The number of memorable gaming experiences I've had with the Dreamcast are so numerous they are hard to count. I still remember visiting a friend who had a DC, playing an import copy of Jet Set Radio and deciding pretty much right then that I had to buy one. But in addition to that revolutionary game there were so many others:
Virtual-On OT is giant robots fighting by Sega! How can you go wrong with this... you can't! The RPG selection was pretty thin but with Skies of Arcadia and Grandia II the quality more than made up for the quantity. Party games like Ooga-Booga and Chu Chu Rocket still stand tall alongside newer offerings like Mario Kart DD and Wario Ware.
But the most memorable experience for me has to be Bangai-O. One of the best shooters and indeed games I have ever played. The counter-attack concept Treasure came up with there is so innovative and totally satisfying I can't believe no one else has tried to imitate it... the tension of deliberately getting into a dire situation so you could unleash a 400 missile barrage to clear a screen is exhilirating. Each level design was always zany and clever, while the final boss was so ridiculously difficult that you had to use every single trick you'd picked up along the way to survive for more than a few seconds.
One thing I know is as long as my DC keeps working I'll keep playing it, no matter what flashy new technology is out there.
How is this insightful? It's analagous to saying they should change the name of the internal combustion engine because combustion sounds dangerous. They are called fuel cells because it's an electrochemical cell (like those that make up conventional batteries) that can be continuously refuelled instead of being recharged. Using some market-speak terminology to placate alarmists will only confuse most people and will have no effect on those who are paranoid about new technology.
As someone who works with FC's every day, and has given numerous talks and public presentations about them, fuel cells tend to elicit curiosity and excitement rather than fear and terror. As far as I'm concerned public perception is not going to be the stumbling block to commercializing them.
(Of course the thought of everyone switching to fuel cells might elicit terror in the halls of Honda or Duracell, but I can't speak to that personally.)
I have owned a dell laptop for three years now and it has worked perfectly the entire time. The only problem that I had was a recall for the AC adaptor, and they simply mailed me a new one. I also know several others with Dells who have had similar experiences, and they constantly get good reviews on comp.sys.laptops. Their laptops have won the PC magazine "torture test" for something like five years running.
There are plenty of laptop makers out there that sell shoddy product, but from my experience, and those of many others, Dell isn't one of them.
I don't think you've got all the facts right here:
This isn't the WTO, this is NAFTA. It has nothing to do with the UN or the WTO.
All of the stories I've seen have companies suing the US (not California) government for damages. This is compensation for potential lost revenue, not an attempt to force a change of any law.
It's impossible to petition the WTO to turn over a ban instituted by a government. How are they going to enforce it? The WTO could ask (for the law to be overturned or damages), but they have no method of ensuring cooperation other than allowing the levying of tariffs by other countries. This doesn't work for companies, especially those with domestically based branches and competitors.
I really don't care what Stallman thinks the operating system should be called, it's entirely his perogative. However, I think it's extremely arrogant and egotistical of him to insist everyone else call it that as well. It's not like anyone's infringing on a trademark or copyright, and for him to infringe on my freedom to call it anything I want irks me. If I want to make a distribution and call it "GNU-SUCKS/Linux" there's nothing he can do to stop me as long as I redistribute the source code.
The whole "It's a GNU system with a Linux kernel until HURD comes out" strikes me a so insulting and rude I can't believe people still talk to him. It seems to me he's effectively dissing all of the programming work of Linus, Alan and the thousands of other kernel hackers. "You're programming is pretty good as a stop-gap measure, but we're going to make a kernel eventually, so you should name your system after us."
Now, I understand that the GNU tools are very important and a remarkable technical achievement, but RMS is acting like a bully, and as far as I'm concerned that invalidates any moral crusade he's on to gain recognition for the FSF or GNU. If they want to make a "GNU Inside" sticker, good for them, I don't plan on putting it on anything until the GNU people, and especially Stallman, mature by leaps and bounds.
Using the critical magnetic field to turn the gate on and off would work, but it's hardly a new phenomenon, so why would it suddenly appear as a news article?
Also, how would you produce gates of this type on a microchip? I'm not terrbily famliar with the process, but it seems that it would cause considerable difficulty to try and do this at a nanometer scale. Perhaps that is part of their "discovery"?
Yeah, but you don't have to be from the U.S. to file for a patent at the U.S. patent office. It is often advantageous for Canadians to do so because that way they gain access to a monopoly in a bigger market. The USPTO's policy will stifle innovation in many places, not merely the states.
Slashdot Mirror
The number of memorable gaming experiences I've had with the Dreamcast are so numerous they are hard to count. I still remember visiting a friend who had a DC, playing an import copy of Jet Set Radio and deciding pretty much right then that I had to buy one. But in addition to that revolutionary game there were so many others:
Virtual-On OT is giant robots fighting by Sega! How can you go wrong with this... you can't! The RPG selection was pretty thin but with Skies of Arcadia and Grandia II the quality more than made up for the quantity. Party games like Ooga-Booga and Chu Chu Rocket still stand tall alongside newer offerings like Mario Kart DD and Wario Ware.
But the most memorable experience for me has to be Bangai-O. One of the best shooters and indeed games I have ever played. The counter-attack concept Treasure came up with there is so innovative and totally satisfying I can't believe no one else has tried to imitate it... the tension of deliberately getting into a dire situation so you could unleash a 400 missile barrage to clear a screen is exhilirating. Each level design was always zany and clever, while the final boss was so ridiculously difficult that you had to use every single trick you'd picked up along the way to survive for more than a few seconds.
One thing I know is as long as my DC keeps working I'll keep playing it, no matter what flashy new technology is out there.
How is this insightful? It's analagous to saying they should change the name of the internal combustion engine because combustion sounds dangerous. They are called fuel cells because it's an electrochemical cell (like those that make up conventional batteries) that can be continuously refuelled instead of being recharged. Using some market-speak terminology to placate alarmists will only confuse most people and will have no effect on those who are paranoid about new technology.
As someone who works with FC's every day, and has given numerous talks and public presentations about them, fuel cells tend to elicit curiosity and excitement rather than fear and terror. As far as I'm concerned public perception is not going to be the stumbling block to commercializing them.
(Of course the thought of everyone switching to fuel cells might elicit terror in the halls of Honda or Duracell, but I can't speak to that personally.)
I have owned a dell laptop for three years now and it has worked perfectly the entire time. The only problem that I had was a recall for the AC adaptor, and they simply mailed me a new one. I also know several others with Dells who have had similar experiences, and they constantly get good reviews on comp.sys.laptops. Their laptops have won the PC magazine "torture test" for something like five years running.
There are plenty of laptop makers out there that sell shoddy product, but from my experience, and those of many others, Dell isn't one of them.
MBG
I don't think you've got all the facts right here:
MBG
I really don't care what Stallman thinks the operating system should be called, it's entirely his perogative. However, I think it's extremely arrogant and egotistical of him to insist everyone else call it that as well. It's not like anyone's infringing on a trademark or copyright, and for him to infringe on my freedom to call it anything I want irks me. If I want to make a distribution and call it "GNU-SUCKS/Linux" there's nothing he can do to stop me as long as I redistribute the source code.
The whole "It's a GNU system with a Linux kernel until HURD comes out" strikes me a so insulting and rude I can't believe people still talk to him. It seems to me he's effectively dissing all of the programming work of Linus, Alan and the thousands of other kernel hackers. "You're programming is pretty good as a stop-gap measure, but we're going to make a kernel eventually, so you should name your system after us."
Now, I understand that the GNU tools are very important and a remarkable technical achievement, but RMS is acting like a bully, and as far as I'm concerned that invalidates any moral crusade he's on to gain recognition for the FSF or GNU. If they want to make a "GNU Inside" sticker, good for them, I don't plan on putting it on anything until the GNU people, and especially Stallman, mature by leaps and bounds.
Using the critical magnetic field to turn the gate on and off would work, but it's hardly a new phenomenon, so why would it suddenly appear as a news article?
Also, how would you produce gates of this type on a microchip? I'm not terrbily famliar with the process, but it seems that it would cause considerable difficulty to try and do this at a nanometer scale. Perhaps that is part of their "discovery"?
Yeah, but you don't have to be from the U.S. to file for a patent at the U.S. patent office. It is often advantageous for Canadians to do so because that way they gain access to a monopoly in a bigger market. The USPTO's policy will stifle innovation in many places, not merely the states.