle their problems. I deal with them. Problem is, it's hard to deal with problems when you have the "authorities" being fed full of shit and having eyes on you wherever you go.
A letter from the government to the parents of little Susie.
Dear parents of little Susie:
Your child has a really nice body and her legs are so fine that they'd just drive a pedophile CRAZY! You should really keep an eye on her, for none of us here at your gov't would like to see her get on top of a pedophile.
You know what I think is insane? Bush can go up to the podium and say he wants people put on Mars, yet he probably doesn't know jack shit about the space program. And of course, people are going to listen to him because he's the president, and blah blah blah. It's like this with so many things. But, let's all pause a moment to remember that Bush is the DECIDER! He said that the people who want us to draw troops from Iraq have reasonable concerns but that they are "wrong" and of course, he is "right".
Have you ever even used Vista, sir? The sidebar is pretty useless. "Suspend to hibernate" isn't anything special (even though I know it's just a beta, I can only remember Vista screwing up badly whenever trying to restore my system from sleep). The new start menu is nice, but not nice enough to dish out $99 for an upgrade. Included apps? You are still WAY better off using third-party software. Have you used some of the stuff that's included? New WiFi networking model? Perhaps that's why it would say I only have limited connectivity for several minutes before giving me access to my gateway. This is a repeatable problem too. Performance Statistics? What's this really going to solve? When I buy a program it's still going to require X MB's of RAM (or in Vista's case, GB's of RAM) and at least an AMD Athlon XP/64/X2 XX00+ or an Intel Core II Duo XXXX. And how do you know there are a "few hundred changes" that you haven't noticed yet? Because Microsoft says so? Maybe it's just a fuzzy feeling you get when you look at Aero. Windows XP has 64-bit support too, although it's not the greatest. The only difference is that Vista is new so people won't feel as bad going to 64-bit since they'll be upgrading their systems anyway.
lol, Vista the biggest change in Windows since 3.11/Win95? I'd say it's the biggest change in GUI Microsoft has ever made, but other than that it's just same old same old. You can do EXACTLY the same thing with Vista as you always could with XP except for now they've changed the interface so freaking much that you have to sit there and search and search for something before you find it. I remember people complaining about XP being hard to use when it first came out and that people had to "relearn how to use it", but I thought XP was pretty consistent with previous versions (as well as making it a little cleaner in the process). And unless you click "classic style" for the control panel, you have to wrestle with the stupid grouping that microsoft thought was intuitive. I hate XP's default control panel too, but at least it was grouped logically and you didn't have 500 ways to do one single task. I remember so many times hunting and hunting for a dialog and eventually just giving up and opening the console. Oh, and to get to that you have to use the nice shiny new start menu and find it. In XP run was right there at your fingertips. Now we have search (a feature I never used in XP because I know how to organize my data. It's called directories, people.)
You think Vista runs faster than XP slimmed down? Have any proof? Any proof that wasn't written by Microsoft? Although Vista IS designed a lot better than XP, it's still stuck with the same problem XP faced: backwards compatibility.
I was going to say that Linux had many of these "features" of Vista for a long time (I don't care about your last paragraph). The problem is: they're not features on Linux. In Linux, you don't need a company to tell you what you can and can't do and force you to be stuck on the same codebase for years. In Linux, these things are not features, they are simply you operating with your machine. That's right, it's called an OPERATING system for a reason. I hardly think that a new start menu is any reason to upgrade. I hardly think a new GUI is any reason to upgrade. I hardly think a new interface is any reason to upgrade. If people weren't so lazy they'd make their own damn shells for Windows (that weren't horrible). Then you can do whatever you want for FREE. Of course, you could also pay $99 every time Microsoft gets its act together and assembles an OS. And then you can deal with hardware and software issues, and lament over the waste of cash you just spent because most of what you wanted was stripped out. Basically you bought a new desktop environment. In Linux, all I have to do is type "pacman -S kde" and BOOM! PRESTO! WOWY! I have a new desktop environment. I can type "pacman -S xfce4" and BOOM! I have another desktop environment. And it's constantly being upgraded (and just imagine a world where updates don't just mean fixes for security holes).
Wow. You got modded down for posting relevant information. Slashdot's absolutely wonderful.
But anyway, yeah the DX did have FPU built-in. I remember even being able to play Jedi Knight on my old 486 DX-33. We got QuakeII to run on it as well, but it was ass-slow. I did beat the first level with it (although I got sick of how slow the game was running and uninstalled it). All I had for graphics was a 1MB Trident SVGA card too. It might seem like I'm lying, but seriously, I'm not. That machine could play games way beyond its time.
Your (sic) wrong when you say you read my post all the way. I didn't say at all that without the drones the police would bash everybody's door down. I didn't say that at all. You just made that up. It's like you read one word here and one word there and created your own nice little sentence.
Thanks for telling me searches require warrants. I was so idiotic that I didn't know that. You said "it was included to prevent against arbitrary searches and seizures by an overenthusiastic government without oversight". I said that in my post. I'm glad your (sic) taking MY arguments and trying to make them your own. Reminds me of the presidential debates between Bush and Kerry.
The way I understand it is that all police have to do is present the warrant to the resident of the home and that if the person refused to come out and acknowledge the police or whatever whatever, the police can bash down the door (only if they do in fact have the warrant). If the Supreme Court just ruled that they can just walk in without showing the warrant then that just makes me even more confident that the supreme court sucks. It is probably the most abused branch in government (sure, the legislative is abused by lobyists, but remember what happended with FDR and the supreme court? I believe Reagan also did a similar thing, to a lesser extent. That's only IIRC).
Criminals DO abuse the Bill of Rights. Did you read my comment about Miranda v. Arizona? Do you even know what happened in that case? Similar things happen every day. People claim their first amendment rights are being abused when they really aren't; the list goes on. There's so many times that people find ways to get off free from impeding an investigation. Sometimes it's out of sheer stupidity and misunderstanding of the government (which everybody in/. thinks of me) and sometimes it's just to be crooked. It's become the job of many lawyers simply to find loopholes in law to get criminals to go free. They don't care, it's only their job to do whatever they can to get their client off free. That's how they get paid.
Crooked people taint evidence probably every day in this country. The Bill of Rights doesn't have much to do with tainted evidence, just in the acquiring of evidence. Does the Bill of Rights defend you if the police see you shoot a man in your back yard from a helicopter? Probably not. They did not unlawfully obtain that knowledge, they did not bash down your door, they did not do any of that. They saw it without tampering with any of your property. A drone is an airbourne vehicle (as is a helicopter).
lol, I'm glad a "real" liberal is enlightening me as to what liberalism is. I knew nothing of the subject before, thanks a million. All that reading about politics of old, the French Revolution, various monarchies, communism, nazism, fascism, etc. etc. etc. was just pointless, right? I have NO right to say what is liberal and what is conservative. I have NO right to say that the religious right disgusts me and the ineffective left disgusts me just a little less. I have NO right to even form my own political ideology. For, I am not free, am I?
I do believe that the rule of law should be moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protections of the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities. Thanks for trying to say I don't. You know me so well, right? I'm all for the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Probably more than you. Which is why I am defending the constitution, unlike you. What? You mean to say I'm DEFENDING the Constitution? Yes I am. I've sat back and watched TOO many people abuse the Constitution. It makes me SICK. People who whine about stuff and say "oh but the Constitution protects me from this right? Oh, if I phrase this X way then maybe I can trick the judge into making the judgment in my favor even though I am the wrong party". The Constitution is NOT your right to party, it is your right to be able to live your life in FREEDOM. You people who keep going on about freedom must not really unde
Number 1: are you really that ashamed of your own body? What are you so scared of? I think this whole country is stark (no pun intended) scared of everything. How else could we be governed so well?
Number 2: you still are innocent. Nobody is accusing of any crime whatsoever. Yes, it would be the same thing if they were polite and searched through my stuff. That would inconvenience me. First of all, I have to let some people into my home. This means I'm going to have people walking around poking and prodding at all my stuff. If you think that it isn't an inconvenience watching people poking around in your stuff, even if they're neat about it, I do have to say you have much more patience than I.
Number 3: I'll give you a fun solution. PUT YOUR FRICKEN TOP UP. If there's a simple solution to a problem, instead of crying about it, fix it. You know what you did? You caused a hassle for the police department. You had to get the captain down to your vehicle, taking him away from his duties because you think it's SO much of a hassle to put the top on your vehicle. GROW UP. The government's job isn't to kiss you on the forehead, it's job is to keep you and me safe. By wasting the law enforcement's time, you are actually infringing upon MY safety as a citizen, as well as wasting my tax money for your petty problem. If YOU left the top off your jeep, it's YOUR responsibility for what's in it. I know a guy who works construction and some of his guys throw beers in the bed of his truck when he's not looking. You know what he does? He cleans them out. He doesn't call the police captain and say "but THEY threw it in there mister, please have mercy on me!"
Number 4: Yes, the rules do exist to protect all of us. And you pulling your stunts with your jeep and murderers getting off without any jailtime because they claimed not to know their legal rights that they had every right to see beforehand (the whole Miranda v. Arizona BS) undermine their capacity. People say they want this country to be safer and that it's crooked, yet they do everything they can to make it that way.
I'd just like to ask how does having that drone inconvenience you in any way? It disgusts me when people think that the Bill of Rights is there to keep you safe from being prosecuted. Unlawful search and seizure is in the Bill of Rights because in England search and seizure was abused by crooked policemen and people would have their houses tore up for nothing. You'd have the police bash down everybody's door and search through everybody's stuff no matter if you have any connection to the crime at all. Sometimes they didn't even need a crime to initiate it. Having a little drone peek in at your backyard does not bash down your door and rummage through your things forcibly. It does not harass you (well, unless it was like the annoying things on HL2). I consider myself to be pretty liberal, but I wish criminals would stop crying and finding ways to cheat the judicial system out of pressing proper punishment.
If you don't agree with the laws you are supposed to abide by you can either try to get them changes or find somewhere else to live. Trash is what makes this country (USA) much more complicated than it has to be.
Oh noes! Some guy had an accident and suffered a mortifying booboo. Guess what, industrial accidents have been around longer than robots. Replace "turning off robot" with "turning off feed loader" and just let your imagination carry you to what can happen to your pretty little arms.
The logic used in this "if robots weren't around this man would still be alive" is horrible. You could say JFK would still be alive if it wasn't for the bullet being invented.
Can somebody translate this man's post please? I sat there and read it several times and the meaning of it just escapes me. Perhaps it just doesn't make sense?
Look, I can see how the parent might be PARANOID or something, but the fact is ANYTHING public can be retrieved by anybody. If you go on MySpace and say you like to molest little children and give a list of children you've molested, and the police are pressing a molestation charge on you and they see that, that can incriminate you even more. I've always been for privacy, but on some things I do agree with the idea "If you've done nothing wrong, what do you have to be afraid of?". Public forums are one of those things. Now, if the government snooped in on private things of mine without subpoena, I'd be quite pissed.
And the idea that someone would be outraged because the government reads public things is beyond me. When you post something public ANYBODY can read it. Anybody that wants to read this post I'm making right now can read it if they want. I don't care if the government reads or a really intelligent llama reads it.
I'm all for privacy and all, but I think people are really blowing this out of proportion. Let the NSA get all this information. I don't honestly care. If someone was going to push a case against you, they'd look at these pubs anyway because they're PUBLIC. That's like walking into school with a shirt saying "I'm gay" and then punching someone in the face because he called you gay.
Who's the dumbass here? If you actually read what happened about Oblivion you'd know that Oblivion only got rerated because of the gore. The ESRB did a piss-poor job rating Oblivion and since somebody brought to their attention a nude texture, they looked over the game and found it to contain too much gore to be rated Teen. Don't believe me? Read this: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6148897.html
Yeah, they're still getting the nudity descriptor, but I think that was more of a thing to get people to shut up and stop arguing about it. Since the game was going to be rerated anyway, they figured the easiest thing to get the argument on whether the nudity should be accounted for was just to throw a nudity descriptor on it. An appeasement if you will.
I didn't mean for Wii to be emulated, I was simply stating that I think Wii's games are going to be good enough to where I'd want to play them over a decade later, just as I do with the SNES. I only emulate SNES because I don't have a TV, otherwise I'd just use my SNES (as it is still in perfect condition)
I doubt people will play many of the late 90's and 2000's games because their graphics are so horrible it's distracting. 2D games are still playable because the only people that were responsible for a game looking good were the artists. Nowadays the artists, programmers, animators, hardware, API's, etc. etc. etc. have to be just perfect for a decent experience. Plus the studios didn't have to spend so mnuch because the only people responsible for art were artists and you didn't need as many programmers because you don't have to wrestle with 3D. Thus, the game designers had a lot more responsibility in making a game sell. Gameplay is what makes a game last. Notice how quickly people lost interest in Doom III? I'm sure the extremely limited multiplayer on DIII also had an influence in that as well:(.
Take Super Mario World. That game was perfect. I still play it today with an emulator, and I can see my cartridge for it from my chair. It came with my Super Nintendo and I've been playing it since my early days (I don't remember when we got our SNES, but I was less than 5 back then).
Now today's games, as in the generation of Wii, PS3, and XBox360, I think that Wii games have a chance of being as good as the SNES games. The last Nintendo console I bought was a SNES and the mere fact that I'm considering on buying a console again, is a good sign. The games Nintendo plans to release on Wii seem like they have that same magic that SNES games had. As well as you can play SNES games on it as well. Nintendo said that all the virtual console games will be under $10 and IIRC, some will only be like $4.
Big companies will always abuse their power. This is why I hate capitalism. Nobody deserves that kind of power. Things like this was what people hates about monarchs. Instead of a large company abusing their power, the monarch would abuse his power and do things like restrict the internet. So are we really in a better situation today than we were in monarchy? Now it's just an oligarchy of business leaders that control different things. It makes me sick.
They said it folks! Their reason is because of poor documentation in Linux! The converse of this is that those server admins don't know enough about Linux to be administrating a Linux machine. End of story. Seriously, how long does it take to read a two page man file?
The point I'm trying to make is that Linux is more stable and WILL give you more uptime, if you only know how to use it. Windows gives people a "pretty good" uptime and "average" stability if you don't care to learn much about server administration.
Slashdot Mirror
Jesus christ, it's like none of you have heard of fan throttling before.
The funniest thing was I wasn't asking for any sympathy, or if anybody even cared. I was just sharing an experience. It sounds like YOU are the one needing to return to MySpace, because most people who say crap like " whiner!" are usually people who can't handle life, has a lot of problems, and are generally very depressed people. To deal with it they call everybody else whiners for actually sharing their experiences. You know what you are? Weak.
You don't even have to go that far with it. The first amendment does not protect against threats. Your rights end when they infringe on others' rights, and if someone feels threatened because of your words, actions, or "art", then your first amendment is not going to protect you. It's like if I came to your house and said "I'm going to kill your wife and then rape your daughter". I really hope that me saying "But I have free speech" wouldn't get me out of that situation.
I've come across a similar problem. It doesn't involve threats, but I once made a satirical website targetted at a group of people at school I severely dislike. There was no threats involved, and I didn't really directly insult them at all. All I did was retell certain events how they happened so that everybody could read how foolish these people are. So one day said group threatens me at school and tries to cause some big scene in my Honors American History class. I didn't give a crap, I knew they couldn't back up any threat, but guess where I'm stuck the next day of school? I'm stuck in the guidance counseler's office (a lot of my friends were stuck in there too. Basically anybody mentioned in my site besides said group). I was accused of being a neo-nazi, cultist, and a threat to the entire student body. Then I found out why I was put in there. One of the members of said group lied to the guidance office and said that I made a bunch of threats to them and that they were "fearful that I might have developed a psychological condition they read about in their psychology book". Ok, this person who did this happens to be one of those christian zealots who claims they are holier than everybody else. The guidance counseler is a preacher at a local church.
It's funny too, because my site caused no disturbances (they caused the disturbance on purpose because they are attention whores and they were trying to get me in trouble because they hate me) and I caused no damage at all. Those stories usually involved crap they had done to me in the past, so I was not writing anything inflamatory or hate-related. There were just accounts of how I got screwed. And then I get screwed yet again. An aside here: they have targetted and destroyed two websites created by people at our school by paying an admin off on one of the boards and utter spamming on another one. Yet, only one of them ever got in any kind of trouble at all, and all it was was one day in in-school-suspension. I get called a fucking neo-nazi. I was the damn victim. All I was trying to do is voice how I had been treated and I get treated even worse. I see them all as cowards and low-lifes. They have to lie to people in staff positions to handle their problems. I deal with them. Problem is, it's hard to deal with problems when you have the "authorities" being fed full of shit and having eyes on you wherever you go.
A letter from the government to the parents of little Susie.
Dear parents of little Susie:
Your child has a really nice body and her legs are so fine that they'd just drive a pedophile CRAZY! You should really keep an eye on her, for none of us here at your gov't would like to see her get on top of a pedophile.
You know what I think is insane? Bush can go up to the podium and say he wants people put on Mars, yet he probably doesn't know jack shit about the space program. And of course, people are going to listen to him because he's the president, and blah blah blah. It's like this with so many things. But, let's all pause a moment to remember that Bush is the DECIDER! He said that the people who want us to draw troops from Iraq have reasonable concerns but that they are "wrong" and of course, he is "right".
Have you ever even used Vista, sir? The sidebar is pretty useless. "Suspend to hibernate" isn't anything special (even though I know it's just a beta, I can only remember Vista screwing up badly whenever trying to restore my system from sleep). The new start menu is nice, but not nice enough to dish out $99 for an upgrade. Included apps? You are still WAY better off using third-party software. Have you used some of the stuff that's included? New WiFi networking model? Perhaps that's why it would say I only have limited connectivity for several minutes before giving me access to my gateway. This is a repeatable problem too. Performance Statistics? What's this really going to solve? When I buy a program it's still going to require X MB's of RAM (or in Vista's case, GB's of RAM) and at least an AMD Athlon XP/64/X2 XX00+ or an Intel Core II Duo XXXX. And how do you know there are a "few hundred changes" that you haven't noticed yet? Because Microsoft says so? Maybe it's just a fuzzy feeling you get when you look at Aero. Windows XP has 64-bit support too, although it's not the greatest. The only difference is that Vista is new so people won't feel as bad going to 64-bit since they'll be upgrading their systems anyway.
lol, Vista the biggest change in Windows since 3.11/Win95? I'd say it's the biggest change in GUI Microsoft has ever made, but other than that it's just same old same old. You can do EXACTLY the same thing with Vista as you always could with XP except for now they've changed the interface so freaking much that you have to sit there and search and search for something before you find it. I remember people complaining about XP being hard to use when it first came out and that people had to "relearn how to use it", but I thought XP was pretty consistent with previous versions (as well as making it a little cleaner in the process). And unless you click "classic style" for the control panel, you have to wrestle with the stupid grouping that microsoft thought was intuitive. I hate XP's default control panel too, but at least it was grouped logically and you didn't have 500 ways to do one single task. I remember so many times hunting and hunting for a dialog and eventually just giving up and opening the console. Oh, and to get to that you have to use the nice shiny new start menu and find it. In XP run was right there at your fingertips. Now we have search (a feature I never used in XP because I know how to organize my data. It's called directories, people.)
You think Vista runs faster than XP slimmed down? Have any proof? Any proof that wasn't written by Microsoft? Although Vista IS designed a lot better than XP, it's still stuck with the same problem XP faced: backwards compatibility.
I was going to say that Linux had many of these "features" of Vista for a long time (I don't care about your last paragraph). The problem is: they're not features on Linux. In Linux, you don't need a company to tell you what you can and can't do and force you to be stuck on the same codebase for years. In Linux, these things are not features, they are simply you operating with your machine. That's right, it's called an OPERATING system for a reason. I hardly think that a new start menu is any reason to upgrade. I hardly think a new GUI is any reason to upgrade. I hardly think a new interface is any reason to upgrade. If people weren't so lazy they'd make their own damn shells for Windows (that weren't horrible). Then you can do whatever you want for FREE. Of course, you could also pay $99 every time Microsoft gets its act together and assembles an OS. And then you can deal with hardware and software issues, and lament over the waste of cash you just spent because most of what you wanted was stripped out. Basically you bought a new desktop environment. In Linux, all I have to do is type "pacman -S kde" and BOOM! PRESTO! WOWY! I have a new desktop environment. I can type "pacman -S xfce4" and BOOM! I have another desktop environment. And it's constantly being upgraded (and just imagine a world where updates don't just mean fixes for security holes).
Wow. You got modded down for posting relevant information. Slashdot's absolutely wonderful.
But anyway, yeah the DX did have FPU built-in. I remember even being able to play Jedi Knight on my old 486 DX-33. We got QuakeII to run on it as well, but it was ass-slow. I did beat the first level with it (although I got sick of how slow the game was running and uninstalled it). All I had for graphics was a 1MB Trident SVGA card too. It might seem like I'm lying, but seriously, I'm not. That machine could play games way beyond its time.
on the above post: the "FORCED to stay inside" should read "FORCED to stay outside"
Your (sic) wrong when you say you read my post all the way. I didn't say at all that without the drones the police would bash everybody's door down. I didn't say that at all. You just made that up. It's like you read one word here and one word there and created your own nice little sentence.
/. thinks of me) and sometimes it's just to be crooked. It's become the job of many lawyers simply to find loopholes in law to get criminals to go free. They don't care, it's only their job to do whatever they can to get their client off free. That's how they get paid.
Thanks for telling me searches require warrants. I was so idiotic that I didn't know that. You said "it was included to prevent against arbitrary searches and seizures by an overenthusiastic government without oversight". I said that in my post. I'm glad your (sic) taking MY arguments and trying to make them your own. Reminds me of the presidential debates between Bush and Kerry.
The way I understand it is that all police have to do is present the warrant to the resident of the home and that if the person refused to come out and acknowledge the police or whatever whatever, the police can bash down the door (only if they do in fact have the warrant). If the Supreme Court just ruled that they can just walk in without showing the warrant then that just makes me even more confident that the supreme court sucks. It is probably the most abused branch in government (sure, the legislative is abused by lobyists, but remember what happended with FDR and the supreme court? I believe Reagan also did a similar thing, to a lesser extent. That's only IIRC).
Criminals DO abuse the Bill of Rights. Did you read my comment about Miranda v. Arizona? Do you even know what happened in that case? Similar things happen every day. People claim their first amendment rights are being abused when they really aren't; the list goes on. There's so many times that people find ways to get off free from impeding an investigation. Sometimes it's out of sheer stupidity and misunderstanding of the government (which everybody in
Crooked people taint evidence probably every day in this country. The Bill of Rights doesn't have much to do with tainted evidence, just in the acquiring of evidence. Does the Bill of Rights defend you if the police see you shoot a man in your back yard from a helicopter? Probably not. They did not unlawfully obtain that knowledge, they did not bash down your door, they did not do any of that. They saw it without tampering with any of your property. A drone is an airbourne vehicle (as is a helicopter).
lol, I'm glad a "real" liberal is enlightening me as to what liberalism is. I knew nothing of the subject before, thanks a million. All that reading about politics of old, the French Revolution, various monarchies, communism, nazism, fascism, etc. etc. etc. was just pointless, right? I have NO right to say what is liberal and what is conservative. I have NO right to say that the religious right disgusts me and the ineffective left disgusts me just a little less. I have NO right to even form my own political ideology. For, I am not free, am I?
I do believe that the rule of law should be moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protections of the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities. Thanks for trying to say I don't. You know me so well, right? I'm all for the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Probably more than you. Which is why I am defending the constitution, unlike you. What? You mean to say I'm DEFENDING the Constitution? Yes I am. I've sat back and watched TOO many people abuse the Constitution. It makes me SICK. People who whine about stuff and say "oh but the Constitution protects me from this right? Oh, if I phrase this X way then maybe I can trick the judge into making the judgment in my favor even though I am the wrong party". The Constitution is NOT your right to party, it is your right to be able to live your life in FREEDOM. You people who keep going on about freedom must not really unde
Number 1: are you really that ashamed of your own body? What are you so scared of? I think this whole country is stark (no pun intended) scared of everything. How else could we be governed so well?
Number 2: you still are innocent. Nobody is accusing of any crime whatsoever. Yes, it would be the same thing if they were polite and searched through my stuff. That would inconvenience me. First of all, I have to let some people into my home. This means I'm going to have people walking around poking and prodding at all my stuff. If you think that it isn't an inconvenience watching people poking around in your stuff, even if they're neat about it, I do have to say you have much more patience than I.
Number 3: I'll give you a fun solution. PUT YOUR FRICKEN TOP UP. If there's a simple solution to a problem, instead of crying about it, fix it. You know what you did? You caused a hassle for the police department. You had to get the captain down to your vehicle, taking him away from his duties because you think it's SO much of a hassle to put the top on your vehicle. GROW UP. The government's job isn't to kiss you on the forehead, it's job is to keep you and me safe. By wasting the law enforcement's time, you are actually infringing upon MY safety as a citizen, as well as wasting my tax money for your petty problem. If YOU left the top off your jeep, it's YOUR responsibility for what's in it. I know a guy who works construction and some of his guys throw beers in the bed of his truck when he's not looking. You know what he does? He cleans them out. He doesn't call the police captain and say "but THEY threw it in there mister, please have mercy on me!"
Number 4: Yes, the rules do exist to protect all of us. And you pulling your stunts with your jeep and murderers getting off without any jailtime because they claimed not to know their legal rights that they had every right to see beforehand (the whole Miranda v. Arizona BS) undermine their capacity. People say they want this country to be safer and that it's crooked, yet they do everything they can to make it that way.
Finally, somebody I can agree with. If I had mod points and that good stuff, I'd mod you up for sure.
I'd just like to ask how does having that drone inconvenience you in any way? It disgusts me when people think that the Bill of Rights is there to keep you safe from being prosecuted. Unlawful search and seizure is in the Bill of Rights because in England search and seizure was abused by crooked policemen and people would have their houses tore up for nothing. You'd have the police bash down everybody's door and search through everybody's stuff no matter if you have any connection to the crime at all. Sometimes they didn't even need a crime to initiate it. Having a little drone peek in at your backyard does not bash down your door and rummage through your things forcibly. It does not harass you (well, unless it was like the annoying things on HL2). I consider myself to be pretty liberal, but I wish criminals would stop crying and finding ways to cheat the judicial system out of pressing proper punishment.
If you don't agree with the laws you are supposed to abide by you can either try to get them changes or find somewhere else to live. Trash is what makes this country (USA) much more complicated than it has to be.
Funny, I actually thought this was going to be about Doctor Who and his reincarnation on the season finale.
Oh noes! Some guy had an accident and suffered a mortifying booboo. Guess what, industrial accidents have been around longer than robots. Replace "turning off robot" with "turning off feed loader" and just let your imagination carry you to what can happen to your pretty little arms.
The logic used in this "if robots weren't around this man would still be alive" is horrible. You could say JFK would still be alive if it wasn't for the bullet being invented.
That video's really funny. Doesn't hold a candle to Lazy Sunday though...
Can somebody translate this man's post please? I sat there and read it several times and the meaning of it just escapes me. Perhaps it just doesn't make sense?
Look, I can see how the parent might be PARANOID or something, but the fact is ANYTHING public can be retrieved by anybody. If you go on MySpace and say you like to molest little children and give a list of children you've molested, and the police are pressing a molestation charge on you and they see that, that can incriminate you even more. I've always been for privacy, but on some things I do agree with the idea "If you've done nothing wrong, what do you have to be afraid of?". Public forums are one of those things. Now, if the government snooped in on private things of mine without subpoena, I'd be quite pissed.
And the idea that someone would be outraged because the government reads public things is beyond me. When you post something public ANYBODY can read it. Anybody that wants to read this post I'm making right now can read it if they want. I don't care if the government reads or a really intelligent llama reads it.
Read this: http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?se archid=10588
Nintendo says they're not expecting losing much at all at launch.
What shocks me even more is that SCO is still in business.
I'm all for privacy and all, but I think people are really blowing this out of proportion. Let the NSA get all this information. I don't honestly care. If someone was going to push a case against you, they'd look at these pubs anyway because they're PUBLIC. That's like walking into school with a shirt saying "I'm gay" and then punching someone in the face because he called you gay.
Who's the dumbass here? If you actually read what happened about Oblivion you'd know that Oblivion only got rerated because of the gore. The ESRB did a piss-poor job rating Oblivion and since somebody brought to their attention a nude texture, they looked over the game and found it to contain too much gore to be rated Teen. Don't believe me? Read this: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6148897.html
Yeah, they're still getting the nudity descriptor, but I think that was more of a thing to get people to shut up and stop arguing about it. Since the game was going to be rerated anyway, they figured the easiest thing to get the argument on whether the nudity should be accounted for was just to throw a nudity descriptor on it. An appeasement if you will.
I didn't mean for Wii to be emulated, I was simply stating that I think Wii's games are going to be good enough to where I'd want to play them over a decade later, just as I do with the SNES. I only emulate SNES because I don't have a TV, otherwise I'd just use my SNES (as it is still in perfect condition)
I doubt people will play many of the late 90's and 2000's games because their graphics are so horrible it's distracting. 2D games are still playable because the only people that were responsible for a game looking good were the artists. Nowadays the artists, programmers, animators, hardware, API's, etc. etc. etc. have to be just perfect for a decent experience. Plus the studios didn't have to spend so mnuch because the only people responsible for art were artists and you didn't need as many programmers because you don't have to wrestle with 3D. Thus, the game designers had a lot more responsibility in making a game sell. Gameplay is what makes a game last. Notice how quickly people lost interest in Doom III? I'm sure the extremely limited multiplayer on DIII also had an influence in that as well :(.
Take Super Mario World. That game was perfect. I still play it today with an emulator, and I can see my cartridge for it from my chair. It came with my Super Nintendo and I've been playing it since my early days (I don't remember when we got our SNES, but I was less than 5 back then).
Now today's games, as in the generation of Wii, PS3, and XBox360, I think that Wii games have a chance of being as good as the SNES games. The last Nintendo console I bought was a SNES and the mere fact that I'm considering on buying a console again, is a good sign. The games Nintendo plans to release on Wii seem like they have that same magic that SNES games had. As well as you can play SNES games on it as well. Nintendo said that all the virtual console games will be under $10 and IIRC, some will only be like $4.
Or you could pull out a hammer drill and punch a whole through the walls of every room. I'm a genius. Pay me $50 billion dollars for my great idea.
Big companies will always abuse their power. This is why I hate capitalism. Nobody deserves that kind of power. Things like this was what people hates about monarchs. Instead of a large company abusing their power, the monarch would abuse his power and do things like restrict the internet. So are we really in a better situation today than we were in monarchy? Now it's just an oligarchy of business leaders that control different things. It makes me sick.
They said it folks! Their reason is because of poor documentation in Linux! The converse of this is that those server admins don't know enough about Linux to be administrating a Linux machine. End of story. Seriously, how long does it take to read a two page man file? The point I'm trying to make is that Linux is more stable and WILL give you more uptime, if you only know how to use it. Windows gives people a "pretty good" uptime and "average" stability if you don't care to learn much about server administration.