Of course neither do the PS3 or X360 games. This whole generation has left me with a "blah" feeling.
So says the user "commodore64_love". *wink wink*
It's not just you. I've played Rock Band, and that's pretty fun when you've got a group around the TV with pizza and beer (or sushi and wine, whatever turns your crank). Most of the rest that I've seen are kind of whizz-bang gimmicky, but don't hold my interest.
I want to say that the reason for this is that nobody makes good games any more, but the sales figures tell me that's probably not true. Then I want to say that consumers these days have no taste and are blinded by slick advertising and sex, but that makes me feel like a grumpy old fart. Then I decided that I am a grumpy old fart, and games just don't interest me as much as they used to.
It's okay, you can be a grumpy old fart too. We need a VFW for people who remember Sinistar so we can get together and drink beer and tell lies and spit.
This is where the so-called Slashdot "editors" actually do some "editing". Slashdot always was "What Rob Malda Thinks Is Cool," so I'm not bothered by stuff like this. Editors help to establish a publication's flavor, and part of Slashdot's flavor is Brian Eno and The Who.
I just wish they'd also take on the editor's duty to unfuck some of the more idiotic summaries as well.
That's not my experience from 14 or so years ago. Italy was fantastic, and Italians good natured and friendly. Prior to the adoption of the Euro Italy was also a big bang for your buck. Not so much anymore, but still filled with more art, history, culture and food than most places.
Lay people with no knowledge of the field whatsoever feel free to argue with, nitpick and outright dismiss studies and experiments.
Read that another way and you're basically saying that scientists are a protected class.
You would only have a point if scientists were never wrong, incomplete or biased. Good science withstands petty attacks. Bad scientists hide behind the imprimatur of "science".
I would argue that what most people call anti-intellectualism is actually anti-elitism. Americans, in general, don't dislike intellectuals. They do take a very dim view on elitists, however. Elitists are often intellectuals of one stripe or another though, and it's more comforting to suggest that people don't like you because you're smart rather than admit that people don't like you because you're a pushy, meddlesome asshole.
It's often said that you can't just copy another country to fix your issues. That may be true most of the time, but like I said education is the same problem for anyone, and because of that looking up to a successful as a role model is a good and relatively safe thing to do.
This.
Usually discussions of the problems in our educational system start off well. Everybody agrees that there's a problem; everybody agrees that it should be fixed; everybody agrees that the end goal is to have a more widely educated citizenry.
Then it all goes to shit because the solutions offered are always focussed around the shibboleths and sacred cows of the two major parties.
Local control of schools is supposed to aid in allowing widespread experimentation of different educational methods, but for some reason it's all fucked up. Taking a look at how some other countries are doing things is our next best shot and digging the worst under-performers out of their mire.
Blaming Apple for an exclusivity contract with AT&T neglects to acknowledge the state of things prior to the iPhoning of the World. Exclusivity was Apple's best shot at entering an utterly new market.
Remember waaaay back, in 2006 Bi (Before iPhone)? People thought Apple was mad to make a mobile headset. Then they released it at the ridiculous price of $800,000,000, with a 2-year contract and 1 soul. Everybody said "Craziness!"
Apple had to give somebody exclusivity in order to shoehorn into the market as a complete newbie. Especially since they were going to require the carrier to make extensive changes to their infrastructure to accommodate iPhone-only features like visual voicemail. It was a gamble for both companies, if only a modest gamble.
Except for a few biologically retarded individuals, I've found that most people aren't stupid at all. Instead they're narrowly focussed in their intelligence.
So Jim Bob may not know Sartre from Sasquatch, but he intimately knows a Chevy big-block engine. Or how to skin and clean a deer with a broken Coke bottle. Or some damn thing. He's intelligent and capable within some narrow parameters, and he's happy when he stays within them.
It's the pervasive and rigid modern school system that divides people into "smart" and "stupid".
Actually, "y'all" is inherently plural. Contrary to lazy movie writers, "y'all" is almost never used to refer to a single person. I say "almost never" because I have heard it used thusly once or twice. But those are the (very) rare exceptions. Bad bad grammar, if you will.
Foolish Yankees tend to think of "y'all" as some kind of Southern shibboleth, but like any good incantation it must be used in proper context.
Which is not to say that "all y'all'll" is not in common use. But in this case, "all" is used for emphasis, not to indicate plurality.
You should try addressing issues instead of just shouting people down, unfortunately uninformative posts like your reflect the current approach to public matters of angry people with nothing to say or contribute.
You should try bringing some issues up, in that case. "We're not spending enough money" is not an issue. Did you even read the article? $4.1 million spent on a non-working piece of shit technology. $4.1 million buys a lot of education, if you could actually buy education. They didn't spend that money because they were hurting for funding.
You were spouting nonsense, mistaking it for deep thinking. Feeling aggrieved because somebody points out that's it's nonsense makes you a pussy.
Because a significant portion (not all) of the population is unwilling to pay for adequate education.
You're an idiot if you don't think we're spending enough money on education.
Because a significant faction in American politics believes there should be no public education at all and so do everything possible to sabotage it, including packing boards of public education.
You're insane if you think money, or numbers, want to do anything.
I don't see why it's so hard for you to lay the blame properly. There are some people out there who are assholes. In a free society you're going to run into them. In a democratic system of government, if you give the government too much power it becomes an asshole magnet. Then you'll run into them more often.
The same way the other regulations have hampered American business -- business would love to sell arsenic-laden playground soil, or pump mercury into rivers, if by doing either of those things they could increase their profits. We hamper business to prevent them from valuing money over people's lives, or over the health of the environment. It's sadly necessary to do so.
This idea that "business" wants to kill everybody for money is an idea that has a ridiculous amount of traction. And staying power. Stop thinking like this, it leads you to faulty conclusions.
"Business" doesn't want anything. Sometimes decisions are made, by people running the business, without any malice at all. Sometimes changing an ingredient or process is difficult or impossible, and the people running the business (quite rightly) don't want to just say "fuck it" and quit. If you approach this problem with the assumption that one side is a slobbering monster, ravenous for the flesh and long bones of orphan children, you're going to make bad decisions.
Cops on a beat aren't there to prevent or solve crime, that's for certain. They're a conduit between the community and the police. They should, in fact, overlook a lot of petty lawbreaking, as it's less important to prosecute every infraction than it is to be trusted and accepted by the community at large. That way when the precinct captain asks, "what's going on," the beat cops don't have to say "we don't know, nobody will talk to us."
Of course, that's just crazy talk. Police should be dressed in SWAT gear and shoot looters on sight.
This is what happens when you don't have consumer protection agencies, or if they turn a blind eye to consumer rights for things they don't understand.
Rights by their nature must be free.
Your rights as a consumer are completely protected. You can not buy the game that Blizzard makes. However, you do not have the right to force Blizzard to make the game that you want.
Funny how the synopsis mocks teenage girls, but we dont mock teenage fanboys who loudly declare "FAIL" after just seeing a teaser trailer. Seems thats the more odious habit.
Slashdot Mirror
So says the user "commodore64_love". *wink wink*
It's not just you. I've played Rock Band, and that's pretty fun when you've got a group around the TV with pizza and beer (or sushi and wine, whatever turns your crank). Most of the rest that I've seen are kind of whizz-bang gimmicky, but don't hold my interest.
I want to say that the reason for this is that nobody makes good games any more, but the sales figures tell me that's probably not true. Then I want to say that consumers these days have no taste and are blinded by slick advertising and sex, but that makes me feel like a grumpy old fart. Then I decided that I am a grumpy old fart, and games just don't interest me as much as they used to.
It's okay, you can be a grumpy old fart too. We need a VFW for people who remember Sinistar so we can get together and drink beer and tell lies and spit.
This is where the so-called Slashdot "editors" actually do some "editing". Slashdot always was "What Rob Malda Thinks Is Cool," so I'm not bothered by stuff like this. Editors help to establish a publication's flavor, and part of Slashdot's flavor is Brian Eno and The Who.
I just wish they'd also take on the editor's duty to unfuck some of the more idiotic summaries as well.
That's not my experience from 14 or so years ago. Italy was fantastic, and Italians good natured and friendly. Prior to the adoption of the Euro Italy was also a big bang for your buck. Not so much anymore, but still filled with more art, history, culture and food than most places.
Read that another way and you're basically saying that scientists are a protected class.
You would only have a point if scientists were never wrong, incomplete or biased. Good science withstands petty attacks. Bad scientists hide behind the imprimatur of "science".
I would argue that what most people call anti-intellectualism is actually anti-elitism. Americans, in general, don't dislike intellectuals. They do take a very dim view on elitists, however. Elitists are often intellectuals of one stripe or another though, and it's more comforting to suggest that people don't like you because you're smart rather than admit that people don't like you because you're a pushy, meddlesome asshole.
This.
Usually discussions of the problems in our educational system start off well. Everybody agrees that there's a problem; everybody agrees that it should be fixed; everybody agrees that the end goal is to have a more widely educated citizenry.
Then it all goes to shit because the solutions offered are always focussed around the shibboleths and sacred cows of the two major parties.
Local control of schools is supposed to aid in allowing widespread experimentation of different educational methods, but for some reason it's all fucked up. Taking a look at how some other countries are doing things is our next best shot and digging the worst under-performers out of their mire.
Seriously, you should listen to yourself.
If I told somebody who was having trouble with their computer to do that horseshit I would fully expect them to punch me in the face.
On the upside it encouraged me to add the original series to the Netflix queue again. So, uh, good job, guys?
You miss the point.
Blaming Apple for an exclusivity contract with AT&T neglects to acknowledge the state of things prior to the iPhoning of the World. Exclusivity was Apple's best shot at entering an utterly new market.
There's always some way of casting Google in a good light.
Good thing Google isn't evil! WHEW!
Remember waaaay back, in 2006 Bi (Before iPhone)? People thought Apple was mad to make a mobile headset. Then they released it at the ridiculous price of $800,000,000, with a 2-year contract and 1 soul. Everybody said "Craziness!"
Apple had to give somebody exclusivity in order to shoehorn into the market as a complete newbie. Especially since they were going to require the carrier to make extensive changes to their infrastructure to accommodate iPhone-only features like visual voicemail. It was a gamble for both companies, if only a modest gamble.
Except for a few biologically retarded individuals, I've found that most people aren't stupid at all. Instead they're narrowly focussed in their intelligence.
So Jim Bob may not know Sartre from Sasquatch, but he intimately knows a Chevy big-block engine. Or how to skin and clean a deer with a broken Coke bottle. Or some damn thing. He's intelligent and capable within some narrow parameters, and he's happy when he stays within them.
It's the pervasive and rigid modern school system that divides people into "smart" and "stupid".
Actually, "y'all" is inherently plural. Contrary to lazy movie writers, "y'all" is almost never used to refer to a single person. I say "almost never" because I have heard it used thusly once or twice. But those are the (very) rare exceptions. Bad bad grammar, if you will.
Foolish Yankees tend to think of "y'all" as some kind of Southern shibboleth, but like any good incantation it must be used in proper context.
Which is not to say that "all y'all'll" is not in common use. But in this case, "all" is used for emphasis, not to indicate plurality.
You should try bringing some issues up, in that case. "We're not spending enough money" is not an issue. Did you even read the article? $4.1 million spent on a non-working piece of shit technology. $4.1 million buys a lot of education, if you could actually buy education. They didn't spend that money because they were hurting for funding.
You were spouting nonsense, mistaking it for deep thinking. Feeling aggrieved because somebody points out that's it's nonsense makes you a pussy.
You're an idiot if you don't think we're spending enough money on education.
Never mind, you're not a fool, you're a paranoid.
I'd watch that one.
And I don't even give a shit about WoW.
You're insane if you think money, or numbers, want to do anything.
I don't see why it's so hard for you to lay the blame properly. There are some people out there who are assholes. In a free society you're going to run into them. In a democratic system of government, if you give the government too much power it becomes an asshole magnet. Then you'll run into them more often.
Keyboard missing a dedicated number row? Check.
UI a mishmash of whizzo gimmicks without much thought put into them? Check.
Instantly abandoned as soon as Nokia sees another shiny object? Check.
I want to like this thing. I do not. This is neither a BB nor an iPhone killer.
This idea that "business" wants to kill everybody for money is an idea that has a ridiculous amount of traction. And staying power. Stop thinking like this, it leads you to faulty conclusions.
"Business" doesn't want anything. Sometimes decisions are made, by people running the business, without any malice at all. Sometimes changing an ingredient or process is difficult or impossible, and the people running the business (quite rightly) don't want to just say "fuck it" and quit. If you approach this problem with the assumption that one side is a slobbering monster, ravenous for the flesh and long bones of orphan children, you're going to make bad decisions.
Sounds to me like a valid reason to run OpenBSD.
Or maybe all those fucking banks can make Web sites that don't recommend (or require) Internet Explorer.
Cops on a beat aren't there to prevent or solve crime, that's for certain. They're a conduit between the community and the police. They should, in fact, overlook a lot of petty lawbreaking, as it's less important to prosecute every infraction than it is to be trusted and accepted by the community at large. That way when the precinct captain asks, "what's going on," the beat cops don't have to say "we don't know, nobody will talk to us."
Of course, that's just crazy talk. Police should be dressed in SWAT gear and shoot looters on sight.
Yeah, I can put my hands on an 8-track player and a stack of old radio shows on 8-track cassettes.
It's not that difficult. That said, I wouldn't want to be looking for a functional 5 1/4" floppy drive.
Drupal basically does this. The taxonomy system of Drupal is one of the most confusing parts of it.
Too much granularity on a Web site can get hairy very quickly. Rigidity isn't all bad.
Rights by their nature must be free.
Your rights as a consumer are completely protected. You can not buy the game that Blizzard makes. However, you do not have the right to force Blizzard to make the game that you want.
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."