What people should do is join their communities, use their communities instead of laws to fix the issues in their communities and be as responsible as they can be for their families, their friends and their neighbors.

Is this not exactly what Sarkeesian is doing? She seems to have garnered significant influence with notable game makers in the community.

I'm just still trying to keep up

No you're not. You're trying to make glib and sarcastic comments. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make other than being angry at something or other.

You very well know that making credible threats to either men and women is completely and unambiguously illegal.

It may not be appropriate for a woman to stand there fully naked in the middle of the street

Incidentally that's not illegal in England, though it is in Scotland. Read about the naked rambler for more details if you're interested.

Why do women wear skirts that leave the knees bare?

Skirts below full length became very popular in England during WWII, because of the severe shortages of fabric for clothes. That was in fact the first time it was really socially here acceptable. More than that in fact: it was a sign that you were doing your bit for the war effort by not engaging in excessive consumption.

So, the knees/no knees thing is relatively recent. Once that damn was broken it appears that the length became less and less important.

still: Why do women wear skirts that leave the knees bare?

Why not? It's more comfortable in hot weather and many people believe it looks better too.

I was taught that one ought to cover oneself from the shoulders down to at least the knees.

By whom and according to what logic. I'm sitting here slacking in my office (you can tell I'm slacking since I'm writing this post) wearing shorts and a T shirt. My knees are most certainly visible.

So you're the thought police?

u wot m8?

Seriously when did [citation needed] become a sign of the fascist overlords? He's making unsubstantiaed claims. It's entirely legit for me to call him out on it. He can think what he wishes and say what he wishes. Doesn't mean he won't get replies telling him what he thinks and says is crap.

Free speech cuts both ways.

Your argument is basically:

I'm really ok with this being shitty because it makes the world EQUALLY shitty.

Lovely. How about being the better person and not accepting shittiness in your life instead?

I think this woman is a liar

Put up or shut up. Or, if you prefer [citation needed].

Thanks for proving my point

Your point was that you haven't read anything by this person, can't quote anything by her and yet dismiss everything she has to say. I'm glad that you agree that I proved my point that you're a raging bigot.

I don't believe they can be civilly debated at all.

Well, no. Not with you and the reason is you are clearly very very bigoted:

Modern day feminists are not rational.

There, you've made a gross generalisation about a whole group of people and therefore this one in particular. It is not possible to debate with *you* on this topic because instead of listening to her videos and bringing up points to disagree with you launched into:

$PERSON is of $GENERAL_CATEGORY. I assert that $GENERAL_CATEGORY is unreasonable in some way and cannot be reasoned with. Therefore $PERSON cannot be reasoned with.

The only person who cannot be reasoned with is *you*.

Yes I did: I summarised it as "etc".

We both agree military spending is out of control.

And how exactly is meme investigation "basic research"?

It's pretty solid social science as far as I see it. It's about better understanding of people.

I'd really like to know how cutting frivolous grants like this will damage future meme propagation on the internet.

It won't harm meme propagation, and if you believe that you seriously misunderstand the research (which is why decisions on such things should not be left to lay people). It's about better understanding of human behaviour.

I'm perfectly fine with federal dollars being judiciously spent on science which may have a real impact on our society or fundamental technology, or even of our understanding of the universe. This isn't it.

It's understanding of people, how they behave and so on. I don't see why the study of human behaviour is not a worthy topic of research.

Quite frankly, this sort of stuff is insane when we're continuously running a massive deficit.

No, not even slightly. The reason you're running a massive defecit is because you have dumped trillions into two pointless wars and the military industrial complex. It was such a dumb idea that even previous presidents have warned about such things.

Cutting back on basic research is a sure-fire way to hobble long term future development. The only way to do this successfully and on the scale and longevity required is via government funding.

etc...

Yes government spending is out of control. About the worst way of reignin it in is to cut down on basic research.

Gaming and culture documentaries. So, hackers, right?

Off to hack the gibson. BRB.

Confused people will start talking about things like "cow farts" or "trees" or similar. These have nothing to do with global warming - the climate thing - because these do not represent sequestered carbon.

Not quite right. Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So, taking existing atmospheric carbon in the form of CO2 and turning it into methane will increase warming.

Betteridge says no.

We'll just have to fine somewhere else to stick them.

Besides, the deterrant actually lives at sea. It's the ones not currently being a deterrent which are berthed.

I do find the anti-nuke stance naive and a bit pathetic personally. Sure, the world would be a nicer place without nukes. However, it's late 1940s tech and people who don't like you also have them.

If one wants to be all "nice" and "give them up" you're implicitly asking the US, UK/England and France to basically step in if something bad happens. It's basically freeloading since they know that the other countries will step in (as they have before) if they really have to.

Then again, a good part of King Salmond's personal independence movement seems to be about freeloading so that figures.

TSRs

Yeah, people did use DOS for the filesystem access, so providing a TSR that hacked that layer allowed any program to access files on the CD.

I forgot about the mouse driver. That was some what standard by the end.

From memory, sound cards notably didn't have drivers built-in, or rather the only startup programs they had just set the ports and interrupts the cards used. (i.e. sb16set)

And then the programs tweaked the registers of the cards manually given that info. IOW they had the drivers built into the programs.