The exact same game that is being discussed is already on Sprint phones. Gladiator is NOT a BREW game, but rather a cell phone game that will now be inserted into BREW. You stated, and I quote:
No one's yet pointed out that in order to even play these games, you need a BREW-enabled phone.
That statement, on its face, is not correct. I can play Gladiator on my Sprint Touchpoint 1100, and it is not BREW enabled, as you state a phone must be to play these games.
No one's yet pointed out that in order to even play these games, you need a BREW-enabled phone. Verizon's just started coming out with them according to the article, and there's no mention of any other US carrier offering them.
Not to mention that this usually locks you into another contract with substantial penalties for early withdrawal. I think I'll stick with snake if I feel the need to play a game on my cellphone. Or just stick with my PDA for games, especially when I'm stuck on an airplane."
No, you're wrong. Jam Dat Mobile Inc. has been providing Gladiator to Sprint for quite some time. Porting it to BREW is a brand new innovation and doesn't change the fact that its already out there.
"In 1898, Cuba gained independence from Spain, and thereafter, until 1934, it was controlled by the USA, who invested in its economy (mainly sugar and tobacco). FDR granted its independence in 1934, and in 1952, Batista came to power. He was right wing, and so acceptable to the USA, but he was idle, inefficient and cruel. Profits dropped and the US people with business interests complained. From 1957, the US supported the rise of a young (30) Cuban lawyer, Fidel Castro (born, 1927), who led a band of 300 fighters called the 26th of July Movement. They helped him gain power in January 1959.
He began to nationalise industry, collectivise farms and censor the press. The USA realised too late that they had sponsored a Marxist with their investments and profits on Cuba at risk. American aid to Cuba ended in January 1961. Cuban capitalists fled to the USA. It was not until December 1961, that Castro admitted his government was Marxist. Before this he had been trying to get aid from both the USA and the USSR."
--from http://www.rpfuller.com/gcse/history/10.html
"He didn't "lose his head" by the execution that you imply, but fell sick and died of natural causes."
Actually, I never stated that he lost his head. I was referring to kings who proclaimed the doctrine of 'might makes right'. Louis the XIV comes to mind. As for natural causes, the jury's still out on that one.
"Once in Babylon, he drank heavily at several banquets. One such banquet was hosted by his friend, Medius. In the Armenian version of the story, Psuedo-Callisthenes wrote that this banquet was a conspiracy involving Iollas, Cassander, and others who were unhappy with Alexander. They gave him poisoned wine, and immediately after drinking it, Alexander felt as if he had "been hit in the liver with an arrow." When he tried to throw it back up, he was given a poisoned feather, which ensured that the poison would reach his blood stream. He proceeded to get very sick and his condition deteriorated until his death."
--borrowed from http://wso.williams.edu/~junterek/death.htm
As for overestimating his power...
"In the summer of 325 B.C.E., Alexander and his army had sailed to the mouth of the Indus River, and they began to march west across the dangerous Gedrosian Desert. Nearchus was put in command of a fleet that would take the sea route west rather than marching through the desert. Alexander, on land, lost nearly three quarters of his army to starvation and the harsh conditions of the desert."
--borrowed from http://wso.williams.edu/~junterek/goinhom.htm
I agree with you, but I meant if it were to come to light and the American people were to find out about it. China hadn't mentioned it among its people until it became an incident.
You make an excellent point, but keep in mind that there was a time when kings who believed in the 'might makes right' doctrine lost their heads. Of course, that hasn't stopped people ever since from overestimating their power. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev, Lyndon Johnson, Napoleon, Alexander the Great...the list is endless.
The real problem here is that strong-arming smaller countries makes us look worse every day to the world community. I constantly hear talk on the major news sources about Muslims hating us because of our extravagant lifestyle, and that may play some small part, but the real cause for their anger is the things we do that meddle in other countries' politics. I heard an interview on Pacifica with a Palestinian girl who said that she went out for a walk one day after a vicious Israeli attack, and she found a fragment of a missile with USA stamped on the side. Sometimes we supply a rebel group or government with weapons and it works out well for us, but far more often, as was the case with supplying Israel and other Arab enemies, we end up with skyscrapers acting as landing strips. Not that I condone those terrorist acts, but Osama bin Laden would not have NEARLY the popularity in the Arab community with regular people if we weren't meddling, and we wouldn't have dead civilians.
Still don't believe the trouble we cause for ourselves? Consider Cuba. It used to be a resort with gambling and beautiful beaches and hotels. Then someone in U.S. foreign policy decided that we didn't like the government that housed it, and the United States government armed a young revolutionary named... can you guess? Fidel Castro. Shortly thereafter, Castro overthrows the government, establishes communist rule, and points medium range ICBM's at us.
Or perhaps something a little more modern? In the 70's Russia had a border dispute with Afghanistan and decided to invade. There was a group of fighters known as the mujahadeen who was trying unsuccessfully to fight off the more experienced Russian troops. Lo and behold, the United States forks over some heavy duty weapons, and Russia spends 10 years of failure trying to penetrate Afghanistan. High in the ranks of these mujahadeen is a now heavily armed man named Osama bin Laden. Oops.
You asked my point. I suppose its that we would be wise to take a far more isolationist view in our foreign policy and stop letting other countries' troops fight wars that are in our interest.
People undervalue the danger spy planes can pose. The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction states that intelligent governments will not attempt to destroy another country if they believe that country can and will destroy them in return. To allow another country to find a flaw in your defense is to open the door to an attack. After that, the only thing keeping them from attacking you is their good intentions (yea, right) and their interest in maintaining a good reputation in the world community. This latter can easily be dodged by creating a controversy worth going to war over. Before WWI, for example, the Germans sank a cargo and passenger ship named Lusitania, claiming that they had reason to believe munitions were aboard. United States officials, including the president, called them liars and used this opportunity to fire up a nation that had been fairly isolationist. It was not until many years after the war that it was discovered that the Lusitania really DID have munitions aboard.
Given that we were VERY ACTIVELY spying on China, attempting to discover a chink in their armor, it is possible that a similar situation could be concocted giving us supposedly just cause to go to war. This alone, in my very humble opinion, is just cause for fighters to accompany a US plane and ensure that it doesn't get too close to Chinese soil. Of course, the accident was just that...an accident. One of the pilots made an error at some point and both planes were damaged.
But you seem to feel that the U.S. plane was justified in its espionage, and had a God granted right to be collecting radio transmissions and the like from the Chinese coast. A Chinese pilot lies dead at the bottom of the ocean somewhere and you sarcastically quip, "makes me feel bad to be an American! They're such victims! I feel their pain!" Pretend you're Chinese for a minute, and imagine that's the sort of attitude you're getting from the United States government. Your fellow citizen is not even buried yet, and U.S. officials are demanding that you not try to spy on their technology... Technology that was being used to SPY ON YOU! Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?
I may not agree with you on much, but we do agree on one thing. Slashdot does indeed abound with "geniuses".
Well, perhaps I mispoke. What I intended to imply was that he doesn't seem to value repairing diplomatic relations with them at all. For example, he's constantly speaking poorly of them in speeches. In fact, I'm surprised he didn't include China in his short-sighted Axis of Evil speech.
Actually, China claims 200 miles of airspace surrounding its landmass, and the plane was 60 miles off the coast when the incident took place. Top Speed for an EP-3 is 345 knots, which could have put it over Chinese soil in 9 minutes. These are numbers that would alarm most Americans if the situation were reversed. Of course, many Americans also have a limited world-view, obscured by things like nationalism, so it does make sense that there weren't many Americans speaking against our actions.
But then, this isn't the first time the U.S. has thrown itself in over its head and had to demand that prisoners be released. Remember that little incident in Bosnia? There was a little tiff brewing in Bosnia where U.S. soldiers had been stationed that hardly got media play. If it did, it was always the last or next to last story on the news, coming just after the local story about the kitten being rescued from a tree. While on a training mission, traveling in Hummers, some soldiers accidentally crossed the border by several miles. When they did, they were captured. Suddenly it was the top story, and U.S. officials were practically calling for blood. The sentiment was "How DARE you capture and detain our soldiers who were illegally trespassing on your soil?!" Bosnian officials said that they were pondering trying these doughboys for their crime. Under the threat of harsh U.S. aggression, they were finally released and allowed to return home. The point here is that is was a non-story for Americans until 3 American soldiers were captured. Little did it matter that Bosnian civilians were dying daily from U.S. bombing missions that were hitting civilian marketplaces, and at one point, the Chinese Embassy. Its this kind of blind, stupid patriotism that gets us into trouble with the world community, and makes even our allies hesitate before hopping into military operations with us.
Gee, I sure wish you'd tell me where I can buy an F-8 for 5 bucks. After all, its only a newer, fresher version of Russia's MiG-21. Maybe I should check pricewatch!
Of course, this is all just part of a much larger picture. For the past few years, relations with China have not been good. When we're not hitting one of their embassies with a missile (and effectively enraging their population), we're running spy missions off their coast. Then to ease the world's mind, we say that everyone does these things, but I do wonder how tolerant we'd be of a Chinese plane flying off the coast of California collecting data. Yes, it would appear that we may be on a collision course with China. Bush has repeatedly stated that China is a "strategic enemy", and Chinese leaders haven't exactly been glowing in their assessment of Bush. I remember an old Vulcan proverb that stated, "Only Nixon could go to China."
The new administration doesn't seem too concerned with the power of China, and that may be a grave folly. Not that this is any worse than Clinton practically getting into bed with the Chinese and selling secrets and favors, but it will be morbidly interesting to see how this potentially enormous future conflict develops.
The RIAA and MPAA can be pretty unreasonable, but keep in mind that it was mp3 and movie trading, and previously, audio and video tape dubbing that allowed them to rise to power in the industry.
I think I'd probably support a similar organization if kids had their hands in my pocket.
Yes, but the only reason that's the fastest you've seen a modem connect is because the regulation keeps you from seeing the full power. Unless, of course, you have some scientific data that corroborates your contention that a voice line (which is actually a data line) can only carry ~50k.
Lucas has always said Episode IV was rushed. I saw an interview where he explained that he had many ideas for Episode IV, but was given limited resources, time and money with which to acchieve his vision, as he had not yet proved himself. It would be interesting to see the entire sexiligy (is that what you call it?) as he envisioned it 20 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but you're missing the point...
The exact same game that is being discussed is already on Sprint phones. Gladiator is NOT a BREW game, but rather a cell phone game that will now be inserted into BREW. You stated, and I quote:
No one's yet pointed out that in order to even play these games, you need a BREW-enabled phone.
That statement, on its face, is not correct. I can play Gladiator on my Sprint Touchpoint 1100, and it is not BREW enabled, as you state a phone must be to play these games.
No one's yet pointed out that in order to even play these games, you need a BREW-enabled phone. Verizon's just started coming out with them according to the article, and there's no mention of any other US carrier offering them.
Not to mention that this usually locks you into another contract with substantial penalties for early withdrawal. I think I'll stick with snake if I feel the need to play a game on my cellphone. Or just stick with my PDA for games, especially when I'm stuck on an airplane."
No, you're wrong. Jam Dat Mobile Inc. has been providing Gladiator to Sprint for quite some time. Porting it to BREW is a brand new innovation and doesn't change the fact that its already out there.
http://www.jamdatmobile.com/
"Please back this up with some evidence."
Sure thing.
"In 1898, Cuba gained independence from Spain, and thereafter, until 1934, it was controlled by the USA, who invested in its economy (mainly sugar and tobacco). FDR granted its independence in 1934, and in 1952, Batista came to power. He was right wing, and so acceptable to the USA, but he was idle, inefficient and cruel. Profits dropped and the US people with business interests complained. From 1957, the US supported the rise of a young (30) Cuban lawyer, Fidel Castro (born, 1927), who led a band of 300 fighters called the 26th of July Movement. They helped him gain power in January 1959.
He began to nationalise industry, collectivise farms and censor the press. The USA realised too late that they had sponsored a Marxist with their investments and profits on Cuba at risk. American aid to Cuba ended in January 1961. Cuban capitalists fled to the USA. It was not until December 1961, that Castro admitted his government was Marxist. Before this he had been trying to get aid from both the USA and the USSR."
--from http://www.rpfuller.com/gcse/history/10.html
Actually, Gladiator and the like are on the Wireless Web, so any Web enabled Sprint phone could access them.
"He didn't "lose his head" by the execution that you imply, but fell sick and died of natural causes." Actually, I never stated that he lost his head. I was referring to kings who proclaimed the doctrine of 'might makes right'. Louis the XIV comes to mind. As for natural causes, the jury's still out on that one. "Once in Babylon, he drank heavily at several banquets. One such banquet was hosted by his friend, Medius. In the Armenian version of the story, Psuedo-Callisthenes wrote that this banquet was a conspiracy involving Iollas, Cassander, and others who were unhappy with Alexander. They gave him poisoned wine, and immediately after drinking it, Alexander felt as if he had "been hit in the liver with an arrow." When he tried to throw it back up, he was given a poisoned feather, which ensured that the poison would reach his blood stream. He proceeded to get very sick and his condition deteriorated until his death." --borrowed from http://wso.williams.edu/~junterek/death.htm As for overestimating his power... "In the summer of 325 B.C.E., Alexander and his army had sailed to the mouth of the Indus River, and they began to march west across the dangerous Gedrosian Desert. Nearchus was put in command of a fleet that would take the sea route west rather than marching through the desert. Alexander, on land, lost nearly three quarters of his army to starvation and the harsh conditions of the desert." --borrowed from http://wso.williams.edu/~junterek/goinhom.htm
I agree with you, but I meant if it were to come to light and the American people were to find out about it. China hadn't mentioned it among its people until it became an incident.
You make an excellent point, but keep in mind that there was a time when kings who believed in the 'might makes right' doctrine lost their heads. Of course, that hasn't stopped people ever since from overestimating their power. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev, Lyndon Johnson, Napoleon, Alexander the Great...the list is endless.
The real problem here is that strong-arming smaller countries makes us look worse every day to the world community. I constantly hear talk on the major news sources about Muslims hating us because of our extravagant lifestyle, and that may play some small part, but the real cause for their anger is the things we do that meddle in other countries' politics. I heard an interview on Pacifica with a Palestinian girl who said that she went out for a walk one day after a vicious Israeli attack, and she found a fragment of a missile with USA stamped on the side. Sometimes we supply a rebel group or government with weapons and it works out well for us, but far more often, as was the case with supplying Israel and other Arab enemies, we end up with skyscrapers acting as landing strips. Not that I condone those terrorist acts, but Osama bin Laden would not have NEARLY the popularity in the Arab community with regular people if we weren't meddling, and we wouldn't have dead civilians.
Still don't believe the trouble we cause for ourselves? Consider Cuba. It used to be a resort with gambling and beautiful beaches and hotels. Then someone in U.S. foreign policy decided that we didn't like the government that housed it, and the United States government armed a young revolutionary named... can you guess? Fidel Castro. Shortly thereafter, Castro overthrows the government, establishes communist rule, and points medium range ICBM's at us.
Or perhaps something a little more modern? In the 70's Russia had a border dispute with Afghanistan and decided to invade. There was a group of fighters known as the mujahadeen who was trying unsuccessfully to fight off the more experienced Russian troops. Lo and behold, the United States forks over some heavy duty weapons, and Russia spends 10 years of failure trying to penetrate Afghanistan. High in the ranks of these mujahadeen is a now heavily armed man named Osama bin Laden. Oops.
You asked my point. I suppose its that we would be wise to take a far more isolationist view in our foreign policy and stop letting other countries' troops fight wars that are in our interest.
People undervalue the danger spy planes can pose. The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction states that intelligent governments will not attempt to destroy another country if they believe that country can and will destroy them in return. To allow another country to find a flaw in your defense is to open the door to an attack. After that, the only thing keeping them from attacking you is their good intentions (yea, right) and their interest in maintaining a good reputation in the world community. This latter can easily be dodged by creating a controversy worth going to war over. Before WWI, for example, the Germans sank a cargo and passenger ship named Lusitania, claiming that they had reason to believe munitions were aboard. United States officials, including the president, called them liars and used this opportunity to fire up a nation that had been fairly isolationist. It was not until many years after the war that it was discovered that the Lusitania really DID have munitions aboard.
Given that we were VERY ACTIVELY spying on China, attempting to discover a chink in their armor, it is possible that a similar situation could be concocted giving us supposedly just cause to go to war. This alone, in my very humble opinion, is just cause for fighters to accompany a US plane and ensure that it doesn't get too close to Chinese soil. Of course, the accident was just that...an accident. One of the pilots made an error at some point and both planes were damaged.
But you seem to feel that the U.S. plane was justified in its espionage, and had a God granted right to be collecting radio transmissions and the like from the Chinese coast. A Chinese pilot lies dead at the bottom of the ocean somewhere and you sarcastically quip, "makes me feel bad to be an American! They're such victims! I feel their pain!" Pretend you're Chinese for a minute, and imagine that's the sort of attitude you're getting from the United States government. Your fellow citizen is not even buried yet, and U.S. officials are demanding that you not try to spy on their technology... Technology that was being used to SPY ON YOU! Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?
I may not agree with you on much, but we do agree on one thing. Slashdot does indeed abound with "geniuses".
Well, perhaps I mispoke. What I intended to imply was that he doesn't seem to value repairing diplomatic relations with them at all. For example, he's constantly speaking poorly of them in speeches. In fact, I'm surprised he didn't include China in his short-sighted Axis of Evil speech.
I'm familiar. A racist prank phone call, at that.
Actually, China claims 200 miles of airspace surrounding its landmass, and the plane was 60 miles off the coast when the incident took place. Top Speed for an EP-3 is 345 knots, which could have put it over Chinese soil in 9 minutes. These are numbers that would alarm most Americans if the situation were reversed. Of course, many Americans also have a limited world-view, obscured by things like nationalism, so it does make sense that there weren't many Americans speaking against our actions.
But then, this isn't the first time the U.S. has thrown itself in over its head and had to demand that prisoners be released. Remember that little incident in Bosnia? There was a little tiff brewing in Bosnia where U.S. soldiers had been stationed that hardly got media play. If it did, it was always the last or next to last story on the news, coming just after the local story about the kitten being rescued from a tree. While on a training mission, traveling in Hummers, some soldiers accidentally crossed the border by several miles. When they did, they were captured. Suddenly it was the top story, and U.S. officials were practically calling for blood. The sentiment was "How DARE you capture and detain our soldiers who were illegally trespassing on your soil?!" Bosnian officials said that they were pondering trying these doughboys for their crime. Under the threat of harsh U.S. aggression, they were finally released and allowed to return home. The point here is that is was a non-story for Americans until 3 American soldiers were captured. Little did it matter that Bosnian civilians were dying daily from U.S. bombing missions that were hitting civilian marketplaces, and at one point, the Chinese Embassy. Its this kind of blind, stupid patriotism that gets us into trouble with the world community, and makes even our allies hesitate before hopping into military operations with us.
Good! Maybe I can finally understand that "Chick a Me Chi, the Chinese Chicken" song. :P
Just make sure you don't throw it away in China when its defunct. HA!
Gee, I sure wish you'd tell me where I can buy an F-8 for 5 bucks. After all, its only a newer, fresher version of Russia's MiG-21. Maybe I should check pricewatch!
But the point is that the spy plane never should have been there in the first place.
Of course, this is all just part of a much larger picture. For the past few years, relations with China have not been good. When we're not hitting one of their embassies with a missile (and effectively enraging their population), we're running spy missions off their coast. Then to ease the world's mind, we say that everyone does these things, but I do wonder how tolerant we'd be of a Chinese plane flying off the coast of California collecting data. Yes, it would appear that we may be on a collision course with China. Bush has repeatedly stated that China is a "strategic enemy", and Chinese leaders haven't exactly been glowing in their assessment of Bush. I remember an old Vulcan proverb that stated, "Only Nixon could go to China."
The new administration doesn't seem too concerned with the power of China, and that may be a grave folly. Not that this is any worse than Clinton practically getting into bed with the Chinese and selling secrets and favors, but it will be morbidly interesting to see how this potentially enormous future conflict develops.
Yes, we simply MUST do something about these green houses putting out these emissions...they are out of control! ;)
Why not just have a separate room for adults only to surf, and a filtered room or area for the kiddies? Everyone would be happy.
Physicists use analysis and topology :-)
;)
Don't forget ballistics
Everyone dogs on the RIAA these days, but let's here some specific complaints.
Perhaps you're familiar with the First Amendment. This would be the same First Amendment that allows you to speak poorly of them.
The RIAA and MPAA can be pretty unreasonable, but keep in mind that it was mp3 and movie trading, and previously, audio and video tape dubbing that allowed them to rise to power in the industry.
I think I'd probably support a similar organization if kids had their hands in my pocket.
Incorrect. Prohibition, blue laws, segregation laws, slave trade laws, and sodomy laws are all examples of laws that have been repealed.
Yes, but the only reason that's the fastest you've seen a modem connect is because the regulation keeps you from seeing the full power. Unless, of course, you have some scientific data that corroborates your contention that a voice line (which is actually a data line) can only carry ~50k.
Lucas has always said Episode IV was rushed. I saw an interview where he explained that he had many ideas for Episode IV, but was given limited resources, time and money with which to acchieve his vision, as he had not yet proved himself. It would be interesting to see the entire sexiligy (is that what you call it?) as he envisioned it 20 years ago.