Mainly. However, as I understand it, the new design also cannot be "chipped" like the old to be able to play import/pirtated games. Also, will software that's hardcoded to need a double speed drive work on the ps2 (which is backwards compatible)? What about using bleem! on a pc or bleemcast for dreamcast? If so, it seems that sony could have come up with a way to make psOne load faster.
Some miscellaneous comments in response to your post:
There are many reasons for nintendo using cartridges on n64 besides fear of piracy. I would also name the fact that have been using carts forever and were afraid of change and a desire to reduce load times. Playstation had a lot of rpgs for which disc space was important, but for action games, playstation load time sucks. btw, sony just came out with "psOne", a redesigened playstation. Don't you think if you were coming out with a new playstation model you would give it something faster than a 2x cdrom?
Sega definitely had more than 5 systems. You forgot 32x and 32xCD, not to mention game gear (of course, you didn't mention game boy and virtual boy for nintendo). I bring this up because I think 32x is the epitomy of what you are discussing: bringing out too many systems to support. 32x was brought out when sega had already announced that saturn was coming out in less than a year as a system to "hold people over" until then. That's ridiculous! It was obvious to everyone that sega had no plans to support it once saturn came out and that there was no reason to buy it, so it bombed.
And you ask "who's talking about the DC?" Well, lots of people are! It has 200 games out and that library is growing very rapidly. The system has sold well and everyone I know who has one (including me) has been very happy with it. No doubt, in a few years when ps2 and gamecube and xbox and whatever else gain dominance it will of course fade, but for the time being, dreamcast is the system.
And lastly, as for a shakeout, I agree. It seems to be a natural thing that the market can't support two many systems. I thought two per generation was the max, but the idea of a "generation" of consoles seems to be breaking down as the releases of new consoles in the near future are highly staggered. e.g. is dreamcast competing directly with ps2 or is it an earlier system? Will xbox we head-to-head against ps2, or will it be the next thing to replace it? Unclear. But, for an example of too many systems competing, just look back to the previous generation where people thought that jaguar, 3DO, n64, ps and saturn were all going to be going head to head.It was down to two before that struggle even started! No doubt the same thing will happen again. ps2 will be one. The question is who will be its competitor.
Care about freedom?
Re:A crash is possible, but for different reasons
on
Gaming Crash up Ahead
·
· Score: 1
Oh, yes, I guess that probably is what he meant. I misunderstood.
Care about freedom?
Re:A crash is possible, but for different reasons
on
Gaming Crash up Ahead
·
· Score: 1
The cost of video games is going up,
I have to disagree. I remember spending as much as $80 for new video games for Super Nintendo and N64 (when it was new). Now, I am routinely able to buy dreamcast games for $35 or so. This is, of course, largely due to the high price of cartridges wrst discs, but the claim that video game prices are going up strikes me as just being false.
MOST people think of it as an inciter of violence.
A lot of parents will be buying video games for their children this year. If a sizable portion of society honestly thought games were very harmful, I doubt that would be the case. It would be a small portion of parents who bought their children games, and they would be stigmatized as being bad parents, isn't what's happening at all.
Phrased differently, open source is capitalism, except the resource that the free market is competing for, and the one the system is trying to maximize, is poeple's time, not money.
An while we're on the subject, weren't there an awful lot of bad people in that train station. I mean, out of like 5 people who bumped into him, one was a rapist, one a racist, another a thief... Dear God. I'm glad I don't live in Philadelphia.
Care about freedom?
Re:Against Libertarianism! (Objectivism)
on
Geek Charities?
·
· Score: 1
Giving to a library (for eample) for selfish reasons is not charity. Charity, by definition, is done for altruistic reasons and "love of humanity". Giving a money out of self-interest is not charity, it is just giving someone money. Any true charity would be against objectivism.
It would really be pretty easy. They own slashdot.org and slashdot.com . Right now, the latter redirects to the former. It should be the other way around.
Do you really need to reformat them by hand? Why not just save them on a disk (or email them, or ftp them or whatever) and open them on the computer of someone who has a working StarOffice and then save them there in a format you can read.
I don't think most people will see "It's February, you can't use the Save feature until you renew your Office subscription dues..." messages because they will simply be set up to automatically bill them every month (or however often). The Microsoft bill will be like the cable bill or isp bill, something people understand they have to pay continously to not have their service cut off.
Um, why would you need to post another message just to see your.sig? Just go back and look at the one you posted before and see if it looks better now. It's not like the old message keeps the old.sig.
I have to disagree with your statement that windows programming is the only kind likely to "likely to provide a decent living". I am college students and in fact all of the jobs I have had (summer and term-time) have been in unix. The reason for this is that the number of companies needing web-based programs has exploded and I have had no trouble finding work programming perl under unix for applications that used the web for their interface. Not just small cgi's, but large application with a team of people working on them full time that just use the web (and email) for their interface. Granted, this does not require a great knowledge of unix system calls/networking, but I think it is a real error to say that unless you know how to program for windows, you will be unemployed.
A revote is still not a completely fair solution because a lot of Nader supporters may vote gore the second time around, changing the results. Of course, as a nader voter I wouldn't do that, but I know there are people who would.
The facts are, as it seems, that the majority of Nader's votes come from people who wouldn't have voted anyway.
Actually, most polls I've said say that well over half of Nader voters say they would have voted Gore if Nader hadn't run. That includes me, by the way. On another note, the poll they showed on cnn said that 10% of nader voters would have voted bush. Who are these people? I don't understand what they support that they shifted from bush to nader. are they just confused?
I'm a little confused. If Bush has "an undeniable ability to persuade... the Press" then how is it that "the press, being mostly liberal, is inclined to bash him as much as possible"? Constant bashing doesn't sound like the actions of a "persuaded" Press to me.
Well, if one more person comes up to me and says: "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush", I'm going to flip. If I don't like or support Gore enough to vote for him, why should it possibly scare me that he might lose?
I don't think this theory holds. Once the RIAA lies and says SDMI was unhackable, what's to stop the person who hacked from calling them on it and telling everyone what happened? Sure he signed away his right to talk about it, but the RIAA can't sue him for it without admitting that someone hacked SDMI which would blow their whole cover.
The problem here is just distinguishing cause from effect. To what extent does Nader get coverage because he has more support than Browne (even if he didn't in the last election) and to what extent does Nader have more support because people have actually heard of him thanks to newspaper coverage?
It's pretty hard to boycott polluting companies since we won't know who they are without government inspections. What are they supposed to just volunteer the fact that they pollute? And the firepower of citizens must match that of the government? Rather than assault rifles, that would give people tanks, nuclear bombs and attack helicopters.
As much as bashing the "liberal" media may be fun, I would say that the real reasons Nader gets more attention is that firstly, he is already something of a celebrity and secondly, he actually has people voting for him, unlike Browne, who is expected to get about 1% of the vote (which would be more than he got last time).
Just because he is a getting a small portion of the vote doesn't mean that the libertarian party is politically irrelevent though; of all of the "third parties" in the US, they have managed to get the most people elected. They just tend to have success in local elections in various places, rather than in the federal government. However, I will not vote for Browne because he is just too extreme. For example, he honestly tries to explain why it is critical that assault rifles be legal and we get rid of laws requiring gun registration, child safety locks on guns, etc. While I support people's second amendment right to have guns, I feel that this is going too far. Furthermore, his desire to remove all laws stopping companies from polluting is ridiculous. He says they still wouldn't because there's a natural economic incentive to keep the land you own healthy, but this totally disregards the "tragedy of the commons" type effct, whereby companies will pollute the air since it affects everyone equally, rather than just hurting them stronlgy. By the way, for anyone whose interesed, they also have the Great Libertarian Offer video in realvideo format on Browne's webiste if you don't feel like purchasing it.
By the way, I've realized how the war on drugs will end, and it won't really be through us electing the right politicians. The war on drugs is just too deeply entrenched in the United States. What's going to happen is every other country (by which I obviously mean Europe and Canada) is going to have to legalize first. Then, after a few years (maybe as much as 5-10), the US will look pretty stupid for being the only country left with drug laws, other than Singapore and Afghanistan. No one will be able to talk about the damage legalization will do to society with a straight face anymore, and people will start to wonder why the US isn't keeping up with the rest of the world, and our politicians will reluctantly give in and follow suit. This is not and issue where we will ever be leading.
Slashdot Mirror
Mainly. However, as I understand it, the new design also cannot be "chipped" like the old to be able to play import/pirtated games. Also, will software that's hardcoded to need a double speed drive work on the ps2 (which is backwards compatible)? What about using bleem! on a pc or bleemcast for dreamcast? If so, it seems that sony could have come up with a way to make psOne load faster.
Care about freedom?
Care about freedom?
Oh, yes, I guess that probably is what he meant. I misunderstood.
Care about freedom?
I have to disagree. I remember spending as much as $80 for new video games for Super Nintendo and N64 (when it was new). Now, I am routinely able to buy dreamcast games for $35 or so. This is, of course, largely due to the high price of cartridges wrst discs, but the claim that video game prices are going up strikes me as just being false.
Care about freedom?
A lot of parents will be buying video games for their children this year. If a sizable portion of society honestly thought games were very harmful, I doubt that would be the case. It would be a small portion of parents who bought their children games, and they would be stigmatized as being bad parents, isn't what's happening at all.
Care about freedom?
Phrased differently, open source is capitalism, except the resource that the free market is competing for, and the one the system is trying to maximize, is poeple's time, not money.
Care about freedom?
An while we're on the subject, weren't there an awful lot of bad people in that train station. I mean, out of like 5 people who bumped into him, one was a rapist, one a racist, another a thief... Dear God. I'm glad I don't live in Philadelphia.
Care about freedom?
Giving to a library (for eample) for selfish reasons is not charity. Charity, by definition, is done for altruistic reasons and "love of humanity". Giving a money out of self-interest is not charity, it is just giving someone money. Any true charity would be against objectivism.
Care about freedom?
It would really be pretty easy. They own slashdot.org and slashdot.com . Right now, the latter redirects to the former. It should be the other way around.
Care about freedom?
Do you really need to reformat them by hand? Why not just save them on a disk (or email them, or ftp them or whatever) and open them on the computer of someone who has a working StarOffice and then save them there in a format you can read.
Care about freedom?
I don't think most people will see "It's February, you can't use the Save feature until you renew your Office subscription dues..." messages because they will simply be set up to automatically bill them every month (or however often). The Microsoft bill will be like the cable bill or isp bill, something people understand they have to pay continously to not have their service cut off.
Care about freedom?
My fault, I overreacted. But, for your future reference, when you change your .sig, it changes on any messages you have posted.
Care about freedom?
Um, why would you need to post another message just to see your .sig? Just go back and look at the one you posted before and see if it looks better now. It's not like the old message keeps the old .sig .
Care about freedom?
I have to disagree with your statement that windows programming is the only kind likely to "likely to provide a decent living". I am college students and in fact all of the jobs I have had (summer and term-time) have been in unix. The reason for this is that the number of companies needing web-based programs has exploded and I have had no trouble finding work programming perl under unix for applications that used the web for their interface. Not just small cgi's, but large application with a team of people working on them full time that just use the web (and email) for their interface. Granted, this does not require a great knowledge of unix system calls/networking, but I think it is a real error to say that unless you know how to program for windows, you will be unemployed.
Care about freedom?
A revote is still not a completely fair solution because a lot of Nader supporters may vote gore the second time around, changing the results. Of course, as a nader voter I wouldn't do that, but I know there are people who would.
Care about freedom?
Actually, most polls I've said say that well over half of Nader voters say they would have voted Gore if Nader hadn't run. That includes me, by the way. On another note, the poll they showed on cnn said that 10% of nader voters would have voted bush. Who are these people? I don't understand what they support that they shifted from bush to nader. are they just confused?
Care about freedom?
I'm a little confused. If Bush has "an undeniable ability to persuade... the Press" then how is it that "the press, being mostly liberal, is inclined to bash him as much as possible"? Constant bashing doesn't sound like the actions of a "persuaded" Press to me.
Care about freedom?
rounding.
Care about freedom?
Well, infighting and disagreements over philosophical issues have created the entire gnome project for one.
Care about freedom?
Well, if one more person comes up to me and says: "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush", I'm going to flip. If I don't like or support Gore enough to vote for him, why should it possibly scare me that he might lose?
Care about freedom?
Someone who can afford four computers can't justify buying a console? I don't get it.
Care about freedom?
I don't think this theory holds. Once the RIAA lies and says SDMI was unhackable, what's to stop the person who hacked from calling them on it and telling everyone what happened? Sure he signed away his right to talk about it, but the RIAA can't sue him for it without admitting that someone hacked SDMI which would blow their whole cover.
Care about freedom?
The problem here is just distinguishing cause from effect. To what extent does Nader get coverage because he has more support than Browne (even if he didn't in the last election) and to what extent does Nader have more support because people have actually heard of him thanks to newspaper coverage?
Care about freedom?
It's pretty hard to boycott polluting companies since we won't know who they are without government inspections. What are they supposed to just volunteer the fact that they pollute? And the firepower of citizens must match that of the government? Rather than assault rifles, that would give people tanks, nuclear bombs and attack helicopters.
Care about freedom?
Just because he is a getting a small portion of the vote doesn't mean that the libertarian party is politically irrelevent though; of all of the "third parties" in the US, they have managed to get the most people elected. They just tend to have success in local elections in various places, rather than in the federal government. However, I will not vote for Browne because he is just too extreme. For example, he honestly tries to explain why it is critical that assault rifles be legal and we get rid of laws requiring gun registration, child safety locks on guns, etc. While I support people's second amendment right to have guns, I feel that this is going too far. Furthermore, his desire to remove all laws stopping companies from polluting is ridiculous. He says they still wouldn't because there's a natural economic incentive to keep the land you own healthy, but this totally disregards the "tragedy of the commons" type effct, whereby companies will pollute the air since it affects everyone equally, rather than just hurting them stronlgy. By the way, for anyone whose interesed, they also have the Great Libertarian Offer video in realvideo format on Browne's webiste if you don't feel like purchasing it.
By the way, I've realized how the war on drugs will end, and it won't really be through us electing the right politicians. The war on drugs is just too deeply entrenched in the United States. What's going to happen is every other country (by which I obviously mean Europe and Canada) is going to have to legalize first. Then, after a few years (maybe as much as 5-10), the US will look pretty stupid for being the only country left with drug laws, other than Singapore and Afghanistan. No one will be able to talk about the damage legalization will do to society with a straight face anymore, and people will start to wonder why the US isn't keeping up with the rest of the world, and our politicians will reluctantly give in and follow suit. This is not and issue where we will ever be leading.
Care about freedom?