Valsuelm

Yea... companies that are essentially government sponsored monopolies in most markets, like Comcast, Time Warner, or my gas/power company tend to have the same set types of incompetent asswipe characters servicing the public as the government does. My power company's customer service is generally atrocious, though Time Warner's isn't that bad in my experience once you get past their tier one incompetents (there are tricks to do this fairly quick) who actually have always at least been friendly even if they have little to no idea what they are talking about in my experience. That there even are government sponsored monopolies is also another indicator of tyranny.

Ed Schultz... The poster boy for what's wrong with the mainstream media news networks. He makes Bill O'Reilly look level headed, Sean Hannity look humble, Keith Olbermann look mentally well balanced, and Piers Morgan look intelligent. Fortunately the latter two are gone from 'news' for the time being, if only all the other aforementioned would follow suit.

You've had experiences with belligerent DMV peoples? Haha. I've only had experiences with mentally slow, physically slow, uncaring, remorseless, and generally all around super incompetent yet docile DMV peoples. It's funny for me to imagine the overweight chair weights that serve as my local DMV peoples getting belligerent. I think if they did bad stuff might happen to them and the government goons (police) would need to be called because there's generally enough anger and frustration amongst the public who are at the DMV already that if they were presented with a belligerent DMV person that DMV person might get pummeled by some of the crowd. That said, it's generally only government workers that ever get away with belligerence and abuse while on the job in our society (it's also generally only government workers that get away with sustained high levels incompetence and keep their job). For the most part in any other job dealing with the public a person would be fired for doing what that cop did. That government workers so often get away with such belligerence and abuse on the public is an indicator of tyranny. Oh.. and the DMV should be abolished. So much modern government evil can be traced to it. The cons outweigh the pros like an oil freighter outweighs a kitten.

You can stop trolling anytime. You're essentially saying that someone who orders a hamburger in a restaurant needs to tell the waiter ahead of time that they don't want deermeat in place of the beef, cow dung mixed in with it, or anything else other than what a hamburger is, and not the waiter's job to inform the customer that what's listed on the menu isn't exactly what one will get when one sinks their teeth into their order. If you're not trolling and you actually believe that, you're a bit messed in the head, as well as fundamentally dishonest. While I'm sure it's the dream of the some of the gender confused that everyone else be gender confused, that is not the case for most people, fortunately for the human race. Trying to imply the dishonest person is in the right over the duped person is evil. That said, the arguments presented for censoring the headstone are complete nonsense as there's nothing definitive in the limerick even says there was a transanything in that bed, or even that anyone lied, it's really quite ambiguous. It does not bode well for our society and culture that such nonsense is given an ear.

Some years back I would have recommended Spybot as a must have, and did for many people. Sadly, it's usefulness fell off a few years ago. I actually have it on my computer (it's free and doesn't take up a lot of space) and still run it every once in awhile. It hasn't found anything my AV or Malwarebytes hasn't found in years, but I keep it around just in case, though perhaps mostly out of habit at this point. A few years back I got a nasty virus (one of two I've ever gotten in ~25 years of internet/BBS use), that got through my AV (I was using Avast or AVG at the time (forget which for sure) and Spybot). After some research I found malwarebytes, and that detected and took care of my problem when the AV and Spybot didn't. Malwarebytes is free and I've been using it ever since. I picked up a lifetime license for the premium version a couple of years ago for $5 on newegg.com as part of a bundle with something. Sadly I don't think the lifetime licenses are offered anymore (looks like they became successful and then greedy like so many other companies), but the free version is just about as good (insofar as protection I'm pretty sure it is as good). Highly recommended.

Not really. Keep Kaspersky. If you're going to link an AV comparison guide, use a good one, not what you linked. Monthly reports change insofar as who is at the top in various categories. Overall NOD32 wins the 'false alarm' category as well as the impact on system resources catagory. The best overall AVs out there over the last few years in regards to protection vs other factors (like false alarms, impact on system resources, invasive/annoying notifications, etc) are (in alpha order) : Bitdefender, F-Secure, Kaspersky, and NOD32. They all offer very good protection and are about equal in this regard. Protection however isn't the only important factor in an AV for many people. If it was then I'd add AVG, Avast, and others to the list of good AVs (protection wise these are good AVs, but they fail in other factors). I've personally used all of these except Bitdefender (just haven't ever needed to as I became happy with NOD32). As someone who travels in the darker alleys of the web Kaspersky gave me far more false positives than F-Secure or NOD32 did. In fact, it was those false positives that lead me to get rid of it. I personally prefer NOD32 to F-Secure as I found F-Secure to lock down my computer a little more than I personally like (your average user probably wouldn't notice this though) as well as it's a usually quite a bit more expensive (at least in the U.S.; you can often find NOD32 or Kaspersky on sale for much less than F-Secure at newegg.com and other vendors). So again, if one finds false positives in Kaspersky to be an issue (as I once did), then I recommend NOD32. Also, no matter what AV you use, I recommend getting your hands on a copy of Malwarebytes as well, as even the best AVs sometimes fail to catch all the malware there is out there. With a good AV and Malwarebytes you've essentially got two good strong condoms on, and will be unlikely to ever catch any unwanted malware, save for the kind that you might actually give the ok to install (like some companies tool bar via another companies installer; but not everyone considers this malware). if you ever end up with crap you find hard to get off your computer and your OS, AV, or Malwarebytes doesn't do the job, then I recommend RevoUninstaller.

Being repulsed by something =/ a fear of it. Unless you're actually afraid of cross dressers or folks who like to mutilate their genitalia and perhaps replace it with the genitalia of the opposite sex via surgery then you have no such phobia. Repulsion often leads to phobia, though, and particularly to very negative and unwarranted behaviour towards the person they irrationally find "repulsive". You make an unintelligent assumption that whatever is repulsive to the person is irrational. For the most part being repulsed by anything or anyone is a subjective thing, as is being attracted to someone or something. It's rarely a matter of being rational or irrational. Is the proverbial pig in **** irrational for loving being there, is your average human irrational for not wanting to be there? No, it's entirely subjective. Also, being repulsed by something/someone generally just leads to not wanting to be around it/them and that's about it, super rarely does it lead to a phobia (that would generally be irrational), or 'unwarranted behavior' (what's warranted or not is often subjective itself). I don't know what your first language is, guessing not English, and maybe you're mistranslating repulsion, but absolutely it is irrational. If it's rational, it's not repulsion. If you're rationalizing it after the fact, as a "survival instinct" or whatever, that's rationalizing, rather than actually being rational. The poster above you understands this. My first language is indeed English, and I'm not 'mistranslating' anything. If you think being repulsed by something is necessarily irrational then you either have a misunderstanding of what it is to be repulsed, a misunderstanding of what it is to be irrational, or have a very limited imagination.

Being repulsed by something =/ a fear of it. Unless you're actually afraid of cross dressers or folks who like to mutilate their genitalia and perhaps replace it with the genitalia of the opposite sex via surgery then you have no such phobia. Repulsion often leads to phobia, though, and particularly to very negative and unwarranted behaviour towards the person they irrationally find "repulsive". You make an unintelligent assumption that whatever is repulsive to the person is irrational. For the most part being repulsed by anything or anyone is a subjective thing, as is being attracted to someone or something. It's rarely a matter of being rational or irrational. Is the proverbial pig in **** irrational for loving being there? Is your average human irrational for not wanting to be there? No, it's entirely subjective. Also, being repulsed by something/someone generally just leads to not wanting to be around it/them and that's about it, super rarely does it lead to a phobia (that would generally be irrational), or 'unwarranted behavior' (what's warranted or not is often subjective itself).

Being repulsed by something =/ a fear of it. Unless you're actually afraid of cross dressers or folks who like to mutilate their genitalia and perhaps replace it with the genitalia of the opposite sex via surgery then you have no such phobia.

I feel your character creation pain. If you're actually interested in reading up on all the madness, here's the primary thread on the subject: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/73243-memorials-problem/

Please refrain from combining threads. Conversations, even if related, often make little sense when this is done. Certainly that is the case with this thread. Moderation tip that you and most of the other moderators desperately need to take to heart: The less moderation the better.

Over my and a lot of other people's dead bodies would that ever happen.

NOD32 One of the best AVs out there at detecting things, and nowhere near the number of false alarms as Kaspersky and many others.

I grew thinking as many people on this forum do. That the cops were the good guys. That they only arrested, shot, bothered, etc 'bad people'; 'criminals', with super few exceptions (I had seen Serpico and the like, and had heard some stories of bad cops but I didn't really believe them (as so many do not, and I'm sure that will read this and not)). Then I took a field trip to NYC my senior year of high school and had my first bad experience with a cop that started me questioning the idea that the police were the good guys. If that had been my only bad experience with the police, I would have probably thought the cops were the good guys a lot longer than I did. But it wasn't. I've since had similar experiences as the the Uber driver in NYC, in New Jersey (not sure the town), in my home town, in the next city over (where I even had a cop pull a gun on me), in the city I went to college in, and from the NY State Troopers on a highway. What this cop did, is normal. The likelihood of something happening to him as a result of this incident is near nil, and if anything does it will be a slap on the wrist for public relations sake. Corruption and abuse is the rule with NYC police, not the exception. Are all cops like this? Definitely not. I've met some good ones (or at least they were good (as in treating me respectfully) while I was talking to them). But a real lot of them are not. (I've also personally witnessed a cop mistreating someone else that treated me well as the cop perceived the other person to have less money than myself (less likely to hire a good lawyer; cops abuse the poor more than anyone else because they generally get away with it). Most cops are thugs, and that's the truth. For the most part the only ones doing any good are the detectives, not the revenue raising harassers that wear blue. And that's not to say some detectives aren't corrupt ****s either, I personally know some that are. But they generally aren't harassing as many people as often as the boys in blue. It's honestly almost laughable to me that some people are surprised by this behavior, especially in light of all the police abuse videos that have been circulating the world these last few years. I guess cell phone cameras are good for one thing: highlighting the police abuse and misconduct that a lot of people have known about for years, yet a large portion of the populace is conditioned by decades of radio, TV, and movies to think the cops are the good guys.... so even when presented with evidence they either pretend they aren't seeing what they are, or pretend that it's the exception to the rule.

Startpage is just google through a proxy. I'd only use it if you actually want google results. I recommend ixquick or duckduckgo as better alternatives to google. Of course there's other alternatives (that track you near as much or as much as google does though) such as Yahoo, Bing, Ask, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=088iKjUnRys

Well sometimes punitive legal steps are necessary to get people to do the right thing, so yes you are right. This bill would have prevented businesses and people from being sued if they had refused to serve members of the LGBT community. And I'm not even talking about marriage or churches which we understand are different, I am talking about commercial entities. So of course this would cause frustration and offense. So yes this bill needs to be amended so people can't use the law to discriminate ..that's the whole point That's called tyranny. It's not necessary. It's evil. What you think is a good idea is no more a good idea than a law that says a man can't stick his weewee in another man's bunghole, even if both men are cool with it.

As president I'd ban Ryan Reynolds from being in movies. My constitution has been buffed to 18. I can implement whatever I want. You got that backwards. It's been dumped to below even 3. The most successful evil tyrants have doublespeak come naturally to them, so you're well on your way.

Good thing the President has no such constitutional powers to implement such a thing. Oh wait.... lack of legal constitutional authority hasn't stopped Presidents in the past, especially in recent times. Wo...

Makes a change though from the great US of A to always appear to think that nothing exists outside of their borders. We in the EU have been shafted or years and continue to be so regarding games versions and release dates. Think how we have felt for years. I really have no sympathy if you're referring to games or any other product produced in the US or anywhere else outside of whatever nation you live in, especially when you cop such an attitude. Whatever the product, making it available first in the nation in which it is produced it what's generally done, for all sorts of good reasons.

Eh... I wouldn't be so sure. Of all the folks in the field right now, I think he probably has the best shot. Of course it's quite early, and there's a lot that remains to be seen.

There's something fundamentally wrong with the fact that a game developed and produced in the U.S. is not available for retail purchase in the U.S., yet is in Europe. This likely has something to do with the fact that Obsidian contracted with a European company to publish the game. A move that I'm more and more thinking was bigtime fail.