What I'd like to see is a decent capital ship sim, set in the Starwars universe.
(deep smoker's voice)Coming this summer, from acclaimed game designer Will Wright. SimStarDestroyer! Manage the economy of a Star Destroyer on a mission to erradicate the rebel alliance. Build TIE fighters and other spacefighting craft! Survive and rebuild after a variety of space disasters like magnetic storms and black holes! Build a room with no doors and wait until Darth Vader wets himself!...yadda yadda yadda...
Balance would probably be an issue, with TIEs being mostly paper dragons compared to XWing. There's a reason standard imperial tactics require you to outnumber the rebels 3:1 before engaging...
One step towards resolving this is spawn timing, Imperial forces with an 0-3 second spawn delay, rebel forces with a 8-12 second spawn delay. There are other ways to resolve this, it just requires game designers to be creative. (creative, whuts that?)
yeah, but it's apparently legal for a battery maker to clone their battery "feature":
Thats all fine and good, but cloning the feature will cost money, money to implement, and money on each battery. Who do you think eats those costs? The manufacturer? Of course not, it just gets passed down to us. Panasonic is making life more expensive for us in a miserable economy. Guess who I'm not buying from.
In the digital compact market Panasonic is holding its own fairly well. Although the newest models indeed have these nonsensical battery firmware updates, the FZ28 can go head to head easily with the canon SX10.. And if you don't upgrade firmware, the LX3 with the 1.1 FW is one of the best cameras in its segment. Similarly for the tz7.
Panasonic began doing this battery lockout awhile back, I remember seeing their camcorders reject third party batteries about a year or 2 back. Canon makes excellent cameras, doesn't attempt to shoot you in the leg with a battery lock-in, and their RAW format plays well with many software options (free and otherwise). If I was looking to buy a camera right now, you can bet it wouldn't be a Panasonic, regardless of how close it compares to a Canon.
There are many good suggestions here, but you mentioned going sideways into another help desk. That *may* work for you. I worked in one form of a help desk, then transitioned to another, better paying support desk. 1.8 years later I'm doing server work, and the only calls I field are the ones that the help desk can't fix. If you're up against a wall, you can leave the building (go back to school) or walk alongside the wall until you find the door into the next room, and hope it has bags of cash. =D
And I forgot to mention that this was done with no formal education, and and brain infested with ADD
There are many good suggestions here, but you mentioned going sideways into another help desk. That *may* work for you. I worked in one form of a help desk, then transitioned to another, better paying support desk. 1.8 years later I'm doing server work, and the only calls I field are the ones that the help desk can't fix. If you're up against a wall, you can leave the building (go back to school) or walk alongside the wall until you find the door into the next room, and hope it has bags of cash. =D
There is a significant difference between "purchasing a domain and making a profit by having it" and "purchasing a domain in order to make a profit by selling it".
Stating that there is a difference and explaining the difference are two very different things. Both things are legal. Both things involve monetary transactions. In both cases, the investor hopes to gain more then he has invested, preferably much more then he invested. Explain the difference, and how it is so significant.
Clearly the reason there's a huge profit margin in used games is that new games are priced way too high.
I was thinking along the same lines. If they don't like the used games market, then either make games that are too much fun to part with (I almost giggled typing that one) or adjust prices according to how old the game is, and price used games off the market. You want brand new game X? Pay 59.99 for it. You want 6 month old game X? Pay 35.99 for it. 12 month old...you get the idea. Use the Wal-Mart philosophy and undercut as you go, if a used copy is 18.99 and the new game is $20, I'll pay the little more for the brand new, even if the used copy looks spotless. But if the used copy is 35.99 and the brand new copy is 59.99, the game makers themselves would save the 25 bux without hesitation.
You're making the assumption, of course, that 'getting there with the money first' is a totally fair and equitable process. That no one starts out with more of this stuff than anyone else. Which, of course, is entirely wrong.
Welcome to the real world. One man's fair is another man's cheating.
With real estate you have to continue to put money into it to maintain value.
You have upkeep on a house, you have to keep renewing your lease on the domain. The value of a house can fluctuate based on it's surrounding neighborhood and location. The value of a domain can fluctuate based on the market and companies it can be related to.
most leases will state you can only sublet it for the amount of money you're renting it for, if you can do so at all. Why are internet domains any different?
In real estate, the investor owns, and the renter leases. In domain names, the person leasing the domain name is the investor. He defines the rules of what lives in that domain. He can choose to lease a portion of that domain to a company, but that is his business.
You're arguing that someone who happens to have money at the creation of a new commonly held resource has all the rights to that resource. That they get to profit all they want off that resource without ever paying back into the communal holding. That is, directly, harmful to society.
How is www.chosenwebsitename.com commonly held? If I choose to purchase and continue to lease this domain, why shouldn't I profit off of it? What is this communal holding you speak of? If society chooses to purchase this domain from me, why is it harmful? Making stuff up in your head may work in egowumpusland, but not here. Please, try to enlighten us on this point if nothing else.
You should be careful, by the way. Just because we say 'buy' a domain, that does not mean in actuality 'buy'. It means 'lease'. Because we say 'buy', you should not confuse it with 'buying a house'. The two are not equivalent. If you want to debunk someone's logic, you should be careful to use proper logic yourself.
This is the only point to which I would concede, except that I was careful to use the term "invest". Investments by nature can carry costs, more commonly referred to as "risks". In housing, you carry the risk of a recession, or housing prices dropping, as well you pay into it every year in the form of taxes. In domains, you continue paying into that domain, at the risk of receiving nothing back. Ever.
And yes my argument is spelled wrong. You had to be correct about something in this spiel.
Insert ATM card...
Observe message stating that the ATM is now deleting all files on your ATM card.
Watch helplessly as the progress bar nears completions while filenames zip across the screen
Take possession of the card as the machine spits it out with an accompanying "GOT YA!" on the screen
Still waiting for this one...
No, what you say is nonsense. If you buy up a domain name to which you have no legitimate right, just for the purpose of extorting money from or preventing use by someone who does, then you are just being an asswipe. Just because the law doesn't prevent you from doing this doesn't mean your action has any moral legitimacy.
Your arguement has no merit. First off, "having a right" to a domain name is a concept that exists in your head. As well, by your logic, a person who purchases a house without the intention of living in it is mafia scum.
If someone has the foresight to get ahead of the market, be it investing in stocks, real estate, or domain names, you would have them strung up and hung by their necks, simply because all they did was get there with the money first.
Not sure if it's one of the first two button mice, but it was purchased roughly a year before windows 3.1 came out. Good old Logitech 9pin serial. Still works, but almost hurts to use it compared to the logitech g5. Thing must be about 20 years old now...
It's funny, as you're posting as AC, I can't even be sure that I'm talking to the same person. I could end up having a discussion with 5 people acting as one. While this may happen in my head from time to time, I'd rather it not happen elsewhere =>
I'm not saying it's unique the differnce between them and other religions is that in France Scientology is NOT a recognized religion.
My statement was meant to include religions, but was not meant to be restricted to them. There are many groups that make money off of a belief that people may hold, including those that sell so-called lucky charms or spirit wards. They're no more a recognized religion, yet they can sucker people in by the droves. They're just not as secretive and lawyer-eager as the E.T. worshipers.
*Disclaimer* This comment was made with the influence of prescription drugs. You may or may not need drugs questionable legality to understand it.
(Note: "The Old Testament doesn't really count anymore!!!" is a copout)
I have. Old and new. However, AC has a point, one man's wacky shit is another man's bread and butter. My understanding of Christianity's wacky shit is pretty broad, but starts with preachers raping childen, and includes the Morman's concept of "test-driving" the bride. However, that's just the obvious stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
What I'd like to see is a decent capital ship sim, set in the Starwars universe.
(deep smoker's voice)Coming this summer, from acclaimed game designer Will Wright. SimStarDestroyer! Manage the economy of a Star Destroyer on a mission to erradicate the rebel alliance. Build TIE fighters and other spacefighting craft! Survive and rebuild after a variety of space disasters like magnetic storms and black holes! Build a room with no doors and wait until Darth Vader wets himself! ...yadda yadda yadda...
Balance would probably be an issue, with TIEs being mostly paper dragons compared to XWing. There's a reason standard imperial tactics require you to outnumber the rebels 3:1 before engaging...
One step towards resolving this is spawn timing, Imperial forces with an 0-3 second spawn delay, rebel forces with a 8-12 second spawn delay. There are other ways to resolve this, it just requires game designers to be creative. (creative, whuts that?)
but i would rather just shut down final fantasy, dragon quest, sonic, and mega man.
I for one, reject our off-topic overlord.
Star Ocean = Awesome Especially "Til the End of Time" for the PS2
Quest for Glory! YAY!
they would only need to be believable in the first 15 minutes or so
Because the government moves that fast. Really.
yeah, but it's apparently legal for a battery maker to clone their battery "feature":
Thats all fine and good, but cloning the feature will cost money, money to implement, and money on each battery. Who do you think eats those costs? The manufacturer? Of course not, it just gets passed down to us. Panasonic is making life more expensive for us in a miserable economy. Guess who I'm not buying from.
In the digital compact market Panasonic is holding its own fairly well. Although the newest models indeed have these nonsensical battery firmware updates, the FZ28 can go head to head easily with the canon SX10.. And if you don't upgrade firmware, the LX3 with the 1.1 FW is one of the best cameras in its segment. Similarly for the tz7.
Panasonic began doing this battery lockout awhile back, I remember seeing their camcorders reject third party batteries about a year or 2 back. Canon makes excellent cameras, doesn't attempt to shoot you in the leg with a battery lock-in, and their RAW format plays well with many software options (free and otherwise). If I was looking to buy a camera right now, you can bet it wouldn't be a Panasonic, regardless of how close it compares to a Canon.
There are many good suggestions here, but you mentioned going sideways into another help desk. That *may* work for you. I worked in one form of a help desk, then transitioned to another, better paying support desk. 1.8 years later I'm doing server work, and the only calls I field are the ones that the help desk can't fix. If you're up against a wall, you can leave the building (go back to school) or walk alongside the wall until you find the door into the next room, and hope it has bags of cash. =D
And I forgot to mention that this was done with no formal education, and and brain infested with ADD
There are many good suggestions here, but you mentioned going sideways into another help desk. That *may* work for you. I worked in one form of a help desk, then transitioned to another, better paying support desk. 1.8 years later I'm doing server work, and the only calls I field are the ones that the help desk can't fix. If you're up against a wall, you can leave the building (go back to school) or walk alongside the wall until you find the door into the next room, and hope it has bags of cash. =D
There is a significant difference between "purchasing a domain and making a profit by having it" and "purchasing a domain in order to make a profit by selling it".
Stating that there is a difference and explaining the difference are two very different things. Both things are legal. Both things involve monetary transactions. In both cases, the investor hopes to gain more then he has invested, preferably much more then he invested. Explain the difference, and how it is so significant.
Clearly the reason there's a huge profit margin in used games is that new games are priced way too high.
I was thinking along the same lines. If they don't like the used games market, then either make games that are too much fun to part with (I almost giggled typing that one) or adjust prices according to how old the game is, and price used games off the market. You want brand new game X? Pay 59.99 for it. You want 6 month old game X? Pay 35.99 for it. 12 month old ...you get the idea. Use the Wal-Mart philosophy and undercut as you go, if a used copy is 18.99 and the new game is $20, I'll pay the little more for the brand new, even if the used copy looks spotless. But if the used copy is 35.99 and the brand new copy is 59.99, the game makers themselves would save the 25 bux without hesitation.
You're making the assumption, of course, that 'getting there with the money first' is a totally fair and equitable process. That no one starts out with more of this stuff than anyone else. Which, of course, is entirely wrong.
Welcome to the real world. One man's fair is another man's cheating.
With real estate you have to continue to put money into it to maintain value.
You have upkeep on a house, you have to keep renewing your lease on the domain. The value of a house can fluctuate based on it's surrounding neighborhood and location. The value of a domain can fluctuate based on the market and companies it can be related to.
most leases will state you can only sublet it for the amount of money you're renting it for, if you can do so at all. Why are internet domains any different?
In real estate, the investor owns, and the renter leases. In domain names, the person leasing the domain name is the investor. He defines the rules of what lives in that domain. He can choose to lease a portion of that domain to a company, but that is his business.
You're arguing that someone who happens to have money at the creation of a new commonly held resource has all the rights to that resource. That they get to profit all they want off that resource without ever paying back into the communal holding. That is, directly, harmful to society.
How is www.chosenwebsitename.com commonly held? If I choose to purchase and continue to lease this domain, why shouldn't I profit off of it? What is this communal holding you speak of? If society chooses to purchase this domain from me, why is it harmful? Making stuff up in your head may work in egowumpusland, but not here. Please, try to enlighten us on this point if nothing else.
You should be careful, by the way. Just because we say 'buy' a domain, that does not mean in actuality 'buy'. It means 'lease'. Because we say 'buy', you should not confuse it with 'buying a house'. The two are not equivalent. If you want to debunk someone's logic, you should be careful to use proper logic yourself.
This is the only point to which I would concede, except that I was careful to use the term "invest". Investments by nature can carry costs, more commonly referred to as "risks". In housing, you carry the risk of a recession, or housing prices dropping, as well you pay into it every year in the form of taxes. In domains, you continue paying into that domain, at the risk of receiving nothing back. Ever.
And yes my argument is spelled wrong. You had to be correct about something in this spiel.
Insert ATM card...
Observe message stating that the ATM is now deleting all files on your ATM card.
Watch helplessly as the progress bar nears completions while filenames zip across the screen
Take possession of the card as the machine spits it out with an accompanying "GOT YA!" on the screen
Still waiting for this one...
No, what you say is nonsense. If you buy up a domain name to which you have no legitimate right, just for the purpose of extorting money from or preventing use by someone who does, then you are just being an asswipe. Just because the law doesn't prevent you from doing this doesn't mean your action has any moral legitimacy.
Your arguement has no merit. First off, "having a right" to a domain name is a concept that exists in your head. As well, by your logic, a person who purchases a house without the intention of living in it is mafia scum.
If someone has the foresight to get ahead of the market, be it investing in stocks, real estate, or domain names, you would have them strung up and hung by their necks, simply because all they did was get there with the money first.
*quite* perky
Your slashdot name suggests otherwise.
damn, and me without modpoints!
I scan my PC once a year, just to be safe, and still nothing!!
Oh, you use Antivirus2009 as well. Sad.
Not sure if it's one of the first two button mice, but it was purchased roughly a year before windows 3.1 came out. Good old Logitech 9pin serial. Still works, but almost hurts to use it compared to the logitech g5. Thing must be about 20 years old now...
"Bob, where's my bong?" "Have you tried looking underneath your belt?" "Not that bong, Bob. The other bong."
Did you try binging your bong?
Imaginary child exploitation you mean?
Great...this means we're going to have to nuke imagination land.
You must live in Northern California. Southern California has two seasons, Pants, and Shorts.
I'm not saying...
It's funny, as you're posting as AC, I can't even be sure that I'm talking to the same person. I could end up having a discussion with 5 people acting as one. While this may happen in my head from time to time, I'd rather it not happen elsewhere =>
I'm not saying it's unique the differnce between them and other religions is that in France Scientology is NOT a recognized religion.
My statement was meant to include religions, but was not meant to be restricted to them. There are many groups that make money off of a belief that people may hold, including those that sell so-called lucky charms or spirit wards. They're no more a recognized religion, yet they can sucker people in by the droves. They're just not as secretive and lawyer-eager as the E.T. worshipers.
*Disclaimer* This comment was made with the influence of prescription drugs. You may or may not need drugs questionable legality to understand it.
(Note: "The Old Testament doesn't really count anymore!!!" is a copout)
I have. Old and new. However, AC has a point, one man's wacky shit is another man's bread and butter. My understanding of Christianity's wacky shit is pretty broad, but starts with preachers raping childen, and includes the Morman's concept of "test-driving" the bride. However, that's just the obvious stuff.
The wacky shit that Scientologists are taught to believe is no more wacky than the shit Christians are taught to believe in.
It's a shame that the Pastors and Ministers of Christianity no longer hold firm to the Bible. If they did, it would remove the wacky shit.
They are trying to ban them because they are using peoples beliefs for the monetary gain of the church.
Oh, and that's unique to the scientologists right?
If thats what it is, they've got a long road ahead of them, and scientology is just the beginning.