Not sure why the article goes into all the FAA rules. Other than for ease of domestic testing, these things are not really designed to be used in the US, but rather in countries that lack regular internet connectivity (which are unlikely to have any such rules anyway).
I'm somewhat critical if this is really even a possibility, but curious at least from a technical standpoint of how it might be done. Most specifically the power and transmission requirements along with weight restrictions that must be in place for the thing to work etc...
Lev Andropov: It's stuck, yes? Watts: Back off! You don't know the components! Lev Andropov: [annoyed] Components. American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!
I find it hard to get worked about about "branding" issues of Chinese knockoffs when most of the "branded" crap is made in China anyway.
Perhaps not in the case of Birkenstocks, which is perhaps why they are the only ones making a fuss over it. Otherwise it seems a tad overly hypocritical...
KAT was never about finding torrents, as you say, it isn't hard by various methods. The real value of KAT was the community. The KAT community would comment and rate torrents. As you're probably aware, there are a lot of bad torrents, and simply fake ones generated by the various copyright associations. The only thing KAT really did was enable a large group of people to crowd source the verification of torrents enabling people to find good ones. Otherwise yes you can most easily find a "torrent" you are looking for, but is it any good, or is it a fake.
However, none of this has anything to do with technology, so any site can do it, it just helps to be a popular one (i.e. a larger community to manually verify torrents). Should KAT go away, people will just move to a different one, and things continue as before. There will likely be some disruption, but it will only really be a temporary win for the copyright associations. They of course will simply use this is justification of their existence to continue to leech money from the various media industries (hence the "BILLION" dollar figure which is complete BS, as the simplistic example goes the car thief wasn't going to buy the car if he hadn't stolen it)... Rinse, repeat, etc...
One thing to keep in mind in line with Chen's comments is that Canada has some of the best privacy legislation in the world. Sure it has issues, and has been challenged politically in recent years under the guise of terrorism and protecting children, but in the end it survives and is pretty powerful. So from his perspective in Canada his point of view is pretty consistent and has merit. However is the US, it is a bit of a different story. In much of the world it is even more so. India is one example people will cite. However BB has made a few stands on ethics such as Pakistan where the proposed governments use wasn't aligned with what BB thought was reasonable, so they suspended service to that country (they do not do business there).
So anyway take what he says with a bit of grain of salt considering where he is coming from. I think what Chen is failing to comprehend is there there are citizens out there that are reasonable people that live in places where privacy laws are not as strong as some might like, and for those people there is a demand for "artificially" imposed privacy by technology rather than legislation which they lack the power to seemingly implement. Apple (particularly after the whole Snowden thing) I think sees this and is trying to capitalize on it. How long they can get away with it is the key point. The funny (or depressing) part is, the only reason they can probably get away with it is the general popularity of their devices. Where should they say "fine, we're not changing our phones, we just won't sell there any more" people would get very upset and it would quickly become political. Much more so however than a bunch of people actually getting together that disagree with the privacy laws in a particular country and actually doing something about it. In this way Apple is playing a bit of chicken with governments on the issue. I don't for a minute thing that Apple would do it, but I don't think political leaders are willing to take that chance which is as I mentioned a bit crazy.
The problem with Netflix is market fragmentation which is due to content creators and licencing. The more original content they make the better. When Netflix was totally dominant it wasn't so bad as either you had a licensing deal or you did not. Now that every telecommunications company is trying to pimp their own "streaming service", they shop around, or have exclusive deals to try to attract users.
The impending release of the New Star Trek is a perfect example. The entire world gets in on Netflix. Oh except in the US where the licence is owned, or in Canada where the thing is being filmed. In those countries, you have to use the CBS streaming service whatever the hell that is, and in Canada you have to use the Bell streaming service.
Kick. in. the. balls.
Personally, it isn't a big deal as I *also* have cable, and it will be showing on the Space channel which is Bell owned. However it is the principle of it that pissed me off. Before I saw that I could watch it on a channel I already get (hence I will Tivo it), my thought was, if ever there was content to pirate and screw the content creators and have no moral objections to it at all and no sympathy to anyone for anything it would be that. Just such a jerk move.
Costs are usually determined (housing included) by "whatever the market will bare".
That "market" has been steadily corrupted by easy to get large loans people can't afford. As a result, prices for things (like houses) go up. Because most money is made off debt, the incentive is to continue down this path. However sooner or later... Stagnant wages, increasing cost of living, debt growing. Well, something will eventually give.
Much the same way as I can likely do much of what an engineer might do using some modern software that now exists and is easily obtainable. That said in many cases, a professionally certified engineer is required legally for certain tasks because there has to be some level of legitimacy and accountability behind the work.
Also there is the "Accountability" of a certified accountant, that is often required for the books. Some dude using financial software isn't the same kind of responsibility. It maybe (or may not) end up as the same result, but I expect in many cases, legally a certified account is required to vouch that the correct and legal processes were taken to validate the numbers.
Not to mention that the CBPP basically does research and makes policy recommendation on various government run social support programs.
Basic Income would more less eliminate all those social support programs.
Which would basically put CBPP out of business.
So while I'm not saying there is, but there is the potential for some bias. At the same time, it does sound like they have experience dealing with social support issues so their comment may be valid. I'd read into it critically however just the same.
A couple of years ago a Police Chief in Canada notably argued the number one reason to legalize it was that it was a huge waste of time for police officers to enforce. If I remember it was weirdly from out in Alberta (which is usually staunchly Conservative if you're not from Canada). It isn't like the police have a lack of things to do. The time could be spent doing real police work. They don't get to choose what laws to enforce however.
Personally I think it would also wipe out a ton of low level crime as a result almost instantly, and they would be basically out of business.
I was thinking about the same thing. Also with the valuation of 32 Billion, not chump change for any type of company. Apparently they own 83% of sprint (and who knows what else), so who knows what companies own what now a days...
Though a quick wikipedia shows they are basically a cell phone provider in Japan who brought Apple there, so go figure they have lots of cash. With revenue of almost a trillion US dollars (9.15 Trillion Yen)...
Kinda make you wonder why Apple didn't do this first really.
Pretty much exactly. Really the point here is "lack of interconnection". Renewable is not a replacement for base power despite what many might say. Anyone who works in the industry could point that out within about 5 seconds. You can get away with it, IF you have that have neighbors with excess base power to sell to when you have too much, and to buy from when you have too little. However at that point you are making your sovereign nation's energy dependent on someone else's. In some cases you can get away with it. However without a lot of "interconnection" to play with, you are pretty much out of options as they are finding out.
So for example, Germany is doing very well with it's renewables, however it is right next door to France which is highly invested in nuclear...
A perfect example is building an off grid cottage. In situation A where you have no access to any electrical grid, you will have to make sacrifices, use power sparingly, and sometimes you may just have to go without. However you're happy to just have some power as otherwise you would not. If however in situation B, you want to power you cottage with solar and wind, but it is still connected to the grid, you may try to be self sufficient, but in those times where your power consumption exceeds your budget you can still tap the grid for no interruptions. So if you're more less in situation A, it is pretty unrealistic to think you won't have any power issues, and you're likely to be disappointed when you do, which is about where this story is. The correct question is why the folks in charge (pardon pun), were so unrealistic...
Yet history has shown that almost every republican government has spent more and increased debt and grown government than their democrat counterparts. This is what I really don't understand about American politics, their ideology in no way mirrors reality.
So far as I can tell the republican party is made up of rich people who want to stay rich, and others too stupid to realize they are voting against their own self interest (social issues aside like gun control, abortion, and gay marriage).
Anyway as you say, I'm sure the same (if not more) variation exists within the democratic party as well.
I think (unless it is a complete disaster, like Trump making a gay joke or something after) it is a good think regardless, perhaps give the republicans a bit more diversity. Because if you think about it, the more democratic types that join the republicans, really the more centrist and representative they will become in the end.
Yeah, we had/have the same problem with the Green Party up here. They have some good ideas, but then start spouting ideology just as bad as any other party on certain topics regardless of science.
Additionally, they wanted to be seen as a legitimate party, so they tried to run a candidate in every riding in Canada. Which I think was a real mistake, as you really start scraping the bottom of the barrel at a certain point, and the types of candidate they attract are basically crackpots and hippies neither of which you really want to run anything let alone your government. Nothing wrong with hippies, so long as they have their heads out of the clouds and are trying to achieve their hippie like goals within the realm of realism. Anyway until they really focus on being more realistic they will be nothing more than a fringe party.
You could say the same thing about the housing crisis. Who is ultimately responsible? The institution who recklessly gave you a loan? The person accepting the terms and conditions of a loan they can't afford? Well as has been seen it really doesn't matter in the big picture, because everyone will end up paying for both the reckless lending, and the personal lack of responsibility. When banks and the like are being bought out, you pay for it with your taxes. Just like when several Trillion dollars of bad student debt with no hope of repayment, well you'll pay for it regardless of how responsible and frugal you personally were in your own situation... Which kind of makes it unfair. However if you want to point the finger, it is hard to be really angry with the unemployed poor guy with a useless degree and no prospects, and a bit easier to be mad at the very wealthy corporate student debt factory basically sucking up your tax dollars from government using the poor and vulnerable as their patsy...
I'm not really talking about the traditional collages or even the expensive ivy league schools. There is a whole new brand of schools out there offering useless degrees to anybody. They market themselves to those eligible for government loans, which are guaranteed by the government so the school gets paid no matter what. The debt does not go away with bankruptcy. The people graduating with the useless degree have no prospects of paying it back. They should not have gotten a loan for the crappy school to begin with. The schools are entirely geared to marketing and gaming the government loan system. It is pretty much a mirror of the banks giving large loans to people who will never be able to pay it back, making the money of the debt. These student mills of course lobby government to keep the current system the way it is, because it is basically free money for them. A 2 second google search puts the value of student debt to 1.2 Trillion dollars, second only to (you guessed it) mortgage debt... As I said, sooner or later, as this value grows, as does unemployment, and dropping wages, well something will eventually give.
The next crisis that everyone knows about and will eventually occur is another involving trillions of debt, student debt. The system has been, and continues to be abused, that value is only getting bigger, and the students graduating finding no jobs due to corporations lobbying for ever more powers to move jobs to cheaper places. At some point that cup will overflow, and we'll have another housing crisis type event.
Exactly. I think there are a lot of people over estimating the amount of damage he can actually do. The office of the President isn't all powerful. There are a lot of checks and balances (by design). At worst the only thing that would happen is that not a lot might get done for a couple of years and he may be a ineffectual President. At best he might shake things up and instigate a lot of change. I expect with Hillary you get the status quo, which is probably why she is backed and funded so well, and why she will probably win.
You pretty much described every politician ever. Some of them are just better at it than others.
Gone are those that actually stood for something. Probably because if you do like poor Bernie Sanders you get labeled something like "socialist" and can't get yourself elected either by your party or the people. People that stand for something will have people that oppose you. If you take the middle road, are vague, don't really say anything, or flip flop around, you have the potential to get both sides of the vote. The trick is not to get neither side of the vote. That is pretty much the modern political game in a nutshell.
Well one might argue about exclusion of various games as favorites, however three things seem evident:
1) No mention of Wifi for loading new games, which probably means:
A) It doesn't have it
B) You won't be able to 2) The front cartridge bay at least from the pictures is fake, and considering not mentioned, doubly so. 3) It has 3 sets of ports: HDMI, USB, and Controllers. Only the USB might be used to load games, but it is being used for power.
So all of those things point to this being a one off stand alone product (which is still pretty awesome), and considering it is only 60$ there isn't really a whole lot to complain about really (the cost of one modern video game).
Also no Contra Waaaa! Though Super C, so not so bad.
Personally some omissions I see are: Blades of Steel - Biggest omission. One of the best two player games. Dragon Warrior - 2nd Biggest omission, though FF so not too bad. Super Spike V Ball - Also one of the most fun two player games. Perhaps nixed due to lack of 4 player support. Bionic Commando - I just have fond memories of this one. Strider - Ditto
Some runner ups: Ultima - Can't remember what it was like. Big frachise. TMNT - Kids would probably like this. Probably licencing issues. Wizardry - Can't remember what it was like, probably didn't age well.
This sounds suspiciously like they probably had older developers who likely knew what they were doing and the history of the data/application/business who retired/fired/left were replaced by younger cheaper models, who were given a task, did it as best they could without all the prior experience and knowledge (and likely little or no documentation). Having no one else in the organization that understands or sees what is going on, fast forward 15 years, and presto a big problem (though 7 million for a corporation like Citigroup is probably peanuts anyway)...
Actually that sounds like the issue. Too many hands in the pot. Too many middlemen. However writers and artists allow this to happen for their own profit (or not). Change your business model if it isn't working for you.
The times they are a changin'! (They would probably want royalty for just using that quote) They have been changing for some time now. Trying to use legal machination as your only method of prolonging your business model is not going to work forever.
I'd say the *real* question is will be how reliable will their HD be after they fire 14% of their workforce... of course no one will figure this out for sometime, and they will have made their money by then, at which point it will be some other CEO's problem likely.
Also they probably the only reason they can get away with this is that all the companies have been consolidated in to 4, and they all do the work pretty much in the same geographical location (as we saw as few years ago with that flood and the following profiteering).
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure why the article goes into all the FAA rules. Other than for ease of domestic testing, these things are not really designed to be used in the US, but rather in countries that lack regular internet connectivity (which are unlikely to have any such rules anyway).
I'm somewhat critical if this is really even a possibility, but curious at least from a technical standpoint of how it might be done. Most specifically the power and transmission requirements along with weight restrictions that must be in place for the thing to work etc...
Verizon is basically saying "go away" we don't want you as customers anymore.
A) You use "significantly" more than 100 GB.
B) Our largest plan is 100GB (and costs 450$ a month!!!)
Lev Andropov: It's stuck, yes?
Watts: Back off! You don't know the components!
Lev Andropov: [annoyed] Components. American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!
I find it hard to get worked about about "branding" issues of Chinese knockoffs when most of the "branded" crap is made in China anyway.
Perhaps not in the case of Birkenstocks, which is perhaps why they are the only ones making a fuss over it. Otherwise it seems a tad overly hypocritical...
KAT was never about finding torrents, as you say, it isn't hard by various methods. The real value of KAT was the community. The KAT community would comment and rate torrents. As you're probably aware, there are a lot of bad torrents, and simply fake ones generated by the various copyright associations. The only thing KAT really did was enable a large group of people to crowd source the verification of torrents enabling people to find good ones. Otherwise yes you can most easily find a "torrent" you are looking for, but is it any good, or is it a fake.
However, none of this has anything to do with technology, so any site can do it, it just helps to be a popular one (i.e. a larger community to manually verify torrents). Should KAT go away, people will just move to a different one, and things continue as before. There will likely be some disruption, but it will only really be a temporary win for the copyright associations. They of course will simply use this is justification of their existence to continue to leech money from the various media industries (hence the "BILLION" dollar figure which is complete BS, as the simplistic example goes the car thief wasn't going to buy the car if he hadn't stolen it)... Rinse, repeat, etc...
One thing to keep in mind in line with Chen's comments is that Canada has some of the best privacy legislation in the world. Sure it has issues, and has been challenged politically in recent years under the guise of terrorism and protecting children, but in the end it survives and is pretty powerful. So from his perspective in Canada his point of view is pretty consistent and has merit. However is the US, it is a bit of a different story. In much of the world it is even more so. India is one example people will cite. However BB has made a few stands on ethics such as Pakistan where the proposed governments use wasn't aligned with what BB thought was reasonable, so they suspended service to that country (they do not do business there).
So anyway take what he says with a bit of grain of salt considering where he is coming from. I think what Chen is failing to comprehend is there there are citizens out there that are reasonable people that live in places where privacy laws are not as strong as some might like, and for those people there is a demand for "artificially" imposed privacy by technology rather than legislation which they lack the power to seemingly implement. Apple (particularly after the whole Snowden thing) I think sees this and is trying to capitalize on it. How long they can get away with it is the key point. The funny (or depressing) part is, the only reason they can probably get away with it is the general popularity of their devices. Where should they say "fine, we're not changing our phones, we just won't sell there any more" people would get very upset and it would quickly become political. Much more so however than a bunch of people actually getting together that disagree with the privacy laws in a particular country and actually doing something about it. In this way Apple is playing a bit of chicken with governments on the issue. I don't for a minute thing that Apple would do it, but I don't think political leaders are willing to take that chance which is as I mentioned a bit crazy.
The problem with Netflix is market fragmentation which is due to content creators and licencing. The more original content they make the better. When Netflix was totally dominant it wasn't so bad as either you had a licensing deal or you did not. Now that every telecommunications company is trying to pimp their own "streaming service", they shop around, or have exclusive deals to try to attract users.
The impending release of the New Star Trek is a perfect example. The entire world gets in on Netflix. Oh except in the US where the licence is owned, or in Canada where the thing is being filmed. In those countries, you have to use the CBS streaming service whatever the hell that is, and in Canada you have to use the Bell streaming service.
Kick. in. the. balls.
Personally, it isn't a big deal as I *also* have cable, and it will be showing on the Space channel which is Bell owned. However it is the principle of it that pissed me off. Before I saw that I could watch it on a channel I already get (hence I will Tivo it), my thought was, if ever there was content to pirate and screw the content creators and have no moral objections to it at all and no sympathy to anyone for anything it would be that. Just such a jerk move.
Debt is at the heart of it all.
Costs are usually determined (housing included) by "whatever the market will bare".
That "market" has been steadily corrupted by easy to get large loans people can't afford. As a result, prices for things (like houses) go up. Because most money is made off debt, the incentive is to continue down this path. However sooner or later... Stagnant wages, increasing cost of living, debt growing. Well, something will eventually give.
Do you even game bro!
Much the same way as I can likely do much of what an engineer might do using some modern software that now exists and is easily obtainable. That said in many cases, a professionally certified engineer is required legally for certain tasks because there has to be some level of legitimacy and accountability behind the work.
Also there is the "Accountability" of a certified accountant, that is often required for the books. Some dude using financial software isn't the same kind of responsibility. It maybe (or may not) end up as the same result, but I expect in many cases, legally a certified account is required to vouch that the correct and legal processes were taken to validate the numbers.
Not to mention that the CBPP basically does research and makes policy recommendation on various government run social support programs.
Basic Income would more less eliminate all those social support programs.
Which would basically put CBPP out of business.
So while I'm not saying there is, but there is the potential for some bias. At the same time, it does sound like they have experience dealing with social support issues so their comment may be valid. I'd read into it critically however just the same.
A couple of years ago a Police Chief in Canada notably argued the number one reason to legalize it was that it was a huge waste of time for police officers to enforce. If I remember it was weirdly from out in Alberta (which is usually staunchly Conservative if you're not from Canada). It isn't like the police have a lack of things to do. The time could be spent doing real police work. They don't get to choose what laws to enforce however.
Personally I think it would also wipe out a ton of low level crime as a result almost instantly, and they would be basically out of business.
I was thinking about the same thing. Also with the valuation of 32 Billion, not chump change for any type of company. Apparently they own 83% of sprint (and who knows what else), so who knows what companies own what now a days...
Though a quick wikipedia shows they are basically a cell phone provider in Japan who brought Apple there, so go figure they have lots of cash. With revenue of almost a trillion US dollars (9.15 Trillion Yen)...
Kinda make you wonder why Apple didn't do this first really.
Pretty much exactly. Really the point here is "lack of interconnection". Renewable is not a replacement for base power despite what many might say. Anyone who works in the industry could point that out within about 5 seconds. You can get away with it, IF you have that have neighbors with excess base power to sell to when you have too much, and to buy from when you have too little. However at that point you are making your sovereign nation's energy dependent on someone else's. In some cases you can get away with it. However without a lot of "interconnection" to play with, you are pretty much out of options as they are finding out.
So for example, Germany is doing very well with it's renewables, however it is right next door to France which is highly invested in nuclear...
A perfect example is building an off grid cottage. In situation A where you have no access to any electrical grid, you will have to make sacrifices, use power sparingly, and sometimes you may just have to go without. However you're happy to just have some power as otherwise you would not. If however in situation B, you want to power you cottage with solar and wind, but it is still connected to the grid, you may try to be self sufficient, but in those times where your power consumption exceeds your budget you can still tap the grid for no interruptions. So if you're more less in situation A, it is pretty unrealistic to think you won't have any power issues, and you're likely to be disappointed when you do, which is about where this story is. The correct question is why the folks in charge (pardon pun), were so unrealistic...
Yet history has shown that almost every republican government has spent more and increased debt and grown government than their democrat counterparts. This is what I really don't understand about American politics, their ideology in no way mirrors reality.
So far as I can tell the republican party is made up of rich people who want to stay rich, and others too stupid to realize they are voting against their own self interest (social issues aside like gun control, abortion, and gay marriage).
Anyway as you say, I'm sure the same (if not more) variation exists within the democratic party as well.
I think (unless it is a complete disaster, like Trump making a gay joke or something after) it is a good think regardless, perhaps give the republicans a bit more diversity. Because if you think about it, the more democratic types that join the republicans, really the more centrist and representative they will become in the end.
Yeah, we had/have the same problem with the Green Party up here. They have some good ideas, but then start spouting ideology just as bad as any other party on certain topics regardless of science.
Additionally, they wanted to be seen as a legitimate party, so they tried to run a candidate in every riding in Canada. Which I think was a real mistake, as you really start scraping the bottom of the barrel at a certain point, and the types of candidate they attract are basically crackpots and hippies neither of which you really want to run anything let alone your government. Nothing wrong with hippies, so long as they have their heads out of the clouds and are trying to achieve their hippie like goals within the realm of realism. Anyway until they really focus on being more realistic they will be nothing more than a fringe party.
You could say the same thing about the housing crisis. Who is ultimately responsible? The institution who recklessly gave you a loan? The person accepting the terms and conditions of a loan they can't afford? Well as has been seen it really doesn't matter in the big picture, because everyone will end up paying for both the reckless lending, and the personal lack of responsibility. When banks and the like are being bought out, you pay for it with your taxes. Just like when several Trillion dollars of bad student debt with no hope of repayment, well you'll pay for it regardless of how responsible and frugal you personally were in your own situation... Which kind of makes it unfair. However if you want to point the finger, it is hard to be really angry with the unemployed poor guy with a useless degree and no prospects, and a bit easier to be mad at the very wealthy corporate student debt factory basically sucking up your tax dollars from government using the poor and vulnerable as their patsy...
I'm not really talking about the traditional collages or even the expensive ivy league schools. There is a whole new brand of schools out there offering useless degrees to anybody. They market themselves to those eligible for government loans, which are guaranteed by the government so the school gets paid no matter what. The debt does not go away with bankruptcy. The people graduating with the useless degree have no prospects of paying it back. They should not have gotten a loan for the crappy school to begin with. The schools are entirely geared to marketing and gaming the government loan system. It is pretty much a mirror of the banks giving large loans to people who will never be able to pay it back, making the money of the debt. These student mills of course lobby government to keep the current system the way it is, because it is basically free money for them. A 2 second google search puts the value of student debt to 1.2 Trillion dollars, second only to (you guessed it) mortgage debt... As I said, sooner or later, as this value grows, as does unemployment, and dropping wages, well something will eventually give.
The next crisis that everyone knows about and will eventually occur is another involving trillions of debt, student debt. The system has been, and continues to be abused, that value is only getting bigger, and the students graduating finding no jobs due to corporations lobbying for ever more powers to move jobs to cheaper places. At some point that cup will overflow, and we'll have another housing crisis type event.
Exactly. I think there are a lot of people over estimating the amount of damage he can actually do. The office of the President isn't all powerful. There are a lot of checks and balances (by design). At worst the only thing that would happen is that not a lot might get done for a couple of years and he may be a ineffectual President. At best he might shake things up and instigate a lot of change. I expect with Hillary you get the status quo, which is probably why she is backed and funded so well, and why she will probably win.
You pretty much described every politician ever. Some of them are just better at it than others.
Gone are those that actually stood for something. Probably because if you do like poor Bernie Sanders you get labeled something like "socialist" and can't get yourself elected either by your party or the people. People that stand for something will have people that oppose you. If you take the middle road, are vague, don't really say anything, or flip flop around, you have the potential to get both sides of the vote. The trick is not to get neither side of the vote. That is pretty much the modern political game in a nutshell.
Well one might argue about exclusion of various games as favorites, however three things seem evident:
1) No mention of Wifi for loading new games, which probably means:
A) It doesn't have it
B) You won't be able to
2) The front cartridge bay at least from the pictures is fake, and considering not mentioned, doubly so.
3) It has 3 sets of ports: HDMI, USB, and Controllers. Only the USB might be used to load games, but it is being used for power.
So all of those things point to this being a one off stand alone product (which is still pretty awesome), and considering it is only 60$ there isn't really a whole lot to complain about really (the cost of one modern video game).
Also no Contra Waaaa! Though Super C, so not so bad.
Personally some omissions I see are:
Blades of Steel - Biggest omission. One of the best two player games.
Dragon Warrior - 2nd Biggest omission, though FF so not too bad.
Super Spike V Ball - Also one of the most fun two player games. Perhaps nixed due to lack of 4 player support.
Bionic Commando - I just have fond memories of this one.
Strider - Ditto
Some runner ups:
Ultima - Can't remember what it was like. Big frachise.
TMNT - Kids would probably like this. Probably licencing issues.
Wizardry - Can't remember what it was like, probably didn't age well.
This sounds suspiciously like they probably had older developers who likely knew what they were doing and the history of the data/application/business who retired/fired/left were replaced by younger cheaper models, who were given a task, did it as best they could without all the prior experience and knowledge (and likely little or no documentation). Having no one else in the organization that understands or sees what is going on, fast forward 15 years, and presto a big problem (though 7 million for a corporation like Citigroup is probably peanuts anyway)...
Actually that sounds like the issue. Too many hands in the pot. Too many middlemen. However writers and artists allow this to happen for their own profit (or not). Change your business model if it isn't working for you.
The times they are a changin'! (They would probably want royalty for just using that quote) They have been changing for some time now. Trying to use legal machination as your only method of prolonging your business model is not going to work forever.
https://www.backblaze.com/blog...
I'd say the *real* question is will be how reliable will their HD be after they fire 14% of their workforce... of course no one will figure this out for sometime, and they will have made their money by then, at which point it will be some other CEO's problem likely.
Also they probably the only reason they can get away with this is that all the companies have been consolidated in to 4, and they all do the work pretty much in the same geographical location (as we saw as few years ago with that flood and the following profiteering).