That's the beauty of modern American Christianity - the sects are so fragmented that it's trivial to distance themselves from any sort of unpleasantness by saying that the perpetrators weren't really Christians.
One advantage of gold is that it's stable, mostly useless and, in most cases, even if it's used it can easily be recovered and put back in a pure form. Food must be eaten or spoil. Ammo is good for one use. Paper will wear out.
OTOH - an economic system that allows somebody to collect more wealth than their descendants can possibly use for generations isn't exactly ideal, either...
some n00b admin couldn't exactly master Apache in a weekend like they could IIS.
A "n00b admin" isn't going to be able to master anything in a weekend. They might figure out how to set something up & get it working but mastery is a long ways off.
Even among those that drive drunk, the vast majority of the time, they're driving sober. Most people don't ever do it. Because a few dipshits kill a few kids while driving, -everyone- is somehow obligated to invest in expensive electronics in their cars?
...as long as you're willing to start playing a game where you know'll forever be the bitch of some guy that's been playing since launch. At least WOW gives you a realistic shot at catching up with The Big Kids.
If I wanted that kind of depressing reality, I wouldn't need to be playing games.
Re: C&C3 on an older machine, or laptop?
on
Protoss For a Day
·
· Score: 1
Since the advent of 3-D, most integrated graphics have not been up to gaming use. Recent Intel offerings are getting better, but we're just talking about the difference between "painfully behind the curve" and "woefully behind the curve" - a stand-alone $50 card could easily outperform them.
Unfortunately, stand-alone $50 cards don't exist in the world of laptops. Your only real options with laptop gaming are from ATI or nVidia.
Don't worry - Once you've been out of school a little longer you'll realize that your generation doesn't suck significantly more than the rest of humanity.
How do they call anything that's only 2 years old a "cult classic"? I could understand "underappreciated critical success" or "underground hit" but labeling something so fresh as a classic merely serves to highlight the chronological myopia of this 'all time' best-of list.
Whereas a for-profit insurance company simultaneously tries to deny high-risk drivers coverage while raising everyone else's premiums as high as possible while still staying competitive.
I'm reminded of how, in the late-90s, the insurance companies in Washington state lobbied to place restrictions on young drivers (age 16-18) claiming that these restrictions would result in far fewer accidents. They got the law passed and, as expected, teenagers got in less accidents. They never mentioned that they had no intention of lowering premiums for anyone, even though the roads become measurably safer.
While it didn't impact my ability to drive, as I was over 18 when the law passed, these events cemented my distrust of the insurance industry.
The game can't be that horribly broken - I'd guess that far less than 1% of players actually feel the need to pay for gold or leveling. When you have 8 million subscribers, however, a significant market is created.
The problem is that these people fail to recognize that they're playing the wrong game.
In a normal CS curriculum, you probably won't need to use TeX at all as an undergrad. On the outside, you might have one math/theory course where the prof thinks it's worth knowing. If you continue on to graduate studies, OTOH, the use of TeX increases significantly.
The thing is, most people drive drunk because, by their (admittedly skewed) calculation of the odds, they're going to get home safely. Many people drive drunk for years without ever injuring another, facing legal consequences or even causing property damage.
So, it becomes a case of $100 vs. (cost of dui)*(odds of getting caught). Given an average cost of DUI of $20,000 that means, if you're a gambler, you're better off driving than losing a $100 key until the odds of getting caught are higher than one half of one percent. During certain times of the year or certain geographical regions, this may be the case but most places, at most times, I'd say the actual odds are far less.
Do you think American Big Business really cares about things like the "long term" anymore?
Look at the IT industry - they're regularly outsourcing the jobs that used to serve as entry-level positions. In 20 years, are they going to have a domestic talent pool to rely on?
If you look at the DUI laws in this country, they're pretty far removed from "drunk" driving. Most places have established a threshold of.08 BAC (which is commonly equated with the consumption of about 2 beers in an hour) - a point at which most people would not consider themselves significantly impaired or intoxicated. If you consider this as a point of reference rather than more severe impairment that the phrase "drunk" is normally associated with, it puts the "cell phones are as bad as being drunk" in a different light.
Not only does the initial claim become far more plausible, but it puts a different light on your morality argument. Just as most people will condemn "drunk driving" yet go ahead and drive after "just a few beers" most people feel that you shouldn't drive while talking on a cell-phone but have no problem making exceptions when they "just have to take a quick call".
While it's great fun to argue the constitutionality of such of law, what are the chances that an atheist actually could get elected to any position of importance in TX?
Slashdot Mirror
That's the beauty of modern American Christianity - the sects are so fragmented that it's trivial to distance themselves from any sort of unpleasantness by saying that the perpetrators weren't really Christians.
Shouldn't you have included a "spoiler alert" there? Not all of us have finished watching the series.
One advantage of gold is that it's stable, mostly useless and, in most cases, even if it's used it can easily be recovered and put back in a pure form. Food must be eaten or spoil. Ammo is good for one use. Paper will wear out.
OTOH - an economic system that allows somebody to collect more wealth than their descendants can possibly use for generations isn't exactly ideal, either...
A "n00b admin" isn't going to be able to master anything in a weekend. They might figure out how to set something up & get it working but mastery is a long ways off.
Even among those that drive drunk, the vast majority of the time, they're driving sober. Most people don't ever do it. Because a few dipshits kill a few kids while driving, -everyone- is somehow obligated to invest in expensive electronics in their cars?
...as long as you're willing to start playing a game where you know'll forever be the bitch of some guy that's been playing since launch. At least WOW gives you a realistic shot at catching up with The Big Kids.
If I wanted that kind of depressing reality, I wouldn't need to be playing games.
Since the advent of 3-D, most integrated graphics have not been up to gaming use. Recent Intel offerings are getting better, but we're just talking about the difference between "painfully behind the curve" and "woefully behind the curve" - a stand-alone $50 card could easily outperform them.
Unfortunately, stand-alone $50 cards don't exist in the world of laptops. Your only real options with laptop gaming are from ATI or nVidia.
Don't worry - Once you've been out of school a little longer you'll realize that your generation doesn't suck significantly more than the rest of humanity.
...and you're using yours to remember episodes of Married With Children?
...it's not apt.
icy cold.
How do they call anything that's only 2 years old a "cult classic"? I could understand "underappreciated critical success" or "underground hit" but labeling something so fresh as a classic merely serves to highlight the chronological myopia of this 'all time' best-of list.
Whereas a for-profit insurance company simultaneously tries to deny high-risk drivers coverage while raising everyone else's premiums as high as possible while still staying competitive.
I'm reminded of how, in the late-90s, the insurance companies in Washington state lobbied to place restrictions on young drivers (age 16-18) claiming that these restrictions would result in far fewer accidents. They got the law passed and, as expected, teenagers got in less accidents. They never mentioned that they had no intention of lowering premiums for anyone, even though the roads become measurably safer.
While it didn't impact my ability to drive, as I was over 18 when the law passed, these events cemented my distrust of the insurance industry.
The game can't be that horribly broken - I'd guess that far less than 1% of players actually feel the need to pay for gold or leveling. When you have 8 million subscribers, however, a significant market is created.
The problem is that these people fail to recognize that they're playing the wrong game.
The better question is why are people who don't want to play the game involved in it in the first place?
In a normal CS curriculum, you probably won't need to use TeX at all as an undergrad. On the outside, you might have one math/theory course where the prof thinks it's worth knowing. If you continue on to graduate studies, OTOH, the use of TeX increases significantly.
There is also the massive sales boost generated by the hype-machine from the 3rd installment of the series.
The thing is, most people drive drunk because, by their (admittedly skewed) calculation of the odds, they're going to get home safely. Many people drive drunk for years without ever injuring another, facing legal consequences or even causing property damage.
So, it becomes a case of $100 vs. (cost of dui)*(odds of getting caught). Given an average cost of DUI of $20,000 that means, if you're a gambler, you're better off driving than losing a $100 key until the odds of getting caught are higher than one half of one percent. During certain times of the year or certain geographical regions, this may be the case but most places, at most times, I'd say the actual odds are far less.
Mod parent +1
Do you think American Big Business really cares about things like the "long term" anymore?
Look at the IT industry - they're regularly outsourcing the jobs that used to serve as entry-level positions. In 20 years, are they going to have a domestic talent pool to rely on?
If you look at the DUI laws in this country, they're pretty far removed from "drunk" driving. Most places have established a threshold of .08 BAC (which is commonly equated with the consumption of about 2 beers in an hour) - a point at which most people would not consider themselves significantly impaired or intoxicated. If you consider this as a point of reference rather than more severe impairment that the phrase "drunk" is normally associated with, it puts the "cell phones are as bad as being drunk" in a different light.
Not only does the initial claim become far more plausible, but it puts a different light on your morality argument. Just as most people will condemn "drunk driving" yet go ahead and drive after "just a few beers" most people feel that you shouldn't drive while talking on a cell-phone but have no problem making exceptions when they "just have to take a quick call".
Why should universities be under any more of an obligation to stop copyright infringement than any other ISP?
The difference is that Real Life doesn't have an "/ignore" function.
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a law on the books against this already?
While it's great fun to argue the constitutionality of such of law, what are the chances that an atheist actually could get elected to any position of importance in TX?