Seriously, people are quick to jump on companies that are doing the suing, but the problem at heart is that there needs to be some serious patent reform. Until then, companies will sue for whatever ridiculous reason there might be if it leads to happier shareholders.
are very important. I work in the embedded field, and it can be quite a pain in the ass to throughly test something without having a set of unit tests. It helps to have a mindset of encapsulating modules or groups of work, and abstract out the platform (at build time) if possible. Then have a set of unit tests that exercise the code that can run on your desktop machine. Doing this lends well to code responsible for doing calculations, that is often bug ridden if not unit tested.
I think it's kind of interesting how the economics of this work. The supply of scientists and engineers is steady, but it seems like there are fewer who are good in the market. What this means is that if you are good and in the field, you are in extremely high demand and thus salaries can be lucrative for you. So, the field may only attract those who have a genuine interest and more likely to innovate.
Then again, money is a strong factor and may siphon away people. I work in the embedded software field, and I get paid fairly well for someone only a couple of years out of college. However, I often think how nice it would be nice to be making well into 7 figures and have a nice home and possibly a Lamborghini (I love cars) after going into lawschool instead of "just" 6 figures and trying to cobble together a 20% down payment for a decent home in Northern California.
Seriously, you may be a geek, but that doesn't mean your life is limited to doing only geeky things. Go for a run on some trails, go to a bookstore and try reading some literature. Most universities have free talks and lectures that are open to the public. Through this, you meet tons of people. You could also, you know, talk to people at work about non-work related things.
I used to sit at home and do only geeky things, and frankly I wasn't happy. It was only when I started learning to cook, paint, running and seeing a live performance at a theatre that I became happier person. In addition, my GF and I got to know each other at work by talking about what we did for fun outside of work.
Just because you might spend your work days working with computers doesn't mean the rest of your life is limited to that, there is more to life than numbers and code.
Isn't the whole point of open source that you volunteer to contribute work? That's what makes open source great, and actually helps with a quality. Public radio is another good example as it seems to be the only thing worth listening on regular FM radio these days. People might say these are all very fiscally-left organizations, but I would say that these represent some of the ideals of being fiscally-conservative. That is, that volunteer-based things can often thrive and be great based on people making donations.
The keynote on Tuesday showed an alternative that might work better than the "Fearless Leader" approach.
What we've been seeing more often recently are VP's and engineers themselves on the stage. Apple isn't just a company with one fearless leader and an army of minions. The public will get to see that there are innovators throughout the entire company. Just like seeing Randy Ubilios, I'm looking forward to hearing more from the other minds behind some of the developments at Apple.
I was watching past seasons show a few months ago and it shows pretty raw first hand accounts of what it's like to attempt to climb Everest. The show also makes a good effort in recognizing the true climbers on the mountains -- the Sherpas, who assist and often save the lives of climbers.
Indeed. Here in the Great USA, if you screw up big time (at least a few hundred million) and you are in grave amounts of debt, the government will bail you out.
Good point. I pay over $40K per year on federal income taxes alone. Now, let's imagine for a moment :
Let's say I only paid $10K. I would be more than happy to give the remaining $30K to a local charity, in fact, I would do such a thing. And in that case, I know that money is not being squandered away on a war or needless bureaucracy.
Quoting the TSA: The actions of a few individuals in no way reflect on the outstanding job our more than 43,000 security officers do every day to ensure the security of the traveling public," she said.
I'm of South Asian ethnicity and have a few Middle Eastern friends. We're all used to getting the secondary protocol at the airport due to our last names. Funny how they say a few bad TSA employees shouldn't reflect upon the other employees, yet they treat anyone with a brown shade of skin as a criminal.
In fact, what's with mileage going DOWN over the last 15 years? Why do I have to buy a hybrid to get a 35MPG Altima, when I owned a 6-cylinder '95 Intrepid with a 3.5L V6 just a few years ago that got a measly 35MPG when I drove with a lead foot? Who do they think they're fooling?
Because of an increase in weight. As the years have gone by, cars have gotten heavier and heavier.
A 1990's Camry and a brand new Corolla weigh almost the same. The engines are getting bigger as well, the V6 in the Camry makes 268-hp!
Unfortunately it's difficult to blame the manufacturers. Customers keep requesting more power, more room, and more safety for the same amount of money. Engine technology improves, but there's only so much you can do to offset the increase in weight and the need for a bigger engine to motivate everything.
Very few manufacturers are willing to downsize the engine, as that creates a bit of a marketing nightmare for the average Joe driver who sees the reduction in displacement (but equal or better performance) as a downgrade to the outgoing model. This has led a few manufacturers to simply insert smaller models at the beginning of their lineup as their current models balloon in side - the BMW 1 series is a good example. Some other manufacturers simply discontinue a model and replace it with one in the same class that is slightly smaller - the Toyota Yaris replacing the Toyota Echo is a good example so customers won't think Toyota suddenly "shrunk" the Echo.
Don't get me wrong here, some manufacturers have tried going the light and lean method, the Toyota MR2 Spyder s a good example. Unfortunately, people saw it as being underpowered since it has less HP than the model it replaced, even though it's acceleration was comparable and had superior cornering due to its longer wheelbase and light weight. The car was a tad expensive, and had very little storage space, but it's the perfect second car as a daily driver for its excellent fuel economy.
Personally I'd like to see the customer smarten up a little bit, I'm tired of the "I want more" attitude, I'd like to see more cars like the Toyota MR2 being offered and I'd like to see newer generations of cars get lighter - I don't care of my Camry can almost outrun a Ferrari Testarossa from 0 to 60.
Ford can't restrict their cars to only running on Ford gas, and only being repaired with Genuine Ford Parts, for example
Oh dear... another car analogy. Let me give you a more correct one. Assuming cars had upgradeable engines for a moment, this is like ford designing engines specifically for their cars and selling them with very low (or zero and below) margins. In order to maintain profitability, they rely on subsidizing R&D costs for the engines using the sale of their fully-built cars.
I think it shows that people are ever more shallow in their music tastes and now only want those one or two big hits, ignoring the rest of the material. How many times have you listened to an album, or an artist's entire catalogue, and come to love one of the b-sides or album tracks more than the one or two big hits? For me it's a lot.
Bullshit. Are you saying that people should be forced to buy the entire album so they listen to the lesser known songs that are possibly very good? If someone wants to try out one of the lesser known songs, that person can get the entire album, and full albums are about the same price on iTunes (if not cheaper) than physical CD's
Also, more often than not, there are typically only 3-4 good songs on an album (there are exceptions, of course) and most consumers would not want to waste money buying the ones they hate. It's not just Britney, it's also some of the electronic mixes (from labels like the Ministry of Sound) where there are some awful songs, but also some very good ones.
are a very good way to exercise your ability to solve problems and think rationally. There are quite a few that are open, like USACO. Check out if your local University has an ACM team, although ACM is more of a time commitment and is more like joining a sports team (but without the hot cheerleaders).
Also, check out some of the past problems of competitions that were back in High school. I'd check out the past CCC (a Canadian contest run at the High school level by the University of Waterloo) and ACSL.
Another important thing about being a good SW developer is knowing how to design and architect. I used to think that architecture wasn't really important and that problem solving was paramount, until I began working in the real world where I found that managers/VP's and other execs like to change their minds frequently. It's also not uncommon for bits of hardware to not work exactly as described by technical documents, and thus you end up having to add software workarounds:) However, architecture is something that is more difficult to simply pick up, but there are lots of books on this topic. Some Open source projects have good code architecture, you may want to get involved in those. Watch out though, a great deal of open source is also poorly architected, gdb, and Xorg are among the worst from my experience.
It says a lot by saying a little. It's artistic without being artsy.
It's amazing how much of a conversation you can have with just green, isn't it?
You can see the effort but not the grace. Yellow can be so unforgiving.
I think you're missing the fundamental point of modern art. Modern art is technically more accessible because there are no boundaries. Right - a modern painting can take considerably less time than a photo-realistic or impressionistic piece of art, but that's part of the beauty of it.
Modern art doesn't mean the artist had to spend days or months on a painting, and that it could've been done with ease and joy, and not frustration. In essence, it's the freest form of expression and just exploring very basic aspects of vision (color, shapes, etc.).
I think one just needs to open their mind a little, and with modern art, you tend to appreciate beauty of things you take for granted.
I have a lot of friends who were in Engineering when I was an undergrad. The biggest complaint that they seemed to have was that they felt like they were just being fed equations and not taught to think for themselves. The second they came across a problem that was a slight deviation from the questions mentioned in class or from the textbook, they had some trouble, because the underlying theory was lacking. I suppose it's no surprise that the students who do the best in math or programming competitions like Putnam or ACM are typically under the math faculty. Don't get me wrong, I know lots of brilliant engineering graduates, but they often feel a little cheated.
It's for this reason why I chose Computer Science, which is a math-based program at the University of Waterloo in Canada. Although I can't recite as many equations from memory as my engineering colleagues, I know how derive them, and am able to handle curveballs that come by way because I developed logical thinking. As a plus, I was able to get a minor in physics with a specialization in quantum mechanics with the extra freedom in courses I had.
I'd really like to see real math and theory return to engineering. Some formula-feeding might need to be dropped, but a lot of that stuff isn't useful in the workplace anyway.
Anyone worth their weight as a programmer doesn't care what language they
program in but...
Sorry, but you clearly haven't done much research about the less common languages out there. A lot of these languages are designed in such a way that you are forced to look at problems in a completely different manner.
Prolog is a great example - with it's code is data philosophy where the algorithm you use is best described as being "implicit". It's very different from how you'd tackle a problem in C, but there's also something very elegant about it.
Another example is using lambda calculus, which is often taught in programming languages in Universities. The syntax is extremely simple, but with it, you can create any sort of programming language construct you can think of.
Just look at those religious wackos like Stalin and Brezhnev who killed millions and sent more to death camps or psychiatric hospitals just for reading the wrong books Oh wait, they were atheists
This is a common misunderstanding. Stalin, et al. were atheists, but they did not do their actions in the name of atheism - it was merely that they had certain views, and they just happened to be atheists.
The inability for random people to call themselves software engineers in Canada is because the Real Engineers objected to the proliferation of people with MCSE's and the the like doing a discredit to the standards of the profession, both in terms of training and work results.
Yeah.. unfortunately, Waterloo's Engineering (especially Software) program has some issues. Professors cram as much as they can into the students to the point where they are simply reciting formulas without understanding their meaning. The program has degraded mostly to just raw memorization, and what you typically get are a bunch of code monkeys and a few strong Engineers that decided to learn the actual theory beyond the curriculum.
And sorry, but Waterloo's SW Engineering program is a farce. All people that I know that have been in it and don't suck have dreaded it, and some have switched into CS to get more theory and less fluffy mandatory courses. Personally, as a CS grad from UW, I am glad that I chose CS over SE, as I've been happy with what I've learnt (I've taken the "big three" plus Quantum Information Processing), have a minor in physics and obtained a good job in Northern California upon graduation
The problem upon graduation for a lot of these students is that they come out expecting to make top dollar and are surprised when they have trouble finding a job. What students need to realize is that the University program is a tool, not a free ticket, it's up to you to use it.
that lead me to become an atheist. More and more it becomes evident that religious teachings are being used to push racism, censorship, other forms of hatred and oppressing those who have beliefs against societal norms. I personally beleve that religion going the way of the belief that the earth is flat will be a big step forward for humanity. This way we don't have ridiculous fairytales and superstitions getting in the way of education, human rights, science and technology.
Playing video games, playing real life sports, drinking, partying, watching tv, watching sports, upgrading your car, buying new toys, buying a new car, hiking, camping, getting married, having a baby, buying a house
A lot of these things have secondary advantages that will often give you further enjoyment in the future. For example Playing Sports: Give you don't have any major medical issues, you improve your fitness, and thus your health will improve. Buying a new Car: No more major maintenance, more efficient engines, better safety. Getting Married and having a baby: A good marriage is often a good financial decision, and lowers stress and you now have someone to support you. Buying a house: Instead if renting, where you're just throwing your money away, you are at least gaining some capital. Choosing wisely what you buy will also yield a financial advantage due to appreciation.
The thing about playing video games is that they don't really have a secondary advantage unless in rare cases. In moderation, I see nothing wrong with it, but I think it's damaging to play them to the point where your health, financial situation and situation with your family degrades. The key is to look at value, and I think people who are addicted to video games are putting immediate utility before long-term utility.
Why are people entitled to have every luxury good at an such a low cost that it jeopardizes human and environmental health and safety
I think it's interesting for people to make comments like these when a third world nation tries to progress itself, when they're often posting from an iPhone while sipping their Starbucks Latte and then hopping into their Lexus.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, people are quick to jump on companies that are doing the suing, but the problem at heart is that there needs to be some serious patent reform. Until then, companies will sue for whatever ridiculous reason there might be if it leads to happier shareholders.
are very important. I work in the embedded field, and it can be quite a pain in the ass to throughly test something without having a set of unit tests. It helps to have a mindset of encapsulating modules or groups of work, and abstract out the platform (at build time) if possible. Then have a set of unit tests that exercise the code that can run on your desktop machine. Doing this lends well to code responsible for doing calculations, that is often bug ridden if not unit tested.
but it generates page hits, thus ore ad revenue, thus more money for slashdot :)
It's the same reason why you see so many Apple related posts on Engadget.
I think it's kind of interesting how the economics of this work. The supply of scientists and engineers is steady, but it seems like there are fewer who are good in the market. What this means is that if you are good and in the field, you are in extremely high demand and thus salaries can be lucrative for you. So, the field may only attract those who have a genuine interest and more likely to innovate.
Then again, money is a strong factor and may siphon away people. I work in the embedded software field, and I get paid fairly well for someone only a couple of years out of college. However, I often think how nice it would be nice to be making well into 7 figures and have a nice home and possibly a Lamborghini (I love cars) after going into lawschool instead of "just" 6 figures and trying to cobble together a 20% down payment for a decent home in Northern California.
Seriously, you may be a geek, but that doesn't mean your life is limited to doing only geeky things. Go for a run on some trails, go to a bookstore and try reading some literature. Most universities have free talks and lectures that are open to the public. Through this, you meet tons of people. You could also, you know, talk to people at work about non-work related things.
I used to sit at home and do only geeky things, and frankly I wasn't happy. It was only when I started learning to cook, paint, running and seeing a live performance at a theatre that I became happier person. In addition, my GF and I got to know each other at work by talking about what we did for fun outside of work.
Just because you might spend your work days working with computers doesn't mean the rest of your life is limited to that, there is more to life than numbers and code.
Isn't the whole point of open source that you volunteer to contribute work? That's what makes open source great, and actually helps with a quality. Public radio is another good example as it seems to be the only thing worth listening on regular FM radio these days. People might say these are all very fiscally-left organizations, but I would say that these represent some of the ideals of being fiscally-conservative. That is, that volunteer-based things can often thrive and be great based on people making donations.
The keynote on Tuesday showed an alternative that might work better than the "Fearless Leader" approach.
What we've been seeing more often recently are VP's and engineers themselves on the stage. Apple isn't just a company with one fearless leader and an army of minions. The public will get to see that there are innovators throughout the entire company. Just like seeing Randy Ubilios, I'm looking forward to hearing more from the other minds behind some of the developments at Apple.
I was watching past seasons show a few months ago and it shows pretty raw first hand accounts of what it's like to attempt to climb Everest. The show also makes a good effort in recognizing the true climbers on the mountains -- the Sherpas, who assist and often save the lives of climbers.
Indeed. Here in the Great USA, if you screw up big time (at least a few hundred million) and you are in grave amounts of debt, the government will bail you out.
Good point. I pay over $40K per year on federal income taxes alone. Now, let's imagine for a moment
: Let's say I only paid $10K. I would be more than happy to give the remaining $30K to a local charity, in fact, I would do such a thing. And in that case, I know that money is not being squandered away on a war or needless bureaucracy.
Quoting the TSA:
The actions of a few individuals in no way reflect on the outstanding job our more than 43,000 security officers do every day to ensure the security of the traveling public," she said.
I'm of South Asian ethnicity and have a few Middle Eastern friends. We're all used to getting the secondary protocol at the airport due to our last names. Funny how they say a few bad TSA employees shouldn't reflect upon the other employees, yet they treat anyone with a brown shade of skin as a criminal.
Perhaps the remaining millions who did not claim the money actually, you know, liked the game?
I don't think it would make sense for gamers to exploit a frivolous lawsuit to get a few dollars out of a company that made a game they enjoyed.
In fact, what's with mileage going DOWN over the last 15 years? Why do I have to buy a hybrid to get a 35MPG Altima, when I owned a 6-cylinder '95 Intrepid with a 3.5L V6 just a few years ago that got a measly 35MPG when I drove with a lead foot? Who do they think they're fooling?
Because of an increase in weight. As the years have gone by, cars have gotten heavier and heavier.
A 1990's Camry and a brand new Corolla weigh almost the same. The engines are getting bigger as well, the V6 in the Camry makes 268-hp!
Unfortunately it's difficult to blame the manufacturers. Customers keep requesting more power, more room, and more safety for the same amount of money. Engine technology improves, but there's only so much you can do to offset the increase in weight and the need for a bigger engine to motivate everything.
Very few manufacturers are willing to downsize the engine, as that creates a bit of a marketing nightmare for the average Joe driver who sees the reduction in displacement (but equal or better performance) as a downgrade to the outgoing model. This has led a few manufacturers to simply insert smaller models at the beginning of their lineup as their current models balloon in side - the BMW 1 series is a good example. Some other manufacturers simply discontinue a model and replace it with one in the same class that is slightly smaller - the Toyota Yaris replacing the Toyota Echo is a good example so customers won't think Toyota suddenly "shrunk" the Echo.
Don't get me wrong here, some manufacturers have tried going the light and lean method, the Toyota MR2 Spyder s a good example. Unfortunately, people saw it as being underpowered since it has less HP than the model it replaced, even though it's acceleration was comparable and had superior cornering due to its longer wheelbase and light weight. The car was a tad expensive, and had very little storage space, but it's the perfect second car as a daily driver for its excellent fuel economy.
Personally I'd like to see the customer smarten up a little bit, I'm tired of the "I want more" attitude, I'd like to see more cars like the Toyota MR2 being offered and I'd like to see newer generations of cars get lighter - I don't care of my Camry can almost outrun a Ferrari Testarossa from 0 to 60.
Ford can't restrict their cars to only running on Ford gas, and only being repaired with Genuine Ford Parts, for example
Oh dear... another car analogy. Let me give you a more correct one. Assuming cars had upgradeable engines for a moment, this is like ford designing engines specifically for their cars and selling them with very low (or zero and below) margins. In order to maintain profitability, they rely on subsidizing R&D costs for the engines using the sale of their fully-built cars.
I think it shows that people are ever more shallow in their music tastes and now only want those one or two big hits, ignoring the rest of the material. How many times have you listened to an album, or an artist's entire catalogue, and come to love one of the b-sides or album tracks more than the one or two big hits? For me it's a lot.
Bullshit. Are you saying that people should be forced to buy the entire album so they listen to the lesser known songs that are possibly very good? If someone wants to try out one of the lesser known songs, that person can get the entire album, and full albums are about the same price on iTunes (if not cheaper) than physical CD's
Also, more often than not, there are typically only 3-4 good songs on an album (there are exceptions, of course) and most consumers would not want to waste money buying the ones they hate. It's not just Britney, it's also some of the electronic mixes (from labels like the Ministry of Sound) where there are some awful songs, but also some very good ones.
are a very good way to exercise your ability to solve problems and think rationally. There are quite a few that are open, like USACO. Check out if your local University has an ACM team, although ACM is more of a time commitment and is more like joining a sports team (but without the hot cheerleaders).
:) However, architecture is something that is more difficult to simply pick up, but there are lots of books on this topic. Some Open source projects have good code architecture, you may want to get involved in those. Watch out though, a great deal of open source is also poorly architected, gdb, and Xorg are among the worst from my experience.
Also, check out some of the past problems of competitions that were back in High school. I'd check out the past CCC (a Canadian contest run at the High school level by the University of Waterloo) and ACSL.
Another important thing about being a good SW developer is knowing how to design and architect. I used to think that architecture wasn't really important and that problem solving was paramount, until I began working in the real world where I found that managers/VP's and other execs like to change their minds frequently. It's also not uncommon for bits of hardware to not work exactly as described by technical documents, and thus you end up having to add software workarounds
It says a lot by saying a little. It's artistic without being artsy.
It's amazing how much of a conversation you can have with just green, isn't it?
You can see the effort but not the grace. Yellow can be so unforgiving. I think you're missing the fundamental point of modern art. Modern art is technically more accessible because there are no boundaries. Right - a modern painting can take considerably less time than a photo-realistic or impressionistic piece of art, but that's part of the beauty of it.
Modern art doesn't mean the artist had to spend days or months on a painting, and that it could've been done with ease and joy, and not frustration. In essence, it's the freest form of expression and just exploring very basic aspects of vision (color, shapes, etc.).
I think one just needs to open their mind a little, and with modern art, you tend to appreciate beauty of things you take for granted.
I have a lot of friends who were in Engineering when I was an undergrad. The biggest complaint that they seemed to have was that they felt like they were just being fed equations and not taught to think for themselves. The second they came across a problem that was a slight deviation from the questions mentioned in class or from the textbook, they had some trouble, because the underlying theory was lacking. I suppose it's no surprise that the students who do the best in math or programming competitions like Putnam or ACM are typically under the math faculty. Don't get me wrong, I know lots of brilliant engineering graduates, but they often feel a little cheated.
It's for this reason why I chose Computer Science, which is a math-based program at the University of Waterloo in Canada. Although I can't recite as many equations from memory as my engineering colleagues, I know how derive them, and am able to handle curveballs that come by way because I developed logical thinking. As a plus, I was able to get a minor in physics with a specialization in quantum mechanics with the extra freedom in courses I had.
I'd really like to see real math and theory return to engineering. Some formula-feeding might need to be dropped, but a lot of that stuff isn't useful in the workplace anyway.
Anyone worth their weight as a programmer doesn't care what language they program in but...
Sorry, but you clearly haven't done much research about the less common languages out there. A lot of these languages are designed in such a way that you are forced to look at problems in a completely different manner.
Prolog is a great example - with it's code is data philosophy where the algorithm you use is best described as being "implicit". It's very different from how you'd tackle a problem in C, but there's also something very elegant about it.
Another example is using lambda calculus, which is often taught in programming languages in Universities. The syntax is extremely simple, but with it, you can create any sort of programming language construct you can think of.
Not just any bomb, mind you. It's a really thin bomb.
Actually only the detonator is in the laptop. The bomb is sold separately as a $99 external USB device.
Just look at those religious wackos like Stalin and Brezhnev who killed millions and sent more to death camps or psychiatric hospitals just for reading the wrong books Oh wait, they were atheists
This is a common misunderstanding. Stalin, et al. were atheists, but they did not do their actions in the name of atheism - it was merely that they had certain views, and they just happened to be atheists.
The inability for random people to call themselves software engineers in Canada is because the Real Engineers objected to the proliferation of people with MCSE's and the the like doing a discredit to the standards of the profession, both in terms of training and work results.
Yeah.. unfortunately, Waterloo's Engineering (especially Software) program has some issues. Professors cram as much as they can into the students to the point where they are simply reciting formulas without understanding their meaning. The program has degraded mostly to just raw memorization, and what you typically get are a bunch of code monkeys and a few strong Engineers that decided to learn the actual theory beyond the curriculum.
And sorry, but Waterloo's SW Engineering program is a farce. All people that I know that have been in it and don't suck have dreaded it, and some have switched into CS to get more theory and less fluffy mandatory courses. Personally, as a CS grad from UW, I am glad that I chose CS over SE, as I've been happy with what I've learnt (I've taken the "big three" plus Quantum Information Processing), have a minor in physics and obtained a good job in Northern California upon graduation
The problem upon graduation for a lot of these students is that they come out expecting to make top dollar and are surprised when they have trouble finding a job. What students need to realize is that the University program is a tool, not a free ticket, it's up to you to use it.
that lead me to become an atheist. More and more it becomes evident that religious teachings are being used to push racism, censorship, other forms of hatred and oppressing those who have beliefs against societal norms.
I personally beleve that religion going the way of the belief that the earth is flat will be a big step forward for humanity. This way we don't have ridiculous fairytales and superstitions getting in the way of education, human rights, science and technology.
Playing video games, playing real life sports, drinking, partying, watching tv, watching sports, upgrading your car, buying new toys, buying a new car, hiking, camping, getting married, having a baby, buying a house
A lot of these things have secondary advantages that will often give you further enjoyment in the future. For example
Playing Sports: Give you don't have any major medical issues, you improve your fitness, and thus your health will improve.
Buying a new Car: No more major maintenance, more efficient engines, better safety.
Getting Married and having a baby: A good marriage is often a good financial decision, and lowers stress and you now have someone to support you.
Buying a house: Instead if renting, where you're just throwing your money away, you are at least gaining some capital. Choosing wisely what you buy will also yield a financial advantage due to appreciation.
The thing about playing video games is that they don't really have a secondary advantage unless in rare cases. In moderation, I see nothing wrong with it, but I think it's damaging to play them to the point where your health, financial situation and situation with your family degrades. The key is to look at value, and I think people who are addicted to video games are putting immediate utility before long-term utility.
Why are people entitled to have every luxury good at an such a low cost that it jeopardizes human and environmental health and safety
I think it's interesting for people to make comments like these when a third world nation tries to progress itself, when they're often posting from an iPhone while sipping their Starbucks Latte and then hopping into their Lexus.