Oops, I didn't mean to malign the wrong person there:-)
On a tangent, I know from my own research that half a braincell quickly becomes no braincell due to programmed cell death, therefore those devs quickly become the executive types.
But I'd bet 9 out of 10 companies probably don't really follow this advice.
I'm really at a loss as to why that is too. Since you actually work in the industry, could you give any educated guesses as to why specifically they don't? I mean, those all seem like issues every company runs into from time to time, but they usually seem to learn from it. Not the case with game developers. Maybe that's just flawed perception on my part and most companies of all flavors continually try to take the cheap way out?
stop making these huge, expensive games. go back to making small, experimental fun games.
it seems so simple.
I agree, you'd think that with the new controller and the lower graphical capabilities, game devs would have thought "well, all we can do with this is make something new and innovative, rather than doing the same thing we did last year with prettier graphics. Spend less money, but put a little more thought into it."
Most instead went with the tactic of "Lets put out games we already made for older systems with only the control scheme changed.
When we run out of old games, we'll just
1. slap something together in 2 hours that will hardly be playable 2. come up with a silly title like 'ninjabread man' 3. ??? maybe hope that enough people will accidentally buy our game instead of another game that... 4. Profit"
It's not like there's a shortage of good ideas for games on the wii, I honestly don't know why game makers are so resistant to new ideas when their current strategies aren't working.
Reggie Fils-Aime, chief marketing officer for Nintendo of America, says publishers of games for its Wii console need to sell one million units of a game to turn a profit, but the majority of games, analysts said, sell no more than 150,000 copies.
That's because the majority of wii games are shit that SHOULDN'T turn a profit. Why people aren't changing that I don't know. It seems to me that if you put out a crappy game for the wii and it sells crappy, that might tell you something.
(Hint: put out a good game for the wii for good sales)
Hypothetically, let's say that before I turned 18 and instantly became aware of the consequences of my actions, I took some photographs of myself masturbating, but never distributed them. It would be patently illegal for me to distribute (or even possess them) them now, despite my being well over the age of majority, because it would be child pornography.
You're assuming that both the students and the teachers have the competence, knowledge and understanding of the science in order to properly evaluate it, and that the teachers guiding such student evaluation do so in an honest and unbiased fashion.
... in TEXAS no less.
(To all you texans who may be offended at that, I'm in California, which is often even worse, so don't feel bad.)
This promotes proper investigation and revision and kills-off Bad Science through attrition.
...he says ALMOST 150 years after Darwin first published origin of species, as creationism/intelligent design is STILL trying to sneak in the back door of the classroom.
This promotes proper investigation and revision and kills-off Bad Science through attrition.
...he says over 150 years after Darwin first published origin of species, as creationism/intelligent design is STILL trying to sneak in the back door of the classroom.
they have been loosing money from their lawsuits last time i checked the ##'s
Who is going to tell them to stop? Someone who is going to be immediately sued, that's who.
Record companies: "Listen RIAA, we've decided your services are no longer needed, and we're not going to be giving you any more money. Frankly, you've been disgusting idiots, have eroded any sympathy we might have had in fighting piracy, and have been failing to even win in courts."
RIAA: "Under the digital millenium act, the patriot act, patent law, fourteen federal codes, and twenty one UN resolutions, we are presenting you with 4000 lawsuits to continue paying us and furthermore we have a court order to go fuck yourself."
Record companies: "Are you serious? This is absurd!"
RIAA: "We'll see you in court. Courts, plural, sorry. In every state at least 14 times."
That's pretty interesting, considering that it's already against the law in Canada to incite hatred on the basis of religion
So you can't be hypocritical when speaking to the UN? My god... someone should really tell the reps!
Anyway, of course Canada doesn't speak with one voice, the government that made the law in canada might not be the same one that is currently opposed to this proposal (and the current administration could be actively trying to repeal the canadian law for all I know), and there's obviously a few differences between canadian law and UN proposals. Granted, the main difference is that laws in canada actually are worth more than the paper they're printed on, but still...
If a fourth-rate power like Sudan can tell the UN to pound sand and get away with it then what is the point?
Are you speaking in euphamisms or did Sudan actually tell the UN to punch sand? Because if they actually said that, then I'm not sure any response would be apropriate. I'd apologize for being ignorant of what you're specifically talking about, and not even bothering to do a search, but hey, I'm American, if I don't know about it already then it's not important
The blurb does kind of make it sound that way, the third sentence in the actual science article cites a 1993 paper: "In vitro, infection with cell-associated HIV can be thousands fold more efficient than infection with cell-free virus."
the government sanctions the agricultural giant Monsanto to engineer a new strain of HIV virus with a limited lifespan beyond a certain generation with ability to recode the DNA as it progresses
Is that even feasible? I'm not a virologist, but adding a feature like this seems pretty complicated. Is there an easy way to do that, like adding one gene from another virus, or are you proposing we invent a whole new mechanism from scratch? Because we're really no good at that yet. Pretty much all the artificial genes that I'm familiar with are either genes we've copied from natural ones, or ones that are extremely rudimentary compared to natural ones.
And though I have no experience in either virology or terminator seeds, I'd guess that terminator seed technology in no way can be applied to HIV. Plants and viruses don't reproduce the same obviously. Notably, the plants you're talking about seem to be sterile hybrids, the first generation is all you get. You're talking about some delayed fuse thing that would have a dominant negative effect after several replications. And of course, viruses don't mate to make the next generation. So the technology to my knowledge doesn't exist at all.
Not saying it's impossible, just that I think we'd have better luck with other approaches. And of course, if you know of something specific to retroviruses that does what you're talking about, that's a different story. I'm not quite clear what "a limited lifespan beyond a certain generation with ability to recode the DNA as it progresses" but it seems like there would be simpler ways to create a dominant-negative acting virus than that. Expressing a truncated form of some viral coat protein might interfere with virus production for example.
But the biggest problem is definitely the "People voluntarily get infected with this new virus" part. They won't wear a condom but they'll be willing to get infected with HIV before they get it?
If you were trolling, good job, I really couldn't tell and wasted a lot of time.
Where were those people when RE4 was released (set in an, iirc, Spanish town), shouting that it was clearly racism to only shoot Spanish people!
A white guy was doing the shooting there. Of other white people. I guess the lesson is that fewer people have problems with white-on-white racism, possibly because that's not really racism. Why am I playing devil's advocate? Boredom.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure any dev with half a braincell did.
The people making the decision, however...
Oops, I didn't mean to malign the wrong person there :-)
On a tangent, I know from my own research that half a braincell quickly becomes no braincell due to programmed cell death, therefore those devs quickly become the executive types.
Good solution, because we're the only country to spy on their own citizens or internet users.
We are?!? Sweet, I'm moving away ASAP! On an unrelated note, why were several words of your post underlined and interspersed with [slashdot.org]???
They're politicians. It's their *job* to be assholes and douchbags.
Oddly enough, politicians say the same thing about people posting about politicians on the internet.
But I'd bet 9 out of 10 companies probably don't really follow this advice.
I'm really at a loss as to why that is too. Since you actually work in the industry, could you give any educated guesses as to why specifically they don't? I mean, those all seem like issues every company runs into from time to time, but they usually seem to learn from it. Not the case with game developers. Maybe that's just flawed perception on my part and most companies of all flavors continually try to take the cheap way out?
stop making these huge, expensive games.
go back to making small, experimental fun games.
it seems so simple.
I agree, you'd think that with the new controller and the lower graphical capabilities, game devs would have thought "well, all we can do with this is make something new and innovative, rather than doing the same thing we did last year with prettier graphics. Spend less money, but put a little more thought into it."
Most instead went with the tactic of "Lets put out games we already made for older systems with only the control scheme changed.
When we run out of old games, we'll just
1. slap something together in 2 hours that will hardly be playable
2. come up with a silly title like 'ninjabread man'
3. ??? maybe hope that enough people will accidentally buy our game instead of another game that...
4. Profit"
It's not like there's a shortage of good ideas for games on the wii, I honestly don't know why game makers are so resistant to new ideas when their current strategies aren't working.
Exactly
Reggie Fils-Aime, chief marketing officer for Nintendo of America, says publishers of games for its Wii console need to sell one million units of a game to turn a profit, but the majority of games, analysts said, sell no more than 150,000 copies.
That's because the majority of wii games are shit that SHOULDN'T turn a profit. Why people aren't changing that I don't know. It seems to me that if you put out a crappy game for the wii and it sells crappy, that might tell you something.
(Hint: put out a good game for the wii for good sales)
Cheaper way: set your desktop to that. A picture of a bare-chested, sweaty Freddy Mercury should clear things up.
You can't take the Huff seriously. IT's a political shill site.
As opposed to YOUR favorite political news blog, which is (unbiased/balanced/hard-hitting/other meaningless buzzword) news reporting.~
140 Characters? You can copyright 140 characters?
Dibs on the first 140 characters of all amino acid sequences of every human gene!
Hypothetically, let's say that before I turned 18 and instantly became aware of the consequences of my actions, I took some photographs of myself masturbating, but never distributed them. It would be patently illegal for me to distribute (or even possess them) them now, despite my being well over the age of majority, because it would be child pornography.
Plus, you know, that's really gross.
You're assuming that both the students and the teachers have the competence, knowledge and understanding of the science in order to properly evaluate it, and that the teachers guiding such student evaluation do so in an honest and unbiased fashion.
... in TEXAS no less.
(To all you texans who may be offended at that, I'm in California, which is often even worse, so don't feel bad.)
I hate to be the one to break it you all, but it's a cold, hard fact that evolution is basically just a theory at this point.
Aha, but THAT is just a theory! Specifically a wrong one. Where's your intelligent designer now!?!
This promotes proper investigation and revision and kills-off Bad Science through attrition.
...he says ALMOST 150 years after Darwin first published origin of species, as creationism/intelligent design is STILL trying to sneak in the back door of the classroom.
This promotes proper investigation and revision and kills-off Bad Science through attrition.
...he says over 150 years after Darwin first published origin of species, as creationism/intelligent design is STILL trying to sneak in the back door of the classroom.
they have been loosing money from their lawsuits last time i checked the ##'s
Who is going to tell them to stop? Someone who is going to be immediately sued, that's who.
Record companies: "Listen RIAA, we've decided your services are no longer needed, and we're not going to be giving you any more money. Frankly, you've been disgusting idiots, have eroded any sympathy we might have had in fighting piracy, and have been failing to even win in courts."
RIAA: "Under the digital millenium act, the patriot act, patent law, fourteen federal codes, and twenty one UN resolutions, we are presenting you with 4000 lawsuits to continue paying us and furthermore we have a court order to go fuck yourself."
Record companies: "Are you serious? This is absurd!"
RIAA: "We'll see you in court. Courts, plural, sorry. In every state at least 14 times."
That's pretty interesting, considering that it's already against the law in Canada to incite hatred on the basis of religion
So you can't be hypocritical when speaking to the UN? My god... someone should really tell the reps!
Anyway, of course Canada doesn't speak with one voice, the government that made the law in canada might not be the same one that is currently opposed to this proposal (and the current administration could be actively trying to repeal the canadian law for all I know), and there's obviously a few differences between canadian law and UN proposals. Granted, the main difference is that laws in canada actually are worth more than the paper they're printed on, but still...
If a fourth-rate power like Sudan can tell the UN to pound sand and get away with it then what is the point?
Are you speaking in euphamisms or did Sudan actually tell the UN to punch sand? Because if they actually said that, then I'm not sure any response would be apropriate. I'd apologize for being ignorant of what you're specifically talking about, and not even bothering to do a search, but hey, I'm American, if I don't know about it already then it's not important
(and that would ruin the joke).
Is it Luxembourg? It's Luxembourg isn't it.
Considering that it seems to have slipped right over your head, I can only assume that you don't know about Monsanto
Save me some time: where in there does it say anything about Monsanto dabbling in HIV research?
The blurb does kind of make it sound that way, the third sentence in the actual science article cites a 1993 paper: "In vitro, infection with cell-associated HIV can be thousands fold more efficient than infection with cell-free virus."
the government sanctions the agricultural giant Monsanto to engineer a new strain of HIV virus with a limited lifespan beyond a certain generation with ability to recode the DNA as it progresses
Is that even feasible? I'm not a virologist, but adding a feature like this seems pretty complicated. Is there an easy way to do that, like adding one gene from another virus, or are you proposing we invent a whole new mechanism from scratch? Because we're really no good at that yet. Pretty much all the artificial genes that I'm familiar with are either genes we've copied from natural ones, or ones that are extremely rudimentary compared to natural ones.
And though I have no experience in either virology or terminator seeds, I'd guess that terminator seed technology in no way can be applied to HIV. Plants and viruses don't reproduce the same obviously. Notably, the plants you're talking about seem to be sterile hybrids, the first generation is all you get. You're talking about some delayed fuse thing that would have a dominant negative effect after several replications. And of course, viruses don't mate to make the next generation. So the technology to my knowledge doesn't exist at all.
Not saying it's impossible, just that I think we'd have better luck with other approaches. And of course, if you know of something specific to retroviruses that does what you're talking about, that's a different story. I'm not quite clear what "a limited lifespan beyond a certain generation with ability to recode the DNA as it progresses" but it seems like there would be simpler ways to create a dominant-negative acting virus than that. Expressing a truncated form of some viral coat protein might interfere with virus production for example.
But the biggest problem is definitely the "People voluntarily get infected with this new virus" part. They won't wear a condom but they'll be willing to get infected with HIV before they get it?
If you were trolling, good job, I really couldn't tell and wasted a lot of time.
From TFS
"...lets the researchers very precisely control timing and dose of reward administered to the brain."
Oops, sorry, didn't mean to make "Rat Pr0n FTW" even less funny.
Next step: do this with sharks
Step after next: reverse it, such that every time a shark does a line of coke, it shoots a laser out of it's brain.
Where were those people when RE4 was released (set in an, iirc, Spanish town), shouting that it was clearly racism to only shoot Spanish people!
A white guy was doing the shooting there. Of other white people. I guess the lesson is that fewer people have problems with white-on-white racism, possibly because that's not really racism. Why am I playing devil's advocate? Boredom.
Controlled fusion is the next step for our species. We won't know how hard it is except for retrospectively...
So... we don't know how hard fusion is... but we do know it's DEFINITELY the next step?
Here's hoping it doesn't turn out to be impossible. That'd really suck if our next step was impossible.