Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Bob

Real Name Bob   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname LittleMe
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jun 15, 2005, 08:15
Total Comments 4889 (Master)
User ID 23321
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > The Crew Reviews Delay
8. Re: The Crew Reviews Delay Nov 25, 2014, 12:19 LittleMe
 
NewMaxx wrote on Nov 25, 2014, 11:50:
Personally, I believe some serious reform is needed in the gaming industry, but it's not going to come from "voting with your wallet" as a lot of people like to believe. Allowing the "free market" to present an alternative is also a false promise because advertising dollars coupled with publisher exclusives are the bottom line. The gaming industry, while perhaps ostensibly in decline on the console side, is a massive industry that sooner or later must face additional regulation.

Their soured reputation is market forces working. They're not extorting us. Just don't buy their products if you don't want to.

I don't call it 'free market' because we don't live in one. We do have choices and countless competing products. You're cherry picking the data you want and then using that to proclaim your moral superiority and poorly guided good intentions over the entire industry. I can already see more Federal Fail coming to a theater near you.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Shroud of the Avatar: Forsaken Virtues Early Access
2. Re: Shroud of the Avatar: Forsaken Virtues Early Access Nov 24, 2014, 20:27 LittleMe
 
Well that's often a good way to develop a game, no? I guess it depends more on execution than how early it goes into heavy play testing.  
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Gatherings & Competitions
5. Re: Gatherings & Competitions Nov 24, 2014, 12:20 LittleMe
 
Is it gamer slang or is it just slang? I think that use goes back tens or maybe even hundreds of years.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
13. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 21, 2014, 23:38 LittleMe
 
Don't underestimate the globalized finance industry and it's psychopathic stranglehold on governments including the EU. Also, they want some degree of chaos (riots, wars etc) since that gives them control. They make money from the interest.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Assassin's Creed Unity Crash Workaround
9. Re: Assassin's Creed Unity Crash Workaround Nov 21, 2014, 13:50 LittleMe
 
Another issue with both Unity and DA:I is the non PC versions of the game you need a potato to play.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
5. Re: Morning Interviews Nov 21, 2014, 13:39 LittleMe
 
Fion wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 12:44:
Personally I prefer that they are zones. Loading up a new zone means that zone can have its own art assets, color palette, textures, etc. The truly open world games generally have to settle on one specific style with little true variation because without a true loading screen the game cannot dump the texture memory from your video card, or on occasion simply does so much more slowly. It's why you start getting crashes when you set ugrids too high in Skyrim.

It's for this reason that the 'zones' in DA:I are incredibly diverse. Besides it loads pretty fast on a SSD.

+1 this. I must say from what I've seen so far of the first zone it is a very skilfully created region with lots of detail even beyond the level of Skyrim.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
4. Re: Morning Interviews Nov 21, 2014, 13:35 LittleMe
 
Julio wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 13:29:
I would think they'd be more worried about the claims that DA:I is wrecking SSD drives...

At first I was concerned about that too, but it turns out to be a disreputable claim by Russian crackers. Read the comments in that thread. Also TB talked about it in his performance review saying it wasn't a credible claim.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Assassin's Creed Unity Patch and Workarounds
14. Re: Assassin's Creed Unity Patch and Workarounds Nov 15, 2014, 15:03 LittleMe
 
Good that they're working on fixing this. It's supposed to be a good AC game, more along the lines of AC1/AC2.  
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
14. Re: Morning Metaverse Nov 14, 2014, 13:20 LittleMe
 
Prez wrote on Nov 14, 2014, 12:33:
I found my new favorite metal band, Allegaeon that way. Most exciting metal band in years.

Cool! Which of their albums do you recommend most? Just started playing Elements of Infinite now.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
4. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 12, 2014, 21:39 LittleMe
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Nov 12, 2014, 21:09:
AT&T resorting to blackmail? When they were paid 20 years ago to lay fiber in the first place? No surprise here.

Whole books can be written how these welfare queen corporations have screwed us over. Don't question the duopoly or suggest that we need more competition. Lets tell ourselves that a NN law will fix this much bigger problem of being under their thumb for too long already.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
44. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 03:25 LittleMe
 
PropheT wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 03:15:
LittleMe wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:35:
No, no he wasn't. Here's the quote:

Obama called on the Federal Communications Commission to more heavily regulate Internet providers and treat broadband much as it would any other public utility.

Nothing there about congress. It does look like a decree do me, and an unlawful one at that.


There's nothing about congress in there because it IS NOT NECESSARY.

The president called on them to enact this sort of reform because he can't do it himself. He can't create laws necessary for that to happen, therefore he needs to call on lawmakers to do that. Calling on lawmakers to enact legislation making these changes is doing exactly what you are saying he isn't.

I guess at this point it's semantics.

PropheT wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 03:15:
Because the providers are able to make those agreements and create their own monopolies by area with no impedance or penalty from government. They create the deals with local municipalities in exchange for non-competes with other providers in many cases because no regulation exists to prevent them from doing so.

I've done a fair amount of work at a local government level with this over the last ten years or so. Anyone who has done the same will immediately acknowledge that smaller communities are hamstrung when making these deals because there is no regulation that protects them. The lack of regulation leaves us with all but a take it or leave it approach to negotiations, and when changes or alterations outside of the agreements take place there is often little or no recourse for the communities affected.

I don't expect it to help much, because many of the problems we encounter are with general cable service as much as internet service, but separating the two from a legal aspect would give us ground to ensure stability and options that as of right now aren't available. In practice, that should lower the cost for subscribers and increase the number of available customers for providers.

Yes this is correct I've heard these stories too and believe it. However why do these local governments need to think that they should deliver a turn-key solution? Why can't they just create a legal framework that empowers people to build their own Internet infrastructure on their own? In my mind that's the true role of government - to empower people to solve their problems.

I think in most cases people can and would solve the problem (wire their communities), especially when it comes to the Internet and how it loves decentralization.

PropheT wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 03:15:
All I'm seeing is that you don't like it because Obama said it. When you're not declaring our system a monarchy, you're arguing for the same things that people who are happy about this are.

If Bush said it I'd be just as concerned. I didn't say monoarchy but I did say that it read as a decree and I keep seeing this pattern from our presidents. Bush did it too and I felt the same then as now about it.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
42. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 03:06 LittleMe
 
beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:35:
LittleMe wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:58:

Yes I see your sarcasm and strawman arguments. Please reread what I said with consideration of the warnings I gave.

You got the sarcasm part right, but calling something a "strawman argument," does not make it so.

How were my examples in any way "straw men?"

Thanks, I take your asking as genuine curiosity of where I stand on that.

Banks were never fully de-regulated or 'free market' they just sloppily removed critical parts of regulation because they finance industry has far too much influence of our government. The house of cards that all regulations are, crumbled quickly. Instead of taking it as an example that regulations can be dangerous, many people seemed to take it as the opposite.

We haven't had free market monies or finance here in a very long time. Much of the regulatory infrastructure was still there but many people labeled 'bad regulation' as 'free market' in order to demonize it. It's socialist rhetoric that comes from media corporations who are financially connected to oligarchs who benefit from the entire system. Play their propaganda game or they destroy you. That's the predatory rule.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as FDIC were all regulatory entities as well as HUD all had their part to play in the many failures. Also the Fed was deeply involved because they kept interest rates low for far too long.

It was a domino effect of course. Politicians wanted to parade (Clinton/Bush) around saying they saved our economy but their goal was do distract us with illusionary wealth while they built a vast warfare+welfare state.



beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:35:
You are one of those "Let the Free Market Decide!" guys. I gave you examples of exactly that: the deregulation of particular industries all of which led to total disaster. The last--the deregulation of the financial industry--badly damaged the global economy and we in the U.S. are still suffering from the after effects.

We disagree on the causes of what happened. Yes ending glass-stegal under bush and one under Clinton (forget its name) were very bad ideas.

beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:35:
As for your "warning" ... it seems at best nonsensical to me. Like I said, you are "Pro-free market," at the same time that you rail about "corporate controlled governments." And when the government gets out of the way and lets the free market decide everything, those same corporate overlords, free of their regulatory fetters, are going to ... What? Treat all consumers with respect and give us the best possible service out of fear that we will spend our dollars elsewhere?

Really ... ?

Because corporations use government to their ends and that's anti free-market. It's called corporatism. We don't live in a free market society at all. That notion is a dogma or myth. It's a modern equivalent of mercantilism. These corporations love to be regulated nowadays. They write the regulations. Your presumption that the government is in between us and the corporations is false.

The government is out for its own ends, as are you and as are the corporations. It's a triangle of interests more than a one dimensional line with us on either ends.

So in my mind, when government gains authority, both good and bad things happen. However those who wanted more authority are blind to how power operates and are delusional in thinking that some new regulation or program is going to be some sort of utopian dream. Instead a new institution is created and that institution is actually out for its own preservation more than anything else (FCC in this case). That's because almost all people in power are materialistic and selfish - the ego mind state.

I've seen this at play in the real world at work. Government employees selfishly fighting over the scraps as wolves do over a deer carcass.

are going to ... What? Treat all consumers with respect and give us the best possible service out of fear that we will spend our dollars elsewhere? Really ... ?

Voting with our wallets gives us far more influence than begging the FCC and living under the thumb of Comcast/Verizon. Vote with your wallet. It doesn't take much for them to change their policy even for just 10% of their customers they will not bring the ire of bad reputation if their customers can go elsewhere. Yes consumer choice is far, far, far, far more powerful than government regulation.

edit: because consumer choice is dynamic and ever changing. People who write regulations can't predict the future so they are very limited. When we act as a consumer and make a choice we are taking our inalienable right and god-given power! Conversely, taking our choices away with Internet duopolies is denying us our human right and the consequences are not being properly dealt with by NN advocates such as you.

This comment was edited on Nov 11, 2014, 03:16.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
37. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 02:28 LittleMe
 
beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:13:
LittleMe wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:58:
Yes well it was local government regulation in their creation of local monopolies as a sacrifice for service. That was the dicatum presented to us that only a monopoly can provide a service. Now they are exploiting their government sanctioned monopolies but the whole issue has been blown out of proportion and people are now hysterical for NN.

So ... you are saying ... that local government cutting sweetheart deals with Comcast and its army of corporate lobbyists is what created this problem?

And that's why ... you don't want the federal government to step in and intervene in these monopolies?

I don't want federal intervention, as you put it. Correct. Local governments created the problem, they should solve it. I fully support local communities altering the terms of these monopoly (franchise) agreements with full NN wording.

There are several reasons why I don't want Federal involvement. That's the subject of a several book as far as how corrupt and controlled they are. Let me just say that a "one size fits all" solution won't work but it's much more complicated than that to me.

beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:13:
The rest of the world has much better internet service, at cheaper rates, than we do in the U.S. And the rest of the world--particularly in Europe--places heavy regulations on those ISPs and cable companies to stop them from gouging their customers.

Okay but we're not Europe, but yes more and more we're becoming as they are. So yes I think similar what you are saying will happen here. Healthy competition has already been destroyed here and a highly controlled Internet infrastructure will result.

When I was a kid we criticized Europe for it's antiquated and poor quality telecommunications. Now we idolize them. They have earned some of that but a lot of our admiration of a very controlled/regulated Internet is undeserved. I'm not talking about price or access here. I'm talking about rapid technological advancement that can't happen in a highly regulated and controlled (monopolized) market.

This comment was edited on Nov 11, 2014, 02:36.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
36. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 02:14 LittleMe
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 02:05:
Take it over? What are you even talking about? Do you have even the foggiest idea what Title I and II are?

Okay I'm not saying literally as in seizing the physical properties as has been done in the past in other countries (in other industries), no of course not.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
32. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 01:58 LittleMe
 
beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:53:
Yep. Over regulation (is there any other kind?) by the Federal Government and our Commissar in Chief is what led to all the problems with internet monopolies.

Yes well it was local government regulation in their creation of local monopolies as a sacrifice for service. That was the dicatum presented to us that only a monopoly can provide a service. Now they are exploiting their government sanctioned monopolies but the whole issue has been blown out of proportion and people are now hysterical for NN.

beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:53:
If they just totally deregulated the internet, and let THE FREE MARKET DECIDE, then there would be NO MORE MONOPOLIES!

Again the government created the monpolies. how many times do I need to say that this is a government-created problem? All your minds have been conditioned by years of government education where they taught you to love the government!

beremot wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 01:53:
Just look at what deregulation did for the savings and loan industry.

And the banking industry. Repealing the Glass-Steagall Act was a great idea, right? No problems there.

Yes I see your sarcasm and strawman arguments. Please reread what I said with consideration of the warnings I gave.

This comment was edited on Nov 11, 2014, 02:05.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
27. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 01:35 LittleMe
 
PropheT wrote on Nov 10, 2014, 21:55:
A law would need to be passed. That's what the president was asking for. That is not king-like behavior, because the executive branch does not create and pass laws; he is calling for these measures to be enacted, not decreeing to all his vassals that from now henceforth the land shall have net neutrality.

No, no he wasn't. Here's the quote:

Obama called on the Federal Communications Commission to more heavily regulate Internet providers and treat broadband much as it would any other public utility.

Nothing there about congress. It does look like a decree do me, and an unlawful one at that. I think especially since that the Internet is so proving so key to nearly everyone's hour-to-hour modern lifestyle that the FCC, on it's own decision, could effectively take it over is scary. I find that notion repugnant. And yes you've not seen any written regulation or law so presume the worst. They could really harm the Internet with Verizon, Comcast, etc writing nearly whatever they want in there as a "compromise".

PropheT wrote on Nov 10, 2014, 21:55:
As for a free-er market solution, I don't know how you can think this when there is already obvious and tangible proof that the exact opposite of what you're saying is already true. There's even examples provided in the Oatmeal link. We have a free market in place right now, and the providers have used it to give themselves monopolies over coverage areas, control pricing, enact bandwidth limitations, and so on because the necessary regulations preventing them from doing so do not exist.

The whole local internet service is very anti-free market with antiquated mid-20th century local 'franchise agreements' that are the foundation of how the vast majority of local Internet service is provided. These franchise agreements are just kind words for government granted monopolies. THAT is the core problem here - that being, very limited consumer choice and minimal competition.

"When the leader of the free world says the Internet should remain free, that's a game changer," said Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass.
That's pure self-serving propaganda. Read between the lines. I'll rewrite it since you guys can't interpret that statement. "A narcissistic power drunk attention whore says he's going to do you a favor and expects you to sit back and trust him with one of the greatest inventions of human-kind. The corporate controlled government says it's going to do a 180 degree turn and if you believe that you deserve what you'll get. If it turns into a nightmare don't worry, police with guns will show up and arrest you if you interfere."

This comment was edited on Nov 11, 2014, 01:42.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
25. Re: tougher Internet regulation. Nov 11, 2014, 01:12 LittleMe
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 00:22:
LittleMe wrote on Nov 10, 2014, 20:37:
But last January, a federal appeals court struck down the regulation because the court said the FCC didn't technically have the legal authority to tell broadband providers how to manage their networks.

The proper way to go about this sort of thing would be to pass a law. I saw no such language in the article. So it appears the pres doesn't care about the rule of law but his supposed authority over the FCC to enforce a 'rule' already found to be not within their lawful authority. This is how kings operate.

The government can only do so much here. This is where a free-er market would give consumers what they want - Internet access without being under the thumb of government-sanctioned monopolistic internet providers. Obama just loves to be the center of attention here as usual. It's superficial flair with no substance.

There is a law -- the Telecommunications Act -- and it is the whole basis of the current state of the Net Neutrality discussion. You don't seem to understand the difference between legislation and public administration. Law cannot, does not, and will not ever, describe every detail, with precision, of how the government does its job; this is the difference between law and administrative rules, a difference which should be civics 101. The Congress writes laws, but the Executive branch determines how to "execute" and administer those laws. For example, the Congress passes the Clean Water Act, a law mandating improvement in water quality and authorizing the EPA to administer those mandates; the EPA, in turn, studies the requirements, brings their own expertise to bear, determines the exact regulatory rules necessary to implement those legislative mandates, determines the details of how to enforce those rules, and establishes metrics to measure how well the new regulatory regime is actually achieving the goals set down in law by Congress. Again, this is Civics 101. In the case of Net Neutrality, the FCC has the authority to classify broadband Internet as a Title II Public Utility under the Telecommunications Act. As a regulatory body responsible for the actual implementation of said law, the FCC has administrative discretion on whether or not broadband Internet should be so classified, and whether or not the rule making authority granted by such a classification should be used to write rules which enforce Net Neutrality. The President, who is the head of the Executive Branch, of which the FCC is a part, has come out in favor of classification of broadband Internet as a public utility subject to Title II regulatory authority. This is how government is supposed to work. It's called separation of powers. The Executive branch makes the administrative decisions which actually implement laws, and whether or not broadband Internet is a Title II utility or an information service is one such administrative decision. If Congress determined the precise details of how to run government, government would cease to function because a deliberative body is completely ill suited to solving administrative problems; imagine if the management at your company took a company wide vote on any decision no matter how minute.

Thank you for your reply. Well I meant in the context of the article which stated in the quote I pasted that it was found outside of their authority by a court, much to your chagrin apparently. I'm not sure what you say is true as far as them classifying them as a utility is within their purview. So you and other passionate NN supporters say it would fix the issue (of the monopolistic ISP's paywalling or stymieing the Internet).

I agree with the notion that Internet access should be open and free (as in freedom) but I don't believe that government action such as NN as it is currently being advocated will do much to help and it would do a lot of harm that is never talked about by NN advocates. The FCC is a corporate controlled entity. That in and of itself should give us great cause for concern as to the deceptive magic show they are about to put on.

There are often real unintended consequences of expanded government authority. Also, corporations often want regulations. Why? So they can create a costly and bureaucratic regulatory hurdle too high for new competitors to enter the market. It's modern mercantilism. Corporations are now writing their own regulations. The new competitors can and would help the consumer with better products, services and prices but are denied because they aren't as politically connected, etc...

Even so, the very nature of the Internet is for free and open communication and the Internet will, by its adaptive and dynamic nature, fight those regulations.

NN wouldn't fix much at all as it is being advocated now. I feel that you and other NN advocates have far too much trust in the government to solve the problem that they themselves created in the first place with the duopoly (not possible without government regulations of local service).

This comment was edited on Nov 11, 2014, 01:20.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
1. tougher Internet regulation. Nov 10, 2014, 20:37 LittleMe
 
But last January, a federal appeals court struck down the regulation because the court said the FCC didn't technically have the legal authority to tell broadband providers how to manage their networks.

The proper way to go about this sort of thing would be to pass a law. I saw no such language in the article. So it appears the pres doesn't care about the rule of law but his supposed authority over the FCC to enforce a 'rule' already found to be not within their lawful authority. This is how kings operate.

The government can only do so much here. This is where a free-er market would give consumers what they want - Internet access without being under the thumb of government-sanctioned monopolistic internet providers. Obama just loves to be the center of attention here as usual. It's superficial flair with no substance.

This comment was edited on Nov 10, 2014, 20:42.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > New NVIDIA WHQL Drivers
5. Re: New NVIDIA WHQL Drivers Nov 10, 2014, 19:30 LittleMe
 
There have been some AC:U twitch streams from xbones. It looks like the same thing so far.  
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Blizzard Announces Overwatch
43. Re: Blizzard Announces Overwatch Nov 7, 2014, 18:48 LittleMe
 
What is wrong with you people!? Did you see all the hat variations in that?!?!  
Avatar 23321
 
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4889 Comments. 245 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo