|
As deliciously schadenfreudy as that is, Kingdoms of Amalur was a legitimately good game and it sucks that it'll never get a sequel.
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
If you live in RI I hope you're entitled to a free copy. You already paid for it, after all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Schilling got poo poo more specifically for screwing a lot of the employees out of their wages. He was operating the company knowing full-well the whole time that things were going south quick, and once it did there'd be no money to pay anyone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
I know KoA was given out as a PS plus game a while back so I'm guessing they already got a small chunk of change back from Sony for that. Probably nowhere enough to cover the losses though. I vote that all video games should now be state funded. Imagine the fun that'll be!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Schilling got poo poo more specifically for screwing a lot of the employees out of their wages. He was operating the company knowing full-well the whole time that things were going south quick, and once it did there'd be no money to pay anyone. To his credit, while he spent way more money than he had, it was mostly on things to benefit his employees like 401k matching and healthcare plans and even a couple of houses for people to live in while they looked for a home in Rhode Island. Make no mistake, he was a dumbfuck for thinking he could afford all that and then for completely blindsiding his employees when the money ran out, but hey, at least it wasn't all gold-plated jets and crap like Enron. As far as 38 Studios went, it seemed like he had pretty good intentions, at least. Here's what I'm basing most of this on: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2012/07/38-studios-end-game/
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Crazy Pigeon posted:I know KoA was given out as a PS plus game a while back so I'm guessing they already got a small chunk of change back from Sony for that. Probably nowhere enough to cover the losses though. I got it with PS+ and it was one of the few games I got with that service that made me feel like I should've actually paid for a full copy of it, based on how many hours I put into it. So while I'm all for a dude getting the sack for dumb comments, it's also a shame that the studio went out of business when they had some actual talent and could've produced more good games if it hadn't all gone to poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:we 100% know lead levels like these kids have in their blood leads to lifelong health conditions that are often fatal. Proving any individual case is difficult, and as a result, no one will be punished for this because no one will care to expend the effort to do so. Indeed. Lead exposure was much higher in the past and many of those people are dead now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:we 100% know lead levels like these kids have in their blood leads to lifelong health conditions that are often fatal. Proving any individual case is difficult, and as a result, no one will be punished for this because no one will care to expend the effort to do so. "Lifelong health conditions" aren't manslaughter and even if you could show 100% that some bureaucrat's falsified inspection data led to people drinking lead in their tap water and winding up with behavioral disorders, neurological disorders, that's still not "manslaughter" and no prosecutor is going to charge someone with that because it will not stick. It's not a matter of "expending the effort," it's a matter of rule of law, standards of evidence, and statutes meaning things. You also can't charge someone with manslaughter today on the basis of "Well, some people will probably die from lead poisoning eventually, years from now." If someone does not, in fact, commit manslaughter, you probably shouldn't argue that he should be charged and found guilty of it. This'd be a perfect case for a civil suit, since both the government of Michigan and the EPA were pretty clearly negligent, and that resulted in real harm, and the standard of proof is much lower, but hey, you can't sue the government unless it allows you to do that. And Michigan sure doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/GUYHXsb.webm https://i.imgur.com/e1gLk5x.gifv
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:This'd be a perfect case for
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Breath tests not needing a warrant: I think the basic argument is you expel air into your surroundings and don't expect it to remain private because of that, so you don't technically need a warrant to do that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
I expel blood when I pee
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
Stare-Out posted:As deliciously schadenfreudy as that is, Kingdoms of Amalur was a legitimately good game and it sucks that it'll never get a sequel. It has the misfortune of not just being completely mis-managed but also came out in the same breath as Skyrim and, consequently, faced a lot of unfair comparison. It's a very fun game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:I expel blood when I pee Yeah, doesn't everybody? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Ahhh. I thought 38 studios had lied. I didn't know Rhode Island knew about the unreasonable expectations. poo poo.  Yeah, the whole thing was mind boggling to watch and I could go on and on about the whole loving thing. I grew up in that area and I knew a few people on both sides of the collapse, and everyone agreed in the end that Schilling was a loving moron and an rear end in a top hat to boot. The thing that made it truly infuriating to watch, was that Gov. Chaffee had been against the loan but wasn't in office when the loan was approved and paid out, so all he could really do was voice his stance against it. Of course, once he was in office and 38 Studios came to the state and asked for more money because they had blown 75 million dollars in about a year with little to show for it, he wisely told them to get hosed. This led to Schilling whining about how they would have succeeded and had a WoW killer to release if only Chaffee didn't deny them any further funding. If you want some good reading on it, http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3485399&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1 IIRC, some poster comes in about half way through defending 38 Studios and bitching about how everyone was wrong for saying Schilling was an idiot. It later turned out that his mom worked for the RIEDC among other things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Here's my problem with the way the Court is going to come out on this though. Weird how you guys do it because I don't think we ever require blood tests. They don't have to do any sobriety tests before asking for a test, if you blow over you do a second test at the station on a more reliable/accurate breath machine than the handheld testers. I'm not sure you are ever forced to give a blood test but they give it as an option. Carecat has a new favorite as of 00:43 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
My understanding is handheld breath tests are inadmissible. They use it only to demonstrate you were supposedly drunk at the time of arrest. The machine at the station is admissible, and I don't know if it's just where I live or whatever(over 1 million people in my county) but each time I've been arrested for d dub I've shown up at jail at like 10 PM and there's always a magistrate there who is capable of issuing warrants.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
https://vine.co/v/iTizj7EMD51
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Merijn posted:Judging from their heads' position, they are! Often, as I watch my videos, I wonder "Was I recording?" and "How was my battery doing?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
im pooping! posted:but each time I've been arrested for d dub I've shown up at jail at like 10 PM and there's always a magistrate there who is capable of issuing warrants. I hope you've gotten help.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Ha, this is great  reminds me of an old physics sim I used to play with in high school, wish I could find it again
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Ozz81 posted:Ha, this is great https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_Builder ?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
im pooping! posted:My understanding is handheld breath tests are inadmissible. They use it only to demonstrate you were supposedly drunk at the time of arrest. The machine at the station is admissible, and I don't know if it's just where I live or whatever(over 1 million people in my county) but each time I've been arrested for d dub I've shown up at jail at like 10 PM and there's always a magistrate there who is capable of issuing warrants. Most states don't even let the field breath test in as evidence for proving guilt anymore (reliability problems, they aren't calibrated as often, they're in the field because their cheap which is the reason they aren't super accurate). However in every jurisdiction I know of the field breath tests are used for the purposes of showing that the officers had probable cause to arrest. Police departments have a more expensive and bulkier breath test machine at the station that's more reliable and calibrated often to make sure it's accurate and that's admissible to prove guilt. Most departments also have the option of taking a blood sample (which is more accurate still) if the person can't/won't do a breath test. The challenged law at issue is "implied consent laws" which says that once you drive on the state's roads you agree to submit to a mandatory test once at the station if police have probable cause to believe you're impaired while driving. The states that have it typically limit the implied consent to the station breath test, some states' law however says that it also applies to blood draws. Neither the breath test nor the blood test are being administered prior to a warrant, you are presumed to have agreed to them if you're driving. Needless to say, defense and civil rights lawyers have a problem with this. Kurieg posted:I thought the justices were saying "If you're taking them to the police station anyway for a breathalyzer why aren't you spending the time in that car getting a warrant? If you have the time to do so, choosing not to do so is stupid." From a page back: There are two groups of petitioners, one who were given the choice of submitting to a warrentless blood draw or being punished under an implied consent law and one group given the choice of submitting to a breath test, again made mandatory under an implied consent law. The article makes a throwaway comment about it, but based on questioning and precedent the Court is likely to hold implied consent laws for blood draws as unconstitutional (meaning they need to get a warrant) but seem likely to uphold an implied consent law requiring suspects submit to a station house breath test. The Justices have at various points held that blood draws are inherently more intrusive of a person while breath tests are the most minimally invasive means available to investigate the crime/gather evidence. Philosophically I can agree with them, but if the Justices are going to say that getting a warrant electronically is a minimal burden for a blood draw that argument is equally strong for a mandatory breath test. Pook Good Mook has a new favorite as of 03:04 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
trickybiscuits posted:the one about getting bit by a goat twice. This sounds like exactly the right thread. Beans + spilling = you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 03:08
|
|
corillon posted:Looking good for the 4th amendment. Meh. A warrant is worthless for protecting your rights when there are literally no requirements for having it issued. "Just keep a guy on call 25/8, and he can whip up a warrant for you in ten minutes." A warrant requested, issued, and delivered in ten or fifteen minutes probably didn't require much in the way of proof or thought.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Meh. A warrant is worthless for protecting your rights when there are literally no requirements for having it issued. There are requirements: probable cause. In the case of these defendants, that'd have been an easy bar to clear because they were clearly and entirely drunk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih1wqd48q5k
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Meh. A warrant is worthless for protecting your rights when there are literally no requirements for having it issued. "Just keep a guy on call 25/8, and he can whip up a warrant for you in ten minutes." A warrant requested, issued, and delivered in ten or fifteen minutes probably didn't require much in the way of proof or thought. Agreed that in general the phone conversation will be "I need a breath and or blood warrant for XYZ, he was swerving/failed roadside/etc. ... Done." I still like it though because every now and then a judge gets fed up with lovely specific police officers or even entire departments so there's an extra potential check.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
bitcoin bastard posted:Agreed that in general the phone conversation will be "I need a breath and or blood warrant for XYZ, he was swerving/failed roadside/etc. ... Done." Ya. Sure it adds a legal step, but standard for requiring the blood test was already probable cause so the level of proof required isn't different. The real added pressure is reputational. If you the magistrate in eastern North Dakota and you want to be nominated/placed on a district court you don't want to be the guy who's constantly getting his warrants thrown out. If nothing else requiring police to use best practices is good for everyone. Even if the same number of people are guilty as the year before and year before that it makes trying the cases easier and cheaper if you're forcing cops to do simple things like turn on their camera, or make sure to make contemporaneous written records. The same number of people might be found guilty but they'll spend less money and time proving it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
Majestic owl.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
Superb owl touchdown
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Awww.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
The wedding didn't seem that spectacular though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 11:08
|
|
|
Darkhold posted:I hope some goon knows what article I'm talking about but I remember reading an article on a sinking boat where the crew abandoned it. Some appalling low percent of passengers actively tried to help themselves and others. Another percent simply refused help even when offered and the majority of people just milled around like cows until given direction by the first group. There was that Korean ship that sank a year or two ago where most of the students just sat around and waited to die because the crew told them to remain seated and stay calm, then abandoned ship. I think they found a good number of them still in their rooms afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Darkhold posted:I hope some goon knows what article I'm talking about but I remember reading an article on a sinking boat where the crew abandoned it. Some appalling low percent of passengers actively tried to help themselves and others. Another percent simply refused help even when offered and the majority of people just milled around like cows until given direction by the first group. Maybe the Oceanos? Crew did nothing to help the passengers and didnt even tell them the ship was sinking. One of the guys that was playing in the band at the time when the power went out was the one to actually radio the mayday for help. Its a great story and there is a Dateline show of it somewhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanos e: found a short video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BFux2AAMso shy boy from chess club has a new favorite as of 13:54 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
I recall the motto of this thread: "What did they expect to happen?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
God. This is like the most dad video ever. You can see mom gets up and turns her back for two seconds and BAM. Dad's just laughing like an idiot. He knew what was going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Ya. Sure it adds a legal step, but standard for requiring the blood test was already probable cause so the level of proof required isn't different. No, that wasn't the standard. There was no standard. That's the point of the case: the laws being challenged are implied consent laws that state that by operating a motor vehicle on public roadways, you have already consented to the search. A search that you consent to requires no probable cause, it doesn't even require reasonable suspicion. "Can I search your poo poo?" "Sure thing, officer, go ahead," has always been entirely legal even if the officer has no probable cause that you've committed a crime. In the case before the Supreme Court the defendants were drunk off their rear end, "probable cause" would have been a trivial bar to clear, but they're challenging their convictions because they cops didn't even have to do that. bitcoin bastard posted:Agreed that in general the phone conversation will be "I need a breath and or blood warrant for XYZ, he was swerving/failed roadside/etc. ... Done." And it gives the defense a basis to attack the *warrant*. "The probable cause for this warrant being issued was that my client was swerving out of his lane, but your dashcam video doesn't show that." or "You say my client failed the roadside test, but your dashcam video shows he never stumbled." If there's a warrant, you can potentially get the warrant thrown out, in which case the product of the search performed under the authority of the warrant is also out, in which case your client walks free. If there's no warrant requirement and it's just implied consent you can't do any of that stuff, it's not even an option, you're reduced to challenging the accuracy of the equipment, the training of the personnel who used it, etc. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 16:08 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 16:50
|
|
