+1. I'm also starting to think that participating in "early release" games is also driving very poor behavior. Early on, it's hard to tell between a company that is going to cash in and run and a company that is actually committed to completing a game.
There was a LOT of hype about 6 months or so ago when a bunch of (highly manicured) gameplay footage was shown. The most annoying thing is that ever since then, every week or so a new No Man's Sky "Demo" or "Features Revealed" or "Updates!" video shows up in my feed, and it's always a bullshit rehashing of information and video from the earlier release. I agree with the general consensus that the only reason to apply censorship at this level is because the game is not that interesting or quickly loses appeal.
It probably turns out that selling low-quality internet to the masses for $10/mo is still very profitable, especially when these new customers don't overlap the existing customer base forced to pay $60/mo.
+1. People in my facebook feed were complaining about the lack of Tetris. I have no doubt Nintendo asked for it, but last I looked the official game was still being marketed on mobile platforms for $4.99.
Hopefully there's a uSD slot so we can add more ROMs.
I would be very surprised for an item with this price point to have any kind of scalability, especially considering they already have a platform for monetizing old content. But if it's popular enough then I bet once it has been out for a while someone will post instructions for modding.
I think to "steal" would mean Microsoft ends up with the item in the end. In this case Microsoft is actually destroying the property of their customers.
+1 that. Maybe they figured the fallout would be worth the profits if they could keep it up long enough (and maybe it was). Also based on history I find it hard to believe anyone will actually do jail time for this.
Not a great argument in Ontario. Up here if your car is caught by a red-light camera, the owner of the car (or the plate at least) is responsible for paying the fine. Normally running a red light also gets you demerit points on your licence, but you cannot receive any demerit points via a red-light camera because they can't prove it was you. So in this analogy, you might still be responsible for copyright fines as the owner of the connection.
many people on here couldn't even name a Motorola phone model
I think that's mainly because almost all of their phones have coded names that are hard to remember, rather than a lack of impact on the market (back in their day). Today the impact certainly isn't great.
Regarding the 3 sidebar pics, what's wrong with the Trump pics? Trump tends to look more serious in the press, and Clinton tends to smile more.
Also, Trump looks a bit goofy when he smiles, enough that I'm surprised the main banner on his site has him smiling (it might just be because he almost comes across as friendly, which my mind cannot accept).
For the little primary results pic, it does seem like an odd choice to choose a pic of him in the middle of saying something while the other candidates have professional headshots. Though to be fair, his main web page contains a supporting video whose cover pic shows him in his often-portrayed shouting expression - obviously he doesn't have a problem with people seeing him that way.
Competitive markets rely on informed participants. By withholding data, Uber's actions are clearly anti-competitive.
The data is already available via their app. There is no obligation on a player in the market to have to inform the other players using a real-time data service that they made available specifically for their own benefit. Just because a company refuses to provide an optional service to make competition easier doesn't make them anti-competitive in the normal use of the term. I think it's quite a stretch to apply that here.
A company cannot just stuff anything into an EULA, and expect to be able to enforce it.
This is not "anything". It's pretty specific, and apparently they can enforce it quite easily.
This is only hypocritical if one can argue this is actually anti-competitive, which I haven't seen any supporting argument for. Uber is not stifling or restricting their competition by refusing to provide a free data service to some third party. My read of it is that this is a violation of the EULA to use their data services.
Has Uber been anti-competitive? Absolutely. But this ain't it.
+1. Even in Canada too. I managed to get a plan during a crazy wave of promotions that gets me 600 MB for $40/mo (which includes the base phone plan as well). That was 3 years ago. Under today's promotions, $40/mo will only get me 400MB. Why would anyone expect data usage to go up if costs are not coming down? Are people willing to pay 22x more for 22x more data?
Maybe all the schizophrenics are a processing thread like the rest of us, but with the DEBUG=true. They see the simulation for what it really is. And without realizing it we set their DEBUG=false by pumping them full of drugs.
+1. My baby monitor comes with an Android app to allow you to view the feed when you are on the same wifi as the monitor. I used to use the app all the time rather than carry around the remote handset. Then the company released an app update which forces you to register an account with the company before you can access the feed. Instant delete. Fuck you Summer Infant.
Sure they'll always be valuable, but if fossil-fuels aren't being used heavily for energy then the demand will drop significantly from what it is today. Multi-billion dollar investments in oil pipelines (with long ROI) today will be a waste of resources if demand drops heavily in 10 years.
Seriously. Every few topics there is a first-post that starts with "I bet this will be modded down...". It's the same pattern every time. Hell until recently it was even the exact same post content. This is a troll, stop giving it your mod points. Hell someone even pointed it out the other day and linked to a bunch of them.
If a couple of taller vehicles pull up behind it though, then all traffic now moves as fast as the bus which can be impeded by one tall vehicle in front of it. I think it's a neat idea but definitely would require special rules for existing vehicles on the road, or additional lanes for taller vehicles.
There are plenty of better solutions, none of which politicians would agree on or are likely to be implemented in the near future. In the meantime, minimum wage is a tool that exists. While everyone argues about the best solution moving forward, raise minimum wage by a small amount. Even by one dollar. You can argue all day about the right way to patch the hole in your boat, but maybe someone should stick their finger in the hole in the meantime.
So, what about "healthy" sized people that are smoking, vaping, dipping, are doing something risky and dangerous with their life that could also be teaching people it's ok to partake in these dangerous and potentially fatal activities?
In many countries it is illegal for a cigarette ad to depict a person smoking, because of that exactly. Does it work? Hard to attribute it to a single thing, but there has certainly been a significant reduction in the number of smokers over the last generation.
Continuing to pay workers less than a living wage is already damaging society, today. Putting it off for longer and longer periods will only make the eventual necessary adjustment even more damaging.
The article mentions he "entertained" offers from the "Romney-PwC", but that could easily have been part of the FBI sting or even just self-interest to find out how he got in.
The group is currently crowdfunding to go on tour.
Don't worry, they will be coming to your area soon. The only thing dumber than pissing off emergency services in your own city is to go do it in another country.
Slashdot Mirror
+1. I'm also starting to think that participating in "early release" games is also driving very poor behavior. Early on, it's hard to tell between a company that is going to cash in and run and a company that is actually committed to completing a game.
There was a LOT of hype about 6 months or so ago when a bunch of (highly manicured) gameplay footage was shown. The most annoying thing is that ever since then, every week or so a new No Man's Sky "Demo" or "Features Revealed" or "Updates!" video shows up in my feed, and it's always a bullshit rehashing of information and video from the earlier release. I agree with the general consensus that the only reason to apply censorship at this level is because the game is not that interesting or quickly loses appeal.
It probably turns out that selling low-quality internet to the masses for $10/mo is still very profitable, especially when these new customers don't overlap the existing customer base forced to pay $60/mo.
+1. People in my facebook feed were complaining about the lack of Tetris. I have no doubt Nintendo asked for it, but last I looked the official game was still being marketed on mobile platforms for $4.99.
Hopefully there's a uSD slot so we can add more ROMs.
I would be very surprised for an item with this price point to have any kind of scalability, especially considering they already have a platform for monetizing old content. But if it's popular enough then I bet once it has been out for a while someone will post instructions for modding.
It's still not a fair comparison - how many of those autopiloted miles ended with the driver taking the wheel back to deal with non-ideal conditions?
I think to "steal" would mean Microsoft ends up with the item in the end. In this case Microsoft is actually destroying the property of their customers.
You can't run any scam forever.
+1 that. Maybe they figured the fallout would be worth the profits if they could keep it up long enough (and maybe it was). Also based on history I find it hard to believe anyone will actually do jail time for this.
Not a great argument in Ontario. Up here if your car is caught by a red-light camera, the owner of the car (or the plate at least) is responsible for paying the fine. Normally running a red light also gets you demerit points on your licence, but you cannot receive any demerit points via a red-light camera because they can't prove it was you. So in this analogy, you might still be responsible for copyright fines as the owner of the connection.
many people on here couldn't even name a Motorola phone model
I think that's mainly because almost all of their phones have coded names that are hard to remember, rather than a lack of impact on the market (back in their day). Today the impact certainly isn't great.
a couple of armed individuals inside the club would have a good chance of disrupting the carnage and lowering the death toll
But we DO know that putting guns into law abiding hands LOWERS violent crime rates
So, let's be honest, you need to disarm the bad guys, not the good guys.
The US has an incurable illness.
Regarding the 3 sidebar pics, what's wrong with the Trump pics? Trump tends to look more serious in the press, and Clinton tends to smile more.
Also, Trump looks a bit goofy when he smiles, enough that I'm surprised the main banner on his site has him smiling (it might just be because he almost comes across as friendly, which my mind cannot accept).
For the little primary results pic, it does seem like an odd choice to choose a pic of him in the middle of saying something while the other candidates have professional headshots. Though to be fair, his main web page contains a supporting video whose cover pic shows him in his often-portrayed shouting expression - obviously he doesn't have a problem with people seeing him that way.
Competitive markets rely on informed participants. By withholding data, Uber's actions are clearly anti-competitive.
The data is already available via their app. There is no obligation on a player in the market to have to inform the other players using a real-time data service that they made available specifically for their own benefit. Just because a company refuses to provide an optional service to make competition easier doesn't make them anti-competitive in the normal use of the term. I think it's quite a stretch to apply that here.
A company cannot just stuff anything into an EULA, and expect to be able to enforce it.
This is not "anything". It's pretty specific, and apparently they can enforce it quite easily.
This is only hypocritical if one can argue this is actually anti-competitive, which I haven't seen any supporting argument for. Uber is not stifling or restricting their competition by refusing to provide a free data service to some third party. My read of it is that this is a violation of the EULA to use their data services.
Has Uber been anti-competitive? Absolutely. But this ain't it.
+1. Even in Canada too. I managed to get a plan during a crazy wave of promotions that gets me 600 MB for $40/mo (which includes the base phone plan as well). That was 3 years ago. Under today's promotions, $40/mo will only get me 400MB. Why would anyone expect data usage to go up if costs are not coming down? Are people willing to pay 22x more for 22x more data?
Maybe all the schizophrenics are a processing thread like the rest of us, but with the DEBUG=true. They see the simulation for what it really is. And without realizing it we set their DEBUG=false by pumping them full of drugs.
+1. My baby monitor comes with an Android app to allow you to view the feed when you are on the same wifi as the monitor. I used to use the app all the time rather than carry around the remote handset. Then the company released an app update which forces you to register an account with the company before you can access the feed. Instant delete. Fuck you Summer Infant.
Sure they'll always be valuable, but if fossil-fuels aren't being used heavily for energy then the demand will drop significantly from what it is today. Multi-billion dollar investments in oil pipelines (with long ROI) today will be a waste of resources if demand drops heavily in 10 years.
MODS - Stop being baited by this shit.
Seriously. Every few topics there is a first-post that starts with "I bet this will be modded down...". It's the same pattern every time. Hell until recently it was even the exact same post content. This is a troll, stop giving it your mod points. Hell someone even pointed it out the other day and linked to a bunch of them.
If a couple of taller vehicles pull up behind it though, then all traffic now moves as fast as the bus which can be impeded by one tall vehicle in front of it. I think it's a neat idea but definitely would require special rules for existing vehicles on the road, or additional lanes for taller vehicles.
There are plenty of better solutions, none of which politicians would agree on or are likely to be implemented in the near future. In the meantime, minimum wage is a tool that exists. While everyone argues about the best solution moving forward, raise minimum wage by a small amount. Even by one dollar. You can argue all day about the right way to patch the hole in your boat, but maybe someone should stick their finger in the hole in the meantime.
So, what about "healthy" sized people that are smoking, vaping, dipping, are doing something risky and dangerous with their life that could also be teaching people it's ok to partake in these dangerous and potentially fatal activities?
In many countries it is illegal for a cigarette ad to depict a person smoking, because of that exactly. Does it work? Hard to attribute it to a single thing, but there has certainly been a significant reduction in the number of smokers over the last generation.
Continuing to pay workers less than a living wage is already damaging society, today. Putting it off for longer and longer periods will only make the eventual necessary adjustment even more damaging.
The article mentions he "entertained" offers from the "Romney-PwC", but that could easily have been part of the FBI sting or even just self-interest to find out how he got in.
The group is currently crowdfunding to go on tour.
Don't worry, they will be coming to your area soon. The only thing dumber than pissing off emergency services in your own city is to go do it in another country.