I actually enjoyed these games quite a lot. No doubt DA2 was rushed through production (the reuse of maps was particularly annoying), and everyone can agree that the ending of ME3 was a complete failure. Even still, I enjoyed these games immensely. Bioware's character writing is fantastic. I became deeply involved in the storyline of both games. Where there parts of both games that disappointed me? For sure; but my overall experience was overwhelming positive.
Skyrim might have been a better game overall, but I couldn't be bothered to even finish playing it. Same goes for any of the Fallout games. I just couldn't get involved in the story.
I know most people have strong feelings about the latest Bioware games. I'm really not trying to change anyone's mind. I just wanted to speak up for some of the people who did enjoy the games.
I've worked in the food service industry my whole life. I can say with absolute certainty that most every food handler comes into work when they are sick. This happens largely for two reasons. The first is a lack of paid sick days. The second is that a lot of restaurants really struggle to operate when they are short handed. It's not like an office where some (if not all) of the work can just be left for tomorrow. People who show up today really want to eat today, so there is a lot of pressure to make it in, even if you're sick.
I respect your opinion. You seem like a thoughtful person. However, some accusations are so severe, no amount of retraction can ever fix them in the eyes of some people. For example, a poster (xenobyte) further down has this opinion.
"So we actually don't know anything about what made the kids post stuff like that (pedophile, rapist, bipolar etc.) but if several honor-roll students feel the need to post stuff like this I think something is seriously wrong at that school and with that teacher... Let's give these kids the benefit of the doubt - odds are on their side."
Even if you are innocent, public outrage over accusations of pedophile can never be stopped.
I know everyone in concerned about credit card security, but please consider:
1 - Don't just write "see id" on the signature line of your card. Most people don't realize that credit cards are transferable. That is why they almost always contain the phrases "NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED" and "AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE". If you fail to sign your card, then the person who steals it will just sign it for you. It doesn't matter if the signature matches the name on the front of the card. It only matters if the signature on the back matches the signature on the receipt. If writing "see id" on the back of your card makes you feel safer, great, but please remember to also sign the card.
2 - If you want someone to check your ID when you sign your card, please hand it to the cashier with your credit card.
3 - The security of your credit cards is primarily your concern not the concern of the cashier. I assure you that someone who refuses payment to some yuppie that forgot their driver's license would almost assuredly be reprimanded when that same person calls in to complain. And they WILL complain. People are not reasonable. YOU may be, but trust me, not everyone is as understanding as you are.
Actually, depending on where you shop, the pricing can be quite competitive. I recently bought my first computer after having built my last three. I ended up purchasing my computer from Alienware because:
A: They came highly recommended from sources I trust.
B: They could build the computer I wanted, cheaper then I could buy the parts.
I won't bother you with all the messy detail (prices for computer parts are in such flux that it would be pointless anyways. If you really must know, hit reply and I'll tell you) but I was able to get such a good deal for a couple of reasons. They had a special around Christmas for free shipping, I didn't pay sales tax because they are located out of state and they were probably cutting their profit margins about as close as any other online retailer.
You've all heard of nimby's yes (Not In My Backyard)? An acronym used to describe people who don't want necessary but somewhat undesirable utilities (a garbage dump for instance) built around there homes? Well in California, instead of nimby's they've got banana's. Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
The problem lies in the fact that often times you CAN'T separate quality and taste. Should the government fund anti-semitic neo nazi art, for instance? What if it's of high quality? How about art work that's anti-catholic? This is the problem we face when the government gets involved with things of this nature. You are never going to make everyone happy. A tax payer who is FORCED to fund (through his or her taxes) art work which degrades or ridicules their beliefs is not going to find comfort in the fact that the government isn't taking sides. These are difficult questions. Personally, I'm willing to put up with some art that I find offensive as long as I get something that I dig somewhere along the line. Others feel differently. My point though, is that lack of funding for your work dose not constitute censorship. Censorship is when the Chinese government blocks internet content that would otherwise be readily available. In this case the Chinese people are forbidden from even accessing the content. If for whatever reason they find a way to beat the system, they can be imprisoned. This is a far cry from someone not receiving a free outlet for their speech. No one is entitled to a meal ticket. I think the NEA is a great thing. I love publicly funded art. I just think it's a shame when people say that the US is "censoring" art, whenever someone doesn't get a grant for their latest outrageous piece of art.
I would be forced to disagree. Government funds quite a few things, and it has all sorts of rules that have to be followed and standards that have to be met before any cash is handed out. Government gets it's money from tax payers and tax payers are people. They're not spending their own money they are spending my money and your money. To suggest that the government not have standards is just silly. I don't expect an NEA grant for the masterpiece I drew in the forth grade. The fact that my mother put it up on the refrigerator is enough. To say that the government having standards is the same as the government being arbitrary is a fallacious argument, and besides it's besides the point. We are not talking about fairness we are talking about censorship. Censorship, is when the government tells you that you CAN NOT display your work. It is not censorship when the government tells you that they wont pay you for it. It is also not censorship if the government refuses to hang your work in a publicly funded museum. Now, if the government tells you that you can't hang your work in a privately funded museum that is happy to have you as a patron, then we have problems.
That's a very good point. It's important to remember however that the right to free speech is not, by extension, the right to be heard. For example, you are not guaranteed government funding to create art that other people find offensive. It is completely within your rights to create such art, and to display it, but you receive no guarantees to public funding, (examples would be an NEA grant for free exhibition space) just because you did so. Many people seem to confuse to second with censorship. It is not.
You need to find a new computer shop friend. Any mom and pop place that won't sell you a computer without a hard drive full of crap won't be around for long. I'm from Kansas City and I've got dozens of shops to choose from. I bet you can find one who will build you the computer you want somewhere in Milwaukee.
"I hope I do not offend anyone by saying that people who feel that Linux does not have enough games need to find other things to do with their time than play video games."
Not to offend in return, but who are you to judge what I do with my free time? If you really want to support Linux you'll drop the attitude of "if it can't be done on Linux, it's not worth doing anyway". That's sour grapes if ever I've heard it.
It's really pretty simple. A checking account is YOUR MONEY. If someone withdraws something from it, they've stolen YOUR MONEY. Depending on the circumstances, you might get YOUR MONEY back, but then again you might not.
A credit card on the other hand, is completely different. With a credit card, you are using SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY, and you promise to pay them back. As long as you check your statement every month for suspicious charges, you are in the clear. But it's even better then that. Even if you're a bone head, and you never even look at you credit card statement, you can always refuse to pay the bill months. It's illegal as hell, but take it from me (I used to work in collections) it's hard as hell (and expensive to boot) to get people to pay up.
The moral of this story is: Use credit cards! If you pay the bill off every month, you pay no interest and you gain a world of consumer protection.
The problem of course being:
on
Good to Great
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The problem with most of these books is that the right people never read them. Back in the days, when I was stuck working in "the cube" every time one of these books would come along, the company would purchase a copy for all of it's employees. The problem of course being: I'm only in charge of pushing around my pencil, the people who are truly capable of making changes never really do.
Well, quite a few people can't afford two computers. If there is some compelling reason for them to own a laptop (say for instance they do a lot of traveling) then this would make a lot of sense for them. Work on the road, and play at home. Sort of like a high tech mullet =)
Also there are ways around all of the limitations that you've presented:
Small Screen - Actually quite a few laptops come with generously sized screens. I can't imagine a laptop with this kind of video card having a tiny screen.
Cramped Keyboard - So what? How big of a keyboard do you really need? If it's that big of a deal get a docking station with a regular sized keyboard.
$1,500...? Goodness! For that kind of bread you can build yourself a pretty nice box, sans monitor. I thought the whole appeal of the X-Box or a PS2 was that it's a relatively inexpensive alternative to a computer. Sure, they can't do everything a computer can do, but it can be competitive on one or two levels (games, DVD movies...)
To put things another way: I always thought you'd buy a game console because you couldn't afford a computer. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things just a tad (I know quite a few people who own both) or maybe I'm just a computer snob, but who in there right mind would buy this sort of thing?
Cheers!
-Kevin
.com is just to prominent for this to work
on
.biz Open For Biz
·
· Score: 3, Redundant
I can't imagine this being very successful..com has become synonymous with the entire internet. Heck, internet startup's are even called "dotcoms" more often then not. I'd be willing to make a sizeable bet that the.com on the back of your address is more important then whatever's in front. Think about all the nonsensical names on the internet. Yahoo! springs to mind, and for that matter what does "Amazon" have to do with selling books? What makes those names successful is the fact that they are easy to remember and easy to spell.
One other thing.biz will have against it from the very start is the fact that there will always be a more marketable.com version for whatever name you can come up with. What we really need, for obvious reasons, is.xxx
Bummer. I haven't gotten a look at the game cube yet, but I was really hopping that the controller wouldn't be all out wack. I can't tell you how much I despised the N64 controller. It seemed like most games had you hold the controller at a funny angle so you could use the high hat instead of the thumb pad. Dose anybody know why they set things up this way? As of yet, I've been unable to find a coherent answer...
Slashdot Mirror
I actually enjoyed these games quite a lot. No doubt DA2 was rushed through production (the reuse of maps was particularly annoying), and everyone can agree that the ending of ME3 was a complete failure. Even still, I enjoyed these games immensely. Bioware's character writing is fantastic. I became deeply involved in the storyline of both games. Where there parts of both games that disappointed me? For sure; but my overall experience was overwhelming positive.
Skyrim might have been a better game overall, but I couldn't be bothered to even finish playing it. Same goes for any of the Fallout games. I just couldn't get involved in the story.
I know most people have strong feelings about the latest Bioware games. I'm really not trying to change anyone's mind. I just wanted to speak up for some of the people who did enjoy the games.
I've worked in the food service industry my whole life. I can say with absolute certainty that most every food handler comes into work when they are sick. This happens largely for two reasons. The first is a lack of paid sick days. The second is that a lot of restaurants really struggle to operate when they are short handed. It's not like an office where some (if not all) of the work can just be left for tomorrow. People who show up today really want to eat today, so there is a lot of pressure to make it in, even if you're sick.
I respect your opinion. You seem like a thoughtful person. However, some accusations are so severe, no amount of retraction can ever fix them in the eyes of some people. For example, a poster (xenobyte) further down has this opinion.
"So we actually don't know anything about what made the kids post stuff like that (pedophile, rapist, bipolar etc.) but if several honor-roll students feel the need to post stuff like this I think something is seriously wrong at that school and with that teacher... Let's give these kids the benefit of the doubt - odds are on their side."
Even if you are innocent, public outrage over accusations of pedophile can never be stopped.
Wasn't there an article a few weeks back about Apple setting up mini stores inside of Wal-Mart?
I know everyone in concerned about credit card security, but please consider:
1 - Don't just write "see id" on the signature line of your card. Most people don't realize that credit cards are transferable. That is why they almost always contain the phrases "NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED" and "AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE". If you fail to sign your card, then the person who steals it will just sign it for you. It doesn't matter if the signature matches the name on the front of the card. It only matters if the signature on the back matches the signature on the receipt. If writing "see id" on the back of your card makes you feel safer, great, but please remember to also sign the card.
2 - If you want someone to check your ID when you sign your card, please hand it to the cashier with your credit card.
3 - The security of your credit cards is primarily your concern not the concern of the cashier. I assure you that someone who refuses payment to some yuppie that forgot their driver's license would almost assuredly be reprimanded when that same person calls in to complain. And they WILL complain. People are not reasonable. YOU may be, but trust me, not everyone is as understanding as you are.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
Actually, depending on where you shop, the pricing can be quite competitive. I recently bought my first computer after having built my last three. I ended up purchasing my computer from Alienware because:
A: They came highly recommended from sources I trust.
B: They could build the computer I wanted, cheaper then I could buy the parts.
I won't bother you with all the messy detail (prices for computer parts are in such flux that it would be pointless anyways. If you really must know, hit reply and I'll tell you) but I was able to get such a good deal for a couple of reasons. They had a special around Christmas for free shipping, I didn't pay sales tax because they are located out of state and they were probably cutting their profit margins about as close as any other online retailer.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
You've all heard of nimby's yes (Not In My Backyard)? An acronym used to describe people who don't want necessary but somewhat undesirable utilities (a garbage dump for instance) built around there homes? Well in California, instead of nimby's they've got banana's. Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
The problem lies in the fact that often times you CAN'T separate quality and taste. Should the government fund anti-semitic neo nazi art, for instance? What if it's of high quality? How about art work that's anti-catholic? This is the problem we face when the government gets involved with things of this nature. You are never going to make everyone happy. A tax payer who is FORCED to fund (through his or her taxes) art work which degrades or ridicules their beliefs is not going to find comfort in the fact that the government isn't taking sides. These are difficult questions. Personally, I'm willing to put up with some art that I find offensive as long as I get something that I dig somewhere along the line. Others feel differently. My point though, is that lack of funding for your work dose not constitute censorship. Censorship is when the Chinese government blocks internet content that would otherwise be readily available. In this case the Chinese people are forbidden from even accessing the content. If for whatever reason they find a way to beat the system, they can be imprisoned. This is a far cry from someone not receiving a free outlet for their speech. No one is entitled to a meal ticket. I think the NEA is a great thing. I love publicly funded art. I just think it's a shame when people say that the US is "censoring" art, whenever someone doesn't get a grant for their latest outrageous piece of art.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
I would be forced to disagree. Government funds quite a few things, and it has all sorts of rules that have to be followed and standards that have to be met before any cash is handed out. Government gets it's money from tax payers and tax payers are people. They're not spending their own money they are spending my money and your money. To suggest that the government not have standards is just silly. I don't expect an NEA grant for the masterpiece I drew in the forth grade. The fact that my mother put it up on the refrigerator is enough. To say that the government having standards is the same as the government being arbitrary is a fallacious argument, and besides it's besides the point. We are not talking about fairness we are talking about censorship. Censorship, is when the government tells you that you CAN NOT display your work. It is not censorship when the government tells you that they wont pay you for it. It is also not censorship if the government refuses to hang your work in a publicly funded museum. Now, if the government tells you that you can't hang your work in a privately funded museum that is happy to have you as a patron, then we have problems.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
That's a very good point. It's important to remember however that the right to free speech is not, by extension, the right to be heard. For example, you are not guaranteed government funding to create art that other people find offensive. It is completely within your rights to create such art, and to display it, but you receive no guarantees to public funding, (examples would be an NEA grant for free exhibition space) just because you did so. Many people seem to confuse to second with censorship. It is not.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
You need to find a new computer shop friend. Any mom and pop place that won't sell you a computer without a hard drive full of crap won't be around for long. I'm from Kansas City and I've got dozens of shops to choose from. I bet you can find one who will build you the computer you want somewhere in Milwaukee.
Cheers!
"I hope I do not offend anyone by saying that people who feel that Linux does not have enough games need to find other things to do with their time than play video games."
Not to offend in return, but who are you to judge what I do with my free time? If you really want to support Linux you'll drop the attitude of "if it can't be done on Linux, it's not worth doing anyway". That's sour grapes if ever I've heard it.
Amen brother. Preach it!
It's really pretty simple. A checking account is YOUR MONEY. If someone withdraws something from it, they've stolen YOUR MONEY. Depending on the circumstances, you might get YOUR MONEY back, but then again you might not.
A credit card on the other hand, is completely different. With a credit card, you are using SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY, and you promise to pay them back. As long as you check your statement every month for suspicious charges, you are in the clear. But it's even better then that. Even if you're a bone head, and you never even look at you credit card statement, you can always refuse to pay the bill months. It's illegal as hell, but take it from me (I used to work in collections) it's hard as hell (and expensive to boot) to get people to pay up.
The moral of this story is: Use credit cards! If you pay the bill off every month, you pay no interest and you gain a world of consumer protection.
The problem with most of these books is that the right people never read them. Back in the days, when I was stuck working in "the cube" every time one of these books would come along, the company would purchase a copy for all of it's employees. The problem of course being: I'm only in charge of pushing around my pencil, the people who are truly capable of making changes never really do.
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
Well, quite a few people can't afford two computers. If there is some compelling reason for them to own a laptop (say for instance they do a lot of traveling) then this would make a lot of sense for them. Work on the road, and play at home. Sort of like a high tech mullet =)
Also there are ways around all of the limitations that you've presented:
Small Screen - Actually quite a few laptops come with generously sized screens. I can't imagine a laptop with this kind of video card having a tiny screen.
Cramped Keyboard - So what? How big of a keyboard do you really need? If it's that big of a deal get a docking station with a regular sized keyboard.
Battery life - A/C adaptors rock your world.
Anyway, just my two cents...
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
$1,500...? Goodness! For that kind of bread you can build yourself a pretty nice box, sans monitor. I thought the whole appeal of the X-Box or a PS2 was that it's a relatively inexpensive alternative to a computer. Sure, they can't do everything a computer can do, but it can be competitive on one or two levels (games, DVD movies...)
To put things another way: I always thought you'd buy a game console because you couldn't afford a computer. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things just a tad (I know quite a few people who own both) or maybe I'm just a computer snob, but who in there right mind would buy this sort of thing?
Cheers!
-Kevin
I can't imagine this being very successful. .com has become synonymous with the entire internet. Heck, internet startup's are even called "dotcoms" more often then not. I'd be willing to make a sizeable bet that the .com on the back of your address is more important then whatever's in front. Think about all the nonsensical names on the internet. Yahoo! springs to mind, and for that matter what does "Amazon" have to do with selling books? What makes those names successful is the fact that they are easy to remember and easy to spell.
.biz will have against it from the very start is the fact that there will always be a more marketable .com version for whatever name you can come up with. What we really need, for obvious reasons, is .xxx
One other thing
Cheers!
-Pointed Stick
Bummer. I haven't gotten a look at the game cube yet, but I was really hopping that the controller wouldn't be all out wack. I can't tell you how much I despised the N64 controller. It seemed like most games had you hold the controller at a funny angle so you could use the high hat instead of the thumb pad. Dose anybody know why they set things up this way? As of yet, I've been unable to find a coherent answer...