Not really. They can sell stuff they harvest, which is good if they enjoy harvesting. If the crafting game is what's fun for them, they can't really access it until they're at an advanced level.
It's simply not cost effective, since they can't dump their grind-goods even for the cost of the non-farmed components.
It's a bit disingenuous to say that this is a recent development however. The nature of the crafting XP system means that the raw materials are almost always more valuable than the finished goods, since with the raw materials, you can get the item AND the XP. The only *chance* you had for profit with the crafting system was to make items that are components for goods in other crafting professions.
Frankly, though, the crafting minigame always seemed a bit primitive. "Gather components and wait for progress bar" doesn't require any skill, and therefore can't differentiate products, either.
far more likely, it was a problem with the email server in question. And again -- not likely overload, but some actual, temporary error.
Far, Far more likely, it was a problem with the *staffer* in question.
3:30 Monday: "Staffer, did you send me that memo I asked for?" 3:31 Monday: "Uh.. yeah, I sent that like 10 AM on friday, you didn't get it yet?" 11:30 Tuesday: staffer finally sends memo 11:30 Tuesday: Senator receives memo, blames interblag.
Usually they stay pretty busy, but with things like the writers strike happen, they aren't worrying where their next meal is coming from.
Interesting argument. I would say it's actually an argument *against* royalties, though. If the writers had to worry about where their next meal came from, we might not have lost all the crappy new shows (and a couple good ones) in favor of "all new" reality tv resurgence.
Sound bites. You never actually hear what the candidates are about any more, due to the nature of the medium they're using to garner votes, and their skill in avoiding taking definitive stands on controversial issues.
So you end up with one candidate who is for "change and hope" and you're not really sure what that means, and another candidate who's for "hope and change" and you're not quite sure what that means either.
Since it's become more like gambling (specifically coin-flip gambling, and this is by design: there are lots of laws trying to prevent people from "influencing" the coin toss), the percentages will approach coin-flip percentages.
"I think both candidates are way off the mark on energy issues."
Well we're not going to get one who isn't until an engineer runs for office. And the last two I can think of have had some pretty whackjob ideas, themselves.
i.e. Jimmah Carter (Democratic Party) and John Hagelin (Natural Law Party).
Yes, that's the problem. I don't know if obama's the right guy, but the main problem with McCain (other than his shoddy understanding of the constitution which lead to point number 2 in your list) is that he simply won't veto Democratic legislation.*
*and as a republican, he'll have a hard time vetoing Republican legislation, too, which was Bush's main flaw. McCain is a war hero, who had to endure much suffering already on behalf of this country. He should be celebrated for it. I'm don't think it's a qualification for high office, however. Not when he has almost thirty years worth of record since then.
I don't know if Obama will paint with the veto ink more than McCain. Pretty unlikely if he has a Democratic congress. Perhaps a Republican congress would lock horns with him, though...
I'm thinking of getting a bike myself, mostly because of the mileage thing. But my point is that there are a *lot* of bad apples in the bunch, and you have to deal with the reality that they're making people care less about motorcyclists on the road.
For every biker like you there's five more using shoddy logic like "loud pipes save lives" to justify driving like an asshole.
Also, does the fourth and tenth prevent TSA from searching (either manually or via x-ray) your carry-on luggage?
YES
What about making you walk through a metal detector, waving the wand over you and searching your shoes?
ALSO YES
Well they don't prevent them from doing it, as they're doing it. They contraindicate their authority to do it.
Power has been usurped here, without constitutional amendment, and that's the real tragedy: The more we find ways wrangle federal authority that is not specifically granted in that document, the less relevant that document becomes, until eventually it doesn't prevent *anything*.
The airlines are, as private companies, well within their rights to require security check before boarding. The federal government is not within their rights to be the security company.
There is bitching about ID, because if we don't bitch about it, they will assume that it's ok, and that is exactly the opposite direction from eliminating the federal agency.
Not funny at all. Science neither requires nor requests faith. Faith is the domain of religions.
At the moment, there is a lot of scienceology going on around the field of evolution. A lot of people using it as if it is some kind of bludgeon with which to beat the faithful. A response is to be expected.
No. that 33K difference comes from the emissivity factor. Blackbody radiation is the *only* mechanism the earth has for rejecting heat, and it will always reach a balance between the incoming absorbed irradiation and the outgoing radiation. Internal heat also gets factored in there, but it's a very small contribution owing to six thousand miles of earth making a pretty good insulator.
*one other mechanism, convection with the solar wind, is far too low to account for anything, even if the solar wind was at a lower temperature than the earth.
The question on the climate scientists minds has always been how the gases in the atmosphere affect the effective emissivity (and absorptivity, and albedo), and therefore the final equilibrium temperature.
Bikers would engender quite a bit more sympathy if they would decrease the stupidity. If it were just a small minority of bikers not wearing helmets, riding two-per, weaving through traffic (driving down the dividing line at times), and annoying other drivers (straight pipe assholes), then they wouldn't be perceived as irrational psychopaths.
But it's not. I'd say more than 30% of the motorcycles I encounter on the road are doing something really stupid. More than 50% if you count "not wearing protective gear" while doing it. During bike week, I'd be lucky to encounter 10% responsible bikers.*
*now granted, bike-week bikers are mostly posers, so they don't necessarily have the experience of their friends' deaths to sober them up, but still.
Well yeah, the SUV looks a lot cooler from the outside. But the minivan is a lot comfier, even with more passengers. The minivan also gets better mileage, and is just as safe as the SUV.
Here's the deal, If your SUV isn't covered in mud from all the crappy dirt roads you have to drive down to get to where you want to go, you look like an idiot in it. A tool that is easily swayed by popular trends, and wants to look like some kind of exciting, athletic outdoorsman without.. you know.. actually visiting the outdoors.
You hit a light pole in a miata, and you'll go through it. They're designed to shear on impact to protect drivers. You hit a *power* pole in an excursion, and you're dead.
In order for the miata to have the same energy-of-impact as the excursion, it would only need to be going 40% faster. So you gotta ask yourself, In a place where the ford is going through a neighborhood at 30 mph, how unlikely is it that the miata driver would be zipping along at 42 mph?
Yeah, but a lot of bikers ride really stupidly, too. Like the "side-by-side" bullshit. Yeah, I know it's legal in many states. It's also stupid. You've got no reaction room. If you're in a car, you don't drive right up side-by-side with cars in other lanes, why do bikers think it's safe to ride two up in a single lane?
Or refusing to wear helmets. Or pretending that "skull caps" are helmets. I've been through a couple o' "Bike Weeks" in my time, and there are news reports *every freakin day* of bikers who die because they're not wearing helmets and bikers who manage to scrape through because they were wearing them.
So yeah, stereotype wise I lump bikers right in there with women who drive the Avalanche as dumb drivers. The only difference is that I've been nearly killed twice by women in the Avalanche, and bikers mostly put only themselves at risk.
Just because someone lambasts "conservatives" for "supporting" something doesn't mean that conservatives have to defend the thing they're deriding.
The fourth, second, and tenth amendments all contraindicate the very existence of TSA. What was ok for a private company to make a condition of sale is not ok for the federal government to demand on it's whim.
Huh? I'm a conservative, and I've been shouting about how stupid TSA and DHS are since the start.
I think you mean liberal fascism, because the reason those TLAs exist is because of the backlash against guns in the cockpit, and the balking at my plan of keeping a bowl of complementary guns by the jetway (to be returned on arrival. Guns are cheap, but not "1 free with every flight" cheap)
Also, the "We have to do something now" mentality that brings us things like the Megan's Laws. News flash, Right after a disaster is precisely the wrong time to be writing tons of legislation and creating vast new cabinet level posts. It doesn't matter what party is in power, "In the spirit of cooperation" a lot of crap is going to get rammed through the ol' hopper.
If you have an infinite number of monkeys, it only takes you one keystroke in time. You only need the infinite amount of time if you don't have enough monkeys.
No they have not. Just because you've got crappy eyes doesn't mean the rest of us want to suffer through pixelated text.
Now, double that would be good enough for me, and 500 would probably be good enough for almost everyone from what I've read. But the device you're talking about just doesn't cut it. For me, at least.
I would pay up to $300 for one if it was 300+ dpi and had a decent-sized screen. And it would be economical for me. Gutenberg has a tremendous number of historical texts, I'm pretty sure I can find sixty of them that I haven't read and have been meaning to.
Take a deli slicer, slice the spine, and put the stack on one of those automated scanners and push the PDF+OCR button. Or just OCR if the text is clear enough.
And.. the vast majority of books sold are paperbacks at closer to a $7-9 price point. Hardback books are terrible measuring sticks, not the least because they almost never sell for the more than 70% of the "sticker price" anyway.
Nuclear energy IS clean energy. You're pouring water over hot metal to generate steam, and you do it in a closed loop. It doesn't get much cleaner than that.
In the case of the shoes, work done compressing the cushion approximately come back on the up-stroke. It's fairly conservative (in the physics sense). You'll find that if the shoes had tiny holes in the cushions, it'd be quite a bit harder to walk in them, especially if they had a lot of vertical play. The difference between a spring and a shock absorber.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. They can sell stuff they harvest, which is good if they enjoy harvesting. If the crafting game is what's fun for them, they can't really access it until they're at an advanced level.
It's simply not cost effective, since they can't dump their grind-goods even for the cost of the non-farmed components.
It's a bit disingenuous to say that this is a recent development however. The nature of the crafting XP system means that the raw materials are almost always more valuable than the finished goods, since with the raw materials, you can get the item AND the XP. The only *chance* you had for profit with the crafting system was to make items that are components for goods in other crafting professions.
Frankly, though, the crafting minigame always seemed a bit primitive. "Gather components and wait for progress bar" doesn't require any skill, and therefore can't differentiate products, either.
Far, Far more likely, it was a problem with the *staffer* in question.
3:30 Monday: "Staffer, did you send me that memo I asked for?"
3:31 Monday: "Uh.. yeah, I sent that like 10 AM on friday, you didn't get it yet?"
11:30 Tuesday: staffer finally sends memo
11:30 Tuesday: Senator receives memo, blames interblag.
Interesting argument. I would say it's actually an argument *against* royalties, though. If the writers had to worry about where their next meal came from, we might not have lost all the crappy new shows (and a couple good ones) in favor of "all new" reality tv resurgence.
Sound bites. You never actually hear what the candidates are about any more, due to the nature of the medium they're using to garner votes, and their skill in avoiding taking definitive stands on controversial issues.
So you end up with one candidate who is for "change and hope" and you're not really sure what that means, and another candidate who's for "hope and change" and you're not quite sure what that means either.
Since it's become more like gambling (specifically coin-flip gambling, and this is by design: there are lots of laws trying to prevent people from "influencing" the coin toss), the percentages will approach coin-flip percentages.
"I think both candidates are way off the mark on energy issues."
Well we're not going to get one who isn't until an engineer runs for office. And the last two I can think of have had some pretty whackjob ideas, themselves.
i.e. Jimmah Carter (Democratic Party) and John Hagelin (Natural Law Party).
"Clearly, McCain knows how to get politics done"
Yes, that's the problem. I don't know if obama's the right guy, but the main problem with McCain (other than his shoddy understanding of the constitution which lead to point number 2 in your list) is that he simply won't veto Democratic legislation.*
*and as a republican, he'll have a hard time vetoing Republican legislation, too, which was Bush's main flaw. McCain is a war hero, who had to endure much suffering already on behalf of this country. He should be celebrated for it. I'm don't think it's a qualification for high office, however. Not when he has almost thirty years worth of record since then.
I don't know if Obama will paint with the veto ink more than McCain. Pretty unlikely if he has a Democratic congress. Perhaps a Republican congress would lock horns with him, though...
If it didn't work for the indians, why would you expect it to work for his dog?
Well, that's not the experience of most people's WoW hobby...
I'm thinking of getting a bike myself, mostly because of the mileage thing. But my point is that there are a *lot* of bad apples in the bunch, and you have to deal with the reality that they're making people care less about motorcyclists on the road.
For every biker like you there's five more using shoddy logic like "loud pipes save lives" to justify driving like an asshole.
Also, does the fourth and tenth prevent TSA from searching (either manually or via x-ray) your carry-on luggage?
YES
What about making you walk through a metal detector, waving the wand over you and searching your shoes?
ALSO YES
Well they don't prevent them from doing it, as they're doing it. They contraindicate their authority to do it.
Power has been usurped here, without constitutional amendment, and that's the real tragedy: The more we find ways wrangle federal authority that is not specifically granted in that document, the less relevant that document becomes, until eventually it doesn't prevent *anything*.
The airlines are, as private companies, well within their rights to require security check before boarding. The federal government is not within their rights to be the security company.
There is bitching about ID, because if we don't bitch about it, they will assume that it's ok, and that is exactly the opposite direction from eliminating the federal agency.
Not funny at all. Science neither requires nor requests faith. Faith is the domain of religions.
At the moment, there is a lot of scienceology going on around the field of evolution. A lot of people using it as if it is some kind of bludgeon with which to beat the faithful. A response is to be expected.
I don't care. Unless it affects my mandatory insurance price.
But the more apt question: why would you expect car drivers to care more about a biker's safety than the biker himself?
No. that 33K difference comes from the emissivity factor. Blackbody radiation is the *only* mechanism the earth has for rejecting heat, and it will always reach a balance between the incoming absorbed irradiation and the outgoing radiation. Internal heat also gets factored in there, but it's a very small contribution owing to six thousand miles of earth making a pretty good insulator.
*one other mechanism, convection with the solar wind, is far too low to account for anything, even if the solar wind was at a lower temperature than the earth.
The question on the climate scientists minds has always been how the gases in the atmosphere affect the effective emissivity (and absorptivity, and albedo), and therefore the final equilibrium temperature.
Bikers would engender quite a bit more sympathy if they would decrease the stupidity. If it were just a small minority of bikers not wearing helmets, riding two-per, weaving through traffic (driving down the dividing line at times), and annoying other drivers (straight pipe assholes), then they wouldn't be perceived as irrational psychopaths.
But it's not. I'd say more than 30% of the motorcycles I encounter on the road are doing something really stupid. More than 50% if you count "not wearing protective gear" while doing it. During bike week, I'd be lucky to encounter 10% responsible bikers.*
*now granted, bike-week bikers are mostly posers, so they don't necessarily have the experience of their friends' deaths to sober them up, but still.
Well yeah, the SUV looks a lot cooler from the outside. But the minivan is a lot comfier, even with more passengers. The minivan also gets better mileage, and is just as safe as the SUV.
Here's the deal, If your SUV isn't covered in mud from all the crappy dirt roads you have to drive down to get to where you want to go, you look like an idiot in it. A tool that is easily swayed by popular trends, and wants to look like some kind of exciting, athletic outdoorsman without.. you know.. actually visiting the outdoors.
You hit a light pole in a miata, and you'll go through it. They're designed to shear on impact to protect drivers. You hit a *power* pole in an excursion, and you're dead.
In order for the miata to have the same energy-of-impact as the excursion, it would only need to be going 40% faster. So you gotta ask yourself, In a place where the ford is going through a neighborhood at 30 mph, how unlikely is it that the miata driver would be zipping along at 42 mph?
Yeah, but a lot of bikers ride really stupidly, too. Like the "side-by-side" bullshit. Yeah, I know it's legal in many states. It's also stupid. You've got no reaction room. If you're in a car, you don't drive right up side-by-side with cars in other lanes, why do bikers think it's safe to ride two up in a single lane?
Or refusing to wear helmets. Or pretending that "skull caps" are helmets. I've been through a couple o' "Bike Weeks" in my time, and there are news reports *every freakin day* of bikers who die because they're not wearing helmets and bikers who manage to scrape through because they were wearing them.
So yeah, stereotype wise I lump bikers right in there with women who drive the Avalanche as dumb drivers. The only difference is that I've been nearly killed twice by women in the Avalanche, and bikers mostly put only themselves at risk.
Just because someone lambasts "conservatives" for "supporting" something doesn't mean that conservatives have to defend the thing they're deriding.
The fourth, second, and tenth amendments all contraindicate the very existence of TSA. What was ok for a private company to make a condition of sale is not ok for the federal government to demand on it's whim.
Huh? I'm a conservative, and I've been shouting about how stupid TSA and DHS are since the start.
I think you mean liberal fascism, because the reason those TLAs exist is because of the backlash against guns in the cockpit, and the balking at my plan of keeping a bowl of complementary guns by the jetway (to be returned on arrival. Guns are cheap, but not "1 free with every flight" cheap)
Also, the "We have to do something now" mentality that brings us things like the Megan's Laws. News flash, Right after a disaster is precisely the wrong time to be writing tons of legislation and creating vast new cabinet level posts. It doesn't matter what party is in power, "In the spirit of cooperation" a lot of crap is going to get rammed through the ol' hopper.
If you have an infinite number of monkeys, it only takes you one keystroke in time. You only need the infinite amount of time if you don't have enough monkeys.
No they have not. Just because you've got crappy eyes doesn't mean the rest of us want to suffer through pixelated text.
Now, double that would be good enough for me, and 500 would probably be good enough for almost everyone from what I've read. But the device you're talking about just doesn't cut it. For me, at least.
I would pay up to $300 for one if it was 300+ dpi and had a decent-sized screen. And it would be economical for me. Gutenberg has a tremendous number of historical texts, I'm pretty sure I can find sixty of them that I haven't read and have been meaning to.
Take a deli slicer, slice the spine, and put the stack on one of those automated scanners and push the PDF+OCR button. Or just OCR if the text is clear enough.
And.. the vast majority of books sold are paperbacks at closer to a $7-9 price point. Hardback books are terrible measuring sticks, not the least because they almost never sell for the more than 70% of the "sticker price" anyway.
Nuclear energy IS clean energy. You're pouring water over hot metal to generate steam, and you do it in a closed loop. It doesn't get much cleaner than that.
W=f*d
In the case of the shoes, work done compressing the cushion approximately come back on the up-stroke. It's fairly conservative (in the physics sense). You'll find that if the shoes had tiny holes in the cushions, it'd be quite a bit harder to walk in them, especially if they had a lot of vertical play. The difference between a spring and a shock absorber.