True, however it was actually rocket science at work.

There is a very big difference between buying bonds, and buying real world goods. His point is that buying bonds does as much for the economy as sticking your cash in the mattress. Just take a look at the economy for the last 4 years and you can see this playing out. The Stock Market is doing great! The real world economy is stagnant.

No they don't stick it under the mattresses, they dump it into the stock market. Which is great if you play in the stock market, but kinda sucks ass for everyone else. See the last 4 years for a perfect example of this.

Whats truly sad is that a large public works program would have been far better way to save the economy than giving banks trillions of dollars in bailout money. It's not like our infrastructure doesn't need the work. Aging roads, bridges, sewers, gas lines all over the country need to be replaced.

Great!. So when do you plan to implement the great firewall of china?

Life expectancy has been roughly the same for thousands of years. The only difference is that babies today live more often than they die.

For the same reason source code for old dead games never get released. It might be worth more in the future sometime. They might want to setup their own streaming service someday in the future so why sell the rights and miss out on the potential profits.

Damn that's not a good sign then.

It's only supposed to shield you from financial liability, not criminal liability.

No what she actually said was "I'm not a fan of video games". http://vimeo.com/13216819#t=12...

Really? Apparently you haven't read any of the feminist responses to the anti-feminist movement. Plenty of hate being spread there by women.

Citation Provided thanks google A bit harder to find info on Quinn but I guess that's not really surprising considering the implications to "journalists".

The problem with Anita is that she made her subject/focus the negative aspects of gaming, rather than the good aspects and what changes she would like to see.

When you approach a subject from a negative prospective you automatically put people on the defensive. You're less likely to get people to see your point of view that way.

She would be better off promoting those games that do show strong female characters and story telling. Highlight what makes them good examples and then talk about what changes she would like to see in the industry as whole.

The only problem with that method is that incentives cutting corners to meet the deadlines. Not a good idea to sacrifice quality for timeliness in a nuclear power plant.

Which thankfully isn't a problem nowadays. Otherwise shows like Game of thrones or Walking Dead would suffer the same fate and poor ratings that Babylon 5 did.