In an ideal libertarian world, what stops the mega-wealthy from exploiting the people? Is there any room for labor laws? OSHA? EPA? Regulations of any kind? FCC?

How does any of that square with extremely limited governance?

What does Libertarianism mean to you?

From what I've been told by libertarians is that the government needs to be smaller, less rules, less regulations, less interference. Individuals and market forces and rational common interest will benefit us all.

I don't buy it myself, but...

The problems you're describing where the hyper wealthy are colluding in an oligarchy to oppress the people and keep them consuming isn't solved by being more libertarian. Being hands off, having less regulations and rules doesn't solve that problem.

That problem's solved by *more* rules, specifically the rules to reform election laws to keep money out of politics.

The implicit theoretical side effect of libertarianism is that the wealthy, those with the means and resources, would do every well and those with out wouldn't. If you don't have people paying taxes for schools, libraries, roads, etc. How do things get better? When you've got concentrated wealth, what's stopping the wealthy from taking over?

Violent insurrection is a fine idea in that case, but, I wouldn't bet on it.

Of course SHIELD runs Android, how else could they have gotten Ultron?

I don't think Ultron's too keen on sweets though. Must be a proprietary fork.

"Conjoined?" Good.

TBF, given globalization, part of it, even marginally, was probably actually built in Siam. So it wouldn't be a stretch to call it Siamese...

I'm not saying exactly "we're not fucked YET" I'm saying, "We're fucked for a lot of other reasons and it's no shock that this isn't on the radar."

If you think this is the biggest problem we face, you are extremely privileged.

Getting the Half Life 2 Episodes is just heartbreaking.

It's like somehow the double reverse inverse(or something) of the Star Wars prequels. They're really REALLY good... but leave you hanging. You're actually better off acting like the Star Wars prequels and just pretend they don't exist.

Quite frankly, government surveillance isn't this Orwellian nightmare(not yet; and I support moves to curtail this) the hacker crowd thinks it is.

Quite frankly, we have serious problems with the environment, economy, human and civil rights, labor, etc. that the actual day to day impact of PRISM just isn't a big deal to most people. If it were, Facebook would be a ghost town and everyone would be afraid to use the Internet.

As I said above, this is just isn't a problem yet. People aren't being jailed for associating with known dissidents. No one's curb stomping the press for associating with undesirables.

I can imagine it happening, and happening slowly and gradually that no one even notices. But let's be honest here. What's more important and relatable, tax reform or NSA reform? When you're making 30k a year, and you're struggling to get by, what's more important, PRISM or making sure unemployment and social security are still a thing in the future?

I was thinking Toph, from Avatar: The Last Airbender.

Toph is awesome.

The professor had surprised us then told us to write out on paper what the algorithm actually did and why.

There were a few people missing the next class.

Yes. When you're talking about solving problems for the first time, you have to do the grunt work and know what you're doing. My CS135 class had the same problem with people cheating on a parsing roman numerals problem.

When you're in a work environment, no one's going to expect you to implement, say, quick sort or whatever algorithm that's non-trivial but basically grunt work, by hand. The work is going to be way more in-depth than just "this solves this specific problem." however, knowing how these things actually work is another thing.

"Here's the overwhelming consensus. Please stop being shitty" is hardly onerous.

Given that she does lectures at conferences, and has to network with other games professionals like CliffyB and John Carmack, her real name sort of has to be out there.

I'm not sure what kind of business you think gaming is, but even there you generally have to use your real name.

If you think that being a game developer means you have to be pseudonymous so you can hide from death threats then you're part of the problem. This is somehow Wu's fault, and not the fault of toxic culture around us. Telling.

No, it's the feminists (and other sjw leftist types) who "make the personal, political." It's part of their SOP. They target communities with sway over the culture as a whole and inject their RNA. If it's accepted, those who give an inch are expected to give a mile. If they don't, they're outcast as bigots and a cultural takeover is attempted (atheism+ comes to mind). If the infection is rejected resoundingly, we get things like gamergate. It's a nice healthy immune response to bullshit. If feminists want their own brand of politics in games, they should make their own instead of being entitled brats demanding that others put that shit into their games. You know why they don't? They know it won't sell well, for the same reasons "Wally Bear and the 'no' gang" didn't sell well. People don't like preachy authoritarian shit in their games unless it comes from antagonist characters they're supposed to battle.

"These are my experiences and the experiences of women/trans/*sexuals/people of color/oppressed minority religious group and here's why it sucks."

If you hear something like that and you're inclined to reject it because it makes you uncomfortable, there's no discussion to be had here. I don't know what I could tell you that could change your mind.

If it could be shown that feminism is actually harmful to society at large and that women actually have it easy, sure. I'll listen and change my mind. Unfortunately, the evidence I've seen from the women in my life doesn't bear this out. If I'm wrong, then I'll gladly change my tune. I might be grumpy and surly for awhile, sure, but that's just cognitive dissonance kicking in and that'll be over in like a week at worst.

What's your criteria for giving up your worldview? Why do you believe what you believe?

Wait, alphabet agency? What mass shooter from the last 30 years has been part of such a government agency?

Furthermore, you're just ignoring the effect of ending the conversation at, "He was mentally ill."

Lots of mentally ill women out there. How many of them engage in mass shootings?

If this is just the effects of testosterone, where are the Female to Male transsexual men who engage in mass shootings? Shouldn't the sudden surge in testosterone cause these guys to also go shooting?

Also do you actually have any good data to show that they even had high levels of testosterone in their bodies?

I find it *Incredibly* telling you're more willing to accept that a shadowy conspiracy by government agencies are out to cause mass shootings than you are to accept that how we treat, raise and teach boys how to behave is why we have violence problems.

I remember being six. And 12. And 18.

At no point did I ever think doxxing and swatting were acceptable ways to deal with others.

This is the "boys will be boys" argument to just sweep this behavior under the rug.