I would consider the death to be about the time of the Activision merger, so 2009-2010. Not really a decade yet.

Microcenter has a tolerable $400 2560x1440 these days, but yeah, they're a little rare still.

But as time goes on, that may change. I just wish more of them were 16x10, I really hate losing 10% of my screen space on the off chance that I never do anything but watch movies.

I consider it somewhat a good thing, simply because Steam doesn't fit my use case well, so I buy stuff from GoG.

I'd also point out that there's a fair number of 2560x1440 monitors out there now.

[citation needed]

No, quite the opposite, really.

People who don't make mistakes are either (1) perfect or (2) unwilling to try things without total confidence.

#1 doesn't exist. #2 is pathological and crippling.

People who don't have a history of interesting and possibly impressive mistakes are almost certainly a bad fit for any job important enough to bother with a background check. Thing is, if we were comparing the teenager to a much older person, the "irresponsible kid" comparison might be relevant. But that's not what's on the table; we're comparing two adults, one of whom did stupid stuff years earlier when their brain wasn't even finished growing.

I don't think that makes it a misquote.

Especially when you look at Google's ongoing practices when it comes to privacy, personal data, or people who could conceivably have a reason to care about their privacy.

I have a Wii U. I use it at least some. I have no intention of getting either the PS4 or the Xbox One. This is not unique among gamers I know.

Well, one answer might be that they could get the same rights everyone else does, to ask to be addressed or referred to a given way. But not necessarily the right to demand that everyone else be referred to the same way.

But I've only ever known one, and so far as I can tell, if her family weren't abusive she'd be fine, it's just that they're abusive to her. It's sorta like the distinction between "gay people" and "people who struggle with homosexuality".

See, that's the thing.

I don't want people going around separating me from who I am. Autism is not a thing that happened to me. It's what I am. If you made a thing otherwise like me, but not autistic, that thing would be a person, sure, but it would be a different person.

Please, please do NOT use "person-first" language.

I'm autistic. Most of my friends are autistic. I know dozens to hundreds of autistic people.

Guess how many people I have ever met who are autistic, and prefer to be called a "person with autism"? Hint: The number is slightly lower than one, and it's an integer.

Try going around referring, not to women, but to "persons with femaleness", and see how that works out for you.

A randomly selected blog article on the topic.

Basically, person-first language marks you as aligned with the Autism Speaks folks and their anti-autistic-people propaganda machine. Avoid it.

The distinction you point to is not as clear-cut as it might seem, because often these are the same people under different circumstances.

I do just fine. I have friends whose underlying autistic traits aren't any "more severe" or whatever, but who were raised by people who tried to force them to "be normal", and they have a much harder time.

Overload me, and I can't understand or use spoken language reliably. I can still read and write, though. But if no one ever gives you a pen, you can come across as a lot less capable than you are...

Yes, eating certain radioisotopes is dangerous. Some isotopes concentrate in areas of the body and emit radiation that is much more harmful when it is in the body (alpha radiation).

However, The chart is given in Sv. Sv takes into account that some radiation is more harmful than others. So, the biological effects from 1 mSv should be the same whether it came from an alpha emmiter or a beta emmiter.

Again, some radionuclides concentrate in parts of the body (others are eliminated quickly - see effective halflife which combines radiological halflife and biological halflife). So, how can we know how many mSv we might get from ingesting one isotope or another? You want to look at commited dose. This is a calculation of how much dose (mSv) you recieve from ingesting some radioisotope. You then use that figure, in mSv, to compare against the chart on xkcd. What you might be interested in is ALI (annual limit on intake). This will give you an amount of a radionuclide (measured in activity or mass) that, if ingested, will give you the highest allowable dose (measured in mSv).

So, you can compare the damage done by various radioisotopes done to you in various ways if you are comparing them in the right units, mSv. But you couldn't compare them just by giving the amount of substance (without considering what kind of radiation and what in the body was irradiated). But, those calculations can be done, and the answer is given in mSv or mrem. This is why the xkcd chart uses mSv for the units, so that a meaningful comparison can be made.

Get a Wii U, then you can play on the main TV and allow others to watch TV without interrupting your session.

A guy whose company uses stack ranking is not in a position to complain about non-cooperative behavior.

This is a question about at the level of "yeah, if humans evolved from primates, why are there still APES?!?!?"

Basically, no one can explain it to you, because that you're asking at all tells us you are not seriously interested in the topic, and are either acting in bad faith or not patient enough to read through a complicated explanation.