>Honestly I don't get how you can perceive that he's happier, but still see him as having changed "for the worse".
Well, from his perspective it's a worse change in personality, but from his friend's perspective he could be happier. So he's recognizing that his friend seems happier despite the change in personality he perceives to be bad.
I happen to live in the (Northern) Midwest and I think you're just not in the right area. My city is ethnically and culturally diverse and I never encounter open racism. There are some of the more rural areas where that might be present. However, without statistics to back up any density of racism that may or may not be present it's hard to say whether race might be more of a factor here than anywhere else in the US.
Actually, I believe there is precedent for laws being struck down for pretty much exactly this reason. I think prohibition and the newly changing attitude against marijuana and the laws surrounding it are examples of this.
If the majority populace is committing illegal acts it's often because they believe the act should not be illegal. I believe that many/most laws exist for the exact opposite reason. Murder is illegal because most people believe it's wrong. So we created a law saying so.
Your site needs more detail about how your system functions and compares to existing captcha systems. All I could find on your site is that basically existing systems don't work and that yours does.
I don't really find AT&T's idea fascinating in any way. I think it's just them trying to get around the rules. I have no doubt that if something like that were set in place, they would apply enormous pressure on all their users to request priority for whatever they (AT&T & others) want. Most people who don't know anything about the internet will just do as they are asked because "It's for their own good" - as I'm sure AT&T will pitch it that way. I for one - want NO prioritizing. I DO want them to quit complaining about their infrastructure and just upgrade it.
I'm really not sure why some of the other comments here are focusing on the playing of music on the stream. Obviously they've never watched someone gaming on twitch. Nobody watches twitch for the music someone is playing. People watch it to see other people play and talk about games. Music may be in the background but is often obscured by dialog and game sounds. It's not even close to the quality a youtube video for music supplies.
Music isn't obviously not the focus of any Twitch stream, but nevertheless, people are breaking copyright laws by playing copyrighted music on their streams. And if Twitch becomes a part of YouTube, they might have to crack down on copyrighted music on streams, due to pressure from the copyright holders.
Moving away from the music for a second, the public streaming of gameplay doesn't constitute copyright infringement? I'm no legal expert but it seems to me a bit of a stretch to call it fair use - especially for single player games.
Music is a good differentiation between streams. When I used to watch a lot of LoL streams that was one of my deciding factors on who to watch. Why watch someone playing all top 40 stuff when there's someone else playing music I enjoy?
I'm sorry for your loss. My father passed away in December of 2012 (after a 9 year battle with cancer). In fact, I posted on here mere hours afterward in regards to a goodbye blog post someone wrote to their father that was submitted here.
While things have been difficult, life will continue as it always has. Try to remember the good parts and celebrate their life rather than mourn their loss.
Well, from his perspective it's a worse change in personality, but from his friend's perspective he could be happier. So he's recognizing that his friend seems happier despite the change in personality he perceives to be bad.