I love the technology behind the Kinect, but I honestly loved any games. They need to allow accessories with the next Kinect. How awesome would it be to have a gun and duck, cover, jump, hide behind your couch and shoot? And making a "finger gun" just isn't the same, no matter how accurate the system is.
Agreed. Sometimes there are exceptions, but usually I only want to see a movie in the theatre if I can't get the same experience at home. Similarly, I only play an arcade machine if I can't get the experience at home (punching bag, prize tickets, etc)
Then this is mostly mid-80s to mid 90s technology. Seems like an awesome collection, but... a million dollars!?!? Seems like a lot cooler ways to nerd out for that kind of dough...
Actually, now that I see it in writing, adoption is ok for the cause. Sorta like Adopt-a-Highway or Adopt-a-Whale. It's support, now ownership.
Now, to be clear - it's "Name a Star" crap that they sell on the radio near Valentine's Day that I hate. And they'll even put it into an "International Registry!"
I agree 100%. In the mid 90s, EGM was 100% of all gaming news and tips for me. It was so popular that, for a time, they even had EGM^2, a second magazine each month with yet more information.
2. It is free, it is quite literally clicking one button, you're quite literally spending more of the customers money trying to get paid than doing the service. Back when quality service meant something, a store would frequently be willing to do the one click just to have positive word of mount. Fair exchange really.
Back in the 80s, my video store used to charge a dollar (or maybe it was $2) for not rewinding. It's free at home, takes 1 second to hit the button, and so therefore was fraud?
I think that the decision between Roman and Arabic numerals is more important than you give it credit for. It is an extremely important decision artistically. Whether to call yourself "The Godfather, Part II" or "The Godfather, Part 2" is more than just a marketing idea for a poster, even if from the studio's POV it might be.
Like the movies Se7en or Face/Off, in calling someone John Appleton II instead of John Appleton 2 (or even John Appleton 2.0 - someone will do that soon) conveys a different meaning. So in conversation, while only an arse would correct you for saying "It's Warcraft II, not Warcraft 2, ASSHOLE!" it is technically and artistically correct. And if you're going to shorten Civilization to Civ or civ, you might as well keep the punctuation too.
I completely agree with the GP, and as I read the article, the reply-I-was-ready-to-type was almost word for word what I was going to say.
First time in like 4 years, I'm "friend'ing" someone on/.
uhm? Are you sure they have to pull them back?
That would be a bit against the way lottery math works.
I see your point from a mathematical POV, but not in a legal one. When you advertise "You could win up to 1,000,000 today with 'Scratch-Off-Millions!'" after the million dollars was won, you are in fact lying, since that's no-longer possible.
A casino can advertise that you can win up to $10,000 on this roulette table because you can, every time. But they can't advertise "win the 1,000,000th-customer prize of $1,000,000" after the prize has been given out...
If that's what he's saying, then you're saying, "Do the crime, ruin people's lives. The worst that'll happen? They put you up in a hotel."
Punishment is fine, but imprisoning this guy just might not be punishment. He's not being used, and he's not being hurt.
At least use him, for something.
Um... prison is a punishment, not a hotel. You are cast out of society and civilization. You are withdrawn from normal human beings. You lose (almost) all of your rights (including most of the Bill of Rights).
You sleep when they tell you. You will never have sex again (er... voluntary heterosexual). You will never see a single human being ever again who won't/can't travel to the middle-of-nowhere prison. You will never go to your place of worship again. You'll never see your home again. You'll never see a sport event ever again. You'll never drive a car or ride a bicycle in the breeze again. You'll never have your mother's/wife's/son's/daughter's food again. You'll never see your daughter get married or walk her down the aisle. You'll never again wear any clothing you want for comfort or any other reason. You'll never go to a bookstore/tech store/flower store again and browse. You'll never sleep-in ever again. You'll never smell a rose or fresh-baked bread ever again. You'll never... EVER... go anywhere ever again by yourself because you wanted to go there. You'll never swim ever again. You'll never poop ever again in privacy. You'll never again see the ocean, a mountain, a farm, a skyscraper or the home you grew up in. Ever.
Seriously... you lose everything that's worth living for. And he has nothing to look forward to either since he'll never get out.
Basically, anything and everything went wrong with the rovers. Everything from the funding to all the equipment breakdowns (both before and after launch). It's absolutely amazing that they got them off the ground.
And it really was designed for 90 days. Dr. Squyres talks about how "90 days" to the NASA engineers usually means up to 180 days (x2). Like Sojourner, Mars Polar Lander, it was NOT meant to last through the first winter. I remember Dr. Squyres telling us in class that they purposely didn't design anything to clean the inevitable dust-buildup over the solar panels (and he talks about this in the book as well). They considered windshield wipers, a saran-wrap-like plastic that would simply revolve and create a fresh surface, and other means. They had to account for every GRAM on the machines, and adding these didn't make sense (money or weight-wise) because the entire thing wasn't supposed to last more than the solar panels would last anyway. The whole dust-storm-cleanups was obviously a complete surprise.
The entire rover was designed with the 3-6 month power-loss in mind. It's seriously an amazing mission: unbridled dedication, creative and intelligent team members, and dumb luck - time and time again Squyres talks about how they got through every mission-crippling hurdle. It's all in the book. Seriously, pick it up on half.com for a few bucks. Great read.
I'm wagering that designing a rover that you are certain is capable of running around Mars for 90 days would necessarily entail a degree of engineering that makes it at least theoretically capable of running around Mars for years.
I mean this in the politest way, but you're wrong. Read Steve Squyres's Roving Mars. He was the head of the entire project. It's amazing how many things almost didn't work (for example, they got one chance to test their chute - and it shredded to pieces. And it was like 30 days before launch). It's an amazing book.
On a personal note, Steve Squyres was my professor at Cornell, and he was one of the most amazing professors I ever had or ever would have after. I still remember the day he came off the plane from Pasadena and told us about the Rovers about a week before the press was told. He told us all that it was "off the record" and any reporters in the room (student paper, etc) had to treat it as so.
But lately it seems like Pixar is making movies to impress themselves while forgetting who their audience is.
Brad Bird says he doesn't make "cartoons." He makes motion pictures that just happen to be animated. My 4 year-old neice hated the first 30 minutes of Wall-E because it had no talking or singing or dancing (Hello Dolly clips not counting). But the adults - they loved it.
they weren't random. they had the identical cd artwork of their first 5 cds. they did the exact same thing as Danger Mouse is doing now (and I think it's great for both of them)
not exactly. It shows where you are, and it's VERY accurate (like any Garmin I've seen). But it does NOT let you input the destination and show the route. Rightfully so, because then tourists would (rightly or wrongly) panic when they driver was going a different way and assume they were getting cheated. In NYC there are 174 ways to get between any 2 places.
For some reason, the cabbies still give me dirty looks when I pay with a credit card. I mean, for a $7.90 cab, I used to give $9 tops when i pay cash, but the credit card, they give you the option of 15%, 20% or 25% tip (or "other"), but the default tips ALWAYS wind up being more than I would have given them with cash, even when you account for the 2% Mastercard will surcharge them.
Then again, NYC cabbies by and large aren't very nice. Last night I was on my fire escape. it was 1am, totally empty on 2nd avenue, and these 2 black kids in their mid-20s were trying to get a cab for like 10 minutes, and NONE would stop (they were all empty, and you can tell by if their roof light is lit or not). I mean, these kids weren't wearing tuxedos, but it's not like they were wearing gang colors or looked drunk (I could clearly hear them). I thought it was horrible, and I tend to be skeptical about these things. Not anymore, since I saw it myself.
For example: Advertisements. Someone thought it would be a good idea to fill cabs with loudspeakers and screens that subject the passenger to one-way advertisements. I'm annoyed by this because A: It's unpleasant to be so aggressively marketed to. That's why I usually hit the big MUTE button on it, the OFF button next to it. Takes 1 second total. 1.5 if I'm slow.
I was living in Murray Hill on 33rd Street & 3rd Ave (yes, "toidy toid n' toid!"). Here's a picture I took from my friend's balcony that day. The cars were in this exact position for HOURS. Look at the poor sap caught on 32nd in the middle of 3rd avenue - it's actually why I took this picture. No traffic lights forced average citizens to direct traffic themselves, as you can see. They were pretty unsuccessful, and they gave up after 5 minutes and a new sap would try (I mean, where were the cars supposed to go?). We watched this for a while. And as you can see in the picture - across the street, on 3rd ave, the grocery store witht he blue awning (Grestedes) and the deli (dont remember the name) were just giving out ice cream and slicing up meat sandwiches for anyone who wants.
I agree with the other poster. Central Park, while beautiful, is not a residential spot. Incidentally, I went to Central Park that day too (no power and I lived on the 23rd floor and that first pic was from my friend on the 14th floor). Here's a picture from that day. I took it specifically because I remembered how pretty it was, and how it looked identical to any other day in Central Park, powered or not. Do you see yourself?
Since you do not comprehend the difference between a rather straightforward analysis of readily available post facto historical data and predicting the future there is little point talking to you.
Great - so you won't respond to this then. Easier for me I guess. Now, you already said, let me quote you on this, "We know the historical strength of the German army in 1941-1945, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the USSR and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals." I correct my earlier statement before. Nazi Germany shouldn't have hired you back then to help them with your brilliant clairvoyance. They should have hired 2009 IgnoramusMaximus instead, so that 2009 IgnoramusMaximus could have told them the "obvious" outcome (you words "observe the inevitable outcomes based on long established historical data."). Again, they also knew their strengths and weaknesses, but only YOU saw it better then they did! As a bonus, 2009 IgnoramusMaximus would have also been able to brilliantly "predict" the past 68 winners of the World Series, based on the fact that "We know the strength of the New York Yankees in 1941-2009, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the Red Sox and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals."
But then again you are just a dishonest jerk.
Please list the specific things I said dishonestly. Oh, wait... you already promised not to respond. Oh well, I guess you'll never be able to back up your accusations. Unless you're the dishonest one and you do respond. Oooh, the excitement is killing me! Please cave and respond! Oh please please please!
The question is entirely different. We know the historical strength of the German army in 1941-1945, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the USSR and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals. The Germans simply did not have the sufficient military strength, nor the personnel to achieve victory, which was plainly apparent even long before the landings in Normandy.
Wow, another brilliant analysis by you! Too bad, um... GERMANY apparently didn't know as much about the strength of the German Army in 1941 as well as you did. Because, um... they still were thinking they'd WIN the war in '41. Too bad they didn't hire you.
Oh, and since you can make sweeping predictions, what stats do you need about the strength of the Pakistani, Tainwanese, Israeli armies do you need to better make your prediction? I see you cleverly dodged that question by simply stating "apples and oranges." Please - make a 25 year prediction about all of those countries, since you're so good at (snicker) backdating past historical events and then predicting that they were inevitable.
Slashdot Mirror
I love the technology behind the Kinect, but I honestly loved any games. They need to allow accessories with the next Kinect. How awesome would it be to have a gun and duck, cover, jump, hide behind your couch and shoot? And making a "finger gun" just isn't the same, no matter how accurate the system is.
Agreed. Sometimes there are exceptions, but usually I only want to see a movie in the theatre if I can't get the same experience at home. Similarly, I only play an arcade machine if I can't get the experience at home (punching bag, prize tickets, etc)
Then this is mostly mid-80s to mid 90s technology. Seems like an awesome collection, but... a million dollars!?!? Seems like a lot cooler ways to nerd out for that kind of dough...
Actually, now that I see it in writing, adoption is ok for the cause. Sorta like Adopt-a-Highway or Adopt-a-Whale. It's support, now ownership.
Now, to be clear - it's "Name a Star" crap that they sell on the radio near Valentine's Day that I hate. And they'll even put it into an "International Registry!"
as well as through the non-profit Pale Blue Dot project.
Ugh. I simply cannot stand star "adoption."
I agree 100%. In the mid 90s, EGM was 100% of all gaming news and tips for me. It was so popular that, for a time, they even had EGM^2, a second magazine each month with yet more information.
I loved the reviews by Sushi X.
2. It is free, it is quite literally clicking one button, you're quite literally spending more of the customers money trying to get paid than doing the service. Back when quality service meant something, a store would frequently be willing to do the one click just to have positive word of mount. Fair exchange really.
Back in the 80s, my video store used to charge a dollar (or maybe it was $2) for not rewinding. It's free at home, takes 1 second to hit the button, and so therefore was fraud?
I think that the decision between Roman and Arabic numerals is more important than you give it credit for. It is an extremely important decision artistically. Whether to call yourself "The Godfather, Part II" or "The Godfather, Part 2" is more than just a marketing idea for a poster, even if from the studio's POV it might be.
Like the movies Se7en or Face/Off, in calling someone John Appleton II instead of John Appleton 2 (or even John Appleton 2.0 - someone will do that soon) conveys a different meaning. So in conversation, while only an arse would correct you for saying "It's Warcraft II, not Warcraft 2, ASSHOLE!" it is technically and artistically correct. And if you're going to shorten Civilization to Civ or civ, you might as well keep the punctuation too.
I completely agree with the GP, and as I read the article, the reply-I-was-ready-to-type was almost word for word what I was going to say. First time in like 4 years, I'm "friend'ing" someone on /.
uhm? Are you sure they have to pull them back? That would be a bit against the way lottery math works.
I see your point from a mathematical POV, but not in a legal one. When you advertise "You could win up to 1,000,000 today with 'Scratch-Off-Millions!'" after the million dollars was won, you are in fact lying, since that's no-longer possible.
A casino can advertise that you can win up to $10,000 on this roulette table because you can, every time. But they can't advertise "win the 1,000,000th-customer prize of $1,000,000" after the prize has been given out...
If that's what he's saying, then you're saying, "Do the crime, ruin people's lives. The worst that'll happen? They put you up in a hotel."
Punishment is fine, but imprisoning this guy just might not be punishment. He's not being used, and he's not being hurt.
At least use him, for something.
Um... prison is a punishment, not a hotel. You are cast out of society and civilization. You are withdrawn from normal human beings. You lose (almost) all of your rights (including most of the Bill of Rights).
You sleep when they tell you.
You will never have sex again (er... voluntary heterosexual).
You will never see a single human being ever again who won't/can't travel to the middle-of-nowhere prison.
You will never go to your place of worship again.
You'll never see your home again.
You'll never see a sport event ever again.
You'll never drive a car or ride a bicycle in the breeze again.
You'll never have your mother's/wife's/son's/daughter's food again.
You'll never see your daughter get married or walk her down the aisle.
You'll never again wear any clothing you want for comfort or any other reason.
You'll never go to a bookstore/tech store/flower store again and browse.
You'll never sleep-in ever again.
You'll never smell a rose or fresh-baked bread ever again.
You'll never... EVER... go anywhere ever again by yourself because you wanted to go there.
You'll never swim ever again.
You'll never poop ever again in privacy.
You'll never again see the ocean, a mountain, a farm, a skyscraper or the home you grew up in. Ever.
Seriously... you lose everything that's worth living for. And he has nothing to look forward to either since he'll never get out.
Basically, anything and everything went wrong with the rovers. Everything from the funding to all the equipment breakdowns (both before and after launch). It's absolutely amazing that they got them off the ground.
And it really was designed for 90 days. Dr. Squyres talks about how "90 days" to the NASA engineers usually means up to 180 days (x2). Like Sojourner, Mars Polar Lander, it was NOT meant to last through the first winter. I remember Dr. Squyres telling us in class that they purposely didn't design anything to clean the inevitable dust-buildup over the solar panels (and he talks about this in the book as well). They considered windshield wipers, a saran-wrap-like plastic that would simply revolve and create a fresh surface, and other means. They had to account for every GRAM on the machines, and adding these didn't make sense (money or weight-wise) because the entire thing wasn't supposed to last more than the solar panels would last anyway. The whole dust-storm-cleanups was obviously a complete surprise.
The entire rover was designed with the 3-6 month power-loss in mind. It's seriously an amazing mission: unbridled dedication, creative and intelligent team members, and dumb luck - time and time again Squyres talks about how they got through every mission-crippling hurdle. It's all in the book. Seriously, pick it up on half.com for a few bucks. Great read.
that's absolutely ridiculous. So you're saying "Do the crime, ruin people's lives. The worst that'll happen? You pay it back and break even."
I'm wagering that designing a rover that you are certain is capable of running around Mars for 90 days would necessarily entail a degree of engineering that makes it at least theoretically capable of running around Mars for years.
I mean this in the politest way, but you're wrong. Read Steve Squyres's Roving Mars. He was the head of the entire project. It's amazing how many things almost didn't work (for example, they got one chance to test their chute - and it shredded to pieces. And it was like 30 days before launch). It's an amazing book.
On a personal note, Steve Squyres was my professor at Cornell, and he was one of the most amazing professors I ever had or ever would have after. I still remember the day he came off the plane from Pasadena and told us about the Rovers about a week before the press was told. He told us all that it was "off the record" and any reporters in the room (student paper, etc) had to treat it as so.
But lately it seems like Pixar is making movies to impress themselves while forgetting who their audience is.
Brad Bird says he doesn't make "cartoons." He makes motion pictures that just happen to be animated. My 4 year-old neice hated the first 30 minutes of Wall-E because it had no talking or singing or dancing (Hello Dolly clips not counting). But the adults - they loved it.
Fry living in Bender's closet?
they weren't random. they had the identical cd artwork of their first 5 cds. they did the exact same thing as Danger Mouse is doing now (and I think it's great for both of them)
slope day isnt a fraction of what it used to be.
-Cornell '01 grad...
not exactly. It shows where you are, and it's VERY accurate (like any Garmin I've seen). But it does NOT let you input the destination and show the route. Rightfully so, because then tourists would (rightly or wrongly) panic when they driver was going a different way and assume they were getting cheated. In NYC there are 174 ways to get between any 2 places.
For some reason, the cabbies still give me dirty looks when I pay with a credit card. I mean, for a $7.90 cab, I used to give $9 tops when i pay cash, but the credit card, they give you the option of 15%, 20% or 25% tip (or "other"), but the default tips ALWAYS wind up being more than I would have given them with cash, even when you account for the 2% Mastercard will surcharge them.
Then again, NYC cabbies by and large aren't very nice. Last night I was on my fire escape. it was 1am, totally empty on 2nd avenue, and these 2 black kids in their mid-20s were trying to get a cab for like 10 minutes, and NONE would stop (they were all empty, and you can tell by if their roof light is lit or not). I mean, these kids weren't wearing tuxedos, but it's not like they were wearing gang colors or looked drunk (I could clearly hear them). I thought it was horrible, and I tend to be skeptical about these things. Not anymore, since I saw it myself.
For example: Advertisements. Someone thought it would be a good idea to fill cabs with loudspeakers and screens that subject the passenger to one-way advertisements. I'm annoyed by this because A: It's unpleasant to be so aggressively marketed to.
That's why I usually hit the big MUTE button on it, the OFF button next to it. Takes 1 second total. 1.5 if I'm slow.
I was living in Murray Hill on 33rd Street & 3rd Ave (yes, "toidy toid n' toid!"). Here's a picture I took from my friend's balcony that day. The cars were in this exact position for HOURS. Look at the poor sap caught on 32nd in the middle of 3rd avenue - it's actually why I took this picture. No traffic lights forced average citizens to direct traffic themselves, as you can see. They were pretty unsuccessful, and they gave up after 5 minutes and a new sap would try (I mean, where were the cars supposed to go?). We watched this for a while. And as you can see in the picture - across the street, on 3rd ave, the grocery store witht he blue awning (Grestedes) and the deli (dont remember the name) were just giving out ice cream and slicing up meat sandwiches for anyone who wants.
I agree with the other poster. Central Park, while beautiful, is not a residential spot. Incidentally, I went to Central Park that day too (no power and I lived on the 23rd floor and that first pic was from my friend on the 14th floor). Here's a picture from that day. I took it specifically because I remembered how pretty it was, and how it looked identical to any other day in Central Park, powered or not. Do you see yourself?
Hi 2009IgnoramusMaximus! How are ya?
Since you do not comprehend the difference between a rather straightforward analysis of readily available post facto historical data and predicting the future there is little point talking to you.
Great - so you won't respond to this then. Easier for me I guess. Now, you already said, let me quote you on this, "We know the historical strength of the German army in 1941-1945, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the USSR and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals." I correct my earlier statement before. Nazi Germany shouldn't have hired you back then to help them with your brilliant clairvoyance. They should have hired 2009 IgnoramusMaximus instead, so that 2009 IgnoramusMaximus could have told them the "obvious" outcome (you words "observe the inevitable outcomes based on long established historical data."). Again, they also knew their strengths and weaknesses, but only YOU saw it better then they did! As a bonus, 2009 IgnoramusMaximus would have also been able to brilliantly "predict" the past 68 winners of the World Series, based on the fact that "We know the strength of the New York Yankees in 1941-2009, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the Red Sox and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals."
But then again you are just a dishonest jerk.
Please list the specific things I said dishonestly. Oh, wait... you already promised not to respond. Oh well, I guess you'll never be able to back up your accusations. Unless you're the dishonest one and you do respond. Oooh, the excitement is killing me! Please cave and respond! Oh please please please!
The question is entirely different. We know the historical strength of the German army in 1941-1945, the state of its industry etc, the respective strength of the USSR and its industry, and there were no possibilities of any miraculous reversals. The Germans simply did not have the sufficient military strength, nor the personnel to achieve victory, which was plainly apparent even long before the landings in Normandy.
Wow, another brilliant analysis by you! Too bad, um... GERMANY apparently didn't know as much about the strength of the German Army in 1941 as well as you did. Because, um... they still were thinking they'd WIN the war in '41. Too bad they didn't hire you.
Oh, and since you can make sweeping predictions, what stats do you need about the strength of the Pakistani, Tainwanese, Israeli armies do you need to better make your prediction? I see you cleverly dodged that question by simply stating "apples and oranges." Please - make a 25 year prediction about all of those countries, since you're so good at (snicker) backdating past historical events and then predicting that they were inevitable.