>> ^deathcow:

Panorama Done!
frame 1920 of 1920
back LCD lights up
<< NO MEMORY CARD >>


I shot some sun rays breaking through the early morning mist over the mountains around Machu Picchu. It was gorgeous - dream lighting - and about an hour later realized that the camera was set to a ludicrously high ISO. I was devastated. I can't imagine how that guy would have felt if something had gone wrong.

Ok, I'll start with a few things that most people would probably agree with, but the police force currently would fight like hell to avoid. How about we decide to actually punish cops who break existing rules and laws. Use testing to weed out unbalanced power hungry or corrupt types from becoming cops. QUIT hiring COMBAT veterans to become PEACE officers. I'm sure there are many things that could be done to fix the problem with the police, its just that it's not being done because the police think the only problem is that we, the lowly people, dont always follow ALL commands,and sometimes we need to be put in our place. >> ^shveddy:
False dichotomy, among other things. There are innumerable intermediate steps between "allowing them to do whatever they want to you" and "shooting the motherfuckers." I'll admit that there is a point where armed resistance is warranted, but if you think that we have arrived anywhere near that point with enough frequency to warrant armed resistance, then you are crazy.
Yes, there are plenty of instances of people's rights being violated - but in 99.99% of those occasions, I think the problem can best be solved through other means.
Do I think that the students who got peppersprayed at UC Davis had their rights violated?
Yes, I do. But this guy seems to suggest that the proper response is for the students to pull guns and start a shoot-out. Let's imagine what that would look like for a second:
One of the students peers through the caustic mist with righteous fury and a wet t-shirt over his mouth. He can feel the comforting weight of his Barretta, held close to his heart in a chest holster, and he knows that this is the moment to act. He stands up tall despite the onslaught of bright orange asphyxiation, reaches for his piece and takes aim. Somewhat startled, the officer is suddenly defenseless with his canister and it is not long before he crumples to the ground in an ever expanding pool of blood. He basks in a brief moment of clarity before chaos reigns. His fellow students are quick to bear arms themselves, but the training, body armor and poise of the officers allows them a significant head start and the students suffer heavy casualties in this initial volley.
Not to be deterred by the deaths of their friends, the occupy movement takes up refuge in the life sciences building which, designed in the late sixties with a brutalist aesthetic, is mostly concrete and as such is a perfect fortress from which to outlast the ensuing siege and inspire innumerable citizens on the outside world to take up arms as well. Guerrilla warfare is the only tactic effective in such asymmetrical circumstances, and after a few weeks of violence the powers that be succumb to international pressure and agree to negotiate with the 99%...
...or we could launch an official investigation, fire the guy as a scapegoat after an admittedly long, expensive and cumbersome process, and let the public outrage that ensued lead to a more cautious approach to future student protests. Bloggers and editorialists collectively write millions of words on the subject, increasing awareness and generally shaming the agency that allowed it to happen.
Not perfect, but a whole hell of a lot more civilized.
Any time you use guns against a government entity in he US, you will eventually be caught and put in jail. Period. The only way to avoid this is to be a small part of a large popular movement that eventually overthrows the US government, and I don't see that ever happening with citizen gun-owners unless it involves guerrilla tactics. Imagine gunfights erupting at your local municipal buildings. Imagine pipe bombs at your local police station. People need to realize that this is what they are advocating when they argue for second amendment rights as a fourth check and balance.
If you disagree with that statement, feel free to fill in a reasonable sequence of events to span the gap between "guy whose fourth amendment rights are violated guns down cop" and "said guy is vindicated, and massive changes are made to our law enforcement policies." I suspect that we are far more likely to see a greater militarization of the police in response.
I humbly propose that we join the civilized world and come up with more creative ways to correct our problems.

False dichotomy, among other things. There are innumerable intermediate steps between "allowing them to do whatever they want to you" and "shooting the motherfuckers." I'll admit that there is a point where armed resistance is warranted, but if you think that we have arrived anywhere near that point with enough frequency to warrant armed resistance, then you are crazy.

Yes, there are plenty of instances of people's rights being violated - but in 99.99% of those occasions, I think the problem can best be solved through other means.

Do I think that the students who got peppersprayed at UC Davis had their rights violated?

Yes, I do. But this guy seems to suggest that the proper response is for the students to pull guns and start a shoot-out. Let's imagine what that would look like for a second:

One of the students peers through the caustic mist with righteous fury and a wet t-shirt over his mouth. He can feel the comforting weight of his Barretta, held close to his heart in a chest holster, and he knows that this is the moment to act. He stands up tall despite the onslaught of bright orange asphyxiation, reaches for his piece and takes aim. Somewhat startled, the officer is suddenly defenseless with his canister and it is not long before he crumples to the ground in an ever expanding pool of blood. He basks in a brief moment of clarity before chaos reigns. His fellow students are quick to bear arms themselves, but the training, body armor and poise of the officers allows them a significant head start and the students suffer heavy casualties in this initial volley.

Not to be deterred by the deaths of their friends, the occupy movement takes up refuge in the life sciences building which, designed in the late sixties with a brutalist aesthetic, is mostly concrete and as such is a perfect fortress from which to outlast the ensuing siege and inspire innumerable citizens on the outside world to take up arms as well. Guerrilla warfare is the only tactic effective in such asymmetrical circumstances, and after a few weeks of violence the powers that be succumb to international pressure and agree to negotiate with the 99%...

...or we could launch an official investigation, fire the guy as a scapegoat after an admittedly long, expensive and cumbersome process, and let the public outrage that ensued lead to a more cautious approach to future student protests. Bloggers and editorialists collectively write millions of words on the subject, increasing awareness and generally shaming the agency that allowed it to happen.

Not perfect, but a whole hell of a lot more civilized.

Any time you use guns against a government entity in he US, you will eventually be caught and put in jail. Period. The only way to avoid this is to be a small part of a large popular movement that eventually overthrows the US government, and I don't see that ever happening with citizen gun-owners unless it involves guerrilla tactics. Imagine gunfights erupting at your local municipal buildings. Imagine pipe bombs at your local police station. People need to realize that this is what they are advocating when they argue for second amendment rights as a fourth check and balance.

If you disagree with that statement, feel free to fill in a reasonable sequence of events to span the gap between "guy whose fourth amendment rights are violated guns down cop" and "said guy is vindicated, and massive changes are made to our law enforcement policies." I suspect that we are far more likely to see a greater militarization of the police in response.

I humbly propose that we join the civilized world and come up with more creative ways to correct our problems.

Well technically they got king of the hill taken away by a completely free to play game that you don't even have to buy. League of legends soared past them in active monthly users last November and they haven't slowed down. There was an article on forbes about this time last year where LoL had double the amount of monthly gameplay hours. I think WoW is finally dying.>> ^RFlagg:

If WoW would just adopt the Buy to Play model like Guild Wars 2 I would come back (if they kept the price low, say $30...$40 tops for this expansion as I've got the ones before it). With Guild Wars 2, Planetside 2, trying learn DOTA 2 and LoL and the host of Free to Play stuff, it is getting harder to justify the monthly fee. I liked Cataclysm, and I would be all over this, but money is too tight to waste when there are high quality titles out there that are buy to play or free to play. I predict an uptick in subscribers for a few months then the continual bleed of subscribers to other titles... though they'll still be king of the hill as even if they drop to 6 or 8 million by this time next year, they'll still be ahead of everyone else... I'll wager around 7 million left, around 5 or 6 million they might start thinking of making the move to another business model to test it out for Titan and get the bugs of the model worked out. I think Blizard's high quality justifies a Buy to Play over the Free to Play model...
As to the movie. Sam Raimi was slated to direct it, and may still be producing a part of it... last I heard Charles Leavitt was taking over the script and then they were going to call for a new director.

Your video, World of Warcraft: Mists of Pandaria - Cinematic Trailer, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^EMPIRE:

amazing CG.
But I can't help but get the feeling that this is Kung Fu Panda 3.
And by the way Blizzard... Seriously? You can't reach into your pockets and grab 150 million dollars or so, and just create a damn feature length movie already? It's not like you don't have the money, and it's not like it wouldn't make more than enough money back.


That or Kung Fu panda was written by a guy who saw the Pandarans in Warcraft 3 and decided to make a movie about that. Let's check the timeline.

But yeah, why the hell did they decide to go with a live action WoW movie when they are themselves brilliant at CG. Square made the transition to movie making. . . it was a miserable failure, but still.

You gonna play this expansion?

I'm on the fence, still. If they finally update the player models, that will put me over the edge and I'll play again. Otherwise, I dunno... hard sell.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^braindonut:
I must be a humbug. But I thought this trailer sucked.
I don't get why I should care about anything happening in it.

I liked it because it wasn't about a single big baddie that we have to all gear up to meet at the end of the expansion like ALL the other expansions.

>> ^braindonut:

I must be a humbug. But I thought this trailer sucked.
I don't get why I should care about anything happening in it.


I liked it because it wasn't about a single big baddie that we have to all gear up to meet at the end of the expansion like ALL the other expansions.

Pun intended?>> ^shagen454:

They are just pandaring...

>> ^charliem:

...they really know how to make CG...goddamn.
Shame its for an 8 year old game.


Have you played the beta? While the game as a whole is nearly 8 years old, the graphics of this latest expansion are the most beautiful yet. I'm frickin excited!

>> ^charliem:

...they really know how to make CG...goddamn.
Shame its for an 8 year old game.


Eight years? I thought it was seven. BTW, you forgot an apostrophe.

I wish they wouldn't call it the elk test, or moose test or whatever. jimnms is right - it should the the high speed avoidance test. This would stop people going into discussions about the right or wrong way to hit a moose which is actually nothing to do with this test.

Maybe they should call it the small child avoidance test? I wonder how many people would say they'd just pink mist the kid?

@Stu If a kid runs out in front of your Jeep, are you going to "pink mist" it too? It should be renamed to the high speed avoidance test. We have lots of deer down here and they say the same thing about deer too, to just hit the breaks and take the hit. Of course that never happens as you instinctively want to avoid the crash, so we get a lot of good 'ole boys rolling their trucks over swerving to avoid hitting a deer.

@charliem and @MilkmanDan Jeep removed weight not added. They worded it strange, but read it again, it says "Jeep-Chrysler loaded the car with 470 kilos (1 036 lbs), 132 kilos (291 lbs) under the official maximum payload." The previous tests were performed at the maximum official payload the car can carry.

It looks like Jeep could fix it with a suspension upgrade. The Jeep compared to the other two vehicles rolls farther into the turn and bounces where the other two roll into the turn without the bounce.

I have a jeep wrangler and I can tell you from experience that you don't swerve. The bumper is pure steel attached to the frame. The deer that walked into the road got pink misted without much damage to the jeep itself. Some cars aren't made to swerve.

I saw a single rainbow in the mist... was waiting for the DOUBLE rainbow though. all the way.