That's because the US has always been the dumping ground of the world's dregs...puritans, slaves, shithead brats who hated their families and just had to move to another continent, shithead brats whose rich familes hated them and forced them to attend school in the US, Mexico and South America's uneducated and unemployed, Canada's alcoholics and meth heads, and, historically, the drunkest of the inbred Irish and the cattiest of the catty Dutch.

And for political posturing reasons, the US will continue to fill up with morons with no skills or social graces (who would leave their family, really?) which makes the US moron footprint on the internet even more over-represented.

The funny part is that anyone smart is really planning a exit strategy long-term, if they haven't left already. The US economy is like emptying a bath with the faucet of petrodollars left on. You could optimistically call the vortex above the drain a "whirlwind of activity"...but no, thats the sucking sound that happens at the end, and after sufficient time, the petrodollar will cease to exist and the bath will drain really quickly >:O

And good for us who HATE those damned annoying automated app invites.

Basically what was removed is this:
1. You add <bogus political app>
2. <bogus political app> sends me an invite automagically, with your name on it
3. I get annoyed and delete it

Now what happens:
1. You add <bogus political app>
2. I don't give a fuck because it doesn't pester me with your bullshit
3. Fin

Bravo Facebook. If you're one of those annoying fuckers who installed that spammy ass Obama 2012 app, eat my shorts. And Zuckerburg's shorts too.

It took me 3 attempts to pass that exam and now there are 5 year olds who can pass it?

Hey, buying a recent brain dump and using it to cheat on a cert is a great job skill FYI. There is no way a 5 year old actually passed legitimately, he's just being taught by pops how to win at the corporate game

Bollocks. You didn't mean it, but you're basically saying "fuck the poor to encourage conservation". The majority of people, at least in the United States, just don't have the means to buy a bigger car in the face of falling gas prices, let alone buy a smaller car if prices rise. Fancy Pants Whitebreadland is a small, shrinking world these days, and many of the homes of those left behind by that bubble are still siting vacant, waiting for new prosperity that so far hasn't come yet. If you're still living in that bubble, lucky you.

Greedy politicians and big conglomerate executives (no difference nowadays) are dying to screw the poor with higher prices and higher taxes, and lower wages from cheap immigrant labor. What great lengths have been taken to justify that end with seemingly agreeable ideas...

-Let's bring in millions of undocumented immigrants and make them legal. That group will join the poor, and the new poor population as a whole will pay more taxes than the smaller, current crop of poor people, even if they individually make less money. Win for gov't for the tax proceeds, win for big conglomerates for dirt cheap labor.
-Fossil fuel tax. Make it uneconomical for the poor to own a car. Force them to live in local ghettos rather than commute. Bonus since the rich don't have to deal with their traffic.
-Carbon tax. Make it uneconomical for the poor to use electricity and natural gas. Make their home environments too miserable for their children to succeed academically.
-ACA. Tax the poor if they can't afford health care.
-Conservation. Seize land in the name of nature, forcing land prices up, property tax higher, forcing poor and subsistence farmers to sell their land and enter the job market with no skills.
-Cigarette tax. The poor are much more likely to smoke than the rich. Poor tax.

I mean, none of those things really disturb me that much, since I'm not poor and I can handle price increases by leveraging a raise. I'd especially love not having to spend an hour commute with every idiot loser and his brother who thinks they just *have* to own a car and drive it every morning. BUT...once the majority of the country is good and screwed, and there is no hope to be had, and no more can be squeezed out of the poor...who or what is next? Just think about that for a minute.

That wasn't his point. Some companies will locate in dangerous drug-infested ghettos to cut costs. But when you get there you realize that you really need to move to the more expensive area anyway, AND suffer a long commute and low salary. "Low cost of living" doesn't always work like you think it should.

We should teach our students business-valuable critical thinking skills, like:
-Confidence is more important than critical thinking, critical thinking is for low-wage cogs
-Marriage sets back your career. Children bring it to a screeching halt. Just don't.
-Don't get fat or they won't hire you
-Go for loafers that way you don't need to bend over and rip your pants to tie your shoes on the way to the interview
-Smile a lot so your coworkers feel bad when they backstab
-Live like a poor now so you don't have to change your habits later
-Retirement funds are not an actual benefit. They only exist to make save businesses from pensions and make bankers money. You're just keeping up with inflation. 35 years from now a roll of toilet paper will cost a $1,000 dollars. Not that it matters, getting fired and spending the rest of your 50's eating ramen and hot dogs will kill you long before you can collect
-Most of the jobs left are in big cities with insane costs of living. No, you'll probably never pay off that student loan early like you thought you would.
-Getting out of school is like getting out of prison. Life becomes just an aimless, pointless expanse, and acquiring useless shiny things to impress an insane whore to procure snot-nosed children seems like a good idea at the time
-Working with passive-aggressive adult children means you get to eat a lot of crap.
-Some men are man-children. All women are women-children.

DosBox can already do Glide. Look at the Daum SVN builds of DosBox. A lot of cool patches rolled into these builds, including Voodoo/Glide support. You'll need to sleaze a copy of Windows 95 but it works.

If you use the Daum build, also consider using the latest version of DBGL which supports the extra experimental config settings.

The fact that non-management workers are approaching being worth 100k is a big factor on stagnating wage inflation from what I can see.

For years 6 figures was considered the benchmark for success (e.g. management). Now that this number is edging more toward living wage status rather than a ticket to an extravagant lifestyle. But the old guard still has that "why would I pay non-management a 100k salary" mindset. Which trickles down. Ok I'm paying my engineering 90k and that is all. But wait...why should I pay my top tier support 90k when that is what my engineering folks are making? They can deal with 80k. And the level 2 folks want 70k but they're not worth nearly as much as the top tier folks...they can live with 60k....and so on.

Until the average for top tier non-management positions in general exceeds 100k by a good margin, there's gonna be downward pressure across the board just coming from that old 6 figure stereotype.

stop being so vane[sic] and judgmental

That's kinda the whole point of online dating. I can think of about 15 different repulsive women I'm more or less compatible with that I could go score tonight.

I'm just not into wiping someone else's ass because they're too big to reach. Am I alone in this? I think not.

Just like online dating is about filtering the other "definite no" stuff traditional dating takes too long to uncover. It takes about 5 seconds to uncover a single momma...pictures. Aha, I see kids! And blocked. Simple. That would waste at least two evenings done the traditional way.

That being said, in effect online dating only seems to work well for women in their 20s and men 50+. 20 something women I know who date online seem to get men you would normally think would be out of their league, because there are literally 50 guys (aged 18-80) lined up for each 1 of them. And then men aged 50+...if you still have a pulse, a stable job, and can still pop a hard on, you're literally in the top 10% in your age group and there are 30 (age 40+) women for each guy like you, especially because every other

For those of you just tuning in, "rUK" is a term scots use to denote the "rest of the UK" aka England and Wales.

Google isn't helpful with this one, you have to ask someone lol

It makes sense though that the nutjobs feel emboldened. As Snowden revealed, the government really is watching. And is Obama going to do anything about it? Hahahahaha. no. His perfectionist personality is currently disengaged from anything resembling a mess.

You're hoping for some future technology to save us all--a deus ex machina.

Is it incorrect to have hope for the future when it comes to technology? If you told someone from 1959 that in 10 years we would have our human deus ex machina moment all the way to the moon, and then go walk around on it...the response would probably be incredulous. But after so much win happening all around us every day, isn't a bit premature to suggest that we can't collectively come up with a solution by simply giving the science or the market time to cook up something more effective than an edict from above could provide?

"Big Oil" works out pretty well for everyone right now. Eventually we'll be complaining about "Big Algae", I'm certain.

Predicting the weather and predicting the climate are too very different things.

Whoosh. I know you're educated about that specific point, but my point with my flawed comparison is that half-baked logically-flawed ideas will become serious obstacles when you present an idea that suggests you might have to do anything resembling austerity. Like cutting meat out of your diet, for example, which if you suggest it most people will give you a pretty forceful and vehement rejection outright. Facts are out of scope at that point.

Honest answer from a denier. I've found myself jumping on the climate change skeptic bandwagon, and there are a bunch of different reasons for that, none of them having to do with the actual hard data or the models, or any of the details of the science, except for some specific tidbits that enable my skepticism. (For example, most of the models I've looked at predict milder summers and warmer winters in my particular area, and flooding in areas, not nearby, where people I don't like currently habitate)

People (myself included) don't want to hear it for the same reason that people get huffy when you mention that whole food veganism is bar none the best diet to avoid cancer and heart disease. They'll just point out the few that stil get cancer, and still get heart disease. Or smokers when you point out the cancer risks...plenty of smokers don't have a problem and live to healthy old age.

But, you CAN find a positive. If you point out that the hottie jogging down the street is always a non-smoker, and always either a vegan or a Paleo with higher than average vegetable intake, no one can really argue with that one, and if you ask one of them they'll confirm that observation every time.

When the climate change topic comes up, my brain automatically translates that the punitive corrective measures bandied about over the years...Carbon Tax, Environmental Regulation, and all the other proposed measures that wind up trading modest pollution levels for wideband economic austerity.

I know it is frustrating when you're trying to get people to stop polluting and people want to turn a blind eye to it and keep going about their business. Yet, basing your argument on science models that can predict the climate 10 years into the future yet somehow can't predict the climate tomorrow...yeah, if there are ANY holes whatsoever in your argument when you're preaching austerity, everyone is going to focus on the holes in the argument, no matter how small or short-sighted.

I think you'll find less resistance from me or anybody else if you focus on things that elicit a positive image...like pushing increased research funds for cleaner burning engines, real fuel production alternatives like algae. Things that benefit everyone, AND reduce environmental impact. But by default I'm going to automatically assume your motive is to argue for higher taxes and economic austerity, and of course I'll get turned off pretty quick.

You're certainly entitled to your point of view, but don't try to tell me what I believe.

I think of the feminist concept as just a tool, in the toolbox of the modern miserable, sex-obsessed, bossy, and manipulative woman. The people who use that tool come off as power hungry and getting off on control. You could call that viewpoint insecure, or you could call it being annoyed by people who look at life through terms of how much power they have and what is holding them back from getting more, and don't have much else to talk about. To each their own.