Is there any sort of archive for the old testing ground posts? I couldn't find any in the Retired Forums section.
I ask because I put a tutorial there some years ago about installing a mtg software program, and I want to know if I should change the links I have to it or just delete them.
I made this a long time ago to commemorate Scott M. Fischer's blue-eye-stripe fetish (there's also a time theme: Time Stop and Telling Time). I never really got the hang of photoshop, but it's decent enough, I think.
It kind of follows naturally, but quoting Wikipedia is a no-no.
Truth.
Even if your teacher/professor is enamored with the idea of Web 2.0 and user-submitted content and all that jazz and lets you use Wikipedia, you really shouldn't.
Or that people who use the internet, particularly ones who get their new from user-submitted content rather than the mainstream media, differ strongly from the "average American."
You're implying that these are being posted under less than honest cicumstances, that we have a small group of rabid individuals posting with false user idents. Not that people are excited about him and want to post news about him. I agree people are excited and want to get his name out, I'm not agreeing they're falsifying information to do so. I'm asking for evidence that that is the case.
What, you want me to find an exploit in the software for one of the sites and collect every IP address and then call the owners of the IP to determine they allowed it for use as a proxy on the specific date?
I don't have magical hacking powers. The internet is Anonymous. You might as well ask me to prove that you and I aren't the same person using two IPs. I can't actually do that either. But it's still obvious to everyone what the reality is.
Ron Paul doesn't do nearly as well in polls that aren't on the internet. Ergo, the internet polls are filled with proxy votes. That's the simplest explanation there is. It not like I'm claiming the sky is yellow or something; it's very easy to do something like this:
All it takes is determination, and from what R_E is saying, Ron Paul supporters have that in abundance.
Do you have proof of this, sources or simply the conjecture of the establishment, since God know's there aren't enough people in this sheep filled land angry enough with the destruction of our peace, our pprosperity, our freedoms, or our happiness or our Sovreignity to actually want a change, who would WANT a gasp! return to a constitutional government, perish the thought! Or perhaps it's inconceivable that people would prefer a genuine Man, and not a spoiled little boy for their next president.
Go on any user-submitted news site. There will be hundreds of stories about Ron Paul by fresh accounts without stories on anything else. Let's not insult each-other's intelligence here.
Quote from R_E »
Oh, HILARIOUS! I hadn't heard that one yet tonight!
You just implied that the media was conspiring to make Ron Paul lose on purpose. If you don't enjoy being laughed at, don't be laughable.
Quote from R_E »
If it annoys you, maybe it's because you disagree with them, which is fine. But polling frantically isn't against the law, immoral, or even unfair. If the polls are set up, and Ron Paul wins because his supporters call/message/email/smokesignal in rabidly, then they win. If someone else were to win, they THEY would win. It's whoever has the most supporters in that format. Sorry that the truth annoys you, but that's just how it is. It annoys me that some polls leave Ron Paul completely off the list of choices, but that's their prerogative I guess.
Your waving about of how it doesn't matter what annoys me makes no sense. The question was precisely about what annoys me about them.
Why don't you go find a bodhi tree to meditate about the reasons you are annoyed by libertarians.
Om Mani Padme Hum...
Flooding online polls and user-submitted news sites using proxies and then citing a media conspiracy for the discrepancies between actual voters and online representation, rather than their own actions.
Om Mani Padme Hum...
Ron Paul had someone else write for that newsletter and it got sent out (under his name) before he approved it. He publicly apologized on behalf of the writer, who was fired, and stated that he doesn't endorse those beliefs. Unfortunately, it allowed anyone who wants to take a potshot at him to quote it from that day forth, even now. Anyone who knows a bit about Ron Paul can see that it's completely against how he actually feels, how he acts, and how he votes. But since almost nobody knows about him, due to the controlled media being told to either discredit him or not report about him at all, most people don't know much about him, and therefore don't immediately recognize it as the garbage that it is. This has allowed his opponent's to continue to misquote him on it for years, and largely get away with it.
It's kind of funny because they've all got piles of dirt on them, and the only thing they can try and nail on him actually wasn't him at all.
But they still try.
Do you have a source? The article says nothing like that, and says his campaign defended his statements. I find it unlikely they would do that if he wasn't the person who wrote the newsletter. I also find it incredibly unlikely that the Houston Chronicle wouldn't discover an error like that in the span of eleven years.
Quote from Article »
A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has decried the spread of urban crime.
Or perhaps they are also part of the vast media conspiracy against him?
Quote from R_E »
But since almost nobody knows about him, due to the controlled media being told to either discredit him or not report about him at all, most people don't know much about him, and therefore don't immediately recognize it as the garbage that it is.
Ah, yes. There it is. Put on your tinfoil hats, it's time to go into the bunker.
That alone should shut up those with the flimsy&debunked racism charge as their only desperate means of downplaying the logic of Ron's stances. Where were the darling 'frontrunners'? Are they racists now? See? Bad ad hominem.
Feel free to debate his stances, but your racism ad hom is a pitiful example of discussion.
Most recent relevant post I could find, sorry.
Is this the same Ron Paul in this article (not really sure)?
we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers
Quote from Ron Paul »
By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government
If so, I think it needs more explaining than a PBS appearance.
Since I am finally leaving these forums (omg forevar111!!), and since I actually confirmed that this works and can connect to Apprentice if followed properly, I'm making this topic to inform all three Mac users on Salvation that the tutorial for running the Mindless Automaton software is finished. You can find it here.
Do not hesitate to comment on it in this or the tutorial's own thread if you have suggestions, problems or spot mistakes, since even though I'm not on Salvation, I'll be sent an email automatically.
I'm not expecting much of a response, since most of you probably dropped the money for Parallels by now to get MODO and whatnot.
Also, I accept absolutely no responsibility of any kind whatsoever. If you rm -rf / your stuff, too bad.
Lackey is horrendus for use. It feels like it was designed for Mac OS 9 and I still haven't found a way to proportion the program to my screen.
I wouldn't even say it's up to the standards of OS 9 ports; there are no native widgets whatsoever. It's like using a brightly colored Java applet or a webpage done entirely in Flash.
LOL, open source doesn't mean it's easy to hack. You'll have the Linux and Mozilla Firefox users up in arms for suggesting that. It uses encryption, checks for compatibility, etc, like anything else.
Well, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with hacking. Other open source programs like Mindless Automaton freely admit that cheating is possible by manipulating the source code and compiling it yourself:
Quote from MA Site »
Q: Is it possible to cheat while playing M.A.?
Hell yes. By making small modifications to the source code, you can view your opponent's hand, his library, control the order your cards get shuffled, etc. Your opponent can do the same thing. So, next time you lose, just tell yourself that your opponent was probably cheating.
It comes down to a combination of the honor system and technical incompetence, I suppose. And, of course, this works for any kind of application (it's just easier to get the code for OSS ones).
Of course, I could just be talking out of my ass and OCTGN has some sort of authentication system for tourneys to make sure you are playing with something they compiled...
I had actually found Mindless Automaton yesterday but had no clue as how to run it. I'll play around with the options you gave me but I'm not that computer-savy. Thanks though
Well, if you ever do feel up to it, here is a tutorial:
I ask because I put a tutorial there some years ago about installing a mtg software program, and I want to know if I should change the links I have to it or just delete them.
Truth.
Even if your teacher/professor is enamored with the idea of Web 2.0 and user-submitted content and all that jazz and lets you use Wikipedia, you really shouldn't.
Or that and they can operate Torbutton.
What, you want me to find an exploit in the software for one of the sites and collect every IP address and then call the owners of the IP to determine they allowed it for use as a proxy on the specific date?
I don't have magical hacking powers. The internet is Anonymous. You might as well ask me to prove that you and I aren't the same person using two IPs. I can't actually do that either. But it's still obvious to everyone what the reality is.
Ron Paul doesn't do nearly as well in polls that aren't on the internet. Ergo, the internet polls are filled with proxy votes. That's the simplest explanation there is. It not like I'm claiming the sky is yellow or something; it's very easy to do something like this:
All it takes is determination, and from what R_E is saying, Ron Paul supporters have that in abundance.
Go on any user-submitted news site. There will be hundreds of stories about Ron Paul by fresh accounts without stories on anything else. Let's not insult each-other's intelligence here.
You just implied that the media was conspiring to make Ron Paul lose on purpose. If you don't enjoy being laughed at, don't be laughable.
Your waving about of how it doesn't matter what annoys me makes no sense. The question was precisely about what annoys me about them.
Om Mani Padme Hum...
Flooding online polls and user-submitted news sites using proxies and then citing a media conspiracy for the discrepancies between actual voters and online representation, rather than their own actions.
Om Mani Padme Hum...
Your words cut me like a knife, sir.
Do you have a source? The article says nothing like that, and says his campaign defended his statements. I find it unlikely they would do that if he wasn't the person who wrote the newsletter. I also find it incredibly unlikely that the Houston Chronicle wouldn't discover an error like that in the span of eleven years.
Or perhaps they are also part of the vast media conspiracy against him?
Ah, yes. There it is. Put on your tinfoil hats, it's time to go into the bunker.
Most recent relevant post I could find, sorry.
Is this the same Ron Paul in this article (not really sure)?
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1996_1343749
If so, I think it needs more explaining than a PBS appearance.
Do not hesitate to comment on it in this or the tutorial's own thread if you have suggestions, problems or spot mistakes, since even though I'm not on Salvation, I'll be sent an email automatically.
I'm not expecting much of a response, since most of you probably dropped the money for Parallels by now to get MODO and whatnot.
Also, I accept absolutely no responsibility of any kind whatsoever. If you rm -rf / your stuff, too bad.
kthxbai
Though Mark Hamil was clearly the best Joker.
I wouldn't even say it's up to the standards of OS 9 ports; there are no native widgets whatsoever. It's like using a brightly colored Java applet or a webpage done entirely in Flash.
Well, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with hacking. Other open source programs like Mindless Automaton freely admit that cheating is possible by manipulating the source code and compiling it yourself:
It comes down to a combination of the honor system and technical incompetence, I suppose. And, of course, this works for any kind of application (it's just easier to get the code for OSS ones).
Of course, I could just be talking out of my ass and OCTGN has some sort of authentication system for tourneys to make sure you are playing with something they compiled...
Well, if you ever do feel up to it, here is a tutorial:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=1983605#post1983605
I tried to make it coherent for someone who has never used a command-line interface, but it is still rather long and complex.