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 > Sunday Metaverse |
 |
| 48. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 26, 2016, 15:33 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Verno wrote on Sep 26, 2016, 14:49:
Perhaps choosing a third party is the lesser of "two" evils for some voters, I don't make assumptions about peoples reasons.
Fair enough. Certainly, my argument makes some implicit assumptions about what people want from the present election. That said, I do suspect that many voters are not realistic about what they can reasonably hope to achieve through democratic politics and consequently make voting decisions that ensure they get even less than they're already getting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Metaverse |
|
| 44. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 26, 2016, 14:10 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Verno wrote on Sep 26, 2016, 13:23:
Most of the time when I hear that argument it seems to be from people who just want you to lean towards their candidate of choice.
Perhaps, but I would argue that most 3rd-party supporters don't understand that democracy is a process -- not an outcome -- that is geared towards producing the watered-down stability of compromise over the dramatic change of decisive action. In a system where everyone has a (relatively) equal say, no one can get everything they want, all of the time, unless by some miracle the overwhelming majority of the voting public agrees on something and is organized in support of it. Instead, democracy provides a process to mediate political disagreements, so that everyone, ideally, gets a small piece of what they want and can at least put up with the rest. The question everyone has to ask themselves when in the voting booth is not "Does this candidate support everything I've ever wanted?" but "Does this candidate have a realistic shot of making some degree of progress on a few of the issues I care about most without dragging me too far back on others?" Note the qualifications and warrants in the latter question: democracy is a process that creates complex compromise, not decisive simplicity.
Choosing between the lesser of two evils is not indicative of a broken system: it's indicative of the democratic system in a big, diverse country working (mostly) as intended. A candidate that gave you everything you wanted, would offer too little to everyone else, and everyone else matters just as much as you. If that compromised choice between far less than ideal candidates is too unappealing, by all means vote your conscious, but don't be surprised that by walking away from an offer to get some of what you want, you end up getting nothing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Metaverse |
|
| 30. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 26, 2016, 00:01 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Zanthar wrote on Sep 25, 2016, 21:14:
I hope Hillary has a seizure on stage. Foaming at the mouth, shitting and pissing her pants suit, eyes going all wacky. Now that would be entertainment.
Well in the pursuit of even-handedness, I suppose that would balance out the walking national embarrassment across the stage from her. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Oculus Facing Political Backlash [Updated] |
|
| 140. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 25, 2016, 15:15 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Quboid wrote on Sep 25, 2016, 09:58:
I hate seeing people refer to the UN/EU/NATO as people pointlessly sitting in a room arguing when that has replaced people pointlessly dying on a field.
Yup. The same goes for international trade. Globalization and world trade have created real losers, in our own country and in many others, and has hardly been equitable in its economic benefits. BUT they have also led to a world order in which major powers do not go to war with each other: they have too much to gain from being at peace and trading with one another, and too much to lose by going to war. That doesn't mean the world has been conflict free, but the kinds of wars which major powers used to fight near continuously no longer exist. As you note, major power conflict is rapidly receding from living memory, which unfortunately makes it all the more likely for people to forget how easily and often war used to occur, and how quickly it could come about again if we abandon the institutions which have given us so many decades of peace and prosperity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Oculus Facing Political Backlash [Updated] |
|
| 128. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 25, 2016, 01:35 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Redmask wrote on Sep 25, 2016, 01:00:
The country burn? No, probably just the state of affairs in Washington is what they're wishing to burn. It doesn't really matter though, even if elected Trump's caustic dealings will render him a lame duck in office, unable to accomplish anything. People scared about him ending the world are just being overly dramatic, Washington has tamed much fiercer men and the President is constrained in numerous ways from doing whatever he wants. The wasted time with Trump is what worries me more but I would almost welcome it as it would essentially destroy the Republican party which is a god damn mess. We could even get three viable parties out of it.
If Trump wins, then the likelihood of Democrats retaking the Senate, let alone the House, drops to basically nil. In otherwords, we can expect a GOP controlled Congress, and, in short order, a conservative leaning court with possibility for Trump to appoint additional conservative leaning justices. While the President's powers are limited by the Constitution, Constitutional norms are only that: norms. Trump has repeatedly shown that he has little understanding or respect of the US Constitution, of American Democratic values, or of the institutions which safeguard them. An American President who has little to no respect for Constitutional norms has a great deal of power to run them over: he can order the Department of Justice to open anti-trust investigations against businessmen who have spoken out against him, he can order the NSA to surveil journalists who write negative things about him, he could indeed order the US military to seize Iraqi oil, the war crime which he keeps promising to commit. And the list goes on.
Sure, the GOP-controlled House and Senate could conduct oversight investigations, subpoena Trump administration officials, open impeachment proceedings, etc. but those GOP members of Congress depend upon Trump voters to stay in office. Given how quickly the GOP rolled over for Trump this election season, why in the world would you think they would stand up to him once he's in office? With hardly any exception, the only GOP lifers who are opposing Trump are those who are not actively seeking office. Everyone else? They know they need Trump supporters to stay in office and so they're toeing the line; even Ted Cruz is now placing his own political career ahead of opposing an incompetent nominee who thinks his dad helped assassinate Kennedy.
Maybe things won't be so bad. Maybe the GOP would grow a pair under a President Trump and put aside their own personal ambitions for the sake of American democracy. Maybe once in office, Trump could be tamed and his advisers could keep him from doing stupid shit that damages the country. But everything we've seen so far in this campaign suggests the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Oculus Facing Political Backlash [Updated] |
|
| 124. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 25, 2016, 01:19 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Redmask wrote on Sep 25, 2016, 00:09:
They would rather burn it all to the ground with Trump than see Clinton elected.
The thing that bothers me about this attitude is it shows little imagination for how bad things can get. If you place the last 70 years or so, since the end of World War II, in the broad context of human history, then it becomes immediately clear that we were fortunate enough to live in arguably the greatest golden age humankind has ever experienced. The world has never been more prosperous, more peaceful, or more free, for more people, than it has in the latter half of the 20th century and the first few decades of the 21st. That's not to say things are perfect -- far from it -- but that most humans have endured lives far more brutal, far more violent, far poorer, and far shorter with far more loss. The last time humans came close to enjoying what we have, it was the second century AD at the height of the Roman Empire.
But Rome fell.
Our civilization is robust, but it's not impervious. A truly catastrophic leader can deal irreparable damage to a society, that perhaps doesn't destroy things overnight (although in the age of nuclear weapons don't rule it out), but nevertheless precipitates a long, irrecoverable decline and fall. This has happened over and over again throughout world history. For Rome, see Commodus. For Ancient Athens, see Alcibiades and the Sicilian expedition. For a hypothetical, read Plato's discussion in the Republic of how democracies devolve into tyrannies, and his description of the tyrannical man, and tell me that when you look at Trump you don't see that same passion-enslaved man -- always desirous of praise and popularity -- a man unable to control his desires or even himself.
This isn't to say our society doesn't have major problems and inequities that aren't being addressed by our national politics. No one is wrong to organize and press for change. But that doesn't mean we can be foolish when it comes time to select our president. We cannot claim a lack of historical imagination and perspective as an excuse for burning down a system that has given us the one of the great (if not the greatest) golden ages ever lived by humans. Things could be far better, but they could also be much much much worse, and the odds for rolling the dice on Trump should give any thinking person pause. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Oculus Facing Political Backlash [Updated] |
|
| 106. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 24, 2016, 20:02 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
RedEye9 wrote on Sep 24, 2016, 17:22:
snip
The hilarious/sad thing is that's just the last seven days, and only the blatant/major lies. The man is a blackhole of insecurity requiring a steady stream of bluster and bullshit to fill it. Most of us figure out that character matters far more than juvenile dominance displays by about the time we graduate from high school. Why would we give drone strike authority to someone who emotionally and socially never left the high school locker room? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Deus Ex: Mankind Divided System Rift DLC |
|
| 9. |
Re: Deus Ex: Mankind Divided System Rift DLC |
Sep 24, 2016, 01:35 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
| I'm not very far into it, but it doesn't feel like cut content: it feels like a lengthy self-contained mission that relates to but does not depend upon the main game. It's still set in Prague, and there's no references so far to the ending of the main game, so it could have been integrated, but then there's nothing leaping out at me so far that says "cut out to be sold as DLC" either. Basically if you want a small new section of city to explore, coupled with what appears to be a massive infiltration mission, then it's probably worth getting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Civilization VI Specifications |
|
| 8. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 23, 2016, 23:44 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
GinRummy wrote on Sep 23, 2016, 22:36:
Has the actual Sid Meier been within a hundred miles of the development of any of the last several Civ games? He probably has about as much to due with programming these any more as Tom Clancy or John Madden did with theirs.
The only Civilization game where Sid Meier had a direct, hand-on role was the first one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Interviews |
|
| 17. |
Re: Morning Interviews |
Sep 23, 2016, 21:27 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Prez wrote on Sep 23, 2016, 20:22:
Also, what are "MRA's"?
Men's Rights Activists: individuals who believe and organize around the principle that the most oppressed and disadvantaged demographic group in contemporary society is straight white males. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Interviews |
|
| 9. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 22, 2016, 13:48 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
ItBurn wrote on Sep 22, 2016, 13:19:
Why are you even on this site if you're not a PC gamer?
Presumably because you can enjoy PC games while simultaneously thinking many self-identified "PC gamers" live in an echo chamber of their own making. I don't own a gaming console, and haven't since the N64/PS1 days, but Pachter definitely described PC gamer "culture" to a T. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Metaverse |
|
| 4. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 22, 2016, 13:26 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Task wrote on Sep 22, 2016, 12:48:
Additionally the 'official' polling also does not include millennials for some dumb reason,
This is where I stopped and said "WTF". If you think there is such a thing as an "official" poll -- and that these are explicitly excluding a major demographic group -- as opposed to a myriad of polls conducted by a variety of organizations for any number of purposes, then you clearly are existing in another reality and can safely be ignored.
And the polling data that makes the news A) includes millenials, and B) shows that millenials are preferring third party candidates in much larger numbers than other demographic groups. Hell, there's been a lot of ink spilled in recent weeks about how millenials are the part of the Obama coalition that is missing from Clinton's base and which are most likely to be the determining factor if she loses. So what exactly is your complaint here other than that "the media" isn't pulling numbers out of its ass that are even more amenable to your argument, such as it is? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Blizzard Dropping Battle.net Name |
|
| 28. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 22, 2016, 11:49 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Mr. Tact wrote on Sep 22, 2016, 09:19:
Not quite sure what you are complaining about. People are criticizing Blizzard for making a meaningless, cosmetic change and treating it like a big press event. I don't think anyone thought the service was going away.
As someone said, this is mostly the CEO thinking he is doing something productive -- and even though he isn't I'm sure he will get credit for being productive garnering a bonus worth many millions...
Except it's not a big press event: it's a blog post that apparently people are reading too quickly and then getting upset about for little reason. I'm annoyed because people can't be bothered to read an (admittedly easy to misinterpret) blog post and just want to post knee-jerk reactions about how fucking terrible everything (nothing) is.
TYPICAL COMMENTS SECTION POSTER: "OMG Blizzard Tech is such a terrible fucking name. What assholes! I bet some greedy CEO is behind this!1!"
The problem is that Battle.net has NOT been renamed as Blizzard tech. Instead, the technologies that compose their online backend are losing their discrete branding, and will instead just be referred to as Blizzard technologies, if they'll be referred to at all. This isn't renaming, this is unnaming.
Don't like "Blizzard tech"? Great! You'll probably never hear it except as an off-hand reference deep in an interview about backend technical improvements for a new game/major patch!
And to which CEO do you refer? I think it's fascinating that no one seems to say "Mike Morhaime", and instead references a more generic figure. Better, I suppose, to have someone faceless and only loosely identified when making absurd claims about bonus padding, or corruption by Activision, or [insert idiotic gamer complaint here]. Anyone that thinks a CEO of a company Blizzard's size did anything but sign off on it after scanning through an email on retiring Battle.net branding doesn't have a clue how enterprise-scale businesses operate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Blizzard Dropping Battle.net Name |
|
| 16. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 21, 2016, 23:17 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
I know most folks on Bluesnews can't be bothered to click a link before commenting, but can they at least be bothered to read the article blurb before commenting?
Battle.net technology will continue to serve as the central nervous system for Blizzard games—nothing is changing in that regard. We’ll just be referring to it as Blizzard tech instead.
...
Given that built-in multiplayer support is a well-understood concept and more of a normal expectation these days, there isn’t as much of a need to maintain a separate identity for what is essentially our networking technology.
Note that they refer to "Battle.net technology" and how it will now be referred to as "Blizzard tech", i.e. their backend tech stack will no longer have its own branding. They're dropping the discrete branding for their backend tech stack, not rebranding as something else. If the backend tech stack needs to be referred to, it'll be referred to as "Blizzard tech", but not as part of an orchestrated branding effort for what in 2016 is just a standard part of an online game.
Reading is hard, I guess.
As for me, I'm sad to see the Battle.net branding go -- I still remember getting my Diablo 1 box with the "Play Online with Battle.net!" sticker in the corner -- but Blizzard is right: Battle.net isn't a product differentiator like it was in 1996, it's just an expected part of a modern video game and doesn't need its own marketing push.
This comment was edited on Sep 21, 2016, 23:32. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Mobilization |
|
| 14. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 19, 2016, 17:28 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 16:05:
Ah, the border of the Village. I live in the West Village, and can give you a billion restaurant recommendations. The gentrification of the Village is real, but the place is still great with so many wonderful places around. You'll love it.
Nice! I may take you up on the restaurant recommendations at some point. I'm hoping to live within walking distance of work, so my apartment hunting will be concentrated in the West Village and Chelsea. The job doesn't start until March though, so I haven't gotten too serious about finding a place yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Mobilization |
|
| 10. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 19, 2016, 15:53 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 14:28:
Actually, someone just shared a tweet on my FB feed:
New York Fears Ranked:
1) pushed into subway tracks
2) Seamless outage
3) Have to go to Times Square
4) Favorite dive bar gentrified
1,563) ISIS
I'd also add in "no Ubers available" and "Uber Surge above 1.9x" to the top 10.
Heh, that's awesome.
And it sounds like we'll be living in the same neighborhood: I recently accepted a job located about 10 blocks south of where the bombing occurred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 14. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 19, 2016, 15:49 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 11:43:
Cutter wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 10:51:
You know, it's funny. Whenever I'm downtown I see the people lined up for the food bank they're all smoking. So they can afford $15 for a pack a day but not food? Yeah. Ok.
Well, you're right in a sense, but it's also hard as hell to quit smoking once you start. The more poor and less educated somebody is, the higher the chance (it seems at least) that they will smoke. A vicious little loop, of addiction, further poverty and weakened health, and lack of education. Obviously if nobody used tobacco products at all(dip is also a huge problem), humanity would be much better off, but it's not really reasonable to expect that or even feasible anytime soon.
The other two pieces of it are A) poverty is a continual cognitive drain that reduces your mental resources when making decisions, such as the decision to quit smoking and follow through on it, and B) poverty means constantly and continually having to tell yourself "no, I can't have it" with all the major things in life (like a car, a home, furthering your education, etc.) so at some point you have to say "yes" to some small things, like a cigarette or a hamburger at McDonald's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Safety Dance |
|
| 4. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
Sep 19, 2016, 14:32 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
Timmeh wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 14:26:
The guy spent 4 months to engineer a clone nand unit in order to do brute force hacking...
If you don't think that level of work is worth a million bucks...
THATS YOUR OWN DUMB PROBLEM.
Not the FBI's or someone else who values their genius and hard work.
Yeah. I mean it should go without saying that the FBI (like the military, like the government in general) gets ripped off by contractors regularly, but time and expertise are certainly not free commodities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2913 Comments. 146 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 > |
|
Twitter 
