Well, if you're not in EST, the timing isn't even right, so I would imagine that it would have to be more than a little region-specific.

Still, I can't bring myself to care. It's nice to be at a party with people who do care, though, because it really boosts the energy level.

This isn't about the Wii. This is about the upcoming 3DS, which gets its name from its (fairly unique) stereoscopic abilities.

Having deaths, events, emotions and other things attributed to them is actually exactly what symbols are for. It's kind of the definition.

Everything you said is true (except for the last part about a simple in-game picture being a potential source of education and meaningful exposure--I don't learn all about the history of Christianity by seeing an image of a cross)

None of it changes the fact that the people in question are probably unaware of these facts, and almost certainly using the symbol in a hateful way.

It's not the only place, but it's almost certainly the best place. A completely stand-alone version of the game with no external software or DRM, exclusive pre-order bonuses, and the pre-order is really just a declaration of your intent to possibly purchase the game when it comes out and involves no commitment and no payment until the game is actually available.

Your claim is that any system built on artificial scarcity is inherently broken (although this only because you are following your own moral code, which nobody else seems to agree with).

There IS no alternative, logically, unless you consider something along the lines of selling merchandise. Your argument considers any system that sells an unlimited-supply item to be broken, all data is unlimited, so any system that sells data is broken. This includes video games, all written language, music, movies, and to an extent all visual art.

So, even though there is no alternative possible, you somehow cling to a sense of moral superiority while you claim, in essence, that a creator is not entitled to be rewarded for their work if it has no physical form. Certainly, you don't use those words, but that is the logical conclusion to your reasoning.

Does this mean that you would be okay with somebody spreading lies about you that prevent you from ever getting hired again? After all, they would only be depriving you of "potential profit," which, according to your argument, does not hurt you.

The myth is not just about setting wood on fire with the sun. As you say, nobody would consider that to be a potential myth. It's about setting a boat on fire while it's floating in the water, at long range, using technology equivalent to what could be found in ancient Greece. I would love to see you try to ignite damp wood at 50 yards with a hand-shaped 10-centimeter polished bronze reflector.

Of course, you might not be ABLE to switch carriers. If Time Warner were to put me behind NAT, I'd be pretty much screwed. I might be able to switch to some form of wireless connection, but that might not even be any better.

In a lot of cases, carriers can do whatever they feel like.

I had never thought about it that way. I think you're absolutely right, but that's incredibly depressing. The fact that we've lost that which made the moon landings possible should serve as motivation to get it back, not as motivation for people to stick their fingers in their ears.

I use Chrome on Windows and Firefox on Ubuntu, by preference.

I prefer Chrome, but I have some issues with it in Ubuntu. If those get solved (or if they just stop affecting ME) then I would switch to Chrome completely and would have no need for cross-browser syncing.

It would be a lot more complicated to have a system without a central server. It wouldn't work for everybody, for one thing, because they would always need to have some combination of systems up. If you only have two, one would always have to be up when the other was activated. A central server pretty much eliminates the problem of ISP outages (because you aren't using your bookmarks if the internet is out). You would need to have firewalls open and ports forwarded to allow for direct transfers between computers.

When you consider all of that, storing things server-side is really the best way to make it usable by a large number of people.

Also, keeping the stuff server-side allows you to use the service as a zero-effort backup, which I've found handy in the past.

Oh, I've no doubt that it is, or will soon be, fairly easy to find 3D glasses that can easily be worn in conjunction with regular glasses. Unless the manufacturers are just banking on everybody wearing contacts (which is an option for most people, though maybe not an attractive one to many) or on surgery becoming cheap and universally effective. There's no compelling technical reason that it shouldn't be possible, or even easy, as far as I can figure. Glasses-wearers definitely compose a large enough segment of the population to make it a very important issue.

I don't think that's technically how they look at it. It seems more like you pay to set up an account to play on the servers. You can download the whole client for free from Blizzard, even without a WoW subscription.

Some of the data that the servers use, however, is not in that client. Obviously, all the art and sound assets are included in the client, as is the gameworld's terrain, but most of the actual gameplay-related data is provided by the server.

Look at the WoW server like a website, and the client like a web browser. It's a very apt comparison.

So, the private server companies are making their own websites! Obviously, there's nothing wrong with making a website.

There is, however, something wrong with copying another website in its entirety, or even with minor changes. That's what the private servers do. It's not really about the protocol.

At least, I assume this is what the lawyers would say if anybody showed up to argue with them.