"Thats typical Slashdot moderation. If you look carefully, I had posts modded down where I was actually describing Metroid Prime - even the one where all I mentioned was the lack of a proper strafe was modded down as flamebait."
You were modded down because you were intentionally trying to make a point that wasn't true just to rile people up. You were either trolling, or seriously misinformed.
Believe me, I've seen people with your opinion of SMS modded up as insightful before. It ain't Nintendo zealotry or 'typical Slashdot moderation' going on here.
Put the site up. Mac users aren't exactly a quiet bunch when something doesn't work quite right on their machines. Believe me, you'll know rather quickly if something doesn't work.
" Let's see something to back that up. I want decents numbers from a verifiable source."
Go find them. Or just look around for a bit and see how common cell phones are.
Believe me, if cell phones were the true the problems people attributed to them, then traffic would be far more chaotic, theaters would sound like a PBS tele-thon, and people'd be dropping like flies due to brain cancer.
"I don't think we should end the anti-MS pissing contest until MS ends the anti-linux pissing contest and the anti linux PR machine and the anti linux legislature lobbying."
Yeah, that's a good reputation for the Linux community to have. "Let's find every point we can to prove MS is bad, whether it's truthful or not, until Microsoft lightens up."
"Frankly, that research sounds like bullshit to me."
Too bad it's true.
"I never have to wait on an asshole at a green light because they are putting in a CD."
And how exactly would you be able to tell that he was putting a CD in? The reason you percieve the phone users is that you actually can see the phone.
Let me give you something to think about: Half the people in the US has a cell phone. That means roughly 1 in every 2 or 3 cars you see is somebody that has a cell phone in it. Yet, you've only given 4 examples of people being stupid.
Are cell phones the problem, or are there some really bad drivers out there?
" I recommend Debian stable for quickstart web services: the key step is the one where after you have it all set up you say "apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade" and all of the sudden your box is protected against essentially all known exploits."
Thanks for the info. I'll definitely keep that in mind.
" And unlike MS, it is quite uncommon to apply a security patch and have it break existing unrelated stuff."
MS employs humans just like the ones that work on Open Source. Shit happens.
"Damn dude, how did you get rooted so quickly and easily? I've had a few different apache servers up (running different versions of Mandrake with Advanced Extranet Apache) for years and to this day none of them have gotten owned."
Like I said, it only takes one exploit. Linux and Apache both have several of them waiting to be discovered.
I tried to translate RFID like one would with RTFA. When I read "RFID Privacy Workshop At MIT" I thought it meant "Read the F'ing Information Dumbass Privacy Workshop at MIT".
"Actually, there are many companies that let you do something as crazy as Valenti's lawnmower story. "
When I bought my Nintendo 64, I paid $30 for a warranty like that. They said I could drive over it and still get a replacement heh. In retrospect, the warranty was a waste of money. The motivating factor in getting it was the analog controls, had no idea how long those would last.
The reason I picked on Valenti on this one was because his choice of rebuttals. The main problem with it is that when somebody burns a copy of a CD or downloads Mp3s, the RIAA suffers absolutely no direct expense from it. You're not using their media, you're not using their internet bits, you're not even using their electricity. So, in Mr. Valenti's case, he's saying I'm not allowed to buy a lawn mower and then, using this one as reference, build a duplicate one with my own resources. If it were being asked of the RIAA to make backups available for the consumer, well that'd be a different story.
Which leads to this point:
"Why don't they make an ironclad guarantee that anyone who presented at least 51% of a damaged CD or DVD--no matter how old--would be given a new copy? "
They should be doing that. They absolutely should be doing that. But since they don't do that, it makes one wonder how they're supposed to know they're buying a license to listen to music, not a pretty CD with music on it. Grr.
It seems that the Record Industry has forgotten that sales are dependent on both product and service. Customers'll come buy your stuff, but you still need to treat them good. Soft drink companies come to mind. They produce a consumable. You can get them anywhere, often times without any sort of human interaction what soever. Yet, they still make you glad to be a customer. Sometimes they give away prizes. Sometimes they entertain you with amusing commercials. (well, Coke moreso than Pepsi) Sometimes they even respond to supply and demand. Buy 12 cans of Coke, pay less per oz. than you'd pay for one can of Coke. I don't think softdrink companies could get away with demanding that customers only buy 24 packs at a time. No single can for you.
"Exactly. That is why I only shoplift at stores that do not have that pesky 'Shoplifters will be prosecuted' sign."
I really don't like when comments like this are modded up. These oversimplified metaphors are not useful. It's like when Valenti likened having backup copies of music to recieving a replacement lawn mower after it has been run over. Did he make a startling point, or did he give his enemies reason to think "Is this man an idiot? There's nothing similar about..."?
"Which I thought was stupid. If I stole it then it's not a purchase so therefore it says "steal here for free"."
When I worked at McDonald's a friend of mine pointed something interesting out to me. He handed me a container for a Quarter Pounder and pointed at the verbage that read "Please put Litter in its Place." I said "so?" And he said "In order to turn it into litter, I have to put it on the ground. Therefore, it's place is outside the trashcan."
I pretty much thought he was a dork over that convo, but I had to admit that "Please throw this into a trash can when you're done" would have been less troublesome.
"Never mind if it was a team effort, you basically admit that you _personally_ could not do any better. And by that, I don't mean just you working on the project, but rounding up the team necessary to pull it off as well."
Anybody else read some broken logic in this?
"Let me see some of your work, I'm sure I could pick out far more flaws."
He's got a link to some of his art in his sig. Go look at it. But we should play by your rules. Unless you can show better artwork than he's done, you can't criticize it.
" I can't guess how effective it would actually be, though."
Would the effectiveness really matter? If a card like you suggests fell out that read "Don't share this on the internet!" then the RIAA's got a case. "People can't avoid this!!"
I like your idea. I think the RIAA should do this.
"Because it is totally true, and is something that has been stated in numerous reviews. There is far more than mere 'fundamentals' that are similar - the main crux of the game is the same."
Funny, I went skimming around the reviews. I found one that supported your statement, and a handful of others that had lots of good things to say about the evolutions of the game. There's something I'll concede to: the game's not revolutionary, but it's a heck of an evolution. I'll settle onn that. However, something very important about SMS, you don't play it the same as you play Mario 64. You may be after sunshine sprites or whatever, the road getting there is very different. You have to think about the world in a much different way than you had to in Mario 64.
"For Gods sake, even Nintendo themselves owned up that SMS didn't live up to expectations."
They're talking about their sales numbers. Yes, Nintendo has taken a very significant hit in popularity.
"Incorrect - it is mere zealotry to say that SMS is all that different to Mario 64."
Riiiight. Never mind the FLUDD pack with all that brings, the much broader variety in how challenges are solved, and the different state of mind you have to be in to play this game, it's the same because you run and jump and the guy wears a little red hat.
"Half arsed assumption is believing that SMS is significantly different to Mario 64"
This alone disproves your point. If you don't see the difference between SMS and Mario 64, then how can anybody take you seriously? It's got some of the same fundamentals, no argument there. It is, though, a hell of a lot richer of an experience over Mario 64. Being good at Mario 64 does not make you good at Mario Sunshine. You still have a lot to learn in order to do anything useful in that game.
That's why nobody is taking you seriously. It's got nothing to do with Nintendo zealousy, it has to do with you not opening your eyes. Nintendo did a fine job, the defect is with you. If you don't enjoy that style of game, fine, perfectly okay, no problem here. Just don't go around saying Mario Sunshine is just like Mario64. That's what's getting people to argue with you.
"I didn't say that JUST having the same characters makes it a rehash. But many of their games are rehashes, and using the same characters for nearly twenty years reinforces that view."
Heh, no, it doesn't.
"No, it is the usual GC-owner response that signifies that they cannot understand why not everyone finds Nintendo games fun."
Nice try, but no. This isn't Nintendo zealousy talking, it's somebody who's arguing with your details that sound an awful lot like frequent complaints made by the people who haven't played these games.
"If you cannot see that SMS is very similar to Mario 64, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews, and is one critisism that many people have said about the game."
If you cannot see the glaring differences between the two games, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews.
"Once again, it is allways a case of "No, the problem is definetly NOT Nintendo! The problem is YOU!" from the Nintendo camp."
In this case, the problem is that you presented yourself badly.
"You are talking out of your arse, as I do own a Gc and have played those games. But hey, I must be lying, right? The problem MUST be with me, right?"
Oh I'm sure you picked it up, made Mario run around and jump a bit, and then said "this is just like Mario 64! Dammit!" Yep, the problem must be with you.
"And you say that I talk out of my arse? Hoo boy! "
Still do.
"I knew that I would get this type of response, though - it happens every time I see someone start critisising Nintendo games. Within 3 or 4 posts, the Nintendo camp starts saying that the other person doesn't know what they are talking about. I got a post modded down, and all I said was that taking Metroid into 3D was not innovative."
As I've said, and you've pointed out, you brought it on yourself. You came in and said something that's easily disputable. Instead of listening to the disputes, you just sit there like "Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption. It must be all that Nintendo zealousy! It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't. Oh well, my dissatisfaction must be Nintendo's fault."
You should re-examine how you sound to people informed on the topic of which you speak instead of trying to blame them for having a rebuttal.
Slashdot Mirror
"Is that the politically correct way of saying "performance sucks"?"
That's not quite how I read it. I read it as "for the money, you can get a lot more performance. Games optimized for it will scream, tho..."
I guess it's hard to say its performance sucks if it plays today's games just fine anyway.
"Thats typical Slashdot moderation. If you look carefully, I had posts modded down where I was actually describing Metroid Prime - even the one where all I mentioned was the lack of a proper strafe was modded down as flamebait."
You were modded down because you were intentionally trying to make a point that wasn't true just to rile people up. You were either trolling, or seriously misinformed.
Believe me, I've seen people with your opinion of SMS modded up as insightful before. It ain't Nintendo zealotry or 'typical Slashdot moderation' going on here.
"One wonders why was this modded 'Troll'? This was pretty funny."
:)
I'm puzzled myself. I figured the "as a robot" part of my post would have at least shaken off anybody who never sawa Futurama before..
Thanks man.
Flamebait? Doh, forgot the smiley!
"In addition, Linux gives you the source code for your fix, allowing you to determine the extent of the patch before applying it."
I hate to break it to you, but no sysadmin has ever read the source code to a patch to make sure it'll play nice with the server.
Not disputing your point in general, I just think the source code detail of rebuttals like yours tends to overrate the source code factor.
"how can you tell if things will work out fine?"
Put the site up. Mac users aren't exactly a quiet bunch when something doesn't work quite right on their machines. Believe me, you'll know rather quickly if something doesn't work.
" Let's see something to back that up. I want decents numbers from a verifiable source."
Go find them. Or just look around for a bit and see how common cell phones are.
Believe me, if cell phones were the true the problems people attributed to them, then traffic would be far more chaotic, theaters would sound like a PBS tele-thon, and people'd be dropping like flies due to brain cancer.
"I don't think we should end the anti-MS pissing contest until MS ends the anti-linux pissing contest and the anti linux PR machine and the anti linux legislature lobbying."
Yeah, that's a good reputation for the Linux community to have. "Let's find every point we can to prove MS is bad, whether it's truthful or not, until Microsoft lightens up."
"Frankly, that research sounds like bullshit to me."
Too bad it's true.
"I never have to wait on an asshole at a green light because they are putting in a CD."
And how exactly would you be able to tell that he was putting a CD in? The reason you percieve the phone users is that you actually can see the phone.
Let me give you something to think about: Half the people in the US has a cell phone. That means roughly 1 in every 2 or 3 cars you see is somebody that has a cell phone in it. Yet, you've only given 4 examples of people being stupid.
Are cell phones the problem, or are there some really bad drivers out there?
" I recommend Debian stable for quickstart web services: the key step is the one where after you have it all set up you say "apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade" and all of the sudden your box is protected against essentially all known exploits."
Thanks for the info. I'll definitely keep that in mind.
" And unlike MS, it is quite uncommon to apply a security patch and have it break existing unrelated stuff."
MS employs humans just like the ones that work on Open Source. Shit happens.
"Damn dude, how did you get rooted so quickly and easily? I've had a few different apache servers up (running different versions of Mandrake with Advanced Extranet Apache) for years and to this day none of them have gotten owned."
Like I said, it only takes one exploit. Linux and Apache both have several of them waiting to be discovered.
"Oh, good... ...another thing to distract people while they're driving."
If you really feel that way, then remove your car radio and CD player. Don't contribute to the problem.
Asskisser.
ready PITCHFORKS!
Oh wait.. this is Apple, not Microsoft. Bugs like this are cute and give their machines character.
Stand down, everybody.
... because they're worried about their privacy.
I tried to translate RFID like one would with RTFA. When I read "RFID Privacy Workshop At MIT" I thought it meant "Read the F'ing Information Dumbass Privacy Workshop at MIT".
I need more coffee.
"Actually, there are many companies that let you do something as crazy as Valenti's lawnmower story. "
When I bought my Nintendo 64, I paid $30 for a warranty like that. They said I could drive over it and still get a replacement heh. In retrospect, the warranty was a waste of money. The motivating factor in getting it was the analog controls, had no idea how long those would last.
The reason I picked on Valenti on this one was because his choice of rebuttals. The main problem with it is that when somebody burns a copy of a CD or downloads Mp3s, the RIAA suffers absolutely no direct expense from it. You're not using their media, you're not using their internet bits, you're not even using their electricity. So, in Mr. Valenti's case, he's saying I'm not allowed to buy a lawn mower and then, using this one as reference, build a duplicate one with my own resources. If it were being asked of the RIAA to make backups available for the consumer, well that'd be a different story.
Which leads to this point:
"Why don't they make an ironclad guarantee that anyone who presented at least 51% of a damaged CD or DVD--no matter how old--would be given a new copy? "
They should be doing that. They absolutely should be doing that. But since they don't do that, it makes one wonder how they're supposed to know they're buying a license to listen to music, not a pretty CD with music on it. Grr.
It seems that the Record Industry has forgotten that sales are dependent on both product and service. Customers'll come buy your stuff, but you still need to treat them good. Soft drink companies come to mind. They produce a consumable. You can get them anywhere, often times without any sort of human interaction what soever. Yet, they still make you glad to be a customer. Sometimes they give away prizes. Sometimes they entertain you with amusing commercials. (well, Coke moreso than Pepsi) Sometimes they even respond to supply and demand. Buy 12 cans of Coke, pay less per oz. than you'd pay for one can of Coke. I don't think softdrink companies could get away with demanding that customers only buy 24 packs at a time. No single can for you.
"Exactly. That is why I only shoplift at stores that do not have that pesky 'Shoplifters will be prosecuted' sign."
I really don't like when comments like this are modded up. These oversimplified metaphors are not useful. It's like when Valenti likened having backup copies of music to recieving a replacement lawn mower after it has been run over. Did he make a startling point, or did he give his enemies reason to think "Is this man an idiot? There's nothing similar about..."?
"Which I thought was stupid. If I stole it then it's not a purchase so therefore it says "steal here for free"."
When I worked at McDonald's a friend of mine pointed something interesting out to me. He handed me a container for a Quarter Pounder and pointed at the verbage that read "Please put Litter in its Place." I said "so?" And he said "In order to turn it into litter, I have to put it on the ground. Therefore, it's place is outside the trashcan."
I pretty much thought he was a dork over that convo, but I had to admit that "Please throw this into a trash can when you're done" would have been less troublesome.
"Never mind if it was a team effort, you basically admit that you _personally_ could not do any better. And by that, I don't mean just you working on the project, but rounding up the team necessary to pull it off as well."
Anybody else read some broken logic in this?
"Let me see some of your work, I'm sure I could pick out far more flaws."
He's got a link to some of his art in his sig. Go look at it. But we should play by your rules. Unless you can show better artwork than he's done, you can't criticize it.
" I can't guess how effective it would actually be, though."
Would the effectiveness really matter? If a card like you suggests fell out that read "Don't share this on the internet!" then the RIAA's got a case. "People can't avoid this!!"
I like your idea. I think the RIAA should do this.
"Because it is totally true, and is something that has been stated in numerous reviews. There is far more than mere 'fundamentals' that are similar - the main crux of the game is the same."
Funny, I went skimming around the reviews. I found one that supported your statement, and a handful of others that had lots of good things to say about the evolutions of the game. There's something I'll concede to: the game's not revolutionary, but it's a heck of an evolution. I'll settle onn that. However, something very important about SMS, you don't play it the same as you play Mario 64. You may be after sunshine sprites or whatever, the road getting there is very different. You have to think about the world in a much different way than you had to in Mario 64.
"For Gods sake, even Nintendo themselves owned up that SMS didn't live up to expectations."
They're talking about their sales numbers. Yes, Nintendo has taken a very significant hit in popularity.
"Incorrect - it is mere zealotry to say that SMS is all that different to Mario 64."
Riiiight. Never mind the FLUDD pack with all that brings, the much broader variety in how challenges are solved, and the different state of mind you have to be in to play this game, it's the same because you run and jump and the guy wears a little red hat.
Sorry, hit submit when I meant to hit preview.
"Half arsed assumption is believing that SMS is significantly different to Mario 64"
This alone disproves your point. If you don't see the difference between SMS and Mario 64, then how can anybody take you seriously? It's got some of the same fundamentals, no argument there. It is, though, a hell of a lot richer of an experience over Mario 64. Being good at Mario 64 does not make you good at Mario Sunshine. You still have a lot to learn in order to do anything useful in that game.
That's why nobody is taking you seriously. It's got nothing to do with Nintendo zealousy, it has to do with you not opening your eyes. Nintendo did a fine job, the defect is with you. If you don't enjoy that style of game, fine, perfectly okay, no problem here. Just don't go around saying Mario Sunshine is just like Mario64. That's what's getting people to argue with you.
"Half arsed assumption is believing that SMS is significantly different to Mario 64"
This comment alone disproves your point.
"I didn't say that JUST having the same characters makes it a rehash. But many of their games are rehashes, and using the same characters for nearly twenty years reinforces that view."
Heh, no, it doesn't.
"No, it is the usual GC-owner response that signifies that they cannot understand why not everyone finds Nintendo games fun."
Nice try, but no. This isn't Nintendo zealousy talking, it's somebody who's arguing with your details that sound an awful lot like frequent complaints made by the people who haven't played these games.
"If you cannot see that SMS is very similar to Mario 64, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews, and is one critisism that many people have said about the game."
If you cannot see the glaring differences between the two games, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews.
"Once again, it is allways a case of "No, the problem is definetly NOT Nintendo! The problem is YOU!" from the Nintendo camp."
In this case, the problem is that you presented yourself badly.
"You are talking out of your arse, as I do own a Gc and have played those games. But hey, I must be lying, right? The problem MUST be with me, right?"
Oh I'm sure you picked it up, made Mario run around and jump a bit, and then said "this is just like Mario 64! Dammit!" Yep, the problem must be with you.
"And you say that I talk out of my arse? Hoo boy! "
Still do.
"I knew that I would get this type of response, though - it happens every time I see someone start critisising Nintendo games. Within 3 or 4 posts, the Nintendo camp starts saying that the other person doesn't know what they are talking about. I got a post modded down, and all I said was that taking Metroid into 3D was not innovative."
As I've said, and you've pointed out, you brought it on yourself. You came in and said something that's easily disputable. Instead of listening to the disputes, you just sit there like "Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption. It must be all that Nintendo zealousy! It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't. Oh well, my dissatisfaction must be Nintendo's fault."
You should re-examine how you sound to people informed on the topic of which you speak instead of trying to blame them for having a rebuttal.