Amentep

I'm not following you, what do you mean in the context of this discussion by "neglect to get outrages over the fact that profiling is being done every single day around the world" My suspicion is that he's saying that the game highlights a problem that perhaps as a society we should be outraged over but aren't - namely the day to day profiling of people within our society and how the use of the "profiler" in Watch Dogs is an underline to the dangers of real profiling, ramped up in Video Game style to a level which its odoriferousness cannot be ignored.

Funnily enough, as I recall linguists aren't sure of the origins of "g-string". There is a reference to "geestring" from around 1877 referring to loincloths, but the reason for the attribution is unknown (theorized that "gee" and, subsequently, "g" perhaps stood for "groin", which may not have been used in polite society at the time but that is certainly uncertain.)

Does the test actually tell you at any point that it's incorrect? I saw no grading of any of the actual individual answers. I do agree that it's a valid sentence though, particularly if it's in response to the question "Did you end up going to the beach today, or did you go somewhere else?" "We *did* go to the beach, and it was lovely". Note the sentence does not have a "to" in it. We did go the beach We did go to the beach

I love SR3 and SR4 but I'd agree that in general I probably enjoyed SR2 best (but then it was my gateway drug to the SR universe).

Whoops, don't want to bring the thread down with too much text, so umm...how about:

Paper all the way for me. I understand why people like digital versions, but I'm not a fan of them to be honest.

I actually don't own a camera, so difficult to do.

Went to a comic convention yesterday and bought some comics. Now my legs are sore from all the walking and standing. But, mmmmmmm....comics!

Am I the only person who doesn't know anyone who looks like these people?

I actually think he's talking about giving the player character creation choices that fly in the face of the railroading the story does to the character (like having rogue as a class but being put in situations where being a specific type of rogue is nonsensical. The height of this, IMO, is Hawke in DA2 being able to be an apostate mage without the Chantry falling on him/her like a tonne of bricks simply because the game doesn't support that even though, realistically that's what should have happened).

Our top three guesses for your English dialect: 1. American (Standard) 2. US Black Vernacular / Ebonics 3. Canadian Our top three guesses for your native (first) language: 1. English 2. Dutch 3. Norwegian

Saw Maleficient over the weekend. Thought it was pretty good; I think there's a few things they could have developed in a stronger fashion (and rumors of at least 15 minutes cut from the film makes me think some of that may have been). Still it was a fun revisionist fantasy telling of the Disney version of the fairy tale.

can't you romance characters in fire emblem: awakening? tell bruce that it were buckets o' fun when you romanced an elf girl (or boy?) and got yourself married. c'mon, it will make his day. HA! Good Fun! Haha, yeah as Drudanae linked, you can "romance" characters (take them to S support). You can do this with a number of characters, though, and the character's children travel back in time to try and avert their future from happening. Many of the characters have friendships beyond that (going to A level support). Support levels add bonuses if the characters fight next to each other, so its an important part of the game.

I left Bioware's boards during the DA2 development (particularly the Bethany Romance threads). I've only been back when someone makes a specific reference somewhere about something worth reading there. Prior to that, I was periodically active, particularly in the JE2 group when the BSN started.

If the person who owns the copyright publishes an item that they have the right to publish in any format that they wish - including putting their material on torrents for all to download, it is their right as the copyright holder to publish in that fashion (or even in multiple fashions). This is a vast difference from someone who doesn't want their copyrighted material to go on torrents but others put it up there anyway.

^Hmm, when did the 3rd Street Saints take over Thedas?

I'm still playing Fire Emblem: Awakening. Finally got loads and loads of Master and Secondary Seals. And actually I've realized a few things about the FE series that makes me want to go back and play that DS FE game I got and never finished...

I was mostly trying to make a joke about you being railroaded by the game into having your identity exposed. And failing, obviously.

Ah but now you are deciding what is and isn't irrelevant, you can't have it both ways. When you copy a file there will exist 2 copies until you delete one, when you move a file there will exist two copies until the computer deletes the original upon the completion of the copy. The only simple way to get around this would be to give your friend your ebook reader with the book as loan. Spirit vs the letter of the law... "there will exist 2 copies until you delete one" implies post transfer, which is what I was asking and fits into the scenario outlined for "When the transfer is done". When the transfer is done, if 2 copies exist (your original and the one you made) and it is not covered in the EULA or making backups for yourself where allowed, you have violated the copyright by making copies. What I said was irrelevant was a temporary file created during the transfer that cannot exist on its own as the copied work (ie is not a true copy, but a file that exists to facilitate the transfer and may contain part/all of the document but which is deleted after the transfer is done).

Were you in a railroad yard when the news story broke?

When you are transferring a file there are going to be 2 copies. Following your strict rules, that makes you a pirate. I'm not asking about "when you are transferring a file", I'm asking "When the transfer is done". If, at the end of that there are two copies and unless the activity is provided for by the EULA of the ebook (or equivalent) or applicable rules about making back up copies for personal use, then you have assumed the publishing role with respect to the second copy in so much as you have created and distributed a presumably* work under copyright. Whether this is (or should be) legally actionable is a secondary point. While the transfer of files is going on, and incomplete copy may exist in some secondary state, but unless this copy were not deleted upon completion of the file transfer, I'd suspect it'd be irrelevant to discussion. Hence why I'm stressing completion. *I say presumably because this would be obviously moot for things that were legally in the public domain

Okay, to me being paid to produce something would be a "money influx" as it keeps the company flush with capital with which to operate, whereas I'd characterize any money's needed over the production as "profit", but I see how we started talking at cross purposes. I only did one course in accounting 20-something years ago so perhaps my terminology is inaccurate. I seem to recall that Feargus had said in the past about lining up projects to keep people busy; it could be a project like this would allow them to rotate people in and out of development as other projects begin/end. However it could also become a permanent time/money/personnel sink, so I can understand where you're coming from.

Oh did you open a can of worms with that one. How does one accomplish what you are saying? At one point in the transfer there need to exist 2 copies of the ebook. Does that mean you broke the law? See what I said above about the letter vs. the spirit of the law. When the transfer is done, does 2 copies exist or one? If only one you didn't act as an unauthorized publisher, did you? If the transfer is interrupted halfway through does 1.5 copies exist or 1? If only 1 you didn't act as an unauthorized publisher, did you?

My only point was that they had to have some money upfront on the project which means money coming into the company as my understanding was that my.com (I think that was the Russian company) was acting as the "publisher" - ie funding the production. You seem to be arguing that Obsidian is acting as the "publisher" and thus investing their own money into the development which may be true, but would indeed be news to me. If I'm right, then yes Obsidian is getting money upfront. If you are right, then yes Obsidian is investing their money into development in the hopes of a return. Obviously, I thought we were talking about the former and not the latter with regard to Obsidians money flow and "work for free".

Obsidian can't be working on it - F2P model or not - if there wasn't money coming in to work on the project. In essence, you're arguing that Obsidian is working on it for free out of the goodness of their hearts until at some point in the future some money might roll in. They're nice guys, and all, but I don't see Urquhart et al being THAT nice.