213374U

Guilty as charged, Your Honor! Yeah, mocking people based on appearance is quite fun, if not always "safe". You should try it sometime, maybe when you stop taking yourself so seriously and lording over peeps. (; Thing is, most members of the Ugly Club don't go around shooting up random public servants and, you know, cheating at online games (!), so spare me. Prickface here deserves no respect from me.

Okay, so like, I think I might have a hypothesis here: Probably being an angry crank with terrible grammar doesn't help either. Yeah, life can be cruel like that. I mean, I'm no Adonis... but I do have eyebrows. Good thing that 99% of all angry basement-dwelling virgins don't have what it takes to turn their online fantasies into actual deeds, otherwise we'd be in some serious ****. Also: Tea Party theories about how this was a leftist loony trying to make them look bad are fun stuff.

I'll see your "real change" and raise you "the more things change, the more they stay the same".

That is fantastic. Thank you for posting it, my entire outlook on mankind has brightened Please tell me you're being sarcastic. Please. So this one obviously staged digital feel-good show somehow changes everything? From the rampant discrimination with regards to access to civil service Copts face in Egypt to Pakistan's efforts towards getting "blasphemy" to be criminalised worldwide? From cartoon-motivated murder to Turkey's ruling party's efforts to undermine secularism in the country? All of that and so much more, automagically swept under the rug because Mubarak's whelps led a mock unity demonstration. Quaint how "non-partisan" (even if laudably "fighting radical right-wing agenda") media are so taken in by empty words and PR fluff. Ah, my bad. This must be Change.

We don't care if you're going through a mid-30s crisis or just can't get it up anymore, chump. This ain't your therapy group. Try Facebook, maybe? (;

tl;dr Three short paragraphs is "too long" a read for you? Really? Or were you just trying to be cool again by posting something you saw on Facebook but actually have no idea what it means? edit: I'm thinking that the fact that you think that reading half a page is too much effort explains a lot, so thanks. I couldn't ever ridicule you nearly as well as you do that yourself. Good job!

If you think that right-wing = nazi, you either don't know what right-wing means, or don't know who the nazis were. Either way, you are only making it evident that your bigotry is only surpassed by your ignorance. Go read more on the Nazis and their policies. No, not on Facebook. If you can't conceive a "left-wing" extremist ethno-nationalist political movement, then I'm afraid you aren't simply lacking imagination and intelligence, no -- you are also terribly uninformed. Go read on the Basque independence movement, and delight yourself in their mind-boggling attempts to assert an ethnically-rooted self-determination right based on... a greater presence of RH- in "true" Basques, compared to the rest of the population. That's right up there with phrenology, if you ask me. But then, those are not the only ways in which you've demonstrated your dimwittedness, no. You are also quite easily taken in by tendentious interpretations of statistics. Six attacks may mean very little or quite a lot depending on how many people are killed. This is relevant in the sense that "traditional" separatist and right/left wing extremist attacks are usually in a much smaller scale than Islamic terrorist attacks. For reference, the worst attack perpetrated by Basque terrorists killed 21 in a mall in Barcelona, in 1987. The 2004 Madrid attacks killed 191. The most vicious (R)IRA action recorded killed 29 in Omagh, in 1998, in contraposition to the 270 dead from the Pan Am 747 jet blown out of the sky in 1988. If you don't want to count that as Islamic terrorism, then the 2005 London rush hour bus bombs still ranks higher than anything done by domestic terrorists, at 52 victims. So yes, Islamic terrorism is, in fact, worse than the other sorts. This is by far the best part of your post. When presented with data that doesn't support your preconceptions and monochrome vision of the world, then the automatic conclusion is that the data must be wrong. That's some really sophisticated reasoning, chum. You were right, a badly hidden agenda is not behind your inane comments -- you obviously aren't smart enough to have one. You are nothing more than a loud-mouthed tool.

Funny, because the EUROPOL report does not specify a political colour for attacks categorised as "Separatist" - you'd know this if you had actually read the reports, instead of regurgitating something you read on the net's premier news outlet: Facebook. Funny, too, that it would be you to make such a "mistake". I know, I know; you were betrayed by your subconscious, is all - no hard feelings. But I think it's necessary to clarify a few facts. For starters, the overwhelming majority of such attacks were carried out in France or Spain. And here's a little tidbit you may find interesting: the Basque and Corsican independence movements to which the armed clandestine groups responsible for those attacks are linked (or outright belong) are, guess what, left-wing. In the case of the Basque separatists, which are responsible for most, if not all attacks which resulted in deaths, they have gone so far as calling themselves "Communist Party of the Basque Lands", in a thankfully failed attempt to sidestep a previous ban to stand for election at the municipal level. Not that it matters though, as for these thugs, "ideology" is just an excuse to keep running their criminal syndicates. Left or right, they will crush you if they can and you are in their way. I was just thinking how remarkable it is that ignorant comments have a way of coming back to bite you in the ass, don't you agree?

I hadn't heard anything about this. When was that? Do you have a link?

And just because I love to break the board's quote limit: Not quite. Maybe, maybe not. The EC actions didn't destroy MS, IE or their ability to compete. And also, you are apparently forgetting that Steamworks implementation does not necessarily mean Steam distribution, exclusive or otherwise, so the chances of an anti-trust package being passed against Valve affecting the viability of Steamworks and its business model are reduced even more.

Uh, no. If "opportunities to acquire the software in other ways still exist" but those opportunities still force you to deal with Steam... they don't really exist at all. Also, don't throw words like "irrelevant" around without being completely certain of their meaning. Being compared to Vol is not something to be proud of, in any case. Is there a point to this rambling, or...? I posted some of the obvious advantages for devs that the Steam-Steamworks combo offers. Because I'm not an inside source, you suggest that whatever I say is baseless and therefore not worth rebutting ("assumptions"). Please, stop with these flagrant sophisms and address my points instead of attacking my credibility. Uh, no. If anything, that was Mamoulian confusing Steam and Steamworks... and assuming that Mafia 2 would be Steam exclusive, which is false (though I did notice that you didn't bother to clear it up, either). However, I felt it was sufficiently clear he was referring to Steam as a distribution and control service and not Steamworks as an API -- because otherwise the anti-monopoly comment makes no sense (even if in fact almost all games using Steamworks work through Steam). But hey, obfuscating the point does work sometimes, right? I know it forced me to read a few pages back just to understand what the **** you were talking about. Congrats, you made me waste five minutes. Yay you. No, it's a special case for the reasons listed. Instead of trying to pick every little statement apart could you, you know, address the actual reasoning? Which is factually true. There are no alternatives to Steam for some games. Which is what I said. No, you made an invalid comparison, and I simply pointed out the reasons why it is invalid. It's called a rebuttal -- get used to it, this is how discussions work. On the other hand, misrepresenting the opponent and/or their points and then attacking the misrepresentation you built yourself is not a rebuttal, it's a textbook example of a straw man. Yeah, that's pretty cool and I'm really glad for you... but why don't you go back a few posts and answer the question of the justification for the mandatory installation of a software that is not necessary for the game to work or to protect IP rights? It is, as you admitted yourself, an opt-in service. This is the central issue we are discussing (no, really), and not why your small but lovely games dealer around the corner doesn't stock Eye of the Beholder anymore. No. Note that I haven't advocated the anti-trust measures taken against MS. There was a thread about it here, in Skeeter's I think, look it up. I felt it was unfair and retarded and I still do. Which means I think a similar action against Valve wouldn't be warranted. However, that doesn't stop me from despising Steam, and the fact that some games demand its use. All I want is control over the **** that's installed on my computer, control over the **** I pay a license for, and companies not infringing my rights so their profits are increased. If that hurts the options of developers, well, too bad. You know, I was thinking why this statement is so difficult to disprove in an absolute sense. And I reached the conclusion that it's because it's neither a reasoning nor a statement of facts; it's just an opinion. Digital distribution is a subset or segment of the gaming market, yes? Valve does hold a dominant position over this subset, yes? So, the question of whether it's relevant to examine if Valve does hold a dominant position over this segment is one of perspective, yes? However, a similar argument could be made that OS are a subset of "software", and therefore, it's irrelevant to look simply at OS when trying to establish whether MS was trying to establish a monopoly. O-kay. This is especially precious. Does this means we are to talk at length about your political views or Mom and Pop's dealer, because you happened to mention them to support your arguments in the course of the discussion? The point is that it's particularly obvious that those games don't need Steam to work or be delivered to the customer -- it's being installed for other reasons. This was brought up to support my stance on Valve's competition tactics and how Steam implementation is a product of those.

Oh please. We are specifically discussing digital distribution, not the gaming market in general. And I think that handling 70% of the deals in any market or venue does, in fact, constitute a dominant market position. http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=26158 Oh, but I don't need to ask them, it's plain for anyone to see. Steamworks is, after all, free (doesn't this sound familiar? At all?). And then there's also the other chief advantage: infringing on consumer rights, as Steam prevents second-hand sales. You can also use Steamworks but not Steam itself... only nobody seems to do this. I wonder why? What are we discussing, again? The effectiveness of Valve's business tactics, or their legitimacy? True. But GOG specializes in games that are no longer available through normal means, as you admit yourself. It's a special case, and for the games in GOG's catalog the "exclusivity" arises from the fact that they are rescuing games that the original publishers are no longer interested in keeping available. And there's also the fact that the way they provide the service is 100% less obtrusive.

Perhaps, but that's a moot point -- it makes no sense to enact anti-trust measures against somebody that isn't in a postion to establish a monopoly. MS was in a dominant market position... much like Valve is now. Or maybe it's appealing to them because it already has a larger market share than any other DD platform? Any reasons you present why devs might like it better are just speculation, unless you can show they really offer better deals to developers. It's cool how you cherry-picked the part of my post that was convenient for you to make your point, disregarded the part where I said that there are no alternatives to Steam for some games, and then went on to admit that Steam is not only DRM but essentially opt-in -- as in non-essential for the actual functioning of the game or the protection of IP rights. So the justification for it's exclusivity and mandatory use is...?

The nuclear fusion inside the star stops when the core is iron, because after this it is no longer energy effective: Binding energy curve First hydrogen is fused to helium, then helium to carbon, then carbon to oxygen, then oxygen to silicon, and silicon to iron. That is the moment where the star cannot longer withstand its gravitational collapse and becomes either a white dwarf, a neutron star or black hole depending on its mass. Not quite, it'll keep fusing but it'll loose energy due to the fusion. Otherwise we wouldn't find elements higher than iron on the table occurring naturally in the environment. That fusion is what drains the energy to leave behind the less energy filled neutron star.It was my understanding that heavier elements weren't created through "regular" fusion at the star's core, but rather as a consequence of the extreme pressures the material is subjected to during the *BANG!* phase of the supernova.

Actually, these things shouldn't even exist, according to current stellar development models anyway. As a star accrues gas, outwards radiation pressure caused by fusion at the core prevents the star from gaining more and more mass... or so the theory goes, anyway. Wolf-Rayet stars lose mass rapidly this way, although not quite as fast as this one should. There is supposedly a limit where outwards pressure and gravitational force even out, capping the upper mass for stars. A limit that just got revised by a factor of about 2. And yeah, supermassive stars explode leaving not even a black hole behind. Again, in theory...

On the other hand, it was perfectly possible and virtually hassle-free to download and use any other browser if the user so desired -- something you can't do with Steam. And once you are forced to deal with steam by virtue of having purchased one game that uses it, Steam will be favored over other DD platforms, effectively "queuing people to overlook competitor" DD setups. And no, while it may be more convenient for people to use Microsoft OS, it's by no means "essential". As I said, it's no monopoly. But I don't think it's playing fair either, and the arguments I've heard so far have done nothing to persuade me otherwise.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/eso-...red-100721.html Estimates point at a mass at birth of ~320 solar masses. Observation once again trumps theoretical predictions.

Yes, painting Steam as a monopoly is a bit of a stretch. However, forcing retail copies of non-Valve games to install and work through steam isn't too far from ye olde MS practice of shipping IE bundled with Windows, and that got shot down by the EC, on grounds that it was unfair competition. Unfair competition needn't imply monopolistic tactics either, but it's still bad form.

Sorry to hear it didn't work. The ???? thing is odd, because you are using #0 for languages, which is English, right? Where does Korean come into play here? English BG2, English patches, English mods, no? WeiDU crashing the DOS prompt program is really, really weird.

Apparently I don't have permission to upload attachments anymore. Yay me. PM me your email and I can send you the whole package if you want. Btw, what's your install route? IIRC, problems may arise if stuff is installed in Program Files... which may explain all the weirdness in your WeiDU log.

Dispel arrows are SO cheap. There's no save or caster level check for the dispel -- they just kill all magic in one shot. 20 of those should be enough for the whole game. Useless against a well prepared mage, maybe, but deadly against fighter types AND especially divine casters. What's exactly the problem with BG2Tweaks? I can upload my tp2 but I think it's an old version and there's no guarantee it would work for you. Usually install errors are patch-related. Have you checked if there's a hotfix? edit: just took a look at your WeiDU log, and there's a lot of ???? and profit over there. My guess would be that a previous install went wrong and BG2Tweaks attempts to run a check on what's already installed is having problems with that...

Nah, there's no way this could be viewed as a monopoly. It's still annoying as ****, though. Duh! Yeah, now they only need to spend another bunch of millions on a study to verify their operating assumption that console gamers will get nasty rashes if they need to plug a keyboard and mouse to up their game in shooters.

You'll all change your tune when the hordes of teenage elite asian haxors steal all of your personal data in under two minutes, and then proceed to empty your bank account! It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you! *ahem* Just wrapped up my ToB game. SCSII AI + Ascension Melissan = fun times. Pretty crazy too that the only really, really dangerous enemy in that battle is none other than Illasera. I had to Timestop-Mislead-Backstab her right off the bat just to get a shot at winning. Pretty satisfying battle overall. They just don't make 'em like this anymore. Wait, since I'm playing Gaider's version of what it should have been, I guess they never really made 'em like this...

<3 you guys

Do I have your permission to use that? Ah, I'm going to anyway. Re mistakes: there's only one way of learning about life in general and human relations in particular, and that's the hard way. So in fact my advice would be "kids, don't be like your uncle #s. Better to crash and burn than spend nights wondering how things might have turned out". Or maybe I just plain old suck.