Could you imagine the amount of money they'd make treating people with the diseases? Or lifelong treatment of people with complications of the disease?
Wheelchair makers would make billions on polio victim alone!
This is a fantastic point. I studied biology (specializing in genetics and evolution). But it really is no more important than chemistry, physic, algebra, etc.
It is simply because it's political that it's been dragged into the spotlight. But it was only given special attention because it is under attack. I'm sure that scientists and well reasoned people would defend physics if people were trying to pass laws requiring science teachers to teach the controversy of flying elves making things fall vs the "theory of gravity"
The whole point of teaching science is to hope that people will find that things are wrong with it and improve on it.
But without a solid understanding on the scientific method, what we observe now, how we interpret that evidence and why the current body of knowledge is accepted, people cannot possibly understand WHY the science is wrong (when it's wrong) and how to fix it.
EVE is not really a space sim. To me, space sim means real time flying and dog fighting... specifically things like having to lead your target.
I've always found that the X series wasn't very accessible. The controls seem really complicated (instead of complex yet simple).
But the biggest thing I miss from the old space sim days is the story. In Wing Commander, X-Wing, TIE Fighter, etc. you really felt like you were a pilot who's accomplishments on missions really made a difference in the larger picture. Something sorely missing from either of the titles that you mentioned.
As a developer, I have to say that I develop for iOS first. There are many reasons for this (I actually like Android better for personal use).
The fragmentation of the Android platform is ridiculous. Not only do you have to worry about processors, screen ratio, resolution and anything else hardware related... you also have to worry about fragmentation of the operating system. Some people might have gingerbread and haven't upgraded to ice cream sandwich yet. And perhaps their phone can't handle the newest version. On top of that users may not have enough technical knowledge to fix it.
This results in consumers blaming your product. It doesn't work on their phone, this app sucks, the company sucks, etc.
However, releasing on iOS... you only have to worry about a couple of configurations of phone (you can even stipulate that your app only works on 3GS or 4 and above or whatever) and a few different screen ratios/resolutions. It's even okay to force the user to upgrade to the latest version of iOS. Which is simple to do.
This results in people (hopefully) enjoying your app and getting your company and products a fan base. Then when you port it to Android... if the app doesn't work on their phone and they do a search they'll find good reviews, testimonials, etc and blame their phone instead of the developer.
The problem with Microsoft (and other companies) that Apple didn't have is that they are slaves to market research. Apple did what they thought the consumer wanted, instead of researching the consumer and then making the same crap that they were already buying.
This is the thinking that lead to the cancellation of the Courier (google it, it was awesome).
By chasing trends, you will never be leading. I think this quote is quite apt: "There go my people. I must find out where they are going so I can lead them."
- Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin
You joke... but this is actually the kind of thing that was lost with Steve Jobs. Not that OSX is impevious, but the almost religious belief in whatever Apple says.
Jobs would have kept saying it. Mac user would parrot it. You won't believe how often I hear Mac users (although I am one) delude themselves into thinking how great their platform is. The marketing speak of "Macs are immune to viruses" doesn't have to be true, the consumers just have to believe it is.
It's sort of like how Howard Camping said the world was going to end in May last year and then it didn't, and then people STILL believed him when he said it was going to end in October.
"... the people who were calling us did not understand the bill any better than we did"
I can't believe she used this as an argument. If they don't understand the bill, and their constituents didn't understand the bill, there can only be two reasons for trying to pass it:
1) Passing legislation for legislation's sake (Stupid) 2) Passing legislation because you are compelled to by another party that only holds it's own interests (Evil)
I think that we can all agree that the person most likely to be forgotten in this article is Malcolm Gladwell.
Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration
on
Diablo III Released
·
· Score: 1
I don't really care about 10 or 15 years from now. I would however, like to play it now. Unfortunately, I can't because the authentication servers are down.
They were down last night. I got to play a little before I left for work. But that's it.
The ridicule was not because Palin said that she could see Russia from certain parts of Alaska, it was that she was offering that up as a rationale of why she had foreign policy experience.
It's not even that the Left or the Right believe lies that are repeated enough... anyone will believe whatever supports their own view of the world.
Of course this has nothing to do with the anti science movement that took over when W was in office and is still a matter of fact for half the population.
Half the american public are against "intellectuals", against evolution, deny climate change and think that investing in science is against God or is far to great a burden on the economy and you're surprised at this?
I agree as I'm a lifelong martial artist as well... but I will also say that knowing something tends to be much better than the majority of people out there who know nothing.
And I've worked a lot in the IT industry, I would argue that the same is true there.
Interesting. A lot of people saying "you're an idiot" or "you're stupid" for bringing faith into the conversation. Ad hominem attacks add nothing to the conversation. Especially because I have not attacked science or the scientific method in anyway. Using personal insults only serve to weaken your position.
I'm actually trying to understand the (incorrect) view point of many religious people talking about faith in science. Particularly about evolution.
I agree with the analysis that I have incorrectly used the word faith here. I'm actually arguing from a point of view that I don't believe. My original intent was to point out that the only things that can be considered hard fact are things that have already occurred.
That drawing my next breath is fact... well... if you think about it, that's is not fact. I could die in the middle of this sentence.
When I said faith, what I really mean is truth. There is a difference between truth and fact. The problem is that religion requires no facts to determine truth whereas science is truth based on fact. But truth is not the same as fact and treating it so can be incredibly dangerous (from any side).
Also, one of the predominant aspects of the theory of evolution is that speciation occurs because of geographical separation from the "ancestral species". If you can agree on small "adaptations" can you also see that many of these small adaptations to environments can lead to complete changes in physiology? Say, if a mountain appeared (due to tectonic shift or eruption) and land locked a section of water... and then the fish species within that lake, in order to get food, "adapted" a way to breathe air some of the time and got food from the land surrounding it. And then because that was the species that was best able to survive and not starve to death ended up spending more and more time on land, that some elements of the population mutated stronger fins... that those would be even better suited to get food on land... until after generations (as the original lake dried out) it because a land walking species that bore little resemblance to the original species that didn't get land locked?
Slashdot Mirror
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos"
;)
What's the bad news?
"If Jesus had a gun he'd still be alive today!" - Homer Simpson
Arguably... things in orbit ARE falling towards the "gravity well". They're just missing the ground.
If people are going to call Dec 21 the "Mayan Apocalypse," I'm going to start calling Dec 31 the "Gregorian Apocalypse" ... every year.
Could you imagine the amount of money they'd make treating people with the diseases? Or lifelong treatment of people with complications of the disease?
Wheelchair makers would make billions on polio victim alone!
"A goal is not always meant to be reached, it often serves simply as something to aim at."
-- Bruce Lee
"overcoming current manufacturing limitations through innovation to reduce complexity and cost"
Don't forget overcoming the patents own by big oil and reducing legal fees.
This is a fantastic point. I studied biology (specializing in genetics and evolution). But it really is no more important than chemistry, physic, algebra, etc.
It is simply because it's political that it's been dragged into the spotlight. But it was only given special attention because it is under attack. I'm sure that scientists and well reasoned people would defend physics if people were trying to pass laws requiring science teachers to teach the controversy of flying elves making things fall vs the "theory of gravity"
Why not last thursday? ;)
The whole point of teaching science is to hope that people will find that things are wrong with it and improve on it.
But without a solid understanding on the scientific method, what we observe now, how we interpret that evidence and why the current body of knowledge is accepted, people cannot possibly understand WHY the science is wrong (when it's wrong) and how to fix it.
EVE is not really a space sim. To me, space sim means real time flying and dog fighting... specifically things like having to lead your target.
I've always found that the X series wasn't very accessible. The controls seem really complicated (instead of complex yet simple).
But the biggest thing I miss from the old space sim days is the story. In Wing Commander, X-Wing, TIE Fighter, etc. you really felt like you were a pilot who's accomplishments on missions really made a difference in the larger picture. Something sorely missing from either of the titles that you mentioned.
X - Wing
As a developer, I have to say that I develop for iOS first. There are many reasons for this (I actually like Android better for personal use).
The fragmentation of the Android platform is ridiculous. Not only do you have to worry about processors, screen ratio, resolution and anything else hardware related... you also have to worry about fragmentation of the operating system. Some people might have gingerbread and haven't upgraded to ice cream sandwich yet. And perhaps their phone can't handle the newest version. On top of that users may not have enough technical knowledge to fix it.
This results in consumers blaming your product. It doesn't work on their phone, this app sucks, the company sucks, etc.
However, releasing on iOS... you only have to worry about a couple of configurations of phone (you can even stipulate that your app only works on 3GS or 4 and above or whatever) and a few different screen ratios/resolutions. It's even okay to force the user to upgrade to the latest version of iOS. Which is simple to do.
This results in people (hopefully) enjoying your app and getting your company and products a fan base. Then when you port it to Android... if the app doesn't work on their phone and they do a search they'll find good reviews, testimonials, etc and blame their phone instead of the developer.
The problem with Microsoft (and other companies) that Apple didn't have is that they are slaves to market research. Apple did what they thought the consumer wanted, instead of researching the consumer and then making the same crap that they were already buying.
This is the thinking that lead to the cancellation of the Courier (google it, it was awesome).
By chasing trends, you will never be leading. I think this quote is quite apt:
"There go my people. I must find out where they are going so I can lead them."
- Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin
You joke... but this is actually the kind of thing that was lost with Steve Jobs. Not that OSX is impevious, but the almost religious belief in whatever Apple says.
Jobs would have kept saying it. Mac user would parrot it. You won't believe how often I hear Mac users (although I am one) delude themselves into thinking how great their platform is. The marketing speak of "Macs are immune to viruses" doesn't have to be true, the consumers just have to believe it is.
It's sort of like how Howard Camping said the world was going to end in May last year and then it didn't, and then people STILL believed him when he said it was going to end in October.
"... the people who were calling us did not understand the bill any better than we did"
I can't believe she used this as an argument. If they don't understand the bill, and their constituents didn't understand the bill, there can only be two reasons for trying to pass it:
1) Passing legislation for legislation's sake (Stupid)
2) Passing legislation because you are compelled to by another party that only holds it's own interests (Evil)
So they are either stupid or evil (or both)
I think that we can all agree that the person most likely to be forgotten in this article is Malcolm Gladwell.
I don't really care about 10 or 15 years from now. I would however, like to play it now. Unfortunately, I can't because the authentication servers are down.
They were down last night. I got to play a little before I left for work. But that's it.
The ridicule was not because Palin said that she could see Russia from certain parts of Alaska, it was that she was offering that up as a rationale of why she had foreign policy experience.
It's not even that the Left or the Right believe lies that are repeated enough... anyone will believe whatever supports their own view of the world.
"I do not recall" works really well for politicians. Why couldn't it work here?
Of course this has nothing to do with the anti science movement that took over when W was in office and is still a matter of fact for half the population.
Half the american public are against "intellectuals", against evolution, deny climate change and think that investing in science is against God or is far to great a burden on the economy and you're surprised at this?
I agree as I'm a lifelong martial artist as well... but I will also say that knowing something tends to be much better than the majority of people out there who know nothing.
And I've worked a lot in the IT industry, I would argue that the same is true there.
Interesting. A lot of people saying "you're an idiot" or "you're stupid" for bringing faith into the conversation. Ad hominem attacks add nothing to the conversation. Especially because I have not attacked science or the scientific method in anyway. Using personal insults only serve to weaken your position.
I'm actually trying to understand the (incorrect) view point of many religious people talking about faith in science. Particularly about evolution.
I agree with the analysis that I have incorrectly used the word faith here. I'm actually arguing from a point of view that I don't believe. My original intent was to point out that the only things that can be considered hard fact are things that have already occurred.
That drawing my next breath is fact... well... if you think about it, that's is not fact. I could die in the middle of this sentence.
When I said faith, what I really mean is truth. There is a difference between truth and fact. The problem is that religion requires no facts to determine truth whereas science is truth based on fact. But truth is not the same as fact and treating it so can be incredibly dangerous (from any side).
Also, one of the predominant aspects of the theory of evolution is that speciation occurs because of geographical separation from the "ancestral species". If you can agree on small "adaptations" can you also see that many of these small adaptations to environments can lead to complete changes in physiology? Say, if a mountain appeared (due to tectonic shift or eruption) and land locked a section of water... and then the fish species within that lake, in order to get food, "adapted" a way to breathe air some of the time and got food from the land surrounding it. And then because that was the species that was best able to survive and not starve to death ended up spending more and more time on land, that some elements of the population mutated stronger fins... that those would be even better suited to get food on land... until after generations (as the original lake dried out) it because a land walking species that bore little resemblance to the original species that didn't get land locked?
I disagree with people who say it's the "only" possibility. But it's currently our best explanation.
The flying fish is a great example of something that arose (it's still a fish) and is on the way to become something else.