And then there are games that are unanimously considered awesome, such as Psychonauts, but that most people never heard of. Marketing is also important...

Good old Lords of the Realm...
Somehow I liked more than twice as many games in then 90s than in this decade. I wouldn't mind seeing GOOD remakes of them either.

Maybe you're asking a little too much from Google. Remember that a significant share of their revenue comes from web advertising...

Maybe because the joke is so good someone thought he deserved karma for it ;)

Looking at an original painting is completely different from looking at a print or digital copy on a screen...

As for the entrance prices, they are often necessary to pay for the maintenance and restoration of existing and new exhibits.

That said, not being british or american, I completely side with US law on this one. A photo of a painting is a copy, no matter how you look at it, and shouldn't be subject to copyright.

I was writing from the standpoint of the small website owner, who is not on a local area network. The parent said he doesn't even manage his own server, so I am assuming he's an individual with a direct internet connection and a shared webspace account (and not a corporate user).

You'll be fine if you take care of your own computer (which you do indeed manage). This article states that FTP is insecure, but that is based on the assumption that everyone's computer is infected periodically. So if your server is secure and your computer runs a secure OS, or at least a good firewall, a good antivirus, all security patches and is periodically scanned for malware, I don't see what harm the evil spammers can possibly cause.

Personally I barely follow a half of that advice, and yet I am never infected. If you know what you're doing, all it takes is some common sense to keep you safe. Such as not downloading and running suspicious programs, keeping your web browser(s) fully patched and making sure they are not vulnerable (VERY important) and a strong firewall (even if you get infected, it can stop your pet trojan from sending your passwords away).

QBasic Bomberman?

Exactly! Personally I'd never use it, but it doesn't bother me that it's there. Why would it? No one is forcing me or anyone else to use it at all. They're probably smart enough to include a "number of seconds played automatically" meter so people who truly beat the game can brag to their friends with evidence ;)

You'll need plenty of tall-nuts too ;)

The dishonest one here is you.

I think you should have re-read your first sentence before writing the second.

Also, religious people do not have a monopoly on starting long bloody wars as you seem to be implying. If you really think that, you are seriously deluded.

I never heard of that "Xian society" of yours. Is that in China?

You are twisting my words by subtly implying that I am specifically referring to the pillars of my society. Those who I am calling criminals are those who commited crimes. Sometimes they were important, even central people. Sometimes they weren't. We all know there have been corrupt and bloodthirsty religious leaders. When they were responsible for the deaths or torture of large amounts of people, they were criminals.

If you consider christians, for instance, they are following the doctrine preached by Jesus, which boils down to "love each other and God that created you" (he said so himself). They are not following the doctrine preached by pope XYZ a thousand years later that boiled down to "travel a thousand kilometres and massacre the entire population of a country". Am I really dishonest for accepting the first and rejecting the second? I don't think so. I have absolutely nothing to do with Pope XYZ, and he has nothing to do with me. Do not stereotype us all together.

That may be so, but it has nothing to do with what I wrote! I am not denying that specific part of the OP's rant.

There are many examples, I merely picked a few.

The most famous religious muslim scientist I can recall (and he was in fact Persian, that is, Iranian) is Avicenna, one of the forefathers of modern medicine.

I'm glad there are still people capable of rational thought around here!

The funny thing is that I also agree with most of what the OP wrote. The mad mullahs of Iran are definitely mad. And I condemn any kind of violence or opression, especially when commited in name or religion.

But the OP is basically stating that *everyone* who is religious doesn't deserve any of the benefits of science, and that includes (and always included throughout history) millions of reasonable, tolerant people, famous philosophers, philantropists, mathematicians, sociologists, scientists and, heck, even good leaders. Hate evil people, don't hate people you classified based on an arbitrary criteria just because some of them are/were batshit insane, murderous fanatics.

And so do I, and everyone else here, I suspect. But there have been and still are thousands of religious people in history who did not oppress anyone, and instead left us a legacy of knowledge and/or charity. The original parent (I don't know if that you or not, since you're posting as an anonymous coward) is hatefully denying the merit of these people's work based on a completely unrelated disagreement, which I find completely unfair.

I replied to the original post, a troll posted anonymously, with a rational, example-supported rebuke in which I recommended tolerance and open-mindedness, and I'm the one who is modded troll and flamebait?

Some of you people who are moderating this discussion are definitely not right in the head.