Portal 2 image dump

[Some_weirdGuy]

So, here is the topic for you to look at or post any images from Portal 2 that you stumble across.

For the most part the images can be found in the articles from here:
http://gameinformer.com/mag/portal2.aspx

But any other images you may find can be posted (or if any of you feel like posting direct links to images for any lazy slobs who can't be bothered looking at those articles themselves)

I found another smaller article on the game informer website that i hadn't seen before, which had this image here.

[Korushi]

Ehm, excluding the stuff from the game informer hub (which you've already covered,) the only other images are from the magazine, and we arn't allowed to post those here.

This thread will come in handy later though, once more stuff is revealed.

[shoop]

Thanks, I wasn't aware of the GI article one.

[Pilk]

We actually have many, many more images at the portalwiki.

[leahcim]

Originally Posted by Pilk

We actually have many, many more images at the portalwiki.

Well yeah, but that's just stuff from the BBS and GI website and stuff from the GI article - but adding the latter to the wiki has made links to that site off limits on this forum (see the sticky at the top)

[Some_weirdGuy]

Yes, that little restriction really puts a bit of a damper on this thread.

I had planned to edit my original post with image links that people posted up, i guess i still can when more is revealed, just have to be careful its not a scan.

[Pilk]

If we were to "respect copyright of all third party material" then we wouldn't be able to link to basically anything. It's a shame since the magazine is released now, anyway.

If that's the case, When I link to that page I'm not linking to the magazine scans, I'm linking to the BBS images. Act as if the magazine scans were never there.

[Artemirr]

Well here is something I wrote up awhile ago that has been sitting ideally by I have not edited it as it is in a ideal state. Anyways it may give you understanding of the grey area of law in certain areas.

Isn't that a breach of freedom of speech, if one denotes something as fact or truth as a documented article with its affiliates of the original source and not exclusively saying it is their own, then it is in legal bounds of the freedom of speech act, as it would be in line with truth as a documented source. Since it can’t be considered intellectual property as it is just the virtual sharing of information and not used for personal gain or profit. Where that in itself one that would try to make such claims would be as if trying to create a monopoly or capitalize on privilege information which is a violation of trust per say as example “insider trading, stocks”. If you wish to have information remain a secret and undisclosed take care of who you tell it too, other than that, it makes no sense in saying you can not put a link to that website or share information. Such as one can take out sources from a newspaper as long as they are credited to such author. If one were to ask for allowances in everything ever written we would be a very slow moving species in knowledge gain and sharing of information. Intellectual property is a myth for the most unless on the side of business, but that in itself such as formulas or special or unique brands can have a heavy burden on the populace if not all chemicals are at least shown or given to the public indiscriminately. This also eliminates a free market if the public is not given the information so an individual can be competitive with. (Food industry has to be tightly monitored)
As case with Microsoft in the early 90’s for monopolizing over how the software is coded. Thus Microsoft had to release information so other individuals would have the same opportunities to create said such software to operate a system. Another point though stealing the use of information of unpublished information in a future public product for consumers is a breach of intellectual property as it would hurt that companies business and future profits. Once the property is released however on the open market it is an entirely different scenario on intellectual property. There for restriction of reverse engineering is in violation of not the user agreement but in violation of the free trade agreement, once a product has already been released. Although recreating a duplicate source and claiming it yours is a violation of copyright, if one wishes to seek profit or notoriety. Such as said like entities of such company/companies/ Monsanto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Company
As you can see the company itself, misleads the people and violates the constitution and proliferates capitalism to supersede the importance of the masses and thus is a breach of ethics over the majority of the people. Company has been reckless and imposing upon litigation within the governing body and encroached upon the freedoms of the people of America. Under further review the company should be trialed under the international Supreme Court for the violation of human rights and trusts. I personally hope Obama’s next step is to restructure the bread and butter of its nation and that would be its food source. Once a monopoly has been created it is hard to de-root it however, these sort of entities are a danger to the masses as they can mislead and even use their influence in litigation and such as in the food industry to cause wide spread hunger and even more destitution. If certain policies continue to undermine said peoples some counties may find a lack of friends in the future. Currently the laws once to protect the people are now being used to undermine them and sell them into bondage. Furthermore look into case files regarding the suing of farmers for windblown seed that was genetically altered. The company itself is using life that it altered as a means of ownership. Where we all know you can clip a birds wings and it won’t fly as in case of the terminator seed,(thank god that did not pass) but whereas itself if the seed can still reproduce and is flying in the wind it is a natural subsequent relationship to the affects of law and nature. Once their product was released to the public it is free to all competitive circumstances including nature. Which in itself supersedes all notions of our pathetic human scripture, thusly it is our imperative to governing the importance to negate any affects of oppression onto any persons or peoples, whereas as long as they abide by laws which keep them civil. If upon this nature they violate law, one is in fact is to be oppressed and jailed until said such crimes themselves can be deterred against. Likely note that when subject as in animal or human said is deprived of such basic needs there is a possibility for their mental status to return to a more feral intellect and thusly jeopardize citizens, until their basic needs met. Appearing more animal in nature and a loss of conscience can occur, when that happens; it is a grave thing when I human has to act upon instinct and not conscience. That was said by a great philosopher in Greek history, although the point eludes me at this very moment to whom it was. This has nothing to do with socialism, capitalism and or any other ideologies in governing body system but it is in order of protection upon all people. If the people become restless in to great an amount they will most likely send ones head down the hill as sort to speak, history preludes to this point. That is why citizens come first in regarding ethics of business’s. If the monetary system loses its honour and integrity as a governing principle it jeopardizes the safety and well being of its populace and an oppressive human nature can spawn, the signs of oppression is the % to people base in destitution. We are and always will be a people in service to each other as all that is and was, was created by the people and not those that dictate their image upon others. Tyranny is not acceptable under any curcumstances. Protect democracy - protect the people.

[wade]

Starts off strong, but got a bit messy near the end.

[Artemirr]

yeah, little fragmetned in shape as it relates other points but it is usually how I start something then it is those ideals one takes and exapnds like an acordian to more congruent facts and better grammar I suppose lol. When one is to stream it together as one piece more fluid like later on. Anyways its all here say at the moment as it isnt complete. Ty for your op on it though >.>. I don't usually post things unfinished.

[nod113]

a few new shots of the redesigned chell here

[leahcim]

Originally Posted by Pilk

If we were to "respect copyright of all third party material" then we wouldn't be able to link to basically anything. It's a shame since the magazine is released now, anyway.

Well, no. Although everything is, usually, copyrighted, there a huge difference between linking to a site that has put images on it for which either they own the copyright or have permission to use them, and linking to one that has put images on for which they neither own the copyright nor have permission.

That said, obviously the nature of URLs means that virtually any URL you use will (eventually) link to a site that has disregarded copyright, I think any reasonable person reading the sticky can figure out the spirit of the rule.

[leahcim]

Originally Posted by Artemirr

yeah, little fragmetned in shape as it relates other points but it is usually how I start something then it is those ideals

You fall into a common trap. There's no need to talk like a ponce to say something intelligent. Equally, saying nothing at all doesn't become something intelligent if you say it by talking like a ponce.

Worse stuff like "sitting ideally by" just makes you look like a buffoon, you'd be better simply using words and phrases you understand the meaning of to make your point.

That said, to answer the question you asked with the first few words, no, it isn't a breach of freedom of speech.

As for the rest of the waffle. Most of the advocates for stealing other people's work produce nothing of value themselves. It's basically projection : their ideas are rubbish, their pictures are rubbish, their creativity is non-existent.

If you spent more time trying to create something of value yourself rather than lamenting the cost of other people's things, you may, perhaps, learn the value of them instead.

If anything is going to put you into bondage, it's the rather stupid idea that you can use google to find information.

Do you suppose Valve could have googled to find portal 2 stuff? Think of all the time, money and effort they wasted for stuff that's on google now The magazine article is no different, google didn't create it, nor did the portal wiki site owners. If not, write about that instead. It might make sense and be profound, even if your torrenting buddies don't like the conclusions you reach.

[Artemirr]

You fall into a common trap. There's no need to talk like a ponce to say something intelligent. Equally, saying nothing at all doesn't become something intelligent if you say it by talking like a ponce.

It has a feminine appeal, eh? or in being gay to sound intelligent... More like ignorance to even make such remarks. You know nothing of me… a common trap? Yet you dispute the whole thing based on a link to wiki because it is an Internet source. Then again I am supposed to behave like some domineering superior person as a male, exactly what is your use of that word. All you had in your reply is insults and nothing of value or fact upon how things act when injected upon another. All you have done is attempt; to entice me to your depravity of loathsome morals in your dictation of you’re writing forked-tongue. That in it self is pure arrogance to think it would be of any meaning or bearing towards me. You like your throne do you. You will never know nothing of thrones until you have one taken away then perhaps you will be humble.

Worse stuff like "sitting ideally by" just makes you look like a buffoon, you'd be better simply using words and phrases you understand the meaning of to make your point.

How one looks is a perception of a human quality, when one is not writing something, is it not sitting ideally by in ones mind as one gets more information to make it more concrete in its facts rather then just some rabble. I did mention it was a work in progress, no? or did that elude you?

That said, to answer the question you asked with the first few words, no, it isn't a breach of freedom of speech.

If someone cannot post something that someone else wrote it is a violation of freedom of speech, I however noted that one should not state that its their own but from that source and then how they used it as their synthesis perhaps one should privatize the language or even alphabet and the wheel, your logic makes no sense. Next you will tell me money created everything but in reality it was just people it is always people money is just a formality of encouragement until the point it became leverage and mis-direction over the masses.

As for the rest of the waffle. Most of the advocates for stealing other people's work produce nothing of value themselves. It's basically projection : their ideas are rubbish, their pictures are rubbish, their creativity is non-existent.

Then you go on about that I again am not creative, yet you are pulling that out of where? How do you propose is it by creative, in inventiveness or creativeness in writing or in the visual. Credit though Internet is not a very credible source, but it was related to another source and the information in there can be searched out and legitimately found since court cases are filed away. Ops are formed from experience or conjuring of the mind, one can pull those apart to find some truth to create an informed synthesis or at least disregard the conjured thoughts.

If you spent more time trying to create something of value yourself rather than lamenting the cost of other people's things, you may, perhaps, learn the value of them instead.

If I spent more time trying to create something of value yourself, just who the hell are you do you know me? I think not you know not of whom I am. I was lamenting? It was written in protection of the masses I for one will stand by them before an arrogant fool, for they do everything.

If anything is going to put you into bondage, it's the rather stupid idea that you can use google to find information.

Bondage is directly related to slavery; slavery has many forms, as it is an oppression of another human or use of control over. Google would be more related to indoctrination of its related search methods if that was how you were trying to use that word. For the most part in general the people that use google are happy with the search results that I know of.

Do you suppose Valve could have googled to find portal 2 stuff? Think of all the time, money and effort they wasted for stuff that's on google now The magazine article is no different, google didn't create it, nor did the portal wiki site owners. If not, write about that instead. It might make sense and be profound, even if your torrenting buddies don't like the conclusions you reach.

Apparently I use torrents, yet I have paid for everything I have… apparently you also say I get all my information from the internet. Yet alone I have 5 hours of down time at work which is spent reading various degree of books mostly on history and philosophical meaning or studies of my field. Some fiction here and there but for the most part I would rather invent my own tale, so they do not intrigue me as much. What governs the minds of people in there actions upon othersis far more interesting to me.

Next your arrogance and flaming tenacity will tell me my piano playing makes me a ponce because you are such a socially weak mindless worm because a few men that were famous could play the instrument and had that sexual preference. Then again perhaps I just enjoy Hungarian Rhapsody and contemporary classical music’s as much as I enjoy pop culture music. It’s your kind of trolling mind that makes me question my morals or virtues if you have be and whether I should exploit people for how simple and naïve most are. I wonder why one can’t patent the wheel? Perhaps because it is of wide public use and demand therefore its intellectual properties were absolved by the peopel as it isa sueful tool for service. Need I remind you there was once a man so wealthy that he had more money then the entire senate and enjoyed mistreating his slaves and subjects servants what have you until they killed him to have no burial and divided his wealth. You think in the end he had any friends no they all believed he got what he deserved yet he is written in history. I will not say his name for you can go search it out, you may even find more then one but there is only one I am referring to as it was the wealthiest human to date. Instead of giving your ugly charm and plain dribble of demeaning someone’s thoughts perhaps you could put into more constructive words or add to it or give facts in relation to a why that doesn’t work. Rather then just being so dismissive of things that do not congeal with you, your highness. I found that your words were not constructive in there crtic but blatently intended to flame. Here comes the one liners for your retort no?

[Artemirr]

well... duplicate office computer lag