So do the boxes rotate sideways from one shaft to the other at the top and bottom like a ski lift?

(I don't know how to use google.)

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Baaaah.
I guess you're gonna vote for Obama and Goldman Sachs again this year as well?
>> ^Quboid:
This video is trying to tell me that EA remake the same shitty game that idiots buy over and over.
However, what it actually tells me is that the maker of this video is a hipster asshole who thinks his opinions are worth more than other people's, and who thinks because they don't like Call of Honour, then people who do are simple minded, gullible sheep. This asshole is so full of his or her own opinion that anyone who disagrees must have fallen for EA's evil marketing because anyone actually thinking independently would surely have the same opinion as them, as they're so fucking special; they're the only sane person.
EA, Activision and Ubisoft do produce many shitty games and are involved in underhanded tactics like buying reviews. However, that doesn't mean all their games suck and it doesn't mean people who like an EA game, even an uninnovative sequel, are wrong. The implication that we should all follow what this guy thinks (or if you prefer, independently come to the same conclusion) would make us sheep.



What? You know this is a video about EA, not a political thing, right? I can assure you I am not going to vote for Obama or Goldman Sachs this year but this has zero to do with me thinking this guy is a prick for setting himself up as some sort of superior being.

If the video just criticised EA's game production system and how it results in a massive lack of innovation, and how PC gamers tend to get shafted, fine. I agree. But this guy implies that players who buy the latest FIFA, Battlefield or whatever are fools and that's insulting. I bought BF3 because I liked BF:BC2, not because something shiny was dangled in front of me and not because IGN gave it good marks. Likewise, I bought FIFA12 because I played FIFA11 lots and even though little has changed, I've still got many, many times as much gameplay from it than I've got from most other games from developers and publishers big and small.

My complaint isn't that poor little EA don't deserve the criticism. My complaint is that he seems to think people who don't share his opinion must be fools.

>> ^bareboards2:

Have you spent more than 2 minutes thinking about this topic, dear @Yogi?
Have you tried the little mental exercises that I suggested?
I know the answer is no.
So yeah. I am right. Because I --- HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS. For a long time. Changed my thinking about certain things as I gathered more information and came up with a reasoned argument that I have tested over the years. There aren't any holes in my logic or my conclusions. I know, because I have long since fixed any holes in my logic and my conclusions.
So yeah. I am bad. In the best sense of the word. Like Shaft is bad, baby.
I'm so bad, I'm good.


You're never right Boy.

Have you spent more than 2 minutes thinking about this topic, dear @Yogi?

Have you tried the little mental exercises that I suggested?

I know the answer is no.

So yeah. I am right. Because I --- HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS. For a long time. Changed my thinking about certain things as I gathered more information and came up with a reasoned argument that I have tested over the years. There aren't any holes in my logic or my conclusions. I know, because I have long since fixed any holes in my logic and my conclusions.

So yeah. I am bad. In the best sense of the word. Like Shaft is bad, baby.

I'm so bad, I'm good.

I love this idea...just think about how humans react. When someone works hard at a job and they get shafted while rich fucks keep getting rewarded. It's enough to drive any man insane.

@renatojj

Church has high interested in religious candidates being elected. Most of the debates going on in politics are based on religious philosophy. Few off the top of my head are abortion, creationism, and women's rights. They've been going against the grain of the Constitution trying to get creationism which is a arguably religion based subject taught in schools. Which in turn possibly gets them more followers, which in turn gets them more tithing and more people in their "group" giving them more power. In fact I would argue they are specifically trying to erode the line between church and state with these arguments, injecting religion based reasons into many of the arguments.

Big media networks push for things like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996 where the reason for the bill is not actually what ends up happening. It was supposed to deregulate and open up the market for competition and instead it allowed them to reconsolidate by buying up competitors. And they largely don't fight with censorship on curse words because generally it drives off their audience, and those networks that don't have to censor curse words charge for the privilege of hearing them and seeing some nudity to boot. And they also support SOPA-like bills which are essential a blanket tool to censor the web....they also support monitoring and traffic shaping on the networks they control...which is another potential avenue for censorship.

You'll have to be more specific on what you're getting at......all these groups are eroding divisions we built through regulation and have been doing so steadily since the 80s at every opportunity across industries.

I've already shown that given the chance, they buy up competition to remain a monopoly. Look at ISPs, look at all the oil companies we USED to have. Look at the media conglomerates that own the majority of your radio stations ( I think there's two major radio networks, but they have like a million different stations under the same banners so it LOOKS like choice). How the record labels and movie industries are all tied together and often even tied into the same parent company that owns your ISP. Cell phone industry, ATT trying to buy T Mobile which would have brought it down to 3 major providers and they did it in the name of "better service" but still haven't announced plans to build out their infrastructure since the deal went through...why? Because it wasn't about better service, it was about buying up a competitor that offered plans at prices people preferred.

When people are unhappy with their ISPs they've tried to form local government run coop non-profit ISPs, and they get sued by the huge companies who refuse to service their area. It's happened multiple times. With regulation, they would have to provide internet to those places in a timely manner instead of preventing people from doing their own thing.

Did GoDaddy pay dearly for supporting SOPA? I heard they lost 30k subscribers at some point, but did they really? You'll have to show me on that. GoDaddy did lots of terrible things before it, yet they were still a huge provider and still are. They cybersquat on domain names people search for and allow you to buy them at "auction" from them when you try to look up if it's taken or not..they snatch it up to sell to you. They also give away people's domain names with no repercussions and a myriad of other things. Sounds like it needs a regulatory body with some teeth on it to make them act right or shut them down.

Unions are actually a really good way to fight monopolies and under the table deals, but they've been systematically villified. And unions aren't monopolies if they aren't mandatory, and most places are not fully unionized anymore. Often times they will have sections with union employees to do government work and non-union to do non-government work. Non-union guys make half the rate of union guys usually, and have less protections in place to keep themselves from getting shafted. But I don't really see how a union is a monopoly when there are lots of unions and lots of individuals in a union who make decisions for themselves and not as a collective like a company would. IE a company has a "head" that directs it and unions are a collective of individuals. Companies are people after all, unions are not (they are made up of people).

There are laws governing behavior usually based roughly on societal standards. Like pot being illegal is kind of against most of the societies beliefs, yet it remains illegal is an example of where it doesn't quite track. But overall we have laws that say you can't write a check that you know won't cash. Drunk driving, trespassing, vandalism, theft.....yelling fire in a crowded building.......setting off the fire alarm for fun.....etc. Giving people the finger isn't against the law....well probably not in most places so that might fall under social pressure. But we see that social pressure fails miserably at stopping bad behavior, so we have laws to enforce behavior...like not stealing and not murdering. This is society and people holding other people to standards, without the law to judge and convict them by the only thing you have left is personal interpretation and meeting out punishment by each individual or vigilante justice.

If you don't regulate business there is nothing stopping them, because nothing about our market is free. You can't have a free market without perfect information. You can't know every possible thing going on, so you will never have perfect information even if it was possible. So you will have swindlers and knock offs, pyramid schemes, etc. And without laws and regulations on these things, you will never be able to punish the company for what they did in a court of law.

Even if they were 100% above the board honest, they'd still be sourcing their materials from overseas and getting inferior materials to what you are paying for. It happens to the military all the time right now. They buy a bunch of nuts and bolts and some of them are chinese knockoffs that fail well after the installation is done and the machine is in operation. They can't catch them because china is basically lawless when it comes to producing goods for knock off purposes. It could just as easily be a US source doing it if we de-regulated everything and made no way for people to sue them into oblivion...because the damage would be done as soon as you buy a knock off and it fries the rest of your stuff.

The definition of "free market" right now means they want to be able to buy stuff cheap as shit from overseas and charge you US built prices for it. And when it comes to financial industry "free market" means they want to have speculation upon speculation to where the financial industry has 10-100x more money leveraged than what actually exists. It's a house of cards if they can just inflate it without any kind of acceptable risks being enforced.

How did Shaft get shafted?

Amusing, but man, she gets shafted (pun intended) through this arrangement... he gets to fuck her for a month, including anal, never goes down on her, and she has to pay for her way home and can't crap in his toilet.

For a necklace and bracelet.

Sounds suspiciously like a cheap hooker.

I laughed at the guy who said he gets, "claustrophobic".

In this case he should feel relaxed, plummeting down a spacious elevator shaft.

Its the sound and vibration of commander data furiously polarizing his turbo shaft.

If only someone would chuck him down a bottomless shaft.

The world hasn't "moved on" and never will, due the constant known as "human nature".

The reason there appears to be "no difference" between the two parties is because people want it that way. Imagine having to hand over your guns every time a taxocrat assumes office, then get them back when the other team is elected, or taxes being stuck on a permanent roller coaster, making it impossible for businesses to plan ahead. It's best that radical changes don't arrive on a weekly basis.

If anyone really believes there's "no difference" then please vote against taxocrats, they'll make you poorer, faster.




>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
@quantumushroom
Stop pretending there's a difference between republicans and democrats.
Occupy Wall Street has proven this.
Bush Obama are the same administration just different colors.
Stop fantasying that Republicans controlled by Corporate Lobbyist are favorable to Democrats controlled by the same Corporate Lobbyists.

Agreed, qm needs to wake out of his slumber, the world has moved on but his view of the world and politics hasn't. We're all getting the shaft from the same people going under different banners, and the genius of it is that for all this time they've had us fighting amongst ourselves.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

@quantumushroom
Stop pretending there's a difference between republicans and democrats.
Occupy Wall Street has proven this.
Bush Obama are the same administration just different colors.
Stop fantasying that Republicans controlled by Corporate Lobbyist are favorable to Democrats controlled by the same Corporate Lobbyists.


Agreed, qm needs to wake out of his slumber, the world has moved on but his view of the world and politics hasn't. We're all getting the shaft from the same people going under different banners, and the genius of it is that for all this time they've had us fighting amongst ourselves.

If you watched Jon Stewart during the strike, Stewart would take a good couple of minutes, had running gags, etc. talking about how the writers were being shafted every night. ("A Daily Show", not "The Daily Show", etc.) He explained if he shut the show down, it would cost a lot of his other staff their jobs and livelihood. But he made a point every show to declare he was on the side of the writers. McFarlane surely could have picked a more appropriate target.

With that said, whatever. Not a big deal in the big scheme of things...