Well in many European countries, you can get a useless liberal arts degree for free...

The temperature of the interstellar medium is it's temperature, there is no difference temperature for "space". The questions is at the astounding low density, does it matter that there are a few high energy particles. Same is with space craft, especially maned ones, have more of a problem of overheating. Thermodynamic become counter intuitive when operating in a near vacuum.

I agree with GP, I am also old fashioned and don't like politics in my entertainment and entertainment in my politics. I am somewhat politically active, but at the end of the day I just want to unwind and when people overtly interject their agenda in my entertainment, I get pissed of and watch / do something else.

Further I am not sure if what the player did had any operational value. It got Blizzard put into the hot spot and a short buzz, but If you where not aware of the mess that is the current HK situation, you would not start to care now. So this situation did not really increase the awareness world wide and did not persuade anyone on the HK / China debate to change their mind. And getting Blizzard banned in China via Mei... wow this will really change the world...

Valve get 2 tries in France to appeal, but only if the appeals court believes that there are grounds for an appeal. They can, without a hearing confirm the judgement. My lay person interpretation is that this case is cut and dry, at least in the French interpretation of the law. Valve would need to substantiate their "it's a subscription" point, which does not look good.

After that, since this refers to a EU law, they can start proceedings at the European court of justice and claim France has unfairly judged them.

Also nice tidbit, because EU laws are to be applied equally in all of the EU, this will open the option a EU citizen in any other country to sue them and referring to the French case. This would then allow the court to "just" establish equivalency and pass a summery judgement. And if they don't come to the same conclusion, it's again to the European court of justice pass a final verdict.

They can try the second hand market place, which might not be such a bad thing, for steam, but probably not the game publishers. This would kind of solve the situation where you don't know anybody that would want to buy the game. If Steam does not do it, somebody will.

But Steam needs to offer a "transfer license to xyz" feature or it will not be compliant. The transfer of games can be part of a non monetary transaction.

For starters, like with physical games, the transfer of license (sale) of the game does not mean transfer of account. The buyer can only create a new account, as if it was a new license. Granted, there may be some technical hurdles, where the license id is the account id, but that should be a fixable problem.

Second Like any sale, Steam can limit the sale to a fixed amount of units per person. This is kind of already an issue, because what prevents someone of buying a large amount of gift codes?

And finally, basic account security is already required, since what prevents someone to hack you account and buy gift codes with your saved payment method? I think undoing a transferred game license is way less of an issue than working through CC charge-backs, with the potential loss of credit score.

Please never quote the 97% consensus (even by analogy), it just makes you and climate science in general look bad.

First the original 97% study was conducted with a small sample size of postgraduate students and faculty. Granted, a number later studies tried to massage something like 97%, because it was getting embarrassing.

Second, consensus in science means nothing. There where a large number of situations where scientific consensus existed and are not known to have been wrong. (Einsteins relativity -> matter and energy are different things, quantum mechanics -> "God does not play dice.", the food pyramid -> the reason for a sharp increase in obesity)

Third, the agreement is that climate change is happening and that it is primarily caused by humans. The first claim, you will hardly find anybody sane that will claim that is wrong. The second claim, is mildly more under scrutiny, but most skeptics I know are more along the line of "yes it's human, but it's no big deal" or such.

Pleas for everybody that ties to advance the discussion on climate science stop using an argument that can be shot down so easily.

It's also a bit about maintaining brand appearance. The Audi e-tron sounds kind of cool. As someone put it, "like a spaceship". There went allot of effort in designing that sound.

Although I agree with you on their nonsense, you might want to read up on the singular they: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The use of the singular they fell out for frequent use only in the late 20th century. Which does not preclude a newfound use. I will use they anytime over Xe. Especially if the Gender can not be known.

Maybe they did the cost benefit analysis and came to the conclusion, that you can just make a screen shot and share that... so why bother with more layer of obfuscation and "protection".

The Food Pyramid

I am looking at the same chart as you are and can simply not see the pattern. Everybody, except the Clinton administration increased deficit and the Obama administration makes up for Reagan and the two Bushes combined. So I don't see your point. One democrat President reduced deficit and that was his key campaign promise. In addition had the health care reform not failed, that promise would have been out of the door.

Looks like one, a bit, if you squint...

Same here, most of the vegan/vegetarian stuff is either wrapped or layred on aluminum, not because of contamination, just so it worn't burn...

Why this is not new. Police always could ask for something and if you agree to hand it over, no need for a warrant. The only thing that changes is that now every body and their dog has 24/7 camera surveillance.