He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did.
Yeah, right. They said Gears 1 wasn't going to have a PC version, either. Bungie said that their next project after Halo 2 wouldn't be Halo 3. Game companies lie about their future plans all the time. Gears of War 2 will have a PC version, it'll just be after they've wrung all they reasonably can out of the 360 version. Mark my words.
Obama clearly spoke, with his vote, and said that he believes it's ok to break the law if the president says you can. Absolutely anyone is better in office than him. Why would you want him in office, when he's already disrespecting the law before he gets there? Anything's better than outright contempt for the law.
Sorry, but I hold enforcement of the rule of law in our country, and the American citizen's right to privacy, to be more important than all of the things you mentioned put together. It's a big fucking issue, and is one of the few things I'd say can singlehandedly make or break a candidate.
Obama very clearly stated, with his vote, that he doesn't believe you have to follow the law if the president says it's OK not to. Pardon me if I don't want a man with that little respect for the law to be my president.
This is irrelevant. Nobody has provable evidence that I had a dream about driving through my home town in a car last night, either. It is still quite true. For your own personal belief in something, evidence that won't convince anyone but yourself is perfectly acceptable and rational, as long as you aren't ignoring conflicting evidence.
Since there's no evidence to disprove God, you don't have to worry about that aspect, and as long as you have some evidence to suggest to you that God exists, your belief can be perfectly rational.
Sorry, Christians. I disagree with your beliefs, but I despise how your beliefs are treated on this site. It's low, immature, and uncalled-for, and for what it's worth, just know that not all atheists/agnostics are as juvenile as some slashdotter atheists/agnostics are.
That's a ridiculous stance. By that stance, every retailer is responsible for every defect in the manufacturer's product, no matter what it may be. If I buy a new microwave from Wal-Mart, and it's nicked? Their fault!
This obviously isn't the case. It's what we have warranties for. If the product is faulty, that's a beef you need to take up with the manufacturer, not the retailer. If you want the retailer to fix the manufacturer's screw-up, there's no reasonable cause for it to be free. It wasn't the retailer who fucked it up, he shouldn't have to fix it gratis. If you want it fixed gratis, take it to the manufacturer.
It most certainly is. As long as my code is in the public domain, you can take it, modify it, and adapt it to your heart's content. It doesn't say anywhere that the same must extend to derivative works.
And the numbering is the FSF's, not mine. Don't blame me.
You have to be careful with both media, just in different ways. You can drop a DVD, but you can also leave a hard drive sitting on a dusty desk without fear that it'll be ruined from a scratch. I wouldn't say there's a real difference in how careful you have to be with either, but HDDs have a serious convenience and size advantage over DVDs. I can see choosing a SSD over an HDD if you don't have space concerns, but I can't ever see myself choosing optical media over a HDD, except for quick-and-dirty, disposable media for sneakernet transfers.
No, it's not. That's what the GPL (well, others too, but primarily that) are about. The FSF definition (I think we can agree that they're the definitive source here?) doesn't say that derivative works must remain free. It specifies:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
Freedom 1: The freedom to study and modify the program.
Freedom 2: The freedom to copy the program so you can help your neighbor.
Freedom 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits.
All of these conditions would be satisfied by public domain.
I am, as of now, going to get someone to pay me a nickel for everyone who makes an annoying, smug "Ad? What ad? I use adblock/noscript" comment on slashdot.
I have $.05 right now from this program, and predict I'll be filthy rich by the time the year's out.
Yes, like abstension would have helped... "Obama can't make a decision, or doesn't care about the issue".
McCain can't say that, since he didn't vote. It would've helped Obama a great deal to not vote on this one.
The whole point is, whatever decision he made, the opposition would have found a way to twist it to their favour.
Not if he didn't vote. Your opponent can't credibly criticize you for doing something he's doing. Obama is smart enough to know this, and voted yea anyway. He's a traitor to our people.
If he'd voted against the bill, he might have gained the respect of a lot of sane-minded people, but at the same time, he'd have given McCain a classic soundbite of "Obama doesn't care about terror".
And now, he just gave McCain a classic soundbite of "Obama doesn't care about your privacy". Great victory, that!
The only politically expedient thing to do was abstain. Since he didn't do that, he's either an idiot, or actually supported the bill. Given that he doesn't seem like an idiot to me, the only possible conclusion is that he actually supported the heinous bill. Which disqualifies him from being a good presidential candidate.
However, that's going to be a big thing that the McCain camp is going to harp on, and drill it in that Obama doesn't support measures to tackle terrorism.
And as it is, McCain's camp is just going to harp that he voted in a way that hurts Americans. Voting either way is equally stupid politically (there's something equally delicious and juicy to attack no matter which way you vote), so if Obama was trying to just be politically smart, he should've not voted, like McCain. Now, Obama doesn't seem stupid to me, so that means he knew that it wasn't the most politically smart move he had. Thus, his vote shows where he really stands... and it ain't pretty.
Dude, are you serious? Obama sold us out. He voted for telecom immunity for their illegal wiretaps, and thus proved he'll bend us over just as hard and fast as any other politician would. How can you say you want him as president, when he already killed our ability to have any faith in him?
I'd run myself, but if I'm asked about my Christian Faith, I'd have to lie. I'm a shitty liar. I'm in the Bible belt here, so it comes up.
Then don't lie. If people won't vote for someone based on any sort of religious affiliation, or lack thereof, they're morons, and deserve to get bent over by our current politicians. Fuck 'em.
Additionally, you could explain how your lack of belief doesn't mean you won't show respect for their faith, but if they're as stupid as we're assuming, that wouldn't make an impact.
That's a laugh. 16 GB is not enough for most people, not even close. If you'd have said 40 GB, or 80 GB, it might be true, but 16 is paltry. Consider: Windows XP is 5 or 6 GB. That leaves you with 10. Most people will have some music on their laptop, let's say you have 2 GB (not an unreasonable amount by any means). We're down to 8. Not even any applications installed yet, which could easily eat 8 GB. If you want a game on the laptop (and many people are gamers, don't even try to claim this isn't normal usage), kiss 5+ GB goodbye.
The start menu is almost the exact same. The control panel IS the same, unless you aren't using the classic view (which can be said of XP as well). The network setup works just fine (unless you mean the useless setup wizard, which, again, was broken in XP too). I've never seen any problems with "advanced" setup options, so I'm not sure what you mean.
The short version is that there isn't anything really borked that wasn't already a problem in XP (UAC aside, of course. UAC is the one legitimate problem Vista has... but it can also be turned off pretty easily). There isn't anything really better, either, unless you want Media Center, but I've never advocated upgrading from XP to Vista. Vista is as good as XP, just not better.
...and it's a SELF-KO! Man, I can't believe he fell for the "piracy = stealing"!
Props for having enough of a sense of humor to go along with the sportscasting thing, but I must point out that it is far from "fact" that piracy isn't stealing. I'm sure we could, if we tried, spark a 20-page flame war on this very subject. So, it isn't really shooting myself in the foot to take one side of a very undecided issue.
Slashdot Mirror
He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did.
Yeah, right. They said Gears 1 wasn't going to have a PC version, either. Bungie said that their next project after Halo 2 wouldn't be Halo 3. Game companies lie about their future plans all the time. Gears of War 2 will have a PC version, it'll just be after they've wrung all they reasonably can out of the 360 version. Mark my words.
Obama clearly spoke, with his vote, and said that he believes it's ok to break the law if the president says you can. Absolutely anyone is better in office than him. Why would you want him in office, when he's already disrespecting the law before he gets there? Anything's better than outright contempt for the law.
Sorry, but I hold enforcement of the rule of law in our country, and the American citizen's right to privacy, to be more important than all of the things you mentioned put together. It's a big fucking issue, and is one of the few things I'd say can singlehandedly make or break a candidate.
Obama very clearly stated, with his vote, that he doesn't believe you have to follow the law if the president says it's OK not to. Pardon me if I don't want a man with that little respect for the law to be my president.
Nobody has provable experience of "god"
This is irrelevant. Nobody has provable evidence that I had a dream about driving through my home town in a car last night, either. It is still quite true. For your own personal belief in something, evidence that won't convince anyone but yourself is perfectly acceptable and rational, as long as you aren't ignoring conflicting evidence.
Since there's no evidence to disprove God, you don't have to worry about that aspect, and as long as you have some evidence to suggest to you that God exists, your belief can be perfectly rational.
Sorry, Christians. I disagree with your beliefs, but I despise how your beliefs are treated on this site. It's low, immature, and uncalled-for, and for what it's worth, just know that not all atheists/agnostics are as juvenile as some slashdotter atheists/agnostics are.
What can I say? It's just so much fun watching the sparks fly in there. ;)
That's a ridiculous stance. By that stance, every retailer is responsible for every defect in the manufacturer's product, no matter what it may be. If I buy a new microwave from Wal-Mart, and it's nicked? Their fault!
This obviously isn't the case. It's what we have warranties for. If the product is faulty, that's a beef you need to take up with the manufacturer, not the retailer. If you want the retailer to fix the manufacturer's screw-up, there's no reasonable cause for it to be free. It wasn't the retailer who fucked it up, he shouldn't have to fix it gratis. If you want it fixed gratis, take it to the manufacturer.
No we don't. Some of us have standards for ethical and professional behavior that we follow. Shocking, I know.
No, it isn't appalling at all. Best Buy didn't put the crapware on, why should they take it off for free?
It most certainly is. As long as my code is in the public domain, you can take it, modify it, and adapt it to your heart's content. It doesn't say anywhere that the same must extend to derivative works.
And the numbering is the FSF's, not mine. Don't blame me.
You have to be careful with both media, just in different ways. You can drop a DVD, but you can also leave a hard drive sitting on a dusty desk without fear that it'll be ruined from a scratch. I wouldn't say there's a real difference in how careful you have to be with either, but HDDs have a serious convenience and size advantage over DVDs. I can see choosing a SSD over an HDD if you don't have space concerns, but I can't ever see myself choosing optical media over a HDD, except for quick-and-dirty, disposable media for sneakernet transfers.
All of these conditions would be satisfied by public domain.
I am, as of now, going to get someone to pay me a nickel for everyone who makes an annoying, smug "Ad? What ad? I use adblock/noscript" comment on slashdot.
I have $.05 right now from this program, and predict I'll be filthy rich by the time the year's out.
Yes, like abstension would have helped ... "Obama can't make a decision, or doesn't care about the issue".
McCain can't say that, since he didn't vote. It would've helped Obama a great deal to not vote on this one.
The whole point is, whatever decision he made, the opposition would have found a way to twist it to their favour.
Not if he didn't vote. Your opponent can't credibly criticize you for doing something he's doing. Obama is smart enough to know this, and voted yea anyway. He's a traitor to our people.
If he'd voted against the bill, he might have gained the respect of a lot of sane-minded people, but at the same time, he'd have given McCain a classic soundbite of "Obama doesn't care about terror".
And now, he just gave McCain a classic soundbite of "Obama doesn't care about your privacy". Great victory, that!
The only politically expedient thing to do was abstain. Since he didn't do that, he's either an idiot, or actually supported the bill. Given that he doesn't seem like an idiot to me, the only possible conclusion is that he actually supported the heinous bill. Which disqualifies him from being a good presidential candidate.
However, that's going to be a big thing that the McCain camp is going to harp on, and drill it in that Obama doesn't support measures to tackle terrorism.
And as it is, McCain's camp is just going to harp that he voted in a way that hurts Americans. Voting either way is equally stupid politically (there's something equally delicious and juicy to attack no matter which way you vote), so if Obama was trying to just be politically smart, he should've not voted, like McCain. Now, Obama doesn't seem stupid to me, so that means he knew that it wasn't the most politically smart move he had. Thus, his vote shows where he really stands... and it ain't pretty.
Dude, are you serious? Obama sold us out. He voted for telecom immunity for their illegal wiretaps, and thus proved he'll bend us over just as hard and fast as any other politician would. How can you say you want him as president, when he already killed our ability to have any faith in him?
I'd run myself, but if I'm asked about my Christian Faith, I'd have to lie. I'm a shitty liar. I'm in the Bible belt here, so it comes up.
Then don't lie. If people won't vote for someone based on any sort of religious affiliation, or lack thereof, they're morons, and deserve to get bent over by our current politicians. Fuck 'em.
Additionally, you could explain how your lack of belief doesn't mean you won't show respect for their faith, but if they're as stupid as we're assuming, that wouldn't make an impact.
16 GB is enough for most people.
That's a laugh. 16 GB is not enough for most people, not even close. If you'd have said 40 GB, or 80 GB, it might be true, but 16 is paltry. Consider: Windows XP is 5 or 6 GB. That leaves you with 10. Most people will have some music on their laptop, let's say you have 2 GB (not an unreasonable amount by any means). We're down to 8. Not even any applications installed yet, which could easily eat 8 GB. If you want a game on the laptop (and many people are gamers, don't even try to claim this isn't normal usage), kiss 5+ GB goodbye.
A "normal" user will easily chew through 16 GB.
you can't through an HDD at the other side of the room and survive
And you can't put a DVD in the microwave and have it survive. That is why we neither microwave DVDs, nor throw HDDs at the wall.
You know nothing of the word "monopolistic". No one said Apple is a monopoly, they said Apple is engaging in monopolistic behavior. Big difference.
The start menu is almost the exact same. The control panel IS the same, unless you aren't using the classic view (which can be said of XP as well). The network setup works just fine (unless you mean the useless setup wizard, which, again, was broken in XP too). I've never seen any problems with "advanced" setup options, so I'm not sure what you mean.
The short version is that there isn't anything really borked that wasn't already a problem in XP (UAC aside, of course. UAC is the one legitimate problem Vista has... but it can also be turned off pretty easily). There isn't anything really better, either, unless you want Media Center, but I've never advocated upgrading from XP to Vista. Vista is as good as XP, just not better.
Ever try to torrent something that isn't popular? Yeah. That's why you keep a local copy.
FUD FUD FUD FUD FUD FUD FUD. I have 2 GB memory, and Vista runs just as well as XP did with 2. Spread less misinformation, please.
how can you want to install their software?
Very simply. It does something that I want. That's all the reason I need to want to install any software, and it trumps all other arguments.
...and it's a SELF-KO! Man, I can't believe he fell for the "piracy = stealing"!
Props for having enough of a sense of humor to go along with the sportscasting thing, but I must point out that it is far from "fact" that piracy isn't stealing. I'm sure we could, if we tried, spark a 20-page flame war on this very subject. So, it isn't really shooting myself in the foot to take one side of a very undecided issue.