Assuming of course that this isn't just Sony doing viral marketing.

Why not take advantage of being hacked to promote up a movie that was going to bomb hard. Create "evidence" that the subject of mocking was behind it.

Not saying that is what they are doing, but I won't be surprised to find out 6 months from now that they did.

While on its face this reaction appears quite stupid, if there were just one physical attack on one theater, the survivors and families of the victims would sue Sony for a lot claiming that they had a credible threat and ignored it.

Mind you, I believe that they are just using this as a propaganda move. Free publicity, and when it does finally get released the attendance will be significantly higher than it otherwise would have been.

A fair response. VG is probably reporting based on formal requests while the article is probably based on polling.

Fair enough. I would not be surprised to see a news source inflate numbers. Though it is also just as likely that VG is trying to downplay the numbers.

30/700 = 4% even if you round it to the more than 700 as 800 you get 3.75% which is more than 3%, not less.

Better check those tolerances again.

Apple Pay provides a new unique transaction number with each purchase. No credit card information is provided. This is to avoid being able to use information from a transaction for a second purchase. Big for security. Not so much for correlating transactions with a user.

While a number of projects certainly are treated this way, it is this attitude from users that has ruined my enjoyment of backing projects.

Backers are certainly not investing in the traditional sense since they do not get any share of profits, etc, but once upon a time, they were investing in having an idea become available. I backed many projects just to see the idea come to be. Ideas that could not get funding through traditional means. Between a mix of people who were trying to get a fast buck and backers loudly complaining that their "pre-order" was taking too long, it just became too much trouble.

People could no longer take chances on interesting things because they had to provide constant assurances to backers that they would get their loot.

A project pretty much has to be good to go now which has made it difficult for new people to get into the game with fresh ideas. There is too much risk those projects might fail and backers will come screaming for their money back.

If your car stopped on a freeway and wouldn't start again. I'm pretty sure the police would show up and want an explanation.

Because no one has ever lied to try to garner sympathy.

If anything like this had happened, there would be a police report to back it up.

Cribbage... that's where those fat cat card manufacturers get you with their fancy wood board and peg upgrades.

If the total doesn't change, that really doesn't prove anything. Other technologies help reduce accidents. 1 in 4 accidents were linked to cell phone use. If all of those accidents could have been avoided, you would probably have seen a drop in rates.

I do honestly believe that some people can drive and talk on a phone at the same time safely, but they should have to prove they have that skill rather than just let everyone do it and hope for the best.

That's the point. While it may be legal, it has been shown in studies to be unsafe (hands free or otherwise). Government has failed to act to address this safety issue.

If the government had actually dealt with known issues regarding driving and cell phone use, his vigilantism would not have been necessary. I know I have thought about doing the same thing myself. And I wonder how many politicians receive contributions from the cell phone companies.

Still... he committed a crime and should be punished. Civil disobedience requires a willingness to accept the punishment to help solve the problem.

If they were simply confiscating it, they would not have felt the need to run.

Wow. You must be superman or something to jump that far.

I'm simply positing where some of the hostility may be coming from. Nothing in there about whether or not you should own one.

While it does not excuse their behavior (theft and violence are rarely excused), it is meant to explain it. If you ignore what motivates people, you open yourself up for unexpected reactions.

I wish we lived in a society where people ask questions before they react to things they don't understand, but that is often not the case.