"Matt Smith - 27 (when he starts playing the part in 2010 not now)"
Except they start shooting this year, so 26.
"So only 2 of the Doctors were over 50 when he started."
Decades ago - times change, so not relevant.
"Seeing as Matt Smith is only 2 year shy of Peter Davidson's age I fail to see the problem really. Plus I'm 32 and the guy looks older than me."
The problem, at the moment, is he looks like a dumb snotnosed kid. And your problem, if you really look younger than him, is that you look younger than him. If a plastic operation is too expensive perhaps a large bear would help.
What dream world do you live in. I did that, but stopped - because NOBODY CARES - it works in the majority browser, that that's it. Can't watch it - tough, get a "real" browser is the feedback you get 99.9999999% of the time.
"Anybody with strong feelings about which web browser is the best is probably spending too much time surfing the web, and is in fact suffering from an internet addiction. IE 7, Opera, and Firefox are all pretty similar from a normal end-user perspective."
Or you are just so retarded you can't tell big difference.
"It seems it's not just a matter of money, it's a question of proof, technical feasability, willingness on the part of the ISP's and quite a lot of money."
Sure its a matter of money, they don't care about proof (just an excuse) but technicians cost money. If the riaa handed them 5000$ every time, they would just do it.
Slashdot Mirror
"All these + more indicate that the limit may not be a physical one."
Well those didn't.
They start shooting this year, so remember - he's 26 not 27 at the start!
"Matt Smith - 27 (when he starts playing the part in 2010 not now)"
Except they start shooting this year, so 26.
"So only 2 of the Doctors were over 50 when he started."
Decades ago - times change, so not relevant.
"Seeing as Matt Smith is only 2 year shy of Peter Davidson's age I fail to see the problem really. Plus I'm 32 and the guy looks older than me."
The problem, at the moment, is he looks like a dumb snotnosed kid. And your problem, if you really look younger than him, is that you look younger than him. If a plastic operation is too expensive perhaps a large bear would help.
What dream world do you live in. I did that, but stopped - because NOBODY CARES - it works in the majority browser, that that's it. Can't watch it - tough, get a "real" browser is the feedback you get 99.9999999% of the time.
"Anybody with strong feelings about which web browser is the best is probably spending too much time surfing the web, and is in fact suffering from an internet addiction. IE 7, Opera, and Firefox are all pretty similar from a normal end-user perspective."
Or you are just so retarded you can't tell big difference.
Incompetent web "designers" have been a curse on end users forever.
"What's wrong with amorally trying to make money? It's a hell of a lot better than immorally making money,"
For the purpose of that sentence amoral/immoral are interchangeable, so your linguistic flame fails.
"It seems it's not just a matter of money, it's a question of proof, technical feasability, willingness on the part of the ISP's and quite a lot of money."
Sure its a matter of money, they don't care about proof (just an excuse) but technicians cost money. If the riaa handed them 5000$ every time, they would just do it.
My hope is that copyright will one day be removed from law, since its an amoral way of trying to make money.
"Just because you don't have some trait doesn't mean that other people don't. "
That is true.
"In this case, that trait is how fast your eyes can see. Congratulations, you have slower eyes."
But that isn't. Human eyes don't have a "frame rate" - you let it get to you, he doesn't.
The moderation proves it.
Nuff said.
That's gotta be a shit hobby.
That comment is ample proof that the wrong people are allowed to moderate here.
The death penalty for spamming - then slowly you'd get to the bottom of this problem.
Keep walking west dude - until your hat floats.
Because the kids who moderate this place now, they'll just like it!
I mind - it was much more readable before.
But then that is what 2.0 is all about: Making it more difficult for the end user.
The Ethiopic languages beat them to it.
I can't detect sarcasm! I'm done for!
They have proof that he is really an alien!
"The service were probably installed by some other Google product."
No it wasn't.
"..but I really don't see why getting rid of the dumb updater was such a chore, or why it was there in the first place."
Because, alas, they are turning evil.
"I looked in my Task Manager and there's GoogleUpdater running. I uninstalled Chrome and never looked back. "
Perhaps you should - when I tried Chrome, and uninstalled it - the updater wasn't removed but was still running.
"The browser is constantly and silently upgrading itself as the Chrome team push out new updates. "
That in itself is a dealbreaker - NOTHING should *silently* update anything. *I* download new versions, if *I* want.
"run the updater."
Another deal breaker - don't bloody well install an 'updater' program.
Oh well, Google is evil - the tide has turned.