Thingcubed

While it would be cool for a little while, it would get old as soon as you got above cloud cover, or if there were no clouds. The sun coming through the glass would be extremely bright and all. Now, if the plane were made out of some sort of material where the transparency could be controlled... that'd be pretty cool. If they could turn it transparent just for a couple minutes I'd be down with that. Kinda awkward for anyone in the bathroom though.

Peewee Herman. He's got weird gadgets, and he's slightly demonic.For a most epic fight I choose:Mr. Rogers vs. a Teletubbie

Well, I spent about $1600 on a laptop a few months ago, and the best deal I found was from some company called M-Tech. http://www.m-techlaptops.com/shoponline/pc/home.asp Don't know if you'll be able to find a better deal there or not, but I spent a lot of time trying to find the best quality/price ratio, and that's where I found it. I'm quite happy with the laptop I have right now, and I've had no trouble running newer games on it such as Gears of War and Crysis (the demo at least).

Well, don't ask her if she likes you. I don't know if thats how you meant what you said, but it sounded a bit like that. What you should do is just ask her out sometime. It doesn't really matter where. If you feel uncomfortable asking her out on a one-on-one date then try getting a bunch of your friends together for a movie and invite her along (make sure to invite her yourself).

This is mainly just information gleaned from Wikipedia and encyclopedias:Political Science is a branch of Social Science. Social Science is the study of humanity/human influences that uses the scientific method. They're considered a science because of that, although according to Wikipedia they're considered "Soft Science" while natural sciences like Geology are considered "Hard Science."

That's pretty rad. Although, I think it only proves the the Xbox 360 controller is better, not the entire system. The Blu-Ray in the PS3 does a fair amount to counteract that advantage.

Most research agrees that wifi is not bad for your health. It operates at such low power levels that it is doubtful that it could cause any sort of harm, and a cell phone has much greater amounts of radiation (not that cell phones cause damage either, but they make a good comparison). This article from the BBC covers a lot of information about it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6676129.stm

Well, I've read/like a large chunk of the books mentioned so far. I started A Song of Fire and Ice a couple weeks ago and I'm at the end of the third book already. I think my favorite author is probably L.E. Modesitt Jr. though. I guess he's not quite as popular as a lot of other authors mentioned here, but I started with his Recluce series and haven't stopped reading his books. To tell you the truth though, I'm just as big a fan of his science fiction.

Well, speaking as someone from the US, I've heard this theory from people about the US government as well. While I don't believe that it is really happening right now, I do see it happening in the far future (possibly). I think in the long term it would actually be a good thing for the people of each nation, but in the short term it would cause many problems. I think there are a number of fundamental changes that would have to occur within each society before it would even be a viable idea.

I had the same problem. Although, I installed Ubuntu using Wubi, so it might have been a little different. I was able to connect to my wireless network properly, but for some reason the browser couldn't load any webpages. I didn't really need to install Ubuntu so I just gave up on it, and I'll probably install it again in a couple months to play around with it.

It seems like you could have a lot of fun with something like this. With the whole multi-touch thing going on you could probably develop some sort of multi-player game on there (entertaining version of pong anyone?). Also, doing artwork on something like that would be interesting as well, sortof like having a large canvas to paint on.

To tell you the truth, I think the EU is just using Microsoft as a scapegoat for US companies and business practices. I think the requirements that the EU have put on Microsoft in the past are frankly dumb. Windows XP N edition anyone? Microsoft provides a free media player with their operating system, as does Mac and any number of linux distributions. Somehow providing a free service is anti-competitive? In my opinion that is just Microsoft doing a good job of shipping a product that the user will be able to use and be happy with.Note, I'm not anti-EU or anything, I just think they tend to penalize US businesses to a greater degree. Both Microsoft and Google have been or may be subject to various EU regulations that I find ill-thought out and rather pointless.

If a lawyer feels that they cannot properly represent their client then it's usually their duty to say so, and let their client find a new lawyer.

I don't have much experience with formal debates so I couldn't tell you on that one. I guess you could just go with "If 'lawyers' means ____ then ___ " sort of argument, and then let the other person decide if they want to go with your definition.

Well, if the topic is ALL lawyers then it should be easy. Public defenders work for the state/federal government to defend people who can't afford lawyers.On the flip side, you could argue that no one actually works for anyone but themselves. Doing a good deed makes you feel good, so is it selfish to do a good deed? Etc...

I'm surprised to see McAfee and Norton on there cause... well, they suck compared to free stuff out there (in my opinion). I'm confused as to why people would bother to pirate software that has better free alternatives.I'm actually not too surprised that there are no games on there. Gamers are still a bit of a niche market, even if there are a lot of us.

Well, as a teenager in the US who watched 300: I care about education. 300 was based on a comic book, which is why it is the way it is. It's a stylistic piece, along the lines of Sin City, and isn't meant to have historical accuracy.

I don't believe that there should be a death penalty. This is not because I value of the lives of murderers, but because I realize the limitations of the legal system. Too often there are cases where innocent people have been sent to Death Row. If there was a way to know with absolute certainty that a person was guilty, then I would probably be alright with the death penalty, but it is too easy for a jury to be misled, lied to, or confused. This has happened multiple times here in the US, despite the fact that we have one of the better legal systems in the world. That's why I can't support a death penalty.On the other hand, I might support a very limited death penalty for crimes such as genocide, and extreme mass murderers. I didn't really mind that they chose to give Saddam Hussein the death penalty, his crimes were rather obvious.

Well, from personal experience as a guy, I respect a woman who is more independent. My best relationships have been with people like that, and my worst relationships are with people who say things like "I'll do anything for you." If you truly love someone, the anything phrase is alright sometimes, but definitely not if it's a highschool relationship that's been going for less than a month (which happened to me).Also... I'm not sure about that "safe" thing. It's a bit... dated. I don't think I've heard anyone use it recently.

Well, what kind of game do you want to make? Not to put a downer on things, but it's a lot of work even to make simple games. I'm currently a student at DigiPen, which someone mentioned earlier, so I have a bit of experience with this kind of thing. If you really want to get into the game industry my suggestion would be to start learning C/C++ now. There are plenty of tutorials online, but a good book is always useful. On top of that, don't set yourself up for failure. You're not going to be able to make anything approaching the current popular games. They require huge teams of people who have years of experience to make. Not only that, but they take a very long time to make, even with all those people. It's not unusual for games to be in development for a few years.Also, if your main issue with studying programming and working for a company is that you don't want to work for anybody, my suggestion would be to get a business degree instead. If you're programming, unless it's something relatively small, you're probably going to be working for someone else.As far as programming for the gamecube/ps2... I don't know how effective that will be. You may be interested in making flash games though, because those can be played on the Wii. As long as all it requires is a mouse and clicking the button on the mouse, any flash game can be played. Some students at my school came up with a design for a game, and they prototyped it in flash before putting their proposal forward to a game company.In the end, your best bet for getting into the industry is learning programming, and then getting a degree and working your way up. As you don't want to do that, you might want to rethink your options, and see if you wouldn't rather run a business than be a programmer.Of course, if you prove me wrong, I'll gladly play whatever game you make.

Well, I don't want to turn this into a "You're wrong, Obama's the best" post, but the facts you've stated there as to his voting record tend to be a little misleading. Well... Obama wasn't even a member of the senate in 2001, so it's impossible for him to have voted on the original. As to re-authorizing it he did technically vote "for" it, but only after compromises were made, and even then he was not satisfied with it and said so at the time. It is a bit misleading saying it that way. I think his worlds involve something along the lines of "leaving force on the table, combined with aggressive diplomacy." I don't think anyone who is elected President can say that "for no reason whatsoever will I ever invade Iran." Of course, I could be wrong. Entirely true. Of course, from my point of view that was correct of him to do so. I wholeheartedly agree with him, that despite opposition to the war itself, we have a responsibility to make sure that the troops who are currently in Iraq receive all of the support they need. Well, I'm not certain, but I assume you're referring to Iraq here. Granted, I don't think we should've gone in in the first place, but if we just pulled everything (troops, resources, money, etc...) out right now, wouldn't that be an even greater evil? Going in and destroying their working infrastructure (even if it was corrupt) and then leaving without rebuilding it would be a poor move in my opinion. As for how they plan to pay for everything... well, I'll agree there, I'm not entirely certain if it's feasible. I think the Republicans are just as bad in this case though, I've read some of the promises Republican candidates have made and from an economic standpoint they just seem poorly thought out, designed entirely just to get them votes, not actually improve and stabilize the economy. On the subject of Ron Paul, I think he has some interesting ideas but I find it hard to agree with him, and I can't see him as being an effective President for us. One thing I can't quite grasp is his belief that we should withdraw from the UN. What's your view on this?

Nokia is best cell phone company in my opinion. For me, they tend to be extremely durable and have lasted through many drops onto concrete, being chucked at walls, being splashed with water, etc... (I didn't treat my phone very nicely). On top of that, I've found Nokia's tend to get better service than other models. In places where I've had trouble with other brands picking up a signal, the Nokia phone was able to find one, and not only did it find it, but the call clarity was quite good. All the phones I've used have been on the T-Mobile network in the US, so I don't have any experience anywhere else with them.

Well, determining who will be the next World Super Power depends on a lot of different factors. First in my mind is what is our definition of Super Power? As it stands now we still tend to define Super Power in militaristic terms, with economics as a (relatively) important sidenote. In the future, this may change depending on how the world continues to evolve. Due to the growth of organizations such as the EU and the lessening of militaristic tensions around the world in comparison to the past (alright not exactly, but if you think about it the "War on Terror" is really not that big, if you think of it in terms of previous conflicts it helps put things in perspective), I tend to think that it is quite possible for the economic aspect of Super Powers to take precedence. If that happens we could start to see a huge shift in the world. One often ignored region of the world is South America, and I think that in the future they could play a large part in how the world develops, even if nobody takes them into account at the moment. While the USA is just starting a trend of moving towards a viewpoint with more socialist tendencies (it may not move there, and it's not universal, but there are signs), South America has a history of socialism. Many South American countries are beginning to form trade agreements amongst themselves, and while it may take time, I think that they will eventually develop a working regional economic unit. If the USA is intelligent and fosters cooperation and friendly terms with South America they can prevent themselves from being economically handicapped by their distance from the EU and Asia where developing nations such as China and India are going to start gaining greater footholds in the world economy. My view is that the world is going to eventually become more focused on regional, rather than global trade. Economically it makes sense, and economics tend to be the deciding force for most major changes and evolutions.Of course, all of this is based on the idea that militaristic might will become increasingly less important, and that different nations and ideologies will be able to coexist with at least civil harmony. If it breaks down into pseudo-coldwar times again than I think that developing nations such as China that haven't developed strong liberal ideals-based societies will have a greater advantage in extending their power as they will not have to convince an electorate to ignore safety and environmental regulations. China has the ability to make things on the cheap, both in an monetary and environmental view. State controlled regulations and a large workforce that has a strong sense of nationalism are what allow a country to quickly gear up and fight. The US had this at one point, but we have given up some of our willingness to work in the nations interest so that we can work in the interests of the world. I don't think this is a bad thing, but it does give nations that are still going through the stages of industrialization an advantage (China, and India to a lesser degree).Oh, don't forget Japan either. If my first view correct, than Japan's lack of a large military will become insignificant. If they can find a way to deal with the rising age of their population, Japan has some of the most advanced technology in the world. Their work with robotics is amazing, and if the world becomes a more stable economically based environment, advanced technologies are going to be some of the major signs pointing to the world's "Super Powers."

Yup, it worked. Thanks again for the help.

Ah, I was wondering about that... Apparently I just assumed that was somehow the same as the original "submit form" that I had done before (looked similar somehow). Silly mistake on my part, thanks for letting me know.