The Wiimote is engineered to be thrown and/or swung around your hand.
So is a tennis racket, and a baseball bat. They need straps too, right?
They have no buttons on them. You don't swing a tennis racquet toward an expensive and fragile device while letting go of the button on the back with your pointer finger, which may for some people cause the three other fingers holding on to lift away a bit as well, as is done in Wii Bowling. Now think about their expanded demographic that they targeted.
I was pointing out the fallacy in the original post of blaming the victim of a faulty device for the damage it caused. And that the author hid the fallacy by repeating the story with a crucial fact removed to try to make the case sound clear-cut to justify his point of view.
Seriously, if you break your TV with a remote, its your fault.
You're ignoring the circumstances of the situation. What's next, if you kill yourself in a car accident, it's your fault? Even if the seatbelt broke because it couldn't take the force of a crash? And it would have saved your life if it was engineered properly?
Or how about if you jump off a plane to your death, it's your fault. So your parachute didn't deploy... Who cares? You killed yourself.
I'm sorry, but the fact that the strap broke is relevant. There's a reason the word "ignorant" is so closely related to the word "ignore." Sometimes ignorant people have the facts, but just toss them aside.
We don't need to bother with kill switches since any potential killbots would have a pre-set kill limit. Knowing that weakness, we can just send wave after wave of our soldiers at them until they reach that limit and shut down.
As Windows annoyances go, EULA's are fairly low down on the list for most people.
Maybe so, but it's still an annoyance, and it's one that will be seen very early and hurt first impressions. Also, though Windows users may be used to EULA's while installing software, getting one when they're actually trying to run a program is going to be jarring.
In this age of user-hostile software, I've seen people impressed when I pointed out the lack of EULA's. It helps to show that Ubuntu really is something different from the dystopian Windows software ecology and can free them from the fear of installing new software or updates. I'd hate to see EULA's start appearing in Ubuntu.
It's entirely unreasonable to demand a special right that, if everyone got it, would completely ruin the experience. Imagine if every application popped up an EULA the first time you ran it. Per user or per boot of the LiveCD. One of the main selling points of Ubuntu is that it's devoid of common Windows annoyances, one of which is the constant popups that don't serve the user in any conceivable way and nobody reads anyway.
You make a broad statement about Windows, without explaining what problem or problems you are encountering,
I'm not encountering any problems with Windows because I'm not using it. Yeah, I made a "broad statement" about Windows. That's because I was talking about a general widespread problem covering almost all aspects of Windows, not one specific instance of the issue.
and then attribute them to idealogy (technicality - you're specifically claiming that Open Source is different, which I'm interpreting as the Open Source idealogoy).
You're really reaching here. I never said anything about why Windows doesn't improve. My point is that it doesn't, and therefore most old criticisms from Windows 2000 have remained valid today. Those criticisms are acceptable debate because they're still true today. On the other side, Linux is frequently attacked with complaints that were once true but today are only misconceptions because Linux actually improves things. Pointing this out is NOT a double standard.
How about backing up YOUR claim?
You want examples of my claim, and that's fine. For starters, let's look at the way software installation works. Setup programs run with admin rights, extract files to the disk, then register an Add/Remove Programs entry pointing to the removal program. That's how it worked on Windows 95, and that's how it still works in Vista.
And over the years, across Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, and Vista machines, I've seen plenty of instances where programs couldn't be removed because an uninstaller was crashing or its file was missing. Recently, I saw a Vista machine where every single 'Remove' button was deleted.
What has Microsoft done to improve this feature during the last 13 years? Well, in Windows 2000/ME, they made the dialog look nicer. And in Vista they finally renamed it to "Programs and Features" (since it was never able to actually add anything). Oh, yeah, and there's Windows Installer now, which is just an API to help developers create installers that work the old broken way. And now Microsoft provides a tool to remove the uninstall data for programs you've given up on removing properly. What they need to do is make software installation work more like a package management system where installed files are tracked (see/var/lib/dpkg/info on Ubuntu or Debian) and removal is done through a single standardized program.
Another issue related to software installation: getting a Windows system fully up to date often requires rebooting multiple times. In Windows 95 and Vista.
Windows 95 had issues with moving the installation to new hardware. It would detect the new hardware, but also remember the old, leading to conflicts. But at least there was a trick you could do, deleting some registry keys to remove all hardware information. Then it would redetect everything and go back to a fully working state (usually).
When Windows 2000 came around, it'd just bluescreen with INACCESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE, being unable to boot from an IDE controller other than the one it had during the initial install. You just had to reinstall. Rather than solving this problem, Windows XP and Vista absolutely embraced this flaw, making it so you also had to re-authorize on hardware changes.
There's also the overzealous disk caching in Windows 2000 that frequently pages out program data. Doing so requires writing to the disk at the time of paging, then reading it again when the data is needed again. And you're doing the writing part while you're also trying to read files from disk. Kills performance. And if instead you just expired t
Because that logic isn't a fallacy when applied to Windows. Unlike popular Open Source software, Windows isn't really improving with time.
Try this: Go back to Windows 2000 for a while, and as you use it, make a list of all its faults. Then install Vista, and start crossing the fixed issues off your list. Despite seven years of development, I doubt you'll have much to cross off.
Now repeat the experiment with Ubuntu 4.10 and 8.04. The difference is huge even though that represents half as much development time as Microsoft had between Windows 2000 and Vista.
I'm confused. Are you talking about something other than what's in the Layouts tab of System -> Preferences -> Keyboard? Because there's also the keyboard setup that happens during the install process. What's missing?
Then how come you're acting so much more brainwashed than the people with positive things to say about Macs?
"It just works" is obviously referring to the machine being usable on day one, without requiring a lot of work first. In other words, the software to do what you want to do is already there and there's no preinstalled deadweight bloatware or nagware that you need to waste time removing. It also suggests that the software is of higher quality and crashes less often.
I'm sorry, but it's completely fair for Apple to boast that their OS "just works" when most people use Windows. Microsoft's OS is a broken (non-working) mess on day one, compared to MacOS or Ubuntu. Whether it's a clean install of Windows and you're missing apps, or it's direct from Dell/HP/etc and bogged down with junk, either way you're a good chunk of work away from a decent experience. Then there's the issue of applying the updates, since some of those updates have to be installed by themselves and you have to reboot before more updates can be applied. And I've seen plenty of systems with "automatic updates" enabled that wouldn't get any new updates until I manually went to Windows Update.
As long as they're being compared to Windows, Macs definitely do "just work."
This campaign is going to be catching Apple representatives lying to their customers. How is that a bad thing? It's even good for the consumers that you claim are being harmed by this. And it's not like people will waste time waiting in lines; those meetings are scheduled.
The CNET article, by the way, was idiotic trolling. For example, the author truncated out the question part of question four, then complained that it wasn't a question. Seems like the author hastily skimmed what is only a couple pages of text, then wrote his article, which would explain why he mischaracterized the campaign so badly.
What's disturbing is how many people were willing to just accept this characterization as truth without even checking. I guess that's why we see so many political attack ads.
Only Majora's Mask and Donkey Kong absolutely require it. Beyond that, StarCraft 64 required it for Brood War content, and Perfect Dark could function without it, but most of the game wasn't available.
Finally, there were a lot of games that could take advantage of it, but I think most of them just used it to support high-res mode, which you'd often turn off anyway because the framerate was too low.
Before he had said he was absolutely against retroactive telecom immunity. Now he says he will vote for the bill even if it has the immunity in it. It is that simple. He flip-flopped
This attitude is an absolutely moronic anti-knowledge mind virus that's a plague to functioning democracy. You say that Obama must vote no if he's against telecom immunity. I guess he must also vote yes if he supports something in the bill. Tell me, if he supports one thing and is against another in the same bill, as is the case here, what happens? Does the flow of time grind to a halt to preserve the validity of your idiot-logic?
Let's take a look at what Obama actually said about this:
Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.
The above information is what people don't seek out when they believe what they hear in 30-second attack ads is enough to conclude somebody is a hypocrite or a flip-flopper. Please stop spreading your anti-knowledge attitude. The coming election is very important, and it's absolutely critical that we stop being idiots and start thinking by election day.
For all the valid criticisms of Apple and Microsoft, I think it can't be denied that they work towards usability for the average guy who doesn't know anything computers and doesn't care.
Because Microsoft and Apple wrote their own drivers for that modem, right? After all, that's what would be required for your conclusion to be supported by your anecdote.
That doesn't seem to be important to the world of Linux.
Uhh... Linux people DO want drivers. That's the point of the story. They want manufacturers to supply drivers for their OS just like the manufacturers already do for Microsoft's and Apple's.
If complaining that something should be different is the same thing as forcing someone to change it, then your own complaint is a forceful suppression of free speech, and I should call the police to have you arrested.
Moderators, the insightful mod is for non-fallacious reasoning, not for "I like his conclusion even though his argument is idiotic." The parent post is just a troll.
You're the moron who can't read and when your own bias can't perceive reality correctly, you project the opposite bias onto others.
Here are some facts to rationalize:
1. The Xorer trojan is a win32 executable. There was no exe in the language pack!
2. Even if there was an exe in there, it wouldn't be able to run and infect the computer.
3. It is perfectly reasonable, and in fact desired, for virus scanners to detect modifications made by viruses even if those modifications aren't copies of the original virus. The virus scanner picked up HTML code that is known to be inserted by Xorer. That is not the same as Xorer itself!
4. It's just a script tag pointed at some server. Since it's in an HTML file and not chrome, it should have no more privileges than any web page you browse to.
In other words, it's nothing more than an ad banner that shouldn't be there.
I have a Wii but I don't use it much. It's developed a weird and annoying problem with showing random white flecks in some textures and in the menu too.. I'm wondering if it overheated and got damaged at some point..
Yeah, your Wii's GPU went bad. That has happened to some people. You should check the warranty. It's good for one year, and if you register the serial number, they extend the warranty another 90 days. If something's wrong, don't let the warranty expire!
It's a pretty pain-free process. They actually track the purchase date when the system is bought and scanned at the store, so you don't need to track down any receipts for the warranty repair, just read them the serial number printed on the console. Then they send a shipping label, so you don't even have to pay shipping.
If the warranty is up, I hear it costs $75 to have them to repair it. That's a much better option than re-buying a new one for $250. And even if you don't care about owning a Wii anymore, why not repair it and sell it?
Slashdot Mirror
So is a tennis racket, and a baseball bat. They need straps too, right?
They have no buttons on them. You don't swing a tennis racquet toward an expensive and fragile device while letting go of the button on the back with your pointer finger, which may for some people cause the three other fingers holding on to lift away a bit as well, as is done in Wii Bowling. Now think about their expanded demographic that they targeted.
I was pointing out the fallacy in the original post of blaming the victim of a faulty device for the damage it caused. And that the author hid the fallacy by repeating the story with a crucial fact removed to try to make the case sound clear-cut to justify his point of view.
Kind of like if someone posted "Bob killed Steve. Killing is murder. Bob should go to prison" in response to a story about self-defense. First of all, anyone that thinks knowing that Bob killed Steve is enough to draw a conclusion like that lacks critical thinking skills. You need to know the details. And anyone who responds with that quote to the hypothetical situation is practicing denial: "a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence." That's what's going on en masse in this discussion. So many people are leaving out key facts, but some are even going as far as making stuff up to justify their knee-jerk reaction against all lawsuits no matter how well-justified.
Of course you're probably going to say "what the hell has this got to do with a game controller" again. In which case, my point is made.
Seriously, if you break your TV with a remote, its your fault.
You're ignoring the circumstances of the situation. What's next, if you kill yourself in a car accident, it's your fault? Even if the seatbelt broke because it couldn't take the force of a crash? And it would have saved your life if it was engineered properly?
Or how about if you jump off a plane to your death, it's your fault. So your parachute didn't deploy... Who cares? You killed yourself.
I'm sorry, but the fact that the strap broke is relevant. There's a reason the word "ignorant" is so closely related to the word "ignore." Sometimes ignorant people have the facts, but just toss them aside.
We don't need to bother with kill switches since any potential killbots would have a pre-set kill limit. Knowing that weakness, we can just send wave after wave of our soldiers at them until they reach that limit and shut down.
Apple will soon be selling pre-bricked laptops.
Hey, it worked for iPhones!
As Windows annoyances go, EULA's are fairly low down on the list for most people.
Maybe so, but it's still an annoyance, and it's one that will be seen very early and hurt first impressions. Also, though Windows users may be used to EULA's while installing software, getting one when they're actually trying to run a program is going to be jarring.
In this age of user-hostile software, I've seen people impressed when I pointed out the lack of EULA's. It helps to show that Ubuntu really is something different from the dystopian Windows software ecology and can free them from the fear of installing new software or updates. I'd hate to see EULA's start appearing in Ubuntu.
It's entirely unreasonable to demand a special right that, if everyone got it, would completely ruin the experience. Imagine if every application popped up an EULA the first time you ran it. Per user or per boot of the LiveCD. One of the main selling points of Ubuntu is that it's devoid of common Windows annoyances, one of which is the constant popups that don't serve the user in any conceivable way and nobody reads anyway.
What's the punctuation symbol for 'woosh'?
Amazingly, right here's the first accidental mod I've done (flamebait). Sorry. Posting to undo.
I believe you've summarized this story pretty well.
And you prove my original point.
There's a name for that.
You make a broad statement about Windows, without explaining what problem or problems you are encountering,
I'm not encountering any problems with Windows because I'm not using it. Yeah, I made a "broad statement" about Windows. That's because I was talking about a general widespread problem covering almost all aspects of Windows, not one specific instance of the issue.
and then attribute them to idealogy (technicality - you're specifically claiming that Open Source is different, which I'm interpreting as the Open Source idealogoy).
You're really reaching here. I never said anything about why Windows doesn't improve. My point is that it doesn't, and therefore most old criticisms from Windows 2000 have remained valid today. Those criticisms are acceptable debate because they're still true today. On the other side, Linux is frequently attacked with complaints that were once true but today are only misconceptions because Linux actually improves things. Pointing this out is NOT a double standard.
How about backing up YOUR claim?
You want examples of my claim, and that's fine. For starters, let's look at the way software installation works. Setup programs run with admin rights, extract files to the disk, then register an Add/Remove Programs entry pointing to the removal program. That's how it worked on Windows 95, and that's how it still works in Vista.
And over the years, across Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, and Vista machines, I've seen plenty of instances where programs couldn't be removed because an uninstaller was crashing or its file was missing. Recently, I saw a Vista machine where every single 'Remove' button was deleted.
What has Microsoft done to improve this feature during the last 13 years? Well, in Windows 2000/ME, they made the dialog look nicer. And in Vista they finally renamed it to "Programs and Features" (since it was never able to actually add anything). Oh, yeah, and there's Windows Installer now, which is just an API to help developers create installers that work the old broken way. And now Microsoft provides a tool to remove the uninstall data for programs you've given up on removing properly. What they need to do is make software installation work more like a package management system where installed files are tracked (see /var/lib/dpkg/info on Ubuntu or Debian) and removal is done through a single standardized program.
Another issue related to software installation: getting a Windows system fully up to date often requires rebooting multiple times. In Windows 95 and Vista.
Windows 95 had issues with moving the installation to new hardware. It would detect the new hardware, but also remember the old, leading to conflicts. But at least there was a trick you could do, deleting some registry keys to remove all hardware information. Then it would redetect everything and go back to a fully working state (usually).
When Windows 2000 came around, it'd just bluescreen with INACCESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE, being unable to boot from an IDE controller other than the one it had during the initial install. You just had to reinstall. Rather than solving this problem, Windows XP and Vista absolutely embraced this flaw, making it so you also had to re-authorize on hardware changes.
There's also the overzealous disk caching in Windows 2000 that frequently pages out program data. Doing so requires writing to the disk at the time of paging, then reading it again when the data is needed again. And you're doing the writing part while you're also trying to read files from disk. Kills performance. And if instead you just expired t
You haven't even explained what problem or problems you are encountering, but you've attributed them to ideology. How about backing up your claim?
At least say what the problem is. Beyond that, I'd really like to hear how ideology is to blame.
Because that logic isn't a fallacy when applied to Windows. Unlike popular Open Source software, Windows isn't really improving with time.
Try this: Go back to Windows 2000 for a while, and as you use it, make a list of all its faults. Then install Vista, and start crossing the fixed issues off your list. Despite seven years of development, I doubt you'll have much to cross off.
Now repeat the experiment with Ubuntu 4.10 and 8.04. The difference is huge even though that represents half as much development time as Microsoft had between Windows 2000 and Vista.
I'm confused. Are you talking about something other than what's in the Layouts tab of System -> Preferences -> Keyboard? Because there's also the keyboard setup that happens during the install process. What's missing?
In other words, it's a cult.
Then how come you're acting so much more brainwashed than the people with positive things to say about Macs?
"It just works" is obviously referring to the machine being usable on day one, without requiring a lot of work first. In other words, the software to do what you want to do is already there and there's no preinstalled deadweight bloatware or nagware that you need to waste time removing. It also suggests that the software is of higher quality and crashes less often.
I'm sorry, but it's completely fair for Apple to boast that their OS "just works" when most people use Windows. Microsoft's OS is a broken (non-working) mess on day one, compared to MacOS or Ubuntu. Whether it's a clean install of Windows and you're missing apps, or it's direct from Dell/HP/etc and bogged down with junk, either way you're a good chunk of work away from a decent experience. Then there's the issue of applying the updates, since some of those updates have to be installed by themselves and you have to reboot before more updates can be applied. And I've seen plenty of systems with "automatic updates" enabled that wouldn't get any new updates until I manually went to Windows Update.
As long as they're being compared to Windows, Macs definitely do "just work."
This campaign is going to be catching Apple representatives lying to their customers. How is that a bad thing? It's even good for the consumers that you claim are being harmed by this. And it's not like people will waste time waiting in lines; those meetings are scheduled.
The CNET article, by the way, was idiotic trolling. For example, the author truncated out the question part of question four, then complained that it wasn't a question. Seems like the author hastily skimmed what is only a couple pages of text, then wrote his article, which would explain why he mischaracterized the campaign so badly.
What's disturbing is how many people were willing to just accept this characterization as truth without even checking. I guess that's why we see so many political attack ads.
if you don't like the terms of the game, don't buy it.
OK.
As usual, it's on Wikipedia.
Only Majora's Mask and Donkey Kong absolutely require it. Beyond that, StarCraft 64 required it for Brood War content, and Perfect Dark could function without it, but most of the game wasn't available.
Finally, there were a lot of games that could take advantage of it, but I think most of them just used it to support high-res mode, which you'd often turn off anyway because the framerate was too low.
Before he had said he was absolutely against retroactive telecom immunity. Now he says he will vote for the bill even if it has the immunity in it. It is that simple. He flip-flopped
This attitude is an absolutely moronic anti-knowledge mind virus that's a plague to functioning democracy. You say that Obama must vote no if he's against telecom immunity. I guess he must also vote yes if he supports something in the bill. Tell me, if he supports one thing and is against another in the same bill, as is the case here, what happens? Does the flow of time grind to a halt to preserve the validity of your idiot-logic?
Let's take a look at what Obama actually said about this:
Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.
The above information is what people don't seek out when they believe what they hear in 30-second attack ads is enough to conclude somebody is a hypocrite or a flip-flopper. Please stop spreading your anti-knowledge attitude. The coming election is very important, and it's absolutely critical that we stop being idiots and start thinking by election day.
Because Microsoft and Apple wrote their own drivers for that modem, right? After all, that's what would be required for your conclusion to be supported by your anecdote.
That doesn't seem to be important to the world of Linux.Uhh... Linux people DO want drivers. That's the point of the story. They want manufacturers to supply drivers for their OS just like the manufacturers already do for Microsoft's and Apple's.
If complaining that something should be different is the same thing as forcing someone to change it, then your own complaint is a forceful suppression of free speech, and I should call the police to have you arrested.
Moderators, the insightful mod is for non-fallacious reasoning, not for "I like his conclusion even though his argument is idiotic." The parent post is just a troll.
Allow me to paraphrase: "When you don't like something, just don't participate. You shouldn't be complaining about it."
That's quite a hypocritical thing to say. If you really believed that, you'd follow your own advice and keep your mouth shut.
FYI, Diablo II runs flawlessly in wine.
You're the moron who can't read and when your own bias can't perceive reality correctly, you project the opposite bias onto others.
Here are some facts to rationalize:
1. The Xorer trojan is a win32 executable. There was no exe in the language pack!
2. Even if there was an exe in there, it wouldn't be able to run and infect the computer.
3. It is perfectly reasonable, and in fact desired, for virus scanners to detect modifications made by viruses even if those modifications aren't copies of the original virus. The virus scanner picked up HTML code that is known to be inserted by Xorer. That is not the same as Xorer itself!
4. It's just a script tag pointed at some server. Since it's in an HTML file and not chrome, it should have no more privileges than any web page you browse to.
In other words, it's nothing more than an ad banner that shouldn't be there.
Yeah, your Wii's GPU went bad. That has happened to some people. You should check the warranty. It's good for one year, and if you register the serial number, they extend the warranty another 90 days. If something's wrong, don't let the warranty expire!
It's a pretty pain-free process. They actually track the purchase date when the system is bought and scanned at the store, so you don't need to track down any receipts for the warranty repair, just read them the serial number printed on the console. Then they send a shipping label, so you don't even have to pay shipping.
If the warranty is up, I hear it costs $75 to have them to repair it. That's a much better option than re-buying a new one for $250. And even if you don't care about owning a Wii anymore, why not repair it and sell it?