>> ^xxovercastxx:
I still enjoyed ME2, I just found it rather light. I wanted ME2 to be Mass Effect Extreme, not Diet Mass Effect.
I was surprised to find out people had such problems driving the MAKO. I had a blast with that thing. I loved that you could land on any planet and drive around, I just wish more of those planets had something on them to discover. To me, they "fixed" planetary exploration completely backwards: they removed the fun part (exploring) and featured the boring part (there's nothing on any of the planets). If you didn't like the handling of the MAKO, that's a separate issue, IMO. I would have been fine with a completely new vehicle so long as the exploration was still an option.


I've heard that the MAKO was really tough to control on the consoles, where the MAKO followed the turret, while on the PC you can move the MAKO and turret independently. I do agree the MAKO was fun, though the things you encountered were a bit bland and generic. This mineral scanning thing is terrible, why not have the onboard AI EDI do in a microsecond what takes you minutes. Instead of ditching the MAKO thye should have just improved the variety of planetary exploration.
I also hate that they removed the weapon statistics and that there are only something like 20 different weapons. Also you can't customize your squad's armor anymore. I wish they wouldn't have simplified this game so much to please the console generation.
Still I'm having fun with it, but I doubt I'll buy the third one.

Last thing I really can't stand how game review sites always praise overhyped games to death. Just look at the metacritic site. A third of the ratings are a perfect 10 and another third 9+. Same thing with Dragon Age
Are there any honest review sites?

His footwork looks rather clean and controlled, very polished.

Personally, I prefer the more chaotic approach where they don't keep their left foot on the clutch at all times, but rather switch between left-foot-braking and the heel-and-toe-technique. An example, of course, would be the onboard madness from Walter Roehrl, driving an Audi Quattro in the early '80s. Ignore the cheesy music and watch the insanity at 1:12-1:22 amongst others.

>> ^Psychologic:
^spoco2:
It really has so few uses it begs the question why would you actually want one?
Well, I'd probably prefer this over physical books (depending on pixel size). It sounds more like a Kindle replacement than anything so far.
It's thin and light, so it would fit in a briefcase nicely. Apple has never been the company for people on a budget. If $600 were a small sum of money for me then I would consider buying one (after playing with one at a store first). I doubt it would replace my netbook though.


My issue is really this though... I like my phone to do lots of extra stuff... surf the web, play games, play video etc. etc. because I have to carry it around anyway and in my pocket no less... so why not have it do lots of extra stuff. For ANYTHING else it better have some pretty darn stellar extra functionality to make me want to lug it around in a bag.

Now, this eBook Reading lark. I'm not onboard myself, still love actual books, read them every morning/night on the train to/from work... love them... I know lots of people love electronic books... but I really do love having book shelves with real honest to goodness books.

But I'm obviously not part of this 'new wave' of e book readers. But if I was I don't think I'd want to have one that is running a backlit screen with only 10 hours of battery life just to read a book, that seems very wasteful to me. I'd much rather have an e-ink screen that is passive most of the time.

So... I don't get it, don't know how it's going to find its market, because I don't think it has one. Plenty of the commentators are saying exactly the same thing... but who knows, maybe people do want this... me? No, everyone I've so far talked to? No... just... just has nothing going for it.

Thanks for that

In reply to this comment by maatc:
>> ^spoco2:
I can't call it, as it's mine, but dupeof http://www.videosift.com/video/iPhone-controlled-Qua
dRotor-Helicopter-with-onboard-cameras


Ah right. Thanks!
*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/iPhone-controlled-QuadRotor-Helicopter-with-onboard-cameras

I got ya covered.

In reply to this comment by ant:
Ah frak! Sorry about that. How do I put it back?

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Why discuss?

In reply to this comment by ant:
SkyNet!*discuss

>> ^gwiz665:
If you have a good reason to discuss this, ant, you have to state it.
For now return


Sorry about that. I accidently pressed discuss link. Now, to think about it. That's a bit scary to click on.

Ah frak! Sorry about that. How do I put it back?

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Why discuss?

In reply to this comment by ant:
SkyNet!*discuss

Why discuss?

In reply to this comment by ant:
SkyNet!*discuss

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

>> ^spoco2:
I can't call it, as it's mine, but dupeof http://www.videosift.com/video/iPhone-controlled-Qua
dRotor-Helicopter-with-onboard-cameras


Ah right. Thanks!
*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/iPhone-controlled-QuadRotor-Helicopter-with-onboard-cameras

I can't call it, as it's mine, but dupeof http://www.videosift.com/video/iPhone-controlled-QuadRotor-Helicopter-with-onboard-cameras

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

>> ^Doc_M:


I remember reading a while back that there is quite a lengthy certification process to bring any electronics into space. That's why the laptops onboard the ISS are several generations behind. They need to test for safety factors, energy consumption and suitability for zero-g. Anything with mechanical parts in it, just might not work no gravity. We would probably be surprised how many devices depend on actual weight to function properly.

>> ^volumptuous:
>> ^Xax:
I wasn't aware that Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 days after he took office. That says it all, as far as I'm concerned.

Why?

Well if you love peace, why would you like Obama, who took Bush's plan for war in Iraq, and extended it, escalated Afghanistan, continued the rendition(kidnapping) program, continued the torture of detainees by sleep deprivation and sensory deprivation and continues to call for intervention in force in Iran. Only if you have been sleeping since the week Obama was inaugurated would you give Obama a peace prize.

Last week, we were debating in the news, how many more troops we would send to Afghanistan. Would there be a small increase, or a substantial increase? And this for a war against the taliban, who have never done anything against our homeland, except "not getting onboard with us invading their country." Afghanistan is a perfect example of a war for war's sake, and we have our new president cementing the conflict with more troops and bombs.
This week in the new war surge

Yeah the Nobel people want to encourage the president, but to some of us the prize just makes the song seem more awful.

Alright, I'm done.

I've had it with these types of videos.
Thousands of cops are doing their jobs properly, thousands more do it because they like keeping the peace. A fraction of them do something stupid, and suddenly ALL cops are bad?
Seriously people, where would you be without a police force, good or bad.

You know why shit like this is happening? Lack of respect for the officers in question.
Before, if cops went up to a car, and said "You were doing 60 in a 40" the driver would say "Okay, won't happen again" take the damn ticket, and drive away.

What's happening now is that people feel they've somehow been wronged by the law that's been protecting them for years, instead of accepting the ticket and driving along, they decide the best course of action is to argue with the cop.

Why?

Arguing with any form of authority figure is a stupid idea, would you talk back to your boss? your supirior? your principal? your parents? all of those people in one way, shape, or form have some form of control over you at one point in time. The difference? They're not the ones making sure people aren't speeding in school zones, aren't driving while intoxicated, aren't causing a menace to society.

You can hate the man, but at least respect the badge. The bottom line is, if you got pulled over, you were doing something wrong in the first place. Look at some of the videos here about "Police Brutality" 90% of these situations could be avoided by not doing something wrong in the first place.

Now, picture this is you. You've pulled someone over for speeding along a deserted road. You get out of the car, go up to their window, and ask for the License, Registration, and Proof of insurance.
They instead say "I didn't do anything wrong, no." You once again ask for their license and registration, this time, annoyed, they give it to you and you walk back to the car.

You type the plate number into the onboard computer, and while it's getting the information, the driver decides to get out of the car. He's clearly glaring at you, and approaching you. You ask them to get back in the car, and the refuse, and start talking back to you saying that "This is stupid, I'm not accepting the ticket" you again ask them to get back into the car and they refuse, and start approaching you again.

You now have very few options left.

Because this person is not doing what they're asked, you can:

Continue to allow them to approach you, with no idea what possible concealed weapons they have on them, be it a firearm or knife, and keep asking them to get into the car, which they continue to refuse.

Or

You can take out your tazer, and demand they get back into the car, or on the ground, saving potentially both of you from harm if they then comply.

Now, let's say you took option 2...

Why does it take the threat of force to get them to do what they're asked?

Now, some of you can see my point on this already, and for those that are still saying "That's a stupid plan, the cop should've allowed the man to approach in the first place, he shouldn't have drawn the tazer"

The only thing I have left to say to you, is the way that this entire thing could've been avoided...stay put in the car, stay quiet, and just give what they asked. The cop would've driven away, you would've driven away, and if you still felt there was no reason for you to get that ticket, go to court, demand all the information about the event (Dash cam footage, ect) and fight it.

There's no reason that scenario should've come to needing to use any form of threat or force in the first place.

Just read some new info about this. Apparently the onboard computer switched into ground mode the second a set of wheels touched the ground. In this mode, a limit is put onto the amount of rudder the pilots can apply, thus reducing their ability to compensate for crosswinds. When the pilot pulled up, it switched back into the proper mode, thus allowing the pilot to hold her steady yet again.

No official info though.