Just because women voters overwhelmingly voted for Obama over Romney doesn't really mean they're going to decide the election. People have to show up at the polls..period. Midterms traditionally have lower turnout because of the perception that they don't matter and low voter turnouts tend to favor the R

To me it just means Romney failed miserably connecting with women (just like he failed miserably to connect with most humans, even fellow republicans)

Republicans are "attempting" to make up for a long history of treating women as second class citizens so they're desperate, but it's just coming off as patronizing.

If Republicans could put forth a candidate that wasn't a complete stereotype of someone in the 50s maybe they'd have better luck. Women aren't the only demographic Republicans are having trouble with.

The Unreal Engine is perhaps the easiest engine to create levels in, at least for me. I never got the hang of making levels in Source or any of the id Tech engines. Of course I am just talking the base level design. After that I don't know which would be easiest to add the effects and like to as I never got that far with the other two major ones. I like the looks of this, but agree that it is hard to judge it until we see it in action with AI and character animation. I love Rage and what id is doing with id Tech 5, but the character's look like they are deep in the uncanny valley at the moment.

I also agree that consoles really need a good midterm refresh. Not a full new system, more like a 360.5 and a PS3.5. For the 360 upgrade it to XBox 360 Blue.
This hypothetical 360 features not just a Blu-Ray drive, but one ups it by going for Blu-Ray XL compatible. Controllers/remote etc. upgrade to bluetooth, though the old controllers would still have to work for now, the idea is more to setup for the next generation. Tie in with Win 7 mobile devices so you can pick plays on sport games from them, have a remote control in them, and some other games may tie to them as an option as well in whatever form developers feel like they can do. If possible without breaking compatibility with old 360 games (360 Blue exclusive games would be available so they wouldn't work on the old 360 as they come on Blu-Ray) a mild refresh to the graphics, more memory mostly, but if possible a Direct X 11 compatible chip, of course at that point you are nearly at a full refresh and not just a mid-generation refresh. I would say make Live free so you can do Netflix and online play for free, and user replaceable hard drives, but I doubt Microsoft sees that as part of their plans.
The PS3 would be much the same, upgrade to XL and if possible more memory and a slight graphics increase...
With both you can't really do too much for a mid-term refresh without moving to what is essentially a new machine.
Computers are always ahead of consoles on what they can do, but this new 7-10 year cycle is starting to show its age more than usual. I sure hope they don't go 10 years, 2 more years would be more than enough...though if they were 2 years out I would think there would be more rumors of what they are doing by now, so we probably do have more than that.

Hey I just noticed that you, Tymbrwulf, gave this (my) vid a big help.

Thank you very much Mr. Wulf and my what teeth you have



Anarcho-Syndicalism at it's best!

*quality

>> ^quantumushroom:

The Top 200 Chomsky Lies


Well that sure convinced me. Noam Chomsky's well thought out and articulated points are obviously inferior to your regurgitated propaganda copy/paste link. Why bother to attempt to refute a single one of Chomsky's numerous points when you have this deeply intellectual strategy to fall back on. Good show.

>> ^quantumushroom:

The Top 200 Chomsky Lies


I love how they label the nuanced statements of Chomsky as "The Lie" and their half-truthy reinterpretation of them as "The Truth".

Example:

The Lie: “I have never considered myself a ‘Marxist,’ and in fact regard such notions as
‘Marxist’ (or ‘Freudian,’ etc.) as belonging more to the domain of organized religion than of
rational analysis.”

The Truth: Previously, Chomsky had said: “in my opinion, a Marxist-anarchist perspective
[on politics] is justified quite apart from anything that may happen in linguistics.” He had also
declared: “I wouldn’t abandon Marxism.”


Here's the last quote in context, from a printed interview and thus easily cited out of context:
"[Chomsky:] [...] But I don't see any reason to abandon the notion anarchism just because it has some strange periphery that uses it [namely, the right-wing anarcho-capitalists].
[Interviewer:] Just as you wouldn't abandon Marxism.
[Chomsky:] Yes, like I wouldn't abandon Marxism. After all, we're not interested in making heroes and identifying ourselves with them, but of finding what's valid in various ideas and concepts and actions that have some use for us."

So, Chomsky says we can't abandon either anarchism or marxism as wholes just because of some extremist interpretations. How does that say he is a Marxist? It does not, of course, unless you are a paranoid anti-communist trying to discredit Chomsky by associating him with what you consider an Evil ideology.

Also, you must understand that being a scholarly discussion, Marxism is here strictly differentiated from Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, etc. Marxism only refers to the initial political doctrine as expounded by Karl Marx.

As we can see, the cited text is taken out of context and made to imply much more that it actually says. Of course this is the typical modus operandi of the right, because let's be honest: their only arguments are those that appeal to our greed and selfishness. Better to demonize the opposition and thus appear angelic by default.

MycoftHomlz, you are dead on. The University I attended urged all professors to create fresh exams for every midterm or final, good professors did, bad professors didn't, which leads me to the conclusion that this fellow should be more upset with his own idle complacency then he should with his students. What a lazy crybaby.

Thanks for the promote and interesting story, although the last sentence was the one that really raised my eyebrows:

"The cheating scandal is the latest blow to the Academy, which suffered a sexual harassment scandal in 1990 after eight male midshipmen chained a female classmate to a urinal."

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
>> ^EmptyFriend:

interesting story.
side note: i hope it's not a math course...
"the midterm exam makeup will open at 7AM on Monday morning, Nov 8.... it will close at midnight on November the 10th... it will be open 51 hours."
Sorry professor, that's 41 hours!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If they're keeping office hours from 7:00 am to midnight just for the makeup exam, that's 17 hours per day. (I highly doubt they would stay open 24 hrs/day, even to administer the makeup exam. They ain't working in a factory with night shifts.) If they do this on November 8, November 9, and November 10, that's three days. That would be 51 hours in total.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

He's bluffing. There's no way they could prove conclusively whether or not any one person was involved without searching their rooms/belongings for the cheat-sheet.
You're probably right. However they might compare each student's score on the cheat test with the scores they've gotten on previous tests in the course, and if their cheat test score is significantly higher than their previous test scores, then that could be a big red flag. Maybe that's just one of their lines of evidence against the 200 suspected cheaters.

However I was thinking the same thing @chtierna said: he's mainly bluffing the cheaters. The guilty parties are much better off simply retaking the exam (and even possibly doing badly) than not taking the exam and then risk being expelled for cheating.

Unfortunately this shit happens more often than many suspect, but most of the time it goes undetected. Anyone remember the cheating scandal at the US Naval Academy in the early '90s? Of course not; you're all a bunch of damn kids.

*promote

>> ^EmptyFriend:

interesting story.
side note: i hope it's not a math course...
"the midterm exam makeup will open at 7AM on Monday morning, Nov 8.... it will close at midnight on November the 10th... it will be open 51 hours."
Sorry professor, that's 41 hours!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If they're keeping office hours from 7:00 am to midnight just for the makeup exam, that's 17 hours per day. (I highly doubt they would stay open 24 hrs/day, even to administer the makeup exam. They ain't working in a factory with night shifts.) If they do this on November 8, November 9, and November 10, that's three days. That would be 51 hours in total.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

He's bluffing. There's no way they could prove conclusively whether or not any one person was involved without searching their rooms/belongings for the cheat-sheet.
You're probably right. However they might compare each student's score on the cheat test with the scores they've gotten on previous tests in the course, and if their cheat test score is significantly higher than their previous test scores, then that could be a big red flag. Maybe that's just one of their lines of evidence against the 200 suspected cheaters.

However I was thinking the same thing @chtierna said: he's mainly bluffing the cheaters. The guilty parties are much better off simply retaking the exam (and even possibly doing badly) than not taking the exam and then risk being expelled for cheating.

Unfortunately this shit happens more often than many suspect, but most of the time it goes undetected. Anyone remember the cheating scandal at the US Naval Academy in the early '90s? Of course not; you're just a bunch of damn kids.

*promote

interesting story.

side note: i hope it's not a math course...
"the midterm exam makeup will open at 7AM on Monday morning, Nov 8.... it will close at midnight on November the 10th... it will be open 51 hours."

Sorry professor, that's 41 hours!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

So why did corporations spend more money then has ever been spent in a midterm election to get Republicans and Teabaggers elected this cycle?


Did they? I wouldn't know.

So why did corporations spend more money then has ever been spent in a midterm election to get Republicans and Teabaggers elected this cycle?

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
It isn't really all that hard to follow, Jesus. I've put it in talking points style bullets to make it easier for you to understand.
-Obama to not renew Bush tax giveaway to the mega rich.
-The mega rich gives money to think tanks that know how to manipulate people like you.
-Manipulated people like you vote corporate lapdogs into office.
-Tax giveaway back on the table.
Getting it yet?

Not sure why you think the Democrats aren't Corporatists like the Republicans?

Thanks!

In reply to this comment by MrFisk:
*promote

@dystopianfuturetoday, I think that what's being said here is true also, but that's because it's a logical inference from the facts that no one's really disputing, not because Russia Today is so credible I need not question anything they say.

For example, we recently had this shoot up the charts, where RT had on a propagandist from Reason to basically say that Prop 19 is going to fail because Obama's DOJ is engaging in "voter intimidation" because it truthfully stated that states don't have the power to nullify federal law.

As for better sources on the campaign finance problem, here's a number of articles in mainstream press to paint the picture:

Washington Post - Interest-group spending for midterm up fivefold from 2006; many sources secret
The Economist - Ignore that $800,000 behind the curtain
The New York Times - Top Corporations Aid U.S. Chamber of Commerce Campaign
The New York Times - John Roberts's America
NPR - 'Independent' Groups Behind Ads Not So Independent

So it's more than a gut feeling on my part that this is true, but again, that's because a) it's a reasonable deduction from the facts, and b) lots of people I respect, both inside mainstream press and outside it are saying the same thing.

But the fact that Russia Today decided to say it too doesn't mean they are some sort of unbiased source. On the contrary, I believe they're only giving it airtime because their bias drives them to promote stories like this.

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by MrFisk.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/A-special-animated-look-at-the-2010-US-midterm-elections