This is actually the thing that makes me chuckle with 5G. Nearly 60% of Americans either live in Suburbs or in a Rural part of the US. I look around the suburbs I live in and something is missing here: Telephone poles, or just poles in general. Most of the articles I see talking about 5G roll out always mention placing the mini-cell towers up on telephone poles or power lines. Most suburbs I've been in don't have this kind of above ground infrastructure. So I've just come to assume that 5G isn't rolling out past the large cities.
I haven't looked into it but I wouldn't be surprised to learn the telecoms got grants and tax-credits to roll out 5G; and this is just playing out to be the bandwidth scandal all over again.
There are some technical difficulties with this, but I think it could do well if Google is smart with their marketing.
The biggest hurdle will be getting people to sign up for it. I can't see people paying a subscription fee to stream from the cloud on top of buying games to play on the cloud as well. Theoretically it could be a better investment for say a parent than just buying a game console, but I think most people will be short sighted. Lets say Google prices the sub at $10/month. Most game consoles release at about $400-500. A $10/month sub that always gets you the most top of the line [virtual] PC won't hit a comparative cost until after about 3-4 years. Unfortunately, I think people will see that $10 a month and just think its too much when compared with other subs they are probably paying for, such as Netflix, Spotify, cable TV, etc.
I think a smart way to tackle this might be to include Stadia in existing bundles. For example, if you have YouTube Premium or YouTube TV, then you get Stadia for free and maybe a 10-20% discount on your first game purchase.
During my one trip to LV a few years ago, I saw the rail from the ground. Me and my brother considered using the monorail at one point to get from one part of the strip to the other, but its not easy to find when you are going from the main street of the strip, into a casino, to the monorail. The signage for it was horrible, so I think the casino's just got way too caught up on trying to keep people from using it. In the end we just Uber-ed or walked.
We'll revisit this proposal in 20 years when its obvious that everyone's efforts to try and curb emissions has completely failed. Keeping with the trend of humanity being completely reactionary in all this.
From what I've read stirring up racial animosity seems to be a big part of the plan, including things like drumming up support for BLM while at the same time marshaling forces against it.
Yep this is the clever kind of stuff Russia did in the last election. They'd set up protests for Political Issue A and then set up counter protesters to show up for the other side. Often times both groups didn't even realize they were puppets for these Russian groups.
Comments aren't useless, its just that the YT comment system is horrific. Its impossible to view comments on videos with 1k+ comments because of how they load. They lack any kind of threading system really, so you can't have easy to follow conversations on there. If YT would implement a karma system where upvotes improve your karma and then they filter bad karma commenters, then the YT comments section wouldn't be... "the YT comments sections."
Is this fault of people failing to read or is it the fault of too much information now? It's been said the medical field has hidden discoveries lying around all over the place in previous studies but due to the quantity of research being done now, its becoming more challenging for researchers to stay caught up anything other than their own small field.
The fact of the matter is that all the low-hanging fruit has been picked and things are getting harder.
Not just getting harder, but more expensive. The major discoveries made at the end of the 19th century and start of the 20th century were "cheap." Now in order to explore the nature of reality even further, it often requires that millions if not billions of dollars be spent to build specialty equipment in order to verify findings.
Some googling shows a number of articles that China is planning to dump billions of dollars into Nigeria in various areas. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that telecoms in Nigeria are also working closely with China and in exchange for money and favors, they are routing traffic -- ie: acting as an arm of the Chinese Intelligence agency.
I think the West should keep an eye on all the countries that China gets involved with via the One Belt One Road initiative, because those could be countries that might opt to route traffic to China as well.
Another possible reason for the Crystal City pick is because of a major contract the Pentagon is trying hammer out. Its a $10 Billion contract that's aiming to move large portions of the military systems (Administrative stuff I'm guessing) into the cloud. A number of companies are competing for it right now but the contract is a "winner takes all" type so it can't be broken into a series of sub-contracts and doled out to smaller businesses. This means the winner is likely to be a big player such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, or maybe Cisco(?).
What better way to improve your odds of scoring the contract than to have one of your HQs just "across the street" from the Pentagon?
I had been hoping that Amazon would choose a city that could handle to have a large company like Amazon show up; instead, Amazon picked two cities/regions that already have ridiculous issues with real estate. NYC at least has a semi-functional public transit system, but my understanding with DC is that the metro doesn't stretch out far enough to accommodate most people living in the suburbs, resulting in long commutes. There are a number of cities that would have been a better choice and probably handled Amazon's impact on real estate much better (Atlanta, Austin, Dallas, Miami).
Liberal here. I'm not the biggest free market proponent, I'm for socializing a number of obvious industries. That said, I don't support many of these tariffs because they just don't make any sense to me. Most of the tariffs look like attempts to magically turn the clocks backwards and bring back industries that we gutted in the US decades ago. Tariffs in industries we already have or are in their infancy make more sense to me, though it'd probably be better to subsidize those industries temporarily to help them out instead of tariffing competitors. Countries get more backlash for tariffs than they do for subsidizing by my reckoning.
I don't know much about South America's resources very well, but I know another factor in the electronics manufacturing in China was due to a large number of rare earth metal deposits (which generate a large amount of ground water toxins during mining, see the lax environmental regulations again). I know Brazil has some mines, but I can't tell if they knew about those mines in the 80s or not. I found a slide online that shows China's rare earth mining accelerating drastically in the mid-80s. That really helped with the decision to turn China into a manufacturing power house; at least in electronics.
There is still one thing those "normal nations" were missing and are still missing, that China provided a lot of these electronic hardware manufacturers: little to no operating regulation.
It's starting to change very slowly, but for the longest time, China had incredibly lax environmental regulations. The production of some electronics results in a fair amount of waste that can be pricey to handle in "normal countries." Also, work environment safety is really lax in China as well which helps draw down the price associated with building the products.
This will continue to be the case in a lot of parts of the world in the future to come. Poor regions have no reason to care about health and safety when 80% of the population is poor and possibly starving.
The problem with this stuff is that the interaction with the tech is too vague unlike say Cruise-control. The operation of cruise control is very straight forward, arm it, set your speed, and brake or cancel when you want to stop. These other systems provide little in the way for you to understand the limits of the tech and get a feel for them. The manufacturers want some of these systems to function similar to air-bags or anti-lock brakes, but people want to rely on them more actively than this.
I believe Home assistants (Alexa, Siri, Google Home) also have a similar issue in a way. I've watched my parents that are almost in their 60s now interact with the Google Home assistant. There aren't any readily available manuals to help you understand how to work with the Home Assistant so I've often caught them trying to talk to beyond what its capable of. ex: They expect G.Home to maintain conversation context. They expect it to be able to handle some actions without using very specific commands ("Ok Google, turn the living room lights all the way up."). They expect it to work out of the box on things like Reminders. They expect it to be able to tell you what it can and can't do ("Ok Google, are you able to turn my sprinklers on?").
At this point, user data is valuable and ads are valuable.
Ads are perceived as valuable, but I think that is slowly becoming less the case. Ads of today don't function in the same way they use to. The ads that mostly do work are ads for things like Coke vs Pepsi, laundry detergent, or other things you get at the supermarket; there the ads serve to "prime" you to buy a particular brand. A lot of the ads I have seen (which is few thanks to uBlock) have been to "Come to my website and buy this thing!" and I don't think those are nearly as effective.
This sounds cool but I feel like every time there is a big announcement about something amazing involving Quantum Physics, the first thing everyone mentions is how it'll be useful in nanotechnology and quantum computing. Unfortunately, no one ever really explains how its useful and what the actual application in those fields are, so I'm left wondering if any of this is really that useful or just simply that the reporters have 0 clue and just toss that in to make it seem important.
Twitter/FB/YT should only be liable for content when they don't remove content that has been flagged. This is similar to how DMCA and Copyright material works on sites where people can upload music or videos. If someone emails and asks that content be removed, if the provider doesn't do it, then they open themselves up to lawsuits. You can already report posts on Twitter/FB/YT though, so I think this is all covered.
About 3 weeks ago, Hank of the Vlogbrothers put up a vlog where he questioned whether we need to reconsider how the First Amendment works now. The basic premise of his post was questioning whether private platforms could eventually reach a size and scope such that they become public forums upon which free speech must be protected. I don't think he's in support of this, but was simply airing the general thought and outrage that some people (conservatives) are having over the censorship that is occurring on various platforms. In other words, the public is starting to feel that free speech is something that should be protected from businesses, not just the government.
I personally don't think this should or will happen. At the end of the day, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are private businesses that let people on the platform and let them say what they want, for free. The companies have to manage and pay for the servers and infrastructure that keeps all of that running, which gives them the power to decide what they want on their platforms. Is it censoring? Yes, but its not much different from a business owner kicking you out of their shop for cursing up a storm.
If society decides that free speech is something that should exist within private businesses as well, then I think we'll start to see a lot products simply forgo allowing people to have speech in the first place. I know some services have stripped comments and reviews completely because they can be very toxic and are more trouble to police than anything else.
But the damage he's done to foreign relationships will last decades. It will be even harder for future presidents and future congresses to be able to work out deals with countries because everything will need to be put on the books as a law. Handshake agreements aren't worth anything now.
And Obama raised tariffs on Aluminum during his first term and the move didn't seem to bother anyone.
Unless you have a source for this, this seems like some Grade A BS. The only tariffs that I have been able to find that Obama implemented were tariffs on Tires and Solar Panels from China, Steel from South Korea, and beef tariffs from the EU. In many cases the Obama admin went through the process of bringing their grievances before the WTO and getting a general consensus among other countries that the US had been wronged and was in the right to impose some of these tariffs. The solar panel tariff is one case where Obama didn't do that and in fact China countered the tariff at the WTO later. Trump did none of this, he's waging a full out trade war by imposing tariffs across the board by claiming "national security" threats (so no WTO consensus). Nothing about this is an Apples to Apples comparison between what Obama did and what Trump did and the media/political backlash.
The US is the only country that is expected to sacrifice anything and everything to placate the "international" community.
You state this as if the US gained nothing from putting it self out there both in manpower and in financial power. The fact that we are involved in a lot situations (not just wars) means we have some sway in the politics at play, because at the end of the day we could take our ball and go home. Hypothetical example: The US wants to shift some foreign financial policy between the US and France but France has given the diplomatic middle finger. The US can go to Germany and put pressure on them to "encourage" France to see some reason in the situation, we can do that because we could decide not to keep some military bases in Germany or decide to wind down the troop presence in Germany which has an effect on local economics. Those changes in US-France policy could have an affect that allows US companies to operate more easily in France which means more US workers in France, which means more jobs to fill back in the US. Foreign policy is not a simple Zero-Sum game.
Thinking a little more ahead, I'd also say HTSes have a role in fusion plants as well. The use of helium would work and isn't even that crazy really especially when you consider how much helium CERN is probably using at the LHC, but costs and power requirements tied into making LN must be better.
Looking even further ahead into the realm of sci-fi. Orbital Rings would benefit immensely from this.
I still have my fingers crossed that one day we'll find a HTS that operates decently around -30C that doesn't require crazy setups (ie: Hydrogen Sulfide and its crazy high pressures in order to superconduct @ -70C).
I was pretty pissed that the Verge left out the Tweets from Deroir in the actual article. It really paints a one-sided picture and sets him up to be the bad guy.
Really interesting thread to read! However, allow me to disagree *slightly*. I dont believe the issue lies in the MMORPG genre itself (as your wording seemingly suggest). I believe the issue lies in the contraints of the Living Story's narrative design; (1 of 3)
When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3)
But, if instead players were given the option to meaningfully express *their* character through branching dialogue options (which also aren't just on the checklist for an achievement that forces you through all dialogue options), (3 of 4 cause I count seemingly...)
then perhaps players would be more invested in the roleplaying aspect of that particular MMORPG. Nonetheless, I appreciate the insightful thread! (End)
Personally, nothing about this came off as sexist or trying to "set a woman straight;" its simple, civil criticism to something someone plastered onto the web publicly. Maybe this was the straw that broke the camel's back and set her off. Verge stated that her posts were motivated by the whole "Dev & Community interaction" that is expected, but if that's the case, then I think the better option would have been to post her 27 tweets into the ArenaNet forum or on a company developer blog where Community Managers could moderate the discourse. Either way, Deroir's not at fault here any more than anyone replying to posts here on Slashdot are.
If Apple loses this, then maybe they'll be forced to provide options for allowing side-loading apps with the general populace. This would allow GPL licensed libraries and applications to become available on iOS devices. The GPL requires that code licensed under it be redistributal and usable anywhere; however, there is a license agreement when you make and publish apps on the App Store that limits the code reuse capabilities. Some relevant links, 12.
Slashdot Mirror
Say you live in a city
This is actually the thing that makes me chuckle with 5G. Nearly 60% of Americans either live in Suburbs or in a Rural part of the US. I look around the suburbs I live in and something is missing here: Telephone poles, or just poles in general. Most of the articles I see talking about 5G roll out always mention placing the mini-cell towers up on telephone poles or power lines. Most suburbs I've been in don't have this kind of above ground infrastructure. So I've just come to assume that 5G isn't rolling out past the large cities.
I haven't looked into it but I wouldn't be surprised to learn the telecoms got grants and tax-credits to roll out 5G; and this is just playing out to be the bandwidth scandal all over again.
There are some technical difficulties with this, but I think it could do well if Google is smart with their marketing.
The biggest hurdle will be getting people to sign up for it. I can't see people paying a subscription fee to stream from the cloud on top of buying games to play on the cloud as well. Theoretically it could be a better investment for say a parent than just buying a game console, but I think most people will be short sighted. Lets say Google prices the sub at $10/month. Most game consoles release at about $400-500. A $10/month sub that always gets you the most top of the line [virtual] PC won't hit a comparative cost until after about 3-4 years. Unfortunately, I think people will see that $10 a month and just think its too much when compared with other subs they are probably paying for, such as Netflix, Spotify, cable TV, etc.
I think a smart way to tackle this might be to include Stadia in existing bundles. For example, if you have YouTube Premium or YouTube TV, then you get Stadia for free and maybe a 10-20% discount on your first game purchase.
Hence, the quote: "Success occurs when opportunity meets preparation."
There is also the similar quote supposedly attributed to Seneca: "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity."
During my one trip to LV a few years ago, I saw the rail from the ground. Me and my brother considered using the monorail at one point to get from one part of the strip to the other, but its not easy to find when you are going from the main street of the strip, into a casino, to the monorail. The signage for it was horrible, so I think the casino's just got way too caught up on trying to keep people from using it. In the end we just Uber-ed or walked.
We'll revisit this proposal in 20 years when its obvious that everyone's efforts to try and curb emissions has completely failed. Keeping with the trend of humanity being completely reactionary in all this.
From what I've read stirring up racial animosity seems to be a big part of the plan, including things like drumming up support for BLM while at the same time marshaling forces against it.
Yep this is the clever kind of stuff Russia did in the last election. They'd set up protests for Political Issue A and then set up counter protesters to show up for the other side. Often times both groups didn't even realize they were puppets for these Russian groups.
Comments aren't useless, its just that the YT comment system is horrific. Its impossible to view comments on videos with 1k+ comments because of how they load. They lack any kind of threading system really, so you can't have easy to follow conversations on there. If YT would implement a karma system where upvotes improve your karma and then they filter bad karma commenters, then the YT comments section wouldn't be... "the YT comments sections."
Is this fault of people failing to read or is it the fault of too much information now? It's been said the medical field has hidden discoveries lying around all over the place in previous studies but due to the quantity of research being done now, its becoming more challenging for researchers to stay caught up anything other than their own small field.
The fact of the matter is that all the low-hanging fruit has been picked and things are getting harder.
Not just getting harder, but more expensive. The major discoveries made at the end of the 19th century and start of the 20th century were "cheap." Now in order to explore the nature of reality even further, it often requires that millions if not billions of dollars be spent to build specialty equipment in order to verify findings.
Some googling shows a number of articles that China is planning to dump billions of dollars into Nigeria in various areas. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that telecoms in Nigeria are also working closely with China and in exchange for money and favors, they are routing traffic -- ie: acting as an arm of the Chinese Intelligence agency.
I think the West should keep an eye on all the countries that China gets involved with via the One Belt One Road initiative, because those could be countries that might opt to route traffic to China as well.
Another possible reason for the Crystal City pick is because of a major contract the Pentagon is trying hammer out. Its a $10 Billion contract that's aiming to move large portions of the military systems (Administrative stuff I'm guessing) into the cloud. A number of companies are competing for it right now but the contract is a "winner takes all" type so it can't be broken into a series of sub-contracts and doled out to smaller businesses. This means the winner is likely to be a big player such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, or maybe Cisco(?).
What better way to improve your odds of scoring the contract than to have one of your HQs just "across the street" from the Pentagon?
I had been hoping that Amazon would choose a city that could handle to have a large company like Amazon show up; instead, Amazon picked two cities/regions that already have ridiculous issues with real estate. NYC at least has a semi-functional public transit system, but my understanding with DC is that the metro doesn't stretch out far enough to accommodate most people living in the suburbs, resulting in long commutes. There are a number of cities that would have been a better choice and probably handled Amazon's impact on real estate much better (Atlanta, Austin, Dallas, Miami).
Liberal here. I'm not the biggest free market proponent, I'm for socializing a number of obvious industries. That said, I don't support many of these tariffs because they just don't make any sense to me. Most of the tariffs look like attempts to magically turn the clocks backwards and bring back industries that we gutted in the US decades ago. Tariffs in industries we already have or are in their infancy make more sense to me, though it'd probably be better to subsidize those industries temporarily to help them out instead of tariffing competitors. Countries get more backlash for tariffs than they do for subsidizing by my reckoning.
Right, but unless we're supposing nature makes light sail capable material naturally...
Humans haven't launched enough light sails for it be our trash, so its somebody else's trash in space most likely and the paper does suggest that.
I don't know much about South America's resources very well, but I know another factor in the electronics manufacturing in China was due to a large number of rare earth metal deposits (which generate a large amount of ground water toxins during mining, see the lax environmental regulations again). I know Brazil has some mines, but I can't tell if they knew about those mines in the 80s or not. I found a slide online that shows China's rare earth mining accelerating drastically in the mid-80s. That really helped with the decision to turn China into a manufacturing power house; at least in electronics.
There is still one thing those "normal nations" were missing and are still missing, that China provided a lot of these electronic hardware manufacturers: little to no operating regulation.
It's starting to change very slowly, but for the longest time, China had incredibly lax environmental regulations. The production of some electronics results in a fair amount of waste that can be pricey to handle in "normal countries." Also, work environment safety is really lax in China as well which helps draw down the price associated with building the products.
This will continue to be the case in a lot of parts of the world in the future to come. Poor regions have no reason to care about health and safety when 80% of the population is poor and possibly starving.
The problem with this stuff is that the interaction with the tech is too vague unlike say Cruise-control. The operation of cruise control is very straight forward, arm it, set your speed, and brake or cancel when you want to stop. These other systems provide little in the way for you to understand the limits of the tech and get a feel for them. The manufacturers want some of these systems to function similar to air-bags or anti-lock brakes, but people want to rely on them more actively than this.
I believe Home assistants (Alexa, Siri, Google Home) also have a similar issue in a way. I've watched my parents that are almost in their 60s now interact with the Google Home assistant. There aren't any readily available manuals to help you understand how to work with the Home Assistant so I've often caught them trying to talk to beyond what its capable of. ex: They expect G.Home to maintain conversation context. They expect it to be able to handle some actions without using very specific commands ("Ok Google, turn the living room lights all the way up."). They expect it to work out of the box on things like Reminders. They expect it to be able to tell you what it can and can't do ("Ok Google, are you able to turn my sprinklers on?").
At this point, user data is valuable and ads are valuable.
Ads are perceived as valuable, but I think that is slowly becoming less the case. Ads of today don't function in the same way they use to. The ads that mostly do work are ads for things like Coke vs Pepsi, laundry detergent, or other things you get at the supermarket; there the ads serve to "prime" you to buy a particular brand. A lot of the ads I have seen (which is few thanks to uBlock) have been to "Come to my website and buy this thing!" and I don't think those are nearly as effective.
This sounds cool but I feel like every time there is a big announcement about something amazing involving Quantum Physics, the first thing everyone mentions is how it'll be useful in nanotechnology and quantum computing. Unfortunately, no one ever really explains how its useful and what the actual application in those fields are, so I'm left wondering if any of this is really that useful or just simply that the reporters have 0 clue and just toss that in to make it seem important.
Twitter/FB/YT should only be liable for content when they don't remove content that has been flagged. This is similar to how DMCA and Copyright material works on sites where people can upload music or videos. If someone emails and asks that content be removed, if the provider doesn't do it, then they open themselves up to lawsuits. You can already report posts on Twitter/FB/YT though, so I think this is all covered.
About 3 weeks ago, Hank of the Vlogbrothers put up a vlog where he questioned whether we need to reconsider how the First Amendment works now. The basic premise of his post was questioning whether private platforms could eventually reach a size and scope such that they become public forums upon which free speech must be protected. I don't think he's in support of this, but was simply airing the general thought and outrage that some people (conservatives) are having over the censorship that is occurring on various platforms. In other words, the public is starting to feel that free speech is something that should be protected from businesses, not just the government.
I personally don't think this should or will happen. At the end of the day, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are private businesses that let people on the platform and let them say what they want, for free. The companies have to manage and pay for the servers and infrastructure that keeps all of that running, which gives them the power to decide what they want on their platforms. Is it censoring? Yes, but its not much different from a business owner kicking you out of their shop for cursing up a storm.
If society decides that free speech is something that should exist within private businesses as well, then I think we'll start to see a lot products simply forgo allowing people to have speech in the first place. I know some services have stripped comments and reviews completely because they can be very toxic and are more trouble to police than anything else.
Forget Trump. He will be gone in a few years.
But the damage he's done to foreign relationships will last decades. It will be even harder for future presidents and future congresses to be able to work out deals with countries because everything will need to be put on the books as a law. Handshake agreements aren't worth anything now.
And Obama raised tariffs on Aluminum during his first term and the move didn't seem to bother anyone.
Unless you have a source for this, this seems like some Grade A BS. The only tariffs that I have been able to find that Obama implemented were tariffs on Tires and Solar Panels from China, Steel from South Korea, and beef tariffs from the EU. In many cases the Obama admin went through the process of bringing their grievances before the WTO and getting a general consensus among other countries that the US had been wronged and was in the right to impose some of these tariffs. The solar panel tariff is one case where Obama didn't do that and in fact China countered the tariff at the WTO later. Trump did none of this, he's waging a full out trade war by imposing tariffs across the board by claiming "national security" threats (so no WTO consensus). Nothing about this is an Apples to Apples comparison between what Obama did and what Trump did and the media/political backlash.
The US is the only country that is expected to sacrifice anything and everything to placate the "international" community.
You state this as if the US gained nothing from putting it self out there both in manpower and in financial power. The fact that we are involved in a lot situations (not just wars) means we have some sway in the politics at play, because at the end of the day we could take our ball and go home. Hypothetical example: The US wants to shift some foreign financial policy between the US and France but France has given the diplomatic middle finger. The US can go to Germany and put pressure on them to "encourage" France to see some reason in the situation, we can do that because we could decide not to keep some military bases in Germany or decide to wind down the troop presence in Germany which has an effect on local economics. Those changes in US-France policy could have an affect that allows US companies to operate more easily in France which means more US workers in France, which means more jobs to fill back in the US. Foreign policy is not a simple Zero-Sum game.
Thinking a little more ahead, I'd also say HTSes have a role in fusion plants as well. The use of helium would work and isn't even that crazy really especially when you consider how much helium CERN is probably using at the LHC, but costs and power requirements tied into making LN must be better.
Looking even further ahead into the realm of sci-fi. Orbital Rings would benefit immensely from this.
I still have my fingers crossed that one day we'll find a HTS that operates decently around -30C that doesn't require crazy setups (ie: Hydrogen Sulfide and its crazy high pressures in order to superconduct @ -70C).
I was pretty pissed that the Verge left out the Tweets from Deroir in the actual article. It really paints a one-sided picture and sets him up to be the bad guy.
Really interesting thread to read! However, allow me to disagree *slightly*. I dont believe the issue lies in the MMORPG genre itself (as your wording seemingly suggest). I believe the issue lies in the contraints of the Living Story's narrative design; (1 of 3)
Source
When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3)
Source
But, if instead players were given the option to meaningfully express *their* character through branching dialogue options (which also aren't just on the checklist for an achievement that forces you through all dialogue options), (3 of 4 cause I count seemingly...)
Source
then perhaps players would be more invested in the roleplaying aspect of that particular MMORPG.
Nonetheless, I appreciate the insightful thread! (End)
Source
Personally, nothing about this came off as sexist or trying to "set a woman straight;" its simple, civil criticism to something someone plastered onto the web publicly. Maybe this was the straw that broke the camel's back and set her off. Verge stated that her posts were motivated by the whole "Dev & Community interaction" that is expected, but if that's the case, then I think the better option would have been to post her 27 tweets into the ArenaNet forum or on a company developer blog where Community Managers could moderate the discourse. Either way, Deroir's not at fault here any more than anyone replying to posts here on Slashdot are.
If Apple loses this, then maybe they'll be forced to provide options for allowing side-loading apps with the general populace. This would allow GPL licensed libraries and applications to become available on iOS devices. The GPL requires that code licensed under it be redistributal and usable anywhere; however, there is a license agreement when you make and publish apps on the App Store that limits the code reuse capabilities. Some relevant links, 1 2.