thrillhouse

Pretty fair point on the audio quality relative to high production ones. BUT I think the WAN show at this point is very much "we are lucky linus enjoys and finds time for" situation so I don't think we'll see any type of professional production quality to it. It's very niche and only the very dedicated fans really consistently tune in for it. Don't get me wrong I love that I can get some pure Linus and Luke every week but Linus could very easily drop it and loose very little so any effort he finds is spare to do it is kinda lucky considering how bonkers running LMG and his homelife must be. however that just my intuition so I could be wrong on that

Genuinely curious, why is the general consensus that Polaris isn't going to be able to match Pascal?

While I think it is a felony to destroy evidence provided you could prove that anything on it was incriminating and that it was destroyed intending to get rid of evidence (very hard to prove in certain circumstances beyond reasonable doubt) simply destroying his hard drive couldn't not and would not have much if any bearing on a conviction, it's too circumstantial you could perfectly argue he was disposing of an old hard drive he wanted to get rid of it however ridiculous it may seem with the charges against him.

Does any one else get the feeling that the NEO will be the "VR" version? That it's a reaction from Sony looking at the PC VR developments and going "Oh shit we need something NOW, not at the end of the life PS4 before PC eat's our lunch." I understand that Sony are mandating "what works on the NEO needs to work on the original". I don't think it's too much of leap to say they can see the demand and willingness from PC gamers to drop cash on, let's face it, very expensive peripherals and reason why wouldn't console gamers? That makes more sense to me then beefing up to play 4k movies because they own the format.

I'm not sure you understand, it's exactly what the FBI were after. Unlocking a phone IF it is encrypted IS decrypting it. From an objective point of view the reason doesn't matter it's building the ability to action the request which in this case is one in the same. Apple really have no obligation of vested interest in unlocking the phone. If it could provide the photo's another way then sure what ever, but the law surrounding ownership in the US around a deceased child I could guarantee you would not cover encrypted data. Technically the father has the data in his possession on the phone physically he just can't access it due to the function of the device, all apple would be required to do is provide the data if it was backed up on their services, there's no obligation to provide it un-encrypted as they did not receive it as such. I feel for the man I really do but I don't believe what he is asking can be done and as cold as it is I don't think it should be done. If Apple were to compromise their encryption in that way it would be a disaster waiting to happen.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Nah, he is over simplifying it. There has to be a legitimate reason for the refund like its not as was described, has a major fault ect and those would be rights regardless of time played/owned up to a reasonable period (what reasonable is dependent generally on the situation, what ACCC deem as reasonable and what a judge agrees with you is reasonable). If you simply do not want the game any more because you don't like it or you don't enjoy it but it's as described, without any major faults you are entirely at the mercy of store. "I've changed my mind" Refunds are perfectly fine to be refused by a store in Australia unless otherwise stated or described by the store. I think Valves policy would be at odds with the ACL (Australian consumer law) where if a game dramatically changed (in a detrimental fashion) or became broken AFTER the 2 weeks or 2 hours. ACL would entitle you to a refund but valves policy wouldn't cover it.

I would argue, well if they are taking money for it they bear some responsibility/liability. Getting paid on something with zero liability sounds like they are trying to have their cake and eat it. Honestly if Valve wants to improve it's relations with customers and customer support (which it very much needs to)they should be building in better guarantees. It doesn't matter that Valve didn't create whats coming through steam they are the ones taking my money and what's more they are getting a cut of it. I'm not saying Valve is responsible for a games quality or bugs or problems but they need avenues for recourse if i'm not happy with the product that I have paid them money for just like they've implemented in with refunds.