I kid, I kid, steam has made a good number of their games available for linux. There is a second of the store called "Linux" which features only games available on linux. You don't need a icon. Just browse the linux section. Or use google. Or look on the page in the store that tells you what the system requirements are, it will say linux.
organizations like the ACLU speak against the 2nd amendment -- as do many many others today.
What organizations other than the ACLU are you thinking of? Not the EFF obviously.
And the ACLU doesn't speak against the 2nd amendment. They have a different interpretation, specifically that the 2nd allows for militias, not individuals with guns, but I don't think they do anything to try to TAKE AWAY from the individual right to guns.
While you may call the NRA batshit crazy, and I while I object to them throwing the first under the bus to defend the second -- as a lobby, NRA has one mission and one mission only -- the 2nd amendment.
You seem to object to the ACLU for supporting every amendment BUT the second, but then praise the NRA for ONLY supporting the second.
And I consider all ten in that bill of rights indispensible.
Enough that I will support the strongest ally of the second if it undermines the first just a little.
The first amendment is your defense against a tyrannical government. The second is not. You can't afford any guns that would be much of a threat to a tyrannical government in control of the military, or even police force today.
Well, they evidently have someone to say that they are making an RSS reader that includes "features" that every other reader BESIDES Google reader had, so that's one. Perhaps they're now going to claim other apps as their own in addition to claiming content for their own?
I was excited briefly when I thought it said "will NOT include social media." Because that seems to be a rarity. Here's a wild thought guys: maybe the reason everyone was using google reader was because it did one thing and did it well, and didn't bug us about "LOGIN NOW with your Facebook, Tumblr, Hacker News, Reddit, LinkedIn, twitter, G+, Digg, stumbleupon, orkut, myspace, grindr, flickr, picassa, slashdot, memebase, youtube, fox news, and social security number to proceed."
If I want to see pictures of my friends from high school's babies pooping, I can load up facebook. If I want to go onto reddit, there are like a dozen apps for that.
GGP was insinuating that America or Britain took the islands away from China and gave them to Japan. Which isn't the case. Japan took them herself. Whether later treaties affected Japan's claim doesn't change the fact that the west wasn't divvying up land to start a conflict in this case.
I... whelp, that seals it. Fuck the NRA and the gun industry totally and completely then. I'm still not quite to the point of donating money to pro-gun-control groups, but just barely.
Have you ever tried to use your cellphone on a plane? Out of curiosity, I did. (Spoiler: the plane did not explode, I did not die.) Reception was lost soon after we got very high in the air. I think I tried it again in mid-flight, but still no signal. This was one phone, not a comprehensive test, but I'd guess that the plane is moving too fast and is too high for most cell phones to get and maintain much of a connection. Plus, the dull roar of the engines in most planes drowns out most conversational tones, the reason children wailing is annoying is because you can hear them over the engines.
Where I'd like to see the FAA ban cell phones is once you have landed, while you're waiting to deplane. "OH HAI! WE JUST LANDED! ARE YOU OUTSIDE? I SAID ARE YOU OUTSIDE? NO, WE JUST LANDED! WAITING TO GET OFF. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, YEAH, WHY DO THEY SERVE YOU SUCH SMALL BAGS OF PEANUTS? SO ARE YOU GOING TO PICK ME UP? NO, I SAID I JUST LANDED! AT THE AIRPORT! ARE YOU GOING TO PICK ME UP? I NEED TO GET MY BAGS! OKAY!"
Fucking text it morons. If not for politeness to the rest of us in earshot who are already impatient to get out of the plane, for efficiency. You can't hear them and they can't hear you, reading is much faster. Well, maybe not for idiots who can't wait until they get off the plane to announce multiple times that they've just landed and need to get their bags and can you pick them up...
I'm not a big fan of guns or gun rights, but I'm pretty sure that games are not the first scapegoat, guns were. And while I haven't been paying attention to NRA press releases, I haven't heard much noise about the gun industry trying to shift the blame onto videogames either. So I don't see how videogames will be left holding the bag, unless we let pro-censorship groups (I think they call themselves concerned parents organizations or something like that) run wild with it.
On 14 January 1895, during the First Sino-Japanese War, Japan incorporated the islands under the administration of Okinawa, stating that it had conducted surveys since 1884 and that the islands were terra nullius, with there being no evidence to suggest that they had been under the Qing empire's control.[13] After China lost the war, both countries signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki in April 1895 that stipulated, among other things, that China would cede to Japan "the island of Formosa together with all islands appertaining or belonging to said island of Formosa."
Wiki goes on to list some of the complications, but western powers had nothing to do with Japan taking control of it. Also noteworthy: China only asserted it's claim to the islands after oil was found there.
After it was discovered in 1968 that oil reserves might be found under the sea near the islands,[4][5][6][7][8] Japan's sovereignty over them has been disputed by the People's Republic of China
So, yeah, the US and the brits, and other western countries were assholes about claiming and trading land that wasn't theirs when it's in their strategic interests, much like all nations attempt to do, and much like China is doing here. "We included these uninhabited islands in our maps in the 14th century, so clearly the oil is ours!"
Respectable to you and I. Not society. The downside of the american dream is that anything less than "super rich or will be eventually" is seen as "failure."
Really? You think it's only the Obama camp that has no clue?
To quote the first line of my own post you were responding to "I'm not sure a high percentage of Obama's supporters, or americans in general , know what net neutrality is."
It has nothing to do with partisanship. Nothing happens for the people unless the people ask for it, whether it goes with the party's ideology or not. This has probably always been true, but it's definitely true now. If people don't demand net neutrality, no party, not R, not D, not independent, libertarian, american, communist, or whatever, is going to deliver it to them, unless it somehow becomes profitable for them to do so.
Perhaps he has accumulated a lot of bitcoins and is attempting to make them worth something though a PR game before he divests for real money.
"Hey, there's this guy who is selling his house for 'bitcoins.' I'm reading up on them, they sound interesting, I'm going to buy some bitcoins!"
I suppose much of the financial industry is based on similar principles, so the only thing I find at fault there is that he actually collected some bitcoins at some point.
I'm not sure a high percentage of Obama's supporters, or americans in general, know what net neutrality is. I don't think most videogame enthusiasts know how net neutrality is important to their future lives. I -know- most netflix users don't.
That's important: most people aren't already "with" net neutrality. The pro net neutrality side is small, the telecom side is smaller, but they have money, our side does not. The only way we keep them from crapping up the internet is with significantly higher numbers, by explaining to people how losing net neutrality is going to mean worse graphics for their games, netflix dying out and going back to something closer to blockbuster, inflating prices for internet access, no increase in speed, and your favorite mom and pop websites being replaced by MTV, MSNBC, and FOX websites.
In case you couldn't tell, I'm in favor of using FUD to our advantage. Feel free to try to convince people to care about net neutrality by honest, unbiased information, and feel free to call me a cynic for thinking that approach won't work.
What's the goal here? Pay a blogger to convince geeks that google is being a douche and MS is the good guy when it comes to intellectual property rights, and so we all buy windows phones?
I can't see any way paying Florian Muller more than ten dollars a year makes any sense for their interests.
I realize I did say the "problem" was solving itself, which is a bit of a leap from one group deciding not to use them anymore, even if it weren't unique circumstances, you're right that extrapolating from that was illogical. But I don't think bitcoins are much of a concern to anyone besides law enforcement in regards to silkroad or money laundering, and again, TFA makes no mention of how many $10K+ transactions are going on.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant "SECTION of the store," in case anyone is confused.
Why make an icon for two games?
I kid, I kid, steam has made a good number of their games available for linux. There is a second of the store called "Linux" which features only games available on linux. You don't need a icon. Just browse the linux section. Or use google. Or look on the page in the store that tells you what the system requirements are, it will say linux.
organizations like the ACLU speak against the 2nd amendment -- as do many many others today.
What organizations other than the ACLU are you thinking of? Not the EFF obviously.
And the ACLU doesn't speak against the 2nd amendment. They have a different interpretation, specifically that the 2nd allows for militias, not individuals with guns, but I don't think they do anything to try to TAKE AWAY from the individual right to guns.
While you may call the NRA batshit crazy, and I while I object to them throwing the first under the bus to defend the second -- as a lobby, NRA has one mission and one mission only -- the 2nd amendment.
You seem to object to the ACLU for supporting every amendment BUT the second, but then praise the NRA for ONLY supporting the second.
And I consider all ten in that bill of rights indispensible. Enough that I will support the strongest ally of the second if it undermines the first just a little.
The first amendment is your defense against a tyrannical government. The second is not. You can't afford any guns that would be much of a threat to a tyrannical government in control of the military, or even police force today.
Well, they evidently have someone to say that they are making an RSS reader that includes "features" that every other reader BESIDES Google reader had, so that's one. Perhaps they're now going to claim other apps as their own in addition to claiming content for their own?
I was excited briefly when I thought it said "will NOT include social media." Because that seems to be a rarity. Here's a wild thought guys: maybe the reason everyone was using google reader was because it did one thing and did it well, and didn't bug us about "LOGIN NOW with your Facebook, Tumblr, Hacker News, Reddit, LinkedIn, twitter, G+, Digg, stumbleupon, orkut, myspace, grindr, flickr, picassa, slashdot, memebase, youtube, fox news, and social security number to proceed."
If I want to see pictures of my friends from high school's babies pooping, I can load up facebook. If I want to go onto reddit, there are like a dozen apps for that.
GGP was insinuating that America or Britain took the islands away from China and gave them to Japan. Which isn't the case. Japan took them herself. Whether later treaties affected Japan's claim doesn't change the fact that the west wasn't divvying up land to start a conflict in this case.
Hey, I just read your post
And this is crazy
But here's my number
So call me maybe.
I didn't say it slowed anything down. It's just annoying. The "Hope the FAA bans it" was an intentional hyperbole.
I... whelp, that seals it. Fuck the NRA and the gun industry totally and completely then. I'm still not quite to the point of donating money to pro-gun-control groups, but just barely.
So that explains the 5 minutes they tell you how to use a seatbelt... what about the other 20 minutes or so in takeoff and landing?
Have you ever tried to use your cellphone on a plane? Out of curiosity, I did. (Spoiler: the plane did not explode, I did not die.) Reception was lost soon after we got very high in the air. I think I tried it again in mid-flight, but still no signal. This was one phone, not a comprehensive test, but I'd guess that the plane is moving too fast and is too high for most cell phones to get and maintain much of a connection. Plus, the dull roar of the engines in most planes drowns out most conversational tones, the reason children wailing is annoying is because you can hear them over the engines.
Where I'd like to see the FAA ban cell phones is once you have landed, while you're waiting to deplane. "OH HAI! WE JUST LANDED! ARE YOU OUTSIDE? I SAID ARE YOU OUTSIDE? NO, WE JUST LANDED! WAITING TO GET OFF. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, YEAH, WHY DO THEY SERVE YOU SUCH SMALL BAGS OF PEANUTS? SO ARE YOU GOING TO PICK ME UP? NO, I SAID I JUST LANDED! AT THE AIRPORT! ARE YOU GOING TO PICK ME UP? I NEED TO GET MY BAGS! OKAY!"
Fucking text it morons. If not for politeness to the rest of us in earshot who are already impatient to get out of the plane, for efficiency. You can't hear them and they can't hear you, reading is much faster. Well, maybe not for idiots who can't wait until they get off the plane to announce multiple times that they've just landed and need to get their bags and can you pick them up...
I'm not a big fan of guns or gun rights, but I'm pretty sure that games are not the first scapegoat, guns were. And while I haven't been paying attention to NRA press releases, I haven't heard much noise about the gun industry trying to shift the blame onto videogames either. So I don't see how videogames will be left holding the bag, unless we let pro-censorship groups (I think they call themselves concerned parents organizations or something like that) run wild with it.
Noted, but that's an oversimplification of what is going on here, so your point is irrelevant.
On 14 January 1895, during the First Sino-Japanese War, Japan incorporated the islands under the administration of Okinawa, stating that it had conducted surveys since 1884 and that the islands were terra nullius, with there being no evidence to suggest that they had been under the Qing empire's control.[13] After China lost the war, both countries signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki in April 1895 that stipulated, among other things, that China would cede to Japan "the island of Formosa together with all islands appertaining or belonging to said island of Formosa."
Wiki goes on to list some of the complications, but western powers had nothing to do with Japan taking control of it. Also noteworthy: China only asserted it's claim to the islands after oil was found there.
After it was discovered in 1968 that oil reserves might be found under the sea near the islands,[4][5][6][7][8] Japan's sovereignty over them has been disputed by the People's Republic of China
wiki
So, yeah, the US and the brits, and other western countries were assholes about claiming and trading land that wasn't theirs when it's in their strategic interests, much like all nations attempt to do, and much like China is doing here. "We included these uninhabited islands in our maps in the 14th century, so clearly the oil is ours!"
Our regulations in this country need some overhauling.
I think most people worldwide throughout most of history would agree that this statement was true for their country.
Respectable to you and I. Not society. The downside of the american dream is that anything less than "super rich or will be eventually" is seen as "failure."
Really? You think it's only the Obama camp that has no clue?
To quote the first line of my own post you were responding to "I'm not sure a high percentage of Obama's supporters, or americans in general , know what net neutrality is."
It has nothing to do with partisanship. Nothing happens for the people unless the people ask for it, whether it goes with the party's ideology or not. This has probably always been true, but it's definitely true now. If people don't demand net neutrality, no party, not R, not D, not independent, libertarian, american, communist, or whatever, is going to deliver it to them, unless it somehow becomes profitable for them to do so.
So like all currency, if you want to hedge against inflation, you buy something that IS of real value and store that.
Perhaps he has accumulated a lot of bitcoins and is attempting to make them worth something though a PR game before he divests for real money.
"Hey, there's this guy who is selling his house for 'bitcoins.' I'm reading up on them, they sound interesting, I'm going to buy some bitcoins!"
I suppose much of the financial industry is based on similar principles, so the only thing I find at fault there is that he actually collected some bitcoins at some point.
I'm not sure a high percentage of Obama's supporters, or americans in general, know what net neutrality is. I don't think most videogame enthusiasts know how net neutrality is important to their future lives. I -know- most netflix users don't.
That's important: most people aren't already "with" net neutrality. The pro net neutrality side is small, the telecom side is smaller, but they have money, our side does not. The only way we keep them from crapping up the internet is with significantly higher numbers, by explaining to people how losing net neutrality is going to mean worse graphics for their games, netflix dying out and going back to something closer to blockbuster, inflating prices for internet access, no increase in speed, and your favorite mom and pop websites being replaced by MTV, MSNBC, and FOX websites.
In case you couldn't tell, I'm in favor of using FUD to our advantage. Feel free to try to convince people to care about net neutrality by honest, unbiased information, and feel free to call me a cynic for thinking that approach won't work.
What's the goal here? Pay a blogger to convince geeks that google is being a douche and MS is the good guy when it comes to intellectual property rights, and so we all buy windows phones?
I can't see any way paying Florian Muller more than ten dollars a year makes any sense for their interests.
Implying there are "natural" controversies in politics these days?
murder. MURDER!!!
AC helpfully illustrates what is wrong with democracy.
I realize I did say the "problem" was solving itself, which is a bit of a leap from one group deciding not to use them anymore, even if it weren't unique circumstances, you're right that extrapolating from that was illogical. But I don't think bitcoins are much of a concern to anyone besides law enforcement in regards to silkroad or money laundering, and again, TFA makes no mention of how many $10K+ transactions are going on.
Good to know, but my point is that it doesn't seem to be catching on enough to be worth going after for taxes.