Most people outside of the southeast use the term "barbecuing" to mean the same thing as grilling. Oddly enough though they use the term BBQ usually to mean what people in the midwest and texas refer to as BBQ.
For example, 20 years ago, virtually no one outside of the southeast referred to pulled pork as BBQ. For most people it meant ribs, or in Texas - brisket, or quite often chicken (not smoked chicken.) Interestingly, Hawaiians have Kalua pork which is roughly equivalent, but doesn't use a barbecue.
True, but which one are we more likely to consume with our steak? Now if only pizza had these colon cancer causing properties and I'd have an excuse to drink beer 'round the clock...
I'm not saying he himself is religious, but I am saying that the reason he is clearly not afraid to espouse stupidity in the face of science without fear of repercussion is because his base support is anti-science due to religion.
There's a much simpler solution. Ban political parties.
Abolish the entire concept of them/us.
Then you can finally have people who can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or vice versa, or a "Democrat" who can be anti-abortion, or a "Republican" who can be pro-choice, et cetera, ad nauseum.
Let centrists re-emerge from the wilderness, and the crazies fall of the scene.
Since when did right wing nut jobs label themselves "libertarians"? Do they actual know what Libertarianism actually is? They seem to have it confused with being conservative.
It is coming from the church dish, and their broadcasting stations and their "universities", and the "Faith Based Initiatives" funding, and from corporate giants like Tyson - it's scary how badly these people (adherents of dominionism) want to remake America into "Christian America." They absolutely despise the separation of church and state. They re-invent phrases like "secular humanism", "liberty", and "freedom" to mean things that those words do not actually mean.
There is a river of money at these people's fingertips and they, unlike most Christians, believe that not only should they tie politics to their religion but that they must ingrain the two. They believe in a Christian sharia. The irony is that many of them disagree theologically, but are united by a hatred of the separation of church and state.
They're just as crazy as those who want to impose Islamic sharia.
I think that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard considering that he was under zero pressure (as opposed to asking a beauty pageant contestant about quantum gravitation and recording the gurgles...)
Please note that I didn't say blame Christianity, or fundamentalists, I said blame dominionism.
Their goal is to subvert and abuse the very words people use to describe things like 'science' (i.e. 'historical science'), 'liberty', and 'freedom.' They want nothing to do with science and they're spending amazing amounts of money electing people who are willing to espouse their causes - anything to get elected.
I just started reading the paper on this but I think it is more a mechanism to protect a database full of passwords from being cracked by encrypting the DB in such a way that you need to know multiple logins to in order to map the attempted login into a mathematical space (sorry for the poor description.) Basically, trying to prevent the ability to test against the stolen password database offline; meaning, you can only brute force passwords by going through the system that was able to decrypt the database, which means you can introduce all kinds of time lapses, account lockouts, et cetera.)
The backlash is because many people who are comfortable with tech think FaceBook are the biggest bunch of douches in the tech world. The primary reason they feel that way is because FaceBook treats EVERYTHING as an avenue to generate revenue off of your personal life, treats everything as if it belongs to them, and makes decisions about privacy that any rational person would recognize as highly questionable and implements them simply because they will result in a likely revenue stream.
Who wouldn't want a company like that taking a fledgling tech darling that many people really were going to make gaming soooo much better?
"Hi, little baby unicorn, meet Darth Vader - he's going to raise you..."
For myself, I can't wait to put on my partially subsidized Oculus-berg and play Elite Dangerous and dodge asteroids textured in Vistaprint ads and a constant background subliminal audio soundtrack about whatever the latest f***ing things is that Dr. Oz is hawking...
Unless you're talking about DeVry graduates, there weren't "programming" degrees in accredited colleges in the early 90's. The closest you could come was a CS degree from a non-liberal arts school so you could just do the CS portions and didn't have to get a well rounded education since you could skip things like liberal arts electives.
Not that this has anything to do with the topic, since I brought up Apple's gouging model simple to point out to the other poster that gross and net are VASTLY different things, but you're comparing the 43% makes in comparison to the developer of the actual software to the amount a storefront makes off your product when it's on the shelf?
Apple is a storefront only. No games/software store in the world has a 30% markup.
Apple does virtually nothing for their 30% cut. You seem to be trying to include publisher, production, advertising, and many other potential costs into your comparison.
If you even think otherwise, ask yourself why Apple doesn't let anyone else have an app store (and please, don't think it is because they want to "protect the experience" LOL.)
Epic wants 5% of your gross sales. Not 5% of what you get from a sale. You understand that there's a difference, right? Especially when a**hats like crApple want 30% of your gross sales already.
..their other 'vr headsets' it will likely be total crap. SONY is an amazing company, but for some reason there are areas in which they simply produce garbage - this being one of them.
This doesn't mean it won't be a good device, just that SONY's history with VR headsets and tracking is terrible.
It is unethical, in my opinion, to buy a house that you don't live in, simply to get on the state's donor list. He didn't live in Tennessee and the only person who ever apparently did live in that house was his doctor.
Slashdot Mirror
Most people outside of the southeast use the term "barbecuing" to mean the same thing as grilling. Oddly enough though they use the term BBQ usually to mean what people in the midwest and texas refer to as BBQ.
For example, 20 years ago, virtually no one outside of the southeast referred to pulled pork as BBQ. For most people it meant ribs, or in Texas - brisket, or quite often chicken (not smoked chicken.) Interestingly, Hawaiians have Kalua pork which is roughly equivalent, but doesn't use a barbecue.
I think you mean to say "welcome death gratefully."
True, but which one are we more likely to consume with our steak? Now if only pizza had these colon cancer causing properties and I'd have an excuse to drink beer 'round the clock...
1997 called and wants its comment back...
I'm not saying he himself is religious, but I am saying that the reason he is clearly not afraid to espouse stupidity in the face of science without fear of repercussion is because his base support is anti-science due to religion.
There's a much simpler solution. Ban political parties.
Abolish the entire concept of them/us.
Then you can finally have people who can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or vice versa, or a "Democrat" who can be anti-abortion, or a "Republican" who can be pro-choice, et cetera, ad nauseum.
Let centrists re-emerge from the wilderness, and the crazies fall of the scene.
Since when did right wing nut jobs label themselves "libertarians"? Do they actual know what Libertarianism actually is? They seem to have it confused with being conservative.
It is coming from the church dish, and their broadcasting stations and their "universities", and the "Faith Based Initiatives" funding, and from corporate giants like Tyson - it's scary how badly these people (adherents of dominionism) want to remake America into "Christian America." They absolutely despise the separation of church and state. They re-invent phrases like "secular humanism", "liberty", and "freedom" to mean things that those words do not actually mean.
There is a river of money at these people's fingertips and they, unlike most Christians, believe that not only should they tie politics to their religion but that they must ingrain the two. They believe in a Christian sharia. The irony is that many of them disagree theologically, but are united by a hatred of the separation of church and state.
They're just as crazy as those who want to impose Islamic sharia.
I think that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard considering that he was under zero pressure (as opposed to asking a beauty pageant contestant about quantum gravitation and recording the gurgles...)
It's so dumb it is actually depressing.
What does this have to do with a religious perversion of democracy?
...Christianity.
Please note that I didn't say blame Christianity, or fundamentalists, I said blame dominionism.
Their goal is to subvert and abuse the very words people use to describe things like 'science' (i.e. 'historical science'), 'liberty', and 'freedom.' They want nothing to do with science and they're spending amazing amounts of money electing people who are willing to espouse their causes - anything to get elected.
I just started reading the paper on this but I think it is more a mechanism to protect a database full of passwords from being cracked by encrypting the DB in such a way that you need to know multiple logins to in order to map the attempted login into a mathematical space (sorry for the poor description.) Basically, trying to prevent the ability to test against the stolen password database offline; meaning, you can only brute force passwords by going through the system that was able to decrypt the database, which means you can introduce all kinds of time lapses, account lockouts, et cetera.)
Then again, I may be talking out of my a**...
The backlash is because many people who are comfortable with tech think FaceBook are the biggest bunch of douches in the tech world. The primary reason they feel that way is because FaceBook treats EVERYTHING as an avenue to generate revenue off of your personal life, treats everything as if it belongs to them, and makes decisions about privacy that any rational person would recognize as highly questionable and implements them simply because they will result in a likely revenue stream.
Who wouldn't want a company like that taking a fledgling tech darling that many people really were going to make gaming soooo much better?
"Hi, little baby unicorn, meet Darth Vader - he's going to raise you..."
For myself, I can't wait to put on my partially subsidized Oculus-berg and play Elite Dangerous and dodge asteroids textured in Vistaprint ads and a constant background subliminal audio soundtrack about whatever the latest f***ing things is that Dr. Oz is hawking...
Unless you're talking about DeVry graduates, there weren't "programming" degrees in accredited colleges in the early 90's. The closest you could come was a CS degree from a non-liberal arts school so you could just do the CS portions and didn't have to get a well rounded education since you could skip things like liberal arts electives.
What college did offer them before 1995?
Oh, and get off my lawn... ;)
...does an accredited (presumably) school come up with that? That sounds like a trade school degree. Might as well be self-taught.
When did people stop going to college to get "educated" as opposed to "resumated"?
You got that right.
Aaah, the "two wrongs make a right" theory...
That worked out well in Sudetenland, eh? God let's hope it doesn't come to that...
It offers you a 'store system' for free
No it doesn't, even if you're app is free you pay $99 annually just to be able to build your product/game.
If you had to set that up your own you spent more time setting up your sales and billing infrastructure than it takes you to craft your first App.
Have you ever done this? I have, and unless you're app is "hello world" it doesn't take very long and it's mostly just waiting.
That is again a majour obstacle if you want to set it up yourself: solved for you
Maybe if you're lazy and/or a hobbyist.
The only reason that game companies and larger indie teams use the App store is because YOU HAVE NO CHOICE.
Everything else is just applies to hobbyists.
Not that this has anything to do with the topic, since I brought up Apple's gouging model simple to point out to the other poster that gross and net are VASTLY different things, but you're comparing the 43% makes in comparison to the developer of the actual software to the amount a storefront makes off your product when it's on the shelf?
Apple is a storefront only. No games/software store in the world has a 30% markup.
Apple does virtually nothing for their 30% cut. You seem to be trying to include publisher, production, advertising, and many other potential costs into your comparison.
If you even think otherwise, ask yourself why Apple doesn't let anyone else have an app store (and please, don't think it is because they want to "protect the experience" LOL.)
It's a racket, plain and simple.
...is the same at your bottom line.
What is that supposed to mean?
Epic wants 5% of your gross sales. Not 5% of what you get from a sale. You understand that there's a difference, right? Especially when a**hats like crApple want 30% of your gross sales already.
5% of gross is a lot. 5% of net is not.
..their other 'vr headsets' it will likely be total crap. SONY is an amazing company, but for some reason there are areas in which they simply produce garbage - this being one of them.
This doesn't mean it won't be a good device, just that SONY's history with VR headsets and tracking is terrible.
Let's hope it proves otherwise.
It is unethical, in my opinion, to buy a house that you don't live in, simply to get on the state's donor list. He didn't live in Tennessee and the only person who ever apparently did live in that house was his doctor.