andallas

I disagree that Manning deserves a pardon, because she was significantly more (read completely) careless. Not only about the content of what was released, but the manner in which it was released. Comparing Manning's actions to Snowden's is naive at best.

I'm from Portland and I had smoked when I was younger as most people do, however I stopped around 20. 30 now and I smoke most days due to the legality change in OR.

Also have some friends in Denver who started back up after it became legal.

Just some more anecdotal 'evidence' to go off of.

Oh, and it's Venus, get it, No Man's Sky! Haha, good job JPL

I see you No Man's Sky

So glad I kickstarted this. Very excited about the progress. Keep on with it. One of the projects I'm okay waiting a long time for because I know it's going to be worth the wait!

I understand how you were just trying to make a point, but it just doesn't make any sense.

You say that "people who are assholes, aren't assholes". Well... are they or aren't they?

Then you say that they may be suffering from Asperger's and that the commenter above is lumping them together.

The issue with this argument is that the commenter above took problem with the other commenter about saying these perceived assholes have a mental illness, and how that negatively impacts those who actually have a mental illness. Your argument (metaphor?) is that by saying someone is an asshole is lumping those with Asperger's in, when Asperger's wasn't even mentioned.

Regardless of how your metaphor didn't actually make any sense, you then go on to say that "GamerGate" sub-community (what does that honestly even really mean???) attracts 'such people', implying that GamerGate is full of people with Asperger's. Then imply that something needs to 'be done about it'.

What is wrong with people with Asperger's? Why are you picking on them?

That's a nice trap there. If I don't mention anything, you'll claim (or at least there will be a tacit implication) that you've "won" any argument here.

However if I do provide sources (articles written by you and/or rooshv), tweets, whatever, then there is the implication I'm "stalking" you or him. I'd rather not get involved in any such drama.

To be clear, by history I meant that the two of you have both written/talked/tweeted about each other (in generally negative ways). My intent there was to agree with the person who commented about how this whole situation is a "shit sandwich".

ahh, thanks for clarifying, wasn't sure if you were implying something else.

In regards to your question, yes things got bad, unfortunately what is hard to see from the outside, is that the vast majority of the harassment was originally done by outside third parties who just wanted to troll two groups. They harassed some people (mostly women) then said they were part of GamerGate. This wasn't even remotely true, and they admitted to this. Unfortunately the other side got caught up in the harassment and the claim that was done by GamerGate to ever actually think, "Why would this person who is harassing me (which is illegal) mention they were part of GamerGate (which was originally about Games Media, and had literally nothing to do with women in tech)?"

Follow that up with lots of mudslinging on both sides, and neither side being that willing to 'dig-deep' into the facts, and you get a year long 'cyber-war' between two groups of people who probably have much more in common than they think.

Maybe I need to read a bit better. I don't deny that they are different people, but I guess I thought the linked article was more important than just a side comment.

I don't follow you on that last bit, about noticing how she didn't mention the username. I feel like you mean to imply something, but maybe I'm not following?

I agree with you, but I think they were talking about past events maybe? Their is a history between FreeBSDGirl and the roosh guy. (By history, I mean going back and forth online, not a personal history).

I went back and counted, there are 6 mentions of GamerGate (not including the tag) and all of them are anecdotal references by FreeBSDGirl. In fact, the primary article in question (the guy that wants to legalize rape) doesn't mention GamerGate at all, or even remotely allude to it.

P.S. Thanks for the downvote rather than a reply. It really shows your willingness to talk about issues and not just jump to conclusions...

What does this have to do with GamerGate? This is a feminist talking about an MRA, neither of those things are GamerGate...

I feel like you have conflated the issues a bit maybe?

Thank you, if people kept agreeing with him I was about to have an aneurysm. I have a rental property in upstate NY that was built in 1895 and is at least a century ahead of a mud hut. I'd argue several centuries, but I guess it depends on which civilization you are comparing it to.

I think you're right, I read a few months back that grass is actually much more efficient in terms of reducing carbon. I'll have to look that up.

That is EXACTLY what I'm thinking. I read a few weeks back about how superconductors allow the free-flow of electricity without any loss of power, couple that with this shielding and you could (in theory) create a completely secure form of communication (during transit, not necessarily secure at the endpoints).

Keep in mind that there are also experienced studios that don't get all their funding from Kickstarter. I don't know (and doubt) if this was the case with this Kickstarter project.

$50,000 could have afforded them an artist for 6 months, or helped them to secure some essential software, or just supplemented the incomes of the existing team, while they continued doing 'side-jobs' to generally pay the bills.

Now ideally, they would get all their funding from one source (so we know what they received) and it would be enough to pay for everything. But I think a lot of people who pledge on Kickstarter have a gross misunderstanding of how much money a game takes, considering each team-member may have a salary ranging from $50k - $100k is not unreasonable at all.

He's also listed as a "Fail Expert"

I see this same issue come up from time to time and I always recall a little saying I heard (unfortunately I don't remember the source).

"If you are having trouble naming something, then you don't fully understand that something."

What I get from that saying is that if I have a function that I am struggling to name, it means that I don't fully understand the problem, and there's a good chance that it is doing to many things. Keep your functions to performing a single task, so they have just that one purpose, then name it after what it does. This improves readability and makes naming things much easier.

You have a variable you can't name, well, what data is it actually holding? If it is holding more than one piece of data (reused) then you are doing something wrong or very hacky.

Follow the same rule as with functions. Keep your variables to holding just one specific piece of data, and name it after that.

Both of these rules not only make naming things much easier, I've found they produce much more readable code, easier to debug code, and generally much less bugs in the code.

"...especially in America where we don't even sort our materials."

I've lived an 7 states from coast to coast, north and south, and in all but 2 we sorted our materials. Just because it doesn't happen where you are from doesn't mean it's not happening everywhere else.