Zoraptor

Useless spam sucks. Whether it's e-mail, phone, forums, or the release and genre lists at a online stores. It's annoying and it makes it harder to notice actual worthwhile games. Valve's discovery updates have done nothing to help this, they revolve entirely around the UI and their joke of a tag system. If it obfuscates 'worthwhile' titles it pretty much has to be worse than merely useless spam. And Valve's answer to it will be the same as Valve's answer to everything, half arsed and minimal effort. You'd think that with their resources they could do some curation given that GOG does it with a tiny fraction of their resources, but I guess with Valve's supposed structure all their curation bods would suddenly decide they really want to work on Ricochet 2 or some VR fad that nobody wants or Steam Machine DOA and forgotten Project 2.0, and then they'd be back at square one. That's the problem with monopoly positions, no actual incentive to fix problems since there's no viable alternative. If too much noise is the problem a moderate fee will do nothing to stop it and it may get even worse, if too many crap games/ games that don't get finished is the problem it won't fix that either and that too may get worse. And if it's a big fee people have to find 5k extra money to enter a system where their game will still be one sardine in a massive school. (Kind of weird though, the 'big change' involving submitters needing to provide bank details and company paperwork before distributing on Steam. I'm not an accountant and a mere layman in such matters, but I would have thought you'd already need to provide such details before publishing on steam...)

For every post a so called moderator writes they have to delete two others?

People said Trump was ineptly dishonest from the moment he started running. His strategy has worked pretty well since then, despite the criticism. It seems rather an odd strategy to me as well, but you can't really argue results and so far the results have been tremendous, the best results. Thing is, people won't remember the details. Commentators may, and journalists may, but people in general won't. What they will remember is that Trump wanted to stop terrorism, and that it was in the news for ages, and that [people] stopped him doing so. When the next terrorist attack happens- as it will- that is what will be remembered. They won't remember that the Bowling Green massacre never happened, that's detail which keeps the main issue in the headlines. The people who remember such things are never going to support Trump anyway (or are so committed they'll never stop supporting him). By and large you can tell when they aren't doing stoking controversy deliberately, because they then try and kill the story rather than double down. Things like Conway's 'buy Ivanka' are not intended, keeping terrorism in the news is though as it's political insurance in case there is an attack- Trump tried to do something about it- and political ammunition to fire at his opponents too. As strategies go it's fine, albeit somewhat... unpleasant since you're effectively waiting for an attack to happen to have it pay off, but you do get some benefit from it anyway.

Yeah, Mateen himself said he was doing it for and pledged allegiance to, ISIS so there was a link there; and he knew about the death of a reasonably obscure ISIS leader. The CIA said they found no evidence that ISIS knew about him, but they didn't rule out a link either, only said they found no evidence. The FBI also found no evidence that he was a semi repressed homosexual or using Grindr etc either, which was widely reported as being the 'real'/ alternative motive. If reports he was linked (other than self professed) to ISIS are alternative facts/ fake news then so was anything using the repressed homosexual angle. I'm always suspicious of 'x said he did this for y reason, but really he did this for z reason' with no evidence provided for reason z. At least there's his confession for reason y and he showed some knowledge on the subject. I seldom agree with WoD but this definitely ain't alternative facts, not even close.

That's a bit harsh on Muhammed Sahid al Sahaf. He'd have been literally shot if he went off script. Wasn't like those under Bush or Obama were any good either. All press secretaries are awful- it's in the nature of their job to be terrible, they have to lie, obfuscate, embiggen, spin and generally be untrustworthy- and the Bush/ Obama ones at least had the advantage of a more orthodox approach from their boss, and a far less overtly hostile press- even term 2 Bush. Then again, when I see 'alternative facts' I know that it isn't a new phenomenon- Obama's PR blithely defended the murder of civilians with drones, massaged the numbers, 'forgot' to include a significant number of them in stats (only for them to be rediscovered once he left office) etc. Sure, that's different from Spicer overestimating the numbers at Trump's inauguration, Obama's underestimation of the number of civilians he killed was greater than Spicer's overestimation and was referring to people actually dying as opposed to turning up to be bored by politicians talking for hours.

What kind of depraved mind thinks "I like milkshake, I also like crisps and pretzels. Let's combine them..."? And what's the mysterious brownish layer 2/3 of the way down- going by the crisps and pretzels it's probably caramelised onion, or anchovies. The decadence of western civilisation summed up in one picture.

The Flash is too repetitive. At the moment it's probably the worst of the CW hero shows. I was prepared to be disappointed with The Expanse S2, since I liked S1 a lot and that usually means expectations get set too high. This time, I wasn't disappointed. Plus it's nice to see Ashur from Spartacus and Ula from Shortland Street again, though she's probably a bit young for the character she's playing.

"The bigger cause for the creation of ISIS is their holy book, historically speaking." IIRC it's actually Hadiths (basically non formalised stories about Muhammed and his motivations/ experiences) that ISIS tends to use rather than the Koran itself. If you're looking for a way to radicalise being able to mix and match is important- and by their nature you can do that with Hadiths far more easily than with the Koran itself; and they have distinctly relaxed rules about authenticity by their nature. They can use the Koran as well, but it tends to be in the same way that a radical christian will use Leviticus to justify hating gays, while snacking on prawns and a bacon sandwich and ignoring 'cast not the first stone'/ 'do unto others'/ 'mote in your neighbours eye' etc. (Also, I'm always amused when people talk of bombing Assad so refugees can go home. There are far more refugees in Syria than outside it, so all you'd get is all the pro Assad civilians running away from the salafi / wahhabi head choppers people like Graham/ McCain/ Hollande etc are so keen on supporting. Especially now that there's only one effective rebel group left which is mopping up all resistance- they've learnt well from Blackwater Xi Academi, Jabhat al Nusra gets forgotten after going through Jabhat Fatah al Sham to Ha'at Tahrir al-Sham. It would be an unmitigated disaster where none of the current refugees would want to return and you'd end up with more than there currently are fleeing from ISIS lite. You'd definitely get the 2 million alawites and similar number of christians/ druze/ shia fleeing, so that's 4 million extras for a start. The west is utterly incompetent at interventions)

I'd suspect at this point most would know him better as Tom Zarek in the remake rather than Apollo in the original. Probably more effective as a villain than any of the cylons, and if he and Gaeta had flushed all the self righteous gits out of an airlock in S4 I would have cheered.

There is no hard and fast dividing line between a corporate and a collective- cooperatives are a hybrid model between the two, as are syndicates. The most prominent cooperative here is even traded on the sharemarket, despite its core shareholdings being protected and limited solely to the farmers that produce milk. So is that socialist collectivism or not? It's ownership of the means of production by the producers (broadly) which makes it socialist, but it's also a capitalist entity consisting of multiple other capitalist entities trading on the sharemarket and primarily interested in maximising profit for its shareholders/ members. They also have collectivised risk (aggregated returns, bridging loans and other financial services) and own things like a rural supplies outlet to supply their members. I'd admit though that including all listed companies as being owned collectively is a bit facetious, it's correct but there's a more accurate term available- albeit, there are more accurate terms available for 'socialist' collectives as well. Wait, what? Two or more capitalists start a factory by putting together their capitals and abracadabra we have socialism? Bonkers. Nope, but you do have collective ownership. Collective ownership does not necessarily mean government ownership, socialism does not necessarily mean government ownership. You're just doctrinaire and using made up definitions that fit your world view. As for your summary, yes, in a country where everything is owned by the government, everything including companies would be owned by the government. That's what is known as a truism, a circular argument and a logical fallacy since you're using the proposition itself to prove said proposition. It relies on socialism meaning everything is owned by the government which is incorrect, since socialism does not mean that everything is owned by the government. That is what has been pointed out.

Easily. Publicly Listed Cimpanies are collectively owned and are not owned by the government, they're also at least theoretically little d democratic. Otherwise, Co-Ops, syndicates, Apoism etc etc, they're even properly democratic. Personally, I'd get rid of 'democratic' though, and go for the straight 2-axes political compass style set up of having left (socialist) and right (capitalist) with both of those being independent of the authoritarian (statist, undemocratic)/ anarchism (libertarianism, democratic) axis. OK, so corporations are actually socialist, I got it. Collective ownership generally means owned by society, not by a group of people. Nope, you're just using an 'alternative definition' of what collective ownership means. Collective ownership = "ownership by many individuals, for the benefit of said individuals". That is, at least theoretically, a company just as much as it is socialism. Collective ownership describes PLCs, it also describes full on communism, co-ops, trusts, governmental ownership, 'commons', syndicates and a whole bunch of other stuff that may or may not also be socialist. There's a specific term for when something is owned by society/ humanity as a whole- common ownership- or government owned when the government owns it. Collective just means owned by a collection of people, it's an umbrella term.

Blame it on the internet, now you can have people blame nazi = right wing on google and others will actually believe it because it fits their preconceived notions. Easily. Publicly Listed Cimpanies are collectively owned and are not owned by the government, they're also at least theoretically little d democratic. Otherwise, Co-Ops, syndicates, Apoism etc etc, they're even properly democratic. Personally, I'd get rid of 'democratic' though, and go for the straight 2-axes political compass style set up of having left (socialist) and right (capitalist) with both of those being independent of the authoritarian (statist, undemocratic)/ anarchism (libertarianism, democratic) axis.

PoE1 works fine on an e6400, which is even older and slower than an e7400. For that matter so does DivinityOS. Indeed, the OP's computer is positively modern compared to mine (e6400, 4GB RAM (but 32 bit motherboard so like 3.25 available), 1GB 5770). On the positive side, my 10 year old hard disk is in better condition than 99.99% of its contemporaries last time I checked. Waiting on (Ry)Zen to release, then I'll get a new computer, promise.

But yes, he pushed for the Autobahnen and VW projects Heh, and the VW project was basically a giant Ponzi scheme, since barely a single volk got his wagen out of all their contributions and the factories ended up producing tanks instead of cars. FTR, my copy of the Concise Oxford Dictionary, published 1976, defines fascism as "..system of extreme right wing or authoritarian views". Clearly corrupted by SJWs, 41 years ago.

Daily Mail has been leading example of how to write non-factual news since of its inception. Also when it comes to NY Times best selling list, I would say that I don't value lists which are base on secret methods, instead of open data, very high. I'd tend to say that the Daily Fail writes... quasi factually (guess alternative facts is the de rigeur term) rather than using outright lies, most of the time- or they occasionally just make everything up, names and events included. Writing outright lies about real people tends to get them sued, which in a country with libel laws as rigid as the UK's is not a good idea. Quasi factual meaning that if a refugee rescued a cat from a tree the headline would be "Refugee Seizes Good British Moggie from Natural Habitat- Is Commie Corbyn to Blame?". And they are, amazingly, better than The Sun and probably on a par with a couple of other papers, despite being appallingly bad. They should know fascists pretty well though since at one point they were Hitler and Mussolini's #1 fans. Always ironic, a blatantly nationalist jingoist right wing 'alternatively commie' xenophobic paper accusing others of being fascist. (They're also approaching the #1 news website worldwide, so their strategy works/ people are really dumb)

You have to add postage and packaging/ shipping to that as well.

Neither Malcolm Turnbull nor Bibi Netanyahu are a head of state. It's Queenie/ the Governor General (basically the same person, legally) and the President of Israel. And in both cases respect has to be reciprocal. Bibi respects nothing whatsoever and actively campaigned against Obama. As for Turnbull... Frankly, if Turnbull set out to 'shirtfront'* Trump as reported then Trump was perfectly within his rights to tell him to go asterisk himself. I don't know why we're bailing Australia out of their refugee problem (well I do, they threatened to escort refugee ships to NZ waters- we still should have told them to go lose another war to oversized turkeys), let alone why the US is. His predecessor set out to shirtfront Putin previous, and wasn't exactly successful there. Posturing in both cases, neither Turnbull nor Abbot are anywhere near as important as they think they are. It was also, in both cases, done primarily to bolster their domestic appeal by appearing tough. *from Aussie Rules football ~confront aggressively though that's fairly obvious from context.

Well yeah, everyone hates Bibi except for right wing (Israeli) voters. He's also not the best person to bring up with respect to corruption since he's actually under investigation for it right at this moment, plus he blatantly interfered in a US election before it was fashionable and for the losing candidate. No wonder Obama loathed him.

"," but he was never compared to Hitler "" "Talk about revisionist history. LMAO" Outside of a few opinion pieces the press didn't, though there was of course a lot of Bu$Hitler stuff on the internet. Bush was a dreadful president by most measures- he had the worst terrorist attack in the US on his watch, launched a war that killed thousands of US citizens and caused 100ks of other deaths, still rising, under false pretences plus ran the economy into the ground- and I don't think there's any way to avoid that conclusion. He also wasn't Hitler, indeed there's been precisely one Hitler and most comparisons using Hitler are lucky if they're merely facile; more often you can add 'lazy', 'asinine', 'hypocritical', 'gross hyperbole' and similar terms as well.

I don't really know why they'd bother putting a few MB of steam installer onto a dvd in a box either. I understand doing that with retail copies as that's how EB and any physical publisher makes their money (and they're often cheaper than digital copies too). I don't really 'get' collecting though, I tend to think that if you're buying a physical tier you want to open the box and get everything out rather than have it sitting on a shelf- otherwise it might as well be empty. I also wouldn't pay well above the odds +P/P to get a box, but plenty of collectors are willing to hence the popularity of the high $ physical/ collectors editions I guess.

Constructor is free to purchase for a day. Never heard of it personally, but it does have pretty good on site reviews and sounds interesting. Plus you can't beat free.

Actually there are more then 1750 physical tier backers. So that's slightly above 10% of all backers that are getting a not so physical copy of the game. I really hope they are going to change this, or at least let us get a proper game disc after the game has had it's initial patching done. I wasn't counting the higher tiers, whether that was fair or not I don't know, but I would expect many collectors not to open the box and those higher tiers do explicitly say they include a digital copy as opposed to the two lower tiers that say they don't. I don't think that 1750 or 300 really matters when it comes to the reasoning as to why it's just a steam installer though, either way they'd have to have separate installers etc for patches for people who have (1) already paid and (2) are likely to be considerably less than 1% of total sales; plus complaints about not having physical copies of expansions and the like. I'd suspect that process was a pain in the arse last time and they want to avoid it this time. *well, theoretically and per description. The physical tier descriptions are a bit of a mess, if not outright misleading, I agree. A steam installer with (presumably) a code is a digital copy of the game rather than a physical one, by any sensible measure. Ceterum censeo steam delendam esse.

There are less than 300 physical tier backers. Presumably they don't want to have to do a separate patching branch with separate installers for only a few hundred people and would prefer it to be handled through GOG or satan instead.

I wouldn't disagree with its intentions, but all sorts of laws get used differently from how they were intended- the UK threatening Iceland with anti terror measures when they wouldn't back up their banks, for example, or the legal jiggery pokery associated with Guantanamo that lets people be detained for 16 years. So long as it isn't permanent and has a plausible legal basis it is as valid as Obama's immigration EO. Well now, that's over dramatic. Neither refugees nor immigrants have a right to enter the US any more than I do, it's entirely a privilege offered at the whim of and dependent on the goodwill of the USA government. They can extend or withdraw that privilege whenever they want to, and can place whatever restrictions they like within the laws of the US. Slightly different from gangs of brown shirted thugs Krystallnachting people who were out and out german citizens many of whose families had been there for centuries. Those laws also didn't tend to name jews as they were aimed at pretty much everyone Hitler hated- gypsies, gays, conscientious objectors, socialists/ communists, slavs rather than solely at jews.

I'm not particularly hung up on the use of the word 'ban' itself, I do think that suspension is more accurate. Trump using ban doesn't mean much, especially on twitter where he has limited characters available; he's an off the cuff speaker anyway. Mostly though, the EO itself is very careful not to couch this as either a (permanent) ban but as a (temporary) suspension or as a religious thing- except insofar as it 'encourages' receiving persecuted religious minorities (practically, ME christians since I don't think it's aimed at, say, Rohinja from Burma or Shia from Saudi) yet it has generally been described as both by the media. When it doesn't get struck down as targeting religion there will be a lot of people reading WaPo/ NYT type articles who will be outraeged!!!!1!!! because they haven't read the EO and are going by what the media is saying. There's enough there to dislike without distortion.