|
stoutfish posted:you pay a lady for her to go on an internet date with you, yes lollllllll
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
lol what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
stoutfish posted:you pay a lady for her to go on an internet date with you, yes haha, is this what passes as a strip club for milenials?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Citizen Tayne posted:haha, is this what passes as a strip club for milenials? tbf its easier to masturbate and not get literally thrown out
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
a new lost generation filled with neets can only make it easier for me to succeed in life so i'm all for it
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
whats neets precious?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
same as DINKs from before or more special snowflakey
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Ruby got Railed posted:whats neets precious? "Not in Education, Employment, or Training"
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
stoutfish posted:"Not in Education, Employment, or Training" not employed or even trying
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
nature's evidence of evolutionary terminus
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
big fan of wife beating comment
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
One of the major reasons to acquire a competitor is to close them down. Youtube is already a site where you can stream and store videoes, why would Google buy twitch and keep it around?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:One of the major reasons to acquire a competitor is to close them down. Youtube is already a site where you can stream and store videoes, why would Google buy twitch and keep it around? afaik you can't directly stream to youtube in real time, which means that you can't have IMMEDIATE VIEWER FEEDBACK which is important because i dunno i don't get livestreaming in general and i used to loving make lps so time is clearly passing me by
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Proteus4994 posted:afaik you can't directly stream to youtube in real time, which means that you can't have IMMEDIATE VIEWER FEEDBACK which is important because https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMGNp5735_Y
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
livestreaming is better than LPs because last time i checked all the LP sub-forum guides were written for xp and vista and there were weird rules like "dont encode audio in mp3!" yes because i need to use a better audio format for my loving master system games lol w/ livestreaming u just open up obs and hit go
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
id think if google bought them out they'd keep the status quo for a while or at least try to get them to migrate before deleting everything
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
computer parts posted:id think if google bought them out they'd keep the status quo for a while or at least try to get them to migrate before deleting everything migrate to google+ accounts lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
computer parts posted:id think if google bought them out they'd keep the status quo for a while or at least try to get them to migrate before deleting everything Their advice about VODs was explicitly to migrate them to youtube and that twitch staff could help bulk export them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Proteus4994 posted:afaik you can't directly stream to youtube in real time, which means that you can't have IMMEDIATE VIEWER FEEDBACK which is important because
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
it's because just sitting around and playing games all day makes you an uninteresting piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
stoutfish posted:they also ruled that corporations are people so the law doesn't represent reality look at this nerd who doesn't understand what legal personhood is
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
oh god, you loving triggered him
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
I don't understand any of this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:look at this nerd who doesn't understand what legal personhood is the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that. congrats on not understanding legal personhood, moron.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
have you considered: reading a book ever
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
motherfucker i write books 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that. shut up you fuckin loser
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that. haha, you are literally a moron and your posts are all bad and embarassing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:motherfucker i write books ah yes the guide to being incorrect on the law, a popular book
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
the only thing better than fishmeching is watching someone get fishmeched, hard
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
believing that corporate personhood is new or unique to the us is generally a sign that the person posting has a legal understanding on par with sovereign citizens
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that. Thank you for the insightful essay on the legal system, fat computer man who posts about Star Wars and video games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
in all seriousness the personhood status of corporations hasn't changed in over 100 years and isn''t meningfully different from most world jurisdictions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
o the thread got good brb getting some popcorn
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
an interesting definition of good
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
its cool how equal protection for corporations because enshrined in american caselaw when a case about it came before SCOTUS, the chief justice apparently opened oral argument by saying "look don't even bother arguing about whether or not corporations are people" the opinion itself doesn't even mention anything about equal protection of corporations. instead the headnote written by the court reporter claims that the justices unanimously agreed on it, but the actual opinion (which is the only real legally binding language) says nothing about it the court reporter asked the chief justice about his headnote before it was published and the chief justice replied "looks fine, but you might want to add something pointing out that we avoided addressing the equal protection question" the court reporter decided not to add that in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
PuTTY riot posted:whats raidcall? basically just teamspeak/ventrilo/mumble but p2p so you don't need servers and poo poo? i'm not too sure tbh
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Breakfast All Day posted:the funny thing is you're the person who doesn't. every time this comes up anywhere on the forums you have a red siren that goes off and quote the wikipedia article you read and incessantly chant "THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS CONTRACTS" because you're an autistic moron that can't looking past definition a part iii and completely miss the debate grown ups are having about the actual social context, the actual outcomes of equivocation of personhood, and why that operant definition may or may not be socially desirable in general. we know what it loving is, we're arguing about whether it should be that because of things that are actually happening in the world, because we as a society have agency to reformulate our understanding of legal personhood. because we loving made it that. lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
everybody gets one free fishmeching, after that it should be an autoban
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:30
|
|