Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Nickname said:
The wired headsets plug directly into the controllers… not sure about wireless ones.
The wireless headsets sync directly to the XBOX.
Nickname said:
just saying, $650 for an xps with an i5, 500gb, 4b ram, and dedicated nvidia card is a good deal IMO
Core i5 mobiles are dualcore with hyperthreading. I’ll apply your own standards when judging that
Having a 420M would be nice but if he doesn’t plan on gaming there’s really no need.
AFAIK, the Lifechat series is not compatible with the XBOX360. It’s not a terrible loss though because they’re not that good. They’re not terrible but I’d never use one as a primary headset.
Newegg doesn’t list any wireless headsets that are compatible with both the XBOX360 and PC.
Phonetically Phamous (dice said:
Looking to spend less than $600 w/student discounts
He’s probably better off not getting an XPS. You can get a nice inspiron for the same prace as an entry XPS.
If you lived in NC I’d say drive up and take the concealed carry class with me that day but alas you live in SC
I picked up the component cables a couple years back for like $20 on sale. You can definately tell a difference on quality TVs. I’m the same as you, I’d rather use HDMI ports for bluray and media center PCs than the wii.
If the new Intel HD video is sufficient you can pick up a core i3 with 4-6GB of for like $500 from Dell or HP.
Unless the newer Intel HD video cards are any good, you’re probably not going to be happy using a
You can get an ATI card on the $600 ones from Dell but only when using an AMD Turion X2 processor, which I consider unacceptable when compared to the Core i3 in similarly priced models with Intel HD video.
A Waffle? What, the question he asked over a month ago? The “*edited*s” already answered that for him using our extensive knowledge in the black arts of reliable AND convenient information. He didn’t even have to trek into the lair of stink to get the answer either.
Nickname, on the other hand, has a more pressing question…
Nickname said:
gah cmon im being serious i have been planning to come up for the lan but if the lan doesnt happen i wont be there. IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE THAT CAN CONFIRM OR DENY A DEC 11 LAN?!?
He genuinely wants to know because he doesn’t want to drive 5 hours both ways for nothing. If he has to trek to the commuter lounge to get an answer it pretty much defeats the purpose.
You know maybe if people didn’t come here specifically to flame bait others none of that *edited* would have happened. Need I remind you why you were banned to start with?
Maybe instead of boycotting the forums you might try fixing the problems. I mean you guys started the process of fixing things then threw in the towel and walked away when alumni started cooperating. What, did you not expect cooperation? Was that too far out in left field for you guys to comprehend? You gave your ideas and asked for input and help, we gave input and offered to help work through things and magically you guys quit replying. It’s almost like you were expecting a flamewar and when you didn’t get one just pretended there was one and went about the plan anyway.
Fascist Flakes (Jagr) said:
I was able to get on today so it looks like they‘ve fixed the issue that was causing us not to be able to connect ignored the issue until it went away.
Fixed.
major newrayz said:
and our troops currently there? what happens to them? if *edited* goes off there is no way we won’t see casualties.
We have a full carrier group there. Wouldn’t take long to evacuate the local garrison. We actually used a carrier group to evacuate troops from Vietnam during the fall of Saigon. Granted it wouldn’t be confortable but with Japan like RIGHT THERE we could easily ferry them to one of our Japanese bases after they’re out of the direct line of fire. Tbh though, if China gets *edited*ed at us I’d rather be in SK than on a giant target off shore
major newrayz said:
If we lose one soldier, i think we ought to retaliate. at the very least a tomahawk missile or two in that direction. Of course we won’t do either.
Correct, we won’t. The rationale will be that our troops should never have been in harms way to begin with and that it’s our fault they died. One soldier isn’t worth a war but it’s definately worth a good bombing run or two. It’s unfortunate that carpet bombing isn’t on the menu anymore, it was such an effective means of shutting countries down. Civilian casualties are regretably high but in some countries it holds true that every person killed is one less that can shoot at our soldiers. Unfortunately, that rule of thumb holds true for anyone planning on invading the US as well <_>
major newrayz said:
If China was g-status they’d say *edited* you NK and do an eiffle tower on their asses.
It is unlikely China will ever have a g-status above .1
So back on topic, check out the latest from MSNBC.
Apparently even they are reporting that Al Gore lies to make money.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40317079/ns/us_news-environment/
The Chinese have always supported the North Koreans. If NK went to war with SK you can be sure China would do what they could to keep the UN and US out of it. They virtually own our consumer economy and have a permanent veto-weild seat in the UN security council.
Japan’s “defensive” military is surprisingly strong, due to the WW2 surrender they aren’t allowed to have a large military so they’ve had to keep it modernized and I’d pity any country foolish enough to attack them. It’d be like attacking Israel, it’s not necessarily how large the stick is that matters, it’s what it’s made of that counts.
You can have 10 guys wailing on someone with wiffleball bats but when that guy pulls out an aluminum bat, fight’s over.
PillowPet said:
I have 3 seperate personalities, don’t you know?
Describe all three and win a fabulous prize!
Dummy, Dopey, and Anonymous.
Back to the topic, I’m still surprised that none of the major news outlets have picked this up. Does Obama et al. really think they can sneak something like this through?
Also something to keep an eye on, a new Department of Homeland Security bill is sneaking through congress that would place technology infrastructure giants under the control of DHS. Microsoft, Apple, Google, AT&T, Verizon, and Cisco would have to base their software, hardware, and security technology around the demands of DHS. There are very few things in life that scare me, silent takeovers like this is one of them.
This is what happens when a country doesn’t recognize an armistice line.
They’ll be at war with each other again in our lifetimes, the North is arrogant enough to think the South would easily fall and the South is ignorant enough to think the US or UN would help them fight.
PillowPet said:
MasterP said:
PillowPet said:
-This post has been censored by fascist forum moderators-
This post has been edited by PillowPet: Today, 07:51 PM
har har
I am the moderator!
So you are now plural?
That’s an interesting turn of events but it does explain a few things
PillowPet said:
-This post has been censored by fascist forum moderators-
This post has been edited by PillowPet: Today, 07:51 PM
har har
adam37 said:
its a little hard to aim and its not as fluid as i remember, but its not bad
Agreed but it’s no moreso than Goldeneye or Halo when I first picked them up. I figure in 10-12 hours of gameplay I’ll have it fluid again. I imagine playing with the settings will help as well.
Follow up, ok this is one of the better developed Wii games to date. Tried using the classic controller and it was meh, better than wiimote but still nothing special so I turned on the gamecube wavebird I had plugged in and it instantly switched to input from it without me changing any settings. With a wavebird, gameplay is golden.
Will play it online tonight and see how it goes.
It won’t use the wiimote if used with USBLoaderGX but Neogamma works fine (?)
That’s kinda backwards but w/e.
I don’t like that they used Craig as the James Bond and I’m not sure how well the wiimote movement works. It’s lightyears better than the other Wii shooters but I still maintain that pointing at the sreen for a console shooter will never be as intuitive or fun as the developers intended.
As quoted in the article, the law would not meet the narrowly tailored requirement needed to supress a first amendment form of free speech as it leaves the speech being supressed open to the interpretation of others.
It would easily be decared unconstitutional.
It’s interesting though just how quiet this is being kept. None of the major news outlets are talking about it. It’d be interesting to see them try to censur the US, Anonymous would have a field day with government servers.
Port 80 is http. The problem lies in the fact that a packet’s port is embedded in the header, meaning that to see which packets to filter it has to look at every one.
rossman said:
If there is any hope of “Good internet” again
No. They spent alot of money on their new filter and they’re not removing it unless the chancellor himself complains, which he won’t b/c he doesn’t use WCU’s internet. You can try complaining to ITS but they aren’t going to help, they still think the filter only touches packets on port 80. I don’t think they googled what was in a packet header before they bought it <_>
They may try to sell this problem as being with their packet shaper but if SC2 is still laggy then no, that’s not the case. We had SC2 ports cleared through it a few months back and from all accounts it didn’t help enough to matter.
If you know what ports PSN uses you can try to get them cleared but that’s the route they went with SC2 and the other laggy games and we all know how well that worked out.
Duendes said:
that’s only been backed up by one study. Argument is invalid
If by one you mean more than one then yeah. A quick google gave me 3 studies on it but if I’d spent a whole minute I might have found more.
Besides even if it was only 1 study, do you have any idea how much of our “science” is based on factual studies? Just look how far they got with global warming and it’s “study data” was almost entirely fictional. Studies and articles used to be how things got done but the last decade has proven it’s allows equally bad science to get pushed. It’s far easier to publish than it used to be, mainly because all the actual “good science” is spent trying to debunk the already published “bad science”. And before you call me full of crap, I spent my junior and senior years disproving a large chunk of a freshly published book on metamaterials, written by one of the “leaders” in the field. I’d have much rather done something else but that’s what the program head wanted us to do so we did.
Nebs said:
Lol nice bro science, bro
Duendes said:
please, mp, just… stop
I’m not making this *edited* up.
