I think most of us realize that scammers, cheaters, criminals, and fraudsters prefer 2 types of targets:
1) Those who are safe/easy prey. 2) Those who they can justify doing it to, or even deserve it.
Because of too many people find porn to be embarrassing or shameful, some people may not want to report or fight back. They make themselves into easy marks. Also, it's easy to find people who want porn, especially free porn (because of embarrassment, lots of people don't want their identities and payments traced back to them for these sites).
Also, because porn is perceived as such a shady thing, it's easy for some to justify screwing over these types of people.
In the end it's about getting away with it without being plagued by a guilty conscious.
First of all, IANAE (economist), but the way I see it....
I do believe in buying reliable products that last. Really, I do. I think it's a ridiculous waste when we buy shoddy products that we end up tossing in landfills a few years down the road when they break down.
However, as a thought experiment, have you ever considered what would happen if all American made products became more reliable? Eventually sales for these products would slow (since we're replacing them less often), which eventually would lead to having to cut back on on these companies. They'd probably have to cut back on production (and employees) to meet the reduced rate of consumption. As sales slow, investment in the company begins to slow and pull out. The loss of sales, investments, and jobs is going to adversely affect the economy.
As for the consumer, not having to re-buy their appliances and systems helps relieve costs for them. It's hard to say where that extra money will go. They might save it, which increases their personal financial security )but everyone saving more money also adversely affects the economy). The might just spend it on more goods, but there are only so many durable goods one can practically buy. They might spend more on more services (but I think they'd spend less than what they are saving on goods. Then again, by this point, they might be one of the unfortunate people who have been affected by the earlier job reductions and there is no extra money.
In the end, we are living in a system that works best when we have more consumption, waste, insecurity, and low reliability of goods. I'm not saying that's how it should be, but that's how it works out.
I'm on the fence about whether I approve or disapprove of using "Tweet" (though I dislike the word) by journalists. However, I think your examples of "flivver" and "flapper" are poor ones. "Flappers" have become rather iconic for the era, so I would not even blink at seeing that word pop up in old articles, especially regarding entertainment or popular culture.
"Flivver", on the other hand, is far more obscure. However it's obviously survived time, even if to a lesser degree than "flapper."
I predict that "tweet" has less than a flivver's chance of surviving a century.
I can't tell. Are you intentionally taking that fragment of a sentence out of context in order to try to imply that I was stating that as a fact, or are you just interjecting science into the silliness?
If the former, then shame. It's obvious that I was not intending to present that as a fact, but questioning if the earlier poster was intending to imply that.
If the latter, then yeah, I'm aware of that, hence my doubting. somaTh and I were just engaging in a bit of absurd and silly thought experimenting.
I'm a total physics and astronomy noob, but I always saw black holes not so much as *pulling* the light so hard it couldn't escape, but rather distorting space so much that shortest path for light to travel is right back toward the singularity.
The idea of something distorting space in the exact opposite way is certainly an amusing idea, even if I think it's impossible.
Can we get guys like that in the US? And maybe like that Spanish Judge who ruled that an individual file sharing wasn't a crime against humanity while we're at it?
What are you trying to imply with a "white hole"? It would sound like you are suggesting that an antimatter variation of a black hole would have strong anti-gravity... That it would be so strong that even light could not reach it. Would that make the antimatter version of an event horizon to be... a U-Turn?
Though that is a funny though, I have serious doubts about such an idea.
Oh take it easy Mr. Grammar Nazi. I would never write that intentionally. I probably alt-tabbed or was distracted (or otherwise interrupted) mid-sentence and finished it in a different manner than I originally intended. I will try to be more careful to proofread the next time I submit formal writing to you.
"Sometimes people make silly mistakes, even when they know better. More at 11!"
Or maybe people will just want to play a GAME and not learn an instrument? Seriously dude, I can spend a few bucks and be learning in instrument right now, but I don't want to. No amount of comparing 'real' to 'fake' is going to change that.
You also seem to miss the point that you can still just play it like a simplified game before. The Pro Mode is an Option. Nobody is going to force you to use it. The fact that you are criticizing it for having an *optional* feature that *you* aren't interested in (but others might be) is just silly.
However, I find it pretty absurd that you are ragging by implying that the game is nothing but an overly simplified Simon, but at the same time railing against the idea for having an *OPTION* of being more realistic.
For the record, music games have little to do with Simon other than having bright colorful buttons. Simon is purely a memory game. These music games are about rhythm, hand eye coordination, and contain small elements of strategy.
When it comes to music... realism can be fun, if you can are good enough to play.
From what they show, Pro Mode is completely optional, and nobody is required to play any instrument in a realistic fashion. It's just an option for those that might want to take it to the next level in order to play realistically, learn to play realistically, or shut up the constant "learn to play a real guitar!" and similar quips.
It sounds like a great option to me, and might even be instrumental (no pun intended) in getting some kids into actual music.
Now High School kids can quit school to join a real band (like a real rock star!) instead of doing it for a video game like this kid:
That's assuming that they maintain 60 fps for each eye. It's far more likely that they'd drop down the FPS to 30 per eye, and still maintain 60 overall.
Honestly, 30 fps per eye probably isn't the end of the world... though I think you'd perceive a darker picture than normal.
It's trolling to say that people will mod you for making a joke about this (when I actually was modded troll for doing the exact same thing as this poster)? And yet he got modded insightful...
So, are you suggesting it's not socially acceptable for slashdotters to watch Glee? What if they watch it streaming online? How about if they pirate it?
I'm probably going to get modded down by fan boys for my blasphemy, but...
Lack of USB ports, card readers, and video outputs and the like are features? Seriously!?
You do realize that the reason that there are compatibility issues that exist within the PC world is not simply because of hardware options, but because of the fact that every single piece of the system is customizable. Every piece of hardware, every piece of software, and even the OS can be picked by a user. The more variables there are, the more possibility that there can be unexpected interactions.
However, if you have a locked down platform where you control the OS and the hardware that is present, then the chances of random compatibilities goes down incredibly. That's without even taking into account having control of the software too.
My XBox 360 has more hardware features than my Wii does, and amazingly I haven't had a single compatibility problem with it. My friend has no issues with his DSi, even though it has more hardware features than his old DS. I'm going to take a stab in the dark and guess that if Apple had added additional hardware features to their iPad, then the chances are they'd work without compatibility issues.
I think that one could argue legitimate reasons for exclusion of certain hardware exclusions. I might disagree, but reasonable arguments could be made. However this one just seems silly. I might have a lot of criticisms for Apple, but they seem to do well in quality control; I have faith that they could pull off hardware features that work.
I doubt that many play "computer" games (the summary said "gamer" not "computer gamer"). However, I have no trouble believing that many people play video games at least casually. They might be PC gamers, console gamers, or they might have a portable gaming system like a DS or something. Don't forget that cell phones also include games now too.
Also, don't forget that not everyone lives in a 2 parents and a single child household. What about those that are retired? Those whose kids have moved out? Singles? You mentioned the average family size, but that's not exactly the same thing as the average household size.
The demographics for gamers has changed quite a bit over the last couple decades. The average video gamer is about 30 years old now. Many gamers are old enough to have children (and grandchildren). If the parents still like games, the chances of them accepting video gaming in their kids is probably even greater.
At our current course, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if in another generation that playing video games being close to as being ubiquitous as watching TV is now. It might even surpass TV.
I would expect someone out there to try to do creative things just to make the AI Generated Text say something really weird. At least... that's what I'd want to do. I like challenging and breaking software though.
I find Homer's character to be too two dimensional... He lacks depth.
But seriously, I have mixed feelings about that choice. Let me say that I could see Homer being the tops of many notable lists; he is *a* great character. He's a little bit Everyman, and a little bit of satire of the "Everyotherman" (if I may be allowed to invent a word here... It's perfectly cromulent!)
However, It just seems a bit superficial to me to say the greatest character of TV or Film in 20 years. There are so many great characters from TV and film that really do have tremendous depth of character, but just aren't as ubiquitous as Homer. Perhaps I just don't know how I feel about the designation of "Greatest".
But on the other hand... I am just merely questioning it, not outright disputing it. I really don't know how I feel about it.
No, because the standard has nothing whatsoever to do with the content.
Perhaps I was assuming too much when I thought that it would be clear that when contrasting the application vs the content, that by "content" I am referring to the vehicle for which this content is being carried, i.e. the format/standard... And by application, I specifically mean Adobe's software.
I wasn't trying to suggest that Apple doesn't want any content that could possibly be made as a flash app, and I'm baffled as to how you could reasonably interpret it as such.
Slashdot Mirror
How awkward...
I think most of us realize that scammers, cheaters, criminals, and fraudsters prefer 2 types of targets:
1) Those who are safe/easy prey.
2) Those who they can justify doing it to, or even deserve it.
Because of too many people find porn to be embarrassing or shameful, some people may not want to report or fight back. They make themselves into easy marks. Also, it's easy to find people who want porn, especially free porn (because of embarrassment, lots of people don't want their identities and payments traced back to them for these sites).
Also, because porn is perceived as such a shady thing, it's easy for some to justify screwing over these types of people.
In the end it's about getting away with it without being plagued by a guilty conscious.
First of all, IANAE (economist), but the way I see it....
I do believe in buying reliable products that last. Really, I do. I think it's a ridiculous waste when we buy shoddy products that we end up tossing in landfills a few years down the road when they break down.
However, as a thought experiment, have you ever considered what would happen if all American made products became more reliable? Eventually sales for these products would slow (since we're replacing them less often), which eventually would lead to having to cut back on on these companies. They'd probably have to cut back on production (and employees) to meet the reduced rate of consumption. As sales slow, investment in the company begins to slow and pull out. The loss of sales, investments, and jobs is going to adversely affect the economy.
As for the consumer, not having to re-buy their appliances and systems helps relieve costs for them. It's hard to say where that extra money will go. They might save it, which increases their personal financial security )but everyone saving more money also adversely affects the economy). The might just spend it on more goods, but there are only so many durable goods one can practically buy. They might spend more on more services (but I think they'd spend less than what they are saving on goods. Then again, by this point, they might be one of the unfortunate people who have been affected by the earlier job reductions and there is no extra money.
In the end, we are living in a system that works best when we have more consumption, waste, insecurity, and low reliability of goods. I'm not saying that's how it should be, but that's how it works out.
I'm on the fence about whether I approve or disapprove of using "Tweet" (though I dislike the word) by journalists. However, I think your examples of "flivver" and "flapper" are poor ones. "Flappers" have become rather iconic for the era, so I would not even blink at seeing that word pop up in old articles, especially regarding entertainment or popular culture.
"Flivver", on the other hand, is far more obscure. However it's obviously survived time, even if to a lesser degree than "flapper."
I predict that "tweet" has less than a flivver's chance of surviving a century.
an antimatter variation of a black hole would have strong anti-gravity...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_interaction_of_antimatter [wikipedia.org]
Consensus: Antimatter has normal gravity.
I can't tell. Are you intentionally taking that fragment of a sentence out of context in order to try to imply that I was stating that as a fact, or are you just interjecting science into the silliness?
If the former, then shame. It's obvious that I was not intending to present that as a fact, but questioning if the earlier poster was intending to imply that.
If the latter, then yeah, I'm aware of that, hence my doubting. somaTh and I were just engaging in a bit of absurd and silly thought experimenting.
I'm a total physics and astronomy noob, but I always saw black holes not so much as *pulling* the light so hard it couldn't escape, but rather distorting space so much that shortest path for light to travel is right back toward the singularity.
The idea of something distorting space in the exact opposite way is certainly an amusing idea, even if I think it's impossible.
How can you expect Americans to have aristocracies if you stand in the way of holding back or penalizing the poor!?
Can we get guys like that in the US? And maybe like that Spanish Judge who ruled that an individual file sharing wasn't a crime against humanity while we're at it?
What are you trying to imply with a "white hole"? It would sound like you are suggesting that an antimatter variation of a black hole would have strong anti-gravity... That it would be so strong that even light could not reach it. Would that make the antimatter version of an event horizon to be... a U-Turn?
Though that is a funny though, I have serious doubts about such an idea.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/option
"if you can are"? that's pretty bad.
Oh take it easy Mr. Grammar Nazi. I would never write that intentionally. I probably alt-tabbed or was distracted (or otherwise interrupted) mid-sentence and finished it in a different manner than I originally intended. I will try to be more careful to proofread the next time I submit formal writing to you.
"Sometimes people make silly mistakes, even when they know better. More at 11!"
Or maybe people will just want to play a GAME and not learn an instrument? Seriously dude, I can spend a few bucks and be learning in instrument right now, but I don't want to. No amount of comparing 'real' to 'fake' is going to change that.
You also seem to miss the point that you can still just play it like a simplified game before. The Pro Mode is an Option. Nobody is going to force you to use it. The fact that you are criticizing it for having an *optional* feature that *you* aren't interested in (but others might be) is just silly.
However, I find it pretty absurd that you are ragging by implying that the game is nothing but an overly simplified Simon, but at the same time railing against the idea for having an *OPTION* of being more realistic.
For the record, music games have little to do with Simon other than having bright colorful buttons. Simon is purely a memory game. These music games are about rhythm, hand eye coordination, and contain small elements of strategy.
When it comes to music... realism can be fun, if you can are good enough to play.
From what they show, Pro Mode is completely optional, and nobody is required to play any instrument in a realistic fashion. It's just an option for those that might want to take it to the next level in order to play realistically, learn to play realistically, or shut up the constant "learn to play a real guitar!" and similar quips.
It sounds like a great option to me, and might even be instrumental (no pun intended) in getting some kids into actual music.
Now High School kids can quit school to join a real band (like a real rock star!) instead of doing it for a video game like this kid:
http://www.nme.com/news/nme/39065
That's assuming that they maintain 60 fps for each eye. It's far more likely that they'd drop down the FPS to 30 per eye, and still maintain 60 overall.
Honestly, 30 fps per eye probably isn't the end of the world... though I think you'd perceive a darker picture than normal.
It's trolling to say that people will mod you for making a joke about this (when I actually was modded troll for doing the exact same thing as this poster)? And yet he got modded insightful...
Seriously, where's the CoCo love!? ;-)
So, are you suggesting it's not socially acceptable for slashdotters to watch Glee? What if they watch it streaming online? How about if they pirate it?
Not having a monopoly is illegal, using it to gain a 2nd is.
Shit, I'd better run out and get one!
But only one! You better not try to get a 2nd one using the first!
Careful... last time I made a minor joke regarding Sony revoking features, I got modded a troll. Some people are sensitive about their Play-Boxes.
I'm probably going to get modded down by fan boys for my blasphemy, but...
Lack of USB ports, card readers, and video outputs and the like are features? Seriously!?
You do realize that the reason that there are compatibility issues that exist within the PC world is not simply because of hardware options, but because of the fact that every single piece of the system is customizable. Every piece of hardware, every piece of software, and even the OS can be picked by a user. The more variables there are, the more possibility that there can be unexpected interactions.
However, if you have a locked down platform where you control the OS and the hardware that is present, then the chances of random compatibilities goes down incredibly. That's without even taking into account having control of the software too.
My XBox 360 has more hardware features than my Wii does, and amazingly I haven't had a single compatibility problem with it. My friend has no issues with his DSi, even though it has more hardware features than his old DS. I'm going to take a stab in the dark and guess that if Apple had added additional hardware features to their iPad, then the chances are they'd work without compatibility issues.
I think that one could argue legitimate reasons for exclusion of certain hardware exclusions. I might disagree, but reasonable arguments could be made. However this one just seems silly. I might have a lot of criticisms for Apple, but they seem to do well in quality control; I have faith that they could pull off hardware features that work.
I doubt that many play "computer" games (the summary said "gamer" not "computer gamer"). However, I have no trouble believing that many people play video games at least casually. They might be PC gamers, console gamers, or they might have a portable gaming system like a DS or something. Don't forget that cell phones also include games now too.
Also, don't forget that not everyone lives in a 2 parents and a single child household. What about those that are retired? Those whose kids have moved out? Singles? You mentioned the average family size, but that's not exactly the same thing as the average household size.
The demographics for gamers has changed quite a bit over the last couple decades. The average video gamer is about 30 years old now. Many gamers are old enough to have children (and grandchildren). If the parents still like games, the chances of them accepting video gaming in their kids is probably even greater.
At our current course, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if in another generation that playing video games being close to as being ubiquitous as watching TV is now. It might even surpass TV.
If they don't want to be recorded, they may be hiding something.
Now now, be careful with that sword, it's double-edged.
Maybe I'm assuming too much, but I think that the original statement was meant satirically. Though... It's hard to tell.
"First"??? They'll be lucky to be able to get in a "IBTL" ;-)
I would expect someone out there to try to do creative things just to make the AI Generated Text say something really weird. At least... that's what I'd want to do. I like challenging and breaking software though.
We finally get some *real* "News for Nerds"!
That's really awesome.
I find Homer's character to be too two dimensional... He lacks depth.
But seriously, I have mixed feelings about that choice. Let me say that I could see Homer being the tops of many notable lists; he is *a* great character. He's a little bit Everyman, and a little bit of satire of the "Everyotherman" (if I may be allowed to invent a word here... It's perfectly cromulent!)
However, It just seems a bit superficial to me to say the greatest character of TV or Film in 20 years. There are so many great characters from TV and film that really do have tremendous depth of character, but just aren't as ubiquitous as Homer. Perhaps I just don't know how I feel about the designation of "Greatest".
But on the other hand... I am just merely questioning it, not outright disputing it. I really don't know how I feel about it.
No, because the standard has nothing whatsoever to do with the content.
Perhaps I was assuming too much when I thought that it would be clear that when contrasting the application vs the content, that by "content" I am referring to the vehicle for which this content is being carried, i.e. the format/standard... And by application, I specifically mean Adobe's software.
I wasn't trying to suggest that Apple doesn't want any content that could possibly be made as a flash app, and I'm baffled as to how you could reasonably interpret it as such.