The fact that we're still arguing about this is kinda depressing. I admit that there are some violent, awful games, but I personally could state a list of incredibly good games, games which carry a more powerful message than a lot of books or film, and simply could not achieve that without being at least a little violent and visceral.

This article does bring up the interesting point, that violent media has equal potential to make people violent, no matter what form of media it is (the 2-minutes hate from 1984 springs to mind)

But that said, the debate is still ridiculous because Video Games fall under free speech, and therefore should not be banned, whatever their content, just like we treat books, movies, and tv.

First reaction: How are people still denying this???
Second reaction: We are so screwed

After spending a significant amount of time studying the data and politics surrounding this issue, I concluded that global warming is a baked cake at this point (no pun intended) The US contains a little over 4.5% of the worlds population says Google yet we are responsible for the majority of world emissions. Now consider that we are trying to cut back, meanwhile China is rapidly industrializing, increasing its footprint with every passing day. When you think of the footprint China will have when it is as industrialized as the USA, any hope of avoiding serious global damage is tiny at this point.

The Fermi Paradox, this thing, says that we should not only have encounted "life" by now, but we should have encountered life at least as complex as ours over and over again by now.

Kinda creepy to think about the endless possibilities out there. To quote Douglas Adams: "Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space"

Yeah, disabling javascript is generally a pretty good practice and can save one quite a bit of money, and make browsing less hazardous. Also wow "iCopyright"? I'm trying to decide if the name makes me dislike them more than the practice of charging $150 for quotes