"NASA Boss Accused of Breaking Arms"

Das parts of NASA's loss of funds. You gots to break legs if youse wants to makes moneys.

Designers like myself have a hard time because so many people say it's, "photoshop for free!!11@omgwtfbbq," whenever a new release comes out. If people stopped making the absurd assertion that they're remotely comparable for most pro work, we wouldn't make a stink about it. But even the summary here is saying it's that good—it isn't. I would call it a decent tool, one worth spending time with, but it's not in the same league yet. It needs layer styles (which from the way most open source projects go, I can see them pulling off a far better version than Adobe currently does), better typography tools, nested files and other non-destructive techniques.

Just quit comparing them and we'll stop complaining.

Infinitely worse.

Many companies buy check paper (complete with anti-fraud holographs, watermarks etc.), and then print on top of that using a regular laser printer. Being able to remove just the laser overprint.

That having been said, it wouldn't take long for the check paper companies to begin making check paper that will fail upon being introduced to the green laser field.

Government investing in private industry isn't exactly Bolshevik, now is it? But you'd rather attack people than ideas any day.

Well then, we agree in more ways than one: english is stupid!

Actually, JPEG doesn't lack ICC, or EXIF. Every camera that makes JPEG files embeds EXIF. Any suitable photo editor can embed ICC profiles as well.

I'll agree that the lack of alpha channel sucks, and that JPEG's lossy compression can be improved, but it's simply untrue that neither EXIF nor ICC can't be embedded. I do it all the time.

Randian thought and Objectivism works on the basic question of, "Is this good for me?" At it's core is selfishness, and quite a few people—from christians to secular humanists—find this selfishness repugnant.

Before you claim I don't know what I'm talking about, I used to be a Randian drone. It's a sick, inhuman mindset that places self on a pedestal above all others.

What kind of twisted, self-righteous bullshit is this? I've known plenty of underhanded, socially-maladjusted, smarter-than-thou, back-stabbing engineers in my short time here. Explain that.

If you're going to start throwing out anecdotal crap as evidence to justify your blind hate for people with other talents than yourself you might as well give up. I'd expect a man of science such as yourself to at least try harder.

I hate the vast majority of pop, on principal, and even I know who the fuck she is. Good voice, actually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adele_(singer)

I don't want "everyone happy." I don't want the US happy when ICE wants to seize a few thousand domains. I don't want Gaddafi happy when he wants to cut down political revolutionaries.

I don't know what precisely this system should look like. I just know that a UN commission wouldn't work, just like the current system lets in the US government whenever it pleases.

First I didn't affirm US control. I just said the UN is a bad option. In all honesty, I don't want the US to have control. Incidents such as ICE wiping out all those domains a few months back, just reenforced those opinions. With US's own human rights record—although not as bad as many nations—has blots throughout history, such as slavery, genocide and internment of native people, Gitmo, Japanese internment camps, etc.

The UNHRC exists in the same power structure that routinely puts dictatorships on the Security Council. Libya isn't some one-in-a-million mistake.

I imagine the Economic and Social Council would command the agency that controls domain names. Up until 2006, they also controlled the Human Rights Commission, until it was moved under the General Assembly. Many members states of the Human Rights Commission had terrible human rights records. That was why it was moved to the General Assembly. To further prove my point, when it moved not much changed.

With that in mind, I don't think they're unrelated at all. If they can't get things as important as the UNHRC right, how are we to expect they'll succeed in things like domain name registration.

The UN put Libya on the Human Rights Council. They only suspended their involvement when Gaddafi started fucking over the people who asked for better government. I don't want the UN involved. At all.

English is a stupid language full of exceptions. It took me years to get the apostrophe out of, "its," when used possessively. If we referred to it as, "Google's mobile operating system," it'd be correct. When we use the pronoun we remove the apostrophe while it's possessive, because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."

We native speakers get it wrong because English—in spite of its advantages—is a language chock full of weird rules that always have exceptions. Not that it's an excuse for the editors though.

The legal and economic definitions of theft indicate the loss of a physical item. If I steal something from a store, that item needs to be replaced. If I infringe your copyright by downloading your music, you've at worst lost a sale. The economic impact is a lot less because you're not actually losing real goods that already have work invested into them.

Is it wrong? Yes.
Does it suck? Yes.
Is it a theft. No.

That's certainly a conclusion you can come to, but that also means it's difficult to create deep, lasting relationships with anyone but family. Sort of a quality vs. quantity thing.