pwmanagerdied

We all know that the UN is retarded. By increasing the penalties for crimes motivated by discrimination against selected groups, you imply that crimes motivated by discrimination against groups that haven't been so selected are less severe. If someone went around and started killing geeks because they hated us collectively, they'd be less heavily punished than if they were targeting a protected group, such as Christians. Is that fair?

tyvm, but before you do could you please provide your name, so I can have the satisfaction of looking up your obituary tomorrow?

There is no gray area. If you support laws against hate crime or hate speech, you're against freedom of speech.

It's satire. If you can't cope with that, please off yourself for the good of the rest of us.

Well, I'm afraid I have to be the one to inform you that you are both pathetic and an idiot.

Who gives a damn if it's racist, the entire site is a joke!

I'm sorry, I still don't get it; could you be more precise?

Not really interesting, no. Go away.

I don't understand what's confusing.

Well, that's solved easily enough: upvote it, and if nothing changes, flag it away. It seems very unlikely that this has any merit, but since nobody else has posted the results I'll do it, in the name of science!

EDIT: Correct, nothing happened. Flagged.

I'd guess that there are actually far more open source clients than closed-source. The author's asking in particular for a Cocoa email client, which Thunderbird is not, but I don't really see why that's an important factor.

MMORPGs and RTSs aren't directly comparable. Due to nature of the genre there's no long-term reward possible in RTSs outside of self-improvement, whereas this is generally the focus of RPGs, massive and online or not.

Choice quote: Ballmer reiterated the statement in an interview with Reuters. "We're attacked every day from all parts of the world and I think everybody else is too. We didn't see anything out of the ordinary," he told the news service. "There are attacks every day. I don't think there was anything unusual, so I don't understand"

This post doesn't say anything. "Corporate America needs a centralized version control system because it needs [features of centralized version control systems]", but without explanation of why they need it.

They'd probably just block blogspot. If Google really wanted to, they could cycle through practically endless different domain and IPs, but the firewall could probably just pull the current ones out of the pages as they were loaded, if necessary. Or, yeah, just block Google. If they did something like that, it doesn't seem unlikely.

Let's flag this deceptively labeled thing.

Bad minus being able to directly sniff your password equals less bad, not just as bad.

I agree that their decisions are often a good indication of what not to do, but from a practical perspective it is a good example of why page rewriting needs to be done cautiously, if it must be done at all.

It should be noted that there's already a precedent for comments having real meaning: IE's conditional comments, which many sites use to apply different stylesheets to IE users.

I just got an email about this. I assumed that it was a scam that Gmail had missed. Huh.

"Google Plans to" and "Google filed a patent to" are very different things.

I like the idea, but thiss caught my eye:

> Next, imagine an iMac sans the internal computer, just a screen with some extra storage, extra RAM, a stronger video card, maybe even an extra processor, and a docking bay for the tablet.

What part of the internal computer is missing from that list?

I don't think he was implying otherwise.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

Sure, but in general it's not as bad as your post suggests.

You can hold down a key when you turn a Mac on to have it switch from the default "pretty" screen to a normal wall-of-text booting screen. The problem for the author was that he'd locked himself out of these options when enabling some security feature previously.

How about we just stop linking to Zed, m'kay?

One thing I don't understand in all of these discussions about there having been life on Mars in the past: wouldn't it still be there today?

Even given that the planet's climate has changed entirely over time, as long as life had begun at some point and had a non-negligible amount of time to evolve it would have expanded into every available niche. There's life here on Earth in environments far less hospitable than those on Mars, isn't there?

Huh. A five bit range would give a max of 31, and if we assume that the default/built-in stylesheet knocks another off, that's 30.

I agree with you, though I think I'd prefer this to hint at the reason over it being an entirely arbitrary descision. Making such a choice for a bad reason is still preferable to making it for no reason.

Though the topic is interesting, this article is rambling and senseless. For example it states that life, by reducing local entropy, violates the second laws of thermodynamics.