Seems you have a taste for it as well.
Seems you have a taste for it as well.
Try opening a modern PSD in the old Photoshop for Windows 3.1 and see what error message doesn't pop up.
Have you actually tried doing that before you said this? Because of all formats, the Photoshop file format is incredibly backward compatible. I know at the very least you can open CS6 documents saved in compatibility mode (which is the default mode) in Photoshop 5.0 which was released in 1998.
You don't know the first thing about what you speak. The versions of Photoshop from the 3.1 era are lightyears ahead of the most modern version of MS Paint. That you have it so backwards and yet talk about the value of time is humorous to say the least.
Even Paint Shop Pro, which was Photoshop's much cheaper cousin in the Win 3.1 days is far superior to the most modern version of MS Paint, may it rest in peace.
Well you went and missed the point of my post, which is fine since I didn't actually quote the specific thing I was referring to but that's fine because I don't really care about the answer anyway.
Are you seriously attempting to suggest that something bad cannot be used for a good purpose?
You have to scroll down the length of an encyclopedia just to get to the various lists of entries all the while the site is telling you that you probably shouldn't ruin it for yourself. It's not like the guys who screamed "Dumbledore's dead!" at midnight book releases.
What's your point exactly? The source is intentionally available.
Wow. I have heard some dumb things come from you in the past, but I do believe this one might win some sort of medal, especially given the context of this discussion.
The problems with these movies is seemingly 90% of the public believes every detail about them as long as they don't contain vampires or other supernatural forces. We'll be hearing all sorts of moments in this movie pushed on others as if it's fact, and it's damn frustrating when you're trying to have a conversation with someone who can't see passed the fantasy of these stories because it's "based on a true story".
Except for the issue that no game company would do something so controversial, and even if one had the balls, no publisher would touch it with a hundred foot pole. We can't even let kids die in video games. You really think a game about being a terrorist would actually get publishing deals?
Shit would be all over the news how we're training kids to be terrorists and there would be all sorts of lobbying for it to get banned.
It would be a goddamn nightmare.
This guy is nothing but an attention whoring internet troll. He did what he did for nothing more than to try to publicly shame AT&T in the most irresponsible way possible, and generally goes out of his way to cause trouble all over the internet. He had no sense of care for the data he was putting under the public spotlight instead of sensibly disclosing the vulnerability to AT&T. For him to suggest he did because of AT&T's "egregiously negligence" yet chose himself to make the most egregiously negligent response is hypocritical to say the least.
I have no sympathy for this Weev guy. Do not liken his situation to Aaron Swartz. That would be doing a massive disservice to his memory. Tools like this should get what is coming to them.
When Windows was a dominant platform? You're joking, right? You aren't actually trying to suggest that mobile exclusives are a problem for Windows?
To be frank, not many PC users appreciate mobile ports when they happen anyway, given that they generally cost $1 on the mobile device, and $6-15 on PC as a straight port. Most people just don't see the value, and for good reason... Save for very few games, very few successfully make the transition to PC and do well.
The loads and loads of identical casual games might be good time wasters on phones, but that sort of casual gameplay doesn't often translate well to a PC release. The market just isn't all that interested in them. Trying to use android games to suggest that Linux is really picking up is downright silly and disingenuous to what everyone else means when we talk about gaming on Linux.
Don't expect steam for Linux to turn Linux into a gaming powerhouse. It has been around for Macs for a while now and the list of games available is extremely paltry in comparison to the Windows counterpart. Gaming on Windows isn't going anywhere, and it's certainly not going to be replaced by Linux anytime soon regardless of what you've read into the situation Valve is in.
Let me guess; you get called an idiot and referred to as sheeple a lot?
I think the problem with most alternatives is PayPal covers the most ground. I've been looking for alternatives to PayPal for a while now and none of them have covered the kind of ground PayPal does. Even Google's offering, which you would honestly kind of expect to be pretty widely available is only usable in a few countries.
I await the day PayPal is lost to the annals of obscurity.
A bit far from
You're not Dave. Who are you?