AAA game studios are totally missing the point. Angry Birds is a huge hit across multiple platforms and it is single player. It's also more fun than 90% of the AAA titles available. Sales numbers don't lie. This guy should be investing in the single player experience so serious gamers, who recognize genres beyond "first person shooter", have engaging games to buy and play. Seriously, running around a maze of war-torn buildings looking for friends to frag is seriously tired and boring these days. There are some gems, but AAA titles are so dumbed down and predictable now that the fun factor has been diluted to the point where the games sometimes feel more like work than play.

She's a harmless MILF. Smarter than Obama though.

I've been looking for a good reason to quit using the internet. Maybe the borgification of today's web will lead to better, more secure things in the future.

Datacenters + Moonshine = Downtime.

PHP. But, I'd recommend learning programming/software engineering concepts using a variety of languages. When I was starting out many decades ago it was hard to get one's hands on a compiler and even harder to get time on an actual machine. These days you can get solid compilers or interpreters for most every language 100% FREE. If you understand how computers work, how programs are written, compiled, or interpreted, and you have a decent mind for math and problem solving you should be able to learn any language you want to quickly.

Nicely put.

It just chaps my hide that statements like this get scored 5 "insightful". Sounds like someone is jealous that their life sucks while others are living it up off of grandpa's J.R. Ewing-style success. I see by the lame sig that you are also a liberal. That explains your lack of ethics, wit, and class.

Nice rebuttal. I agree that students get a dose of everything while at school. Maybe that's why we have such a divided nation. Some people are inclined to go left and others go right. It's all good though. I'll try to keep my feet planted somewhere in the middle.

Ok, this response if fragmented, but I had a lot to cover and not much time. Good response by the way. You make some good points. I knew that list wouldn't be popular but it is true. I come from the very hive of liberalism (San Francisco) and spent three decades in high tech and academia so I'm not some Gomer who's never left the farm. I've seen what decades of liberal policies have done to our nation, and especially california (which is basically a third-world state at this point). I have lots of gay friends and many liberal friends. I'm also aware of how unions work and how the left panders to them. The child molester thing has to do with NAMBLA which is supported by the left, not the right. The "rich" bosses generally work harder and carry more responsibility than the worker. Yes there are board-room abuses, but for the most part the average CEO works harder and longer than their employees do. Yes, the environment is a SUPER left thing. But, I've never met a conservative who wanted to ruin the environment, they just want to manage it responsibly without losing our edge as a superpower to countries like China that could give a rat's ass about the environment. Leftists like Al Gore used the environment for personal gain and blackmailed companies with his influence over popular opinion. That's low. All the lefties I know have one thing in common. They are angry and jealous that they are not someone else. Stereotypes are, at least somewhat true. That is why they are stereotypes.

Maybe Sharron Angle was tongue tied, but I can tell you that if we lose the Bush tax cuts, it will probably mean more laid-off employees. People refer to the "rich" like they are somehow flawed for being successful, but the fact is "the rich" provide jobs for people and create opportunities for the not so rich to become rich themselves.

Yes, it is a broad generalization, but there's nothing wrong with that in this context. And, I agree 100% that our leaders should be people we can trust know what they are doing. Still, I find it pretty easy to look down intellectually on anyone who subscribes only to the left or the right (I was in the top 10% too), but since I try to eat my own dog food I remember that they are entitled to their beliefs and that I may be wrong and they may be right. But I just don't see how! I've had a great life as an independent thinker, and I've been very successful as well. Why would I change the way I think just because it's not hip or in line with the latest trends or even correct by today's standards? Hell, even Steve Jobs said "I don't care about being right, I just want to do neat stuff." Sorry for being tangential, it's really late on the East Coast.

I've often wondered the same thing, but being smart isn't a guarantee of being correct. Hawking spent a career searching for a unified theory that he now claims doesn't exist. Is he not smart? Actually, studies have shown that the more intelligent a person is the higher the likelihood that they will defy common sense in search of their own intellectual gratification. If you went to a major university in the US, that wasn't a military academy, then you were most definitely subjected to loads of liberal indoctrination, and you probably don't even know it. It's a sneaky recipe. A little political correctness here, a dash of environmentalism there, a heaping teaspoon of marxism all rolled into a casserole of insecurity, jealousy, and hatred for anyone who doesn't think the same which can eventually lead to doing stupid things like DDoS-ing a major media website. :-) Of course, you could be 100% correct and the academics may be smarter and know what is best for humanity. I'll concede to that, I certainly don't deny that there are tons of really smart people out there (most way smarter than me), but I do question their motives. The fictional character Q (Star Trek) had limitless knowledge, but he was adolescent in his behavior and his motives were questionable.

It's interesting how things get perceived differently by different people. You mentioned that you often find right-wing people claiming to be victims, but I would say the opposite is most certainly true. Right-wingers are generally hard working, socially responsible, religious, patriotic, military servers, and family/community oriented people. Left wingers (I'm generalizing here because I DO have right-wing friends in some of these demographics) are entertainers, lawyers, criminals, child molesters (NAMBLA), unions, welfare recipients and just about any other special interest group out there that has no problem claiming that evil capitalists are oppressing them. Look at how the left always plays the race card. It's despicable and MLK would surely be kicking asses if he could see how his message has been twisted and confused by the left in order to manipulate people. Conservatism is not about being a victim, it is about personal responsibility.

Hey, I didn't claim to subscribe to any of their views. The right is just as screwed up as the left, but if I have to pick sides I'm leaning towards the right because they are at least smart enough to know that unions are bad and smaller government is good.

Umm.... I graduated college too. I just didn't drink the kool-aid while I was there. College is where much of the brainwashing I'm talking about happens. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-education, but universities have been overrun by leftists and *everyone* knows this is true. To deny this is like saying 2+2=5.