"Your right to religion doesn't give you a right to silence all speech related to said religion. Free speech is important." And so is freedom of religion. I do go to church and I have seen people protest at some events related to my church. They tend to be peaceful, none threatening, and frankly wasting their time. My faith teaches that only a fool is takes offense when not is intended and it is a bigger fool that takes offense when it is, sort of a spiritual version of "don't feed the trolls". However some protesters can be be threatening to people and stiflings to their spirituality. That can be violating their freedom of religion. Think about that church in Kansas and some of their protests at funerals. While my faith makes me want to be Christ like I have to admit that they make it very hard. You are seeing everything in black and white terms. I don't know exactly what was going on but isn't it possible that they where blocking the door or gate? I wasn't there so I don't know. Also how is saying that you can not protest at a place of worship silencing all speech related to said religion? I know Scientology is using copyright law to stop criticism of their church but that is a different issue than this law. I am just trying to show what the law intends to do. I can see it's good points and it's bad. It can be abused but it can also protect a freedom. I can see how some people would be very grateful of it's protections. I am trying to present both sides of it. It is just too simple to jump in and be outraged just because I happen to really dislike Scientology.
That was my thought. But it gets worse. Dell is also a big and relatively new AMD customer. Intel's integrated graphics solution works very well under Linux. So for the low end Linux solution Intel maybe the system of choice. The Dell guys might start crossing ATI and AMD off the list. Intel offers easier on stop shopping and a more politically correct FOSS system.
Why? You value his freedom of speech more then the people going to the synagogue's freedom of religion? Both are protected under the law. He is not prevented from saying what he wants he is just limited from saying it in a way that violates other peoples rights. As I said it is a balance between the two rights.
Well for one the law isn't about deriding a religion it is about "Interfering with a Religion". Second freedom of religion is protected. People have the right to worship how they please. This law isn't to prevent you from making comments about a religion but to protect peoples right to believe as they choose. I don't like Scientology but they have a right to their beliefs just as much as you do. Even if their beliefs where the result of a bet with Asimov about creating a religion.
I have to give them some credit. Recruiting celebrities is brilliant. Scientology is all about how great and powerful you really are and how things of this world hold you back. I can see how that can be very attractive to a certain personality type. Then you have the people that wish to be like celebrities following them plus all the great pr you get from them. Of course I expect no more spiritual, moral, and political guidance from an actor or rock-star than I do my plumber I find it all very silly but way too many people do fall for it.
Not threatening a religion. He was convicted of interfering with a religion. The same law would apply to someone with a Nazi arm band protesting out side a synagogue with sign saying "Dirty Jews killed Jesus!". And I for one would be hard pressed to shed a tear if some was arrested for that. He was protesting at their church. While I don't like Scientology and think they manipulate the law very effectively I have to say that there is also the Freedom of Religion in the US. People have the right to worship as they choose without being harassed. The balance between freedom of speech and freedom of religion is the question here. Now getting arrested for the Tom Cruse missile joke on a news group. That is totally bogus. The law has good intentions but I don't know about this case. I also think this guy might be a little paranoid. I just don't see gangs of Scientologists killing people in county jails as being very likely. But then this is California so who knows.
Your right nobody could use an Aircraft to strike at a US target. Not in our life time... Yea right. I am not really worried about an ICBM or bomber. Those we can handle but what about a hijacked cargo plane or even a light plane filled with explosives, or even a small UAV like this one http://tam.plannet21.com/?
The US air defenses are so poor that one September 11 we couldn't intercept any of the planes that hit the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. Even after the World Trade Center got hit a plane go through to the Pentagon and would have gotten through to any building in the capital. So no I don't think that the US air defense is good enough. For goodness sakes at least put some SAMs around our military bases.
Okay I guess you have never heard of a UAV. How about this little toy http://tam.plannet21.com/. It doesn't take much of an explosive payload to damage or destroy a fully fueled plane. I hate to even post something like this for fear it will give the law makers ideas but even if you scale it up to the size of a small homebuilt like a Quickie or LongEZE you have an effective cruise missile.
I do understand but they are claiming these are massive. But again no numbers on mass just some reference that they could be 1 AU in diameter. I really hate science stories that don't include any useful data. My question is are these above or below the Chandra limit and is the their density limit the same as normal matter?
Just wondering but if they are are massive and burn slowly wouldn't they tend to collapse into black holes? If they don't put out enough heat to counter their gravitational field they should collapse. If so they may be the cores of the super massive black holes at the center of many galaxies. Just and idea since there where no numbers given in the article.
"I do not think it is, and I do not think there is naything wrong with sharing it for free." That is nice but untrue. Making copies of it and giving it out to the public is piracy. So is copying it and giving it to a friend. The problem with the DMCA isn't that it is trying to make piracy illegal. It already is. It is that it is making all sorts of perfectly legal activities illegal. Like me ripping DVDs that I own and putting them on my iPod or notebook. I don't use DeCSS to pirate DVDs I use it to watch DVDs that I own on my Linux machine. I don't use Bit torrent to download movies. I use to to download Linux ISOs.
These laws are bad because they are making legal things illegal.
Yes yes nothing is free. I am talking just about accounting dollars. Hidden costs are often overblown to the point of fantasy. One person I know tried to tell me that than more oil was used in building a nuclear plant than was saved by one.
Dams are interesting because while they destroy one type of ecosystem they create a new one. A river valley is turned into a lake. Which is a better ecosystem really depends on who you are. Yes Dams have an impact but each location is different. In some places putting a dam is a really bad idea. In others a good one.
Frankly I would rather deal with the impact of a western nuclear plant more than any Coal or Oil fired plant. In fact I live with one in my town so it is in my back yard:)
Wow you are nuts. France left but stayed in the command and control structure and even took part in joint exercises. France left like a little kid that runs away to their best friends house. Besides if France had try to start a war in Europe it would have faced all of western Europe and the US. I don't think that they would have since they had nothing to gain with another war in Europe. France left NATO the same way they won WWII, in name only. Germany finally had a chance to form a democratic government and feed their people at the same time. Something that France and the UK did a lot to prevent after WWI. It also helped that the US had a lot of troops in country right after the war so that any attempt to bring back the Nazi party was doomed before it started. Then you have the Berlin Airlift which prevented the fall of Berlin or a war over Berlin. Simple truth is that without the US's influence and charity, Europe with the possible exception of the UK would have crashed into starvation, civil war, or fallen under the control of the USSR. I am not the one digging. The EU is the result of things like the Marshall and NATO. Besides by your own statement all they do spend money and make paper. How could that bring peace and stability? You like many Europeans want to forget the role the US played in building modern Europe. So you minimize it and try and forget it.
Wow you are from another planet. NATO falling apart in the 50s? Where exactly did it say in that article that NATO was falling apart in the 50s. NATO is still around or did you forget Kosovo. Or that other nations are trying to join NATO even today. France left... Kind of anyway. They follow all Nato standards and have a linked Command and Control structure. Yea the Marshall plan was the one thing the US did. That one thing was called rebuilding and feeding Western Europe when Western Europe couldn't feed it's self. Funny how you claim NATO started falling apart in the 50s when it has more members now than any time in the past. And yes countering the USSR/Warsaw pac was a part of keeping the peace.
Maybe they know history better than you do. Europe in 1945 was destoried and starving. Even the UK was at the brink of collapse. The US extended Lend Lease and then started the Marshall plan. Throw in the reconstruction of Germany and you can begin to see the difference. Then you have NATO which started in 1949 which predates the Frano-German Steel and Coal agreements. Yes the US had a HUGE impact on peace in Europe. It is just that it is easier to minimize the impact of the US than to admit that only with the US playing a part in European affairs could Europe stop killing each other. Here are some sources for you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_plan And the real start of what you call the EU the the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_for_Econ omic_Co-operation_and_Development Which was funded by the Marshall plan.
It seems that your view of history is off. It must make you feel good as a European to feel like the stability and prosperity you have now is all the product of your enlightned hard work. But that is as about as factual as saying the US defeated Hitler all by it's self. The 50 years of European peace you are talking about was accomplished with a lot of US help.
BTW the answer to your friends question, "why would someone develop for the Wii" is simple, a paycheck.
Actually I would love to develop for the Wii. The controller opens up new possibilities for games while the 360 and the PS3 are more about eye candy.
Yes the 360 and PS3 are very different critters. Most of the people that post with such authority on how easy it is to port software and or deliver bug free software have never written a line of code or used any system but and X86 or maybe a PPC.
The EU hasn't been around for 50 years and has very little if nothing to do with those 50 years of peace. The reasons that Europe has had 50 years of peace are. 1. Germany and France where both pretty well destroyed. So they spent a good number of hears rebuilding. 2. Germany was rebuilt with a constitution that enforces none aggression. That was enforced by the US and the the UK for many years. 3. The US rebuilt Europe both friend and foe alike with the Marshall Plan and continued Lend Lease. 4. The US help found NATO to build cooperation in Europe and then funded a large percentage of the the European nations defense budgets. 5. The USSR/WARSAW pact gave Western Europe a common fear and the US gave them protection.
I keep hoping that part of it is that the members of the EU are just sick of killing each other. However historically a large part of that stability clearly came from the rise of the US as a superpower and the US being actively involved with Europe.
Oh BTW a lot of people in Europe really don't share your wish for a European Army. I doubt that the UK would disband their Army and France would want to control the EU Army.
So if you are only for the EU because it kept the peace... It didn't.
From the article. "Was this the first bot to incinerate Homo sapiens?" No. Sidewinder and AIM-120 missiles are disposable, suicidal, killing machines. Robots like those have been in service for a long time. They are flying robots and not even remote controlled. Same as the new Hellfire, MK 48 ADCAP, Tomahawk , ALCM or any number of systems. Robotic killing machines have been around since at least WWII.
If the PS3 only gets 360 ports it is dead. Why pay for PS3 when you can buy a 360 to play the same games plus have the exclusives of the 360. Third party support of the Wii is building very quickly and frankly from what I have seen the Wii has more high rated games than the PS3 currently has. You must be a real Sony fan or a real Nintendo hater. I was a big fan of the PS3 before it shipped. I wanted a Cell to program so bad I could taste it. I actually thought that idea of Apple going for Intel was stupid since the Cell was coming and was going to revolutionize computing. Reality is different than hype. Porting a game between the PS3 and the Wii isn't going to be that easy for a complex game. The 360 offers a uniform programing model of three PPC cores each supporting 2 threads and a directX like interface to the GPU. The PS3 offers a single PPC core and seven SPEs. The XBox also only offers a DVD for the game and may or may not have a Hard drive. The only thing that the PS3 and 360 share screen resolution so the the artwork can be the same. Yes artwork and textures are a big part of a game but not everything. A port between the PS3 and the 360 isn't a simple task. BTW both the PS3 and 360 support SDTV resolution so when a developer creates the artwork and textures for SD mode they will have them for the Wii. I also think you may be surprised how many games will work just fine on the Wii. It really doesn't matter Nintendo is selling millions of Wii's and DSs and are currently out selling bot the PS3 and the 360. Third party developers are getting titles out for the Wii and Nintendo is has produced some great games for it. Wii Sports is a lot of fun, Paper Mario is great and Zelda has become an instant classic. So far I have not heard of any PS3 block busters yet. Maybe there will be but it better be soon.
That is just a statement of fact. If you decide to drive drunk, have unprotected sex, or even speed it can ruin your life and or somebody else's. Getting kicked out of a university for drinking a beer seems extreme but are they expelled for life or just a semester? If it was just a semester and it was a published rule then hey he decided that a beer was worth getting kicked out. He is in university now not kindergarten.
Now the kid the got put into a special school for making a game map of his high school is just wrong. What rule did he break? What crime? None that I know of.
As for the merry days of hippie culture? They are a myth. Many women ended up being single parents when the summer of love was over. Then you have the Rolling Stones deciding that Hell's Angels make great concert security... The 60s where at time of self indulgent drivel that went on into the 70s and ended with the mega greed of the 80s. Do the math if you want proof. 18 in 1965 28 in 1975 38 in 1985. The end result of hippie culture is the greed is good culture of the 80s.
PS3 sales are pretty slow and they will slow to a trickle if there are no PS3 exclusives. I don't know if the Wii will over take the 360 but at the current rate of sales it might. The Wii doesn't have to beat the PS3 and the 360. It just has to make Nintendo a lot of money. And it is. I just don't see sales of the Wii going down or the sales of the PS3 going up. Take a look here http://nexgenwars.com/ the Wii is lagging the 360 by that much. If Wii sales keep up at this rate it will equal or surpass 360 by next Christmas.
Slashdot Mirror
The most dedicated "aka" extreme voters turn out for the primaries.
"Your right to religion doesn't give you a right to silence all speech related to said religion. Free speech is important."
And so is freedom of religion. I do go to church and I have seen people protest at some events related to my church. They tend to be peaceful, none threatening, and frankly wasting their time. My faith teaches that only a fool is takes offense when not is intended and it is a bigger fool that takes offense when it is, sort of a spiritual version of "don't feed the trolls". However some protesters can be be threatening to people and stiflings to their spirituality. That can be violating their freedom of religion. Think about that church in Kansas and some of their protests at funerals. While my faith makes me want to be Christ like I have to admit that they make it very hard.
You are seeing everything in black and white terms. I don't know exactly what was going on but isn't it possible that they where blocking the door or gate? I wasn't there so I don't know. Also how is saying that you can not protest at a place of worship silencing all speech related to said religion? I know Scientology is using copyright law to stop criticism of their church but that is a different issue than this law.
I am just trying to show what the law intends to do. I can see it's good points and it's bad. It can be abused but it can also protect a freedom. I can see how some people would be very grateful of it's protections. I am trying to present both sides of it. It is just too simple to jump in and be outraged just because I happen to really dislike Scientology.
That was my thought. But it gets worse. Dell is also a big and relatively new AMD customer. Intel's integrated graphics solution works very well under Linux. So for the low end Linux solution Intel maybe the system of choice. The Dell guys might start crossing ATI and AMD off the list. Intel offers easier on stop shopping and a more politically correct FOSS system.
Why? You value his freedom of speech more then the people going to the synagogue's freedom of religion? Both are protected under the law. He is not prevented from saying what he wants he is just limited from saying it in a way that violates other peoples rights.
As I said it is a balance between the two rights.
Well for one the law isn't about deriding a religion it is about "Interfering with a Religion".
Second freedom of religion is protected. People have the right to worship how they please. This law isn't to prevent you from making comments about a religion but to protect peoples right to believe as they choose.
I don't like Scientology but they have a right to their beliefs just as much as you do. Even if their beliefs where the result of a bet with Asimov about creating a religion.
I have to give them some credit. Recruiting celebrities is brilliant. Scientology is all about how great and powerful you really are and how things of this world hold you back. I can see how that can be very attractive to a certain personality type. Then you have the people that wish to be like celebrities following them plus all the great pr you get from them. Of course I expect no more spiritual, moral, and political guidance from an actor or rock-star than I do my plumber I find it all very silly but way too many people do fall for it.
Not threatening a religion.
He was convicted of interfering with a religion. The same law would apply to someone with a Nazi arm band protesting out side a synagogue with sign saying "Dirty Jews killed Jesus!". And I for one would be hard pressed to shed a tear if some was arrested for that.
He was protesting at their church. While I don't like Scientology and think they manipulate the law very effectively I have to say that there is also the Freedom of Religion in the US. People have the right to worship as they choose without being harassed. The balance between freedom of speech and freedom of religion is the question here. Now getting arrested for the Tom Cruse missile joke on a news group. That is totally bogus.
The law has good intentions but I don't know about this case. I also think this guy might be a little paranoid. I just don't see gangs of Scientologists killing people in county jails as being very likely. But then this is California so who knows.
Your right nobody could use an Aircraft to strike at a US target. Not in our life time...
Yea right.
I am not really worried about an ICBM or bomber. Those we can handle but what about a hijacked cargo plane or even a light plane filled with explosives, or even a small UAV like this one http://tam.plannet21.com/?
The US air defenses are so poor that one September 11 we couldn't intercept any of the planes that hit the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. Even after the World Trade Center got hit a plane go through to the Pentagon and would have gotten through to any building in the capital. So no I don't think that the US air defense is good enough. For goodness sakes at least put some SAMs around our military bases.
Okay I guess you have never heard of a UAV. How about this little toy http://tam.plannet21.com/. It doesn't take much of an explosive payload to damage or destroy a fully fueled plane.
I hate to even post something like this for fear it will give the law makers ideas but even if you scale it up to the size of a small homebuilt like a Quickie or LongEZE you have an effective cruise missile.
You ask and I can show you options.
I do understand but they are claiming these are massive. But again no numbers on mass just some reference that they could be 1 AU in diameter. I really hate science stories that don't include any useful data. My question is are these above or below the Chandra limit and is the their density limit the same as normal matter?
Just wondering but if they are are massive and burn slowly wouldn't they tend to collapse into black holes? If they don't put out enough heat to counter their gravitational field they should collapse. If so they may be the cores of the super massive black holes at the center of many galaxies. Just and idea since there where no numbers given in the article.
"I do not think it is, and I do not think there is naything wrong with sharing it for free." That is nice but untrue. Making copies of it and giving it out to the public is piracy. So is copying it and giving it to a friend. The problem with the DMCA isn't that it is trying to make piracy illegal. It already is. It is that it is making all sorts of perfectly legal activities illegal. Like me ripping DVDs that I own and putting them on my iPod or notebook. I don't use DeCSS to pirate DVDs I use it to watch DVDs that I own on my Linux machine. I don't use Bit torrent to download movies. I use to to download Linux ISOs.
These laws are bad because they are making legal things illegal.
Let me give you an example of some data that may be dangerous.+ AFB+LA&ie=UTF8&ll=32.4938,-93.665201&spn=0.002927, 0.005343&t=h&z=18&om=1+ AFB+LA&ie=UTF8&t=h&om=1&ll=32.506468,-93.642467&sp n=0.002927,0.005343&z=18&iwloc=addr+ AFB+LA&ie=UTF8&t=h&om=1&ll=32.518368,-93.66394&spn =0.001463,0.002671&z=19&iwloc=addr+ AFB+LA&ie=UTF8&t=h&om=1&ll=32.518368,-93.66394&spn =0.001463,0.002671&z=19&iwloc=addr
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Barksdale
Those are B52s and those are their parking spots. While not realtime data with Google Earth at least you can get the latitude and longitude of those spots. That Air base like most the rest of the US has no real anti-aircraft defense systems it would be very easy to target those planes. You can also see a lot more than three buildings in an L shape. If that isn't good enough for you here are the weapon storage bunkers http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Barksdale
and just for fun some fuel storage http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Barksdale
and just to show you how good these images are these are some older aircraft they have on static display at the base. This is a B52 with a Mig-21 fighter next to it. I am not an expert but the photos are good enough even for me to identify pretty small aircraft. http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Barksdale
I am not saying that I like the idea but to dismiss it seems less than honest. This is not a black and white issue.
I haven't looked at the Unreal 3 engine but it might run just fine on the Wii. Red Steel used the Unreal 2.5 engine.
Yes yes nothing is free. I am talking just about accounting dollars. Hidden costs are often overblown to the point of fantasy. One person I know tried to tell me that than more oil was used in building a nuclear plant than was saved by one.
:)
Dams are interesting because while they destroy one type of ecosystem they create a new one. A river valley is turned into a lake. Which is a better ecosystem really depends on who you are. Yes Dams have an impact but each location is different. In some places putting a dam is a really bad idea. In others a good one.
Frankly I would rather deal with the impact of a western nuclear plant more than any Coal or Oil fired plant. In fact I live with one in my town so it is in my back yard
Actually I believe that Hydro is the cheapest followed by Nuclear or Coal. Other than that you are right on the money.
Wow you are nuts. France left but stayed in the command and control structure and even took part in joint exercises. France left like a little kid that runs away to their best friends house. Besides if France had try to start a war in Europe it would have faced all of western Europe and the US. I don't think that they would have since they had nothing to gain with another war in Europe. France left NATO the same way they won WWII, in name only.
Germany finally had a chance to form a democratic government and feed their people at the same time. Something that France and the UK did a lot to prevent after WWI. It also helped that the US had a lot of troops in country right after the war so that any attempt to bring back the Nazi party was doomed before it started. Then you have the Berlin Airlift which prevented the fall of Berlin or a war over Berlin.
Simple truth is that without the US's influence and charity, Europe with the possible exception of the UK would have crashed into starvation, civil war, or fallen under the control of the USSR.
I am not the one digging. The EU is the result of things like the Marshall and NATO. Besides by your own statement all they do spend money and make paper. How could that bring peace and stability? You like many Europeans want to forget the role the US played in building modern Europe. So you minimize it and try and forget it.
Wow you are from another planet. NATO falling apart in the 50s? Where exactly did it say in that article that NATO was falling apart in the 50s.
NATO is still around or did you forget Kosovo. Or that other nations are trying to join NATO even today. France left... Kind of anyway. They follow all Nato standards and have a linked Command and Control structure.
Yea the Marshall plan was the one thing the US did. That one thing was called rebuilding and feeding Western Europe when Western Europe couldn't feed it's self.
Funny how you claim NATO started falling apart in the 50s when it has more members now than any time in the past. And yes countering the USSR/Warsaw pac was a part of keeping the peace.
Maybe they know history better than you do.n omic_Co-operation_and_Development
Europe in 1945 was destoried and starving. Even the UK was at the brink of collapse. The US extended Lend Lease and then started the Marshall plan. Throw in the reconstruction of Germany and you can begin to see the difference.
Then you have NATO which started in 1949 which predates the Frano-German Steel and Coal agreements. Yes the US had a HUGE impact on peace in Europe. It is just that it is easier to minimize the impact of the US than to admit that only with the US playing a part in European affairs could Europe stop killing each other.
Here are some sources for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_plan
And the real start of what you call the EU the the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_for_Eco
Which was funded by the Marshall plan.
It seems that your view of history is off.
It must make you feel good as a European to feel like the stability and prosperity you have now is all the product of your enlightned hard work. But that is as about as factual as saying the US defeated Hitler all by it's self.
The 50 years of European peace you are talking about was accomplished with a lot of US help.
BTW the answer to your friends question, "why would someone develop for the Wii" is simple, a paycheck.
Actually I would love to develop for the Wii. The controller opens up new possibilities for games while the 360 and the PS3 are more about eye candy.
Yes the 360 and PS3 are very different critters. Most of the people that post with such authority on how easy it is to port software and or deliver bug free software have never written a line of code or used any system but and X86 or maybe a PPC.
The EU hasn't been around for 50 years and has very little if nothing to do with those 50 years of peace.
The reasons that Europe has had 50 years of peace are.
1. Germany and France where both pretty well destroyed. So they spent a good number of hears rebuilding.
2. Germany was rebuilt with a constitution that enforces none aggression. That was enforced by the US and the the UK for many years.
3. The US rebuilt Europe both friend and foe alike with the Marshall Plan and continued Lend Lease.
4. The US help found NATO to build cooperation in Europe and then funded a large percentage of the the European nations defense budgets.
5. The USSR/WARSAW pact gave Western Europe a common fear and the US gave them protection.
I keep hoping that part of it is that the members of the EU are just sick of killing each other. However historically a large part of that stability clearly came from the rise of the US as a superpower and the US being actively involved with Europe.
Oh BTW a lot of people in Europe really don't share your wish for a European Army. I doubt that the UK would disband their Army and France would want to control the EU Army.
So if you are only for the EU because it kept the peace... It didn't.
From the article.
"Was this the first bot to incinerate Homo sapiens?" No.
Sidewinder and AIM-120 missiles are disposable, suicidal, killing machines. Robots like those have been in service for a long time. They are flying robots and not even remote controlled. Same as the new Hellfire, MK 48 ADCAP, Tomahawk , ALCM or any number of systems. Robotic killing machines have been around since at least WWII.
And combine this with JGC and I will be a happy man.
If the PS3 only gets 360 ports it is dead. Why pay for PS3 when you can buy a 360 to play the same games plus have the exclusives of the 360. Third party support of the Wii is building very quickly and frankly from what I have seen the Wii has more high rated games than the PS3 currently has.
You must be a real Sony fan or a real Nintendo hater. I was a big fan of the PS3 before it shipped. I wanted a Cell to program so bad I could taste it. I actually thought that idea of Apple going for Intel was stupid since the Cell was coming and was going to revolutionize computing. Reality is different than hype.
Porting a game between the PS3 and the Wii isn't going to be that easy for a complex game. The 360 offers a uniform programing model of three PPC cores each supporting 2 threads and a directX like interface to the GPU. The PS3 offers a single PPC core and seven SPEs. The XBox also only offers a DVD for the game and may or may not have a Hard drive. The only thing that the PS3 and 360 share screen resolution so the the artwork can be the same. Yes artwork and textures are a big part of a game but not everything.
A port between the PS3 and the 360 isn't a simple task. BTW both the PS3 and 360 support SDTV resolution so when a developer creates the artwork and textures for SD mode they will have them for the Wii. I also think you may be surprised how many games will work just fine on the Wii. It really doesn't matter Nintendo is selling millions of Wii's and DSs and are currently out selling bot the PS3 and the 360. Third party developers are getting titles out for the Wii and Nintendo is has produced some great games for it. Wii Sports is a lot of fun, Paper Mario is great and Zelda has become an instant classic. So far I have not heard of any PS3 block busters yet. Maybe there will be but it better be soon.
That is just a statement of fact. If you decide to drive drunk, have unprotected sex, or even speed it can ruin your life and or somebody else's.
Getting kicked out of a university for drinking a beer seems extreme but are they expelled for life or just a semester? If it was just a semester and it was a published rule then hey he decided that a beer was worth getting kicked out. He is in university now not kindergarten.
Now the kid the got put into a special school for making a game map of his high school is just wrong. What rule did he break? What crime? None that I know of.
As for the merry days of hippie culture? They are a myth. Many women ended up being single parents when the summer of love was over. Then you have the Rolling Stones deciding that Hell's Angels make great concert security... The 60s where at time of self indulgent drivel that went on into the 70s and ended with the mega greed of the 80s. Do the math if you want proof. 18 in 1965 28 in 1975 38 in 1985. The end result of hippie culture is the greed is good culture of the 80s.
Everything looks better in retrospect.
PS3 sales are pretty slow and they will slow to a trickle if there are no PS3 exclusives.
I don't know if the Wii will over take the 360 but at the current rate of sales it might. The Wii doesn't have to beat the PS3 and the 360. It just has to make Nintendo a lot of money. And it is. I just don't see sales of the Wii going down or the sales of the PS3 going up. Take a look here http://nexgenwars.com/ the Wii is lagging the 360 by that much. If Wii sales keep up at this rate it will equal or surpass 360 by next Christmas.