They aren't talking about Atheletes, as there job is to be good physically over mentally. They are talking about getting basic exercise so we dont have a fat useless society.
My fiance is in the science world and of the ones we know (a ton mind you) they all do some sort of exercise. Yet of all the IT people I know (again a lot) maybe 1% actually do anything.
Dear lord no. Technology does not need to be used to solve this at all. Put your kids (or yourself) into something which not only helps you lose weight, but meet new people, help you learn something new and useful. sports, walking, biking, etc.
The really sad thing is you only need 30 mins of exercise a day and cut back on junk food to lose weight, be healthy, etc. The amount of excuses I hear is pathetic. Walk, bike, lift, get into a sport, etc. Problem is so many people think the virtual world is a better place to be.
I can believe it. I've come close several times myself to getting rid of it but I really like the history channel.
But still Viacom does provide ways for a person to see the show, now whether or not the person wants to pay for it (or except the limitations) is another matter.
"For years I tried watching clips of the Daily Show, and other Comedy Central programming on a frequently slow or broken Real Audio or Windows Media format. I had given up watching the show because of the frustration."
Ummm you found it to hard to turn on the TV and tune it to comedy central every night? Or record the show and watch it when you wanted to?
I don't agree with this at all. If I own luxury media and only release it via certain channels and you can't get it via those channels you are not entitled to get it through illegal channels. We are talking about luxury goods here not some medicine which will save millions of lives.
so google avoids a lawsuit for breaking the law by buying out the person suing them? Interesting strategy to say the least. Though something about that idea doesn't sit right with me.
Depends on what the settlement says, however I doubt ownership would ever be discussed. More likely they could reach and agreement where all current Viacom stuff can stay up or the agreement could say all viacom stuff must come down. And it will not protect them from future lawsuits either.
Until you have 10 companies each sure for a billion after google pays out. And that will cover all content up to the point of the lawsuit. Next year when they have content they shouldn't have up all the companies will be back. How long could google last with constant lawsuits?
How long will youtube last when all the commercial stuff goes away?
IANAL either but common carrier would, to me, seem to apply to things which deliver the information/voice/data and not apply to a website which stores the actual info. If youtube goes away the common carrier (Isp's for example) can still deliver information.
And? Who cares if there is auto aim or not? I've never understood this elitist point of view.
I've played almost every PC FPS since wolfenstein 3d came out. IMHO 95% are either crap or just the same game with a higher number. The magic controls of KB + mouse didn't make those games any better, I've seen many FPS games screw up the controls.
I've played tons of FPS on consoles and some games did the control right, some did it wrong. When a game did the controls right, but the game itself sucks, then it still sucks. who cares if the controls are good?.
So my point is if I am playing an FPS that I truly enjoy, that is fun , etc. why would I care if it is KB + mouse or auto aim on the console? The only argument I have ever heard is "well it shows who has the most skills". And at the point I laugh at the person because we are talking about video game FPS skills...
"Yet never has a console turn based rpg ever come close to some of the PC greats like fallout."
Considering how long its been since Fallout 1 and 2 came out, or X-Com, Breach, etc. the turn based genre has suffered for a long time on the PC box. Heck you could do great adventure games on the console too (kings quest, space quest, monkey island, etc) I think the reason is (see below)
"The only conclusion I can come up with is that the audience just has tastes similar to mine."
I think its just lazy game companies. If we make A we can get B amount of cash. If we make C we have no idea how it will be received. In general both PC and Console markets have been saturated with crap lately. Each has its gems of course.
You could do RTS on a console, just require the game to use mouse and keyboard. If the RTS is great people will spend 20 bucks on the mouse and keyboard.
Play this tons and haven't seen one ad. In fact I was impressed at the time they took to name a lot of buildings with fake names that gave the city a sense of life.
Now that would be an interesting study to say the least.
But still I think having all gadgets that will distract the driver is a bad move. Make sure they can't work for the driver when driving.
I guess I'm just from the old school of "pay attention when driving".
How about:
Old Car (pree 1998) OC
New Car NC
OC: Oops I backed into a pole at 5mph looks like I have a little scratch.
NC: That's nothing
OC: Nothing?
NC: Ya when I back into a pole at 5 mph I cause about $5000 dollars of repairs to myself.
That is interesting to say the least. I wonder if it's because the other people in the car can sense dangerous situations and be quiet.
But overall I think adding any distractions to the driver is just a bad idea. Have gadgets in the car fine; don't make them available to the driver if driving.
Except I have read a few articles where the research has shown it's not the issue of both hands being on the wheel, it's the actual conversation on the phone which distracts the drivers and there has been no evidence hands free reduces accidents.
Once you take you mind off the road (phone, computer, eating, fighting with someone in the car, etc) that's what causes the accidents.
I see no reason to have all this stuff available to the driver when DRIVING. The safety of the driver and others is greater then their need to check stocks, email, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
They aren't talking about Atheletes, as there job is to be good physically over mentally. They are talking about getting basic exercise so we dont have a fat useless society.
My fiance is in the science world and of the ones we know (a ton mind you) they all do some sort of exercise. Yet of all the IT people I know (again a lot) maybe 1% actually do anything.
Dear lord no. Technology does not need to be used to solve this at all. Put your kids (or yourself) into something which not only helps you lose weight, but meet new people, help you learn something new and useful. sports, walking, biking, etc.
I believena person who does not understand their bodies and how to maintain them (exercise, eating right, etc) cant be all that smart :-)
The really sad thing is you only need 30 mins of exercise a day and cut back on junk food to lose weight, be healthy, etc. The amount of excuses I hear is pathetic. Walk, bike, lift, get into a sport, etc. Problem is so many people think the virtual world is a better place to be.
ACCEPT...I can spell really... :-(
I can believe it. I've come close several times myself to getting rid of it but I really like the history channel.
But still Viacom does provide ways for a person to see the show, now whether or not the person wants to pay for it (or except the limitations) is another matter.
"For years I tried watching clips of the Daily Show, and other Comedy Central programming on a frequently slow or broken Real Audio or Windows Media format. I had given up watching the show because of the frustration."
Ummm you found it to hard to turn on the TV and tune it to comedy central every night? Or record the show and watch it when you wanted to?
I don't agree with this at all. If I own luxury media and only release it via certain channels and you can't get it via those channels you are not entitled to get it through illegal channels. We are talking about luxury goods here not some medicine which will save millions of lives.
so google avoids a lawsuit for breaking the law by buying out the person suing them? Interesting strategy to say the least. Though something about that idea doesn't sit right with me.
Depends on what the settlement says, however I doubt ownership would ever be discussed. More likely they could reach and agreement where all current Viacom stuff can stay up or the agreement could say all viacom stuff must come down. And it will not protect them from future lawsuits either.
it's not free, they are ads. And ads make me not watch live TV anymore. DVR + skip = good times.
Until you have 10 companies each sure for a billion after google pays out. And that will cover all content up to the point of the lawsuit. Next year when they have content they shouldn't have up all the companies will be back. How long could google last with constant lawsuits?
How long will youtube last when all the commercial stuff goes away?
IANAL either but common carrier would, to me, seem to apply to things which deliver the information/voice/data and not apply to a website which stores the actual info. If youtube goes away the common carrier (Isp's for example) can still deliver information.
But hey, like usual, I am probably wrong
And? Who cares if there is auto aim or not? I've never understood this elitist point of view.
I've played almost every PC FPS since wolfenstein 3d came out. IMHO 95% are either crap or just the same game with a higher number. The magic controls of KB + mouse didn't make those games any better, I've seen many FPS games screw up the controls.
I've played tons of FPS on consoles and some games did the control right, some did it wrong. When a game did the controls right, but the game itself sucks, then it still sucks. who cares if the controls are good?.
So my point is if I am playing an FPS that I truly enjoy, that is fun , etc. why would I care if it is KB + mouse or auto aim on the console? The only argument I have ever heard is "well it shows who has the most skills". And at the point I laugh at the person because we are talking about video game FPS skills...
"Yet never has a console turn based rpg ever come close to some of the PC greats like fallout." Considering how long its been since Fallout 1 and 2 came out, or X-Com, Breach, etc. the turn based genre has suffered for a long time on the PC box. Heck you could do great adventure games on the console too (kings quest, space quest, monkey island, etc) I think the reason is (see below) "The only conclusion I can come up with is that the audience just has tastes similar to mine." I think its just lazy game companies. If we make A we can get B amount of cash. If we make C we have no idea how it will be received. In general both PC and Console markets have been saturated with crap lately. Each has its gems of course. You could do RTS on a console, just require the game to use mouse and keyboard. If the RTS is great people will spend 20 bucks on the mouse and keyboard.
Play this tons and haven't seen one ad. In fact I was impressed at the time they took to name a lot of buildings with fake names that gave the city a sense of life.
So basically car quality went down as pole quality went up...lol
Now that would be an interesting study to say the least. But still I think having all gadgets that will distract the driver is a bad move. Make sure they can't work for the driver when driving. I guess I'm just from the old school of "pay attention when driving".
How about: Old Car (pree 1998) OC New Car NC OC: Oops I backed into a pole at 5mph looks like I have a little scratch. NC: That's nothing OC: Nothing? NC: Ya when I back into a pole at 5 mph I cause about $5000 dollars of repairs to myself.
That is interesting to say the least. I wonder if it's because the other people in the car can sense dangerous situations and be quiet. But overall I think adding any distractions to the driver is just a bad idea. Have gadgets in the car fine; don't make them available to the driver if driving.
They could focus more on mileage, pollution, quality, etc. of cars then the bells and whistles?
Except I have read a few articles where the research has shown it's not the issue of both hands being on the wheel, it's the actual conversation on the phone which distracts the drivers and there has been no evidence hands free reduces accidents. Once you take you mind off the road (phone, computer, eating, fighting with someone in the car, etc) that's what causes the accidents. I see no reason to have all this stuff available to the driver when DRIVING. The safety of the driver and others is greater then their need to check stocks, email, etc.
And will developers even code for this since they wont know if people have it or not?
Ya ignore the title I copied and pasted without enough coffee :-)
So ignoring the loss on each Ps3, So ignoring the loss on each Ps3, sony only has to sell 250,000 more units to recover from this. Piece o cake ;-)