Should games companies move to the Gillette model - give away the razor, but sell the blades, in essence? With more and more gamers depending on the "online experience", it seems logical. Of course, the counter-argument is that the traditional model gives you a large influx of cash up-front when people buy the game, versus a series of micro-transactions to get to the same level of profit. But for a more patient company, I think the Gillette model could pay big dividends - you get more people playing the game to start, since it's free, so (assuming the same percentage downloads additional content) your download market is potentially a lot bigger.
For $8 an hour, you likely will not be doing anything interesting, and probably not even doing anything tech-related. You're being hired as a "gopher", and you're not going to learn much. The company that offers that sort of rate does so with the understanding that they aren't going to attract the best-and-brightest (who will go intern at some place like IBM that pays their interns a living wage), and they'll treat you as such.
To sum up, in all likelihood it's a crap job that pays crap, and you'll be treated like crap. I hope I'm wrong.
...is why Farmville is so popular despite the fact that it's an incredibly buggy piece of software. I've been playing it for a few months, and can't count the number of times it's crapped out on me. It continually decides to "update" (losing any recent changes, with no "save" option for the user), and sometimes just randomly loses "gifts" from other Facebook users. I'll be leaving the game soon, and when I do the last thing I'll do is set up a big "Zynga sucks!" in my fields using hay bales.
There is a lesson here that many software companies fail to learn - fix the existing problems before you add new features. Otherwise, your customers will find something less frustrating to use.
I never understood why they keep letting Space Hulk go out of print, then bringing it back, then letting it go out of print. The third edition is very "pretty" (nice sculpts on the figures), but apparently it basically sold out in record time and GW said "We're not making any more".
It's like they have a license to print money, say "Nah, we have enough", but then won't let anyone else have any?
There's one more key we're missing - the ability to render humans realistically. We can manage just about everything else, but until we can make a virtual John Wayne that looks like John Wayne and not a wax mannequin, we're not going to see Hollywood abandon "talent".
Of course, once we can do so, the next step will be to "improve" the stars - start with a virtual Natalie Portman (for example), and then "tweak" her for further fanboy appeal.
I already admitted it was likely off-topic, flagging it as such is disingenuous at best. But, hey, if you'd rather just flag crap than open a discussion about how maybe ancient tech wasn't quite as off-the-ball as we think, feel free!
But I find it interesting that according to ancient alchemy there were four "elements" (fire, water, earth, and air), and according to modern science there are four "states of matter" (plasma, liquid, solid, and gaseous).
I'm more used to Europe having the right idea about privacy, while the US (at least lately) tends to put individual rights to things like privacy in secure storage where nobody can use them, "to keep them safe for future generations."
...this makes sense. If you distribute the UPS responsibility across all the servers, then a single failure will only take down one server, rather than a whole block.
On the other hand, they're probably going to need to hire a full-time person eventually just to go around and change all the batteries. They do go bad eventually and need to be changed.
(As for the people wondering why 12 volts - your computer at home may be plugged into a 110 or 220V household circuit, but the CPU, and everything else on the MoBo, doesn't use anywhere near as much.)
I've had an idea for a while (actually, I have many ideas, but this one is actually printable).
One of the perceived problems with Linux (for the masses) is its complexity, and the truth is that for the average end-user, Linux does a lot more than it needs to for a typical end-user. I sometimes wonder if a "cut-down" Linux distro, with tighter integration with the X interface (but not so tight as Windows) and removing some of the server-level stuff (like SMP for example) might be able to crack the "average user" marker.
Now, I might be a complete crack-bunny here (that's happened before), but a GEOS work-alike based on a Linux kernel could be an interesting thing to go with. After all, the price is right.:-) Strip it down so the only install is a desktop, take out the heavy-duty code that we all love but my mom would never use, and pitch that to the charities and schools.
You're right in that ADD's not a disease - it's not even a disorder. It's very poorly named.
If you consider most behaviours in nature, they tend to fall within a standard "bell curve" distribution. All ADD is, is your ability to "pay attention" (whatever that is) is at the low end of the bell curve. There's a corresponding situation where you have difficulty NOT paying attention, but I don't know if they've given it a name.
Anyway, treatments of ADD generally focus on pushing you towards the centre of that bell curve, either through pharmaceutical means or other methods. While I don't have any firsthand knowledge of Neural Feedback Training as a specific treatment, I seem to recall reading something about it in the past, and it is successful in some cases.
Remember, though, that ADD is a "spectrum disorder" - people are all over the map in terms of their symptoms and what works for them. Make sure you and your doctor work together on a treatment plan for your daughter, and if you're not happy with the meds she's on, don't be afraid to ask about other options - other meds, or non-medication options.
I'm 34, and I was diagnosed ADD about 8 months ago. Suddenly a lot of things in my past make sense.:-)
Anyway, you'll see a lot of people saying "try drug X", "no, drug X is no good, use drug Y", "no, don't use any drugs". The fact of the matter is this - EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT. Everyone has different symptoms, to different degrees, and responds differently to medications, diet, magnesium supplements, or whatever other treatment you want to try.
The important thing is, make sure that once you have the diagnosis you work with your doctor(s) to determine what the best course of treatment is for you.
Personally, I'm on plain old generic-form Ritalin (methylphenidate). It's improved my focus (not 100%, but to the point where I'm not so annoying in meetings any more), and I haven't had any noticeable side effects (except for a slight rise in blood pressure which my doctor and I are monitoring).
Um, cost for one. All those kewl architectural details (nice moldings, gargoyles, french doors, and so on) cost $$$. If you're a developer, you want to maximize your profit (hence, minimize cost).
I'm in the middle of renovating my house (dates back to Victorian era, high ceilings, etc.) and you wouldn't believe the cost of some of that crap, even at "contractor" rates.
Not that I'm advocating this, but... The "FIN" brochure was "postage paid by addressee". If you got a bunch of 'em, mailed them in (blank even), Micro$oft would still have to pay the postage.
Slashdot Mirror
Should games companies move to the Gillette model - give away the razor, but sell the blades, in essence? With more and more gamers depending on the "online experience", it seems logical. Of course, the counter-argument is that the traditional model gives you a large influx of cash up-front when people buy the game, versus a series of micro-transactions to get to the same level of profit. But for a more patient company, I think the Gillette model could pay big dividends - you get more people playing the game to start, since it's free, so (assuming the same percentage downloads additional content) your download market is potentially a lot bigger.
For $8 an hour, you likely will not be doing anything interesting, and probably not even doing anything tech-related. You're being hired as a "gopher", and you're not going to learn much. The company that offers that sort of rate does so with the understanding that they aren't going to attract the best-and-brightest (who will go intern at some place like IBM that pays their interns a living wage), and they'll treat you as such.
To sum up, in all likelihood it's a crap job that pays crap, and you'll be treated like crap. I hope I'm wrong.
...is why Farmville is so popular despite the fact that it's an incredibly buggy piece of software. I've been playing it for a few months, and can't count the number of times it's crapped out on me. It continually decides to "update" (losing any recent changes, with no "save" option for the user), and sometimes just randomly loses "gifts" from other Facebook users. I'll be leaving the game soon, and when I do the last thing I'll do is set up a big "Zynga sucks!" in my fields using hay bales.
There is a lesson here that many software companies fail to learn - fix the existing problems before you add new features. Otherwise, your customers will find something less frustrating to use.
Games Workshop - good games that cost too much.
I never understood why they keep letting Space Hulk go out of print, then bringing it back, then letting it go out of print. The third edition is very "pretty" (nice sculpts on the figures), but apparently it basically sold out in record time and GW said "We're not making any more".
It's like they have a license to print money, say "Nah, we have enough", but then won't let anyone else have any?
There's one more key we're missing - the ability to render humans realistically. We can manage just about everything else, but until we can make a virtual John Wayne that looks like John Wayne and not a wax mannequin, we're not going to see Hollywood abandon "talent".
Of course, once we can do so, the next step will be to "improve" the stars - start with a virtual Natalie Portman (for example), and then "tweak" her for further fanboy appeal.
I already admitted it was likely off-topic, flagging it as such is disingenuous at best. But, hey, if you'd rather just flag crap than open a discussion about how maybe ancient tech wasn't quite as off-the-ball as we think, feel free!
For some reason I read that as plasma hot tub.
The mind boggles.
But I find it interesting that according to ancient alchemy there were four "elements" (fire, water, earth, and air), and according to modern science there are four "states of matter" (plasma, liquid, solid, and gaseous).
I'm more used to Europe having the right idea about privacy, while the US (at least lately) tends to put individual rights to things like privacy in secure storage where nobody can use them, "to keep them safe for future generations."
...this makes sense. If you distribute the UPS responsibility across all the servers, then a single failure will only take down one server, rather than a whole block.
On the other hand, they're probably going to need to hire a full-time person eventually just to go around and change all the batteries. They do go bad eventually and need to be changed.
(As for the people wondering why 12 volts - your computer at home may be plugged into a 110 or 220V household circuit, but the CPU, and everything else on the MoBo, doesn't use anywhere near as much.)
Wow! Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?!?!
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
I've had an idea for a while (actually, I have many ideas, but this one is actually printable).
:-) Strip it down so the only install is a desktop, take out the heavy-duty code that we all love but my mom would never use, and pitch that to the charities and schools.
One of the perceived problems with Linux (for the masses) is its complexity, and the truth is that for the average end-user, Linux does a lot more than it needs to for a typical end-user. I sometimes wonder if a "cut-down" Linux distro, with tighter integration with the X interface (but not so tight as Windows) and removing some of the server-level stuff (like SMP for example) might be able to crack the "average user" marker.
Now, I might be a complete crack-bunny here (that's happened before), but a GEOS work-alike based on a Linux kernel could be an interesting thing to go with. After all, the price is right.
Whaddaya think?
You're right in that ADD's not a disease - it's not even a disorder. It's very poorly named.
If you consider most behaviours in nature, they tend to fall within a standard "bell curve" distribution. All ADD is, is your ability to "pay attention" (whatever that is) is at the low end of the bell curve. There's a corresponding situation where you have difficulty NOT paying attention, but I don't know if they've given it a name.
Anyway, treatments of ADD generally focus on pushing you towards the centre of that bell curve, either through pharmaceutical means or other methods. While I don't have any firsthand knowledge of Neural Feedback Training as a specific treatment, I seem to recall reading something about it in the past, and it is successful in some cases.
Remember, though, that ADD is a "spectrum disorder" - people are all over the map in terms of their symptoms and what works for them. Make sure you and your doctor work together on a treatment plan for your daughter, and if you're not happy with the meds she's on, don't be afraid to ask about other options - other meds, or non-medication options.
I'm 34, and I was diagnosed ADD about 8 months ago. Suddenly a lot of things in my past make sense. :-)
Anyway, you'll see a lot of people saying "try drug X", "no, drug X is no good, use drug Y", "no, don't use any drugs". The fact of the matter is this - EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT. Everyone has different symptoms, to different degrees, and responds differently to medications, diet, magnesium supplements, or whatever other treatment you want to try.
The important thing is, make sure that once you have the diagnosis you work with your doctor(s) to determine what the best course of treatment is for you.
Personally, I'm on plain old generic-form Ritalin (methylphenidate). It's improved my focus (not 100%, but to the point where I'm not so annoying in meetings any more), and I haven't had any noticeable side effects (except for a slight rise in blood pressure which my doctor and I are monitoring).
I'm in the middle of renovating my house (dates back to Victorian era, high ceilings, etc.) and you wouldn't believe the cost of some of that crap, even at "contractor" rates.
Um, I think that should have been "not if you happen to have any sort of attachment to your kneecaps."
Atrocious spelling is barely tolerable. Grammatical errors, particularly those which completely reverse what you are trying to say, are not.
Sure, it's petty. So?