This isn't rocket science. Black Friday deals, i.e. discounts. If the discounts reduce profits to zero (see, "If they're not making a profit off discounted items"), then zero is what they donate. Take your false dichotomy rant elsewhere.
Bullshit. If by law, bosses have to fire you or stop you from wearing certain shirts, then that *is* a free speech issue.
Bullshit yourself. That's not what I said. I know it's hard for you to understand, but companies must stop harassment of their workers. A court would just as readily find a company that allows it's employees to wear KKK robes around their black or Catholic employees, or Swastikas around their Jewish employees to be at fault for not stopping a hostile work environment.
If you have a problem with this, go on into work wearing a white shirt with a vagina on it, swastikas on the sleeves, and wearing a hood that says "KKK." And when the company fires you, go take them to court for wrongful termination.
Bullshit. The first amendment makes *no* such distinction. The courts were absolutely 100% wrong here. Too often, the courts ignore the constitution in order to satisfy their personal agenda: To give the government powers the constitution does not grant it.
Again, bullshit yourself. Roth v. United States Miller v. California
Again, go fight a fucking court case if you disagree.
Talk about it AFTER they did it for one. Charity isn't supposed to be ostentatious. If you're profiting off giving charity, then it's not really charity. It's a self-serving attitude.
If they're not making a profit off the discounted items, then no money goes to AIDs research. It's not a decent gesture. They're only doing it because it'll drum up more sales. If they really cared, they wouldn't advertise it, or at least not right before.
You're making an argument for Steam and nothing more. Your old PC games on those discs will eventually become unplayable from those discs. Your computer's hard drive can fail and you could lose whatever old school game you've been storing there. PC gamers are in the same crapshoot that console gamers are when it comes to playing older games.
No, laughably no. Support in PC games for anything other than keyboard and mouse is incredibly shoddy. If you want to argue that a keyboard and mouse is the better input device(s) for gaming, you have some notions about gaming.
Better graphics, better sound
Graphics don't make a game. If graphics mattered, PC gamers wouldn't be all lovestruck over the indie game scene which is notorious for horrible graphics. As for sound, that has little to do with the console or the PC and everything to do with your own sound system set up.
I can use a PC to do much more than just play games.
The war turned a federation of sovereign states into a compulsory chain of provinces.
You mean the Revolutionary War? I think you're confused as to the nature of this country's formation.
Texas v White may clarify things for you.
The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
More the media. TFA is biased. The bill was pushed on bipartisan basis and it wasn't just Republicans that voted against it; further it passed the Republican controlled House and its main sponsor is a Republican. So I'm unsure how we got the headline "Republicans block...."
Well there's the crux of their whole flawed argument. They're conflating "correct decision" with "best outcome" possible. Human judgement and morals don't work on what will result in the best outcome, but what will result in the most reasonable outcome.
Right, but what you described is not discrimination based solely on gender, race, etc. If your job requirement for PR/Customer facing is good looking people, then an seemingly ugly person would not fit the mold. It's like how modelling agencies can choose to only higher pretty people.
Slashdot Mirror
The FBI statistics should never be taken as a standard for other studies. Merely a guide post. The reporting is completely voluntary.
Or GTA for that matter...
Just to be clear, these are two different companies.
Around that time period, it was quite common to transfer music files from the CD albums you bought to you MP3 player.
The Apple RDF is in place, there's no helping them!
Fine, Kirk, not Spock.
Well at least we're not lazy commies!
The song and video are a parody of the lifestyle of Koreans in the Gangnam District of Seoul.
To the leader boards!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
Stop projecting.
This isn't rocket science. Black Friday deals, i.e. discounts. If the discounts reduce profits to zero (see, "If they're not making a profit off discounted items"), then zero is what they donate. Take your false dichotomy rant elsewhere.
Bullshit. If by law, bosses have to fire you or stop you from wearing certain shirts, then that *is* a free speech issue.
Bullshit yourself. That's not what I said. I know it's hard for you to understand, but companies must stop harassment of their workers. A court would just as readily find a company that allows it's employees to wear KKK robes around their black or Catholic employees, or Swastikas around their Jewish employees to be at fault for not stopping a hostile work environment.
If you have a problem with this, go on into work wearing a white shirt with a vagina on it, swastikas on the sleeves, and wearing a hood that says "KKK." And when the company fires you, go take them to court for wrongful termination.
Bullshit. The first amendment makes *no* such distinction. The courts were absolutely 100% wrong here. Too often, the courts ignore the constitution in order to satisfy their personal agenda: To give the government powers the constitution does not grant it.
Again, bullshit yourself.
Roth v. United States
Miller v. California
Again, go fight a fucking court case if you disagree.
...the US will continue to fill up with morons with no skills or social graces...
The irony of this quote is astounding. :)
Talk about it AFTER they did it for one. Charity isn't supposed to be ostentatious. If you're profiting off giving charity, then it's not really charity. It's a self-serving attitude.
If they're not making a profit off the discounted items, then no money goes to AIDs research. It's not a decent gesture. They're only doing it because it'll drum up more sales. If they really cared, they wouldn't advertise it, or at least not right before.
When you run the radio with the engine off, doesn't that drain the battery though?
You're making an argument for Steam and nothing more. Your old PC games on those discs will eventually become unplayable from those discs. Your computer's hard drive can fail and you could lose whatever old school game you've been storing there. PC gamers are in the same crapshoot that console gamers are when it comes to playing older games.
better controls/input devices
No, laughably no. Support in PC games for anything other than keyboard and mouse is incredibly shoddy. If you want to argue that a keyboard and mouse is the better input device(s) for gaming, you have some notions about gaming.
Better graphics, better sound
Graphics don't make a game. If graphics mattered, PC gamers wouldn't be all lovestruck over the indie game scene which is notorious for horrible graphics. As for sound, that has little to do with the console or the PC and everything to do with your own sound system set up.
I can use a PC to do much more than just play games.
Gee that's funny, so can modern consoles.
Web pages or web applications?
The war turned a federation of sovereign states into a compulsory chain of provinces.
You mean the Revolutionary War? I think you're confused as to the nature of this country's formation.
Texas v White may clarify things for you.
The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
More the media. TFA is biased. The bill was pushed on bipartisan basis and it wasn't just Republicans that voted against it; further it passed the Republican controlled House and its main sponsor is a Republican. So I'm unsure how we got the headline "Republicans block...."
I need to upgrade every 4 years or so to keep up with the latest games, spending ~$500
How is that different than a console?
Well there's the crux of their whole flawed argument. They're conflating "correct decision" with "best outcome" possible. Human judgement and morals don't work on what will result in the best outcome, but what will result in the most reasonable outcome.
No, because atomic bombs don't have computers in them.
And somehow there is no system in place for killer robots?
Right, but what you described is not discrimination based solely on gender, race, etc. If your job requirement for PR/Customer facing is good looking people, then an seemingly ugly person would not fit the mold. It's like how modelling agencies can choose to only higher pretty people.