Cost? technology? Processing power? I'm sure there were many other factors that rendered force feedback infeasible back in the 80s.
We're talking about something that can be built from Legos. All the processor would have to do is regulate the amount of power the motor gets. About as tech intensive as implementing sound.
Sorry mate, but you don't pass laws / screw over hundreds of millions (or billions) of people on "beliefs".
Indeed, only politicians get to do that.
yes, despite what fanatics say, temperature changes are quite small and in many places are actually going DOWN
Define small. If you think global warming will lead to 90C temperatures worldwide you're mistaken, we're talking about single digit changes (maybe even just half a C) but even those are enough to mess up our ecosystems and expand the deserts to make even more land uninhabitable.
Also the warming is on a global average, not everywhere. It's called climate change for a reason, some parts will get colder, the weather changes get more extreme and we see increased weather related desasters like floods and hurricanes wiping out cities.
Your Right... I say you lead the way... Start by commiting suicide to consume less, thus producing less GH gases... If it makes a measureable impact on the planet, I promise I'll follow shortly after.
Decomposition releases greenhouse gasses but that aside, do you only go voting if there was an election that was decided by a single vote?
BTW, IF we could get it soooo hot that everything dies (On purpose!) Eventually MAN will then die too... So eventually the planet will recreate life (from all the bacteri & stuff way down below the surface) that may lead to a new dominient species... so we are REALLY just contributing to the normal course of (if you believe in it) evolution. Right? so WHO GIVES a WHOOP if the Human race wipes itself out?
Um, we do? I don't care about any fuking philosophical blather about how it's just natural that we die, I care about my species first and foremost and I'd destroy the rest of the universe if that was the only way to save it.
I think there is a MUCH GREATER chance that the 1,313,973,713 people in china (1.3 BILLION) will make MORE of an impact than the 298,444,215 People in the US (300 MILLION with "undocumented" immigrants) BUT everyone seems to jump on our backs first...
That's because it's not a biological process in humans producing these gasses but factories and other buildings they make. The US has more of those than China even though China represents a much larger part of the world's population (and as such is entitled to more emissions than the US since you can't expect 1.3 billion to live with the same energy as 300 million).
Even if we just look at Mars, don't I see a bit about melting CO2 icecaps in the summary there? Wouldn't that suggest that Mars is developing a stronger greenhouse effect that may have an effect on this?
The labs have shown that CO2 leads to warming (causation), at that point there isn't much that could interefere. In economics you're watching humans, those are fairly complex organisms and changes in the environment could affect seemingly unrelated variables but the climate is quite a bit simpler.
the simple fact is that there is no physical proof that we have warmed the earth or that we can alter its course.
If you know so much about science you should know that there is no proof when dealing with physics. There is no proof that a rock will fall down when you drop it. If you want to go philosophical there isn't even proof that we exist.
How's the government going to track me with a fucking piece of paper in my pocket? Do you think stores will all of a sudden expect you to show photo ID when you buy toothpaste and immediately report to the police that they've seen you?
You use an English dictionary whereas what we need here is a legal dictionary. Tax evasion is a felony whereas tax avoiding here refers to using methods to reduce the tax you have to pay. The main difference is that the latter is legal.
Yes but they claim those prices also apply to "offline" shopping and when the customer asks about that he gets shown a false website that shows a higher price with the claim that that's what the website says.
It's false advertising if they claim a lower price on their website than they are actually willing to honor. If their website says those prices apply to stores and their stores say they don't that's different from simply charging differently but either saying nothing at all or saying that you charge differently.
Patents aren't about the underlying idea, they are about the implementation.
Also, the nonobvious part seems to be applying that to games and making the game control it, the technology would have been available at the time of the Atari 2600 if it was so obvious that it's a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
But do you know that you think?
Why? Patents cover how you did it, not what it does. You can't patent "curing cancer" but you can patent a drug that cures cancer.
Tell that to RIM.
But RIM isn't being sued over the same patent.
Cost? technology? Processing power? I'm sure there were many other factors that rendered force feedback infeasible back in the 80s.
We're talking about something that can be built from Legos. All the processor would have to do is regulate the amount of power the motor gets. About as tech intensive as implementing sound.
Immersion's patent covers the specific implementation, not the idea.
Because Nintendo uses a different implementation.
Provided he doesn't bring his own.
Sorry mate, but you don't pass laws / screw over hundreds of millions (or billions) of people on "beliefs".
Indeed, only politicians get to do that.
yes, despite what fanatics say, temperature changes are quite small and in many places are actually going DOWN
Define small. If you think global warming will lead to 90C temperatures worldwide you're mistaken, we're talking about single digit changes (maybe even just half a C) but even those are enough to mess up our ecosystems and expand the deserts to make even more land uninhabitable.
Also the warming is on a global average, not everywhere. It's called climate change for a reason, some parts will get colder, the weather changes get more extreme and we see increased weather related desasters like floods and hurricanes wiping out cities.
Your Right... I say you lead the way... Start by commiting suicide to consume less, thus producing less GH gases... If it makes a measureable impact on the planet, I promise I'll follow shortly after.
Decomposition releases greenhouse gasses but that aside, do you only go voting if there was an election that was decided by a single vote?
BTW, IF we could get it soooo hot that everything dies (On purpose!) Eventually MAN will then die too... So eventually the planet will recreate life (from all the bacteri & stuff way down below the surface) that may lead to a new dominient species... so we are REALLY just contributing to the normal course of (if you believe in it) evolution. Right? so WHO GIVES a WHOOP if the Human race wipes itself out?
Um, we do? I don't care about any fuking philosophical blather about how it's just natural that we die, I care about my species first and foremost and I'd destroy the rest of the universe if that was the only way to save it.
I think there is a MUCH GREATER chance that the 1,313,973,713 people in china (1.3 BILLION) will make MORE of an impact than the 298,444,215 People in the US (300 MILLION with "undocumented" immigrants) BUT everyone seems to jump on our backs first...
That's because it's not a biological process in humans producing these gasses but factories and other buildings they make. The US has more of those than China even though China represents a much larger part of the world's population (and as such is entitled to more emissions than the US since you can't expect 1.3 billion to live with the same energy as 300 million).
Even if we just look at Mars, don't I see a bit about melting CO2 icecaps in the summary there? Wouldn't that suggest that Mars is developing a stronger greenhouse effect that may have an effect on this?
So you say the greenhouse effect doesn't exist and climate is ONLY affected by the sun's radiation levels?
Am I missing something?
Yes, a few cash injections from big oil.
Would taste even better if you used Celsius or Kelvin.
The labs have shown that CO2 leads to warming (causation), at that point there isn't much that could interefere. In economics you're watching humans, those are fairly complex organisms and changes in the environment could affect seemingly unrelated variables but the climate is quite a bit simpler.
the simple fact is that there is no physical proof that we have warmed the earth or that we can alter its course.
If you know so much about science you should know that there is no proof when dealing with physics. There is no proof that a rock will fall down when you drop it. If you want to go philosophical there isn't even proof that we exist.
I think we'd have noticed the sun going through a McDrive on Earth.
How's the government going to track me with a fucking piece of paper in my pocket? Do you think stores will all of a sudden expect you to show photo ID when you buy toothpaste and immediately report to the police that they've seen you?
How does an ID reduce terrorism? Do they plan on putting an evil bit on these things that terrorists will have to set?
How does having the government know that you exist enslave you?
Well, try it and tell us if it works.
You use an English dictionary whereas what we need here is a legal dictionary. Tax evasion is a felony whereas tax avoiding here refers to using methods to reduce the tax you have to pay. The main difference is that the latter is legal.
Of course but at least it'd give the govt a bit more money so it doesn't have to cut budgets for e.g. education that much more.
You probably don't care for the port of Settlers 2 that's in the works, do you?
Yes but they claim those prices also apply to "offline" shopping and when the customer asks about that he gets shown a false website that shows a higher price with the claim that that's what the website says.
It's false advertising if they claim a lower price on their website than they are actually willing to honor. If their website says those prices apply to stores and their stores say they don't that's different from simply charging differently but either saying nothing at all or saying that you charge differently.
I assume that's only for when the customer claims that the price was advertised as lower than what the system shows.
Patents aren't about the underlying idea, they are about the implementation.
Also, the nonobvious part seems to be applying that to games and making the game control it, the technology would have been available at the time of the Atari 2600 if it was so obvious that it's a good idea.