One of them, yes. I think we had 2 or 3 battery recalls for the macbooks and one hell of a recall for the macbooks with nvidia graphics. The graphics one was horrendous; I didn't have to deal with the support calls once we nailed it down and they stopped escalating them to tier 3, but god the call volume was out of this world for the tier 1 folks.

People don't realize it, but I can tell you that for the years I worked there (from 2005 to 2011), we used to joke that we should change the catchphrase to "It just doesn't work." Of course, a lot of the problems were because end users were trying to use products in a way they weren't meant to be used.

You can dance all you like, but you are still hypocritical. A war plane was never designed as anything other than a device to KILL. A hammer might have been used to kill, but it was not designed for it.

So, I am not trying to say you are less moral, I am just trying to get you to SEE that you are just as capable of making distinctions regarding your values as we are. We are all the sum of our parts, we choose moral stances and we choose to avoid others we consider to be less necessary. In choosing to follow the vegan dogma, you unfortunately have put yourself in a lifestyle that usually carries at least a thin veneer of "I am better than you", when in fact you have merely chosen to restrict your diet. It doesn't make you any better or worse than someone who chooses to quit smoking, or perhaps to only ride public transportation.

As far as winning, I have no intention of winning because this is an unwinnable discussion. I will neither be able to persuade you that you are being selectively moral and elitist, nor will you be able to persuade me that mankind should cease to partake in the flesh of other creatures (if we choose to). The most I can do is call you on your comments, you can take or leave my opinions the same way I would do yours.

I won't resort to a catchphrase like bacon, but the end result is the same, futile as you said.

Any person who believes in or supports a system where you pay far more for a far inferior product is a moron. End of story. People can wave the catchphrases around as much as they like, but that is fucking stupidity. In which case, "socialism" is the opposite of stupidity, even in socialist lite countries like Australia.

My father in law is having 2 femoral bypass surgeries in the next 2 months. Completely free, air conditioned 2 bed room, free medication (oxycodone for the win), free at home post op care visits, very little waiting (isn't an emergency but is urgent enough to not be considered elective). Great surgeons and other staff. Food still sucks (it's a hospital of course), but if that's the worst complaint that can be made about the system that costs 7% less of GDP than the US and freely hands out so very much more, I know what I would choose...

BK33, does your sister receive free or reduced cost care under medicare? If so, the system has worked for her. She can now put those premiums towards other costs, or savings for retirement or w/e she wants to. It might not be optimal, but it's a far sight better than close to 20k a year...

This was painful to watch, wasn't even funny for old time's sake. The timing was bad and the catchphrases from 1991-92 just sound lame. The few clips I have seen from the 40th SNL show so far have been pretty bad, looks like I didn't miss much.

And that's the issue right there. I think you and I are arguing about completely different things. In terms of the person who stole the photos and posted them, yes there is no middle ground--that person 100% committed a crime and needs to be punished.

However, in terms of responsibility of people for putting themselves in the position to be victimized, there is a huge range of possibilities--but often this range of possibilities isn't examined for fear of someone shouting "Blaming the victim!" The link I posted above goes to great lengths to point out that the criminal who commits the crime is 100% responsible for the criminal act (by virtue of having made the choice to commit it) but that the victim can in fact also have contributed to the crime in a continuum of ways starting with not at all (100% innocent, as in a child who is abused) to fully responsible (as in the case of a rapist who is killed by a potential victim in self-defense during the rape attempt--in this case the rapist becomes the "victim" of a shooting that he brought completely upon himself). There is lots of middle ground between these extremes.

Let's examine a simple case:

I am walking down the street in LA during the early evening in a neighborhood that normally has very little crime. A homeless man shambling past me suddenly pulls a knife, rams it into my chest, and steals my wallet which happened to contain several hundred dollars. I think we can agree in this situation I've no responsibility for this incident occurring. I could not have predicted it would happen and there is little I could have done to anticipate or prevent it. I am 100% an innocent victim in this scenario.

Now let's change the situation. I go down to Skid Row in the early evening and start showing all the homeless people there wads of $100 bills and telling them how worthless they are and how if they only got off their asses and worked hard like me they could have money too. Again, I get shanked in the chest and my money is stolen. Am I 100% an innocent victim in this case? It seems a bit absurd to say yes, doesn't it? My actions (choosing to go to an area that is not often policed, at night, alone, and flash money while belligerently accosting random people who don't have a lot left to lose) are directly linked to the stabbing.

Note that in both cases the person committing the crime is still 100% responsible for their own actions--they chose to stab me and steal my money. But in one case I clearly could not have foreseen or prevented the attack coming whereas in the other it was reasonably foreseeable that my actions were going to lead to problems (not necessarily a stabbing but at the very least some sort of altercation, unless the most patient and forgiving homeless people on Earth happened to be gathered on Skid Row that day). Does that mean the stabber in the second case should get a lighter sentence? No. But it does mean I have some responsibility for what went down and can be justly criticized for my actions. I can't hide behind the "don't blame the victim" catchphrase. I still deserve justice, though, despite being an offensive idiot.

Back to the case at hand.

You are correct, the woman did nothing "wrong" in the moral or legal sense, and the person who violated her privacy is 100% responsible for making the photos public. But I dislike the idea that because she's a victim of a crime, her actions can't be criticized. She might not have done anything "wrong" but she did indeed make a huge error of judgement when she decided to snap naked pics of herself and post them to a social network which is known for dodgy privacy practices. Given the state of technology today, one should be able to infer that there is a pretty high risk that racy photos are going to get leaked at some point, particularly if posted online. If you are okay with that risk, go ahead and post them. And if they are leaked, by all means prosecute the offenders. But don't expect people not to criticize you for gambling that nothing is going to happen, especially when there is plenty of evidence to believe the contrary.

I thought she was cute and her catchphrase was suitably naff.

Although they do lose mayor points for calling one of their characters "Reaper". I think that's what I called myself at Laser Quest when I was 11 yrs old. Also he looks bullshit (starting early on that whining about Bliz balance).

So yah, Valve are kings of characterisation. I still won't knock Bliz for trying to give their characters...some character. The multicultural lineup of caricatures was a well established trope long before TF2.

All that aside, your comment wasn't simply that it lacked TF2's style and humour, you also dismissed any differences in gameplay. I am commenting on a gameplay video. My rant was more directed at this assumption that the game is the same as TF2, sans perhaps decent writing. I thought this trailer demonstrated some nifty looking mechanics that TF2 certainly doesn't have which were apparently overlooked in favour of pointing out that both games had turrets. or that it was "TF2 without style or humour".

I have nothing against Blizzard doing a TF2 style game.

It might even be good.

My comment was simply that TF2 has humour and style, something that (at least from the initial impressions) Overwatch lacks.

It's not bad, but it just clearly wants to ape TF2 in terms of the different accents, etc and it falls flat. Primarily because Blizzard suck at writing. See the cinematic trailer and their desperate attempt for that cockney girl to be cute and have a catchphrase.

"It will wreck our economy"

Sound familiar? Any AGW denier ever uttered that line and when asked "how", they have no clue?

Let me introduce you the institution behind it: Freedom Partners. Check who is behind that. Follow the money, who has most to lose. Then try to think a tactic that will keep you floating in dollars the longest. Yup, it is to teach all your followers to keep repeating the same catchphrase..

When even there has been a great communal investment in better technology infrastructure, the economy has had a tremendous boost. Railroad, electric grid, internet. Renewable energy is just a another on that line. Burning something, destroying it to get energy is finite resource. Renewables are basically infinite. Person who sells firewood is not going to like your electric heater even when it means half of the village will not die next winter. Company that sells oil will not like infinite energy source they are not in control of even if it means half of us die. They and their kids won't be affected but you will.

"It will wreck our economy"

If something, it will boost your economy. Greatly. It is already in motion in most EU countries, Germany is at 33%. Norway is at 99%. Where i live, in Finland, we are at 25% even when half of the year most of our hydro-electric is not functional. Have ANY of those countries seen any negative, economy destroying effects? No? They all have actually benefited from them? No way, bloody communists propaganda.. Lies lies, lallaalaaa, i believe in Koch.

"It will wreck our economy"

The people behind that line of words has been behind every major block in the way of creating green energy. The will raise the cost so high it is impossible, they will lobby until it's too complicated to change anything. THEY are wrecking your economy. THEY are stopping innovation. THEY are wrecking our whole mfcking planet and you are worried about your electric bill or not having two hot showers per day.

"I have nothing against green energy but i'm not going to do anything for it."

That is you.

TV's Greatest Catchphrases (Supercut) has been added as a related post - related requested by ant.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/TVs-Greatest-Catchphrases-Supercut

Television/TV's Greatest Catchphrases (Part 2) has been added as a related post - related requested by ant on that post.

Do it! Let's get some of the old players together kind of like Space Cowboys. And @kronosposeidon can go around saying his catchphrase, "I'm getting too old for this shit."

Sad side note -- I didn't do TubeChop because of the significance of the first 20 seconds -- This show was first broadcast on the day of the Sandy Hook tragedy. I stayed up late that night, because I wanted to hear how Craig would deal with the news that day. His one enduring catchphrase, always said at the beginning of his monologue, is "It's a great day for America." When the show began, it was labelled "Recorded yesterday." So the whole show was done before Sandy Hook. And then there is the catchphrase. How did they deal with the catchphrase? It normally is in the first 30 seconds of the monologue.

reacting to Newt's withdrawal the way a sane person would. How un-Fox-like...

How long do you think before this catchphrase finds its way onto shirts, dance remixes, and a new political party:

Shep Smith is, for a moment, a bona fide deer in the mind-numbingest of headlights.