A steam machine isn't a PC, it's a console (further proving my point, nice job). It doesn't have a general-purpose OS like Windows or a general-purpose Linux dist. Keep trying though, you are getting closer.
Then you aren't comparing apples to apples, because a console can run high-end 1080p / 60 FPS games that your $300 laptop cannot.
Your point boils down to: "I play old games that don't require new hardware, and I can buy old hardware that runs those old games for cheap, so who would ever buy a console?" Can you really not come up with an answer to that?
1) Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. In *your* words - "A basic gaming PC" is $469 [newegg.com].
You link to a PC with integrated graphics. That PC doesn't play 1080p 60 FPS games now does it? How about comparing apples to apples? Just because you are calling that a gaming PC doesn't make it true. Regardless, it's still 50% more $$$ than a current gen console anyway so WTF is your point?
2) I already have a computer. It already has games that still work, from 1994 to 2016. To play newer-than-2014 games I merely need to add in a $200 video card (which I did). The difference in cost means that the PC-gaming works out much cheaper than console-gaming.
Yeah and you know what? Buying a car is cheaper than buying a bicycle? Can you believe it? Oh I forgot to mention, that's because I already own the car so it costs me nothing. Brilliant. Useful information that really benefits the conversation here.
3) The biggest reason to game on PC rather than on console is, in fact, cost - it's a great deal cheaper to acquire
See #1. $300 $469. I hope you aren't also helping your son with his math homework.
Yup. when you can get a mid-range gaming laptop for around $500, consoles start looking pretty useless.
Link something from a reputable sight and from a brand I've heard of.
I just did a search for gaming laptop on newegg and saw NOTHING under $1000 (and even then you are getting something that going to require low-end graphics settings).
If any manufacturer releases a console that allows for offline play and free interactive online play, and doesn't require an absurd controller, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.
Get used to subscriptions or say goodbye to gaming, not just console gaming.
The idea of free online play is sort of nuts anyhow. Like they are going to maintain these servers and their code base for 5? 10? 15? years with zero compensation other than the $50 bucks they received from the sale of the game 10 years ago?
Executing nutters like this doesn't act as an effective deterrent, as crazies can't be deterred.
It's not only about deterrence, it's about appeasing the wronged (relatives, friends, etc). It's also about furthering the idea of a safe society which is essential to having a productive tax-paying society.
And the vast majority of Christians I know would agree.
And the old "correlation is not causation" applies here. Supporting the death penalty has nothing to w/ being a Christian, since that is not new-testament morals. It has to do with the majority of Christians being republicans, and republicans supporting the death penalty.
Great idea. In fact, the source of any information should be able to choose exactly what information is available through search results. Like if a politician is arrested for solicitation of prostitution, they could choose to not release that in search results.
Nice job mischaracterizing the argument again. You spoke as though all the people getting benefit from this were people who took out student loans they never intended to pay off. It was easy to disprove that point with a single counterexample.
You are the one that keeps talking in black or white terms, not me. I never said everyone does, everyone did, or any such thing.
If you think one counterexample proves / disproves a point, you are hopeless.
Ah yes, let's sue our way to happiness! Not every tragedy is due to negligence - freak accidents happen. Do you really want our society to become even more litigious?
Right, so instead of suing the responsible party, let the taxpayer cover it. Let the negligent corporation off the hook. You really got something here. Have you ever considered running for office?
Not every tragedy is due to negligence
Well don't keep me in suspense, how'd it happen? Either he was negligent, the manufacturer was negligent, or the employer was negligent. Or the magical wood chipper fairy was negligent.
Yes, I get it. Give poor people benefits so they will commit fewer crimes. Understood. You can try to craft that in as bleeding heart liberalisms you like but it won't change.
What if I told you that some people become disabled AFTER getting a degree
For those people, forgive their loans. I agree with you, move on.
If you are suggesting we should pass policy based on the minority of cases, uh, no. I could care less about "some people". I care about the majority of people. The fact that there's own counterexample is really, REALLY poor reasoning that you should act one way or another.
Did you know that seat belts actually result in more injuries in some cases? We should outlaw seat belts. It's sound reasoning.
this is student loan forgiveness ONLY for the disabled, not for a bunch of hippy-dippy art history hipsters.
For the disabled, that don't have to prove they are disabled any longer. And, "disabled" and "hippy-dippy art history hipsters" are not mutually exclusive.
I know a guy
I know a guy that owns a rocket launcher, but only uses it to eradicate moles in his backyard, and always wears eye protection. Ergo, rocket launchers should be legal.
But there's no question his ability to earn a wage is now severely impacted, quality of life took a big hit, and it is just simply a freak accident that was in no way his fault. Has a family with several kids too, including some he had adopted. Do he and his family deserve to have the banks come after them?
Oh well that's different. It wasn't his fault? I ask why didn't he take legal action against the responsible party (his employer, the manufacturer of the chipper, the person that forced his hands into the chipper...). Let the school loan be paid from his settlement.
If I become disabled and lose my job, do I "deserve" to have the mortgage company repo my house? They will. Why is this different?
Nope, give people money so they don't become homeless and/or starve to death.
Sorry, that's not what you said:
goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to.
Again, I'm against paying someone to not commit crimes.
where the government is somehow maliciously sinning against you personally, thieving and extorting like a cartoon villain
I don't think that and I don't think most people do either. I think the government is so huge they, and some citizens, lose track of the fact that the money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is us. Firemen: good investment. Police: good investment. Roads: good. I don't think giving stupid people money is a good investment for the nation. I say stupid because they either pissed away the money and didn't get a degree, got a worthless degree, or were too disabled to work and therefore shouldn't have taken the money in the first place. Sure, it's a mistake a lot of us could, or did make. But life is about being responsible for your actions. I learned that around age 4.
When an adult makes an informed decision to enter into a contract to borrow money, that's between them and the lender, and shouldn't involve anyone else. Don't like it? Fair enough, don't borrow the money next time. There's bankruptcy* and all it entails. It sucks, but it's supposed to suck because you f'ed up. There should be some punishment such a royal f'up. I don't know about you, but $50k is a lot of money to me. It only seems like no big deal if you are stuck in the mindset of "not my money" or "eh the government's so big they can absorb that".
* I read in this thread somewhere that student loans don't get erased in bankruptcy. I don't agree with that.
This isn't about forgiving all student loans. Only the ~400k student loans of disabled people.
Yes, that's what my math is based on. 380K x $32.4K average debt = ~$12.3B forgiven.
And think about the alternative - the goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to. This helps the entire society.
That's akin to extortion. Give people money so they won't commit crimes against me?
The thing is, you don't get to assign new meanings to words to try to make reality what you want it to be. When you say "taxes are theft"
That's good since I didn't say that. You are quoting the wrong guy.
Apple has no interest in running afoul of the US government. What they are concerned about is letting the public know that they cooperated. Do they really care if the FBI gains access to this phone? Of course not. I'd have to guess that Mr. Cook is opposed to terrorism and would like it stopped.
My guess is that this was a shady, unofficial back-alley deal between Apple and the FBI. "Here's how you do it. Here's some hardware to help. You never saw us. We don't exist."
You keep telling yourself that when your contact info shows up on a suspected terrorist's phone and you are hauled off for extensive interrogation.
Fine with me. I either know nothing which I invite them to verify, or I do know something and I will readily share with them since I'm not a fan of terrorists.
A student loan isn't a benefit. It's a contact between a lending institution and a private party. I vote to fund fire, police, and disability benefits. I didn't vote to pay off the debt of private parties.
There's ~$1.2T in debt across ~37M people right now. That's ~$32.4K / person. So we're talking about $12.3B in forgiveness. No, I didn't vote for that.
I've seen a lot of firsthand accounts about this stuff.
Okay so your sample size is 5, 10? Out of tens of millions of cases?
I could be a counter-example myself and you would try to deny my relevance just because it's not on the web somewhere.
Do I really need to explain to why one counter example doesn't prove a point... ?
Beyond that, are you seriously expecting a magical reservoir of relevant statistics to be sitting out there on the web somewhere?
Yeah, that's generally how these things are done. Data is collected. Facts are determined. I know I'm saying some controversial things here, but try to take it in.
If you want to talk about actual "evidence", there really is none.
Let me recount what happened here.
1. The OP made a statement. 2. You made a counter point, offering no references, asked the OP to provide references. Remember this?
Ever known someone who was disabled who applied for Social Security benefits based on it? It's not easy to get them to admit that they are disabled. It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability. Got any references?
3. I asked you for references.
Do YOU have any references?
4. You say you have none, and that I should take your word for it.
Do you see any logical problems at all this that line of reasoning?
You're as much "full of shit" as anyone here.
I never took a side one way or the other on the topic at hand. I just pointed out that you offer no evidence for your opinion yet chastise others for not providing evidence. Maybe you forgot what you said. Just scroll up.
Slashdot Mirror
A steam machine isn't a PC, it's a console (further proving my point, nice job). It doesn't have a general-purpose OS like Windows or a general-purpose Linux dist. Keep trying though, you are getting closer.
LINK?
Then you aren't comparing apples to apples, because a console can run high-end 1080p / 60 FPS games that your $300 laptop cannot.
Your point boils down to: "I play old games that don't require new hardware, and I can buy old hardware that runs those old games for cheap, so who would ever buy a console?" Can you really not come up with an answer to that?
1) Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. In *your* words - "A basic gaming PC" is $469 [newegg.com].
You link to a PC with integrated graphics. That PC doesn't play 1080p 60 FPS games now does it? How about comparing apples to apples? Just because you are calling that a gaming PC doesn't make it true. Regardless, it's still 50% more $$$ than a current gen console anyway so WTF is your point?
2) I already have a computer. It already has games that still work, from 1994 to 2016. To play newer-than-2014 games I merely need to add in a $200 video card (which I did). The difference in cost means that the PC-gaming works out much cheaper than console-gaming.
Yeah and you know what? Buying a car is cheaper than buying a bicycle? Can you believe it? Oh I forgot to mention, that's because I already own the car so it costs me nothing. Brilliant. Useful information that really benefits the conversation here.
3) The biggest reason to game on PC rather than on console is, in fact, cost - it's a great deal cheaper to acquire
See #1. $300 $469. I hope you aren't also helping your son with his math homework.
NO they don't, even in Australia you can get prebuilt gaming for around half that.
Link? Why don't you find it on Newegg so we know it's reputable.
regardless the benefit of PC gaming is you don't have to go the prebuilt route
I think you may have your answer why consoles are relevant.
Link? Make sure it's something I can buy off the shelf today, and make sure it's pre-built.
Yup. when you can get a mid-range gaming laptop for around $500, consoles start looking pretty useless.
Link something from a reputable sight and from a brand I've heard of.
I just did a search for gaming laptop on newegg and saw NOTHING under $1000 (and even then you are getting something that going to require low-end graphics settings).
Actually, that hasn't been the case for a long time.
It is the case when you factor in costs. A basic gaming PC is ~$1000. A current gen console is ~$300.
games don't have no tunables whatsoever
When the hardware is identical, you don't need to tune. Like, just in case you happen to want worse graphics? To save power?
Now, I can buy a Windows machine with all the same apps and features as the Xbox One for the same price
No, you can't get a gaming PC for $300. Pre-built gaming rigs start at ~$1000.
If any manufacturer releases a console that allows for offline play and free interactive online play, and doesn't require an absurd controller, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.
Get used to subscriptions or say goodbye to gaming, not just console gaming.
The idea of free online play is sort of nuts anyhow. Like they are going to maintain these servers and their code base for 5? 10? 15? years with zero compensation other than the $50 bucks they received from the sale of the game 10 years ago?
No, that you are a Christian and a republican.
Oh wow. What a coincidence.
Executing nutters like this doesn't act as an effective deterrent, as crazies can't be deterred.
It's not only about deterrence, it's about appeasing the wronged (relatives, friends, etc). It's also about furthering the idea of a safe society which is essential to having a productive tax-paying society.
And the vast majority of Christians I know would agree.
And the old "correlation is not causation" applies here. Supporting the death penalty has nothing to w/ being a Christian, since that is not new-testament morals. It has to do with the majority of Christians being republicans, and republicans supporting the death penalty.
much like yourself, committed horrible crimes
Not at all like me. You perhaps, I can only judge by your posts.
Great idea. In fact, the source of any information should be able to choose exactly what information is available through search results. Like if a politician is arrested for solicitation of prostitution, they could choose to not release that in search results.
Nice job mischaracterizing the argument again. You spoke as though all the people getting benefit from this were people who took out student loans they never intended to pay off. It was easy to disprove that point with a single counterexample.
You are the one that keeps talking in black or white terms, not me. I never said everyone does, everyone did, or any such thing.
If you think one counterexample proves / disproves a point, you are hopeless.
Ah yes, let's sue our way to happiness! Not every tragedy is due to negligence - freak accidents happen. Do you really want our society to become even more litigious?
Right, so instead of suing the responsible party, let the taxpayer cover it. Let the negligent corporation off the hook. You really got something here. Have you ever considered running for office?
Not every tragedy is due to negligence
Well don't keep me in suspense, how'd it happen? Either he was negligent, the manufacturer was negligent, or the employer was negligent. Or the magical wood chipper fairy was negligent.
Yes, I get it. Give poor people benefits so they will commit fewer crimes. Understood. You can try to craft that in as bleeding heart liberalisms you like but it won't change.
What if I told you that some people become disabled AFTER getting a degree
For those people, forgive their loans. I agree with you, move on.
If you are suggesting we should pass policy based on the minority of cases, uh, no. I could care less about "some people". I care about the majority of people. The fact that there's own counterexample is really, REALLY poor reasoning that you should act one way or another.
Did you know that seat belts actually result in more injuries in some cases? We should outlaw seat belts. It's sound reasoning.
this is student loan forgiveness ONLY for the disabled, not for a bunch of hippy-dippy art history hipsters.
For the disabled, that don't have to prove they are disabled any longer. And, "disabled" and "hippy-dippy art history hipsters" are not mutually exclusive.
I know a guy
I know a guy that owns a rocket launcher, but only uses it to eradicate moles in his backyard, and always wears eye protection. Ergo, rocket launchers should be legal.
But there's no question his ability to earn a wage is now severely impacted, quality of life took a big hit, and it is just simply a freak accident that was in no way his fault. Has a family with several kids too, including some he had adopted. Do he and his family deserve to have the banks come after them?
Oh well that's different. It wasn't his fault? I ask why didn't he take legal action against the responsible party (his employer, the manufacturer of the chipper, the person that forced his hands into the chipper ...). Let the school loan be paid from his settlement.
If I become disabled and lose my job, do I "deserve" to have the mortgage company repo my house? They will. Why is this different?
Nope, give people money so they don't become homeless and/or starve to death.
Sorry, that's not what you said:
goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to.
Again, I'm against paying someone to not commit crimes.
where the government is somehow maliciously sinning against you personally, thieving and extorting like a cartoon villain
I don't think that and I don't think most people do either. I think the government is so huge they, and some citizens, lose track of the fact that the money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is us. Firemen: good investment. Police: good investment. Roads: good. I don't think giving stupid people money is a good investment for the nation. I say stupid because they either pissed away the money and didn't get a degree, got a worthless degree, or were too disabled to work and therefore shouldn't have taken the money in the first place. Sure, it's a mistake a lot of us could, or did make. But life is about being responsible for your actions. I learned that around age 4.
When an adult makes an informed decision to enter into a contract to borrow money, that's between them and the lender, and shouldn't involve anyone else. Don't like it? Fair enough, don't borrow the money next time. There's bankruptcy* and all it entails. It sucks, but it's supposed to suck because you f'ed up. There should be some punishment such a royal f'up. I don't know about you, but $50k is a lot of money to me. It only seems like no big deal if you are stuck in the mindset of "not my money" or "eh the government's so big they can absorb that".
* I read in this thread somewhere that student loans don't get erased in bankruptcy. I don't agree with that.
This isn't about forgiving all student loans. Only the ~400k student loans of disabled people.
Yes, that's what my math is based on. 380K x $32.4K average debt = ~$12.3B forgiven.
And think about the alternative - the goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to. This helps the entire society.
That's akin to extortion. Give people money so they won't commit crimes against me?
The thing is, you don't get to assign new meanings to words to try to make reality what you want it to be. When you say "taxes are theft"
That's good since I didn't say that. You are quoting the wrong guy.
Apple has no interest in running afoul of the US government. What they are concerned about is letting the public know that they cooperated. Do they really care if the FBI gains access to this phone? Of course not. I'd have to guess that Mr. Cook is opposed to terrorism and would like it stopped.
My guess is that this was a shady, unofficial back-alley deal between Apple and the FBI. "Here's how you do it. Here's some hardware to help. You never saw us. We don't exist."
You keep telling yourself that when your contact info shows up on a suspected terrorist's phone and you are hauled off for extensive interrogation.
Fine with me. I either know nothing which I invite them to verify, or I do know something and I will readily share with them since I'm not a fan of terrorists.
"The less fortunate get all the breaks!"
A student loan isn't a benefit. It's a contact between a lending institution and a private party. I vote to fund fire, police, and disability benefits. I didn't vote to pay off the debt of private parties.
There's ~$1.2T in debt across ~37M people right now. That's ~$32.4K / person. So we're talking about $12.3B in forgiveness. No, I didn't vote for that.
I've seen a lot of firsthand accounts about this stuff.
Okay so your sample size is 5, 10? Out of tens of millions of cases?
I could be a counter-example myself and you would try to deny my relevance just because it's not on the web somewhere.
Do I really need to explain to why one counter example doesn't prove a point ... ?
Beyond that, are you seriously expecting a magical reservoir of relevant statistics to be sitting out there on the web somewhere?
Yeah, that's generally how these things are done. Data is collected. Facts are determined. I know I'm saying some controversial things here, but try to take it in.
If you want to talk about actual "evidence", there really is none.
Let me recount what happened here.
1. The OP made a statement.
2. You made a counter point, offering no references, asked the OP to provide references. Remember this?
Ever known someone who was disabled who applied for Social Security benefits based on it? It's not easy to get them to admit that they are disabled. It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability. Got any references?
3. I asked you for references.
Do YOU have any references?
4. You say you have none, and that I should take your word for it.
Do you see any logical problems at all this that line of reasoning?
You're as much "full of shit" as anyone here.
I never took a side one way or the other on the topic at hand. I just pointed out that you offer no evidence for your opinion yet chastise others for not providing evidence. Maybe you forgot what you said. Just scroll up.