Actually, this news doesn't shatter the theory. Basically it reaffirms it. XBox Live is the #1 for-pay console network, hence it is the biggest target.
I'm just curious how the Mac brand would be affected if Apple added a low-end computer to their lineup. Apple currently seems to target the groups that want proof that they they are "cooler" or "more hip" than everyone else, although they surely wouldn't use those phrases. Would low end Macs completely eliminate the "cool" factor of the Apple brand, thus eliminating much of the fickle pretentious college student market, or would they be able to rely on their superior usability to keep their current markets and add new ones?
Ok, so I'm not your typical fantasy reader. I have read some sci fi/fantasy before but have definitely not delved to the depths of many of my friends. If you are going to teach about fantasy, though, I have to say that you must limit your selections. I would say avoid series, unless you are going to sample specific books from them. Also, make sure to check other English Lit classes and avoid books that they already cover. Nobody wants to analyze 1984 in different manners for two different classes.
You would probably want to briefly sample mythology, Greek and Norse especially, because most fantasy has many roots in these mythologies. I would definitely hit The Hobbit, as the Tolkien universe was (ab)used to a very large degree in future books, and it can be read separately from the LotR series. Also, Frankenstein or one of Vern's works would be great since these are generally considered to be the origins of SciFi. Again, if other classes teach Frankenstein, you would probably want to leave it out.
After these basic works, you would probably want to decide whether you want to focus on literature that was popular, had a large impact on society, or had insightful social commentary. I would try to focus on just one of those trees, but try to include literature that crosses the boundaries between them.
But remember, make sure not to pick out too many pieces, these are high school students and you don't want to completely stifle their interest in the genre(s). Limit your selections and make sure you have a cohesive and clear plan to get them through the semester.
Ok, so he spent, in total $4374.08. Over the course of 56 months since he bought WoW, that's about $78.11 per month. That's really not all that much. It's approximately two nights out with a modest dinner and a movie/snacks. One night out if they go to a bar afterwards. Really, it's not such a bad deal, assuming they actually enjoy playing the game.
Things that should already be done by well-defined organizations (usually governmental).
Of course, this depends on your view of government. Some believe that government should do the minimum possible. If that's the case, then the government shouldn't be doing most of them, with a couple obvious exceptions (I'm looking at you, government transparency). Personally, though, I agree with you. Any time there's an investment to be made in which the overall benefit is greater than the cost by a certain margin, the government would have the responsibility to ensure that investment is made. Please note I said benefit and not profit, which is the reason the private sector wouldn't get involved. There would, though, be obvious limitations as to where civil liberties and freedoms are involved.
There is some irony with your claim that the PS2 didn't win based on technical prowess. There were two really major technological factors that pushed the PS2 past the GameCube: backwards compatibility and its DVD player. The fact that technophiles could buy a PS2 cheaper than almost all other DVD players at the time it was released (and even a few years after it was released) was a boon to sales. Plus, all of the people who had PSones didn't have to throw away all of their old games. Not to mention that the PS2 did have superior graphics to the GameCube, even if the Cube did run faster.
Even though the XBox had superior capabilities, since the PS3 had already established it's place in the market by the time the XBox was released, there really wasn't much competition. XBox was already only playing for second place.
Surely you'd agree that if we went back to shooting your black dot with my blue dots, gameplay wouldn't matter much beyond the first 10 minutes. People would abandon it relatively quickly for something with superior graphics, even if it did have inferior gameplay. That said, I'd say art design and utilizing the capabilities of the system to the fullest would be the most important factor, and Wii does excel in that area. Even if they don't have the sharpest graphics, many of the Nintendo Wii games are very, very good at setting the mood and drawing you into the game just with their stage design.
Also, don't forget the issue of price. The PS2 outsold the PS3 early on in the PS3's lifecycle. With all of the extra capabilities of the PS3 and the fact that it was backwards compatible (at the time) you would think it should have won handily over it's older sibling, but price was an important factor.
Another thing that you've completely failed to include is the age ranges of people who play both the three systems. I can't find the information, but I know that I've read it somewhere, but, basically, while all three major systems have a similar average age (between 25-35), the Wii has a much larger standard deviation. More parents buy it for their children (whether due to price, the coolness factor, or that it gets their kids off the couch) and more older people who have never played video games before have taken to it. Because of this, the games are often simpler, and many long time gamers get bored with them quickly.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Wii is a bad system, I'm just saying that it had different goals than the XBox and the PS3. Even if it was wildly successful in achieving those goals, this doesn't make it a better system, it just makes it a different system.
When your best argument is that something is "fine," there's an issue. Aside from that, I've always viewed the Wii as a party system. You have a bunch of friends over and have the Wii going with Mario Kart or Mario Party and you can have a ton of fun with it. The few single player games that I've tried for Wii just didn't feel like that had really fluid controls. Regardless, the Wii is still the only system my fiancee will play, so it's not leaving my apartment any time soon.
Alright! All you physicists out there, stop! You don't fully understand what you're doing, so experimenting will hurt us all in the long run. Doctors, you too. No more surgeries, no more medications until we know EXACTLY what's going on in the human body.
Ok, so that doesn't make sense, right? We need doctors to do their jobs, even if they aren't 100% perfect, because being wrong on occasion is better than doing nothing at all. There is often a benefit to continuing experimentation or implementation, even if we don't have all the facts.
If the vitamins and minerals that humans get are what you're worried about, don't worry so much. Human life expectancy has increased pretty much every year since GM crops were first implemented. Before these GMOs existed, scientists questioned the possibility of feeding the ballooning population in Asia - Now we produce enough food in the world to feed them without a problem, it's just logistics/politics that get in the way. Surely you'd agree that getting food with poor nutritional value is better than getting no food at all.
The part that I'd be considerably more worried about (and even then, I'm not that worried) is the possibility that they completely screw up the environment with their GM crops. At this point, however, there are already safeguards in place to prevent this very thing from happening. That's the whole reason this article exists, afterall.
To a certain point, this is feasible, but generally manufacturers don't just stick to one single strain GM crop. In one of my classes back in college we discussed Monsanto and some other GMO manufacturers in the US. While they did develop strains that were more prominent than others, theywere continually working to create new strains so that this precise scenario would NOT occur. If I were a farmer, though, I would ensure that I was not using the same GM corn that all of my neighbors were, just to make sure that this didn't happen to me.
You were modded as funny, but honestly, I think public humiliation could do a hell of a lot more to stop people from being stupid than a suspension with or without pay. Sometimes it really is too bad that we have that whole "cruel and unusual punishment" thing in our Constitution.
Or it could have been built for the same reason that Perimeter was built. The irony with your statement is that not all deterrence is intended for the enemy, it is often intended to deter one's self. If the Soviets had a system like this that they didn't tell the world about, it's entirely possible, and even plausible, that the US had a similar system.
Couldn't happen. Obviously someone didn't rtfa. As stated several times above, but not in response to you, the damn thing isn't automated. It's a series of checks that, if they are all completed, lead to a human making the decision to blow up the US. Perimeter wouldn't even be turned on unless the Russkies expected an imminent attack from the US.
if you were the one who pointed out to the rebels the location of the vulnerable exhaust shaft that lead straight into the reactor core.
Actually, though, this isn't like saying "LOOK! There's no lock on that door!" It's closer to the following scenario: "First, go to the back of the building where there's a whole in the fence. Then climb up onto the roof and enter the ventilation system. Crawl through the vent shaft and take the first left. Drop into that room, but stay close to the wall to avoid the motion sensors. Then, wait for the guards to pass and leave the room. Move quietly down the hallway and the super awesome vault filled with treasure will be the third door on your left."
While, technically you aren't damaging or stealing anything, you're clearly making it a possibility for others to do so. In this scenario, I wouldn't make McKinnon pay to clean up my security, but I'd hold him responsible for breaking and entering, plus any crimes committed based on the information that he gave out.
I thought it was sad that you had to post this response to begin with. I was wrong. The really sad part is that you were modded insightful on this one. I would have thought that any reasonable person would be able to figure out that they shouldn't buy a product if it doesn't pertain to them, and that not every product is useful for every person.
Honestly, even if you(not you in particular, but you in general) don't like these particular headphones, just the technology that they bring about is interesting. Maybe their next product (or their rival's next product) will allow you to listen with just one earbud in, or let you program it to work in the way that you would prefer. It bothers me how people treat one singular advancement as the end of advancement in that tree, when it is highly possible that considerably more development will branch off from the new technology.
I can't complain about that, too much, though. I know I've done the same thing myself in a past life.
The problem with this is that with little to no worth ethic, instead of working hard at our jobs, we just end up on slashdot.
I wasn't challenged at all through school. Everything has come easy to me for almost my entire life. The moment a challenge is introduced, I tend to pull back. It's taken a lot of time and effort to correct this, and I seriously wish that I could have started much sooner.
Let's say down the road, super efficient solar cells are invented. Then what? We are no longer at a point where we can accurately estimate how much someone is using roads by the energy that they purchase.
Besides, taxing electricity is not an accurate measure of miles driven, either. People use electricity for a lot of things outside of driving. To eliminate any issues with that, you'd have to install a meter on the vehicle. At this point, you might as well just use the odometer, but that would require a maintenance check at least once per year to take the reading and ensure that there was no tampering. This would have the potential to cost a lot of time/money. Think about how long it currently takes at the DMV, then add in one extra stop per car in the United States. Do you really think that would be a better alternative?
The last possibility (outside of tracking) is just to move to a flat tax. Everyone benefits from having roads, so everyone should pay whether they drive or not. The main problems with this would be that the government would be double dipping into your wallet if you still drove a vehicle with a gasoline engine or losing the other benefits of a gasoline tax (discouraging gasoline usage/emissions). All in all, I think this would be the best option, although there would be a LOT of opposition to it.
As a fan of the Green Bay Packers, after watching what happened with Brett Favre, I can tell you with almost complete certainty that Apple customers do not love abuse or complaining. In their blind adoration of Favre, err, Apple, they believe that Apple can do no wrong and any notion to the contrary is heretical. Their basic argument often follows this line of thought: "If it wasn't for everyone else trying to undermine what Apple is trying to do, they wouldn't need to take all of these measures. Apple only does this because they want to create the best experience for their customers."
I'm just waiting for the 3d glasses that work well with my current glasses. That's what sucks about the current technology. If you have glasses, you're forced to awkwardly place a second pair of glasses in front of your current pair. So instead of *just* the typical headaches and other complaints, you also have to deal with a smaller field of vision to look through and constant rubbing on your lower nose. On top of that, the "coolness" of the 3d effect is lost after about 8 seconds into the movie or show, except for the 1-2 times in which something is being thrown at the camera, but you're forced to wear the stupid glasses for the rest of the two hour movie.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, this news doesn't shatter the theory. Basically it reaffirms it. XBox Live is the #1 for-pay console network, hence it is the biggest target.
I'm just curious how the Mac brand would be affected if Apple added a low-end computer to their lineup. Apple currently seems to target the groups that want proof that they they are "cooler" or "more hip" than everyone else, although they surely wouldn't use those phrases. Would low end Macs completely eliminate the "cool" factor of the Apple brand, thus eliminating much of the fickle pretentious college student market, or would they be able to rely on their superior usability to keep their current markets and add new ones?
Ok, so I'm not your typical fantasy reader. I have read some sci fi/fantasy before but have definitely not delved to the depths of many of my friends. If you are going to teach about fantasy, though, I have to say that you must limit your selections. I would say avoid series, unless you are going to sample specific books from them. Also, make sure to check other English Lit classes and avoid books that they already cover. Nobody wants to analyze 1984 in different manners for two different classes.
You would probably want to briefly sample mythology, Greek and Norse especially, because most fantasy has many roots in these mythologies. I would definitely hit The Hobbit, as the Tolkien universe was (ab)used to a very large degree in future books, and it can be read separately from the LotR series. Also, Frankenstein or one of Vern's works would be great since these are generally considered to be the origins of SciFi. Again, if other classes teach Frankenstein, you would probably want to leave it out.
After these basic works, you would probably want to decide whether you want to focus on literature that was popular, had a large impact on society, or had insightful social commentary. I would try to focus on just one of those trees, but try to include literature that crosses the boundaries between them.
But remember, make sure not to pick out too many pieces, these are high school students and you don't want to completely stifle their interest in the genre(s). Limit your selections and make sure you have a cohesive and clear plan to get them through the semester.
So really, what you're saying, is the crime is actually distracted texting?
Ok, so he spent, in total $4374.08. Over the course of 56 months since he bought WoW, that's about $78.11 per month. That's really not all that much. It's approximately two nights out with a modest dinner and a movie/snacks. One night out if they go to a bar afterwards. Really, it's not such a bad deal, assuming they actually enjoy playing the game.
Many of them appeared to be:
Things that should already be done by well-defined organizations (usually governmental).
Of course, this depends on your view of government. Some believe that government should do the minimum possible. If that's the case, then the government shouldn't be doing most of them, with a couple obvious exceptions (I'm looking at you, government transparency). Personally, though, I agree with you. Any time there's an investment to be made in which the overall benefit is greater than the cost by a certain margin, the government would have the responsibility to ensure that investment is made. Please note I said benefit and not profit, which is the reason the private sector wouldn't get involved. There would, though, be obvious limitations as to where civil liberties and freedoms are involved.
There is some irony with your claim that the PS2 didn't win based on technical prowess. There were two really major technological factors that pushed the PS2 past the GameCube: backwards compatibility and its DVD player. The fact that technophiles could buy a PS2 cheaper than almost all other DVD players at the time it was released (and even a few years after it was released) was a boon to sales. Plus, all of the people who had PSones didn't have to throw away all of their old games. Not to mention that the PS2 did have superior graphics to the GameCube, even if the Cube did run faster.
Even though the XBox had superior capabilities, since the PS3 had already established it's place in the market by the time the XBox was released, there really wasn't much competition. XBox was already only playing for second place.
Surely you'd agree that if we went back to shooting your black dot with my blue dots, gameplay wouldn't matter much beyond the first 10 minutes. People would abandon it relatively quickly for something with superior graphics, even if it did have inferior gameplay. That said, I'd say art design and utilizing the capabilities of the system to the fullest would be the most important factor, and Wii does excel in that area. Even if they don't have the sharpest graphics, many of the Nintendo Wii games are very, very good at setting the mood and drawing you into the game just with their stage design.
Also, don't forget the issue of price. The PS2 outsold the PS3 early on in the PS3's lifecycle. With all of the extra capabilities of the PS3 and the fact that it was backwards compatible (at the time) you would think it should have won handily over it's older sibling, but price was an important factor.
Another thing that you've completely failed to include is the age ranges of people who play both the three systems. I can't find the information, but I know that I've read it somewhere, but, basically, while all three major systems have a similar average age (between 25-35), the Wii has a much larger standard deviation. More parents buy it for their children (whether due to price, the coolness factor, or that it gets their kids off the couch) and more older people who have never played video games before have taken to it. Because of this, the games are often simpler, and many long time gamers get bored with them quickly.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Wii is a bad system, I'm just saying that it had different goals than the XBox and the PS3. Even if it was wildly successful in achieving those goals, this doesn't make it a better system, it just makes it a different system.
When your best argument is that something is "fine," there's an issue. Aside from that, I've always viewed the Wii as a party system. You have a bunch of friends over and have the Wii going with Mario Kart or Mario Party and you can have a ton of fun with it. The few single player games that I've tried for Wii just didn't feel like that had really fluid controls. Regardless, the Wii is still the only system my fiancee will play, so it's not leaving my apartment any time soon.
Nah, it was just remnants from the most recent space shuttle toilet flush.
You can't get away from genetically engineered water, either. That stuff's gotten into our oceans and it's here to stay, forever!
Alright! All you physicists out there, stop! You don't fully understand what you're doing, so experimenting will hurt us all in the long run. Doctors, you too. No more surgeries, no more medications until we know EXACTLY what's going on in the human body.
Ok, so that doesn't make sense, right? We need doctors to do their jobs, even if they aren't 100% perfect, because being wrong on occasion is better than doing nothing at all. There is often a benefit to continuing experimentation or implementation, even if we don't have all the facts.
If the vitamins and minerals that humans get are what you're worried about, don't worry so much. Human life expectancy has increased pretty much every year since GM crops were first implemented. Before these GMOs existed, scientists questioned the possibility of feeding the ballooning population in Asia - Now we produce enough food in the world to feed them without a problem, it's just logistics/politics that get in the way. Surely you'd agree that getting food with poor nutritional value is better than getting no food at all.
The part that I'd be considerably more worried about (and even then, I'm not that worried) is the possibility that they completely screw up the environment with their GM crops. At this point, however, there are already safeguards in place to prevent this very thing from happening. That's the whole reason this article exists, afterall.
To a certain point, this is feasible, but generally manufacturers don't just stick to one single strain GM crop. In one of my classes back in college we discussed Monsanto and some other GMO manufacturers in the US. While they did develop strains that were more prominent than others, theywere continually working to create new strains so that this precise scenario would NOT occur. If I were a farmer, though, I would ensure that I was not using the same GM corn that all of my neighbors were, just to make sure that this didn't happen to me.
You were modded as funny, but honestly, I think public humiliation could do a hell of a lot more to stop people from being stupid than a suspension with or without pay. Sometimes it really is too bad that we have that whole "cruel and unusual punishment" thing in our Constitution.
Or it could have been built for the same reason that Perimeter was built. The irony with your statement is that not all deterrence is intended for the enemy, it is often intended to deter one's self. If the Soviets had a system like this that they didn't tell the world about, it's entirely possible, and even plausible, that the US had a similar system.
Couldn't happen. Obviously someone didn't rtfa. As stated several times above, but not in response to you, the damn thing isn't automated. It's a series of checks that, if they are all completed, lead to a human making the decision to blow up the US. Perimeter wouldn't even be turned on unless the Russkies expected an imminent attack from the US.
if you were the one who pointed out to the rebels the location of the vulnerable exhaust shaft that lead straight into the reactor core.
Actually, though, this isn't like saying "LOOK! There's no lock on that door!" It's closer to the following scenario: "First, go to the back of the building where there's a whole in the fence. Then climb up onto the roof and enter the ventilation system. Crawl through the vent shaft and take the first left. Drop into that room, but stay close to the wall to avoid the motion sensors. Then, wait for the guards to pass and leave the room. Move quietly down the hallway and the super awesome vault filled with treasure will be the third door on your left."
While, technically you aren't damaging or stealing anything, you're clearly making it a possibility for others to do so. In this scenario, I wouldn't make McKinnon pay to clean up my security, but I'd hold him responsible for breaking and entering, plus any crimes committed based on the information that he gave out.
I thought it was sad that you had to post this response to begin with. I was wrong. The really sad part is that you were modded insightful on this one. I would have thought that any reasonable person would be able to figure out that they shouldn't buy a product if it doesn't pertain to them, and that not every product is useful for every person.
Honestly, even if you(not you in particular, but you in general) don't like these particular headphones, just the technology that they bring about is interesting. Maybe their next product (or their rival's next product) will allow you to listen with just one earbud in, or let you program it to work in the way that you would prefer. It bothers me how people treat one singular advancement as the end of advancement in that tree, when it is highly possible that considerably more development will branch off from the new technology.
I can't complain about that, too much, though. I know I've done the same thing myself in a past life.
Actually, I'd guess Malaysia would produce their own cheap knockoffs.
when getting some strange. And use a firewall while surfing th
Nah. Only garlic works against vampires in this fashion, not bulbs that are exceedingly similar to garlic.
The problem with this is that with little to no worth ethic, instead of working hard at our jobs, we just end up on slashdot.
I wasn't challenged at all through school. Everything has come easy to me for almost my entire life. The moment a challenge is introduced, I tend to pull back. It's taken a lot of time and effort to correct this, and I seriously wish that I could have started much sooner.
Let's say down the road, super efficient solar cells are invented. Then what? We are no longer at a point where we can accurately estimate how much someone is using roads by the energy that they purchase.
Besides, taxing electricity is not an accurate measure of miles driven, either. People use electricity for a lot of things outside of driving. To eliminate any issues with that, you'd have to install a meter on the vehicle. At this point, you might as well just use the odometer, but that would require a maintenance check at least once per year to take the reading and ensure that there was no tampering. This would have the potential to cost a lot of time/money. Think about how long it currently takes at the DMV, then add in one extra stop per car in the United States. Do you really think that would be a better alternative?
The last possibility (outside of tracking) is just to move to a flat tax. Everyone benefits from having roads, so everyone should pay whether they drive or not. The main problems with this would be that the government would be double dipping into your wallet if you still drove a vehicle with a gasoline engine or losing the other benefits of a gasoline tax (discouraging gasoline usage/emissions). All in all, I think this would be the best option, although there would be a LOT of opposition to it.
As a fan of the Green Bay Packers, after watching what happened with Brett Favre, I can tell you with almost complete certainty that Apple customers do not love abuse or complaining. In their blind adoration of Favre, err, Apple, they believe that Apple can do no wrong and any notion to the contrary is heretical. Their basic argument often follows this line of thought: "If it wasn't for everyone else trying to undermine what Apple is trying to do, they wouldn't need to take all of these measures. Apple only does this because they want to create the best experience for their customers."
I'm just waiting for the 3d glasses that work well with my current glasses. That's what sucks about the current technology. If you have glasses, you're forced to awkwardly place a second pair of glasses in front of your current pair. So instead of *just* the typical headaches and other complaints, you also have to deal with a smaller field of vision to look through and constant rubbing on your lower nose. On top of that, the "coolness" of the 3d effect is lost after about 8 seconds into the movie or show, except for the 1-2 times in which something is being thrown at the camera, but you're forced to wear the stupid glasses for the rest of the two hour movie.