Toss up between Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, which I handed to Attack of the Clones.

Quote from: Unit 33 on June 11, 2012, 07:18:13 AM

And we still don't know who the protagonist is (It keeps blurring between Obi Wan and Anakin).

You say this like it's, in and of itself, a bad thing.

http://screenshot.xfire.com/s/123689422-3.jpg

I've had this problem once before and found that pressing ctrl + alt + delete and then typing something will fix it.

However, with me, I think it was the number 8 (I've never seen it occur with a letter).

Are me and Rage cleared for our duel or should we wait for everyone else who has to catch up to catch up first?

GG versus Droideka:

DAE THINK THAT CARTOON NETWORK IS ON THE DECLINE??


I've seen a few episodes and, from what I can tell, it seems like a reboot of the one that was released around '03 as a series of short episodes.  But while it boasts updated animation, the story isn't up to par, in that I can't even tell if there is one.  Heck, I pick up on a lot of things in film and television (I perceived the twist in Fight Club and M. Knight Shamalamadingdong can do his best Chubby Checker impersonation and I'll probably see it) but seriously, what is happening? 

Short of Mr. Jackson barking "'What' ain't no galaxy I've ever heard of, do they have Jedi on What?" I don't see it going too far.  Until then, enough is enough.

Count me in so I can pull the Kentucky Wildcat (y'know, one and done and all).


You say that it'll occur in Cloud City... where in CC?  Or is it a mod map?

I'll play Devil's Advocate.  Don't know a whole ton about Psychology, but I was actually reading this yesterday!  My textbook has references to studies--if you want the details, I'll try to find them and link them.

Quote from: Jamman

1. People who watch graphic TV are usually influenced with negative or resembling behavior.
  (ex. recent Michigan University health study shows teens who watch sexual activity on TV are 10 times more likely to engage is such activities.)

And the people who watch peaceful television?  People are influenced by television, sure.  But if one sees the Zapuder *film* (JFK getting shot) and then go out and decide to kill his or her neighbor?  Perhaps that person is the type of person who is so mentally unstable that anything else could have set him or her off.  So this "undue" influence of TV on these people could be replaced by something else, such as peers or society as a whole (see, e.g., the concept of modeling).

Also, these studies are often misnomers.  Was the sample size representative?  If I recall correctly, you need like 1,000 - 1,500 people for an accurate study to be applied to the US population as a whole.  Also, cum hoc ergo propter hoc--correlation does not imply causation.  Maybe these people are more likely to trust the words of some reality TV star (lol), and it's not TV as a whole (a third factor--not that there can also be a fourth, fifth, factor, and so on).

(NOTE: Showing people on TV getting punished isn't an effective deterrent because young people won't know what is going on.)

Quote from: Jamman
2. People who are more susceptible  to create a fantasy world and hide while watching TV (Idk about this one, my partner thought it could work, but i cant think of any support).

I'm not following this one.  But I've touched on it somewhat above (in re Zappuder--I might be able to find a better counterexample, if you want).

Quote from: Jamman
3. The majority of TV viewers waste a noticeable portion of their lives.
   (ex. average TV viewer wastes 9 years of their life watching TV)

I'm supposed to show both sides of the argument in a way like, with number 3, I could say that, there are 2 categories of TV viewers, passive, those who sit and watch pictures go by without thinking about it. Then interpretive viewers, those who form an opinion on what they see. Im not sure if that would count as "showing both sides".

Take it a step further: watching TV does not necessarily need to be sedentary and unproductive--many people go to the gym and do cardio (lol, treadmills) while watching [television program] and do work while watching television.  Also, what kind of TV?  The news?  SportsCenter?  Jersey Shore?  Not all TV is worth the same. 

Quote from: {TcF}Dr.Penguin on March 23, 2012, 11:51:22 AM
Spending money on cable is a harmful side effect maybe?

John Maynard Keynes would beg to differ.

Quote from: Joseph on February 14, 2012, 01:00:31 PM
pretty sure, not much to be scared of politically anymore that hasn't already happened or is taking shape. I will assume you have read the NDAA and that you're speaking "tongue-in-cheek"

I thought that the NDAA, which I believe is mandated by U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 12., didn't grant the Government the ability to indefinitely detain suspects so much as reaffirm, meaning that the Government already had this ability.

Quote from: Joseph on February 13, 2012, 08:28:52 PM
If these fascists have their way there will be 30,000 drones patrolling America by the end of the decade

I'm hoping someone burns down Congress/White House...

Are you sure about that?

Hi, Kiwi!
I'd like to apologize for assuming that your name referred to the fruit; I did not even know about the bird that is your national symbol!


(Off-topic):

Quote from: Darth Verik on January 23, 2012, 06:06:46 AM
Hold on...your calling me a foreigner but in fact we Dutchies we Hollanders, we few we happy few made your country come alive! Albert Tasman was the guy who found New Zealand (thats why it's called Zeeland, thats in fact a province in the Netherlands)...Thats why i believe i am allowed to call anybody a Kiwi, a mango, a banana or even a chimp!

We Dutchies made the world! >D From New Amsterdam (New York) till Dutch Brazil and even towards the very borders of your beloved New Zealand

New Amsterdam and New York are not technically interchangeable.  What you meant to write is New York City.  New York is a state.  New York, New York is the city (The City refers to London, specifically its financial district; however, as I live stateside, when I say "The City," I refer to NYC... cognitive dissonance, I guess).

Please correct me if I am wrong on anything, but this is how I see things:

Supporters of the relevant bills:
(1) argue that piracy hurts their profits;
(2) while making this argument cite the total value of things downloaded dubiously;
and (3) fail to recognize that (i) many people who download dubiously will purchase legitimately--it's not lost business then--and (ii) many other downloads represent people who would not purchase the goods in the absence of being able to obtain them for free.

Opponents of the relevant bills:
(1) agitate for freedom of speech because it's a slippery slope;
(2) and for that are labeled socialists because the result of their results would, in the eyes of big business, limit IP.

I don't think that SOPA or any of its sister legislation will survive constitutional muster.  While I believe that the most likely reason for a court invalidating the statute would be on First Amendment grounds, I do not expect it to be entirely on Freedom of Expression (indeed, I'm fairly sure that the implicit Freedom of Association--see, e.g., NAACP v. Alabama (1958) does not extend to illegal conspiracies); instead, I believe that it will be struck down as either void for vagueness or over-breadth.

Conspiracy theory time: Steven Chu, Obama's Energy Secretary, is the brother of Irella & Manella IP litigator Morgan Chu, the leading IP litigator in the nation.

Hi!

I like Metallica, hence the title.  If you already knew that it was a Metallica reference, you da man (or woman as the case may be).

Anyway, what do I put in here?  Huh...

Well, feel free to call me BS. 
My xfire is 5hadowclaw (it should be under the avatar, I believe--but I see everything twice).

I'm a Windows user, for what it's worth.

Uh...
Hmmm...

Hi?