The story of that woman (I will not say her name for fear of censorship as on Reddit and 4chan) revealed the unethical relationships game journalists had with game developers, but that was only the beginning. Recently it came out that EA had discovered that about 40,000 of its user accounts' passwords were stolen, but they asked the game journalists who knew about it not to report it, and they happily obliged since they were friends.
The collusion and intense cover-up of the corruption inside gaming media by various media sites has been astounding, and the article and summary here and another example of that. The anti-gamergate crowd seems to hold onto the initial perceived misogyny in order to push an agenda. I will repeat one more time: this is not about feminism. It is about ethics.
"Scientists Discover Light Is Made of Oscillating Electric and Magnetic Waves"
"It's Official: The Earth Is Not Flat"
The worst part is how long it takes the game to process the AI's turn. During the first 100 turns, it takes maybe a second to process the next turn, but it grows to 30s - 1min in the late game depending on the map size (at least in my case with a 3.0GHz quad-core CPU and an 8800GTS). It would be great to see some effort put into the optimization of the turn processing algorithm to dampen the exponential increase of processing time.
Also, for once I'd like to play a strategy game where the higher difficulties are differentiated by the intelligence of the AI instead of simply giving them stat bonuses and extra troops/policies/technologies at the beginning.
I have no experience in aviation, but could the plane's second turn be explained by an attempt to orient the plane with a nearby airport's runway? Is the magnitude of the turn too great for that to be the case? If scenarios involving a fire or sudden depressurization are true, then perhaps the initial turn and drop in altitude were an attempt by the pilots to protect themselves and the passengers, and the second turn was meant to set an approach to a runway for an emergency landing. It could be that the pilots lost consciousness before reaching the runway, and the plane just continued on. Of course, that would mean the plane had flown back over land, over an airport even, and in that case it would have certainly been detected by radar. But perhaps an instrumentation failure caused them to be far off the mark.
I'm just thinking aloud at this point. But the question stands: why would the plane make a second turn?
1. Keep your current contributors. By the time you read this, you'll (hopefully) have realized the greatest perceived value in Slashdot is the comments. Slashdot users provide that greatest of content you deliver, but Beta cripples the ability to read and create that content. You have to accept this, or Slashdot will succumb to the entropy of Web 2.0 and be forgotten.
2. Make lots of money. Beta is pretty and will attract a "modern" crowd for that sweet, sweet ad revenue. But why will they stay if there's no longer anything to distinguish the site? Once a newcomer wastes an hour reading comments on an NSA article, they'll see the value in the site and return. No classic, no comments, no ad revenue.
Make the right decision! There's no reason you can't please everyone!
why do you follow religion A? accident of birth: you were born in a country where most people follow A. and so, you are taught and are 'sure' that A is true.
if you were born in country B, you'd be 'sure' that B's religion is true and factual.
I wish I had mod points to use here. I had this same realization many years ago, and soon after I abandoned my religion of birth (Christiantiy) and decided to pursue science. Unfortunately this argument doesn't work well on most religious people since they can come up with a handful of names that converted to their religion, which they use to argue that a truly enlightened person will find his way to the "correct" religion. Of course, they never mention anyone who converts in the other direction...