As de guvornoh awf caleefohneea, i wood like too denownse viohlense as bad!
Die viohlense! Die!

Could someone explain to me why it being illegal to sell adult-oriented software to minors is wrong?

Because the game industry is the only form of entertainment that's currently subject to this form of lawmaking. It's also "illegal" to allow a minor entry into an R rated movie, but if you do, you're not going to get fined for it as an usher / ticket sales person / movie theatre owner.
It's illegal to sell an M rated game to a minor, but if you do as a gamestore owner, you get fined for it? That's rather skewed lawmaking there. You know Hollywood is currently writing big fat checks to everyone who wants them.

It's typical political pandering, and I found it rather peculiar that Ahnold caved on this issue. Not sure why he even did so.

Now, personally, I have no problem with creating some safeguards that stops games of GTA's ilk, or Postal, or things like that, to fall into the hands of middle school kids. But then it has to happen across the board. Not JUST for games.

But the movie industry greases too many palms, and the game industry is still young, so the politicians are looking to score some votes. That's all. If there wasn't a run-up to elections, none of this would ever be in the news.

Creston

This comment was edited on Oct 11, 09:43.

Controlling media without a clear and present danger is a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

This should be in the hands of parents, not stores and government.

Could someone explain to me why it being illegal to sell adult-oriented software to minors is wrong?

Fuck that. What're the grammar and punctuation like in the bill?

*edit for punctuation and grammar*

This comment was edited on Oct 11, 04:09.

Back on topic for a minute...

Could someone explain to me why it being illegal to sell adult-oriented software to minors is wrong?

I have my reservations about the idea, but all in all, this opposition is baffling. If the bill is in any way ambiguous, then it needs to be opposed. But I would like someone to explain the postition that the concept of banning sales of these games to kids is inheritantly wrong.

Don't forget to keep a look out for the tinfoil-hat-wearing guy hiding under a table with a tennis ball tube wireless antenna -- that's Riley.

Secondly: Grow up a little. I didn't aim my comment at you or Shane, I aimed it at both of you for arguing about nothing. Also, calling me an elitist fuck is hysterical, because it's like the pot calling the kettle black.

Explain to me exactly how i'm being elitist. This will be "hysterical" indeed.

Arnold isn't exactly a sheep here...Plus he BENEFITED from the minors buying his movie's latest video game.

There is nothing hypocritical about Arnold approving this law. He would be seen as a self-serving bastard if he opposed it.

He's just jumping on the "video games are evil" bandwagon because the industry is an easy target.

Arnold wants to be re-elected. A politician would be an idiot to oppose a law which at least on its face protects children.

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 21:58.

Hey, does the fact that you used a UVic.ca URL indicate that you're a fellow student there? (I'm currently doing my masters @ UVic)

God help you if he is. When you are walking around campus, be on the lookout for someone parked in front of a computer for long periods of time shouting expletives at the screen and foaming at the mouth because you'll have found random.thought.

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 21:57.

So, first of all, I never said those things were new. I'm sorry I oversimplified, but I don't feel like doing a dissertation. I sure as hell don't believe you when you say you have firsthand knowledge. Why? Because I can claim I'm Godzilla, it doesn't mean shit.

Secondly: Grow up a little. I didn't aim my comment at you or Shane, I aimed it at both of you for arguing about nothing. Also, calling me an elitist fuck is hysterical, because it's like the pot calling the kettle black.

Look, quoting a technology page does not mean shit. Have you ever had a hands on with one of these cards? Do you even have any real idea of what they're capable of? No? Oops!

Guess what though, i have. Yep, really. The technologies that you mention are already possible without a PPU. In fact, they've already been done in games before, some of them as long as 5 years ago, without slowing them to a crawl. Shocking, i know! All the PPU does is allow more of these events to be used. It doesn't allow their use to begin with. And also, the PPU doesn't allow you to use physics on EVERYTHING in a game, as you so claim, because #1 it does have an object limit, and #2 to enable physics on things such as walls and blocking geometry the objects require extra faces, decreasing GPU performance. Since you also require joints for bendable objects and extra faces/skeletal meshes for destructable ones, it is not the be-all-end-all you think it is. If you wanted to focus on new technology offered by the card, you might want to instead mention fluid physics and soft body dynamics and volumetric particle systems, not something as trite as allowing all scene objects to be physics-enabled. That's not viable and it won't happen.

So what's this you're saying random.thought? You mean that being an overly angry forum poster doesn't make you instantly stupid as elitist fucks think it does? Interesting.

By the way, guy, you posted first. You trolled me. Let's not forget that, now.

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 21:12.

Really? My PPU analysis is wrong? Thanks, I'll just take your word for it, hyper-angry forum troll! Don't bother to back up anything you say though, because we all know everyone will take you at your word!

http://www.ageia.com/technology.html

Look it up, then let me know exactly how I am wrong. I will be busy caring. Right over here. Yup.

Also, define irony: Using a cliche to let me know I've used a cliche. BTW, 1995 called, and they'd like you to know the internet wasn't prevalent at that time, and nobody was actually using that joke. They forgive you, though, because you come off as a very young, angry person.

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 20:57.

Listen, Shane.

I will give you credit for getting that. A lot of people seem to never notice it; or it takes a long time.

Everything else…*sigh*
I am embarrassed I have responded so much to your pointless and ideologically flawed arguments. I hold my head in shame. Maybe I will not look back to cheer me up….nah…it is still too damn funny! Been fun playing with you, but I am off to finish playing SWAT 4.

And hey, at least we hijacked the thread and stopped other people from saying stupid ass comments about the actual story! Score!


“That's not a toy! “ –Frylock, “You say that about everything you own. You should own toys. They're fun.” –MasterShake.

Hey Agent, 1995 called, they want their one-liners back. By the way, your PPU analysis is wrong. The company isn't even named Aegis.. that's a fucking mythical shield wielded by Zeus. Oops!

Wow, that went downhill fast. This thread is a nice textbook example of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, though.

Good job, guys. Now somebody compare someone else to Hitler.

Winning an argument on the internet is like winning the Special Olympics. You may have won, but you're still fucking retarded.

Reading comprehension. I did not ‘go after you’. I defended somebody else’s mistakes.
Reading comprehension.

That has nothing to do with reading comprehension. I don't even think you comprehend what reading comprehension is. You're tying a completely unrelated term into this. Embarassing indeed, but not for me. Do understand what a troll is? It's someone who makes a comment about a subject that does not concern him with the intent of evoking a response from another person. Guess what you did when you decided to "defend" someone on a topic that had absolutely nothing to do with you? DING DING DING. You trolled me. Unless you want to try to claim you didn't expect a response. Right. I'll believe that.

Thanks for playing along and embarrassing your self.

Listen, Shane. The person who declares himself the winner never is. Go ahead and opt out of the argument, that's up to you -- but i'm not done yet, asshole. You still can't even grasp that this all comes from your single stupid mistake, and what i originally said is still true -- you wrote a stupid sentence, and i interpreted it the way it was written. THIS IS YOUR FAULT. NOT MINE. I'm not arguing with anything you said afterwards, but you must have missed that, judging from your avoidance of the subject. Perhaps you should re-read what i've been saying over and fucking over and fucking over. Reading comprehension, bud.
Reading comprehension.

Oh and, before you spend another 10 or 15 minutes brewing up some "clever" response to "own" me, don't bother. It isn't. And you won't.

you fucking went after ME because of something i said to someone else!

*sigh*

Reading comprehension. I did not ‘go after you’. I defended somebody else’s mistakes.
Reading comprehension.

As far as everything else you said; wow…too damn funny. Thank you for embarrassing your self even more and proving your lack of reading comprehension by continually referencing one simple typing mistake (while making plenty of your own) and ignoring everything else I have said since (which you have yet to disprove by grammatical means).


Lol….so damn funny. Thanks for the good laugh. Well worth the time. Thanks for playing along and embarrassing your self. Next time I am sad I will look this conversation up and have such a wonderful laugh and cheer my self up. Thank you for that. Really, this might come off as sarcastic or ‘trying to insult you’ or being an ‘asshole’, but I truly do appreciate what you have given me. Thanks!





“That's not a toy! “ –Frylock, “You say that about everything you own. You should own toys. They're fun.” –MasterShake.
This comment was edited on Oct 10, 20:10.

You are absolutely fucking stupid. If you expect someone to comprehend what you write, proper usage and understanding of grammar is key. You wrote a sentence that was confusing at best and completely fucking wrong at worst. I take absolutely no responsibility for the fact that you wrote a poorly constructed sentence and i interpreted it the way it was written. Why should i? You wrote it. Make some sense (using proper GRAMMAR)and this won't happen.

If you think this is emotional, well, you're right, i'll give you that: i'm laughing at you. Laughter is an emotional response indeed. I'm laughing at the fact that you admit to writing a stupid sentence and yet still think it's somehow my fault for not picking through your idiocy and finding the real meaning. Let's not get into who's being defensive either, when you were the first to write the first overly long-winded and boring post defending why you're right and i'm not when clearly -- and by your own admission -- it was your mistake that led to all this. And to be honest, i don't give a flying fuck what excuse you have, because it still doesn't change the fact that all this happened because of you. Trolling my ass, you fucking went after ME because of something i said to someone else! And i responded to your post. That makes you the troll, and me the one feeding you. Eat up!

Well, his election is coming up, too. His support is not what it should be for an election and he needs to do things to shore up his Republican base and look like a moderate to the Democrats/other parties.

In California, he cannot rely on the Republican vote alone.
Politics = Satan.
Stupidly addicted to that West Wing marathon on Bravo,
Ray

-----
http://users.ign.com/collection/RayMarden
http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&id=ray_marden
http://www.livejournal.com/users/raymarden/
I love you, mom.

You imply there is a relationship between the two statements joined by your semi-colon.

Ahh, trolling and overly emotional defense 101. Make a huge deal about a simple typo and insult someone for making a simple mistake that has no impact on the meaning and thought of the sentence. Bravo!

If you're going to instruct me on understanding reading comprehension, i'd highly suggest a class on grammar yourself, asshole.

Yep, you really do need reading comprehension. I never said anything about grammar.

My bad, my mistake, I admit it. I made a typo.
And truly I have no clue why every line had a space between them, must have been some odd formatting going on in office when I typed and copied it. Big freaking deal.

Now THAT's irony.

Yes it is. You are continuing to insult my reading comprehension and defending your argument by means of grammatical correction of a typo. Go look for a tiger in Africa.

I will also point out to you (since you have such poor reading comprehension skills) that the post was clearly in response to the general tone of the messages as of the time of the post. Yes I quoted something from you and responded but I then clearly made a separation from that when I moved onto another concept. This confusion by you can clearly be attributed to your lack of reading comprehension skills.

I'm still just as emotionless as I was before, though... honestly, i just like swearing at stupid people. Perhaps you shouldn't get so defensive over a couple swear words, eh, bitchbiscuit?

Ahh. How wonderful. If you where truly emotionless about it you would not have such a need to defend and prove you are not. Which you did in a very emotionally defensive way I might add.


*edit* Also Mr. Grammar Nazi while ignoring the actual complaint at hand because I am clearly wrong but I shall try and remove focus on my failures and move it to something else. The letter “i” when used as a word should be capitalized.

I am done with you. You refuse to respond or defend your self to what I am saying. All you are doing is trying to shift focus and begin circular arguments. You have embarrassed yourself enough. Time to move along.

“That's not a toy! “ –Frylock, “You say that about everything you own. You should own toys. They're fun.” –MasterShake.
This comment was edited on Oct 10, 19:43.