...Since when does "accessing the internet" equate to "surfing the web"? They gave checking emails and surfing the web as examples of accessing the internet, but I'd like to see if "accessing the internet" was the actual question or not. Every single time I drive my phone "accesses the internet". Google play on an android smartphone? Hell yeah that's accessing the internet. Sending a text at a stop light? That's google voice for me, so accessing the internet. Fucking GPS? Yep, accessing the internet once again to get all that sweet, sweet map data. I don't know of anyone who owns a smartphone but doesn't use it for GPS in the car. The only exceptions are those with a dedicated GPS, which, again, accesses the actual internet to download map data, and get routing information.

Not to mention if he has asserts like project files for models. You know, like Maya and Blender project files (not just the renders). That'd be pretty awesome

Ahem.
while ( strcmp( (*dest++ = *src++), '\0') != 0 );
or, if you feel that's a bit much (personally, I do)
while ( (*dest++ = *src++) != '\0' );

Otherwise, yeah, much agreed.

Also, I'd still have a

if ( !empty($category) )
$page = $category + '.html';

just for readability's sakes. Also, if you ever need to handle a category in a custom fashion, it's easy to modify the code as such:

if ( empty($category) ) {
//Error! Mayhaps set $page to "#"?
}
else if ( strcmp($category,'value') === 0) {
//set page to something special
}
else { //default behavior
$page = $category + '.html';
}

Using a switch would be good to, but you'd still have to text for emptyness before calling the switch

Anyway, probably procrastinated too much here as is

It's similar in the US. OSS development is definitely something to put on your resume (and even more so on a CV). It shows you like programming enough to do it in your spare time, which means you're less likely to be applying for a job just for the paycheck, and probably have more knowledge of programming that what is simply required by your position. Also, if they really want, they have access to a real world code samples from you.

If WD makes crappy mechanical drives, who makes good ones? (Cue some smart ass replying with "nobody")

Eh, only for high priced, small sized goods. International shipping is friggin expensive, even if you're getting it from Canada.

You laugh, but this happened with Guild Wars 2

So, what I'm hearing is that AMD will be releasing its new line of video cards right around Christmas season, when a lot of people get new systems anyway? I've never understood why nVidia and ATI release their first cards around spring. Sure, get the bugs out early I guess, and there's got to be a bunch of young kids who have summer jobs willing to put all their profit towards a new gaming rig, but I still find it hard to believe that it isn't more profitable to just release the cards around October-ish, maybe even in September so you can still cash in on all the kids who just finished up their summer jobs.

If they really do get that boost in sales from the new console generation, and take this extra time to put forth more powerful competition towards nVidia, this may actually turn things around for AMD. Now, if they would finally release some decent Linux drivers, I may be sold

Look, I rarely (if ever) buy games on steam if they're not on sale either. With very few exceptions (Christmas sale for Gods and Kings to name one), the games I buy for sub 10 bucks are never under a year old. So, you're not buying a new game.

This is an issue. The whole reason these games are no longer ~$50 is because they're old. If we make it a habit of only purchasing games a year old, how the hell can developers hope to recoup their development costs? What a proposition: Spend millions of dollars on a game, and don't expect to recoup any of that until a year after you release it. Talk about shitty cash flow.

Though, there is one giant assumption in my statement-- The assumption that games have to be sold around $50 new. Personally, I reject that idea, and feel that $40 or $30 is a much better proposition, depending on the game. If you're not making a AAA game that has a huge fan-base like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Assassins Creed, or Halo, you probably shouldn't be charging the full $50 (well, since I mentioned console games, I guess it's really $60). This would make your game more competitive. Sure, you can get the yearly rehash of the same game you've been playing for the better part of a decade, or you could get two games from either a totally new franchise or one you haven't tried yet for the same price instead. I feel the market would be a lot more competitive if this were the case, but that's just my opinion.

Also, I'm fairly certain Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo set minimum release prices in order to be approved for release on their systems, but if so, that's their failing.

You didn't have to buy a hard drive, only a network adapter. Agreed though, they were both wayyyy overpriced.
Also, while it was a lot better than anything at the time, I don't feel that xbox live gold has currently enough value to merit the 50 bucks a year membership fees. Especially considering how ad-riddled it is, and how PSN is free. Yes, playstation plus costs money, but you don't need that to game, or view the internet, or watch netflix, or download games.