You will be suprised. Highly educated women from 'normal' societies, with careers, life plans, knowledge about birth control etc will have a lot less children than these poor girls kept in the dark. Evolution is about penalizing speciments which produce less offspring. Keeping women uneducated, 'happy' to bear 10 children is the tactic to win evolution game.
So, in 3 generation, it might turn out that 'society' which you are talking about will be 5% of population, rest being dumb-things-down-forbid-birth-control-abuse-women cults/religions.
I think that everybody's patience can get a bit thin after 60 years of waiting... I would probably spend a lot more money in 4th gen fission research rather than chasing fusion holy grail.
I hope they will do the needful to make sure probe can kindly revert with gathered data.
On serious note, what does it mean that "mission would be around Earth"? Are we talking about some small sattelite orbiting Earth, which happens to have lenses directed at Sun? And this is "Mission to Probe Sun"? In such case, Hubble telescope was a mission to probe thousands of galaxies and millions of starts...
I'm quite sure that you can find travelling saleman function somewhere on CPAN. Problem is that it will expect some very specific inputs - zero chances that these inputs will be compatible with whatever format you might get geolocation data. This seems to me to be THE power of Wolfram language - binding data, not actually having saleman solver in global namespace. Unless of course it is so big fake that this salesman function cannot accept anything except Earth map data... but I have a strong feeling that it will work as good with multiple other types of source data. And of course - if you would replicate exactly same things as Wolfram did in any reasonably powerful language (lisp comes to mind), you would achieve similar effect. But it wouldn't be lisp anymore - it would be Wolfram Lisp, same way as what he shows currently is Wolfram Mathematica.
You wish... you forgot about 100 extra commands you need to set up proper nvidia drivers afterwards...
And I think you misunderstood the premise. It is not a language to write salesman algos in. It is language to data mine, connect facts, process and visualize them. And it looks pretty impressive from this point of view.
I dare you. Let's start with travelling salesman example. 4 lines of perl. It has to include the map with graph as an output displayed on the screen. You are free to import any CPAN module, but no utilities of your own written specifically for this purpose.
I do not expect post of excuses and example of things you can do in perl in 4 lines instead of this problem - I expect 4 lines long perl code.
Why they are burning this stuff? I understand picking through it to find sellable parts, possibly smashing it down to extract some metal etc, but why burn the rest? To save the space?
Ok, maybe I should separate the quotes better (and bold highlight was from OP, not me). I was calling BS on later part of statement statement "Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill." I think that members (especially 'priests') of religions have HUGE influence on certain groups of followers. Seems that artor3 somehow wanted to say that we cannot blame NY muslims for not stopping 9/11, because they could not influence the bombers. But nobody is discussing it - we are talking about terrorist priests who are manipulating gullible teenagers into sacrificing their lives.
And if we are discussing definitions... Hive mind also means http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C..., which is "Collective conscious or collective conscience is the set of shared beliefs, ideas and moral attitudes which operate as a unifying force within society[...]This has also been termed "hive mind", "group mind", "mass mind", and "social mind"" I understand that OP meant something more ant-like, which obviously cannot be literally true with humans.
No, I said that religion is closest thing people have to hive minds. And I do not talk about muslims in particular - any strong reglion/cult is like that. And no, I would not be a jihadi. I was raised in Catholic country, been indoctrinated from early age and when I was teenager I said 'it is bullshit' and never went back. I could be now picketing under abortion clinics, but I'm not. Because I made a choice. And if you are suggesting that I would not be able to make that concious decision if I would be born into fanatic muslim family... then you would be only proving hivemind theory.
http://sullydish.files.wordpre... People are trampling each other to death each year there. Please tell me it doesn't look like hive to you... Same can be probably said about things like Woodstock even - but religions are a LOT better at this stuff.
But the fact that 99.9% of Muslims oppose terrorism doesn't seem to be swaying the terrorists.
Quotation needed. I think that you are considerably underestimating amount of 'angry Muslims' in the world. If you would say 99.9% of Muslims aren't _actively_ involved in terrorism - sure. But oppose?
Because, again, religions aren't hive minds. Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill.
Now, this is pure BS. Religions are closest thing people have to hive minds (I count cults of dictators, like in NK, as a religion, even if it is not using world 'god'). Religons influence minds of people in extreme ways. Think about Scientists or other strange cults/sects - this is example of religion completely brainwashing the person. Bigger religions are trying to be slightly more subtle, but still, religion is probably best mind manipulation tool ever invented by mankind.
We are going in loops. I'm saying that in my opinion, for sport broadcasts and movies, full immersiveness is less important than quality/resolution. Different thing for games, where Rift-like solution is not doubts way better. I haven't chance to play with Glyph, but reports are saying they got rid of visible rainbow effect - people were explicitly checking for that by fast horizontal movements. We are having a choice of seeing football with: - 3d normal TV with HD resolution - Glyph which is just a bit bigger 3d TV which you can point in various directions - Rift where you will have a ball taking 3x3 antialised pixels, but will be able to fully immerse in all the edge of view noise
Question is, are you trying to build 'being in stadion simulator' or 'best device to see sports'. My take is that taking high-quality 3d TV experience and adding a _bit_ of interactivity by headtracking is better than degrading quality at benefit of higher 'be-in-place' immersivness.
Rift is aimed at different audience than Glyph. This is why I think it is more tailored for Glyph, because it might be better to have high-quality moving screen in front of you, rather than medicore quality full-surround experience. It is all about pixels. Do you prefer to have 1000x1000 pixels centered on the action, without seeing hands of people sitting next to you on the bench, or do you want to have only 400x400 pixels for actual action, with pronounced screen-door effect on top of that, but having bigger immersion factor by being able to spot that soda drink vendor with corner of your eyes?
Don't get me wrong - I'm going to buy Rift and not the Glyph, because there is no comparison for gaming/immersion purposes. I'm just suggesting that watching movies and sports might be better with Glyph - trading FOV for considerably better quality might be worth it.
I doubt that this 360 film technology would support positional tracking of head movements, which seems to be a major benefit for immersivness in new version of Rift - plus not controlling your movements might be also quite confusing. Glyph is probably better tailored for viewing rail-road movies where you can just move your screen around.
_Real_ breakthrough would be to mix movies and game/rendering engines and let film render on the fly. This way, all the positional tracking/limited movement control etc could be achieved. Probably graphic power/distribution size limits might be a showstoppers right now, but maybe in future... Interactive content could be added there almost for free (not that I think it is that good idea for movies).
Still, even for single center of view, 360 degrees video, size has to be immense? We are talking about probably 8 HD movies stiched together on just horizontal angle - might easily require 20-40 full HD videos to cover entire sphere. Multiply by two because of 3d, let's assume 60 times requirements of HD stream. Compression might be better for this size of video, but stil... Are we talking about swapping bluray each 2-4 minutes? Of course, they can as well just do a 2000x2000 pixels for entire sphere and let us stare at interpolated blur. Which they will most probably do, which means it is nothing else that "let's be there first without solving any real issues" ploy.
I was quite puzzled to see a country with lower Freedom index that North Korea. The gap is quite large (82 versus 85 points of 'non-freedom'). Even if they have described the method used (and misnamed it 'methodology', but thats separate story), they don't give detailed per-country factors, so it is not possible to understand _why_ given country is lower or higher in the ranking.
Actually, after reading further, it is based on _questionaire_. It might just mean that Eritrean citizens are allowed to complain about their country more than NK ones... or that NK data is based on imagination of journalists as opposed to interviews with ones which escaped from Eritrea.
Just like everyone else... Seems that being confused about gender identity is fulfilling same niche as being vocal about not having TV 30 years ago (or never reading Harry Potter book few years ago, or not having Facebook account until recently). Nobody really cares, but you still have to push it into everybody face.
I don't think it is arbitrage in any way. If you read wikipedia beyond first sentence it is " an arbitrage is a transaction that involves no negative cash flow at any probabilistic or temporal state and a positive cash flow in at least one state; in simple terms, it is the possibility of a risk-free profit after transaction costs"
For all real-world use cases of arbitrage, it was about net _profit_ after the arbitrage, not about savings. Example of arbitrage would be buying two tickets which are cheaper that single ticket and then selling it to gullible customer for price higher than what you have paid (possibly lower than price of total ticket). If you could do that while keeping your costs (buying and transporting tickets, 'advertisement', factoring in unsold tickets etc etc) low enough and turn profit, then it is an arbitrage. But even then, given inherent risks of not selling all tickets, it would not be a proper arbitrage. To make it proper, you should sell tickets first and deliver them later - only this way you are sure that profit can be realised.
Yes, but they mention 'cripple' rather than destory. It might be same variation on the 'blinding spy satellites'. Only data I can find about anti-satellite lasers which reached production stage are about ones used for blinding optics (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...).
Mirrors? Really? You must be joking. This kind of power would destroy even a perfect mirror. There would be no reflection.
It is not obvious. First - _perfect_ mirror is perfect, so it would reflect it. Question is, could 1) Best mirror we have currently 2) Normal 'shop' mirror reflect it without melting?
Really good mirrors (one used to focus lasers in physics) absorb maybe 0.2% of energy. Assuming 1cm radius of laser, we would have 60W of power focused on roughly 1cm of metal. There is no magic in laser - it would just need to melt metal behind the mirror. Even assuming no termal conductivity and no special cooling of that 'almost perfect' mirror, we are talking about 60 joules of energy getting there per second. Assuming thin layer of metal in that section, weight maybe 1g, it would heat up by 100-200 C per second. This means you would need to aim in exactly same spot for 5-10 seconds to melt it (well, probably mirror would become less perfect by then - but at same time, there would be a termal conductivity, which can increase time by orders of magnitude)
For the normal shop mirror - yes, it would break fast if you use continous beam. But not before deflecting a LOT more energy around. If you would stand on reflection path from the mirror, you would get fried a lot faster than even shop mirror would break.
Too many unknowns to get exact numbers, but assuming visible light and 10cm aperture, we are probably talking about few mm per each km of distance. Geostationary satellites are completely out of range, but lets take ISS as example - 400km. This means that 30kW would be spread over circle with 2m or so. ISS has a speed of 7-8km/s (as all low orbit satellites, otherwise they would fall down). This means that each part of station would be in the beam 'focus' for 0.005 seconds. Given radius of the beam and speed, there would be no localized damage - just total energy transferred to station. Assuming it goes in most unfavorable way, it can probably get around 100m of length through the beam, giving a total of 0.013s exposure. So, in most unfortunate situation, we are talking about 390 joules of energy being transferred to the ENTIRE station. For comparison, light shining on _earth_ hits with 1000 joules per second for each square meter (a probably a lot more in space). So, we are talking about effect being few hundred times smaller than sun radiation station received each second.
Please note that we are talking about _collateral_ damage due to missed shots, not active tracking of satellites. But even with perfect tracking and a lot more powerful lasers, it would be very hard to do lasting damage. Current anti-satellite laser developments are about _blinding_ satellites, not blowing them up.
If you think that collateral, non-tracked shot from realistic laser with 30kW of power can do any damage to any satellite, please provide your calculations. Otherwise, too much watching StarWars, not enough science.
You can aim laser quite well - you don't event need that much of lead on moving target... Regarding misses - it is not like it will go around earth looking for first person to kill. Good chances is that everything around the target you are aiming at is hostile anyway. In most cases they will be aimed either down (from airplanes) or up (as anti-rocket/mortar weapon), so there will be either ground or empty sky near the target. And diffraction/scattering will make sure that laser is harmless for sattelites if it missed that plane/rocket (http://panoptesv.com/SciFi/LaserDeathRay/DeathRay.html - look at 'Range' section)
Generally, I would expect collateral damage being orders of magnitude smaller than with conventional weapons.
Even for sidearms (which is not possible at this moment), it would be a lot safer due to no ricochets. Just don't get into shooting fight in hall of mirrors;)
I suppose you mean this to indicate that Wizardry predates his work, so Black Onyx is not first computer RPG. Nobody claims that - if you would read TFA: It was immediately obvious to me that the core difference between the two markets was that there were no computer role-playing games in Japan. The US had Ultima and Wizardry. But there were no such adventures in Japan. I thought, I could do that.
True. Which doesn't mean that ones used in both "studies" are valid for Facebook and invalid for Princeton. They might as well invalid for both. Or, which would be even more funny, applicable to universities, but not to internet portals.
Slashdot Mirror
You will be suprised. Highly educated women from 'normal' societies, with careers, life plans, knowledge about birth control etc will have a lot less children than these poor girls kept in the dark. Evolution is about penalizing speciments which produce less offspring. Keeping women uneducated, 'happy' to bear 10 children is the tactic to win evolution game.
So, in 3 generation, it might turn out that 'society' which you are talking about will be 5% of population, rest being dumb-things-down-forbid-birth-control-abuse-women cults/religions.
I think that everybody's patience can get a bit thin after 60 years of waiting... I would probably spend a lot more money in 4th gen fission research rather than chasing fusion holy grail.
I hope they will do the needful to make sure probe can kindly revert with gathered data.
On serious note, what does it mean that "mission would be around Earth"? Are we talking about some small sattelite orbiting Earth, which happens to have lenses directed at Sun? And this is "Mission to Probe Sun"? In such case, Hubble telescope was a mission to probe thousands of galaxies and millions of starts...
I'm quite sure that you can find travelling saleman function somewhere on CPAN. Problem is that it will expect some very specific inputs - zero chances that these inputs will be compatible with whatever format you might get geolocation data. This seems to me to be THE power of Wolfram language - binding data, not actually having saleman solver in global namespace.
Unless of course it is so big fake that this salesman function cannot accept anything except Earth map data... but I have a strong feeling that it will work as good with multiple other types of source data.
And of course - if you would replicate exactly same things as Wolfram did in any reasonably powerful language (lisp comes to mind), you would achieve similar effect. But it wouldn't be lisp anymore - it would be Wolfram Lisp, same way as what he shows currently is Wolfram Mathematica.
You wish... you forgot about 100 extra commands you need to set up proper nvidia drivers afterwards...
And I think you misunderstood the premise. It is not a language to write salesman algos in. It is language to data mine, connect facts, process and visualize them. And it looks pretty impressive from this point of view.
I dare you. Let's start with travelling salesman example. 4 lines of perl. It has to include the map with graph as an output displayed on the screen. You are free to import any CPAN module, but no utilities of your own written specifically for this purpose.
I do not expect post of excuses and example of things you can do in perl in 4 lines instead of this problem - I expect 4 lines long perl code.
Why they are burning this stuff?
I understand picking through it to find sellable parts, possibly smashing it down to extract some metal etc, but why burn the rest? To save the space?
http://www.wired.com/wiredscie...
I suppose that dead salmon should get credits for social science classes in such case...
Ok, maybe I should separate the quotes better (and bold highlight was from OP, not me). I was calling BS on later part of statement statement
"Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill."
I think that members (especially 'priests') of religions have HUGE influence on certain groups of followers.
Seems that artor3 somehow wanted to say that we cannot blame NY muslims for not stopping 9/11, because they could not influence the bombers. But nobody is discussing it - we are talking about terrorist priests who are manipulating gullible teenagers into sacrificing their lives.
And if we are discussing definitions... Hive mind also means http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C..., which is "Collective conscious or collective conscience is the set of shared beliefs, ideas and moral attitudes which operate as a unifying force within society[...]This has also been termed "hive mind", "group mind", "mass mind", and "social mind"" I understand that OP meant something more ant-like, which obviously cannot be literally true with humans.
No, I said that religion is closest thing people have to hive minds. And I do not talk about muslims in particular - any strong reglion/cult is like that.
And no, I would not be a jihadi. I was raised in Catholic country, been indoctrinated from early age and when I was teenager I said 'it is bullshit' and never went back. I could be now picketing under abortion clinics, but I'm not. Because I made a choice. And if you are suggesting that I would not be able to make that concious decision if I would be born into fanatic muslim family... then you would be only proving hivemind theory.
http://sullydish.files.wordpre...
People are trampling each other to death each year there. Please tell me it doesn't look like hive to you... Same can be probably said about things like Woodstock even - but religions are a LOT better at this stuff.
But the fact that 99.9% of Muslims oppose terrorism doesn't seem to be swaying the terrorists.
Quotation needed. I think that you are considerably underestimating amount of 'angry Muslims' in the world.
If you would say 99.9% of Muslims aren't _actively_ involved in terrorism - sure. But oppose?
Because, again, religions aren't hive minds. Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill.
Now, this is pure BS. Religions are closest thing people have to hive minds (I count cults of dictators, like in NK, as a religion, even if it is not using world 'god'). Religons influence minds of people in extreme ways. Think about Scientists or other strange cults/sects - this is example of religion completely brainwashing the person. Bigger religions are trying to be slightly more subtle, but still, religion is probably best mind manipulation tool ever invented by mankind.
We are going in loops. I'm saying that in my opinion, for sport broadcasts and movies, full immersiveness is less important than quality/resolution. Different thing for games, where Rift-like solution is not doubts way better. I haven't chance to play with Glyph, but reports are saying they got rid of visible rainbow effect - people were explicitly checking for that by fast horizontal movements.
We are having a choice of seeing football with:
- 3d normal TV with HD resolution
- Glyph which is just a bit bigger 3d TV which you can point in various directions
- Rift where you will have a ball taking 3x3 antialised pixels, but will be able to fully immerse in all the edge of view noise
Question is, are you trying to build 'being in stadion simulator' or 'best device to see sports'. My take is that taking high-quality 3d TV experience and adding a _bit_ of interactivity by headtracking is better than degrading quality at benefit of higher 'be-in-place' immersivness.
Rift is aimed at different audience than Glyph. This is why I think it is more tailored for Glyph, because it might be better to have high-quality moving screen in front of you, rather than medicore quality full-surround experience. It is all about pixels. Do you prefer to have 1000x1000 pixels centered on the action, without seeing hands of people sitting next to you on the bench, or do you want to have only 400x400 pixels for actual action, with pronounced screen-door effect on top of that, but having bigger immersion factor by being able to spot that soda drink vendor with corner of your eyes?
Don't get me wrong - I'm going to buy Rift and not the Glyph, because there is no comparison for gaming/immersion purposes. I'm just suggesting that watching movies and sports might be better with Glyph - trading FOV for considerably better quality might be worth it.
I doubt that this 360 film technology would support positional tracking of head movements, which seems to be a major benefit for immersivness in new version of Rift - plus not controlling your movements might be also quite confusing. Glyph is probably better tailored for viewing rail-road movies where you can just move your screen around.
_Real_ breakthrough would be to mix movies and game/rendering engines and let film render on the fly. This way, all the positional tracking/limited movement control etc could be achieved. Probably graphic power/distribution size limits might be a showstoppers right now, but maybe in future... Interactive content could be added there almost for free (not that I think it is that good idea for movies).
Still, even for single center of view, 360 degrees video, size has to be immense? We are talking about probably 8 HD movies stiched together on just horizontal angle - might easily require 20-40 full HD videos to cover entire sphere. Multiply by two because of 3d, let's assume 60 times requirements of HD stream. Compression might be better for this size of video, but stil... Are we talking about swapping bluray each 2-4 minutes?
Of course, they can as well just do a 2000x2000 pixels for entire sphere and let us stare at interpolated blur. Which they will most probably do, which means it is nothing else that "let's be there first without solving any real issues" ploy.
I was quite puzzled to see a country with lower Freedom index that North Korea. The gap is quite large (82 versus 85 points of 'non-freedom'). Even if they have described the method used (and misnamed it 'methodology', but thats separate story), they don't give detailed per-country factors, so it is not possible to understand _why_ given country is lower or higher in the ranking.
Actually, after reading further, it is based on _questionaire_. It might just mean that Eritrean citizens are allowed to complain about their country more than NK ones... or that NK data is based on imagination of journalists as opposed to interviews with ones which escaped from Eritrea.
Just like everyone else...
Seems that being confused about gender identity is fulfilling same niche as being vocal about not having TV 30 years ago (or never reading Harry Potter book few years ago, or not having Facebook account until recently). Nobody really cares, but you still have to push it into everybody face.
and proudly introduce yourself as Inspector Gadget.
Astrology -> Astronomy
Alchemy -> Chemistry
Herbalism -> Pharmacology
Economy -> ???
I wonder if we will live till the point where Economy will also give the birth to some real science...
I don't think it is arbitrage in any way. If you read wikipedia beyond first sentence it is
" an arbitrage is a transaction that involves no negative cash flow at any probabilistic or temporal state and a positive cash flow in at least one state; in simple terms, it is the possibility of a risk-free profit after transaction costs"
For all real-world use cases of arbitrage, it was about net _profit_ after the arbitrage, not about savings. Example of arbitrage would be buying two tickets which are cheaper that single ticket and then selling it to gullible customer for price higher than what you have paid (possibly lower than price of total ticket). If you could do that while keeping your costs (buying and transporting tickets, 'advertisement', factoring in unsold tickets etc etc) low enough and turn profit, then it is an arbitrage. But even then, given inherent risks of not selling all tickets, it would not be a proper arbitrage. To make it proper, you should sell tickets first and deliver them later - only this way you are sure that profit can be realised.
Yes, but they mention 'cripple' rather than destory. It might be same variation on the 'blinding spy satellites'. Only data I can find about anti-satellite lasers which reached production stage are about ones used for blinding optics (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...).
Mirrors? Really? You must be joking. This kind of power would destroy even a perfect mirror. There would be no reflection.
It is not obvious. First - _perfect_ mirror is perfect, so it would reflect it. Question is, could
1) Best mirror we have currently
2) Normal 'shop' mirror
reflect it without melting?
Really good mirrors (one used to focus lasers in physics) absorb maybe 0.2% of energy. Assuming 1cm radius of laser, we would have 60W of power focused on roughly 1cm of metal. There is no magic in laser - it would just need to melt metal behind the mirror. Even assuming no termal conductivity and no special cooling of that 'almost perfect' mirror, we are talking about 60 joules of energy getting there per second. Assuming thin layer of metal in that section, weight maybe 1g, it would heat up by 100-200 C per second. This means you would need to aim in exactly same spot for 5-10 seconds to melt it (well, probably mirror would become less perfect by then - but at same time, there would be a termal conductivity, which can increase time by orders of magnitude)
For the normal shop mirror - yes, it would break fast if you use continous beam. But not before deflecting a LOT more energy around. If you would stand on reflection path from the mirror, you would get fried a lot faster than even shop mirror would break.
Too many unknowns to get exact numbers, but assuming visible light and 10cm aperture, we are probably talking about few mm per each km of distance. Geostationary satellites are completely out of range, but lets take ISS as example - 400km. This means that 30kW would be spread over circle with 2m or so. ISS has a speed of 7-8km/s (as all low orbit satellites, otherwise they would fall down). This means that each part of station would be in the beam 'focus' for 0.005 seconds. Given radius of the beam and speed, there would be no localized damage - just total energy transferred to station. Assuming it goes in most unfavorable way, it can probably get around 100m of length through the beam, giving a total of 0.013s exposure. So, in most unfortunate situation, we are talking about 390 joules of energy being transferred to the ENTIRE station. For comparison, light shining on _earth_ hits with 1000 joules per second for each square meter (a probably a lot more in space). So, we are talking about effect being few hundred times smaller than sun radiation station received each second.
Please note that we are talking about _collateral_ damage due to missed shots, not active tracking of satellites. But even with perfect tracking and a lot more powerful lasers, it would be very hard to do lasting damage. Current anti-satellite laser developments are about _blinding_ satellites, not blowing them up.
If you think that collateral, non-tracked shot from realistic laser with 30kW of power can do any damage to any satellite, please provide your calculations. Otherwise, too much watching StarWars, not enough science.
You can aim laser quite well - you don't event need that much of lead on moving target... Regarding misses - it is not like it will go around earth looking for first person to kill. Good chances is that everything around the target you are aiming at is hostile anyway. In most cases they will be aimed either down (from airplanes) or up (as anti-rocket/mortar weapon), so there will be either ground or empty sky near the target. And diffraction/scattering will make sure that laser is harmless for sattelites if it missed that plane/rocket (http://panoptesv.com/SciFi/LaserDeathRay/DeathRay.html - look at 'Range' section)
Generally, I would expect collateral damage being orders of magnitude smaller than with conventional weapons.
Even for sidearms (which is not possible at this moment), it would be a lot safer due to no ricochets. Just don't get into shooting fight in hall of mirrors ;)
I suppose you mean this to indicate that Wizardry predates his work, so Black Onyx is not first computer RPG. Nobody claims that - if you would read TFA:
It was immediately obvious to me that the core difference between the two markets was that there were no computer role-playing games in Japan. The US had Ultima and Wizardry. But there were no such adventures in Japan. I thought, I could do that.
True. Which doesn't mean that ones used in both "studies" are valid for Facebook and invalid for Princeton. They might as well invalid for both. Or, which would be even more funny, applicable to universities, but not to internet portals.