I was rethinking your post and maybe this helps clarify.
The middle of anything is, by definition, average. I was connecting the mathematical term "average" with the subjective word "average" as in, "this product is neither good nor bad..it's average."
The propensity of average people to be attracted to average stuff is not a mathematical phenomena, rather a social one, is all I'm saying. Toyota builds boring Camry's in boring colors because that appeals to the middle of the bell curve, which has more potential customers. And the same goes for things like Farmville...hope that makes better sense.
Sheesh, everyone is criticizing my 50% comment as if they've never heard of normal distribution. Distribution is not even from the 1 to 100th percentile (as one reply states), and contrary to your post, it has EVERYTHING to do with how many there are. By definition, on a normal distribution, there are the most people at the 50th percentile and 68% of everyone in a normal distribution will fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean. Sure, it doesn't matter if there are 500 or 5,000,000 (if that's what you mean by "nothing to do with how many there are"). I'm just helping the guy who wrote the story understand that average folks play average games because there are, by definition, more of them (68% or so, on a standard bell curve).
Amen. I've been an MS basher since XP day 1. Starting with the after-thought Fisher Price graphics, down to the years of poorly design interface that never got fixed, all in the name of maintaining backwards compatibility and not scaring old timers away from learning something new.
Good for MS now. I bought a Win7 box and like it better than my OSX computers, which, for anyone who knows me, is an amazing statement.
I've been an OSX user since day 1 and just last month bought a Win7 box after years of XP sp 2. I hear Vista was garbage, but so far I've had as much success with old versions of software on my Windows box as my always reliable OSX boxes have been over the years. I also have to throw in an added level of complexity for the Win7 box, since it's 64-bit.
These games appeal to the 50th percentile. More "serious" video games require more time investment and interest, which is out of the realm of possibility for most normal folks.
The same reason is why we have so many bland US and Japanese brand sedans, and unexciting light fixtures, and bland music, and beige computers (less, these days though). By definition, there are more people in the 50th percentile, thus we will always have woefully average stuff.
Re:Funny you should choose that example
on
Health Care Reform
·
· Score: 1
I agree if you don't like something that is unconstitutional, then do an amendment, but I don't see anything in the current Constitution that would make mandatory insurance illegal.
You lose when you repeat the Limbaugh mantra of "taking over 1/6th of the economy". It isn't nationalizing health care--it's writing new laws that regulate how health insurance companies can operate. The government isn't taking over anything.
Convenience provides better jobs...take the grocery store self-checkout example. The engineers who make that stuff make way more money than a cashier. By using those automated services, we create a demand for professional engineers and software developers, which have higher wages, which in turn provide more tax revenue which is supposed to make society better (that part is debatable but sounds nice in theory).
In any case, this is an old argument I've never believed in. I grew up in Oregon where you can't pump your own gas because that would eliminate a job (the guy who works 20 hours a week at minimum wage so he can buy another baggie of pot). It is a short-sighted argument.
I love all these posts that think making me show a driver's license is the ultimate answer to everything. Here's a different solution. How about holding the banks liable for everything beyond the first $50 of fraudulent transactions, like the law requires, and quit burdening the rest of us otherwise law-abiding citizens with showing ID cards that wont prevent the fraud anyway.
because only in america could something as simple as a money transfer be so completely ridiculously involved.
Wait, what? I thought the whole point of this is to make depositing money more convenient. Take a picture and it's deposited. How is that "ridiculously involved"? It's not really any different than the current ATM scanner that just scans the check and deposits it (other than it keeps the check, and that you have to go to an ATM to do it).
I'll just take several pictures of the same check, and by the time they figure it out, I'll have my pay day loan (i.e. already spent then over-drafted). Woo hoo! Rent-town-USA here I come!
Good cinema is replete with deplorable characters. You weren't supposed to like Wikus. That's the whole point of the movie. Big corporations and xenophobic nationals are supposed to get theirs in the end, and they did. The movie makes social commentary, and I get a feeling the people who didn't like the movie didn't quite like the social commentary that was being made because it might strike too close to home.
Yes, exactly like the Christians during the crusades, except with roles reversed--religious fanatics imposing their will upon the infidels.
We can safely draw inferences as to whether or not this war will ever be won.
That's the problem. Some of us are not in this "war" to "win" anything. We simply would like to rid the world of bad guys.
Did you know that Mormons wear magical underwear?
I am an escaped mormon, so yes I know of the fancy underpants. The big difference is there are no underwear police patrolling the streets of Salt Lake City, kidnapping and stoning to death anyone not in compliance. BIG difference. Also, our government doesn't say you HAVE to be a Mormon and wear fancy underpants. As a matter of fact, I believe there is a little clause in there forbidding such activity. Again, that makes us the good guys and the beard police the bad guys.
You are right though. Sometimes the labels aren't appropriate and are subjective. My point is sometimes the labels are fitting and not subjective at all--unless you want to argue for the merits of beheading people because they don't believe in the official state religion.
Wait wait wait wait...I remember the first VCRs in the 80s (I was a teenager) and movies were never $90 each. I seem to remember $15 or $20 being a normal price for blockbuster movies back then. Not until the VCR took off did movies jump to the more commercial-friendly $29.99 price tag.
Wait. You don't have to buy the ridiculously priced food. I haven't in over 10 years...not even for my kids. You also don't have to watch the ads. Show up 10 minutes after the start time and you'll be settling in right before opening credits.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. Same goes for Ford. Ford Europe has some pretty nice cars that aren't available in the US.
I'm thinking the distribution of what kind of games people like to play, to keep it on topic.
I was rethinking your post and maybe this helps clarify.
The middle of anything is, by definition, average. I was connecting the mathematical term "average" with the subjective word "average" as in, "this product is neither good nor bad..it's average."
The propensity of average people to be attracted to average stuff is not a mathematical phenomena, rather a social one, is all I'm saying. Toyota builds boring Camry's in boring colors because that appeals to the middle of the bell curve, which has more potential customers. And the same goes for things like Farmville...hope that makes better sense.
Sheesh, everyone is criticizing my 50% comment as if they've never heard of normal distribution. Distribution is not even from the 1 to 100th percentile (as one reply states), and contrary to your post, it has EVERYTHING to do with how many there are. By definition, on a normal distribution, there are the most people at the 50th percentile and 68% of everyone in a normal distribution will fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean. Sure, it doesn't matter if there are 500 or 5,000,000 (if that's what you mean by "nothing to do with how many there are"). I'm just helping the guy who wrote the story understand that average folks play average games because there are, by definition, more of them (68% or so, on a standard bell curve).
Until you apply the bell curve to it, right?
Amen. I've been an MS basher since XP day 1. Starting with the after-thought Fisher Price graphics, down to the years of poorly design interface that never got fixed, all in the name of maintaining backwards compatibility and not scaring old timers away from learning something new.
Good for MS now. I bought a Win7 box and like it better than my OSX computers, which, for anyone who knows me, is an amazing statement.
I've been an OSX user since day 1 and just last month bought a Win7 box after years of XP sp 2. I hear Vista was garbage, but so far I've had as much success with old versions of software on my Windows box as my always reliable OSX boxes have been over the years. I also have to throw in an added level of complexity for the Win7 box, since it's 64-bit.
These games appeal to the 50th percentile. More "serious" video games require more time investment and interest, which is out of the realm of possibility for most normal folks.
The same reason is why we have so many bland US and Japanese brand sedans, and unexciting light fixtures, and bland music, and beige computers (less, these days though). By definition, there are more people in the 50th percentile, thus we will always have woefully average stuff.
I agree if you don't like something that is unconstitutional, then do an amendment, but I don't see anything in the current Constitution that would make mandatory insurance illegal.
1. The government already has several successful insurance programs (medicare/medicaid/Tri-care for military members)
2. Is it? Are you a constitutional expert? Is it unconstitutional to collect income taxes? (I see this as the same thing)
3. Care to elaborate?
4. Nobody is criticizing the quality of health care in America.
5. I'll wait and see, and your "evil, greedy" comment is a straw man.
6. Nobody is saying US government health care will be free either..another straw man argument.
You lose when you repeat the Limbaugh mantra of "taking over 1/6th of the economy". It isn't nationalizing health care--it's writing new laws that regulate how health insurance companies can operate. The government isn't taking over anything.
The point of this article is to discuss the reform in a constructive manner, not to bash entire ideologies just because they are not your own.
I like to bash ideologies that are plain wrong, regardless if the are not my own.
Convenience provides better jobs...take the grocery store self-checkout example. The engineers who make that stuff make way more money than a cashier. By using those automated services, we create a demand for professional engineers and software developers, which have higher wages, which in turn provide more tax revenue which is supposed to make society better (that part is debatable but sounds nice in theory).
In any case, this is an old argument I've never believed in. I grew up in Oregon where you can't pump your own gas because that would eliminate a job (the guy who works 20 hours a week at minimum wage so he can buy another baggie of pot). It is a short-sighted argument.
I love all these posts that think making me show a driver's license is the ultimate answer to everything. Here's a different solution. How about holding the banks liable for everything beyond the first $50 of fraudulent transactions, like the law requires, and quit burdening the rest of us otherwise law-abiding citizens with showing ID cards that wont prevent the fraud anyway.
because only in america could something as simple as a money transfer be so completely ridiculously involved.
Wait, what? I thought the whole point of this is to make depositing money more convenient. Take a picture and it's deposited. How is that "ridiculously involved"? It's not really any different than the current ATM scanner that just scans the check and deposits it (other than it keeps the check, and that you have to go to an ATM to do it).
I'll just take several pictures of the same check, and by the time they figure it out, I'll have my pay day loan (i.e. already spent then over-drafted). Woo hoo! Rent-town-USA here I come!
That's right, when you have nothing persuasive to say, insult the other person. Great.
Two examples are better than the one you offered. I win.
Good cinema is replete with deplorable characters. You weren't supposed to like Wikus. That's the whole point of the movie. Big corporations and xenophobic nationals are supposed to get theirs in the end, and they did. The movie makes social commentary, and I get a feeling the people who didn't like the movie didn't quite like the social commentary that was being made because it might strike too close to home.
Access denied. My company must be controlled by the Israelis.
Like that of the Christians during the crusades?
Yes, exactly like the Christians during the crusades, except with roles reversed--religious fanatics imposing their will upon the infidels.
We can safely draw inferences as to whether or not this war will ever be won.
That's the problem. Some of us are not in this "war" to "win" anything. We simply would like to rid the world of bad guys.
Did you know that Mormons wear magical underwear?
I am an escaped mormon, so yes I know of the fancy underpants. The big difference is there are no underwear police patrolling the streets of Salt Lake City, kidnapping and stoning to death anyone not in compliance. BIG difference. Also, our government doesn't say you HAVE to be a Mormon and wear fancy underpants. As a matter of fact, I believe there is a little clause in there forbidding such activity. Again, that makes us the good guys and the beard police the bad guys.
You are right though. Sometimes the labels aren't appropriate and are subjective. My point is sometimes the labels are fitting and not subjective at all--unless you want to argue for the merits of beheading people because they don't believe in the official state religion.
Higher resolution than HD...thoughts of diminishing returns come immediately to mind.
You fast forward through movies? What's the point of watching them then?
Or I can just use Netflix and pay nothing really.
And I've been playing World of Warcraft, paying nothing really, for over three years now...oh wait...
Wait wait wait wait...I remember the first VCRs in the 80s (I was a teenager) and movies were never $90 each. I seem to remember $15 or $20 being a normal price for blockbuster movies back then. Not until the VCR took off did movies jump to the more commercial-friendly $29.99 price tag.
Wait. You don't have to buy the ridiculously priced food. I haven't in over 10 years...not even for my kids. You also don't have to watch the ads. Show up 10 minutes after the start time and you'll be settling in right before opening credits.