When we talk about ninjas, we are talking about the sweetest being ever- that is, we are talking about the being that which nothing sweeter can be conceived. So, when we conceive of the ninja in our mind, we conceive of the being that which nothing sweeter can be conceived. But consider this: Is it sweeter to exist only in the mind or to exist both in the mind and in reality-outside the mind? Certainly, it is much sweeter to exist also in reality-flipping out and wailing on guitars is much sweeter when someone is actually doing it. So when we conceive of the sweetest being ever, we are conceiving of the being that exists both in the mind and in reality. Since the ninja is that being that which nothing sweeter can be conceived and that being exists in the mind and in reality, the ninja exists in reality. Thus the ninja exists.
QED. Philosophers are idiots.
Rephrase: Since the ninja is that being that which nothing sweeter can be conceived and that being IS CONCEIVED OF as existing in the mind and in reality, the ninja exists in reality. Oh wait, that's a nonsequiter...
First of all, remember the rumor that made the internet implode? Turns out that yes, Sony WAS making the "Home" network, and yes, it's basically a fusion of Live achievements and Wii Miis. Only, it takes it way beyond what Nintendo is doing with Mii. Check that first link for a video. Now, I'll tell you right now I prefer the art style Nintendo went with. I just don't like the realistic "Second Life" look. I prefer cute little animal robots that nearly resemble old timey sprites in their width/height ratios. Other than that, the idea of a massive set of environments to chat with others and a home you can invite people back to full of decorations? Yeah, I'm all over that. Still, that's really just a secondary perk (and a chat room like the V-Chat of old).
So check the second video. THAT is a platformer I WANT to play! It's a nicely done physics system that lends itself well to all sorts of awesome little tricks worked into the game. I mean I really want to play that!
So in other words, Sony's starting to get my attention. Keep it up and maybe I might just get a PS3. Of course, announcements of dropping features like native support for PS2 games (in favor of poor emulation and paying for a team of programmers to slowly expand it's emulated games list, which seems a very poor choice to me) don't help things. BC needs to get improved, not set back a few years.
The fans are unhappy... The thing is, I never finished either one, though I have friends that have both and I have to say I loved playing them those times we could actually get together online (in fact I think I prefer the online survival with friends to playing the single player games). I guess that means I have to convince them to play, find time all of us have free, and finish it by month's end.
The problems here are the same as with Substistance. REOutbreak doesn't have an option to enter a 3rd party server's IP address, nor are the games on the PC where they would be more readily hackable. Again, I'd be forced to buy a mod chip and solder it into my system to even have a chance of maybe someone hacking in custom online play and then someone hosting a server.
The only hope here is that Sony will take it upon itself to host the servers for these games that are dropping like flies, but that's a pretty distant hope.
More cheap games that I'll never get around to playing in full? At these prices, sure!
For $10.50, I got these...
(the Genesis games are cart only and the PSX ones CD only, no original cases or manuals, helping to explain the price)
PSX
Dino Crisis
Silent Hill
Mega Man X6
TigerShark
I just wish George would insure is intellectual property was put into better hands.
This Day of the Dead, from the trailer I can see it already doesn't seem to even remotely have much to do with the original film other then zombies. I read its not even being done as a sequel to the dawn remake,But a stand alone film.
The Dawn film kept some aspects from the original , "The mall , Being trapped on roof tops, With swarms of zombies surrounding the building trying to pry themselves in.
But this Day remake from the trailer misses the mark, In the original Romero film the Zombies were more or less already embarking on their rampage when the movie starts, The characters seek shelter in a laboratory bunker with scientist with the feds to examine zombie specimen, While the outside world gets ravaged.
This day remake , Doesn't do that , Its straight to the begin again back to what the other films already established like dawn, were everything starts normal , People start getting mauled and then comes the rising. * been there done that*
The big thing of Day is that its supposed to be a precursor to Land of the the dead the more recent film, Were Buba *fat black zombie* from land was experimented on in the Film Day of the dead in a attempt to domesticate him, Thats why he could think make some decisions and use weapons.( Although he was Caucasian in day and mysteriously underwent a negroplasty)
The big question is will that happen? Will the Zombie experiment occur or will this film suck?
"My freedom to swing my fist only ends at the beginning of your nose."
Should so-called "victimless crimes" which harm no one be prohibited? (If you want to exclude hard drugs from that, feel free, but I don't under any circumstances condone the prohibition of substances which can be used moderately for the benefit of the users.) Should prostitution, gambling, and abortion be legal? How about suicide and euthanasia?
Personally, I feel that all of the above (aside from hard drugs, in which I am still undecided) should all be legal.
Prostitution: There is the argument presented that prostitution deprecates the female gender, and to an extent, I agree. However, I believe it's more deprecating to humans and their pursuit of happiness to restrict selling your own body. George Carlin had it right when he said, "Why shouldn't you be able to sell what you can give away for free?" Women should have the choice if they choose a lifestyle that's frowned upon by most of society. What if the money they would earn through performing consensual sexual activities on a person they know is disease-free would ultimately help the woman through financial troubles in which she appears to be out of options? What if it remained a skeleton in her closet? What if she knew the man? Why is "friends with benefits" perfectly legal, yet not "friends with financial benefits"?
It should be this woman's choice to hold sex on whatever emotional pedestal she chooses. If it isn't a big deal to her, or if she sleeps around to begin with, why does the added detail of money suddenly make it a moral taboo?
Gambling: I don't disagree with its legal status. I don't participate or care if people choose waste their money.
Abortion: It should be legal. Some people simply aren't ready to have children, nor should they be forced to raise it. Adoption? Sure, it's an alternative, but the child may still feel unwanted. The world is already over-populated. Why raise more god damn children when they're already too many? There's nothing beautiful about giving birth to a child. It does not make you special; mostly everyone else can do the same. Raising a child properly is special, and if there's a bad chance of this taking place, and if the parents are unfit, there's no reason to force them. I do not see the child as an independently living creature until it's birth (or perhaps by the 3rd trimester), and hence, don't see it as any more murderous than removing a tumor or parasite before then. Don't take that the wrong way. :D
Suicide/euthanasia: Yup. If someone really wants to die, and is in constant suffering, who am I to force him to live? He's not truly master of his own domain if I force my own self-righteousness upon him. I may disagree, but it's not my decision to make. On the other hand, someone who is mentally ill and at times DOES value life ought to be saved and helped.
There's a few ideas to mull over. What do you guys think?
