Rule changes bother many people, but they give fast learners an edge. Good game deveropers know that and are careful not to drive away more people than they keep. Not all changes are fun for everyone, but an unchanging game gets boring for others. But, no one likes to be jerked around with no return of entertainment value.
It might be better for the professor to use his grant money to study games that already exist and have been around for years. Most games have in game economies, but many have interactions with the real world. Is it better for the game for players to buy gold on ebay (a black market), or directly from the development company as in Puzzlepirates?
Your comment is funny, but it is absolute proof that the RIAA is a bully and not right. If Harvard students are clearly violating a law, the RIAA would win and it would all be cut and dried from here on. But, by only going after people they can outlawyer, and avoiding Harvard, et al, they are proving that they don't have a strong case against anybody.
Do you really think that the television wouldn't have been invented if most houses ran on DC? Maybe just the power supply would look a little different? And what about these televisions that plug into cigarette lighters? They've been around for decades. And battery powered televisions? You don't think people are smart enough to design circuits that run on DC? How do you think the guy who patented the wall wart makes a living if no one needs his device?
I don't think sales of Rowling's book will be negatively impacted at all. If the Lexicon book is anything like the website, it will be a reference book, whereas, Rowling's book would be humorous. I don't think she could write a real reference book if she tried. I don't think that her fans would want her to waste her time trying, not when we have an experienced librarian (Steve at the Lexicon) who seems to have a knack for that sort of thing.
That's another thing about US elections, the elections are run by the politicians in power. Districts that support the party in power generally have much quicker lines. There is so much wrong with the election process, it's hard to figure out where to start to fix it. But, the people in power are barely interested. Both parties like the system as it is and will never focus on problems such as "first past the post" or even the Electoral College. They'd rather focus on stuff like Gay Mariage that most people don't care about at all, but the ones that do, are quite vocal. At this time, most people have no say in the Presidential Poll, at least not with a vote. Money is the only vote that matters. Congressional and Senate elections aren't much better. Because committee assignments are based on senority, it is better to vote for your incumbant and have some power than vote for the new guy. Freshman have no power until they conform to the system and become incumbants.
The New York voting machines are the nice, reliable, sturdy, and easy to count mechanical things. I've used them many times, from local elections to using old machines for school votes (Wasn't 18 at the time of the last presidential election). They mechanically count each vote based on lever pulls, and have a nice isn't that a bit subjective?
number on the back to read out at the end of the day, all the election worker has to do is read the number and report it. The only error in the system is human error. I have heard of hacks...
In short, They Work. Is the mechanism visible to the voter? Or did you grow up trusting it because it was already in use when you became of voting age?
Tell me why we need to change from a tested, reliable, working system to a new-fangled system with huge concerns as to the accuracy and security? I'm not going to anwer that, but can your parents explain why New York switched to those new fangled mechanical things when pen and paper worked just fine? I have no experience with the mechanical machines, but I know New Yorkers seem to love them, and I don't know why.
Money and politics are the American Way, especially when used together. Unless you live in New Hampshire, your dollar is worth more than your vote. You don't even need citizenship to vote with your money.
If they had a system where the top items in my queue were in the store when I returned a DVD, it seems that would beat the service I get from Netflix. They don't need to always have MovieC in inventory, but if it is near the top of my queue, they can arrange to have it in stock, then after I rent and return it, they can send it off to wherever else it might be wanted. All the stores in a region could share the less popular movies. And I rent a lot of TV series. You don't even need to look at my queue to know what I will want next since I watch each season in order, and if I like the show, I watch the seasons in order, too. A system like that would easily beat Netflix since the transit time would be shorter.
Someone has apparently set up a system where it is easier for short goaled people to spend real money at Walmart than funny money inside the company. When spending money is limited, the cheap product wins over quality just about every time. The relative value of real money and funny money should be adjusted so that the departments are penalized for being forced to buy what amounts to insurance that they might not need. The overhead bill should not be a factor in departmental cost reduction decisions. Cost of overhead should only be a factor to departments that overuse the IT services.
Damn it all, the only reason your "real bosses" get things their way is they participate. If, by "participate", you mean "stuff wads of cash and benefits into the pockets of those they are trying to sway toward the benefit and ultimate needs of their corporations", then I agree. You express it so negatively that I doubt you really agree. But, yes, give money to the candidate of your choice. Give as much as the law allows. Your money is worth much more than your vote, especially at the presidential level where only the votes of those in swing states and early primary states matter. The rest of us might as well stay home or do our jobs on election day and work to raise money for not just candidates, but third parties and other organizations that are out to shake up the current system.
Why do you think Hillary is wasting so much time campaigning in immigrant communities where most people can't even vote?
In fact, the inaccessable website is even more of a problem, since, as a sighted user, I wouldn't be aware of the problem and need blind people and others to make me aware by the use of lawsuits and other communications. Lawsuits are cheaper than an ad campaign. A shopper who walks rather than rolls notices steps even if they can deal with them more easily, but I don't notice nonconforming websites unless I'm looking for problems.
When an affected group is as small as the population of blind online shoppers, the natural boycott by only that group is meaningless, especially if they aren't shopping there to begin with. The ADA is an amplifier for small groups to bring access problems to the attention of others so they can change or help or anything that they wouldn't know or want to do otherwise.
This is one of those times when not living in an earlly primary state is nice. Not being in a swing sate also help. They only want my money, not my vote. Is that the way it is supposed to work?
On the other hand, I'm thinking about moving to New Hampshire where my vote might actually be worth something. I might even join the Free State Project.
And sometimes when you help lift her into bed at night, she'll tell you she loves you. I guess that helps make it all worthwhile.
But, it's awfully hard to convince yourself that it's true.
There is a big difference between the care provided by you who have known the lady in better days and the caregiver for whom she is just another day at the office. But, there is a place for both. You know who she was and love and respect her for all that stuff in your past. But, you didn't choose to be a care giver. You have less time and energy for what comes more easily for you. That makes the care giving tasks much harder. Knowing who she was makes it especially painful..The professional caregiver can be more detached emotionally. Plus, since they chose the job, they are not in a position to regret.
You don't need to put your grandmother in a "home" to get help. Unless she is ill, you don't need a nurse, either. In the US, a nurse is a skilled medical person with a degree and much too expensive for diaper changning. But, you can arrange for someone to come in for a few hours a day to deal with bathing her, feeding her, changing her,etc, in her own home. It would take a lot of the unpleasantness out of your relationship and allow you to have some life of your own.
About the people who work as care givers - not all of them are losers who do it because they have no work ethic or can't get a better job, some actually like working with people and have a proper attitude that gets them through the unpleasantness of it. You have the older ladies who seeminly love everyone and get great persoanal satsifaction out of making your life better and you also get young immigrants who are glad to be working in the US and have dreams of doing bigger things, but are professional enough to do a good job as a caregiver while going to school.
The biggest problem is finding them. The government doesn't do this sort of thing, so you need to learn about all kinds of private agencies. There are lots of them, some are better than others. They don't have big marketing campaigns, and are more likely to advertise for fundraising rather than services. And the ones who are best at fundrasing are necessarily the best at services, plus the advertisiing is aimed at people with money, not people who need the services. But, that's a whole nother discussion.
The point is, one person shouldn't devote several hours a day to unpleasant tasks made even more unpleasant by being too familiar with the person they are caroing for. I would never want my grandchild sacrificing his/her life to keep me clean. I would simply want him/her to be physically close enough to make sure that I am clean and feel loved.
I was thinking T1. I mean we were doing all kinds of remote stuff back in the 80's before corporates were allowed to use the Internet. We set up our own internets with T1's between all the plants and business offices. We used the same sort of protocols as the internet and were not connected. Those networks are still in place, or could be. Your T1 doesn't have to go to a public access point, it can go straight to your own facilities. The only problem with the private internets is that you can't access easily from internet cafes and such while traveling. I don't think you save enough money by using public networks to make it worth the risk. Obviously, it does cost a little more, but this is infrastructure most corporations had in place prior to the opening up of the internet.
And that would cause the computer to leave the house. Gotta research project? Public library for you.
Seriously, we've always kept one computer in the family room and the other in the living room. that gives enough privacy, but not too much. We used to have them next to each other, but that was too close.
I only slowed down for one word, "oghirutt", and I still don't know what that one is since I refuse to think about it. The rest was straightforward, as long as the word shape doesn't change much.
Maybe my memory is bad, but didn't scientists use to think we read the whole word at the same time, unless it was unusallly long and unfamiliar? In which case, we read it a syllable at a time. Reading skill was measured more or less in how many syllables one could ingest at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be cruel, GP has simply confused the PLF with a Fire Safety Lesson he had in kindergarten.
thank you, i just might get those for Christmas, assuming they play on a Mac
They need a Magic School Bus game based on that episode where they drive around in someone's bod, and another whether they drive out to Pluto.
Rule changes bother many people, but they give fast learners an edge. Good game deveropers know that and are careful not to drive away more people than they keep. Not all changes are fun for everyone, but an unchanging game gets boring for others. But, no one likes to be jerked around with no return of entertainment value.
It might be better for the professor to use his grant money to study games that already exist and have been around for years. Most games have in game economies, but many have interactions with the real world. Is it better for the game for players to buy gold on ebay (a black market), or directly from the development company as in Puzzlepirates?
Your comment is funny, but it is absolute proof that the RIAA is a bully and not right. If Harvard students are clearly violating a law, the RIAA would win and it would all be cut and dried from here on. But, by only going after people they can outlawyer, and avoiding Harvard, et al, they are proving that they don't have a strong case against anybody.
They came for the MP3s, but I did nothing, because I was software.....
Do you really think that the television wouldn't have been invented if most houses ran on DC? Maybe just the power supply would look a little different? And what about these televisions that plug into cigarette lighters? They've been around for decades. And battery powered televisions? You don't think people are smart enough to design circuits that run on DC? How do you think the guy who patented the wall wart makes a living if no one needs his device?
I don't think sales of Rowling's book will be negatively impacted at all. If the Lexicon book is anything like the website, it will be a reference book, whereas, Rowling's book would be humorous. I don't think she could write a real reference book if she tried. I don't think that her fans would want her to waste her time trying, not when we have an experienced librarian (Steve at the Lexicon) who seems to have a knack for that sort of thing.
That's another thing about US elections, the elections are run by the politicians in power. Districts that support the party in power generally have much quicker lines. There is so much wrong with the election process, it's hard to figure out where to start to fix it. But, the people in power are barely interested. Both parties like the system as it is and will never focus on problems such as "first past the post" or even the Electoral College. They'd rather focus on stuff like Gay Mariage that most people don't care about at all, but the ones that do, are quite vocal. At this time, most people have no say in the Presidential Poll, at least not with a vote. Money is the only vote that matters. Congressional and Senate elections aren't much better. Because committee assignments are based on senority, it is better to vote for your incumbant and have some power than vote for the new guy. Freshman have no power until they conform to the system and become incumbants.
Money and politics are the American Way, especially when used together. Unless you live in New Hampshire, your dollar is worth more than your vote. You don't even need citizenship to vote with your money.
So you want to dial 911? use a landline. Have you every been in a restarant that didn't have one? They provide better info to the 911 operator anyway.
If they had a system where the top items in my queue were in the store when I returned a DVD, it seems that would beat the service I get from Netflix. They don't need to always have MovieC in inventory, but if it is near the top of my queue, they can arrange to have it in stock, then after I rent and return it, they can send it off to wherever else it might be wanted. All the stores in a region could share the less popular movies. And I rent a lot of TV series. You don't even need to look at my queue to know what I will want next since I watch each season in order, and if I like the show, I watch the seasons in order, too. A system like that would easily beat Netflix since the transit time would be shorter.
Someone has apparently set up a system where it is easier for short goaled people to spend real money at Walmart than funny money inside the company. When spending money is limited, the cheap product wins over quality just about every time. The relative value of real money and funny money should be adjusted so that the departments are penalized for being forced to buy what amounts to insurance that they might not need. The overhead bill should not be a factor in departmental cost reduction decisions. Cost of overhead should only be a factor to departments that overuse the IT services.
Ugh, call a doctor! this thread is making me ill
Why do you think Hillary is wasting so much time campaigning in immigrant communities where most people can't even vote?
In fact, the inaccessable website is even more of a problem, since, as a sighted user, I wouldn't be aware of the problem and need blind people and others to make me aware by the use of lawsuits and other communications. Lawsuits are cheaper than an ad campaign. A shopper who walks rather than rolls notices steps even if they can deal with them more easily, but I don't notice nonconforming websites unless I'm looking for problems.
When an affected group is as small as the population of blind online shoppers, the natural boycott by only that group is meaningless, especially if they aren't shopping there to begin with. The ADA is an amplifier for small groups to bring access problems to the attention of others so they can change or help or anything that they wouldn't know or want to do otherwise.
This is one of those times when not living in an earlly primary state is nice. Not being in a swing sate also help. They only want my money, not my vote. Is that the way it is supposed to work?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/top-democrats-pull-from-michigan/#more-2664
On the other hand, I'm thinking about moving to New Hampshire where my vote might actually be worth something. I might even join the Free State Project.
They had their chance, but none of them wanted it. Now, you have a chance.
take care
And sometimes when you help lift her into bed at night, she'll tell you she loves you. I guess that helps make it all worthwhile.
.The professional caregiver can be more detached emotionally. Plus, since they chose the job, they are not in a position to regret.
But, it's awfully hard to convince yourself that it's true.
There is a big difference between the care provided by you who have known the lady in better days and the caregiver for whom she is just another day at the office. But, there is a place for both. You know who she was and love and respect her for all that stuff in your past. But, you didn't choose to be a care giver. You have less time and energy for what comes more easily for you. That makes the care giving tasks much harder. Knowing who she was makes it especially painful.
You don't need to put your grandmother in a "home" to get help. Unless she is ill, you don't need a nurse, either. In the US, a nurse is a skilled medical person with a degree and much too expensive for diaper changning. But, you can arrange for someone to come in for a few hours a day to deal with bathing her, feeding her, changing her,etc, in her own home. It would take a lot of the unpleasantness out of your relationship and allow you to have some life of your own.
About the people who work as care givers - not all of them are losers who do it because they have no work ethic or can't get a better job, some actually like working with people and have a proper attitude that gets them through the unpleasantness of it. You have the older ladies who seeminly love everyone and get great persoanal satsifaction out of making your life better and you also get young immigrants who are glad to be working in the US and have dreams of doing bigger things, but are professional enough to do a good job as a caregiver while going to school.
The biggest problem is finding them. The government doesn't do this sort of thing, so you need to learn about all kinds of private agencies. There are lots of them, some are better than others. They don't have big marketing campaigns, and are more likely to advertise for fundraising rather than services. And the ones who are best at fundrasing are necessarily the best at services, plus the advertisiing is aimed at people with money, not people who need the services. But, that's a whole nother discussion.
The point is, one person shouldn't devote several hours a day to unpleasant tasks made even more unpleasant by being too familiar with the person they are caroing for. I would never want my grandchild sacrificing his/her life to keep me clean. I would simply want him/her to be physically close enough to make sure that I am clean and feel loved.
I was thinking T1. I mean we were doing all kinds of remote stuff back in the 80's before corporates were allowed to use the Internet. We set up our own internets with T1's between all the plants and business offices. We used the same sort of protocols as the internet and were not connected. Those networks are still in place, or could be. Your T1 doesn't have to go to a public access point, it can go straight to your own facilities. The only problem with the private internets is that you can't access easily from internet cafes and such while traveling. I don't think you save enough money by using public networks to make it worth the risk. Obviously, it does cost a little more, but this is infrastructure most corporations had in place prior to the opening up of the internet.
Getting into the NBA is a bit easier than getting into to be an astronaut, statistically speaking.
and they don't have that bothersome height restriction.
And that would cause the computer to leave the house. Gotta research project? Public library for you.
Seriously, we've always kept one computer in the family room and the other in the living room. that gives enough privacy, but not too much.
We used to have them next to each other, but that was too close.
I only slowed down for one word, "oghirutt", and I still don't know what that one is since I refuse to think about it. The rest was straightforward, as long as the word shape doesn't change much.
Maybe my memory is bad, but didn't scientists use to think we read the whole word at the same time, unless it was unusallly long and unfamiliar? In which case, we read it a syllable at a time. Reading skill was measured more or less in how many syllables one could ingest at the same time.