The video as presented and the actual video were two different things. One shows a faultless black man being beaten by cops. the other shows a criminal black man being beaten by cops.
Thats not saying the beating was justified. Simply that RK wasnt as snowy white guiltless as people assumed him to be because of an edited video.
Write a letter to the MFR. As consumer you still have power. And many of the enthusiast MFr's are very willing to listen to customers, even small order ones, and work out deals. Plus if they think they see a market they might just release a product based on your request. It's happened in the past.
plus its not like the cell phone market. in cell phones, most people have little knowledge and plenty of $$, more $$ than needed to get the services they buy. Combined effect is most people (in US) pay too much for the service they recieve. In that market, the companies get away with it due to the combined effects.
in the homebuilding computer market however the opposite situation exists. the customer base typically has a lot of knowledge. and the amount of $$ they have is far more limited compared to the cost of the products. this gives far more power to the consumer.
If the customer is willing to pay for it, it will exist. Right now there is a market for OC'ed systems using cheaper CPUs to get higher bang/buck. They arent going to just drop that market by forcing people to get the expensive stuff to get the other part they want. These people are in business to make money.
Sure they can make more -potentially- by bundling the I7 with the shiny mobo...but if no one buys it cause its stupid expensive then they dont actually make more.
They arent stupid. They'll continue to bundle i5's or whatever with good mobos cause they know that's the sweet spot that most people are actaully spending money on.
For starters theres no way they could get away with it without people finding out and grabbing their pitchforks and crucifying the company.
Secondly, anyone who did hold it back would only cause increased incentive for a competitor to release the magic cure and get all the money instead. And if there's one thing companies hate, its letting their competitors get all the money.
Lastly, most of these companies are part of conglomerates; and if there's one thing big business knows, its that a working employee is better use of many than an employee taking sick days and getting paid. It's in their interests, hell everyones interest in terms of economy, to have everyone as close to 100% healthy as possible rather than taking a paid sick day.
And then you start paying for every website for every google search for every little thing you do on the web. not just to your ISP, but to every page. the open internet dies.
you totally missed the point of that. the idea as proposed is to serve one version of the site or another based upon a condition. the difference being the cost of bandwidth of serving either version. why waste bandwidth (and money) showing something that wont be seen?
Of course advertising works. If it didnt the internet as a free resource wouldnt exist.
you wouldnt just be paying an ISP for usage, you would be paying every single website for usage. Everything would be pay per view. The web as we know it would not exist.
Want to google that? 10 cents per query please. Wikipedia? 5cent per article read.
This anti-ad blind hate is foolish. This conspiracy "hypnosis" BS is just that: BS. Ads are and can be annoying.
But face it: they pay for your "free" viewing of the majority of the web.
thank you for being reasonable. I often say in these kinds of threads that in todays world of instant calculation there's no reason to get upset of units being used when all it takes is 0.05 seconds of Google calculation to convert from one unit to another.
and this of course oversimplifies too, cause in between EQ and WOW there was also asherons call, shadowbane, EVE, the one with giant playable dragons alongside normal races i forget the name, the EA space one rom westwood.... each had a different UI, tweaked in different ways. the one I remember being clsoest to WoW was Shadowbane, which was also a 3rd person POV but more importantly had a visually similar UI of using hotkeys displayed in a logical and simple manner.
Blizz just did was any other dev would do: they looked at what worked in the past and what didnt, what people liked and didnt, ran through some iterations of their own in testing (ever see some of the alhpa UI screenshots??), and the result is a UI that now is largely copied wholesale with only minor tweaks by other games, for the simple reason that it really works quite well.
And they used to say EQ was for casuals. UO was for hardcores. It's no more true now than it was then. Its just grandpa saying "back in my day..."
truth is, EQ had pretty much the same hard/casual ratio as wow does. to say wow was just about driving off hardcores and appealing to casuals is to miss the point and overly dismiss/simplify what WoW really did: 1) get the interface nearly perfect 2) exploit the builtin fanbase of an already richly developed backstory.
EQ was clunky as hell. fun, yes. more streamlined and intuitive than what came before it, yes. but how different or more intuitive was EQ's user interface than the majority of the other rpg's, particularly first person RPG's of the mid 90's? so compared to WoW? it's clunky as hell. and the UI being clunky or difficult to use is not what makes a game "hardcore".
EQ also had next to no lore, beyond what was created for EQ's release and later shown in game as it progressed. Compared to WoW which is actually the 5th game (4th released, and not counting expansions that also told stories) in the well developed Warcraft universe, already well liked with millions of fans, and that also already had books written in a canonical "expanded universe" (ie, not shown in any game yet).
Better interface makes more appealing. Builtin fanbase gives a jumpstart on userbase. Combined with what at its core is a decent game, and you get skyrocketing numbers.
already been covered in a book: The AI decided the simplest solution to global warming was to remove the source. And promptly eliminated all humans using technology beyond a stone/bronze age level.
dude. no. you're saying already that its all the red's fault. its not. its both. it will always be both.
the problem with the "cliff" is that the congress, red or blue, it doesnt matter, will gladly drive this bus over the cliff without hesitation. both sides together.
Why? Because it doesnt affect them; they get paid regardless. And they'll reelected regardless because they will all just blame it entirely on the other side, taking no resposnibility themselves, and the people who voted for them will all buy it and also blame it all on the evil other side (again, red blue, whichever it is for that person, doesnt matter), andhappily reelect the same people back into congress again.
and again. and again. It's win/win for the politicians either way.
and you're already blaming it all on the "other" side.
Because churches dont help others. and somehow their main drive is to "get members" because thats all that matters and that somehow makes "them" better.
no wait, it makes them richer, though who it is that actually gets that money is vague and somehow not mentioned...
it must be cause churches just collect money from each just to give it back to each other and all get richer or something. or they blindly just let the head priest collect it all for himself? oh wait, if they're catholic they send it back to Rome.
and everyone knows its happening, that they're being defrauded, but they dont say anything. ever.
the (usually) liberal equivalent of conservatives threatening to cut PBS and Big Bird out of their whole 0.0000017% of the budget.
also the question would be, in what way is a church a business? what products are sold? and how would you expect to get re-elected for taxing monies meant to be given to the poor or otherwise spent on charitable work?
problem is the "fiscal cliff" wasnt supposed to be logical. it was just across the board, lets put a gun to heads and threaten to pull the trigger and kill the economy, type cuts.
and the further problem is that its a weak threat, beucase the congress, red or blue it doesnt matter, will gladly drive this bus over the cliff without hesitation.
Why? Because it doesnt affect them; they get paid regardless. And they'll reelected regardless because they will all just blame it entirely on the other side, taking no resposnibility themselves, and the people who voted for them will all buy it and also blame it all on the evil other side (again, red blue, whichever it is for that person, doesnt matter), andhappily reelect the same people back into congress again.
math: 5$ in food per person every day. reasonable amount given the breakdown in what people eat and how, between eating out, special needs (baby, eldery), quantity and quality, etc. and not everyone spends wisely (most dont).
so 5$ per person per day. 350million people. 1,750,000,000$ spent on food per day. 1.75 Billion with a B. 30% sales tax: $525,000,000 sales tax every day, average. just from food. That's 191,625,000,000...191.6 BILLION....a year from Fair tax sales tax on food.
Even if you knock it down to 1$ a day per person, you're seeing 105million a day, 38.3billion a year, just from sales tax on food. still WAAAY more than you get from the supposed mega purchases of the rich that the fair tax is supposed to get "the majority of its revenue from".
And that (5$ day/person) is a low, conservative number! And that's just food! Havent even included hygiene supplies, gasoline, mortgage/rent, clothes, etc etc etc.
Just using food, the notion that the mega purchases of the rich is where the fair tax is supposed to get "the majority of its revenue from" is proven to be total BS.
except the rich didnt get rich by spending money willy nilly. and most fair tax proponents dont know what they are talking about. you can cherry pick examples of big purchases but the simple truth is those are the exception, not the rule. most rich people got rich by NOT buying these things. if they do have them, they either rent it, share it some time-share mechanism, or its provided as a perk from the company they own or work for. these mega purchases are the exception, not the rule. theyare few and far between.
meanwhile the basic cost of living would increase. the minimum amount needed to survive and feed your kids, now plus sales tax. sales taxes -always- hit lower income peoples disproportionately, because there is a minimum cost to living. the lower your income, they higher proportion that cost is out of your income.
which generates more tax revenue? the tax on a once in a lifetime power yacht purchase that most rich people dont even buy? or the consistent day to day tax revenue from basic need-it-to-survive items that everyone buys every day?
stop trying to sell the fairtax on the basis that it makes the rich "pay their share"...it doesnt. and it wont. and if implemented you would only see more renting or sharing of the "big toys" because they arent stupid, and if they can avoid paying a massive sales tax they will.
I know i would; its both logical and intelligent, and how you get "rich" in the first place (by not spending what you dont have to).
(and damnit, "rich" is too vague a word to use; start delineating what is and isnt rich)
SDI also included space based lasers (obstructed and distorted by cloud and atmospherics) and other fanciful toys. missile interception is an older concept than SDI, and SDI was more than just missile interception. SDI just included it.
Slashdot Mirror
The video as presented and the actual video were two different things. One shows a faultless black man being beaten by cops. the other shows a criminal black man being beaten by cops.
Thats not saying the beating was justified.
Simply that RK wasnt as snowy white guiltless as people assumed him to be because of an edited video.
So much melodrama. So much painting with a wide brush BS.
Write a letter to the MFR. As consumer you still have power. And many of the enthusiast MFr's are very willing to listen to customers, even small order ones, and work out deals. Plus if they think they see a market they might just release a product based on your request. It's happened in the past.
plus its not like the cell phone market. in cell phones, most people have little knowledge and plenty of $$, more $$ than needed to get the services they buy. Combined effect is most people (in US) pay too much for the service they recieve. In that market, the companies get away with it due to the combined effects.
in the homebuilding computer market however the opposite situation exists. the customer base typically has a lot of knowledge. and the amount of $$ they have is far more limited compared to the cost of the products. this gives far more power to the consumer.
If the customer is willing to pay for it, it will exist. Right now there is a market for OC'ed systems using cheaper CPUs to get higher bang/buck. They arent going to just drop that market by forcing people to get the expensive stuff to get the other part they want. These people are in business to make money.
Sure they can make more -potentially- by bundling the I7 with the shiny mobo...but if no one buys it cause its stupid expensive then they dont actually make more.
They arent stupid. They'll continue to bundle i5's or whatever with good mobos cause they know that's the sweet spot that most people are actaully spending money on.
That's BS and its always been BS.
For starters theres no way they could get away with it without people finding out and grabbing their pitchforks and crucifying the company.
Secondly, anyone who did hold it back would only cause increased incentive for a competitor to release the magic cure and get all the money instead. And if there's one thing companies hate, its letting their competitors get all the money.
Lastly, most of these companies are part of conglomerates; and if there's one thing big business knows, its that a working employee is better use of many than an employee taking sick days and getting paid. It's in their interests, hell everyones interest in terms of economy, to have everyone as close to 100% healthy as possible rather than taking a paid sick day.
It in no way increases the chance of finding life in those places.
It merely increases our perception of the chance of finding life.
it's called skin.
you dont deep fry a skinless turkey.
and grease isnt crunchy.
he said skin. it sears the skin. not the meat.
and yes, that does lock in the moisture when frying a turkey.
And then you start paying for every website for every google search for every little thing you do on the web. not just to your ISP, but to every page. the open internet dies.
you totally missed the point of that. the idea as proposed is to serve one version of the site or another based upon a condition. the difference being the cost of bandwidth of serving either version. why waste bandwidth (and money) showing something that wont be seen?
Of course advertising works.
If it didnt the internet as a free resource wouldnt exist.
you wouldnt just be paying an ISP for usage, you would be paying every single website for usage. Everything would be pay per view. The web as we know it would not exist.
Want to google that? 10 cents per query please.
Wikipedia? 5cent per article read.
This anti-ad blind hate is foolish. This conspiracy "hypnosis" BS is just that: BS.
Ads are and can be annoying.
But face it: they pay for your "free" viewing of the majority of the web.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=50+knots+mph
Bam. Couple seconds to type it into google, half a second for a reply. Done.
thank you for being reasonable. I often say in these kinds of threads that in todays world of instant calculation there's no reason to get upset of units being used when all it takes is 0.05 seconds of Google calculation to convert from one unit to another.
its called emergent gameplay, analagous to emergent behaviour, just in relation to a game and ones actions within it.
and this of course oversimplifies too, cause in between EQ and WOW there was also asherons call, shadowbane, EVE, the one with giant playable dragons alongside normal races i forget the name, the EA space one rom westwood.... each had a different UI, tweaked in different ways. the one I remember being clsoest to WoW was Shadowbane, which was also a 3rd person POV but more importantly had a visually similar UI of using hotkeys displayed in a logical and simple manner.
Blizz just did was any other dev would do: they looked at what worked in the past and what didnt, what people liked and didnt, ran through some iterations of their own in testing (ever see some of the alhpa UI screenshots??), and the result is a UI that now is largely copied wholesale with only minor tweaks by other games, for the simple reason that it really works quite well.
And they used to say EQ was for casuals. UO was for hardcores. It's no more true now than it was then. Its just grandpa saying "back in my day..."
truth is, EQ had pretty much the same hard/casual ratio as wow does. to say wow was just about driving off hardcores and appealing to casuals is to miss the point and overly dismiss/simplify what WoW really did:
1) get the interface nearly perfect
2) exploit the builtin fanbase of an already richly developed backstory.
EQ was clunky as hell. fun, yes. more streamlined and intuitive than what came before it, yes. but how different or more intuitive was EQ's user interface than the majority of the other rpg's, particularly first person RPG's of the mid 90's? so compared to WoW? it's clunky as hell. and the UI being clunky or difficult to use is not what makes a game "hardcore".
EQ also had next to no lore, beyond what was created for EQ's release and later shown in game as it progressed. Compared to WoW which is actually the 5th game (4th released, and not counting expansions that also told stories) in the well developed Warcraft universe, already well liked with millions of fans, and that also already had books written in a canonical "expanded universe" (ie, not shown in any game yet).
Better interface makes more appealing.
Builtin fanbase gives a jumpstart on userbase.
Combined with what at its core is a decent game, and you get skyrocketing numbers.
already been covered in a book: The AI decided the simplest solution to global warming was to remove the source. And promptly eliminated all humans using technology beyond a stone/bronze age level.
dude. no. you're saying already that its all the red's fault. its not. its both. it will always be both.
the problem with the "cliff" is that the congress, red or blue, it doesnt matter, will gladly drive this bus over the cliff without hesitation. both sides together.
Why? Because it doesnt affect them; they get paid regardless. And they'll reelected regardless because they will all just blame it entirely on the other side, taking no resposnibility themselves, and the people who voted for them will all buy it and also blame it all on the evil other side (again, red blue, whichever it is for that person, doesnt matter), andhappily reelect the same people back into congress again.
and again.
and again.
It's win/win for the politicians either way.
and you're already blaming it all on the "other" side.
Because churches dont help others. and somehow their main drive is to "get members" because thats all that matters and that somehow makes "them" better.
no wait, it makes them richer, though who it is that actually gets that money is vague and somehow not mentioned...
it must be cause churches just collect money from each just to give it back to each other and all get richer or something. or they blindly just let the head priest collect it all for himself? oh wait, if they're catholic they send it back to Rome.
and everyone knows its happening, that they're being defrauded, but they dont say anything. ever.
dude. you're a fool.
the (usually) liberal equivalent of conservatives threatening to cut PBS and Big Bird out of their whole 0.0000017% of the budget.
also the question would be, in what way is a church a business? what products are sold? and how would you expect to get re-elected for taxing monies meant to be given to the poor or otherwise spent on charitable work?
problem is the "fiscal cliff" wasnt supposed to be logical. it was just across the board, lets put a gun to heads and threaten to pull the trigger and kill the economy, type cuts.
and the further problem is that its a weak threat, beucase the congress, red or blue it doesnt matter, will gladly drive this bus over the cliff without hesitation.
Why? Because it doesnt affect them; they get paid regardless. And they'll reelected regardless because they will all just blame it entirely on the other side, taking no resposnibility themselves, and the people who voted for them will all buy it and also blame it all on the evil other side (again, red blue, whichever it is for that person, doesnt matter), andhappily reelect the same people back into congress again.
and again.
and again.
It's win/win for the politicians either way.
math: 5$ in food per person every day. reasonable amount given the breakdown in what people eat and how, between eating out, special needs (baby, eldery), quantity and quality, etc. and not everyone spends wisely (most dont).
so 5$ per person per day.
350million people.
1,750,000,000$ spent on food per day. 1.75 Billion with a B.
30% sales tax: $525,000,000 sales tax every day, average. just from food.
That's 191,625,000,000...191.6 BILLION....a year from Fair tax sales tax on food.
Even if you knock it down to 1$ a day per person, you're seeing 105million a day, 38.3billion a year, just from sales tax on food. still WAAAY more than you get from the supposed mega purchases of the rich that the fair tax is supposed to get "the majority of its revenue from".
And that (5$ day/person) is a low, conservative number!
And that's just food! Havent even included hygiene supplies, gasoline, mortgage/rent, clothes, etc etc etc.
Just using food, the notion that the mega purchases of the rich is where the fair tax is supposed to get "the majority of its revenue from" is proven to be total BS.
except the rich didnt get rich by spending money willy nilly. and most fair tax proponents dont know what they are talking about. you can cherry pick examples of big purchases but the simple truth is those are the exception, not the rule. most rich people got rich by NOT buying these things. if they do have them, they either rent it, share it some time-share mechanism, or its provided as a perk from the company they own or work for. these mega purchases are the exception, not the rule. theyare few and far between.
meanwhile the basic cost of living would increase. the minimum amount needed to survive and feed your kids, now plus sales tax. sales taxes -always- hit lower income peoples disproportionately, because there is a minimum cost to living. the lower your income, they higher proportion that cost is out of your income.
which generates more tax revenue? the tax on a once in a lifetime power yacht purchase that most rich people dont even buy? or the consistent day to day tax revenue from basic need-it-to-survive items that everyone buys every day?
stop trying to sell the fairtax on the basis that it makes the rich "pay their share"...it doesnt.
and it wont.
and if implemented you would only see more renting or sharing of the "big toys" because they arent stupid, and if they can avoid paying a massive sales tax they will.
I know i would; its both logical and intelligent, and how you get "rich" in the first place (by not spending what you dont have to).
(and damnit, "rich" is too vague a word to use; start delineating what is and isnt rich)
SDI also included space based lasers (obstructed and distorted by cloud and atmospherics) and other fanciful toys.
missile interception is an older concept than SDI, and SDI was more than just missile interception. SDI just included it.