Are we reading the rantings of some crazed slash-fiction writer? This has to be the most mind-numbingly stupid objection to a change that I've ever heard.
In fairness, I'd think that's partly because the Index Funds Advisors would like for you to invest in their index funds, instead of somebody else's mutual funds.
(But, yes, mutual funds need to be picked very, very carefully.)
Yeah, dammit. Who are you going to believe? Your licensed and accredited marriage counselor, who sees lots of people with problems like yours, or some anonymous jerk on the Internet, whose advice can be had freely in any forum on the Web. Clearly, your marriage counselor is just bilking you into saving your marriage.
This weapon of mass enlightenment, that's some hippy approach to solar power, right?
Seriously, give me a break. The only thing that seems to make the folks here feel better about themselves more than seeing socialists win an election is being able to shake their heads at us poor benighted dopes who think that maybe, just maybe the frigging global warming alarmists aren't necessarily right. Spare me the self-righteousness.
Some touchy-feely crap about how a video game might make me more in tune with Mother Earth doesn't make me excited about a game. Hell, it wouldn't get me in to hear Al Gore's pompous windbag in a theatre, and that would take less time and be cheaper. Games are about entertainment, as far as I'm concerned.
Oh, if only there was a way I could rap my knuckles on a person's temples for dismissively responding to me on the Intarweb. I could be wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice with such an invention.
Doom Marine? I don't recall the soldier from Doom carrying any obvious political or other message. Unless you're talking about a mod, in which case, I assure you that I paid no attention to those at all.
I'm an adult, and, while I do like my entertainment to be at least moderately intelligent, I really do draw a line between games which are fun to play on their own merits, and games for which the primary merit appears to be the message I'm supposed to take away from it. I don't *want* to take a message away from a first person shooter, except maybe that ragdoll physics are neat and my teammates are probably homonculi made out of spam. To be honest, a moderate amount of speechifying is forgivable: if it's a game set in a dystopian, cyberpunk-ish future, I *expect* to be told (mostly through the setting) that, hey, corporations are bad and individualism is, like, good. I don't expect to actually *believe* it, but it's kind of a convention with the setting.
A freebie flash game mocking a political scandal is really quite different from an multiple-hour FPS that seems to be engaged in near-libel of an entire people, especially as it's the sort of libel that tends to get people cacked in certain parts of the world. Ironically, it sounds a lot like a (better-executed) mirror-version of a game from a few years ago that had the player tracking down and killing/capturing terrorists, with OBL as the final target. Reportedly, it was pretty bad. I didn't play that, either: it was a poor game, for which the primary value was some GWoT-related wish-fulfillment. Maybe the Palestinians-conquer-the-world version is better, but it sounds like it's still just a vehicle for an asinine fantasy. Since it's also one I find offensively misinformed, I don't imagine I'll bother with this one, either.
I don't particularly care if a game is serious. I care if a game is entertaining and fun to play, and if I find the gameplay, setting, or intellectual underpinnings offensive or not. It's not like there aren't porn games, and I don't play (or approve of) those, either.
I need virtual activism like I need a real whole in the head. Spare me.
If it's a good game, I'll play it. If you deign to interrupt my game with a preachy spiel about the plight of the Trashcanistani people, or the blue-crested spotted warbler crane, or the terror of global warming, or whatever, I will shut it off and remember that you wanted to bore, rather than entertain, me with your 'game'.
Nuclear power has been around for fifty-odd years. France uses it for about 3/4s of their electricity needs.
Hydrogen gas must still be produced *and* distributed. There is very, very little existing infrastructure for hydrogen fuel, whatever you wish to do with it.
FOR SHEER COST-EFFECTIVENESS YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BEAT NUCLEAR POWER. It's as simple as that. It's cheaper than either wind or solar at current levels of technology. If you'd like to troll a bit further, be my guest. I'll not be responding.
Solar is expensive, and only works in areas with lots of sunlight. Additionally, it *doesn't* work when it's dark, unless you have a solution to the non-trivial problem concerning energy storage? Wind, tidal, hydro, and geothermal are likewise limited in terms of areas that they can be feasibly deployed. And the environmental impact of any centralized power generation scheme is going to be large, unless you believe that, say, the Hoover Dam didn't have an environmental impact?
We're talking about replacing coal and oil power here. Coal, in particular, is already a resource that is environmentally damaging to get out of the ground. Oil is better, but is more expensive in most areas, and not any cleaner. Power generation isn't generally feasible in most decentralised schemes: peak power usage is basically at night, when wind and solar tend to be least useful. That leaves tidal, hydro, and geothermal, and there are plenty of places where those just aren't feasible. Renewable fuels are, currently, not cost effective. Sad, but true. So, coal, or nuclear?
Okay, so nuclear plants can also be used to create plutonium and enrich uranium, but they're still the most cost-effective source of clean power we've got available. They can be deployed basically anywhere, since they don't rely on environmental factors (sunlight, wind, tides, geothermal hot spots, etc). Build the waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain and get on with rolling out the nuclear power plants.
Unless you are a king hell dork, I think the enhanced special effects mostly went over well. Speaking as a dork, anyway, the only complaints I had surrounded things that were changed in the plot of the films.
Not since the first pass of KotOR 1, I think. Never with an FPS that I can recall. I just can't justify wasting an entire day or night to that sort of thing.
I honestly can't think of the last time I saw a keyboard that had separate keys for enter and return. Anything I can remember using, they're the same key, and the same function.
She also played a few games on the NES, and has been making serious use of a GameBoy for years (Tetris, as it turns out, is still a killer app). I think I need a better point of comparison with the mainstream.
You're half right. An engineer isn't a degree. A degree's not a worthless piece of paper, though, and, although you might not get much value from a college education (good grief. Were your friends students at a community college?) from one, they're still very useful. At the very least, there are better schools out there.
Get a Mac, use OS X instead. (This message posted from a Mac!)
Disconnect machine from Internet.
You may also wish to remove or disable any and all network devices on the machine, actually. Just in case.
Having disconnected the machine from all possible networks, you may also wish to consider disabling USB mass storage devices and removing all removable storage drives and devices.
Come to think of it, you might want to remove all I/O devices, to be absolutely sure. This means no modems, no monitors, keyboards, mice, etc.
May as well unplug it, and stick that sucker in a Faraday cage, lock the cage. This will eliminate the possibility of van Eck phreaking.
Throw away the key! Now your computer is completely secure.
Re:Not many companies allow 3rd party libraries?
on
Java Regular Expressions
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It does, however, simplify the legal mess involved.
Slashdot Mirror
"Bishy"?
Are we reading the rantings of some crazed slash-fiction writer? This has to be the most mind-numbingly stupid objection to a change that I've ever heard.
In fairness, I'd think that's partly because the Index Funds Advisors would like for you to invest in their index funds, instead of somebody else's mutual funds.
(But, yes, mutual funds need to be picked very, very carefully.)
Everyone has a 1040i set? Blast! The Sorny salesman told me they were new, and I'd be the first on my block!
Yes, but now it's 25 gigs of crap that takes all afternoon to load!
Congratulations, you're a babysitter and maid.
Yeah, dammit. Who are you going to believe? Your licensed and accredited marriage counselor, who sees lots of people with problems like yours, or some anonymous jerk on the Internet, whose advice can be had freely in any forum on the Web. Clearly, your marriage counselor is just bilking you into saving your marriage.
This weapon of mass enlightenment, that's some hippy approach to solar power, right?
Seriously, give me a break. The only thing that seems to make the folks here feel better about themselves more than seeing socialists win an election is being able to shake their heads at us poor benighted dopes who think that maybe, just maybe the frigging global warming alarmists aren't necessarily right. Spare me the self-righteousness.
Some touchy-feely crap about how a video game might make me more in tune with Mother Earth doesn't make me excited about a game. Hell, it wouldn't get me in to hear Al Gore's pompous windbag in a theatre, and that would take less time and be cheaper. Games are about entertainment, as far as I'm concerned.
Oh, if only there was a way I could rap my knuckles on a person's temples for dismissively responding to me on the Intarweb. I could be wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice with such an invention.
Doom Marine? I don't recall the soldier from Doom carrying any obvious political or other message. Unless you're talking about a mod, in which case, I assure you that I paid no attention to those at all.
I'm an adult, and, while I do like my entertainment to be at least moderately intelligent, I really do draw a line between games which are fun to play on their own merits, and games for which the primary merit appears to be the message I'm supposed to take away from it. I don't *want* to take a message away from a first person shooter, except maybe that ragdoll physics are neat and my teammates are probably homonculi made out of spam. To be honest, a moderate amount of speechifying is forgivable: if it's a game set in a dystopian, cyberpunk-ish future, I *expect* to be told (mostly through the setting) that, hey, corporations are bad and individualism is, like, good. I don't expect to actually *believe* it, but it's kind of a convention with the setting.
A freebie flash game mocking a political scandal is really quite different from an multiple-hour FPS that seems to be engaged in near-libel of an entire people, especially as it's the sort of libel that tends to get people cacked in certain parts of the world. Ironically, it sounds a lot like a (better-executed) mirror-version of a game from a few years ago that had the player tracking down and killing/capturing terrorists, with OBL as the final target. Reportedly, it was pretty bad. I didn't play that, either: it was a poor game, for which the primary value was some GWoT-related wish-fulfillment. Maybe the Palestinians-conquer-the-world version is better, but it sounds like it's still just a vehicle for an asinine fantasy. Since it's also one I find offensively misinformed, I don't imagine I'll bother with this one, either.
I don't particularly care if a game is serious. I care if a game is entertaining and fun to play, and if I find the gameplay, setting, or intellectual underpinnings offensive or not. It's not like there aren't porn games, and I don't play (or approve of) those, either.
Spore could make me into a tree-hugging hippy? ... this is supposed to make me excited about the game?
I need virtual activism like I need a real whole in the head. Spare me.
If it's a good game, I'll play it. If you deign to interrupt my game with a preachy spiel about the plight of the Trashcanistani people, or the blue-crested spotted warbler crane, or the terror of global warming, or whatever, I will shut it off and remember that you wanted to bore, rather than entertain, me with your 'game'.
I think Eliot Spitzer needs a new hobby.
Nuclear power has been around for fifty-odd years. France uses it for about 3/4s of their electricity needs.
Hydrogen gas must still be produced *and* distributed. There is very, very little existing infrastructure for hydrogen fuel, whatever you wish to do with it.
FOR SHEER COST-EFFECTIVENESS YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BEAT NUCLEAR POWER. It's as simple as that. It's cheaper than either wind or solar at current levels of technology. If you'd like to troll a bit further, be my guest. I'll not be responding.
Solar is expensive, and only works in areas with lots of sunlight. Additionally, it *doesn't* work when it's dark, unless you have a solution to the non-trivial problem concerning energy storage? Wind, tidal, hydro, and geothermal are likewise limited in terms of areas that they can be feasibly deployed. And the environmental impact of any centralized power generation scheme is going to be large, unless you believe that, say, the Hoover Dam didn't have an environmental impact?
We're talking about replacing coal and oil power here. Coal, in particular, is already a resource that is environmentally damaging to get out of the ground. Oil is better, but is more expensive in most areas, and not any cleaner. Power generation isn't generally feasible in most decentralised schemes: peak power usage is basically at night, when wind and solar tend to be least useful. That leaves tidal, hydro, and geothermal, and there are plenty of places where those just aren't feasible. Renewable fuels are, currently, not cost effective. Sad, but true. So, coal, or nuclear?
Okay, so nuclear plants can also be used to create plutonium and enrich uranium, but they're still the most cost-effective source of clean power we've got available. They can be deployed basically anywhere, since they don't rely on environmental factors (sunlight, wind, tides, geothermal hot spots, etc). Build the waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain and get on with rolling out the nuclear power plants.
Nuclear plants. They're not without their hazards, but they're more efficient and cleaner.
Unless you are a king hell dork, I think the enhanced special effects mostly went over well. Speaking as a dork, anyway, the only complaints I had surrounded things that were changed in the plot of the films.
Not since the first pass of KotOR 1, I think. Never with an FPS that I can recall. I just can't justify wasting an entire day or night to that sort of thing.
Oh, I see. In that case, yes, every keyboard I have has separate keys. I think they're all such that the keys have the same name, though.
I honestly can't think of the last time I saw a keyboard that had separate keys for enter and return. Anything I can remember using, they're the same key, and the same function.
She also played a few games on the NES, and has been making serious use of a GameBoy for years (Tetris, as it turns out, is still a killer app). I think I need a better point of comparison with the mainstream.
Possibly one that isn't directly related to me.
For being ignorant of the English language, or for being too lazy to check a dictionary before making a stupid claim?
You're half right. An engineer isn't a degree. A degree's not a worthless piece of paper, though, and, although you might not get much value from a college education (good grief. Were your friends students at a community college?) from one, they're still very useful. At the very least, there are better schools out there.
It does, however, simplify the legal mess involved.
They're talking about time and productivity lost, right?