Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Nintendo's Right, but being Jerks about it... (Score 2) 283

Notch has a lot more to gain from the goodwill of letting people share his games. He's a much smaller game developer than Nintendo and depends more on having the good graces of his fans. An Nintendo doesn't have much to lose. Most people won't see anything wrong Nintendo just soaks up the ad revenue from the video. It's a bit absurd that the people who make these videos think they can profit from the game.

Comment: Re:Easy... (Score 1) 1121

For the sake of argument--and I am not a Genesis literalist--it's kind of crude to assume we know what kind of "behavior God on high would engage in." One could imagine that God would have to lower Himself and speak on terms the little creatures would understand. You could say that no emperor would ever engage in baby talk, but when the man needs to communicate to his toddler, he's going to dumb it down a lot. Christian non-literalists can argue that God communicates symbolicly in very human ways--liberally using myths and what not (not pun intedended)--because it the best way to get his point across to the little meat creatures running around down here.

Comment: Re:I used to block ads (Score 1) 978

by Lanterns (#43132579) Attached to: Game Site Wonders 'What Next?' When 50% of Users Block Ads
Thank you for the uncited numbers you pulled from the air. I think they are fictitious and insupportable. News report: Businesses exist to make a profit. Websites have found no better way to make a profit on free sites than ads. The world ain't Wikipedia. If you can't put up with the ads, you aren't going to open your wallet, and those free sites are going to go under really quick if the majority of users all use Adblock.

Comment: Eyewitnesses confirmed bloodshed in the Square! (Score 1) 235

by Lanterns (#36346754) Attached to: Wikileaks Cables Say No Bloodshed Inside Tiananmen Square
Since when was Wikileaks the authorized source of truth? Eyewitnesses and journalists present at the massacre have stated that there was bloodshed at the Square. Why should I believe some anonymous Wikileaks document over other testimony? For example, Chinese-Canadian Journalist Jan Wong wrote about the incident in detail in her book "Red China Blues." Granted, she could have been lying, but give me a reason I should believe Wikileaks over her. A few sources: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/interviews/wong.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTWBDMen7bo

Hey, diddle, diddle the overflow pdl To get a little more stack; If that's not enough then you lose it all And have to pop all the way back.

Working...