Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Hangout time?

My inner child wants to get back into wrestling, but I tuned into Smackdown! recently and didn't recognise anything/one. I think the last time I watched wrestling Brock Lesner was champ and he had a serious rivalry with Rey Mysterio going on.

What have I missed?

At 4 hours ago, Piggler wrote: Yesterday, I drank about a quarter of a handle of shitty vodka. I went to the park, blacked out, and woke up at home. My jacket is missing, my phone is missing, and there's puke all over my floor and bed. I woke up 2 hours ago and I have a bit of a headache and I'm still kinda drunk.

Had I just smoked some weed, I would've eaten a lot and happily fallen asleep.

Had I stayed sober, I would've been fine.

This si why drinkingn is bad.

Oh for shame.

Tempted to call you out for getting completely wasted off a quarter of vodka, but that'd be childish and petty and unhelpful...

Here's another one, slightly more obscure.

Think Kanye West and embarrassing award ceremonies.

At 2 hours ago, WaterShake wrote:

At 2 hours ago, Bommster wrote: Shall we play a game?
The first player draws an album cover in Paint or similar. Then everyone else has to guess. Whoever guesses first gets to draw the next cover. And so on.

Here's my contribution, probably incredibly obvious to those of you that know me.

Here's another one. Equally predictable.

At 1 minute ago, Ryan wrote:

At 37 minutes ago, Zachary wrote:

At 18 minutes ago, WaterShake wrote: Hangout sesh tonight?

Hey, baby, it's a quarter to eight I feel I'm in the mood~

NOPE

to be fair, the frowning instructions i were given were incredibly vague.

Hangout sesh tonight?

At 2 hours ago, Bommster wrote: Shall we play a game?
The first player draws an album cover in Paint or similar. Then everyone else has to guess. Whoever guesses first gets to draw the next cover. And so on.

Here's my contribution, probably incredibly obvious to those of you that know me.

At 23 minutes ago, Razz wrote:

At 9 minutes ago, WaterShake wrote:

At 12 minutes ago, Razz wrote:

She has had relationships with both men and women; she has since chosen to have relationships exclusively with women. She's a lesbian. She isn't bisexual.

WRONG.etc.etc. describing how "i'm wrong"

I was reiterating her words and her beliefs. She chooses to describe herself as gay, i.e a lesbian.

I understand that attraction to both sexes is bisexuality. But i'll say this again, she chooses to describe herself as lesbian.

At 43 minutes ago, Guns90009 wrote: On a scale of 1 to 10, what would you rate this picture on its realism?

http://screensnapr.com/e/eJfmDO.png

look at me, i downloaded photoshop and now im a graphic designer. look at how i shopped my name to look like spiderman. so cool so cool.

At 4 hours ago, Scarface wrote:

At 2 hours ago, The-Great-One wrote:

At 9 hours ago, WaterShake wrote: Came across this quote from actress Cynthia Nixon today and thought i'd share it here.
She just completely refreshed the gay rights paradigm IMO.

I don't completely understand this quote.

Neither do I.

Ok let's try this again

"Why cant it be a choice?"

Generally speaking, the "choice" debate has 2 sides. Those that believe homosexuality is a choice, and those that rebute this claim by arguing that you can be "born" gay. Nixon is taking neither side of this argument, instead she's attacking the argument itself. What does it matter if it's a choice or not? Why does it being a choice (if it is) make it any less "legitimate" a lifestyle?

"Why is that any less legitimate?"

See above

"It seems were just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I dont think that they should define the terms of the debate"

Most supporters of LGBT rights typically argue that homosexuality etc. is not a choice. In this clause of the statement, Nixon is pointing out that in doing so, it makes it appear as though they wouldn't be in favor of gay rights if it were a choice. Nixon believes that choice or no choice, it's irrelevant.

Hopefully this will add some clarity.

At 12 minutes ago, Razz wrote: If she's been straight, and she's been gay ... As her own words. Then she is not straight nor gay, she is bisexual.

Nononono.

She has had relationships with both men and women; she has since chosen to have relationships exclusively with women. She's a lesbian. She isn't bisexual.

To understand this correctly you need to think more carefully about the word "choose" within the context of her statement.

At 7 minutes ago, Raab wrote: Not this thread again.

This could be the last legitimate thread of this kind thanks to Nixon.

You know, with people finally reevaluating the question and why it does/dosen't matter

At 18 minutes ago, Gagsy wrote:

At 5 minutes ago, Cometstyle wrote:

I think its just going to be one of those you won't get unless you're in that situation of already liking both sexes. Then you kinda make a judgement call.

Thats what she means by choice.

Shes been with both men and women and now she exclusively wants to be with women, but she hates the idea of people thinking that she SUDDENLY realised she was gay. Because thats not true, she has just made a conscious choice about her sexuality because she was able to.

Yeah I think Gagsy has got the clearest interpretation of her statement thus far.

When you look at sexuality from Nixon's perspective it's incredibly liberating.

At A few seconds ago, Cometstyle wrote: Does the average person choose to be heterosexual?

That's how I used to view the argument, but now I now longer think the argument is even necessary.

Cynthia Nixon recently came out with the controversial statement "I choose to be gay". This idea of "choice" is one of the most controversial issues within the gay rights campaign. However, her recent statement has almost entireley voided the issue and has refreshed the paradigm of the conversation.

"Why cant it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems were just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I dont think that they should define the terms of the debate. I also feel like people think I was walking around in a cloud and didnt realize I was gay, which I find really offensive. I find it offensive to me, but I also find it offensive to all the men IâEUTMve been out withâEU

She later went on to say:

"I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line âEU~Ive been straight and Ive been gay, and gay is better.âEUTM And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice. I understand that for many people its not, but for me its a choice, and you dont get to define my gayness for me.âEU

Source

I've been mulling her statements over for the past few days and i've come to the conclusion that I agree with her. I didn't "choose" to be gay, but others like her may have done and thats just as legitimate IMO.

What are your thoughts?

This is Cynthia Nixon here btw, you probs know her from Sex in The City

At 15 minutes ago, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 12 hours ago, WaterShake wrote:

At 54 minutes ago, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: Macs are garbage. They are like new foreign cars if somethings wrong or you want to upgrade expect to spend a arm and a leg.

Or you know, you take it to the genius bar in any Apple store and they fix it for you.

and pay a arm and a leg for it when you can do it yourself with a perfectly good PC or laptop.

No, the genius bar is free of charge man. Might help to check your facts once in a while...

At 14 minutes ago, Wolfos wrote:

At 3 hours ago, MrSoxfan wrote:

spamspamspamspam

Why are you guys incapable of talking objectively? seriously?

Computers aren't a zero sum game, the success of one platform doesn't detract from the success of others.

Sigh.

Came across this quote from actress Cynthia Nixon today and thought i'd share it here.

She just completely refreshed the gay rights paradigm IMO.

"Why canâEUTMt it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems weâEUTMre just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I donâEUTMt think that they should define the terms of the debate. I also feel like people think I was walking around in a cloud and didnâEUTMt realize I was gay, which I find really offensive. I find it offensive to me, but I also find it offensive to all the men IâEUTMve been out with".
Source

Ok I think i've figured out how to setup a new hangout.

Join in here.

Let me know if the link and such works

overstepped the mark

i'll explain given that you haven't.

I got a call at like 3am in the morning from a friend that needed help with her film coursework - she needed to make a 1 minute film. She told me to put on the pink panther suit and come see her. I go down, she explains the film (i get in the lift with someone, freak out, run away, come back for a cigarette and then runaway again).

We made the film in like 20 minutes and the first time we made it they hadn't opened the door and I couldn't see where I was going, hence why I ran into the door.

We all found it pretty funny and it somehow got uploaded to Youtube. It's pretty unfunny for anyone that doesn't know us because it's just a video of a guy hitting a door.

Ends.

At 1 minute ago, Wolfos wrote:

At 55 seconds ago, AReviewer wrote: The only thing I dislike about the Mac OS is that the whole system is not universal to the more common PC format.
Makes switching between the two hard.
Why is there a command button?
Why is the Power switch behind the monitor?
Why is the task bar on the top?
Makes brain hurt.

Why not? I switched in a day.
The buttons on the left? You don't need to use them because the shortkeys are actually universal (CMD+W = close window, CMD+Q = quit application, CMD+M = minimize, etc).
The task bar? That's not a task bar, it's the menu. It's really brilliant actually.
The command button is placed better than the control button, because you have to use the control button with your pinky which is very annoying. Command can be operated using your thumb and basically has the same functionality.
No power switch behind my monitor.

I really don't understand your need to rebut all flaws/complaints with Mac computers. I love my Mac and iPhone, yet I don't see the need to pretend that they're perfect - they have flaws and i'm totally fine with that.

Let's keep the "my OS is better than yours to a minimum guys".

Objectivity and all that.

At 58 seconds ago, AReviewer wrote: http://tinyurl.com/824elhq

My bad.

That why Gatekeeper makes viruses a pretty much null point.

But I agree that the general view that Macs have no viruses is misleading and Apple should do more to encourage users to protect their hardware. But yeah, Gatekeeper.

At A few seconds ago, Raab wrote:

At 2 hours ago, Lady-Stardust wrote: While i never had a mac i wouldn't mind having one really.
Anyway, i like that airplay mirroring thing (that app that lets you show whatever is on your macbook onto your TV screen).

If you had windows, you wouldn't need an "app" to do something as simple as changing your display output.

Airplay isn't used to change your display output; that's what system preferences are far. Airplay is the software used by OSX/iOS to communicate with Apple TV wirelessly.

Who's up for a hangout tonight?

At 54 minutes ago, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: Macs are garbage. They are like new foreign cars if somethings wrong or you want to upgrade expect to spend a arm and a leg.

Or you know, you take it to the genius bar in any Apple store and they fix it for you.

At 2 minutes ago, AReviewer wrote:

At 34 minutes ago, Nicknicolau wrote: That's why I don't like Mac

So true.
Macs are for people who have far too much money on their hands and don't know much about computers.
If you did know what you were doing - it would be PC everytime.
For half the price, you could get a computer with better specs and the only thing you would miss out on is the OS and the Mac-exclusive software. (which isn't that good anyway)
If you really wanted to have a 'Mac' just get a PC and install Mac OS onto it. Simple.

inb4Macusersrage

The great thing about consumer based society is the wealth of choice available for consumers. You can pick whatever platform you wish.

When I eventually replace my Macbook circa 2007 i'll choose to buy another Mac because I like using Mac OSX. That's the end of the story imo.

At A few seconds ago, Cometstyle wrote: PC user here selecting my text using right-clicking, you mad?

Mac user here tweaking the settings of the industry leading trackpad included on my Mac. You mad?

Macs have had right click since i can remember man...

At 4 minutes ago, grime-reaper wrote: Srsly though guys: thoughts on the update?

Does it demonstrate a move to annual updates for desktop akin to iOS?
Will iOS continue to lead from a feature perspective (as has been the case for the past 2 OSXs)?
How usable will the iCloud integration be for average users?

etc.

Each are fair points.

But in my view the biggest change in the game is the inclusion of Gatekeeper - an App Store style app authentication security feature.

John Gruber explains Gatekeeper and it's implications perfectly:

My favorite Mountain Lion feature, though, is one that hardly even has a visible interface. Apple is calling it âEUoeGatekeeperâEU. ItâEUTMs a system whereby developers can sign up for free-of-charge Apple developer IDs which they can then use to cryptographically sign their applications.

If an app is found to be malware, Apple can revoke that developerâEUTMs certificate, rendering the app (along with any others from the same developer) inert on any Mac where itâEUTMs been installed. In effect, it offers all the security benefits of the App Store, except for the process of approving apps by Apple. Users have three choices which type of apps can run on Mountain Lion:

- Only those from the App Store
- Only those from the App Store or which are signed by a developer ID
- Any app, whether signed or unsigned

The default for this setting is, I say, exactly right: the one in the middle, disallowing only unsigned apps. This default setting benefits users by increasing practical security, and also benefits developers, preserving the freedom to ship whatever software they want for the Mac, with no approval process.

What is this? A post by grime-reaper that makes sense? That I agree with? In my thread!? He must be up to something...