No, I just put that in no particular order. I still see no evidence of rape, or even assault, because we don't even know who started what.

Yeah, but who did it is unclear. We have no idea who started the fight.

There is no evidence that I see that there is any truth to this claim. Why weren't charges filed if this is true? What about her leaving things at his apartment? See, this is why the courts should be involved. An appeal to the internet does nothing and finds nothing. The justice system is the tool for the job, not the internet.

Even if it is true that something physical went down. That still does not mean he tried to rape her, or that he started it. Nobody knows what happened because currently it's just her word against his. There is no proper evidence to look at and no trial. For all we know, she assaulted him. She really should have gone to the proper authorities. Just because she's a woman, does not mean we should believe her. There are legal procedures for that.

Companies can change. If they see the error of their ways and start pleasing the customer, they should be rewarded. We shouldn't hold grudges. It's not like Sony is murdering baby seals. If MS reverses their policies, I think games should forgive them. Of course, the PS4 is still more powerful and cheaper, so if I do get a console this time around, I might pick one up. That's assuming most of those games don't turn up on PC, which they might with the hole x86 CPU both of them have going on there.

At the end of the day, the product is a game, not the girl, and if the advertisement makes people more likely to buy the game, then why not? I didn't see anyone but feminists complaining about the show.

That is neither here nor there. You can be outside of the kitchen, wearing shoes, and doing whatever the hell you want. Nobody is forcing you to watch booth babes or play games with pretty women in them. It's that whole freedom thing people are talking about. To remove something people like is pandering to feminist sensibilities. If you don't like it, you could always make your own show without booth babes. Maybe you can even push a couple of games out there. I'm sure women will flock to them, after all the evil men and the booth babes are what's keeping them out of the market.

If women are tired of this stuff, then why are they still buying the games (48%, that's something). Obviously they seem fine with it. Otherwise they'd do something different themselves. They have the freedom to do that. I don't care.

Great, you go and do that. The rest of us will be here not giving a damn. It's not our job to care about what you think and do things the way you like it instead of the way we like it.

I don't know. So far Fun is what sells. Have you heard of that Fun thing? I hear it's all the rage with gamers. It seems not to matter if you consider them chauvinist, feminist, or "people".

I find your comment quite misogynist. These girls are just working. They aren't whores.

Women aren't half the market. Don't fool yourself. Women aren't suddenly going to start buying more games because E3 stopped using booth babes. I fail to see how that would actually stop anyone from buying games. It's not like you have to fondle a booth babe to get the damn things.

They are just pandering to the target audience. Maybe you are very mature, but let's face it, most gamers do act like 13 year old boys. It's all in good fun. E3 exists to show off games and try to get people into the idea of buying them, not to pander to feminist sensibilities.

I try to practice the good enough philosophy, and AMD is good enough. I don't get the whole Intel/AMD fanboyism. I certainly would feel cheated if I just had to have Intel, though.

See, I think you are still wrong. The data literally does not exist in any other form but that which is under encryption. This is forcing someone to interpret data, not unlocking something. To also request documents, there must also be a knowledge that they both exist, and that they are in the possession of the person under investigation. The court does not know that he does have child pornography in the other drives, nor that they and all the data contained are his and his alone. I do not believe that the court has any power to force someone to interpret an encrypted journal, and I fail to see the true difference between this and encrypted drives.

I kind of agree. They could have saved up all those lawyer fees and just paid the guy off. I'd take Microsoft money any day.

Okay, but kiddy porn is abuse. Not the same thing. It's fucked up that kids (15-17) get prosecuted for sending/receiving nudes, though. And I think I will stay away from your kids anyway. They'll probably try to steal my candy and video games.

The US does no such thing. Also as for the Australia thing, it wasn't a guideline. Look: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/28/australian_censors/ The fact is that government should not be in the role of telling you what kind of pornography is good or bad. Look what happened when Japan tried that. It only became more grotesque, yet strangely arousing.

You're talking about the country that tried to ban small breasts and looks to China as an example of sound internet policy.

We could just make them non-sentient. We all know how the whole "thinking robot" thing turns out. We've all seen Terminator.