P.S - Addendum to female responsibility, a big duh, because you will be the one bringing the child to term, not him.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Egotistical? Unfair? Take your crap up with genetics, evolution, god, the universe, all creation, nature, (or continue to blame men) over if it's fair if the responsibility is put on the one who carries the child to term and biologically assumes all medical related risks to it.
Why is it fucking fair that men generally tend to be stronger and suited for hard labor and that no feminist group that exists is advocating for more women in heavy stress highly physically demanding work in high risk environments.
Fair my ass, don't even try it. Men tend to be stronger and better equipped to handle these jobs so we tend to use our biological differences to advantage. There are women who are stronger than men but they're the exception, not the rule.
Women when they get a penis inserted into them can become risk to growing another human, medical stresses or even death. Buck up, take some ownership over your body AND the responsibility that goes with it. Quit trying to spread the blame and responsibility when in the end you get sole choice.
You want equal responsibility? Fine, we'll make it equal, which (Oh my gods, here comes an ego statement! Fire up your double standard machines!) that men, if they have EQUAL responsibility, then they get EQUAL control over the situation. Yeah I bet you don't like that thought, everyone loves MEN being responsible for the consequences or "equally" responsible even though they're not equals in making the decision on if you keep that child, have an abortion, stay together or pay child support.
Equal rights equal responsibility. If you have MORE RIGHTS on what is to become of that child, then you GET MORE RESPONSIBILITY too. Suck it the fuck up.
You should be sad for humanity, because men or women, both do some pretty shitty things.
That aside, women, rightfully in my opinion, call out that it's their body, they have the right to make choices that affect their body.
Yet for everyone pointing a finger a men, what happened to this right to choose what happens to your body, what, you get the right to chose but don't have
Male birth control is the right step forward for equality for men. You see, although all the more extreme fem groups are all looking at the CEO's and measuring their own personal wealth against it, deciding it's the old boys club, there are other areas that have inequity for men, such as decreased pleasure sexually to prevent pregnancy, the way the courts favor women for parenting, that family courts are HEAVILY populated by women, almost always a female judge with female representatives, and that men are on the hook for children women decide to keep or come to term.
Well, this is one way we can make our own choices about what responsibilities we're going to accept and it will be out of a woman's hand, so I'm all for it.
Well, this will take away that excuse for behaving irresponsibly.
Right, because men make the choice if the child was given up for adoption, day after pill or abortions. Or the fact that men don't have to carry a growing life inside of them with potential medical risks and bringing into the world, you know, because, that's clearly not possibly in the range of responsibility for a woman.
I'm responsible myself, but seriously, if I would get a tiny life form growing inside of me, I would assume it's MY responsibility to decide if *I* want that to happen to me. Pro choice pro your body pro your responsiblity? Yeah no one likes that last part. Lot of special interest groups are pro everything I want except the responsibility that comes with that freedom of choice.
This alternative will be a true freedom for men however, especially for couples when birth control doesn't work well for some women out there.
However, this will also protect men from some other issues, like forced responsibility for the irresponsibility of women. If a women makes the mistake of not ensuring she will not get pregnant when both parties claim not to want children, there is no forced responsibility for a child to grow up in a broken home and finances garnished. You'll lose that "Well You're A MAN and you're responsible too!" Because a lot of us will be, a lot more than you would expect, and it will shift things in our favor.
In addition, this will be so new that for women who do cheat (No no, not accusing all women, men do it to, yatta yatta, get your narrow minded self interests out), it will create a different scenario where more women won't be on birth control, but men will be. So when she suddenly gets knocked up, this is going to be interesting on a social / society level.
That's what they judge as performance right?
"My teacher told me the sky is blue because rainbow faries decided it to be" Grit - Studies rainbow faeries exaustively, scores high on test! Great personality! Very open! Pat on back, here's your fucking marks!
Intelligence, "My teacher tells me that the sky is blue because of magic faeries. This of course, is silly and can be explained in more detail scientifically"
Intelligence: Submits paper on light refraction within the atmosphere.
Scores lower. This wasn't the report the assignment was asking for.
Questioning people, having people not like you, not doing exactly as they say are all trade mark things you can do to lower your performance in school.
Tests are not graded by machines. Teachers have been known to be pissed at a student and deliberately give them lower marks.
Anyone trying to claim personality is more important potenitally will spread it from school to life and in a lot of ways it's true.
But you can see this popular people are on the rise thanks to things like social media, so here it is.
"If I don't like you, you will be less successful. Do what I like, because that means you are open and have a great personality"
Manipulation at it's finest.
Where are your statistics? This sounds like something just pulled out of no where.
Here's some facts. - Vehicles travelling the same speed and same direction cannot cause can accident. It's called physics. We can all agree on this. If the car in front of you is going 120 KM/H, and you are going 120 KM/H, neither of you change directions, it's physically impossible to collide.
If the average driver is going 120 KM/H, and you are going the speed limit of 110 KM/H, you are now an object in the way of every other drive on the road. Now, as road safety is for the masses of the road, not the individual, who is flawed? Clearly the single person causing a disruption in the flow of traffic.
Also at higher speeds, the average driver tends to leave significantly more space between them and other drives. That's from my personal experience on the road, I've seen plenty of examples at higher than usual speeds where traffic is quite spread out.
Also if vehicles are moving at a faster rate, it's more likely that vehicles will remove themselves from that road faster, preventing congestion. This will also increase the distance between vehicles.
The slower traffic is going, the more moves drivers make to try and get ahead, changing lanes, having to change speeds because traffic is slowing down in front of them. This leads to accidents.
Statsitically, the more variance in speed in direction, each time you make a change, you increase your odds of getting into an accident, as mentioned above, same speed, same direction, no accident. So that means 1 of out X changes in speeds or direction changes, there will be an accident.
Reducing the variance in speed and direction changes is the only true solution. If 80% of people are driving faster than the speed limit (Seriously, the highways out here, everyone always goes 10-20 KM faster than the speed limit, entire flow of traffic except the odd driver) then the speed limit should be based on the 80%. If more drives increase their speeds to the new speed limit, 85%, or even 90% of drivers going the same speed will reduce risks.
Trying to make people slow down in places that don't make any sense isn't working. Why don't we try speeding up some of the other drives in places that are safe to do so?
The question is, how much force can it handle? Large electro-mags can pick up entire cars. Sure, it's huge, but it's lifting up 2700 lbs+. Also the surface area is large because the objects surface area is large. If a really high powered small electro mag was used, it would just rip out that piece of metal.
How many pounds of force can the small one withstand? It's possible using two small unpowered magnets to easily make one that could crush a hand if a hand was implace and restraints were let go on the mags.
I imagine it could potentially with a little voltage withstand a lot of torque, and limited slip to prevent spin outs, it might be fantastic for rovers.
They're often in lower gravity environments to begin with.
People are calling the comment about burial rituals possibly spreading the disease racist.
You know what brings joy to my heart? That we can label a bacteria or virus racist. The best part, is the virus doesn't give a shit, not one shit. It doesn't care about your political agenda or anything else, or your self entitled right to do whatever you want without consequences.
I hope everyone who considers what was said racist is somewhere with extreme risk of infection based on their practices and the problem takes care of itself.
Those kids at school, boys and girls who were socially popular, always trying to stay on top of the social list are the ones who managed to make it into managers by doing the same clicky behavior.
They are also the same people who treated techies / geeks poorly. They are now your bosses. They don't appreciate what you do and just want it done as cheap and disposible as possible for their profits.
Right, I agree fully with what you said.
I've died in ED, it cost me a few credits. Depending on the mission I take it costs me anywhere from 4 missions worth or 1/20th of a mission.
So as for starting out, the penalties really aren't there that much, much friendlier than say, Eve online which I do not rate as casual.
I assume they scale the higher you get but so does the mission pay. It's enough that I definitely do not
Well specifically I don't know how it would tie into the legend of zelda, there are plenty of games where regardless of male female escaping would be fine.
I mean specifically more than, Gannon is supposed to be defeated. You're not supposed to just escape, or at least in the past.
So maybe if Zelda was imprisoned "someplace" by Gannon or whatever antangonist, then comes after him and defeats him I'd be cool with that.
I just had this concept of Zelda being in the same tower as Gannon and escaping. It just sounded, like running away from Gannon vs wupping his ass. Even if she smashed him on the way out, just the concept on it's own sounds like a rather short quest.
I also don't think an entire game based on being inside gannons castle or whatever would be that exciting. This is all regardless of gender.
There is absolutely longer latency using TCP as the process does not proceed forward without receiving the next packet.
We're talking real world, internet, not your private lans or internal corp networks.
You did exactly what I thought you would, you tried to get exceptionally technical with ambiguous technical statements about TCP vs UDP.
You are correct that in an environment with no other traffic, UDP and TCP transmission would not introduce additional latency. I wouldn't want to be hired
by someone who couldn't handle real world concepts, you sound like like potentially a middle manager that has no idea of real world concepts.
So I'll explain it. Why would TCP have a higher latency over the internet? As you don't control the network, you also cannot ensure the quality of the networks you are routed through. This means when packets are dropped, you wait to receive another packet, as it sends the packet again In most voice conversations, this causes a delay as it buffers communications before playing them on your end. E.G receives enough packets.
When using UDP it sends the packets without waiting for an acknowledgement of the receipt of the packets, therefore when transmitting packets and some get lost, you lose a little voice quality or get the odd artifact.
Alternatively, you could use TCP, and adjust the buffers so that it doesn't wait for the person transmitting to stop talking before sending the information. If it all reaches there with no problem, no issue, if packets are dropped a long the way, you will get artifacts and jitter.
So yes, adjusting the buffers makes a difference, but can also increase latency in environments where you do not control the internet and travel fair distances network wise.
So the reality is, you're an idiot that's omitting fine details to try to make yourself look correct. This is akin to someone who preys on those less knowledgeable managers to make their co-workers look bad by spouting information that is correct in specific situations, but doesn't apply to what is actually being discussed.
It's a terrible practice, if you know anything about networking at all or are in a position where you can decide if someone is an expert or not, you would know that the scenarios I've described are accurate.
Obviously your natural defense is a strong offense, point out other peoples flaws and discussed things like trying to distract, which is entirely what you're doing. It's called projecting. If you weren't doing it, you wouldn't have put the first post you did.
Now, I don't need to convince anyone reading it's right, as they know it is, which is why they're not commenting, as they're more mature than I am and I shouldn't have responded in the first place. As for insulting you, well, yes I did. I do apologize for it, but even with that, I'm not removing it from this post either, as you're being an idiot.
The difference between fund the game and buying the beta is none.
I funded the game at 75$ at a time when they were offering beta for that level of funding.
Others did not.
No, you're right on that I don't think they would have been accepted.
However, now that they are, it's done. It's too late. Being mad at a different device doing it is insanity.
I could understand people who refute all technology that has this behavior, but not when it comes down to the model of the object doing it.
P.S Eve has in game advertisements but they are theme fit and for eve companies, not real world ads, they felt natural. It wouldn't bother me if it was the same but about a real product. I would ignore it just the same.
Maybe they can add an adblock component to your ship for a subscription