metadigital

@Lonewolf: Right, see how much easier that is to read, for us out here?

The UT3 engine will utilize it (and that means just about every game, because nearly every current commercial game uses the current Unreal Tournament 2 Engine). wikipedia

Nah, it's just used as an impotent (yet strangley effective) geopolitical pressure-release used by the countries of "Europe" to demonstrate their "friends" and "foes" (all the Nordic nations vote for their neighbours, all the Baltic states vote for each other, all the Balkan states vote along religio-alliance lines, all of the (other) former Soviet nations vote for each other, etc ...). A good act (well, let's say the best of the awful bunch) will normally score well; other than that all the voting is done on partisan lines. (This is the source of much mirth for Sir Terry Wogan, and why he is persona non grata at these events.) This is also why Britain (unless they have the best act) come dead last. (They scored nil point after Blair invaded Iraq, two years ago.)

Yes, I can see how that is equally as serious as hearing voices in your head telling you to take a bread knife and stab that random pregnant woman walking down the street. Oh, but it's serious because it's YOUR problem! Right. Because egoists devoid of empathy believe that all their problems are more important than everyone elses ...

It's just Petrol Futures for the small investor (see Derivatives). Bear in mind that the futures market is like roulette on crack: that's what brought Bearings Bank down, and it can cost exponential amounts of money compared to the time gambled. For example, it would be better to keep the $2 petrol for much later. Petrol isn't going to go down in price (long term trend), so keeping that for later, when petrol climbs over $6, will help dollar-cost-average the future petrol.

But ... aren't those two little dollies in your sig related to you? It's pretty obvious why the Chinese have a population problem, when their children are living dollies and almost fatally cute.

Cruel and unusual gruel?

Lonewolf, read Walsingham and ~Di's posts. What he said. ^^ There hasn't been anything like that in this thread so far, but I've read lots of posts where people have done exactly what Walsingham describes, not only ridicule and insult those who have chosen to serve their country militarily, but also try to portray themselves as more courageous, even saintly, because they refuse to do so. Makes me nuts when I see stuff like that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If this still doesn't make it plain enough for you (whether you're suffering from poor elucidation skills or not); some of what you are saying is patently self-contradictory. Let me illustrate: (Not exactly, but...) Bingo #1 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You don't want to put yourself in harm's way (it's "crazy" man). Not condescending (I can tell that is your New Favourite Word), simply using laconic humour to point out the hypocrisy latent in his post. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How am I being hypocritical? If I want to avoid death for what I deem to be a pointless war, why am I the bad guy when somebody else decides they want to go fight in my place? Good on them. They see a reason, so let them fight for it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bingo #2 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yet you are happy for others to do so on your behalf, so that you might enjoy their sacrifices. (Hint: that's the hypocrisy.) Then, when Numbers called you on it (which I would have done, if I were here), you tried and failed to wriggle out of it, flinging insults at him. Are you considering a future in firefighting? If not, that's hypocritical of you to say. I have no problem with people saying there's absolutely nothing in the world that they find worth dying for, mind you. As a matter of fact, I'm one of them, and I'm joining the military after summer. I do find it funny when people delude themselves, though. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have to be a firefighter to run into a burning building when a woman's screaming about her baby still being inside? Don't need a uniform for that. You do, however, need a degree in idiocy. And there's a lot I'd die for, just not this particular thing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> To clarify: you are suggesting that you would put yourself in harm's way for something worthwhile, e.g. saving a baby from a house fire, yet you aren't backing up that comment with action (you aren't volunteering for fire service). So what are the "lot" you'd die for, because you haven't volunteered a single one (apart from a fantasy accident).

Nearly. M$ has always used its combined OS and desktop application hegemony to cajole corporates and squeeze out the competition. There are alternatives to Exchange-Outlook (IBM Lotus Domino, for example, which is much cheaper per seat, AND provides workgroup functionality that M$ is STILL playing catch-up to, nearly twenty years after Notes was released). Also, as well as M$ making some borderline anti-competitive practices (e.g. adding unwanted new "features" to Word and Excel document standards, that coincidentally are incompatible with the previous versions ... and competitors' products), and providing cheaper access to their own desktop applications, for customers who buy their OS, by making an "Office" suite that effectively sold for the same amount as a spreadsheet like Lotus 1-2-3, database like Borland Paradox, or a wordprocessor like WordPerfect, on their own. The main issue with a "corporate desktop" is support. M$ have (wisely) invested HUGE amounts into their supporting human resources' structure, so there exists an army of certified consultants who are readily available for corporates to keep their IT effective. Novell have started to address this; they have their own desktop application suite, and their own corporate distribution of Linux, which includes support. However, a LOT of developing nations

Mufti will be the death of militia!

1. It ended the war sooner. 2. I don't understand why you think three days in insufficient for Hirohito and his laughing boys to realise "O crap, we can't win!".

"DirectX" is a M$ standard. OpenGL is not.

They were the aggressors, they were being asked to capitulate to surrender (n.b. NOT ANNIHILATION, merely a ceasation of hostilities). And it wasn't like Japan was winning, either: they had been steadily losing since the Battle of Midway, and all that was up for debate was whether the Allies would have to invade the Japanese mainland.

You should become a tester: you have the aptitude and attitude already. ^_^

Not condescending (I can tell that is your New Favourite Word), simply using laconic humour to point out the hypocrisy latent in his post.

Dual boot.

Linux.

You're the moderator here. If you think he's breaking the board rules, give him a warning. Much more effective than writing an accusation within a spoiler tag, something which makes your own post look like trolling too. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's a polite, official public (as in care in the community) warning. *** END OF MODERATION DISCUSSION *** Thank you.

When did they add "harass the members" to the description? And yes; the game is broken on several ways; but the rest is just too good to be bothered with it... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was merely making an obsevation that YOU seem to be having a disproportionate number of issues with Oblivion; so much so that logic behooves us to conclude that the problem is not with the game, but with your setup, or something that you are specifically doing (or not doing properly). The humour was an added bonus.

The marketing was not very ... err ... stellar, either ... :D

Nice quotation from Bradley, though, Baley.

So you are saying that one of the greatest genrals of US history, Patton, is wrong. Interesting. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You're taking a direct quote from Patton's address to his troops (hint: individuals fighting the conflict) and applying them to countries. Hmmm, I wonder why that doesn't make sense ...?

That's called living in denial.

And that led to the US being delayed entering WW1, while they trained up sufficient recruits for the battle. Hence policy was changed to facilitate a standing army ... then it was thought better to be able to conduct war in two different theatres, simultaneously.