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:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Ask Me

Real Name Ask Me   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Scheherazade
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On Feb 28, 2001, 23:01
Total Comments 320 (Amateur)
User ID 9185
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Older >


News Comments > MechWarrior 5 Mercenaries Destruction Trailer
20. Re: Skyrim Creation Club Launches with Survival Mode Apr 19, 2018, 10:05 Scheherazade
 
Kajetan wrote on Apr 19, 2018, 01:49:
Orogogus wrote on Apr 18, 2018, 12:41:
People say this, but I feel like you generally a game like this doesn't need AI much more advanced than "run towards the player while shooting its guns" to carry a single player campaign. You're not going to have the AI pull feints or flanking maneuvers, things like that are done with event triggers.
The famous "AI" of Far Cry 1 was nothing more than cleverly staged skripts, depending on the position of the player in regard of a specific area. The AI itself was as in every shooter. Run or drive at player, shoot and throw grenades until one of them dies. The illusion worked perfectly, today players still fawn over the "clever" AI of Far Cry 1

Yet to this day FC1 AI is still the only AI that has had convincingly human-like behavior (in my experience).

Literally the only game where at times I said to myself : "Damn, a person would have done that" (regarding sneaky/tricky behavior, not the banalities of how they shoot or take cover).

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield V Battle Royale Plans?
27. Re: Battlefield V Battle Royale Plans? Apr 19, 2018, 09:53 Scheherazade
 
maddog wrote on Apr 19, 2018, 00:06:
Is this "battle royale" mode the game style of this PUBG game everyone is talking about? Sorry, serious question. I don't play much online MP anymore.


BR = Free for all + no respawn


How does this differ from what you could do in quake?

They add a magic barrier that shrinks the map as time goes on, to force a quicker finish.



It does tickle me to see a mere game mode that people used to consider 2nd rate blow up into an entire game.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
20. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 23:06 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:44:
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:01:
Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.

The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.

By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.

Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.

On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).

-scheherazade
given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?

I'm not arguing the legality. It was illegal.

California :
"
(4) (A) Any person who intentionally distributes the image of the intimate body part or parts of another identifiable person, or an image of the person depicted engaged in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, sexual penetration, or an image of masturbation by the person depicted or in which the person depicted participates, under circumstances in which the persons agree or understand that the image shall remain private, the person distributing the image knows or should know that distribution of the image will cause serious emotional distress, and the person depicted suffers that distress.
(B) A person intentionally distributes an image described in subparagraph (A) when he or she personally distributes the image, or arranges, specifically requests, or intentionally causes another person to distribute that image.
(C) As used in this paragraph, “intimate body part” means any portion of the genitals, the anus, and in the case of a female, also includes any portion of the breasts below the top of the areola, that is either uncovered or clearly visible through clothing.
(D) It shall not be a violation of this paragraph to distribute an image described in subparagraph (A) if any of the following applies:
(i) The distribution is made in the course of reporting an unlawful activity.
(ii) The distribution is made in compliance with a subpoena or other court order for use in a legal proceeding.
(iii) The distribution is made in the course of a lawful public proceeding.
"

The man also committed identity theft, and harassment.



I do, however, think the law in this case is B.S..
I disagree with the special case made for this.
Facebook can sell every personal detail they can scrape together about me, and I get no say.
You can follow me around all day taking notes about what I do, and that info belongs to you, because you collected it, and I get no say.
Either fix the ownership of ALL PII (including biometrics and genetics), or leave it alone.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Apr 12, 2018, 23:16.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
15. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:01 Scheherazade
 
Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.

The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.

By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.

Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.

On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
11. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 15:27 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 14:13:
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:
Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:
Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.

Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.

Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."

In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.

In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.

-scheherazade

Ugh. Really? They did not consent to it being shared.

Your analogy is flawed. It's more like a woman agreeing to have oral and being forced for sex. Or agreeing to sex but the man violates her anally without her consenting to that. She consented to one thing, he did another, and therefore it's still rape.

I just don't get why you guys want women to stop being comfortable letting you take naked photos of them. Because that's what your prudeness would bring about. Prudeness, or desperation to defend every man, no matter how shitty he is.

Notice that Cutter always, always sides with the man, with the rate exception of when the man is involved in something unrelated that Cutter feels slighted by. It always comes back to anything that Cutter may do is worth defending, but anything that may be done against him is the end of the world. Anything totally not involving him is something only snowflakes care about.

Nobody in this case was forced to do anything. 100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.

The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.

She was not forced to take nudes and send them. He was not forced to post them online.

The person who sent the images simply did not expect the receiver to share the pictures online.



But if you read the article, there is more to it. The case didn't revolve around him simply sharing pics.


The man impersonated her on dating sites, using her pics, name, address, twitter handle, etc. (identity theft)

The man sent the pics (unrequested) to her friends and coworkers. (harassment)



Personally, I wish the law was changed so that all information belongs to the subject of the information - and the collector of the information has zero ownership.

So any image of you belongs to you, forever and in all cases.
Any info about your name, address, favorite food, height, pet's name, etc, belongs to you, forever and in all cases.
etc.
Automatic copyright on all personal metadata, with a licensing requirement (from the subject) to store, duplicate, share, any of the subject's personal metadata.
Criminal otherwise.

Government exception carved out only for recording name, address, UIN.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 15:06 Scheherazade
 
UttiniDaKilrJawa wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 14:00:
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:
Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:
Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.

Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.

Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."

In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.

In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.

-scheherazade

Here ya go, think ya dropped this.

<leaves “consensually” on the floor and walks away>

Lol. Good catch. Got autocorrected by my browser.

Thanks

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
6. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 13:09 Scheherazade
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:
Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:
Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.

Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.

Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."

In one the "victim" participated [consensually] , and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.

In the other, the victim participated non[consensually].

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Apr 12, 2018, 15:34.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
5. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Apr 11, 2018, 23:43 Scheherazade
 
SirKnight wrote on Apr 11, 2018, 21:19:
Controversial only to the immoral (which is the LARGE majority) liberals who gave up decency and morals long ago. The type of people who accept anything and everything, no matter how immoral or evil it is, just as long as it "feels good" and/or is politically correct.

When you accept everything, you will fall for anything.

"and sex workers say it will make them less safe by driving them offline."

What do you expect when you live a life of MORTAL SIN? Dance with the devil and he's going to poke you. Derp derp. Don't be a heathen and be a decent human being and you will have a MUCH better life.

Sin is a religious matter, and has no place in law.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Safety Dance
8. Re: Morning Safety Dance Apr 4, 2018, 10:32 Scheherazade
 
It kills me how things that were painfully obvious years ago - things that when I mentioned to people they would reply "so what? get over it" (regarding info collection that they were willingly signing up for) - are now upsetting those same people, and they are acting dismayed.

Don't know what to think of it.

I wonder if a complete dox dump of all stolen tax info into the public domain would help things. With the data so easily accessible, it might cause institutions to abandon the old PII entirely (deprecating that security hole via making the data OBE) and resort to in person verification (like the olden days), ultimately helping things.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Metaverse
23. Re: Sunday Metaverse Apr 3, 2018, 10:39 Scheherazade
 
Timmeh wrote on Apr 2, 2018, 18:01:
Another prime example of why these leftist millennial morons should not be making decisions about the future of anything.

These guys are the Heart and Soul of what makes up today's CNN / MSNBC and the like crowd.

Let's be honest, CNN/MSNBC/FOX/etc, they all follow the same destructive formula :

1) Straw man the shit out of the political opposition, such that your audience has a distorted view of the other side
(because nothing is gained by presenting your opposition as rational)

2) Invite the extreme elements of your side to the discussion, to give a soap box to the most sensational peacocks
(because rational people put viewers to sleep)


The "TV liberals" and "TV conservatives" essentially don't exist. They are few and far between. A fringe element in society.

Most people like a specific subset of the ideas of their chosen party affiliation (often the other things they wish for, they don't even realize are what the other party stands for).


(Currently, I've yet to meet a single* liberal that doesn't cringe when they see the purple haired SJW children on a tirade.

*Went to a gay wedding, actually met some actual SJWs in real life. But it was like ~2 people in a crowd of ~70. Still rare even in that environment (and still not as extreme as the TV personalities))

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
3. Re: Morning Tech Bits Apr 2, 2018, 13:29 Scheherazade
 
This is the proper site to look at if buying TVs as a monitor :
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/by-usage/pc-monitor

Refer to each individual review, eg. https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x720e

They have proper tests with detailed results.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
15. Re: etc. Mar 30, 2018, 11:17 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 30, 2018, 11:05:
Scheherazade wrote on Mar 30, 2018, 10:18:
Beamer wrote on Mar 28, 2018, 11:22:
Scheherazade wrote on Mar 28, 2018, 10:09:
snip

Buddy, the authorities have armored personnel carriers in damn near every county in the continental US, they have automatic weapons, they have body armor. They have bombers and tanks. When you get down to it, they have predator drones. Lots of them.

Unless you own a javelin missile launcher, nothing you can buy can save you from your fever-dream nightmare.

You don't have to take on anything, you don't have to go out to fight anyone, you just have to repel or escape from the group of goons that come for you or your resources - which will not be the entire complement of the entire police force at the same place and time.

In any case, I fail to see how being completely helpless is preferable.

In the same way that on a boat I would rather have a life jacket than not have one. Odds are I'll never need it, and having one doesn't mean I'll be ok. But I know sure as anything that _if_ I needed it, I'd be super stoked to have it.

-scheherazade

A lifevest? More like a small piece of foam.

I like that you talk about this being reality in a prior post, but here talk about the police coming to take a piece of your resources, something that does not happen, and that you'd repel them with a gun.

If the cops come for something of yours unjustly, and you fight them off with a gun, do you know what will happen? Far, far worse things.

You sound like Cliven Bundy.

You are missing the circumstances.

On a regular day, absolutely, you would get screwed.

But in a time of chaos, where there is little communication, a lot of confusion, and your survival is on the line, then it's something you must do.

Would you really prefer to let yourself be looted and left to starve? Is that honestly preferable? Would you really say "yes authorities, take everything you need to help yourselves and leave me to starve"? Do you really care so little about yourself or your family? Really?


I did provide links of where it has happened domestically under far more benign circumstances, and we all have seen the news coverage of the mess in other nations that fall into civil war, so why mock the likelihood? Why the hubris?

Odds are, you, and nobody you know, will be shot in a gun crime.
Odds are, you won't be around when the next domestic war breaks out.
None of this has any bearing on any normal person.
None of this requires anyone to do anything at this time.
So why crap on people that just want to hedge against a sad possibility?

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
13. Re: etc. Mar 30, 2018, 10:40 Scheherazade
 
jdreyer wrote on Mar 28, 2018, 13:49:

@Scheherazade
What happens when men with long rifles go up against the might of the US military (warning: disturbing).

Other countries don't arm everyone, and they have orders of magnitude less gun violence. We have 30,000 gun deaths a year, that's the death toll in a lot of civil conflicts. Hell, we only lost 50,000 in the entire Vietnam war.

There isn't enough military equipment to watch over even a small percentage of the nation. There are less than 50 of those gunships, total. 350 million people over 3.8 million square miles.

Civil war the worst possible scenario, and also inconsequential to the point. You still have to guard yourself from conscription, and you have to guard your resources from looting/confiscation. Unless you would be happy to 'just give up' and disappear/die.
There is no need to jump straight to the hero soldier fantasy straw man.

Read executive order 13603
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-03-22/pdf/2012-7019.pdf
Look under section "502".
Think about what the words "without compensation" really mean.
Would you rather stay with your family to watch over each other, or would you rather go to a labor camp and not know what became of them?



2/3 of that 30k is suicides (which is an individual right).
Of the remainder, almost all of it is pistols used in small crimes or gangland conflict.
Banning military style weapons won't even change the statistics - which is why using statistics as a rationale for banning military style weapons is disingenuous.

-scheherazade

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
12. Re: etc. Mar 30, 2018, 10:18 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 28, 2018, 11:22:
Scheherazade wrote on Mar 28, 2018, 10:09:
snip

Buddy, the authorities have armored personnel carriers in damn near every county in the continental US, they have automatic weapons, they have body armor. They have bombers and tanks. When you get down to it, they have predator drones. Lots of them.

Unless you own a javelin missile launcher, nothing you can buy can save you from your fever-dream nightmare.

You don't have to take on anything, you don't have to go out to fight anyone, you just have to repel or escape from the group of goons that come for you or your resources - which will not be the entire complement of the entire police force at the same place and time.

In any case, I fail to see how being completely helpless is preferable.

In the same way that on a boat I would rather have a life jacket than not have one. Odds are I'll never need it, and having one doesn't mean I'll be ok. But I know sure as anything that _if_ I needed it, I'd be super stoked to have it.



Furthermore, let's be 100% clear.
A repeat of Civil strife or domestic war, is an eventual certainty.

Every place on earth has experienced it multiple times throughout history, and there is no evidence that human nature had changed.
"Now is not special"
"We are not special"

Some day, who knows when, unlikely as it is at any given moment, it will happen again.
I'm a 'hope for the best, plan for the worse' type of person. So I don't dismiss such things.

Also, I weigh consequences into my risk assessment. The weight of any event = likelyhood x consequences.
So, for example, I would rather 75% odds of being punched in the gut, over 1% odds of being hit by a car.
I can deal with a gut punch, but it would be hard to deal with being run over.

So, the tiny odds of being shot in a gun crime, vs even tinier odds of helplessly having my entire family wiped out by a goons during civil strife - I'll take the odds of the gun crime. Both are so unlikely that neither require any worry, but I think those consequences are easier to accept.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Mar 30, 2018, 11:13.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
7. Re: etc. Mar 28, 2018, 10:09 Scheherazade
 
jdreyer wrote on Mar 27, 2018, 22:26:
Pigeon wrote on Mar 27, 2018, 15:43:
“A month ago, we weren’t really having this conversation, and all of a sudden a 15-year-old on television who would just as soon be eating Doritos and playing video games wants to tell me that my constitution needs to be changed. Really?" Butler County Rep. Candice Keller said at a pro-gun rally in Columbus earlier this month.

He just came from nowhere, for no reason, to try and get rid of the 2nd amendment. Does that kid not even know the soul crushing pain of not being able to immediately purchase a high powered semi-automatic extended clip rifle at Walmart the very instant you want it? Of course not cause he's a hateful little millennial snowflake liberal plant. Rolleyes

Between her and Santorum I'm starting to wonder if there's a requirement to lack compassion for people who've undergone tragedy before you can become a Republican. I mean shit, they act like these kids didn't just experience 34 of their classmates being killed or wounded while they had to run or hide as a mad man literally hunted them. And why are they so flummoxed that people see guns as the problem? It wasn't high-velocity jellybeans, or a Call of Duty DVD that were shredding those kids' internal organs beyond repair.
It's hard to understand the horror of mass shootings when the NRA pays you to not understand.

Sometimes I feel like people don't read enough history.

I understand that the U.S. hasn't had a domestic conflict in 150 years, but still, you would think people would keep in mind all possibilities, not just those of a school shooting.

Furthermore, weighted by number of persons affected, a major war every ~200 years (for argument's sake) will still affect more people per year than does day to day gun violence.

Some people have come from places where conflict was not that long ago, and have an appreciation for not being entirely helpless. "Just saying"(TM).



Democracy is fragile. It doesn't take much for the people in charge to select themselves over the welfare of the citizens (In this case, all it took was bad weather).
Case in point : https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/virgin-islands-order-seizure-weapons-irma/
Sadly, the only reason anyone cared is due to 2nd amendment grounds.

(aside : Similar was also done during Kartina in New Orleans. You can watch youtube videos of the raids.)

But the more important part of the order is : "any other property that may be required by the military forces for the performance of this emergency mission".
Meaning that food, fuel, generators, cars, homes, etc, are all on the table for taking.
The people charged with protecting you, can on a whim fleece you for what you need to survive, in order to feed/provision themselves.

Just imagine how that goes down if there was a nation wide emergency, such as a loss of diesel fuel. No food deliveries, no gasoline deliveries, no anything coming in or out. Who do you think will get the food?
This is a serious possibility. Not some off the wall impossible post apoc fantasy. Shit happens. Economies crash in the span of days without warning. Sometimes they crash hard.
99.999% odds that I will never need home insurance, yet it's something one buys... "just in case". Yet there are other more serious possibilities with similar aggregate likelihood, which people dismiss off hand (i.e. less often, but more people are affected, so on a persons-per-year basis they are just as affective (aside : not using 'effective' on purpose)).

What people who live in a long period of peace for most of their life will fail to understand, is that authorities are not your friends. They live off of you. Your taxes put food on their table. When things go bad, they have to pick between themselves, and you. 99% of people will pick themself over a stranger. Any authority figure who risks protecting the fleeced, risks becoming the fleeced, for they are operating in a 'with us or against us' environment. This has been the case in practically every last instance of human turmoil in recorded history.

(aside : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings Was only 50 years ago. Funny thing to say, "only". If you're a kid, that's ancient history. If you're older, that's just yesterday. That leaves two very different impressions of likelihood. Also a good reason for why views on such subjects tend to change with age.)

Point is, the 2nd amendment exists for good reason. And it's specific to military esque weaponry (civilian paramilitary) for a reason. A) To enable a Switzer-like national defense. B) To prevent the pre-revolutionary circumstances from repeating (forced quarter, etc). These are not day to day concerns. But concerns that are met every few hundred years, and are serious when they come about, too serious to neglect.

Sometimes I feel like I'm watching a transposed version of the designers of the Titanic eliminating life rafts, because "we'll never need those again".






The Kids are lashing out at all gun owners, including the innocent ones.

Blaming anyone but those responsible is a dangerous philosophy, and should not be applied anywhere.
Be it with drug use, or cell phones while driving, or violent video games, or owning sports cars, or whatever.

Put blame solely on the individuals that harm you, leave everyone else out of it.

If no one has harmed you, or if the persons you are going after have not personally harmed you or anyone else, take a step back and reassess your feelings.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Mar 28, 2018, 10:34.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
4. Re: Amid dangerous vaccine-autism myth, kids with autism aren’t getting their shots. Mar 27, 2018, 21:08 Scheherazade
 
jdreyer wrote on Mar 27, 2018, 21:06:
Leper wrote on Mar 27, 2018, 18:33:
Good for them. If I had autism I'd probably want to be put out of my misery, too.

Einstein, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Dan Akroyd are among the many famous and successful autistics. The BitTorrent guy too. Think of where we'd be without these people.

Also too: Fuck you.

"autism"

There was a time when these people's autisms would have simply been differences of character, and they would have not been judged as defective.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
11. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Mar 26, 2018, 10:39 Scheherazade
 
Ladron3dfx wrote on Mar 26, 2018, 08:54:
Man created programs that let ‘Grand Theft Auto’ players cheat: suit.

Totally affecting the game in a very negative way. Every other game session there seems some user running one of these programs to alter the game, alter any given players stats, money, bad sport status, teleportation. I must say that insta $50 billion does come in handy in all matters but still I prefer to play as Rockstar intended. Smiley

Gotta say, I hate companies suing hack makers.

You should be able to use your own machine as you please, and use a representative (even a software program) to represent you as you please (no different than using a lawyer to stand in for you in official matters).

It's up to the game makers to make undesirable things impossible to do in-game.

A votekick and voteban system, for any given match instance, solves the issue perfectly without involving courts.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
10. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Mar 26, 2018, 10:31 Scheherazade
 
Cutter wrote on Mar 25, 2018, 20:32:
He can easily win his legal costs back - and I'm guessing that's in the works. Punitive damages are much more difficult to get. If he can secure a jury trial for damages he stands a much better position of making some bread off this.

The timing is bad for a jury trial.

Jury selection process makes anyone with any domain knowledge disqualified, so only domain illiterates get to participate. So the question becomes, what does the average nobody know about "Nissan"?

At the time the website was created, Nissan did not exist in the US. It was known only as Datsun. Back then (or when the Datsun->Nissan name transition was still fresh), he could have countered (if the first case had been quick enough) and won, because the general population would have had little to no association between "Nissan" and the car company.

Today, Nissan is primarily known as the car company. It would be a Sisyphean task to convince the average nobody that Nissan shouldn't have the domain.

The average nobody lives in a 'now-bubble'. Case in point, tell someone you're listening to an isis album (the metal band from the 90's). Their first response will be 'wth is wrong with you? Listening to terrorists?'. They have an inability to process time, and understand that the names are older than the things they are associated with at any given moment in time (in this case, a name as ~old as human civilization on earth).

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Bullet Train Pulls Out of CPAC
36. Re: I watched more DOOM videos (not all of them [TL;DW]), with a guy's commentaries, from YouTube... Mar 17, 2018, 00:42 Scheherazade
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Mar 1, 2018, 00:55:
Scheherazade wrote on Feb 27, 2018, 02:47:
**Rambling snipped**

-scheherazade

Wake me when the GOP applies your logic to any of their many bogeymen, like Muslim terrorists, or scary immigrants that are even more unlikely to ever impact anyone.

Going full retard on some subjects doesn't nullify being rational on other subjects. That goes for all parties.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
8. Re: Out of the Blue Mar 15, 2018, 15:07 Scheherazade
 
Tipsy McStagger wrote on Mar 15, 2018, 14:53:
First thing I thought was "I'd carry mace and a knife too if my brother was arrested for killing colored people in a mass shooting" but the more I read when she started saying "Fixing.. black people" I started to realize that even though the first one made sense, she certainly isn't that far off from her brother and the parents are probably white trash to the max.

Probably.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
320 Comments. 16 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo