This game has little in common with Angry Birds. They only way it is similar is that they both involve a parabolic trajectory. Everything else about it is completely different. Using one (obvious) element that happens to have been present in many other games doesn't make it a copy. Innovative doesn't mean entirely new, it means different from what existed before.
You could say the same thing about tetras or pack-man, but some people spent hundreds of dollars playing them in arcades. Just because it's a different kind of game doesn't mean it is worth less, and just because it is cheap doesn't mean it isn't a good value. Some games you play for 5 minutes but you come back to again and again. Other games you sit down and play through all at once. Those ones cost more because fewer people have the time to play them, not because they are worth more.
Why are people so down on angry birds? It's simple, clever, and innovative. It's the tetras of the 2010's. You're just a gaming elitist who is no longer capable of having fun. You've forgotten what games are for.
This is a huge milestone. A consumer electronics company is now the most valuable (by $$$) company in the world! And it's one that had been written off for dead little more than a decade ago (some people like yourself would still like us to believe it is not doing well).
The stock price is not overvalued by any reasonable measure at this time. They doubled their profits in the last year, and if they do it again (and all indications are that they actually will, since they have no clear competitor) they will be earning more profits than Exxon. The price is due to speculators betting (intelligently) that will happen. But even if it doesn't, the P/E is well line with the rest of the technology sector.
Their largest competitor is BP, and we all know that they don't do as good a job as Exxon does. They have terrible accidents all the time! It's surprising they are even allowed to operate in the US anymore. Exxon does much, much better. That's why they were the most valuable company yesterday. That said, everyone knows oil is on it's way out. It keeps becoming more expensive to produce, and it's getting to the point where there isn't enough of it to go around.
Apple, on the other hand, is just getting started.
No, this is accounting double speak. Social Security is not paid for. The money in the trust fund has already been spent, soon the program will be paying out more than it takes in, and at that time we will need to raise taxes or take out additional debt to make up the difference.
What do you mean there's mo such thing as entitlement spending? Anything spent on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security is entitlement spending. Today, (most of) this money is paid for by special taxes but that will not be true moving forward. Regardless of any special taxes named after where the money was supposed to be spent, the budget includes all spending, whether you believe it is separate or not. And spending on these programs on it's own will be enough to drive the federal government into bankruptcy over the next decade. If you believe their hopelessly optimistic predictions, maybe it's two decades, but even so we are arguing about when we will face financial ruin, not if.
That makes sense but you are completely wrong. The deficit, in real dollars and as a fraction of the GDP, is expected to grow over the next 10 years. To say nothing of the debt, which is slated to increase very dramatically over that time. The defect reduction is indeed calculated by taking where we expected to be before the reductions and subtracting it form where we expect to be afterward.
The major issue is entitlement spending, which if nothing changes, would require us to raise the federal income tax rate to 50% for the average American in order to have a balanced budget 10 years from now. This is due to almost entirely to baby boomers who will become eligible for social security benefits at that time, so it's a number that is well known.
Only a complete idiot would look at the deficit reduction deal and conclude that it will make any difference in the long run. We need to either raise taxes dramatically, or raise the retirement age an cut benefits, or both. These ridiculous promises to cut "discretionary" spending are pointless and woefully inadequate.
He's not complaining that it was called a tablet. He's complaining that it was called a tablet and then it's price was compared to that of a netbook, this implies the poster knew the comparison was flawed.
It's somewhat reasonable to consider tablets specs to netbook specs, in that they're often used for similar tasks.
But it's not reasonable to complain that they are overpriced based on that comparison, since since you can use tablets in ways that you can't use a netbook. It's a different kind of device.
You're wrong about one thing. It isn't their fault people have been giving them shit for free their whole lives. And when someone gets something for free, they naturally learn to expect it. Their expectations are completely rational and warranted as a result. The social programs are at fault, and the recipients of the social services are as much victims of system as anybody. We never should have expected a different result form the individuals involved.
It bugs me the way older generations seem to expect young people to stay at home all day, and then think it strange when the go out and do these sort of things. This is a time when people are trying to make a name for themselves and decide who whey will become, people who want to be spineless, worthless stackers will sit at home and watch TV, but there are a lot of people who want more than that for themselves, and when this is the only real option they have, it's what they turn to.
They already know who he is. The comics chronicle conversations he had with people in that office. And you can tell from their tone that he's on the outs with the leadership. They just want proof it was him so they can fire him, or whatever.
Establishing a perminnant presence in space is not a reasonable goal at this time. It would cost too much, and it would not be sustainable as a result.
The ISS was an experiment in space construction and international cooperation. As such, the goal of the project was achieved when it was completed. The purpose of these expieremnts is to gain expience in such endeavors, investigate the feasibility of human space flight, and to gather any scienctific knowledge we can along the way.
These science experiments weren't meant to last for ever, and it's important that we stop spending money one them once they've run their course.
No, friend, Slashdot has never been that. I've been visiting this site for over 15 years, and it has always had articles from a broad range to technical themes, and a diverse array of opinions expressed in the comments. It used to be very anti-apple, it's true, and some explained this by claiming apple was not open, but the change happened around the time apple released the iMac.
This was the time when the quality of Apple's products improved dramatically. Apple started innovating and their products were no longer overpriced and underpowered. Apple reinvented the music industry and the cell phone industry. You complain they are not open, but maybe you don't remember how things were before apple moved into these industries (much, much worse).
I'll admit that apple does a lot of screwed up stuff, but the reason they get traction here on slashdot is they move the state of the art forward, and they produce products of supperior quality. Open platforms will win out in the end, and Apple will be forced to capitulate some day, when the rest of the market has caught up to them. But in the mean time, Apple has the support of most slashdotters because they actually release new products from time to time.
The ground will continue to be warm for some time after the sun sets. Also, the tower works based on the temperature differential between the ground and the top of the tower, which will still exist at night.
I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but Hollywood is constantly coming out with new ideas. There are a lot more movies coming out than just the ones you see advertised. And a lot of indepentend films have big name actors and directors too. Some examples are movies l Iike the Fountian or The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Obviously, they don't spend a lot of money promoting experimental films, because that's not where the money is, but if you aren't lazy you can go out and find the new stuff. If you're just sitting there with you mouth open, you shouldn't be surprised that they spoon feed you gabage, go out and do a little work for a change.
Space is not entirely soundless. If you were to put a microphone nearby a rocket nozzle, or thrusters firing, you would record sound. Likewise, if the microphone were attached to the vehicle while it was undergoing stage separation you would record sound. I'm not gonna say the video was perfectly technically accurate, but you can't just say "no sound in space" either.
Slashdot Mirror
This game has little in common with Angry Birds. They only way it is similar is that they both involve a parabolic trajectory. Everything else about it is completely different. Using one (obvious) element that happens to have been present in many other games doesn't make it a copy. Innovative doesn't mean entirely new, it means different from what existed before.
They shot and killed an innocent man. They caused the riots, not the people complaining about it. This asshole needs to be beaten with a clue-stick.
You could say the same thing about tetras or pack-man, but some people spent hundreds of dollars playing them in arcades. Just because it's a different kind of game doesn't mean it is worth less, and just because it is cheap doesn't mean it isn't a good value. Some games you play for 5 minutes but you come back to again and again. Other games you sit down and play through all at once. Those ones cost more because fewer people have the time to play them, not because they are worth more.
Why are people so down on angry birds? It's simple, clever, and innovative. It's the tetras of the 2010's. You're just a gaming elitist who is no longer capable of having fun. You've forgotten what games are for.
This is a huge milestone. A consumer electronics company is now the most valuable (by $$$) company in the world! And it's one that had been written off for dead little more than a decade ago (some people like yourself would still like us to believe it is not doing well).
The stock price is not overvalued by any reasonable measure at this time. They doubled their profits in the last year, and if they do it again (and all indications are that they actually will, since they have no clear competitor) they will be earning more profits than Exxon. The price is due to speculators betting (intelligently) that will happen. But even if it doesn't, the P/E is well line with the rest of the technology sector.
Their largest competitor is BP, and we all know that they don't do as good a job as Exxon does. They have terrible accidents all the time! It's surprising they are even allowed to operate in the US anymore. Exxon does much, much better. That's why they were the most valuable company yesterday. That said, everyone knows oil is on it's way out. It keeps becoming more expensive to produce, and it's getting to the point where there isn't enough of it to go around.
Apple, on the other hand, is just getting started.
Woah, you set the bar pretty high there.
So social security is a huge problem. Am I right?
No, this is accounting double speak. Social Security is not paid for. The money in the trust fund has already been spent, soon the program will be paying out more than it takes in, and at that time we will need to raise taxes or take out additional debt to make up the difference.
What do you mean there's mo such thing as entitlement spending? Anything spent on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security is entitlement spending. Today, (most of) this money is paid for by special taxes but that will not be true moving forward. Regardless of any special taxes named after where the money was supposed to be spent, the budget includes all spending, whether you believe it is separate or not. And spending on these programs on it's own will be enough to drive the federal government into bankruptcy over the next decade. If you believe their hopelessly optimistic predictions, maybe it's two decades, but even so we are arguing about when we will face financial ruin, not if.
That makes sense but you are completely wrong. The deficit, in real dollars and as a fraction of the GDP, is expected to grow over the next 10 years. To say nothing of the debt, which is slated to increase very dramatically over that time. The defect reduction is indeed calculated by taking where we expected to be before the reductions and subtracting it form where we expect to be afterward.
The major issue is entitlement spending, which if nothing changes, would require us to raise the federal income tax rate to 50% for the average American in order to have a balanced budget 10 years from now. This is due to almost entirely to baby boomers who will become eligible for social security benefits at that time, so it's a number that is well known.
Only a complete idiot would look at the deficit reduction deal and conclude that it will make any difference in the long run. We need to either raise taxes dramatically, or raise the retirement age an cut benefits, or both. These ridiculous promises to cut "discretionary" spending are pointless and woefully inadequate.
He's not complaining that it was called a tablet. He's complaining that it was called a tablet and then it's price was compared to that of a netbook, this implies the poster knew the comparison was flawed.
But it's not reasonable to complain that they are overpriced based on that comparison, since since you can use tablets in ways that you can't use a netbook. It's a different kind of device.
When is Shashdot going to get a "like" button?!
Maybe there are other options we haven't considered.
These young people are too young to work (legally). And we're talking about things that happen after school hours. Get a clue.
You're wrong about one thing. It isn't their fault people have been giving them shit for free their whole lives. And when someone gets something for free, they naturally learn to expect it. Their expectations are completely rational and warranted as a result. The social programs are at fault, and the recipients of the social services are as much victims of system as anybody. We never should have expected a different result form the individuals involved.
It bugs me the way older generations seem to expect young people to stay at home all day, and then think it strange when the go out and do these sort of things. This is a time when people are trying to make a name for themselves and decide who whey will become, people who want to be spineless, worthless stackers will sit at home and watch TV, but there are a lot of people who want more than that for themselves, and when this is the only real option they have, it's what they turn to.
They already know who he is. The comics chronicle conversations he had with people in that office. And you can tell from their tone that he's on the outs with the leadership. They just want proof it was him so they can fire him, or whatever.
Establishing a perminnant presence in space is not a reasonable goal at this time. It would cost too much, and it would not be sustainable as a result.
The ISS was an experiment in space construction and international cooperation. As such, the goal of the project was achieved when it was completed. The purpose of these expieremnts is to gain expience in such endeavors, investigate the feasibility of human space flight, and to gather any scienctific knowledge we can along the way.
These science experiments weren't meant to last for ever, and it's important that we stop spending money one them once they've run their course.
No, friend, Slashdot has never been that. I've been visiting this site for over 15 years, and it has always had articles from a broad range to technical themes, and a diverse array of opinions expressed in the comments. It used to be very anti-apple, it's true, and some explained this by claiming apple was not open, but the change happened around the time apple released the iMac.
This was the time when the quality of Apple's products improved dramatically. Apple started innovating and their products were no longer overpriced and underpowered. Apple reinvented the music industry and the cell phone industry. You complain they are not open, but maybe you don't remember how things were before apple moved into these industries (much, much worse).
I'll admit that apple does a lot of screwed up stuff, but the reason they get traction here on slashdot is they move the state of the art forward, and they produce products of supperior quality. Open platforms will win out in the end, and Apple will be forced to capitulate some day, when the rest of the market has caught up to them. But in the mean time, Apple has the support of most slashdotters because they actually release new products from time to time.
No, no. You're thinking about it all wrong! Apple's not taking 30%. They're letting the rest of us keep 70%! That's over half, you should be grateful!
The ground will continue to be warm for some time after the sun sets. Also, the tower works based on the temperature differential between the ground and the top of the tower, which will still exist at night.
In some respects, the tower itself acts as a hurricane.
The higher the tower, the greater the pressure differential you'll generate. More pressure equals more power.
I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but Hollywood is constantly coming out with new ideas. There are a lot more movies coming out than just the ones you see advertised. And a lot of indepentend films have big name actors and directors too. Some examples are movies l Iike the Fountian or The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Obviously, they don't spend a lot of money promoting experimental films, because that's not where the money is, but if you aren't lazy you can go out and find the new stuff. If you're just sitting there with you mouth open, you shouldn't be surprised that they spoon feed you gabage, go out and do a little work for a change.
Space is not entirely soundless. If you were to put a microphone nearby a rocket nozzle, or thrusters firing, you would record sound. Likewise, if the microphone were attached to the vehicle while it was undergoing stage separation you would record sound. I'm not gonna say the video was perfectly technically accurate, but you can't just say "no sound in space" either.