I definitely agree with you that Guantanamo is wrong. The difference, however, is that Guantanamo is filled with people captured overseas who are believed to somehow be connected with terrorism for reasons other than "they're Arabs." The Japanese internment camps were filled with Americans whose only connection to the enemy at the time was "they're Japanese". That doesn't make Guantanamo more ok than the internment camps, but it does make them different. Stop claiming they're the same.

I really doubt it. High school started at 7:25 in the morning. I take long showers (longer when I'm trying to wake up) and made it a habit to eat breakfast so I didn't starve before lunch at noon. The bus arrived at around 6:40 every day. This all meant that I had to get up at 5:45 for school. My grades definitely suffered for it, and I'm certain that if I had to get up any earlier I would have just stopped going altogether.

Same with Torchlight. The only way it's a demo is that they're using the same engine and some of the same assets to build an MMO. The game itself is a complete (and incredibly fun) Diablo clone.

Well at least Hyrule's safe.

People playing roguelikes :)

Depends on the gamer. I'm a mouse-and-keyboard guy myself, but I know a lot of people who I'd qualify as hardcore who prefer gamepads. And when it comes to a less competitive game (say, a good adventure or role-playing game) I do prefer gamepads.

I can't see either Sony or Microsoft succeeding, regardless of the quality of their actual products. The problem is that the "hardcore" gamers, the ones who flock to the Playstation and Xbox, don't want a motion controller. They're content to play games with a gamepad. Meanwhile, the more "casual" gamers have already gone with the Wii. Anybody looking into buying a new system with motion controls will see that the Wii is $200 while the PS3/360 are ~$300 plus the cost of the motion controllers.

This has nothing to do with the quality of the products (I suspect Natal's going to suck hard, though the feedback from Move seems to be pretty good) and everything to do with what people want. If Sony or Microsoft released a new, cheaper console with a motion controller packed in, I could see that being successful. As it stands, I can't see too many people dropping $100 to play LittleBigPlanet with a motion controller.

I don't think he was advocating a system more like ours. Rather, a truly communist society has no government, since then the government officials wouldn't be equal (or what government there would be would simply be police force/courts/army, nothing else).

How are you not modded troll? Do you really believe that everyone who's a member of a HOA is racist?

Try telling your wife sometime that you've slept with less than seven other women since you got married. That'll go over real well.

Sorry to hear about your boyhood farmyard accident.

Indeed. It seems like many of the people who complain about the educational system on here don't know what they're talking about. I'm currently 20 and a sophomore in college. My school is certainly not dumbed down, at least not for honors engineering students such as myself. Admittedly, my high school was a joke, but comments like the GP's are, in my experience, incredibly ignorant.

I'd argue that there are two reasons people have children, both of which fulfill biological needs. The first is that we're programmed to an extent to be parents, and as a result many people feel they need to have children at some point in their lives (the "biological clock" theory). The second is that sex is fun, and babies just happen to be byproducts. Since it fulfills these two needs, people keep having kids. Unfortunately, there's no needs to be filled by going to another planet (that I'm aware of at least) so I tend to agree with the GP.

Oh, huh, I must have missed the announcement that the Apple tablet wasn't just a rumor but actually a real thing. Odd, normally I'm on top of things like that. Oh well.

While I'd like to agree with you, I'm not sure I can. This raises the following question: was the reason that parts of Avatar looked unrealistic the fault of the technology, or the fault that we couldn't suspend disbelief to the point of believing in tall blue aliens riding on miniature pterodactyls?