As it has been said previously, I do believe that results -- and even comparisons -- should be put into proportion. By this, I mean one should imagine them in terms of "real-life" situations. To begin with, I would say it depends on the question you are asking. Whereas one might be asking some "pub quiz" questions, or collecting information for the writing of an essay, a lot of the time, one might just be asking oneself a banal question, or searching for information which would not truly be classified as general knowledge. (I have a few examples to demonstrate this. The other day, I heard a song on a radio but did not hear the title, though I had a few lyrics in mind, and a short search on Google allowed me to find the title of the said song thanks only to the few lyrics I had remembered; also, my father wanted to find the poem 'If' by Rudyard Kipling, and just typing 'poem if' on Google allowed us to find the poem in less time than it takes to pronounce its author's name.) I think that for these kind of searches, there really is no reference faster and more efficient than Google.
Other than the question one is asking, I also think one should look at the speed, and cost, of the various solutions to obtain the answer to the question being asked. Firstly, I shall consider Google (which, in the article, has never taken more then 7 minutes to find an answer). I believe most people nowadays benefit of a broandband connection, so for those it is a simple matter of going to Google and typing the search query. For those who are still surfing with a classic modem, then I would think the matter of turning on the computer, connecting to the Internet, going to Google and searching would take no more than five minutes. As for the results Google provides itself, I think in this domain, Google does not have such a reputation for no reason. It should take no more than five minutes to find a persistant answer to a question among the provided results. Next, I think added to the time it takes to phone the person is the time it takes to research a good source which can provide an answer to the question. Obviously, also to be counted is the subsequent capability of the person at the other end of the line to search for the answer. Overall, this may vary but it can come more slowly, costly, and I would think less practical, than a Google search (I say less practical because you may copy, paste and print the resulting pages of a Google search). Finally, as it has been said, added to the time of the library is the time it is taked to get there, and the efficiency of the staff working there. Should one not live very close to a good library, driving the distance also adds to the cost.
In my opinion, I would say that in terms of speed, cost, and of course results to one's query, it is hard to find a better traditional alternative to Google. What is more, the results can be handled in a more practical way. Also, the search engine is suited to both serious and more banal queries.
I myself am always wary of a mechanism that doesn't have more verbose settings or options. Just one checkbox that refers to an Internet Connection Firewall as a catch-all is a bit suspect.
It's not like you can define specific TCP/UDP ports to allow/disallow with this mechanism.
Actually, it is possible to define specific ports to allow, or disallow, with this mechanism. In the properties of your Internet connection, click 'Advanced', then click in the checkbox which offers to activate the firewall. Once this is done, you may click on the 'Parameters' button to access configuration of the authorisation of the system ports, though I still do think that the firewall should be securely configured on activation whether or not it is activated be default.
Personally, I have no trouble dealing with worms proliferating through ports other than those I can control myself (which include HTTP and E-Mail), such as Blaster.Worm and Sasser.Worm, thanks to my ZoneLabs ZoneAlarm firewall, which allows me to protect my computer from intruding -- and protruding -- dangers, easily yet with control. I always recommend this firewall to users of personal computers because I have yet to find a free firewall which protects well yet works so simply. I have read some messages in which it is said that turning on the Windows XP firewall will suffice to protect users against such worms. I must protest against this, as I have a small anecdote of my own.
After having reformatted my computer, I thought it would be safe to activate Windows XP's firewall as an intermediate protection against such threats until I had ZoneAlarm installed. I connected to the Internet, and in less than a minute had Norton Antivirus, which I had updated beforehand, warning me that Welchia.Worm had been able to access my system -- remember Welchia is based on Blaster and uses the same UDP ports to proliferate -- yet the Windows XP firewall was activated. I could say I was somewhat surprised, but then perhaps I wasn't all that much; after all, it is Microsoft software. I do not know if the same situation could apply to Sasser, since it does proliferate through a more commonly used port, but I must still say I have some trouble recommending the Windows XP firewall, even as an intermediate one.
In the event of needed enhancements or fixes, the Linux development community, no matter how well intentioned, simply cannot advance Linux the way we can - and must - innovate in Windows.
Steve Ballmer does have a truly valid statement here, and does make a strong point besides. It is true that the Linux development community, no matter how well intentioned, simply cannot fix, advance and innovate Linux both as slowly and as hideously as Microsoft can.
I do not know if only I feel this way about the look of the new Lycos website design, but do you not think it looks somewhat cheap and unprofessional, in the style of "search engines" which are in fact just advertisement whores appearing in various pastly infamous domains? The front page looks hideous as the preponderant yellow does not look nice at all. As for the links of 'top searches', it could be "helpful", but at the same time, what that section mostly does is clutter up my screen with links I mostly do not care about. The links to Lycos' other services are existant albeit the general layout and design makes the page look amateurish and cheap.
The search results page is not too bad, and the news search results page bearing the same design, then that aspect is alright in a sufficient way; but the image search results page definitly loses out to Google
's in my opinion -- the system warned me that the files I was about to view contain adult material, when in fact they didn't, and the search results' layout itself was idiotic. As for the shopping section, I believe Google's Froogle does a good stab at this section, and even more impressively so since it is more recent than Lycos'. I also forget to mention the ridiculous web hosting service, which is just truly unsatisfying in terms of space and service itself.
All in all, I think Lycos is just relying on its reputation now, just as MSN Search is relying on users utilizing Internet Explorer's search function. The problem is, it is already beaten by far by Yahoo! and probably Google will progressively transform into a web portal itself, albeit a much less cluttered one than the currently existing platforms. If you ask me, Lycos' death will not be anytime soon though, because there are still thousands of people relying on its services for now; still, it is just a matter of time I would say.
The decision of the American Military forces to adapt their technology to Linux does make me wonder what is going on in the headquarters of SCO. Since the choice has been made by the Army, perhaps the conversations over at the SCO headquarters are similar to this one.
Darl McBride: 'Alright John, please can you get me the list of major Linux users we're going to have to sue?'
John: after a few clicks -- 'So, we have IBM, Chrysler, the Bank of America, the American Army...'
Darl McBride: 'Eh... Excuse me, but what was that last one?'
John: 'The American Army, why?'
Darl McBride: 'Erm, perhaps we will have to reconsider that one, right?...'
As a 14-year-old boy, I think this subject is very interesting from several points of view. I have to admit I rather disagree when it is said kids are math- and science-friendly, but then as has been said it is not surprising that the situation has turned out this way when you consider the sad culture the moronic majority of the population is plunging the country into here in France -- having seen several previous comments, I see the situation is not so different in America either. For example, in my class, a lot of the children are drawn to the idiotic reality TV shows (we even have a Celebrity Farm, a show in which one is able to view celebrities living in a farm and vote one out each week) and the teenagers seem to find the boring lives of others more interesting than theirs ever could be. This truely is sad, but this said group of people is the same which doesn't bother working much at school. Now I have not done a psychology major so I am not in the best position to ponder on how this crash in TV quality has affected childrens' work so much, but I would think this is due to a generalisation and banalisation of this moronic culture, developing into a way of life: doing nothing while watching TV to see others doing nothing. I would say that this tendancy to slack off has affected how the said children tend to percieve other activities in life, schoolwork included. I am pretty sure if one was to exclude children from watching such trash on television, they would not have such a tendancy to do nothing and not use their brain actively as is happening now.
In my opinion, math and science are already kid-friendly. It is just a case of the children being voluntary to approach these subjects in an optimistic way, something which is becoming rarer and rarer these days as the kids are becoming progressively less math- and science-friendly, as I said in the first paragraph. Any child willing to enhance his or her knowledge on these topics can do so easily, as I think there are an infinite number of resources suited to their capabilities which are available to them. In my case, for example, I was pushed to improve my math skills when I got interested in more serious programming (as I have currently started learning C++, which I find somewhat more interesting than just placing controls on a form as I did with Delphi). Of course, I am not omitting the fact that the motivation of the teacher can change everything in the stance of children towards math, but if we cannot change much, let alone anything, in the educational system, then the responsibility of changing the childrens' stance towards these topics rests in the hands of the parents; the latter can do so much more to get their children to be motivated in the instruction of math and science, and for example a good start is to raise the children in the omission of the wave of "crap" television -- but without an excess of tendancy towards elitism, which could get the children rejected at school. I believe parents should show the children at the youngest age how fun math and science can be, how vast these topics are and how important they are later on.
Math and science are already kid-friendly -- I think the balance has to reside on the other side, by having the children be math- and science-friendly; I believe that for this, kids have to understand the value of these subjects as soon as they can, and for the most part I should think the responsibility of having the children understand this is first and foremost in the parents' hands.
Thank you for noticing this new white paper, document which I have once again mirrored and that you may find there: mysql-cluster-technical-whitepaper.pdf (181 KB in size).
For the lazy among you (and lazy you have to be to find the task of entering a few fields in a form exhiliarating), I have uploaded the MYSQL Cluster white paper to another FTP site, mirror of the file which you may access there: mysql-cluster-whitepaper.pdf (the document is a PDF file, so fear the Adobe Acrobat Reader loading time).
This post may be understood as flamebait by those who do barely try to see things from my point of view, but I can brace myself up against that. The issue is, I do not really see where some peoples' complaints against major advertising companies lie, as it seems apparent to me that the softwares' privacy policy has always been available to the end-user. Out of curiosity, I visited WhenU's site to verify whether or not there was truely a case of non-consent on the behalf of the user, and of breach of the user's privacy. WhenU's privacy policy is freely available on their site, and for the lazy among you, these are basically the most important paragraphs:
By downloading the SaveNow software, you give permission to WhenU.com to display relevant contextual information and offers. The SaveNow software selects which ads and offers to display to individual users based on several factors, including: URLs associated with Web pages visited by the user, search terms typed by the user into search engines, HTML content of the Web pages viewed by the user and the local zip code of the user.
The software protects users' privacy by uploading a database of content in small chunks to individual desktops, and then determining on the desktop whether to retrieve information from WhenU.com or third-party servers. To protect user privacy, the same database of content is sent to all desktops. Decisions regarding which ads to retrieve to an individual desktop are all processed on the user's desktop - and isolated from WhenU.com servers. User privacy is also protected in the following manner:
1) Personally-identifiable information is NOT required in order to use the software and WhenU.com does NOT know the identity of individual users of the software
2) As the user surfs the Internet, URLS visited by the user (i.e. the user's "clickstream data") are NOT transmitted to WhenU.com or any third party server
3) WhenU.com does NOT assemble personally-identifiable browsing profiles of users
4) WhenU.com does NOT assemble anonymous machine-identifiable browsing profiles of individual users
5) WhenU.com does NOT track which ads and offers are seen or clicked on by individual machines - analysis and tracking is done in the aggregate.
So far, so "clean" -- WhenU.com informs the user of the information that is sent to WhenU.com, and also details which information is not used, and when the required information is sent. Although, my cynicism pushed me to download the SaveNow software just to check whether or not there were some strings attached with the software itself; on installation, I read the privacy statement which was completely identical.
So, according to this privacy statement the user consents to installing the software and subsequently to have the said software make use of the user's bandwidth to send anonymous usage statistics to WhenU.com and download advertising banners corresponding to the profile built with the anonymous information. I hastedly repeated the small research for Claria software (formerly GATOR software) and the results are pretty much identical -- the user consents to installing the program and have it use bandwidth to send anonymous information to Internet servers. So the major desktop advertising comapnies are sadly pretty much right when the affirm that the user is consenting to their software using their computer to perform various tasks and activities. Now the question which is preponderant in my mind is: what am I doing wrong here? There must be a further reason for everyone complaining about a breach of privacy, further than the statements in the privacy policies then -- but if the information in the privacy policies is invalid, doesn't that make the activity of these companies illegal?
In recent times, we have been what one could call "plagued" by first-person shooters based on events of the second World War, with the Medal of Honor series, Call of Duty, Battlefield 1942 and others of which I have forgotten the name or the existence. Now, game developers are milking a new money cow with the sudden arrival of several FPS games based on the Vietnam War. It would be most pleasant if these two preponderant themes could now leave game developers' minds as fast as they have entered them, because after a few theme-based games, the originality is just inexistent -- yet the theme-based games continue to appear (and there will always be punters to get the said games). There are several wars which could be poked at yet without making a political statement, such as the apparently "forgotten" first World War, the wars of the Cold War other than in Vietnam, post-Cold War wars and contemporary wars such as Iraq and Afghanistan (I think only the average Conflict Desert Storm truely touches the latter subject).
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that this upcoming game from Gearbox will be average -- in fact far from that, the team over there are an experienced bunch of developers --, I am just saying that when it comes out, though it may be a good game, and why not great, I may have already "played" the game before. With all the respect I have for Gearbox and their apparent research into the subject, I still believe this game will have an overly strong feeling of "deja-vu", with its basis already having been over-exploited beforehand.
What truely surprises me is the fact that this is the 19th incarnation of the Netsky virus, and the can be really quite revealing about how much "Joe and Jane Blow" really try to protect their computer, even after all the repeated assaults from multiple virii in recent times. I am sure some blinded, elitist geeks out there will point out that 'Joe and Jane Blow are too stupid so they get loads of virii instead of moving to Linux' before moving to the next discussion whih can sprout a pro-Linux, anti-Microsoft thread. Believe me, I do know a lot of Joe and Jane Blows, and if you do not then simply forget about your elitist argument, because for the most part they are not simple or stupid. They want to surf the Internet, check their e-mail, play some games and perhaps download music -- they do not want to program a database engine, do not own a Linux box for a hobby, do not start counting lists from '0' and think anyone who thinks learning Pi should perhaps see a doctor.
So, they ask you for help because they think they have a virus or are feeling a slowdown. You do everything they should have done, that is install Ad-Aware, update it, scan for spyware -- and find some truckload of the bloatware eating up disk and registry space (and I'm not going to start on the RAM). That done, you download AVG Grisoft, update it, scan for virii -- and find several hundred files contaminated by virii, and that is quite a lot to clean up. Finally, you install a firewall -- preferably ZoneAlarm or Kerio Personal Firewall -- and set it up for them, so no more Blasters et al sneaking through some obscure system ports. The best option, on the long term at least, is to be sure to install a firewall with preconfigured program access rights (and I think Kerio Personal Firewall has this feature), and I shall tell you why: it may seem simple for any of us to simply check a checkbox for the firewall to remember to allow Half-Life Launcher to attack the Internet, and I truely thought this was the case for anybody -- after all, all the firewall does is ask a simple question, at least what seems like a simple question for most of us. Then, my grandma, who has barely touched a computer all her life, tried the new one she had bought to have a pastime during her six weeks' inability to walk. And the result was pretty surprising, to say the least. A new icon on the desktop, or even a pop-up, can get her panicking. So can you imagine this kind of non-techie, new user getting a firewall pop-up every minute for every program this user launches? This is why a preconfigured program access rights list is something good to have.
Of course, anyone can go without an antivirus by simply installing a firewall and knowing what comes in their e-mail -- or, for those who grasp the technology a bit more, just block the ports manually; but Joe and Jane Blow have much more simple needs and don't want to have to learn loads of techniques simply to avoid virii and spyware, malware which they do not notice most of the time. In my opinion, the best way to prepare Mr. and Mrs. Blow against all this malware is to set up their software so at best, they can surf around and write emails totally unconscious of this protection, since in this case the software updates itself and does its job automatically. You can also give the user further tools against malware, such as replacing their browser and e-mail clients with Mozilla/Firefox and Eudora or Thunderbird. You should also set them simple guidelines, such as to always refuse anything whatsoever from a source they do not trust. Try and get them to buy commercial software (Norton Internet Security or McAfee Internet Security) as in general it offers better protection and a bit more tools that shall make everyone a happy bunny. Joe and Jane Blow want to know that they are protected against virii and spyware, but do not want to know how, and you'd be rather stubborn to get, what in their opinion is an extra worry, on the
Unless my memory is failing me, isn't it Namco's [1][2]Ridge Racer (or it's sequent title Revolution) which boasts a game of Galaxian while the game loads? And as a little bonus, killing all the invaders before the timer runs out gives the player a choice of nine cars, instead of four, when comes the vehicule selection. Ah, the old times -- you couldn't even save your game, I think. That was truely an arcade game.
I think that what was a pretty good idea back then could even be welcome nowadays; after all, in most games we are presented with a boring and frustrating loading screen which simply presents the player with a loading progress bar. Instead of this, game developers could get the main game to load a small, light mini-game which could serve as an intermediate screen to avoid a sudden break from interactivity (for example, in a football game, one could imagine a Pong-like mini-game to avoid long pauses during the loading times which just bore the player, long loading times which are recurrent in the FIFA series which comes to mind). The subsequent problem is, such mini-games would be a good way to occupy the player in out-of-game loading screens, but what about in-game transitions? A good method which avoids in-game loading times -- and perhaps also laterally reduces out-of-game loading times -- is to load the upcoming in-game elements, such as maps and FMVs, during the more inactive in-game moments. This has several advantages, first of all being that the player does not notice a slowdown in play since the loading should take place when the game is more inactive. Then, the said elements already loaded into memory appear instantly and there is no break in in-game playing whatsoever. And I shall also develop what I have minimally said, about the out-of-game loading times being shorter since the loading is done in-game. I am not a game developer (being only 14 that would be a mean feat) so I do not know if this could be accomplished but perhaps the "inactivity loading" concept could be taken even further, with the in-game content being loaded while the player goes through the starting menus, or even when the introducing FMV is being played.
Is it just me, or are the Lindows developers blindfolded, waiting for the next punch? I mean, Microsoft are bound to notice it after some time... 'LindDOS'? Lindows could be the next Phoenix -- sorry, Firebird -- sorry... Well, you get the idea. Subsequent naming of the distribution will be 'Lindo', perhaps...
This is a sad day for the Internet: Google has truely shot itself in the foot. Where are the big banner ads? the pop-ups? Where are the unrelated search results, obfuscated by even more unrelated "sponsored" search "results"? And why is it useful? It's the sad truth, but alas Google is living in the past, instead of looking to the future. (- Insert obligotary "BSD is dead" parody here -)
Seriously though, wandering around on ZDNet, I found that Google has launched a personalized search engine. I tried it out, and I'll tell you what -- it kicks major ass. Let's say you are trying to look up information for a particular or specialized search term on the traditional Google, it may give you some random unrelated results, those of another domain you wish to consult about; on Google Personalized Search, you specify which domain you want to search about and it will provide you with more pertinent results. Kudos to Google, once again.
The reason for the search term "Miserable failure" giving Michael Moore's site as the most pertinent result is based on the way Google PageRank works, I beleive. I remember reading that an American radio host, Glenn Beck, asked his audience to get the search term "Miserable failure" to give Michael Moore's site as the first result. If my memory is not failing me, the way Google searches for the most pertinent results is by searching for the terms in the links. For example, Glenn Beck asked his audience with a website to write this link in their website:
Michael <a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/" title="Miserable Failure">"Miserable Failure"</a> Moore
Google beleives "Miserable failure" is the nature of the link to michaelmoore.com, and this is how the host's audience managed to fullfil the feat. This is why a Google search for "bastards" shows up a certainly very pertinent result.
I hope you will forgive me if I tell you that I haven't had the chance to play the first episodes extensively, given the fact that I am only 13 and only got into video games at the age of 8, when I got my first console, the PlayStation. Hence I beleive I can justify not really having yet had the chance to have a detailed play of every major classic which was released on NES and MegaDrive.
I would also like to point out that you are placing a same argument on two different levels. First of all you say I have 'no taste in video games' and 'have no idea what classic is', then you go on to say I 'consider FF7 and 8 to be the classic episodes of Final Fantasy' and thus 'lose all [my] credibility'. These are two different things, as having not been able to play the precedent opuses of the Final Fantasy series, I took the general opinion of the gaming press which was that the said games were classics, so this was not specifically my opinion. You may dislike these episodes of the series, but saying I 'have no taste in video games' is somewhat flamebait since it was much appreciated by the general public, me included. I pointed out I was an aficionado of these two episodes and not of the series, so in some ways your argument is redudant since I never said I was a gung-ho Final Fantasy aficionado. I am sorry to have afflicted your true fan root feelings with naming these episodes classics, but I just follow my opinion and that of the majority of people having played the game; you could say that they are not true Final Fantasy fans but when a game is coined a classic by game reviewers and is highly appreciated by a high number of players, I think that can at least justify a bit why I said this.
Well, to say the truth, I was aware that certain Japanese games were not released in the USA but unaware that certain games got released in Europe and not in the USA; but I must say that I was specifically talking about the Japan/Europe example. If you look at the Europe/USA example, then I think it's once again a case of the "stereotypic" culture clash I was talking about (i.e. publishers thinking certain markets are not ready or suited to certain games, as I said in my comment).
About importing games from America or Canada, I must point out that though I live in France, I am fully bilingual so the language of the game documentation would not be what bothers me. What would bother me is the steps I beleive are needed to properly play import games. I don't know much about importing, but since I own a PAL console and the American standard is NTSC (I think so, at least), wouldn't I need a chip of some kind? Aren't import games dearer? And most importantly, is that all legal?
First of all, I would like to start by saying that though Metal Slug Online could sound like a nice game concept, there are several problems posed. When you say the words 'Metal Slug', the instant reaction is the thought of that classic side-scrolling shooter with its unique character and charm, because that is what the game is all about: wreaking havok in city streets with heavy weapon power sideways, in pure arcade style. It is just something which I beleive cannot be recreated in 3D, simply because it wouldn't really be the same game anymore. Its side-scrolling carnage arcade gameplay made it what it is and what stays in most peoples' memories. If you try and evolve that environment into a modern 3D engine, and bring it online, it isn't really Metal Slug, but just another online game with big mechs. Metal Slug Online, if it comes through development, will be in my opinion like what Crystal Chronicles is the Final Fantasy series: a different game with the same name. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that it is not a good game, on the contrary, but I am just saying that I feel that it is not in essence a Final Fantasy game, though that feeling may be related to the fact I'm an aficionado of the classic seventh and eighth episodes of the series.
Next, in his speech Toru Iwatani made a good point about game developers having to be more open to and inspired by real life elements, but he also said he thinks game systems should be more simple. Of course we always say that the simplest gameplay is the best, but I think that if you have the desire to simplify it too much, a worse game experience can result from this. In a time where game engines and systems are continually evolving, simplifying the gameplay is a bit like walking backwards on a escalator going forward and upward. You have to design gameplay which exploits and suits these engine evolutions and in my opinion, simplifying the gameplay is somewhat limiting the gamer's control of how (s)he can fully use the newer and modern engines. Of course, I am taking a general example, as there are simpler games that do not rely on heavy engines and hence can afford to do with this simplified gameplay, but it can get somewhat scary when the idea is extended to deliver dog-digested horrors such as Kirby's Air Ride. I am all for good gameplay, and simple if you can make it so, but not if all it does is limit my enjoyment of the game because I cannot access instantly what I would like to with a more complex UI.
I am truely a bit saddened at Dave Perry's "descent" (need I put that in double-quotes?). He seemed quite a bit of an idol for me when I first saw what gems he produced such as Earthworm Jim and MDK, but when I see corporate tripe such as Enter the Matrix, I really wonder what has happened to his creativity and his philosophy of originality in games. You can always defend him by saying that 'he was not provided with enough time' but by saying that you are just reinforcing the point of why the corporate scheme provides us with litteraly crap film tie-ins. I wonder if Shiny were planning to really work on the game at all, or were just relying on the name to sell in which cars have square wheels to five million fans. It seems they relied more on the second option sadly, and I hope this is not a phenomenom which will get to the companies we appreciate most. But then, this also goes to show how uneducated a lot of people are when it comes to films' promotional games. If this is how future games are going to be, then we are really looking at a sad future for video games as a whole.
This Game Boy Advance Famicon/NES with NES games package has first of all been released in Japan, which I read the said series would be exclusive in, and it is now America which is granted with its release. I truely hope Nintendo seriously consider releasing it on the European market, as over here, it would sell like hot buns. Why is the European gaming market always the last one considered when a game is released? On the Nintendo France forums, people are crying and even writing petitions to have Baten Kaitos and Naruto (also Animal Crossing, which is not planned to be released in France) sold over here. There is a real gaming public over here and for some reason, it does not seem to be taken seriously, at all: in the majority of cases, we are always the last to get a bite on the good games; a number of awesome video games products and gimmicks stay exclusive to Japan, when I am sure that they would be a real success here.
Of course, there is the difference in culture, which I know plays the main role in this game of releases and exclusivities. Whereas in the 'land of the rising sun', video gaming has become a cult phenomenom, a true subculture, to the point of having been banalized, here in Europe we seem to have been somewhat "late" in on the market, or so that is what it looks like. Japan has known a real growth in the technology market and America is not far off (if not on a par with) the Japanese technology market, but this does not mean Europe is not ready to be the host to new kinds of technology, which seems to be the constructors' perception of the situation. Their is a real and serious gaming audience in Europe and one that could be of profit, which is, let's not forget, why companies sell games. How could they not understand us being frustrated on being left out on some products which we will never get our hands on excepted in the pages of our favorite magazine? The culture difference is a big factor in this game, as you can notice if you compare the prices of games in Japan to those of the same games in Europe, but I am pretty sure that one can affirm that Europe is ready for the new games and gimmicks, and that there is a public here which can be taken seriously.
Now don't get me wrong, I never said we would want all Japanese releases over here, become some are seriously quite dodgy (what's with the manga whorehouse puzzle games?), but some have true appeal over here and not only to an "elitist" bunch of gamers, but also to a genuine and expanding public which is ready to hand over the cash to get these gems. The best I can hope for is one of the major Japanese companies of the industry seeing the potential of this market; I am conscious this is something which shall not happen overnight, let alone happen at all perhaps, but we over here need to be seen as gamers now, and not only as 'hobbyists'. Whoever knows, maybe one day video games will be as banalized over here as they are in Japan, but as long as the European public is not seen as a serious one, that will not happen... Though will it ever?
Though it may be true that those teenagers discovered security holes that could have cost several hundred thousands of dollars of losees both personal (every client in the sites' databases is a potential victim of fraud) and professional (with the said sites having to deal with the consequences which follow, such as compensation, a massive advertising campaign to catch up on the bad reputation, and whatnot), you shouldn't omit that by spending $3 million on Bill Gates' credit card, the boys did commit a crime, fact which is not altered by their discoveries of the security holes in the e-commerce systems.
What's more, I suppose that the sites hacked by the teenagers would rather want to sue the boys than compensate them, as I beleive the said sites must have a user charter which strictly prohibits the act of abusing of the service or of its eventual security faults, whether it is to commit another crime or not -- another crime which in this case is theft, as the money they used to pay for the items wasn't theirs. The two teenagers can always say they were doing the 'right thing', which they and others perhaps think they were, but the truth is they just commited a crime, or two.
To avoid having insult added to their injury, once the boys had discovered the faults in the sites' security systems, they should have contacted the site administrators to alert them on the subject and tell them how to repair the security holes (as far as the "hacker ethic" goes anyway); but instead, they exploited their knowledge to commit a real crime by stealing $3 million from the planet's richest man, Bill Gates (though I do wonder if he actually noticed the "slight" outcome on his account; he must have thought his wife had bought another wrist watch). I don't think you can argue that it really is the boys' fault if they now find themselves in this situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if they had to pay a hefty fine alongside a lengthy ban from the vicinity of any computers.
One activity you can indulge in can simultanesouly improve your memory, make you feel good and allow you to show off in front of your friends so they will think that you are a really intelligent person (which I am not saying you aren't, but people who aren't really into this kind of brainy and "geeky" activity will surely be very impressed) is to memorize 1000 digits of pi. It's funner than you may think, as it's a real challenge and over time will increase your capacity to use the full potential of your memory properly.
People in Europe must think that Americans are complete, sexually-repressed, idiots.
Living in France, I would not go as far as that, but I have to admit you really aren't far off the truth. Here in France, breasts on television at any hours of the day is a common happening (especially in all the shampoo adverts). When I say 'any hour of the day', I am not hyperboling and you can beleive me, that really is from morning time to prime time television, even when the smaller children come back from school. I think this is what has 'normalized' the view of breasts enormously, and seeing some continually on television when the young children are watching isn't something shocking or surprising at all here. When we heard of the whole 'Janet Jackson's breast' affair, it was something quite comic over here, and when we heard America's legislation to ban live television, the States' population's fear of a breast became something of a joke over here.
What surprised me, more than anything, were the reactions on Slashdot. Some were comparing the situation to a televisual 'Goatse' -- though in my opinion there is a bit of difference between being taking by surprised by a gaping anus and by a breast (with a sun around the nipple, goddamit!). I don't know if the same numbers apply to the USA, but over here most boys have seen a pornographic film by the age of around 8. I just do not see how seeing a breast on television could be so shocking. Anyway, isn't the Superbowl broadcast in the evening in America? Shouldn't kids who aren't old enough to have seen a pornographic flm yet have been in bed already?
So, to say it frankly, it is true that most French people think of you Americans not only as warmongers but also as prude maniacs. Though you say this could be the general opinion throughout Europe, I beleive that the United Kingdom does have a lower tolerance of what appears on television than in France or in Germany. In the United Kingdom, the "F word" is censored even at 10 PM, whereas in France we are allowed to hear it as soon as 5 - 6 PM. That is one of the aspects of our liberal censorship policy that I like less of, as I do feel there should be certain regulations to protect what our children car hear on daytime television. I'm 13 and I swear constantly, but perhaps my language would be more elegant had the television not repeated some language so much.
Being able to play a game on your computer, then to continue to play exactly the same game miniaturized on your mobile phone while going to school is a very nice idea said as such, but the author seems to completely forego the real problem of making the same game playable on multiple formats. For this kind of feat to be possible, you would need all the systems which are being aimed at (most probably computer, console, portable gaming systems and mobile phone) to use the same format for games, which in my opinion is just impossible for several reasons. If that stage is passed, you then have to pose the problem of the game being able to adapt itself to all these different systems, without having it too underopzimized proportionally in each form it is usable as.
As I have said, I beleive the problem of each system using the same format for games is most probablyy impossible to solve. I cannot conceive how it can be possible to create a format which is both usable on each system and powerful enough for the variety of systems it has to face. You just have to take a look at the diversity of the gaming platforms the author wishes the ideal game to aim for to see that this imaginative idea will have to stay just that, an imaginative idea. Personal computers are continually evolving, gaining megahertz by the second, and it is a platform which can harness incredible power; computers are out-of-date in three to six months, and it is just about the same thing for their games' graphics. Whereas computers are getting more and more powerful as time goes along, consoles are only released every few years and do not benefit of the same continual evolution that computers do, and as home consoles have to keep price reasonable not to push consumers away, they are virtually out-of-date when they leave the production factory. As for portable gaming systems, they obivously cannot boast too much power as they have to stay portable. This may change a bit as minituarization of material goes on, but not to the point of havinh the power of a computer in a pocket. Finally, mobile phones are primarily communation tools and not gaming tools, but as the emphasis is put on the phones having better support for games, one can notice the abundance of the latter growing quickly; but mobile phones have to stay portable phones, and overhauling the power of the integrated graphics for gaming would surely mean producing heavier phones aimed at a more special sector of the market and not at the everyday user.
I cannot see how one could actually think it is possible to create a game which could expand over so many systems. You would need a format which would be compatible with machines from the size of a pocket calculator to that of a television, and that would be able to support information compatible with everyone of these systems. If you were able to solve that problem, which is very unlikely, then you would surely be halted when it comes to developing a same game which would have to run on both systems with enormous power and systems with less than a hundredth of the power of the latter. It is just unconceivable, as you would need a common format, the tools to develop the same software on all these systems and for it to be able to harness enough power of each system to be up-to-date when it comes to graphics and gameplay.
Though the author's idea is just pure fantasy, I think we can certainly approach a level of interactivity and interoptability between the currently available gaming platforms which have a lot of possibilities. Of course, I am talking about Nintendo's GameCube/GBA connectivity features (me, biased? No way!:o), which I think have the potential to allow a satisfying level of interactivity between games on both format if the usage is pertinent enough. You do not need to stretch your mind much to find a lot of possible features with this, though it still means having to develop a game separately for each system. By the way, Nintendo were not the first to throw themselves into the 'connectivity' ide
I personally beleive that this is somewhat clear proof that marketing by e-mail can work, but only if it is taken in hand by honest companies who do not deal through an nigh-on anonymous mass-mailing scheme. Take a look at the statistics, and you will notice 8% of the respondents to a survey conducted asking whether or not they had bought anything through spam replied affirmatively, though spammers say that this number is higher due to the fact that most people having bought products through spam can not bear the embarassment of admitting it. Now if you reflect on those numbers, and consider that a lot of people delete spam as soon as they see some in their inbox, or use some kind of spam filter, you could perhaps come to a conclusion which may not be so far off the truth.
Let's suppose the companies which now sell their products through mass-mailing could come to some sort of agreement with e-mail services. This agreement would involve allowing the user to choose whether or not they would like to receive some offers from the company that has come to the agreement with the service. The e-mail service could choose to impose limits to the company, such as the number of e-mails sent and the products offered in the e-mails. As this feature would be an opt-in option, the user would be responsible for what comes through their inboxes. I think this kind of feature would actually benefit every party involved, as the e-mail service could really control what would be coming through to their users' inboxes, the users would know what to expect in their inboxes, and the companies could actually make more profit from this system. What I mean by this is, as most e-mail users would be expecting to receive their offers by e-mail, they would be the people who would be actually expected to buy what comes through. There would be more sales than there would be complaints and deletion. Last of all, this would of course benefit the people who would like to receive some honest, discounted offers by e-mail. The whole system would be completely legal.
In my opinion, this is how marketing by e-mail could actually be something that works, and that, at the end of the day, leaves both the sales companies, the e-mail services and the e-mail users satisfied.
Slashdot Mirror
As it has been said previously, I do believe that results -- and even comparisons -- should be put into proportion. By this, I mean one should imagine them in terms of "real-life" situations. To begin with, I would say it depends on the question you are asking. Whereas one might be asking some "pub quiz" questions, or collecting information for the writing of an essay, a lot of the time, one might just be asking oneself a banal question, or searching for information which would not truly be classified as general knowledge. (I have a few examples to demonstrate this. The other day, I heard a song on a radio but did not hear the title, though I had a few lyrics in mind, and a short search on Google allowed me to find the title of the said song thanks only to the few lyrics I had remembered; also, my father wanted to find the poem 'If' by Rudyard Kipling, and just typing 'poem if' on Google allowed us to find the poem in less time than it takes to pronounce its author's name.) I think that for these kind of searches, there really is no reference faster and more efficient than Google.
Other than the question one is asking, I also think one should look at the speed, and cost, of the various solutions to obtain the answer to the question being asked. Firstly, I shall consider Google (which, in the article, has never taken more then 7 minutes to find an answer). I believe most people nowadays benefit of a broandband connection, so for those it is a simple matter of going to Google and typing the search query. For those who are still surfing with a classic modem, then I would think the matter of turning on the computer, connecting to the Internet, going to Google and searching would take no more than five minutes. As for the results Google provides itself, I think in this domain, Google does not have such a reputation for no reason. It should take no more than five minutes to find a persistant answer to a question among the provided results. Next, I think added to the time it takes to phone the person is the time it takes to research a good source which can provide an answer to the question. Obviously, also to be counted is the subsequent capability of the person at the other end of the line to search for the answer. Overall, this may vary but it can come more slowly, costly, and I would think less practical, than a Google search (I say less practical because you may copy, paste and print the resulting pages of a Google search). Finally, as it has been said, added to the time of the library is the time it is taked to get there, and the efficiency of the staff working there. Should one not live very close to a good library, driving the distance also adds to the cost.
In my opinion, I would say that in terms of speed, cost, and of course results to one's query, it is hard to find a better traditional alternative to Google. What is more, the results can be handled in a more practical way. Also, the search engine is suited to both serious and more banal queries.
Personally, I have no trouble dealing with worms proliferating through ports other than those I can control myself (which include HTTP and E-Mail), such as Blaster.Worm and Sasser.Worm, thanks to my ZoneLabs ZoneAlarm firewall, which allows me to protect my computer from intruding -- and protruding -- dangers, easily yet with control. I always recommend this firewall to users of personal computers because I have yet to find a free firewall which protects well yet works so simply. I have read some messages in which it is said that turning on the Windows XP firewall will suffice to protect users against such worms. I must protest against this, as I have a small anecdote of my own.
After having reformatted my computer, I thought it would be safe to activate Windows XP's firewall as an intermediate protection against such threats until I had ZoneAlarm installed. I connected to the Internet, and in less than a minute had Norton Antivirus, which I had updated beforehand, warning me that Welchia.Worm had been able to access my system -- remember Welchia is based on Blaster and uses the same UDP ports to proliferate -- yet the Windows XP firewall was activated. I could say I was somewhat surprised, but then perhaps I wasn't all that much; after all, it is Microsoft software. I do not know if the same situation could apply to Sasser, since it does proliferate through a more commonly used port, but I must still say I have some trouble recommending the Windows XP firewall, even as an intermediate one.
I do not know if only I feel this way about the look of the new Lycos website design, but do you not think it looks somewhat cheap and unprofessional, in the style of "search engines" which are in fact just advertisement whores appearing in various pastly infamous domains? The front page looks hideous as the preponderant yellow does not look nice at all. As for the links of 'top searches', it could be "helpful", but at the same time, what that section mostly does is clutter up my screen with links I mostly do not care about. The links to Lycos' other services are existant albeit the general layout and design makes the page look amateurish and cheap.
The search results page is not too bad, and the news search results page bearing the same design, then that aspect is alright in a sufficient way; but the image search results page definitly loses out to Google 's in my opinion -- the system warned me that the files I was about to view contain adult material, when in fact they didn't, and the search results' layout itself was idiotic. As for the shopping section, I believe Google's Froogle does a good stab at this section, and even more impressively so since it is more recent than Lycos'. I also forget to mention the ridiculous web hosting service, which is just truly unsatisfying in terms of space and service itself.
All in all, I think Lycos is just relying on its reputation now, just as MSN Search is relying on users utilizing Internet Explorer's search function. The problem is, it is already beaten by far by Yahoo! and probably Google will progressively transform into a web portal itself, albeit a much less cluttered one than the currently existing platforms. If you ask me, Lycos' death will not be anytime soon though, because there are still thousands of people relying on its services for now; still, it is just a matter of time I would say.
The decision of the American Military forces to adapt their technology to Linux does make me wonder what is going on in the headquarters of SCO. Since the choice has been made by the Army, perhaps the conversations over at the SCO headquarters are similar to this one.
As a 14-year-old boy, I think this subject is very interesting from several points of view. I have to admit I rather disagree when it is said kids are math- and science-friendly, but then as has been said it is not surprising that the situation has turned out this way when you consider the sad culture the moronic majority of the population is plunging the country into here in France -- having seen several previous comments, I see the situation is not so different in America either. For example, in my class, a lot of the children are drawn to the idiotic reality TV shows (we even have a Celebrity Farm, a show in which one is able to view celebrities living in a farm and vote one out each week) and the teenagers seem to find the boring lives of others more interesting than theirs ever could be. This truely is sad, but this said group of people is the same which doesn't bother working much at school. Now I have not done a psychology major so I am not in the best position to ponder on how this crash in TV quality has affected childrens' work so much, but I would think this is due to a generalisation and banalisation of this moronic culture, developing into a way of life: doing nothing while watching TV to see others doing nothing. I would say that this tendancy to slack off has affected how the said children tend to percieve other activities in life, schoolwork included. I am pretty sure if one was to exclude children from watching such trash on television, they would not have such a tendancy to do nothing and not use their brain actively as is happening now.
In my opinion, math and science are already kid-friendly. It is just a case of the children being voluntary to approach these subjects in an optimistic way, something which is becoming rarer and rarer these days as the kids are becoming progressively less math- and science-friendly, as I said in the first paragraph. Any child willing to enhance his or her knowledge on these topics can do so easily, as I think there are an infinite number of resources suited to their capabilities which are available to them. In my case, for example, I was pushed to improve my math skills when I got interested in more serious programming (as I have currently started learning C++, which I find somewhat more interesting than just placing controls on a form as I did with Delphi). Of course, I am not omitting the fact that the motivation of the teacher can change everything in the stance of children towards math, but if we cannot change much, let alone anything, in the educational system, then the responsibility of changing the childrens' stance towards these topics rests in the hands of the parents; the latter can do so much more to get their children to be motivated in the instruction of math and science, and for example a good start is to raise the children in the omission of the wave of "crap" television -- but without an excess of tendancy towards elitism, which could get the children rejected at school. I believe parents should show the children at the youngest age how fun math and science can be, how vast these topics are and how important they are later on.
Math and science are already kid-friendly -- I think the balance has to reside on the other side, by having the children be math- and science-friendly; I believe that for this, kids have to understand the value of these subjects as soon as they can, and for the most part I should think the responsibility of having the children understand this is first and foremost in the parents' hands.
Thank you for noticing this new white paper, document which I have once again mirrored and that you may find there: mysql-cluster-technical-whitepaper.pdf (181 KB in size).
For the lazy among you (and lazy you have to be to find the task of entering a few fields in a form exhiliarating), I have uploaded the MYSQL Cluster white paper to another FTP site, mirror of the file which you may access there: mysql-cluster-whitepaper.pdf (the document is a PDF file, so fear the Adobe Acrobat Reader loading time).
This post may be understood as flamebait by those who do barely try to see things from my point of view, but I can brace myself up against that. The issue is, I do not really see where some peoples' complaints against major advertising companies lie, as it seems apparent to me that the softwares' privacy policy has always been available to the end-user. Out of curiosity, I visited WhenU's site to verify whether or not there was truely a case of non-consent on the behalf of the user, and of breach of the user's privacy. WhenU's privacy policy is freely available on their site, and for the lazy among you, these are basically the most important paragraphs:
So far, so "clean" -- WhenU.com informs the user of the information that is sent to WhenU.com, and also details which information is not used, and when the required information is sent. Although, my cynicism pushed me to download the SaveNow software just to check whether or not there were some strings attached with the software itself; on installation, I read the privacy statement which was completely identical.So, according to this privacy statement the user consents to installing the software and subsequently to have the said software make use of the user's bandwidth to send anonymous usage statistics to WhenU.com and download advertising banners corresponding to the profile built with the anonymous information. I hastedly repeated the small research for Claria software (formerly GATOR software) and the results are pretty much identical -- the user consents to installing the program and have it use bandwidth to send anonymous information to Internet servers. So the major desktop advertising comapnies are sadly pretty much right when the affirm that the user is consenting to their software using their computer to perform various tasks and activities. Now the question which is preponderant in my mind is: what am I doing wrong here? There must be a further reason for everyone complaining about a breach of privacy, further than the statements in the privacy policies then -- but if the information in the privacy policies is invalid, doesn't that make the activity of these companies illegal?
In recent times, we have been what one could call "plagued" by first-person shooters based on events of the second World War, with the Medal of Honor series, Call of Duty, Battlefield 1942 and others of which I have forgotten the name or the existence. Now, game developers are milking a new money cow with the sudden arrival of several FPS games based on the Vietnam War. It would be most pleasant if these two preponderant themes could now leave game developers' minds as fast as they have entered them, because after a few theme-based games, the originality is just inexistent -- yet the theme-based games continue to appear (and there will always be punters to get the said games). There are several wars which could be poked at yet without making a political statement, such as the apparently "forgotten" first World War, the wars of the Cold War other than in Vietnam, post-Cold War wars and contemporary wars such as Iraq and Afghanistan (I think only the average Conflict Desert Storm truely touches the latter subject).
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that this upcoming game from Gearbox will be average -- in fact far from that, the team over there are an experienced bunch of developers --, I am just saying that when it comes out, though it may be a good game, and why not great, I may have already "played" the game before. With all the respect I have for Gearbox and their apparent research into the subject, I still believe this game will have an overly strong feeling of "deja-vu", with its basis already having been over-exploited beforehand.
What truely surprises me is the fact that this is the 19th incarnation of the Netsky virus, and the can be really quite revealing about how much "Joe and Jane Blow" really try to protect their computer, even after all the repeated assaults from multiple virii in recent times. I am sure some blinded, elitist geeks out there will point out that 'Joe and Jane Blow are too stupid so they get loads of virii instead of moving to Linux' before moving to the next discussion whih can sprout a pro-Linux, anti-Microsoft thread. Believe me, I do know a lot of Joe and Jane Blows, and if you do not then simply forget about your elitist argument, because for the most part they are not simple or stupid. They want to surf the Internet, check their e-mail, play some games and perhaps download music -- they do not want to program a database engine, do not own a Linux box for a hobby, do not start counting lists from '0' and think anyone who thinks learning Pi should perhaps see a doctor.
So, they ask you for help because they think they have a virus or are feeling a slowdown. You do everything they should have done, that is install Ad-Aware, update it, scan for spyware -- and find some truckload of the bloatware eating up disk and registry space (and I'm not going to start on the RAM). That done, you download AVG Grisoft, update it, scan for virii -- and find several hundred files contaminated by virii, and that is quite a lot to clean up. Finally, you install a firewall -- preferably ZoneAlarm or Kerio Personal Firewall -- and set it up for them, so no more Blasters et al sneaking through some obscure system ports. The best option, on the long term at least, is to be sure to install a firewall with preconfigured program access rights (and I think Kerio Personal Firewall has this feature), and I shall tell you why: it may seem simple for any of us to simply check a checkbox for the firewall to remember to allow Half-Life Launcher to attack the Internet, and I truely thought this was the case for anybody -- after all, all the firewall does is ask a simple question, at least what seems like a simple question for most of us. Then, my grandma, who has barely touched a computer all her life, tried the new one she had bought to have a pastime during her six weeks' inability to walk. And the result was pretty surprising, to say the least. A new icon on the desktop, or even a pop-up, can get her panicking. So can you imagine this kind of non-techie, new user getting a firewall pop-up every minute for every program this user launches? This is why a preconfigured program access rights list is something good to have.
Of course, anyone can go without an antivirus by simply installing a firewall and knowing what comes in their e-mail -- or, for those who grasp the technology a bit more, just block the ports manually; but Joe and Jane Blow have much more simple needs and don't want to have to learn loads of techniques simply to avoid virii and spyware, malware which they do not notice most of the time. In my opinion, the best way to prepare Mr. and Mrs. Blow against all this malware is to set up their software so at best, they can surf around and write emails totally unconscious of this protection, since in this case the software updates itself and does its job automatically. You can also give the user further tools against malware, such as replacing their browser and e-mail clients with Mozilla/Firefox and Eudora or Thunderbird. You should also set them simple guidelines, such as to always refuse anything whatsoever from a source they do not trust. Try and get them to buy commercial software (Norton Internet Security or McAfee Internet Security) as in general it offers better protection and a bit more tools that shall make everyone a happy bunny. Joe and Jane Blow want to know that they are protected against virii and spyware, but do not want to know how, and you'd be rather stubborn to get, what in their opinion is an extra worry, on the
Unless my memory is failing me, isn't it Namco's [1] [2] Ridge Racer (or it's sequent title Revolution) which boasts a game of Galaxian while the game loads? And as a little bonus, killing all the invaders before the timer runs out gives the player a choice of nine cars, instead of four, when comes the vehicule selection. Ah, the old times -- you couldn't even save your game, I think. That was truely an arcade game.
I think that what was a pretty good idea back then could even be welcome nowadays; after all, in most games we are presented with a boring and frustrating loading screen which simply presents the player with a loading progress bar. Instead of this, game developers could get the main game to load a small, light mini-game which could serve as an intermediate screen to avoid a sudden break from interactivity (for example, in a football game, one could imagine a Pong-like mini-game to avoid long pauses during the loading times which just bore the player, long loading times which are recurrent in the FIFA series which comes to mind). The subsequent problem is, such mini-games would be a good way to occupy the player in out-of-game loading screens, but what about in-game transitions? A good method which avoids in-game loading times -- and perhaps also laterally reduces out-of-game loading times -- is to load the upcoming in-game elements, such as maps and FMVs, during the more inactive in-game moments. This has several advantages, first of all being that the player does not notice a slowdown in play since the loading should take place when the game is more inactive. Then, the said elements already loaded into memory appear instantly and there is no break in in-game playing whatsoever. And I shall also develop what I have minimally said, about the out-of-game loading times being shorter since the loading is done in-game. I am not a game developer (being only 14 that would be a mean feat) so I do not know if this could be accomplished but perhaps the "inactivity loading" concept could be taken even further, with the in-game content being loaded while the player goes through the starting menus, or even when the introducing FMV is being played.
Is it just me, or are the Lindows developers blindfolded, waiting for the next punch? I mean, Microsoft are bound to notice it after some time... 'LindDOS'? Lindows could be the next Phoenix -- sorry, Firebird -- sorry... Well, you get the idea. Subsequent naming of the distribution will be 'Lindo', perhaps...
This is a sad day for the Internet: Google has truely shot itself in the foot. Where are the big banner ads? the pop-ups? Where are the unrelated search results, obfuscated by even more unrelated "sponsored" search "results"? And why is it useful? It's the sad truth, but alas Google is living in the past, instead of looking to the future. (- Insert obligotary "BSD is dead" parody here -)
Seriously though, wandering around on ZDNet, I found that Google has launched a personalized search engine. I tried it out, and I'll tell you what -- it kicks major ass. Let's say you are trying to look up information for a particular or specialized search term on the traditional Google, it may give you some random unrelated results, those of another domain you wish to consult about; on Google Personalized Search, you specify which domain you want to search about and it will provide you with more pertinent results. Kudos to Google, once again.
The reason for the search term "Miserable failure" giving Michael Moore's site as the most pertinent result is based on the way Google PageRank works, I beleive. I remember reading that an American radio host, Glenn Beck, asked his audience to get the search term "Miserable failure" to give Michael Moore's site as the first result. If my memory is not failing me, the way Google searches for the most pertinent results is by searching for the terms in the links. For example, Glenn Beck asked his audience with a website to write this link in their website:
Google beleives "Miserable failure" is the nature of the link to michaelmoore.com, and this is how the host's audience managed to fullfil the feat. This is why a Google search for "bastards" shows up a certainly very pertinent result.I hope you will forgive me if I tell you that I haven't had the chance to play the first episodes extensively, given the fact that I am only 13 and only got into video games at the age of 8, when I got my first console, the PlayStation. Hence I beleive I can justify not really having yet had the chance to have a detailed play of every major classic which was released on NES and MegaDrive.
I would also like to point out that you are placing a same argument on two different levels. First of all you say I have 'no taste in video games' and 'have no idea what classic is', then you go on to say I 'consider FF7 and 8 to be the classic episodes of Final Fantasy' and thus 'lose all [my] credibility'. These are two different things, as having not been able to play the precedent opuses of the Final Fantasy series, I took the general opinion of the gaming press which was that the said games were classics, so this was not specifically my opinion. You may dislike these episodes of the series, but saying I 'have no taste in video games' is somewhat flamebait since it was much appreciated by the general public, me included. I pointed out I was an aficionado of these two episodes and not of the series, so in some ways your argument is redudant since I never said I was a gung-ho Final Fantasy aficionado. I am sorry to have afflicted your true fan root feelings with naming these episodes classics, but I just follow my opinion and that of the majority of people having played the game; you could say that they are not true Final Fantasy fans but when a game is coined a classic by game reviewers and is highly appreciated by a high number of players, I think that can at least justify a bit why I said this.
Well, to say the truth, I was aware that certain Japanese games were not released in the USA but unaware that certain games got released in Europe and not in the USA; but I must say that I was specifically talking about the Japan/Europe example. If you look at the Europe/USA example, then I think it's once again a case of the "stereotypic" culture clash I was talking about (i.e. publishers thinking certain markets are not ready or suited to certain games, as I said in my comment).
About importing games from America or Canada, I must point out that though I live in France, I am fully bilingual so the language of the game documentation would not be what bothers me. What would bother me is the steps I beleive are needed to properly play import games. I don't know much about importing, but since I own a PAL console and the American standard is NTSC (I think so, at least), wouldn't I need a chip of some kind? Aren't import games dearer? And most importantly, is that all legal?
First of all, I would like to start by saying that though Metal Slug Online could sound like a nice game concept, there are several problems posed. When you say the words 'Metal Slug', the instant reaction is the thought of that classic side-scrolling shooter with its unique character and charm, because that is what the game is all about: wreaking havok in city streets with heavy weapon power sideways, in pure arcade style. It is just something which I beleive cannot be recreated in 3D, simply because it wouldn't really be the same game anymore. Its side-scrolling carnage arcade gameplay made it what it is and what stays in most peoples' memories. If you try and evolve that environment into a modern 3D engine, and bring it online, it isn't really Metal Slug, but just another online game with big mechs. Metal Slug Online, if it comes through development, will be in my opinion like what Crystal Chronicles is the Final Fantasy series: a different game with the same name. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that it is not a good game, on the contrary, but I am just saying that I feel that it is not in essence a Final Fantasy game, though that feeling may be related to the fact I'm an aficionado of the classic seventh and eighth episodes of the series.
Next, in his speech Toru Iwatani made a good point about game developers having to be more open to and inspired by real life elements, but he also said he thinks game systems should be more simple. Of course we always say that the simplest gameplay is the best, but I think that if you have the desire to simplify it too much, a worse game experience can result from this. In a time where game engines and systems are continually evolving, simplifying the gameplay is a bit like walking backwards on a escalator going forward and upward. You have to design gameplay which exploits and suits these engine evolutions and in my opinion, simplifying the gameplay is somewhat limiting the gamer's control of how (s)he can fully use the newer and modern engines. Of course, I am taking a general example, as there are simpler games that do not rely on heavy engines and hence can afford to do with this simplified gameplay, but it can get somewhat scary when the idea is extended to deliver dog-digested horrors such as Kirby's Air Ride. I am all for good gameplay, and simple if you can make it so, but not if all it does is limit my enjoyment of the game because I cannot access instantly what I would like to with a more complex UI.
I am truely a bit saddened at Dave Perry's "descent" (need I put that in double-quotes?). He seemed quite a bit of an idol for me when I first saw what gems he produced such as Earthworm Jim and MDK, but when I see corporate tripe such as Enter the Matrix, I really wonder what has happened to his creativity and his philosophy of originality in games. You can always defend him by saying that 'he was not provided with enough time' but by saying that you are just reinforcing the point of why the corporate scheme provides us with litteraly crap film tie-ins. I wonder if Shiny were planning to really work on the game at all, or were just relying on the name to sell in which cars have square wheels to five million fans. It seems they relied more on the second option sadly, and I hope this is not a phenomenom which will get to the companies we appreciate most. But then, this also goes to show how uneducated a lot of people are when it comes to films' promotional games. If this is how future games are going to be, then we are really looking at a sad future for video games as a whole.
This Game Boy Advance Famicon/NES with NES games package has first of all been released in Japan, which I read the said series would be exclusive in, and it is now America which is granted with its release. I truely hope Nintendo seriously consider releasing it on the European market, as over here, it would sell like hot buns. Why is the European gaming market always the last one considered when a game is released? On the Nintendo France forums, people are crying and even writing petitions to have Baten Kaitos and Naruto (also Animal Crossing, which is not planned to be released in France) sold over here. There is a real gaming public over here and for some reason, it does not seem to be taken seriously, at all: in the majority of cases, we are always the last to get a bite on the good games; a number of awesome video games products and gimmicks stay exclusive to Japan, when I am sure that they would be a real success here.
Of course, there is the difference in culture, which I know plays the main role in this game of releases and exclusivities. Whereas in the 'land of the rising sun', video gaming has become a cult phenomenom, a true subculture, to the point of having been banalized, here in Europe we seem to have been somewhat "late" in on the market, or so that is what it looks like. Japan has known a real growth in the technology market and America is not far off (if not on a par with) the Japanese technology market, but this does not mean Europe is not ready to be the host to new kinds of technology, which seems to be the constructors' perception of the situation. Their is a real and serious gaming audience in Europe and one that could be of profit, which is, let's not forget, why companies sell games. How could they not understand us being frustrated on being left out on some products which we will never get our hands on excepted in the pages of our favorite magazine? The culture difference is a big factor in this game, as you can notice if you compare the prices of games in Japan to those of the same games in Europe, but I am pretty sure that one can affirm that Europe is ready for the new games and gimmicks, and that there is a public here which can be taken seriously.
Now don't get me wrong, I never said we would want all Japanese releases over here, become some are seriously quite dodgy (what's with the manga whorehouse puzzle games?), but some have true appeal over here and not only to an "elitist" bunch of gamers, but also to a genuine and expanding public which is ready to hand over the cash to get these gems. The best I can hope for is one of the major Japanese companies of the industry seeing the potential of this market; I am conscious this is something which shall not happen overnight, let alone happen at all perhaps, but we over here need to be seen as gamers now, and not only as 'hobbyists'. Whoever knows, maybe one day video games will be as banalized over here as they are in Japan, but as long as the European public is not seen as a serious one, that will not happen... Though will it ever?
Though it may be true that those teenagers discovered security holes that could have cost several hundred thousands of dollars of losees both personal (every client in the sites' databases is a potential victim of fraud) and professional (with the said sites having to deal with the consequences which follow, such as compensation, a massive advertising campaign to catch up on the bad reputation, and whatnot), you shouldn't omit that by spending $3 million on Bill Gates' credit card, the boys did commit a crime, fact which is not altered by their discoveries of the security holes in the e-commerce systems.
What's more, I suppose that the sites hacked by the teenagers would rather want to sue the boys than compensate them, as I beleive the said sites must have a user charter which strictly prohibits the act of abusing of the service or of its eventual security faults, whether it is to commit another crime or not -- another crime which in this case is theft, as the money they used to pay for the items wasn't theirs. The two teenagers can always say they were doing the 'right thing', which they and others perhaps think they were, but the truth is they just commited a crime, or two.
To avoid having insult added to their injury, once the boys had discovered the faults in the sites' security systems, they should have contacted the site administrators to alert them on the subject and tell them how to repair the security holes (as far as the "hacker ethic" goes anyway); but instead, they exploited their knowledge to commit a real crime by stealing $3 million from the planet's richest man, Bill Gates (though I do wonder if he actually noticed the "slight" outcome on his account; he must have thought his wife had bought another wrist watch). I don't think you can argue that it really is the boys' fault if they now find themselves in this situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if they had to pay a hefty fine alongside a lengthy ban from the vicinity of any computers.
One activity you can indulge in can simultanesouly improve your memory, make you feel good and allow you to show off in front of your friends so they will think that you are a really intelligent person (which I am not saying you aren't, but people who aren't really into this kind of brainy and "geeky" activity will surely be very impressed) is to memorize 1000 digits of pi. It's funner than you may think, as it's a real challenge and over time will increase your capacity to use the full potential of your memory properly.
What surprised me, more than anything, were the reactions on Slashdot. Some were comparing the situation to a televisual 'Goatse' -- though in my opinion there is a bit of difference between being taking by surprised by a gaping anus and by a breast (with a sun around the nipple, goddamit!). I don't know if the same numbers apply to the USA, but over here most boys have seen a pornographic film by the age of around 8. I just do not see how seeing a breast on television could be so shocking. Anyway, isn't the Superbowl broadcast in the evening in America? Shouldn't kids who aren't old enough to have seen a pornographic flm yet have been in bed already?
So, to say it frankly, it is true that most French people think of you Americans not only as warmongers but also as prude maniacs. Though you say this could be the general opinion throughout Europe, I beleive that the United Kingdom does have a lower tolerance of what appears on television than in France or in Germany. In the United Kingdom, the "F word" is censored even at 10 PM, whereas in France we are allowed to hear it as soon as 5 - 6 PM. That is one of the aspects of our liberal censorship policy that I like less of, as I do feel there should be certain regulations to protect what our children car hear on daytime television. I'm 13 and I swear constantly, but perhaps my language would be more elegant had the television not repeated some language so much.
Being able to play a game on your computer, then to continue to play exactly the same game miniaturized on your mobile phone while going to school is a very nice idea said as such, but the author seems to completely forego the real problem of making the same game playable on multiple formats. For this kind of feat to be possible, you would need all the systems which are being aimed at (most probably computer, console, portable gaming systems and mobile phone) to use the same format for games, which in my opinion is just impossible for several reasons. If that stage is passed, you then have to pose the problem of the game being able to adapt itself to all these different systems, without having it too underopzimized proportionally in each form it is usable as.
As I have said, I beleive the problem of each system using the same format for games is most probablyy impossible to solve. I cannot conceive how it can be possible to create a format which is both usable on each system and powerful enough for the variety of systems it has to face. You just have to take a look at the diversity of the gaming platforms the author wishes the ideal game to aim for to see that this imaginative idea will have to stay just that, an imaginative idea. Personal computers are continually evolving, gaining megahertz by the second, and it is a platform which can harness incredible power; computers are out-of-date in three to six months, and it is just about the same thing for their games' graphics. Whereas computers are getting more and more powerful as time goes along, consoles are only released every few years and do not benefit of the same continual evolution that computers do, and as home consoles have to keep price reasonable not to push consumers away, they are virtually out-of-date when they leave the production factory. As for portable gaming systems, they obivously cannot boast too much power as they have to stay portable. This may change a bit as minituarization of material goes on, but not to the point of havinh the power of a computer in a pocket. Finally, mobile phones are primarily communation tools and not gaming tools, but as the emphasis is put on the phones having better support for games, one can notice the abundance of the latter growing quickly; but mobile phones have to stay portable phones, and overhauling the power of the integrated graphics for gaming would surely mean producing heavier phones aimed at a more special sector of the market and not at the everyday user.
I cannot see how one could actually think it is possible to create a game which could expand over so many systems. You would need a format which would be compatible with machines from the size of a pocket calculator to that of a television, and that would be able to support information compatible with everyone of these systems. If you were able to solve that problem, which is very unlikely, then you would surely be halted when it comes to developing a same game which would have to run on both systems with enormous power and systems with less than a hundredth of the power of the latter. It is just unconceivable, as you would need a common format, the tools to develop the same software on all these systems and for it to be able to harness enough power of each system to be up-to-date when it comes to graphics and gameplay.
Though the author's idea is just pure fantasy, I think we can certainly approach a level of interactivity and interoptability between the currently available gaming platforms which have a lot of possibilities. Of course, I am talking about Nintendo's GameCube/GBA connectivity features (me, biased? No way! :o), which I think have the potential to allow a satisfying level of interactivity between games on both format if the usage is pertinent enough. You do not need to stretch your mind much to find a lot of possible features with this, though it still means having to develop a game separately for each system. By the way, Nintendo were not the first to throw themselves into the 'connectivity' ide
I personally beleive that this is somewhat clear proof that marketing by e-mail can work, but only if it is taken in hand by honest companies who do not deal through an nigh-on anonymous mass-mailing scheme. Take a look at the statistics, and you will notice 8% of the respondents to a survey conducted asking whether or not they had bought anything through spam replied affirmatively, though spammers say that this number is higher due to the fact that most people having bought products through spam can not bear the embarassment of admitting it. Now if you reflect on those numbers, and consider that a lot of people delete spam as soon as they see some in their inbox, or use some kind of spam filter, you could perhaps come to a conclusion which may not be so far off the truth.
Let's suppose the companies which now sell their products through mass-mailing could come to some sort of agreement with e-mail services. This agreement would involve allowing the user to choose whether or not they would like to receive some offers from the company that has come to the agreement with the service. The e-mail service could choose to impose limits to the company, such as the number of e-mails sent and the products offered in the e-mails. As this feature would be an opt-in option, the user would be responsible for what comes through their inboxes. I think this kind of feature would actually benefit every party involved, as the e-mail service could really control what would be coming through to their users' inboxes, the users would know what to expect in their inboxes, and the companies could actually make more profit from this system. What I mean by this is, as most e-mail users would be expecting to receive their offers by e-mail, they would be the people who would be actually expected to buy what comes through. There would be more sales than there would be complaints and deletion. Last of all, this would of course benefit the people who would like to receive some honest, discounted offers by e-mail. The whole system would be completely legal.
In my opinion, this is how marketing by e-mail could actually be something that works, and that, at the end of the day, leaves both the sales companies, the e-mail services and the e-mail users satisfied.