Children of Men was a very underhyped recent movie that had an extremely "real" feel to it largely due to its staying with the protagonist's point of view for the entiritey of the film. Seriously some of the best continuous action shots ever. Highly recommended.
If you have ever driven on L.A. freeways, you probably would think it quite possible to jump a bus without a ramp - what with all of the horrendous patchwork and potholes.
When I'm benevolent fascist dictator everyone will go by Greenwich Mean Time (aka Zulu time aka Coordinated Universal Time). Yeah sure everyone will be all pissed off at first when they have to go to bed at 7:00 in Tokoyo or wake up at 23:00 in Los Angeles, but they'll get used to it. And it will be hard for people to change, but that's why I need to be appointed to the head of the U.N.'s Dictatorial Standards Department.
Remember you'll never have to reset your wrist watch again. NEVER. And when gets assassinated by in at 11:34 you will know exactly where you were at that exact moment. No calculations needed.
And then after that I'll get everyone to switch to metric.
Other news sites mention that the 19 year old male lied saying that he was a senior in high school (probably saying he was 18). However, the girl lied too saying that she was 18 when she was really only 13. I really doubt that the guy still thought she was 18 by the time he met up with her. He's a total creep, but who dropped the ball on the girl's side of this. They met up in the parking lot of a park. Real, safe public-meeting spot. Why didn't the girls parents teach her about strangers on the internet? And if so, are today's teenagers really that gullible?
It should be noted that MySpace doesn't let you register unless you at least say that you are 14 or older. But really if every website with comunications features had to verify the ages of all users (with credit checks, drivers licenses, social security numbers, what?) then very few modern style websites would be permitted to operate.
It's true that if the publishers of scientific journals offered their information for free that a substantial amount of their revenue would dry up. However, not everyone would stop buying the hard copy. I'm sure that many libraries for prestigious universities would still buy the hard copy. For the average student or scientist, however, we could care less about the hard copy (it just takes up shelf space). We just want the information.
Furthermore, they could alter their business model by charging a flat fee per submission. After all that is the true value added that they provide: the peer-review system which filters out articles that lack scientific merit and forces researchers to really do their homework. Even a submissions fee of $1,000 is a small amount when compared to the overall budget of a multi-year scientific research project. Of course academic fields with smaller budgets may have to find other business models, but what else is new.
The world changes. Either you can be innovative and survive. Or you can use scare tactics to try to prolong the death of your dying business model.
The only DRM that I would gladly accept would be a 10 foot tall genetically modified human, designed from the DNA and up to seek out the people that pirate movies still in theatrical release. These DRM Trolls could wander the countryside avoiding law-abiding, fair use-using citizens, only to bust open the front door of a commercial piraters and smash them into a thick paste. He would be driven through indescribable psychological urges to hone in on scents released in high capacity DVD-R burnings through his tailor-made olfactory receptors.
Ordinary citizens could sit back and relax as the DRM Troll passed, comfortable in our knowledge that he won't be pummeling us and that he will be helping movie actors and crew members.
I've done that experiment in my college psychology course. The random person enters the room does something crazy and then walks out. Then the group is asked to describe the person. Yes it was hard for a big group of people to accurately describe a person. I told a relative who works in the Justice system about this, and his response was "What the hell are they teaching you there?"
Now my relative is very intelligent and college educated. What threw him for a loop was the fact the experiment was carried out very differently from the way things happen in real life, and that the psychology academia feel the need to impress undergrads with a parlor trick that undermines the undergrads' confidence in the Justice system. If you based your opinion of the Justice system solely upon this experiment you would think that the prisons are FULL of people that didn't do the crime.
What happens in real life is the investigators question witnesses separately (and yes sometimes people have trouble describing features of people with a different ethnicity and sometimes people are too focused on the gun in their face to get a good look at the perpetrator's face). Then the investigators essentially haul in a bunch of people over the next hour or days or weeks and they do a line-up. Just like in the movies. This means that the investigators can have random people in the mix with a real suspect. If the eye-witness picks out a random person then they might be so good of a witness. But if they pick out the suspect then they probably did get a good look. If you still have doubts about the ability of a witness to identify someone then think of the last time you watched a movie and recognize a no-name actor from a different movie that you saw months before.
And remember if you still have doubts about the justice system remember: right to remain silent, adversarial lawyers, cross-examination, discovery of evidence, inadmissible evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, unanimity of a jury of 12 peers, and appeals, appeals, and more appeals.
This isn't a waste of money when you consider how much a next-generation (after CERN) supercollider would cost. The more we know about the Big Bang the more we will know about subatomic particles, quantum physics, and the "fabric" of the universe.
Although the chances of near-term applications developing from the science are slim, it could lead to the developments in quantum communications, subatomic "rocket" engines, and spaceships that "surf" on the gravitational waves to get around the galaxy.
Okay, so I am getting into the realm of science-fiction, but the facts remain: the Big Bang happened, it was a very large event with lots of weird stuff happening, and the effects are still floating around the universe (aka lots of data). We would be fools to not try to gather and make sense of some of that data in order to further understand the universe and so that we can make weird stuff happen (aka advanced technology) and maybe benefit mankind by doing so.
Hey, I know a simple way to ensure that "big tube providers" get a fair compensation (which will ensure the incentivization of "more, bigger, faster tubes" while still preventing innovative, small, budding companies from being service fee-ed into oblivion. Come out with a simple and reasonable rate sheet (should all fit on one page), and have it only apply to companies with over $10 million in gross revenue.
Radiation is definitely something to be concerned about. Who knows what "fantastic" changes might occur to the DNA of four astronauts caught in an onslaught of comsmic rays. How will they cope and what will they do with their new-found powers. Be sure to pick up ISSUE #2.
Yes, the fans pay in advance system could prevent new talent from being able to find exposure. Yes, it could kill the romantic idea of running down a "dream." Yes, it could encourage established talent to become stuck in a rut.
The fact is that most of those problems still exist today. New talent today has trouble finding exposure. There are plenty of old talent that keeps on churning out the same old stuff (you know who). And frankly, as long as there is any potential for reward and recognition talent will always "dream" and have their dreams shattered.
As long as we are creating a whole media financing system based on paying in advance (through escrows and the like) it really wouldn't be that hard to create mechanisms to help prevent the problems. You could give each shareholder a vote based on their financial contribution and if a certain percentage (say 70%) of shareholders were not satisfied then a chunk of the money would be transferred to an independent artists fund.
These independent artists funds would really be the key to promoting new talent and encouraging creativity. There could be funds based on media (film, music, paintings, comic book, literature) and by genre (sci-fi, comedy, techno, rap, hard-rock, emo, experimental). In a sense we already have awards funded by donations (and consumer eyeballs), but what is needed in the digital age is a common framework that blends the grass-roots participation and voting (ala American Idol) with an NPR pledge drive.
Gold is intrinsically valuable. People (especially women) are genetically predisposed to like shiny things. Also gold is (as far as I know) the best room-temperature conductor that we have today. Thus there will always be a demand for gold for use in jewelry and electronics.
Companies still have gold-mining operations today. They may rely on various chemical pools to get relatively small amounts of gold out, but it's still adding some to the supply, and people are still buying jewelry and electronics which takes away from the supply. Now, I don't really understand how world gold markets work, but I bet you that if the price of gold got high enough some of the gold being traded on paper would get sold off in reality also.
Anyway, as a species it's really in our best interest to have difficult to access but valuable supplies gathered together (in a readily usable form) instead of dispersed, just in case we need it for something important - such as a giant super computer to calculate the answer to life, the universe, and everything, or we might have to bribe some alien race with a giant, golden statue of female squiddy, crowned and bearing a torch and a book, to prevent them from invading us. Think about it.
If you have watched or about to watch the video, please make a bit of a transcript and post excerpts so other people can know what you are talking about and can make informed commentary.
"If we were to translate Castlevania to the Wii, the expectation would be that we would find a new and outrageous use for the 'Wiimote.' I'm not sure we could get away with just using the traditional controller. I'm still considering different ways we can use the standard Wii controller, but am not yet happy with what has been proposed. Of course, we are always looking into expanding the series to new platforms, and the Wii is certainly one of our candidates." - Koji Igarashi producer of the Castlevania series since 2001.
Here's how they could make a Wii game without pissing too many people off: make it 2 games.
1) A standard 2D game, but with all of the characters, enemies, and backgrounds being presented as 3D models (ala Viewtiful Joe). This will allow the character animation to be incredibly smooth, something that was somewhat lacking in the GBA/DS games. Also it would allow you to zoom in on character while they are talking.
2) A 3rd person/1st person game (can switch) using the Wii-mote as the whipping mechanism.
What would really make this thing work is that you could keep each game relatively short (10-20 hours). You could keep the same dialogue, music, and 3D models. You could also use the same basic layout of the 2D castle for the 3D (or vice versa).
I think it would be awesome to play through the same game with 2 different perspectives. And that way if the Wii-mote gameplay just didn't suit your fancy you wouldn't be stuck with a dud for a game.
Have you ever watched the Beatles' animated The Yellow Submarine film? There is a Sea of Holes. Anyway you should watch it, and not while smoking or licking anything because that would be bad.
By the way, the Beatles didn't actually do the voices for their characters except for the singing because they were busy saying "screw you" to the capitalistic society that gave them the free time and wherewithal to meditate on how screwed up the capitalistic society was. Or maybe they just respected Billy West's opinion.
Build a giant killer robot. It may sound stupid, but the economics are totally there - people are willing to pay to avoid death. Right now though, you need to hit the books. Keep in mind that the robot needs to be able to withstand or avoid high energy military weapons: artilery, daisy cutters, lasers, and kinetic energy weapons. Don't worry about tactical nukes as long as you keep your robot on U.S. soil no president would dare use one: that would be political suicide. You will probably have to worry about corrosive chemical weapons: strong acids and oxidizers.
To have your robot withstand such destructive weapons you will have to study up on material science. Your robots exterior metals, plastics, and composites need to be top notch. You may want to create an cooling system for the electronic guts, but it may have to shut off and close vents when your robot is under attack. Stealth when not in populated areas, ordinance avoidance, and counter-measures should also be considered.
For AI your giant killer robot needs to be able to kill people, but it also needs to be able to collect protection money, and identify those who have paid protection money. Your urban navigation system needs to be able to avoid obstacles even while chasing down people who refuse to pay. Nothing says "don't pay me" like a giant toppled robot that can't get up. The most essential AI/mechanical problem may in fact be carrying customers to the nearest ATM machine without crushing them, but also without letting them escape.
Now for the economics. You really need to experimental with multiple business models once your robot is up and running - then see which is the most profitable. Maybe the most profits are in hanging around high income neighborhoods. Maybe a Paypal fund for an entire city - kind of like a telethon (once you reach $1 million no one in Des Moines will be killed). Remember though that once you hit a certain price people will be more likely to flee than pay - you may want to fund a phone survey to determine prices prior to operating in a certain location. Consider advertising - people unfamiliar with your product will flee with instinctual terror until they are aware of the commercial options.
I talk on my cell phone while driving, but I also play ultra twitch, fast action 3D games to compensate. They bring my reaction time back up:P
Seriously, I wonder if driving with a hands-free set is really safer than a regular cell phone. If you are using a regular cell phone, sometimes people behind or beside you can see that you are driving impaired and will give you more of a space cushion. Hell maybe people talking on cell phones should swerve ridiculously within their own lanes or turn on special warning lights to give other drivers the heads up.
My accident didn't occur when I was talking on my cell phone, but when I was pissed off at my girlfriend, and she wasn't in the car.
I work for a consulting company, and trust me that all subcontractors have some kind of multiplier for markup. The main company doesn't just pay for the workers time, they pay for overhead, benefits, insurance, AND profit. Yes the subcontractor's shareholders want a big piece of the pie.
So yeah, if you don't need these production workers all the time, then subcontracting is cheaper. But if you use them all the time then it could be cheaper to just hire some more people and cut out the middleman. Of course sometimes the reason for subcontracting is to reduce liability. I wonder if Rockstar would have been as liable for Hot Coffee, if they subcontracted out the game.
I know how a definitive winner could come about. Sometime before Christmas this year, Blockbuster and Netflix and Best Buy get together and agree to evaluate both the HD-DVD and Blue-Ray on terms of quality and price. Then they declare a winner. There is no way in hell either Blue-Ray or HD-DVD would survive if all three of them together said, "We don't want to stock more than one type of hi-def DVD. And this is the type we choose." Whichever they chose would thrive and whichever they dissed would die. Of course the longer they wait, the harder it will be to break the stalemate.
Bughunting was definitely the way into the game industry for Satoshi Tajiri . After spending his childhood hunting insects, he later came up with the idea that became Pokemon.
How can the game be even an evolution simulation while leaving out the possibility of fur. From what we've seen so far they seemed to have left out any possibility of creating MAMMALS of any kind. No live birth (only eggs), no hair, no mammary glands.
If I can't evolve my creature to look like any REAL creature as well as imaginary, then what's the point of giving me constrained freedom. If I can't evolve a mouse into an ape into a human, then why play an evolving game.
Seriously, the scale bump mapping looks great, but if the PS2 can do great fur for Shadow of the Collosus and the XBox 360 can do fur for Kameo, then the average 2007 gamer PC should be able to do fur no problem. I just hope that Will Wright rectifies this design error before the game ships - and doesn't make it a Mammals expansion. Just so you know I am looking forward to this game, I just thought I would cut through the irrational exuberance surrounding it.
How can the game be even an evolution simulation while leaving out the possibility of fur. From what we've seen so far they seemed to have left out any possibility of creating MAMMALS of any kind. No live birth (only eggs), no hair, no mammary glands.
If I can't evolve my creature to look like any REAL creature as well as imaginary, then what's the point of giving me constrained freedom. If I can't evolve a mouse into an ape into a human, then why play an evolving game.
Seriously, the scale bump mapping looks great, but if the PS2 can do great fur for Shadow of the Collosus and the XBox 360 can do fur for Kameo, then the average 2007 gamer PC should be able to do fur no problem. I just hope that Will Wright rectifies this design error before the game ships - and doesn't make it a Mammals expansion. Just so you know I am looking forward to this game, I just thought I would cut through the irrational exuberance surrounding it.
Slashdot Mirror
Children of Men was a very underhyped recent movie that had an extremely "real" feel to it largely due to its staying with the protagonist's point of view for the entiritey of the film. Seriously some of the best continuous action shots ever. Highly recommended.
If you have ever driven on L.A. freeways, you probably would think it quite possible to jump a bus without a ramp - what with all of the horrendous patchwork and potholes.
A Scanner Darkly has the best homemade silencer scene EVER.
When I'm benevolent fascist dictator everyone will go by Greenwich Mean Time (aka Zulu time aka Coordinated Universal Time). Yeah sure everyone will be all pissed off at first when they have to go to bed at 7:00 in Tokoyo or wake up at 23:00 in Los Angeles, but they'll get used to it. And it will be hard for people to change, but that's why I need to be appointed to the head of the U.N.'s Dictatorial Standards Department.
Remember you'll never have to reset your wrist watch again. NEVER. And when gets assassinated by in at 11:34 you will know exactly where you were at that exact moment. No calculations needed.
And then after that I'll get everyone to switch to metric.
Other news sites mention that the 19 year old male lied saying that he was a senior in high school (probably saying he was 18). However, the girl lied too saying that she was 18 when she was really only 13. I really doubt that the guy still thought she was 18 by the time he met up with her. He's a total creep, but who dropped the ball on the girl's side of this. They met up in the parking lot of a park. Real, safe public-meeting spot. Why didn't the girls parents teach her about strangers on the internet? And if so, are today's teenagers really that gullible?
It should be noted that MySpace doesn't let you register unless you at least say that you are 14 or older. But really if every website with comunications features had to verify the ages of all users (with credit checks, drivers licenses, social security numbers, what?) then very few modern style websites would be permitted to operate.
It's true that if the publishers of scientific journals offered their information for free that a substantial amount of their revenue would dry up. However, not everyone would stop buying the hard copy. I'm sure that many libraries for prestigious universities would still buy the hard copy. For the average student or scientist, however, we could care less about the hard copy (it just takes up shelf space). We just want the information.
Furthermore, they could alter their business model by charging a flat fee per submission. After all that is the true value added that they provide: the peer-review system which filters out articles that lack scientific merit and forces researchers to really do their homework. Even a submissions fee of $1,000 is a small amount when compared to the overall budget of a multi-year scientific research project. Of course academic fields with smaller budgets may have to find other business models, but what else is new.
The world changes. Either you can be innovative and survive. Or you can use scare tactics to try to prolong the death of your dying business model.
The only DRM that I would gladly accept would be a 10 foot tall genetically modified human, designed from the DNA and up to seek out the people that pirate movies still in theatrical release. These DRM Trolls could wander the countryside avoiding law-abiding, fair use-using citizens, only to bust open the front door of a commercial piraters and smash them into a thick paste. He would be driven through indescribable psychological urges to hone in on scents released in high capacity DVD-R burnings through his tailor-made olfactory receptors.
Ordinary citizens could sit back and relax as the DRM Troll passed, comfortable in our knowledge that he won't be pummeling us and that he will be helping movie actors and crew members.
I've done that experiment in my college psychology course. The random person enters the room does something crazy and then walks out. Then the group is asked to describe the person. Yes it was hard for a big group of people to accurately describe a person. I told a relative who works in the Justice system about this, and his response was "What the hell are they teaching you there?"
Now my relative is very intelligent and college educated. What threw him for a loop was the fact the experiment was carried out very differently from the way things happen in real life, and that the psychology academia feel the need to impress undergrads with a parlor trick that undermines the undergrads' confidence in the Justice system. If you based your opinion of the Justice system solely upon this experiment you would think that the prisons are FULL of people that didn't do the crime.
What happens in real life is the investigators question witnesses separately (and yes sometimes people have trouble describing features of people with a different ethnicity and sometimes people are too focused on the gun in their face to get a good look at the perpetrator's face). Then the investigators essentially haul in a bunch of people over the next hour or days or weeks and they do a line-up. Just like in the movies. This means that the investigators can have random people in the mix with a real suspect. If the eye-witness picks out a random person then they might be so good of a witness. But if they pick out the suspect then they probably did get a good look. If you still have doubts about the ability of a witness to identify someone then think of the last time you watched a movie and recognize a no-name actor from a different movie that you saw months before.
And remember if you still have doubts about the justice system remember: right to remain silent, adversarial lawyers, cross-examination, discovery of evidence, inadmissible evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, unanimity of a jury of 12 peers, and appeals, appeals, and more appeals.
This isn't a waste of money when you consider how much a next-generation (after CERN) supercollider would cost. The more we know about the Big Bang the more we will know about subatomic particles, quantum physics, and the "fabric" of the universe.
Although the chances of near-term applications developing from the science are slim, it could lead to the developments in quantum communications, subatomic "rocket" engines, and spaceships that "surf" on the gravitational waves to get around the galaxy.
Okay, so I am getting into the realm of science-fiction, but the facts remain: the Big Bang happened, it was a very large event with lots of weird stuff happening, and the effects are still floating around the universe (aka lots of data). We would be fools to not try to gather and make sense of some of that data in order to further understand the universe and so that we can make weird stuff happen (aka advanced technology) and maybe benefit mankind by doing so.
In Soviet Russia the microwave cooks you!!!
Hey, I know a simple way to ensure that "big tube providers" get a fair compensation (which will ensure the incentivization of "more, bigger, faster tubes" while still preventing innovative, small, budding companies from being service fee-ed into oblivion. Come out with a simple and reasonable rate sheet (should all fit on one page), and have it only apply to companies with over $10 million in gross revenue.
Radiation is definitely something to be concerned about. Who knows what "fantastic" changes might occur to the DNA of four astronauts caught in an onslaught of comsmic rays. How will they cope and what will they do with their new-found powers. Be sure to pick up ISSUE #2.
Yes, the fans pay in advance system could prevent new talent from being able to find exposure. Yes, it could kill the romantic idea of running down a "dream." Yes, it could encourage established talent to become stuck in a rut.
The fact is that most of those problems still exist today. New talent today has trouble finding exposure. There are plenty of old talent that keeps on churning out the same old stuff (you know who). And frankly, as long as there is any potential for reward and recognition talent will always "dream" and have their dreams shattered.
As long as we are creating a whole media financing system based on paying in advance (through escrows and the like) it really wouldn't be that hard to create mechanisms to help prevent the problems. You could give each shareholder a vote based on their financial contribution and if a certain percentage (say 70%) of shareholders were not satisfied then a chunk of the money would be transferred to an independent artists fund.
These independent artists funds would really be the key to promoting new talent and encouraging creativity. There could be funds based on media (film, music, paintings, comic book, literature) and by genre (sci-fi, comedy, techno, rap, hard-rock, emo, experimental). In a sense we already have awards funded by donations (and consumer eyeballs), but what is needed in the digital age is a common framework that blends the grass-roots participation and voting (ala American Idol) with an NPR pledge drive.
Gold is intrinsically valuable. People (especially women) are genetically predisposed to like shiny things. Also gold is (as far as I know) the best room-temperature conductor that we have today. Thus there will always be a demand for gold for use in jewelry and electronics.
Companies still have gold-mining operations today. They may rely on various chemical pools to get relatively small amounts of gold out, but it's still adding some to the supply, and people are still buying jewelry and electronics which takes away from the supply. Now, I don't really understand how world gold markets work, but I bet you that if the price of gold got high enough some of the gold being traded on paper would get sold off in reality also.
Anyway, as a species it's really in our best interest to have difficult to access but valuable supplies gathered together (in a readily usable form) instead of dispersed, just in case we need it for something important - such as a giant super computer to calculate the answer to life, the universe, and everything, or we might have to bribe some alien race with a giant, golden statue of female squiddy, crowned and bearing a torch and a book, to prevent them from invading us. Think about it.
"I just turned 33 today. Way to remind me that I am old. :P"
Jesus died when he was 33... I'm just saying.
If you have watched or about to watch the video, please make a bit of a transcript and post excerpts so other people can know what you are talking about and can make informed commentary.
"If we were to translate Castlevania to the Wii, the expectation would be that we would find a new and outrageous use for the 'Wiimote.' I'm not sure we could get away with just using the traditional controller. I'm still considering different ways we can use the standard Wii controller, but am not yet happy with what has been proposed. Of course, we are always looking into expanding the series to new platforms, and the Wii is certainly one of our candidates." - Koji Igarashi producer of the Castlevania series since 2001.
Here's how they could make a Wii game without pissing too many people off: make it 2 games.
1) A standard 2D game, but with all of the characters, enemies, and backgrounds being presented as 3D models (ala Viewtiful Joe). This will allow the character animation to be incredibly smooth, something that was somewhat lacking in the GBA/DS games. Also it would allow you to zoom in on character while they are talking.
2) A 3rd person/1st person game (can switch) using the Wii-mote as the whipping mechanism.
What would really make this thing work is that you could keep each game relatively short (10-20 hours). You could keep the same dialogue, music, and 3D models. You could also use the same basic layout of the 2D castle for the 3D (or vice versa).
I think it would be awesome to play through the same game with 2 different perspectives. And that way if the Wii-mote gameplay just didn't suit your fancy you wouldn't be stuck with a dud for a game.
Have you ever watched the Beatles' animated The Yellow Submarine film? There is a Sea of Holes. Anyway you should watch it, and not while smoking or licking anything because that would be bad.
By the way, the Beatles didn't actually do the voices for their characters except for the singing because they were busy saying "screw you" to the capitalistic society that gave them the free time and wherewithal to meditate on how screwed up the capitalistic society was. Or maybe they just respected Billy West's opinion.
Build a giant killer robot. It may sound stupid, but the economics are totally there - people are willing to pay to avoid death. Right now though, you need to hit the books. Keep in mind that the robot needs to be able to withstand or avoid high energy military weapons: artilery, daisy cutters, lasers, and kinetic energy weapons. Don't worry about tactical nukes as long as you keep your robot on U.S. soil no president would dare use one: that would be political suicide. You will probably have to worry about corrosive chemical weapons: strong acids and oxidizers.
To have your robot withstand such destructive weapons you will have to study up on material science. Your robots exterior metals, plastics, and composites need to be top notch. You may want to create an cooling system for the electronic guts, but it may have to shut off and close vents when your robot is under attack. Stealth when not in populated areas, ordinance avoidance, and counter-measures should also be considered.
For AI your giant killer robot needs to be able to kill people, but it also needs to be able to collect protection money, and identify those who have paid protection money. Your urban navigation system needs to be able to avoid obstacles even while chasing down people who refuse to pay. Nothing says "don't pay me" like a giant toppled robot that can't get up. The most essential AI/mechanical problem may in fact be carrying customers to the nearest ATM machine without crushing them, but also without letting them escape.
Now for the economics. You really need to experimental with multiple business models once your robot is up and running - then see which is the most profitable. Maybe the most profits are in hanging around high income neighborhoods. Maybe a Paypal fund for an entire city - kind of like a telethon (once you reach $1 million no one in Des Moines will be killed). Remember though that once you hit a certain price people will be more likely to flee than pay - you may want to fund a phone survey to determine prices prior to operating in a certain location. Consider advertising - people unfamiliar with your product will flee with instinctual terror until they are aware of the commercial options.
I talk on my cell phone while driving, but I also play ultra twitch, fast action 3D games to compensate. They bring my reaction time back up:P
Seriously, I wonder if driving with a hands-free set is really safer than a regular cell phone. If you are using a regular cell phone, sometimes people behind or beside you can see that you are driving impaired and will give you more of a space cushion. Hell maybe people talking on cell phones should swerve ridiculously within their own lanes or turn on special warning lights to give other drivers the heads up.
My accident didn't occur when I was talking on my cell phone, but when I was pissed off at my girlfriend, and she wasn't in the car.
I work for a consulting company, and trust me that all subcontractors have some kind of multiplier for markup. The main company doesn't just pay for the workers time, they pay for overhead, benefits, insurance, AND profit. Yes the subcontractor's shareholders want a big piece of the pie.
So yeah, if you don't need these production workers all the time, then subcontracting is cheaper. But if you use them all the time then it could be cheaper to just hire some more people and cut out the middleman. Of course sometimes the reason for subcontracting is to reduce liability. I wonder if Rockstar would have been as liable for Hot Coffee, if they subcontracted out the game.
I know how a definitive winner could come about. Sometime before Christmas this year, Blockbuster and Netflix and Best Buy get together and agree to evaluate both the HD-DVD and Blue-Ray on terms of quality and price. Then they declare a winner. There is no way in hell either Blue-Ray or HD-DVD would survive if all three of them together said, "We don't want to stock more than one type of hi-def DVD. And this is the type we choose." Whichever they chose would thrive and whichever they dissed would die. Of course the longer they wait, the harder it will be to break the stalemate.
Bughunting was definitely the way into the game industry for Satoshi Tajiri . After spending his childhood hunting insects, he later came up with the idea that became Pokemon.
How can the game be even an evolution simulation while leaving out the possibility of fur. From what we've seen so far they seemed to have left out any possibility of creating MAMMALS of any kind. No live birth (only eggs), no hair, no mammary glands.
If I can't evolve my creature to look like any REAL creature as well as imaginary, then what's the point of giving me constrained freedom. If I can't evolve a mouse into an ape into a human, then why play an evolving game.
Seriously, the scale bump mapping looks great, but if the PS2 can do great fur for Shadow of the Collosus and the XBox 360 can do fur for Kameo, then the average 2007 gamer PC should be able to do fur no problem. I just hope that Will Wright rectifies this design error before the game ships - and doesn't make it a Mammals expansion. Just so you know I am looking forward to this game, I just thought I would cut through the irrational exuberance surrounding it.
How can the game be even an evolution simulation while leaving out the possibility of fur. From what we've seen so far they seemed to have left out any possibility of creating MAMMALS of any kind. No live birth (only eggs), no hair, no mammary glands.
If I can't evolve my creature to look like any REAL creature as well as imaginary, then what's the point of giving me constrained freedom. If I can't evolve a mouse into an ape into a human, then why play an evolving game.
Seriously, the scale bump mapping looks great, but if the PS2 can do great fur for Shadow of the Collosus and the XBox 360 can do fur for Kameo, then the average 2007 gamer PC should be able to do fur no problem. I just hope that Will Wright rectifies this design error before the game ships - and doesn't make it a Mammals expansion. Just so you know I am looking forward to this game, I just thought I would cut through the irrational exuberance surrounding it.