I like the idea of Vanguard's class system, a lot, because I know right from the start that I can be a paladin and be as good of a tank as a warrior. That's how they are designing it.
Unlike in say, World of Warcraft, where the developers before release claimed that there would be "more than one class to fill every role", and that the paladin would be "a tank overall", but they still ended up with a class that they intentionally don't want to tank at end-game except in a few limited circumstances, and instead they want as a cleric.
If I had the best of both worlds, I'd take a game with Vanguard's class structure and balance, with Warcraft's level 1-59 gameplay. I think the company that does this (and can throw in a few new/innovating things for buzz) will be able to steal a large portion of the existing MMORPG consumer base.
Now the PS2 shortage at its release, on the other hand, was a real supplier problem.;p My proof on that one is even more solid, but I could get my source at the vendor who caused the delay in trouble.
The whole shortage thing was a complete fabrication. Microsoft wanted to create buzz, so they intentionally shorted North American distribution.
I'm not just spouting garbage, either. My proof is simple: In early December, my wife went to Japan for a week on business. She went shopping (for a new camera). The electronics stores she visited had hundreds of XBox 360s sitting around in huge piles. As expected, they weren't selling well. They weren't being given out free with every Walkie Bits purchase, yet, but there was clearly a massive oversupply.
I know Microsoft wanted the 360 to do well in Japan. But they also had to know that getting product on the shelf in the US before Christmas is incredibly important. Unless, of course, that they thought the delay would somehow serve them better.
This is only true if this gets into a court of law, and the MPAA uses this in their argument. A company or organization cannot use a legal argument in one case, then in another case claim the argument is invalid. (Well, they can try, but that is a good way to get a judicial smackdown.)
This will only happen if the content owner wants to keep pressing the point through a lawsuit. If he can't find a lawyer willing to take the case, or if he considers any settlement the MPAA might offer, it has little to no effect on the rest of us, sadly.
>> I'm willing to bet that most people who are on WoW, if Blizzard went under tomorrow, would find something equally useless to do in their spare time. This idea that people who play games are all going take up triathlon training or feed the homeless in their spare time, if games weren't available, is dumb. In all likelihood they'd just watch TV.
How true. I was a paladin. I didn't want to be a cleric. I no longer play.
I spent yesterday watching 12 episodes of Lost on DVD. Sad, really. =(
Stick the line of bold type into Google, and the original article is the first hit.
The original parallel was that the origination bank, as you call it, is providing a service between a user and a content provider (where, in this case, the content is money). The origination bank charges the user for the service. Plus, the origination bank charges the destination bank (i.e. the content provider) for the luxury of having its conduit used in the transaction.
I didn't realize that so little of the fee charged by the destination bank went to pay the origination bank. The example's 50 cents out of $1.50 was unexpected. I bank at a credit union, and I am charged $1.00 if I use an out-of-the-company-network* ATM. Because I did not believe my credit union was taking a profit from this transaction, I expected the amount paid to the ATM owner to be closer to $1. Perhaps it varies. Perhaps I should complain. =p
* Fortunately, the company network for my credit union includes an ATM network composed of all ATMs owned by most any credit union in the state.
Yes, publically traded companies are, for the most part, intended for the sole purpose of "maximizing shareholder equity."
But is that all they should ever be about? A lot of people think that corporations are bad, and that their number one purpose should be (by law!) to "serve the public good", followed by any claims about money. This is what the people who founded the USA believed.
Yes, there are non-profits that fill part of the public good gap, but isn't there room for something in between? "At Bwandana, Inc., we will donate 50% of our profits each year to save the rainforests. The remaining 50% will go to grow the business and maximize shareholder equity."
Perhaps existing companies could not change their purpose without legislation. However, if a new company makes a claim (like, say "Do no evil"), and puts that in their business plan before they go public, there is no reason at all why that cannot be their number one purpose. Anyone who owns stock in Google knew that was the purpose of the company when they bought the stock. I suspect that some people own the stock because they feel the company does good.
If Google fails to follow its business plan, which includes the requirement to do no evil, then it would be the responsibility of the shareholders to oust the board and replace it with others who would.
Now all that said, yeah, I agree they need to grow into other, related markets, because that's the only way they can survive a downturn.
Not that I've read the article, of course, but assuming this is about net profit versus COGs...
My company's published business model states that our desired Cost of Goods Sold is 24% of our gross revenue. However, our desired profit margin is 18% of gross revenue.
The remaining 58% goes to pay for the sales force, marketing, and me.
I assume the article is talking about net revenue after COGs, while you and the parent poster are talking about profit margin.
Bank of America customer pays $3.50 to make a withdrawal at a Chase ATM
Bank of America charges $2, which shows up later on customer's statement
Chase charges $1.50, which is deducted immediately
Bank of America ends up with $1.45
Chase ends up with $2
Bank of America pays 50[cents] to Chase
5[cents] Bank of America pays less than 5[cents] to the Plus network
Sources: Bank Network News; American Bankers Association; Bank of America; Chase Manhattan Bank
-----
As this notes, part of the charge assessed by the customer's bank (Bank of America) is sent right back to the owner of the ATM. This adds to the ATM owner's surcharge.
Yes, the customer's bank is also taking some profit in this example.
So your blame for unions is that they aren't strong enough? Sounds like the unions in the examples you cite - if there were any - did a piss poor job of fighting for their members.
Or that's like ATM vendors charging your bank to provide service through an ATM, and your bank passes that fee on to you. Then, the ATM assesses you a surcharge directly, which is added to the other fee.
I don't think CmdrTaco submits his entries on his own blog to other editors for review.
That said, I think he specifically wants the latest and greatest from the slashdot crowd, probably because he values the opinions of those here greater than those off the random internet as a whole.
Personally, I bought an lower-grade PC a few years ago, stuck a big drive in it, installed Xandros 2.0 (because I wanted to try Linux, and Xandros was easy for this hardware-not-software-not-computer-tech engineer to install). Plus I discovered that Samba works so much better than Windows 2000 file sharing! Our home computers (5 at one point, not including the server) could only sporatically see each other on the network via filesharing, but they can all see the Samba machine all the time.
My next attempt will probably include raid and Kubuntu, when I get around to a free weekend or three. But I'll see what else is posted here and if I can follow it without being a Linux guru.
Remember that this is a continuation of the *same* series as the original Doctor Who, not a reinvention of the series in a new form.
And, given that the Doctor is a time traveler, he's already encountered Daleks in their future forms. BBS can't just go and say they've "redesigned themselves" without pulling a George Lucas on the old episodes.
I doubt the slashdot editor always knows what is the "original" story. Is that the CNN article, or is it the unable-to-handle-the-bandwidth blog of the person who the story is about?
However... I do think that the slashdot editor should do the following: 1. Follow the links in submitted articles. Not just the first article on a topic, but the first few. If four submitted versions go to one place, and the fifth goes to a different site, go with one of the first four (or accept the fifth but change the link to the other article).
2. Add all appropriate meta tags to the new story, then do a search based on those meta tags for the last few stories on that topic, with maybe one keyword thrown in. If anything comes back, delay the new story submission to take the time and confirm it isn't a duplicate, unless you know based on the topic (i.e. an event you know just happened) that it cannot be a dupe.
3. Add no-follow tags to all links. I just don't see anything wrong with this.
If this process causes stories to be delayed on slashdot by 15 minutes, so be it. I don't read slashdot to get the absolute latest news; I read slashdot to benefit from the work of others who scoured the web to find stories I might like, and to read and participate in the discussion.
Yeah, I'm not addicted to my MP3 player. I'm just anti-addicted to Clear Channel, and my MP3 player is the most convenient way to listed to music that doesn't come from a corporate playlist.
I may check CNN and Slashdot several times a day when at work (or at home), but on vacations I don't even bother to take a computer. (You might even find me with a copy of the local paper!) I just find the internet, when readily available, to be the most convenient way to keep informed of news for me and things that matter to me.
Really, Adblock is the only basic Extension that, in my opinion, is required. Here at home it's the only one I install.
I use a few more at work, but I need more from my browser there. I have Copy Plain Text, which works wonders when grabbing product specs, etc., to paste into Word and Excel documents. And I installed Focus Last Selected Tab, which helps when I'm blowing through page after page of slightly different ICs, looking for the one with the exact featureset I need.
If any of those were integrated into base Firefox, I wouldn't mind. But really, only Adblock is a necessity.
I've already ripped most of my CDs because - you know - I listen to them. But there are maybe 20-30 left that I've never gotten around to. Some are my wife's musicals, a few instrumentals, some old pop music I don't care much for right now but might some day.
One of these companies offers a 25 CD free "trial". Given that it's free, I'd be crazy to not try it.
Unless you are very obsessive about the formatting of your ID3 tags or the exact codec used, how many other people wouldn't want to take them up on this free offer?
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno, an unexpected shortage is one thing. But a shortage that was discussed on Slashdot as possibly fake weeks before release?
Let's hope he pulls it out in the primary. Up against this guy, Kinky has a sure win.
Yes, exactly.
I like the idea of Vanguard's class system, a lot, because I know right from the start that I can be a paladin and be as good of a tank as a warrior. That's how they are designing it.
Unlike in say, World of Warcraft, where the developers before release claimed that there would be "more than one class to fill every role", and that the paladin would be "a tank overall", but they still ended up with a class that they intentionally don't want to tank at end-game except in a few limited circumstances, and instead they want as a cleric.
If I had the best of both worlds, I'd take a game with Vanguard's class structure and balance, with Warcraft's level 1-59 gameplay. I think the company that does this (and can throw in a few new/innovating things for buzz) will be able to steal a large portion of the existing MMORPG consumer base.
Now the PS2 shortage at its release, on the other hand, was a real supplier problem. ;p My proof on that one is even more solid, but I could get my source at the vendor who caused the delay in trouble.
The whole shortage thing was a complete fabrication. Microsoft wanted to create buzz, so they intentionally shorted North American distribution.
I'm not just spouting garbage, either. My proof is simple:
In early December, my wife went to Japan for a week on business. She went shopping (for a new camera). The electronics stores she visited had hundreds of XBox 360s sitting around in huge piles. As expected, they weren't selling well. They weren't being given out free with every Walkie Bits purchase, yet, but there was clearly a massive oversupply.
I know Microsoft wanted the 360 to do well in Japan. But they also had to know that getting product on the shelf in the US before Christmas is incredibly important. Unless, of course, that they thought the delay would somehow serve them better.
This is only true if this gets into a court of law, and the MPAA uses this in their argument. A company or organization cannot use a legal argument in one case, then in another case claim the argument is invalid. (Well, they can try, but that is a good way to get a judicial smackdown.)
This will only happen if the content owner wants to keep pressing the point through a lawsuit. If he can't find a lawyer willing to take the case, or if he considers any settlement the MPAA might offer, it has little to no effect on the rest of us, sadly.
>> I'm willing to bet that most people who are on WoW, if Blizzard went under tomorrow, would find something equally useless to do in their spare time. This idea that people who play games are all going take up triathlon training or feed the homeless in their spare time, if games weren't available, is dumb. In all likelihood they'd just watch TV.
How true. I was a paladin. I didn't want to be a cleric. I no longer play.
I spent yesterday watching 12 episodes of Lost on DVD. Sad, really. =(
Stick the line of bold type into Google, and the original article is the first hit.
The original parallel was that the origination bank, as you call it, is providing a service between a user and a content provider (where, in this case, the content is money). The origination bank charges the user for the service. Plus, the origination bank charges the destination bank (i.e. the content provider) for the luxury of having its conduit used in the transaction.
I didn't realize that so little of the fee charged by the destination bank went to pay the origination bank. The example's 50 cents out of $1.50 was unexpected. I bank at a credit union, and I am charged $1.00 if I use an out-of-the-company-network* ATM. Because I did not believe my credit union was taking a profit from this transaction, I expected the amount paid to the ATM owner to be closer to $1. Perhaps it varies. Perhaps I should complain. =p
* Fortunately, the company network for my credit union includes an ATM network composed of all ATMs owned by most any credit union in the state.
Yes, publically traded companies are, for the most part, intended for the sole purpose of "maximizing shareholder equity."
But is that all they should ever be about? A lot of people think that corporations are bad, and that their number one purpose should be (by law!) to "serve the public good", followed by any claims about money. This is what the people who founded the USA believed.
Yes, there are non-profits that fill part of the public good gap, but isn't there room for something in between? "At Bwandana, Inc., we will donate 50% of our profits each year to save the rainforests. The remaining 50% will go to grow the business and maximize shareholder equity."
Perhaps existing companies could not change their purpose without legislation. However, if a new company makes a claim (like, say "Do no evil"), and puts that in their business plan before they go public, there is no reason at all why that cannot be their number one purpose. Anyone who owns stock in Google knew that was the purpose of the company when they bought the stock. I suspect that some people own the stock because they feel the company does good.
If Google fails to follow its business plan, which includes the requirement to do no evil, then it would be the responsibility of the shareholders to oust the board and replace it with others who would.
Now all that said, yeah, I agree they need to grow into other, related markets, because that's the only way they can survive a downturn.
Not that I've read the article, of course, but assuming this is about net profit versus COGs...
My company's published business model states that our desired Cost of Goods Sold is 24% of our gross revenue. However, our desired profit margin is 18% of gross revenue.
The remaining 58% goes to pay for the sales force, marketing, and me.
I assume the article is talking about net revenue after COGs, while you and the parent poster are talking about profit margin.
Here's an example from a CNN article:
-----
Bank of America customer pays $3.50 to make a withdrawal at a Chase ATM
Bank of America charges $2, which shows up later on customer's statement
Chase charges $1.50, which is deducted immediately
Bank of America ends up with $1.45
Chase ends up with $2
Bank of America pays 50[cents] to Chase
5[cents] Bank of America pays less than 5[cents] to the Plus network
Sources: Bank Network News; American Bankers Association; Bank of America; Chase Manhattan Bank
-----
As this notes, part of the charge assessed by the customer's bank (Bank of America) is sent right back to the owner of the ATM. This adds to the ATM owner's surcharge.
Yes, the customer's bank is also taking some profit in this example.
So your blame for unions is that they aren't strong enough? Sounds like the unions in the examples you cite - if there were any - did a piss poor job of fighting for their members.
Or that's like ATM vendors charging your bank to provide service through an ATM, and your bank passes that fee on to you. Then, the ATM assesses you a surcharge directly, which is added to the other fee.
Oh wait, this one happens...
I don't think CmdrTaco submits his entries on his own blog to other editors for review.
That said, I think he specifically wants the latest and greatest from the slashdot crowd, probably because he values the opinions of those here greater than those off the random internet as a whole.
Personally, I bought an lower-grade PC a few years ago, stuck a big drive in it, installed Xandros 2.0 (because I wanted to try Linux, and Xandros was easy for this hardware-not-software-not-computer-tech engineer to install). Plus I discovered that Samba works so much better than Windows 2000 file sharing! Our home computers (5 at one point, not including the server) could only sporatically see each other on the network via filesharing, but they can all see the Samba machine all the time.
My next attempt will probably include raid and Kubuntu, when I get around to a free weekend or three. But I'll see what else is posted here and if I can follow it without being a Linux guru.
Remember that this is a continuation of the *same* series as the original Doctor Who, not a reinvention of the series in a new form.
And, given that the Doctor is a time traveler, he's already encountered Daleks in their future forms. BBS can't just go and say they've "redesigned themselves" without pulling a George Lucas on the old episodes.
And that would be silly...
I dunno, has your PC ever accidentally shot rat blood in your eye?
To expand on this...
I doubt the slashdot editor always knows what is the "original" story. Is that the CNN article, or is it the unable-to-handle-the-bandwidth blog of the person who the story is about?
However... I do think that the slashdot editor should do the following:
1. Follow the links in submitted articles. Not just the first article on a topic, but the first few. If four submitted versions go to one place, and the fifth goes to a different site, go with one of the first four (or accept the fifth but change the link to the other article).
2. Add all appropriate meta tags to the new story, then do a search based on those meta tags for the last few stories on that topic, with maybe one keyword thrown in. If anything comes back, delay the new story submission to take the time and confirm it isn't a duplicate, unless you know based on the topic (i.e. an event you know just happened) that it cannot be a dupe.
3. Add no-follow tags to all links. I just don't see anything wrong with this.
If this process causes stories to be delayed on slashdot by 15 minutes, so be it. I don't read slashdot to get the absolute latest news; I read slashdot to benefit from the work of others who scoured the web to find stories I might like, and to read and participate in the discussion.
Yeah, I'm not addicted to my MP3 player. I'm just anti-addicted to Clear Channel, and my MP3 player is the most convenient way to listed to music that doesn't come from a corporate playlist.
I may check CNN and Slashdot several times a day when at work (or at home), but on vacations I don't even bother to take a computer. (You might even find me with a copy of the local paper!) I just find the internet, when readily available, to be the most convenient way to keep informed of news for me and things that matter to me.
Guild Wars is not an MMORPG. Even the developers of Guild Wars don't call it an MMORPG.
The article is simply wrong to call it one. If anything, it is more like a fantasy/medieval MMOFPS.
Really, Adblock is the only basic Extension that, in my opinion, is required. Here at home it's the only one I install.
I use a few more at work, but I need more from my browser there. I have Copy Plain Text, which works wonders when grabbing product specs, etc., to paste into Word and Excel documents. And I installed Focus Last Selected Tab, which helps when I'm blowing through page after page of slightly different ICs, looking for the one with the exact featureset I need.
If any of those were integrated into base Firefox, I wouldn't mind. But really, only Adblock is a necessity.
He probably had to take an oath to uphold it as governor of Texas too.
I did earlier this week when I was sworn into an appointed, volunteer position on the planning and zoning commission of a small town in Texas.
If that level of government service requires it, I would presume a governorship would as well.
I've already ripped most of my CDs because - you know - I listen to them. But there are maybe 20-30 left that I've never gotten around to. Some are my wife's musicals, a few instrumentals, some old pop music I don't care much for right now but might some day.
One of these companies offers a 25 CD free "trial". Given that it's free, I'd be crazy to not try it.
Unless you are very obsessive about the formatting of your ID3 tags or the exact codec used, how many other people wouldn't want to take them up on this free offer?
Deleting a file in Windows is shift-delete-return.
You mean there's a confirmation box?
How can you post that without an obligatory link to awfulplasticsurgery.com?
He doesn't call you now when he puts is bank account information into a fake banking site.
Would you rather have him call when the location bar is a funny color, or simply never get the call until his bank account is wiped out?