Wacom tablets have had 'mouse' styluses for a while now. I seriously doubt anybody on the planet is using one.
Um... I understand designers love those things because they like pretending to draw much more than they like 'mousing' art. Also, those pens have tilt and pressure sensing... mice don't.
As I said, screenshots are more than enough to judge differences such as having a big ass pixel be a 'tank' and having a near photorealistic tank. They don't need to play the games to know what they are about. All they need to do is read a review.
Come on, we all hate them, but let's not be irrational about this.
Just because they're myopic doesn't mean they get a free pass on the bigger issues.
They are not getting a free pass. I am not agreeing with them. But it is still an irrelevant question to ask them, because yes, they would also ban saving private ryan if they could. That is their platform. They care not the message games or movies portray.
Besides, comparing games to saving private ryan is pretty far fetched, even for me. Games are for having *fun*. Saving private ryan was not intended to leave you with any sort of *fun* image. It was very different.
If you had a game like saving private ryan, it would be tedious to play, easy to die, you wouldn't be able to aim worth a shit (read major handicaps), would get out of breath real fast, lose your coop buddies right at the start (and they could not rejoin for the entire duration of the game), and every time you died, you'd have to choose a new character with new stats.
I know these people are hated here on slashdot (and I certainly don't love them), but come on now, it IS an irrelevant question.
I think we all know just from screenshots and descriptions what the games generally involve. These people, in their glorious wisdom, decided that anything involving shooting guns is too violent. I really don't think knowing that game A has a riviting storyline, or that game B involves fighting evil oppressors, will at all change their opinion.
It's like people who think cars are from the devil. Will it matter to them that car A is fuel efficient, or car B is fun to drive, or car C is practical? No, they just hate cars, and they don't need to drive one to know it's a car.
If 6% of OSX users switch to XP because itunes is available on win32, the situation is pretty much a wash.
First, I don't know the actual stats on people switching the other way. But even if 6% did switch the other way, it's still not a wash.
Why? Because the number of OS X users is different than the number of ipod users. Assuming (again, don't know the numbers, but it seems reasonable), that there are far far more ipod users than OS X users, 6% of a large number is much much more than 6% of a small number.
The majority of bioinformatics software is 'free for academic and non-profit use'. So I don't see how there is any hinderance to innovation. All this would do is hurt the little guy, who can currently get some nice extra income by selling software to the drug companies.
I do know: money. Is you paying money better than ads?
YES. Things like satillite radio are proof people would rather pay money than listen to ads. People also pay money for things like Tivos to avoid ads. Also, the whole idea that without ads things would be more expensive is not always true. For instance, movie theatres never used to play ads. They still made a profit. Yes, the SAME movie theatres that operate today.
Why ads? Greed. Now the theatres are making *more* profit. Still charge the same price, yet also get money from ads. These days, more often than not, ads are used to supplement already profitable things. The argument that they reduce consumer costs is only true for fledging startups like the new VOIP companies.
Do you think programming grows on trees? Do you think it's there because it's fun to make it? Do you have any idea how much it would cost you if there weren't advertising? I don't think you do.
So, my question is, what takes the place of the advertising revenue?
i don't know. But anything is better than ads.
How and when is it acceptable for products to be advertised?
This is easy. When I ask to see ads. Otherwise, never. For instance, if I am interested in some device, I can ask to see ads for all devices meeting my criteria. Of cousre, this puts the big boys on a level playing field with the little guy... so it will never fly.
So I'll just keep on aggressivly blocking ads as much as I can. It's an information war out there.
I particularly hate advertisements in the cinema --- I pay seven pounds for a two-hour film, plus 30 minutes of advertising, which means I'm paying over a pound just so I can sit there and watch the bloody things. And I don't even have a choice in the matter.
Just wait outside the theatre for 20 min and talk with your friends. Or better yet, go grab a beer at a nearby bar. That's what I used to do before I stopped going to see movies.
Anti-intellectual is just another way of whining. I don't care just how intellectual you are, it's not going to help you 'develop' expertise in an art.
"Intellectuals" think (much like the educational system) that having a cirriculum will help them. 'Tain't so. Tuff.
Speaking about whining, you certainly seem pretty good at it. If you practise something you will eventually get decent at it.
Art is no different. I'm sorry if you feel that this fact 'cheapens' what you thought was your unique inate ability or something.
Umm. It happened on Sunday night. It was all over the news Monday and Tuesday. Slashdot is so late to this story that the Aurora is likely gone already.
Well, the correct way to go about this, I guess, is to phone each store from the comfort of your home and ask the price of the item (and if it's in stock). Then drive once to the store with the lowest price.
Otherwise you waste lots of time and energy driving to each store to save 5$ (usually, fine it's sometimes more). Is it really worth it?
Also, do you like non-US based music? Imports can cost up to 30 dollars for a single CD here in Canada, simply because a group is, say, european. Hell, I've seen HMV label a canadian group as an 'import' here in Canada. WTF is with that?!
Except that creationism is not usefull in predicting new discoveries, unlike evolution. We can use the principles of evolution to do usefull things. For instance, we can predict taht 'missing link' type species exist.
Of course, that may not be usefull in a practical sense. So how about genetics? We can use the ideas behind evoltuion to discover genes in our DNA. These genes can be related to diseases, and finding them is important to understanding the disease, and even curing it!
Creationism? That doesn't seem to have any utility. Why are you suprised that scientists don't care about it? It's a theory that doesn't have any predictive power! Absolutely useless.
And you are completely wrong about scientists not caring about cases where things differ from what we expect. Those cases are in fact the most interesting, because it highlights something we got wrong. In the case of evolution, refining the theory to make it more detailed is all that has been needed to account for ambiguities.
What makes you think I am a liberal, or even American? What makes you think I care about handguns?
I may be 'liberal' by your standards, but I could care less about handguns and rifles. I'm not your stereo-typed 'liberal'. I am specifically referring to acts like the Patriot act and the DMCA. You can own a gun, but you soon may not be able to record broadcast tv even. Freedom? You had far more freedom in the past than you do now.
You are already afraid. You are destroying yourself. The terrorrists won't bomb you out of existence, but they WILL frighten you into giving away all your civil liberties.
Stand up for what America once meant: freedom.
Vote for who will give you that. Don't believe the propaganda your politicians feed you.
It would cut down on selling of sports dvds if you can just "burn your own" so content makers are going to freak.
This is exactly what happened when VCR first came out, but at the time the content makers were shot down. These days, they seem to be allowed to do anything they want, shut down anyone they want. You can own a gun in your country, but you can't record broadcast TV?
Slashdot Mirror
Wacom tablets have had 'mouse' styluses for a while now. I seriously doubt anybody on the planet is using one.
Um... I understand designers love those things because they like pretending to draw much more than they like 'mousing' art. Also, those pens have tilt and pressure sensing... mice don't.
As I said, screenshots are more than enough to judge differences such as having a big ass pixel be a 'tank' and having a near photorealistic tank. They don't need to play the games to know what they are about. All they need to do is read a review.
Come on, we all hate them, but let's not be irrational about this.
Just because they're myopic doesn't mean they get a free pass on the bigger issues.
They are not getting a free pass. I am not agreeing with them. But it is still an irrelevant question to ask them, because yes, they would also ban saving private ryan if they could. That is their platform. They care not the message games or movies portray.
Besides, comparing games to saving private ryan is pretty far fetched, even for me. Games are for having *fun*. Saving private ryan was not intended to leave you with any sort of *fun* image. It was very different.
If you had a game like saving private ryan, it would be tedious to play, easy to die, you wouldn't be able to aim worth a shit (read major handicaps), would get out of breath real fast, lose your coop buddies right at the start (and they could not rejoin for the entire duration of the game), and every time you died, you'd have to choose a new character with new stats.
I know these people are hated here on slashdot (and I certainly don't love them), but come on now, it IS an irrelevant question.
I think we all know just from screenshots and descriptions what the games generally involve. These people, in their glorious wisdom, decided that anything involving shooting guns is too violent. I really don't think knowing that game A has a riviting storyline, or that game B involves fighting evil oppressors, will at all change their opinion.
It's like people who think cars are from the devil. Will it matter to them that car A is fuel efficient, or car B is fun to drive, or car C is practical? No, they just hate cars, and they don't need to drive one to know it's a car.
If 6% of OSX users switch to XP because itunes is available on win32, the situation is pretty much a wash.
First, I don't know the actual stats on people switching the other way. But even if 6% did switch the other way, it's still not a wash.
Why? Because the number of OS X users is different than the number of ipod users. Assuming (again, don't know the numbers, but it seems reasonable), that there are far far more ipod users than OS X users, 6% of a large number is much much more than 6% of a small number.
The majority of bioinformatics software is 'free for academic and non-profit use'. So I don't see how there is any hinderance to innovation. All this would do is hurt the little guy, who can currently get some nice extra income by selling software to the drug companies.
I do know: money. Is you paying money better than ads?
YES. Things like satillite radio are proof people would rather pay money than listen to ads. People also pay money for things like Tivos to avoid ads. Also, the whole idea that without ads things would be more expensive is not always true. For instance, movie theatres never used to play ads. They still made a profit. Yes, the SAME movie theatres that operate today.
Why ads? Greed. Now the theatres are making *more* profit. Still charge the same price, yet also get money from ads. These days, more often than not, ads are used to supplement already profitable things. The argument that they reduce consumer costs is only true for fledging startups like the new VOIP companies.
Do you think programming grows on trees? Do you think it's there because it's fun to make it? Do you have any idea how much it would cost you if there weren't advertising? I don't think you do.
The answers to all your questions: yes.
So, my question is, what takes the place of the advertising revenue?
i don't know. But anything is better than ads.
How and when is it acceptable for products to be advertised?
This is easy. When I ask to see ads. Otherwise, never. For instance, if I am interested in some device, I can ask to see ads for all devices meeting my criteria. Of cousre, this puts the big boys on a level playing field with the little guy... so it will never fly.
So I'll just keep on aggressivly blocking ads as much as I can. It's an information war out there.
Then I get a lousy seat.
:(
I guess that's true. Advertising is evil.
I particularly hate advertisements in the cinema --- I pay seven pounds for a two-hour film, plus 30 minutes of advertising, which means I'm paying over a pound just so I can sit there and watch the bloody things. And I don't even have a choice in the matter.
Just wait outside the theatre for 20 min and talk with your friends. Or better yet, go grab a beer at a nearby bar. That's what I used to do before I stopped going to see movies.
Anti-intellectual is just another way of whining. I don't care just how intellectual you are, it's not going to help you 'develop' expertise in an art.
"Intellectuals" think (much like the educational system) that having a cirriculum will help them. 'Tain't so. Tuff.
Speaking about whining, you certainly seem pretty good at it. If you practise something you will eventually get decent at it.
Art is no different. I'm sorry if you feel that this fact 'cheapens' what you thought was your unique inate ability or something.
If it interacts with us, then it is by definition part of our physical world.
If it has absolutely no interaction with us, then I don't see how you can associate it with us.
The soul experiment was terribly bad science, and from it we can only conclude that the man who performed it believed in a soul, and hence found that.
a sp
Details can be found here:
http://www.snopes.com/religion/soulweight.
Some of the short points are:
* small sample size of 4 cases
* the results varied widely
* deciding upon the exact time of death is no easy task
All in all, the experiment proves nothing.
Umm. It happened on Sunday night. It was all over the news Monday and Tuesday. Slashdot is so late to this story that the Aurora is likely gone already.
Well, the correct way to go about this, I guess, is to phone each store from the comfort of your home and ask the price of the item (and if it's in stock). Then drive once to the store with the lowest price.
Otherwise you waste lots of time and energy driving to each store to save 5$ (usually, fine it's sometimes more). Is it really worth it?
Because the point is to save money, not to quickly get out of the store.
But is time not money?
In Canada 18-20 is normal.
Also, do you like non-US based music? Imports can cost up to 30 dollars for a single CD here in Canada, simply because a group is, say, european. Hell, I've seen HMV label a canadian group as an 'import' here in Canada. WTF is with that?!
Except that creationism is not usefull in predicting new discoveries, unlike evolution. We can use the principles of evolution to do usefull things. For instance, we can predict taht 'missing link' type species exist.
Of course, that may not be usefull in a practical sense. So how about genetics? We can use the ideas behind evoltuion to discover genes in our DNA. These genes can be related to diseases, and finding them is important to understanding the disease, and even curing it!
Creationism? That doesn't seem to have any utility. Why are you suprised that scientists don't care about it? It's a theory that doesn't have any predictive power! Absolutely useless.
And you are completely wrong about scientists not caring about cases where things differ from what we expect. Those cases are in fact the most interesting, because it highlights something we got wrong. In the case of evolution, refining the theory to make it more detailed is all that has been needed to account for ambiguities.
Yes. That's a problem isn't it? :( But one must be better than the other.
And a 3rd party is the _only_ way to keep this country from destroying itself.
Unfortunately, I fear you are right.
What makes you think I am a liberal, or even American? What makes you think I care about handguns?
I may be 'liberal' by your standards, but I could care less about handguns and rifles. I'm not your stereo-typed 'liberal'. I am specifically referring to acts like the Patriot act and the DMCA. You can own a gun, but you soon may not be able to record broadcast tv even. Freedom? You had far more freedom in the past than you do now.
You are already afraid. You are destroying yourself. The terrorrists won't bomb you out of existence, but they WILL frighten you into giving away all your civil liberties.
Stand up for what America once meant: freedom.
Vote for who will give you that. Don't believe the propaganda your politicians feed you.
It would cut down on selling of sports dvds if you can just "burn your own" so content makers are going to freak.
This is exactly what happened when VCR first came out, but at the time the content makers were shot down. These days, they seem to be allowed to do anything they want, shut down anyone they want. You can own a gun in your country, but you can't record broadcast TV?
That's just rich.
Both FreeBSD and DragonflyBSD have nvidia drivers... which is pretty much all Linux has. So quite trolling.
In my experience it was mostly the hardware, rather than IRIX. But IRIX wasn't stunning either.