Zombie Man

Dividing by zero isn't that bad... <dons shades> within limits.

Let me translate...

lol*



*I guess we're allowed to do these kind of no-content posts now!

How did you know that's what I call it?!

1. Computer-driven cars will be in accidents proportionally less so than human-driven cars. Yes, they will be sensational because of the attention they get and people will assume their worse even though, statistically they won't. It's the same thing with airplane accidents, which proportionally happen less frequently than car accidents... but people don't get it because large statistically numbers and probabilities are not as intuitive to grasp as people think they are. Besides, what people don't realize is that commercial air traffic is almost all completely computer-driven already, which is one of the reasons it's so much safer.

2. As far as being 'stuck in traffic' and being forced to obey speed limits, computer-driven cars will get you where you want to go faster even if you know the short-cuts to avoid traffic. And that's because computer-driven cars also knows the short cuts and will know where all the traffic congestion is because they'll all be linked to a big GPS map of all cars. The system will alter routes of all cars to maximize efficiency and avoid bottle necks. There will be no inefficient waiting at traffic lights.... cars will slow down or speed up in advance of intersections and pass each other with the precision of football marching bands.

And even in rural areas with long stretches of highway, computer-driven cars will take advantage of speed limits that adjust for the situation. If there's no one on the roads and there is good conditions and your car doesn't show signs of strain (like vibrating at high speeds), the computer-driven car will hurl you at 90 mph or more knowing it can react faster than you to unexpected things like a deer on the road. Static speed limits will be a thing of the past.

Robot girlfriend.

Yeah, you are totally off.

Delusional with a persecution complex comes to mind, too.

The game makes this *really* easy: Start a SSA. You don't have to even go anywhere to start it... the contact is in the Contact window.

Contemporary descendants of pre-Columbian natives are divided about their self-designation in this regard. As noted, "Native American" is a misnomer unless applied to all who were born in the Americas. And "Indian" is laughably wrong when considering its literal meaning. Calling them "American Indians" doesn't make the 'indian' part correct, though, it is what the US Census uses.

"Indigenous" has the same semantic problem as "native." And "aboriginal" is not literally true since the pre-Columbians did not originate in the Americas.

"Pre-Columbian Americans" is a technically correct term and what ethnologists usually use, but, unlikely to catch on.

And so, those of pre-Columbian American descent will use any of the above terms as the preferential term while being indifferent or antagonistic toward other designations. It just depends who you're talking to.

Cryptic can't... they had to sell themselves to Perfect World Entertainment to stay afloat. CO is kept open as loss leader to have toehold in Western MMOs. They hope that the Star Trek and Neverwinter properties of Cryptic can make the real dough.

So... the thing is to see if PWE would want to buy Paragon Studios so that they have a supers MMO that actually makes money. It is not unknown for a parent company to buy rival products and keep the brands going as a way to dominate a market.