Actually, the cookies accumulate even when I am not actively at my computer playing the game.

Hence, if I do go out to do something and then return to the game, I will have a lot more cookies than before I went out.

or with the grind fest that is pokemon go on the phone

and it is grindfest
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/07/how-pokemon-go-starts-punishing-its-high-level-players/

>>"From level 29-30 I went through over 1000 pokeballs. Literally," Riggnaros complains. "I cannot stress how ridiculous this would be for someone playing [without] spending coins on pokeballs (ie playing the game [free to play] - which is the majority)."

What's more, the total amount of experience needed to reach the next level appears to go up exponentially as the game continues. While advancing to level 15 only requires a few thousand experience points per level, by the time you hit level 30, it takes a full 500,000 experience points to increase your in-game status.

The exponentially increasing steepness of the leveling climb is particularly daunting, Riggnaros argues, because the game doesn't increase the amount of experience offered by the Pokémon you capture at later levels. "It makes no sense that a 10cp Pidgey should be giving the same XP as an 1600cp Scyther," he writes. "Stronger, evolved, and more rare Pokémon should reward you with more XP, plain and simple."<<

It has been scientifically proven that pokemon go, will cure autism in children, transexuals, ferretts, chimps and guppies.

transexual ferrets ?

there was a comma. But I do think the ferret on the big lebowski was probably a transexual.

You see most of us set it up so when we leave, cookies are removed...
Thankfully I have no interest in it, other than perhaps to put all the searchable things about 30 yards past the cliff edge.

It doesn't. I've done about the same, and I've even written a neat JavaScript add-on for it without learning the language, just by looking at the source code and experimenting (that probably means it's an easy language, but still :P).

The definition of cheesy, in this context, is generally along the lines of "poor quality," "cheap," "inauthentic." Cookie Clicker is an absolute opposite of that: the pixel art is of great quality, the flavour text is excellent and the gameplay is really innovative (that's why it was shamelessly copied countless times) and also has an incredible depth you'll rarely find somewhere else. But you should know since you've played a good deal of it. Sure, the name isn't that great, but under that hides a real gem.

I agree, though, that the original Cookie Clicker (the one Orteil made over a night before it turning into a cult) was cheesy since it was really just a proof of concept and made for shits and giggles, and because the art just consisted of a collage of pictures that didn't really fit together.

I think that, by "cheesy games," they meant games like the ones you could find on Facebook: casual, filled with micro-transactions and / or ads, and often featuring that cartoonish art style that a lot of Flash games use.

The name change is probably due to it being able to produce non-Flash content (ie. you can choose to export to a Flash file, or a more standards-based combo of HTML5/Javascript/CSS(/SVG?) which works on more platforms).

The only place I've used flash recently is YouTube. With my V15 no longer supported I just disabled it entirely. Now I have a newer version of PaleMoon that doesn't have flash, but seems to allow video to play, probably via a VLC pass-through.

Youtube have had the option for HTML5 video for several years, and enabled it by default a year or two ago.

They announced that was coming along with completely removing NPAPI about a year ago. What's sad is that they're not actually going to do it until 2018 now by the sounds of it and are simply going to make it click-to-play like Chrome has done for a year or so, so websites wont have a tremendous motivation to update to HTML5 technologies for yet another year. ;o(

I was really hoping both Mozilla and Google would stand firm on their promise to rip out flash/java/etc. completely by 2017 so that companies embrace HTML5 full on and we have a more secure web as a result.

This is still a step in the right direction, but it is degraded from what they originally planned to do. I'm guessing that Google must have changed their minds as well.
Yup, Facebook uses HTML5 video by default also, although some videos still show up there as Flash for some reason. Unfortunately Twitch.TV is all flash as well.

To be honest I HATE sites forcing you to use flash to navigate. I've actually just outright left and went somewhere else. Can't remember what they were, couldn't be that important...

Although it's more that Flash forces SUPER HIGH QUALITY and won't default to a lower setting so it's so clunky and slow and crap. Plus ads... hate ads that use flash. Getting flash-blocker was first to stop ads from killing my browser back in 2007...

Indeed, many websites use Flash completely unnecessarily nowadays doing things that are 100% doable without Flash using plain HTML5+CSS+JS. Drives me nuts.

About a year ago roughly during one of the latest major flash security flaw meltdowns, at the time the flaw announcements went out but Adobe had no patches to fix them. I am one of the minority who takes stuff like that very seriously and puts security above convenience so I went ahead and uninstalled Flash as I've done many times in the past for such scenarios. Usually I wait until the security patch comes out and then reinstall it later, and just bookmark videos or whatever into a "Watch" folder in my bookmarks etc. A year ago though I decided to do something different - to see how long I could go just completely doing without Flash in my main browser. Well, around a year has passed and I still do not have Flash in my browser, and long ago I decided the change would be permanent. Surprisingly, the biggest annoyance I've hit where I've went somewhere and been unable to use it is Twitch.TV which requires Flash, so I usually just close the window when I follow a link to Twitch.TV. For those things which are higher priority that I need to access or that I really want to see the content with higher priority etc. - I sometimes fire up Google Chrome which I keep as a secondary browser for web development testing because it has Flash built in and you can't get rid of it, so it is a good fallback for important cases with Flash.

As for ads, I used to use AdBlock Plus for over a decade which did a great job of eliminating all ads, but it was slow and clunky and used a lot of memory and CPU resources as well as destabilizing the web browser over time due to massive memory leakage etc. About 18 months ago someone told me about uBlock Origin, an alternative ad blocker which uses the exact same filter lists that AdBlock Plus does so it blocks the same amount of advertising. uBlock Origin is written from scratch so it's not a fork of the buggy AdBlock codebase, but rather a ground up implementation which aimed at efficiency and conserving resources by reducing memory and CPU consumption. I've been using it ever since and it blocks all the same ads but without any of the problems AdBlock Plus has.

As such, I can offer a strong recommendation to all people to try out uBlock Origin whether you already have an ad blocker you're satisfied with or not, it is rock solid stable and reliable and uses the least resources of any other I've seen while blocking all the same ads. It's important to note that there are two addons with the name "uBlock", this one is specifically called "uBlock Origin" and not just "uBlock", it's important to mention that because a lot of people go looking for it after the recommendation and grab the wrong one which is a much older release that has been replaced with the "uBlock Origin" name long ago.

So if anyone has problems with annoying advertising online, definitely try out uBlock Origin for Firefox or Chrome and you wont be disappointed. You'll probably also notice your browser crashes way less often as well. :)