sol740

As did I sir. As did I.

My all-time favorite RTS game series is Company of Heroes. Play it right now. And cause its old-ish (2007?) now, it's cheap.

Didn't expect to find lolz, but I followed direction, and lo, chuckles emerged.

Would only be good if Gordon continuously tried to speak, but was always interrupted just before.

Mine is the 37LH20, nabbed it for less than $400 bucks on sale, and have been real happy with it as a bedroom set.

Yup ... out fucking loud.

Its so hard to just say "well plasma is better than LCD" or vice versa. These days quality is almost model-specific. I have a 37 inch LG LCD in my bedroom, and its been a great set. Crisp picture, and accurate color representation. Though keep in mind I tune all of my tv's in the service menus, so I can't speak for off the shelf settings. Also at those sizes the difference between 720p, and 1080p is almost non-existent. I'd go cheaper, but still good quality, 720p every time at 42" or less.

Insert LOL.

Nice !

Now this is modding. NICE !

Nice!

I can't find the words.

Gospel

Thats exactly it. I built a QC 3.8Ghz oc'ed amd black air-cooled, with an ati 5850 also oc'ed, and haven't found a game I can't play maxed yet. Though I generally keep 4x AA and AF to save frames. It holds its own fine and with a 22" monitor I netted around 650 bucks. Though admittedly I built the rig while I was also saving for a car. Had price not been a factor I would have went intel. All said, I am more than satisfied with its performance as a gaming pc, and more so considering price.

I really enjoyed it. It was far better than I anticipated.

And for gods sake make sure it is in the correct orientation, a chip should sink right in no fight or fuss, if you feel any resistance back off & verify. Find out what GPU it is, even slower, older cards can play most games if you back off the settings and resolution enough, I suppose its more a matter of if you want to run more demanding games at 1080p, no hiccups, and ultra high settings. Which I do with an ATI card, just fine .

lol

I love how he postulates that it couldn't "possibly be a radio cause its 1928 ...", I really hope this is a (stupid) joke. ITS UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE HOLD SOMETHING TO THEIR FACE WHILST SPEAKING !!! THE ONLY ANSWER IS TIME TRAVEL + CELL PHONE !!! Though to answer your question, is time travel possible ? Do we count Time Dilation ? Edit: Also we know for a fact from the terminator movies that when time traveling into the past you can only bring organic matter. Unless of course you're a non-organic giant murderbot, that is encased in living tissue. Which does sort of beg the question as to why John Future Connor didn't just ram future-guns into some animal, or other fleshy pocket and send those back too. Though why didnt skynet just send another terminator back to the day before the first one got there and just kept trying over and over, since time wasn't an issue. Also why didn't ... awww fuck time travel.

Meh.

Legalize everything, tax, and drive prices down so low, there would be little money left for these wastes of life to make. Plus save billions of tax dollars on pointless drug war that only serves to keep cartels rich and able to purchase gold-plated firearms. Save even more on housing jailed offenders. Let those too stupid to handle it, kill themselves on *whatever*, and in 20 years time you have non-discriminating eugenics.

Looks like we are both sending ourselves straight to hell.

Your baseless reply destroys itself upon closer examination.

This just *blew my mind*.

The more I read, the more I see myself agreeing with some of his ideas about evolution, and man creating god supernaturally, before we could create him technologically. My heart is breaking a little thinking someone so thoughtful, and intelligent, could reduce their existence into an "experiment in nihilism". I'm only 200 or so pages in, so I can't honestly pass any real judgement yet. I'm not sure if I will read the whole 1900 proper, I can already feel my brain wanting to skip paragraphs when he goes off on a philosophical tangent. However that has been the exception so far, and he often quotes one of my favorite authors/scientists, Mr. Richard Dawkins, which never hurts, unless you're a fundie. However I truly hope this doesn't end in an "obviously clinically depressed" manor, and that he somehow quantifies his position in a way that I will wholeheartedly disagree with, yet can still see some validity in from a purely methodical perspective. Seeing as this thesis tends to err philosophically, as opposed to strictly scientifically, i don't see that being too terribly probable.

Damn it ... now I have to keep reading.