Rain boots.

Ok, let's make it clear. I love rain boots. They allow you to jump in water ponds. Now that it's clear, let's get to the point: in no circumstances are you allowed to wear rain boots, unless the entire city is drowning. Let me explain this. I know it is raining outside, that you fear your shoes can get wet. However, please understand that rain boots are fucking ugly. If you are a girl clothed in garments, even if you're slut (or, especially), if you consider yourself someone that most people would call "chick", you cannot wear rain boots. I thought that was a well-known fact. Understand that fook-me boots will also protect your feet from the water. They might make you a whore, but at least, it doesn't destroy your style. Even geeks do not wear rain boots to go to school, so no one is supposed to wear rain boots. End of discussion.

The Giz!

As a nice follow-up to Thompson's story, he's now under investigation.

Next. Have you ever heard of the Gizmondo? It is a fantastic product that is gonna blow the DS and the PSP out the window. Out of Earth's orbit probably. As GPS satellites. Now, let's face it, the actual product does seem interesting. More features than the PSP, nice hardware, integrated GPS, etc. But that's before reading a CNN review (Of course, take it with some salt. CNN being, CNN.), which points out some... disadvantages. Let's not even mention some of the games. We understand that with a new console that has practically no backup from anyone, it's hard to get good games. Even though Colors sounds cool. Let's rather talk about... loading time. The CNN review mentions 48 seconds to boot up the device. Another ZDNet review mentions 20 seconds. Assuming it takes around 30 seconds to boot, that's more than my PC. Let's face it, any portable gaming platform that takes 30 seconds to boot is doomed. Imagine how crazy that'd be? You're waiting for the bus. You get your Giz, press On, and then have the time to finish the Rubik's Cube before it loads. WTF. Seemingly it's almost as hard to turn off. That's some great design, right there. Then you look at the price, which is either 229 US bucks, or 399. That's right! At that price, I can probably get a lousy laptop. Which is still better than a 400Mhz handheld that boots in 30 sec. And don't forget your cherry on your sundae! The 229$ version comes with... ads. HELLO!? A portable gaming device with ads!? What the fuck? I don't know what they were thinking at Tiger. Or rather, if they were thinking... Because that, THAT, is unbelievable. Assuming we can excuse an horrible price of above 200$ US and insane boot time, no one can excuse ads. Hey, peeps are blocking ads on the internet, for stuff they don't even pay for! And they ship something with ads. On a portable gaming system.

Do you guys even remember Tiger? They used to make those portable electronic games, that had only one game. You know. The fixed positions on the screen, and you were just seeing a ball move in discrete, fixed distances? Like "Ball is incoming. Me have choice of 4 positions, me gotta block ball. Yay!" The games were stuff like, Disney Space Jam, which I still have, Power Rangers and the sort. And, undoubtedly, those machines probably own the Gizmondo. Because, at the time, they were fun. Push on, play, no menu, no nothing, just play. Of course, they won't sell now since we have GBA and stuff, but it's sad to see that Tiger forgot its origins and is trying to emule the PSP, while failing badly. I think I'd rather buy a Phantom.

Thompson is the PWN

I LOVE that guy. He is awesome. I'll not bother you with the actual story, because I guess you all know about it. If you don't, you really should. I'll not even link it, just read PA, slashdot, vgcats, the internet, the links are there, somewhere. Anyway.

The thing with Thompson is, he's gone crazy. You can't go and add "or else" to every sentence you write. It's one thing to defend your case, and say that young kids shouldn't be allowed to play GTA. That, most gamers agree on. There are violent games out there. Just like there are violent movies. And lawyers. But then, it's another thing to attack the whole community of gamers and show blatant hate. That's just losing it, and being unprofessional. I mean... writing that "satire" piece was okay. I accepted it. You think you're cool stuff, you can provoke people, sure. But when people listen to you, and do what you want, you fill up your end of the bargain. What happens? No, he denies everything, and proclaims that he's the shit and that gamers can't understand witty satire. Coming from Thompson. Ok, cool, sure. Fuckhead. Then PA shows up, gives ten grand, and rubs it in his face. I guess he didn't feel good about it, because he called the cops. But hey dude, ain't you a lawyer? What did you call the cop for?... Harassment? Man, how can you even think about defending a case like that? People should write to Thompson with "or else" attached to every sentence. Go sue him. How long can he defend himself?

In conclusion, it appears obvious that Thompson is a piece of shit. Considering that:
1. He's a piece of shit
2. He's a piece of shit
3. Refer to article 1 and 2.
It should be clear to the jury that Thompson is a piece of shit. Seriously though. When you're a lawyer, just defend your case. Use clear arguments. Try to sway the public opinion if you can, but do it professionally. Do not go crazy.

Grow up and take your responsibilities.

There is a general trend in modern society, where everyone blames others but never themselves. I think there was that shitty song, "It wasn't me", or something. But that's beside the point. Today, Howard Schmidt, ex-White House cybersecurity advisor, said that developers should be liable for security holes. What the fuck? I know, it sounds acceptable when you say that the one that makes mistakes should pay for them. But is a developer really the one that makes the mistakes? A developer, and a software company, should make sure they build a software as well as they can. If you asked for a particular feature, and instead you get a bug ("Uhm. That wasn't a bug. That was our intended feature." - *cough*), then the company/developer/whomever/your mom is liable. But security flaws? That's like saying, I know you built a nice bridge, but it got nuked. I want a refund. You see, it's impossible to test every possible flaws and attacks. You just... can't. It's possible to design your bridge to resist high winds, medium earthquakes, etc. Because, that just might happen. It's the same in software, you can expect the developers to do what they can for security, but you can't expect something perfect.

Also, in the most recent episode involving Jack Thompson, he proposed a video game scenario. The real link is now dead -correction, it reappeared, screw the Fairy, you know you wanna-, due to the involvement of Miss Fairy. I mean, *coughpoliticalpowermoneycorrutionbushismfucktardinesscough*. Please read a small summary by Joystiq, instead. So basically, what he wants is a chainsaw -er, baseball bat massacre game? Shouldn't that be easy to do? Someone should seriously mod GTA, and hand that mod to him. Guys, that's ten grand, to a good cause! Then sell the mod for, uhm, 1$ per download, and beat his offer using that money. But seriously though... Grow up. If you think banning violent video games with do the trick and save your dying education system, you suck. The problem is not games. It's everything, including Thompson. Movies, music, way of thinking, everything. And you can't ban everything. If you want your kid to grow up without being subjected to extreme violence in games, don't fucking buy the game.

Don't fuck with us. ~Ctrl-alt-del, Tim Buckley.

Shoot me first, baby.

Guns are a bad invention. No need to chop the head off, hack the limbs, and disenbowel anyone. Point, and click. Knowing that (or perhaps, not knowing that), some countries allow their citizens to have guns. Why? Oh, I dunno. Pleasure. Utility. Self-defense. At least usually, their usage are somewhat regulated. But that is clearly not the case in Florida, governed by a popular Bush person. Because now, you can shoot someone based on the fact that you feel endangered. Kind of like, pre-emptive strike. It should be a well-known fact by now, mental illnesses run in the family. Anyway. So the new law permits you to shoot, provided the fact that you fear for your own safety. Because obviously, if you have a gun, you feel much safer. You probably feel much safer also knowing every other guy walking on the street has a gun. And that if you get attacked, you won't get beaten and sent to the hospital with some injuries. No, you'll die, with your brain splattered on the wall because someone shot you. Definitely, so many arguments for keeping guns. While we're at it, I suggest the US removes all its laws. Why would you need law when you can maintain your law using a gun? It's the same thing with their foreign policy. Why respect agreements, conventions, contracts, sanity when you can pre-emptively strike someone, without retaliation?

For every fatal shooting, there were roughly three non-fatal shootings. And, folks, this is unacceptable in America. It's just unacceptable. And we're going to do something about it.
—Pres. Bush, Philadelphia, Penn., May 14, 2001