It's faster than XP. It's really not, but most people will believe it is. Why? Because in the last 3 years nearly everyone has upgraded their PC, and a large portion of computers at workplaces have been upgraded within that time. So by the time they get to Win7 it will seem faster just because the hardware has finally caught up to the bloated monstrosity that is Windows. They won't know this, but they would have been happy about performance if Vista had been installed on their machines instead of Win7. Instead, what you'll hear is "Oh, I'm so glad we finally moved to Windows7 and skipped over Vista completely!"
I was going to post something like the parent. The themed neighborhood ideas was brilliant. It was the first real attempt at community on the internet. I remember they had neighborhood sponsors who you could chat with, they had something akin to "town hall meetings" where everyone in the neighborhood would chat...it was interesting, exciting, invigorating. I couldn't WAIT to get home from school and hop back on my website. As for me, I had a crappy page just like the rest of you in 1997 - my first ever. RIP TimesSquare/Stadium.
And thus why you should never by a new car OR a new game. They aren't worth what they're sold for, and with cars you lose something ridiculous like 30% of its value in the first year. With games it's similar, you can buy a used game a year later for half the original new price, maybe even less.
Does this mean we're one step closer to getting iPhone with Verizon? Could I buy this in the Apple store and then take it to a Verizon store and say "here, make this my phone"?
Nah, it's not so much that their votes have been bought by the big companies, but because both democrats and republicans don't want their butts on the line when it breaks. Every politician is an expert at dodging responsibility, regardless of party affiliation. A gigantic myth out there right now is that technical support for open source software does not exist, and so if you want to make sure that when it breaks someone will fix it, you must use proprietary software. It doesn't matter if it's true, what matters is that technically ignorant people really believe it.
I'd like to second this. I also consider myself a serious gamer and had no idea this game was even out. Wwhen UT3 hit Steam I told my friends "Hey, look! They finally released UT3!"
This is AWESOME news! I cannot even begin to describe just now annoying this crap is to deal with! I usually filter servers by map for the map I want to play, with a good ping, not full, not empty, and not password protected. Then I order them by players and join one with a max of around 20 - 24, with an open slot and have fun. On TF2, having 30 players usually results in neither side winning. Anyway, I hate, hate, HATE, ***HATE**** it when I join a server that claims to have 20/24 players, wait about one minute to connect and send the data to their server, and then NO ONE IS THERE! It gets even more frustrating when you do this several times in a row. I hate lying servers so very much.
Once again Valve has proven themselves to be a really awesome company that doesn't just care about profits but also about their player community. My hat is off to you, Valve. Good job.
As an early adopter...
on
The Age of Steam
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I remember when they first pushed Steam with Counter Strike 1.5 (or was it 1.6?) oh well. Before you could launch CS without Steam in a stand-alone client and after you had to have Steam. I was in college at the time and everyone (with but few exceptions) in my entire dorm hall played CS together at nights. Then Steam came out. Everyone hated Steam at first because it was clunky, slow, and impeded our play. It would frequently crash and sometimes kick people for no reason. It was Steam that killed dorm CS and left a bad taste in my mouth. Several years later when HL2 came out along with CS:S and I saw that they were still using Steam, I almost didn't buy it. When I found out what they had done with Steam (improved it substantially, made it actually work, added an online community, etc) I was happily surprised. Today I use Steam all the time and just last night downloaded a new game (UT3). Steam allows me to play with my friends in just a few clicks, keep tabs on their achievements and progress, and voice chat rather easily. I have real-life friends scattered all across the country now, and we can still very easiloy get on and play CS together. I know of no other platform that allows such seamless play for such a variety of games.
Just my 2 copper coins.
No no no, the perpetual motion machine is made by strapping a piece of toast (butter side up) to the back of a cat and then dropping it. It will forever spin right above the ground.
Agreed. If people are going to have sex anyway, then you might as well teach them how to use contraceptives. Less abortions is a good thing, regardless of pro-life or pro-choice viewpoints.
I'm not even going to go into the long theological discussion required to rebut your accusations regarding why Gentile Christians do not follow the Mosaic law. That in itself is another discussion and I gather from your hate-filled words that you would not read it anyway.
Now, onto the rest. You, sir, are sadly mistaken in calling me a bigot. It is attitudes like that which further divide our country. The rest of the post that I wrote which you conveniently did not quote states unequivocally "As a Christian, my official stance on homosexuality is that I do not agree with it...However, I also believe in America and that you cannot legislate morality. Therefore, be homosexual if you want to. If you ask me why I do not believe you are right before God for being homosexual, I will explain it my point of view. Else, do what you want. It's America."
I believe that's just about as non-bigot as you can get and yet you still proceed with name calling and hateful insults against me. We need to pull together as a country and realize that just because I don't agree with you and you don't agree with me doesn't mean we can't be friends. There's alot of Christians who need to hear this too. Name calling, insults, and anything else that derives itself from hate is wrong. It always will be. And you, sir, are wrong to act is such a fashion regardless of the actions of other people. More hate won't solve the problem.
Are you attempting to imply moral relativism as a mode of rationalizing your own bigotry or that of others?
Actually, far from it. I believe in moral absolutism (the Bible). What I am espousing is the same thing you are: freedom for all. Like I said in my previous post: it's America, do what you want. Men and women died for your freedom to be gay, straight, (insert way of life here). They also died for my right to disagree with you about whether it is morally right or wrong. But don't call me a bigot just because I disagree with you. Call me a bigot if I actually treat those of opposing viewpoints with hate. The entire message of Jesus is summed up in this: "Love God. Treat others like you want to be treated. Tell others about your faith." I don't see anywhere in there where it says to treat anyone with hatred.
Strangely enough, I am also pro-life, and also not because my religion says so. Rather, because I asked a doctor (who, as far as I know, is not affiliated with any religion) when life begins. He simply stated: "Medically, life beings at conception." That's all I needed. I agree with you: human rights should be for everyone, no matter what.
I am not going to argue tautologies with you because I find people who argue in such a manner usually irrational.
You're good, you know. You start right off with an insult. You say you're all about equality, ending bigotry, etc, and yet you start with an insult against my own intelligence. It appears, sir, that you are just as much a bigot against Evangelical Christians as the very people you speak against. Bigotry at all is wrong. It always will be.
One thing that really pisses me off is when people who disagree morally with homosexuality are called "homophobes". When will people realize that treating someone wrong, regardless of their viewpoint, is WRONG? So you don't agree with Christians? Ok. Let's talk with civility and nix the name calling. If (and I stress _if_) Rick Warren has "hate in his heart" then by your own words I would guess that you have "hate in your heart" against Christians who disagree with homosexuality. Is your hate any less "hate" than Mr. Warrens? No. Hate is hate and it is wrong.
As a Christian, my official stance on homosexuality is that I do not agree with it as I believe God does not agree with it. I believe God created man for woman and woman for man. However, I also believe in America and that you cannot legislate morality. Therefore, be homosexual if you want to. If you ask me why I do not believe you are right before God for being homosexual, I will explain it my point of view. Else, do what you want. It's America.
The hedonism in the gay community that leads to unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like is exacerbated if not caused in part by denying them the right to unite as a family of their own choosing under the social contract.
This statement is outright false. You are making excuses for the actions of individuals who make poor choices (not being gay, but rather in the words of the parent "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like"). If you think being able to sign a piece of paper and declare yourself "married" will solve these problems than you are sorely mistaken. For evidence, just look to the rate of divorce in the US, which is staggering. Marriage will not prevent these woes from affecting the gay community. The "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like" stems from an ideology that a person should be free to do whatever they want, any time they want, so long as it doesn't affect someone else's rights. If I want to have sex with someone, get into a relationship with that person, and then while in that relationship go have sex with someone else...why not? I'm free to do whatever I want. If I want to have sex with a different person every night...why not? I'm free to do whatever I want. If I want to go and do drugs...why not? I'm free to do what I want (so long as I don't get caught). This is what causes the "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like" that you speak of. (note: whether or not homosexuals should be allowed the right of marriage is not the subject of this post)
I too loved 1 over 2, mainly because of the Hoth map. Also I found the Cloud City map to be very difficult and I might only win half the time at it. I like maps like that where I don't know if I'll win or not.
The only reason I played BF2 at all was to play as a Jedi. I'd play maps with ridiculous odds stacked against me but I would play as a Jedi hero and that was awesome. Oh yeah, and playing the maps where it's only heros playing against you, that's fun too.:P
So long as they actually lower and eventually remove the gas tax, this isn't a bad idea. It makes sense that if you're using their roads, you need to pay to help keep them up. Not a foreign concept.
The major problem with this is: currently the gas tax gets interstate traffic, this new plan will not. If you're a trucker and you drive through a state then when you fill up with gas you're helping to maintain the very roads you used to get your product from point A to point B. Under this new system, Oregon tax payers would foot the bill for truckers and other interstate traffic to cut through their state and use their roads (basically) free of charge. That's not cool at all.
How sad. I got all excited when I saw that Christmas tree pic in the actual post, like he'd somehow managed to make it look like a real freaking tree. The actual picture is much less exciting. Ok, strike that, depressing.
Hard drive xmas tree man, you lose an internet. Your tree sucks.
I was watching CNN last night on AC360, and Soledad O'brien said "96% of African Americans voted for Obama". That trend disturbs me quite a bit. I understand just how far African American have come since the Emancipation Proclamation. I get that. I'm also proud that we're at a point in our nation where we can elect someone who is black. That's great. What really bothers me is that somehow 96% of African Americans found the qualifier for President of the United States to be in a man's color of skin, and not his promised policies. I'm sure there were a hefty group who also believed in his policies, but I know that not all African Americans are hardcore democrats, or even independents. So there was a rather large (aka: not small) group that voted for Mr. Obama because of the color of his skin, despite differences of opinion on the way the country should go. That, is what disturbs me. And yes, I also realize there are voters in every election who vote for someone because they're white. Duh. But you'll never see 96% of white voters voting for the white candidate in an election between a white man and a black man. That obviously didn't happen yesterday. Race should never be a reason to vote for anyone - I don't care if they're purple.
Slashdot Mirror
It's faster than XP. It's really not, but most people will believe it is. Why? Because in the last 3 years nearly everyone has upgraded their PC, and a large portion of computers at workplaces have been upgraded within that time. So by the time they get to Win7 it will seem faster just because the hardware has finally caught up to the bloated monstrosity that is Windows. They won't know this, but they would have been happy about performance if Vista had been installed on their machines instead of Win7. Instead, what you'll hear is "Oh, I'm so glad we finally moved to Windows7 and skipped over Vista completely!"
I was going to post something like the parent. The themed neighborhood ideas was brilliant. It was the first real attempt at community on the internet. I remember they had neighborhood sponsors who you could chat with, they had something akin to "town hall meetings" where everyone in the neighborhood would chat...it was interesting, exciting, invigorating. I couldn't WAIT to get home from school and hop back on my website. As for me, I had a crappy page just like the rest of you in 1997 - my first ever. RIP TimesSquare/Stadium.
Yeah! Rabble! Rabble rabble rabble!
And thus why you should never by a new car OR a new game. They aren't worth what they're sold for, and with cars you lose something ridiculous like 30% of its value in the first year. With games it's similar, you can buy a used game a year later for half the original new price, maybe even less.
I wasn't asking for me, you insensitive clod!
Could someone explain what they're doing in a bit more of layman's terms? And then also, what the point of doing all of that is?
Nah, I prefer to win the game
Ahhh! And now I just LOST the game! Thanks alot! :(
Does this mean we're one step closer to getting iPhone with Verizon? Could I buy this in the Apple store and then take it to a Verizon store and say "here, make this my phone"?
Nah, it's not so much that their votes have been bought by the big companies, but because both democrats and republicans don't want their butts on the line when it breaks. Every politician is an expert at dodging responsibility, regardless of party affiliation. A gigantic myth out there right now is that technical support for open source software does not exist, and so if you want to make sure that when it breaks someone will fix it, you must use proprietary software. It doesn't matter if it's true, what matters is that technically ignorant people really believe it.
I'd like to second this. I also consider myself a serious gamer and had no idea this game was even out. Wwhen UT3 hit Steam I told my friends "Hey, look! They finally released UT3!"
This is AWESOME news! I cannot even begin to describe just now annoying this crap is to deal with! I usually filter servers by map for the map I want to play, with a good ping, not full, not empty, and not password protected. Then I order them by players and join one with a max of around 20 - 24, with an open slot and have fun. On TF2, having 30 players usually results in neither side winning. Anyway, I hate, hate, HATE, ***HATE**** it when I join a server that claims to have 20/24 players, wait about one minute to connect and send the data to their server, and then NO ONE IS THERE! It gets even more frustrating when you do this several times in a row. I hate lying servers so very much.
Once again Valve has proven themselves to be a really awesome company that doesn't just care about profits but also about their player community. My hat is off to you, Valve. Good job.
I remember when they first pushed Steam with Counter Strike 1.5 (or was it 1.6?) oh well. Before you could launch CS without Steam in a stand-alone client and after you had to have Steam. I was in college at the time and everyone (with but few exceptions) in my entire dorm hall played CS together at nights. Then Steam came out. Everyone hated Steam at first because it was clunky, slow, and impeded our play. It would frequently crash and sometimes kick people for no reason. It was Steam that killed dorm CS and left a bad taste in my mouth. Several years later when HL2 came out along with CS:S and I saw that they were still using Steam, I almost didn't buy it. When I found out what they had done with Steam (improved it substantially, made it actually work, added an online community, etc) I was happily surprised. Today I use Steam all the time and just last night downloaded a new game (UT3). Steam allows me to play with my friends in just a few clicks, keep tabs on their achievements and progress, and voice chat rather easily. I have real-life friends scattered all across the country now, and we can still very easiloy get on and play CS together. I know of no other platform that allows such seamless play for such a variety of games. Just my 2 copper coins.
No no no, the perpetual motion machine is made by strapping a piece of toast (butter side up) to the back of a cat and then dropping it. It will forever spin right above the ground.
Agreed. If people are going to have sex anyway, then you might as well teach them how to use contraceptives. Less abortions is a good thing, regardless of pro-life or pro-choice viewpoints.
I'm not even going to go into the long theological discussion required to rebut your accusations regarding why Gentile Christians do not follow the Mosaic law. That in itself is another discussion and I gather from your hate-filled words that you would not read it anyway.
Now, onto the rest. You, sir, are sadly mistaken in calling me a bigot. It is attitudes like that which further divide our country. The rest of the post that I wrote which you conveniently did not quote states unequivocally "As a Christian, my official stance on homosexuality is that I do not agree with it...However, I also believe in America and that you cannot legislate morality. Therefore, be homosexual if you want to. If you ask me why I do not believe you are right before God for being homosexual, I will explain it my point of view. Else, do what you want. It's America."
I believe that's just about as non-bigot as you can get and yet you still proceed with name calling and hateful insults against me. We need to pull together as a country and realize that just because I don't agree with you and you don't agree with me doesn't mean we can't be friends. There's alot of Christians who need to hear this too. Name calling, insults, and anything else that derives itself from hate is wrong. It always will be. And you, sir, are wrong to act is such a fashion regardless of the actions of other people. More hate won't solve the problem.
Are you attempting to imply moral relativism as a mode of rationalizing your own bigotry or that of others?
Actually, far from it. I believe in moral absolutism (the Bible). What I am espousing is the same thing you are: freedom for all. Like I said in my previous post: it's America, do what you want. Men and women died for your freedom to be gay, straight, (insert way of life here). They also died for my right to disagree with you about whether it is morally right or wrong. But don't call me a bigot just because I disagree with you. Call me a bigot if I actually treat those of opposing viewpoints with hate. The entire message of Jesus is summed up in this: "Love God. Treat others like you want to be treated. Tell others about your faith." I don't see anywhere in there where it says to treat anyone with hatred.
Strangely enough, I am also pro-life, and also not because my religion says so. Rather, because I asked a doctor (who, as far as I know, is not affiliated with any religion) when life begins. He simply stated: "Medically, life beings at conception." That's all I needed. I agree with you: human rights should be for everyone, no matter what.
I am not going to argue tautologies with you because I find people who argue in such a manner usually irrational.
You're good, you know. You start right off with an insult. You say you're all about equality, ending bigotry, etc, and yet you start with an insult against my own intelligence. It appears, sir, that you are just as much a bigot against Evangelical Christians as the very people you speak against. Bigotry at all is wrong. It always will be.
One thing that really pisses me off is when people who disagree morally with homosexuality are called "homophobes". When will people realize that treating someone wrong, regardless of their viewpoint, is WRONG? So you don't agree with Christians? Ok. Let's talk with civility and nix the name calling. If (and I stress _if_) Rick Warren has "hate in his heart" then by your own words I would guess that you have "hate in your heart" against Christians who disagree with homosexuality. Is your hate any less "hate" than Mr. Warrens? No. Hate is hate and it is wrong.
As a Christian, my official stance on homosexuality is that I do not agree with it as I believe God does not agree with it. I believe God created man for woman and woman for man. However, I also believe in America and that you cannot legislate morality. Therefore, be homosexual if you want to. If you ask me why I do not believe you are right before God for being homosexual, I will explain it my point of view. Else, do what you want. It's America.
The hedonism in the gay community that leads to unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like is exacerbated if not caused in part by denying them the right to unite as a family of their own choosing under the social contract.
This statement is outright false. You are making excuses for the actions of individuals who make poor choices (not being gay, but rather in the words of the parent "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like"). If you think being able to sign a piece of paper and declare yourself "married" will solve these problems than you are sorely mistaken. For evidence, just look to the rate of divorce in the US, which is staggering. Marriage will not prevent these woes from affecting the gay community. The "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like" stems from an ideology that a person should be free to do whatever they want, any time they want, so long as it doesn't affect someone else's rights. If I want to have sex with someone, get into a relationship with that person, and then while in that relationship go have sex with someone else...why not? I'm free to do whatever I want. If I want to have sex with a different person every night...why not? I'm free to do whatever I want. If I want to go and do drugs...why not? I'm free to do what I want (so long as I don't get caught). This is what causes the "unsafe sex, rampant drug use and the like" that you speak of. (note: whether or not homosexuals should be allowed the right of marriage is not the subject of this post)
I too loved 1 over 2, mainly because of the Hoth map. Also I found the Cloud City map to be very difficult and I might only win half the time at it. I like maps like that where I don't know if I'll win or not.
:P
The only reason I played BF2 at all was to play as a Jedi. I'd play maps with ridiculous odds stacked against me but I would play as a Jedi hero and that was awesome. Oh yeah, and playing the maps where it's only heros playing against you, that's fun too.
Yeah, most of the Star Wars fan community wants them to make another flight sim game. They haven't given us one since X-Wing Alliance!
So long as they actually lower and eventually remove the gas tax, this isn't a bad idea. It makes sense that if you're using their roads, you need to pay to help keep them up. Not a foreign concept. The major problem with this is: currently the gas tax gets interstate traffic, this new plan will not. If you're a trucker and you drive through a state then when you fill up with gas you're helping to maintain the very roads you used to get your product from point A to point B. Under this new system, Oregon tax payers would foot the bill for truckers and other interstate traffic to cut through their state and use their roads (basically) free of charge. That's not cool at all.
How sad. I got all excited when I saw that Christmas tree pic in the actual post, like he'd somehow managed to make it look like a real freaking tree. The actual picture is much less exciting. Ok, strike that, depressing.
Hard drive xmas tree man, you lose an internet. Your tree sucks.
That, sir, deserves: roflcopter!!!!1!!11one
I was watching CNN last night on AC360, and Soledad O'brien said "96% of African Americans voted for Obama". That trend disturbs me quite a bit. I understand just how far African American have come since the Emancipation Proclamation. I get that. I'm also proud that we're at a point in our nation where we can elect someone who is black. That's great. What really bothers me is that somehow 96% of African Americans found the qualifier for President of the United States to be in a man's color of skin, and not his promised policies. I'm sure there were a hefty group who also believed in his policies, but I know that not all African Americans are hardcore democrats, or even independents. So there was a rather large (aka: not small) group that voted for Mr. Obama because of the color of his skin, despite differences of opinion on the way the country should go. That, is what disturbs me. And yes, I also realize there are voters in every election who vote for someone because they're white. Duh. But you'll never see 96% of white voters voting for the white candidate in an election between a white man and a black man. That obviously didn't happen yesterday. Race should never be a reason to vote for anyone - I don't care if they're purple.