I also don't agree with him lying the the nations of the world either (esspecially in a way that makes them feel as though they are in mortal danger)
Name ONE nation that didn't believe that Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction. If you can, provide a link to where they stated it.
According to our own legal system, if I tell someone to kill you, and they do, then I am guilty of murdering you, regardless of whether or not I'm even on the same planet as you, and it would be accurate to say that I murdered you. In the same way, if Osama bin Laden tells some guys to kill people, and they do, then he is guilty of murdering them, and it would be accurate to say that Osama bin Laden murdered those people.
I was patronizing you.
Actually it was stated by, "a former UN Assistant Secretary General, Denis Halliday"
Correct... With information coming from... THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT. And I quote:
The study also contains an estimate by the Itaqi Ministry of Health that 109,000 people died annually because of sanctions, but it observes that the study's investigators "had no way of confirming this figure."
You would believe the Iraqi government after the Iraqi Information Minister? Are you nuts? I suppose the Iraqi military is going to slaughter us now...
I'll be honest and say that most of this stuff I have no idea about, so I'm going to ask YOU my questions, and hope that you respond relatively quickly.
1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran -- Installs Shah as dictator
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala -- 200,000 civilians killed in the process
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1963-1975: American military kills 4 million people in Southeast Asia
How many did the Viet Cong kill, before, during, and after the war?
1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile -- Democratically-elected President Salvador Allende Assassinated -- Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed -- 5,000 Chilieans murdered under his rule
You're "democratically-elected" president was elected with 36.2 percent of the vote in 1970. That's NOT a majority... not even close. By the way, Allende wanted to shift Chili to a socialist country... which 2/3 of the country didn't want, hence the military coup in Sept. of 1973.
1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador -- 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed
I can't find anything worthwhile about this at all. Some reference material would be greatly appreciated.
1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets -- CIA gives them $3 billion
Did we train Osama to protect our national interests in the same way we train police officers to protect our citizens?
1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras" -- 30,000 Nicaraguans die
The Contras were assisting a Nicaraguan guerilla movement aimed at overthrowing their government, which is 1979 launched an office from Costa Rica that toppled Somoza. I really don't see too much problem with that... how many did the Sandinistas kill between 1962 and 1979?
1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians
At the time, I suppose it seemed like the lesser of the two evils. Maybe they were right. Maybe not. We'll never know.
1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis
Hey, if you help both sides, you can't lose.
1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as President of Panama) disobeys orders from Washington -- U.S. invades Panama and removes Noriega -- 3,000 Panamanian civilian casualties
And he's paying for it now, isn't he? I think he MIGHT get out of prison in 2032.
1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from U.S. (If you can't trust an "evil" murderous dictator, who can you trust?)
What weapons would they be? Reference material would help...
1991: U.S. enters Iraq -- Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait
The Kuwaitis certainly don't seem to mind. Neither do the Iraqis, now that I think about it.
1998: Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan -- Factory turns out to be making aspirin
To distract people from Monica Lewinsky, yeah. I don't agree with it... but I also didn't agree with him committing perjury about it either.
1990's: The U.N. (emphesis on The U.N.) estimates 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
That's just crap made up by the Iraqis. They got those numbers by assuming what the population would be, then subtracting what the population actually was... then assuming all those missing "people" were killed by the sanctions. There has never
I've been looking for a good how-to clustering book, but haven't found anything yet. If anyone knows of one, can you post a link?
If anyone would like to send me on the righteous path towards clustering enlightenment, here are the details of what I have, and what I'd like to do... I haven't looked into clustering too much, so I don't really even know if this is possible.
I have 18 Linux workstations, and 1 server. I'd like all the workstations to work together to run all the processes on them, and also have a RAID 5-type architecture for the hard drives. Each workstation is a complete, stand-alone computer, with monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc. I need to have each workstation able to be logged into locally, and the cluster has to be remotely accessible (duh). I've read brief articles on Coda and Mosix, but I really don't understand all the particulars. The computers are in a lab, and run high-end software that generally takes several days to complete. Anybody have any advice for me?
"Decontamination is time consuming and requires resources. Nerve agents and substances causing injury to the skin and tissue are easily soluble in, and penetrate many different types of material, such as paint, plastics and rubber, all of which renders decontamination more difficult."
That tells me, the uninformed average Joe on the street, that simply spraying them with a garden hose isn't enough, as you imply. However, given that we're really only discussing chemical weapons sitting in barrels somewhere, let's continue...
Allow me to expand the quote you used. The article says "CW agents can be washed and rinsed away, dried up, sucked up by absorbent substances, or removed by heat treatment. Water, with or without additives of detergents, soda, soap, etc., can be used, as well as organic solvents such as fuel, paraffin and carburettor spirit. Emulsified solvents in water can be used to dissolve and wash-off CW agents from various contaminated surfaces." That doesn't say it destroys it. It says it washes the chemical weapons away. Where? Into the ocean? I doubt that's good for the environment.
Oh wait, YOUR article goes into that too... and I'm not cutting specific parts which suit my needs. It says When decontaminating by washing, consideration must be taken to the poisonous substance remaining in the decontaminant unless the CW agent has first been destroyed." So you MUST first DESTORY the CW agent before jumping in the shower or washing your clothes. That would be very helpful information. I would certainly not like someone from/. to get infected with Anthrax because they read your post and assumed after they washed their clothes and took a shower that they were A-OK. Let me continue...
"When washing with water - particularly with hot water and detergent - the CW agent will often be decomposed to some extent through hydrolysis. Detergents containing perborates are particularly effective in destroying nerve agents. Without an addition of perborates in the detergent, the hydrolysis products of V-agents may still remain toxic unless the pH is sufficiently high."
So VX gas will NOT be destroyed by water unless the pH level is "sufficiently high". Good thing I didn't just rinse it off in the sink.
"Mustard agent is encapsulated by the detergent and, consequently, the hydrolysis rate decreases in comparison with clean water. However, the low solubility of mustard agent makes it difficult to remove without the addition of detergent, but the water used will still contain undestroyed mustard agent."
So, the water, even with detergent, will contain undestroyed mustard agents. Again, helpful information.
I think you see my point. Let me ask you a question. If chemical weapons were so easy to get rid of, why didn't Saddam get rid of them over the last 12 years? Or, even better, why's everyone (including you) so scared of them? If all you have to do is take a hot shower a few hours after inhaling Sarin, VX, Mustard, etc., why all the fear? Could it be because it's NOT that simple? I don't particularly care who you are or what you did 10-50 years ago in the military... this isn't about politics, it's about people's lives. Don't try to give people a false impression that chemical weapons aren't that bad and they're easy to get rid of.
They are pretty reactive (otherwise they would be lousy weapons), and can easily be neutralized by ordinary household cleaning products, or gasoline (Iraq certainly had no shortage of that one...).
I'd be interested in reading any articles or reference material you have on that. I'll delay any judgments I have until after I verify what you say. I don't think that's unreasonable... Saddam had WMD's in 1993, after he was told to get rid of them, so why is it too difficult to believe he had them in 2002? After all, you're not assuming what Bush says is true, so why should I assume what you're saying is true? No offense or anything, but you're just someone on Slashdot... Bush is the president, and I like to think that the President should be a little more trustworthy than any Joe on Slashdot.
I have personally tried this with both sarin (a nerve-agent) and mustard-gas, and were told it would work on other substances, like Fosgen or VX too.
Did you sniff them to make sure they were OK?
Most chemical weapons also decay with time (very reactive, remember) and thus proving that Iraq had working nerv-agents a decade ago doesn't prove they had it now since their proven 1993 weapons would be unsable by now.
Again, I'd be very interested in reading whatever reference material you have concerning their reactive & degenerative properties... particulary VX and Sarin.
I've been given the honor to go through a POS economy (and don't give me this Clinton set it up crap, the GOP was in office for 6 years before Clinton, and for 6 years the economy crap)...
Say what? 1980 - 1992 set up the 90's, despite Clinton's attempts at the opposite. What exactly DID Clinton do to stimulate the economy in the 90's, aside from largest tax increase of US history? In case you're wondering, you can't use that old "it was lower in percentage of the overall economy" crap because you don't accept that argument for Bush's economy either, which, BTW, Bush's deficit is LOWER in percentage of the overall economy than Reagan's.
Bush appointed Ashcroft cut the DOJ's budget for the Microsoft case & changed course from justice to slap on the wrist (if you can even call it that)...
This one I agree with. I'm not sure why Microsoft got away with it, but neither are you. That's the point. Perhaps (and I know this may be difficult to accept for a WHOLE LOT of people on/.) the government knew something about Microsoft's business practices that the general public doesn't... just maybe.
Bush appointed Ashcroft -- gaining control via the homeland security bill -- put an end to the inconvenient reports filed by the ATF each year that showed the stats of gun dealers in regards to them being caught selling illegally...
If you're insane, and you want to shoot someone 15 times in the head, do you REALLY think waiting 2 weeks to purchase a handgun is going to stop you from getting one? Seriously... if you're certifiably crazy and you want to murder someone, not having a gun isn't going to stop you. Want proof? Try taking a sledgehammer on an airplane with you and tell them it's your "safety blanket". It's not a dangerous weapon, right? It's certainly not a gun, so it must not be too dangerous...
my state -- along with the vast majority of the states -- are poor as hell now due to tax cuts that lead to a drastic cut in federal funding...
I'd recommend looking into your state's budget and finding out what programs they've started. I'll assume you're not living in California, which has a high budget for 1 reason that I can sum up in 2 words: Gray Davis.
Oh, but this president doesn't get laid, so I guess that should make me proud. Because getting laid is much more shameful than inciting a war that lead to the death of thousands of innocent people (Oh, I think I figured it out, Saddam is using ultra-high tech/invisable/ WoMD!).
I assume you're referring to the Clinton case... involving Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, etc. Maybe you don't understand, but getting laid wasn't the problem. If Clinton would have simply said "Yeah, I got a piece of ass, so what?" I'd have no problem with it. Unfortunately, he lied under oath. In case you're taking notes, that's perjury... which seems to be a crime only when a Republican commits it.
Oh, and while you're whining about the innocent people dying because of Bush standing up for what's right and decent in the world, maybe you should look into the humane torture practices your buddy Saddam was committing. The last figure I heard was a LOT higher than a thousand or so.
I'm afraid you also miss my point, friend. My point isn't that there aren't enough options... my point is that there are TOO many options, none of which are the industry standard. If I tell you I'm using a word processor in Red Hat 8, can you assume which one I'm talking about with any more accuracy than 25% (given Crossover Office, OpenOffice, KDE Office, and StarOffice)? Now if I say I'm using a word processor with Windows, you'd immediately think of Word. Which version is arguable, but most Word's are basically the same.
My point is that all the distros need to get together and decide what the future of Linux is going to be... so we don't have discussions like which package manager is the best, or what browser should come standard on Mandrake 47. There are FAR more important issues at hand than going back to the same argument that's been taking up time and energy since 1993. I'm not saying get rid of the other options... Consumers deserve (and require) good competition. I'm saying that the Linux community is always screaming about how Microsoft doesn't abide by industry standards (XML anyone?), yet there are NO application standards in Linux. It's like the pointing out the splinter in your enemy's eye only to miss the 2x4 in your own.
You're missing the point... or proving mine... I'm not sure which.
If your distro uses a decent file system layout it would be/usr or/usr/local.
But what if my distro doesn't use a decent file system layout? ALL Windows versions have Program Files as the default place to install applications. Linux has nothing. My argument stands.
Makes sense to me./home is easier to type too.
Missing the point... It's another example of how things aren't standardized. For you, and most other people, it's/home... but it certainly isn't hard to change that. Try changing your home directory in WinXP sometime... I'm not saying that no flexibility is a good thing... I'm saying that limited flexibility is good for the industry.
Microsoft has Computer Management. Linux has...
Webmin, YaST, Gnome Control Center, vim, or whatever else you want to use.
But you have a choice of 4 right there... and NONE are the accepted standard, industry-wide. Here's my point. You try to install something, and tech support tells you that you need to get into the Linux equivalent of Computer Management... You go into YaST... but the tech support guy doesn't know YaST, because it's not an industry-wide accepted standard. My argument stands for everything you said, including browsers, updating tools, media players, installation utilities, and office applications.
Name the ONE APPLICATION in Linux that is 100% industry accepted, similar to how Internet Explorer is accepted. Don't name 10 variations of the same application that lots of people use... name ONE that EVERYBODY uses.
Both you and the parent are missing one of the main points of economics. I'll try to explain...
Sure, you could pay $40 for an Apple II game back in the 1980's. Why? How long did it take to produce that game? How many people did it take to produce that game? How many Apple II's were there in the country/countries that the game would be sold in? Let's say it took 5 people (a lot for the 80's) 3 months to make a game. Let's assume that each of those people were paid $30,000 (a lot in the 80's) per year for their work on that game. Since they only worked 3 months, that's $7500 a person, which comes to $37,500 for the game, not including marketing, which is anyone's guess.
That means that to make back the development money, you need to sell about 750 copies. If there were more than 1,000,000 Apple II's in the collective countries the game would sell in, you could probably get your money back.
Fast forward to the present... Take a game that's produced now. You're lucky if you can get a team of 10 people to make a game that takes a year to produce. Incredibly lucky, IMHO. Assuming a salary of $40,000 (average), that's a cool $400,000. At a price of $50, you need to sell 8000 copies to make back the development time. Although, that's for a VERY limited development time. How about 2 years, which seems pretty normal now? That would make it 16,000 copies to make back your money.
Conclusion: There was less of a market for video games in the 1980's, so the same amount of money went to pay fewer people to make games in less time. Presently, more people want games that take longer to make by more people.
Um... yeah, except that one company sells the computer, and another company sells the software. Unless, of course, Dell wanted to purchase Electronics Boutique, or Gateway wanted to buy Software Etc. I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that, as long as they make the EB store bigger so more people can fit in at once... EB never has windows, and always smells like teenager sweat. Ew.
Can you ask your friend when the next YDKJ game is coming out? Also, tell him to make sure it's funny, cheap, and not filled with stupid measures to call the mothership on the drop of a hat to make sure it's a "legitimate" copy.
Loss of reputation? Come on... you buy a game, not a game from a company. If a reputation could really be damaged from a bad game, Sierra would have died after "Outpost" (the only game that made me write a letter to the publisher).
For the most part, I agree... except that I kinda liked Outpost. (I don't understand why so many people hated it, but oh well.) I do pay attention to what company it's from. Blizzard is a good example. Name a bad game from Blizzard. Also, how about Acclaim? Name a good game from Acclaim (in the past 5 years or so). I'm not particularly fond of Activision either. I'll try anything from Square at least once. Eidos falls somewhere between Sierra and EA. It could be good, or it could be bad. I'll give the demo a try... I have nothing to lose.
Where can you return computer video games without a hassle, even after you open them? I've tried Electronics Boutique and Walmart... both are a pain in the ass though.
What happens to Microsoft's stranglehold when you can dual-boot Windows and Linux on the same partition? More people will start installing it - thats what... Obfuscating the file system gets OSS out of the picture. The DOJ needs to require open specs on this new file system.
This statement implies that Windows / Microsoft is so successful because its file system isn't interoperable with any other OS. At the very least, it implies that Linux would have a much larger market share than it currently does. At the risk of offending all the *nix lovers on/., I'd have to disagree. Windows can't read ext3 file systems, and that hasn't prompted much outrage... If Microsoft announced that in a new update for XP, it would support ext2, ext3, reiserfs, etc., would you install Windows XP? I didn't think so...
The problems facing Linux are far worse than a file system developed by a monopoly. Think of it this way: Linux can't easily communicate with Windows 2000/XP (if it's NTFS)... but then again, a whole LOT of Linux programs can't even communicate with other Linux programs unless specifically told how. There's never been a successful "Control Panel" project to centralize administration (although Webmin is pretty nice, it just isn't there yet... I'm looking for something very similar to Windows' Control Panel).
How about standard commands and formats? Just this morning I went to run a script to install a piece of software, and it failed because it couldn't find "uncompress". Another script found "gunzip", and yet another found "tar" and "gz". There's 4 commands that basically do the same thing, but aren't merged. The most basic features and functions have standard commands, like "ls", "cd", and "ps", but almost anything else has 2+ options. There are even several shells that don't need to exist (my opinion). Really, who needs anything besides bash, ksh, and csh? In fact, here's a thought... make bash the standard, and include ksh and csh in whatever program needs to run them... but don't put them in/usr/bin and take up space.
Microsoft has addressed the basic necessities of an operating system, and made it relatively easy to work with. Linux still has an amazingly long way to go. I would gladly give my time to help in any way I can, but I'm not a programmer (working on it though).
Here's some thoughts to look at when questioning my reasonging:
Microsoft has Program Files. Linux has.../usr/local/src?
Microsoft has Documents and Settings. Linux has.../home?
Microsoft has Computer Management. Linux has... nada.
Microsoft has Internet Explorer. Linux has Netscape, Mozilla, and Konquerer.
Microsoft has Windows Update with 3 clicks. Linux has... manual update with a whole lot of clicks and typing.
Microsoft has Windows Media Player. Linux has... zip. (Can anything in Linux play all the formats that WMP can?)
Microsoft has (*gasp*) setup.exe as a standard install. Linux has configure, make, and make install.
Microsoft has Office. Linux has OpenOffice, KDE Office, and StarOffice.
The bottom line is that Microsoft has a good idea what programs it wants to work and what each program is supposed to do. The Linux community has no central figure leading the charge, so any Joe with an ounce of programming experience can go and create his own Winamp impersonation. I love Linux... but the fact is that it's not easy to use, and there's a lot more work needed than anyone wants to admit.
Here's the problem with it though... Name 5 good games for the N64. I can think of a few... but 5 is pushing it.
I can come up with Goldeneye, Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Zelda: Majora's Mask, Super Mario Kart 64, and Super Mario 64. Really, both Zelda games are the same... Can anyone think of any others?
The Dreamcast came out on 9/9/99 (remember the adds? 9/9/99... "It's thinking."...). The PS2 came out the following year on October 26 (if memory serves). So, yes, you're right... it was just over a year. The reason PS2's were so hard to come by was that Sony didn't manufacture enough of them to meet demand. Some of them were going for over $1000 on eBay right before Christmas. They didn't completely meet the demand until the following March or April, perhaps even as late as May. I got mine in March... I think... Seems like so long ago... =)
Now, now... let's not get hostile. I only suggested that the parent provide the current exchange rates because he was complaining about the cost of new games in a foreign country. I don't feel anyone can make a comment one way or the other without the appropriate information, which is, in this case, the exchange rate.
Sure, I prefer to pay $20 to play a new game... but I recognize that with the demand of new games with good graphics, sound, and gameplay, there's a supply that necessitates a cost of around $35 - 50. So, I don't really complain. I enjoy getting a good, fun game for $20 (like SimGolf), but I don't think that is, or necessarily should be, the norm.
I think it's a little objective to say that the only games that have improved due to (at least in part) the graphics are racing games. By that logic, I could say that since I like them, that the only games that have improved because of graphics are FPS's. After all, I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that Wolfenstein 3-D (the original) is a better game overall than Doom 3 or Half-Life 2 (hopefully). I had a much more enjoyable experience playing Final Fantasy X than I did playing Final Fantasy 2 (or 4, depending on your point of view). However, I also recognize that people look at their pleasant childhood experiences through gold-colored glasses... so I realize that in retrospect, Final Fantasy 2 SEEMS like it was more fun. For reference, play Final Fantasy 2, immediately followed by Final Fantasy X and see which you enjoy more. It would be especially interesting to play 2 games that you've never seen or played before... just to be totally subjective.
How low can prices go before a new generation of console hardware kicks in?
Pretty low. Remember the NES and SNES? Or even the SNES and N64? What about the N64 and the GameCube? (This is from memory, so mistakes can and probably will be made.) AFAIK, they ALL dropped to around $100 before the next generation came out. Here's my prediction: we should expect another relatively minor cut in the next few months (probably before November) to around $149 for the PS2 and XBox. Then, right at the end of 2004 or beginning of 2005, they'll announce the next generation, which would be out in mid-2005 to late-2005... as soon as the announcement is made, it'll be less than a week before they drop prices to $100, or possibly $125 (counting for inflation and all).
Wireless has always had some appeal to me, as well, but the problems with them in terms of gaming don't even seem to be something that most people have been looking at. I know 2 people that have wireless controllers for their gamecubes that noticed the same latency issues I'm talking about (note: not dropouts, latency, the time between pressing the button and the action being performed on-screen), but I don't know if they have the controller you're talking about or not. I definitely have had problems with wireless controllers on the PS2 (my step-brother bought one), and wireless keyboards/mice on the PC (my dad and my roommate both have wireless keyboard/mouse combos that are less than a year old).
My guess is that you're not using good wireless equipment. I have a WaveBird for my GameCube, and it's fantastic. I never used a wired controller with it, and don't see any need to. I've played it on the same batteries for 8-12 hours at a time for over 6 months and never had any problems at all, including latency (yes, I know what latency is). For the PC, I'm currently using a Logitech MX700, both at work and at home. I have noticed one relatively minor problem... after a little while of not moving the mouse, it takes about 1/4 of a second to re-initialize the wireless connection before any movement is seen on the screen. It never seems to happen during games, but only when I'm browsing the internet or doing other non-time-critical things. I would highly recommend both items, although cost might be an issue. If memory serves, the WaveBird was about $35 new, and the Logitech MX700 is around $75 - 80.
At least the XBox controllers have longer cables than the Sony controllers. I had to buy extension cables for my PS2 controllers, whereas the XBox controllers get from beside the TV to the couch with no problems. I've considered putting my consoles next to the couch to alleviate all of the problems associated with the cables streamed across the room when playing, but then I'll have to route the video & audio cables under the carpet or through the walls & attic, either of which seems a bit much at the moment.
I bought my XBox a week after it came out, and I have to agree. I absolutely LOVE the 10' cables, as compared to the standard 6' ones on the GameCube and PS2. I don't know who the hell ever thought that 6' was enough to go from somewhere near the TV to wherever the kids would be sitting, but they need beaten in the head with something heavy. That's the main reason I tried the WaveBird (see above;-) ).
It depends a lot on how it's handled by the transmitter. Many wireless standards such as bluetooth will shift frequencies to avoid interference, which I'd imagine the Live headset would do as well (I'm not sure what wireless standards it uses, or the specs if it's a proprietary protocol). The amount of data is generally not an issue, as long as they chose their specifications properly in the first place.
I personally wouldn't recommend bluetooth, or anything else in the 2.4ghz range. At this point, almost everything is operating at 2.4ghz... microwaves, cordless phones, wireless mice / keyboards, etc. Even if bluetooth can shift frequencies, there's only 3 non-overlapping ranges in the 802.11b standard... I'd recommend 5ghz. It's got additional bandwidth, and not nearly as many things operating in the same range. Latency shouldn't be an issue, as long as it's tested properly...
My personal opinion would be to sell the wireless controller in 2.4ghz, and the XBox Live headset in 5ghz. In the XBox Live box there would be a replacement transmitter that would include BOTH 2.4ghz AND 5ghz, and there wouldn't be any overlapping between them at all. The headset could easily have a 5ghz transmitter built-in, and the controller already would have the 2.4ghz built in. It may not be cost effective yet, but it seems like a good solution to me.
So obviously the solution is to take the money that one person earned, and give it to someone who didn't. Great solution. BTW, I need the keys to your car.
Losing in a market doesn't mean going out of business. It means that they won't be in that market anymore. For Walmart to go out of business, it would require some catastrophy of Biblical proportions at this point.
NetFlix is the leader in online DVD rentals. Walmart is not. If Walmart can't beat NetFlix in some way, Walmart will no longer offer online DVD rentals. It doesn't matter that the Walmart corporation also runs a very successful franchise... it only matters that they're going into a new market with another company as the leader.
Yeah, but when was the sequel to Citizen Kane announced? I haven't heard of it... and to my knowledge, George Lucas only announced Episode I the year before it was released... not in 1992.
I used to have a store called Ames in my area. It was a nice department store. Then K-Mart moved across the street, and Ames went out of business. Now Wal-mart is right down the street from K-Mart, and K-Mart is looking like it won't be there much longer. Even large corporations can fail in certain market... in this case, Walmart could fail on online DVD rentals. If they fail, they won't offer online DVD rentals anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
I also don't agree with him lying the the nations of the world either (esspecially in a way that makes them feel as though they are in mortal danger)
... THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT. And I quote:
Name ONE nation that didn't believe that Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction. If you can, provide a link to where they stated it.
According to our own legal system, if I tell someone to kill you, and they do, then I am guilty of murdering you, regardless of whether or not I'm even on the same planet as you, and it would be accurate to say that I murdered you. In the same way, if Osama bin Laden tells some guys to kill people, and they do, then he is guilty of murdering them, and it would be accurate to say that Osama bin Laden murdered those people.
I was patronizing you.
Actually it was stated by, "a former UN Assistant Secretary General, Denis Halliday"
Correct... With information coming from
The problem with many of the most frequently cited studies is that they rely primarily on official Iraqi information sources. The 1995 FAO study contains a table reporting more than 500,00 deaths among children due to sanctions, but the source for these figures is the government of Iraq.
The study also contains an estimate by the Itaqi Ministry of Health that 109,000 people died annually because of sanctions, but it observes that the study's investigators "had no way of confirming this figure."
See here also.
You would believe the Iraqi government after the Iraqi Information Minister? Are you nuts? I suppose the Iraqi military is going to slaughter us now...
I'll be honest and say that most of this stuff I have no idea about, so I'm going to ask YOU my questions, and hope that you respond relatively quickly.
1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran -- Installs Shah as dictator
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala -- 200,000 civilians killed in the process
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
Why did we do that? Was he posing a threat, or could he easily pose a threat? Was he a ruthless dictator responsible for millions of deaths?
1963-1975: American military kills 4 million people in Southeast Asia
How many did the Viet Cong kill, before, during, and after the war?
1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile -- Democratically-elected President Salvador Allende Assassinated -- Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed -- 5,000 Chilieans murdered under his rule
You're "democratically-elected" president was elected with 36.2 percent of the vote in 1970. That's NOT a majority... not even close. By the way, Allende wanted to shift Chili to a socialist country... which 2/3 of the country didn't want, hence the military coup in Sept. of 1973.
1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador -- 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed
I can't find anything worthwhile about this at all. Some reference material would be greatly appreciated.
1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets -- CIA gives them $3 billion
Did we train Osama to protect our national interests in the same way we train police officers to protect our citizens?
1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras" -- 30,000 Nicaraguans die
The Contras were assisting a Nicaraguan guerilla movement aimed at overthrowing their government, which is 1979 launched an office from Costa Rica that toppled Somoza. I really don't see too much problem with that... how many did the Sandinistas kill between 1962 and 1979?
1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians
At the time, I suppose it seemed like the lesser of the two evils. Maybe they were right. Maybe not. We'll never know.
1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis
Hey, if you help both sides, you can't lose.
1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as President of Panama) disobeys orders from Washington -- U.S. invades Panama and removes Noriega -- 3,000 Panamanian civilian casualties
And he's paying for it now, isn't he? I think he MIGHT get out of prison in 2032.
1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from U.S. (If you can't trust an "evil" murderous dictator, who can you trust?)
What weapons would they be? Reference material would help...
1991: U.S. enters Iraq -- Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait
The Kuwaitis certainly don't seem to mind. Neither do the Iraqis, now that I think about it.
1998: Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan -- Factory turns out to be making aspirin
To distract people from Monica Lewinsky, yeah. I don't agree with it... but I also didn't agree with him committing perjury about it either.
1990's: The U.N. (emphesis on The U.N.) estimates 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
That's just crap made up by the Iraqis. They got those numbers by assuming what the population would be, then subtracting what the population actually was... then assuming all those missing "people" were killed by the sanctions. There has never
I've been looking for a good how-to clustering book, but haven't found anything yet. If anyone knows of one, can you post a link?
If anyone would like to send me on the righteous path towards clustering enlightenment, here are the details of what I have, and what I'd like to do... I haven't looked into clustering too much, so I don't really even know if this is possible.
I have 18 Linux workstations, and 1 server. I'd like all the workstations to work together to run all the processes on them, and also have a RAID 5-type architecture for the hard drives. Each workstation is a complete, stand-alone computer, with monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc. I need to have each workstation able to be logged into locally, and the cluster has to be remotely accessible (duh). I've read brief articles on Coda and Mosix, but I really don't understand all the particulars. The computers are in a lab, and run high-end software that generally takes several days to complete. Anybody have any advice for me?
Actually, the link you provided says:
/. to get infected with Anthrax because they read your post and assumed after they washed their clothes and took a shower that they were A-OK. Let me continue...
"Decontamination is time consuming and requires resources. Nerve agents and substances causing injury to the skin and tissue are easily soluble in, and penetrate many different types of material, such as paint, plastics and rubber, all of which renders decontamination more difficult."
That tells me, the uninformed average Joe on the street, that simply spraying them with a garden hose isn't enough, as you imply. However, given that we're really only discussing chemical weapons sitting in barrels somewhere, let's continue...
Allow me to expand the quote you used. The article says "CW agents can be washed and rinsed away, dried up, sucked up by absorbent substances, or removed by heat treatment. Water, with or without additives of detergents, soda, soap, etc., can be used, as well as organic solvents such as fuel, paraffin and carburettor spirit. Emulsified solvents in water can be used to dissolve and wash-off CW agents from various contaminated surfaces." That doesn't say it destroys it. It says it washes the chemical weapons away. Where? Into the ocean? I doubt that's good for the environment.
Oh wait, YOUR article goes into that too... and I'm not cutting specific parts which suit my needs. It says When decontaminating by washing, consideration must be taken to the poisonous substance remaining in the decontaminant unless the CW agent has first been destroyed." So you MUST first DESTORY the CW agent before jumping in the shower or washing your clothes. That would be very helpful information. I would certainly not like someone from
"When washing with water - particularly with hot water and detergent - the CW agent will often be decomposed to some extent through hydrolysis. Detergents containing perborates are particularly effective in destroying nerve agents. Without an addition of perborates in the detergent, the hydrolysis products of V-agents may still remain toxic unless the pH is sufficiently high."
So VX gas will NOT be destroyed by water unless the pH level is "sufficiently high". Good thing I didn't just rinse it off in the sink.
"Mustard agent is encapsulated by the detergent and, consequently, the hydrolysis rate decreases in comparison with clean water. However, the low solubility of mustard agent makes it difficult to remove without the addition of detergent, but the water used will still contain undestroyed mustard agent."
So, the water, even with detergent, will contain undestroyed mustard agents. Again, helpful information.
I think you see my point. Let me ask you a question. If chemical weapons were so easy to get rid of, why didn't Saddam get rid of them over the last 12 years? Or, even better, why's everyone (including you) so scared of them? If all you have to do is take a hot shower a few hours after inhaling Sarin, VX, Mustard, etc., why all the fear? Could it be because it's NOT that simple? I don't particularly care who you are or what you did 10-50 years ago in the military... this isn't about politics, it's about people's lives. Don't try to give people a false impression that chemical weapons aren't that bad and they're easy to get rid of.
They are pretty reactive (otherwise they would be lousy weapons), and can easily be neutralized by ordinary household cleaning products, or gasoline (Iraq certainly had no shortage of that one...).
I'd be interested in reading any articles or reference material you have on that. I'll delay any judgments I have until after I verify what you say. I don't think that's unreasonable... Saddam had WMD's in 1993, after he was told to get rid of them, so why is it too difficult to believe he had them in 2002? After all, you're not assuming what Bush says is true, so why should I assume what you're saying is true? No offense or anything, but you're just someone on Slashdot... Bush is the president, and I like to think that the President should be a little more trustworthy than any Joe on Slashdot.
I have personally tried this with both sarin (a nerve-agent) and mustard-gas, and were told it would work on other substances, like Fosgen or VX too.
Did you sniff them to make sure they were OK?
Most chemical weapons also decay with time (very reactive, remember) and thus proving that Iraq had working nerv-agents a decade ago doesn't prove they had it now since their proven 1993 weapons would be unsable by now.
Again, I'd be very interested in reading whatever reference material you have concerning their reactive & degenerative properties... particulary VX and Sarin.
Let's see, thanks to Bush I've been able to witness a war over weapons of mass destruction (Iraq has WoMD you just can't see them fool)...
/.) the government knew something about Microsoft's business practices that the general public doesn't... just maybe.
/invisable/ WoMD!).
Amazing that everybody but you saw them. Even the Democrats (including Bill Clinton and the United Nations).
I've been given the honor to go through a POS economy (and don't give me this Clinton set it up crap, the GOP was in office for 6 years before Clinton, and for 6 years the economy crap)...
Say what? 1980 - 1992 set up the 90's, despite Clinton's attempts at the opposite. What exactly DID Clinton do to stimulate the economy in the 90's, aside from largest tax increase of US history? In case you're wondering, you can't use that old "it was lower in percentage of the overall economy" crap because you don't accept that argument for Bush's economy either, which, BTW, Bush's deficit is LOWER in percentage of the overall economy than Reagan's.
Bush appointed Ashcroft cut the DOJ's budget for the Microsoft case & changed course from justice to slap on the wrist (if you can even call it that)...
This one I agree with. I'm not sure why Microsoft got away with it, but neither are you. That's the point. Perhaps (and I know this may be difficult to accept for a WHOLE LOT of people on
Bush appointed Ashcroft -- gaining control via the homeland security bill -- put an end to the inconvenient reports filed by the ATF each year that showed the stats of gun dealers in regards to them being caught selling illegally...
If you're insane, and you want to shoot someone 15 times in the head, do you REALLY think waiting 2 weeks to purchase a handgun is going to stop you from getting one? Seriously... if you're certifiably crazy and you want to murder someone, not having a gun isn't going to stop you. Want proof? Try taking a sledgehammer on an airplane with you and tell them it's your "safety blanket". It's not a dangerous weapon, right? It's certainly not a gun, so it must not be too dangerous...
my state -- along with the vast majority of the states -- are poor as hell now due to tax cuts that lead to a drastic cut in federal funding...
I'd recommend looking into your state's budget and finding out what programs they've started. I'll assume you're not living in California, which has a high budget for 1 reason that I can sum up in 2 words: Gray Davis.
Oh, but this president doesn't get laid, so I guess that should make me proud. Because getting laid is much more shameful than inciting a war that lead to the death of thousands of innocent people (Oh, I think I figured it out, Saddam is using ultra-high tech
I assume you're referring to the Clinton case... involving Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, etc. Maybe you don't understand, but getting laid wasn't the problem. If Clinton would have simply said "Yeah, I got a piece of ass, so what?" I'd have no problem with it. Unfortunately, he lied under oath. In case you're taking notes, that's perjury... which seems to be a crime only when a Republican commits it.
Oh, and while you're whining about the innocent people dying because of Bush standing up for what's right and decent in the world, maybe you should look into the humane torture practices your buddy Saddam was committing. The last figure I heard was a LOT higher than a thousand or so.
I'm afraid you also miss my point, friend. My point isn't that there aren't enough options... my point is that there are TOO many options, none of which are the industry standard. If I tell you I'm using a word processor in Red Hat 8, can you assume which one I'm talking about with any more accuracy than 25% (given Crossover Office, OpenOffice, KDE Office, and StarOffice)? Now if I say I'm using a word processor with Windows, you'd immediately think of Word. Which version is arguable, but most Word's are basically the same.
My point is that all the distros need to get together and decide what the future of Linux is going to be... so we don't have discussions like which package manager is the best, or what browser should come standard on Mandrake 47. There are FAR more important issues at hand than going back to the same argument that's been taking up time and energy since 1993. I'm not saying get rid of the other options... Consumers deserve (and require) good competition. I'm saying that the Linux community is always screaming about how Microsoft doesn't abide by industry standards (XML anyone?), yet there are NO application standards in Linux. It's like the pointing out the splinter in your enemy's eye only to miss the 2x4 in your own.
You're missing the point... or proving mine... I'm not sure which.
/usr or /usr/local.
/home is easier to type too.
/home... but it certainly isn't hard to change that. Try changing your home directory in WinXP sometime... I'm not saying that no flexibility is a good thing... I'm saying that limited flexibility is good for the industry.
...
If your distro uses a decent file system layout it would be
But what if my distro doesn't use a decent file system layout? ALL Windows versions have Program Files as the default place to install applications. Linux has nothing. My argument stands.
Makes sense to me.
Missing the point... It's another example of how things aren't standardized. For you, and most other people, it's
Microsoft has Computer Management. Linux has
Webmin, YaST, Gnome Control Center, vim, or whatever else you want to use.
But you have a choice of 4 right there... and NONE are the accepted standard, industry-wide. Here's my point. You try to install something, and tech support tells you that you need to get into the Linux equivalent of Computer Management... You go into YaST... but the tech support guy doesn't know YaST, because it's not an industry-wide accepted standard. My argument stands for everything you said, including browsers, updating tools, media players, installation utilities, and office applications.
Name the ONE APPLICATION in Linux that is 100% industry accepted, similar to how Internet Explorer is accepted. Don't name 10 variations of the same application that lots of people use... name ONE that EVERYBODY uses.
Both you and the parent are missing one of the main points of economics. I'll try to explain...
Sure, you could pay $40 for an Apple II game back in the 1980's. Why? How long did it take to produce that game? How many people did it take to produce that game? How many Apple II's were there in the country/countries that the game would be sold in? Let's say it took 5 people (a lot for the 80's) 3 months to make a game. Let's assume that each of those people were paid $30,000 (a lot in the 80's) per year for their work on that game. Since they only worked 3 months, that's $7500 a person, which comes to $37,500 for the game, not including marketing, which is anyone's guess.
That means that to make back the development money, you need to sell about 750 copies. If there were more than 1,000,000 Apple II's in the collective countries the game would sell in, you could probably get your money back.
Fast forward to the present... Take a game that's produced now. You're lucky if you can get a team of 10 people to make a game that takes a year to produce. Incredibly lucky, IMHO. Assuming a salary of $40,000 (average), that's a cool $400,000. At a price of $50, you need to sell 8000 copies to make back the development time. Although, that's for a VERY limited development time. How about 2 years, which seems pretty normal now? That would make it 16,000 copies to make back your money.
Conclusion: There was less of a market for video games in the 1980's, so the same amount of money went to pay fewer people to make games in less time. Presently, more people want games that take longer to make by more people.
Um... yeah, except that one company sells the computer, and another company sells the software. Unless, of course, Dell wanted to purchase Electronics Boutique, or Gateway wanted to buy Software Etc. I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that, as long as they make the EB store bigger so more people can fit in at once... EB never has windows, and always smells like teenager sweat. Ew.
Can you ask your friend when the next YDKJ game is coming out? Also, tell him to make sure it's funny, cheap, and not filled with stupid measures to call the mothership on the drop of a hat to make sure it's a "legitimate" copy.
Loss of reputation? Come on... you buy a game, not a game from a company. If a reputation could really be damaged from a bad game, Sierra would have died after "Outpost" (the only game that made me write a letter to the publisher).
For the most part, I agree... except that I kinda liked Outpost. (I don't understand why so many people hated it, but oh well.) I do pay attention to what company it's from. Blizzard is a good example. Name a bad game from Blizzard. Also, how about Acclaim? Name a good game from Acclaim (in the past 5 years or so). I'm not particularly fond of Activision either. I'll try anything from Square at least once. Eidos falls somewhere between Sierra and EA. It could be good, or it could be bad. I'll give the demo a try... I have nothing to lose.
Where can you return computer video games without a hassle, even after you open them? I've tried Electronics Boutique and Walmart... both are a pain in the ass though.
What happens to Microsoft's stranglehold when you can dual-boot Windows and Linux on the same partition? More people will start installing it - thats what... Obfuscating the file system gets OSS out of the picture. The DOJ needs to require open specs on this new file system.
/., I'd have to disagree. Windows can't read ext3 file systems, and that hasn't prompted much outrage... If Microsoft announced that in a new update for XP, it would support ext2, ext3, reiserfs, etc., would you install Windows XP? I didn't think so...
/usr/bin and take up space.
... /usr/local/src? ... /home? ... nada. ... manual update with a whole lot of clicks and typing. ... zip. (Can anything in Linux play all the formats that WMP can?)
This statement implies that Windows / Microsoft is so successful because its file system isn't interoperable with any other OS. At the very least, it implies that Linux would have a much larger market share than it currently does. At the risk of offending all the *nix lovers on
The problems facing Linux are far worse than a file system developed by a monopoly. Think of it this way: Linux can't easily communicate with Windows 2000/XP (if it's NTFS)... but then again, a whole LOT of Linux programs can't even communicate with other Linux programs unless specifically told how. There's never been a successful "Control Panel" project to centralize administration (although Webmin is pretty nice, it just isn't there yet... I'm looking for something very similar to Windows' Control Panel).
How about standard commands and formats? Just this morning I went to run a script to install a piece of software, and it failed because it couldn't find "uncompress". Another script found "gunzip", and yet another found "tar" and "gz". There's 4 commands that basically do the same thing, but aren't merged. The most basic features and functions have standard commands, like "ls", "cd", and "ps", but almost anything else has 2+ options. There are even several shells that don't need to exist (my opinion). Really, who needs anything besides bash, ksh, and csh? In fact, here's a thought... make bash the standard, and include ksh and csh in whatever program needs to run them... but don't put them in
Microsoft has addressed the basic necessities of an operating system, and made it relatively easy to work with. Linux still has an amazingly long way to go. I would gladly give my time to help in any way I can, but I'm not a programmer (working on it though).
Here's some thoughts to look at when questioning my reasonging:
Microsoft has Program Files. Linux has
Microsoft has Documents and Settings. Linux has
Microsoft has Computer Management. Linux has
Microsoft has Internet Explorer. Linux has Netscape, Mozilla, and Konquerer.
Microsoft has Windows Update with 3 clicks. Linux has
Microsoft has Windows Media Player. Linux has
Microsoft has (*gasp*) setup.exe as a standard install. Linux has configure, make, and make install.
Microsoft has Office. Linux has OpenOffice, KDE Office, and StarOffice.
The bottom line is that Microsoft has a good idea what programs it wants to work and what each program is supposed to do. The Linux community has no central figure leading the charge, so any Joe with an ounce of programming experience can go and create his own Winamp impersonation. I love Linux... but the fact is that it's not easy to use, and there's a lot more work needed than anyone wants to admit.
Here's the problem with it though... Name 5 good games for the N64. I can think of a few... but 5 is pushing it.
I can come up with Goldeneye, Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Zelda: Majora's Mask, Super Mario Kart 64, and Super Mario 64. Really, both Zelda games are the same... Can anyone think of any others?
The Dreamcast came out on 9/9/99 (remember the adds? 9/9/99... "It's thinking."...). The PS2 came out the following year on October 26 (if memory serves). So, yes, you're right... it was just over a year. The reason PS2's were so hard to come by was that Sony didn't manufacture enough of them to meet demand. Some of them were going for over $1000 on eBay right before Christmas. They didn't completely meet the demand until the following March or April, perhaps even as late as May. I got mine in March... I think... Seems like so long ago... =)
Now, now... let's not get hostile. I only suggested that the parent provide the current exchange rates because he was complaining about the cost of new games in a foreign country. I don't feel anyone can make a comment one way or the other without the appropriate information, which is, in this case, the exchange rate.
Sure, I prefer to pay $20 to play a new game... but I recognize that with the demand of new games with good graphics, sound, and gameplay, there's a supply that necessitates a cost of around $35 - 50. So, I don't really complain. I enjoy getting a good, fun game for $20 (like SimGolf), but I don't think that is, or necessarily should be, the norm.
I think it's a little objective to say that the only games that have improved due to (at least in part) the graphics are racing games. By that logic, I could say that since I like them, that the only games that have improved because of graphics are FPS's. After all, I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that Wolfenstein 3-D (the original) is a better game overall than Doom 3 or Half-Life 2 (hopefully). I had a much more enjoyable experience playing Final Fantasy X than I did playing Final Fantasy 2 (or 4, depending on your point of view). However, I also recognize that people look at their pleasant childhood experiences through gold-colored glasses... so I realize that in retrospect, Final Fantasy 2 SEEMS like it was more fun. For reference, play Final Fantasy 2, immediately followed by Final Fantasy X and see which you enjoy more. It would be especially interesting to play 2 games that you've never seen or played before... just to be totally subjective.
But that doesn't apply to parodies... so maybe IBM just released a "parody" of System V, eh?
You can only fight insanity with insanity.
How low can prices go before a new generation of console hardware kicks in?
Pretty low. Remember the NES and SNES? Or even the SNES and N64? What about the N64 and the GameCube? (This is from memory, so mistakes can and probably will be made.) AFAIK, they ALL dropped to around $100 before the next generation came out. Here's my prediction: we should expect another relatively minor cut in the next few months (probably before November) to around $149 for the PS2 and XBox. Then, right at the end of 2004 or beginning of 2005, they'll announce the next generation, which would be out in mid-2005 to late-2005... as soon as the announcement is made, it'll be less than a week before they drop prices to $100, or possibly $125 (counting for inflation and all).
Does that sound amiable to all?
What's the conversion rate between US$ and AUS$? New titles in the US only cost $50 at worst... most of the time they're $40-45.
Wireless has always had some appeal to me, as well, but the problems with them in terms of gaming don't even seem to be something that most people have been looking at. I know 2 people that have wireless controllers for their gamecubes that noticed the same latency issues I'm talking about (note: not dropouts, latency, the time between pressing the button and the action being performed on-screen), but I don't know if they have the controller you're talking about or not. I definitely have had problems with wireless controllers on the PS2 (my step-brother bought one), and wireless keyboards/mice on the PC (my dad and my roommate both have wireless keyboard/mouse combos that are less than a year old).
;-) ).
My guess is that you're not using good wireless equipment. I have a WaveBird for my GameCube, and it's fantastic. I never used a wired controller with it, and don't see any need to. I've played it on the same batteries for 8-12 hours at a time for over 6 months and never had any problems at all, including latency (yes, I know what latency is). For the PC, I'm currently using a Logitech MX700, both at work and at home. I have noticed one relatively minor problem... after a little while of not moving the mouse, it takes about 1/4 of a second to re-initialize the wireless connection before any movement is seen on the screen. It never seems to happen during games, but only when I'm browsing the internet or doing other non-time-critical things. I would highly recommend both items, although cost might be an issue. If memory serves, the WaveBird was about $35 new, and the Logitech MX700 is around $75 - 80.
At least the XBox controllers have longer cables than the Sony controllers. I had to buy extension cables for my PS2 controllers, whereas the XBox controllers get from beside the TV to the couch with no problems. I've considered putting my consoles next to the couch to alleviate all of the problems associated with the cables streamed across the room when playing, but then I'll have to route the video & audio cables under the carpet or through the walls & attic, either of which seems a bit much at the moment.
I bought my XBox a week after it came out, and I have to agree. I absolutely LOVE the 10' cables, as compared to the standard 6' ones on the GameCube and PS2. I don't know who the hell ever thought that 6' was enough to go from somewhere near the TV to wherever the kids would be sitting, but they need beaten in the head with something heavy. That's the main reason I tried the WaveBird (see above
It depends a lot on how it's handled by the transmitter. Many wireless standards such as bluetooth will shift frequencies to avoid interference, which I'd imagine the Live headset would do as well (I'm not sure what wireless standards it uses, or the specs if it's a proprietary protocol). The amount of data is generally not an issue, as long as they chose their specifications properly in the first place.
I personally wouldn't recommend bluetooth, or anything else in the 2.4ghz range. At this point, almost everything is operating at 2.4ghz... microwaves, cordless phones, wireless mice / keyboards, etc. Even if bluetooth can shift frequencies, there's only 3 non-overlapping ranges in the 802.11b standard... I'd recommend 5ghz. It's got additional bandwidth, and not nearly as many things operating in the same range. Latency shouldn't be an issue, as long as it's tested properly...
My personal opinion would be to sell the wireless controller in 2.4ghz, and the XBox Live headset in 5ghz. In the XBox Live box there would be a replacement transmitter that would include BOTH 2.4ghz AND 5ghz, and there wouldn't be any overlapping between them at all. The headset could easily have a 5ghz transmitter built-in, and the controller already would have the 2.4ghz built in. It may not be cost effective yet, but it seems like a good solution to me.
So obviously the solution is to take the money that one person earned, and give it to someone who didn't. Great solution. BTW, I need the keys to your car.
Losing in a market doesn't mean going out of business. It means that they won't be in that market anymore. For Walmart to go out of business, it would require some catastrophy of Biblical proportions at this point.
NetFlix is the leader in online DVD rentals. Walmart is not. If Walmart can't beat NetFlix in some way, Walmart will no longer offer online DVD rentals. It doesn't matter that the Walmart corporation also runs a very successful franchise... it only matters that they're going into a new market with another company as the leader.
Yeah, but when was the sequel to Citizen Kane announced? I haven't heard of it... and to my knowledge, George Lucas only announced Episode I the year before it was released... not in 1992.
I used to have a store called Ames in my area. It was a nice department store. Then K-Mart moved across the street, and Ames went out of business. Now Wal-mart is right down the street from K-Mart, and K-Mart is looking like it won't be there much longer. Even large corporations can fail in certain market... in this case, Walmart could fail on online DVD rentals. If they fail, they won't offer online DVD rentals anymore.