You got me wrong. The victim may choose to withdraw. The case should move on without them in this case and the involved parties should be punished because this will be the only way to really benefit the citizenry as a whole. The Government itself should carry on with the prosecution.
Re: Re: Do you want to be shot in the left leg, or the right leg? 'Not being shot' is not an option
Actually he has a point. What he is saying is that voting alone loses its power once politics get contaminated by corruption and money on a systemic level. I'd say it's not a defeatist attitude, it's rather a sensible warning that we need to go for a multi pronged strategy. Voting alone does not work anymore.
the law enforcement agency withdrew the case and handed over $14,429 in costs to Halvey... and then walked away from the mess promising to investigate actions it had known about since November of 2013
You know, if you and I commit any crime I have some serious doubts we'd be able to settle and walk away like that. Am I the only one that thinks this is a complete travesty and that both the cop and the PD should be prosecuted to the bitter end EVEN if the victim decides to withdraw?
On a quick visit to the dictionary I've discovered that the verb lush is synonym to drink. So he basically mispelled the name to Tim Drinking. I thought I should register this here because I found it hilarious given the Tims we know AND that the guy seems to be on a drunken stupidity rampage (Zarrelli).
Well, there have been quite controversial posts here on TD either where you and a few others trolled like there was no tomorrow. These articles had a ton of comments yes but most of them were pretty good and even your trolling sparked quite awesome responses.
I'd say that if you cultivate your community, chances are you will still have to deal with trolling, but only on more elevated levels, not the pandemonium you see on some places out there. And even that small amount of trolling may be productive (even if it is annoying at times). So, be proud, you are actually helping!
Re: Re: This could turn out very badly for researchers
Really? That trope again?
"Nobody was harmed so it's ok to let the Government violate your rights!"
This does not work in reality. Period. If there is evidence law enforcement violated laws/the Constitution to get what they wanted then these men should go free, evidence dropped. "But you are a monster! They molest children!" So? Law enforcement should have thought about it before skirting outside their obligations. If anything happens from here it's not the judge that dismiss the case that should be blamed but rather the idiot inside the FBI that thought it's ok to violate the law to get their ends.
Dude. Stop. THE MOD HAS NO RELATION WITH THE OFFICIAL ONLINE SERVERS. It does not mess with them, it has no connection with them.
Since there is no way to be sure, and since the playing experience of other users is at stake, they are prefect right and very correct to ban them.
Hmmm. They specifically mentioned piracy. And the modder clearly said the mod does not differentiate between regular and pirated copies. And, again, the mod does not work on the official servers (which makes the official statement given by Rockstar a load of bullshit).
It's not hard to understand, no matter how much arm waving is going on. Mod your software, and you are not welcome to play on the official servers.
Says the dumb guy that seemingly understood nothing about the case.
I personally see bots as a symptom of another problem. People want to do the stuff in the game. But they don't have the time to spend farming for stupid items. Or items with impossibly low drop rates.
Diablo III is a good example of that for me. I'd love to run a bot to get reagents and possibly items to tinker around and test different builds. Alas I'm limited to an average of 1 hour per day and my weekends have to be balanced with gaming and family.
Another example that go beyond the farming is wow. I abandoned wow when they made daily quests kind of mandatory and I felt my time was being wasted. I had a lot of fun in the Cataclysm patch because I made one char of each class and was able to more or less develop them to a satisfying point. This simply ceased to be possible with Pandaria and a good portion of the fun I had tinkering with various chars disappeared. I liked the way they started scaling item levels so you could have awesome items even if you didn't have the time to spend hours in the process of organizing and conducting a raid though. I'd like to follow the lore ingame, go back playing but I know I won't be able to do it without a ton of time in my hands so I decided to abandon it altogether.
Re: Re: Yet Blizzard still doesn't ban most of the botters
Well, on games that this would add an unfair advantage I do think bots are debatable. But as many said, once you LIKE the game but you don't want to spend several goddamn hours farming for that "Demonic Essence of Whatever" and instead want to move on with the interesting thing then it's only natural people will turn to such things.
Taking Diablo as an example, you expect that within a reasonable time frame you'll be able to reach a determined level of power. But then you see people that play the exact same amount of time you do get awesomely better than you because they are lucky and you keep stalling over and over and over. At some point you'll either give up or resort to bots. I personally like Diablo, I like to test builds to tinker around. But it takes ages and I do not have that much time anymore. I'd LOVE to use a bot there to lessen the time spent a bit. And it would harm nobody. In D2 I started using character editors at a point to test different ways of dealing with levels, handicaps and different monsters while I had that regular char that just went up via normal routes. And editing the chars did not strip the game of its fun.
I do think bots are problematic in mmos but for god sake, let people get the items without having to be living bots.
Stocks, the stock market, they are a curse on humanity. It's a small fraction of companies and individuals that own the majority of the market and have computers responsible for the majority of the transactions. This is actually what causes some major fluctuations we've been seeing lately.
But I digress. If you or I own a company, we will want it to succeed even if it means getting less money today to get tons of money in 10 years. Because we own it, we probably built it, we want it to do well, to be liked, to be the best in what we do. Enter a group of faceless investors that couldn't care less if your company dies as long as they got the profit and one can understand why most open companies act the way they do. Their anonymous owners hidden behind the stocks want profit and want it now. Who cares if we need to kill some puppies and kittens, said 'investors' won't see it or if they do they don't care.
We don't really need huge companies. We need better, ethic companies regardless of their size. And it seems stocks need to go if we want it.
The calls should not be recorded. Period. Eben if they were not used there's nothing preventing them from being used in the future. Of course, in your rosy land where everybody is happy and nobody is a tyrant you may be right.
So hacking (against the law, you know) to get raw phone recordings isn't exactly telling. In fact, it's quite the opposite, suggesting the HACKERS may have violated the privileged communications. Oh, that would sting, wouldn't it?
You may be right but it's yet more evidence these stored records should NOT exist. What if an interested party in the process (ie: the Government) decided to hack into the company and get said recordings? "Hey, look over there, something else!" does not help solve the issue. But it wouldn't be you if you didn't try it, no?