Well, I've used my 802.11 card in adhoc mode with co-workers and friends on planes several times, and the plane never even gave a hint of going down. I've always considered that warning they give a bunch of bunk. I mean, seriously, do you think anyone would let you on a plane with a device that even had a remote chance of causing trouble during flight?
In my opinion, they mainly just say that warning so that people won't be rummaging through their things while the plane is taking off/landing, possibly dropping items on the ground which may decide to slide around.
Re:Probably not going to happen
on
Mario's Revenge?
·
· Score: 1
Did you even read the article linked in the original story? Most of your arguments are solved right there.
1) Nintendo *is* going to a different market segment, mostly, one which it practically owns all by itself. While Sony and Microsoft battle it out for the older age group, Nintendo will sit pretty with their 6-12 year olds (and a few of us older gamers).
2) Nintendo has the *only* handheld gaming system worth owning. They own every age group with handhelds.
3) The GameCube is rumored to be pretty inexpensive. Nintendo may actually make money on the hardware (gasp!). Since the XBox will cost $400, probably, and the PS2 is $300, there's incentive right there to buy a GC.
4) Nintendo has Shigeru Miyamoto, undeniably the greatest game desinger alive today. Ask anyone. He has never made a game that wasn't fun to play.
5) Yes, Square is great...I've been playing all their games since they started. But, they're stumbling a lot on the PS2. The Bouncer and Driving Emotion Type-S, their first two games, have been critically panned. If they don't hurry up and pull out their FF trump card, they may start to lose fanbase.
6) No one has said that Square *won't* be coming to Nintendo again. It's a long shot, but maybe they will now that there are no cartridges. Sony does not own Square, so I would not be surprised if Square developed for GC or XBox.
7) DVD playback is the absolute *last* reason on Earth that I would ever buy a GAMING CONSOLE. By the time the GC comes out, it will probably be more feasible to buy a GC and a separate DVD player instead of PS2 or XBox and having to get extra remote controls and stuff. This is the worst reason I continually hear about not getting a GC. Nintendo has it right in this regard...the GC will be about games, and only games, which is all that I, and too many others I know, care about. And those people you know that got a PS2 solely for DVD? Sony hates those people. They make Sony lose money unless they decide to buy some games (or a *lot* of Sony Picture Studios DVDs).
Just wanted to chime in and say that at the E3 Expo this past May, I recall someone (probably at Pioneer's booth) handing me a black plastic bag with "Akira on DVD...2001" or something, and with the Pioneer logo on it. So this info seems to confirm it, though I wish I could get a specific date...
Actually, probably not. Most absentee ballots are *never* counted for the simple reason that they wouldn't change the outcome. It takes both time and money for counties to count their absentee ballots, and the plain fact is that unless there are more absentee ballots outstanding than the vote difference between the candidates, the absentee ballots are never counted. They are thrown out.
And to keep on this Electoral College topic, the huge fact that most people never realize is that the United States of America is not a democracy. Never was, never was planned to be. It is a democratic republic...a republic of States, United as a nation. But the States are the democracies, not the nation as a whole.
The EC is a direct reflection of Congress as a whole. Each state gets electors based on number of Senators (2) and number of Representatives (based on population). The EC has worked fine for well over 200 years, and continues to work as planned, and quite well. If any reform at all needs to be done to the EC, I guess it would be with how states allocate electors (all-or-none or proportional to % vote in state), but since the federal government has no control over that, the states would have to do as they see fit.
I pretty much agree...something needs to be done about the current tax code. I have always touted a flat tax rate or a national sales tax.
I think a national sales tax is the only truly fair tax system -- the more you consume, the more you pay. Of course, I would advocate exempting necssary food items, just like we do now.
Here is an interesting link to a Cato Institute study on this subject. One of the things they mention about a national sales tax is that it would actually cause a rise in the savings rate in this country (which is dismally low now).
Other links on
this page
deal with more taxation issues. Something that strikes me as amazing is
this link
which explains that in 1990, the top 1% of all taxpayers payed over 25% of all federal income taxes. The top 5% payed over 44%. And the top 50% of all taxpayers payed over 94% of all federal income taxes. Meaning that the bottom 50% of all taxpayers (over half of the country, since many people do not pay any income tax) only paid around 6% of all federal income taxes. I may be strange, but I find that highly disturbing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for society taking care of the less fortunate, but I don't care to subscribe to such a Robin Hood-esque strategy.
As a side note, I think the Estate (Inheritance/Death) Tax is a travesty. Only in our current ass-backwards system could we ever tax someone for dying.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I've used my 802.11 card in adhoc mode with co-workers and friends on planes several times, and the plane never even gave a hint of going down. I've always considered that warning they give a bunch of bunk. I mean, seriously, do you think anyone would let you on a plane with a device that even had a remote chance of causing trouble during flight?
In my opinion, they mainly just say that warning so that people won't be rummaging through their things while the plane is taking off/landing, possibly dropping items on the ground which may decide to slide around.
Did you even read the article linked in the original story? Most of your arguments are solved right there.
1) Nintendo *is* going to a different market segment, mostly, one which it practically owns all by itself. While Sony and Microsoft battle it out for the older age group, Nintendo will sit pretty with their 6-12 year olds (and a few of us older gamers).
2) Nintendo has the *only* handheld gaming system worth owning. They own every age group with handhelds.
3) The GameCube is rumored to be pretty inexpensive. Nintendo may actually make money on the hardware (gasp!). Since the XBox will cost $400, probably, and the PS2 is $300, there's incentive right there to buy a GC.
4) Nintendo has Shigeru Miyamoto, undeniably the greatest game desinger alive today. Ask anyone. He has never made a game that wasn't fun to play.
5) Yes, Square is great...I've been playing all their games since they started. But, they're stumbling a lot on the PS2. The Bouncer and Driving Emotion Type-S, their first two games, have been critically panned. If they don't hurry up and pull out their FF trump card, they may start to lose fanbase.
6) No one has said that Square *won't* be coming to Nintendo again. It's a long shot, but maybe they will now that there are no cartridges. Sony does not own Square, so I would not be surprised if Square developed for GC or XBox.
7) DVD playback is the absolute *last* reason on Earth that I would ever buy a GAMING CONSOLE. By the time the GC comes out, it will probably be more feasible to buy a GC and a separate DVD player instead of PS2 or XBox and having to get extra remote controls and stuff. This is the worst reason I continually hear about not getting a GC. Nintendo has it right in this regard...the GC will be about games, and only games, which is all that I, and too many others I know, care about. And those people you know that got a PS2 solely for DVD? Sony hates those people. They make Sony lose money unless they decide to buy some games (or a *lot* of Sony Picture Studios DVDs).
Just wanted to chime in and say that at the E3 Expo this past May, I recall someone (probably at Pioneer's booth) handing me a black plastic bag with "Akira on DVD...2001" or something, and with the Pioneer logo on it. So this info seems to confirm it, though I wish I could get a specific date...
Actually, probably not. Most absentee ballots are *never* counted for the simple reason that they wouldn't change the outcome. It takes both time and money for counties to count their absentee ballots, and the plain fact is that unless there are more absentee ballots outstanding than the vote difference between the candidates, the absentee ballots are never counted. They are thrown out.
And to keep on this Electoral College topic, the huge fact that most people never realize is that the United States of America is not a democracy. Never was, never was planned to be. It is a democratic republic...a republic of States, United as a nation. But the States are the democracies, not the nation as a whole.
The EC is a direct reflection of Congress as a whole. Each state gets electors based on number of Senators (2) and number of Representatives (based on population). The EC has worked fine for well over 200 years, and continues to work as planned, and quite well. If any reform at all needs to be done to the EC, I guess it would be with how states allocate electors (all-or-none or proportional to % vote in state), but since the federal government has no control over that, the states would have to do as they see fit.
I pretty much agree...something needs to be done about the current tax code. I have always touted a flat tax rate or a national sales tax.
I think a national sales tax is the only truly fair tax system -- the more you consume, the more you pay. Of course, I would advocate exempting necssary food items, just like we do now.
Here is an interesting link to a Cato Institute study on this subject. One of the things they mention about a national sales tax is that it would actually cause a rise in the savings rate in this country (which is dismally low now).
The Economic Impact of Replacing Federal Income Taxes with a Sales Tax
Other links on this page deal with more taxation issues. Something that strikes me as amazing is this link which explains that in 1990, the top 1% of all taxpayers payed over 25% of all federal income taxes. The top 5% payed over 44%. And the top 50% of all taxpayers payed over 94% of all federal income taxes. Meaning that the bottom 50% of all taxpayers (over half of the country, since many people do not pay any income tax) only paid around 6% of all federal income taxes. I may be strange, but I find that highly disturbing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for society taking care of the less fortunate, but I don't care to subscribe to such a Robin Hood-esque strategy.
As a side note, I think the Estate (Inheritance/Death) Tax is a travesty. Only in our current ass-backwards system could we ever tax someone for dying.
---
I don't think that any of those movie bits are prerendered screens. That's all realtime rendering (except *possibly* the Metroid shot).