[Non-political] News that makes you Laugh/Cry/Both...

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 6:18 am

Would you pay $500 for a Burst Lightning?

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:10 pm

Once in a while, I wonder if I should get into paper Magic, perhaps try to see if I could compete. I'm pretty good at wrapping my mind around games, after all.

Then, inevitably, Magic players do what Magic players do and I make the sane decision and stick to MTGO on "ignore whatever's in the chat window" mode. Lot better for my blood pressure.

Longes · Post by **Longes** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:20 pm

Almaz-Antey, BUK manufacturer, presents their report on MH17 catastrophe. There are english subtitles.

TL;DR: It was BUK M1, it was a rocket 9М38М1, the launch was made from Zaroshenskoe.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 3:05 pm

Fallout 4 Trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnn2rJpjar4
Damn it, the graphics are good and all, but that shit looks more like the last of us than it does like Fallout <.<

Shrapnel · Post by **Shrapnel** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:32 pm

FINALLY

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:44 pm

Yes, i will, of course, buy it no matter what . .
But that simply does not look or scream Fallout to me <.<

Shrapnel · Post by **Shrapnel** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:53 pm

Really? I think the aesthetics are totally Fallout.

I mean, look at this. It screams post-apocalyptic 1950's.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:00 pm

no.
way too colourfull for fallout aesthetics <.<

Shrapnel · Post by **Shrapnel** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:04 pm

So? It's still got the whole dystopic "World of Tomorrow" vibe going on, and that's really the core of the Fallout look.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:22 pm

it clashes horribly with the bleak wasteland aesthetics of fallout.
it looks more like the last of us and maybe even bioshock than fallout.
fallout always was blasted wasteland/desert aesthetics. changing it to colourfull like buckets of paint rubs me the wrong way <.<

Shrapnel · Post by **Shrapnel** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:30 pm

Well... I suppose I can see that. Personally, I don't mind the bright colors, because of the fact that it clashes with the bleak surroundings, which I think fits the Fallout series's* sense of irony and whatnot.

*Or is it series'? I hate plurals that end with an s.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:45 pm

That's probably entirely subjective, but we don't have more to go by other than the look of things as of yet . .

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:21 pm

Looks pretty Fallout to me

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:54 pm

@Shrapnel.

Series is inherently plural, the singular is usually "episode", or "game" in this case. It replaces episodes or games to denote they have an ordinal relationship to each other.

The possession apostrophe on a plural word goes at the end. It's pronounced the same but we make a note in writing in place of emphasis and tone (which English lacks markers for, other than perhaps italics and bold).

A princess, the princesses.
The princess's dress, the princesses' dresses.

So "the fallout series' sense of irony" is the sense the fallout series has for irony. You don't particularly need the apostrophe because it can't mean anything else, but that's where it goes.

If you want to talk about many series, like EA sport games series, you pluralise the other bit, or stick a number or other quantitative specifier in there. There's no serieses, but there are many series.

Longes · Post by **Longes** » Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:47 am

Why are there so many assholes among the scientists? Landau was famous for being the same.

sandmann · Post by **sandmann** » Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:53 am

Longes wrote:Why are there so many assholes among the scientists? Landau was famous for being the same.

Because people who are payed to sit in their ivy towers and not have social contact with humans with a phd or lower develop bad manners? When I came to the university, the first thing I learned is that the stereotype of the "out-there-professor" is not that far of. I mean, they're not all cracy-people, but you do notice that they're payed to have ideas, not sell them.

Longes · Post by **Longes** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 7:36 am

http://m.thenation.com/article/208593-y ... er-history

karpik777 · Post by **karpik777** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:14 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebri ... -live.html

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:44 pm

Longes wrote:http://m.thenation.com/article/208593-y ... er-history

At the time Kernell took steps to clean his computer, he does not appear to have known that there was any investigation into his conduct. Regardless, the government felt that they were entitled to that data, and the court agreed that Kernell was legally required to have preserved it.

It is utter horseshit that I could get in trouble for deleting data off of my own computer because it might be used as evidence in the future.

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:29 pm

But the government owns that data. It's your data, and you are owned by the government, therefore you don't have the right to decide what to do with the things that belong to you.

Is it time for the revolution yet?

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:39 pm

Also, Christopher Lee is dead. A tragic loss - it's amazing he lasted this long, given the health problems that assailed him.

RelentlessImp · Post by **RelentlessImp** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 5:10 am

I'm going to miss Christopher Lee. He started out life as a badass (special forces attached to SAS), moved to being a complete badass on stage and screen, and in the last few years of his life continued being a badass by releasing heavy metal albums.

Christopher Lee is the epitome of a man doing what he loves and not taking any shit about it. And losing his example as a role model is a blow. He'll be missed.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:10 am

RobbyPants wrote:
Longes wrote:http://m.thenation.com/article/208593-y ... er-history

At the time Kernell took steps to clean his computer, he does not appear to have known that there was any investigation into his conduct. Regardless, the government felt that they were entitled to that data, and the court agreed that Kernell was legally required to have preserved it.
It is utter horseshit that I could get in trouble for deleting data off of my own computer because it might be used as evidence in the future.

It is also shit that they even bothered to spend the time and effort to prosecute someone over that. You know, even in Orwell's books 'the law' did things for the greater good. I don't see how pursuing a legal case against someone who got rid of data while not even formally charged/under investigation does anyone good (including themselves).

sandmann · Post by **sandmann** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:27 am

MGuy wrote:It is also shit that they even bothered to spend the time and effort to prosecute someone over that. You know, even in Orwell's books 'the law' did things for the greater good. I don't see how pursuing a legal case against someone who got rid of data while not even formally charged/under investigation does anyone good (including themselves).

It's a standart intimidation tactic. This charge exists for the same reason than all the cases of "obstruction of justice" or "attacking police officers" against people making accusations of police brutality.

Occluded Sun wrote:But the government owns that data. It's your data, and you are owned by the government, therefore you don't have the right to decide what to do with the things that belong to you.

*Sigh* No, this is not a case about who owns what. The problem is that the prosecution (again) is using a law made to apply to a very narrow circumstances in ways that are A) not at all the intended circumstances and B) so broad basically anyone at any time could be guilty, including people who destroy "evidence" when they could not possibly know that it is evidence. This has nothing to do with "ownership", even if the article uses that word in a very broad way.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 11:05 am

sandmann wrote:
Occluded Sun wrote:But the government owns that data. It's your data, and you are owned by the government, therefore you don't have the right to decide what to do with the things that belong to you.
*Sigh* No, this is not a case about who owns what. The problem is that the prosecution (again) is using a law made to apply to a very narrow circumstances in ways that are A) not at all the intended circumstances and B) so broad basically anyone at any time could be guilty, including people who destroy "evidence" when they could not possibly know that it is evidence. This has nothing to do with "ownership", even if the article uses that word in a very broad way.

Yeah, this. No one disputes that you own the drugs you illegally bought when you flush them down the toilet, but doing so is still destruction of evidence. The same if your company under criminal prosecution destroys the records of their criminal conduct. Everyone knows they owned those records.

No part of destruction of evidence charges implies government ownership of anything.

The problem with this is 100% that erasing internet history is a thing people regularly do for all kinds of reasons, and if there is no criminal prosecution against you, then you really aren't destroying evidence when you clear it.