Anyone who learns from one of these so-called "gurus" is merely emulating techniques other people with charisma mastery has "natively". Steve Jobs didn't take classes on how to be charismatic. He took acid -- and said it was one of the best experiences of his life...just like the Beatles, Manson (charisma and alignment aren't the same stat), etc.

So, if you're trying to be a better "people person", you can take the same thing Steve did in a "safe setting" -- whatever the means for you...or you can learn some techniques and be lost whenever a situation arrives you haven't learn about.

The whole thing is in assembly.

When it comes to assembly, what exactly is the difference between "source code" and the binary? Better comments and variable names?

"If our Western partners believe the format [of the G8] has exhausted itself, we don't cling to this format. We don't believe it will be a big problem if it [the G8] doesn't convene"
~ Sergei Lavrov (Russian Foreign Minister)

I think a shorter translation might simply be a middle finger.

Source:
  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

I have an idea.

How about Finland proposes a self-determination referendum for Karelia (since it was part of Finland before WWII) and see how the Putin likes it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

...but what if he was bi, you insensitive clod!

No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

~CmdrTaco on Gla^H^H^H the iPod

I'm using the slas^H^H^H^H a website's beta and its designers have the same issue.

Near as I can tell, they don't plan on listening....

Unfortunately, the government authorized by the Constitution doesn't seem to agree with anything the aforementioned document says, so neither Snowden, nor the traitors, nor any of the rest of us will be getting what he/they/we deserve.

If we choose to not participate, we'll get exactly what we deserve. The status quo.

Name a single major reform in the past 200 years without organized support.

...it can't hurt to actually ask all the students what they are interested in.

We want pr0n! Lots of pr0n!

If you want to decrease gas use, just raise the gas tax. It's simple, fair (everyone pays, cheating is hard, and people with more efficient cars pay less), and already there.

No need to re-invent the wheel.

c=a + b ...behold the infinite loop is born!

So here's my equation for the leading cause gun deaths.
Gang membership (* some_rate) * gun ownship (* some_rate)

Gun deaths are mainly in cities with access to guns. DC had a measure of success in controlling hand-gun access (a hand-gun's only purpose is to harm another human being -- it has no moral concepts of "protection" nor "aggression"). Similarly, without high rates of gang membership, it's possible to have relatively few gun deaths with a high ownership rate. You can't restrict gang membership on freedom of assembly grounds (though the word "peaceably" might be a good legal loophole -- I've yet to meet a peaceful gang).

This is not very different from security at an airport.
Terror group membership (* some_rate) * weapon possesion (* some_rate)

Since we can't know the intentions of everyone on the flight, but we search everyone on the flight (while trying to minimize the first item as well).

Also, suicide is a funny thing. As it turns out, means is important. When England switched from gas stoves, suicide by gas went down while virtually all other methods of suicide remained constant. We could expect that fewer people having guns would prevent suicide -- common sense in this case is damned by empirical evidence.

Actually the so-called "wild west" was not open carry.

Upon entering town, you surrendered your weapons to the sherriff who would hold the weapon until you left town. If you didn't surrender your weapon, the sherriff would -- and did -- take it from your cold dead hands. The most famous incident was the Shootout at the OK Corral.

Back then, it was considered "common sense" to not carry a gun around in civilization.

I don't know if you've been to Mountainview lately, but prices are just as high as in SF itself when I was looking for a place in the bay area a month ago.

With rents upwards of $2K a month minimum for a modest 2 bedroom, there's ample reason for developers to build more housing...so long as the process isn't a PITA.

I've played a bit of both, so here's the differences.
* There's no real way to respond on another player's turn, which lessens the strategy, but also means you're not waiting on your effects to resolve forever. Games generally take much less time (~15 minutes at most)
* Not quite as chancy. You just can't win on turn 3. The infinite and quasi-infinite combos of MTG are, as of yet, nonexistant. And there are some *good* combos, but you can't base your deck on channel/fireball as you could during MTG alphas;)
* Harder to keep permanents. All permanents are characters or attached to characters which can be damaged directly via attacking them with your creatures. As a result, utility creatures are much harder to keep alive.

Blizzard's done a great job of making a CCG that actually plays well online by designing it to be that way from the ground up. Unless MTG does a redesign, or at least designs cards specifically to be played online, it will always be a cludgy using a Windows Tablet circa 1999 (or a Windows 8 machine circa now).