Isn't this article just a nice way of saying that those in "Eastern" cultures can't think for themselves? That they're predisposed to follow orders, and are unsuitable participants in even a quasi-democratic system?
I'd imagine that some east-Asian Slashdotters might take issue with this.
> There is *NO* news source out there that you could say does not have a 'side' to a story.
In that case, I assert that the BBC cannot reasonably live up to its charter, and should be cut off into a private company (or companies). End the television tax, and have any public media funded by contribution (like they (mostly) do in America).
If it is intrinsically impossible to have a fair and unbaised media organization, then I see no reason that any more of the British public's money be sunk into this boondoggle.
> What exactly is wrong with advertising your side of the story.
Perhaps the fact that they're using taxpayer money to do it? And the fact that their public charter requires that they be fair and unbiased on everything they report on?
So yes, technically speaking, the BBC should not have a "side" of the story -- even if they are involved. Their journalists should report this Hutton Inquiry news in a factual and even-handed manner. No slant.
The BBC is in a unique position, and is bound by rules that other news organizations are not. Whether they've been abiding said rules is a another story altogether.
To answer your question, according to this page, apparently I was half wrong. They both have the same amount of system memory (12MB), but it is not volitile RAM. It's allocated out of the internal Flash RAM.
Thus, it looks like the 32MB model only has 20MB of "storage" space, for instance.
And then there is the 8MB of video RAM, but that's apart from everything else.
Both the $300 and $400 models of the Zodiac have the same amount of volitile work RAM, thus can play the same games and have the same performance. It's just the flash-ram storage that's different. An extra $100 apparently buys you an extra 96MB to store your files and programs. Both, I believe, have flash card slots if you need extra space.
You may know this, but I feel it is important to point out to the public at large. When they see a difference in "RAM", they automatically assume that one is more powerful than the other, thus they'd better not be stuck with the cheaper one, lest some future games not work. And, as you may guess, a $400 machine will sell a lot less than a $300 one.
In Derek's defense, he still insisted he wasn't done with it. It's just that the publishing company got pissed and nabbed a beta version to shove in a box, without his permission.
Not that he didn't have enough time to finish up the damn game, but there you go.
Actually, I think Carmack was asked about Trinity, and he said it was less of a game than an engine. (He is the lead programmer, after all.)
Furthermore, I recall him saying that it was more of a playground for his programming ideas than anything else, some of which were incorporated into his main commercial engine. (Curved surfaces in Quake 3 were, I think, a result of his fooling around with Trinity.)
On a similar note, I wouldn't be surprised if some old Prey code got into Duke Nukem Forever, despite it being based on the Unreal engine. Much like how the Valve team heavily modified the old Quake engine to suit their needs.
On the other hand, you could say that the Democrat primaries turn out the candidate most effective at appealing to Democrats. Which would be all well and good, except that that is not the same thing as appealing to the general American populace.
I mean, just check out these poll results. Note how Dean is leading the Democrat contenders, yet Clark has more widespread appeal. For instance.
Your link was irrelevant to the topic. What is relevant is that a similar kiddie-porn-art law was overturned in the U.S. earlier this year.
As for what you linked to, that is hardly the Patriot Act II that was passed. Look at it sometime. And where were you when this passed through Congress anyway?
Yeah. And what about politically and economically weaker countries that occasionally have large impacts on international culture? I'm talking about parts of Latin America, Australia, the Carribean, Russia, and wherever else the latest "craze" is from.
Furthermore, what about the more powerful countries that seem to wield little cultural clout anymore? I'm talking about France, Germany, Canada, Australia (most of the time), etc.
Face it, the old rules don't apply. In the global free market of ideas, anyone can contribute to world culture. Information technology -- most recently the Internet -- has torn down the old barriers.
> I bet I can name at least one ethnic group which was forced to adopt American culture, can you?
Nope, I can't. Who are you thinking of -- the Native Americans? The Japanese? Ha, I say.
But regardless, that isn't what is happening today. What really annoys the culture-control freaks is that many people are adopting American (and other foreign) culture of their own free will. And the only solutions to this "problem" are archaic laws and wasteful government spending.
> Anyway, Darwinism just implies "fitness", it doesn't say what fitness is. Boy bands have "fitness" for their market, that doesn't mean they have any other redeeming qualities.
Bah, comparing cultures to see which one is "better" is always an effort in futility. A fool's errand. You can observe popularity, though. (Fitness, if you will.) Which is all I was doing. That, and offering my oh-so-humble opinion as to why American culture currently dominates.
Whenever I hear about France and their draconian culture laws, I don't know whether to laugh (at the futility) or cry (at the damage such laws do to French culture).
The French movie industry was once king of the world, imitated by everyone (including Hollywood). Then the movie quota laws came along (started by the Vichy government, no less) and slowly strangled the industry. Now French studios churn out cheap, locally-made movies in order to satisfy the government quotas, so they can import the newest blockbusters from Hollywood.
The damage is twofold. Not only does this cheapen the quality of French-made films in general, but it also guarantees that only sure-fire hits get imported (Titanic, Star Wars, etc.). Thus the good-but-not-huge-selling movies never see French audiences. The fact that these "French" studios are now mostly foreign-owned only adds to the irony.
Want to know why American culture is so popular? Survival of the fittest. Many other cultures are stagnant and unchanging, but American culture embraces change. Thus, by default, it is much more interesting than most other cultures.
Japanese culture is another big mover. Do I feel threatened or jealous about its recent popularity? Naw. Embrace and extend, that's our motto. We take the best parts of other cultures, integrate and expand on it, and then export it right back at them. Mind you, everyone else is welcome (nay, encouraged) to do the same.
Our culture is no more "poisonous" than anybody else's. It's just more awesome.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't this article just a nice way of saying that those in "Eastern" cultures can't think for themselves? That they're predisposed to follow orders, and are unsuitable participants in even a quasi-democratic system?
I'd imagine that some east-Asian Slashdotters might take issue with this.
> There is *NO* news source out there that you could say does not have a 'side' to a story.
In that case, I assert that the BBC cannot reasonably live up to its charter, and should be cut off into a private company (or companies). End the television tax, and have any public media funded by contribution (like they (mostly) do in America).
If it is intrinsically impossible to have a fair and unbaised media organization, then I see no reason that any more of the British public's money be sunk into this boondoggle.
> What exactly is wrong with advertising your side of the story.
Perhaps the fact that they're using taxpayer money to do it? And the fact that their public charter requires that they be fair and unbiased on everything they report on?
So yes, technically speaking, the BBC should not have a "side" of the story -- even if they are involved. Their journalists should report this Hutton Inquiry news in a factual and even-handed manner. No slant.
The BBC is in a unique position, and is bound by rules that other news organizations are not. Whether they've been abiding said rules is a another story altogether.
To answer your question, according to this page, apparently I was half wrong. They both have the same amount of system memory (12MB), but it is not volitile RAM. It's allocated out of the internal Flash RAM.
Thus, it looks like the 32MB model only has 20MB of "storage" space, for instance.
And then there is the 8MB of video RAM, but that's apart from everything else.
Both the $300 and $400 models of the Zodiac have the same amount of volitile work RAM, thus can play the same games and have the same performance. It's just the flash-ram storage that's different. An extra $100 apparently buys you an extra 96MB to store your files and programs. Both, I believe, have flash card slots if you need extra space.
You may know this, but I feel it is important to point out to the public at large. When they see a difference in "RAM", they automatically assume that one is more powerful than the other, thus they'd better not be stuck with the cheaper one, lest some future games not work. And, as you may guess, a $400 machine will sell a lot less than a $300 one.
In Derek's defense, he still insisted he wasn't done with it. It's just that the publishing company got pissed and nabbed a beta version to shove in a box, without his permission.
Not that he didn't have enough time to finish up the damn game, but there you go.
Actually, sir, that game already came out. Albeit without the Star Wars license.
Actually, I think Carmack was asked about Trinity, and he said it was less of a game than an engine. (He is the lead programmer, after all.)
Furthermore, I recall him saying that it was more of a playground for his programming ideas than anything else, some of which were incorporated into his main commercial engine. (Curved surfaces in Quake 3 were, I think, a result of his fooling around with Trinity.)
On a similar note, I wouldn't be surprised if some old Prey code got into Duke Nukem Forever, despite it being based on the Unreal engine. Much like how the Valve team heavily modified the old Quake engine to suit their needs.
Another thing is that id guys had a lot of ideas for their next game, including a very innovative Prey (IIRC).
Prey was an old 3DRealms project, actually. Dropped, at least for now, in favor of Duke Nukem Forever.
Invade Canada? He'd have to FIND Canada first. As far as I know he has never crossed the border, after 3 years of being president. Some neighbour...
Actually, he went to a conference there in late 2002/early 2003. Please, get your facts straight.
On the other hand, you could say that the Democrat primaries turn out the candidate most effective at appealing to Democrats. Which would be all well and good, except that that is not the same thing as appealing to the general American populace.
I mean, just check out these poll results. Note how Dean is leading the Democrat contenders, yet Clark has more widespread appeal. For instance.
And yelled out "April Fools!" to all the people trying to pick it up that day. I'm sure everyone would get a kick out of it.
And he's actually leading the polls right now, so it'll be even more funny come November.
You mean it gets funnier with age?
OMG, I finally got a conservative moderator.
Either that, or I wasn't that funny.
I mean, if the Iraqis were really resisting the coalition forces, our troops would all be dead from their l33t AWP sniping skillz.
"OMFG! HEADSHOT?! STFU, CH34TER!!!"
Huh? He didn't link to anything concerning censorship. He linked to a story about a non-censorship-related bill being passed recently.
Your link was irrelevant to the topic. What is relevant is that a similar kiddie-porn-art law was overturned in the U.S. earlier this year.
As for what you linked to, that is hardly the Patriot Act II that was passed. Look at it sometime. And where were you when this passed through Congress anyway?
Yeah. And what about politically and economically weaker countries that occasionally have large impacts on international culture? I'm talking about parts of Latin America, Australia, the Carribean, Russia, and wherever else the latest "craze" is from.
Furthermore, what about the more powerful countries that seem to wield little cultural clout anymore? I'm talking about France, Germany, Canada, Australia (most of the time), etc.
Face it, the old rules don't apply. In the global free market of ideas, anyone can contribute to world culture. Information technology -- most recently the Internet -- has torn down the old barriers.
> I bet I can name at least one ethnic group which was forced to adopt American culture, can you?
Nope, I can't. Who are you thinking of -- the Native Americans? The Japanese? Ha, I say.
But regardless, that isn't what is happening today. What really annoys the culture-control freaks is that many people are adopting American (and other foreign) culture of their own free will. And the only solutions to this "problem" are archaic laws and wasteful government spending.
> Anyway, Darwinism just implies "fitness", it doesn't say what fitness is. Boy bands have "fitness" for their market, that doesn't mean they have any other redeeming qualities.
Bah, comparing cultures to see which one is "better" is always an effort in futility. A fool's errand. You can observe popularity, though. (Fitness, if you will.) Which is all I was doing. That, and offering my oh-so-humble opinion as to why American culture currently dominates.
Very funny, but I think you're confusing our successful culture with our successful governmental and economic systems.
Whenever I hear about France and their draconian culture laws, I don't know whether to laugh (at the futility) or cry (at the damage such laws do to French culture).
The French movie industry was once king of the world, imitated by everyone (including Hollywood). Then the movie quota laws came along (started by the Vichy government, no less) and slowly strangled the industry. Now French studios churn out cheap, locally-made movies in order to satisfy the government quotas, so they can import the newest blockbusters from Hollywood.
The damage is twofold. Not only does this cheapen the quality of French-made films in general, but it also guarantees that only sure-fire hits get imported (Titanic, Star Wars, etc.). Thus the good-but-not-huge-selling movies never see French audiences. The fact that these "French" studios are now mostly foreign-owned only adds to the irony.
Want to know why American culture is so popular? Survival of the fittest. Many other cultures are stagnant and unchanging, but American culture embraces change. Thus, by default, it is much more interesting than most other cultures.
Japanese culture is another big mover. Do I feel threatened or jealous about its recent popularity? Naw. Embrace and extend, that's our motto. We take the best parts of other cultures, integrate and expand on it, and then export it right back at them. Mind you, everyone else is welcome (nay, encouraged) to do the same.
Our culture is no more "poisonous" than anybody else's. It's just more awesome.
Is evidenced by today's Something Awful Link of the Day. (Not Safe For Work)
"Reasonable justificiation"? What does that mean?
Oh wait, I figured it out. That's a polite way to say "inferiority complex". Kudos to you on your discretion.