Edit: I posted that hastily, wish I could delete it, makes it sound like it's just greed, when actually the guy might have a reasonable point that I didn't bother to figure out.
It's basically true either way, people aren't in the power business as a charity, it didn't really need to be stated, but that's my job as captain obvious.
we didn't have cell phones. beepers were just starting to appear when i graduated high-school. we never had any problems alerting in the event of an emergency. we had fire alarms, PA system, and ye olde fashioned telephones in every classroom.
Me too, but to be fair, by the time we got to high school, over 70% of my classmates had been killed by fires, cholera, and indian raids. Cell phones would have really helped alert us as to the dangers so we could circle the wagons.
I feel like we're getting off on tangents. I was saying if anyone's upset about the next gen of consoles being delayed, they probably should have switched to PCs. "So players who want to play newly released games have to upgrade to a new platform" is beside the point, the new platform isn't coming for a while.
What's the PC alternative to the Super Smash Bros. series?
I specifically mentioned first party games. They're never going to be released on a competitor's console or harware. That's not a problem with PC games, that's inherent to console makers making games: they're going to be exclusives. There are PC exclusive games as well.
And again, tangents. I wasn't saying PC gaming is the ultimate, all I was saying is that gamers who are going to be upset because the next round of consoles aren't going to be for a while and graphics aren't going to take a jump again should consider the PC.
And the whole PC gaming thing itself was an aside to my point of "delay the next gen of consoles forever, it doesn't matter to most people."
So fans of console-style genres, like party games and fighting games, can't easily switch to PCs unless they want to stay in emulators all the time.
That's a good point, but I was saying that people who just want newer, better hardware should switch, and in general it seems that people who want to be at the cutting edge of hardware aren't big fans of party games. Fighting games maybe, but I'd argue that many fighters don't really need to have graphics that max out the hardware. Especially 2d fighting games, to my eyes at least 10 year old 2d fighters hardly show their age. Plus there are games released for PC, street fighter 4 was.
Anyway, the bigger evil there is that all games aren't released on all systems (yes, aside from 1st party titles). You mentioned that consoles generally have bigger screens, that to me seems like a cheap excuse not to port a game to the PC, since there are still people who would play it.
Right, software makes or breaks a console, but at the end of the day, previous generations have been defined by the hardware. As in, you'd say "Final fantasy 7 and 9 were two of the games I played most that generation." Graphically and otherwise, they were very different, but they were still the same generation because they were still on the same console. They're how everyone marked the progress in console videogames.
Microsoft isn't so hot to waste more money on developing a new console, partly because of the wii's success, they think they can make more money by making games aimed at a wider audience rather than advancing the hardware. It makes sense then that they are going to try to run in place while their PR machine claims it's actually moving forward.
I'm fine with the current generation (hardware) lasting longer, I'm in no rush to buy the next expensive console and might not bother. I know other people think that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, and want the next generation to hurry up, but I'd submit that these people should probably have switched to PCs years ago, that they should give me the money they'd waste on a new console, and that they should remember how boring a new console's library typically is during the launch year or two. So I'm okay with it, but this is pure spin on MS's part, trying to take something that is a disappointment to some people and trying to turn it into a positive for them. It's not really the next generation, if you're not putting out new generations of hardware, then there's no reason to be calling it a "generation."
How about stop stupid feel good programs that do nothing but create stupid rules that cost nothing but money on things that don't work.
Is there a list of "stupid feel good programs" that everyone agrees are wastes of money? Do you happen to have any examples? While it's pretty obvious the budget needs to get cut, I have no idea what works and what doesn't in my own state, let alone arizona.
Just telling the government "Reduce the budget" is a little like telling a child "be good." Good message, relieves some stress, but they need concrete examples or else it's going to be ineffective. If you tell the government to cut the budget and don't tell them how, they're going to take the path of least resistance, which is very often not the best path.
You could have a state park service that is the poster child for how state parks services should run, as efficient as possible, consistently coming up with ways to cut costs as much as possible while providing excellent service, but they're too busy doing their job to make friends in the capitol. Maybe the state trooper office is rampant with corruption and waste, but the head of that department spends most of his time boozing it up with state legislators. The parks service is going to get cut if we just give politicians the command "Cut budget."
Is it because the culture prohibits all contact with members of other sex except in marriage, resulting in testosterone fueled violence or is it the strict adherence to some questionable material in the holy book?
Doubt it. I didn't get laid as a high schooler, yet I managed to channel my angst into electronica and FPS* instead of blowing up stuff or religion or some messed up combination thereof.
(* yes, it was a positive feedback loop, thanks for not pointing that out at the time...)
I know someone who spent years in jail because those Romeo18 and Juliet17 laws were determined to be inapplicable to Romeo18 and Romeo17.
Frankly, I think going back in time a year and doing anything with yourself is a gross violation of the laws of physics. Reguardless of your age or name.
Nuclear power has already proven to be the safest means of producing large quantities of energy, even if you include the most EXTREME and exaggerated outcomes of all nuclear catastrophes combined (lets even throw in Hiroshima and Nagasaki). Of course, you'd have to include all the people who die in the production of coal or oil over the course of the centuries
Coal and oil have also been around a lot longer and had more chances to kill people, and has always been more widely used than nuclear. Not exactly comparing apples to apples there.
We are just unfortunate enough to live in a time where the people in power grew up under the shadow of nuclear annihilation. This child hood trauma has caused the lefty environmentalists to forsake the cleanest possible energy alternative available that allows us to maintain our standards of living.
Yep, that's it. It's definitely not that we, the crazy environmental lefties, hear you ranting about it and blaming us for keeping down the perfect energy source, so we decide to oppose it just to annoy you, like we do on gun control.
There's also a fair amount of hating america and wanting to turn everyone gay that goes into our opposition to nuclear power.
I thought it would be obvious that I wasn't talking about the merge lane. So yes, thank you for pointing out an exception to my rant, I suppose if you're taking a fundamentalist approach to my post I did overstate things, there are exceptions.
Another exception: the left turn lane, or really most roads aside from highways and freeways.
Yet another exception: if there is an exit on the left.
Another one: if you're on a highway and traffic at a crawl, you're in the left lane when it stops completely and the other one starts inching along past you.
I also have to point out that you DIDN'T ignore the countries where they drive on the other side of the road, you in fact DID make a "insensitive clod" statement.
The leaked information could have wound up on a website, blog, or FTP server, and I'm almost sure nobody would be saying that those technologies should be banned.
Personally, there's one rule I'd like ingrained in every driver's head: never match speeds with someone in the lane next to you
I think that's a pipe dream. You know what rule I want to beat into every driver in every flyover state?
(rage bubbling just thinking about it)
DON'T FUCKING GO SLOWER THAN THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC IF YOU'RE IN THE PASSING LANE
I'd be happy if they learned that. If you find yourself in the left lane, and the traffic in the right lane is going faster, do one of a few things -learn to use the gas pedal -get into the right lane as soon as possible -find the nearest cliff and drive off of it -wait for me to ram you off the road and kill all the children in your backseat you appear to be thinking of
I know the speed limit says what it says, and it's good to go that speed. Good for you. If there are people who are not going that speed, you do not try to force them to go the speed limit, that's dangerous for everyone on the road. If someone is passsing you on the right, that should be a major wakeup call to you: you're causing other people to do dangerous things. I've been guilty of this myself at least once or twice, just get over into the right lane ASAP and feel stupid about it, because you were in fact being stupid. Numerous times I've seen drivers create slowdowns on what would otherwise be mostly empty highways because of this. Always in the midwest though, presumably because elsewhere they quickly get shot.
Disclaimer: please do not take this as actual advocacy of killing anyone, even drivers who do this.
But even if you're right, that does not mean we should be completely carefree about inflicting harm against creatures that can feel pain or fear or both, merely because they're not human.
Carefree? You've never had to submit a proposal to an IRB.
Tossing off one-word yes/no responses to that guy's questions makes it sound like there is nothing further to discuss, when in fact the issue of animal testing is a hotly contested one and not so easily answered.
-Because- it is so hotly contested -elsewhere-, and because the subject was spinal cord injuries, not the ethics of animal models for research, I think one word answers are more than sufficient. It's kind of like how any time a story is posted about human genetics, and someone mentions evolution, some creationist is always there wanting to get into an extended debate about how evolution is "just a theory" using the same old arguments that have been floating around since Darwin's time. Sure, they may have something resembling a point, but there is no shortage of places to discuss that, bringing it up when it's really off topic is just trolling.
The trick is making a small enough boat that it can actually make the voyage. The other tricky part is defining yokohama as yokohama, and hamburg as very very slightly north of wherever you designated yokohama.
Same thing in other areas: You don't need to deal with an IRB to raise feedlot pigs. And, for human testing, you (ostensibly at any rate) need informed consent, and various safeguards, IRB oversight, etc. If you need to spray your nerve toxin/probable human carcinogen on your crops, you just hire some undocumented mexican for $3.50 an hour, and throw him away if he breaks...
I don't know about an IRB, but there's several organizations with other 3 letter acronyms who would be on your case about that last one depending on the specifics.
Makes it sound almost like an animal hospital taking in injured creatures and saving them with the food dye.
Says the troll who will still be eating all the blue M&Ms he can stuff down his mouth the next time he has a spinal cord injury.
Anyway, they aren't trying to pull a fast one and slide that by you. It should be pretty obvious that they're breaking rats' backs, they're not denying it or trying to hide it.
Slashdot Mirror
Edit: I posted that hastily, wish I could delete it, makes it sound like it's just greed, when actually the guy might have a reasonable point that I didn't bother to figure out.
It's basically true either way, people aren't in the power business as a charity, it didn't really need to be stated, but that's my job as captain obvious.
Can someone explain this guy's logic to me
Boiled down to it's core, it is "I want money!"
we didn't have cell phones. beepers were just starting to appear when i graduated high-school. we never had any problems alerting in the event of an emergency. we had fire alarms, PA system, and ye olde fashioned telephones in every classroom.
Me too, but to be fair, by the time we got to high school, over 70% of my classmates had been killed by fires, cholera, and indian raids. Cell phones would have really helped alert us as to the dangers so we could circle the wagons.
I feel like we're getting off on tangents. I was saying if anyone's upset about the next gen of consoles being delayed, they probably should have switched to PCs. "So players who want to play newly released games have to upgrade to a new platform" is beside the point, the new platform isn't coming for a while.
What's the PC alternative to the Super Smash Bros. series?
I specifically mentioned first party games. They're never going to be released on a competitor's console or harware. That's not a problem with PC games, that's inherent to console makers making games: they're going to be exclusives. There are PC exclusive games as well.
And again, tangents. I wasn't saying PC gaming is the ultimate, all I was saying is that gamers who are going to be upset because the next round of consoles aren't going to be for a while and graphics aren't going to take a jump again should consider the PC.
And the whole PC gaming thing itself was an aside to my point of "delay the next gen of consoles forever, it doesn't matter to most people."
It was required reading for my "pre-authoritarian dictator" major.
So fans of console-style genres, like party games and fighting games, can't easily switch to PCs unless they want to stay in emulators all the time.
That's a good point, but I was saying that people who just want newer, better hardware should switch, and in general it seems that people who want to be at the cutting edge of hardware aren't big fans of party games. Fighting games maybe, but I'd argue that many fighters don't really need to have graphics that max out the hardware. Especially 2d fighting games, to my eyes at least 10 year old 2d fighters hardly show their age. Plus there are games released for PC, street fighter 4 was.
Anyway, the bigger evil there is that all games aren't released on all systems (yes, aside from 1st party titles). You mentioned that consoles generally have bigger screens, that to me seems like a cheap excuse not to port a game to the PC, since there are still people who would play it.
*puts on Twilight Zone music*
Human beings are the alien probe!
Oh my god! You just blew my mind... you have "the twilight zone" theme song ready to go?!? THAT'S CRAZY!!!
Right, software makes or breaks a console, but at the end of the day, previous generations have been defined by the hardware. As in, you'd say "Final fantasy 7 and 9 were two of the games I played most that generation." Graphically and otherwise, they were very different, but they were still the same generation because they were still on the same console. They're how everyone marked the progress in console videogames.
Microsoft isn't so hot to waste more money on developing a new console, partly because of the wii's success, they think they can make more money by making games aimed at a wider audience rather than advancing the hardware. It makes sense then that they are going to try to run in place while their PR machine claims it's actually moving forward.
I'm fine with the current generation (hardware) lasting longer, I'm in no rush to buy the next expensive console and might not bother. I know other people think that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, and want the next generation to hurry up, but I'd submit that these people should probably have switched to PCs years ago, that they should give me the money they'd waste on a new console, and that they should remember how boring a new console's library typically is during the launch year or two. So I'm okay with it, but this is pure spin on MS's part, trying to take something that is a disappointment to some people and trying to turn it into a positive for them. It's not really the next generation, if you're not putting out new generations of hardware, then there's no reason to be calling it a "generation."
Someone appears to have mistaken the "-1 troll" moderation for the "-1 disagrees with me about taxes" or "-1 ignorant of the matter at hand."
While I think his post was maybe... dumb... it doesn't seem like trolling to me.
How about stop stupid feel good programs that do nothing but create stupid rules that cost nothing but money on things that don't work.
Is there a list of "stupid feel good programs" that everyone agrees are wastes of money? Do you happen to have any examples? While it's pretty obvious the budget needs to get cut, I have no idea what works and what doesn't in my own state, let alone arizona.
Just telling the government "Reduce the budget" is a little like telling a child "be good." Good message, relieves some stress, but they need concrete examples or else it's going to be ineffective. If you tell the government to cut the budget and don't tell them how, they're going to take the path of least resistance, which is very often not the best path.
You could have a state park service that is the poster child for how state parks services should run, as efficient as possible, consistently coming up with ways to cut costs as much as possible while providing excellent service, but they're too busy doing their job to make friends in the capitol. Maybe the state trooper office is rampant with corruption and waste, but the head of that department spends most of his time boozing it up with state legislators. The parks service is going to get cut if we just give politicians the command "Cut budget."
we reject the idea that you should be able to drive your car forever.
Judging by American cars I've seen, I reject the idea that you could drive your car forever anyway.
Is it because the culture prohibits all contact with members of other sex except in marriage, resulting in testosterone fueled violence or is it the strict adherence to some questionable material in the holy book?
Doubt it. I didn't get laid as a high schooler, yet I managed to channel my angst into electronica and FPS* instead of blowing up stuff or religion or some messed up combination thereof.
(* yes, it was a positive feedback loop, thanks for not pointing that out at the time...)
I know someone who spent years in jail because those Romeo18 and Juliet17 laws were determined to be inapplicable to Romeo18 and Romeo17.
Frankly, I think going back in time a year and doing anything with yourself is a gross violation of the laws of physics. Reguardless of your age or name.
Like what is stated in TFS.
Yeah, I must be new here.
In the future if you find yourself accidentally RTFS/A, you can cover it up easily by including a simpsons or star trek reference.
Nuclear power has already proven to be the safest means of producing large quantities of energy, even if you include the most EXTREME and exaggerated outcomes of all nuclear catastrophes combined (lets even throw in Hiroshima and Nagasaki). Of course, you'd have to include all the people who die in the production of coal or oil over the course of the centuries
Coal and oil have also been around a lot longer and had more chances to kill people, and has always been more widely used than nuclear. Not exactly comparing apples to apples there.
We are just unfortunate enough to live in a time where the people in power grew up under the shadow of nuclear annihilation. This child hood trauma has caused the lefty environmentalists to forsake the cleanest possible energy alternative available that allows us to maintain our standards of living.
Yep, that's it. It's definitely not that we, the crazy environmental lefties, hear you ranting about it and blaming us for keeping down the perfect energy source, so we decide to oppose it just to annoy you, like we do on gun control.
There's also a fair amount of hating america and wanting to turn everyone gay that goes into our opposition to nuclear power.
I thought it would be obvious that I wasn't talking about the merge lane. So yes, thank you for pointing out an exception to my rant, I suppose if you're taking a fundamentalist approach to my post I did overstate things, there are exceptions.
Another exception: the left turn lane, or really most roads aside from highways and freeways.
Yet another exception: if there is an exit on the left.
Another one: if you're on a highway and traffic at a crawl, you're in the left lane when it stops completely and the other one starts inching along past you.
I also have to point out that you DIDN'T ignore the countries where they drive on the other side of the road, you in fact DID make a "insensitive clod" statement.
Suprise: lawmakers are once again clueless when it comes to technical issues that have been around for less than 100 years.
The real question is who is advising them so poorly?
The leaked information could have wound up on a website, blog, or FTP server, and I'm almost sure nobody would be saying that those technologies should be banned.
Don't give them any ideas!
Personally, there's one rule I'd like ingrained in every driver's head: never match speeds with someone in the lane next to you
I think that's a pipe dream. You know what rule I want to beat into every driver in every flyover state?
(rage bubbling just thinking about it)
DON'T FUCKING GO SLOWER THAN THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC IF YOU'RE IN THE PASSING LANE
I'd be happy if they learned that. If you find yourself in the left lane, and the traffic in the right lane is going faster, do one of a few things
-learn to use the gas pedal
-get into the right lane as soon as possible
-find the nearest cliff and drive off of it
-wait for me to ram you off the road and kill all the children in your backseat you appear to be thinking of
I know the speed limit says what it says, and it's good to go that speed. Good for you. If there are people who are not going that speed, you do not try to force them to go the speed limit, that's dangerous for everyone on the road. If someone is passsing you on the right, that should be a major wakeup call to you: you're causing other people to do dangerous things. I've been guilty of this myself at least once or twice, just get over into the right lane ASAP and feel stupid about it, because you were in fact being stupid. Numerous times I've seen drivers create slowdowns on what would otherwise be mostly empty highways because of this. Always in the midwest though, presumably because elsewhere they quickly get shot.
Disclaimer: please do not take this as actual advocacy of killing anyone, even drivers who do this.
But even if you're right, that does not mean we should be completely carefree about inflicting harm against creatures that can feel pain or fear or both, merely because they're not human.
Carefree? You've never had to submit a proposal to an IRB.
Tossing off one-word yes/no responses to that guy's questions makes it sound like there is nothing further to discuss, when in fact the issue of animal testing is a hotly contested one and not so easily answered.
-Because- it is so hotly contested -elsewhere-, and because the subject was spinal cord injuries, not the ethics of animal models for research, I think one word answers are more than sufficient. It's kind of like how any time a story is posted about human genetics, and someone mentions evolution, some creationist is always there wanting to get into an extended debate about how evolution is "just a theory" using the same old arguments that have been floating around since Darwin's time. Sure, they may have something resembling a point, but there is no shortage of places to discuss that, bringing it up when it's really off topic is just trolling.
The trick is making a small enough boat that it can actually make the voyage. The other tricky part is defining yokohama as yokohama, and hamburg as very very slightly north of wherever you designated yokohama.
Ask stupid questions, get stupid answers. I on the other hand only answered questions, I didn't ask if anyone disagreed.
Same thing in other areas: You don't need to deal with an IRB to raise feedlot pigs. And, for human testing, you (ostensibly at any rate) need informed consent, and various safeguards, IRB oversight, etc. If you need to spray your nerve toxin/probable human carcinogen on your crops, you just hire some undocumented mexican for $3.50 an hour, and throw him away if he breaks...
I don't know about an IRB, but there's several organizations with other 3 letter acronyms who would be on your case about that last one depending on the specifics.
Because I'm informing the AC as to the correct answers.
(Half joking there.)
Makes it sound almost like an animal hospital taking in injured creatures and saving them with the food dye.
Says the troll who will still be eating all the blue M&Ms he can stuff down his mouth the next time he has a spinal cord injury.
Anyway, they aren't trying to pull a fast one and slide that by you. It should be pretty obvious that they're breaking rats' backs, they're not denying it or trying to hide it.