atom631

15 hours ago, Dre801 said:

Tried RE4 on Xbox One X and put it down.  Sorry, can't do those controls in 2018.

I couldn’t do it in 2005 either. Never understood the love for that game. 

3 hours ago, mo1518 said:

I'm home sick today so I picked up okami on Switch. Man, talk about a poorly paced intro. Non-stop annoying gibberish voices and cutscenes interrupting you every few steps. Awful. Got out of the first cave and now I see what the praise was about. It's got a real ocarina of time vibe to it, and the combat is pretty fun so far. 

 

I'm playing with a pro controller - am I missing out on any motion control stuff, or is it just the drawing, which seems fine with the analog. 

I grabbed the HD version for Xbox and I felt the same way. I couldn’t get past the intro. It’s like 40 minutes of nonsense. I’ll have to tough it out I guess. 

Battlefield 1 

1 hour ago, SFLUFAN said:

@atom631 because MSNBC is the network of the so-called "Resistance" (OLOLOLOL) but continues to turn a blind eye to stories that would reflect badly on the military-industrial complex, just as they did when the guy that they liked occupied the Oval Office.

 

MSNBC "covered" that bombing only as far as the Senator addressing it, nothing more.

so in other words...their views are consistent. whether you agree with them or not is another story. 

can someone ELI5 why MSNBC is being singled-out as dropping the ball on the coverage of Yemen? Reading that article in the OP, Im failing to see the connection of MSNBC being so blatantly anti-trump and yet not covering his failures in Yemen. 

It seems all MSM is really lacking in coverage of Yemen. There are stories, but they are buried and shadowed by the latest Trumpism. 

Also...MSNBC did cover the schoolbus bombing:

http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-we-just-bombed-a-school-bus-1296020547855

"substantive evidence"

this makes me wet. 

from what i understand, the public information released thus far is just the tip of the iceberg. I wish they would hurry up already and drop the bomb. 

I fucking love my crocs. fuck the haters! they have replaced my slippers and im never going back! 

i need to stock up! 

CANT WAIT! This fall is gonna be great. RDR2 for my SP fix and BFV for my MP. My body is ready. 

I played through Diablo 1 once and played the fuck outta 3. Never played much of Diablo 2. 

So with that, Diablo 2 remastered would be awesome. 

Ive only ever replayed one SP game in my life and it was an accident. 

Metal Gear Solid 2. Played through the first half of the game until I got to point and it dawned on my that I remembered everything from that point forward. I had zero recollection of the opening of the game, which to this day feels bizarre. I decided to just keep going as I was doing a run to get ready for MGS4 (playing 1-3). 

based on the title, it sounds like you shit the bed. 

3 minutes ago, The def star said:

Him being taking off YouTube is a long time coming. He has definitely violated their TOS. Plenty of videos and channels that have done the same as his have been taken down. What makes him different?

i was really just hoping the thing that took him down was being caught giving fellatio to a frog. 

and there it is. i guess we will see what happens from here. i dont mind not seeing alex jones anymore and i hope this ruins him..but i just wish it didnt come about in his fashion. 

however, if it works to silence him..then maybe i am wrong. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/06/youtube-removes-alex-jones-account-following-earlier-bans.html

30 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

I did. The regulation idea is the one that doesn't even seem feasible. I don't see how eliminating their reach on the most popular media sites somehow feeds into their narrative but forcing a disclaimer does. What's better is to eliminate their reach on the most popular social media platforms and decimate their way of reaching people. Torch these fuckers to the ground as putting them "out in the open" has been a failure.

youre not going torch them to the ground though. thats the problem. do you really believe these naive people are suddenly going to be "oh, well the gov ruled alex jones is wrong and MSM is removing him from their sites. they must be right. i no longer support alex jones".  

never.going.to.happen. this only strengthens their fantastical suspicions. 

8 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Absolutely nobody knows any of this. I do know that his reach is high due to social media and a lack of action to ban his ideas. Keeping him in plain sight has allowed him to spread misinformation easily and more easily harass parents of dead children. It didn't work.

see my above comments about regulating, disclaimers, categories, etc...

You take down IW and 6 more sites will pop up just like it spewing the same nonsense. Keep him in plan sight where he can be heavily scrutinized and called out. 

1 minute ago, legend said:

 

I don't think the ISP analogy would be pushed though because law and regulation of ISP is more from the lens of the internet as a utility. Regardless of how prolific Facebook (et al.) is, I don't think there is any reason to conceptualize it as a utility and therefore generalize the law across. 

 

This would, however, generalize to say, Youtube and Twitter. And I'm also okay with a world where they block content for the same reason I'm okay with a world in which cable channels choose their content and can kick shows off.

as of now the internet is not a utility, and that's certainly a different argument on whether or not it should become one.

5 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Evangelicals do agree with me on porn; they just do it in secret.  

 

But this isn't based on religious reasons either. I'd rather limit their ability to spread their nonsense; they only easily spread their kooky conspiracy theories by being unfettered on social media, and their influence on harassing parents of dead children only has spread due to it. Make it as hard as possible for these scumbags to do anything.

This is my problem with it. Look,  as I said... hit him hard on the Sandy Hook thing. Make an example out of him. Force regulation that requires him to personally make a statement that his followers should not take action, its entertainment only, etc.... but this is basically saying "we dont agree with your rhetoric, so we are going to ban you". Which you can applaud if you agree with the verdict, but there may be a day where your views are being banned and my feeling is you might sing a different tune. 

8 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

That's not a 1st amendment issue if an ISP blocks porn. There's also a big difference between porn and harassing the parents of dead children.

 

This greatly reduces their social media influence, and it matters. Youtube needs to block them next.

it is if they use religion as the reason. 

ask an evangelical conservative if they agree with you on porn. 

this is why I am not a fan. I understand they can, Im ok with them doing it bc its within their right. But I feel I'd rather keep this kooks where I can see them, then where I cant. 

As I said above, Id rather they be categorized as "Conspiracy Theory Entertainment" and require a very stern, non-skippable disclaimer  before every episode. 

For the same reason that, lets say an ISP decides its going to block all domains that host pornography because they believe it adds to the moral decay of society (or some other nonsensical reason). Im a big boy, I can make the decision on my own as to what content I chose to view. And I understand no platform is required to host it if it goes against their views. On the other side of the argument, I firmly agree that a company should have the right to ban/block/Not serve cake if its what they chose. 

However, this wont suddenly make AJ/IW followers go away or stop believing his lies.  This in fact  will only further to strengthens their narrative. Also, so long as Youtube doesn't ban him, it wont matter. 

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

 

They're not suppressing freedom of speech. As a private company, they have no obligation to host people who think the kids in Sandy Hook didn't die and were just actors. That's like saying firing someone for cussing out the boss is an infringement of first amendment rights.

technically they are publicly traded companies and to a degree i feel that should make a difference. 

I'm certainly not justifying what he said. As a father of two, he can get hit by a truck today and I would praise his death. He should be held accountable for it. Force him to apologize and pay damages, etc.... but as I mentioned this is a slippery slope. 

not a fan of this. I know Alex Jones is a fucking moron...but suppressing freedom of speech is a slippery slope.

maybe create a category called "Conspiracy Theory Entertainment" and throw him and other like him in there. Maybe even add a disclaimer of some sort too, 

Ive sat down to watch this twice and just loose interest within the first 20 minutes. Its so slow. I will have to give it a serious attempt soon though..maybe when i wrap up the 2nd season of Handmaid's Tale 

design wide area networks