|
On May 02 2015 05:17 Cixah wrote: My plans to go see Solveg tonight fell through. Who wants to dota. maybe later tonight after dinner; though D2 mechanics feel really clunky to me (even having played WC3) so bear with me as I try to figure it out
|
United States47024 Posts
It's ok, DotA 2 feels clunky to everyone now that 6.84 is out.
|
On May 02 2015 05:24 TheYango wrote: It's ok, DotA 2 feels clunky to everyone now that 6.84 is out. Or maybe just because is bad gaem
|
On May 02 2015 05:24 TheYango wrote: It's ok, DotA 2 feels clunky to everyone now that 6.84 is out. I don't know how D2 can feel more clunky than WC3 or D1 (when I played it in RoC).
I would think they'd make improvements to it...
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 02 2015 04:28 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2015 22:37 Seuss wrote:On May 01 2015 11:31 Lord Tolkien wrote: Oh god, that Daily Show interview gave me cancer.
He's doing that Bill O'Reilly/Maher pundit thing. Where they have an opinion and tries vocally to push it in an "hardball" interview to support his own worldview, and because he has a fervently loyal audience/viewer base that supports it, isn't gonna get called out on it (that and it can be dismissed as comedy).
Eyeuh. This is why the only actually good US news channel is Al Jazeera America, despite the tinges of anti-Israel bias in some of their investigative pieces (which are still generally sound).I'm totally not just saying this because I've seen one of my old profs on Inside Story. I think that's actually an unfair read of the interview It's important to understand who Judith Miller is. She was at the forefront of the "Saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction" story in the lead up to the Iraq war. When it became clear after-the-fact that the Bush administration had been misleading the American public she received a lot of criticism for articles she wrote or co-authored such as this New York Times article. Her journalistic reputation suffered greatly as a result, and this book tour is attempting to restore that reputation. Which is why Stewart's questions were on point. They were all aimed at attempting to understand and draw out Miller's views on her own responsibility and culpability, and her thoughts on her journalistic conduct in that time. It ends up being pushy because Miller, both in her book and in the interview itself, deflects blame away from herself wherever and whenever possible instead of demonstrating introspective thought on the subject. I am well aware of her reputation, and about the book tour (which is unlikely to do much for her career except make her some royalties at this stage). Nonetheless, Stewart is attempting to push the narrative that the Bush administration manufactured the war, and that Judith Miller was either an active accomplice or an unknowing dupe, and fed information by the administration to garner support for the war. While she is was an accomplice to war, this is necessarily a jaded and partisan view (one popular among the Daily Show audience, mind; anti-Bush sentiment is pretty strong amongst younger Americans, and only somewhat unwarranted), given the conclusions reached by numerous Congressional inquiries into the intelligence failures that lead to Iraq. There was no overt influence by the administration, and it's more that they used the intelligence to confirm their own policy and push for a (popular, even in 2001 based on the polls) war. Hindsight is 20/20, as are the conclusion of issues like Iran (1953), or the Vietnam War, but at the time, the US intelligence community had largely agreed on what we know now was deeply flawed information, for a variety of reasons (overall groupthink and wishful thinking, an overzealous response to 9/11, etc), of which direct pressure from the White House to produce doctored intelligence was not one of them. While statements made by top officials, and the interest in Iraq, may have had an indirect influence on analysts, there is nothing to say Judith Miller was fed information by the Bush administration, as Stewart was trying to push through the entire interview, when her sources within the intelligence community were most likely long-standing ones: predating the administration, and were likely genuine in their (erroneous) tips. As a journalist, she is entirely culpable for what she publishes; however, to lay the blame for this particular fubar at her feet is somewhat misplaced (though her behavior afterwards during the Iraq War, as she tried to confirm the existence of WMDs to save her own career, was not), when the failure was so systemic. The media, intelligence community, the political system, and indeed the American people, all share responsibility. As always, never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity. Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 01:44 Slayer91 wrote: LOL some guys in ireland got in trouble on a stag(bachelor) party in prague for putting on hitler masks and parading around a jewish area or something hahaha this sounds like something you and scip would do Good thing I take all of my politics from the Dixie Chicks.
|
On May 02 2015 05:25 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 05:24 TheYango wrote: It's ok, DotA 2 feels clunky to everyone now that 6.84 is out. Or maybe just because is bad gaem
Yango might actually think that now, he's been pretty salty that Icefrog went full Riot with his 6.83 and 6.84 changes.
Dota2 still better than League or Smite or Heroes though.
|
On May 02 2015 04:28 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2015 22:37 Seuss wrote:On May 01 2015 11:31 Lord Tolkien wrote: Oh god, that Daily Show interview gave me cancer.
He's doing that Bill O'Reilly/Maher pundit thing. Where they have an opinion and tries vocally to push it in an "hardball" interview to support his own worldview, and because he has a fervently loyal audience/viewer base that supports it, isn't gonna get called out on it (that and it can be dismissed as comedy).
Eyeuh. This is why the only actually good US news channel is Al Jazeera America, despite the tinges of anti-Israel bias in some of their investigative pieces (which are still generally sound).I'm totally not just saying this because I've seen one of my old profs on Inside Story. I think that's actually an unfair read of the interview It's important to understand who Judith Miller is. She was at the forefront of the "Saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction" story in the lead up to the Iraq war. When it became clear after-the-fact that the Bush administration had been misleading the American public she received a lot of criticism for articles she wrote or co-authored such as this New York Times article. Her journalistic reputation suffered greatly as a result, and this book tour is attempting to restore that reputation. Which is why Stewart's questions were on point. They were all aimed at attempting to understand and draw out Miller's views on her own responsibility and culpability, and her thoughts on her journalistic conduct in that time. It ends up being pushy because Miller, both in her book and in the interview itself, deflects blame away from herself wherever and whenever possible instead of demonstrating introspective thought on the subject. I am well aware of her reputation, and about the book tour (which is unlikely to do much for her career except make her some royalties at this stage). Nonetheless, Stewart is attempting to push the narrative that the Bush administration manufactured the war, and that Judith Miller was either an active accomplice or an unknowing dupe, and fed information by the administration to garner support for the war. While she is was an accomplice to war, this is necessarily a jaded and partisan view (one popular among the Daily Show audience, mind; anti-Bush sentiment is pretty strong amongst younger Americans, and only somewhat unwarranted), given the conclusions reached by numerous Congressional inquiries into the intelligence failures that lead to Iraq. There was no overt influence by the administration, and it's more that they used the intelligence to confirm their own policy and push for a (popular, even in 2001 based on the polls) war. Hindsight is 20/20, as are the conclusion of issues like Iran (1953), or the Vietnam War, but at the time, the US intelligence community had largely agreed on what we know now was deeply flawed information, for a variety of reasons (overall groupthink and wishful thinking, an overzealous response to 9/11, etc), of which direct pressure from the White House to produce doctored intelligence was not one of them. While statements made by top officials, and the interest in Iraq, may have had an indirect influence on analysts, there is nothing to say Judith Miller was fed information by the Bush administration, as Stewart was trying to push through the entire interview, when her sources within the intelligence community were most likely long-standing ones: predating the administration, and were likely genuine in their (erroneous) tips. As a journalist, she is entirely culpable for what she publishes; however, to lay the blame for this particular fubar at her feet is somewhat misplaced (though her behavior afterwards during the Iraq War, as she tried to confirm the existence of WMDs to save her own career, was not), when the failure was so systemic. The media, intelligence community, the political system, and indeed the American people, all share responsibility. As always, never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity. Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 01:44 Slayer91 wrote: LOL some guys in ireland got in trouble on a stag(bachelor) party in prague for putting on hitler masks and parading around a jewish area or something hahaha this sounds like something you and scip would do
While all of the groups you cited certainly share responsibility, Stewart's questions were primarily aimed at understanding Miller's thoughts and views on her own role and culpability. In that regard I think they were very much on point, and while his opinions were quite clear I don't think he was unfair.
Regarding Miller I think she failed to display much introspection on the subject. If she had the interview would probably have gone very differently.
|
I disagree on the conduct of the interview during my own view, but I respect your opinion, and if you want to continue this discussion, we can take it to PMs so we don't clog up OT.
|
On May 02 2015 06:05 Lord Tolkien wrote: I disagree on the conduct of the interview during my own view, but I respect your opinion, and if you want to continue this discussion, we can take it to PMs so we don't clog up OT. The Chronicles of OT: Gimble has a Debate
|
Complicated as fuck patients all day with 30 min of break. I've now been on the highway for 1.5, and am still 45min distance wise from home (if there were no traffic). I just got off the high way to take a break from driving because at this rate it will take me at least another 2.
3+h to make a 1h trip. I don't get to see my son again tonight.
Fuck this month Seriously just fucking fuck it.
|
On May 02 2015 07:07 WaveofShadow wrote: Complicated as fuck patients all day with 30 min of break. I've now been on the highway for 1.5, and am still 45min distance wise from home (if there were no traffic). I just got off the high way to take a break from driving because at this rate it will take me at least another 2.
3+h to make a 1h trip. I don't get to see my son again tonight.
Fuck this month Seriously just fucking fuck it.
I am sorry wave
|
On May 02 2015 05:49 red_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 05:25 Requizen wrote:On May 02 2015 05:24 TheYango wrote: It's ok, DotA 2 feels clunky to everyone now that 6.84 is out. Or maybe just because is bad gaem Yango might actually think that now, he's been pretty salty that Icefrog went full Riot with his 6.83 and 6.84 changes. Dota2 still better than League or Smite or Heroes though.
6.84 is hilarious patchwise. Still haven't had much time to play it though, really interested in playing Troll/Hohaha.
We have also unlocked the first immortal chest, only 7m to go until chest 2 and 3 are unlocked.
|
who else hyped for boxing match of the century?
|
On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century?
What is Uwe going after another goon?
|
On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century?
It ends in 4 or it goes to 12.
Pacman wins in 4, mayweather wins in 12.
|
On May 02 2015 07:27 Cixah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century? It ends in 4 or it goes to 12. Pacman wins in 4, mayweather wins in 12. mayweather runs for 12. imo. :D
manny is gunna be like 15lbs lighter than pacman in the fight tomorrow.
"lord will deliver him to me"-pacman. hehhe.
|
On May 02 2015 07:28 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 07:27 Cixah wrote:On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century? It ends in 4 or it goes to 12. Pacman wins in 4, mayweather wins in 12. mayweather runs for 12. imo. :D manny is gunna be like 15lbs lighter than pacman in the fight tomorrow. "lord will deliver him to me"-pacman. hehhe.
It is just a matter of styles. If Pac cant get in for the first 4 rounds, mayweather is going the distance and will win on points.
|
On May 02 2015 07:31 Cixah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 07:28 wei2coolman wrote:On May 02 2015 07:27 Cixah wrote:On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century? It ends in 4 or it goes to 12. Pacman wins in 4, mayweather wins in 12. mayweather runs for 12. imo. :D manny is gunna be like 15lbs lighter than pacman in the fight tomorrow. "lord will deliver him to me"-pacman. hehhe. It is just a matter of styles. If Pac cant get in for the first 4 rounds, mayweather is going the distance and will win on points.
TBH, I think pacman is gunna get k-o'd by mayweather in the later rounds. Either way, I just don't see pacman winning it.
Doesn't stop me from cheering him on tomorrow tho.
|
Watching small time worthwhile streamers get donations for doing artwork and getting well deserved recognition gives me faith in humanity that the majority of people are good decent folk.
|
On May 02 2015 07:31 Cixah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 07:28 wei2coolman wrote:On May 02 2015 07:27 Cixah wrote:On May 02 2015 07:21 wei2coolman wrote: who else hyped for boxing match of the century? It ends in 4 or it goes to 12. Pacman wins in 4, mayweather wins in 12. mayweather runs for 12. imo. :D manny is gunna be like 15lbs lighter than pacman in the fight tomorrow. "lord will deliver him to me"-pacman. hehhe. It is just a matter of styles. If Pac cant get in for the first 4 rounds, mayweather is going the distance and will win on points.
Mayweather going down that early would be ridiculously shocking. He's probably the greatest defensive boxer of all time, a 4th round KO wouldn't just be an upset it would be earth shattering, even for an aggressive boxer like Pac-Man(whose average KO, not just fight but KOs only, since 2000 is 5.6 rounds in, none of those fighters are Mayweather).
|
|
|
|