Did they say the same thing about biometric authentication (e.g. fingerprints)? Do fingerprint Ids work after I accidentally buff my fingerprints off with a belt sander? No.
Do retina ids work after I poke my eye out? No.
Are either of these things likely? No.
But an injury that would affect your typing? Very likely.
I have a better idea, let's choose individual candidates that support our views. In fact, remove party affiliations from the ballot altogether. If you can't remember their name, you shouldn't be voting for them.
"No, we should not attempt to foam pad the entire world so the precious little ones don't get hurt, but that doesn't mean we should just toss them out in the woods and let them fend for themselves either."
Why not? It's worked for 10,000 years.
"As it is, the USA has put more money into that city as of late than most of the rest of the world's cities have ever received in the aftermath of a natural disaster"
Yeah, it's called gentrification.
Bit-torrent uses the same infrastructure anything else uses. It just lowers bandwidth costs for the distributor. That's not the problem. Lack of bandwidth is.
I'd love for there to be enough bandwidth for hundreds of millions if not billions of people to download 20+ GB movies at will, but we're a ways off from that.
"Exactly! Which is why Nintendo is so lucky that PCs can't play games"
PC gaming is expensive, and the average consumer's PC isn't exactly up to the task of playing the average PC game.
And in case you hadn't noticed, Sony and Microsoft are striking deals with telcoms around the world for video on demand. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't already have models with cable card slots on the drawing board.
I'm basing the importance of video gaming in such devices on the relative sales numbers of video games and consoles compared to movies/music and cable/satellite.
Video games are gaining, but cinema & music will remain the centerpiece of America's family rooms for a long time to come.
Nintendo did miss the point. People aren't going to buy machines strictly for video games when their dvr/computer/HD player/food processor already plays games.
And last I checked I can't download a 20+ gig movie anywhere legally, and nobody is planning to do so on a large scale.
The infrastructure simply doesn't exist to deliver high def content like that on a large scale.
Every electronics manufacturer on the planet is well positioned to be the first ones out of the gate for the next generation of home theater / video game equipment. And the vast majority of them are better than Nintendo in all but one area: video games. And Nintendo's advantage there is 90% copyrighted characters from the 80s. The hardware and the OS are unremarkable.
Downloads are a novelty that will require multi-billion dollar infrastructure investments to make feasible on a large scale. Blu-Ray will outgrow DVD long, long before that ever happens.
That makes Blu-Ray is 100% of the HD market.
Nintendo entirely missed the point, and they're going to pay dearly for it. This isn't a battle over video games. It's a battle over home entertainment and computing. They've won the video game war, but at the cost of everything else.
I don't know which device will be the heart of the living room when the war is won, but I know video games will be one of it's least important roles.
And Microsoft wants to miss out on 100% of the HD movie market? They're not dumb enough to think downloadable content is going to be a competitor any time soon. And if consumers buy separate blu-ray players, they'll buy the cheapest one: the PS3. And that cuts into 360 game sales.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a better idea, let's choose individual candidates that support our views. In fact, remove party affiliations from the ballot altogether. If you can't remember their name, you shouldn't be voting for them.
Only if Asus is paying Xandros.
It means they were running Windows 98. RTFA.
Or a tunnel from England to France.
Lining a fusion reactor with this stuff could go a long way toward getting more energy out than you put in.
"No, we should not attempt to foam pad the entire world so the precious little ones don't get hurt, but that doesn't mean we should just toss them out in the woods and let them fend for themselves either." Why not? It's worked for 10,000 years.
We'll need years to fund, prepare for, and train astronauts for any Mars mission, so I don't think that will be a problem.
No, we don't. A 500 day flight might be uncomfortable, but it's by no means impossible.
So basically nothing changes?
"As it is, the USA has put more money into that city as of late than most of the rest of the world's cities have ever received in the aftermath of a natural disaster" Yeah, it's called gentrification.
Treaties are only the law of the land if they don't violate the constitution. The founders weren't retarded.
I don't doubt Nintendo will be in the gaming business for years to come. Just like Atari and Sega will be.
Bit-torrent uses the same infrastructure anything else uses. It just lowers bandwidth costs for the distributor. That's not the problem. Lack of bandwidth is. I'd love for there to be enough bandwidth for hundreds of millions if not billions of people to download 20+ GB movies at will, but we're a ways off from that.
"Exactly! Which is why Nintendo is so lucky that PCs can't play games" PC gaming is expensive, and the average consumer's PC isn't exactly up to the task of playing the average PC game. And in case you hadn't noticed, Sony and Microsoft are striking deals with telcoms around the world for video on demand. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't already have models with cable card slots on the drawing board.
Those other companies can't be underestimated either. Microsoft and Sony used to be those other companies.
I'm basing the importance of video gaming in such devices on the relative sales numbers of video games and consoles compared to movies/music and cable/satellite. Video games are gaining, but cinema & music will remain the centerpiece of America's family rooms for a long time to come.
Nintendo did miss the point. People aren't going to buy machines strictly for video games when their dvr/computer/HD player/food processor already plays games. And last I checked I can't download a 20+ gig movie anywhere legally, and nobody is planning to do so on a large scale. The infrastructure simply doesn't exist to deliver high def content like that on a large scale.
Every electronics manufacturer on the planet is well positioned to be the first ones out of the gate for the next generation of home theater / video game equipment. And the vast majority of them are better than Nintendo in all but one area: video games. And Nintendo's advantage there is 90% copyrighted characters from the 80s. The hardware and the OS are unremarkable.
Downloads are a novelty that will require multi-billion dollar infrastructure investments to make feasible on a large scale. Blu-Ray will outgrow DVD long, long before that ever happens. That makes Blu-Ray is 100% of the HD market.
Nintendo entirely missed the point, and they're going to pay dearly for it. This isn't a battle over video games. It's a battle over home entertainment and computing. They've won the video game war, but at the cost of everything else. I don't know which device will be the heart of the living room when the war is won, but I know video games will be one of it's least important roles.
And Microsoft wants to miss out on 100% of the HD movie market? They're not dumb enough to think downloadable content is going to be a competitor any time soon. And if consumers buy separate blu-ray players, they'll buy the cheapest one: the PS3. And that cuts into 360 game sales.
Yeah, just like the FCC looks the other way when people cuss on TV or when a nipple slips out.
How much did you bid? You didn't? Well, there is your answer.