Politics Thread 5

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Hexx » Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:28 pm

It always amused me when you went to a restuaran when I was younger and they asked for smoking/non smoking area.

IT MADE NO strawberry floating DIFFERENCE THATS NOT HOW SMOKE WORKS

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Northampton

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Return_of_the_STAR » Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:36 pm

Hexx wrote:It always amused me when you went to a restuaran when I was younger and they asked for smoking/non smoking area.

IT MADE NO strawberry floating DIFFERENCE THATS NOT HOW SMOKE WORKS


Wow i had forgotten all about that. As you say we always requested a non smoking area but it made no difference as you said.

Image

GRAPL Heavyweight Champion 2010, Runner Up 2017, tag team Champion 2011, 2015, Wrestlemania PPV Winner 2012 and your current all time highest GRAPL points scorer.
Fixture feeling champion 2013.

I'm a Paul Heyman guy!
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Moggy » Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:38 pm

Hexx wrote:It always amused me when you went to a restuaran when I was younger and they asked for smoking/non smoking area.

IT MADE NO strawberry floating DIFFERENCE THATS NOT HOW SMOKE WORKS


:lol:

The McDonalds in Bristol used to have the smoking section downstairs and the non-smoking section upstairs. So non-smokers would have to walk through all the smoke to get to the counters, walk back through the smoke to get to the stairs and then sit upstairs with all the smoke rising up. Clever system. :lol:

User avatar
Lotus
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Lotus » Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:39 pm

Experienced that in Japan recently. Being asked if you want to sit in the smoking or non-smoking area, clothes smelling of smoke regardless of where you've been sitting...like going back in time.

As for cannbis, would definitely be up for prioritising the medicinal use first and foremost. The impact of it can be huge on patients, and surely a precedent has been set now with this latest case.

Image
User avatar
Blue Eyes
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Blue Eyes » Tue Jun 19, 2018 2:19 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ourt-hears

Police arrested a 20-year old Londoner days before he intended to carry out a suicide attack on Downing Street to kill the prime minister, a court has heard.

Naa’imur Zakariyah Rahman believed he was in online correspondence with Islamic State while planning the alleged attack but was in fact in touch with members of the security services pretending to be from the terror group, the Old Bailey was told.

The British-Bangladeshi, who is charged with preparing acts of terrorism, wasarrested on 2 November and is on trial alongside another man, 21-year-old Mohammad Aqib Imran, who is accused of planning to travel abroad either to Libya or Syria in order to to engage in terrorism. Both men deny the charges.


The first day of their trial heard that Rahman had been in contact with an uncle who had travelled to Syria and joined Isis and who had encouraged his nephew to carry out attacks in Britain. Rahman’s resolve to do something hardened over time and he was “tipped over” into doing so when he heard his uncle had been killed in a drone strike.

Details of conversations between Rahman and security service operatives playing the role of Isis members were read out to the jury. In them, Rahman said the uncle had sent him a video about bomb making but he had difficulties downloading it.

“We plotted attacks before he was droned,” Rahman said, indicating that the nascent idea was to use a drone in the UK.


“We were going to do a drone attack first but he told me that we didn’t have the time.”

Mark Heywood QC, prosecuting, said the evidence would show how Rahman had put together a plan to attack Downing Street, carrying out reconnaissance and perfecting details.


Heywood read out Telegram chat in which Rahman was allegedly snared by a fake Isis member.


On 14 September last year, Rahman said: “Can you put me in a sleeper cell ASAP? I want to do a suicide bomb on parliament. I want to attempt to kill Theresa May.”

The next day, he said: “My objective is to take out my target. Nothing less than the death of the leaders of parliament.”

The court heard Rahman went on to praise the Manchester arena bomber, saying he “did well”.


He allegedly said he thought about wearing “a vest”, driving past parliament and “pushing the button” to “clear the entire block”.


Jurors heard he said: “Everyone inside, including the prime minister, would be dead.”


Rahman talked about the MI5 building but allegedly said: “Getting outside parliament when all the leaders are there is simple, you can walk right outside.”

Rahman is accused of conducting reconnaissance, recording a pledge of allegiance, and delivering a rucksack and jacket to be fitted with explosives.

The court was told that the 20-year-old, who was said to have family in the West Midlands but was living at various times in London, had been known to the Channel programme, a government project that seeks to intervene in the cases of individuals thought to be at risk of violent radicalisation.

By the time of the events covered in the hearing for late last year, however, he had started a “total withdrawal” from the programme, said Heywood.


“He had no intention of avoiding radicalisation. He was heading far as he could in the opposite direction.”

Heywood told the court that at the heart of the case was a developing radicalisation in the minds of two young men who knew each other well.


“The case is that their shared inspiration, from the warped ideology of the group calling itself Islamic State, led them beyond contemplation and in to making plans and taking practical steps to engage in violent acts of terrorism,” he said.


If they managed it I would have called for posthumous strawberry floating knighthoods.

User avatar
Dangerblade
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Dangerblade » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:26 pm

Dual wrote:smoke weed everyday

Lol

i was going to clean my room but then i got high lmao!

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:56 pm

that guy isnt the danger; he sounds like a strawberry floating moron

User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Tafdolphin » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:16 am

In more good news, the EU has passed Article 13





This can't be as bad as those tweets suggest, surely? That would mean the end of the internet as we know it, due to a vote that was barely publicised. It sounds like SOMA x 10000 and no one seems to have given it any thought at all in the run-up...

EDIT: Gizmodo has a good primer and... yeah it's pretty bad.

https://gizmodo.com/the-end-of-all-that ... 1826963763

Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
lex-man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by lex-man » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:33 am

I think it's going to be a huge pain in the ass, but I'm guessing their is enough money in large online games like Minecraft to do the work required. I'd be more worried about small sites like this one.

The real issue is the cost of implementing the filters, because it could add a serious cost to running a website.

User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Errkal » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:54 am

I dont think it will matter on the forum but it could be an issue on View as that's user created content and is about games that are copyright content.

User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Tafdolphin » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:58 am

Errkal wrote:I dont think it will matter on the forum but it could be an issue on View as that's user created content and is about games that are copyright content.


Like, I've got a several images on my blog that I snatched from google image search and the idea that I might get smacked with a fine, or more likely simply not be able to do that any more is...galling to say the least.

This article looks like it's going to turn the internet from a place of free expression for everyone to a place controlled by those outlets that can afford to develop and enact copyright filters. Which is horrible.

Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
Pedz
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Pedz » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:01 pm

Too lazy to read article, but will this effect Twitch, Mixer, youtube etc?

ImageImageImageImage.
Image
User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Errkal » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:04 pm

Pedz wrote:Too lazy to read article, but will this effect Twitch, Mixer, youtube etc?

Yes,

User avatar
Pedz
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Pedz » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:05 pm

Errkal wrote:
Pedz wrote:Too lazy to read article, but will this effect Twitch, Mixer, youtube etc?

Yes,


Thought so, guess Twitch will be irl only... :dread:

ImageImageImageImage.
Image
User avatar
lex-man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by lex-man » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:16 pm

Pedz wrote:
Errkal wrote:
Pedz wrote:Too lazy to read article, but will this effect Twitch, Mixer, youtube etc?

Yes,


Thought so, guess Twitch will be irl only... :dread:


It depends, companies could already ask for their games to not be streamed on twitch.

User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Jenuall » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:24 pm

I haven't studied these amendments to the Copyright Directive so I'm not 100% sure on the impact of this but my understanding is that this is introducing a requirement for automated screening for copyrighted material on ALL cases in which users can upload data.

On paper that sounds bad but unless they have actually modified the rules on what constitutes a breach of copyright then has anything actually changed? It was always wrong to upload an entire book or film to the internet for others to consume, just as it was always fine to use portions of copyrighted work for certain purposes - e.g. criticism or review. This shouldn't be changing any of that - just enforcing that sites implement measures to try and actively prevent the former?

ImageImage
User avatar
andretmzt
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Lincolnshire

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by andretmzt » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:26 pm

On PMQs May has just described the children as being detained in 'what appears to be cages'. She is an absolute utter strawberry floating banana split.

HSH28 wrote:No Last Guardian.
No new exclusive PS4 games.
No longer free MP for PS4.

Microsoft win E3.
User avatar
Pedz
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Pedz » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:27 pm

May is probably thinking of a way she can do it to our British kids.

ImageImageImageImage.
Image
User avatar
lex-man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by lex-man » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:30 pm

Pedz wrote:May is probably thinking of a way she can do it to our British kids.


Her new school plan will be to separate from their parents at birth and have them brought up by the state until 18.

User avatar
lex-man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by lex-man » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:40 pm

Jenuall wrote:I haven't studied these amendments to the Copyright Directive so I'm not 100% sure on the impact of this but my understanding is that this is introducing a requirement for automated screening for copyrighted material on ALL cases in which users can upload data.

On paper that sounds bad but unless they have actually modified the rules on what constitutes a breach of copyright then has anything actually changed? It was always wrong to upload an entire book or film to the internet for others to consume, just as it was always fine to use portions of copyrighted work for certain purposes - e.g. criticism or review. This shouldn't be changing any of that - just enforcing that sites implement measures to try and actively prevent the former?


That what it it means, also a lot of European countries don't have any kind of fair use laws. I think Germany newspaper publishers basically banned Google News but banning them from reproducing their headlines with out paying them.

EDIT:

It appears I'm a bit wrong but here's an article about it:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-goog ... YT20141105


Return to “Stuff”