Mostly because I still have some old GB/GBC games that do not play in the DS at all.(I'm a little surprised NoA didn't put out a DS card that would let me play those titles.)
"Hey, lets get idiots to be science journalists" didn't work so well. You know, science journalists that don't get conservation of matter, that light is a form of energy, or don't get the 2nd law of thermodynamics at all.
The state house (Where they do their business) has a inappropriately (or appropriately name) entrance on the side. It's called "The General Hooker Entrance". (And no, I'm not making that one up. Just google it.)
Here's a photo link
http://www.madspedersen.com/photos/1267_large.jpg
The late 30 year old version of me.(I know, I know, it's just my word on that of course but yes I'm old for a techie.) Some how I don't think my position, which has remained unchanged for 20 years, is going to change drastically in under 10. (I thought their position was horse shit when I heard it at 18 and I still think it is today, decades later.)
Lets you take what you want for a change. Why yes, I'm pretty sure the sciences are the thing for me and I would have liked to take more things like chem and bio and not all that foreign languages you dirt bags shoved down my throat, never mind the humanities. Turns out being the worlds foremost expert in me I was pretty much spot on with that assessment before college. (Why yes, I am a little bitter about my college experience. Why do you ask?)
The one that says working code is more important than extensive documentation. I know what that says but I know how developers will interpret it, "Don't worry about docs." There's the problem, the last thing you want to do is encourage a developer to do is skimp on the documentation since that's their natural tendency anyways. I've never met a developer where I thought "Wow, he or she documents too much." (To be fair some devs are decent about docs) It's maddening when you have to come back to the code for some updates and nobody knows what it's supposed to do since nobody bothered to write it down. (Let alone extend it.)
[sarcasm on]
I mean next thing you tell us is that we should break up long blocks of code into separate functions instead of writing 1 function that's between 1 and 2 thousand lines long.(Or that sections of repeated code should be replaced with a well named function.) Oh, and that we should give variables sensible names, not stuff like naming a stack "q".
[sarcasm off]
You know how babies if they can't see something they don't know it exists? Scrum is like that. Features and fixes that can't be seen are often treated as if they don't exist while the methodolgy goes nuts over things you can see. (Like fixing threading issues which might be hard to notice on the outside world because they only cause bad things occasionally but are glaring and need to be fixed when you look at the code. Why yes, I ran into that and I had to tread carefully to get the thing accepted since that baby mentallity showed up.)
I don't mean to be yet another person ripping on Scrum. However the worst person I can think of is a manager who thinks "Scrum Master" is what they call "Project Manager" in scrum. (As in he'd assign people to tasks, expect you to report to him, block the stand up to ask questions on your status. Oh, and he was in charge of writing down what the tasks were and updating them so at the start of the scrum you couldn't even figure out what you were supposed to be working on. Oh, and he didn't actually get rid of roadblocks.) Just personal experience but the SM can be a major choke point if it's done badly. (Our current SM just gets the hell out of the way which is an improvement.)
The problem isn't blood cancer it's graft versus host disease like this poster is talking about. Here's the link to the wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_marrow_transplant
To put it bluntly a bone marrow transplant(which what that other guy was talking about) is one of the most dangerous medical procedure you can go through with a high probability of death as a side effect. (IE between 10-20 percent. None of that 1 in 10000 crap stuff. We're talking 1 in 10 or 1 in 5 die from the treatment in a couple of weeks from the treatment.)
Those scientists have to look on the plus side.(Wow, double entre there) So wait a second, I don't want to hear their bitching anyways and fatty foods will help me forget so what was the problem exactly?
I mean ok this is an annecdote an all but lets use me as an example. I almost didn't graduate from college because I couldn't pass the foreign language requirement. My school pretty much insists that there is no such thing as being bad at languages and that everybody can do it and it always benefits people who take it.(I don't know if they're just wrong or lying through their teeth.) The fact I could take the same course multiple times, fail repeatedly, and actually do worse the more I studied suggests that no, some people actually don't have a talent for it despite what they think. (Since you'd think the more I worked at it the better I'd do which didn't happen. For what it's worth I only managed to graduate when I got to take the reading version of the course. Yes I passed that one on the first try. Actually I should have just cheated to pass the course but some of us were naive and idealistic when we were young.) It's weird since I've taken and done well in physics and chem which are considered hard.(Yet that course was not considered particularly intellectually difficult.)
Why is immediate satifaction better? Because self denial might pay off in the future, immediate gratification always pays off now. (Ok, so I've heard it said about procrastination.
I mean the understand of science is so bad that I've read stuff from science journalists where it was obvious the idiot that wrote it didn't get things like conservation of matter, light contains energy, and catalysts. (I mean really basic stuff from idiots on MSN and other major news sources.) Hell I still get annoyed by morons that talk about a "belief" in evolution. (It's science, it's not supposed to be about belief.)
The heavy power brick with the plug built into it. So many systems have done this and it's just such a pain in the ass. (I think most of us have had experience of what a bad design this really is. Fortunately all the current systems try to get rid of it and use a plug.)
Quoting Carson "I did not know that."
Seriously, that's a good criticism of the adapter. (Not the "oh it's different so we'll whine about it") If the writer of the article had point that out I wouldn't have complained. (Especially since he missed stuff like the PSX not having a soft reset, the DC controller, the GD-Rom, and flakey analog in Sony systems just to name a few.)
No soft reset on the playstation. Some games had their own but it wasn't required. That was annoying since if you hit the reset button on the system the PSX took quite a while to boot up. (Saturn had start+A+B+C for what it's worth which would always take you to the title screen.)
I mean seriously that design was better than the 2600. You didn't have to go behind the tv to take care of things and only one wire came from the TV to your game system. (Of course the one place most likely to have a wall socket was behind the TV.) They made it more convenient with less clutter. Why did people complain? Because they couldn't swap wires from the 2600 to the 5200 because it wasn't compatible.(Which you could do with other systems.) Yes, the reason people complained was because they were too stupid to figure out you could just chain the switch boxes which is what I did.
Because at least with my 2600 the solid plastic center part would snap and joystick would no longer work. Actually atari sort replacements but it was pretty easy to take the controller apart and swap out the part.
So of course there's the already mentioned fact of upscaling. (Which is nice for those of us with HDTV's. It also means I don't have to make sure that my TV is correctly set up to display an SD signal in 4:3 or anything, the PS3 takes care of that.) Then there's the issue of clutter. Since it is BC I don't need yet another system hooked up to my TV. Of course this also means I don't need yet another set of peripherals. Which reminds me, the plugs on the analog controllers on the PS1 and PS2 would always end up getting dirty. This meant that after I had my system for awhile the connection between the controller and the system would get flakey and drop back to digital mode. Guess what, since there's no wires on the PS3 controllers this doesn't happen. (I tried cleaning them with alcohol but they'd start screwing up after a couple of weeks.) Oh, another advantage with the PS3 is I don't need save cards anymore. (The PS3 just uses hard drive space.)
Really, it is a pretty slick piece of work to play PS2 games on it.
And by that simulate the old 80's TV show CHiPs in the game GTA San Andreas. Basically I get a car, take it up on the highway and then stop and park sideways across one side of high way. Then pretty much I start with a traffic jam but quickly cars coming down the high way ram into the back of other cars. (Just like CHiPs it turns into a 10 car pile up.) Finally I detonate my stopped car which hopefully sends up that car pile up in a bunch of explosions, just like CHiPs.
Which is the one I have as well. The first 2 PS3's, the 20GB and 60GB both played PS2 games and both had the complete hardware to do so. (Newer PS3 were missing one of the big chips but still could pull it off. Current systems don't have any of the old PS2 hardware which is why they arn't BC.)
Anyway I hope they put BC back in. (Either that or I hope my PS3 doesn't break as much as my 360.)
So he knows what to say to pretty much every question the other side is going to ask. The defendant shouldn't be thinking, he should just be repeating whatever pat answers his lawyer has worked with him to be the "proper" answer. (I'm not saying perjury but you can prep people to say stuff that wouldn't be that damaging while not actually lying.)
I don't miss the fact it usually took years for a game to get translated by them. (Oh, and I actually liked the humor they'd inject. True it wasn't in the original game but it usually got a chuckle out of me.)
Slashdot Mirror
Mostly because I still have some old GB/GBC games that do not play in the DS at all.(I'm a little surprised NoA didn't put out a DS card that would let me play those titles.)
"Hey, lets get idiots to be science journalists" didn't work so well. You know, science journalists that don't get conservation of matter, that light is a form of energy, or don't get the 2nd law of thermodynamics at all.
The state house (Where they do their business) has a inappropriately (or appropriately name) entrance on the side. It's called "The General Hooker Entrance". (And no, I'm not making that one up. Just google it.) Here's a photo link http://www.madspedersen.com/photos/1267_large.jpg
The late 30 year old version of me.(I know, I know, it's just my word on that of course but yes I'm old for a techie.) Some how I don't think my position, which has remained unchanged for 20 years, is going to change drastically in under 10. (I thought their position was horse shit when I heard it at 18 and I still think it is today, decades later.)
Lets you take what you want for a change. Why yes, I'm pretty sure the sciences are the thing for me and I would have liked to take more things like chem and bio and not all that foreign languages you dirt bags shoved down my throat, never mind the humanities. Turns out being the worlds foremost expert in me I was pretty much spot on with that assessment before college. (Why yes, I am a little bitter about my college experience. Why do you ask?)
The one that says working code is more important than extensive documentation. I know what that says but I know how developers will interpret it, "Don't worry about docs." There's the problem, the last thing you want to do is encourage a developer to do is skimp on the documentation since that's their natural tendency anyways. I've never met a developer where I thought "Wow, he or she documents too much." (To be fair some devs are decent about docs) It's maddening when you have to come back to the code for some updates and nobody knows what it's supposed to do since nobody bothered to write it down. (Let alone extend it.)
[sarcasm on] I mean next thing you tell us is that we should break up long blocks of code into separate functions instead of writing 1 function that's between 1 and 2 thousand lines long.(Or that sections of repeated code should be replaced with a well named function.) Oh, and that we should give variables sensible names, not stuff like naming a stack "q". [sarcasm off]
You know how babies if they can't see something they don't know it exists? Scrum is like that. Features and fixes that can't be seen are often treated as if they don't exist while the methodolgy goes nuts over things you can see. (Like fixing threading issues which might be hard to notice on the outside world because they only cause bad things occasionally but are glaring and need to be fixed when you look at the code. Why yes, I ran into that and I had to tread carefully to get the thing accepted since that baby mentallity showed up.)
I don't mean to be yet another person ripping on Scrum. However the worst person I can think of is a manager who thinks "Scrum Master" is what they call "Project Manager" in scrum. (As in he'd assign people to tasks, expect you to report to him, block the stand up to ask questions on your status. Oh, and he was in charge of writing down what the tasks were and updating them so at the start of the scrum you couldn't even figure out what you were supposed to be working on. Oh, and he didn't actually get rid of roadblocks.) Just personal experience but the SM can be a major choke point if it's done badly. (Our current SM just gets the hell out of the way which is an improvement.)
Until the Valhalla edition of the 360 comes out? (Supposedly comes out next year)
The problem isn't blood cancer it's graft versus host disease like this poster is talking about. Here's the link to the wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_marrow_transplant To put it bluntly a bone marrow transplant(which what that other guy was talking about) is one of the most dangerous medical procedure you can go through with a high probability of death as a side effect. (IE between 10-20 percent. None of that 1 in 10000 crap stuff. We're talking 1 in 10 or 1 in 5 die from the treatment in a couple of weeks from the treatment.)
Those scientists have to look on the plus side.(Wow, double entre there) So wait a second, I don't want to hear their bitching anyways and fatty foods will help me forget so what was the problem exactly?
I mean ok this is an annecdote an all but lets use me as an example. I almost didn't graduate from college because I couldn't pass the foreign language requirement. My school pretty much insists that there is no such thing as being bad at languages and that everybody can do it and it always benefits people who take it.(I don't know if they're just wrong or lying through their teeth.) The fact I could take the same course multiple times, fail repeatedly, and actually do worse the more I studied suggests that no, some people actually don't have a talent for it despite what they think. (Since you'd think the more I worked at it the better I'd do which didn't happen. For what it's worth I only managed to graduate when I got to take the reading version of the course. Yes I passed that one on the first try. Actually I should have just cheated to pass the course but some of us were naive and idealistic when we were young.) It's weird since I've taken and done well in physics and chem which are considered hard.(Yet that course was not considered particularly intellectually difficult.)
Why is immediate satifaction better? Because self denial might pay off in the future, immediate gratification always pays off now. (Ok, so I've heard it said about procrastination.
I mean the understand of science is so bad that I've read stuff from science journalists where it was obvious the idiot that wrote it didn't get things like conservation of matter, light contains energy, and catalysts. (I mean really basic stuff from idiots on MSN and other major news sources.) Hell I still get annoyed by morons that talk about a "belief" in evolution. (It's science, it's not supposed to be about belief.)
The heavy power brick with the plug built into it. So many systems have done this and it's just such a pain in the ass. (I think most of us have had experience of what a bad design this really is. Fortunately all the current systems try to get rid of it and use a plug.)
Quoting Carson "I did not know that." Seriously, that's a good criticism of the adapter. (Not the "oh it's different so we'll whine about it") If the writer of the article had point that out I wouldn't have complained. (Especially since he missed stuff like the PSX not having a soft reset, the DC controller, the GD-Rom, and flakey analog in Sony systems just to name a few.)
No soft reset on the playstation. Some games had their own but it wasn't required. That was annoying since if you hit the reset button on the system the PSX took quite a while to boot up. (Saturn had start+A+B+C for what it's worth which would always take you to the title screen.)
I mean seriously that design was better than the 2600. You didn't have to go behind the tv to take care of things and only one wire came from the TV to your game system. (Of course the one place most likely to have a wall socket was behind the TV.) They made it more convenient with less clutter. Why did people complain? Because they couldn't swap wires from the 2600 to the 5200 because it wasn't compatible.(Which you could do with other systems.) Yes, the reason people complained was because they were too stupid to figure out you could just chain the switch boxes which is what I did.
Because at least with my 2600 the solid plastic center part would snap and joystick would no longer work. Actually atari sort replacements but it was pretty easy to take the controller apart and swap out the part.
So of course there's the already mentioned fact of upscaling. (Which is nice for those of us with HDTV's. It also means I don't have to make sure that my TV is correctly set up to display an SD signal in 4:3 or anything, the PS3 takes care of that.) Then there's the issue of clutter. Since it is BC I don't need yet another system hooked up to my TV. Of course this also means I don't need yet another set of peripherals. Which reminds me, the plugs on the analog controllers on the PS1 and PS2 would always end up getting dirty. This meant that after I had my system for awhile the connection between the controller and the system would get flakey and drop back to digital mode. Guess what, since there's no wires on the PS3 controllers this doesn't happen. (I tried cleaning them with alcohol but they'd start screwing up after a couple of weeks.) Oh, another advantage with the PS3 is I don't need save cards anymore. (The PS3 just uses hard drive space.) Really, it is a pretty slick piece of work to play PS2 games on it.
And by that simulate the old 80's TV show CHiPs in the game GTA San Andreas. Basically I get a car, take it up on the highway and then stop and park sideways across one side of high way. Then pretty much I start with a traffic jam but quickly cars coming down the high way ram into the back of other cars. (Just like CHiPs it turns into a 10 car pile up.) Finally I detonate my stopped car which hopefully sends up that car pile up in a bunch of explosions, just like CHiPs.
Which is the one I have as well. The first 2 PS3's, the 20GB and 60GB both played PS2 games and both had the complete hardware to do so. (Newer PS3 were missing one of the big chips but still could pull it off. Current systems don't have any of the old PS2 hardware which is why they arn't BC.) Anyway I hope they put BC back in. (Either that or I hope my PS3 doesn't break as much as my 360.)
So he knows what to say to pretty much every question the other side is going to ask. The defendant shouldn't be thinking, he should just be repeating whatever pat answers his lawyer has worked with him to be the "proper" answer. (I'm not saying perjury but you can prep people to say stuff that wouldn't be that damaging while not actually lying.)
I don't miss the fact it usually took years for a game to get translated by them. (Oh, and I actually liked the humor they'd inject. True it wasn't in the original game but it usually got a chuckle out of me.)