I'm talking about even on the Nintendo side, who only publishes one Mario game (of each type, potentially) per console. Not all games require the latest and greatest.
Most of those Mario games were created with the intention of selling new consoles and showing effects the previous console generation had no hope of doing, like Super Mario World's rotating sprites or Mario 64's 3D world.
I'm not so sure, there was a fair overlap between console generations, and console generations tend to last 5-7 years or more. That's a very long time to develop for any one platform. Expansion ROMs for the NES were expensive... they had to be, you were getting entirely new hardware, and they were game-specific. It's not like upgrading a computer's video card, where multiple programs can take advange of the new capabilities. If you bought five games with expansion ROMs that did the same thing, you'd be buying the same hardware five times. That's very wasteful compared to a new console, and it would pretty quickly negate the cost savings of not buying a new console. And I've yet to see the expansion ROM that could give an NES all the capabilities of an SNES, or an SNES the capabilities of a PSX. There's only so much you can do with a ROM before you're limited by system hardware anyway.
Amish don't avoid technology. They avoid any -use- of technology that they suspect will degrade the family and community units, so high tech might be fine for one situation but not for another. Therefore, a phone for socializing is no good. But a phone for emergency doctor calls is not contrary to their beliefs.
I'd say for a famous Hollywood person, it's more difficult than others.
Maybe, maybe not. You're certainly surrounded by temptation in Hollywood, but given the number of abusers in the system, I think you're more likely to get a second chance in Hollywood than in many other industries. It's a place where your talent can rocket you quickly to the top. Most people in most industries, even extremely talented people, will toil in obscurity for their whole lives. Employers will look at their resumes, see the red flags, and dump 'em.
You are misusing the word "luddite". A luddite is extreme. A luddite doesn't use a typewriter, a luddite smashes your typewriter with a rock, then feels guilty for having used a rock as a tool.
The Luddites weren't Amish. Even that would be a caricature of Amish beliefs. What the Luddites were against were -new- technologies taking over jobs. They were fine with the technology they already had, not so fine with shifting tides making them obsolete.
Robert Downey Jr. has been through hell and back. He and Treat Williams were good actors who dropped off the scene in the 80s and 90s after falling prey to substance abuse. Downey cleaned up and managed to make his way back to the top. Williams was not so lucky. He had a good role in Everwood, but he didn't make it up to A-list status.
I always felt that Downey, with his past drug and alcohol addictions, was a great choice to play Tony Stark, the subject of "Demon in the Bottle" fame. They touched upon Stark's alcoholism in Iron Man 2, but didn't really give it the treatment it could have gotten.
All the wires from the display (which has next to no chance of having a connector the NES could actually plug in to) go straight to the right..
You sure about that? A month ago I plugged in my old NES right into my home theater system. It was enough to verify that my old NES was truly dead, but I did get perfectly viewable video. If your HT system or monitor has a composite port (I've had Dell monitors that accepted composite signals, then the NES will work without any converters. Otherwise, you'd need a small composite -> VGA converter box.
Yes, most people used the TV-style RF connection, but the North American NES also had two RCA-style ports on the side: one for composite video, the other for monaural audio. Super-new TVs won't have those exact ports, but a good-quality receiver (which they might have even had in the video, hidden under the table) will take a composite and RCA signal and upsample it for the outgoing HDMI.
One side of the abortion debate describes foes as "anti-choice" rather than "pro-life."
To be honest, that one seems to make sense - these "pro-life" people are more likely to supports wars and the death penalty, so calling them "pro-life" seems kind of disingenuous.
People long ago learned that there is a lot more value in being "for" something rather than "against" something. Pro is positive, while against is a negative trait. Even if we don't state that sort of thing, we put an unconscious bonus on the person who is for something rather than the negative person who is against another thing, even if you're only splitting hairs at this point.
Which do you think "sounds" more positive, the person in favor of restricting a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body.... or the person who wishes to protect the lives of those yet born? They imply the same thing -- limiting access to abortion, but the way in which you frame a question can greatly affect how the average person will think about it.
Because everyone would assume from the title that it was some German flick they didn't want to see.
But both Betelgeuse and Beetlejuice work. The former is the origination and the correct spelling, the latter is the phonetic pronunciation hints that the poltergeist conjured to teach... I think it was Winona Ryder's character. Both are used in film.
Islam interprets this commandment as banning images of any living form
Certain sects of Islam does. The Saudis have spent billions of dollars of oil money to promote their view as being the only acceptable one throughout the world.
Pakistan is the source of all the trouble in the region anyway, not seeing any downside to your imagined "erasing"
I'm not sure that Pakistan is worse than our other regional 'ally,' Saudi Arabia. The Saudi development of oil fields is one of the worst things to happen to the Middle East in the last century. It gave incredible amounts of wealth to the Wahhabis, a formerly obscure branch of Islam that is known for being puritanical and ultraconservative. Most Muslims, for instance, didn't mind respectful images of the Prophet Muhammad, or artwork, or whatnot. It's the Wahhabis that forbid all that, the Wahhabis that promote the mandatory burka, it's the Wahhabis that promote factional warfare between Shias and Sunnis.
Wahhibism used to be fairly obscure until the 1970s, when it experienced explosive growth with the oil boom. Every since, an amazing amount of money has been spent promoting the ultra-orthodox Islamic interpretation world-wide.
So yeah. I'm not happy with Pakistan, but they're a sight better than the Saudis.
but some of their loyalties are divided, and in secret
When Obama OKed Seal Team 6's takedown of Osama bin Laden, he didn't warn the Pakistani government or military that their airspace was being compromised by US helicopters. He knew they couldn't be trusted, and knew that there would be a diplomatic incident as a result. If you share information with the military or government, there's a decent chance it'll get leaked.
every tragedy or event in pakistan, where pakistanis can face their shortcomings, come to grips with it, and move forward: nope. instead loopy hilarious conspiracies that shifts blame to the west, to the jews, to india, to iran, etc. keeps them mired in poverty, backwardness, blind denial, strife, and stupidity. every problem in pakistan is never the fault of pakistanis, it's all due to plots and secret cabals and manipulations from abroad. fucking ignorant bullsit
You see this from a lot of Middle Eastern countries. And African countries. And sometimes from the West, but that's a lot harder to pull off.
It happens because the leadership actively encourages it, because it's one of the time-tested, traditional, honored ways to rally the citizenry of the country with you -- tell them they're under attack from outsiders.
I don't see how this is any worse than having a giant coal generator,
You answer your question.
except that the coal generator poisons the area around it slowly during normal operation rather than suddenly during catastrophic failure.
That's it exactly. No one cares about long-term, slow carcinogen exposure. No one cares about a death here and there, year after year. We do care about 9/11-style events or big mushroom clouds.
It doesn't matter whether the death toll is the same. Fukushima/Chernobyl were FLASHY. A coal plant? Boring. It makes air quality bad, and kills us in ways that aren't easy to quantify.
However like Fukushima and Chernobyl it will be operated by humans.
Everything else you wrote is bable.bable.bable
His point is that newer designs come more from the angle of protecting the plant against human error or human negligence. Such as passive cooling that won't disappear when the power goes out.
However, having it located in Pakistan, a country that can't control its terrorists and a military that collaborates with them, is pretty scary.
They used the 1960 tsunami in Japan for reference in Fukushima Daiichi (unlike e.g. Onagawa) - which reached a height of 4.5m. This tsunami was caused by the 1960 Chile earthquake on the other side of the planet, across the pacific
My only guess is some idiot thought that "Oh, if an earthquake hits Japan, the water and energy will be heading away from Japan, not towards it." So they thought they only had to prepare for tsunamis generated from across the ocean, as if earthquakes never happened underwater, and that water displacement wouldn't yield giant surface waves.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm talking about even on the Nintendo side, who only publishes one Mario game (of each type, potentially) per console. Not all games require the latest and greatest.
Most of those Mario games were created with the intention of selling new consoles and showing effects the previous console generation had no hope of doing, like Super Mario World's rotating sprites or Mario 64's 3D world.
I'm not so sure, there was a fair overlap between console generations, and console generations tend to last 5-7 years or more. That's a very long time to develop for any one platform. Expansion ROMs for the NES were expensive... they had to be, you were getting entirely new hardware, and they were game-specific. It's not like upgrading a computer's video card, where multiple programs can take advange of the new capabilities. If you bought five games with expansion ROMs that did the same thing, you'd be buying the same hardware five times. That's very wasteful compared to a new console, and it would pretty quickly negate the cost savings of not buying a new console. And I've yet to see the expansion ROM that could give an NES all the capabilities of an SNES, or an SNES the capabilities of a PSX. There's only so much you can do with a ROM before you're limited by system hardware anyway.
Amish don't avoid technology. They avoid any -use- of technology that they suspect will degrade the family and community units, so high tech might be fine for one situation but not for another. Therefore, a phone for socializing is no good. But a phone for emergency doctor calls is not contrary to their beliefs.
I'd say for a famous Hollywood person, it's more difficult than others.
Maybe, maybe not. You're certainly surrounded by temptation in Hollywood, but given the number of abusers in the system, I think you're more likely to get a second chance in Hollywood than in many other industries. It's a place where your talent can rocket you quickly to the top. Most people in most industries, even extremely talented people, will toil in obscurity for their whole lives. Employers will look at their resumes, see the red flags, and dump 'em.
You are misusing the word "luddite". A luddite is extreme. A luddite doesn't use a typewriter, a luddite smashes your typewriter with a rock, then feels guilty for having used a rock as a tool.
The Luddites weren't Amish. Even that would be a caricature of Amish beliefs. What the Luddites were against were -new- technologies taking over jobs. They were fine with the technology they already had, not so fine with shifting tides making them obsolete.
Robert Downey Jr. has been through hell and back. He and Treat Williams were good actors who dropped off the scene in the 80s and 90s after falling prey to substance abuse. Downey cleaned up and managed to make his way back to the top. Williams was not so lucky. He had a good role in Everwood, but he didn't make it up to A-list status.
I always felt that Downey, with his past drug and alcohol addictions, was a great choice to play Tony Stark, the subject of "Demon in the Bottle" fame. They touched upon Stark's alcoholism in Iron Man 2, but didn't really give it the treatment it could have gotten.
All the wires from the display (which has next to no chance of having a connector the NES could actually plug in to) go straight to the right..
You sure about that? A month ago I plugged in my old NES right into my home theater system. It was enough to verify that my old NES was truly dead, but I did get perfectly viewable video. If your HT system or monitor has a composite port (I've had Dell monitors that accepted composite signals, then the NES will work without any converters. Otherwise, you'd need a small composite -> VGA converter box.
Yes, most people used the TV-style RF connection, but the North American NES also had two RCA-style ports on the side: one for composite video, the other for monaural audio. Super-new TVs won't have those exact ports, but a good-quality receiver (which they might have even had in the video, hidden under the table) will take a composite and RCA signal and upsample it for the outgoing HDMI.
Is this what we can expect if he gets elected to the White House? None of us will be allowed to say 'climate change'.
Wasn't it George W. Bush's administration that promoted the use of the term "climate change" over "global warming?"
Yup, time to leave Slashdot.
The best thing to ever happen to Slashdot was an exodus years ago to kuro5hin.org.
They want Tallahassee to have beach front property too.
Damn you, Lex Luther!!!
Just because there's another side doesn't mean the two sides are equally valid.
One side of the abortion debate describes foes as "anti-choice" rather than "pro-life."
To be honest, that one seems to make sense - these "pro-life" people are more likely to supports wars and the death penalty, so calling them "pro-life" seems kind of disingenuous.
People long ago learned that there is a lot more value in being "for" something rather than "against" something. Pro is positive, while against is a negative trait. Even if we don't state that sort of thing, we put an unconscious bonus on the person who is for something rather than the negative person who is against another thing, even if you're only splitting hairs at this point.
Which do you think "sounds" more positive, the person in favor of restricting a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body.... or the person who wishes to protect the lives of those yet born? They imply the same thing -- limiting access to abortion, but the way in which you frame a question can greatly affect how the average person will think about it.
Maybe the GP means that black kids' deaths aren't usually reported. I don't know if that's true, but it's always what I've heard about the USA.
I'm afraid that's pretty much entirely bullshit. I hope that isn't what the GP was implying.
Eh, propensity to suicide isn't genetic. It's far more based on upbringing and situation, and sometimes chemicals.
"Boner" was an old-timey word for prank or caper (embarrassing). Before it got... another slang usage.
This creates a number of unfortunate... erm, wonderful problems in older comic books:
Batman, we've got to stop the joker! Those boner crimes are making us look bad! And I'm worried about the boner he's readying for you!" "Let's continue our study of the greatest boners of all time -- and try to guess the Joker's next move."
It's quite possible that the ... fundamentalist writing staff hadn't advanced beyond the dialogue of the 50s.
Then why is "Beetlejuice" the title of the film?
Because everyone would assume from the title that it was some German flick they didn't want to see.
But both Betelgeuse and Beetlejuice work. The former is the origination and the correct spelling, the latter is the phonetic pronunciation hints that the poltergeist conjured to teach... I think it was Winona Ryder's character. Both are used in film.
Islam interprets this commandment as banning images of any living form
Certain sects of Islam does. The Saudis have spent billions of dollars of oil money to promote their view as being the only acceptable one throughout the world.
Pakistan is the source of all the trouble in the region anyway, not seeing any downside to your imagined "erasing"
I'm not sure that Pakistan is worse than our other regional 'ally,' Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi development of oil fields is one of the worst things to happen to the Middle East in the last century. It gave incredible amounts of wealth to the Wahhabis, a formerly obscure branch of Islam that is known for being puritanical and ultraconservative. Most Muslims, for instance, didn't mind respectful images of the Prophet Muhammad, or artwork, or whatnot. It's the Wahhabis that forbid all that, the Wahhabis that promote the mandatory burka, it's the Wahhabis that promote factional warfare between Shias and Sunnis.
Wahhibism used to be fairly obscure until the 1970s, when it experienced explosive growth with the oil boom. Every since, an amazing amount of money has been spent promoting the ultra-orthodox Islamic interpretation world-wide.
So yeah. I'm not happy with Pakistan, but they're a sight better than the Saudis.
but some of their loyalties are divided, and in secret
When Obama OKed Seal Team 6's takedown of Osama bin Laden, he didn't warn the Pakistani government or military that their airspace was being compromised by US helicopters. He knew they couldn't be trusted, and knew that there would be a diplomatic incident as a result. If you share information with the military or government, there's a decent chance it'll get leaked.
every tragedy or event in pakistan, where pakistanis can face their shortcomings, come to grips with it, and move forward: nope. instead loopy hilarious conspiracies that shifts blame to the west, to the jews, to india, to iran, etc. keeps them mired in poverty, backwardness, blind denial, strife, and stupidity. every problem in pakistan is never the fault of pakistanis, it's all due to plots and secret cabals and manipulations from abroad. fucking ignorant bullsit
You see this from a lot of Middle Eastern countries. And African countries. And sometimes from the West, but that's a lot harder to pull off.
It happens because the leadership actively encourages it, because it's one of the time-tested, traditional, honored ways to rally the citizenry of the country with you -- tell them they're under attack from outsiders.
I don't see how this is any worse than having a giant coal generator,
You answer your question.
except that the coal generator poisons the area around it slowly during normal operation rather than suddenly during catastrophic failure.
That's it exactly. No one cares about long-term, slow carcinogen exposure. No one cares about a death here and there, year after year. We do care about 9/11-style events or big mushroom clouds.
It doesn't matter whether the death toll is the same. Fukushima/Chernobyl were FLASHY. A coal plant? Boring. It makes air quality bad, and kills us in ways that aren't easy to quantify.
However like Fukushima and Chernobyl it will be operated by humans.
Everything else you wrote is bable.bable.bable
His point is that newer designs come more from the angle of protecting the plant against human error or human negligence. Such as passive cooling that won't disappear when the power goes out.
However, having it located in Pakistan, a country that can't control its terrorists and a military that collaborates with them, is pretty scary.
Well shit, Douglas Adams said it, I guess it applies to everything. We're not going to make any improvements over past designs.
They used the 1960 tsunami in Japan for reference in Fukushima Daiichi (unlike e.g. Onagawa) - which reached a height of 4.5m. This tsunami was caused by the 1960 Chile earthquake on the other side of the planet, across the pacific
My only guess is some idiot thought that "Oh, if an earthquake hits Japan, the water and energy will be heading away from Japan, not towards it." So they thought they only had to prepare for tsunamis generated from across the ocean, as if earthquakes never happened underwater, and that water displacement wouldn't yield giant surface waves.
Normal waves can reach over 10m in height
That doesn't mean the water comes rushing in continuously at 10m. It means a bit of water splashes in. That's not a tsunami.