But if you only reveal that fact if the cops bust in, wouldn't the escort then be able to go after you for attempting to film you and her having sex? I guess it's a possibility she won't, since she'd basically be admitting that she's a prostitute. But if the cops bust in, she's likely already in with them in some manner.

So then you just need to find a friend to trade roles with. One night your friend pays you and the hooker, the next, you pay your friend and the hooker.

Wouldn't it be easier for the government to just "politely" ask the cell tower operator to turn off the tower?

But we aren't talking about a mere lack of sympathy, which may be because you don't know if you should sympathize. We're talking about looking at the situation, and deciding that you have no sympathy for the person, for the things that are about to befall him.

Person 1: "You gotta help me out man!"
Person 2: "Why?"
Person 1: "I robbed a liquor store! The Man is gonna throw me in jail!"
Person 2: "I have no sympathy for you."

If you cannot see how that means that Person 2 approves of Person 1 going to jail, then I don't know what else to say.

Was that in T3? I remember that from MiB2, but not T3.

My point was that him saying "I'm struggling to find sympathy for him" goes beyond merely understanding the events. It expresses a particular feeling you have about the events.

For example, I understand that some people beat up other people. But if I see a guy getting the shit kicked out of him on TV, and I say "I have no sympathy for that guy", how is that not me condoning the beating?

I thought so to when I first skimmed it. Then I re-read it and this line popped out at me.

Saying he has no sympathy doesn't sound much like he's simply stating what will happen. Makes it sound like he approves.

I'm struggling to read that as anything but you supporting his assassination.

Makes me wonder how many pedestrians she nearly clipped...

Maybe, but that's fine. Because when the government does it, it isn't illegal.

I didn't mean to imply that I wasn't updating, only that I could not play the new game I just bought until I did.

Or rather, in theory I could not play it. In practice, I just used one of the many disc managers to install the game to an external HDD, and played the game from that. Completely skips the version check on the disc.

Of course, just in case the game actually did need something in the update, I did still update.

So I was just imagining things every time my PSP refused to play a UMD because the UMD contained a software update? And every time my Wii wouldn't load a game because of a software update on the game disc?

Sorry, but I think you're the one out of touch with reality.

That isn't what UltraZelda64 meant.

If you bought a physical disc of a completely offline game, and that disc contained an update that removed OtherOS, you could not play that game unless you installed the update.

True. But that isn't what Sycraft-fu was talking about. It isn't about not following the rules, it's about technically following them in such a convoluted manner that outsiders just look at it and go "really? You really think that counts as following your rules?"

For a car analogy, lets take two people exceeding the speed limit. The one explains that he thinks the speed limit is too low in that area, so he ignores the limit and goes with what he thinks is a safe speed. The other, goes into a convoluted explanation about how he wasn't actually speeding. In fact, he was actually going under the limit.

"They don't meet any of the traditional requirements. They're prideful, spiteful, hateful, etc... all the classic deadly sins."

I suppose it could be argued that one can be Christian yet also be some/all of those things.