STO is terrible, takes a week to blow through and then there's nothing. The community is non-existent, and the maturity levels of people in game are way below that of other games I play. WoW is worse, but you don't go from worst to really bad and say "it's good" do you?
I'd say you're publicly announcing your justification for handing over too much money to Cryptic.
It's kind of like blaming Blizzard for people's WoW accounts getting hacked. Your account has something someone wants, they'll try to get it. If you use weak passwords, well, no one's fault but your own there.
One thing I find highly amusing is their claim that the proprietary software is "efficient, reliable and relatively fast".
Having worked as support in a large media company, I can assure you that the proprietary software is the biggest problem with publishing. The makers are slow to fix any bugs, if they ever do, they don't adhere to any standards (software will output 2.5GB pdfs for a single page, wtf?), and the interfaces are usually throwbacks to the 1990s if you're lucky. There was many a day that the paper almost wasn't published due to this software failing just before deadline. A number of the journalists and reporters took to writing things up in notepad then copy & pasting it into the publishing system as they'd lose their stories continually otherwise.
If you add to this that most of the journalists barely knew how to use a computer, let alone how to use these specialised systems, well, maybe dumping something new on them wasn't ever going to work. Proprietary or otherwise.
A one day "test" isn't exactly a test, it's a toe in the water. The water may be cold, but it doesn't mean you should run screaming from it.
Nope, if you go to TFA you'll see him standing almost double height of his makers.
I saw this the other day on 1up or something, was amazed how much detail they went to. Kind of like a big "fuck you" to the dudes that wear the Master Chief suits.
So you're saying that something that's already in-game is going to chew more processing power?
Restricting it to certain objects is just artificial obstruction and has nothing to do with processing power. How is it that I can destroy everything in a game like Red Faction 2, but Singularity restricts the use of a device that's essentially the core of gameplay?
You're making excuses for bad game design by saying it's a technological restriction.
You can't throw a gimmick in that's not part of the game mechanics. To me, a game mechanic is no different to a real life mechanic. If it happens on A, it should happen on B, C, D, through Z. To restrict the player to using the gimmick a set times is just as bad as these stupid quick time events. "Press X to do something without skill", yeh, that's full immersion.
A game that breaks it's own rule set is a game that's not fun. The device in Singularity is supposed to be some sort of "I win!" button... at least that's what they were teasing for months before release. If you can't figure out how to limit it's use (via ammo or power levels) in a logical manner, why even put it in game?
In some way we need some sort of translation system to ensure press releases and/or articles are easier to understand. The onus should not be on the scientist writing the paper or giving the lecture to do this, but for the media organisations to do this. You don't print an article in English if the majority of your readership only speak Spanish.
In some ways I feel that the journalists and reporters writing these articles don't even understand it themselves. They just do swathes of cut & pastes (as has been shown in watchdog shows like Media Watch here in Australia), then leave it up to the readership to decipher it - even when they refuse to do this themselves. You don't need to be a scientist to understand research, just decent comprehension skills and an ability to search for more detail on a subject.
I'm no scientist, but I still read slashdot, new scientist, arstechnica and the like. Most of the time the articles would be incomprehensible if I didn't spend time searching for more depth to terms used. Hell, even a lot of comments here on slashdot by people in science are almost incomprehensible if I did not do this.
My friend who works for CSIRO has no idea what I'm talking about when I get too deep into computer jargon, but he is able to understand if I remove the jargon and speak in terms that an average Joe understands. Not because he's dumb, far from it, but because he works in physics, not IT support/administration. The same goes in reverse when he's talking about his latest research project. While I have a basic grasp of quantum physics, I do get lost if he doesn't spend the time to break down the jargon.
I think the big problem is that people are focusing on just Dell. I've stated in a previous post that Lenovo had the same problems, they were aware of them but did nothing to recall or even stop selling the defective machines.
The biggest problem is that consumers don't read tech sites before purchasing, which means they are beholden to the whims of the tech company they are buying from. If they choose to deceive customers it will only become apparent when it's reported by large media organisations.
Look at what happened with the Xbox 360. The first generation were RROD devices and it took a class action law suit with major media reporting it before Microsoft changed their tactics. I have no doubt they were well aware of the problems well before the class action suit, yet still shipped defective products. It took 2 generations of Xbox 360 boards before the problem started to be resolved. Yes, they did do a lot to mitigate brand damage, but by that stage it was too little too late. Yes, I do own a 360, and I have had a RROD.
The biggest problem is that these companies suffer no government backlash, the whole idea that "the market will sort itself out" is total bullshit. So long as companies are not heavily scrutinised after they are caught deceiving the public means they can just claim ignorance and move on. Even with harsh consumer protection laws (like here in Australia), the idea that you can lobby your way out of it sickens me.
I think the key here is that people want a translation of the science into terms they understand. To say it's up to a scientist to both be able to think in terms beyond the average Joe, then they have to dumb it down is stupid.
I don't walk in to a fast food shop and demand that they explain their meals in highly technical terms.
As someone who never went to university/college and has worked in support and systems admin roles, I can assure you that I've never had a problem doing my job. I've actually found that people with degrees tend to know very little about modern computer systems. The worst are "certified" people (most notable are Microsoft Certified). The training companies just seem to churn out "certified" people without them actually knowing anything at all. They get into a job and have to be trained as much, if not more, than someone who's not familiar with the system.
Many a time I've started a job and ended up training the people who have qualifications. It saddens me to think that people go to university to, essentially, learn how to learn, and come out thinking they know it all. Throughout my life I've had the attitude that learning is great, it's fun, and if you don't know it, learn it. This I attribute to my father who is a huge proponent of life long learning and has gained a reputation in south-east Asia developing education programmes with industry & government.
Unfortunately these days it's "cool" not to learn, even if you've been through university. I've had many a confrontation with uni students because all they want to do is parrot lecturers, not actually learn the deeper meaning of what they dribble.
What you're talking about in reference to the "sparkles and dropouts" is the difference between HDMI standards.
1.0/1.2 are very limited in bandwidth capabilities, if you attempt to run 1080p over these cables it won't work, 1080i & 720p will. Any cable that meets the 1.3 or above will do this fine.
There are standards in cable for a reason. So long as it meets the standard, it will do what you expect. No matter if you pay $5 or $500. You're missing the point completely here, Monster adhere to the same standard as the cheap Chinese cables you can buy. The only difference is the bullshit the salesmen say. To profess that there is a difference between cables that meet the standard is buying into the bullshit.
It's like saying that higher quality telecommunications (TP) copper in the street will make a difference on identical line length services. This is not true, you have different gauge wires (.25,.5,.75, etc) for different line lengths and applications. You can't run some services over the lower gauge wires, ISDN being most notable, but that's not to say that a POTS/ADSL service will work better on the same gauge as ISDN. It doesn't, if you have problems it's going to be attributed to line length, number of joints, and how many faults are on the line.
Unfortunately having such a narrow scope you're relying on the whims of a specific subset of society and effectively alienating any possible fringe markets. I doubt this product would have made a dent in any market to be honest, it seems like it was more of an half baked marketing development than anything else. Even if the target market isn't exactly tech savvy, they aren't going to buy into something that's not at the top of it's class. The Kin was far from top of it's class.
As a comment on Engadget said today "a dumbphone with a smartphone pricing plan". Pretty much sums up why MS dumped it.
What does concern me is that MS are doing a lot of big announcements then dumping the designs. The Courier being the most notable of recent years. It seems that with Steve "Chairman" Balmer at the helm they're sailing into stormy waters.
My most recent detection, by Avast, of malware on a site was from a client's site that is REALLY basic. Bit of HTML, that's all. The thing is he linked some "visitor counter" on the site, bam, malware.
The most frequent sites to throw malware warnings by Chrome or Avast seem to be corporate sites, not porn. I don't think I've ever had one for redtube or youporn.
It's a good site, I don't read it that much due to what he's talking about.
Sometimes you're not sure if the troll is a troll, or just a misguided conservative. It does get disheartening. Some of it's good comedy value though, which makes up for the inane or completely false comments left. In some ways you cut to the rawest part of society when you get people to comment on one line summaries.
This is pretty much it. I worked for a media company that moved premises and scrapped the old VC setups. When I saw the pricing for the new ones I was amazed until I saw the setup. 8 mics embedded in the roof, projectors capable of 1080p, multiple cameras, encryption, electronic frosted glass, etc. All coming to about $100 000 per room.
$500 000 isn't too bad if it's speced to government standards. This Cius actually looks like it may make it to market and do well. It's kind of like saying that Blackberry should stop making devices because the iPhone is such a hit. I've supported executives who had a huge hissy fit to get an iPhone then they returned it a week later to go back to their Blackberry. I don't blame them personally, I like my iPhone but I know it's just not as usable for business as Blackberries are.
Indeed, secrecy is not about hiding how powerful you are, but how weak you are.
You can even use it to such an advantage that you screw the other country up - look at the cold war, USSR put so much into out-building the US with regard to nukes that they didn't even realise the US had a fraction of the nuclear weapons that were being claimed.
I'd say this spy ring was actually more interested in business, seeing as how the Russians are now trying to move from being a purely resource backed country to an economic powerhouse. The more they know about how US companies do business with the US government, the easier it will be to get Russian companies (more than likely owned by the Russian oligarchs) to have a foothold in the US.
I can assure you that Dell isn't the only manufacturer that has done this.
Lenovo had the same problem a few years ago, bad capacitors on boards and they still shipped. I'm at a loss to remember the specific machines, but we had a bank who deployed a few thousand of these machines. We had to negotiate a deal with Lenovo to get enough boards in to do proactive replacements. Unfortunately they were pretty slow with this and we just ended up replacing the machines. Lenovo tried to get out of responsibility with this, but when the bank said they'd be moving to HP, well, Lenovo changed their policy quickly.
Even stock we received after they said it had been "fixed" had dodgy capacitors, so they were knowingly shipping new machines with the problem. Such is the way with companies that look at pure profit margins over brand damage.
I was discussing this the other day with my partner that we're actually starting to understand more about the body (mind in particular) from creating robotic systems. Object recognition and the like seems to be having a back flow effect into our understanding of how we work. No doubt this can lead to prosthesis or just purely be used as a way of gaining a deeper understanding of muscle tissue.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you're making excuses for Cryptic?
Nice.
STO is terrible, takes a week to blow through and then there's nothing. The community is non-existent, and the maturity levels of people in game are way below that of other games I play. WoW is worse, but you don't go from worst to really bad and say "it's good" do you?
I'd say you're publicly announcing your justification for handing over too much money to Cryptic.
idiots pour through.
Exactly.
It's kind of like blaming Blizzard for people's WoW accounts getting hacked. Your account has something someone wants, they'll try to get it. If you use weak passwords, well, no one's fault but your own there.
One thing I find highly amusing is their claim that the proprietary software is "efficient, reliable and relatively fast".
Having worked as support in a large media company, I can assure you that the proprietary software is the biggest problem with publishing. The makers are slow to fix any bugs, if they ever do, they don't adhere to any standards (software will output 2.5GB pdfs for a single page, wtf?), and the interfaces are usually throwbacks to the 1990s if you're lucky. There was many a day that the paper almost wasn't published due to this software failing just before deadline. A number of the journalists and reporters took to writing things up in notepad then copy & pasting it into the publishing system as they'd lose their stories continually otherwise.
If you add to this that most of the journalists barely knew how to use a computer, let alone how to use these specialised systems, well, maybe dumping something new on them wasn't ever going to work. Proprietary or otherwise.
A one day "test" isn't exactly a test, it's a toe in the water. The water may be cold, but it doesn't mean you should run screaming from it.
Who's reality though?
Yeh, I have no idea what the GP was on about.
Also, don't use the term SKU unless you're trying to restock your warehouse... makes you look like a fool.
Nope, if you go to TFA you'll see him standing almost double height of his makers.
I saw this the other day on 1up or something, was amazed how much detail they went to. Kind of like a big "fuck you" to the dudes that wear the Master Chief suits.
Nice strawman. Either that or you really missed the point, in which case, why are you reading slashdot?
So you're saying that something that's already in-game is going to chew more processing power?
Restricting it to certain objects is just artificial obstruction and has nothing to do with processing power. How is it that I can destroy everything in a game like Red Faction 2, but Singularity restricts the use of a device that's essentially the core of gameplay?
You're making excuses for bad game design by saying it's a technological restriction.
I'll bite...
You can't throw a gimmick in that's not part of the game mechanics. To me, a game mechanic is no different to a real life mechanic. If it happens on A, it should happen on B, C, D, through Z. To restrict the player to using the gimmick a set times is just as bad as these stupid quick time events. "Press X to do something without skill", yeh, that's full immersion.
A game that breaks it's own rule set is a game that's not fun. The device in Singularity is supposed to be some sort of "I win!" button... at least that's what they were teasing for months before release. If you can't figure out how to limit it's use (via ammo or power levels) in a logical manner, why even put it in game?
In some way we need some sort of translation system to ensure press releases and/or articles are easier to understand. The onus should not be on the scientist writing the paper or giving the lecture to do this, but for the media organisations to do this. You don't print an article in English if the majority of your readership only speak Spanish.
In some ways I feel that the journalists and reporters writing these articles don't even understand it themselves. They just do swathes of cut & pastes (as has been shown in watchdog shows like Media Watch here in Australia), then leave it up to the readership to decipher it - even when they refuse to do this themselves. You don't need to be a scientist to understand research, just decent comprehension skills and an ability to search for more detail on a subject.
I'm no scientist, but I still read slashdot, new scientist, arstechnica and the like. Most of the time the articles would be incomprehensible if I didn't spend time searching for more depth to terms used. Hell, even a lot of comments here on slashdot by people in science are almost incomprehensible if I did not do this.
My friend who works for CSIRO has no idea what I'm talking about when I get too deep into computer jargon, but he is able to understand if I remove the jargon and speak in terms that an average Joe understands. Not because he's dumb, far from it, but because he works in physics, not IT support/administration. The same goes in reverse when he's talking about his latest research project. While I have a basic grasp of quantum physics, I do get lost if he doesn't spend the time to break down the jargon.
I think the big problem is that people are focusing on just Dell. I've stated in a previous post that Lenovo had the same problems, they were aware of them but did nothing to recall or even stop selling the defective machines.
The biggest problem is that consumers don't read tech sites before purchasing, which means they are beholden to the whims of the tech company they are buying from. If they choose to deceive customers it will only become apparent when it's reported by large media organisations.
Look at what happened with the Xbox 360. The first generation were RROD devices and it took a class action law suit with major media reporting it before Microsoft changed their tactics. I have no doubt they were well aware of the problems well before the class action suit, yet still shipped defective products. It took 2 generations of Xbox 360 boards before the problem started to be resolved. Yes, they did do a lot to mitigate brand damage, but by that stage it was too little too late. Yes, I do own a 360, and I have had a RROD.
The biggest problem is that these companies suffer no government backlash, the whole idea that "the market will sort itself out" is total bullshit. So long as companies are not heavily scrutinised after they are caught deceiving the public means they can just claim ignorance and move on. Even with harsh consumer protection laws (like here in Australia), the idea that you can lobby your way out of it sickens me.
I think the key here is that people want a translation of the science into terms they understand. To say it's up to a scientist to both be able to think in terms beyond the average Joe, then they have to dumb it down is stupid.
I don't walk in to a fast food shop and demand that they explain their meals in highly technical terms.
Kudos indeed.
As someone who never went to university/college and has worked in support and systems admin roles, I can assure you that I've never had a problem doing my job. I've actually found that people with degrees tend to know very little about modern computer systems. The worst are "certified" people (most notable are Microsoft Certified). The training companies just seem to churn out "certified" people without them actually knowing anything at all. They get into a job and have to be trained as much, if not more, than someone who's not familiar with the system.
Many a time I've started a job and ended up training the people who have qualifications. It saddens me to think that people go to university to, essentially, learn how to learn, and come out thinking they know it all. Throughout my life I've had the attitude that learning is great, it's fun, and if you don't know it, learn it. This I attribute to my father who is a huge proponent of life long learning and has gained a reputation in south-east Asia developing education programmes with industry & government.
Unfortunately these days it's "cool" not to learn, even if you've been through university. I've had many a confrontation with uni students because all they want to do is parrot lecturers, not actually learn the deeper meaning of what they dribble.
What you're talking about in reference to the "sparkles and dropouts" is the difference between HDMI standards.
1.0/1.2 are very limited in bandwidth capabilities, if you attempt to run 1080p over these cables it won't work, 1080i & 720p will. Any cable that meets the 1.3 or above will do this fine.
There are standards in cable for a reason. So long as it meets the standard, it will do what you expect. No matter if you pay $5 or $500. You're missing the point completely here, Monster adhere to the same standard as the cheap Chinese cables you can buy. The only difference is the bullshit the salesmen say. To profess that there is a difference between cables that meet the standard is buying into the bullshit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Versions
It's like saying that higher quality telecommunications (TP) copper in the street will make a difference on identical line length services. This is not true, you have different gauge wires (.25, .5, .75, etc) for different line lengths and applications. You can't run some services over the lower gauge wires, ISDN being most notable, but that's not to say that a POTS/ADSL service will work better on the same gauge as ISDN. It doesn't, if you have problems it's going to be attributed to line length, number of joints, and how many faults are on the line.
You forgot the third option... but we need a TARDIS for that.
Ouch, $21k... I think I'll pass.
It's still "about", they've even demoed a touchless version that uses a transparent LED screen.
Pretty sure it was "released", but only to business.
Unfortunately having such a narrow scope you're relying on the whims of a specific subset of society and effectively alienating any possible fringe markets. I doubt this product would have made a dent in any market to be honest, it seems like it was more of an half baked marketing development than anything else. Even if the target market isn't exactly tech savvy, they aren't going to buy into something that's not at the top of it's class. The Kin was far from top of it's class.
As a comment on Engadget said today "a dumbphone with a smartphone pricing plan". Pretty much sums up why MS dumped it.
What does concern me is that MS are doing a lot of big announcements then dumping the designs. The Courier being the most notable of recent years. It seems that with Steve "Chairman" Balmer at the helm they're sailing into stormy waters.
This is true.
My most recent detection, by Avast, of malware on a site was from a client's site that is REALLY basic. Bit of HTML, that's all. The thing is he linked some "visitor counter" on the site, bam, malware.
The most frequent sites to throw malware warnings by Chrome or Avast seem to be corporate sites, not porn. I don't think I've ever had one for redtube or youporn.
It's a good site, I don't read it that much due to what he's talking about.
Sometimes you're not sure if the troll is a troll, or just a misguided conservative. It does get disheartening. Some of it's good comedy value though, which makes up for the inane or completely false comments left. In some ways you cut to the rawest part of society when you get people to comment on one line summaries.
This is pretty much it. I worked for a media company that moved premises and scrapped the old VC setups. When I saw the pricing for the new ones I was amazed until I saw the setup. 8 mics embedded in the roof, projectors capable of 1080p, multiple cameras, encryption, electronic frosted glass, etc. All coming to about $100 000 per room.
$500 000 isn't too bad if it's speced to government standards. This Cius actually looks like it may make it to market and do well. It's kind of like saying that Blackberry should stop making devices because the iPhone is such a hit. I've supported executives who had a huge hissy fit to get an iPhone then they returned it a week later to go back to their Blackberry. I don't blame them personally, I like my iPhone but I know it's just not as usable for business as Blackberries are.
Indeed, secrecy is not about hiding how powerful you are, but how weak you are.
You can even use it to such an advantage that you screw the other country up - look at the cold war, USSR put so much into out-building the US with regard to nukes that they didn't even realise the US had a fraction of the nuclear weapons that were being claimed.
I'd say this spy ring was actually more interested in business, seeing as how the Russians are now trying to move from being a purely resource backed country to an economic powerhouse. The more they know about how US companies do business with the US government, the easier it will be to get Russian companies (more than likely owned by the Russian oligarchs) to have a foothold in the US.
Just my food for thought.
I can assure you that Dell isn't the only manufacturer that has done this.
Lenovo had the same problem a few years ago, bad capacitors on boards and they still shipped. I'm at a loss to remember the specific machines, but we had a bank who deployed a few thousand of these machines. We had to negotiate a deal with Lenovo to get enough boards in to do proactive replacements. Unfortunately they were pretty slow with this and we just ended up replacing the machines. Lenovo tried to get out of responsibility with this, but when the bank said they'd be moving to HP, well, Lenovo changed their policy quickly.
Even stock we received after they said it had been "fixed" had dodgy capacitors, so they were knowingly shipping new machines with the problem. Such is the way with companies that look at pure profit margins over brand damage.
I was discussing this the other day with my partner that we're actually starting to understand more about the body (mind in particular) from creating robotic systems. Object recognition and the like seems to be having a back flow effect into our understanding of how we work. No doubt this can lead to prosthesis or just purely be used as a way of gaining a deeper understanding of muscle tissue.
One thing though, where's the bloody crane?