Overclocking has always been, and will probably always be, expert-level shit. Except for OCing those Celeron 300As to 450... that was child's play.

Power supply that can feed the card what it needs and then some.

That part's funny, because it used to be that you had to account for the hard disk and CPU consumption; now the GPU takes more power that either of those.

Oh, I see. But you're one of those enlightened (special pleading) Americans, right?

The thing is, 10 year old kids usually aren't ready for violent games in much the same way they aren't ready for professional sports or quantum mechanics.

We have this idea that kids as old as 16 aren't "fully formed" people.

I'm not so worried about 16 year olds. But as a society, we have governments that tell us that even 18 year olds aren't ready to drink, buy their own health insurance, gamble, get a mortgage, or own a handgun.

What evidence do we have that the Roman Empire existed?

Nope, she's dead of natural causes. And I'm having trouble following your AC logic.

I think I still have a VT-420 somewhere, but an inferior VT-101 is way cooler now with its heavy spring keyboard and robust beeps.

Heck, we had to do this with PCs in the late 80s through the mid 90s before OS/2 and Windows 95. People had DOS boot menus in autoexec.bat so they could choose to boot up with maximum conventional memory, or to emulate EMS in XMS for Lucasarts games. I loved OS/2 because, while the Windows 3.x people had to exit and maybe reboot to play a game, I could fire it up from my desktop for a quick break of X-Wing and quit right back to the paper I was working on. That was amazing back then... unless you had an Amiga. But then, Amigas didn't have memory protection, so you'd better remember to save the paper first.

Basically, he's camping the spawn point in an FPS.

How about if my mother is driving drunk? How about if she's run down someone?

Sounds like it isn't working, because so many people are dying, right? Prove me wrong.

So I'd say that the cops are doing a damn fine job when they're ticketing/arresting people speeding, running lights, drinking/texting while driving and so on.

I'm not sure what data you've used to come to this conclusion. Don't we need a data point comparing traffic deaths WITHOUT heavy enforcement?

While most of the examples you have given *could* be stopped if the crime committed is in progress by a beat cop the majority are up to detectives and special divisions of the police force to handle/solve, which you usually don't see driving around in marked cars.

People are often pulled over by police in unmarked cars, as well. It's part of the fundraising by the police state. If I were governor of my state, unmarked cars would be illegal to use except by detectives. An unmarked car can still be identified as police because of the modifications, but they've purposely made the most obvious part-- the light bar-- extremely small. If you are in REAL trouble and need a cop, you won't even be able to find a cruiser because it'll mostly look like any old Charger or Taurus. If they're really supposed to protect us, as the anti-gun lobby suggests, they need to be VISIBLE.

Yes, it does matter. I think the lesson here is that someone died because TWO drivers weren't paying attention. Thus, not paying attention is the issue. In the same situation, if the stopped driver had been playing with his stereo or looking through the glove box, he would be no more or less in danger.

You're right, they are wrong. It's the loosening of lending requirements by Fannie and Freddie in 1999 that caused the bubble. The Bush administration wanted to create an agency in the Treasury department to oversee them, but Barney Frank and his buddies shot it down. Ironically, in 2006 Frank claimed Republicans tried to do nothing to avoid the crisis.