Except the taurens and the trolls are player races, thus not all of them are monsters. Most of the time they're other people just like you, they just look different and may speak a different language.
It's possible that the price is high so that Sony can cash in on PS3 launch and avoid shortages. That's not because they think shortages are bad, but because shortages mean "money's left on the table". Also from a certain demented point of view, they could announce a $200 price cut to roughly coincide the launch of Halo 3, to steal MS's thunder.
Who knows what Sony's got up their sleaves and what they're willing to do to win. Maybe the Xbox 360 has totally bunged up their plans and they can't afford to price the PS3 lower than what they've got, unlike Microsoft they don't have an infinite money pit to pour into making consoles. Maybe they're being cagey and will drop the price shortly after launch. Maybe they won't drop the price until they fail to meet their sales quotas. Maybe they'll make their sales quotas and won't care that they might have sold more at a lower price.
Most viruses/worms/trojans now exist to build a bot net for nefarious purposes. Assuming the analysis of this virus is correct and that it does not install a rootkit and/or bot the machine, then either the virus writer has a different motive for making the virus.
Now given all the scenarios suggested the most least unlikely alternative is that the person who wrote the virus is a jerk who simply seeks to destroy the files that other people spent time downloading. This type of asshat behaviour is certainly not uncommon or unexpected among the expected demographic of the virus writer, ie. young males with too much time on their hands.
Given that this was previously a common reason for releasing damaging viruses in the past, the current wave of professional viruses does not preclude the occasional amateur releasing his own claim to infamy.
To me, this appears to be the assumption that requires the least additional supposition. It's not necessarily correct, but seems like the most plausible explanation, barring additional information.
Well because you can fire people for a lot of other reasons too. 1) Are they're too good and might potentially replace you? Fire them. 2) Can you hire a new grad for significantly less money, and it'll look good on the bottom line long enough for you to get your promotion and leave? Fire them. 3) Are they sick or do they have sick relatives and take occasional sick days? Fire them. 4) Secretaries won't put out for you? Fire them. 5) Wrong skin colour/ethnicity/sexual orientation? Fire them.
Being able to fire someone for any reason is a privilege that is rampantly abused. My father was fired from a job for refusing to take a retroactive pay cut to the level of a new hire so the boss could make expense targets, please the directors and get a raise. He then told the rest of employees that my father had been fired because he was a drug addict.
However, this is Canada, not the U.S., so things turned out ok. He filed a greivance against the company, the directors fired his boss (who was clearly in the wrong) and the directors settled the wrongful dismissal lawsuit. He didn't get his job back but he quickly found a better one.
So what you're saying is that Microsoft is using their windows monopoly rents to subsidize the price of the Xbox 360 to make Sony look bad for charging a reasonable price for their next gen console?
Sounds about right. I can see Kurasaga's point in that for Sony, they're probably going to loose a lot of money on the PS3 Hardware, in that sense it probably is too cheap. Of course, I also agree with everyone else, the guy's a tool. You don't mouth off to the press like that.
Personally, it's not worth getting upset over the price of the PS3, either it will come down to a price where I will buy it or it won't. I'm reasonably confident that if it doesn't fall in price, the PS console series will die out, and all the games I like will move to either the Xbox, the Wii, or some other console.
I'm not buying the PS3 at $600, but I'm perfectly happy to let Sony try to sell it at that price. If they can in fact do so, then they're smarter than any of them are giving them credit for. If not, well sometimes you make mistakes, the real question will be what they do if the PS3 doesn't fly off the shelves in November.
Indeed, SUVs were generally sold to insecure and stupid people. That's what Ford's own customer profile on SUV buyers indicated. They tend to be shorter than average, dumber than average, and generally insecure. They buy SUVs because they think a bigger vehicle makes them safer, and being higher up makes them feel powerful. In short, the majority of SUV buyers were either compensating. The SUV manufacturers know this, charge outrageous prices for SUVs and they used to get them. Of course, then the price of gas went up, the federal subsidies for SUVs were cut.
The other group who owned SUVs were small business owners who could get a $75,000 subsidy for the SUVs. Yes, that's right businesses could get a $75,000 per vehicle subsidy for SUVs because they were classified as "small trucks". This also why SUVs are less safe than normal cars, the safety standard for trucks are much looser than they are for cars. I'm not sure if this has been corrected in the States yet or not.
No, he need to be confronted and exposed publically, otherwise people will continue to believe him. He's a self-agrandizing moron, but people think because he's a lawyer he knows what he's talking about. More people need to show up and confront him with the fact that he's been disbarred in two states and is for lack of a better words, a nutcase and a leech on society.
Politics as usual. They all pick and choose who they listen to and who they endorse, especially as science is concerned. There have been plenty of experts ignored by every administration, ever. I don't consider that unusual or oppressive, just stupid.
Actually, no. Historically, the administration has ignored any scientific reports it didn't want to support. Bush has taken the unusual step of having the scientists who disagree with his point of view replaced by those who are willing to change their conclusions to agree with his point of view.
In the simplest terms possible: This is religion not science.
Maybe the 3.2 million shipped includes the basic console (which doesn't sell very well) and replacements that have been shipped to customers under warranty. It's also 3.2 million worldwide. Which means there could be a lot of them sitting on shelves in Japan, France and Germany, for example.
Microsoft's numbers can't be trusted, they've manipulated, deceived and lied too often in the past. I'll trust numbers from them once they've been verified by a reliable source who is not being paid by Microsoft.
I disagree... Killing spammers will end the spam problem! Violence can be the solution, if applied correctly. Support the death penalty for spammers... It's the only way they'll ever learn.
Oh, that's simple. Walmart sells groceries at a loss in it's SuperCenter's. The loss is expensed as marketing to get people in the door and they expect to make it back by selling more of their regularly priced products.
That's why Strawberries cost less at Walmart, because you'll go there for Strawberries and leave with a halfdozen other items you never knew you wanted.
Please be careful there, almost everyone on Slashdot is aware that a substancial portion of Microsoft success involves unethical and illegal behaviour. The financial value of exclusive licensing agreements with PC manufaturers by itself is mindboggling, even though those agreements were obviously anti-competitive and have probably collectively cost Microsoft's customers hundreds of billions of dollars in monopoly rents.
The parent is correct. The key to microsoft being in the console market is simple, Microsoft intends to eventually become the only player in the market. They want to Nintendo and Sony out of the console hardware business, or more aptly the console O/S business. Once they've established control of the consoles, they'll raise prices and use their standard tricks to destroy anyone who threatens their newly-lucrative console monopoly.
Of course, the console monopoly is just a first step in building a digital home industry controlled exclusively by Microsoft.
And no, it's not paranoia, it's just the best case scenario for Microsoft.
There's a lot of roadblocks that are blocking them from achieving this. One of the roadblocks is the fact that their media pc/extender software is garbage. I attended an industry demo funded my Microsoft and was so unbelievably underwhelmed that I left halfway through. You bought a $300 interface box that could only do one thing... Stream video. I mean what's the point of having a house wide network if you can't run an IM/Mail/Web client on your TV. They also rigged the demonstration by having a second hidden PC stream video to their second television (it was hidden under a drop cloth, behind the "digital living room" couch). Lame.
I'm not sure what you mean by "how long...", it seems likely the Microsoft is already paying the colleges to let them replace their normal email service. I can't see any reason to do this other than whoring your students out for cash.
If we're talking "launch window" then I believe Sim City, Populus, Lemmings, Contra, and several other high profile games qualify as well. To which I offer GRAW, DOA4, Tomb Raider, Oblivion, etc. We can argue over which games we prefer for ever (though I have no intention of doing so!) but my point remains - the original assertion that the 360's launch lineup was "crap" is BS.
You seem to forget, opinions are suggestive. The games are "crap (to me)" as long as there are none that I want to play.
Actually Microsft is evil, in the petty, "I'd sell my grandmother for a buck" kind of way. Just like the nice guy down the street who stole $2 million from his employer's pension fund.
And the skeptics who say it's probably a planted story are entirely reasonable and justified. The Microsoft PR department frequently lies, takes things out of context, omits important information, and pretends to be someone other than who they are. Anything positive about Microsoft must be taken with a grain of salt because they have completedly destroyed the credibility of anything positive about Microsoft through their own dishonest behaviour.
Although I don't know whether or not this story was planted by the PR department, given Microsoft's history of planting stories it's certain reasonable to think that it might be.
"I agree with you overall, but I think this is a valid complaint by Britannica! They're being attacked for inaccuracies in text they didn't write?"
It would be a valid complaint, if they hadn't actually published it.
Britannica shouldn't complain about being criticized for errors in work they've plagiarized, either. Everyone knows that before you copy someone else's work, you should make sure it's correct.
Re:The books and PJ's movies were the only good on
on
LOTR Jumps the Shark
·
· Score: 1
I've seen the musical, anyone with an open mind will enjoy it. The piece captures the essence, if not all the details, of the books. The musical numbers are reasonably well done and blend in to the show. The technical wizardry that some people complain about is used to good effect to enhance the performance.
Overall it was good, though there were a few flaws I noticed. I thought the musical number at the Prancing Pony was a little bit longer than necessary, but otherwise the show was quite good. They didn't use the pithy "I am... NO MAN" line to explain why the ringwraith leader could suddenly be killed, and they glossed over many parts of the books. But they had to, no one wants to sit for 12 hours for a musical.
Some of the reviewers are clearly newbs who don't even know what the Lord of the Rings is. It was in dire need of editing? The story was incomprehensible? Morons. The play's good, I recommend any non-fanatical fan see it if they get the chance. Fanatics... Just don't go. You'll happier never knowing.
Indeed many people confuse plausibility with realism and, from experience, even when you tell them the difference they still can't understand it. Something is plausible if given the situation (including the setting), the events could reasonably happen. Realistic means the situation could reasonably happen in our world. A story about dragons is unlikely to be realistic, but the events in it should be plausible.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the taurens and the trolls are player races, thus not all of them are monsters. Most of the time they're other people just like you, they just look different and may speak a different language.
There's a nice anti-racism message there too.
4) Never underestimate the stupidity of marketing
It's possible that the price is high so that Sony can cash in on PS3 launch and avoid shortages. That's not because they think shortages are bad, but because shortages mean "money's left on the table". Also from a certain demented point of view, they could announce a $200 price cut to roughly coincide the launch of Halo 3, to steal MS's thunder.
Who knows what Sony's got up their sleaves and what they're willing to do to win. Maybe the Xbox 360 has totally bunged up their plans and they can't afford to price the PS3 lower than what they've got, unlike Microsoft they don't have an infinite money pit to pour into making consoles. Maybe they're being cagey and will drop the price shortly after launch. Maybe they won't drop the price until they fail to meet their sales quotas. Maybe they'll make their sales quotas and won't care that they might have sold more at a lower price.
There's an aweful lot of maybes.
That's funy, I though everyone knew that "reality has a well known liberal bias".
Most viruses/worms/trojans now exist to build a bot net for nefarious purposes. Assuming the analysis of this virus is correct and that it does not install a rootkit and/or bot the machine, then either the virus writer has a different motive for making the virus.
Now given all the scenarios suggested the most least unlikely alternative is that the person who wrote the virus is a jerk who simply seeks to destroy the files that other people spent time downloading. This type of asshat behaviour is certainly not uncommon or unexpected among the expected demographic of the virus writer, ie. young males with too much time on their hands.
Given that this was previously a common reason for releasing damaging viruses in the past, the current wave of professional viruses does not preclude the occasional amateur releasing his own claim to infamy.
To me, this appears to be the assumption that requires the least additional supposition.
It's not necessarily correct, but seems like the most plausible explanation, barring additional information.
Congratulations! We have a winner.
Occam's Razor salutes you.
Well because you can fire people for a lot of other reasons too.
1) Are they're too good and might potentially replace you? Fire them.
2) Can you hire a new grad for significantly less money, and it'll look good on the bottom line long enough for you to get your promotion and leave? Fire them.
3) Are they sick or do they have sick relatives and take occasional sick days? Fire them.
4) Secretaries won't put out for you? Fire them.
5) Wrong skin colour/ethnicity/sexual orientation? Fire them.
Being able to fire someone for any reason is a privilege that is rampantly abused. My father was fired from a job for refusing to take a retroactive pay cut to the level of a new hire so the boss could make expense targets, please the directors and get a raise. He then told the rest of employees that my father had been fired because he was a drug addict.
However, this is Canada, not the U.S., so things turned out ok. He filed a greivance against the company, the directors fired his boss (who was clearly in the wrong) and the directors settled the wrongful dismissal lawsuit. He didn't get his job back but he quickly found a better one.
So what you're saying is that Microsoft is using their windows monopoly rents to subsidize the price of the Xbox 360 to make Sony look bad for charging a reasonable price for their next gen console?
Sounds about right. I can see Kurasaga's point in that for Sony, they're probably going to loose a lot of money on the PS3 Hardware, in that sense it probably is too cheap. Of course, I also agree with everyone else, the guy's a tool. You don't mouth off to the press like that.
Personally, it's not worth getting upset over the price of the PS3, either it will come down to a price where I will buy it or it won't. I'm reasonably confident that if it doesn't fall in price, the PS console series will die out, and all the games I like will move to either the Xbox, the Wii, or some other console.
I'm not buying the PS3 at $600, but I'm perfectly happy to let Sony try to sell it at that price. If they can in fact do so, then they're smarter than any of them are giving them credit for. If not, well sometimes you make mistakes, the real question will be what they do if the PS3 doesn't fly off the shelves in November.
Indeed, SUVs were generally sold to insecure and stupid people. That's what Ford's own customer profile on SUV buyers indicated. They tend to be shorter than average, dumber than average, and generally insecure. They buy SUVs because they think a bigger vehicle makes them safer, and being higher up makes them feel powerful. In short, the majority of SUV buyers were either compensating. The SUV manufacturers know this, charge outrageous prices for SUVs and they used to get them. Of course, then the price of gas went up, the federal subsidies for SUVs were cut.
The other group who owned SUVs were small business owners who could get a $75,000 subsidy for the SUVs. Yes, that's right businesses could get a $75,000 per vehicle subsidy for SUVs because they were classified as "small trucks". This also why SUVs are less safe than normal cars, the safety standard for trucks are much looser than they are for cars. I'm not sure if this has been corrected in the States yet or not.
No, he need to be confronted and exposed publically, otherwise people will continue to believe him. He's a self-agrandizing moron, but people think because he's a lawyer he knows what he's talking about. More people need to show up and confront him with the fact that he's been disbarred in two states and is for lack of a better words, a nutcase and a leech on society.
Politics as usual. They all pick and choose who they listen to and who they endorse, especially as science is concerned. There have been plenty of experts ignored by every administration, ever. I don't consider that unusual or oppressive, just stupid.
Actually, no. Historically, the administration has ignored any scientific reports it didn't want to support. Bush has taken the unusual step of having the scientists who disagree with his point of view replaced by those who are willing to change their conclusions to agree with his point of view.
In the simplest terms possible: This is religion not science.
A lot of people won't really think about that until they or someone they love is up for execution.
Maybe the 3.2 million shipped includes the basic console (which doesn't sell very well) and replacements that have been shipped to customers under warranty. It's also 3.2 million worldwide. Which means there could be a lot of them sitting on shelves in Japan, France and Germany, for example.
Microsoft's numbers can't be trusted, they've manipulated, deceived and lied too often in the past. I'll trust numbers from them once they've been verified by a reliable source who is not being paid by Microsoft.
I disagree... Killing spammers will end the spam problem! Violence can be the solution, if applied correctly. Support the death penalty for spammers... It's the only way they'll ever learn.
Oh, that's simple. Walmart sells groceries at a loss in it's SuperCenter's. The loss is expensed as marketing to get people in the door and they expect to make it back by selling more of their regularly priced products.
That's why Strawberries cost less at Walmart, because you'll go there for Strawberries and leave with a halfdozen other items you never knew you wanted.
Please be careful there, almost everyone on Slashdot is aware that a substancial portion of Microsoft success involves unethical and illegal behaviour. The financial value of exclusive licensing agreements with PC manufaturers by itself is mindboggling, even though those agreements were obviously anti-competitive and have probably collectively cost Microsoft's customers hundreds of billions of dollars in monopoly rents.
The parent is correct. The key to microsoft being in the console market is simple, Microsoft intends to eventually become the only player in the market. They want to Nintendo and Sony out of the console hardware business, or more aptly the console O/S business. Once they've established control of the consoles, they'll raise prices and use their standard tricks to destroy anyone who threatens their newly-lucrative console monopoly.
Of course, the console monopoly is just a first step in building a digital home industry controlled exclusively by Microsoft.
And no, it's not paranoia, it's just the best case scenario for Microsoft.
There's a lot of roadblocks that are blocking them from achieving this. One of the roadblocks is the fact that their media pc/extender software is garbage. I attended an industry demo funded my Microsoft and was so unbelievably underwhelmed that I left halfway through. You bought a $300 interface box that could only do one thing... Stream video. I mean what's the point of having a house wide network if you can't run an IM/Mail/Web client on your TV. They also rigged the demonstration by having a second hidden PC stream video to their second television (it was hidden under a drop cloth, behind the "digital living room" couch). Lame.
I'm not sure what you mean by "how long...", it seems likely the Microsoft is already paying the colleges to let them replace their normal email service. I can't see any reason to do this other than whoring your students out for cash.
You seem to forget, opinions are suggestive. The games are "crap (to me)" as long as there are none that I want to play.
Actually Microsft is evil, in the petty, "I'd sell my grandmother for a buck" kind of way. Just like the nice guy down the street who stole $2 million from his employer's pension fund.
And the skeptics who say it's probably a planted story are entirely reasonable and justified. The Microsoft PR department frequently lies, takes things out of context, omits important information, and pretends to be someone other than who they are. Anything positive about Microsoft must be taken with a grain of salt because they have completedly destroyed the credibility of anything positive about Microsoft through their own dishonest behaviour.
Although I don't know whether or not this story was planted by the PR department, given Microsoft's history of planting stories it's certain reasonable to think that it might be.
Interstellar Frungy. It's the sport of kings!
The dagger is obviously for "adjusting" the uniform of "recruits".
It would be a valid complaint, if they hadn't actually published it.
Britannica shouldn't complain about being criticized for errors in work they've plagiarized, either. Everyone knows that before you copy someone else's work, you should make sure it's correct.
I've seen the musical, anyone with an open mind will enjoy it. The piece captures the essence, if not all the details, of the books. The musical numbers are reasonably well done and blend in to the show. The technical wizardry that some people complain about is used to good effect to enhance the performance.
Overall it was good, though there were a few flaws I noticed. I thought the musical number at the Prancing Pony was a little bit longer than necessary, but otherwise the show was quite good. They didn't use the pithy "I am... NO MAN" line to explain why the ringwraith leader could suddenly be killed, and they glossed over many parts of the books. But they had to, no one wants to sit for 12 hours for a musical.
Some of the reviewers are clearly newbs who don't even know what the Lord of the Rings is. It was in dire need of editing? The story was incomprehensible? Morons. The play's good, I recommend any non-fanatical fan see it if they get the chance. Fanatics... Just don't go. You'll happier never knowing.
No, they had to ditch Tom, not enough time. They did, however, keep Sharkey and the Shire.
Indeed many people confuse plausibility with realism and, from experience, even when you tell them the difference they still can't understand it. Something is plausible if given the situation (including the setting), the events could reasonably happen. Realistic means the situation could reasonably happen in our world. A story about dragons is unlikely to be realistic, but the events in it should be plausible.