Can you purchase quest packs to 85? (i.e., freemium model) If so, then all Blizzard has to do is accept bitcoin or some other location-masking payment option and the problem is solved, right?
Yeah, lets solve all Blizzard business troubles by making their entire business model to give their game and services away for free with no business transactions at all!
F2P, we loose money on every gamer but make it up in bulk.
What a moron. And if you comment on how F2P leads to cash sales... exactly how would those not be blocked by sanctions as business transactions? I had hoped I would not need to point this out on a tech forum but apparently I do.
Please BMOC, nominate yourself for a Darwin award soon.
Ah, WoW, afaik, still has the largest userbase of any MMO, or very near the largest. There's lots of smaller games that survive and even thrive on the freemium model. I don't think Blizzard has anything to fear from going F2P if they haven't already. As you said, they would be better suited to make it up in bulk.
Would this be like someone in the 18th century complaining about newspapers supporting themselves with advertisements because they don't want to see an ad-supported future for mass media?
That is certainly a story I never expected to read, much less on/.
Being ignorant of transsexuals, I find myself wondering if your initial pain w.r.t. morning wood had any influence on feeling as if your body was wrong for you. From my point of view, it's plausible.
I don't trust doctors, and I don't think anyone else should. The only doctors I've met are mailing it in bigtime.
One thing I find amazing is the double-standard that is allowed to exist. IF anyone dared suggest that female baby genitals should be surgically altered because of research suggesting POSSIBLE health benefits, we would see multi-million-women marches on Washington D.C. But male circumcision is completely accepted and even encouraged. No thought to any research towards a more modern method of dealing with potential health issues of an unmutilated penis is considered, only alteration is considered.
Humans are stupid. Humans that have convinced themselves of the soundness of their intellect can be doubly stupid.
I'm forfeiting a mod point for this, sorry to whoever I modded up... The actual abstract of the actual paper backing up this claim (BOLD IS MINE):
ABSTRACT. Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child’s current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided.
IOW, no, we're not recommending anything, we're simply saying there are POTENTIAL medical benefits. Well there are potential medical benefits to getting my appendix removed, or my tonsils cut out, it doesn't mean I should be forced to make that decision.
Stupid journalists, we need to seriously trim the fat in that industry and start with these jackasses who misrepresent science for political gain.
1) Assume Lance cheated
- How wasn't he caught in the act for so long?
- How can all the technological innovation that went into his cycling be ignored? The wind-tunnel testing, the water-tank-in-frame, the unique bike designs, those all were serious efforts that AFAIK were unique, why spend that effort if you're already doping?
- How were others not able to cheat as well as he did?
- How was he not caught cheating in 2009 when he placed 3rd after not racing for 2 years? Wouldn't he be expected to be a total doper taking a standing that high after being retired for so long?
- How can the fact that he trained for only 1 race each year, the Tour de France, be ignored as explaining his stellar performance? Most other competition would do more racing per year, Lance focused like a laser beam on the Tour de France. How can this not help explain his insane performances?
- Lance packed his team with certifiably world-class climbers to set pace for him and run strategy on the large parts of big climbs. Other squads did not. Can't this help explain it?
2) Assume lance did not cheat
- Why are so many people out to discredit him? How big of an a-hole must Lance be to have this many people willing to take him down by lying?
- Why not fight these charges to the last?
- Why wasn't Lance more open in his Tours? The technology existed during his run to simply put Lance on camera 24-hours-a-day for the world to see he wasn't cheating. Why not do this, especially in 2009 when he took 3rd?
- How was Lance so good at simply laying the hammer down at the ends of big climbing stages? Is he just a freak of nature? Were his teammates really capable of simply relieving all the stress of keeping in the pack long enough for him to go balls out at the end?
- Why were later tests on his samples so dodgy? What was the motivation in even testing them?
I have also known a lot of Persians living in the States. They're wonderful people by and large. Strangely most of the ones I've known were women, and quite intelligent women at that (one of them was a physics major). The path their country is choosing should serve as a lesson for everyone. Even an educated population can lose control of a government.
The U.S. was a frontier nation where death and pestilence were simply obstacles towards expansion. As such, the traditional view held here is one of taking care of yourself as you could not (and still can't) rely on the government for anything. While many in the developed world call the U.S. a "laughing stock" in this aspect, many in the US laugh at the absolutely infantile desire to be coddled and taken care of by corrupt appointees of corrupt elected officials.
There is no "best method" of running a nation, there is only an expected reflection of the values the nation has. The U.S.A. has always traditionally valued self-sufficiency over ivory-tower-systems, which is not in any way something to be ashamed of.
Space programs have to dodge (read: spend energy/propulsion/man-hours to avoid) space junk on a regular basis. This is a very real, very present-day, very expensive situation. It doesn't need to be made worse with stupidity.
Putting them on multi-year funding is how you turn NASA into the Department of Commerce, it is NOT how you go to Mars. The fact that NASA has to justify their spending each year, and stand before Congress to defend their programmatic problems or sucesses IS A GOOD THING. The only problem with their budget is the fact that their numbers are fairly small and THE DIRECTION THEY ARE GIVEN FROM THE EXECUTIVE CHANGES TOO OFTEN. $18 billion per year is plenty to put humans on mars, but NASA has become bloated and civil-servanty. It's time to trim the fat, return to the roots of rocket-engineering, and pool the money into a single project.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you purchase quest packs to 85? (i.e., freemium model) If so, then all Blizzard has to do is accept bitcoin or some other location-masking payment option and the problem is solved, right?
Yeah, lets solve all Blizzard business troubles by making their entire business model to give their game and services away for free with no business transactions at all!
F2P, we loose money on every gamer but make it up in bulk.
What a moron. And if you comment on how F2P leads to cash sales... exactly how would those not be blocked by sanctions as business transactions? I had hoped I would not need to point this out on a tech forum but apparently I do.
Please BMOC, nominate yourself for a Darwin award soon.
Ah, WoW, afaik, still has the largest userbase of any MMO, or very near the largest. There's lots of smaller games that survive and even thrive on the freemium model. I don't think Blizzard has anything to fear from going F2P if they haven't already. As you said, they would be better suited to make it up in bulk.
Oh, and, why you so angry?
Would this be like someone in the 18th century complaining about newspapers supporting themselves with advertisements because they don't want to see an ad-supported future for mass media?
Wouldn't F2P solve this situation since there is no business transaction?
That is certainly a story I never expected to read, much less on /.
Being ignorant of transsexuals, I find myself wondering if your initial pain w.r.t. morning wood had any influence on feeling as if your body was wrong for you. From my point of view, it's plausible.
I don't trust doctors, and I don't think anyone else should. The only doctors I've met are mailing it in bigtime.
One thing I find amazing is the double-standard that is allowed to exist. IF anyone dared suggest that female baby genitals should be surgically altered because of research suggesting POSSIBLE health benefits, we would see multi-million-women marches on Washington D.C. But male circumcision is completely accepted and even encouraged. No thought to any research towards a more modern method of dealing with potential health issues of an unmutilated penis is considered, only alteration is considered.
Humans are stupid. Humans that have convinced themselves of the soundness of their intellect can be doubly stupid.
appendix removed, or my tonsils cut out
There's no religion who asks for that. At least not one with major influence on the elections...
Flying Spaghetti Monster demands your tonsils in sacrifice.
I'm forfeiting a mod point for this, sorry to whoever I modded up... The actual abstract of the actual paper backing up this claim (BOLD IS MINE):
IOW, no, we're not recommending anything, we're simply saying there are POTENTIAL medical benefits. Well there are potential medical benefits to getting my appendix removed, or my tonsils cut out, it doesn't mean I should be forced to make that decision.
Stupid journalists, we need to seriously trim the fat in that industry and start with these jackasses who misrepresent science for political gain.
Came for this, leaving satisfied.
1) Assume Lance cheated
- How wasn't he caught in the act for so long?
- How can all the technological innovation that went into his cycling be ignored? The wind-tunnel testing, the water-tank-in-frame, the unique bike designs, those all were serious efforts that AFAIK were unique, why spend that effort if you're already doping?
- How were others not able to cheat as well as he did?
- How was he not caught cheating in 2009 when he placed 3rd after not racing for 2 years? Wouldn't he be expected to be a total doper taking a standing that high after being retired for so long?
- How can the fact that he trained for only 1 race each year, the Tour de France, be ignored as explaining his stellar performance? Most other competition would do more racing per year, Lance focused like a laser beam on the Tour de France. How can this not help explain his insane performances?
- Lance packed his team with certifiably world-class climbers to set pace for him and run strategy on the large parts of big climbs. Other squads did not. Can't this help explain it?
2) Assume lance did not cheat
- Why are so many people out to discredit him? How big of an a-hole must Lance be to have this many people willing to take him down by lying?
- Why not fight these charges to the last?
- Why wasn't Lance more open in his Tours? The technology existed during his run to simply put Lance on camera 24-hours-a-day for the world to see he wasn't cheating. Why not do this, especially in 2009 when he took 3rd?
- How was Lance so good at simply laying the hammer down at the ends of big climbing stages? Is he just a freak of nature? Were his teammates really capable of simply relieving all the stress of keeping in the pack long enough for him to go balls out at the end?
- Why were later tests on his samples so dodgy? What was the motivation in even testing them?
Someone keeps modding my joke posts as troll... fascinating.
I would disagree at placing all your fears on one side of the equation, the other extreme is just as scary for almost the same reasons.
I have also known a lot of Persians living in the States. They're wonderful people by and large. Strangely most of the ones I've known were women, and quite intelligent women at that (one of them was a physics major). The path their country is choosing should serve as a lesson for everyone. Even an educated population can lose control of a government.
I'm sure if the world scorns them strongly enough on this they'll come around on human rights issues.
/is sarcasm dead? ok I'll turn out the lights.
I would expect this endeavor to generate some electricity and buzz.
Idiot, food is whichever delivery I order, so of course I'll need internet to find food in an emergency... jesus it's like they let anyone post here.
/s
That doesn't even make sense, and attributes malice where there is none just to fit a political agenda.
The U.S. was a frontier nation where death and pestilence were simply obstacles towards expansion. As such, the traditional view held here is one of taking care of yourself as you could not (and still can't) rely on the government for anything. While many in the developed world call the U.S. a "laughing stock" in this aspect, many in the US laugh at the absolutely infantile desire to be coddled and taken care of by corrupt appointees of corrupt elected officials.
There is no "best method" of running a nation, there is only an expected reflection of the values the nation has. The U.S.A. has always traditionally valued self-sufficiency over ivory-tower-systems, which is not in any way something to be ashamed of.
from the home of a Treasury Department agent:
"Hi Honey, how was your day?"
"ah, Tough day, first the WOW servers crashed, then LOTRO's Draigoch bugged on us twice, then I couldn't find anyone to group with in SWTOR."
LEEEEROOY JEEEENKINS!!!
Space programs have to dodge (read: spend energy/propulsion/man-hours to avoid) space junk on a regular basis. This is a very real, very present-day, very expensive situation. It doesn't need to be made worse with stupidity.
Seriously, we don't need more space junk. This "artist" is a griefer.
Picard and Dathon at El-Adrel
Putting them on multi-year funding is how you turn NASA into the Department of Commerce, it is NOT how you go to Mars. The fact that NASA has to justify their spending each year, and stand before Congress to defend their programmatic problems or sucesses IS A GOOD THING. The only problem with their budget is the fact that their numbers are fairly small and THE DIRECTION THEY ARE GIVEN FROM THE EXECUTIVE CHANGES TOO OFTEN. $18 billion per year is plenty to put humans on mars, but NASA has become bloated and civil-servanty. It's time to trim the fat, return to the roots of rocket-engineering, and pool the money into a single project.
...managed to convince themselves that giving their customer choices will be bad for business.
That was kinda silly actually, and yes... a bad omen.