Qwest Field management responds to the video. Hmmm.....

"We received a copy of the YouTube video showing the quantity of liquid served in the 16 oz. beer cup is the same quantity that fits into the 20 oz. beer cup. This is the first time we have been alerted to this fact. Upon our internal investigation this afternoon, we discovered the cups that are marked 16 oz. hold 20 oz. of liquid. Fans who purchased a 16 oz. beer actually received 20 oz. of beer for the 16 oz. price. Fans that purchased the 20 oz. beer received the amount they purchased.

"We are working with Levy Restaurants to follow up with the cup vendor about the measurement and to determine how long this has been occurring at Qwest Field. We are determined to find a solution as quickly as possible. In the meantime, we will serve domestic beer in the 20 oz. cup at tomorrow's playoff game to ensure all fans receive the amount they purchase, and we will charge the 16 oz. price."

Actually, the first three specific regulations they raised sound like ones that should be repealed.

The Miami street vendor thing sounded totally fine, as did the thing about making full disclosure of assets when you dissolve a corporation.

At the local level, there are plenty of situations where liberals should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with libertarians.

For example, why should someone need a license to be a hairstylist? That's just corporatism on a small scale.

>> ^Psychologic:

Obviously we need a stronger federal government to reign in excessive local regulations. =D


lol yes. This and the "Chuck changes his mind a lot" post both expose the terrible logic behind the sentiments of the video.

I mean, a giant city like Miami probably has a pretty good reason for regulating street vendors. Obviously the other stuff is silly, but you'd have to pass state or federal laws to prevent local municipalities from making laws like the ones in this video. So, you've got to have bureaucracy somewhere to stop bureaucracy elsewhere.

Carried by Bruce Willis tbh.

The Happening was the worse movie I've seen for a long time, no exhaggeration. You know what the "twist" for that film was? Nothing. There was none, it never happened, nothing was ever explained.
Me- "Omg the tree are killing everybody for somehow for some reason."
Shamamylylanlaylymum- "Yup, pretty much."
THE END.

The only good thing about that movie is that I can look back on the whole experience and laugh about it now, not unlike the time I had food poisoning and was emptying my guts from every orafice simultaneously. Hahaha, silly me eating food from that scummy street vendor, oh and that time I accidently watched The Happening. hoho.

>> ^Tymbrwulf:
I don't know enough about law to make an informed decision on this one. But I did get this from the alaskan state fair website:
Press Release:
Regarding the incident on the Alaska State Fair Fairgrounds 26 August 2010
Friday, August 27, 2010 at 9:50pm
Our concern is first and foremost the safety of our fairgoers, the families with their children who should be able to enjoy the fair without disturbance or potential danger.
We are in touch with the company with whom we have a contract for fair security to review what transpired. We are also in touch with the Palmer Police on this matter.
Because the fairgrounds is on private property, we reserve the right to remove someone from the premises who is creating a disruption or may pose a threat to the safety of others.
We welcome diverse viewpoints and have a structure in place at the Alaska State Fair that allows for peaceful discord and exchange at our vendor and organization booth area.


I am going to speak about the commentor here, not you Tym. I am really annoyed with lame-o's like this punk.

Why do people state irrelavent information? They say it to stir up silly bullshit. "We reserve the right to remove someone from the premises who is creating a disruption..." Good, they can stop right there. Everything else is propaganda lame-o shit. "or may pose a threat to the safety of others." You think so? Is that just because you own the property? I thought, dickmunch, that "danger" would be for the public too...but by your statement, you imply anyone can be dangerous anywhere that is not private property...

The protestor was little danger, and the guy or girl issuing the statement needs to stop adding bullshit and stfu.

I don't know enough about law to make an informed decision on this one. But I did get this from the alaskan state fair website:

Press Release:
Regarding the incident on the Alaska State Fair Fairgrounds 26 August 2010
Friday, August 27, 2010 at 9:50pm

Our concern is first and foremost the safety of our fairgoers, the families with their children who should be able to enjoy the fair without disturbance or potential danger.

We are in touch with the company with whom we have a contract for fair security to review what transpired. We are also in touch with the Palmer Police on this matter.

Because the fairgrounds is on private property, we reserve the right to remove someone from the premises who is creating a disruption or may pose a threat to the safety of others.

We welcome diverse viewpoints and have a structure in place at the Alaska State Fair that allows for peaceful discord and exchange at our vendor and organization booth area.

>> ^shogunkai:

I dunno, I prefer it over Windows. Maybe it's because I love to tinker, but I haven't had any real problems with it at all (nothing I haven't caused...). It's changed a lot lately, and there is much more support for it now then there used to be. Ubuntu also has a great community.
>> ^ForgedReality:
Beautifully done, but it's a shame that Ubuntu, or any flavor of Linux for that matter, just don't work quite as well as shown here. It's a tinkerer's OS, because it requires a lot of tinkering just to get it running smoothly. And even then, there's no guarantees.
Plus there's not a lot that can be done with it since it doesn't really have the vendor support of Windows. Sure, you can watch movies, listen to music, check your email, and browse the internet, but how much real FUN can you have with it? At least when applications aren't crashing or giving nondescript error messages.
Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu Linux is one of the most powerful operating systems around. It's just not ready for mainstream.



I, too, love to tinker. As an operating system, I prefer it over anything else. I used it for years. However, until it reaches the level of Windows as far as vendor support goes (and I'm not talking about opensource stuff), then it can never really replace it for me. When I used it, I had to keep my system as dual-boot, because I would often require Windows.

As a designer, not being able to use Adobe applications such as Illustrator, Photoshop, Flash, etc. is a huge downside. Also, as a gamer, well, you're extremely limited on that front as well.

In any other arena, Linux is very, very powerful. It just lacks a lot of usability that I require. Fill those needs, and it would easily become my sole operating system.

I dunno, I prefer it over Windows. Maybe it's because I love to tinker, but I haven't had any real problems with it at all (nothing I haven't caused...). It's changed a lot lately, and there is much more support for it now then there used to be. Ubuntu also has a great community.

>> ^ForgedReality:

Beautifully done, but it's a shame that Ubuntu, or any flavor of Linux for that matter, just don't work quite as well as shown here. It's a tinkerer's OS, because it requires a lot of tinkering just to get it running smoothly. And even then, there's no guarantees.
Plus there's not a lot that can be done with it since it doesn't really have the vendor support of Windows. Sure, you can watch movies, listen to music, check your email, and browse the internet, but how much real FUN can you have with it? At least when applications aren't crashing or giving nondescript error messages.
Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu Linux is one of the most powerful operating systems around. It's just not ready for mainstream.

Beautifully done, but it's a shame that Ubuntu, or any flavor of Linux for that matter, just don't work quite as well as shown here. It's a tinkerer's OS, because it requires a lot of tinkering just to get it running smoothly. And even then, there's no guarantees.

Plus there's not a lot that can be done with it since it doesn't really have the vendor support of Windows. Sure, you can watch movies, listen to music, check your email, and browse the internet, but how much real FUN can you have with it? At least when applications aren't crashing or giving nondescript error messages.

Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu Linux is one of the most powerful operating systems around. It's just not ready for mainstream.

Hopefully nobody ever buys the rights to the API, cripples it, and makes it vendor-specific. Not like that would ever happen...

I ate something similar to that last week, It was called a "Trucker Burger" it consisted of, a 1/4pound (before cooking) burger patty, a fried egg, two slices of back bacon and a fist full of lettuce and whatever sauces you want, as well as pickles onions and the tomatoes. This thing was fucking massive. I bring it up because I understand how it would be to eat such a burger if you where buying it from a street vendor you would want to find yourself a corner or ally to hide your face while you smoosh it into your talking orifice.

HOW can one respectably eat one of those in public, hahahahha.

too much mayo, in my opinion, but the avocado and other ingredients are mouth watering.

I already explained what I meant. He won't allow Flash on his mobile devices, because he believes HTML5 will be superior. But why not have both? Why not empower your users? He is quoted as saying Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. Okay, even if that's true, wouldn't it be in your best interest to work with the vendor to help improve the product for your users' sake? It's like he's holding top secret documents and he won't let anyone have a look. I can understand not wanting to pay licensing fees or whatnot to get DirectX on your platform, and I wasn't trying to assert one way or the other which is better (DX or OGL).

Back in the day, I was all for OpenGL because it was the open-sourced (although, not entirely) underdog, and I loved it when a game would come out in OpenGL. Quake is one example I can think of at the moment. It was awesome. The colored lighting was one option that easily made it stand out, where DirectX barely handled poly accelleration.

Then, one day, DirectX progressed faster than OpenGL did, and every developer embraced it as the language of choice. Now, it's really hard to get anything in OpenGL, and if OpenGL has come to a point where it rivals DirectX, feature- and performance-wise, I would gladly use it over DirectX, regardless of the platform, as I use both Macs and Windows. Although, for gaming, at the moment, Windows stands high above MacOS in that regard.

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

I will grant you that the open standard OpenGL that Apple adopted is not as good as the closed, proprietary, single vendor technology Direct X that Microsoft owns.

But can you see how that doesn't serve your original assertion that Apple is too closed and Steve is controlling everything?

If you don't want to be considered a knee-jerk hater on the issue, your assertions need to make sense.

I don't understand the fish monger or the jeweler...Brown didn't even state what he handed him. You'd think a person, even distracted, would at least look down to see what denomination was handed them. Now, if he said "Can you make change for a twenty" or something to denote what the bill "should" have been, I can see him potentiality slipping through. But the dude handed him change back....it doesn't make sense.

The hotdog vendor reacted appropriately.

And white paper...the white really catches the eye...more believable if he was using lower denominations, but verbally pushing higher. "Here's $300 in nine twenties, nine tens, and six fives." while handing him $180 in lower bills.

Just seems kinda silly they wouldn't even blink at white paper.

I agree they should focus on Flash as a wrapper for games and apps. The reason being that browsers are supporting HTML5 video more and more and the benefit of flash video will become less important.

Games and richer, less traditional UI's are something that browsers cannot do very well and won't be able to do for several years to come. Javascript is getting faster and faster but still comes nowhere near the performance of Flash and other embedded plugins for complex applications.

The other benefit of Flash (and Air) is it's ability to be deployed as a self executing application; it doesn't need to be a browser plugin. That allows rapid development of multiplatform applications using existing skills. It also provides proprietary encapsulation for those who need it; unlike Javascript.

Right now there's a fairly large disagreement going on between Adobe and Apple; the depths of which aren't well known by most users. As most people know, the iPhone (and iPad) are closed platforms that only allow vetted applications to be distributed through the App Store. This arbitrarily places Apple in the supply chain so they can take a slice of the action. This also involves developers having to pony up just to make their apps available; not even Microsoft squeezes their customers that tightly.

With this in mind it makes business sense to disallow flash in the browser as that has the potential to undermine that revenue.

What's less known is Apple's recent changes to their App Store/iTunes TOS. They are now disallowing apps that were built with third party developer tools. All apps must essentially be created directly by using their own Cocoa Touch API, and are not allowed to be developed with an abstracted framework. This has disallowed stand alone applications built with Flash (and other platforms) to be distributed through the App Store.

They actually implemented this change right after Adobe announced that they had their iPhone app wrapper up and running and would be releasing it with Flash 10.1, allowing devs to distribute standalone Flash apps on the iPhone and Android.

So why would Apple go out of it's way to prevent Flash apps (and apps built with other frameworks) in the App Store while they are allowed on Android?

As this change allows Apple to limit developers to having to work specifically with Cocoa Touch which prevents them from building multiplatform applications with the same code. As iPhone/iPad is currently a leading platform this will encourage developers to target development for them first; and then port to other platforms later. Apple are hoping that many developers won't bother porting them at all. That's quite a deep method of vendor lock in.

As someone who is starting to look at developing an app (a game, and not using Flash) for mobile I've decided not to develop for iPhone/iPad. I don't like them dictating the technology that I should use; rather than letting me choose the best tools for the job. If all other platforms will happily accept apps as the developer chose to develop it, then all the better for their users.

My hope is that with other developers feeling this way; and with the speed of development and the feature sets provided by Flash, Air, and other frameworks like the 3D game engine Unity; this will result in many more appealing applications appearing on Android and other platforms that drive customers away from Apple.

This may teach Apple that they've gotten too big for their boots and lead to them loosening their grip on developers; and in turn, their customers.

At which point developers can click a few buttons and deploy their existing apps to iPhone and iPad; welcoming their users to the 'Mobile Platform' rather than the 'Apple Platform'.