Are they necessarily different? Consider, hypothetically:

"Republican in principle but holy fuck what happened with them!?"

I don't think it's anything special. Make a list of people who have friends in common with you, and sort it by the number of such connections. Keep adding new ones at the top, pushing the older ones that you've ignored so far further down. Seems about the right level of accuracy from what I've seen.

I see your point, I too sometimes get swept up in films to the point that merely closing the player window can be a jarring experience!

Now perhaps the polished nature of film is more accessible, but I feel the the reality of theatre is just as good, even though I can clearly see the costuming and all that. It's not that they are "just" actors trying to make me believe, they are people, humans, inviting me to take part in the play. That's part of what makes it so good, the line between stage and audience starts to blur, in the way that a good standup comedian and a good audience can work together.

I think it's just a matter of what you're used to, or maybe a particular "skill" in suspending disbelief, looking past the medium and allowing the action to take place. But I don't want to sound like I'm saying that theatre-goers are better, or that one is a better form than the other, so maybe an analogy to sports works here: watching a game on TV is different from watching it in person. You can see more on TV, being there in person can be more intense. Or another one: having someone tell you a ghost story can be just as creepy as seeing it on film, or moreso, or less so. It depends on the way it's done rather than the medium

However, as for film looking more like a stage play, I don't think I would like it. I would love to see a good play of the whole Ring saga, but do I expect to watch a movie if I'm going to the cinema.

Would a forest with conjoined canopies hold up, or is overhang difficult to handle in this process?

Controlling the defaults is a lot of control, even if it is nothing like complete control. Internet Explorer tells the story.

If criminals fear for their life, it means everyone fears for their life, and vice versa.

FLAC is already open and Free, no need to make things inconvenient.

I'd take it further and say that people appreciate a person with style. It may be that women appreciate it more, but that's just a matter of degree.

How do you know if a supplier is trusted?

Wouldn't it be more correct to say that some parts of Linux would be in the public domain? If a person contributes today, doesn't that contribution enjoy copyright protection on its own, regardless of the original release by the original author?

Should everyone have calorimeters, spectrometers, drop-test rigs, electron microscopes, and other testing gear in their basement to ensure quality? I don't think he's the idiot.

Technically speaking, icons are not conventions.

There are in fact two separate things going on here, the floppy disk is an icon representing exactly that: a floppy disk. But it is also a symbol for "save". It does not matter what the image is as long as we agree on it, because the symbol is going to be distinct from what it refers to anyway. Just like words in a language are symbols, distinct from what they mean: the word "tree" doesn't look or sound anything like an actual tree, but we have no more problem with that than with a floppy disk.

Never mind the level layout in the 4 KB applet: You can't strafe, you can't turn and move at the same time, you can't slide along walls, only one weapon with infinite ammo, slow AI, no running, etc.. It's basically a completely different game.

Yes, there was some sort of hovertank game that came before. Reference: John Carmack plays Wolfenstein 3D, with commentary. The first part is an interview, the second part he actually plays the original (DOS version, it looks like) and dies a couple of times. Worth watching!