Fair would be opening your own store across the street. Competing would be buying games from people for a higher price and selling them for a lower one.
If you want to sell your game to another person directly, that's super great, and you should use Craigslist or some other way to do it. And, in fact, I think that's what people should do, we don't need physical stores to do this kind of retailing. Still, it's wrong to take advantage of the store on the one hand while undermining it on the other.
To be clear, I understood you, and was being smartassy. But what I said is genuine: I have been a two-decade Apple customer, but have gotten fed up and am currently in the yearlong-or-so permanent transition away from the platform. At the same time, I recognize that different people have different needs, and I still recommend Macs to some other people, if it is the right fit. My problem is not so much with the technology per se, but much more than the average person (apparently) I really, really, really hate it when companies make me feel like a chump, and Apple made me feel like a chump one too many times, so I can't give them my money anymore. But, I don't disparage your choice, and if it suits your needs and doesn't make you feel like too much of a chump, then I verily wish you luck with that.
I discussed this with my coworkers. Normally I'm not a conspiracy minded person, but if a missile is launched off the coast of LA at rush hour I can only imagine two possibilities
1. The US military did it 2. The US military would be motherfucking scared off of its ass and scrambling like crazy
Since #2 is not happening, I am left to assume that #1 is true, despite the military's denial. The only third possibility is something which I can't actually believe could be true:
3. The US military is nonplussed that someone other than them launched a fucking missile in US territory
So if I assume the US military shot off a missile, there are lots of interesting possibilities
A. Mistake (I find this hard to believe) B. Show of might (but wouldn't the show be better if we announced it to the world first?) C. Routine testing or war games or something (what, off the coast of LA? at rush hour? and then deny it?) D. Rogue launch (and then deny it?)
I don't know. This is a really really weird news story.
One to ten thousand? Really, or not really? Are you sure it's not actually 15:1 in the other direction? That's what I would guess if I, like you, were pulling numbers out of thin air.
But, I guess you chose Option 2: fuck that kid, it ain't his fault, but fuck him anyway.
I guess, in this democracy, I can't join you in telling that kind that he should fuck off and fail in life. Still, I'm glad that we have distilled our political differences to this clear difference: you say fuck that child, I say don't fuck that child. Okay. Happy voting, I hope people like me outnumber people like you.
What kind do you have? I just bought an Archos 5. It's not too bad, but yeah I'm still trying to get it to integrate more faithfully with Jolicloud Linux. The Archos itself has its own problems, but all in all it is better than my old (hd dead after 20 months) iPod. The problem with both the Archos and Jolicloud is that neither one has up-to-date software on it.
Yeah, like you I also dislike what has happened to Macintosh. I'm currently transitioning away from that platform for exactly the reasons you describe: dictatorial behavior and a focus on completely non-technical users. I'm glad to have been welcomed into the warm bosom of the Linux OS, where software does what I want (because, evidently, it was written by people who want it to do what I want it to do), is one-click easy to use, yet can be changed if I want to pretend to be a technical user. It truly is the best of all worlds.
How long ago did you try Linux? I tried it for the first time in 2000 and it was difficult and incomplete (Yellow Dog Linux). I tried it in, oh, about 2003 and it was pretty good (Red Hat) but my Mac was better. As of a few years ago it became better and easier to use and more complete than Windows (Ubuntu). Today I use Jolicloud, which is by leaps and bounds the easiest computer experience I've ever had, easier than my Mac. There is still distance to cover, but that distance is being covered by Linux, not Windows. That distance is also being covered by Mac, but in a direction that I'm not interested in. I expect to be a Linux user until computer paradigms completely turn over, which could be after my lifetime.
I see where you are coming from, but I don't agree. For me, abandoning Windows software is a wonderful fringe benefit to abandoning Windows. Windows software nearly universally sucks. But, I do recognize that people have special-purpose software for special needs like engineering or statistics, and if that software demands Windows, then you are stuck with Windows. You know, some people still have crazyass old computers around for doing special tasks. I feel lucky that I'm not one of them.
You think? I think about 30% of people would never install their own OS. I think if it's easy (and it is), then about two thirds or so of people would be willing to install an OS.
I heard arguments like yours about browsers, too, but here we are looking at usage for non-preloaded browsers of around 50%.
Besides, I don't think your point retorts the OP's point. If Linux had lots of developers (and, actually, it does) then its software would become "good enough" (and, actually, it pretty much is) and then there would start to be some preloads (and, actually, there is a small amount of that).
Agreed. The most difficulty I ever had getting drivers for my devices under Linux was doing something like apt-get install old-ass-drivers-for-outdated-hardware. The most difficulty I ever had getting drivers for my devices under Windows was... NEVER SOLVED and Windows never worked at all.
Windows is hard to use. Linux is comparatively easy to use.
Yeah, of course. Windows hardly works at all, and is a pain in the ass to use. Please allow me to share my own anecdote:
By fate, my wife and I were both reinstalling operating systems at the same time. She was installing Windows (Vista or 7; I can't remember) on her laptop, and I was installing Ubuntu on my netbook. Both installations took a while, and both succeeded. Then, that nite we wanted to watch a movie. Again by fate, we each had the movie on separate USB thumb drives, so we both popped them in. Yet again by fate, the codec for the movie wasn't supported by her software (Windows Media Player or whatever) nor mine (VLC or whatever). Both her media software and my media software popped up a box saying, sorry, that file is in an unknown format. I swear this all happened in parallel as we sat next to one another on the couch.
Here's where the stories diverge.
On Ubuntu, after the message saying the codec was unknown, there was an option for Go To The Internet And Find The Needed Software And Install It. I clicked Yes, and the movie was playing about 45 seconds later. For her, the message said Good Luck Finding The Codec And Installing It, You Can Start By Looking On The Internet. We watched the movie on my netbook (output to the TV) and all during the hours of movie time she was trying to find and install the right codec. She failed. It took her a few more days to find it and get it right.
Linux is user-friendly and easy to use. Windows is crap and difficult to use, if it can be used at all. My anecdote proves this beyond any doubt, and we all know that anecdotes are the standard by which these things are judged.
My OS+UI can create a new folder using a keyboard shortcut. Windows cannot do that. I wish Windows could do the things that any nancypants OS could do, because that would really ease my 8 hours of work five days a week.
Whatever you do, NEVER EVER GO TO THE WINDOWS SUPPORT WEBSITE. Wow, man, that website -- as incredible as this sounds -- has even worse design (visual and structural) than Windows itself. When I search the internet for a Windows question, I make sure to avoid support.microsoft.com, because I know it will make Firefox break out in hives and, in the end, will only confuse me more.
Yeah, man, that pulseaudio crap was a pain for us Jolicloud users, too. WTF is that? I don't follow Linux audio software, all I know is that Skype didn't work for months and months.
Interesting. I'm still trying to figure out why Windows still beeps and boops at me, despite the volume being turned down to zero AND the "Mute" checkbox checked. If that doesn't stop Windows from producing any sound ever, then what would? Also, what the hell is the keyboard shortcut for creating a new folder? Don't even get me started on having to click "Yes, I meant to do that dangerous action such as deleting an alias or renaming a file", and THEN clicking "Yes, really", AND THEN clicking "YES, REALLY REALLY". Shit, how many times do I have to tell it? One more: why is it that I have never, not once in ten years of using Windows, changed any preference/configuration which wasn't hidden behind at least one Advanced button, and sometimes up to (this is absolutely true) SIX LEVELS of "Advanced" buttons. What prefs aren't "advanced" according to Microsoft? Oh, damn, I can't stop bitching without asking why the Windows command line, after 25 years, doesn't have a history memory across sessions, or why Notepad can only open one text document, and creating a new text document closes the one that had been open.
It all makes me wonder what the fuck Microsoft has been doing lo these three decades? Has anyone at MS ever actually had the displeasure of sitting down and using Windows? Are they all Mac users over there, and thus not frustrated by this endless parade of crappy design? And if they are all Mac users, why aren't they better at ripping it off? I don't know. I can't figure it out.
I never had that one dual-monitor problem you had with Ubuntu, though. That sounds like a real pisser.
My honest opinion is that if Linux were to become "like Windows", then it would stop being the suitable Desktop OS that it currently is. Windows has never been a suitable Desktop OS, ever.
Yeah, you make the distinction I was trying to make: perhaps these agencies perform adequately for their costs, or perhaps not; but it is wrong and disingenuous to claim they "don't do anything". The former is a conversation had by adults living in a democracy; the latter is a stupid platitude thrown around by intellectual children who aren't willing or capable of acting like grown-ups. The former is how we decide whether to continue funding an agency, or how to change its structure; the latter is how we get lost in angry shouting which wastes time, money, and energy, distracting us from the actual problem at hand.
So, you and I seem to agree on this, which is wonderful. That other idiot can suck eggs.
Obviously they are neither 100% effective nor 100% useless. The real question is, are we getting our money's worth?
Yes! See, now this is how I think, and it's the reason I objected to Arch Michael's claim of "programs that don't do what they were supposed to do". Government programs, with rare exceptions, do what they are supposed to do, more or less. The question is, as you said, whether it's more enough or less enough. And that is a question I am very happy to discuss on a program-by-program basis. Many programs are good, well intentioned, and yet still not worth the cost. What you said about social security is exactly the kind of thing I would say; and similar things about many other programs.
Ideologues say things like "transfer payments are unconstutional!" (which is nonsense) whereas moderates like me and apparently you say "government programs can sometimes adequately address big problems to a degree which is worth the cost, and sometimes not, and we should carefully determine which is which". I like moderates.
Can I ask a question and get an honest reply? I'm genuinely curious whether your false dichotomy is a prerequisite for your political rationale, or whether your rationale also stands up when you don't slander the needy as stupid and lazy? Seriously, I'm curious.
Like, when I grew up my single mother raised me. We ate from food stamps and my health care came from the government. I was not an unemployed boor; I was a hungry child. My mom tried to sub teach, and couldn't find a job despite her two college degrees, so she went back to school to get a third degree, then (immediately, with this third degree) got a job and got us off government assistance.
Does the analogy you gave also apply to me (fuck me, I'm just a lazy burger flipper thanklessly demanding money from productive citizens)?
Does a similar analogy apply to me (well, it's ain't his fault, but fuck him anyway, if he starves to death at least I can still afford my fancy car)?
Or does the analogy not apply to me (don't fuck him, he's just a kid who, with government education, government food, and government health care will grow up to have an above-average paying job whose taxes will support other hungry children)?
Seriously. It's hard on the internet to separate the truly hateful ideologues from the slightly-more-thoughtful people, whose rhetoric often sound very similar. I'm pretty certain that most of the people I meet online are the second type, in which case I encourage you to moderate your tone a little bit; and if you are the first type (which, again, I'm almost ceratin you yourself are not) then fuck you, you are a douchebag.
One final thought: we aren't born equal, except in constitutional theory; but because we believe in the common dignity of each human, we provide some common services for each human, to the extent we can afford.
Slashdot Mirror
No, in addition to inventing numbers, you weren't even good enough to accuse a specific entity. That's a double fail!
Fair would be opening your own store across the street. Competing would be buying games from people for a higher price and selling them for a lower one.
If you want to sell your game to another person directly, that's super great, and you should use Craigslist or some other way to do it. And, in fact, I think that's what people should do, we don't need physical stores to do this kind of retailing. Still, it's wrong to take advantage of the store on the one hand while undermining it on the other.
dude, you use a dial-up modem? passwords are the least of your concerns.
Seriously. Back in my day we just did drugs, no cell phones or social networks needed.
To be clear, I understood you, and was being smartassy. But what I said is genuine: I have been a two-decade Apple customer, but have gotten fed up and am currently in the yearlong-or-so permanent transition away from the platform. At the same time, I recognize that different people have different needs, and I still recommend Macs to some other people, if it is the right fit. My problem is not so much with the technology per se, but much more than the average person (apparently) I really, really, really hate it when companies make me feel like a chump, and Apple made me feel like a chump one too many times, so I can't give them my money anymore. But, I don't disparage your choice, and if it suits your needs and doesn't make you feel like too much of a chump, then I verily wish you luck with that.
I discussed this with my coworkers. Normally I'm not a conspiracy minded person, but if a missile is launched off the coast of LA at rush hour I can only imagine two possibilities
1. The US military did it
2. The US military would be motherfucking scared off of its ass and scrambling like crazy
Since #2 is not happening, I am left to assume that #1 is true, despite the military's denial. The only third possibility is something which I can't actually believe could be true:
3. The US military is nonplussed that someone other than them launched a fucking missile in US territory
So if I assume the US military shot off a missile, there are lots of interesting possibilities
A. Mistake (I find this hard to believe)
B. Show of might (but wouldn't the show be better if we announced it to the world first?)
C. Routine testing or war games or something (what, off the coast of LA? at rush hour? and then deny it?)
D. Rogue launch (and then deny it?)
I don't know. This is a really really weird news story.
One to ten thousand? Really, or not really? Are you sure it's not actually 15:1 in the other direction? That's what I would guess if I, like you, were pulling numbers out of thin air.
But, I guess you chose Option 2: fuck that kid, it ain't his fault, but fuck him anyway.
I guess, in this democracy, I can't join you in telling that kind that he should fuck off and fail in life. Still, I'm glad that we have distilled our political differences to this clear difference: you say fuck that child, I say don't fuck that child. Okay. Happy voting, I hope people like me outnumber people like you.
What kind do you have? I just bought an Archos 5. It's not too bad, but yeah I'm still trying to get it to integrate more faithfully with Jolicloud Linux. The Archos itself has its own problems, but all in all it is better than my old (hd dead after 20 months) iPod. The problem with both the Archos and Jolicloud is that neither one has up-to-date software on it.
Yeah, like you I also dislike what has happened to Macintosh. I'm currently transitioning away from that platform for exactly the reasons you describe: dictatorial behavior and a focus on completely non-technical users. I'm glad to have been welcomed into the warm bosom of the Linux OS, where software does what I want (because, evidently, it was written by people who want it to do what I want it to do), is one-click easy to use, yet can be changed if I want to pretend to be a technical user. It truly is the best of all worlds.
For some time now I have lamented the fact that I cannot do things /everyone/ else can easily do under Windows.
under Linux which
Fair enough, but most people don't lament the fact that they cannot be part of a spam-spewing botnet.
PS I have no problem watching full-screen YouTube videos on Jolicloud Linux running on a severely underpowered Acer Aspire One.
How long ago did you try Linux? I tried it for the first time in 2000 and it was difficult and incomplete (Yellow Dog Linux). I tried it in, oh, about 2003 and it was pretty good (Red Hat) but my Mac was better. As of a few years ago it became better and easier to use and more complete than Windows (Ubuntu). Today I use Jolicloud, which is by leaps and bounds the easiest computer experience I've ever had, easier than my Mac. There is still distance to cover, but that distance is being covered by Linux, not Windows. That distance is also being covered by Mac, but in a direction that I'm not interested in. I expect to be a Linux user until computer paradigms completely turn over, which could be after my lifetime.
I see where you are coming from, but I don't agree. For me, abandoning Windows software is a wonderful fringe benefit to abandoning Windows. Windows software nearly universally sucks. But, I do recognize that people have special-purpose software for special needs like engineering or statistics, and if that software demands Windows, then you are stuck with Windows. You know, some people still have crazyass old computers around for doing special tasks. I feel lucky that I'm not one of them.
You think? I think about 30% of people would never install their own OS. I think if it's easy (and it is), then about two thirds or so of people would be willing to install an OS.
I heard arguments like yours about browsers, too, but here we are looking at usage for non-preloaded browsers of around 50%.
Besides, I don't think your point retorts the OP's point. If Linux had lots of developers (and, actually, it does) then its software would become "good enough" (and, actually, it pretty much is) and then there would start to be some preloads (and, actually, there is a small amount of that).
Agreed. The most difficulty I ever had getting drivers for my devices under Linux was doing something like apt-get install old-ass-drivers-for-outdated-hardware. The most difficulty I ever had getting drivers for my devices under Windows was... NEVER SOLVED and Windows never worked at all.
Windows is hard to use. Linux is comparatively easy to use.
Yeah, of course. Windows hardly works at all, and is a pain in the ass to use. Please allow me to share my own anecdote:
By fate, my wife and I were both reinstalling operating systems at the same time. She was installing Windows (Vista or 7; I can't remember) on her laptop, and I was installing Ubuntu on my netbook. Both installations took a while, and both succeeded. Then, that nite we wanted to watch a movie. Again by fate, we each had the movie on separate USB thumb drives, so we both popped them in. Yet again by fate, the codec for the movie wasn't supported by her software (Windows Media Player or whatever) nor mine (VLC or whatever). Both her media software and my media software popped up a box saying, sorry, that file is in an unknown format. I swear this all happened in parallel as we sat next to one another on the couch.
Here's where the stories diverge.
On Ubuntu, after the message saying the codec was unknown, there was an option for Go To The Internet And Find The Needed Software And Install It. I clicked Yes, and the movie was playing about 45 seconds later. For her, the message said Good Luck Finding The Codec And Installing It, You Can Start By Looking On The Internet. We watched the movie on my netbook (output to the TV) and all during the hours of movie time she was trying to find and install the right codec. She failed. It took her a few more days to find it and get it right.
Linux is user-friendly and easy to use. Windows is crap and difficult to use, if it can be used at all. My anecdote proves this beyond any doubt, and we all know that anecdotes are the standard by which these things are judged.
My OS+UI can create a new folder using a keyboard shortcut. Windows cannot do that. I wish Windows could do the things that any nancypants OS could do, because that would really ease my 8 hours of work five days a week.
I am not an Amish expert, but I think rules vary widely by community. ...which is a lot like Linux, actually.
Whatever you do, NEVER EVER GO TO THE WINDOWS SUPPORT WEBSITE. Wow, man, that website -- as incredible as this sounds -- has even worse design (visual and structural) than Windows itself. When I search the internet for a Windows question, I make sure to avoid support.microsoft.com, because I know it will make Firefox break out in hives and, in the end, will only confuse me more.
Yeah, man, that pulseaudio crap was a pain for us Jolicloud users, too. WTF is that? I don't follow Linux audio software, all I know is that Skype didn't work for months and months.
Interesting. I'm still trying to figure out why Windows still beeps and boops at me, despite the volume being turned down to zero AND the "Mute" checkbox checked. If that doesn't stop Windows from producing any sound ever, then what would? Also, what the hell is the keyboard shortcut for creating a new folder? Don't even get me started on having to click "Yes, I meant to do that dangerous action such as deleting an alias or renaming a file", and THEN clicking "Yes, really", AND THEN clicking "YES, REALLY REALLY". Shit, how many times do I have to tell it? One more: why is it that I have never, not once in ten years of using Windows, changed any preference/configuration which wasn't hidden behind at least one Advanced button, and sometimes up to (this is absolutely true) SIX LEVELS of "Advanced" buttons. What prefs aren't "advanced" according to Microsoft? Oh, damn, I can't stop bitching without asking why the Windows command line, after 25 years, doesn't have a history memory across sessions, or why Notepad can only open one text document, and creating a new text document closes the one that had been open.
It all makes me wonder what the fuck Microsoft has been doing lo these three decades? Has anyone at MS ever actually had the displeasure of sitting down and using Windows? Are they all Mac users over there, and thus not frustrated by this endless parade of crappy design? And if they are all Mac users, why aren't they better at ripping it off? I don't know. I can't figure it out.
I never had that one dual-monitor problem you had with Ubuntu, though. That sounds like a real pisser.
My honest opinion is that if Linux were to become "like Windows", then it would stop being the suitable Desktop OS that it currently is. Windows has never been a suitable Desktop OS, ever.
Yeah, you make the distinction I was trying to make: perhaps these agencies perform adequately for their costs, or perhaps not; but it is wrong and disingenuous to claim they "don't do anything". The former is a conversation had by adults living in a democracy; the latter is a stupid platitude thrown around by intellectual children who aren't willing or capable of acting like grown-ups. The former is how we decide whether to continue funding an agency, or how to change its structure; the latter is how we get lost in angry shouting which wastes time, money, and energy, distracting us from the actual problem at hand.
So, you and I seem to agree on this, which is wonderful. That other idiot can suck eggs.
Obviously they are neither 100% effective nor 100% useless. The real question is, are we getting our money's worth?
Yes! See, now this is how I think, and it's the reason I objected to Arch Michael's claim of "programs that don't do what they were supposed to do". Government programs, with rare exceptions, do what they are supposed to do, more or less. The question is, as you said, whether it's more enough or less enough. And that is a question I am very happy to discuss on a program-by-program basis. Many programs are good, well intentioned, and yet still not worth the cost. What you said about social security is exactly the kind of thing I would say; and similar things about many other programs.
Ideologues say things like "transfer payments are unconstutional!" (which is nonsense) whereas moderates like me and apparently you say "government programs can sometimes adequately address big problems to a degree which is worth the cost, and sometimes not, and we should carefully determine which is which". I like moderates.
Can I ask a question and get an honest reply? I'm genuinely curious whether your false dichotomy is a prerequisite for your political rationale, or whether your rationale also stands up when you don't slander the needy as stupid and lazy? Seriously, I'm curious.
Like, when I grew up my single mother raised me. We ate from food stamps and my health care came from the government. I was not an unemployed boor; I was a hungry child. My mom tried to sub teach, and couldn't find a job despite her two college degrees, so she went back to school to get a third degree, then (immediately, with this third degree) got a job and got us off government assistance.
Does the analogy you gave also apply to me (fuck me, I'm just a lazy burger flipper thanklessly demanding money from productive citizens)?
Does a similar analogy apply to me (well, it's ain't his fault, but fuck him anyway, if he starves to death at least I can still afford my fancy car)?
Or does the analogy not apply to me (don't fuck him, he's just a kid who, with government education, government food, and government health care will grow up to have an above-average paying job whose taxes will support other hungry children)?
Seriously. It's hard on the internet to separate the truly hateful ideologues from the slightly-more-thoughtful people, whose rhetoric often sound very similar. I'm pretty certain that most of the people I meet online are the second type, in which case I encourage you to moderate your tone a little bit; and if you are the first type (which, again, I'm almost ceratin you yourself are not) then fuck you, you are a douchebag.
One final thought: we aren't born equal, except in constitutional theory; but because we believe in the common dignity of each human, we provide some common services for each human, to the extent we can afford.
How much wealth does that 50% control? Did you leave out that number as an oversight?