Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - spank86

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11  Next >
1
Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Elder Scrolls Online
« on: February 05, 2014, 07:51:32 AM »
people who don't pay anything don't get to play at all...

you get what you pay for, in this case you pay a fair bit to get not so much.

By this logic people shouldn't be mad at all about pay-to-win games.

not really, they just shouldn't play them if they're ridiculous.

All games that aren't free are pay to win.

This is pay for frippery, as most real games that people moan about being P2W are.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 04, 2014, 04:36:45 PM »
EDIT: what Saddam said. The death penalty hasn't been shown to actually influence criminal's behavior in any way.

from what I remember it HAS been shown to influence a juries behaviour, in states where there's a mandatory death sentence for certain crimes juries are less likely to convict for those crimes.

I suspect that in the type of situation I'm talking about, this wouldn't be a problem.

What would you do if you believed all life is sacred and any killing is wrong (and that two wrongs don't make a right).

Let the guy go free or be directly responsible for his execution...

It's an issue, although I'm not sure if there's an option to get out of jury duty in those states if you don't feel you could ever support the death penalty.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 04, 2014, 07:58:58 AM »
EDIT: what Saddam said. The death penalty hasn't been shown to actually influence criminal's behavior in any way.

from what I remember it HAS been shown to influence a juries behaviour, in states where there's a mandatory death sentence for certain crimes juries are less likely to convict for those crimes.

4
Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Elder Scrolls Online
« on: February 04, 2014, 07:52:07 AM »
You make it sound like the Imperials are some kind of master race that the munchkins will all flock to.  Gameplay-wise, they're pretty similar to the Dunmer in how middle-of-the-road they are.  I'm not seeing any big advantage in playing as one.

It doesn't matter if there is an advantage or not, the point is that people who don't pay that $20 don't get to play them. Seems like a slap in the face to me.

people who don't pay anything don't get to play at all...

you get what you pay for, in this case you pay a fair bit to get not so much.

5
Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Elder Scrolls Online
« on: February 03, 2014, 01:24:13 PM »

I don't disagree.  I'm simply saying that it may not be enough of an incentive for players to purchase the collectors edition over the normal one.

You do get a little statue.

TBH I never think collectors editions are "worth it" in a value for money sense, they're only ever worth it if you look at it as owning a unique item that transcends value... otherwise known as having more money than sense.

6
Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Elder Scrolls Online
« on: February 03, 2014, 12:06:02 PM »
But what's the difference between having an imperial and not?  Do they not get an alliance?  Are they awesome with stats?  Do they start with more gold/items?

Did you not read the article I linked? >o<
You linked an article?

Found it.

So there's not a whole lot of benefit for an extra $20.
Good to know its not worth it.

they have to maintain a delicate balance between those who want to be able to get cools stuff and those who immediately whine "OMG P2W" the moment anything in the game is purchasable.

I think this threads that line quite well. It seems that digital preorders will also allow you to play any race in any alliance which is quite cool.

I think the idea is to make it semi-realistic since whilst you might get a few rogue elements in different alliances they don't want the whole server full.

7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Unipolar, bipolar, disc, square, infinite plane?
« on: February 03, 2014, 09:46:29 AM »
I think the problem is you think of it as a single theory.
It's more like flat earth theories.

They don't all agree.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 08:24:09 PM »
Does anyone here support rehabilitative models of criminal justice?
In theory.

What practical issues don't you support?

the difficulty of determining if someone is actually rehabilitated.

Look at Jon Venables, that's not an example of rehabilitation working.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 07:36:01 PM »
Does anyone here support rehabilitative models of criminal justice?
In theory.

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 10:38:56 AM »

Yeah. But is revenge really such a bad thing in all cases? Also, since we're talking about incredibly violent people here it protects people from them permanently. Even if they're just in jail, their fellow prisoners deserve protection from the truly crazy people.

It's inconsistent. That's why I'm also against giving the victim a say in sentencing (a proposal that gets mooted from time to time). I don't believe a sentence should be mitigated by how benevolent your victim was nor do I believe that Justice should be a vehicle for revenge. I believe the main purpose of the justice system is or at least should be deterrent (at the very least it should deter reoffending)

And as Duck said, it's only so expensive because of appeals. If we only executed the people who were not in any way at risk of being innocent, the system could be designed such that this was not a problem.
It still makes me question the aspect of it where people see a suicide as escaping punishment but an execution as being it.

I read somewhere that mortality rates are higher among low level gang members than they are among death row inmates in America. That in itself speaks volumes about how broken the system is.

I don't think it's possible to fix the system fully. I also don't think it's necessary. It certainly needs adjustment but there is no perfect system on an individual level, you can only work towards a good system on a national level and that's one that best deters offending and re-offending and Americas record doesn't show that it does this currently.

Quibbling over whether or not something is "revenge" is a silly argument.  Revenge (or retribution, or societal vengeance, or whatever you want to call it) is a major element of every criminal justice system in the world, including those that don't have the death penalty.  You can still criticize that element of criminal justice, of course, but it makes no sense to single out the death penalty.
I disagree. I would characterize those aspects of it as deterrent.

I would rate the effectiveness of any justice system by the level of crimes in a country, the less crimes per head the more effective the system.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellites
« on: February 02, 2014, 01:06:15 AM »
Unless you happen to believe in Electomagnetic Acceleration, of course. But that theory has its own problems, since it fails to conform to the results of the Bedford Level Experiment.
Not something I'm familiar with.

I think we can all agree that the bedford level experiment was not complete, it was an interesting experiment but would require repetition and alteration to be truly scientific and rigorous. That beign so I'm not against things that don't conform with it.

I'll look it up when I'm sober.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 01:03:38 AM »

At no point did I claim the American justice system's handling of the death penalty was the right way to do it. I just said that complete abolishment of it is dumb. In certain cases of rape, murder, and human trafficking death is an appropriate punishment.
I disagree but I respect your opinion.

My personal feeling is that the death penalty is not justice but revenge. The stats in america would suggest it's not even particularly cost effective.

The funny thing is that if a criminal kills themselves there's usually an immediate outcry about how they escaped justice, somewhat contradictory.

There's also the aspect that for the religious among us if you kill someone you deny them the possibility of redemption.

That said I'm not religious and although my personal preference is for a proper LIFE imprisonment as oppose to the death penalty I have no great issue with it as long as people know the consequences beforehand. Well, no issues aside from the miscarriages of justice possibilities.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 12:42:48 AM »

If someone walks into a school with a gun and shoots a bunch of kids and is seen on 20 cameras and is arrested at the scene of the crime holding the gun, I fail to see why we should be worrying that he might be innocent. That's the kind of scenario I'm talking about.
That's a pretty rare scenario.

I have no evidence But I'd hazard a guess it would make up less than 1% of public executions.

call it less than 5% to be safe.

14
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: February 02, 2014, 12:40:10 AM »
Quote
Unless you're transacting in thousands of dollars then the easiest way is to... pretend it never happened.

The tax man may not see it that way.

If there's any value at all in bitcoins, you can be sure as hell the inland revenue is interested in their exchange.

There's money in WOW's money too...

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 12:39:08 AM »
Isn't it true in all nations that either side can appeal to a higher Court if they lose in one of the lower?
You appeal guilty verdicts, not innocent verdicts.
Well YOU do sure, but can't the prosecution appeal to a higher court?

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 10:18:18 PM »
Isn't it true in all nations that either side can appeal to a higher Court if they lose in one of the lower?

And isn't this just an example of that?

Or am I missing something?

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 01:29:41 PM »
I think, in the US, you can appeal a guilty verdict, but that's it. Which makes sense

Well that's not precuisely true, In the Louise Woodward case the district prosecutor appealed to the supreme court after an appeal court reduced her sentence to involuntary manslaughter.

Seems to me like that parallels this situation quite closely.

18
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: January 30, 2014, 01:55:26 PM »

Unless of course you can point me to the bit that shows where money supply is regulated and by whom ...

this is all getting very flat earthy  ;D

If someone did regulate the federal reserve, say the Um-bongo corporation, wouldn't you next simply ask who regulates them?


Bank interest is normally below the inflation threshold regardless, so chances are your savings are losing value despite gaining in numeric volume.
Source?

The last 30 years of reality?

Savings on normal accounts have almost never got close to inflation.

They might however have risen in value compared to other currencies so a current account in sterling may have beaten American inflation if transferred back and this is the point where bitcoin could be more profitable than normal banking.

19
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: January 29, 2014, 09:33:18 AM »
There's not an unlimited supply of anything, the supply of US dollars does however have the potential to be almost unlimited, far more so than bitcoin.
...I find it far more likely that someone would find a way to exploit Bitcoin to produce infinite bitcoin than I do that the Federal Reserve would order infinite dollar bills, and that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing and would then proceed to attempt to produce infinite dollars.

Of course, I don't see either of those events at likely, just one more so. Regardless, the control of the money supply is quite closely monitored and regulated. Hence, it is not unlimited. To suggest that there is an unlimited supply, or the "potential to be unlimited" is pretty clear evidence you haven't even read some basic Wikipedia articles, let alone taken an introductory Economics class.

I'm aware of the consequences of producing infinite money, but the potential IS there, and money can also be forged fairly effectively (even assuming you actually require a paper copy), certainly easier than a bitcoin can currently be forged assuming you have an internet connection to verify it.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Ask a Jew anything.
« on: January 29, 2014, 08:05:36 AM »
Why would you doubt that you should wage war with any Amalekite you encounter?  Do you think God was ambiguous in what he felt the lot of the Amalekites should be?
Genetics perhaps?

By this time it would be extremely unlikely for anyone to be purely Amalekite in the absence of a lot of inbreeding.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11  Next >