Don't want to sound cold, but the places with the most human suffering are also the areas with the worst overpopulation vs. the least natural resources.
BS. Overpopulation is a myth invented by rich western "thinkers" who can't face the wanton wastefulness and idiocy of their own society. - How many resources does it take to maintain an average African or Asian in their current lifestyle? - How many resources does it take to maintain an average American in their current lifestyle?
The problem isn't overpopulation; the world has enough resources to feed, clothe, shelter and provide advanced social infrastructure for everyone currently alive many times over. The problem is a tiny minority of the world's population soaking up a disproportionately large amount of resources for the sake of maintaining a profligate, consumption-based society. *You* are the problem, not the few million African kids who would need under $2 / day extra to prosper as oppose to die.
If we were to live like Americans, yes, the world can only support a fraction of the current poplation. If we lived like Africans on a cup of rice a week, the world could support more people than could fit on its non-arable surface. There is a happy medium in which the Earth could still sustain far more people than it can today while providing social infrastructure that can sustain a healthy, prosperous, rewarding social outcome.
"Overpopulation" is code for "we're now fat and lazy we can't afford to share any of our ridiculous excess with anyone".
Don't. IE will not support HTML5 for many years, if history is anything to go by, making Flash at least a fallback requirement for any remotely popular video site for the forseable future.
I have yet to see them engage in practices where they abuse their market share.
People often say this. What's the matter with you? Privacy not an issue to you? Even if you don't care if your medical records and employment histories were publicly available, surely the endless stream of acquisitions should alarm you. Google is very quickly becoming the hub of a monoculture far larger than anything Microsoft could ever achieve.
BS. The author is bemoaning the fact that games currently suck. The fundamental problem is that they are serving the largest market, and as the market has become more mainstream, the average IQ of the average player has gone down. Computer games used to be the preserve of geeks, or other intellectual types willing to do something as non-jocky as play on a computer. Now, every dolt with a dim sense of consciousness is playing Halo, and their dollars are voting smart gamers out of the picture.
Games like XCom, Syndicate and System Shock will not be made any more, because there's too much money to be made serving Mr. Averagely Average.
Today, a game like System Shock would fail because I doubt even 20% of the current market would have the cerebrum to get through the first 2 levels, let alone have a chance of finishing it.
Furthermore, as game houses become more and more commercial in their decision making, risk taking and breaking the mold becomes less attractive. Why risk development funds on a mold breaking game when you can get instant cash by cranking out another FPS based on the current generation 3D engine?
Consoles are dumbing games down even more, with their painfully limited means of interacting. I liked it better in the old days when game developers had to take risks in order to keep their market interested. Being a "Doom clone" back then was a stigma. Nowadays, being just another FPS is quite honorable if you have bump sketching unobtanium enabled shading 3 days before the next game with it comes out.
Yes, I'm being an elitist snob. Yes I know you're about to mod me down. No I don't care, as long as you get off my lawn while I play 15 year old games in dosbox.
Last I checked Bing didn't have a cookie-enabled advertisement widget that doubled as a user tracking point on every second web site on the internet. Neither does Yahoo.
Google is the only company that has such a pervasive ability to watch you. Google Ads means they can track you even if you never, ever visit google.com. Once you visit a page with Google Ads, you get a google-sourced cookie and they can track your movement through every other Google Ad toting page until you clear your cookies again.
Oh, and Google isn't interested in "you". They're interested in mining data about the population. *You* are only of interest to parties Google sells data to, such as the government looking to squash anyone who may be thinking about starting an organised rebellion.
You think that annihilating entire nations will benefit the security of the world?
Your post sums up the idiocy behind American foreign policy, and demonstrates clearly the real reason that there are so many people fighting you. It's not because of your freedom, it's your idiotic belief that your freedom benefits from the destruction of other people.
Wow! So DST, which I originally viewed as a pain in the backside, may end up saving the world from nuclear annihilation. And we scoffed at Bush for suggesting we make it two hours instead of one. It turns out the man actually had incredible foresight!
I agree with your line of reasoning, but I would like to point out that in reality, despite what Fox News tell you, the enemies of the US do not "hate us for our freedoms". Rather, they hate us for our foreign policy of waging war to secure economic interests and our propping up of foreign dictators like Saudi Arabia who support our foreign policy greed.
No enemies of the USA hate the USA because it has freedom of speech and more than you hate Saudi Arabia because it has sand dunes.
In your case I would assume both criteria are already being met: 1: Never go out into the street 2: Don't ever handle anything sharper than a cereal spoon
Because as anyone with the slightest understanding of context could tell you, given the use of the word, the post I replied to was using "read" in the sense that implied comprehension.
Slashdot Mirror
BS. Overpopulation is a myth invented by rich western "thinkers" who can't face the wanton wastefulness and idiocy of their own society.
- How many resources does it take to maintain an average African or Asian in their current lifestyle?
- How many resources does it take to maintain an average American in their current lifestyle?
The problem isn't overpopulation; the world has enough resources to feed, clothe, shelter and provide advanced social infrastructure for everyone currently alive many times over. The problem is a tiny minority of the world's population soaking up a disproportionately large amount of resources for the sake of maintaining a profligate, consumption-based society. *You* are the problem, not the few million African kids who would need under $2 / day extra to prosper as oppose to die.
If we were to live like Americans, yes, the world can only support a fraction of the current poplation. If we lived like Africans on a cup of rice a week, the world could support more people than could fit on its non-arable surface. There is a happy medium in which the Earth could still sustain far more people than it can today while providing social infrastructure that can sustain a healthy, prosperous, rewarding social outcome.
"Overpopulation" is code for "we're now fat and lazy we can't afford to share any of our ridiculous excess with anyone".
Don't. IE will not support HTML5 for many years, if history is anything to go by, making Flash at least a fallback requirement for any remotely popular video site for the forseable future.
Dear John & Cynthia.
Thank you for all your support this year, and I wish you all the best for the next.
Yours truly,
John and Sarah.
P.S., Attack at dawn.
People often say this. What's the matter with you? Privacy not an issue to you? Even if you don't care if your medical records and employment histories were publicly available, surely the endless stream of acquisitions should alarm you. Google is very quickly becoming the hub of a monoculture far larger than anything Microsoft could ever achieve.
Not true. In a capitalist society the golden rule is: If it makes money and isn't illegal, do it.
If we're so proud about winning the cold war, how come we keep complaining about the precise thing that we were fighting for?
BS.
The author is bemoaning the fact that games currently suck. The fundamental problem is that they are serving the largest market, and as the market has become more mainstream, the average IQ of the average player has gone down. Computer games used to be the preserve of geeks, or other intellectual types willing to do something as non-jocky as play on a computer. Now, every dolt with a dim sense of consciousness is playing Halo, and their dollars are voting smart gamers out of the picture.
Games like XCom, Syndicate and System Shock will not be made any more, because there's too much money to be made serving Mr. Averagely Average.
Today, a game like System Shock would fail because I doubt even 20% of the current market would have the cerebrum to get through the first 2 levels, let alone have a chance of finishing it.
Furthermore, as game houses become more and more commercial in their decision making, risk taking and breaking the mold becomes less attractive. Why risk development funds on a mold breaking game when you can get instant cash by cranking out another FPS based on the current generation 3D engine?
Consoles are dumbing games down even more, with their painfully limited means of interacting. I liked it better in the old days when game developers had to take risks in order to keep their market interested. Being a "Doom clone" back then was a stigma. Nowadays, being just another FPS is quite honorable if you have bump sketching unobtanium enabled shading 3 days before the next game with it comes out.
Yes, I'm being an elitist snob. Yes I know you're about to mod me down. No I don't care, as long as you get off my lawn while I play 15 year old games in dosbox.
Disney would beg to differ.
Last I checked Bing didn't have a cookie-enabled advertisement widget that doubled as a user tracking point on every second web site on the internet. Neither does Yahoo.
Google is the only company that has such a pervasive ability to watch you. Google Ads means they can track you even if you never, ever visit google.com. Once you visit a page with Google Ads, you get a google-sourced cookie and they can track your movement through every other Google Ad toting page until you clear your cookies again.
Oh, and Google isn't interested in "you". They're interested in mining data about the population. *You* are only of interest to parties Google sells data to, such as the government looking to squash anyone who may be thinking about starting an organised rebellion.
The upside to cloud computing is that clouds are in the sky. Other than that, there's not much.
Hmm... perhaps you could just put your laptop in an envelope. I wonder if that would work.
I see your point and raise you a generalization; The US is getting to the point where one should just ask "do any of the amendments apply now?".
Don't trust the Chinese, always whispering their secrets to each other.
Depends on the airport. I was once told by an airport to get lost. When I refused to comply, it made my luggage do what it couldn't make me do.
WTS: One aircraft carrier. Well used and loved. In need of some parts. Sold as-is.
Not quite accurate. While GPGPU != CPU, there are things that GPGPUs can do far better than CPUs, and those things are more common than you'd think.
Even though I don't agree with you that that is the only reason, isn't making the same product, but cheaper, a worthy cause in and of itself?
I feel that you are being unduly dismissive.
Lead codpieces.
You think that annihilating entire nations will benefit the security of the world?
Your post sums up the idiocy behind American foreign policy, and demonstrates clearly the real reason that there are so many people fighting you. It's not because of your freedom, it's your idiotic belief that your freedom benefits from the destruction of other people.
Wow! So DST, which I originally viewed as a pain in the backside, may end up saving the world from nuclear annihilation. And we scoffed at Bush for suggesting we make it two hours instead of one. It turns out the man actually had incredible foresight!
I agree with your line of reasoning, but I would like to point out that in reality, despite what Fox News tell you, the enemies of the US do not "hate us for our freedoms". Rather, they hate us for our foreign policy of waging war to secure economic interests and our propping up of foreign dictators like Saudi Arabia who support our foreign policy greed.
No enemies of the USA hate the USA because it has freedom of speech and more than you hate Saudi Arabia because it has sand dunes.
I know there's a joke about Schroedinger's Pussy in there somewhere, I just can't find it...
In your case I would assume both criteria are already being met:
1: Never go out into the street
2: Don't ever handle anything sharper than a cereal spoon
The Drake Equation is the biggest load of BS to ever grace anything science related. It can be summarized thusly:
P = ( Unknown [ (Unknown + Unknown) / Unknown ^ 2 ] + Unknown ) * F
Where:
F = Frank Drake's affinity for attention.
They already gave us the projected budget surplus. It's not their fault we blew it on a War On Terror.
Because as anyone with the slightest understanding of context could tell you, given the use of the word, the post I replied to was using "read" in the sense that implied comprehension.
Get your facts out of here you dirty terr'rist!