The Gaming Den

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2010 7:38 pm**

Consoles have been sex toys for some time.

-Username17

Posted: **Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:10 am**

That might be the case, but the one you are linking to isn't nightmare fuel like the one I linked to.

No WAY I'm letting that claw get anywhere near my junk.

Posted: **Sun Sep 05, 2010 6:43 am**

What the hell is with the claw thing?

Posted: **Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:05 am**

[caveat=Not_Male]

I'm guessing the general intention is for a guy to put his penis through the ring, but in order to accommodate men of varying girths, they didn't close it.

The result, unfortunately, is a bit frightening.

[/caveat]

Did you know they'll send you a free one to beta test if you sign up for it?

Check it out! {OK, Online Form, Questions}

Posted: **Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:14 am**

Using the word "limn" in your newspaper headlines is arrogant and patronizing.

[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/09/baltimore-suns-use-of-eng_n_711118.html wrote:The Huffington Post[/url] {OK, Blog, Huffing}]Baltimore Sun's Use Of English Language Confuses Readership
Jason Linkins

Joel Meares at the Columbia Journalism Review tips readers off to the incredibly true story of that time the Baltimore Sun used a word in a headline that completely perplexed its readership. The headline in question was "Opposing votes limn difference in race." And now, when you put that into Google, all the top results refer to the confusion that the word "limn" caused the city of Baltimore.

"I had to keep looking at it again and again," complained Carol N. Shaw, one of a number of readers who contacted The Sun yesterday. "I consider myself an educated person. I graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Maryland, College Park some years ago with a degree in international relations/economics. I have never heard of the word "limn." ... To put a word like "limn" in the headline for the lead article on the front page of this newspaper seems to me to be unbelievably arrogant and patronizing."

Really? "Arrogant and patronizing?" That basically opens the door for this University of Virginia-educated dick to point out that there are five words in the above that pretty much explain what went wrong. I'll let the Sun's John E. McIntyre take the high road:
"Speaking as a headline writer myself, though not the author of this one, I heartily endorse all sorts of short verbs that are neither scatological nor obscene," he said. "Speaking as a language maven, I applaud when people consult dictionaries to add another little brick to the wall of their vocabularies. Now that you know what it means, it is yours forever."

Strictly defined, "limn" is a verb that means "to draw or paint on a surface" or "to outline in clear sharp detail." It's a great word! It's the kind of word that Michiko Kakutani's readership grapples with successfully. But critics do have a point: the Sun's headline would have performed a lot better on the web if "limn" had been swapped out for "Justin Bieber."

When it comes to vocabulary deficiency-induced calamity, this is nothing compared to that time an aide to Washington, DC mayor Anthony Williams named David Howard used the word "niggardly" (correctly, I might add) and everyone freaked right the hell out because they thought it was a racial slur. Howard was forced to tender his resignation but was rehired after the mayor's office conducted an internal review. (An internal review of what? The dictionary?)

Anyway, we talk pretty one day, the end.

Posted: **Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:17 pm**

Lol, that's a word D&D players tend to know, as "Limner" has always been in the list of NPC hirelings for a long time.

EDIT: My GF heard about the beta test for the Wii "accessories". And insisted that we sign up

.

Posted: **Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:15 pm**

Claiming unemployment while holding a job: dumb, dishonest, and taking money from people who could use it.

Claiming unemployment while working as a porn site model and presenter for a porn channel: just plain idiotic (Safe-ish For Work. Contains salacious, but non-explicit pictures, Daily Mail)

Posted: **Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:37 pm**

I don't know about the USA, but in Canada you can claim unemployment if you're underemployed, I know a friend of mine is since he can't get more than say 15 or so hours a week.

Probably very limited, though.

Posted: **Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:55 pm**

I doubt someone working as a tv personality and porn model is underemployed. Possibly though. And I think she may have been british, not sure.

edit: yep, she's British. So it depends on what England's unemployment's like.

Posted: **Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:22 am**

"War has changed." alternatively, "The Terminal Man"

Robots are taught deception

Posted: **Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:47 am**

Industry shill promotes GM foods
"Some fear GM food is bad for health. There are no data that support this view. " Bitch, please. I'm not against the idea of GM foods, but sticking in foreign genes into plants does have side-effects; to claim it's entirely harmless is folly.
Talk about the benefits of mangroves
Talk about using old-school farming techniques to be more sustainable
Can't say I'm surprised by fishing issues

Posted: **Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:58 am**

Meikle641 wrote: Industry shill promotes GM foods
"Some fear GM food is bad for health. There are no data that support this view. " Bitch, please. I'm not against the idea of GM foods, but sticking in foreign genes into plants does have side-effects; to claim it's entirely harmless is folly.

1) There is no evidence that X is dangerous.

You) But it's definitely not harmless because I really feel it's bad! What's this talk about evidence like that matters?

Bad news, you've been eating GM foods your whole life.

Good news, GM foods have saved millions of lives from starvation.

Posted: **Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:53 pm**

I could kill someone 150 ways with the objects in an average sized room, including the room itself. Are there literally side effects from everything in the universe? Yes, there is. Do the side effects of GM foods cancel out the billion people that they've fed (That's billion, with a B)? I have not heard any that would even make me blink.

Posted: **Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:16 pm**

I like the idea of GM foods feeding more people, honest. There's been a lot of good benefits to it. But when you start getting allergens from other kinds of food, or have other bizarre issues I think it's a problem.

I'd have to search, but I do recall hearing about people having allergic reactions from some kind of edible GM plant due to it having genes from a nut. I'm sure there was some productive reason for that, but that's a bad thing given the amount of people sensitive to nuts.

Yeah, it's an anecdote, but cross-species gene mods should be looked over really closely. No telling what problems may occur. /scaremongering

Posted: **Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:49 pm**

well, the main problem with GM foods is that people are using the old growing methods with the new seeds. And by old growing methods, I mean out in the open so the pollen contaminates other lesser crops.

The allergens would be another issue, but not a particularly large one, I imagine.

Posted: **Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:10 pm**

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I could kill someone 150 ways with the objects in an average sized room, including the room itself. Are there literally side effects from everything in the universe? Yes, there is. Do the side effects of GM foods cancel out the billion people that they've fed (That's billion, with a B)? I have not heard any that would even make me blink.

Two words: Terminator Seeds.

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:19 am**

Given stuff like the swaths of canola appearing outside of the intended growing fields, and a recent story I read somewhere about an heirloom seed company testing their seeds for GM genes and finding them in 85% of their products, I'm not really happy about the suicide seed thing.

That's rather frightening.

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:48 am**

Ganbare Gincun wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I could kill someone 150 ways with the objects in an average sized room, including the room itself. Are there literally side effects from everything in the universe? Yes, there is. Do the side effects of GM foods cancel out the billion people that they've fed (That's billion, with a B)? I have not heard any that would even make me blink.
Two words: Terminator Seeds.

I'm not crazy about the idea. I think terminator seeds should be illegal and the businessmen funding them should receive a legal and proportional punishment after a trial by a jury of their peers (:p)

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:06 pm**

I think the idea is ridiculous too. We don't need to artificially restrict something like seeds.

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:48 pm**

My only response is "WTF!?"

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:19 pm**

Maj wrote:Given stuff like the swaths of canola appearing outside of the intended growing fields, and a recent story I read somewhere about an heirloom seed company testing their seeds for GM genes and finding them in 85% of their products, I'm not really happy about the suicide seed thing.

That's rather frightening.

It's not really frightening from a biological perspective. If a few plants did manage to get the terminator gene it definitely would not be evolutionarily selected for and it pretty much be self-solving. Whereas it is no surprise that the "good" genes show a high presence since they would definitely be selected for.

Afterall, it's not like a mad swath of terminator genes are going to spread and take over the country side... that's the opposite of what they do. Can't happen.

Now, it's frightening perhaps from the economic perspective. If you don't pay then you can't play in the agriculture market, and it bends the impoverished down on their knees in perpetuity since they can never grow their own crops from their own seeds. But there's nothing stopping Monsanto from simply selling to the impoverished countries at a lower price, or even donating free seeds and then I would have zero complaints about terminator seeds.

Afterall Monsanto would be shooting themselves in the face if they sold their product once and never again to each of their customers. So it makes sense that rather than selling their seeds at a huge cost as a one-time deal, they market it much more cheaply as a recurring expense.

I'm in favor of (or at least not opposed to) the use terminator genes unless someone can persuade me otherwise.

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:57 pm**

erik wrote: Now, it's frightening perhaps from the economic perspective. If you don't pay then you can't play in the agriculture market, and it bends the impoverished down on their knees in perpetuity since they can never grow their own crops from their own seeds. But there's nothing stopping Monsanto from simply selling to the impoverished countries at a lower price, or even donating free seeds and then I would have zero complaints about terminator seeds.

Afterall Monsanto would be shooting themselves in the face if they sold their product once and never again to each of their customers. So it makes sense that rather than selling their seeds at a huge cost as a one-time deal, they market it much more cheaply as a recurring expense.

You're >implying that Monsanto is not Evil Inc., where Biblical Satan is only evil enough (by their standards) to get janitor work.

Posted: **Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:28 pm**

erik wrote:I'm in favor of (or at least not opposed to) the use terminator genes unless someone can persuade me otherwise.

Martha Crouch, a molecular biologist at Indiana University, concludes that the seed sterilizing technology poses potential ecological risks, and she says that it "is unrealistic" to depend on Terminator to prevent genetically engineered organisms or their traits from spreading. Crouch concludes that, under certain conditions, the sterility trait from Terminator crops will spread via pollen to surrounding plants, and it will make seeds of those plants sterile.

Whoops.

Posted: **Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:09 am**

I suppose terminator genes infecting a neighbors crops would be Bad.

I will agree to that terminator genes need more development and improvement. Ideally a terminator gene would terminate production of pollen in said plants and prevent any GM traits from being transferred. I look forward to that day so that argument could be put to bed for good. If terminator genes were done properly then I would have no beef with them.

Anywho, to my knowledge, although Monsanto was developing Terminator Genes, they've never sold any products with them in them. For all we know, Monsanto may well have developed terminator genes that are 100% secure (i.e. no pollen) considering the hubbub regarding them is about 10 years dated now, including that previously referenced link.

Posted: **Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:11 am**

I can only think of a story about genetic modification of organisms where a limiter was put in. Specifically a lycene deficiency, if I recall, with the thinking that, if the organisms didn't get the lycene supplements, they'd die, so any "escapees" could be managed by just the fact that a nutrient deficiency would kill them.

that didn't work out too well...

The Gaming Den

[Non-political] News that makes you Laugh/Cry/Both...