Honestly you can put the sensor bar in front of a blank wall and play the game with the TV behind you if you want. It doesn't know anything about the TV, just about the position of the sensor bar. Place the sensor bar accordingly and you won't have to move any furniture.
I fail to see your point. What I said, quite clearly, was: "most core Republican voters REALLY REALLY hate trial attorneys". What exactly does that have to do with the fact that trial attorneys give politicians lots of money?
The Wii is going to want to load its data in as linear an order as possible. This will be okay for linear track based racing games that KNOW what scenery/data needs to loaded next, but sucks for GTA type games wich might see you loading any kind of data next.
Only if the game is programmed by an idiot. Unless you're dealing with some sort of weird fourth dimensional travel, movement in a game world is always linear. You know what direction the character is moving in and so you know what content to load next. I find it hilarious that you use GTA as your example since that's primarily a Playstation game and therefore was designed to load data from optical discs, not hard disks.
I ended up skimming over the rest of your argument after that because it seemed to boil down to "MEGATEXTURES == MEGAPEENS!!!1!!one!1!" and not much else.
More power is not inherently better. More power requires more resources to get results, and concentration on that aspect of the product often causes other areas to suffer. Case in Point: The Gamecube was the most powerful system of the last generation, and that earned it nothing (Well, except RE4...)
Consoles are not out to take market share from the PC (Well, with the exception of the 360 perhaps). A PC gamer already has too much invested to just walk away from it.
Actually that varies by state. In my state it's perfectly legal to tape any conversation as long as ONE of the parties knows it's being recorded. I'm pretty happy with that, really.
The copyright violation was not an excuse for public humiliation.
Wait, what? Public humiliation? Which person broke the law here again? Not only is it an excuse for public "humiliation" but the author had the right to serve a DMCA takedown notice over the whole thing. Where do you get off saying a professionally worded e-mail explaining the situation is unreasonable? Let's work with an example here: Say someone is displaying your artwork in a public gallery with their name next to it, knowingly misleading visitors as to the source of said art. Do you privately contact them and ask nicely for them to stop doing so (after they've already proven your copyright means jack to them) or do you inform the gallery? You inform the gallery, of course. The fact that your work was copyrighted WAS the polite, private message of "please don't take this and claim it's your own". This is a situation that needs to be remedied immediately. What if said person who "borrowed" your art allows the AP to photograph it? Now every newspaper in the world could (possibly) carry the image with the wrong attribution and suddenly the damages start growing out of control. So you inform the gallery and they pull the work until the ownership of said art can be confirmed. Otherwise you could spend the rest of your life tracking down your mis-attributed work. In this case it's worse. If someone "borrowed" the publicly available (and wrongly) BSD licensed code and put it into a proprietary product, tracking down infringement would be impossible. A public notice was necessary so that anyone who had downloaded said code would know what license it was under. At the very least they should be warned that the code could cause their code to become GPL tainted. In the end, your argument doesn't seem based on any reasonable view of reality.
Actually I've never had a problem there. It's definitely better than shopping at Circuit City. Trying to find a game I want there is a nightmare. I'm lucky if they're even separated by system, much less alphabetized or anything crazy like that.
But then again, I only shop bargains at BB (or the odd game). I don't bother with their internet site, and I only get service plans on things I should get them on (like the camera that I often drop, or a PC I don't feel like supporting for a family member), not silly things like controllers. I also do my research on products and prices before I go in to buy anything, and tell the salesperson what I want, not the other way around.
I've never been lied to, I've never been abused, and I've never been guilty of a bait and switch. They've tried to sell me things I don't want or need, but I just say "No." and that ends it. Honestly, what could they lie to me about?
Well maybe I was exaggerating slightly, but I know I can go to some local places and get an oil change/fluids/filters for about $32. I'd just buy the plugs and do it myself due to how simple the labor is for it (as long as you aren't an idiot with the cables). My car only takes four plugs at about $2.50-$3 ea. And I didn't say it had to be hand washed, just that it better be washed before they give it back to me. ^^;
And yeah, recently I replaced my brakes and had my rotors turned (most significant maint. on the car so far) and I want to say that ran about $150. I did spend another $300 on tires there, but I digress...:P I've owned the car since 2001 and I'd say $500-600 is probably about two years' worth of maintenance for me (tires/oil/filters mostly). But I don't think that's a fair comparison, since it's MY CAR and I NEED it to SURVIVE.:)
Or perhaps it SEEMS expnsive in the US, as their economy is in such poor shape at the moment..
It's a laugh a minute around here. You really think the US economy is in poor shape? Based on what? What indicators? What numbers? Lowest unemployment in years? Soaring consumer confidence? Seriously, share your wisdom.
Either way $500 is not that expensive in the sale of things
$500 for living in the PS3 ghetto. $600 if you want to actually live somewhere they don't deal drugs in your front lawn. And yes, $500 is expensive. I can get a very usable PC with a monitor and probably a printer for less than $500 that will probably play games better and longer than the PS3. I could see you not thinking $500 is expensive if you live in Canada or Australia, but that's because your "dollery doos" are worth significantly less than ours.
Shit, in Nevada $500 could get me two hours with the best woman in a brothel. $500 is not an everyday expense for 99.9% of people, it's something you seriously have to plan for. And I seriously doubt a $500 PS3 is going to give me as much ROI as two hours with the one of the best hookers in Nevada.
Heck my car costs $300 for a service, for a can of oil, some plugs and a few filters..
$300? For a can of oil, plugs, and filters? What is that in, monopoly money? If I paid $50 total for those three services they'd better wash that bitch and put one of those hangy air freshener things on my mirror.
Also, this is a car, a necessity for most people to support themselves. That would be like saying "Hell, I pay $20k a year on my mortgage!" or "Hell, I pay $50/mo for my insulin!" $500 for a system that does not offer anything more superior to the end user than a system priced $200 less is not an expense most people would be willing to make. Someone who thinks that line of reasoning is unsound "needs to get a grip on reality".
Everyone I know who owns a PS3 (and that's not many people) has not been able to give me any answer as to why they bought it other than "Well, it's a PS3..." There's no draw there for anyone but those who a) Have too much disposable income or b) are Sony fanatics. The a) don't really care about the value of their purchase so far, because if they don't enjoy it they'll just spend money on some other fun pursuit (As an example, one friend spends in excess of $400 every Thursday night on liquor alone at the local Buffalo Wild Wings because he works too much and has no other use for the money) and most of b) that I know have already considered returning the thing, but are waiting because they can't find a place with a Wii (in stock, that is) to exchange it for.
Did the Devs take full use of the Cell Proc or did they simply recompile it for the Cell and not optimize it?
Or is optimizing for a Cell processor an absolute nightmare and so you're best off just getting your stuff running good on the 360 and just plain running on the PS3?
It is true the PS3 dosn't have a large following. however the real reason this is such a shame is because the injustice done to gamers world wide.
I would think that having to pay $600 for the ability to play the next "Shadow of the Colossus", "Gears of War", or "Ocarina of Time" (or insert your own favorite 'killer app'/'industry changer' here) would be a huge injustice to gamers. I think any gamer should have at least seen those three games (and many others), the same as any movie buff should see Casablanca or any science fiction fan should read Stranger in a Strange Land. But the fact of the matter is, if the bar for being able to experience the "next great thing" in gaming is set that high, either a) very very few people will be able to experience it, meaning its effect on future titles will be negligible or b) it'll cease being exclusive.
The world tries to move on, move to better technology, get out of the architecture slump and Corporations continue to hold us back.
As a Computer Scientist I'm practically insulted by this comment. The idea of throwing multiple processors (or piles of money, for that matter) at a problem is nothing "new" or "innovative". It's just an expensive copout to avoid good design. That's not to say Cell is a bad design. It's just a design much better suited to servers and supercomputer clusters, not video games. More processors doesn't automagically lead to better performance. As I've explained to students before, no matter how many Chihauhas you tie to your plow, they're not going to do a better job than an old stubborn donkey. That's really what the Cell is when it comes to gaming, a bunch of loud small dogs tied to a plow. If you can somehow make them all pull at exactly the right time maybe they'll pull off a miracle, but why go through all the trouble?
Meanwhile dismissing the XBox 360 as "same old same old" really isn't giving credit where it's due. The original XBox was literally a gimped Celeron PC with an nVidia graphics card. The 360 is a completely new, scratch built platform with custom Power PC CPUs; ie: it has little to nothing in common technologically speaking with its predecessor (except maybe the fact they're both made out of silicon, aluminum, and plastic).
And then with the Wii in the market, trying to claim Sony is the company trying to move the industry in a new direction goes beyond insulting to malicious.
I'm not sure I understand how that makes "PS3 to Continue at the Same Price" news though.
Because 99.9% of Sony's potential customer base believes $600 is too much to pay for a toy. Hell, even in *Japan*, Sony's stronghold, they can't clear 40k systems in a week. Meanwhile the DS practically hasn't dipped under 150k sales for about two years. Traditionally there is no market Sony does better in than Japan, and their two flagship systems' sales (PS3 and PSP) added together aren't even coming close to the numbers of just one of the systems of a company they've already publicly declared they didn't believe to be "real" competition. Then there's the fact that the PS2 has outsold the PS3 several weeks in the past few months (despite an already saturated market) and that the 360's (the least liked console in Japan since the original XBox) numbers have actually come within striking distance a few times in the same time period and the fact that we're not seeing a price drop announced and seeing Sony do crazy things like remove features from their products before European launch makes most people wonder what exactly Sony is trying to do with themselves. Their system is DoA and they don't seem to know what to do to fix it.
I honestly think we can thank rupert murdochs amazing right-wing propaganda machine for convincing democrats to join the republican party in all but name.
Just like we can thank the moonbat left-wing propaganda machines at the alphabit networks for turning more people on to alternative media and off of night-time news.
You're kidding, right? You do realize that when studies are done exploring this very thing that the vast majority of Americans are NOT of the far-left persuasion but actually cluster much more around center-right? You really think most Americans have similar beliefs to people like Jane Fonda, Alec Baldwin, George Soros, and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.? If you do I'd really like to see you back that assertion up.
Just to nitpick, beliefs that are based on non-violence by definition -- e.g. liberalism (libertarianism),
By destroy I did not mean necessarily the use of force. Destroying someone could also refer to ad hominem attack or such. And as far as "liberals" not using violence... I've personally been physically assaulted by "liberals" based on my beliefs and have witnessed several other such assaults. The idea that liberalism is based on non-violence is laughable. Heck, liberal leaders in the US this last election cycle announced they'd lead riots in the streets if the Republicans retained control of Congress. I've had liberal speakers at my campus announce what we should do to David Duke. Alec Baldwin screamed about pulling people who's politics he disagreed with and their families out of their homes and stoning them to death. And don't forget that the founding fathers of the United States were considered at the forefront of "liberal thought" and they sure the hell favored violence as a solution.:)
The idea that libertarianism (my own favorite dogmatic belief system) is based on non-violence is even more hilarious. Try taking a libertarian's stuff and see how "non-violent" they get.:)
And I guess instead of saying Bigfoot I coulda said "Holocaust Denial", but I was trying to illustrate absurdity via absurdity (hence my reference to kibology...)
Non-critical followers of the religion "believe" that this doctrine is the truth, no matter what scientific evidence is brought up against it. Worse, when people insist the doctrine is not true, they proceed to use force against them.
Funny, you just described dogmatic believers in communism/socialism/liberalism/conservatism/libert arianism/global warming/string theory/kibology/bigfoot/socialized healthcare/anarchism/(insert your favorite belief system here). What you're faulting is not a behavior unique to religion, but is something that can be categorized as something bad all on it's own. Namely the behavior of destroying those who disagree with you instead of just trying to prove them wrong. As a good example, Edison did it to Tesla, and at no point was religion involved. People do it in politics everyday.
Any problem in the book, except those explicitly stated so as to force the student to do the steps, can be solved in one line on the TI-89.
My Honors Calc II professor would cackle with glee if he met you while you had that attitude. He was very proud of writing tests that no graphing calculator in existence could solve. And no I'm not exaggerating. All his tests weren't like this (we only had two, he called them "Calculus Unplugged") and in fact he required us to know how to use our calculators and had a class and quiz specifically on calculator use during the semester. But then again in addition to just being a mathematician he was also a scientist (He's the Dean of the College of Science, now...) so he understood the usefulness of tools.
So I have to agree with the other poster. If you're able to get through the course by using your calc and not learning anything, it's the professor's/school's fault, not the calculator's.
Bloggers who don't receive an income in exchange for their work aren't affected.
So if I use ads and merchandise to support my site and try to make something of a living off of my writing I have to register as a lobbyist? Then why shouldn't news anchors/columnists have to do the same? One of the things that (supposedly) led to the American Revolution was the stamp tax. Any attempt to restrict the free press is bad, no matter the consequences. And nothing is more "free press" than a private citizen deciding to write down their thoughts and distribute them to people, for profit or otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly you can put the sensor bar in front of a blank wall and play the game with the TV behind you if you want. It doesn't know anything about the TV, just about the position of the sensor bar. Place the sensor bar accordingly and you won't have to move any furniture.
Makes sense since it is republican mantra not to think for yourself and only do what the party says...or be ostracized.
I think you're projecting.
I fail to see your point. What I said, quite clearly, was: "most core Republican voters REALLY REALLY hate trial attorneys". What exactly does that have to do with the fact that trial attorneys give politicians lots of money?
I'd love to see a race between Ron Paul and Obama. Thats as close to a win win as you get in american politics.
Your definition of winning and my definition of winning seem to have significant disagreements.
and for the hard core republicans like the ones that are the core voters for GWB.
Actually you'll find that "core" Republican voters REALLY REALLY hate trial attorneys.
They'd much rather have some religious figure battle this sort of thing out in the media, not in the courts.
The Wii is going to want to load its data in as linear an order as possible. This will be okay for linear track based racing games that KNOW what scenery/data needs to loaded next, but sucks for GTA type games wich might see you loading any kind of data next.
Only if the game is programmed by an idiot. Unless you're dealing with some sort of weird fourth dimensional travel, movement in a game world is always linear. You know what direction the character is moving in and so you know what content to load next. I find it hilarious that you use GTA as your example since that's primarily a Playstation game and therefore was designed to load data from optical discs, not hard disks.
I ended up skimming over the rest of your argument after that because it seemed to boil down to "MEGATEXTURES == MEGAPEENS!!!1!!one!1!" and not much else.
More power is not inherently better. More power requires more resources to get results, and concentration on that aspect of the product often causes other areas to suffer. Case in Point: The Gamecube was the most powerful system of the last generation, and that earned it nothing (Well, except RE4...)
Consoles are not out to take market share from the PC (Well, with the exception of the 360 perhaps). A PC gamer already has too much invested to just walk away from it.
As opposed to the Clinton era, where justice was for the rich.
Actually that varies by state. In my state it's perfectly legal to tape any conversation as long as ONE of the parties knows it's being recorded. I'm pretty happy with that, really.
Wait, what? Public humiliation? Which person broke the law here again? Not only is it an excuse for public "humiliation" but the author had the right to serve a DMCA takedown notice over the whole thing. Where do you get off saying a professionally worded e-mail explaining the situation is unreasonable?
Let's work with an example here: Say someone is displaying your artwork in a public gallery with their name next to it, knowingly misleading visitors as to the source of said art. Do you privately contact them and ask nicely for them to stop doing so (after they've already proven your copyright means jack to them) or do you inform the gallery? You inform the gallery, of course. The fact that your work was copyrighted WAS the polite, private message of "please don't take this and claim it's your own".
This is a situation that needs to be remedied immediately. What if said person who "borrowed" your art allows the AP to photograph it? Now every newspaper in the world could (possibly) carry the image with the wrong attribution and suddenly the damages start growing out of control. So you inform the gallery and they pull the work until the ownership of said art can be confirmed. Otherwise you could spend the rest of your life tracking down your mis-attributed work.
In this case it's worse. If someone "borrowed" the publicly available (and wrongly) BSD licensed code and put it into a proprietary product, tracking down infringement would be impossible. A public notice was necessary so that anyone who had downloaded said code would know what license it was under. At the very least they should be warned that the code could cause their code to become GPL tainted.
In the end, your argument doesn't seem based on any reasonable view of reality.
Actually I've never had a problem there. It's definitely better than shopping at Circuit City. Trying to find a game I want there is a nightmare. I'm lucky if they're even separated by system, much less alphabetized or anything crazy like that.
But then again, I only shop bargains at BB (or the odd game). I don't bother with their internet site, and I only get service plans on things I should get them on (like the camera that I often drop, or a PC I don't feel like supporting for a family member), not silly things like controllers. I also do my research on products and prices before I go in to buy anything, and tell the salesperson what I want, not the other way around.
I've never been lied to, I've never been abused, and I've never been guilty of a bait and switch. They've tried to sell me things I don't want or need, but I just say "No." and that ends it. Honestly, what could they lie to me about?
YMMV.
Well maybe I was exaggerating slightly, but I know I can go to some local places and get an oil change/fluids/filters for about $32. I'd just buy the plugs and do it myself due to how simple the labor is for it (as long as you aren't an idiot with the cables). My car only takes four plugs at about $2.50-$3 ea. And I didn't say it had to be hand washed, just that it better be washed before they give it back to me. ^^;
:P I've owned the car since 2001 and I'd say $500-600 is probably about two years' worth of maintenance for me (tires/oil/filters mostly). But I don't think that's a fair comparison, since it's MY CAR and I NEED it to SURVIVE. :)
And yeah, recently I replaced my brakes and had my rotors turned (most significant maint. on the car so far) and I want to say that ran about $150. I did spend another $300 on tires there, but I digress...
Or perhaps it SEEMS expnsive in the US, as their economy is in such poor shape at the moment..
It's a laugh a minute around here. You really think the US economy is in poor shape? Based on what? What indicators? What numbers? Lowest unemployment in years? Soaring consumer confidence? Seriously, share your wisdom.
Either way $500 is not that expensive in the sale of things
$500 for living in the PS3 ghetto. $600 if you want to actually live somewhere they don't deal drugs in your front lawn. And yes, $500 is expensive. I can get a very usable PC with a monitor and probably a printer for less than $500 that will probably play games better and longer than the PS3. I could see you not thinking $500 is expensive if you live in Canada or Australia, but that's because your "dollery doos" are worth significantly less than ours.
Shit, in Nevada $500 could get me two hours with the best woman in a brothel. $500 is not an everyday expense for 99.9% of people, it's something you seriously have to plan for. And I seriously doubt a $500 PS3 is going to give me as much ROI as two hours with the one of the best hookers in Nevada.
whatever the next Katmari is
:)
It's called Elebits.
Sony has finally, it seemed, ironed out demand problems
:)
I agree. They've done an excellent job of killing practically any demand for their latest console.
Heck my car costs $300 for a service, for a can of oil, some plugs and a few filters..
$300? For a can of oil, plugs, and filters? What is that in, monopoly money? If I paid $50 total for those three services they'd better wash that bitch and put one of those hangy air freshener things on my mirror.
Also, this is a car, a necessity for most people to support themselves. That would be like saying "Hell, I pay $20k a year on my mortgage!" or "Hell, I pay $50/mo for my insulin!" $500 for a system that does not offer anything more superior to the end user than a system priced $200 less is not an expense most people would be willing to make. Someone who thinks that line of reasoning is unsound "needs to get a grip on reality".
Everyone I know who owns a PS3 (and that's not many people) has not been able to give me any answer as to why they bought it other than "Well, it's a PS3..." There's no draw there for anyone but those who a) Have too much disposable income or b) are Sony fanatics. The a) don't really care about the value of their purchase so far, because if they don't enjoy it they'll just spend money on some other fun pursuit (As an example, one friend spends in excess of $400 every Thursday night on liquor alone at the local Buffalo Wild Wings because he works too much and has no other use for the money) and most of b) that I know have already considered returning the thing, but are waiting because they can't find a place with a Wii (in stock, that is) to exchange it for.
Did the Devs take full use of the Cell Proc or did they simply recompile it for the Cell and not optimize it?
Or is optimizing for a Cell processor an absolute nightmare and so you're best off just getting your stuff running good on the 360 and just plain running on the PS3?
It is true the PS3 dosn't have a large following. however the real reason this is such a shame is because the injustice done to gamers world wide.
I would think that having to pay $600 for the ability to play the next "Shadow of the Colossus", "Gears of War", or "Ocarina of Time" (or insert your own favorite 'killer app'/'industry changer' here) would be a huge injustice to gamers. I think any gamer should have at least seen those three games (and many others), the same as any movie buff should see Casablanca or any science fiction fan should read Stranger in a Strange Land. But the fact of the matter is, if the bar for being able to experience the "next great thing" in gaming is set that high, either a) very very few people will be able to experience it, meaning its effect on future titles will be negligible or b) it'll cease being exclusive.
The world tries to move on, move to better technology, get out of the architecture slump and Corporations continue to hold us back.
As a Computer Scientist I'm practically insulted by this comment. The idea of throwing multiple processors (or piles of money, for that matter) at a problem is nothing "new" or "innovative". It's just an expensive copout to avoid good design. That's not to say Cell is a bad design. It's just a design much better suited to servers and supercomputer clusters, not video games. More processors doesn't automagically lead to better performance. As I've explained to students before, no matter how many Chihauhas you tie to your plow, they're not going to do a better job than an old stubborn donkey. That's really what the Cell is when it comes to gaming, a bunch of loud small dogs tied to a plow. If you can somehow make them all pull at exactly the right time maybe they'll pull off a miracle, but why go through all the trouble?
Meanwhile dismissing the XBox 360 as "same old same old" really isn't giving credit where it's due. The original XBox was literally a gimped Celeron PC with an nVidia graphics card. The 360 is a completely new, scratch built platform with custom Power PC CPUs; ie: it has little to nothing in common technologically speaking with its predecessor (except maybe the fact they're both made out of silicon, aluminum, and plastic).
And then with the Wii in the market, trying to claim Sony is the company trying to move the industry in a new direction goes beyond insulting to malicious.
I'm not sure I understand how that makes "PS3 to Continue at the Same Price" news though.
Because 99.9% of Sony's potential customer base believes $600 is too much to pay for a toy. Hell, even in *Japan*, Sony's stronghold, they can't clear 40k systems in a week. Meanwhile the DS practically hasn't dipped under 150k sales for about two years. Traditionally there is no market Sony does better in than Japan, and their two flagship systems' sales (PS3 and PSP) added together aren't even coming close to the numbers of just one of the systems of a company they've already publicly declared they didn't believe to be "real" competition. Then there's the fact that the PS2 has outsold the PS3 several weeks in the past few months (despite an already saturated market) and that the 360's (the least liked console in Japan since the original XBox) numbers have actually come within striking distance a few times in the same time period and the fact that we're not seeing a price drop announced and seeing Sony do crazy things like remove features from their products before European launch makes most people wonder what exactly Sony is trying to do with themselves. Their system is DoA and they don't seem to know what to do to fix it.
So you can't back it up, then.
I honestly think we can thank rupert murdochs amazing right-wing propaganda machine for convincing democrats to join the republican party in all but name.
Just like we can thank the moonbat left-wing propaganda machines at the alphabit networks for turning more people on to alternative media and off of night-time news.
You're kidding, right? You do realize that when studies are done exploring this very thing that the vast majority of Americans are NOT of the far-left persuasion but actually cluster much more around center-right? You really think most Americans have similar beliefs to people like Jane Fonda, Alec Baldwin, George Soros, and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.? If you do I'd really like to see you back that assertion up.
The scientific method is demonstratably the best tool known to man for weeding dogma and politics out of any predictive theory.
Are you trying to be funny?
Just to nitpick, beliefs that are based on non-violence by definition -- e.g. liberalism (libertarianism),
:)
:)
By destroy I did not mean necessarily the use of force. Destroying someone could also refer to ad hominem attack or such. And as far as "liberals" not using violence... I've personally been physically assaulted by "liberals" based on my beliefs and have witnessed several other such assaults. The idea that liberalism is based on non-violence is laughable. Heck, liberal leaders in the US this last election cycle announced they'd lead riots in the streets if the Republicans retained control of Congress. I've had liberal speakers at my campus announce what we should do to David Duke. Alec Baldwin screamed about pulling people who's politics he disagreed with and their families out of their homes and stoning them to death. And don't forget that the founding fathers of the United States were considered at the forefront of "liberal thought" and they sure the hell favored violence as a solution.
The idea that libertarianism (my own favorite dogmatic belief system) is based on non-violence is even more hilarious. Try taking a libertarian's stuff and see how "non-violent" they get.
And I guess instead of saying Bigfoot I coulda said "Holocaust Denial", but I was trying to illustrate absurdity via absurdity (hence my reference to kibology...)
Non-critical followers of the religion "believe" that this doctrine is the truth, no matter what scientific evidence is brought up against it. Worse, when people insist the doctrine is not true, they proceed to use force against them.
t arianism/global warming/string theory/kibology/bigfoot/socialized healthcare/anarchism/(insert your favorite belief system here). What you're faulting is not a behavior unique to religion, but is something that can be categorized as something bad all on it's own. Namely the behavior of destroying those who disagree with you instead of just trying to prove them wrong. As a good example, Edison did it to Tesla, and at no point was religion involved. People do it in politics everyday.
Funny, you just described dogmatic believers in communism/socialism/liberalism/conservatism/liber
I know, I know, don't feed the trolls...
Well you do realize that Kirby was originally a handheld game, right? :)
Any problem in the book, except those explicitly stated so as to force the student to do the steps, can be solved in one line on the TI-89.
My Honors Calc II professor would cackle with glee if he met you while you had that attitude. He was very proud of writing tests that no graphing calculator in existence could solve. And no I'm not exaggerating. All his tests weren't like this (we only had two, he called them "Calculus Unplugged") and in fact he required us to know how to use our calculators and had a class and quiz specifically on calculator use during the semester. But then again in addition to just being a mathematician he was also a scientist (He's the Dean of the College of Science, now...) so he understood the usefulness of tools.
So I have to agree with the other poster. If you're able to get through the course by using your calc and not learning anything, it's the professor's/school's fault, not the calculator's.
Bloggers who don't receive an income in exchange for their work aren't affected.
So if I use ads and merchandise to support my site and try to make something of a living off of my writing I have to register as a lobbyist? Then why shouldn't news anchors/columnists have to do the same? One of the things that (supposedly) led to the American Revolution was the stamp tax. Any attempt to restrict the free press is bad, no matter the consequences. And nothing is more "free press" than a private citizen deciding to write down their thoughts and distribute them to people, for profit or otherwise.