"Not only are modern IT security professionals faced with a growing complexity and skills gap and keeping up with technology investments and advancements, but they are also expected by colleagues to help them sort out their personal computing woes," says Michael Callahan, CMO of FireMon. "IT personnel are usually the helpful, go-to people for sorting out issues, but it's only when you start to cost it out that you realize how much money it equates to."
Do they mean work colleagues come to them with problems instead of the "normal" IT staff? Or that other, non-security, IT staff are coming to them with problem they can't figure out on their own?
In the first case why don't the security people direct the questions to the correct staff members? In the second case, either the company isn't spending enough on hiring and training and the "savings" there is coming back to bite them in the ass, or this is perfectly normal collaboration between colleagues. If ((normal IT salary + security IT salary) * consulting time) is less than (normal IT salary * figuring it out on their own time) it's not really a loss for the company.
Would that be because the hospital has no good ulterior motive to direct the robot to screw up your surgery, but a bank may very well have ulterior motive to direct your funds to an account that benefits them more than it does you?
There was a period where i would get excited about a movie and consume every trailer i could, and then frequently be disappointed by the movie itself.
At some point i decided to no longer go out of my way to see trailers. If i'm exposed to a trailer by someone else (i.e. commercials, before another movie, etc) i will watch it if i have no idea what the movie is. But if it's movie i know i'll probably want to see i close my eyes or look away. I won't go so far as to cover up my ears, but if i'm intentionally not paying attention and have no visual cues to make associations with i find i don't remember many details from the audio.
When a movie i'm potentially interested comes out i'll take a look at the aggregate reviews. If it's a movie i'm unsure of and the reviews are mostly negative i'll give it a pass unless i hear something positive from one or more friends. If it's a movie i've already committed myself to go see for some reason i will go anyways but be prepared for disappointment.
And if the movie has mostly good reviews i'll try to locate one or two negative but spoiler-free reviews that i can read so that when i go see it i'll still be prepared for disappointment.
Personally i have found that going into movies knowing as little as possible about the details but generally expecting disappointment (or at least knowing the kinds of things i should expect to be disappointed by) has generally improved my enjoyment of movies overall. I'm excited and surprised by the good bits and if there are any bad bits i'm generally able to say to myself "well yeah, i was already expecting that, so no big deal."
You and Kjella are right, i'm probably confusing Ogg and FLAC (it's been years since the last time i bothered comparing the different formats, so the details are hazy to me.) I think the rest of the points are still valid however.
I'm guessing you're relatively new here, as in on Earth, because for those of us who grew up through it it's pretty obvious.
Reason 1: First mover advantage. Mp3 was initially released in 1993. Serious work on Ogg Vorbis didn't start until 1998, the format was frozen in 2000, and the first stable release was in 2002. So mp3 had 7-9 years to build up a lead. Which led to...
Reason 2: Network effect. Quite literally, in this case, because the birth of mp3 went hand in hand with the birth of the internet, and very quickly the rise of mp3 sharing sites and applications, Napster most prominent among them. So for a significant portion of that early period mp3s were getting shared all over the place leading to early adopters quickly accumulating relatively large libraries, which led to...
Reason 3: Vendor lock-in. So now you have a library of thousands of mp3s, you're going to want a media player that can play all the files you already have. Getting one that can even play Ogg Vorbis wasn't even an option for most people until 2002, and for a long time after that it wasn't trivial to get a player with Ogg Vorbis support. And a lot of people didn't want to switch away from a player that they were familiar with that could play all their current files to some new player so they could take advantage of another format as well. And for at least some people they didn't want to bother with the hassle of having to keep two sets of files organized. Unless you want to argue that people should have replaced all the older mp3s with ogg vorbis files, which would be difficult, time-consuming, and probably expensive for most people, and thus even more of a vendor lock-in.
Now all of these are issues that might have been overcome if Ogg Vorbis was superior in _every_ way, but there was this one other issue...
Reason 4: File size. Everyone talks about how space is cheap these days. Well that wasn't always the case. For many people their music collection was expanding rapidly at a time where space to store it was much harder/more expensive to come by. Perhaps the compression has improved since the early days, but when Ogg Vorbis first started making waves i checked it out, and the ogg files at the time were almost ten times the size of the equivalent mp3 files. Meaning my 75-80 GB of mp3s would have forced me to upgrade to a 1 TB drive, which would have been prohibitively expensive in 2005. And the other issue i ran into while testing the new format was...
Reason 5: Most people aren't audiophiles. Most of the time i couldn't tell the difference between an ogg file and an mp3 with a decent bitrate. And even when i can tell the difference... i don't really care. Being able to hear tiny differences when comparing small segments side by side does not lead to me enjoying the lower quality version any less when listening to it in isolation. So the cost of "upgrading" to ogg would be huge, in time, money, and hard drive space, and as a non-audiophile the benefit would be minuscule.
Even the super-cheap phones are 5" or larger these days? I know hoping for a premium phone that's smaller than that is probably unrealistic at this point, but you'd think a smaller phone would be a reasonable "sacrifice" that people looking to save money would be willing to make.
if parts of the Bible were "invented" and not a revelation, then the whole thing collapses. It's no longer a religion, it's just a poorly written code of conduct.
There are three paths to the meaning of life.
There is a pre-existing purpose to life, and it must be discovered.
There is a purpose to life, but it is the creation of humanity.
There is no purpose to life.
Religion is mostly in the first camp, while the second camp is mainly the province of science and humanism. Personally i feel the third camp leads to nihilism and is ultimately self-defeating.
However there is nothing that fundamentally declares that either discovery or creation must be fait accompli rather than an ongoing process. In fact i'm pretty sure that any _real_ student of either school would insist rather emphatically that their understanding is not complete. No scientist would argue that we know everything there is to know about any subject without any doubt because that is the antithesis of science. And no respectable religious scholar would argue that we know everything because omniscience is the province of the gods.
In which case the knowledge that previous attempts to discover the purpose to life were flawed is not a blow against religion itself but only a blow against dogmatism.
Personally i think the ability to accept that you (either individually or collectively) may have been wrong about something in the past without having it shatter your entire your entire worldview is generally a pretty good trait.
Okay, i admit upfront that i am probably a horrible example of a human being and i need to get outside more. But....
Scenario one: I spend an hour reading Slashdot on my PC, then two hours reading twitter on my PC, then three hours playing FF14 on my PC or PS4.
Scenario two: I spend an hour reading Slashdot on my phone, then two hours reading twitter on my phone, then three hours playing FFRK on my phone
By the metrics they seem to be using in scenario one i spent zero minutes using apps, but in scenario two i spent 360 minutes using apps. Arguments about usability of the two formats aside, how is my life fundamentally different in those two scenarios? And yet in once case i'm skewing the average in one direction and in the second i'm skewing the average the other way.
1: All men were once children who were born. Many of us consider this a debt we need to pay forward.
2: Women don't need prostate exams or have to get treated for prostate cancer, but you don't see them complaining about that "unneeded" cost. (And then there are the men who get prescriptions for testosterone or viagra...)
3: In at least 99.999% of cases a man was involved in the creation of the child that needs to be birthed. (And they already get to skip out on all the physical discomfort and medical risk involved.)
4: A large segment of the GOP seems to think women should be stay at home moms, so in the "ideal" GOP family a man is paying for the healthcare anyways. (Either directly or indirectly through employment.) Why do they want to take those benefits away from traditional hard-working family men?
5: Most of the GOP believes women shouldn't get abortions. Saying women can't abort a baby but don't deserve health care bearing it to term and giving birth to it is kind of a dick move.
6: An (unfortunately) non-trivial portion of the GOP seem very concerned by the belief that white people/"real Americans" are being outnumbered by non-whites/immigrants. But they want to make it more difficult for poorer white people to have children?
For a bunch of "pro-life" "pro-family" people, "women don't deserve health care when having kids because men aren't the ones that get pregnant" is a _really_ weird hill to choose to die on.
There are a lot of games you could argue they should have included instead of the ones that have been added so far, a lot of which have been suggested above. But how did they fail to cash in on the 30th anniversary of Final Fantasy?
Final Fantasy deserves to be on the list in its own right (one of the founding JRPGs, saved Square from bankruptcy, started a huge series with over 130 million sales total, etc) but they also could have used the opportunity to cross-promote with Squenix's own 30th anniversary promotions.
I suspect the list isn't complete, but even so Dune 2 was Amiga User International's Game of the Month and Computer Gaming World's Strategy Game of the Year when it came out in 1993, and has been included in numerous "best of" lists since then.
Command and Conquer undoubtedly sold more units than Dune 2, but if you want to go on pure sales then Starcraft beats both of them hands down.
It is normal for later (successful) games to sell more than earlier (successful) games, there's been more time to address gameplay issues, there's a bigger fanbase, and there's a bigger population of gamers in general. But Dune 2 was successful enough to win multiple awards and inspire Westwood to invest in Command & Conquer.
Even more importantly, Dune 2 was successful enough to inspire Blizzard to create the first Warcraft game, which actually beat Command & Conquer to market. In fact supposedly Westwood was so secretive about the devlopment of Command & Conquer that Blizzard initially thought they were the only ones continuing the legacy of/cashing in on the success of Dune 2.
The people most likely to go out and do something violently reckless are the people who feel they have nothing to lose. People who are accepted as a part of their community, are secure in where their next meal is coming from, and have plenty of entertainment and leisure options are unlikely to decide to go out and shoot or blow up a lot of people.
Technology in the form of automation is making the future of employment uncertain, while at the same time continuously increasing the amount of death and suffering an individual can unleash against others. And to top it off the GOP is currently trying to roll back healthcare for millions of people. We're busy creating the possibility of a significantly increased number of poor and sick people, which could easily lead to massive unrest.
And what i really fear is a potential future where someone has lost their job due to automation, they've recently been diagnosed with a fatal disease, and can't afford insurance because of a preexisting condition. But they can mail-order a home CRISPR kit for a thousand dollars and download the blueprint for a super-plague from the internet for free.
You don't need to actively prevent births. The easiest way to reduce the total human population is to spread prosperity. Every country that's undergone an economic revolution has seen their birth rate drop to near or below replacement levels.
There has been a very strong downward trend in population growth worldwide, as you can see by looking at the
World Bank data
India in fact is part of that steep decline, as you can see in the per-country breakdown. On average the "Middle East & North Africa" has also seen a moderate reduction over the last 50 years, from 2.7 to 1.8, while the "Arab World" has gone from 2.7 to 2.0. The only region with a generally upward trend over that time is "Sub-Saharan Africa", and even that has started to level off.
TLDW: disease, war, and famine are not a result of population growth so much as they are a cause. The more people fear their children won't reach adulthood the more children they have. The more developed the country, the more likely children are to reach adulthood, the less children they have. Every country that has undergone significant economic development experiences a (relatively) brief "bubble" in which the older birth rate exceeds the newer death rate before everyone realizes so many children aren't necessary.
Overall Africa is one of the last areas in the world to undergo this normal economic/technological transformation of population growth so they're at the tail end of this cycle. However current data seems to indicate that they're finally moving into Stage 3. So unless something (more) happens to wreck their economy they should start progressing into Stage 4 within a few decades and pretty much all areas of the world will have declining population growth.
The Abyss
2010
5th Element
Galaxy Quest
Real Genius
Bladerunner
Enemy Mine
War Games
Dune (Fight me!)
Tron Legacy (Fight me some more!)
Terminator 2
Nausicaa
Castle in the Sky
Iron Giant
Contact
The Martian
Your other points stand, but comparing Wii U sales numbers to NES Classic sales numbers is really apples and oranges.
The Wii U was out for approximately 52 months before the Switch launched last month. That means sales of 0.26 million per month on average, with the system being easily findable over that period of time.
The NES Classic has been out for five months, mid-November to mid-April, for an average of 0.3 million sales per month.
The WiiU was probably selling higher at the beginning of its 52 month run than the average, but still the NES Classic selling more than the Wii U average even while being out of stock most of the time is a significant achievement.
The NES Classic _probably_ had a lower potential sales total than the Wii U, but there's really no way to know for sure now.
I'm not sure if they're (capable of) thinking it through that thoroughly. One of them tried to insult a woman when she mentioned going on birdwatching trip with two male friends by telling her that her husband was a cuck.
...how does saying that to a woman about her partner even work as an insult? It fails on so many levels!
Slashdot Mirror
"Not only are modern IT security professionals faced with a growing complexity and skills gap and keeping up with technology investments and advancements, but they are also expected by colleagues to help them sort out their personal computing woes," says Michael Callahan, CMO of FireMon. "IT personnel are usually the helpful, go-to people for sorting out issues, but it's only when you start to cost it out that you realize how much money it equates to."
Do they mean work colleagues come to them with problems instead of the "normal" IT staff? Or that other, non-security, IT staff are coming to them with problem they can't figure out on their own?
In the first case why don't the security people direct the questions to the correct staff members? In the second case, either the company isn't spending enough on hiring and training and the "savings" there is coming back to bite them in the ass, or this is perfectly normal collaboration between colleagues. If ((normal IT salary + security IT salary) * consulting time) is less than (normal IT salary * figuring it out on their own time) it's not really a loss for the company.
Would that be because the hospital has no good ulterior motive to direct the robot to screw up your surgery, but a bank may very well have ulterior motive to direct your funds to an account that benefits them more than it does you?
During the campaign Trump said he wants to "open up libel laws" to make it easier to sue the media for reporting things he disagrees with. In his own words.) He keeps accusing the media of being "fake news". He reportedly asked Comey to start jailing reporters.
They're already using facial recognition software, though not to the extent of actually identifying individuals. Yet. (As far as we know.)
http://boingboing.net/2017/05/...
I didn't look into the details, maybe it actually is mostly harmless, but i'm not going to let reality get in the way of good joke!
"Users have been warned to download Panic's apps only from its website or the Apple App Store."
At this point i think the better advise is simply:
Don't [use] Panic
There was a period where i would get excited about a movie and consume every trailer i could, and then frequently be disappointed by the movie itself.
At some point i decided to no longer go out of my way to see trailers. If i'm exposed to a trailer by someone else (i.e. commercials, before another movie, etc) i will watch it if i have no idea what the movie is. But if it's movie i know i'll probably want to see i close my eyes or look away. I won't go so far as to cover up my ears, but if i'm intentionally not paying attention and have no visual cues to make associations with i find i don't remember many details from the audio.
When a movie i'm potentially interested comes out i'll take a look at the aggregate reviews. If it's a movie i'm unsure of and the reviews are mostly negative i'll give it a pass unless i hear something positive from one or more friends. If it's a movie i've already committed myself to go see for some reason i will go anyways but be prepared for disappointment.
And if the movie has mostly good reviews i'll try to locate one or two negative but spoiler-free reviews that i can read so that when i go see it i'll still be prepared for disappointment.
Personally i have found that going into movies knowing as little as possible about the details but generally expecting disappointment (or at least knowing the kinds of things i should expect to be disappointed by) has generally improved my enjoyment of movies overall. I'm excited and surprised by the good bits and if there are any bad bits i'm generally able to say to myself "well yeah, i was already expecting that, so no big deal."
You and Kjella are right, i'm probably confusing Ogg and FLAC (it's been years since the last time i bothered comparing the different formats, so the details are hazy to me.) I think the rest of the points are still valid however.
I'm guessing you're relatively new here, as in on Earth, because for those of us who grew up through it it's pretty obvious.
Reason 1: First mover advantage. Mp3 was initially released in 1993. Serious work on Ogg Vorbis didn't start until 1998, the format was frozen in 2000, and the first stable release was in 2002. So mp3 had 7-9 years to build up a lead. Which led to...
Reason 2: Network effect. Quite literally, in this case, because the birth of mp3 went hand in hand with the birth of the internet, and very quickly the rise of mp3 sharing sites and applications, Napster most prominent among them. So for a significant portion of that early period mp3s were getting shared all over the place leading to early adopters quickly accumulating relatively large libraries, which led to...
Reason 3: Vendor lock-in. So now you have a library of thousands of mp3s, you're going to want a media player that can play all the files you already have. Getting one that can even play Ogg Vorbis wasn't even an option for most people until 2002, and for a long time after that it wasn't trivial to get a player with Ogg Vorbis support. And a lot of people didn't want to switch away from a player that they were familiar with that could play all their current files to some new player so they could take advantage of another format as well. And for at least some people they didn't want to bother with the hassle of having to keep two sets of files organized. Unless you want to argue that people should have replaced all the older mp3s with ogg vorbis files, which would be difficult, time-consuming, and probably expensive for most people, and thus even more of a vendor lock-in.
Now all of these are issues that might have been overcome if Ogg Vorbis was superior in _every_ way, but there was this one other issue...
Reason 4: File size. Everyone talks about how space is cheap these days. Well that wasn't always the case. For many people their music collection was expanding rapidly at a time where space to store it was much harder/more expensive to come by. Perhaps the compression has improved since the early days, but when Ogg Vorbis first started making waves i checked it out, and the ogg files at the time were almost ten times the size of the equivalent mp3 files. Meaning my 75-80 GB of mp3s would have forced me to upgrade to a 1 TB drive, which would have been prohibitively expensive in 2005. And the other issue i ran into while testing the new format was...
Reason 5: Most people aren't audiophiles. Most of the time i couldn't tell the difference between an ogg file and an mp3 with a decent bitrate. And even when i can tell the difference... i don't really care. Being able to hear tiny differences when comparing small segments side by side does not lead to me enjoying the lower quality version any less when listening to it in isolation. So the cost of "upgrading" to ogg would be huge, in time, money, and hard drive space, and as a non-audiophile the benefit would be minuscule.
Even the super-cheap phones are 5" or larger these days? I know hoping for a premium phone that's smaller than that is probably unrealistic at this point, but you'd think a smaller phone would be a reasonable "sacrifice" that people looking to save money would be willing to make.
...did you just straight up copy Fire_Wraith's comment?
https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...
if parts of the Bible were "invented" and not a revelation, then the whole thing collapses. It's no longer a religion, it's just a poorly written code of conduct.
There are three paths to the meaning of life.
There is a pre-existing purpose to life, and it must be discovered.
There is a purpose to life, but it is the creation of humanity.
There is no purpose to life.
Religion is mostly in the first camp, while the second camp is mainly the province of science and humanism. Personally i feel the third camp leads to nihilism and is ultimately self-defeating.
However there is nothing that fundamentally declares that either discovery or creation must be fait accompli rather than an ongoing process. In fact i'm pretty sure that any _real_ student of either school would insist rather emphatically that their understanding is not complete. No scientist would argue that we know everything there is to know about any subject without any doubt because that is the antithesis of science. And no respectable religious scholar would argue that we know everything because omniscience is the province of the gods.
In which case the knowledge that previous attempts to discover the purpose to life were flawed is not a blow against religion itself but only a blow against dogmatism.
Personally i think the ability to accept that you (either individually or collectively) may have been wrong about something in the past without having it shatter your entire your entire worldview is generally a pretty good trait.
Okay, i admit upfront that i am probably a horrible example of a human being and i need to get outside more. But....
Scenario one: I spend an hour reading Slashdot on my PC, then two hours reading twitter on my PC, then three hours playing FF14 on my PC or PS4.
Scenario two: I spend an hour reading Slashdot on my phone, then two hours reading twitter on my phone, then three hours playing FFRK on my phone
By the metrics they seem to be using in scenario one i spent zero minutes using apps, but in scenario two i spent 360 minutes using apps. Arguments about usability of the two formats aside, how is my life fundamentally different in those two scenarios? And yet in once case i'm skewing the average in one direction and in the second i'm skewing the average the other way.
...
1: All men were once children who were born. Many of us consider this a debt we need to pay forward.
2: Women don't need prostate exams or have to get treated for prostate cancer, but you don't see them complaining about that "unneeded" cost. (And then there are the men who get prescriptions for testosterone or viagra...)
3: In at least 99.999% of cases a man was involved in the creation of the child that needs to be birthed. (And they already get to skip out on all the physical discomfort and medical risk involved.)
4: A large segment of the GOP seems to think women should be stay at home moms, so in the "ideal" GOP family a man is paying for the healthcare anyways. (Either directly or indirectly through employment.) Why do they want to take those benefits away from traditional hard-working family men?
5: Most of the GOP believes women shouldn't get abortions. Saying women can't abort a baby but don't deserve health care bearing it to term and giving birth to it is kind of a dick move.
6: An (unfortunately) non-trivial portion of the GOP seem very concerned by the belief that white people/"real Americans" are being outnumbered by non-whites/immigrants. But they want to make it more difficult for poorer white people to have children?
For a bunch of "pro-life" "pro-family" people, "women don't deserve health care when having kids because men aren't the ones that get pregnant" is a _really_ weird hill to choose to die on.
There are a lot of games you could argue they should have included instead of the ones that have been added so far, a lot of which have been suggested above. But how did they fail to cash in on the 30th anniversary of Final Fantasy?
Final Fantasy deserves to be on the list in its own right (one of the founding JRPGs, saved Square from bankruptcy, started a huge series with over 130 million sales total, etc) but they also could have used the opportunity to cross-promote with Squenix's own 30th anniversary promotions.
Dune 2 Reception
I suspect the list isn't complete, but even so Dune 2 was Amiga User International's Game of the Month and Computer Gaming World's Strategy Game of the Year when it came out in 1993, and has been included in numerous "best of" lists since then.
Command and Conquer undoubtedly sold more units than Dune 2, but if you want to go on pure sales then Starcraft beats both of them hands down.
It is normal for later (successful) games to sell more than earlier (successful) games, there's been more time to address gameplay issues, there's a bigger fanbase, and there's a bigger population of gamers in general. But Dune 2 was successful enough to win multiple awards and inspire Westwood to invest in Command & Conquer.
Even more importantly, Dune 2 was successful enough to inspire Blizzard to create the first Warcraft game, which actually beat Command & Conquer to market. In fact supposedly Westwood was so secretive about the devlopment of Command & Conquer that Blizzard initially thought they were the only ones continuing the legacy of/cashing in on the success of Dune 2.
The people most likely to go out and do something violently reckless are the people who feel they have nothing to lose. People who are accepted as a part of their community, are secure in where their next meal is coming from, and have plenty of entertainment and leisure options are unlikely to decide to go out and shoot or blow up a lot of people.
Technology in the form of automation is making the future of employment uncertain, while at the same time continuously increasing the amount of death and suffering an individual can unleash against others. And to top it off the GOP is currently trying to roll back healthcare for millions of people. We're busy creating the possibility of a significantly increased number of poor and sick people, which could easily lead to massive unrest.
And what i really fear is a potential future where someone has lost their job due to automation, they've recently been diagnosed with a fatal disease, and can't afford insurance because of a preexisting condition. But they can mail-order a home CRISPR kit for a thousand dollars and download the blueprint for a super-plague from the internet for free.
You don't need to actively prevent births. The easiest way to reduce the total human population is to spread prosperity. Every country that's undergone an economic revolution has seen their birth rate drop to near or below replacement levels.
World Bank Data on population growth
Overpopulation - The Human Explosion Explained
The concern is that past a certain point automation stops spreading prosperity and starts concentrating it in the hands of a small wealthy class.
There has been a very strong downward trend in population growth worldwide, as you can see by looking at the World Bank data
India in fact is part of that steep decline, as you can see in the per-country breakdown. On average the "Middle East & North Africa" has also seen a moderate reduction over the last 50 years, from 2.7 to 1.8, while the "Arab World" has gone from 2.7 to 2.0. The only region with a generally upward trend over that time is "Sub-Saharan Africa", and even that has started to level off.
The reasons for this are fairly well understood, and are covered in this Kurzgesagt video on Overpopulation.
TLDW: disease, war, and famine are not a result of population growth so much as they are a cause. The more people fear their children won't reach adulthood the more children they have. The more developed the country, the more likely children are to reach adulthood, the less children they have. Every country that has undergone significant economic development experiences a (relatively) brief "bubble" in which the older birth rate exceeds the newer death rate before everyone realizes so many children aren't necessary.
Overall Africa is one of the last areas in the world to undergo this normal economic/technological transformation of population growth so they're at the tail end of this cycle. However current data seems to indicate that they're finally moving into Stage 3. So unless something (more) happens to wreck their economy they should start progressing into Stage 4 within a few decades and pretty much all areas of the world will have declining population growth.
The hero the Internet of Things both deserves _and_ needs.
"with participants receiving up to $17,000 annually if single, and $24,000 for families."
Q: So why are you filing for divorce?
A: Irreconcilable financial differences.
I'm never calling it that
Movies:
The Abyss
2010
5th Element
Galaxy Quest
Real Genius
Bladerunner
Enemy Mine
War Games
Dune (Fight me!)
Tron Legacy (Fight me some more!)
Terminator 2
Nausicaa
Castle in the Sky
Iron Giant
Contact
The Martian
TV Shows:
The Expanse
Babylon 5
Firefly
Your other points stand, but comparing Wii U sales numbers to NES Classic sales numbers is really apples and oranges.
The Wii U was out for approximately 52 months before the Switch launched last month. That means sales of 0.26 million per month on average, with the system being easily findable over that period of time.
The NES Classic has been out for five months, mid-November to mid-April, for an average of 0.3 million sales per month.
The WiiU was probably selling higher at the beginning of its 52 month run than the average, but still the NES Classic selling more than the Wii U average even while being out of stock most of the time is a significant achievement.
The NES Classic _probably_ had a lower potential sales total than the Wii U, but there's really no way to know for sure now.
I'm not sure if they're (capable of) thinking it through that thoroughly. One of them tried to insult a woman when she mentioned going on birdwatching trip with two male friends by telling her that her husband was a cuck.
...how does saying that to a woman about her partner even work as an insult? It fails on so many levels!