I do think Jeremy Lyman indirectly makes a valid point, which is that franchise owners should be held to some degree of responsibility (if not legally than socially) to the proper care, feeding and respect of its fanbase. That is to at least put effort to sustain a standard of quality-of-product, to treat the diegesis with the same respect that the fans would, and then to offer it at reasonable, affordable prices.
I'd also argue that bonus content for re-purchasing old material is taking advantage of fan enthusiasm, much like the LOTR DVD editions being followed with expanded versions of the movie that had to be purchased again. (The digital video industry is awful about taking advantage of fan loyalty.)
Companies are quite fond of disregarding their loyal customers as anything but walking wallets, so, yeah we get Horse Armor caliber content for the cost of an entire standalone game. And the only way that is justified from a marketing perspective is squeezing the loyal fanbase for their lunch money.
Lately I've heard nothing of drug dogs except how they are used to justify suspicions when there are no reasonable grounds. In the Gorman case, the dog signaled countless times, but failed to find any drugs. (I assume it wasn't trained to find money).
It raises some concerns about the reliability of dogs for sniffing contraband at all. Certainly the dog in this case should be retired. His nose sucks. Or the handler sucks. Or both.
Here we go. The Wikipedia article on detection dogs notes a report brought up in a New South Wales case saying that under test conditions, only 26% of tests in which the dog signaled positive there were drugs.
In Chicago 2011, it was noted that 46% of positive signals yielded drugs, but when the target was Hispanic, only 8%.
So yeah, these dogs are serving more as trick pony dogs, signalling when the handler wants it to, not when it's actually found something.
There should be punitive damages for false positives. In the spirit of the forth amendment, any detection system that has more false positives than false negatives should require a warrant.
Won't happen in this America, but a good tip for the next iteration.
Just to clarify AC, it sounds like you're suggesting a new state-endorsed mass-execution program that did not include amongst its intended victims people culled for their Jewish heritage would not count as a holocaust. I don't know if you're being sarcastic.
Regardless, it most certainly would be a holocaust. We differentiate the Jewish Holocaust from, say, the Armenian Holocaust or the American Indian Holocaust or a hypothetical nuclear holocaust.
And yes, not only could it happen here, it could already be happening within the nation's penal system, given how long it has taken to see other crimes against humanity surface from within our prisons (such as the recently uncovered gladitorial fight rings). I expect that, like the Snowden revelations, a Vernichtungslager program in the US will stay quiet until revealed by a whistleblower, and then it can be several years after such a program has been in operation.
We've already seen countless other specific similarities between US society and Germany circa 1929-1939. We've already seen numerous signs of state agencies regarding the people as an occupied enemy and law enforcement recognized as a privileged caste to whom ordinary law does not apply. Extermination camps are only step or two down this same gently sloping path the US has long been trekking.
I wonder if the wardens of such facilities sleep well at night knowing as they authorize the the massacre of countless convicts that at least the Jews are safe.
Is one of the reasons I've reduced my cinema excursions to less than once a year. Mostly to remind myself why I don't go the rest of the year.
The ads are not even necessarily for coming attractions!
The other big reason is the foyers full of video screens strobing ads trying to trigger all the epileptics in the crowd while five or six separate audio tracks assure that not one of them is intelligible.
Oh, and the Don't be a thief! propaganda only reminds me how miserly the studios are, and that 95% of the ticket cost is going to them (which is why all the additional advertising).
You know what kind of media doesn't have all that we own this and you're stealing rhetoric?
It starts with a P and ends with a T which stands for trouble and goes Yo ho ho!
You presume that I would intend to make change from within the system.
We will live in our disenfranchised state until the people choose not to. And with bread and circuses, that could last for a while, if only the corporations who own the government wouldn't keep skimping on the bread and overcharging for the circuses.
At the point that we're joking about our lost human rights on the Tonight Show, we can expect that people are feeling it.
An extra-procedural change will happen if a procedural one doesn't soon, and a violent change will happen if a non-violent one doesn't soon.
One of the problems with our system (and with the one-person-one-vote, first past the post system in general) is that it fails to reveal the nuances of how people vote.
~ Most people vote defensively, which is to say their primary intent is to vote against the other guy. It's not a vote for the lesser evil so much as voting for the greater evil. And this is why third-party votes fail: if enough people try to vote in a third party, it tends to be a spoiler for the lesser evil, putting the worst guy into office.
~ Many people buy into the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist rhetoric (or whatever plausible blood-libel, baby-eating, occult-worshipping-incest-cannibalism rumors are going on about the greater evil), which is why negative campaigning works so well. They don't educate themselves regarding the real issues or reasons to vote for / against someone (and maybe couldn't even comprehend if they tried.)
~ There's also people for whom only a single issue matters, and this is the illusion by which we convince people that we're doing something. Some people really hate gays or really hate guns or really hate abortion, and so long as a representative closes a few clinics or runs a few gun-control bills they can cancel all the benefits of their constituency they want and still get those votes.
~ And yes, there's plenty of the red team / blue team crowd, who vote GOP / DNC no matter what because those are their colors, much like sports teams.
But as I said above, we can't change this. People are people are people, not just in the US but worldwide. So the only solution is to system to accommodate the stupidity of the people.
We have to adjust our election systems to accommodate for people being disinterested in their own self interests, or easily distracted, or unable to think for themselves. No this won't be easy, and I don't know what it would look like or if it is even possible (in which case we're just doomed to exist as hateful tribal apes for another thousand generations).
One first step is to change our electoral systems to one of several that aren't first past the post to allow for more than just two parties. That's a first step.
Yeah, I can't find an analysis of the Jeep SUV failure due to collision detection regarding the second one.
The first one is a problem with controls. It sounds like it's not a problem with power acceleration (fly-by-wire) but with a foot pedal getting stuck. That's actually a situation in which a smart automatic driving system could help, especially if the acceleration was control was fly-by-wire as it could then override the stuck control and slow the car down regardless.