Comments on: PWN Washington!

By: Nicolas Papaconstantinou

Nicolas Papaconstantinou — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:53:19 +0000

Yeh, I’m guessing there’ll be a few high-profile cases where they cause controversy by pulling a few pale, overweight, spotty teenagers, blinking, out of their parent’s basements for “questioning”, costing millions of taxpayers’ dollars for relatively little result (compared to, say, the result you get when a remote control missile costing the same amount is used on a foreign “soft target”).

At which point, the campaign/legislation will go underground, trying not to draw attention to how fundamentally retarded an idea it was in the first place.

By: Cousin George

Cousin George — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:29:09 +0000

Wanna bet on how successful that will be?

By: Vanessa

Vanessa — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:37:41 +0000

Well, the state just figures that it needs to protect the fragile and naive citizens of Washington from the perils of international gambling. They would much rather we lose our gambling dollars in the tribal casinos here. They are going to have to set up a special commission just to patrol the ether.

By: Nicolas Papaconstantinou

Nicolas Papaconstantinou — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:42:02 +0000

Vanessa – What, seriously? How do they even enforce a law like that…? That sounds a bit scary and draconian, to me…

By: Vanessa

Vanessa — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:42:42 +0000

Nick – this is MY “progressive” Washington State you’re talking about in the initial post. Not only is it now illegal to use online gaming sites (except, of course, our beloved-and-local horse racing), but so are websites that TALK about online gaming sites, or give advice or LINKS to online gaming sites (except, of course, our state lottery).

You haven’t heard me on my soapbox yet. Get me started. Come on. I dare you.

By: Nicolas Papaconstantinou

Nicolas Papaconstantinou — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:30:39 +0000

That’s a point well taken.

And Tom almost makes me feel inadequate with that friend amount…

By: Cousin George

Cousin George — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:19:29 +0000

Well, apparantly “Tom has 84937041 friends”..

I’ll put the commas in so it’s easier… 84,937,041.

Assuming that’s true – you can add onto it the ones that have removed him from their friends list (like myself) and maybe it is 100 million.

Still looks like shitloads but there you go!!

And you weren’t talking about ‘the establishment’ you were talking about legislation and governments. Different things – particulalry if you believe the conspiricies…

By: Nicolas Papaconstantinou

Nicolas Papaconstantinou — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:28:54 +0000

Not sure about the other sites. The more I think about the 100 million figure, the more crazy it sounds, to be honest… but I suppose it is possible.

That’s a good point about Murdoch, but I guess when you’re worrying about fighting the establishment, it’s difficult to know where Murdoch would stand… he pretty much is the establishment.

And yeh, that second link was intentional, I think (panicked for a second that I’d accidentally dropped in a link to my slutporn.xxx account). Was looking for a more concise version of the story, but essentially it boils down to the fact that the guy in the story was stitched up by rivals from Wikipedia.

By: Cousin George

Cousin George — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:50:51 +0000

MySpace has 100 million users? Wow… that’s a big number even if you half it to remove the number of users which are people’s second accounts (fan sites, band sites etc).

What’s the user count on something like eBay or Google?

Also worth remembering about MySpace is that it’s now owned by News International and I’m pretty sure that Rupert Murdoch can work a lobby when he wants to…

btw – second link goes somewhere interesting, but probably not what you had intended (if so – I missed the point!)