It's my pleasure, Operagoatse.

As usual, the entirety of your comment is a random mention of a logical fallacy without the will or understanding to actually point it out or refute.

"No true scotsman!!"

or,

"False continuum!".

You have yet to demonstrate that you know what any of those things mean. Maybe you think it makes you look smart with the other guys in desktop support, but you're fooling yourself.

TFA:

...so it's a little less direct, but no great loss.

I was actually thinking of large platform developers such as Zynga. The fee and labour cost is potentially significantly higher, which makes it only attractive to a smaller number of companies prepared to do the work of scraping information itself, but the opportunity for information transfer still exists, doesn't it?

I believe you when you say the company's trying to improve its image in this regard, but, well, when you have a history of putting things like "Facebook does not screen or approve Platform Developers and cannot control how such Platform Developers use any personal information" in your privacy policy, that sours users' perception of your brand. It shouldn't really come as a surprise that people assume such things continue.

The invisible hand was cut off ages ago.

There never was such a thing to begin with. It was a fiction created by plutocrats to give moral cover for avarice. "It's not me, it's just the market!"

Attempting to create a moral framework for greed is one of mankind's oldest hobbies.

Wait a minute. I'm a little slow on the uptake tonight, but did you actually make an argument that a certain video could only be found on iTunes - nowhere else - and then provide a link to that very video on YouTube?

We were talking about songs and you give an example of a lyrics video.

As I said, there are no songs available on iTunes that are unavailable elsewhere.

Except people have good reason to endure such breakage.

There are no songs available on iTunes that are unavailable elsewhere.

I am the opposite. I want everything to be free. Then I won't have to be a slave to corporate America anymore.

I think you have very interesting definitions of "free" and "slave".

Nothing is free except love. And love won't get you broadband.

The flip side of that is a rule I hold to: I am not exceptional.

there should have been a slam aimed at the GOP in there somewhere.

Oh, if you insist: The GOP is using peoples' religion to encourage them to think of themselves as butthurt victims, creating divisiveness and the notion that in a nation where there's a church on every other streetcorner, religious people are somehow the oppressed, and they're doing it, not because they care about those religious beliefs or religious people, but in order to create a political climate where it's easier to redistribute wealth upwards.

Oops, I'm sorry. You specifically requested a cheap shot and that wasn't one. I'll do better next time.

I don't understand. Am I the only person left who really doesn't want anything for free?

I don't play F2P games because they suck. I don't want to run my internet activity through the portal at Starbucks or watch "ad-supported" television. No, I don't want that t-shirt with your company's logo on it, even if you're handing it out for free at the event.

I'm really OK with paying for stuff. I'll even pay extra for really good stuff. I don't even like getting stuff for free. I donate to The Document Foundation when I download Libreoffice because I want to pay my way.

On the other hand, I understand perfectly the notion of using filesharing to get better service or for political purposes. If Ubisoft doesn't want to release a demo for its latest game, I'm happy to use the one the Internet makes for me because I've been burned before by Ubisoft (or EA, or whoever). And if the torrent works better than the buggy mess you released, I'll download it in a second. But even then, I'll donate to the party providing the service. It's not a moral issue, it's strictly based on my own best interest.

the woolly mammoth was actually contemporary with man.

So were the dinosaurs. God said so. Would you argue with Him?

"As you add up all of the dates, and accepting that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to Earth almost 2000 years ago, we come to the conclusion that the creation of the Earth and animals (including the dinosaurs) occurred only thousands of years ago (perhaps only 6000!), not millions of years. Thus, if the Bible is right (and it is!), dinosaurs must have lived within the past thousands of years."

http://www.answersingenesis.or...

Those shoes Dexter Haygood is wearing in the second photo is no different than what was a common style in the '70s.

https://www.google.com/search?...

Didn't a character on your favorite show from the 1970s, Kojak wear those? Remember Huggy Bear? He later went on to become President of the United States, according to Breitbart.com.

The name of my non-profit is "Sony Sucks, Ass."

You think that would be OK?

I've gotten quite a few random spam messages from Chinese industry, despite being a software engineer at an academic institution with absolutely nothing to do with any product development or manufacturing whatsoever. I've gotten offers for piping, ceramics, and a wide variety of plastics. At this very moment, I am reading a spam message from Kevin, who informs me he represents "one of the best digital images retouching/editing professionals located in China."

They seem like very good deals, and I'm almost saddened that I can't take them up on what appear to be very genuine, heartfelt attempts at mass mailing in an age where most unsolicited e-mail is about "your urgent Cooperation in transferring the sum of $11.3million immediately to your private account" and unauthorized activity notifications from Bl1zzard Entertanmnt on my several hundred Batt1e.net accounts.

If you ever figure out what kind of plastic it was, let me know, and I'll check to see if I got the same e-mail!