Is it not obvious to everybody that this show is all being orchestrated to drum up support for censorship?

Other than testing, can you tell me why a blockchain would be used in house, in preference to just using a database system?

Same here. They are still creating a very useful site but it is not fun to participate when it is run by people who insist that the word yogurt has an H and that there's no reason to put MPAA ratings in film articles.

I think it would be super cool if the sun were highest overhead at noon, but thanks to daylight savings time, the sun's highest point seems to be about 1:30 PM most of the year where I live.

"Truth is the law allows migrants to present themselves at our borders & seek asylum" - lawyer Lee Merritt

And what about the impact on human sleep quality?

...that's no moon?

There's not enough explanation here for me to understand what is going on. It sounds like a bunch of old guys are upset that kids are playing video games, so to protest they have disrupted a spectator sport? Except one of the protest groups is named the "young" boys, so I dunno?

Maybe explain more specifically what esports is? Is it video game versions of sports? And how does it affect these protestors - or does it actually affect these protestors? What are they upset about? What change do they desire?

Give me enough information that I can judge whether their protest is even appropriate. It sounds like their idea is that it's bad for kids to play video games and they should do healthier things like sports, except these are sports spectators not sports participants, so there's an irony here in their protest they may not realize. And it sounds like maybe they should've disrupted an esports/video game tournament rather than their own game that they think is superior to video games? Or is the game somehow connected to esports?

Really? There wasn't a huge lawsuit about this?

Right. I'm not okay with copyright. Obviously limited copyright is better than perpetual copyright.

There's nothing here that justifies DRM or copyright. They aren't justifiable.

And even more importantly, why isn't this a purely academic matter? Why do busybodies get to decide that somebody's game is too gambly or their drink is too alcoholy or whatever and make them stop? I think such busybodies should be shown the door of society and allowed to debate those things on their own without forcing their religion on the rest of the world.

Or they could ignore each other until they go away?

I had a similar experience last year on a conference call when I made a comment about our team recording knowledge in case one of our devs was hit by a bus. That's a pretty common remark made in some development circles. But the minute the call was over I suddenly recalled that our lead developer's father had been killed by being hit by a car, just a couple months earlier. I felt terrible, mentioned it quietly to some of the people present on site with me (our lead dev was remote), and have never made that reference again.

Look, don't get in the way of the Two Minutes Hate.