If you work for a company that designs applications of this kind there will be a host of more important things to consider than raw transactions per machine.
Yeah, like how much longer your company can sustain itself writing software to sell pets over the web.
Now if only they'd ship at least ONE DVD player with an old-school coax input. I think it's absurd that I have to buy a new television (or an adapter more expensive than a low-end APEX player) just to watch DVDs on it.
I'm not claiming there's a huge market for it, but it's got to be significant, and it can't cost that much to add.
I run a consulting firm, and there is no way I would hire someone who did not have the exact skills I need. I worked hard to get where I am, and I am hiring other people for my benefit, not for their benefit. If you are frustrated with not having a job, then you have to do a better job showing the owner what you can do to make their business grow.
This approach to hiring is raw idiocy. This "strategy" may make the hiring process easier by slimming the pool of candidates, but does NOTHING for hiring the best talent. If all you want is a heads-down worker who will do the exact job you need now indefinitely, go ahead and hire this way. If you want an adaptive worker who can meet your needs today AND in the future, you will be better served loosening your criteria for people who demonstrate an ability to adaptively develop their skill set. Furthermore, I've far too often seen this approach to hiring yield technically apt workers who are communication nightmares. Once again, I say a team is better served with people who are lacking a couple of skills (but can learn it) and can communicate effectively than with workers who match the skills perfectly but can't get their point across.
This is really it. When CDs came out, prices rose. You could buy the same music on tape cheaper than on CD, in principal because the CD cost more to make. Now, the price differential persists, even though CD production is MUCH cheaper than tapes.
Actually, CDs have been cheaper to manufacture almost since their introduction. The price differential persists because people are willing to pay more for a CD than for a tape. This is because CDs have been marketed as providing higher quality sound, and they do not exhibit the same deterioration of quality after heavy use as cassettes. While DVDs are cheap, the VHS is usually cheaper - same reason, even though VHS still costs more to make.
That's absolutely amazing that it works. Even relatively simple and common constructs from the Collections API would hose 1.1.1 - either the developers coding these sites are targeting the MS JVM, they're not particularly clueful developers, or the apps are exceedingly simple. Probably a little of each.
BREW will fail in the mainstream, almost without a doubt. The obstacle is the same as many similar products before it (such as DivX) - the vendor (Qualcomm) has designed a system where they want to control it all. You have to download the software from your carrier, and your carrier can't offer it unless it's approved by Qualcomm.
While this sort of strategy gets the execs all excited because they get to stick their hand out for money at every step, these ploys fail because, in the end, there's nothing in it for the consumer. The developers are sick of it because they have to be certified against standards that even Qualcomm's own BREW demo apps don't pass, and they have to pay to recertify every time the standards are changed or their app fails. The consumer doesn't want it because this "walled garden" approach by the vendors has no value for them.
I do. I remember it to be a fantastic game, and spent hours and hours playing it. Sadly, the harsh reality of MAME emulation means that I can play today what I simply remembered before. It can be unforgiving experience - loading it up now I find the magic has gone.
Don't let your experience on a PC screen, playing by yourself, ruin the memory. When I was in college, about 20 of us pooled our money and picked up a full Gauntlet arcade unit ($400). It was STILL fun for hours. It was always more of a social experience, especially as one of the first 4 player games. The level design and sheer number of levels kept it interesting, as does the constant struggle for power-ups. It's pure genious as a quarter muncher, too - there's no part of the game that's so tough that a few quarters can't get you through.
If you can find this game and a few friends, I think you'll realize your memories are accurate, and that Gauntlet beats most if not all of today's arcade games hands down.
We have received information that you are offering Internet access service to the above referenced account holder, who has utilized your services to post downloads to Usenet newsgroups of copyrighted motion picture(s) including such title(s) as:
24 (TV)
These people have no clue, especially in this case. They should be OVERJOYED that people are swapping episodes of 24. Why? Because I think the biggest reason most people don't watch the show once they hear it's well done is that they feel like they're coming in halfway through the movie.
(In short, the premise for 24 is that it unfolds in "real time" - each one hour episode is an hour in the life of the show's characters - and that the 24 episodes will comprise a full day of suspense, intrigue, action, etc. as the plot unfolds.)
So strangely, if people are swapping episodes, it probably means they're getting caught up on the plot, and will likely increase the viewership of the next episode (more viewers = higher ratings = higher priced ads). But I guess common sense doesn't matter.
"Sony practically has a monopoly with Playstation 1 and 2, especially since Sega has abandoned Dreamcast and withdrawn from the market, and Nintendo has settled for Game Boy."
Implied: Nintendo is not a player in the console market.
"Nintendo... attacked the market with the GameCube. This console, based on an ATI graphics chip, surprised the whole world with its capacity. However, it targets a younger audience that remains faithful to the Nintendo tradition with its Mario Kart-inspired key titles."
Implied: Nintendo is only for Pokemon and Barney loving children.
Good God - it seems like any time anyone mentions a Nintendo system, they need to put in an aside about it being for kids. You never even see a shred of a veiled compliment suggesting that Nintendo might focus on gameplay, and not on making the most "mature" game. The mass media seems intent on further pigeonholing Nintendo every chance they get, is it any wonder that they are perceived as "kiddie" and that it's tough for them to shake the image. Photorealism and gore have their place in games, as do style and gameplay. When it comes down to it, the latter two have the bigger influence on my enjoyment of a game. Even on a Nintendo system, I'd rather play the latest Mario game than Turok 12, because while one has the wow/blood factor, the other is much more polished all-around.
I'd like to see media writers focus on the enjoyability of the games, for just once, instead of leaning on the tired-but-apparently-mandatory "Nintendo is for kids" appositive.
As a former TA for one of these classes who nearly ended up working on the cheat finder software for a quarter, let me add some additional fuel for the fire.
1. These are not just "programmers" in the traditional Computer Science major sense. The first class is required for almost all students at Georgia Tech. It started off just for Computer Science and Computer Engineering, then expanded to all engineering majors (civil, mechanical, etc). Now, even management majors (Georgia Tech's version of Communications, Basketweaving, or whatever the weak major that many athletes did at your school) have to take the class. The language used to be a locally developed pseudocode language (affectionately known as Russcal). Right or wrong, many of these students consider the class to be an unnecessary hurdle on their way to a degree, and to a technologically illiterate management major, programming does not come easy, nor are they inclined to learn their ethical obligations as a "programmer" - they just want out of the class.
2. Contrary to many snide remarks, the algorithm is, in fact, quite sophisticated. It is not fooled by extra white space, variable name changes, or simple rearranging. As a TA, I saw even simple algorithms done a slightly different way by every single student. Chances are that a student who will resort to cheating doesn't know enough to rearrange the code beyond the recognition of the cheat-finder and still have it be correct, and a student who does know enough would probably spend as much time dressing it up as it would take them to write the thing in the first place.
3. Once two submissions are flagged as possible copies, they are first reviewed by a student TA. If the TA believes that they are in fact copied, it is escalated to the class manager (GT staff), and then to the dean if need be.
It's not a perfect system, but the cheat-finder does a good job of crunching the role of a human down to a minimum, and leaves room for people to make a subjective judgement. It's pretty good, so cut the sarcasm back a bit - it's unwarranted.
Sirius Radio also offers 100 channels (60 commercial-free music and 40 news, sports, talk, and entertainment programming).
This is why they charge a monthly fee. I don't hear anyone complaining about HBO charging a monthly fee.
HBO doesn't require you to buy a separate cable box. They have NO lock-in on you except for their home-brewed programming (Sopranos, Sex in the City, etc.) You can rent the same movies, catch them on a different channel, or borrow them from a friend.
These guys have a government-sanctioned oligopoly and some serious lock-in. What prevents both companies from doubling their monthly fees or adding 20 minutes of commercials per hour? Nothing - look how people have been grudgingly accepting obscene TV-cable rate hikes.
What prevents ClearChannel, Cox, or Infinity from snapping these companies up if they run low on cash? What happens if they start degrading the quality of their broadcast stations in order to upsell people to satellite radio (exclusive songs, promotions, lower commercial %, etc). What happens when a ClearChannel-owned XM pays Honda scads of money to drop support for AM/FM-radios? It can very easily happen, and it pisses me off. The moronic masses will consume as usual until the market share is large enough to screw those who have been holding out.
I'm becoming progressively disturbed at the number of companies trying to get into your pocket every month. Fair-use as we know it for almost any device seems to be going away, and NONE of it is customer-driven. Look at the trends.
Soon, you will pay monthly for your software (Microsoft - others will follow suit), radio (XM/Sirius), music (online music services that give you access to large song catalogs but remove all access to music when you cancel), movies (divx tried to start it, big $$$ is picking up the idea now), books (M$ vision for e-books w/ DRM), video games (Final Fantasy XI), web sites....
What was wrong with existing revenue models? Just because companies like Microsoft were incapable of creating software worth the cost of updating, it screwed up their revenue predictions.... Why should consumers get screwed just so a company can predict their profits more accurately? Why can't I just buy something and own it anymore? I can't tell you how much this pisses me off.
What's the common thread here? Huge footholds in the industry or sanctioned monopolies (MPAA, RIAA, M$, XM/Sirius). Preach all you want about speaking with your dollars, but that only works while you still have a choice. What happens when we don't have access to the alternatives any more because of coersion of distribution channels, anti-competitive practices, and purchased legislation?
Re:How cool is this guy?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
Seems a bit shortsighted - how do you give exact change from pi?
Keep it simple - if you don't need the overhead of a PDA, don't bother with it.
At least a couple of carriers, including Voicestream, support AOL Instant Messenger from any SMS phone, and it's even built into their latest version of the Nokia 3390.
For email, some carriers are begin to support access to email over simple WAP, so once again, you can go on a cheap device and a cheap service plan to pull it off. If the email's for work, several vendors have products for carrier and device-independent access to corporate email.
People make this stuff too complicated with the latest and greatest devices. Real solutions are out there at reasonable prices for commodity hardware.
Huh? How does some guy who heads down to Walmart and picks up 3, then putting the extra overhead of yet ANOTHER layer in there "eliminate the middleman"?
Point being that there have already been so many other middlemen in the mix, who are we to criticize only the last one for taking a markup? What about the retailer who charges $300 for a gamecube, a game and a controller in a mandatory bundle? It's their choice - don't like it? Take a hike.
That is the leaches that suck productivity from the rest of humanity, contributing nothing but imposing their tax. Someone buying some game machines and then reselling them offers absolutely no added value, but they impose their tax.
The added value is convenience, or accessibility. The sellers are on the ball enough to pick up the system when it goes on sale. Most stores enforce a 1 system per-person limit. There was every opportunity to get a system if someone was paying attention. If there wasn't a demand here, people would walk, they wouldn't pay, and people would get their due. There's nothing urgent here, this is purely a luxury. If this wasn't 100% worth it to the buyers, there's an obvious option - get something else or wait.
This "scalpers do a public service!" thing has played out regarding event tickets many times in the past, with scalpers claimer that without them the average joe couldn't get a ticket, but the reality being that the average joe can't get a ticket because of scalpers buying them up (under the pretense, of course, of doing a public service for the average Joe).
It's a fine line to walk here.... These people spent their time and risked their money on something they thought might have a higher market value in the future than its fixed retail value. Their time is worth something, and so is their risk. This pattern repeats itself time and again throughout our society. Not every enterprising individual has access to tickets or electronics or you name it at wholesale cost such that they can resale at this "acceptable" retail price, but why fault them for jumping on an opportunity when they see it? Our economy is built on the spread between what people can buy something for, and what they can sell it for.
Based on the stores here in Atlanta, anyone who made it to a major retailer within the first couple of hours after they opened could easily have walked away with a GameCube at retail price. There was no shortage of opportunity, only shortages of awareness. It's like berating people for buying a Microsoft stock 10 years ago and selling it for several multiples of that now. What did they do? They took a risk in time and money. Did they add any value to the stock certificate while they held onto it? No. Did anyone have the chance to get in? Yes. Behold the wonders of a free market - some early birds will get the worms, and the late birds pay for being late.
It was sweet after Christmas last year seeing hundreds of wankers trying to pawn PS2s at progressively lower prices, eventually taking a pretty heavy loss as the store prices dropped). The fact that scalpers such as yourself run and buy up all the stock just to rape families whose kids want a game to play really pisses me off, and I hope that you are left holding the bag on that.
Oh get over yourself. There's a bit of a double standard in that you seem to find it perfectly reasonable that retailers constrict supply of these systems, preventing consumers from (theoretically) eliminating the middle man and getting a better price. Some of them even enforce bundling restrictions. So why are the scalpers evil?
Like it or not, this is capitalism at work. If someone wants to hustle their butt and risk some of their cash in the hopes of pulling down a better price, who are you to criticize? Retailers do the same thing, but we've been numbed to accept it in the name of convenience. Marked up GameCubes are obviously worth it to those who purchase them - it provides a valuable second market for the systems.
Can you really blame someone? There is ONLY upside potential here. Get a good price? Sell and take it to the bank. Can't sell it? Take the store receipt in for a full refund.
Also, you assume that the families that buy these systems from resellers would be the ones to pick the system up from the store, were it not for the greedy bastards. This is absurd. For some families, people like this guy are the only way they'd ever get a system before Christmas. Their time is more valuable than their money. Get off your high horse.
...is to see what happens when it's run on the XBox. I never really thought about that, but do you really want a console that is highly susceptible to virii?
light-year also light year (ltyîr)
n.
The distance that light travels in a vacuum in one year, approximately 9.46 trillion (9.46 × 1012) kilometers or 5.88 trillion (5.88 × 1012) miles.
The arbitrary term here is "one year", which means nothing to those from other planets. Even when the definition puts in in more concrete terms, miles and km are still purely human inventions of measure.
In other words, even if aliens *did* decide to define long distances in terms of the speed of light and time, they wouldn't use Earth years as their measure of time, and they wouldn't know what miles or kilometers were.
Agreed. AOL caters to the lowest common denominator, the anti-power-user, with few exceptions. I sincerely doubt there are very many people who would be willing to switch to Linux but not willing to switch away from the AOL dummy interface. Still, an intriguing hack, simply on principal.
Salon also has an article on the topic. It discusses the condensate in terms of a new "state of matter" (to go along with solid, liquid, gas, plasma?). It also mentions the most obvious applications are for precision measurement and nanotechnology.
Please post all "I think I'm going to patent [insert obvious commonly used everyday thing here]! hehehe! Aren't I clever!" type posts under this thread so they they can be summarily ignored.
They wouldn't be so "clever" if it weren't for the fact that the U.S. Patent office has a growing track record for patenting stupid things that ARE obvious and everyday. It's absolutely absurd that there's only one place I can go on the web and purchase with one click (not that I really want to, but on principle...) because Amazon.com has been granted a patent. It's unreasonable, and brings out a bitter reaction because who knows if our company's next? Take it one step further - is 2-click purchasing worth a patent? What about 3 or 4?
If this patent is enforced consumers will either have less functionality in their PVR's or face higher prices because this company was granted a patent for an obvious idea.
NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS 98, MICROSOFT WINDOWS MILLENUM EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (EACH AN "OS PRODUCT"), YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
And look at this fine print. "Still using Windows 95 or NT? Tough luck - you have NO rights, and you can't even use our software anymore." I'd LOVE to see them try and take someone to court on changes of installing the latest version of Windows Media Player on Windows 95. (Although this is probably mostly CYA so nobody comes after them for their $5 in damages if it doesn't work on a "legacy" OS.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, like how much longer your company can sustain itself writing software to sell pets over the web.
Now if only they'd ship at least ONE DVD player with an old-school coax input. I think it's absurd that I have to buy a new television (or an adapter more expensive than a low-end APEX player) just to watch DVDs on it.
I'm not claiming there's a huge market for it, but it's got to be significant, and it can't cost that much to add.
This approach to hiring is raw idiocy. This "strategy" may make the hiring process easier by slimming the pool of candidates, but does NOTHING for hiring the best talent. If all you want is a heads-down worker who will do the exact job you need now indefinitely, go ahead and hire this way. If you want an adaptive worker who can meet your needs today AND in the future, you will be better served loosening your criteria for people who demonstrate an ability to adaptively develop their skill set. Furthermore, I've far too often seen this approach to hiring yield technically apt workers who are communication nightmares. Once again, I say a team is better served with people who are lacking a couple of skills (but can learn it) and can communicate effectively than with workers who match the skills perfectly but can't get their point across.
Actually, CDs have been cheaper to manufacture almost since their introduction. The price differential persists because people are willing to pay more for a CD than for a tape. This is because CDs have been marketed as providing higher quality sound, and they do not exhibit the same deterioration of quality after heavy use as cassettes. While DVDs are cheap, the VHS is usually cheaper - same reason, even though VHS still costs more to make.
It's not every day you surf from F****dCompany to SlashDot only to read the same story...
It gets better. The target of your staring will now be Catherine Zeta-Jones.
That's absolutely amazing that it works. Even relatively simple and common constructs from the Collections API would hose 1.1.1 - either the developers coding these sites are targeting the MS JVM, they're not particularly clueful developers, or the apps are exceedingly simple. Probably a little of each.
BREW will fail in the mainstream, almost without a doubt. The obstacle is the same as many similar products before it (such as DivX) - the vendor (Qualcomm) has designed a system where they want to control it all. You have to download the software from your carrier, and your carrier can't offer it unless it's approved by Qualcomm.
While this sort of strategy gets the execs all excited because they get to stick their hand out for money at every step, these ploys fail because, in the end, there's nothing in it for the consumer. The developers are sick of it because they have to be certified against standards that even Qualcomm's own BREW demo apps don't pass, and they have to pay to recertify every time the standards are changed or their app fails. The consumer doesn't want it because this "walled garden" approach by the vendors has no value for them.
Good concept, bad business decisions.
Don't let your experience on a PC screen, playing by yourself, ruin the memory. When I was in college, about 20 of us pooled our money and picked up a full Gauntlet arcade unit ($400). It was STILL fun for hours. It was always more of a social experience, especially as one of the first 4 player games. The level design and sheer number of levels kept it interesting, as does the constant struggle for power-ups. It's pure genious as a quarter muncher, too - there's no part of the game that's so tough that a few quarters can't get you through.
If you can find this game and a few friends, I think you'll realize your memories are accurate, and that Gauntlet beats most if not all of today's arcade games hands down.
We have received information that you are offering Internet access service to the above referenced account holder, who has utilized your services to post downloads to Usenet newsgroups of copyrighted motion picture(s) including such title(s) as:
24 (TV)
These people have no clue, especially in this case. They should be OVERJOYED that people are swapping episodes of 24. Why? Because I think the biggest reason most people don't watch the show once they hear it's well done is that they feel like they're coming in halfway through the movie.
(In short, the premise for 24 is that it unfolds in "real time" - each one hour episode is an hour in the life of the show's characters - and that the 24 episodes will comprise a full day of suspense, intrigue, action, etc. as the plot unfolds.)
So strangely, if people are swapping episodes, it probably means they're getting caught up on the plot, and will likely increase the viewership of the next episode (more viewers = higher ratings = higher priced ads). But I guess common sense doesn't matter.
Implied: Nintendo is not a player in the console market.
"Nintendo... attacked the market with the GameCube. This console, based on an ATI graphics chip, surprised the whole world with its capacity. However, it targets a younger audience that remains faithful to the Nintendo tradition with its Mario Kart-inspired key titles."
Implied: Nintendo is only for Pokemon and Barney loving children.
Good God - it seems like any time anyone mentions a Nintendo system, they need to put in an aside about it being for kids. You never even see a shred of a veiled compliment suggesting that Nintendo might focus on gameplay, and not on making the most "mature" game. The mass media seems intent on further pigeonholing Nintendo every chance they get, is it any wonder that they are perceived as "kiddie" and that it's tough for them to shake the image. Photorealism and gore have their place in games, as do style and gameplay. When it comes down to it, the latter two have the bigger influence on my enjoyment of a game. Even on a Nintendo system, I'd rather play the latest Mario game than Turok 12, because while one has the wow/blood factor, the other is much more polished all-around.
I'd like to see media writers focus on the enjoyability of the games, for just once, instead of leaning on the tired-but-apparently-mandatory "Nintendo is for kids" appositive.
As a former TA for one of these classes who nearly ended up working on the cheat finder software for a quarter, let me add some additional fuel for the fire.
1. These are not just "programmers" in the traditional Computer Science major sense. The first class is required for almost all students at Georgia Tech. It started off just for Computer Science and Computer Engineering, then expanded to all engineering majors (civil, mechanical, etc). Now, even management majors (Georgia Tech's version of Communications, Basketweaving, or whatever the weak major that many athletes did at your school) have to take the class. The language used to be a locally developed pseudocode language (affectionately known as Russcal). Right or wrong, many of these students consider the class to be an unnecessary hurdle on their way to a degree, and to a technologically illiterate management major, programming does not come easy, nor are they inclined to learn their ethical obligations as a "programmer" - they just want out of the class.
2. Contrary to many snide remarks, the algorithm is, in fact, quite sophisticated. It is not fooled by extra white space, variable name changes, or simple rearranging. As a TA, I saw even simple algorithms done a slightly different way by every single student. Chances are that a student who will resort to cheating doesn't know enough to rearrange the code beyond the recognition of the cheat-finder and still have it be correct, and a student who does know enough would probably spend as much time dressing it up as it would take them to write the thing in the first place.
3. Once two submissions are flagged as possible copies, they are first reviewed by a student TA. If the TA believes that they are in fact copied, it is escalated to the class manager (GT staff), and then to the dean if need be.
It's not a perfect system, but the cheat-finder does a good job of crunching the role of a human down to a minimum, and leaves room for people to make a subjective judgement. It's pretty good, so cut the sarcasm back a bit - it's unwarranted.
Sirius Radio also offers 100 channels (60 commercial-free music and 40 news, sports, talk, and entertainment programming).
This is why they charge a monthly fee. I don't hear anyone complaining about HBO charging a monthly fee.
HBO doesn't require you to buy a separate cable box. They have NO lock-in on you except for their home-brewed programming (Sopranos, Sex in the City, etc.) You can rent the same movies, catch them on a different channel, or borrow them from a friend.
These guys have a government-sanctioned oligopoly and some serious lock-in. What prevents both companies from doubling their monthly fees or adding 20 minutes of commercials per hour? Nothing - look how people have been grudgingly accepting obscene TV-cable rate hikes.
What prevents ClearChannel, Cox, or Infinity from snapping these companies up if they run low on cash? What happens if they start degrading the quality of their broadcast stations in order to upsell people to satellite radio (exclusive songs, promotions, lower commercial %, etc). What happens when a ClearChannel-owned XM pays Honda scads of money to drop support for AM/FM-radios? It can very easily happen, and it pisses me off. The moronic masses will consume as usual until the market share is large enough to screw those who have been holding out.
I'm becoming progressively disturbed at the number of companies trying to get into your pocket every month. Fair-use as we know it for almost any device seems to be going away, and NONE of it is customer-driven. Look at the trends.
Soon, you will pay monthly for your software (Microsoft - others will follow suit), radio (XM/Sirius), music (online music services that give you access to large song catalogs but remove all access to music when you cancel), movies (divx tried to start it, big $$$ is picking up the idea now), books (M$ vision for e-books w/ DRM), video games (Final Fantasy XI), web sites....
What was wrong with existing revenue models? Just because companies like Microsoft were incapable of creating software worth the cost of updating, it screwed up their revenue predictions.... Why should consumers get screwed just so a company can predict their profits more accurately? Why can't I just buy something and own it anymore? I can't tell you how much this pisses me off.
What's the common thread here? Huge footholds in the industry or sanctioned monopolies (MPAA, RIAA, M$, XM/Sirius). Preach all you want about speaking with your dollars, but that only works while you still have a choice. What happens when we don't have access to the alternatives any more because of coersion of distribution channels, anti-competitive practices, and purchased legislation?
Seems a bit shortsighted - how do you give exact change from pi?
Keep it simple - if you don't need the overhead of a PDA, don't bother with it.
At least a couple of carriers, including Voicestream, support AOL Instant Messenger from any SMS phone, and it's even built into their latest version of the Nokia 3390.
For email, some carriers are begin to support access to email over simple WAP, so once again, you can go on a cheap device and a cheap service plan to pull it off. If the email's for work, several vendors have products for carrier and device-independent access to corporate email.
People make this stuff too complicated with the latest and greatest devices. Real solutions are out there at reasonable prices for commodity hardware.
Point being that there have already been so many other middlemen in the mix, who are we to criticize only the last one for taking a markup? What about the retailer who charges $300 for a gamecube, a game and a controller in a mandatory bundle? It's their choice - don't like it? Take a hike.
That is the leaches that suck productivity from the rest of humanity, contributing nothing but imposing their tax. Someone buying some game machines and then reselling them offers absolutely no added value, but they impose their tax.
The added value is convenience, or accessibility. The sellers are on the ball enough to pick up the system when it goes on sale. Most stores enforce a 1 system per-person limit. There was every opportunity to get a system if someone was paying attention. If there wasn't a demand here, people would walk, they wouldn't pay, and people would get their due. There's nothing urgent here, this is purely a luxury. If this wasn't 100% worth it to the buyers, there's an obvious option - get something else or wait.
This "scalpers do a public service!" thing has played out regarding event tickets many times in the past, with scalpers claimer that without them the average joe couldn't get a ticket, but the reality being that the average joe can't get a ticket because of scalpers buying them up (under the pretense, of course, of doing a public service for the average Joe).
It's a fine line to walk here.... These people spent their time and risked their money on something they thought might have a higher market value in the future than its fixed retail value. Their time is worth something, and so is their risk. This pattern repeats itself time and again throughout our society. Not every enterprising individual has access to tickets or electronics or you name it at wholesale cost such that they can resale at this "acceptable" retail price, but why fault them for jumping on an opportunity when they see it? Our economy is built on the spread between what people can buy something for, and what they can sell it for.
Based on the stores here in Atlanta, anyone who made it to a major retailer within the first couple of hours after they opened could easily have walked away with a GameCube at retail price. There was no shortage of opportunity, only shortages of awareness. It's like berating people for buying a Microsoft stock 10 years ago and selling it for several multiples of that now. What did they do? They took a risk in time and money. Did they add any value to the stock certificate while they held onto it? No. Did anyone have the chance to get in? Yes. Behold the wonders of a free market - some early birds will get the worms, and the late birds pay for being late.
Oh get over yourself. There's a bit of a double standard in that you seem to find it perfectly reasonable that retailers constrict supply of these systems, preventing consumers from (theoretically) eliminating the middle man and getting a better price. Some of them even enforce bundling restrictions. So why are the scalpers evil?
Like it or not, this is capitalism at work. If someone wants to hustle their butt and risk some of their cash in the hopes of pulling down a better price, who are you to criticize? Retailers do the same thing, but we've been numbed to accept it in the name of convenience. Marked up GameCubes are obviously worth it to those who purchase them - it provides a valuable second market for the systems.
Can you really blame someone? There is ONLY upside potential here. Get a good price? Sell and take it to the bank. Can't sell it? Take the store receipt in for a full refund.
Also, you assume that the families that buy these systems from resellers would be the ones to pick the system up from the store, were it not for the greedy bastards. This is absurd. For some families, people like this guy are the only way they'd ever get a system before Christmas. Their time is more valuable than their money. Get off your high horse.
...is to see what happens when it's run on the XBox. I never really thought about that, but do you really want a console that is highly susceptible to virii?
I have a feeling he DOES know.
light-year also light year (ltyîr)
n.
The distance that light travels in a vacuum in one year, approximately 9.46 trillion (9.46 × 1012) kilometers or 5.88 trillion (5.88 × 1012) miles.
The arbitrary term here is "one year", which means nothing to those from other planets. Even when the definition puts in in more concrete terms, miles and km are still purely human inventions of measure.
In other words, even if aliens *did* decide to define long distances in terms of the speed of light and time, they wouldn't use Earth years as their measure of time, and they wouldn't know what miles or kilometers were.
Agreed. AOL caters to the lowest common denominator, the anti-power-user, with few exceptions. I sincerely doubt there are very many people who would be willing to switch to Linux but not willing to switch away from the AOL dummy interface. Still, an intriguing hack, simply on principal.
Salon also has an article on the topic. It discusses the condensate in terms of a new "state of matter" (to go along with solid, liquid, gas, plasma?). It also mentions the most obvious applications are for precision measurement and nanotechnology.
thematrixonline reports that rumored replacements include Stacey Dash (from Clueless) and Brandy Norwood (singer, star of Moesha).
They wouldn't be so "clever" if it weren't for the fact that the U.S. Patent office has a growing track record for patenting stupid things that ARE obvious and everyday. It's absolutely absurd that there's only one place I can go on the web and purchase with one click (not that I really want to, but on principle...) because Amazon.com has been granted a patent. It's unreasonable, and brings out a bitter reaction because who knows if our company's next? Take it one step further - is 2-click purchasing worth a patent? What about 3 or 4?
If this patent is enforced consumers will either have less functionality in their PVR's or face higher prices because this company was granted a patent for an obvious idea.
NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS 98, MICROSOFT WINDOWS MILLENUM EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (EACH AN "OS PRODUCT"), YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
And look at this fine print. "Still using Windows 95 or NT? Tough luck - you have NO rights, and you can't even use our software anymore." I'd LOVE to see them try and take someone to court on changes of installing the latest version of Windows Media Player on Windows 95. (Although this is probably mostly CYA so nobody comes after them for their $5 in damages if it doesn't work on a "legacy" OS.)