There was a study I read about a while (a few years?) ago about violence and video games. What they discovered was that it wasn't violent games that caused people to respond aggressively/violently, it was frustrating games. I wish I could find the link, but some simple Googling isn't turning it up.
Basically, I think the experimental evidence has shown that your comment is correct.
Well, now that we're past the mid-term elections, it's a much more convenient time to have potentially-incriminating or emails come out. They have almost 2 full years to do damage control before the next election.
There are a few criteria that really determine whether I send someone a link to a story.
1. Does it have a simple, obvious explanation which differs from other sites? Things like "No, [country] didn't really just [kill/embrace] net neutrality" or "No, [country] didn't just abolish software patents" are useful to send to people, because they tend to put the whole situation in perspective with background and an update for where we currently are.
2. Does it need community knowledge? If a story has a lot of snide references to past stories, I will often avoid sending it to people. I recognize your meaning, but they will not. Talking about how something has been thoroughly "debunked" in the past is not always convincing. I don't want them to be put off and think the site is just a self-reinforcing single-narrative perspective. Anything that says "nobody said" typically falls into that same bucket. You may not have said it, but that doesn't mean nobody did.
3. Does it have useful links to past stories? The lists of when things happened in the past, often included as several links-as-words in a sentence, are actually really useful for developing background.
So it looks like the things that I am most likely to send people are stories that help build background on an issue without needing community involvement of any kind. I like the site, but I want anything I send to people to be as objective, informative, and professional as possible.
This is similar to the ignorant reaction when some high-profile people have used the word "niggardly", but it's even more absurd since "homophone" is a word in common usage. These people should not be running a language school.
That paragraph was a nightmare. I took the test in 2003 or 2004, and even then most of us didn't know how to form several of the letters (because we hadn't used cursive in years). It took about half an hour for the single classroom's worth of kids to copy that paragraph. The proctor eventually told us to just make it up if we didn't know letters.
The worst is that it's not even a misspelling, it's just a slightly different transliteration of his name. It's like how 'ß' should be considered equal to both 'ss' and 'sz' if you're doing a good job. Their name matching was obviously not done well.
This is true at this time. I hope I am not alone in hoping that some day technology truly does destroy jobs. In my ideal world, "jobs" are not be necessary. If we can automate away our needs, everyone can do what they choose to do, instead of being forced into a job in order for themselves (and the economy) to survive.
Yes, there are social changes necessary. I hope someday, due to advances in technology, they will happen. Jobs are a necessary evil, not something we should idealize.
There are 2 different types of points on the Xbox. 1 is "achievement points" or "gamerscore", and the other is "Microsoft points". Microsoft points are what you can use to buy stuff. Achievement points are what you earn for completing pieces of games, and aren't actually used for anything (they're basically just an aggregate high score for yourself.)
I would assume that this would reward you with Microsoft points, not achievement points. They already do something similar with small rewards through their Xbox Live Rewards program, which rewards you with Microsoft points for completing their survey each month; this sounds like a logical expansion on that program.
If you listen to Planet Money's podcast on the potential beer merger, it's really interesting. Apparently the big two act together with price increases, and it's only the competition from Corona that keeps the beer prices down. It definitely sounds like it's anti-competitive, not an acquisition because they really like the company.
I think you're a bit offtopic, but I feel I should respond anyway.
Abortions are not about being offended. The argument against it is, "You're killing an innocent child" (or, "You're killing an original-sin-guilty child who will go directly to Hell", if you're a sufficiently devout Catholic).
I am not saying that I agree with that view, but you're mischaracterizing it.
The argument for dollar coins in the US is based on a faulty premise: That they'll be in circulation for enough time above dollar bills that they're worth the added expense to make.
Listen to the Planet Money episode:
Our dollar bills are already cheaper to produce than coins, and longer-lasting than the small notes that all the other countries used to have. Switching to dollar coins is a bad idea for us, even if it made sense for other countries.
In response to the new Facebook guidelines, I hereby declare that I am a pure retard for allowing myself to be trolled by this. My copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention. I don't know what this means, but whatever). I am arrogant enough to think that my work is worth stealing. Being a citizen of our highly litigious society, I will sue you for everything you have. (Anyone reading this can see what a gullible lemming I am, and can join me in ignorance by posting it on their facebook wall. This will place them under protection of copyright laws.) I don't have the intelligence to realize that this is a hoax, and posting this is as effective as using a Swiss cheese condom.
By the present communiqué, (check me out using big words) I notify Facebook that it is strictly forbidden to sell my info. I am ignorant to the fact that when I signed up for this account, I agreed to Facebook's TOS, and I don't have the common sense to simply not post if I'm so afraid of having my stuff stolen. The aforementioned prohibited actions also apply to employees, students, agents and/or any staff under Facebook's direction or control. (That means YOU, Zuckerberg) The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of my privacy is punished by law (UCC 1 1-308-308 1-103 and the Rome Statute). I don't know what this means, but I'm posting it because everybody else is doing it. Also, if I was so concerned with my privacy, I guess I shouldn’t have created a facebook account in the first place.
Facebook is now an open capital entity, and because of that, advanced alien civilizations laugh at us, and refuse contact with Earth. Allowing everyone to use it was a poor decision, and it is well on its way to becoming the next Myspace. If you do not publish a statement at least once, you are smart enough to know not to buy into a hoax. If you do post this, you are proving that not only do you not deserve a facebook account, but you are unworthy of an internet connection, and you should just go back to making cave paintings with your fellow neanderthals.
My news feed shows me a lot of your "intellectual property" Who would want to plagiarize most of you anyway?
We know they have it all prepared, and are just waiting for the "Cyber-9/11" to push it through. I wouldn't necessarily push for evidence of need, because it encourages them to manufacture or allow a catastrophe.
(Some believe that happened with the true "9/11". Regardless, we shouldn't encourage it.)