After months offline I just wanted some cat videos and now this...

You know, Bob, I think you are right. I may not be a US citizen but I think there should be an international law, enforced by the UN.
As a species we can not allow morally bankrupt people to define what marriage should be, especially if that definition is ethically questionable and radically diverging from what the Bible, Torah or Quran describe.
Not only are we subjected to this bizarre propaganda of how normal this sickening behaviour is, this agenda is being sold to children as well. Even if we ignore the risk factors and possible fallout from this dangerous interaction with our youth, I think we can't deny that letting somebody that unstable adopt children isn't the best of ideas.
As you point out, this minority has a strong grasp on the media and an even stronger grip around the neck of political systems around the globe. Even our economy isn't safe of their influence which everyone can see everytime they hurt american businesses with their boycotts. Like disgusting, entitled children, they throw tantrums everytime they don't get their will, no mattere what the cost.
You're right, mankind shouldn't capitulate to their demands. I say annul their existing marriages or domestic partnerships and make it illegal for those people to marry. Worldwide.
According to Wikipedia (yes, I know, Wikipedia) there are 7.2 billion humans on earth and the GOP has around 30 million members. That's only 0.4% of the world population. You're right. Why should any society capitulate for such an insignificant demographic group? Why should we allow republicans to marry or recognize their marriages as legally binding? Nobody needs them to procreate.
Having said that, as far as I'm concerned, George W. Bush is a bastard, even by westerosi standards.

Why did you dead it when http://archive.org/ is under maintenance and upgrades as shown below?

"Scheduled Maintenance

The Internet Archive's sites are offline for scheduled maintenance and upgrades.

Please check our twitter feed @internetarchive for updates.

Sorry for the inconvenience."

*notdead -- Confirm it after it returns.

Holy hell, I just decided to watch a couple of his old streams (he's offline right now).

I watched a video of him hauling ass in Diablo, Single handedly (or..mouthily..) holding the mine in Arathi Basin (World of warcraft) vs literally 3-4 other people, and bottom lane support (as taric) in league of legends.

He's a better fucking gamer than I am, dude's actually amazing.

I can just shut it down even though I'm not ready if you'd like.



Still working on setting things up. As soon as I'm ready we'll be offline. Might be a little while still.

Without any kind of malice or hatred, i tell you that scientists *know* that humans are causing climate change. You will not find the scientific community in any kind of debate.

What the government and corporations do with the information is an entirely different matter. They lie, manipulate, cheat and steal and use it as a tool if they can. But don't question the science, because the science is there for you to see on the website. NASA have a .gov related domain probably because they are one of the most important scientific bodies on the planet and need the kind of internet protection and security that the government can provide. They need the protection or NASA goes offline and with it the base of communications for the majority of space operations.

Anything NASA does will be scientifically sound because the entire world community of scientists would never stand for it, they'd be a laughing stock for trying. Don't forget that the scientific community includes Russia for example - or any "enemy of the west" you choose. All research is available to everyone and anyone, so if you think NASA is somehow corrupt and publishes bullshit then why haven't equally corrupt russian scientists exposed and scored points off it?

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

The evidence is there, and the scientific community believes in it. That includes universities full of teachers and students, it includes any scientist that adheres to the scientific method, anywhere in the world.

"You wouldn't accept lag offline, so why do it online?"

Because I live in the United States of God-damn America, and I already pay $90 a month for 340Kpbs! Insensitive fucks.
GIVE ME AN ALTERNATIVE TO THIS MONOPOLY!

Here're some ethics: The modern digital world is a micro-dystopia so all bets are off. Why pay when it exists for free. It's not like HBO series are hooked up to a complex network of backend processes that prevent offline viewing.

But... when that DOES happen, well, shit. Your ethics will truly be put to the test, won't they?

Thanks for the alternative, the EBS embed will be taken offline again within 7 days anyway.

Why is this interesting? If you'd poke around the settings of Google maps you'd know its had offline map saving ability for years, which allowed me to do the same thing in 2011 without having the radio enabled.
meh video is meh

I don't care about the first impression, because I already have the game. What I want is for them to fix the traffic pathfinding problems and allow larger city sizes. And make disasters optional. And have offline saves. Fixing the game is what I'm interested in, not damage limitation from the disastrous launch. I don't give a toss about EA's PR department.

I was really looking forward to playing this game, until I heard of the DRM and I knew then it would be a big problem and decided not to get it, but I would never have dreamed it'd turn into the FUBAR mess that it has become. And the constant lying and bullshit EA and Maxis say is ridiculous.
I hope they'll add a single player option, offline play, increase the ridiculously small city size and offer a formal apology to everyone for all the outrageous lying. But this is EA, ain't gonna happen

Always on DRM usually refers to requiring a constant (or near constant) connection.

Steam checks in when you boot, and when you try to load a game. If it does anything in between I've *never* been booted from a non-multiplayer game due to my internet connection once I'm in (some companies will throw on more DRM on top of Steam when you buy their game, but I've avoided most draconian DRM's). With steam if your internet's down you can play offline, up to a month I believe..?

That's the big difference - with true always on you're far more at the mercy of the server's status(es). You're good (to as much extent as you can be) with games like WoW that had huge production budgets, and now take on huge profit.

Smaller houses, releasing a game with what they believe is the minimum hardware to get by with (because they always expect their user base to begin to wane after the initial purchasing rush)... you get this ^

EA's got a habit of retiring servers the moment the profit from sales seems depleted, so you have that looming somewhere in the future if this is a game you end up cherishing.

Isn't Steam an always online DRM too? I mean, I can only play most games on Steam if I'm online, even though there's an offline mode, I'm not sure it lets you be offline forever though, I think it requires checking with Steam servers once in a while (I'm guessing, haven't tried playing offline).

Steam has had many terrible problems in the first few years, but nowadays, the online requirement doesn't bother me at all.

What about Starcraft 2, you're required to be online, even to play the single player campaign. Does that qualify as always online DRM too? Seriously, I want to know.

I think ppl are complaining about the online DRM, but maybe they're just mad about SimCity's EA servers being short on capacity. Which is a huge problem if they're enforcing always online DRM, but it's not the DRM's fault. Does that make sense?

The compromise to serve both sides of this argument is dead simple -
Have the single player offline campaign require a connection to the server once a week rather than every single time.
At worse it will be cracked for a week or two while they roll out a new update, and the servers don't get hammered

It's a server side game. Hence, no offline single player. Think of Diablo 3.