User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
| News Comments > Evening Safety Dance |
 |
| 1. |
McAfee attack |
Mar 14, 2006, 00:27 |
Grasman |
|
|
I was a victim of this.. 120 files removed, including my Rome Total War exe, Civ III exe, and Sims 2 exe. Luckily, they had not moved from quarantine to actually being deleted yet and I was able to recover them using this:
http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/ctxundo.asp
All the same, was not very nice to find out my virus scanner was the cause of all the very weird problems I was having over the weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Safety Dance |
|
| 1. |
Ah, Sweden |
Mar 13, 2006, 11:04 |
Grasman |
|
|
The Pirate Bay: Here to Stay?
If you have ever read the legal threats at the pirate bay website, you already know that there providing a bitorrent tracker for copyright material isnt illegal in Sweden.
I had assumed this part of the Swedish legal code was under attack, but I hadn't realized that there was actually a political group defending it. Vote for the Pirate Party!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 14. |
Re: SPOOOOOOOOORE! |
Mar 12, 2006, 00:41 |
Grasman |
|
|
I hadnt seen that video before, very cool. I like the concept of the game, has some very unique possibilities.
My reservation is that when you get to the point where you can move across the galaxy, and 'interact' with other player's worlds, the game will grow old. As he says, the goal-oriented part of the game (evolving) is the tutorial, the actual game is the sandbox. I think that by the time you get to the sandbox you will feel as those you have accomplished your goal and won't feel the desire to mess with the sandbox for any period of time.
But that's just the way I play games; I'm extremely goal oriented, and when I lose sight of my goals, my interest wanes. So while the concept of the game looks extremely cool, I'm not sure that it will be able to hold my interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Into the Black |
|
| 2. |
Re: GW |
Mar 11, 2006, 00:50 |
Grasman |
|
|
That would be the Factions content in preparation for the GW: Factions preview weekend in a couple weeks.
Its a bit more than 10MB.. I think over the past 3 days I've received about 350MB. More is probably coming..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 31. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 3, 2006, 17:40 |
Grasman |
|
|
You know your rear view mirror typically has that thing on the bottom where you flip it up and it only allows 1/5th the amount of light in.
How does that thing work anyway? It has always baffled me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 9. |
Re: OT: Compact cars have high death ra |
Mar 3, 2006, 12:55 |
Grasman |
|
|
If you'd like me to keep blowing holes in this abysmally bad article, I'd be happy to, but I doubt many read this far as it stands.
Actually I was kind of enjoying your tearing it apart. As you say, its pretty ridiculously biased.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > etc. |
|
| 4. |
Re: Holy Crap |
Mar 3, 2006, 11:28 |
Grasman |
|
|
The most profitable run now is either 2 man UW or the troll run from droks...but with the increased energy cost to mantra of resolve I don't know if I'll be able to pull that off anymore.
Which one wont you be able to do.. troll run or 2 man UW run? We'll make the 2 man UW farm work.. i swear it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > etc. |
|
| 2. |
Re: Holy Crap |
Mar 3, 2006, 11:20 |
Grasman |
|
|
Mesmers and Eles got a boost.. looks like they strengthened beast mastery rangers too. Which is interesting because I dont know of anyone that uses ranger beast mastery skills. Maybe they are good now?
Big update, for sure. Gonna go kill the new mobs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Into the Black |
|
| 1. |
stealth shark spies |
Mar 3, 2006, 00:01 |
Grasman |
|
|
While they are at it, they should go the whole way and make sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their foreheads.
That would be something cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > New Counter-Strike: Source Models |
|
| 9. |
Re: Elite models have bluetooth! |
Mar 2, 2006, 10:35 |
Grasman |
|
|
I'd agree that CS remains the most addictive first person shooter. The basic gameplay has been around since 2000 and people are still playing maps that havent changed significantly even with the transition to Source.
According to Valve statistics, there are currently 136 000 CS players, 21 000 CS:Z players and 40 000 CS:S players. 197 000 players playing what is essentially a 5-6 year old game. Damn impressive longevity for a FPS.
This comment was edited on Mar 2, 10:39. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 38. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 28, 2006, 23:18 |
Grasman |
|
|
McGill, in Montreal.
Most of the country will tell me the cold we go through is nothing, but I'm just from southern Ontario. This kind of cold is the exception rather than the rule.
Whenever it gets really cold I look up the weather in Winnipeg or Edmonton. That is some really cold weather.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 13. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 28, 2006, 12:36 |
Grasman |
|
|
Your fellow guildies thought something had happened to you.
Given how much time I have spent playing GW in the past, I can understand this. No I will not use /age
I'll be on tonight.
This comment was edited on Feb 28, 12:37. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 6. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 28, 2006, 11:45 |
Grasman |
|
|
Where HAVE you been?!
It was spring break up here in Canada, so I travelled to warmer climates.. ie Philadelphia then Chicago. It was great; sunshine, no snow on the ground, there was even a day where the temperature was above freezing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 3. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 28, 2006, 11:29 |
Grasman |
|
|
Just couldn't bring myself to do the file-swap.com on my work computer.... just not man enough.
Uploaded: a txt file with redrum pasted a few hundred times.
Downloaded: a picture of Bush and Putin getting into an old Russian car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 48. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 15, 2006, 17:47 |
Grasman |
|
|
I suppose my point is that a tragedy is a tragedy regardless of the intent. I'm not defending the father driving the car, I'm not defending the soldiers stationed there, somebody died pointlessly and the grief of that little girl is there for anybody to see.
If we intentionally blind ourselves to human grief, what are we?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 61. |
Re: Doh...! |
Feb 4, 2006, 11:42 |
Grasman |
|
|
Really? You think I'm wrong? Well, here's the results of every federal election from 1867-2000, provided by Simon Frasier Univeristy....
This is fun, I didn't realize I was talking to someone with so much knowledge about Canada.
Looking at those results, since 1945 the Liberals held Parliament for 45 years, while the Conservatives held Parliament for only 16 years. It is very much true that the Liberals are seen as the party of power, while the Conservatives are the alternative that are most likely to hold federal power. This is on account of the strong support that they command from the prairie provinces and rural ridings in general. But the conservatives are not the only alternative.
The NDP have never held a majority in Ottawa. But they do have parliamentary power, and have long been a voice in Ottawa that cannot be ignored. This is especially true when there are minority governments: when the last budget was being passed, the NDP vote was crucial to the acceptance of the budget. I remember people speculating what the NDP would demand in return for supporting the Liberals and their budget. You can bet that people remembered this during the past election when they considered whether or not their NDP candidate was a viable choice.
Canadians have given the NDP their chance to govern too. As I said earlier, the NDP hold two provincial legislatures - Manitoba and Saskatchewan. These are minor provinces? From 1990 - 1995 the NDP held Ontario legislature: this is a significant Canadian legislature and elections there are always hard fought. The NDP have shown Canadians that they are capable of winning a major election.
When I looked at my ballot during the last election I saw three candidates that if I voted for them, they would have a decent chance at representing me in Parliament. Actually, in my riding there was an independent that had some support - he could have been my MP too. The point is this: for me, it was not a matter of choosing between the incumbant (Conservative) and the other party. If I was unhappy with my MP, I still had a real choice for who I wanted in instead.
The conservatives have become increasingly conservative, and that disturbs most Canadians...
The reason the conservatives have had as much success at the polls as they did is because they reigned in their more radical elements, you said so yourself. True, Canadians were concerned that the conservatives would take the country in another direction if given a chance. So Steven Harper plays quiet, becomes the centrist. And the conservatives aren't giving an inch? Don't confuse American politics with Canadian politics. Here the conservatives have given up trying to ban abortion, and have promised to stay quiet about gay marriage. The conservatives understand that in order to hold Ottawa they need to be centrist, to not offend anybody and to appeal to as many voters as possible.
This is good for Canadian unity. This is how parties lose their partisanship. When Parliament reconvenes here, the Conservatives will reach out across the floor and offer to work with the Liberals to make this government work. The Liberals will take it, because that's how Parliament and especially that's how a minority Parliament works. I think that the experience of being in power will do much to moderate the Conservatives, and will go a long way to continue their swing towards the center.
Well if that's where most of you money comes from, why shouldn't those who foot the bill have a larger say? ...
I'm not sure where to start with this. Ontario and Quebec already have the larger say.. out of 308 seats in Ottawa, Ontario and Quebec have 181 seats. Is this not enough? Don't you think that these provinces are adequately represented in Parliament? I do not think that they need more say.
Yes, the industrialized, developed areas of Canada subsidize the poorer areas. No, I see nothing wrong with this. If we are talking about tax disparity though, lets talk about Alberta, who is really getting screwed by it. Alberta is flush with oil cash and gives to Ottawa far more than it gets back. Don't you think that the maritime provinces, whose fishing based economies have for so long been in decline need economic support from Ottawa more than Alberta? If these regions are to recover, how are they going to do so if they are allowed to sink further and further into poverty?
You are correct, these regions don't have nearly the population of the industrialized areas. And yes they should have a voice. But proportional representation would take away that voice, as they would simply be drowned out by the much much louder voice of the urban areas. For the sake of Canadian unity, the low population areas of Canada need to have their voice heard. Ridings are set up in the way they are for just that purpose. In Canada, when people start talking about seperation, there is a sense of real possibility. It was not that long ago that we became a nation, and there still is not any single event in our history to create a real sense of unity.
If Quebec seperates ...
I intentionally stayed away from the role of the Quebec separatists in Ottawa, and did not mention the Bloc as a viable alternative for voters. But all the same, yes, the Bloc vote is there and they have 51 seats in Parliament.
You are correct, if Quebec seperates (and I sincerely hope they do not) they will lose all of their subsidy monies from Ottawa and will find themselves heavily in debt with nobody helping them out. Seperation would do far more to harm French culture than it would help it. However, by seperating they would also take with them massive amounts of territory (the north, and Montreal being the two most significant) that do not support seperation. Canada would retain French as the second official language, in all likelyhood, as there are significant French speaking populations in the Maritimes, Ontario, and Manitoba.
Quebec won't seperate, they'll continue to talk about seperation. There are enough business minded people in the province that realize what that would mean for them, and they will keep a lid on it. Besides, even if they did get a majority in Quebec to support seperation, they would have to get the approval of the supreme court to actually do it. And we know how likely that is.
As you say, it's all just so much bullshit.
My suspicion is that the primary reason you would like to see proportional representation is because in that way the 'outside' parties would have a much larger chance at gaining at least a seat in Parliament, and votes for them would not be throw away votes. This is the reason why I would support a mixed proportional form of government. The Green party got 4.5% of the vote and not a single seat. Those voters should get at least a representative elected. But again, it would have to be moderated. Full proportional representation is not what we need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 29. |
Re: Doh...! |
Feb 3, 2006, 13:13 |
Grasman |
|
|
Both Canada and America have the 2 party stranglehold, and both countries generally oscillate back and forth between the two parties every couple of years. And it really comes down to voting the incumbent out as opposed to voting the other guy in. And also as I've stated previously we're 2 of a total of 4 countries left on the planet who don't have full-fledged democracy (proportional representation), which are America, Canada, England and India. Proportional representation is long overdue, as this first-past-the-post style of politics is really dangerously dividing our respective countries.
As a Canadian I'll step in here. We just had an election, so I've been thinking about this.
First of all, the idea that we have two parties that simply pass power back and forth is false. The Conservatives are going to be forming their first government in 13 years shortly. The Liberals have been the party of power for so long, it's refreshing to have the Conservatives actually governing instead of opposing the government for opposition's sake. As well, in most electoral districts the voter had 3 viable choices: the Liberals, Conservatives and the NDP (who are more leftist than the liberals). While you do not hear a whole lot about the NDP, they currently hold two provincial legislatures and should not be dismissed as inconsequential.
Secondly, the mudslinging going on between the Liberals and the Conservatives does not mean that Canadians are becoming increasingly divided in their political allegiances. The two parties fight hard to show how different they are from each other, but most Canadians see past this and do not feel that if the other party gets in they will ruin Canada.
Thirdly, and this is where I get into my own opinion, I don't think that proportional representation would be a good thing in Canada. The population of Canada is so heavily concentrated in Ontario and Quebec that the other provinces would receive even less of a voice in Parliament than they currently hold. Proportional representation would also make it very hard to form a majority government in Canada. We would most certainly have to deal with minority governments that are weak and unsure of their mandate. When the government can be removed at any time it stops making the hard decisions for fear of alienating somebody and reverts to caretaker status.
When proportional representation is proposed in Parliament (and periodically it is an issue that is discussed), the proposition is for a mixed form of proportional government, similar to Germany. This is the only type of proportional government I'd consider, perhaps 75% ridings, 25% proportional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > EA versus Ubisoft |
|
| 12. |
Re: No Comment |
Feb 1, 2006, 14:56 |
Grasman |
|
|
I don't imagine Canada's labor laws/practices are all that radically different from the US
Most of Canada's labour laws are not very different from the US. The exception is Quebec. I'm not familiar with exactly how it is different, but I do know that Quebec is a special case in many ways as far as legal codes are concerned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
202 Comments. 11 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
