Well, the rest of the galaxy uses the period and wavelength of the emissions from hydrogen plasma at the critical density to define distance and time, built around a natural logarithm scale. Why don't you get with the times and use an actually universal unit of measure, pitiful human?
[Okay, i have no idea what would be a good basis, nor do I know about critical densities of hydrogen plasmas, but that seems a better standard than "the approximate length of an object that inaccurately measured a portion of a non-spherical planet based on the assumption it was a perfect sphere."]
This is insane. I tell the freaking truth about unemployment and it's flamebait?
Every single person I have ever met who has used unemployment actively avoided getting a new job. A giant chuck of unemployment is obviously a fucking waste of money whether you think so or not.
That's funny because my sister in law personally knows three different people who have been on "Obamaployment" for over a year with absolutely no interest in getting a job. Ya, that system is clearly not an utter disaster. Great insight!
Look, a few months for people who are hard on their luck, okay, I'll concede that. But years for a guy who got fired from KFC to get paid more than he did at KFC just to lie about applying at the KFC he got laid off from? That's just plain ridiculous.
So if I made a perfect copy of a Prada purse, it would be legal for me to sell it for $2000? I don't think exactitude is the best standard to differentiate copyright infringement...
Why are users so stupid as to hand control of the web over to *anybody*? Why are they so keen to support proprietary protocols, closed ecosystems, and single-vendor grabs for power?
Because it's easier. I know guys who are intelligent, capable engineers who buy Macs because "it just comes with everything they need, and it just works." I'm not really convinced they're in the wrong, either.
I didn't say I agreed with pulling out Grandma Mable. I'm just saying that's the real justification.
I think it's always going to be a fight between the right of individuals not to be in the system, and the goddamned ease and efficiency of just putting everyone into the system. It'd be a heck of a lot easier if everyone just consented to Isreali-style background checks, but I'm not ready to take away everyone's rights like that.
It's more than just the profit motive here, too. We can't racially profile in the US because thats racism, and that's not allowed. Additionally, we check for tiny quantities of explosives because where there's smoke, there's fire. That's how this works. It's virtually impossible to conceal explosives inside something without getting at least traces of dust on the outside, and so far that theory has actually managed to catch the few people who have been caught.
Whoever wrote this is an idiot. They're on the right side of the debate, but their maddeningly short-sighted arguments are damaging their position.
Grandma Mable gets scanned because the TSA isn't racist. My PS3 gets scanned because it'd be a great place to hide a bomb.
If they want a good argument, look on here a few days ago when someone argued that the security checks cost more lives than they save due to displaced travelers being pushed off airplanes and onto the roads. That's a solid viewpoint.
Wow you're dumb. It's called branding, and Disney is, like, the god of branding. That's why a Disney subsidiary released Kill Bill. The Disney name isn't on the movie.
I don't really know enough about the Wii to make a claim about Nintendo doing that same type of branding, but, fer christs sakes, Disney is a freaking god in that arena. I do know my Wii and the dozen crappy games I bought for it are going to be a Christmas present for my in-laws this year, and prolly a Christmas present for someone else the following year.
Halflife was made by Valve, a very different company than EA. It's indie versus Hollywood there, and you picked them out as prime examples yourself.
As for Fallout, try the first two, or Planescape Torment. Those are ground breaking storytelling. I haven't played Medal of Honor either, but there is absolutely no way it could possibly compare. None.
I haven't seen Inception, in fact I've seen no new movies in the theater since my son was born, so my negative talk against Hollywood may be a bit stale, it's possible. But not likely.
I think MoH presents a pretty good case that videogames aren't likely to be able to do serious treatments of current wars. But then, maybe it's just the genre? Would a suvival-horror based game, or a small-squad RTS (a la Dawn of War 2) have more luck?
MoH can't be a serious treatment of a current war in the same way that Hollywood can no longer produce ground breaking cinema. They're both subject to a cookie cutter creation method that stifles any innovation that isn't purely technical. I can absolutely guarantee that there are games no one has ever heard of that do a spectacular job of talking about war. The problem is, no multi billion dollar corporation will ever produce them.
One of the many things capitalism has a vastly negative effect on is art, and if MoH is a good case for any argument, it's that one.
Why not skip the chintzy plastic toy stage and just get them a nice, easy solderless breadboard and actual components? Maybe a cheap-y fluke knockoff and a simple controllable DC source? Heck, I woulda loved to have gotten real electronics gadgets when I was little, instead of those crappy erector sets with their crummy plastic gears that always stripped.
On a side note, when graphite was discovered in 1565, they thought it was a form of lead, and, like ancient Roman lead styluses, made pencils out of it.
Well, actually, the present system only rewards marketable advances. What about people who do pure science? If you create a system that only rewards greedy people who can only look ahead for the short time until their patent runs out, then those people will have all the power. Maybe we should re-gear the system to reward people for innovating, not for coming up with a new, clever way to overcharge people.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the rest of the galaxy uses the period and wavelength of the emissions from hydrogen plasma at the critical density to define distance and time, built around a natural logarithm scale. Why don't you get with the times and use an actually universal unit of measure, pitiful human?
[Okay, i have no idea what would be a good basis, nor do I know about critical densities of hydrogen plasmas, but that seems a better standard than "the approximate length of an object that inaccurately measured a portion of a non-spherical planet based on the assumption it was a perfect sphere."]
Mac users seem to like to point out that Chrome is little more than a Google-branded Safari, but it seems to work fine on Chrome, too.
This is insane. I tell the freaking truth about unemployment and it's flamebait?
Every single person I have ever met who has used unemployment actively avoided getting a new job. A giant chuck of unemployment is obviously a fucking waste of money whether you think so or not.
That's funny because my sister in law personally knows three different people who have been on "Obamaployment" for over a year with absolutely no interest in getting a job. Ya, that system is clearly not an utter disaster. Great insight!
Look, a few months for people who are hard on their luck, okay, I'll concede that. But years for a guy who got fired from KFC to get paid more than he did at KFC just to lie about applying at the KFC he got laid off from? That's just plain ridiculous.
Heck, they probably wouldn't even give you your user name...
So if I made a perfect copy of a Prada purse, it would be legal for me to sell it for $2000? I don't think exactitude is the best standard to differentiate copyright infringement...
Um... did no one notice the "I'm not really convinced they're in the wrong, either." part?
Why are users so stupid as to hand control of the web over to *anybody*? Why are they so keen to support proprietary protocols, closed ecosystems, and single-vendor grabs for power?
Because it's easier. I know guys who are intelligent, capable engineers who buy Macs because "it just comes with everything they need, and it just works." I'm not really convinced they're in the wrong, either.
I did mean that as a joke, but I also had no idea they were so shallow... but I guess that explains why you don't see bones and you do see skin.
I didn't say that either. Jeez, I'm getting hit with false dichotomies left and right on here!
Wait... so the TSA caught the shoe bomber, therefore the TSA can't catch any terrorists?
That's why they've introduced the body scanners. Please try to keep up, here!
Johnny builds a fence to eliminate his terrible Coyote problem. All his Coyotes are gone.
The TSA has a fence too, and no Coyotes. Can we rule out the fence as preventing the Coyotes?
I didn't say I agreed with pulling out Grandma Mable. I'm just saying that's the real justification.
I think it's always going to be a fight between the right of individuals not to be in the system, and the goddamned ease and efficiency of just putting everyone into the system. It'd be a heck of a lot easier if everyone just consented to Isreali-style background checks, but I'm not ready to take away everyone's rights like that.
I didn't say the TSA caught anyone. I just said that that method has worked, which it has.
It's more than just the profit motive here, too. We can't racially profile in the US because thats racism, and that's not allowed. Additionally, we check for tiny quantities of explosives because where there's smoke, there's fire. That's how this works. It's virtually impossible to conceal explosives inside something without getting at least traces of dust on the outside, and so far that theory has actually managed to catch the few people who have been caught.
Whoever wrote this is an idiot. They're on the right side of the debate, but their maddeningly short-sighted arguments are damaging their position.
Grandma Mable gets scanned because the TSA isn't racist. My PS3 gets scanned because it'd be a great place to hide a bomb.
If they want a good argument, look on here a few days ago when someone argued that the security checks cost more lives than they save due to displaced travelers being pushed off airplanes and onto the roads. That's a solid viewpoint.
Wow you're dumb. It's called branding, and Disney is, like, the god of branding. That's why a Disney subsidiary released Kill Bill. The Disney name isn't on the movie.
I don't really know enough about the Wii to make a claim about Nintendo doing that same type of branding, but, fer christs sakes, Disney is a freaking god in that arena. I do know my Wii and the dozen crappy games I bought for it are going to be a Christmas present for my in-laws this year, and prolly a Christmas present for someone else the following year.
And if they didn't... I can imagine an alien craft failing to respond on the appropriate emergency frequencies and ending up like Iran Air Flight 655.
Halflife was made by Valve, a very different company than EA. It's indie versus Hollywood there, and you picked them out as prime examples yourself.
As for Fallout, try the first two, or Planescape Torment. Those are ground breaking storytelling. I haven't played Medal of Honor either, but there is absolutely no way it could possibly compare. None.
I haven't seen Inception, in fact I've seen no new movies in the theater since my son was born, so my negative talk against Hollywood may be a bit stale, it's possible. But not likely.
Just because they're not the most popular doesn't mean they don't and can't exist.
I'm, um, glad we agree?
I think MoH presents a pretty good case that videogames aren't likely to be able to do serious treatments of current wars. But then, maybe it's just the genre? Would a suvival-horror based game, or a small-squad RTS (a la Dawn of War 2) have more luck?
MoH can't be a serious treatment of a current war in the same way that Hollywood can no longer produce ground breaking cinema. They're both subject to a cookie cutter creation method that stifles any innovation that isn't purely technical. I can absolutely guarantee that there are games no one has ever heard of that do a spectacular job of talking about war. The problem is, no multi billion dollar corporation will ever produce them.
One of the many things capitalism has a vastly negative effect on is art, and if MoH is a good case for any argument, it's that one.
Why not skip the chintzy plastic toy stage and just get them a nice, easy solderless breadboard and actual components? Maybe a cheap-y fluke knockoff and a simple controllable DC source? Heck, I woulda loved to have gotten real electronics gadgets when I was little, instead of those crappy erector sets with their crummy plastic gears that always stripped.
Why should processes be patentable?
On a side note, when graphite was discovered in 1565, they thought it was a form of lead, and, like ancient Roman lead styluses, made pencils out of it.
Well, actually, the present system only rewards marketable advances. What about people who do pure science? If you create a system that only rewards greedy people who can only look ahead for the short time until their patent runs out, then those people will have all the power. Maybe we should re-gear the system to reward people for innovating, not for coming up with a new, clever way to overcharge people.