You aren't the first asshole to completely be unable to think for yourself you fucking moron. If you had stopped to think even for a second or if you had read my responses to the other posts then you would have discovered that the entire point here is that homosexuality is not like pedophilia in that homosexuality is just fine and pedophilia isn't, and so not all discrimination based on sexual orientation is a problem even if discrimination against homosexuals is a problem. The only one talking about and advertising a connection here between homosexuality and pedophilia is you.

I had read your other posts; you simply don't get it. You made the the case that pedophilia is a form of sexual orientation on par with homosexuality and heterosexuality.

Denying pedophiles employment in kindergartens absolutely is discrimination based on sexual orientation.

You are the one who injected pedophilia into a conversation on homosexuality and heterosexuality. You are the one who is seemingly ignorant of the history of the despicable propaganda machine portraying homosexuals as stalking perverts determined to molest and rape your kids. What you are missing is that I categorically reject the entire premise that pedophilia is a sexual orientation in the first place because THAT argument has been used time and time again to equate homosexuality with sexual deviancy--pedophilia in particular. The mere mention of pedophilia within the context of this discussion was a colossal display of abject ignorance and an enormous insult to those of us who are GLBT. Every fucking time homosexuality is brought up some jackass has to bring up pedophilia and try to treat it as an orientation akin to homosexuality. Do you have any damned clue how insulting that is? Do you even know where that propaganda comes from?

The reason I called you an asshole is you are spewing this bullshit non-science crap without any consideration that what you said is highly inflammatory and insulting to GLBT's. Pedophilia is NOT a sexual orientation just as the desire to rape adult women is NOT a sexual orientation. Pedophiles do not pursue consensual relationships. What they do is rape and molest. Pedophiles get what they want by manipulation, coercion, threats, and physical force against the most vulnerable and innocent. I am not going to sit by and be quiet while you try to blather on with this "pedophilia = sexual orientation" theory of yours. I am going to call you out on it.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.

I doubt you really believe that. How about pedophiles in a kindergarten?

You aren't the first asshole to draw a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia.

OK. So, you are upset google is compensating gays in long term relationships for a tax code that is discriminatory against gays and you wish to eliminate unfair wages based on sexual orientation. So then by implication I can assume you are also wishing to legalize gay marriage so that we can eliminate the federal tax code discrimination against long term gay relationships in order to stamp out google's wage discrimination which is based on countering the federal tax code discrimination against gays?

Hint: if you're against one form of sexual discrimination, then you MUST be against another form of sexual discrimination in order to maintain a consistent logical argument.

If you're that desperate, you're likely cooking Hot Pockets or microwave burritos, and those take only a few minutes to turn from frozen and inedible to warm and inedible.

What do you mean warm? The center of a freshly microwaved hot pocket is a close approximation to the temperature of the surface of the sun. This is a well known fact.

What are you talking about? Big Mac combo is about $6.50 in Seattle. A deluxe combo is about $7.50. A happy meal is about $4.50. It's more expensive to eat at McD's than it is to eat at home. My average home cooked meal costs between 75 cents to $5 depending on whether I'm eating spaghetti or steak. For a child under 12 it's even lower.

You have to know where to shop to get it under $3 a meal. Here we have a few stores: Costco, Bargain Mart, Cash & Carry, and Walmart. Typical prices at Bargain Mart on 4th Ave:

• Jar of spaghetti sauce: $1
• Bag of potatoes $3
• Bag of apples: $4
• 1lb bag of rice: $1
• Loaf of fluffy white bread: $1
• Half gallon of OJ: $2
• Jar of peanut butter: $1.75
• A pack of 8 hot dogs and 8 buns: $2.50
• 3lbs of hamburger meat: $7
• 12 pack of generic soda: $5.

Now, it's a lot more expensive if you choose the top shelf items over lesser items: such as Fuji apples over Empire apples, "not from concentrate" OJ over "from concentrate" OJ, white onions over yellow onions, 7 grain bread over white fluffy bread, etc, so unless you're eating t-bone steak or king crab every night ($10 a steak, $15 for king crab) the avg price per meal is still below McD's. Even with top shelf brands avg meal is between $3 to $6 a meal.

People eat at McD's because 1) they are lazy, 2) they don't want to cook, 3) they don't know how to cook (see #1 and #2), 4) they want something fattening and salty, 5) they want it now and do not want to wait, 6) they are not serious about losing weight.

Statistically, this problem-solving method appears to be a field where women are lacking.

I recently worked with a woman with a masters degree in computer science. She was the smartest person I have ever worked with. Able to recall obscure facts deep within complex systems. (We are talking 40,000+ nodes in massively distributed system processing dozens of terabytes a day.) Able to quickly zero in on concrete solutions to difficult and abstract problems. Able to communicate to superiors extremely effectively. Her problem solving skills blew away the majority of the men on the team. She obviously had an unusually high IQ. Her software designs were generally flawless and came with extensive proofs and tests proving her code did what it claimed to do and did it better than the legacy code it was replacing.

The ironic thing here is that you are the one demonstrating the faults you attribute to women.

I'm sorry, but I think you're just a testosterone asshole who has no clue what he's talking about. It doesn't make a difference when a woman does better. You are still treated the same way--like a child.

I believe you believe what you're saying is true, but the problem is you're not aware you do not experience sexism in the IT industry so of course it's invisible to you, but know this: it's not invisible to women.

Secondly, comparing sexism to a perceived bias against geeks in an age when geeks rule the world and command an unprecedented level of respect is idiotic. (Ever heard of a hipster?)

why? because.. (Score:1, Flamebait)

Bottom line: we are treated with disrespect and disdain.

The fact you were modded flamebait for your frank and honest posting PROVES your point exceedingly well--unfortunately.

Get your arse over here...

you're just making an *international* arse of yourself

It's OK to say "ass". We are grown ups.

Wow (Score:1, Flamebait)

Now mods are flamebaiting blue screen of death jokes? Come on. Seriously. What the fuck.

I mean, I have about two dozen games that I bought and regret buying because most suck. I never play them, those were $50 bucks a pop. I can't see spending 300 bucks for this gimmick.

And that's why we wait for the customer reviews before we buy.

Nostalgia is a huge reason, but you asked for more. Many times it's more fun to code for older machines due to their architectural simplicity. Sometimes people enjoy assembler coding, which can be easier on them. Some people see unfulfilled potential and want to see how far they can push the hardware beyond its expectations. Many of these machines were never pushed to their limits because techniques were discovered after the machine's popularity shrank. Some people want to be different. Fooling around with obscure platforms will make you "unique". Many people keep the machines to play Amiga games. Playing those games on new PCs just isn't the same. Porting modern apps to these machines becomes a game to see who can get XYZ running on the box. (Similar to how porting XYZ to Linux was the "new" thing in the 90's.) Some people merely want to bring new apps and games to the Amiga to support communities devoted to the preservation of the hardware. Some people are hardware collectors and need reasons for playing around with the machines. New apps = new interest.

A lot of Amiga owners are going to have std Wintel desktops lying around and this particular update is for AmigaOS 4.1 which runs on the faster/newer Amigas. I believe those machines are fast enough to be used for primary desktops; although, I doubt you'll find instances where the classic 68k Amigas are the sole PC in the home, but that doesn't mean they aren't heavily used.

This phenomena is nothing unique to Amigas. The exact same thing exists among the groups for Atari, Apple, Tandy, 8086/88, Palm, NES/SNES/N64/GC/GBA/XBOX/PS, TI calculator, and numerous hand held gadgets.