Which incidentally I see as one thing keeping e-sports from reaching the same prestige as traditional sports any time soon. Nobody has the exclusive right to stream basketball matches, for example.
I don't think I can agree completely. You may be right for re-broadcasted pro sporting events, but there's a huge market for streaming rights live pro sports. Some might even say that the biggest business challenge to pro/college sport leagues, and sports media networks right now is how to handle live streaming of pro sports with the consumer shift towards streaming.
I agree with you that it sucks, but exclusive streaming rights for a major league competition might be why Activision was willing to make this deal despite MLG's debt.
How do we not know that this is just a massive star that turned into a black hole after it got ejected from its original galaxy?
Agreed. If I may add to what you're saying, it's possible an ejected star formed a black hole in a region of space with very little matter around it and then drifted towards the larger black hole; not that the larger black hole stripped matter away from the smaller. There's also plenty of documentation of "rouge" stars drifting in the empty space between galaxies, so it's a reasonable guess that there are also "rouge" black holes too.
To be fair the article does say, "But perhaps it just started out with fewer stars because it’s a different sort of black hole," which is not mentioned by the Slashdot summary.
To be clear, I'm not an astronomer, but I do have a comfy armchair.
That the first three films were decent only because of Lucas' lack of control. We saw what happens when his every whim is indulged with the prequels. Ugly stuff. In short: George, you're shite, now fuck off.
Exactly. Star Wars is like a brilliant and beautiful child who has escaped from their abusive father. Lucas should never be allowed near that child again.
If you read the article you have seen that investigations years afterwards tied the dinosaur skull to a smuggler who knowingly broke Mongolian law by removing the fossil [and many others] from the country, and sold it to the auction house, who then sold it to Cage.
How about we don't let a bloated knock-off of a 3 decade old game become news? Terrible shovel-ware Mario-clone games can be found on every generation of consoles, MS-Dos, Windows, Mac, Linux, handheld games, web-based platforms, Steam store, smartphone games, etc. Another mario-clone should not be a surprise to anyone or news worthy of any discussion on Slashdot.
I suspect this was submitted by an "anonymous reader" affiliated with this terrible project.
Meaningless campaign posturing....will be referred to a subcommittee where it will die. To top it off, they're Senators from the minority party so they *know* they have no chance of even getting the bill seriously on the agenda, much less of anything remotely resembling passage.
Which means they're spending taxpayer dollars on political posturing and time campaigning.
I agree it's dead on arrival, but I'm not sure it's campaign posturing, because I doubt the rest of the country really cares enough about this issue to take notice. If a politician's goal is to prop up a campaign, there are much better issues to use. I am more inclined to believe that someone thinks [possibly erroneously] that they can make some progress on this issue. Keep in mind that just because an idea flounders in sub-committee hell doesn't always mean that something useful isn't incorporated into a later law.
So I am an environmental consultant who deals with contamination like this. I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but like many things, it's complicated. Here are a few other facts that should be in the discussion about MTBE:
1) The reason MTBE was mandated by the federal gov't (not just CA) was that it did significantly reduce tailpipe emissions, which had a real benefit to human health and air quality. (Now ethanol has replaced MTBE to serve the same function, again by federal mandate) 2) Risks associated with groundwater contamination were not as well understood then as they are now, so we can only place blame on MTBE and the regulators who mandated it with the benefit of hindsight.* 3) MTBE got lots of press, but there are other compounds in gasoline with much higher toxicity and are more persistent in soils and groundwater (benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, and tri-methylbenzenes to give a few examples). 4) The vast majority of MTBE [and gasoline contamination in general] was from leaky, old, poorly constructed/maintained underground tank systems that prior to the mid-90's had little to no regulations or industry standards. By the end of the 90's essentially all registered underground storage tanks across the country were replaced or upgraded to comply with new federal standards to make them much more reliable (like double-walled tanks, leak detection systems, corrosion resistance, maintenance standards, electronic monitoring, and more). The federal mandate to replace MTBE with ethanol came about a decade after the country had upgraded the tank systems, so the actual of risk MTBE contamination to groundwater at that time was very low; most contamination of MTBE had happened many years prior. 5) Since the federal mandate to replace MTBE with ethanol the number of nationwide reported leaks from tank systems has spiked because ethanol, unlike MTBE, is very corrosive and degrades tank systems faster, which goes back to point #3 that there are worse compounds in gasoline to worry about. The silver-lining is the new tanks systems are much better at quickly identifying when a leak occurs, significantly reducing the volume of gasoline leaked before it is corrected.
*- Keep in mind the EPA didn't even exist until 1970 and politicians/laws typically lag 5-10 years behind the science. So, it wasn't until around 1990 that our understanding of contamination and environmental regulations started to have any significant impact on how businesses/polluters operated. Relative to many other STEM fields, environmental science is very young and the changes in our understanding of contamination, risk, and regulations over the past couple decades cannot be understated.
Telecoms are investing in wireless networks over fiber because when the next generation of wireless mobile internet (5G) comes, it will move data faster at speeds competitive with land-based cable/DSL/Fiber, so selling those land-based internet services will get harder. Consider that 4G LTE can already move data fast enough to accommodate basic internet use (e.g. web browsing, email, basic streaming) and 5G will be faster without laying and maintaining expensive cables all over the planet. For rural areas in particular it will be much more cost-effective to reach homes with a 5G tower on a hilltop than run fiber along miles of rural roads. There were Slashdot stories from earlier this year that Verizon is already testing a 5G network and it's safe to assume AT&T is working theirs too. Mobile ISPs won't satisfy everyone though and some users will be willing to pay a premium for more bandwidth, which is why fiber is still being installed in wealthier, more densely populated neighborhoods.
The only kinds of places that I can think of...underwater applications...nuclear...failures...the applications for those environments are usually based on slow, methodical processes, not on fast-twitch reactions....Admittedly if the technology to make the interface work in real-time is actually working then that's pretty neat, but at the same time I still wonder what it's actually for.
The military has already been researching and investing in similar technology for vehicles with limited views and/or armoring, like tanks, trucks, helicopters, planes, etc. Transferring this tech to entertainment applications was already stated.
Well, we are carbon life forms and we are looking at the situation from our perspective. I would say the chances of these simulations being accurate are vanishingly small. Do we REALLY understand how and where life forms? Being carbon-based, is it really realistic to assume any and all life is like us, formed like us (even if our other assumptions about our own formation are correct)? At one time we thought we were the center of the universe, right here on earth. We also thought that Mars has always been dry, and we thought that Pluto would be a featureless cold world. And THAT's only assumptions within our solar system!
You can be pretty confident that this "detailed new simulation" isn't very accurate at all.
It's funny you bring up Pluto, because I was thinking about how the surprising processes at work there, far from the warmth of a star show we have very little basis for predicting things in the universe. Any large body that can internally retain heat in it's core has the potential for a stable environment to support life.
I don't think I made it half way through before tossing it. And I've read a lot of SF.
Same...I dropped Red Mars less than halfway through. It was like reading technical manual of stuff that doesn't exist. Although, between the fake technical manual parts I think I remember a whodunit mystery story that could inspire a TV series palatable to the general public The target audience of this show will not be Sci-Fi book geeks.
It may be true that Kuiper-belt-like objects are the most common kind, but Pluto is probably unique in that it comes relatively close to the sun, and the temporary heat is likely what causes the "pumping action" that shapes Pluto's dynamic geology. Bodies further out may not get enough energy from the sun to drive similar processes....
If I'm reading you correctly I disagree that that direct heat energy (rays) from the sun is the main driver of geologic processes on Pluto. Pluto's orbit is so far out that the Sun would be about 1000 times dimmer than on earth, so Sun's ability to drive weather and, in turn, geologic processes would be severely limited to say the least. I think it's more likely Pluto's 5 orbiting moons exert varying gravitational forces on Pluto's core creating friction and heat from within the dwarf planet driving geologic processes. Charon in particular is about half as large as Pluto and would likely exert a relatively strong gravitational force as it orbits. It would be like how the Earth's moon exerts force on the earth, or Saturn exerts force on it's moon Enceladus [with a liquid ocean and geysers]. Even on the Earth where the sun's rays are strong, geologic processes driven by the sun (i.e. weather and water cycles) are arguably less influential than mantle thermodynamics driving crustal plate movement and volcanic activity.
I never understand the obsession with bringing things back. Your memories of the past are rose tinted and rehashes rarely live up to them.
Individual opinions/tastes may vary, there are numerous examples of commercially successful "reboots" like, Transformers, Legos, Dr. Who, Le Miserables, Battlestar Galactica, anything Shakespeare, Mad Max, Star Wars, Sherlock Holmes, Lord of the Rings, and more.... Sometimes history/nostalgia can be a foundation to launch into something new and suitable for modern times. It all depends on the implementation.
It's fine to be skeptical of a MST3K reboot and not back the Kickstarter, but let's not be overly-pessimistic and rule it out as a failure before a show is even made.
Gov't mandates for labeling have to be based on proven risk though, otherwise regulators are literally just guessing what is a risk and what isn't and/or they would be forced to have warning labels almost everything produced. The "better safe than sorry" excuse doesn't really work here, because excessive labeling can counter-intuitively harm the public for many reasons. Here are a few that come to mind: 1) People get overwhelmed with seeing labels and they miss or outright ignore warning labels for actual proven risks, which increases public health risk 2) Labeling requirements can stifle development of new technologies and science that can have very real public health benefits 3) It costs more money to regulate and produce goods that gets passed on to the consumer. A little extra cost may not matter much for unnecessary/luxury products, but for basic foods, medicines, etc. higher cost can be big public health issue. 4) In our global economy, other exporting countries might not bother complying with onerous labeling requirements and just not offer their products, which ties into #2 and #3 above. 5) When gov't public health policies are not based on science it makes it much harder to change policies and act quickly when there is a scientific consensus. Or another way to think of it... anti-science policies dilutes all of science, which can hurt everyone (see also: anti-vaxxers).
I'm not against mandating labeling of products when it's based on science and proven public health risk, but the anti-GMO folks aren't there yet. Unfortunately, sometimes it's impossible to identify a risk particularly long-term risks until something used for a while. So, while there are awful examples like DDT, agent orange, asbestos, hormone therapies, etc. the important thing is that gov't has the ability to step in and stop them when the risk was proven (see point #5 above).
I too like to keep my nostalgia in my past where I don't have to tarnish my rose-tinted memories with ugly realities. Too many times I've made the mistake of revisiting my nostalgic loves only to be let down (e.g. 8-bit and 16-bit video games, my childhood cartoons, original Dr. Who, pro wrestling, etc.). So, I get it...HOWEVER....
1. MST3K always used current events and pop culture references. They aren't going to reboot the show and use the same jokes from 20 years ago.
2. They will be able to put more efforts into production, editing, and writing than any competition on YouTube, particularly if they can get a major network behind them. Good shows don't just happen because someone stood in front of a camera... there a lot of work that goes into them that you rarely find with a YouTube production. The amount of money they are asking for was initially pretty astonishing to me, but it also shows that with or without a network supporting them they should be able to make a polished finished product.
3. There are examples of reboots being done well and being successful. Like the new Dr. Who TV series, Transformers, or Mad Max.If done right, these old themes can be revived and be relevant again in today's world, with the advantage of a legacy they can build upon and expand from.
Yes. Are you disclosing those flaws honestly, so consumers can make an informed choice? Unless you're lying about your endorsement, what's the problem?
I agree the author of a review is doing no harm endorsing a game despite flaws if the flaws are disclosed in the review, which based on the Kotaku article it looks like most reviewers are. No foul. The problem as I see it is too many people focus on a review's overall rating/score and don't read the full review where they probably would have learned about the bugs. Metacritic's score aggregation exacerbates this problem. Readers [or users] need to shoulder some responsibility to take game reviews in their entirety.
Similarly there are times when some "choice paralysis" can help me from making bad impulse buys, because in the time it takes to look at options I slow down and think more about why I'm considering the purchase and if I really need that thing. Depending on the situation, impulsive buying can be equally bad as not buying.
Alternatively, it's a stepping stone that will expose a new generation and maybe some of them will continue on to appreciate the classics. Since the first time humans started rhythmically banging sticks together, music has always adapted to our technology and culture.
1) Frack fluid mixtures are 99% potable water and sand. The remaining 1% are lubricants and biocides, many of which are food grade. So, less than 1% of frack fluids are chemicals with a potential to harm people. 2) The frack fluids are injected into GAS bearing rock, so fracking chemicals can't contaminate those waters worse than they were by the naturally occurring gas and oil.
Furthermore, no one is drinking water from private wells with depths anywhere near these gas formations. Most drinking wells are between 50-500 feet deep, whereas gas wells are between 2,000-14,000 feet deep.
...Now the real question is Why isn't there serious study of the environmental impact of fracking. Not just from the oil companies, and not just from groups who have a tendency to be environmental extremist. There are enough areas now to measure water quality and other factors and make a good measurements on what pollutants are out there.
Just a couple month ago the USEPA completed a multi-year study of fracking in several areas of the US, which found no risk to groundwater quality. Anti-frackers wrote it off that study claiming the gov't is paid off by the gas companies. Link to USEPA page: http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy
The media doesn't help because creating sensationalist news articles is easier and more profitable than attempting to accurately explain complex geology, petroleum engineering techniques, contaminate migration, geochemistry, and risk evaluation to a general public that can't pay attention longer than it takes them to read a headline and click "share."
FWIW, I have a degree in geology, I am a certified Professional Geologist for Pennsylvania, I am environmental consultant who works with groundwater contamination, I do not work for oil and gas companies, I am generally liberal and typically vote Democrat, and I think fracking is OK. Like anything fracking is not without some risks, but those risks are being greatly exaggerated by the media and activists.
I still have a few clients that send me files with fax machine even though we email regularly and I'm sure they have scanning capabilities. The fax machine needed to die 10 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Which incidentally I see as one thing keeping e-sports from reaching the same prestige as traditional sports any time soon. Nobody has the exclusive right to stream basketball matches, for example.
I don't think I can agree completely. You may be right for re-broadcasted pro sporting events, but there's a huge market for streaming rights live pro sports. Some might even say that the biggest business challenge to pro/college sport leagues, and sports media networks right now is how to handle live streaming of pro sports with the consumer shift towards streaming.
"rouge" black holes
Are they rouge because of red-shift? Those rogues.
Dammit... I deserve that.... I hate making spelling mistakes. My face is rouge now.
I agree with you that it sucks, but exclusive streaming rights for a major league competition might be why Activision was willing to make this deal despite MLG's debt.
How do we not know that this is just a massive star that turned into a black hole after it got ejected from its original galaxy?
Agreed. If I may add to what you're saying, it's possible an ejected star formed a black hole in a region of space with very little matter around it and then drifted towards the larger black hole; not that the larger black hole stripped matter away from the smaller. There's also plenty of documentation of "rouge" stars drifting in the empty space between galaxies, so it's a reasonable guess that there are also "rouge" black holes too.
To be fair the article does say, "But perhaps it just started out with fewer stars because it’s a different sort of black hole," which is not mentioned by the Slashdot summary.
To be clear, I'm not an astronomer, but I do have a comfy armchair.
That the first three films were decent only because of Lucas' lack of control. We saw what happens when his every whim is indulged with the prequels. Ugly stuff. In short: George, you're shite, now fuck off.
Exactly. Star Wars is like a brilliant and beautiful child who has escaped from their abusive father. Lucas should never be allowed near that child again.
Because Lucas messed up the original IV-VI movies with his remastered versions, I welcome JJ Abrams' rehash.
If you read the article you have seen that investigations years afterwards tied the dinosaur skull to a smuggler who knowingly broke Mongolian law by removing the fossil [and many others] from the country, and sold it to the auction house, who then sold it to Cage.
How about we don't let a bloated knock-off of a 3 decade old game become news? Terrible shovel-ware Mario-clone games can be found on every generation of consoles, MS-Dos, Windows, Mac, Linux, handheld games, web-based platforms, Steam store, smartphone games, etc. Another mario-clone should not be a surprise to anyone or news worthy of any discussion on Slashdot.
I suspect this was submitted by an "anonymous reader" affiliated with this terrible project.
Meaningless campaign posturing....will be referred to a subcommittee where it will die. To top it off, they're Senators from the minority party so they *know* they have no chance of even getting the bill seriously on the agenda, much less of anything remotely resembling passage.
Which means they're spending taxpayer dollars on political posturing and time campaigning.
I agree it's dead on arrival, but I'm not sure it's campaign posturing, because I doubt the rest of the country really cares enough about this issue to take notice. If a politician's goal is to prop up a campaign, there are much better issues to use. I am more inclined to believe that someone thinks [possibly erroneously] that they can make some progress on this issue. Keep in mind that just because an idea flounders in sub-committee hell doesn't always mean that something useful isn't incorporated into a later law.
So I am an environmental consultant who deals with contamination like this. I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but like many things, it's complicated. Here are a few other facts that should be in the discussion about MTBE:
1) The reason MTBE was mandated by the federal gov't (not just CA) was that it did significantly reduce tailpipe emissions, which had a real benefit to human health and air quality. (Now ethanol has replaced MTBE to serve the same function, again by federal mandate)
2) Risks associated with groundwater contamination were not as well understood then as they are now, so we can only place blame on MTBE and the regulators who mandated it with the benefit of hindsight.*
3) MTBE got lots of press, but there are other compounds in gasoline with much higher toxicity and are more persistent in soils and groundwater (benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, and tri-methylbenzenes to give a few examples).
4) The vast majority of MTBE [and gasoline contamination in general] was from leaky, old, poorly constructed/maintained underground tank systems that prior to the mid-90's had little to no regulations or industry standards. By the end of the 90's essentially all registered underground storage tanks across the country were replaced or upgraded to comply with new federal standards to make them much more reliable (like double-walled tanks, leak detection systems, corrosion resistance, maintenance standards, electronic monitoring, and more). The federal mandate to replace MTBE with ethanol came about a decade after the country had upgraded the tank systems, so the actual of risk MTBE contamination to groundwater at that time was very low; most contamination of MTBE had happened many years prior.
5) Since the federal mandate to replace MTBE with ethanol the number of nationwide reported leaks from tank systems has spiked because ethanol, unlike MTBE, is very corrosive and degrades tank systems faster, which goes back to point #3 that there are worse compounds in gasoline to worry about. The silver-lining is the new tanks systems are much better at quickly identifying when a leak occurs, significantly reducing the volume of gasoline leaked before it is corrected.
*- Keep in mind the EPA didn't even exist until 1970 and politicians/laws typically lag 5-10 years behind the science. So, it wasn't until around 1990 that our understanding of contamination and environmental regulations started to have any significant impact on how businesses/polluters operated. Relative to many other STEM fields, environmental science is very young and the changes in our understanding of contamination, risk, and regulations over the past couple decades cannot be understated.
Telecoms are investing in wireless networks over fiber because when the next generation of wireless mobile internet (5G) comes, it will move data faster at speeds competitive with land-based cable/DSL/Fiber, so selling those land-based internet services will get harder. Consider that 4G LTE can already move data fast enough to accommodate basic internet use (e.g. web browsing, email, basic streaming) and 5G will be faster without laying and maintaining expensive cables all over the planet. For rural areas in particular it will be much more cost-effective to reach homes with a 5G tower on a hilltop than run fiber along miles of rural roads. There were Slashdot stories from earlier this year that Verizon is already testing a 5G network and it's safe to assume AT&T is working theirs too. Mobile ISPs won't satisfy everyone though and some users will be willing to pay a premium for more bandwidth, which is why fiber is still being installed in wealthier, more densely populated neighborhoods.
Then why are the drivers inside of the vehicle?
The only kinds of places that I can think of...underwater applications...nuclear...failures...the applications for those environments are usually based on slow, methodical processes, not on fast-twitch reactions....Admittedly if the technology to make the interface work in real-time is actually working then that's pretty neat, but at the same time I still wonder what it's actually for.
The military has already been researching and investing in similar technology for vehicles with limited views and/or armoring, like tanks, trucks, helicopters, planes, etc. Transferring this tech to entertainment applications was already stated.
Well, we are carbon life forms and we are looking at the situation from our perspective. I would say the chances of these simulations being accurate are vanishingly small. Do we REALLY understand how and where life forms? Being carbon-based, is it really realistic to assume any and all life is like us, formed like us (even if our other assumptions about our own formation are correct)? At one time we thought we were the center of the universe, right here on earth. We also thought that Mars has always been dry, and we thought that Pluto would be a featureless cold world. And THAT's only assumptions within our solar system!
You can be pretty confident that this "detailed new simulation" isn't very accurate at all.
It's funny you bring up Pluto, because I was thinking about how the surprising processes at work there, far from the warmth of a star show we have very little basis for predicting things in the universe. Any large body that can internally retain heat in it's core has the potential for a stable environment to support life.
I don't think I made it half way through before tossing it. And I've read a lot of SF.
Same...I dropped Red Mars less than halfway through. It was like reading technical manual of stuff that doesn't exist. Although, between the fake technical manual parts I think I remember a whodunit mystery story that could inspire a TV series palatable to the general public The target audience of this show will not be Sci-Fi book geeks.
It may be true that Kuiper-belt-like objects are the most common kind, but Pluto is probably unique in that it comes relatively close to the sun, and the temporary heat is likely what causes the "pumping action" that shapes Pluto's dynamic geology. Bodies further out may not get enough energy from the sun to drive similar processes....
If I'm reading you correctly I disagree that that direct heat energy (rays) from the sun is the main driver of geologic processes on Pluto. Pluto's orbit is so far out that the Sun would be about 1000 times dimmer than on earth, so Sun's ability to drive weather and, in turn, geologic processes would be severely limited to say the least. I think it's more likely Pluto's 5 orbiting moons exert varying gravitational forces on Pluto's core creating friction and heat from within the dwarf planet driving geologic processes. Charon in particular is about half as large as Pluto and would likely exert a relatively strong gravitational force as it orbits. It would be like how the Earth's moon exerts force on the earth, or Saturn exerts force on it's moon Enceladus [with a liquid ocean and geysers]. Even on the Earth where the sun's rays are strong, geologic processes driven by the sun (i.e. weather and water cycles) are arguably less influential than mantle thermodynamics driving crustal plate movement and volcanic activity.
I never understand the obsession with bringing things back. Your memories of the past are rose tinted and rehashes rarely live up to them.
Individual opinions/tastes may vary, there are numerous examples of commercially successful "reboots" like, Transformers, Legos, Dr. Who, Le Miserables, Battlestar Galactica, anything Shakespeare, Mad Max, Star Wars, Sherlock Holmes, Lord of the Rings, and more.... Sometimes history/nostalgia can be a foundation to launch into something new and suitable for modern times. It all depends on the implementation.
It's fine to be skeptical of a MST3K reboot and not back the Kickstarter, but let's not be overly-pessimistic and rule it out as a failure before a show is even made.
Gov't mandates for labeling have to be based on proven risk though, otherwise regulators are literally just guessing what is a risk and what isn't and/or they would be forced to have warning labels almost everything produced. The "better safe than sorry" excuse doesn't really work here, because excessive labeling can counter-intuitively harm the public for many reasons. Here are a few that come to mind:
1) People get overwhelmed with seeing labels and they miss or outright ignore warning labels for actual proven risks, which increases public health risk
2) Labeling requirements can stifle development of new technologies and science that can have very real public health benefits
3) It costs more money to regulate and produce goods that gets passed on to the consumer. A little extra cost may not matter much for unnecessary/luxury products, but for basic foods, medicines, etc. higher cost can be big public health issue.
4) In our global economy, other exporting countries might not bother complying with onerous labeling requirements and just not offer their products, which ties into #2 and #3 above.
5) When gov't public health policies are not based on science it makes it much harder to change policies and act quickly when there is a scientific consensus. Or another way to think of it... anti-science policies dilutes all of science, which can hurt everyone (see also: anti-vaxxers).
I'm not against mandating labeling of products when it's based on science and proven public health risk, but the anti-GMO folks aren't there yet. Unfortunately, sometimes it's impossible to identify a risk particularly long-term risks until something used for a while. So, while there are awful examples like DDT, agent orange, asbestos, hormone therapies, etc. the important thing is that gov't has the ability to step in and stop them when the risk was proven (see point #5 above).
I too like to keep my nostalgia in my past where I don't have to tarnish my rose-tinted memories with ugly realities. Too many times I've made the mistake of revisiting my nostalgic loves only to be let down (e.g. 8-bit and 16-bit video games, my childhood cartoons, original Dr. Who, pro wrestling, etc.). So, I get it...HOWEVER....
1. MST3K always used current events and pop culture references. They aren't going to reboot the show and use the same jokes from 20 years ago.
2. They will be able to put more efforts into production, editing, and writing than any competition on YouTube, particularly if they can get a major network behind them. Good shows don't just happen because someone stood in front of a camera... there a lot of work that goes into them that you rarely find with a YouTube production. The amount of money they are asking for was initially pretty astonishing to me, but it also shows that with or without a network supporting them they should be able to make a polished finished product.
3. There are examples of reboots being done well and being successful. Like the new Dr. Who TV series, Transformers, or Mad Max.If done right, these old themes can be revived and be relevant again in today's world, with the advantage of a legacy they can build upon and expand from.
Yes. Are you disclosing those flaws honestly, so consumers can make an informed choice? Unless you're lying about your endorsement, what's the problem?
I agree the author of a review is doing no harm endorsing a game despite flaws if the flaws are disclosed in the review, which based on the Kotaku article it looks like most reviewers are. No foul. The problem as I see it is too many people focus on a review's overall rating/score and don't read the full review where they probably would have learned about the bugs. Metacritic's score aggregation exacerbates this problem. Readers [or users] need to shoulder some responsibility to take game reviews in their entirety.
Similarly there are times when some "choice paralysis" can help me from making bad impulse buys, because in the time it takes to look at options I slow down and think more about why I'm considering the purchase and if I really need that thing. Depending on the situation, impulsive buying can be equally bad as not buying.
Alternatively, it's a stepping stone that will expose a new generation and maybe some of them will continue on to appreciate the classics. Since the first time humans started rhythmically banging sticks together, music has always adapted to our technology and culture.
A couple points on "frackin chemicals"
1) Frack fluid mixtures are 99% potable water and sand. The remaining 1% are lubricants and biocides, many of which are food grade. So, less than 1% of frack fluids are chemicals with a potential to harm people.
2) The frack fluids are injected into GAS bearing rock, so fracking chemicals can't contaminate those waters worse than they were by the naturally occurring gas and oil.
Furthermore, no one is drinking water from private wells with depths anywhere near these gas formations. Most drinking wells are between 50-500 feet deep, whereas gas wells are between 2,000-14,000 feet deep.
To echo others correlation is not causation.
...Now the real question is Why isn't there serious study of the environmental impact of fracking. Not just from the oil companies, and not just from groups who have a tendency to be environmental extremist. There are enough areas now to measure water quality and other factors and make a good measurements on what pollutants are out there.
Just a couple month ago the USEPA completed a multi-year study of fracking in several areas of the US, which found no risk to groundwater quality. Anti-frackers wrote it off that study claiming the gov't is paid off by the gas companies. Link to USEPA page: http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy
The media doesn't help because creating sensationalist news articles is easier and more profitable than attempting to accurately explain complex geology, petroleum engineering techniques, contaminate migration, geochemistry, and risk evaluation to a general public that can't pay attention longer than it takes them to read a headline and click "share."
FWIW, I have a degree in geology, I am a certified Professional Geologist for Pennsylvania, I am environmental consultant who works with groundwater contamination, I do not work for oil and gas companies, I am generally liberal and typically vote Democrat, and I think fracking is OK. Like anything fracking is not without some risks, but those risks are being greatly exaggerated by the media and activists.
Seriously though, who prints stuff outside of work anyway?
Yeah, I read this article and thought, businesses with large volume business printers/copiers are the real market for this, not home printers.
I still have a few clients that send me files with fax machine even though we email regularly and I'm sure they have scanning capabilities. The fax machine needed to die 10 years ago.