So lets go over how you can buy items in game currently.
You gain ISK, which are the in game currency doing missions or what have you as you would expect. You think use that ISK to purchase all other items that can be purchased.
OR
If you choose to do so, you can buy a PLEX, which is a certificate for 30 days of game time basically. You can legally bring that into the game and sell it on the open market for in game ISK, this isn't new. Its probably about a year old, but its not something people aren't used to at this point.
So... what people are complaining about... they are just too stupid to realize is already a legitimate part of the game. Its already trivial to buy game items for real world cash. I suck at the game, but like dicking around in it so thats how I get my stuff, then of course being a bad player I promptly get ganked by some griefer and lose it all if I don't get out fast enough.
EVE is about strategy, just having superior equipment doesn't give you even a little advantage against other players. Might help you beat down an NPC, but in my experience, EVE gives so many ways to fight that there is simply no way you can buy yourself into being protected from a better player.
I think the difference is that if you get in-game currency via paying rl money, you can just buy in-game items which other players produced. That is, you go buy that new spaceship, but it is a spaceship built by a player. That other player then has your in-game currency and can go on buying other stuff from other player with the money he earned via his own work. Whereas if you go spend $500 on the new spaceship advertised on the website, that spaceship just poofs into existence from nowhere, and the rl money price on the website also determines the price for all the other spaceships of that type offered in game by other players. So it could be that other players who up to now earned in-game money by selling stuff suddenly have competition (from the game company itself) which can "produce" at a lower cost than they can, and there is also no way anymore of playing the market (if you're the only player who can offer product X, you can set the price - but if there always is competition from the game company, which always sells at the same price, that's not possible anymore).
Why would you keep that type of cash in bitcoin? Anyone with half a brain would at least put that kind of money in a savings account to get interest. I think it's a hoax.
I guess one major problem with that would be to find somebody actually willing to GIVE you that amount of $ for your bitcoins. That's the problem with bitcoins, like a "real" currency it has the value which people would exchange it for, but it is a bad currency because most people WON'T give you anything for it. So all people can do right now is sit on their pile of bitcoins, shouting "this would be worth $200k - if somebody would actually give me that amount of $ for it".
I'm not sure when it happened, but a lot of sites like NetFlix started doing these side-ways scrolling interfaces and it's just annoying and difficult to navigate.
The web is a vertical medium and pages should be designed around that. For the web browser, I'd love NetFlix to just give me a simple list with a thumbnail on the left, description on the right, and 500 entries to quickly scroll through with the mouse wheel before needing the next page. This would even work great on touch devices.
This. Everybody who uses a computer at home or at work is used to text scrolling vertically. Writing application, web browser - everything scrolls vertically. And even normal text on paper is read left to right (* your culture may vary), until you reach the edge of the paper, and then you read the next line below. So it's only natural that the best way to show a list of movies would be a vertical list, and as an indication of where you are in the list, you could use maybe - oh I don't know - maybe the fcking scroll bar of the browser? And there is also information which NEEDS to be visible without having to click or hover anywhere on the screen - the fcking NAME of the movie (because sometimes it is hard to read it on the cover, if the picture is not as big as the whole screen) and other essential data, like rating, year, a very quick description, genre, and maybe the names of one or two main actors. You could easily squeeze that, together with a thumbnail pic of the DVD cover, on a few lines. And then either put in a good search, or make the headers (year, genre, actor...) clickable to sort stuff.
If you don't trust them with access to the information, you already have bigger problems in that your IT department can probably access all sorts of private information.
He does not trust the IT department with the information in his calendar database, but expects the IT department to trust him that this server is no security risk for the patient data on the rest of the hospital network. Seems kinda wrong to me.
If the hosting device is only supposed to be for staff calendaring (who's on duty when) and contains no patient data then HIPAA would not apply
The problem is not whether there is patient data on the server itself - this server has a connection to the public internet while sitting in a network where patient data is located on the other servers. That's a problem for security and therefor HIPAA does apply.
I think it will take a while for the full extent of this disaster to become known. Tepco and the government have been downplaying everything since day one. When the first plant exploded due to the hydrogen buildup, and they said in effect that "It isn't a big deal - just the superficial structure over the reactors was damaged" I knew for sure that they were painting a totally different picture than reality. The amount of destruction from those explosions was tremendous. What gets me is that after the first reactor building explosion, they still could not prevent the second (and worse) explosion. As an armchair nuclear plant operator, it sure seems like they have done a very poor job trying to reign in control of the situation.
They *intentionally* vented the hydrogen to prevent bigger problems. The explosion was inevitable.
When we did a school trip to Prague (from Germany), a classmate of mine met one of those "hey, want to buy a cheap VCR?" guys. It was already evening and dark, the guy showed something which LOOKED very much like a VCR from a box, my classmate bought it (for what would be something like $20 today), and later on found out it was just a VCR-sized piece of wood with some printed paper depicting the front/top of a VCR glued to it. Thank god alcohol was cheap in Prague back then, so we all just had a good laugh.
when you ran out of fuel in the other cars, you took a few minutes to fill up and could go back out. The Tesla, on the other hand, was done for the day as it took something like 12 hours to recharge
An issue, yes, an insurmountable issue, no, and an issue that was only in the minds of the Top Gear hosts rather than reality.
Running out of charge and pushing the car to the shop was a stunt, a hoax, it was fake, neither car ran out of charge.
I like watching most of the Top Gear shows but I expect them to flog cars not their egos and stubborn pride.
They never claimed the car DID run out of charge, as in "why is it suddenly not moving anymore". The exact words from the film were "we calculated that on our track it would run out after 55 miles". And that number came from the Tesla technicians themselves (see the linked article). Yes, they showed the car stopped on the track, maybe a cheap shot to show "this is what WOULD have happened", but nobody from Top Gear stated that a car actually stopped on the track - neither due to a flat battery, nor due to the overheated engine. Which does not change the fact that a.) one car's battery was not enough to do all the filming, they had to switch to the second car while the first one was recharging b.) the brakes on one car broke (just a sensor apparently, but a normal customer would have had to drive to the shop to get it fixed) and c.) on one car, the engine was overheating so that you could only drive at low speed. I see nothing faked there. All they said was true.
I don't think they are removable at the moment. Apart from anything, the battery packs cost $36,000 so I doubt many cars would be kept with several spares. Interestingly Wikipedia lists the recharge time as about 4 hours, but that still makes the car pretty much useless on the track.
The recharge time is less than "overnight" if you have a special super extreme power outlet in your garage.
Faking results isn't a legitimate tactic in my books.
Battery didn't go flat and the car didn't have to be stopped while the engine was reading hot, but the footage suggested it should.
The brakes issue is legitimate but I don't consider 1/2 a pass.
Nobody from Top Gear ever said that the battery went flat. What they said was that the battery WOULD go flat after 55 miles of driving, and this number came from the Tesla people who were at the track on that day. same for the engine - nobody from Top Gear said that the car had to be stopped, they said that it only drove with "reduced power". Which was true.
I hate how Top Gear is so against ANY electric or hybrid car. Yes, some hybrid and electric cars are weak, but that doesn't mean they all are. Good hybrid cars are often better then their gas counterparts in turns of performance. And if you've ever seen a Tesla, it's a kick-ass car!
Watch their review of the Honda Clarity. They liked it a lot, because *it works* in the real life.
Being anal about the distribution rights of a 14 year old video game seems like it's an issue of screwing your most dedicated fans, the very people that the company should be catering to.
Actually, the DOS version of the game is about 26 years old.
I admit that I own a "gaming mouse". No, actually I own three of them, one for each of my computers at home. It's simply because the mouse that I found to work best for me happens to be the Logitech G5 (which now has been succeeded by the G500). The shape, the weight and the surface texture are all very nice, and unlike the less expensive mice, the "gliders" at the bottom are very large and the optical sensor works on pretty much every surface I tried it on. I just like it, and I think that when it comes to an input device you use all day long, you should buy something you really like instead of saving $30 and then being annoyed for years until you buy the next mouse.
Yes, news say that the nuclear power plant in Fukushima has the cooling system only running on battery power right now - which will only last for a few hours. After that, a meltdown could occur.
What people don't realize is that they typically only throttle the download. So let's say there's a 10 megabit connection, it's probably 1 or 0.5 megabits upload. So if people have a slowed download, they spend more time uploading the unfinished parts which means more sources which means a faster download on peer to peer networks. So they can do that all they want, they're just basically going to make leechers host files longer.
From TFS:
Trialing of the new traffic management plans commenced on March 2 and will only apply to upstream traffic, therefore download speeds will be unaffected.
I do not see any big problem with what Sony is doing. If your PS3 is modded, of course you should not be allowed onto their network, because that would open the door for all kinds of cheat software, which would destroy the fun for all the legit players trying to enjoy competitive games there. You still can play offline (as long as the game does not use online verification, which newer games very well might do) and you can still use your "homebrew" software. The whole thing would only be problematic if Sony would remotely brick your PS3 for being modded. But they do not do that.
What I never understand is how all those companies can get away with showing ads with happy people who use tons of video streaming, internet radio/music/video download shops and other highish bandwidth stuff, claim "sign up here and enjoy all these awesome things!", when the reality is that if you actually DO use all this stuff every day, you are told to stop doing that because you are an asocial bandwidth hog.
Either advertise it and let people do it, or don't advertise it. And especially do not advertise it if you know from the start that it is not technically possible for lots of people to use these options because your network is not good enough.
So, will there be some kind of "override" for dangerous situations? Like, I do not PLAN on driving that day, so I have a beer or two and am just over the limit where the car won't start anymore, but then suddenly space aliens with anal probes arrive and I *really* need to drive away fast - but the car won't let me.
Or any other, more real life situation - say, you THINK you're still under the limit, on the way to your car you get assaulted by some criminal, you just make it to your car and want to get away, and your car tells you "sorry, driving right now would not be good for you."
Or just scratch the alcohol in all these examples and let the damn thing have a malfunction. "Sorry, you can't drive your wife to the hospital right now."
Does not seem to be the same bug, since people state they had SMS go to persons they never sent a message to before, and the link you posted states a message might go to the recipient entered in an old draft message.
I thought start/stop systems were already available on production cars for over a decade now, for example the Volkswagen Lupo 3L had one already in 1999. What you wrote about cylinder positioning on the Mazda 3 sounds similar to what BMW are working on - a system to start the engine without a starter motor, by determining cylinder position, so that the car knows which cylinder to fire first.
Well one would assume one would look at the battery charge level (guess) and the heat requirements, and outside temp etc, before turning the engine OFF. Frankly this isn't rocket science even a prius will run the engine to provide enough heat energy in cold situations.
Exactly, that all is taken into consideration on the already existing systems (e.g. Volkswagen Bluemotion): as long as the engine is cold, it will not be turned off, same if the battery is low. And you can override the system via a button. Also, the starter motor and other components are designed for the extra wear, see for example http://www.bosch-presse.de/presseforum/details.htm?txtID=3042&locale=en
Slashdot Mirror
So lets go over how you can buy items in game currently.
You gain ISK, which are the in game currency doing missions or what have you as you would expect. You think use that ISK to purchase all other items that can be purchased.
OR
If you choose to do so, you can buy a PLEX, which is a certificate for 30 days of game time basically. You can legally bring that into the game and sell it on the open market for in game ISK, this isn't new. Its probably about a year old, but its not something people aren't used to at this point.
So ... what people are complaining about ... they are just too stupid to realize is already a legitimate part of the game. Its already trivial to buy game items for real world cash. I suck at the game, but like dicking around in it so thats how I get my stuff, then of course being a bad player I promptly get ganked by some griefer and lose it all if I don't get out fast enough.
EVE is about strategy, just having superior equipment doesn't give you even a little advantage against other players. Might help you beat down an NPC, but in my experience, EVE gives so many ways to fight that there is simply no way you can buy yourself into being protected from a better player.
I think the difference is that if you get in-game currency via paying rl money, you can just buy in-game items which other players produced. That is, you go buy that new spaceship, but it is a spaceship built by a player. That other player then has your in-game currency and can go on buying other stuff from other player with the money he earned via his own work. Whereas if you go spend $500 on the new spaceship advertised on the website, that spaceship just poofs into existence from nowhere, and the rl money price on the website also determines the price for all the other spaceships of that type offered in game by other players. So it could be that other players who up to now earned in-game money by selling stuff suddenly have competition (from the game company itself) which can "produce" at a lower cost than they can, and there is also no way anymore of playing the market (if you're the only player who can offer product X, you can set the price - but if there always is competition from the game company, which always sells at the same price, that's not possible anymore).
Why would you keep that type of cash in bitcoin? Anyone with half a brain would at least put that kind of money in a savings account to get interest. I think it's a hoax.
I guess one major problem with that would be to find somebody actually willing to GIVE you that amount of $ for your bitcoins. That's the problem with bitcoins, like a "real" currency it has the value which people would exchange it for, but it is a bad currency because most people WON'T give you anything for it. So all people can do right now is sit on their pile of bitcoins, shouting "this would be worth $200k - if somebody would actually give me that amount of $ for it".
I'm not sure when it happened, but a lot of sites like NetFlix started doing these side-ways scrolling interfaces and it's just annoying and difficult to navigate.
The web is a vertical medium and pages should be designed around that. For the web browser, I'd love NetFlix to just give me a simple list with a thumbnail on the left, description on the right, and 500 entries to quickly scroll through with the mouse wheel before needing the next page. This would even work great on touch devices.
This. Everybody who uses a computer at home or at work is used to text scrolling vertically. Writing application, web browser - everything scrolls vertically. And even normal text on paper is read left to right (* your culture may vary), until you reach the edge of the paper, and then you read the next line below. So it's only natural that the best way to show a list of movies would be a vertical list, and as an indication of where you are in the list, you could use maybe - oh I don't know - maybe the fcking scroll bar of the browser? And there is also information which NEEDS to be visible without having to click or hover anywhere on the screen - the fcking NAME of the movie (because sometimes it is hard to read it on the cover, if the picture is not as big as the whole screen) and other essential data, like rating, year, a very quick description, genre, and maybe the names of one or two main actors. You could easily squeeze that, together with a thumbnail pic of the DVD cover, on a few lines. And then either put in a good search, or make the headers (year, genre, actor...) clickable to sort stuff.
If you don't trust them with access to the information, you already have bigger problems in that your IT department can probably access all sorts of private information.
He does not trust the IT department with the information in his calendar database, but expects the IT department to trust him that this server is no security risk for the patient data on the rest of the hospital network. Seems kinda wrong to me.
If the hosting device is only supposed to be for staff calendaring (who's on duty when) and contains no patient data then HIPAA would not apply
The problem is not whether there is patient data on the server itself - this server has a connection to the public internet while sitting in a network where patient data is located on the other servers. That's a problem for security and therefor HIPAA does apply.
I think it will take a while for the full extent of this disaster to become known. Tepco and the government have been downplaying everything since day one. When the first plant exploded due to the hydrogen buildup, and they said in effect that "It isn't a big deal - just the superficial structure over the reactors was damaged" I knew for sure that they were painting a totally different picture than reality. The amount of destruction from those explosions was tremendous. What gets me is that after the first reactor building explosion, they still could not prevent the second (and worse) explosion. As an armchair nuclear plant operator, it sure seems like they have done a very poor job trying to reign in control of the situation.
They *intentionally* vented the hydrogen to prevent bigger problems. The explosion was inevitable.
With some file formats, like mpeg, it works. You can just cut a few mb out of an mpeg file and play it, it will work just fine.
When we did a school trip to Prague (from Germany), a classmate of mine met one of those "hey, want to buy a cheap VCR?" guys. It was already evening and dark, the guy showed something which LOOKED very much like a VCR from a box, my classmate bought it (for what would be something like $20 today), and later on found out it was just a VCR-sized piece of wood with some printed paper depicting the front/top of a VCR glued to it. Thank god alcohol was cheap in Prague back then, so we all just had a good laugh.
An issue, yes, an insurmountable issue, no, and an issue that was only in the minds of the Top Gear hosts rather than reality.
Running out of charge and pushing the car to the shop was a stunt, a hoax, it was fake, neither car ran out of charge.
I like watching most of the Top Gear shows but I expect them to flog cars not their egos and stubborn pride.
They never claimed the car DID run out of charge, as in "why is it suddenly not moving anymore". The exact words from the film were "we calculated that on our track it would run out after 55 miles". And that number came from the Tesla technicians themselves (see the linked article). Yes, they showed the car stopped on the track, maybe a cheap shot to show "this is what WOULD have happened", but nobody from Top Gear stated that a car actually stopped on the track - neither due to a flat battery, nor due to the overheated engine. Which does not change the fact that a.) one car's battery was not enough to do all the filming, they had to switch to the second car while the first one was recharging b.) the brakes on one car broke (just a sensor apparently, but a normal customer would have had to drive to the shop to get it fixed) and c.) on one car, the engine was overheating so that you could only drive at low speed. I see nothing faked there. All they said was true.
I don't think they are removable at the moment. Apart from anything, the battery packs cost $36,000 so I doubt many cars would be kept with several spares. Interestingly Wikipedia lists the recharge time as about 4 hours, but that still makes the car pretty much useless on the track.
The recharge time is less than "overnight" if you have a special super extreme power outlet in your garage.
Faking results isn't a legitimate tactic in my books.
Battery didn't go flat and the car didn't have to be stopped while the engine was reading hot, but the footage suggested it should.
The brakes issue is legitimate but I don't consider 1/2 a pass.
Nobody from Top Gear ever said that the battery went flat. What they said was that the battery WOULD go flat after 55 miles of driving, and this number came from the Tesla people who were at the track on that day. same for the engine - nobody from Top Gear said that the car had to be stopped, they said that it only drove with "reduced power". Which was true.
I hate how Top Gear is so against ANY electric or hybrid car. Yes, some hybrid and electric cars are weak, but that doesn't mean they all are. Good hybrid cars are often better then their gas counterparts in turns of performance. And if you've ever seen a Tesla, it's a kick-ass car!
Watch their review of the Honda Clarity. They liked it a lot, because *it works* in the real life.
Being anal about the distribution rights of a 14 year old video game seems like it's an issue of screwing your most dedicated fans, the very people that the company should be catering to.
Actually, the DOS version of the game is about 26 years old.
I admit that I own a "gaming mouse". No, actually I own three of them, one for each of my computers at home. It's simply because the mouse that I found to work best for me happens to be the Logitech G5 (which now has been succeeded by the G500). The shape, the weight and the surface texture are all very nice, and unlike the less expensive mice, the "gliders" at the bottom are very large and the optical sensor works on pretty much every surface I tried it on. I just like it, and I think that when it comes to an input device you use all day long, you should buy something you really like instead of saving $30 and then being annoyed for years until you buy the next mouse.
America Fail
wtf America fail indeed, that's just ridiculous o.O
Yes, news say that the nuclear power plant in Fukushima has the cooling system only running on battery power right now - which will only last for a few hours. After that, a meltdown could occur.
What people don't realize is that they typically only throttle the download. So let's say there's a 10 megabit connection, it's probably 1 or 0.5 megabits upload. So if people have a slowed download, they spend more time uploading the unfinished parts which means more sources which means a faster download on peer to peer networks. So they can do that all they want, they're just basically going to make leechers host files longer.
From TFS:
Trialing of the new traffic management plans commenced on March 2 and will only apply to upstream traffic, therefore download speeds will be unaffected.
I do not see any big problem with what Sony is doing. If your PS3 is modded, of course you should not be allowed onto their network, because that would open the door for all kinds of cheat software, which would destroy the fun for all the legit players trying to enjoy competitive games there. You still can play offline (as long as the game does not use online verification, which newer games very well might do) and you can still use your "homebrew" software. The whole thing would only be problematic if Sony would remotely brick your PS3 for being modded. But they do not do that.
What I never understand is how all those companies can get away with showing ads with happy people who use tons of video streaming, internet radio/music/video download shops and other highish bandwidth stuff, claim "sign up here and enjoy all these awesome things!", when the reality is that if you actually DO use all this stuff every day, you are told to stop doing that because you are an asocial bandwidth hog.
Either advertise it and let people do it, or don't advertise it. And especially do not advertise it if you know from the start that it is not technically possible for lots of people to use these options because your network is not good enough.
So, will there be some kind of "override" for dangerous situations? Like, I do not PLAN on driving that day, so I have a beer or two and am just over the limit where the car won't start anymore, but then suddenly space aliens with anal probes arrive and I *really* need to drive away fast - but the car won't let me.
Or any other, more real life situation - say, you THINK you're still under the limit, on the way to your car you get assaulted by some criminal, you just make it to your car and want to get away, and your car tells you "sorry, driving right now would not be good for you."
Or just scratch the alcohol in all these examples and let the damn thing have a malfunction. "Sorry, you can't drive your wife to the hospital right now."
Does not seem to be the same bug, since people state they had SMS go to persons they never sent a message to before, and the link you posted states a message might go to the recipient entered in an old draft message.
Moving the pollution anywhere else is a big win because it becomes less localized, and effects fewer people.
FTFY.
Unless you meant to say that people of lower value are being driven into the earth by pollution.
Never knew that air pollution causes spontaneous sex. Unless you meant to write "affects".
I thought start/stop systems were already available on production cars for over a decade now, for example the Volkswagen Lupo 3L had one already in 1999. What you wrote about cylinder positioning on the Mazda 3 sounds similar to what BMW are working on - a system to start the engine without a starter motor, by determining cylinder position, so that the car knows which cylinder to fire first.
Well one would assume one would look at the battery charge level (guess) and the heat requirements, and outside temp etc, before turning the engine OFF. Frankly this isn't rocket science even a prius will run the engine to provide enough heat energy in cold situations.
Exactly, that all is taken into consideration on the already existing systems (e.g. Volkswagen Bluemotion): as long as the engine is cold, it will not be turned off, same if the battery is low. And you can override the system via a button. Also, the starter motor and other components are designed for the extra wear, see for example http://www.bosch-presse.de/presseforum/details.htm?txtID=3042&locale=en
So, in your opinion, what qualifies as "porn"? What does Mr. "I am extremely conservative oh no a girl in a swimsuit" consider "porn"?