But that's a Swedish Prize. The US wants to lock him up.

I guess that tells you which country is on the right side of history, and which isn't.

But not for holding the US to any standards. I mean, well, back in the day, he was against illegal detention in Guantanamo Bay, and for transparent government and protection of whistle blowers, and you could argue that he got his Nobel Peace Prize before he turned his back on all that.

It's not gamification until the tank crew scores points by doing their job.

Apparently you can turn a jock into a nerd by damaging his brain? Suddenly I understand college football.

Quite often, when I type a local url without the protocol in front, Chrome assumes I want to google for it. It's very annoying. I'm all for separating the search box from the address box.

Unusually? The Witcher 2 was also DRM-free (if you bought it from them, and not through some other distributor, at least). Releasing DRM-free is standard for them, and one of several reasons why I like them so much. (Other reasons are that their games are unbelievably gorgeous, and they do interesting stuff with really driving moral choices in their games.)

No idea what you're talking about. I got Witcher 2 totally DRM free.

My Steam games are often very slow to start, and sometimes refuse to start at all. I'm not a huge fan of whatever it is Steam does to my games (though easily installing it on multiple machines is certainly nice).

We have those too. Problem is that they only reflect light that shines on them, which means you don't see them until you're pretty close. I think the idea behind these glow-in-the-dark lines is that you can see the shape of the road much further ahead.

I can see just fine by the faint yellow haze that hangs over my city at night.

If everybody was to stop voting for assholes, the chance of a non-asshole winning would be pretty good.

No, I got that. I'm just pointing out that it's just the outer clothing that's in public, and not the underwear.

But what's under your clothes is still public. Photographing under someone's skirt is like photographing the interior of your house through the window. It's technically visible from the right angle and with the right effort, but it's not intended to be public.

I assumed that's what he meant. A skirt is clearly meant to cover something. Photographing up someone's skirt is clearly photographing something not currently intended to be publicly visible.

Usually it's the US version that gets censored. I guess it's a "nudity + drugs" versus "libel and hate speech" issue.