I just sent my mom pictures of my vacation that I uploaded to Picasa. Predictably, I had to go over her house to show her how to browse them. She does not have a google plus account, and was able to view them fine. My pictures are not shared with everybody, just my family circle in google plus.

It's possible that the fact that she has a gmail address is what allowed her to pass through.

Just found out that TF2 is now free from these comments. I just finished creating a Steam account and it'll be about 3-4 hours before TF2 is installed. It's one of those games that I really wanted to try at the time, but never got around to. Finding out it's free and active is more than enough to get me to give it a try.

I think the main reason I never tried it is that I didn't realize that it still had an active community, and I've been tired of paying for games I get bored with easily. Also, though the game may have slipped to 10 bucks, I never even knew it was that cheap.

On topic, I tried a trial of WOW about a year ago and played about an hour before I got tired of it. Took me about 2 weeks before I completely deleted it though. I have no intention of downloading it again due to the changed terms. I know I'll get hooked if I play long enough, but while I'm still clear eyed it just doesn't seem to be that fun of a game.

Because you don't want a "shitty half-assed console port."

If what they're saying is true, what does it matter what their motive is? If WebGL is a "severe security risk", what's the point of attacking Microsoft for pointing that out and not supporting it? Conversely, if Microsoft did support something that gave IE and Windows a new gaping security hole, wouldn't everyone then jump on Microsoft for not doing the right thing? Also, if Microsoft has a competing platform which is a lot more secure, why shouldn't they support that instead? I don't see how it's their responsibility to fix a technology which is not prepared for primetime, when they already have technologies that do the same thing without the same amount of risk.

I really can't figure out what Microsoft is being blamed for here.

Or maybe he was just trying to communicate an idea and wasn't worried about being graded.

Online retailers have usually only been doing that for states they had a physical presence in. I guess when both the seller and buyer are in the same state, it's simply a sales tax and not a "use tax" and remains the obligation of the seller to collect those taxes.

A coworker just showed me his ambulance bill as he was raving about it. He crashed his motorcycle about 1.5 blocks from the hospital, and paid about $800. I joked with him that if that ever happens again, he should decline the ambulance and call a taxi.

That kind of thing only works if everyone is actually prepared to quit. That's usually not the case, and could backfire horribly if your bluff is called. Threatening to quit is a lot like pulling out a gun. You better be prepared to pull the trigger if the threat alone doesn't work.

Hmm.

It seems to me that jailbreaking was specifically authorized both to run applications and to connect to a different network.

Source: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

You don't get calls when they want new software on their Linux box?

Yeah, that's pretty much nonsense. Like a lot of critics who don't know what they're talking about, you haven't read/watched the very material you're criticizing.

My favorite is people who tell me a movie sucked because they fell asleep in the first 15 minutes.

I actually read the article, and no it isn't.