Yes, the real problem is the hypocrisy. Government leaders who on one hand will be encouraging citizens to dutifully pay their taxes, or who campaign that they side with the little people instead of the wealthy, then end up looking like fools or liars when they're caught playing tax tricks with their money.
Standard Kremlin responses. Accuse the opponent of undermining their political system, or of being Nazi collaborators, or preferrably both. Anything it takes to make the kleptocracy look good.
Never heard this buzzword before. Therefore, combined with the mention of agile here and there, I conclude that it must be something to do with web server backends?
Yes, $10/month for a huge number of shows with full seasons and all seasons, a huge number of movies of all varieties, and as an optional extra a decent number of original programming (never the thing I much care about), it doesn't seem like a bad deal and certainly nowhere near going back to paying as much as cable. The few things I am missing are small, and at that point I start worrying that $10/month is for just one single show. (plus many of the other streaming services have really horrible user interfaces, unable to remember what you've seen or not, lower quality, etc)
CBS gives you 5 episodes of a show for free; but if you subscribe you get 7! Wow, two extra episodes. Clearly CBS has their finger on the pulse of penny pinching Americans.
All these other wannabe streaming services haven't quite figure it out. We want one subscription with a large variety, not 10 different lackluster subscriptions that cost more combined than the original satellite or cable plans.
Lattes are dumb. These sorts of comparisons on the other hand are ridiculously. Different markets, different amount of consumption, different uses, it just doesn't make sense to compare that way. Some people may shun the $8 latte because for that low a price it's probably not high brow enough for them, others will buy 30 lattes a week but only have to pay Netflix once a month, some people may think $8 for a latte is far too expensive when you can make coffee at home for a few cents, and so forth.
I remember when people used to say things like "that's no more expensive than your cable bill", and then over time so many people felt that was way too expensive and cancelled the cable bill altogether.
Karma system was silly. The entire world instantly knowing that you stole a sweet roll (suweeeet rooolll!). Never made any sense. Max out karma very quickly, shoot up an entire village and karma is only at neutral.
The plot is very good, better than Fallout 3, better than Fallout New Vegas (which had zero surprises). But remember, this is an open world sandbox, it is NOT a stupid plot on rails like 99% of the games out there. The main plot is a very minor part of the game. You can go one hundred hours between one main plot quest and the next if you want to. People that focus on the main quest end up saying "that was dumb, the whole game was only 2 hours long!"
Base building seems mediocre to me. It's ok, but doesn't grab my interest.
The weapon mod system is not borrowed from FO:NV, and I hated the mod system there (5/10). Too many guns is boring, this is not a shooter game.
Better world landscape. Better treatment of city areas (DC had big open streets, Boston feels smaller and cramped with more unexpected things to discover). More interesting companions (granted no long and easily breakable companion quests like FO:NV had, but light years ahead of Skyrim or Fallout 3). Not a big fan of the perk system but I'm also not creating overpowered characters easily which was a flaw in earlier Fallouts.
I think it's ironic because some of the most bitter haters of Bethesda love Obsidian to death, proclaiming Fallout 3 the worst game of all time and Fallout New Vegas as the best.
As for bugginess, Fallout 4 seems pretty good overall. People with some high end graphics setups seem to have troubles but for my system which doesn't even meet the minimum specs is getting good performance and have never had a lockup or hang or a broken quest. Fallout 1 on the other hand, which I love, is one of the buggiest games I have (not as bad as Daggerfall, from Bethesda).
Basically if you don't want a really stupid shooter on rails and want a open world sandbox RPG with lots of exploration and no wall that says "don't go here", no cut scenes that force you down a certain path, then the only company doing this sort of thing is Bethesda. Maybe it's not the popular style but Skyrim and Fallout 3 made huge amounts of money so there's still interest in that sort of play style.
Compare to Fallout 3. More to explore (the major point of the game). More songs, and yes a few repeat from Fallout 3). More interesting combat options. Things respawn fast at times, but that happened in FO3 also. And dogmeat is actually useful unlike the one in FO3. Can't think of any way it's not improving on FO3, though the different level/stats/perks is more of a side move than improvement. The things that don't feel so great feel that way in FO3 also. Not finished with the main quest and I'm an embarrassing number of hours into it.
Human adding machines in a sense. Though they did multiplication and division too and could look up in tables. I think some people look back from the present day with a mindset that computers are amazing, mathematics is very difficult and hard without an electronic calculator, and so think that someone doing this work must be completely amazing. Yet it was very commonplace. Now being very good at that job gets one promotions or opportunities in better jobs, but ultimately there's some more important people who want something calculated and send that work to the less important parts of the building to get the answer.
Although at the time, computing was not necessarily a prestigious career choice. Ie, the job of doing computation by hand. It was often repetitive and rote. Those people with prestige figured out the algorithms or problems to be solved and then used the answers for their own work. The viewpoint at the time was probably like comparing an accountant to a mathematician. This is not to diminish what this person did of course.
Technically this should not really matter. However those who don't think it's being caused by humans also seem to have the opinion that there's no reason whatsoever to change anything. Since they think we didn't cause climate change therefore it's impossible for us to mitigate it. Which is stupid, because why argue about why the house is on fire while you're standing in the living room?
Guess what, most earthquakes are natural and not caused by mankind, but we still should make sure we build houses according to code (and for those who are religious there is even a parable here that applies).
There are some people I think who just refuse to believe in climate change or that it's just part of a typical trend. Some believe it's absolutely impossible because the Bible has already stated how the world will end (it's not so clearly stated though), so any claims of climate change is a secular/atheist plot and all a part of the broader culture wars. Which ignores all those verses and sermons about being good stewards and such.
Cygwin is slow. Maybe not for a few commands here and there but you can see noticeable slow downs when running some scripts or makefiles or things like that. This is because Cygwin is forcing full Unix compatibility, the point is not to have a Unix look-alike but to allow compiling and running code written for Unix.
But that's inherently slow on Windows where a process sticks around long term rather than the one-process-per-command fork/exec style of Unix. So a Windows native bash would probably not be just put a wrapper around the original bash source code but instead build on top of win32 and other dlls.
Cygwin also uses forward slash for directory separators which might be just a bit too much for Microsoft to use.
They're worried that a mere customer might be able to type "bash" by accident and end up enlightened. Microsoft's core bread and butter comes from unenlightened customers.
There was higher professional demand. However they seemed to think that Novell was good enough and helped lock customers to their platform, whereas a more open standard like IP was only going to encourage customers to go elsewhere. Microsoft isat heart a microcomputer company from the eight bit world and they are reluctant to be tainted by good ideas that originate from outside of the microcomputer world.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, the real problem is the hypocrisy. Government leaders who on one hand will be encouraging citizens to dutifully pay their taxes, or who campaign that they side with the little people instead of the wealthy, then end up looking like fools or liars when they're caught playing tax tricks with their money.
That's settled then.
Putin is the state. So seeking to make sure Putin is not reelected is seen as equivalent to seeking the overthrow of the state.
I think that one person was actually a tourist.
"Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?"
Putin essentially is the state now. At least he's such a big part of the state that even he has difficulty knowing the difference.
Standard Kremlin responses. Accuse the opponent of undermining their political system, or of being Nazi collaborators, or preferrably both. Anything it takes to make the kleptocracy look good.
Never heard this buzzword before. Therefore, combined with the mention of agile here and there, I conclude that it must be something to do with web server backends?
Yes, $10/month for a huge number of shows with full seasons and all seasons, a huge number of movies of all varieties, and as an optional extra a decent number of original programming (never the thing I much care about), it doesn't seem like a bad deal and certainly nowhere near going back to paying as much as cable. The few things I am missing are small, and at that point I start worrying that $10/month is for just one single show. (plus many of the other streaming services have really horrible user interfaces, unable to remember what you've seen or not, lower quality, etc)
CBS gives you 5 episodes of a show for free; but if you subscribe you get 7! Wow, two extra episodes. Clearly CBS has their finger on the pulse of penny pinching Americans.
All these other wannabe streaming services haven't quite figure it out. We want one subscription with a large variety, not 10 different lackluster subscriptions that cost more combined than the original satellite or cable plans.
Lattes are dumb. These sorts of comparisons on the other hand are ridiculously. Different markets, different amount of consumption, different uses, it just doesn't make sense to compare that way. Some people may shun the $8 latte because for that low a price it's probably not high brow enough for them, others will buy 30 lattes a week but only have to pay Netflix once a month, some people may think $8 for a latte is far too expensive when you can make coffee at home for a few cents, and so forth.
I remember when people used to say things like "that's no more expensive than your cable bill", and then over time so many people felt that was way too expensive and cancelled the cable bill altogether.
Two whole dollars. Maybe I'll reconsider and go back to paying $80 again, if only I could figure out how to uncut this cord.
Karma system was silly. The entire world instantly knowing that you stole a sweet roll (suweeeet rooolll!). Never made any sense. Max out karma very quickly, shoot up an entire village and karma is only at neutral.
The plot is very good, better than Fallout 3, better than Fallout New Vegas (which had zero surprises). But remember, this is an open world sandbox, it is NOT a stupid plot on rails like 99% of the games out there. The main plot is a very minor part of the game. You can go one hundred hours between one main plot quest and the next if you want to. People that focus on the main quest end up saying "that was dumb, the whole game was only 2 hours long!"
Base building seems mediocre to me. It's ok, but doesn't grab my interest.
The weapon mod system is not borrowed from FO:NV, and I hated the mod system there (5/10). Too many guns is boring, this is not a shooter game.
Better world landscape. Better treatment of city areas (DC had big open streets, Boston feels smaller and cramped with more unexpected things to discover). More interesting companions (granted no long and easily breakable companion quests like FO:NV had, but light years ahead of Skyrim or Fallout 3). Not a big fan of the perk system but I'm also not creating overpowered characters easily which was a flaw in earlier Fallouts.
Bethesda is not stereotyped by shipping too soon. They're sort of the opposite in many ways.
I think it's ironic because some of the most bitter haters of Bethesda love Obsidian to death, proclaiming Fallout 3 the worst game of all time and Fallout New Vegas as the best.
As for bugginess, Fallout 4 seems pretty good overall. People with some high end graphics setups seem to have troubles but for my system which doesn't even meet the minimum specs is getting good performance and have never had a lockup or hang or a broken quest. Fallout 1 on the other hand, which I love, is one of the buggiest games I have (not as bad as Daggerfall, from Bethesda).
Basically if you don't want a really stupid shooter on rails and want a open world sandbox RPG with lots of exploration and no wall that says "don't go here", no cut scenes that force you down a certain path, then the only company doing this sort of thing is Bethesda. Maybe it's not the popular style but Skyrim and Fallout 3 made huge amounts of money so there's still interest in that sort of play style.
Compare to Fallout 3. More to explore (the major point of the game). More songs, and yes a few repeat from Fallout 3). More interesting combat options. Things respawn fast at times, but that happened in FO3 also. And dogmeat is actually useful unlike the one in FO3. Can't think of any way it's not improving on FO3, though the different level/stats/perks is more of a side move than improvement. The things that don't feel so great feel that way in FO3 also. Not finished with the main quest and I'm an embarrassing number of hours into it.
I love Fallout 4, and I've played all the Fallout games. People are still bitter that Bethesda got the license and are holding a grudge.
Human adding machines in a sense. Though they did multiplication and division too and could look up in tables. I think some people look back from the present day with a mindset that computers are amazing, mathematics is very difficult and hard without an electronic calculator, and so think that someone doing this work must be completely amazing. Yet it was very commonplace. Now being very good at that job gets one promotions or opportunities in better jobs, but ultimately there's some more important people who want something calculated and send that work to the less important parts of the building to get the answer.
Although at the time, computing was not necessarily a prestigious career choice. Ie, the job of doing computation by hand. It was often repetitive and rote. Those people with prestige figured out the algorithms or problems to be solved and then used the answers for their own work. The viewpoint at the time was probably like comparing an accountant to a mathematician. This is not to diminish what this person did of course.
Technically this should not really matter. However those who don't think it's being caused by humans also seem to have the opinion that there's no reason whatsoever to change anything. Since they think we didn't cause climate change therefore it's impossible for us to mitigate it. Which is stupid, because why argue about why the house is on fire while you're standing in the living room?
Guess what, most earthquakes are natural and not caused by mankind, but we still should make sure we build houses according to code (and for those who are religious there is even a parable here that applies).
There are some people I think who just refuse to believe in climate change or that it's just part of a typical trend. Some believe it's absolutely impossible because the Bible has already stated how the world will end (it's not so clearly stated though), so any claims of climate change is a secular/atheist plot and all a part of the broader culture wars. Which ignores all those verses and sermons about being good stewards and such.
Vodka helps.
Cygwin is slow. Maybe not for a few commands here and there but you can see noticeable slow downs when running some scripts or makefiles or things like that. This is because Cygwin is forcing full Unix compatibility, the point is not to have a Unix look-alike but to allow compiling and running code written for Unix.
But that's inherently slow on Windows where a process sticks around long term rather than the one-process-per-command fork/exec style of Unix. So a Windows native bash would probably not be just put a wrapper around the original bash source code but instead build on top of win32 and other dlls.
Cygwin also uses forward slash for directory separators which might be just a bit too much for Microsoft to use.
They're worried that a mere customer might be able to type "bash" by accident and end up enlightened. Microsoft's core bread and butter comes from unenlightened customers.
There was higher professional demand. However they seemed to think that Novell was good enough and helped lock customers to their platform, whereas a more open standard like IP was only going to encourage customers to go elsewhere. Microsoft isat heart a microcomputer company from the eight bit world and they are reluctant to be tainted by good ideas that originate from outside of the microcomputer world.
It tends to be very verbose, but on Windows this is still considered taciturn.