No.

Speaking for myself, there are only three reasons I don't finish games (and most of the ones I play I finish):

Getting stuck a ridiculously difficult part: If the game is good, then I always finish it unless I get hopelessly stuck somewhere and try and try and try to get past it, but cantt. I then get tired of it and move on to something else, but this hardly ever happens anymore. Now what I usually do is set it aside and come back to it later, with fresh eyes, and that usually works.

Quality issues: If I quit early on, then the game just wasn't compelling or was too boring or had way too many bugs, etc.

Something new and much more interesting comes out and I start playing that; if the initial game I was playing was a quality, compeling game, then I'll return to it fresh....

I can't imagine anyone not finishing a Mass Effect game though, unless the reason is time - those games are so fun and they're quite easy.

the meager sum of 8k dollars.

It has 48k!!! (updated from 32)....I have the original tape drive AND the dual floppy drive, as well as one of those monitors where everything is green.

As well as:

          *Apple Trek (Killing Klarnons is awesome, trust me, when you fire a photon torpedo that looks exactly like this: * and see it shooting across the green screen in 8 bit glory, you'll know that all the money you spent on an Xbox360/PS3 was truly wasted.

          *Mystery House

          *Wizardry (actually, this was a really cool game...when I was 10).

I am certain that Steve Jobs was in the same building that this machine was built in...at some point, or maybe not, but if youre really super 133t you can strip out the chassis and put a mini ATX mobo in there, rig some kind of fan system, install windows 7 and then install an Apple ][ emulator and STILL play all of those great games I just mentioned (oh yeah, plus "The Bard's Tale,").

This is so stupid.

More security theatre. I think the real terrorists work in DC.

Unless it's clearly child porn -

But it's total bullshit if any cops anywhere think they can arrest people for looking drunk, or being seen in a photo with a bottle of booze even if they're underage - or a photo of someone smoking something out of a bong or pipe - there is no way they could prove what the substance was, and while I am not sure about the UK, in the US our legal system hasn't eroded to that point yet, I am sure it probably will as we continue our descent into fascism and away from the rule of law.

it's bad enough that people think that the system works how it oes on TV and it's a hell of a rude awakening when you find out just how ridiculously fucked up it really is as it stands now.

Sounds like something that could be exploited...

It's true. The average gunfight lasts mere seconds...now, what happened an Kent State was anything but average, but still...over a minute?

There are so many things that are wrong with what happened that day, from all of the evidence, it looks to me and many others like this was orchestrated...someone wanted the anti war college students to be fired on, likely within the FBI - cointelpro, etc.

No.

Of course he has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Unless the person was on his friend's list and permitted to see particular posts, the ONLY thing the court should be able to see are things that are viewable by everyone - everything else is SPECIFICALLY set up to be private by way of the passwords and permissions system inherent in having a Facebook account.

I don't know what area they serve, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's in a place where they have no effective competition...

That's the only way I can see any company doing this (from a business perspective), because to do this in a market where your competitors do not would be incredibly foolish, especially knowing how the bulk of users feel about this sort of thing (which can be easily noticed by anyone with half a brain by visiting sites like /.

I guess the other possibility is that they have incompetent management.

Yeah - and those guys had everything to lose and nothing to gain by talking about it.

This has happened many times since the late 60s and possibly before.

These people are credible enough to handle launching nuclear ICBMs, including one who was a base commander at a foreign base where nuclear weapons were stored, yet some people still doubt their credibility?

It's not just unidentified objects showing up at silos, they've been able to take all of the independent missile systems offline in a very particular way, which shouldn't be possible...In some cases when fighters have been scrambled the objects will lead the fighters many, many miles away then shoot back to where they were in an instant.

I realize that a lot of people like to ridicule this stuff, because they're not used to credible people coming clean about this stuff. But UFOs are a reality, and these events did happen... Back in the 50s UFOs were in the press all of the time, without the added ridicule, there were days in July of 1952 where the capital was swarming with them.

What the UFOs are and where they came from, who knows - but there is something to these reports, so why don't you get all of the facts before you make up your mind. Contempt prior to investigation is a sure way to remain ignorant.

Sure, people will dismiss this and think it's about making money, but there are many, many crews that have stated this going back to the 60s, they're not selling books or anything else.

Something weird and political is going on here obviously. One of Assange's problems is that he loves publicity too much and tends to run off at the mouth; don't get me wrong, I know it's important for a site like this to be publicized, but I am talking about something beyond that.

He also made some statements about 9/11 and the families, cops, and firefighters who want a genuine investigation into what happened that day - basically dismissing them as "invalid conspiracy theorists," which I thought was short sighted and ignorant; and that, along with some of the other things that have happened in regard to Wikileaks really makes me wonder if that site is not at all what it appears, because think about it:

Wikileaks is now perfectly positioned as the worldwide "go to" place if you have sensitive information that could bing down the rich and powerful, or government, or anything like that.

Quite true...Strip malls, boardwalks, pine barrens, marshes, suburbs, golf courses.....and corruption out the ass.

The guy may be slimy, but what he did is business as usual in American politics - particularly in Chicago.....

He pissed somebody off or stepped on some toes and THAT is why he's being prosecuted - then, rather than lying down, which would have resulted in lesser charges or some sort of deal, he told the powers that did this to him to "fuck off" and grandstanded, which they really didn't like, so they're going after him....

I would say "that's American politics in 2010" for you, but I'd imagine there are plenty of other countries where this sort of shit goes on too....Apparently Finland and Norway and Sweden are the places to live if you want relatively uncorrupted politicians...(though I suspect there must be some corruption there).....