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:
San Diego, CA 08/21

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Bill Pickett

Real Name Bill Pickett   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname headkase
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jul 5, 2007, 06:49
Total Comments 167 (Novice)
User ID 41707
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Older >


News Comments > Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned?
17. Re: Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned? Jun 15, 2011, 01:03 headkase
 
KilrathiAce wrote on Jun 15, 2011, 00:54:
OH yea, if ME3 is exclusive to origin only that means I wont be buying it, I bought me1 and 2 on steam and if its not on steam I wont be buying it, but I am not saying I wont be playing it.

A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse. I hear ya, at least any titles of that "nature" wouldn't have left over Steam "hooks" for my legitimate purchases to worry about. And in the last 3 years, *ALL* my acquisitions have been legitimate: it would seriously, and I really mean it, pain me if that changed because a deal became sour for me.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned?
15. Re: Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned? Jun 15, 2011, 00:53 headkase
 
noman wrote on Jun 15, 2011, 00:42:
I like this development. Steam's DRM (in how it ties a game to an account, and makes giving the game to others impractical) is quite bad. Alternate services such as Impulse, GFWL, Amazon Dl or even EA DM (now Origin) are much better in giving customers more option in how to install (and patch) a product. Basically all these services, make the entire DVD-ROM content available, and it's up to you how and where to install the game, and which of the publicly available patches you can apply.

I wish more developers follow this route and go to non Steamworks DRM (or NO DRM).

Impulse, at least for Stardock (the platform owner) games only allows you to get patches for the games through their service. They aren't available as stand-alone installers anywhere else at all. And you must use the enclosed serial in the product - which is single use - to register in the client and have that associated with your account before you can get any patches.

Tumbler wrote on Jun 15, 2011, 00:45:
Impulse I only have because you can't get Galactic Civilizations II anywhere else

You can buy Galactic Civ II in stores (you could in the past anyway) but to register it and use it online, IE download all the updated content you have to use impulse. This is all EA will have to do with games like Mass Effect 3, Battlefield 3 and TOR. You can buy a boxed copy anywhere you like but it will be connected to origin. Much like how many games are attached to steam. For the moment it looks like origin is only affecting people buying software from origin, I would assume buying Alice in a physical box just used their standard drm servers? I would assume they plan to roll drm services into this system as soon as possible so that games in the future all fall under this one system.

You're technically right: you can buy GC2 in lot's of places, but see above, you have to register it - single use - to get any patches.


Edit: And I'll relate a little story about Impulse I have. I bought GalCivII. Then the first expansion came out and the only thing I could find in the stores was the "Gold" pack than included both GalCivII and it's first add-on Dark Avatar. So I bought that. When I emailed them asking for the base game serial to be unregistered from my account they politely but firmly declined. That was sad but I don't fault them for it. In contrast: on Steam, when I buy games - as collections - which includes a title I already own I'm usually able to gift the original license away. And that exact little fact is why I give preference to Steam when a title is available on both.

---

And as Teddy said: "The valid for one copy" part isn't clear yet. But I'll be damned if I support the service if the downloads part of it is limited in uses in any way at all.

Edit: Teddy edited his post with a quote from Origin's FAQ saying you can always re-download your games. However, I'm still squinting at it with a leery eye..

This comment was edited on Jun 15, 2011, 01:14.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned?
8. Re: Crysis 2 Steam Crisis, Origin Exclusivity Planned? Jun 15, 2011, 00:33 headkase
 
Well. While EA is measuring how far they can piss with Valve.. Meanwhile I won't be picking up Alice. I'm not going to go to an service that says: "Valid for one copy of.." Yeah, screw that. I only have Steam and Impulse accounts and I'm not getting any more. Impulse I only have because you can't get Galactic Civilizations II anywhere else and if a game is on both Impulse and Steam I get the Steam version: which, ta-da, I can download as many times as I need to in the future.

Screw EA - they screw you too!
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
32. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 14, 2011, 20:05 headkase
 
Creston wrote on Jun 14, 2011, 15:55:
headkase wrote on Jun 13, 2011, 22:21:
You know, just sayin', the problem stated in Homefront is real. Nukes in space. The USA is rapidly on track to have perfect missile defenses: no ICBM nuke will make it to US soil. BUT, if you just launch them high above the US and don't try to make it through the missile shield before you detonate them: massive electromagnetic pulse. All your power lines (well the lines will be fine but all the substations will be burnt out), your computers, your cars, just turned into junk. Now, try to fix and replace *ALL* of it at the same time.

And at the same time, the US retaliates and incinerates your entire country. So... epic win?

Creston

In a traditional world, yes: "epic" win. But in a world where the nation that launched the nukes and the people responsible for launching the nukes are not the same..
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
16. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 14, 2011, 00:34 headkase
 
space captain wrote on Jun 14, 2011, 00:29:
headkase wrote on Jun 13, 2011, 23:24:
Here's another scenario that's just as bad as "hackers getting direct control of nuclear networks."

hackers getting direct control over your brain??

just sayin

 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
13. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 13, 2011, 23:43 headkase
 
PHJF wrote on Jun 13, 2011, 23:29:
Nukes in space.

International treaty bans nuclear weapons in space.
ICBM's travel through space. They just not supposed to go off until they're back on the ground. You know why nuclear weapons are illegal in space? Because they tried it once. Over the Pacific which fortunately didn't have a lot to fry at the time. They did it once and never did it again because of the effects. The Russians at the time looked at the test and (likely) said to themselves: yeah, we won't even bother to try and replicate that one for ourselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
11. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 13, 2011, 23:24 headkase
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jun 13, 2011, 22:47:
You know, just sayin', the problem stated in Homefront is real. Nukes in space. The USA is rapidly on track to have perfect missile defenses: no ICBM nuke will make it to US soil. BUT, if you just launch them high above the US and don't try to make it through the missile shield before you detonate them: massive electromagnetic pulse. All your power lines (well the lines will be fine but all the substations will be burnt out), your computers, your cars, just turned into junk. Now, try to fix and replace *ALL* of it at the same time.
Ok, so someone with enough nukes could launch a suicide attack against the US and take out our electronics. Then what? What's their endgame? Do they have some kind of desperate need to depopulate their country... completely? Just not making much sense here...

Here's another scenario that's just as bad as "hackers getting direct control of nuclear networks." The Russians during the cold war built a "doomsday device." It's purpose was to maintain the balance of power against US nuclear submarines that could just surface off the Russian coast and launch a preemptive attack. They *really* should turn that thing off because while it had a purpose during the cold war it's a liability now. It's basically a network of seismographs and if they pick up the signature of a nuclear explosion on Russian soil they start counting down. If they don't get a signal to stop the countdown they launch all their nukes when the times up. And all those nukes are still pointed at the US because there is simply no better place to point them yet. Only top politicians in Russia have the codes to stop it. So, some rag-tag band of terrorists get a hold of *1* nuke. Place that puppy in Moscow. Set off the seismographs at the same time as vaporizing the people with the authority to turn it off. You would hope the Russians thought of that but even really smart people don't think of everything.

As for the same rag-tag terrorists smuggling a nuke into a US city (and perhaps a Russian one) that's not likely to happen. US cities (who knows how many yet but eventually it'll probably be all of them) are ringed with radiation detectors put up for exactly that type of attack. You never read about them first-hand, but you do read about cancer treatment patients being stopped every once in a while traveling between US cities. The radiation in their bodies from the treatment while super low is still detectable - apparently - because that group of people do get stopped.

But above all that, you just got to have faith in people. I lived through the Cold War and it was a freaky time. Once the Soviet Union fell a story would trickle out every few years and it was always about some kind of malfunction with an early warning system here or that type. And what happened invariably? The people, the average person, who just happened to be in the position to make it all go to hell just simply refused to launch. The just didn't do it. Yes, they were disciplined and some even went to prison but no one was going to be responsible for the end of the world. And events of that kind happened on both sides over the years.

Seriously, nation to nation nukes are all kinds of simple but when you're dealing with tiny little threats that may just happen to have a big bang because of the inevitable proliferation of arms over the decades: I really hope the people who really know what's going on have updated their plans.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/09/soviet-doomsday/
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
6. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 13, 2011, 22:51 headkase
 
The assumption is sanity. Any nation that lobbed enough nukes to do that would likely be a glowing hole for centuries to come. But, say some really good hacker manages to penetrate Russian nuclear control networks? That's probably not possible but people all over the world are really creative and really insane too.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Homefront 2 Confirmed
1. Re: Homefront 2 Confirmed Jun 13, 2011, 22:21 headkase
 
You know, just sayin', the problem stated in Homefront is real. Nukes in space. The USA is rapidly on track to have perfect missile defenses: no ICBM nuke will make it to US soil. BUT, if you just launch them high above the US and don't try to make it through the missile shield before you detonate them: massive electromagnetic pulse. All your power lines (well the lines will be fine but all the substations will be burnt out), your computers, your cars, just turned into junk. Now, try to fix and replace *ALL* of it at the same time.  
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > New AMD/ATI Reference Drivers
2. Re: New AMD/ATI Reference Drivers Mar 29, 2011, 14:32 headkase
 
I'm running the 11.4 preview. Don't know if I'll bother with these ones, 11.4 is working fine for me right now.  
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
31. Re: Op Ed Mar 19, 2011, 10:39 headkase
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 17:37:
headkase wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 15:32:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 15:10:
A good story?
Who cares.

You should. And if you don't: play Homefront, you'll need the practice.

To put it into context: At the end of World War II the United States emerged as a Super-Power. It did so not because of manifest destiny but rather because all of it's competitors had their entire infrastructures bombed completely into ruin. Europe had to rebuild from scratch. And while they were rebuilding the USA did not stop building so it was a game of catch-up. Now, the United States is no longer anything special: it has no unique capabilities when it comes to production or research against the rest of the world. The USA Empire *is* fast fading. China will overtake the United States in production and educated citizens right quickly now (in Nation time scales that is: 20 years). The economy of the United States which enjoyed this period of high prosperity by exporting everything to everybody else because everybody else's factories were holes-in-the-ground is over. Notice things say "made in China" now? This is invariably shifting the balance. I live in Canada. I just bought $99.98USD worth of goods on Steam this morning. I paid $99.05CDN. So, the Canadian dollar to the US dollar is about 1.02:1 - ballpark - that is terrible for the US! When I was a kid, 1 Canadian dollar was worth $0.64 US dollars. The US is neck-deep in trouble and has their head in the sand: still acting like a Super-Power when they categorically aren't anymore sans nuclear weapons.

So, what does this mean for Americans? Aside from the Greater Korean invasion part, Homefront should scare the shit out of them.

**YAWN**

How tight is that tinfoil hat?

How old/mature are you? I've been around the block a few times.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
26. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 16:29 headkase
 
You know though, if Africa and the Mid-East smarten up like the recent revolutions in the area promise: they would be ideal markets for everyone to export goods to, enough anyway to give the US some life-support. It would be awesome if those other nations started fresh down the path of democracy in the next few decades.  
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
23. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 15:54 headkase
 
Ruffiana wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 15:47:
headkase wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 11:22:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."

Baa.

"corporatist" does not mean "corporations" in the sense you implied.

Corporatist: organized by function, corporations: organized by production. Convergence: Taco Bell wins the corporation wars and produces every single product by 2050 providing the function.

:p


Edit for your edit: I don't expect it to be identical to what we've already experienced:

History doesn't repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme ~ Mark Twain.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-fascism

As a jumping off point.

This comment was edited on Mar 18, 2011, 16:12.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
21. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 15:32 headkase
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 15:10:
A good story?
Who cares.

You should. And if you don't: play Homefront, you'll need the practice.

To put it into context: At the end of World War II the United States emerged as a Super-Power. It did so not because of manifest destiny but rather because all of it's competitors had their entire infrastructures bombed completely into ruin. Europe had to rebuild from scratch. And while they were rebuilding the USA did not stop building so it was a game of catch-up. Now, the United States is no longer anything special: it has no unique capabilities when it comes to production or research against the rest of the world. The USA Empire *is* fast fading. China will overtake the United States in production and educated citizens right quickly now (in Nation time scales that is: 20 years). The economy of the United States which enjoyed this period of high prosperity by exporting everything to everybody else because everybody else's factories were holes-in-the-ground is over. Notice things say "made in China" now? This is invariably shifting the balance. I live in Canada. I just bought $99.98USD worth of goods on Steam this morning. I paid $99.05CDN. So, the Canadian dollar to the US dollar is about 1.02:1 - ballpark - that is terrible for the US! When I was a kid, 1 Canadian dollar was worth $0.64 US dollars. The US is neck-deep in trouble and has their head in the sand: still acting like a Super-Power when they categorically aren't anymore sans nuclear weapons.

So, what does this mean for Americans? Aside from the Greater Korean invasion part, Homefront should scare the shit out of them.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
18. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 14:56 headkase
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 14:18:
This is central planning and what is brainwashed into everyone, but it's not often true. And anyway, 'being wealthy' isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's only a carrot used to keep the masses under control. It's not all that different in how games nowadays use weapon unlocks and leveling as a carrot-like system.

Freedom and human dignity is true wealth. Wealth under tyranny is slavery and suffering. We are all born wealthy. Human insanity is what takes our wealth away.


Ok, you're crazy, but your first paragraph is half-true.
There is lessened upward mobility now. And I relate it directly to those strict tax cuts. When someone is free to make $20MM in a year he'll do so. That comes at the expense of everyone else. Back in the "pick yourself up by your bootstrap" days people making that much more than the rest was far less common. Since money was still being made it needed to go somewhere. It went to a wider pool of employees. This allowed for more upward mobility.

Now the wealth goes to fewer people, making class changes far less common.

I think the second paragraph, Freedom and Dignity is True Wealth, is an ideal. But, let's just go on anyway: focusing on "That comes at the expense of everyone else." That is called a zero-sum game. Technology right now is making it increasingly possible to break out of that mold. Automation is the key: it is within sight that all human needs can be taken care of by machines in a self-sustainable and intervention-free manner. Utopia. Of course lots of people are going to try and twist away from that possibility but the potential is truly there. If we achieve Utopia then we are in a possible "Star Trek" economy where social status could be based on a meritocracy. You get respect, stature, and control of an area by being the best possible candidate at what you have decided to do. Turn subsistence over to the machines: then humans will have true Freedom to pursue higher goals. Or just cut each others throats like usual, as said, plenty of people will try to twist away from Utopia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
17. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 14:36 headkase
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 14:16:
Reagan's tax cuts were done in favor or trickle down economics. The problem is we've had the exact opposite effect: rather than the tax cuts creating a cascade of wealth to the bottom it's instead created one from the middle to the top. Since those cuts the wealthy have become significantly wealthier.

This is called "Starving the Beast." It is a tactic to force smaller government at the expense, usually, of positive social programs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
13. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 13:08 headkase
 
adamj wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 12:55:
The top 2% does not control 90% of the wealth. And even if it did, what do you propose we do about it? I hate the idea of government saying, you have too much wealth, let's take it and give it to others. That opens up a bag of potential massive corruption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States#Wealth_Inequality_and_Class

"In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6 trillion) of the country’s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no net wealth at all."

Many times it is the fault of the poor that they have no net wealth at all. I'm not saying I won't personally help them by donating time and money ( I do), nor do I say that all of them are to blame for their situation. But dropping out of school, getting pregnant in high school with some random guy, doing drugs, etc will lead to poverty. While doing well in school, and working hard can lead to becoming wealthy. Duh. But who the hell are you or who the hell am I to say when somebody is too wealthy and that his wealth should be confiscated. As long as he earns it ethically, that is.

I never said take their money away. I said that relatively few people are really in control. "They" use propaganda and bread and circuses to mask that. I'm not saying it is a conspiracy, I'm saying that people are acting in their own selfish interests to the detriment of wider democratic principles.

Remember Glenn Beck saying "Don't use google because it's full of lies" (paraphrased)? Well, beware those who would deny you your own judgement, because in their heart they dream themselves your master.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
10. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 12:34 headkase
 
Fion wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 12:32:
The 90% of the nations wealth is controlled by 2% of the population thing is certainly worrying. But what is more so is that of those 2%, 400 people in the US control 50% of the money in the country. Now [b]that[/b] is a problem.

And I agree corporations have bought and sold our government. They put republicans in power by spending unprecedented amounts of money (thanks to Citizen's United vs. FEC) and now those republican governess, senators, etc are producing dramatic bills around the country to strip peoples rights away. To this that such acts are coincidences is pure lunacy.

Good sir,
My Steam download of Metro 2033 is almost done so I may not participate further here depending on whether or not it is any good. The Internet and Jerry Springer and Gaming too is such a wonderful version of Bread and Circuses. Another point of contention to add to decline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
8. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 12:16 headkase
 
InBlack wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 11:38:
headkase wrote on Mar 18, 2011, 11:22:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."

Baa.

Baa yourself idiot. How bout reading further down that paragraph in wikipedia or clicking the actual link.

Also, how did you infer from my post that I disagree with the view that corporate rule is bad? I just said that it isnt Fascism, not in the classical "Hitler, Musolini, Hirohito..etc.etc." sense.

Right now the USA is in a state of regulatory capture. This is a failure mode in government. Corporations are able to outright purchase the laws most favorable to them. The agencies tasked with regulating them are stacked with former members of the business in question. Don't for a instant think that back-room deals like the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement are not passed around through rings of cronies. This is a precursor to fascism - the inital blending of corporations and government. Complicating the issue is the inequality of wealth distribution. Literally 90% of the US wealth is held by 2% of the population. This 2% then spews out propaganda in forms like Fox "News" and gets the candidates they favor elected which goes back to the original point. Fascism is on the way, and the ingredients are regulatory capture and plutocracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

* Plutocracy may be substituted with plutarchy.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
3. Re: Op Ed Mar 18, 2011, 11:22 headkase
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."

Baa.
 
Avatar 41707
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
167 Comments. 9 pages. Viewing page 6.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo