"...cutting down on those additives would almost have the same effect as stopping smoking entirely..."
What I meant was that pure tobacco, especially secondary, would be about the same as your normal intake of toxins, if you are around someone who is smoking, for say a couple cigarettes, then it would be about the same as another day, when your neighbours chimney smoke happened to drift your way, or you burnt off the dead grass in the spring, etc.. I never said it was healthy, only that it was immensely more so by comparison, especially since some of the intentionally added toxins are specifically there to aid in its toxicity, to increase the amount that reaches your blood stream, to pacify or neutralize your lungs abilities to cleanse themselves, etc.
Why is it that various indigenous people, who smoke raw/pure tobacco on a daily basis, still live into their 80's, I'm not saying that if you smoke it it's going to cure you or something, only that it's impact seems almost insignificant, granted, "indians" also don't eat fast food, and eat far less sugar, etc, etc... it's just a single improvement of many that would be needed.
Your house, just sitting there, not even including your furnace, air conditioner, or toilet and septic, are putting off far more toxins per day than a smoker. Think about all the plastic, the paint on the walls, the shingles on your roof, the insulation and tar-paper, the chemicals in the treated wood, got a paved driveway?...
The amount of power your PC used during your comment, is probably indirectly equal to 1 cigarette, via the power station, even if it's hydro, the damn because of the raised water level is allowing all sorts of chemicals to seep out of the ground, the trees and plants that were killed in the process, gas to run the bulldozers, etc, even if you use a solar cell to power your PC, the mining to get the minerals in it, the manufacturing of it, the plastic on the wires...etc etc etc.
Besides, tobacco by itself isn't very toxic, the major problem with second hand smoke and the likes, is commercialized tobacco which has hundreds of additives in it, benzene, formaldehyde, acetone, hydrogen cyanide, etc... so even in some sort of agreement with you, cutting down on those additives would almost have the same effect as stopping smoking entirely, by going back to natural tobacco.
"...and it has been successful so far. I see no reason to change."
Has it? Can we really be sure that the current method is accurate in ruling out earth-like and non-earth-like?
I'm not really disagreeing with you, just not so sure that it's 100% accurate (which is ideal, but not exactly realistic). To me this sounds like they are intentionally thwarting the idea, so the public will go "well shit, guess we're trapped here for 300 more years" kinda thing.
Current method seems fine, applied to the new equipment. Keep searching, monitor the ones we already assume are earth-like, and when we figure out a way to do something about it (wormholes, etc) we pick the best candidate at that time, and go for it, if that fails, or if it takes longer than the time to build/induce/etc the next method of travel/communication, we head for the second candidate, etc... this "new" method seem to suppose that we won't be able to do anything about it for 200 more years, so we have the time to piss around with hundreds of tests, when we should probably assume it'l be possible next year, kinda like "Year of Linux on the Desktop", may never happen, but why can't it happen next year? Just because you may not succeed, doesn't mean you should't try.
As michaelhood pointed out (I think)... it's probably just as likely as hacking your normal bank account.
As for mortgages, or purchasing a house/car/etc, I presume that those will still require face-to-face meetings and signatures, at least until an assortment of biometric nonsense improves.
It seems for now, or at least according to the article it's mostly an inward sort of thing, money comes in, but doesnt go out except for (what's now) somewhat normal things you may already do online, pay bills, which will already have an established record, and verification, probably in tandem with your current setup.
Although, that probably wouldnt stop a hacker that happens to already work for one of the companies you are billed from (Ph., rent, electricity), etc, cause they would know both sides of it, but that too isn't much different from normal non-game-world, but online banking.
It's basically like, instead of doing your banking with Firefox, and www.bank.com, you are using Game, and 11.22.33.44, both can be secure, or not, all depends on how it's implemented.
I simply meant since XP was released, or more specifically, since the internet became really popular, and.Net was released, there are now hordes of craptastic applications out there.
Vista is pretty much irrelevant, although with Vista, they introduced (to the average windows user) things like Widgets, so now people are a little more familiar with running stupid little shit all the time, so maybe Microsoft realized that when people run all their craptastic software, they blame the OS, rather than the software, so they are trying to minimize that blame by partially taking responsibility for various peoples poorly coded software, and allowing for even more of it to run, or for the "normal" amount now, to run better.
And I'm not necessarily even saying that's what I think, I was only adding another possibility to the GP's comment, although that I'm sure that it does play a part, however major or minor it may be, in addition to just the general desire for a slimmer/faster/smoother OS.
Well, maybe, but along those lines it could be something similar, such as the mass amounts of poorly coded applications on Windows (or anywhere really, but more apparent on Windows), so with that in mind they make the OS itself take less resources, to allow for the resources used by the crappy applications.
Neither is a good reason for improving performance, but I think in the long run I'd prefer it was for DRM rather than poor coding practices, DRM can be subverted, and generally quite easily, improving application performance and coding practices is much harder, even if it's open source you still have to spend the time yourself, or wait for someone else to fix it.
Yeah, but you seem to be redistributing, not just a one time thing "I bought too much, need to offload some"... but you seem to be going about it more like you buy it on a weekly basis, and then resell it. Which I'm pretty sure no matter which product business you are in, you need to have an agreement to do that beforehand, part of that whole company reputation, and customer guarantee shit... I'm not saying I agree with it, only that, that is how I thought it worked.
Besides, if this company is so vile, with schemes, and poor PR, and bad business practices, why do you continue to buy stuff from them, and advertise for them?
Maybe I'm just mo naive than some, but, isn't that a legitimate case, ie: they are within the law to ask eBay to remove/disable/etc your ability to sell their product.
Maybe you should contact them, sign up to be a distributor. Or make your own kool-aid, and sell that so they don't have a "monopoly". And I'd like to point out that a quick search led me to 3 companies, MonaVie, AgroLabs and Dr. Tims, which means there is probably another 6 at least.
I think that's why some people are so upset about the LHC, it's a large hardon, whereas the US only has Fermilab, barely firm. Guess if they find the god particle, they'll orgasm, and we'll end up with Spermilab, Fetulab, Infalab, etc...
Replace "trees" with some inhuman word like "constituents", or "population", or just ignore the human aspect entirely, and refer to it only in legalese.
Kinda like (many, but not all) in the military, they aren't humans, with families, hopes, dreams, etc., they are targets, the opposition, the enemy.
The "constituents" of this country, will continue to "reproduce", and eventually they flower, open of their pocketbooks and let the bureaucrabees pollinate.
Or a lack of market, it's the same as any new(ish) product really, cars 120 years ago were expensive because they were all low-production, then mass manufacturing came in, prices dropped because they were suddenly everywhere, but the newest of the new was always 10x the price of the basic ones... computers, same thing 80 years ago, expensive as hell, because they were all custom, companies may have only made 3 of them a year, now they make thousands a year because there is a market for them, drives down the price, but the newest of the new is still 10x more than the basic...
You can go down to Radio Shack (if they still existed) and buy a bunch of little cells for a couple dollars, because they are everywhere, there's probably like 3 or 4 of them in your house right now, calculator, weatherproof radio, battery recharger, etc... you can buy those for like 50 cents a piece, but they are useless to power your house, you'd have to cover your entire roof, garage, and neighbours house with them for it to work.
Once the company (or people in general) realizes there is a market/use for them, they'll spend the time + money to establish a facility to build them in bulk, with 100 machines, instead of just the 3 machines they are using now, this demand drives down the prices of the materials they need to build them, which drives down the prices of mining the materials, they figure out better/quicker packaging, they establish stable shipping routes, etc etc etc... the faster it's going, the less force needed to keep it there, like pushing someone on a swing, first few pushes are hard, once they are swinging, you can keep them swinging with a pinky push...
"Getting an 'uncounted' batch of 'mixed quality' just screams 'stolen'"
Not necessarily, "In October 2008 I bought my first 100 cells via Ebay.", "...I found another seller on Ebay who had the same cells... But these were slightly damaged."
The first set, could have been someone who bought them, to use as a weekend project sort of thing, but never got around to it, gave up, or moved, "the wife wants these things out of the garage, now!"... the second, being "slightly damaged" may have come from the reverse, a building that was torn down, or upgraded to newer/larger cells, or even something like those various solar car races, they did good, got a sponsor, ditched the clumsy setup they were using, or as someone else pointed out, factory rejects, or possibly damaged in shipping, thus having no warranty, can no longer be sold in a typical commercial way...
That's probably the wrong question, or wrong way to find out, especially if you do not wish to become suspect, a lot of people would interpret that as a ploy to get a hold of the list for malicious interests.
The best, or rather the first option would be to call your local Comcast ISP, and ask them if your details are on the leaked list (as they should have the list in some form). When that (likely) fails, then go hunting, or possibly try contacting Mr. Andreyo, although I'm sure he's now receiving about 100 spams a minute on all wires leading to him, and likely had to sign some agreement not to disclose any further information about it.
Need for Speed, isn't a simulator, it's arcade. Although more recently with Carbon, and Undercover, a lot of the cars are day-to-day drivers, but you can still plow into a wall and drive away, and excluding cop spikes, you wont get a flat tire or blow an engine (except maybe in the drag races).
Simulators, like GTR/Race/Evo, Live For Speed, rFactor or TORCS either come with, or are available as downloads after, normal day to day cars, likewise most flying sims have Cessna's and ultra-lights which some people do use daily/weekly/monthly...
And generally most people with a bit of extra cash (usually couple hundred dollars, sometimes they go on insurance + per-lap basis), who lives near a race track, can go race their car, someone elses car, and depending on the track, rent a car, which sometimes does include Ferrari's et al.
I think that's largely because AI is generally controlled as a group entity, so there is one main master pool of data that they get information from.
When what should be done, is that each AI is IAI or something, individual artificial intelligence, which can be done with object masking, and an analysis of what the AI can see in it's perspective camera, or it's range to a sound, instead of all players and sounds being a dot on a grid, with no regard for obstructions and range.
Little more on topic, I don't really mind figuring out how the AI is working, what I dislike, is like hard-coded faults, usually with waypointed bots in FPS type games, where they will always get stuck at the same spot on that same path. Because then I abuse it, i'll lead them there, wait for them to get stuck, and kill them... lotsa fun for 15 minutes, but the game gets really boring quickly, however I actually like the superhuman AI as long as they still have to abide by the rules I do (not shooting through walls I can't, etc), makes for great practice.
I generally don't play games for realism, but rather for the lack of it, I can't go out collecting coins from trees, or shooting my neighbours "really"... excluding racing/flying simulators, but usually they don't have much problems with realistic AI because of how many variables there are to "fuck with", most, if not all of which can happen in reality, sudden gust of wind, punctured tire, blown engine, etc, perhaps thats what humanoid AI games need, is more variables to be more realistic. Different eyesights, hearing, reaction times, strength, etc, etc, then slightly randomized variations on them during the same match, so that even a hard-coded fault in the AI wouldn't come to the exact same result, humans don't play by constants, why should AI.
Now that i'm rambling, I'll end with the fact that most games are multi-player now, so they spend more time working on the human interaction with the game, and the AI is just tossed in afterwards, probably carried over from v1.0, just so they can say it has that option, expecting people to want to play people. As a side note, maybe thats the logic behind some of them, make shitty AI, to try and force more people to buy+play the game so the game is useful.
First question was mostly rhetorical, my point was, what makes these new digits, superior to any Microsoft have put out?
And I don't need contrary evidence, because neither evidence can be trusted, nor is it even relevant to the point I was making.
Seems like some people including "the industry experts" have been fooled by Microsofts cherry picked statistics.
So they "seem" to believe these statistics, and others "seem" to believe Microsofts statistics. I have absolutely no idea what Microsoft has said, or Sony either for that matter, but how can you say that people have been fooled by Microsoft, when these can just as easily be inaccurate, when did Microsoft say X > Y, and at what range of time were those statistics relevant to, perhaps the XBox did outsell the PS3 at the time they did their analysis, but since then the PS3 has surpassed, the question is wether that now if Microsoft says that the XBox is still outselling the PS3, it could be argued that it's not true, but have they continued to say that the XBox is outselling the PS3?...
And what was Microsoft talking about; worldwide sales, US sales, sales since release, or sales since the last quarter, etc.
Now that these statistics say that PS3 has sold more units, Sony could theoretically claim they have "outsold" Microsoft from hence forth, when potentially the XBox might make a sudden spike in sales, and surpass the PS3 again, but till someone does a newer study, Sony can't be proven wrong, even if they are wrong in continuing to say they have sold more, just like Microsoft may have done.
So how is/was it FUD? And how have people been fooled?
Oh, it's "right from the article, my mistake, obviously since its in the fucking article, that makes their statistics unquestionable fact.
Guess if someone posts an article now about how Microsoft is outselling Sony, then suddenly that is fact.
I have no vested interest in either, that's why i mentioned it, I haven't been "fooled", because frankly I don't give a damn who is up/down/left/right. My point was, what makes Microsoft's "cherry picked" statistics, less accurate than these "cherry picked" statistics? Why do people simply believe these statistics because they are the newest, from these particular people?
Slashdot Mirror
Only if she writes down what she sees.
"...cutting down on those additives would almost have the same effect as stopping smoking entirely..."
What I meant was that pure tobacco, especially secondary, would be about the same as your normal intake of toxins, if you are around someone who is smoking, for say a couple cigarettes, then it would be about the same as another day, when your neighbours chimney smoke happened to drift your way, or you burnt off the dead grass in the spring, etc.. I never said it was healthy, only that it was immensely more so by comparison, especially since some of the intentionally added toxins are specifically there to aid in its toxicity, to increase the amount that reaches your blood stream, to pacify or neutralize your lungs abilities to cleanse themselves, etc.
Why is it that various indigenous people, who smoke raw/pure tobacco on a daily basis, still live into their 80's, I'm not saying that if you smoke it it's going to cure you or something, only that it's impact seems almost insignificant, granted, "indians" also don't eat fast food, and eat far less sugar, etc, etc... it's just a single improvement of many that would be needed.
"...the damn because..."
Dam* ...lol
Your house, just sitting there, not even including your furnace, air conditioner, or toilet and septic, are putting off far more toxins per day than a smoker. Think about all the plastic, the paint on the walls, the shingles on your roof, the insulation and tar-paper, the chemicals in the treated wood, got a paved driveway?...
The amount of power your PC used during your comment, is probably indirectly equal to 1 cigarette, via the power station, even if it's hydro, the damn because of the raised water level is allowing all sorts of chemicals to seep out of the ground, the trees and plants that were killed in the process, gas to run the bulldozers, etc, even if you use a solar cell to power your PC, the mining to get the minerals in it, the manufacturing of it, the plastic on the wires...etc etc etc.
Besides, tobacco by itself isn't very toxic, the major problem with second hand smoke and the likes, is commercialized tobacco which has hundreds of additives in it, benzene, formaldehyde, acetone, hydrogen cyanide, etc... so even in some sort of agreement with you, cutting down on those additives would almost have the same effect as stopping smoking entirely, by going back to natural tobacco.
"...and it has been successful so far. I see no reason to change."
Has it? Can we really be sure that the current method is accurate in ruling out earth-like and non-earth-like?
I'm not really disagreeing with you, just not so sure that it's 100% accurate (which is ideal, but not exactly realistic). To me this sounds like they are intentionally thwarting the idea, so the public will go "well shit, guess we're trapped here for 300 more years" kinda thing.
Current method seems fine, applied to the new equipment. Keep searching, monitor the ones we already assume are earth-like, and when we figure out a way to do something about it (wormholes, etc) we pick the best candidate at that time, and go for it, if that fails, or if it takes longer than the time to build/induce/etc the next method of travel/communication, we head for the second candidate, etc... this "new" method seem to suppose that we won't be able to do anything about it for 200 more years, so we have the time to piss around with hundreds of tests, when we should probably assume it'l be possible next year, kinda like "Year of Linux on the Desktop", may never happen, but why can't it happen next year? Just because you may not succeed, doesn't mean you should't try.
As michaelhood pointed out (I think)... it's probably just as likely as hacking your normal bank account.
As for mortgages, or purchasing a house/car/etc, I presume that those will still require face-to-face meetings and signatures, at least until an assortment of biometric nonsense improves.
It seems for now, or at least according to the article it's mostly an inward sort of thing, money comes in, but doesnt go out except for (what's now) somewhat normal things you may already do online, pay bills, which will already have an established record, and verification, probably in tandem with your current setup.
Although, that probably wouldnt stop a hacker that happens to already work for one of the companies you are billed from (Ph., rent, electricity), etc, cause they would know both sides of it, but that too isn't much different from normal non-game-world, but online banking.
It's basically like, instead of doing your banking with Firefox, and www.bank.com, you are using Game, and 11.22.33.44, both can be secure, or not, all depends on how it's implemented.
Quick Answer: "No"
I simply meant since XP was released, or more specifically, since the internet became really popular, and .Net was released, there are now hordes of craptastic applications out there.
Vista is pretty much irrelevant, although with Vista, they introduced (to the average windows user) things like Widgets, so now people are a little more familiar with running stupid little shit all the time, so maybe Microsoft realized that when people run all their craptastic software, they blame the OS, rather than the software, so they are trying to minimize that blame by partially taking responsibility for various peoples poorly coded software, and allowing for even more of it to run, or for the "normal" amount now, to run better.
And I'm not necessarily even saying that's what I think, I was only adding another possibility to the GP's comment, although that I'm sure that it does play a part, however major or minor it may be, in addition to just the general desire for a slimmer/faster/smoother OS.
Well, maybe, but along those lines it could be something similar, such as the mass amounts of poorly coded applications on Windows (or anywhere really, but more apparent on Windows), so with that in mind they make the OS itself take less resources, to allow for the resources used by the crappy applications.
Neither is a good reason for improving performance, but I think in the long run I'd prefer it was for DRM rather than poor coding practices, DRM can be subverted, and generally quite easily, improving application performance and coding practices is much harder, even if it's open source you still have to spend the time yourself, or wait for someone else to fix it.
Shit man, you have real dirt? I simply made my taskbar green, that way "get off my lawn" and "get out of my face" both happen at the same time.
On the other hand, I find your comment, plus your sig, quite comical, that wasn't one of his quotes was it?
Yeah, but you seem to be redistributing, not just a one time thing "I bought too much, need to offload some"... but you seem to be going about it more like you buy it on a weekly basis, and then resell it. Which I'm pretty sure no matter which product business you are in, you need to have an agreement to do that beforehand, part of that whole company reputation, and customer guarantee shit... I'm not saying I agree with it, only that, that is how I thought it worked.
Besides, if this company is so vile, with schemes, and poor PR, and bad business practices, why do you continue to buy stuff from them, and advertise for them?
Maybe I'm just mo naive than some, but, isn't that a legitimate case, ie: they are within the law to ask eBay to remove/disable/etc your ability to sell their product.
Maybe you should contact them, sign up to be a distributor. Or make your own kool-aid, and sell that so they don't have a "monopoly". And I'd like to point out that a quick search led me to 3 companies, MonaVie, AgroLabs and Dr. Tims, which means there is probably another 6 at least.
I think that's why some people are so upset about the LHC, it's a large hardon, whereas the US only has Fermilab, barely firm. Guess if they find the god particle, they'll orgasm, and we'll end up with Spermilab, Fetulab, Infalab, etc...
(probably should post AC)
Yes.
Replace "trees" with some inhuman word like "constituents", or "population", or just ignore the human aspect entirely, and refer to it only in legalese.
Kinda like (many, but not all) in the military, they aren't humans, with families, hopes, dreams, etc., they are targets, the opposition, the enemy.
The "constituents" of this country, will continue to "reproduce", and eventually they flower, open of their pocketbooks and let the bureaucrabees pollinate.
Or a lack of market, it's the same as any new(ish) product really, cars 120 years ago were expensive because they were all low-production, then mass manufacturing came in, prices dropped because they were suddenly everywhere, but the newest of the new was always 10x the price of the basic ones... computers, same thing 80 years ago, expensive as hell, because they were all custom, companies may have only made 3 of them a year, now they make thousands a year because there is a market for them, drives down the price, but the newest of the new is still 10x more than the basic...
You can go down to Radio Shack (if they still existed) and buy a bunch of little cells for a couple dollars, because they are everywhere, there's probably like 3 or 4 of them in your house right now, calculator, weatherproof radio, battery recharger, etc... you can buy those for like 50 cents a piece, but they are useless to power your house, you'd have to cover your entire roof, garage, and neighbours house with them for it to work.
Once the company (or people in general) realizes there is a market/use for them, they'll spend the time + money to establish a facility to build them in bulk, with 100 machines, instead of just the 3 machines they are using now, this demand drives down the prices of the materials they need to build them, which drives down the prices of mining the materials, they figure out better/quicker packaging, they establish stable shipping routes, etc etc etc... the faster it's going, the less force needed to keep it there, like pushing someone on a swing, first few pushes are hard, once they are swinging, you can keep them swinging with a pinky push...
"Getting an 'uncounted' batch of 'mixed quality' just screams 'stolen'"
Not necessarily, "In October 2008 I bought my first 100 cells via Ebay.", "...I found another seller on Ebay who had the same cells ... But these were slightly damaged."
The first set, could have been someone who bought them, to use as a weekend project sort of thing, but never got around to it, gave up, or moved, "the wife wants these things out of the garage, now!"... the second, being "slightly damaged" may have come from the reverse, a building that was torn down, or upgraded to newer/larger cells, or even something like those various solar car races, they did good, got a sponsor, ditched the clumsy setup they were using, or as someone else pointed out, factory rejects, or possibly damaged in shipping, thus having no warranty, can no longer be sold in a typical commercial way...
I'm not sure which time they are using, although I would assume PST, but I thought it wasn't going to be released (officially) till Noon...
Which means it wont be on WindowsUpdate for a week or so later.
That's probably the wrong question, or wrong way to find out, especially if you do not wish to become suspect, a lot of people would interpret that as a ploy to get a hold of the list for malicious interests.
The best, or rather the first option would be to call your local Comcast ISP, and ask them if your details are on the leaked list (as they should have the list in some form). When that (likely) fails, then go hunting, or possibly try contacting Mr. Andreyo, although I'm sure he's now receiving about 100 spams a minute on all wires leading to him, and likely had to sign some agreement not to disclose any further information about it.
Need for Speed, isn't a simulator, it's arcade. Although more recently with Carbon, and Undercover, a lot of the cars are day-to-day drivers, but you can still plow into a wall and drive away, and excluding cop spikes, you wont get a flat tire or blow an engine (except maybe in the drag races).
Simulators, like GTR/Race/Evo, Live For Speed, rFactor or TORCS either come with, or are available as downloads after, normal day to day cars, likewise most flying sims have Cessna's and ultra-lights which some people do use daily/weekly/monthly...
And generally most people with a bit of extra cash (usually couple hundred dollars, sometimes they go on insurance + per-lap basis), who lives near a race track, can go race their car, someone elses car, and depending on the track, rent a car, which sometimes does include Ferrari's et al.
I think that's largely because AI is generally controlled as a group entity, so there is one main master pool of data that they get information from.
When what should be done, is that each AI is IAI or something, individual artificial intelligence, which can be done with object masking, and an analysis of what the AI can see in it's perspective camera, or it's range to a sound, instead of all players and sounds being a dot on a grid, with no regard for obstructions and range.
Little more on topic, I don't really mind figuring out how the AI is working, what I dislike, is like hard-coded faults, usually with waypointed bots in FPS type games, where they will always get stuck at the same spot on that same path. Because then I abuse it, i'll lead them there, wait for them to get stuck, and kill them... lotsa fun for 15 minutes, but the game gets really boring quickly, however I actually like the superhuman AI as long as they still have to abide by the rules I do (not shooting through walls I can't, etc), makes for great practice.
I generally don't play games for realism, but rather for the lack of it, I can't go out collecting coins from trees, or shooting my neighbours "really"... excluding racing/flying simulators, but usually they don't have much problems with realistic AI because of how many variables there are to "fuck with", most, if not all of which can happen in reality, sudden gust of wind, punctured tire, blown engine, etc, perhaps thats what humanoid AI games need, is more variables to be more realistic. Different eyesights, hearing, reaction times, strength, etc, etc, then slightly randomized variations on them during the same match, so that even a hard-coded fault in the AI wouldn't come to the exact same result, humans don't play by constants, why should AI.
Now that i'm rambling, I'll end with the fact that most games are multi-player now, so they spend more time working on the human interaction with the game, and the AI is just tossed in afterwards, probably carried over from v1.0, just so they can say it has that option, expecting people to want to play people. As a side note, maybe thats the logic behind some of them, make shitty AI, to try and force more people to buy+play the game so the game is useful.
First question was mostly rhetorical, my point was, what makes these new digits, superior to any Microsoft have put out?
And I don't need contrary evidence, because neither evidence can be trusted, nor is it even relevant to the point I was making.
Seems like some people including "the industry experts" have been fooled by Microsofts cherry picked statistics.
So they "seem" to believe these statistics, and others "seem" to believe Microsofts statistics. I have absolutely no idea what Microsoft has said, or Sony either for that matter, but how can you say that people have been fooled by Microsoft, when these can just as easily be inaccurate, when did Microsoft say X > Y, and at what range of time were those statistics relevant to, perhaps the XBox did outsell the PS3 at the time they did their analysis, but since then the PS3 has surpassed, the question is wether that now if Microsoft says that the XBox is still outselling the PS3, it could be argued that it's not true, but have they continued to say that the XBox is outselling the PS3?...
And what was Microsoft talking about; worldwide sales, US sales, sales since release, or sales since the last quarter, etc.
Now that these statistics say that PS3 has sold more units, Sony could theoretically claim they have "outsold" Microsoft from hence forth, when potentially the XBox might make a sudden spike in sales, and surpass the PS3 again, but till someone does a newer study, Sony can't be proven wrong, even if they are wrong in continuing to say they have sold more, just like Microsoft may have done.
So how is/was it FUD? And how have people been fooled?
Oh, it's "right from the article, my mistake, obviously since its in the fucking article, that makes their statistics unquestionable fact.
Guess if someone posts an article now about how Microsoft is outselling Sony, then suddenly that is fact.
I have no vested interest in either, that's why i mentioned it, I haven't been "fooled", because frankly I don't give a damn who is up/down/left/right. My point was, what makes Microsoft's "cherry picked" statistics, less accurate than these "cherry picked" statistics? Why do people simply believe these statistics because they are the newest, from these particular people?
I think most of them are still compiling the application that will translate the summary for them.
[Citation Need]
And just where exactly did you "cherry pick" your statistics from?
I don't own an XBox, nor PS, but I'd like to know how your statistics are so absolute.
Nope.