cynest

One reason being he died unexpectedly (assassination). The Nobel Peace Prize also wasn't awarded that year due to no suitable living candidates, which can be considered an acknowledgement of him.

I wonder if COD:GHOSTS will beat this. From what I'm seeing, GTAV has a few advantages:

Non-yearly (or biyearly) release schedule for an extremely well-known franchise.

No outstanding publisher issues of note, especially gaffes related to gameplay "dumbing down"

A number of factors contributing to somewhat inflated review scores including normal reactions to AAA titles and the GTA series' tendency to hit the right buttons for reviews that doesn't necessarily reflect on gameplay

Is # an acceptable character?

That wasn't a criticism. It was a short, sarcastic jeer with poor grammar.

Which != left liberalism.

I'm reading Harry Turtledove's Worldwar series right now, and I'm struck by the comparisons he makes between Soviet and Nazi military doctrines. Essentially, the former is controlled by individuals too paranoid to allow for any initiative on the part of individuals under their command, while the latter actively encourages initiative on the part of commanders and dog-faces (grunts). One side effect of this is that German soldiers get away with much less deferential behavior. The result are seen both in previous battles between the two, and with the conflict against the Lizards (invaders from another planet with a much more restrictive bent than even the USSR) where the Nazis generally perform much better given their technology.

I wonder if a similar level of encouraging initiative exists in technology due to the fact that there's a low ceiling on how far you can pass most decisions up before running into nontechnical persons. Looking at it from another side, technical careers might allow for more initiative simply by the ability to enter the market via unconventional means.

Unconnected to the above, it seems to me that these sort of leaks are easier to perform versus a lot of political actions especially with the technical skills of leakers. Leaks' effect per unit of time to follow through surpasses most anything else I can think of. The only real downside is the resultant criminal penalties. Infodumps like Swartz's are similarly relatively easy to perform.

At least post the original and not some paranoid screed.

Tbh I would expect higher intelligence among engineers vs the general public if only due to selection effects. Smart kids tend to be more pushed towards professions under that label and are better able to meet the challenges associated with getting a job there such as earning a degree or learning enough to be useful.

However, one could argue that such an agreement would only represent a codified social contract. Ie it's still "You aren't holding up your end of the bargain" rather than "the contract is for 2 hours/day with an optional extension of $100/hour each day."

> Thomas again used the "en-loco parentis" argument he often makes in decisions involving children

Just a note: it's in loco parentis, latin for in the place of the parent.

Prohibition was 1920-1933.

My experience has been somewhat different. 2012 was a wholly miserable year for me and I honestly feel that it was rather pointless ordeal exacerbated by toxic relationships I lack the means to escape.

I've also wondered if the incentives with regards to cheating have changed. It's certainly easier to cheat. And if grades are perceived as having a greater effect on standing, the rewards have increased as well.

AOPA is purely general (non-commercial) aviation, so the first point is correct, although iirc the data was from actual incidents.

I don't know if anything like that has ever happened in a heavy aircraft. However, commercial pilots have pretty big health requirements to make situations like that less likely.

A few years ago at AOPA I attended a seminar on this. Turns out the success rate is extremely high provided you are able to get in contact with someone on the ground.

But is that truly de-anonymizing? I share my legal name with several famous people, and numerous SEO'd professionals. Barring more specific searching knowing specific details I am relatively hard to identify. Same with just about anyone who fits the (common first name, common last name) paradigm. On the other hand (rare first name, rarer last name) is relatively easy to uniquely identify.

> Suicide is the one crime

Suicide is not a crime in the united states.

Arguably it makes the system less effective by adding a disincentive to enforcing the law in that specific fashion. There's also the risk that, to paraphrase kurt vonnegut, the moral will be to not go after people with friends.

Thq is getting desperate it seems. Really hoping they're able get their next wave of games out before they go under.

No. He stated that his uncle, the current leader, was a dictator.

In this context, privilege is being used in the sense of, "he was a child of privilege."

>- Prescriptions are in units of pills, not nanograms of active substance

While that level of precision would be nice, pills are delineated by dosage so you can simply give 100mg of substance to one patient, and 200mg to another.

> It's not hard to imagine a near future, if not a present, in which a person's identity is entirely evaluated, shaped, and determined by a monolith such as facebook.

I don't think this is entirely correct. I think that facebook is better described as a catalyst for those who would do the evaluating, shaping, etc.

And that's even assuming that Avengers should have been categorized as scifi.

I feel that there is a still stronger form of the argument out there. Or maybe it's closely related. It incorporates what you just said as well as the fact that intelligence != social status. If I could figure out how to properly word it, I would be quite a ways ahead of where I am now.

This implies that a specific target is necessary. Anywhere with people is usable.

There's another possible point here: preventing people from signing up as teens ups the difficulty for targeting teens.

That's disappointing.

Even though I had no clue about actual economics at the time, this is what I saw as so screwy in runescape. A lot of the ingame money came from alchemy. A few clever people had figured out that the two of the highest tier bows were easy to produce en masse and so created a market for their components. Since runescape does not have a shard system like WoW or other MMOs, this particular market was huge. RMT (real money traders) came in and automated the gathering of these components. Jagex tried numerous methods of eliminating RMT from the game, including fixing ingame prices to within a certain amount. Not sure what happened then, but I still can't figure out why they didn't simply fix the mechanic at the heart of it.

> From melting icecaps to near constant nuclear war its a sign of an AI that that too easily bounces from one extreme to another.

Strategy games put the player in the role of the fascist dictator. Your goal is to further your own nation at the expense of everything else. In reality, groups of people have different incentives and act quite a bit differently.