I wish I had points to mod up your MGS 2 reference.

I'm still waiting for remote controlled soldier's like in MGS 4.

Just sayin'.

What's the point of trying to leverage Android or any of Google's products if they're going to try to compete against you in every market on their own turf?

AirPlay already does this. The standard seems open enough that there are many 3rd party apps that I use which can broadcast to the AppleTV. Plus, it has all the infrastructure, updates, and support of Apple.

$160,000 for this project? Am I missing something?

<input type="file">

I suspect that as apps are rewritten to improve support for "Metro" interfaces, most windowed dialogues will be phased out.

kimvette's comment so eloquently and thoroughly demonstrates why Google felt obligated to remove the app from their storefront.

They already run their own Exchange servers to power Outlook. There's nothing stopping them from snooping on corporate e-mail, no matter how you go about accessing it.

Yes. Thank you. I don't understand why there is so little in the way of outbound port and IP control on home routers. You have to install one of the open source WRT packages and know how to maintain iptables to even run a wifi access point safely, these days.

Correct. It's mostly Medicaid.

*every time you clear your cookies

FTFY

I suspect a lot of their collection of contacts is centred around people carelessly leaving whole gobs of people in the To or CC lines (instead of BCC) when doing forwards.

That's just MSRP. If you look online you can usually get them over 50% off retail price.

I got mine because I live in an apartment, so I wanted to have good surround sound headphones to play at night and not disturb my neighbours. Cost me about $80. They will not be compatible with the PS4 except as game audio. I'd have to have a separate device just for chat, which is not an acceptable solution when you have over the ear headphones.

I may not pick up my PS4 reservation because of this and the poor launch titles.

The contract was probably bid as protecting people's privacy and legal got to work right away regarding the terms of service.

But, the developers were probably never able to successfully implement, or were not given sufficient resources to implement, a truly secure system. This comment was probably included as a protest to cover their own asses when the contract goes sideways.

Plausible deniability? The client provided the terms of service.

of censorship

I'm doing it right.