Why do people automatically make that assumption? Look, unlike the nutcase in England who ran himself into unbelievable debt to make a transporter room in his flat, this room at least serves a legitimate purpose: home theater. And in that perspective, why not use something like the bridge of the Enterprise? The screen does exactly what it's supposed to do both on the Enterprise and in a regular theater - show video; the dome lights do exactly what they're supposed to do on both the Enterprise and in a regular theater; the speakers are placed in strategic locations where speakers should be placed for a home theatre system. Considering the things that he could have done to his house to show his love for Star Trek, this is probably the most practical and least bizarre.
It's nowhere near as kitsch as you guys are making it out to be. If he had a regular door instead of a Starfleet door and replaced any blatantly Star Trek-related items with something more contemporary, no one would be bashing his setup. "Nice bookshelf, nice ceiling lighting, leather chairs, big screen, hidden speakers -- this is really nice. Oh wait. Look! The door (that can very easily be replaced) is a Starfleet door! Oh, how stupid this whole thing is!!" Oh, please. I honestly think that to anyone who is a Star Trek fan and has an appreciation for home theare this is not nearly as much of a turn-off as you'd think.
Yet look how Slashdotters react when the newest, highly-creative, PC case mod comes out. "Cool!" "Where do I get one!" "And it's water-cooled!" "Look how it glows!" "r0x0rz!" "Awesome case!" I certainly love cool-looking PC cases, too, but most people would scorn us for paying premium prices for a PC case, no matter how cool it looks. So, perceived value goes both ways.
And don't confuse "market value" for "marketability" or "sellability". They're completely different. The "market value" for a PS3 when it first came out was $699. The "marketability" and "sellability" values were obviously much, much higher. Houses are no different. I don't see this particular home theatre design hurting its market value, but I do see it increasing its marketability to even mild Star Trek fans who happen to love home theatre, especially when the blatant Star Trek-related items appear to be easily replaceable.
Look at the way they phrased it (emphasis mine) -- "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy". It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public while getting out from under the jurisdiction (if that's what you'd call it) of the RIAA and MPAA. Because Sweden is probably known best in BitTorrent circles for its loose copyright policy (aka. "allowing piracy"), moving to a Swedish ISP would give the *AA more ammunition to try to demonize BitTorrent as a pirate's haven, and it would appear that IsoHunt is trying desperately not to give the *AA that ammunition.
Just my 2/100 of a U.S. dollar. Convert to your currency as necessary.
About five years ago, my first DSL company was Verizon, and I had a tech problem that I had to solve for them because they didn't do sh!t about it. So, I left. (I will admit, however, that the tech who installed the line recognized that I'm a geek and that I had a LAN in place, so he rigged up the outside box so that I didn't need any line filters in my house at all.) After going through a few other DSL providers who were either crap or gave up on DSL, I went to Comcast. God! What a mistake. Don't get me wrong, the speeds were exactly what they were supposed to be and I don't recall losing my connection once. My Internet series of tubes were unclogged, although DNS would get very slow every night at about 11:30 for some reason. But I got fed up with "Yes, we're going to give to 6 Mb down with up to 15 Mb burst speeds!" while giving a stranglehold of 256 Kb up at a higher cost than competitors.
I finally went back to Verizon DSL because of cost (US$29.95 for 3 Mb down, 768 Kb up) and I must confess that I never had a problem. I just got FiOS a few months ago (15 Mb down, 2 Mb up confirmed and consistent). The tech was very knowledgable, not only about installation but also in the various details about Verizon IPTV, which is not yet available in my area. Last week, Verizon recognized an accidental charge to my old DSL account, called us to let us know about it, and credited my account. And the one time that I had a problem (user account issue), they had it fixed over the phone in about two minutes.
Considering the bashing that Verizon normally gets on Slashdot, I felt that they deserved at least some credit for my experiences with them since I initially left. That doesn't mean that I'm a fanboy or that they can't piss me off enough to make me leave again, but credit where credit is due.
If anything, this could make it that much better. Verizon ignored those area because they have a much higer density (therefore more potential customers per mile) in urban/suburban areas. Now with those people under a more local telecom, the company doesn't have to focus on anything but those local customers. And it's not like there's no competition. Satellite broadband is there, even though it's probably expensive, and who knows what kind of wireless broadband might be available. (I don't live up there so I don't know.) So, the new company should be far more aware of customer service than Verizon ever will be.
It's rather presumptuous to assume that the customers will be let out to dry just because the big, bad Verizon is leaving.
Lets see. How many governments in the U.S. have already had this type of law bitch-slapped into oblivion? How much taxpayer money was spent in the process? Consider that a federal judge recently ruled that virtual porn is not the same thing as real porn and even extended that down to child porn! So what makes these idiots in the Mass. legislature think that they can come up with a law that can successfully supercede such precedent? What, is the Big Dig not enough of a tax money vacuum?
And Jack Thompson?! Wow! What's the Mass. legislature going to do next? Ask Ted Kennedy for help with a law banning alcohol or ask him to help with educating kids about driving safely over bridges? Why not also ask G. W. Bush for help drafting a law supporting embryonic stem-cell research? Asking Dick Cheney to make PSAs about shotgun safety is probably in their list, too. Good grief!
Look, I don't necessarily like those types of games either. I keep joking with my wife about letting my soon-to-be 7-year-old daughter join me in a game of Unreal Tournament 2004. But if I'm not paying attention to what my kids are playing and I'm not teach my kids right from wrong, that's my problem, not the government's. The same goes -- or at least should -- for any parent.
Um... wouldn't the amount of money in the collection bins of the various vending machines at the contractors' workplace do the same thing? Whichever machine has less product at the end of the day would also be a good clue.;)
All kidding aside, if this is true it's completely ridiculous. I can't think of one reason where bugging coins would prove to be of any value whatsoever. To track where the money goes? That's what a company's income statements are for. For determining which coins go to which businesses? Again, for what purpose? Or is there such a market in counterfeit, Canadian coins that this is a new way of determining which ones are real and which are fake? I'm being facetious in the last comment, of course, but this strikes be as being either (A) bogus or (B) totally nonsensical. Then again, since we are talking about something that comes from the government, (B) might be understandable.
Okay. I read Danathar's post as though there was a hypothetical situation that Apple could have walked away and by walking away not use the iPhone name because an agreement was never made, but Cisco could still sue them, which didn't make sense. I see what Danathar meant now.
CISCO has owned the iPhone trademark since 2000. Exactly what claim do you think Apple would have been able to make in court? "Hey, they refuse to sell us their intellectual property that they legally own, which is of course their right, but we don't like it! That's why were suing!"
10:32--Cisco calls CNET News.com reporter with a statement about Apple's use of the term "iPhone" for its new product. "Given Apple's numerous requests for permission to use Cisco's iPhone trademark over the past several years and our extensive discussions with them recently, it is our belief that with their announcement today, Apple intends to agree to the final document and public statements that were distributed to them last night and that address a few remaining items we expect to receive a signed agreement today."
I don't have a DS and I'm really not inclined to get one just for those games, although my daughter does have a GBA.
The problem with your argument (not that it's an argument, but anyway...) is that at least the DS and GBA are portable. The Wii is not. Anyone who has both a Wii and a DS/GBA need to decide for themselves which features are more important - the portability and expense of the DS/GBA with a small screen and lower resolution or the low cost but higher resoluion and permanence of the Wii.
The two really are not in the same market. I can't take the Wii with me on a car trip or a waiting room or other places where a DS/GBA can be used, but I doubt that the GBA/DS would look anywhere near as good if connected to my 55" 16:9 TV via component running at 480p. So I don't see why recent releases of those games on DS/GBA should be a factor on whether or not to release them on the Wii.
That's very true and I'm not ignorant of that fact; however, there are a number of games, particularly in the SNES and N64 lineup, that I'm sure people are aching to purchase -- not including those who are aching to get their hands on a Wii, of course. (Maybe I should rephrase that. Anyway...) Considering the rather large library of games for those two systems alone, it's staggering that they're still holding out. It's not that SMB3 would be the only game that people would buy or that it has the highest demand of all of the games. But I believe that SMB3 would be one of their biggest VC sellers, which could then be used as that much more capital that can be applied to the conversion of other titles that are also in high demand.
I'm at least fortunate that I still have an N64 that works just fine with about ten games for it, but that includes Mario 64, which is the only N64 game available on VC. So, I have no interest in purchasing the Wii version unless my N64 completely craps out. And for games that I don't have on the N64, I'd be more apt to purchase a VC version of an N64 game than a 10+ year old cartridge that could have gone through who-knows-what abuse from its previous user(s).
WHY is Nintnedo delaying the release of Super Mario Bros. 3 and more N64 titles in favor of a lot of the old 8-bit games that (let's face it) not many of us are waiting for? Compatibility problems? Artificial inflation of demand? Not that this list for the VC is all that bad -- hmmm.... Gradius -- but I'm not really looking to spend more Wii points just for the sake of spending Wii points.
Mario, Mario, wherefore art thou a game that Nintendo dost sit upon?
But it sort of reminds me of that dad who put coal in his son's XBox 360 box for the expensive, audio equipment. Don't know if that patched the son's attitude, but it probably adjusted the brat's AI not to mess with dad again.:)
Maybe I'm reading too much into the review, but it seems to me that the problems are issues that might be correctable by an appropriately implemented patch. (I don't have a 360, but from what I'm told it can download patches and install game patches.) With the exception of some frustrating level design, as Zonk mentioned, it sounds like the primary source of frustration comes from AI. AI logic can be tweaked. Game companies have been releasing AI modifications in game patches for years.
I understand that reviews should be "out of the box" reviews, which this is, and I wish more games were rock-solid right off the shelf; but I wonder if this is a game where those who are hesitant to purchase, particularly on the PC side, should just wait a little while until patches are released and the game is no longer "bleeding edge". I don't appreciate the "release-and-patch" approach, but it is unfortunately a common practice in gaming any more. I'm just wondering if this is a situation where an AI patch and minor level adjustment might be what could help to cure this ailing game. Of course, that all depends on Bethesda understanding this and releasing a patch.
In fact, does the PC version suffer from these same AI bugs? I would assume that both versions are based off the same code base.
there is very little to be gained by believing in global warming.
I think that companies that deal in alternative energy - wind, solar, hydrogen, nuclear, etc. - would very strongly disagree with that.
Skepticism is the lazy person's default position.
Nice pseudo-ad-hominem there. Kindly go indulge in self-fornication. This has absolutely nothing to do with laziness. Heaven forbid that someone looks at what's being said (by all sides) and still come to the conclusion that no side has made a complete argument that irrefutably makes their point.
I've seen the studies on various temperature not only recently but throughout history. The earth regularly goes through warming and cooling trends and we're in a warming trend. Have temperatures risen faster in recent years than in other cycles? Yes, as far as we can tell. Is it without question due to humanity? I have not been convinced of it but neither am I against it.
Nothing any moderators could do to you could possibly make what you have to say any less valid.
Considering your willingness to call anyone who dares to question what you happen to believe in "lazy", your opinion means less than nothing.
Attempting to skew any kind of data for any kind of reason regardless of the agenda is wrong. I don't care if the purpose is for evil ("destroying the world"), good ("saving the spotted owl"), negligible (pushing for a politcal ideology), or whatever. The fact that you appear to be willing to condemn one institution because it follows a "money chain" whle denying that there is such a thing as "big environment", which actually entails just about everyone who supports the global warming causality theory, shows that you're just as swayed by FUD as anyone else.
For the record, I don't know either way. Is global warming happening? The average global temperature shows that it is. Are we indisputably and incontrovertably the cause? That has yet to be proven, and as others are so fond of saying on Slashdot correlation != causation. Just because scientists agree doesn't mean anything without the indisputable proof to back it up, and that is so far what I have not seen -- yet.
So, your accusation that I'm swayed by FUD is nothing more than FUD in and of itself.
It's too bad that you got a mod or two as "troll" instead of "funny", but that itself should have been expected because you're absolutely correct with respect to what's about to happen. The inflammatory (no pun intended) nature of the article summary itself just begs for the whole damned thing to be marked as "troll" or "flamebait".
Look, the whole idea that any company or organization would attempt to skew any studies to their own viewpoint is universal. Enviornmentalists are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Corporations are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Skeptics are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Conspiracy theorists are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Anyone with any kind of agenda is always looking to make surveys/studies support his viewpoint. But in this case it's "big oil" { insert doom-and-gloom music here }, so therefore their attempts to skew results are somehow more evil than other groups doing it? What a complete and utter crock.
The question of "Would a 'global warming controversy' exist without the millions of dollars spent by fossil fuel companies to discredit scientific conclusions?" is infuriating by itself. Hell, yes there would be a controversy for numerous reasons that have been stated time and time and time again, not the least of which is that without indisputable proof, which I still don't believe we have, there will always be room for skepticism. Honestly, the whole notion that skepticism is unhealthy, as that last line suggests, is an abhorrent idea in itself.
Yeah, yeah, mod me down for actually contesting a Slashdot article and for being somewhat of a global warming skeptic. I have karma to burn, but that doesn't make what I've said any less valid.
We've had incredibly good results with LTO. The one that we got (the StorEdge L8) is six times faster than DLT IV on a single tape drive and has had no media reliability problems. I really would love to get my hands on a used StorEdge L8 for home, even if it's LTO-1.
Of course, it doesn't help that I was thinking about the new $399, 1 TB hard drive that was also annouced today when I typed up my response to you, only to look up at the thread title (after submitting) and realize that you were talking about the 37.5 TB drive.
Now, whether or not the home user will be able to afford one of the damned things is another issue:) but one of these bad boys fully loaded will back up that drive.
Although you were being a smart ass -- and I can appreciate that:) -- you do bring up an interesting question. With drives increasing so rapidly and for such inexpensive prices, you'd think that the tape drive manufacturers would be scrambling to keep up and make appropriate backup solutions more affordable for the home user. I don't mind using a mirror to keep the data redundant, but I'd still feel more comfortable having a mirror and a tape backup.
Sam and Max - Tall Tale Games
- $8.95 per episode when bought individually, totalling $53.70
- $5.83 per episode when bought as a 6-episode season with CD for cost of shipping after 6th episode is released, totalling $34.95
Granted, that's only one example and it's up to each developer to price as they feel appropriate, but the ones who overprice will quickly lose customers.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do people automatically make that assumption? Look, unlike the nutcase in England who ran himself into unbelievable debt to make a transporter room in his flat, this room at least serves a legitimate purpose: home theater. And in that perspective, why not use something like the bridge of the Enterprise? The screen does exactly what it's supposed to do both on the Enterprise and in a regular theater - show video; the dome lights do exactly what they're supposed to do on both the Enterprise and in a regular theater; the speakers are placed in strategic locations where speakers should be placed for a home theatre system. Considering the things that he could have done to his house to show his love for Star Trek, this is probably the most practical and least bizarre.
It's nowhere near as kitsch as you guys are making it out to be. If he had a regular door instead of a Starfleet door and replaced any blatantly Star Trek-related items with something more contemporary, no one would be bashing his setup. "Nice bookshelf, nice ceiling lighting, leather chairs, big screen, hidden speakers -- this is really nice. Oh wait. Look! The door (that can very easily be replaced) is a Starfleet door! Oh, how stupid this whole thing is!!" Oh, please. I honestly think that to anyone who is a Star Trek fan and has an appreciation for home theare this is not nearly as much of a turn-off as you'd think.
Yet look how Slashdotters react when the newest, highly-creative, PC case mod comes out. "Cool!" "Where do I get one!" "And it's water-cooled!" "Look how it glows!" "r0x0rz!" "Awesome case!" I certainly love cool-looking PC cases, too, but most people would scorn us for paying premium prices for a PC case, no matter how cool it looks. So, perceived value goes both ways.
And don't confuse "market value" for "marketability" or "sellability". They're completely different. The "market value" for a PS3 when it first came out was $699. The "marketability" and "sellability" values were obviously much, much higher. Houses are no different. I don't see this particular home theatre design hurting its market value, but I do see it increasing its marketability to even mild Star Trek fans who happen to love home theatre, especially when the blatant Star Trek-related items appear to be easily replaceable.
Look at the way they phrased it (emphasis mine) -- "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy". It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public while getting out from under the jurisdiction (if that's what you'd call it) of the RIAA and MPAA. Because Sweden is probably known best in BitTorrent circles for its loose copyright policy (aka. "allowing piracy"), moving to a Swedish ISP would give the *AA more ammunition to try to demonize BitTorrent as a pirate's haven, and it would appear that IsoHunt is trying desperately not to give the *AA that ammunition.
Just my 2/100 of a U.S. dollar. Convert to your currency as necessary.
About five years ago, my first DSL company was Verizon, and I had a tech problem that I had to solve for them because they didn't do sh!t about it. So, I left. (I will admit, however, that the tech who installed the line recognized that I'm a geek and that I had a LAN in place, so he rigged up the outside box so that I didn't need any line filters in my house at all.) After going through a few other DSL providers who were either crap or gave up on DSL, I went to Comcast. God! What a mistake. Don't get me wrong, the speeds were exactly what they were supposed to be and I don't recall losing my connection once. My Internet series of tubes were unclogged, although DNS would get very slow every night at about 11:30 for some reason. But I got fed up with "Yes, we're going to give to 6 Mb down with up to 15 Mb burst speeds!" while giving a stranglehold of 256 Kb up at a higher cost than competitors.
I finally went back to Verizon DSL because of cost (US$29.95 for 3 Mb down, 768 Kb up) and I must confess that I never had a problem. I just got FiOS a few months ago (15 Mb down, 2 Mb up confirmed and consistent). The tech was very knowledgable, not only about installation but also in the various details about Verizon IPTV, which is not yet available in my area. Last week, Verizon recognized an accidental charge to my old DSL account, called us to let us know about it, and credited my account. And the one time that I had a problem (user account issue), they had it fixed over the phone in about two minutes.
Considering the bashing that Verizon normally gets on Slashdot, I felt that they deserved at least some credit for my experiences with them since I initially left. That doesn't mean that I'm a fanboy or that they can't piss me off enough to make me leave again, but credit where credit is due.
If anything, this could make it that much better. Verizon ignored those area because they have a much higer density (therefore more potential customers per mile) in urban/suburban areas. Now with those people under a more local telecom, the company doesn't have to focus on anything but those local customers. And it's not like there's no competition. Satellite broadband is there, even though it's probably expensive, and who knows what kind of wireless broadband might be available. (I don't live up there so I don't know.) So, the new company should be far more aware of customer service than Verizon ever will be.
It's rather presumptuous to assume that the customers will be let out to dry just because the big, bad Verizon is leaving.
Well, I was going to add "or ask him about his military victories as CiC", but I figured that my point was already made. :)
Lets see. How many governments in the U.S. have already had this type of law bitch-slapped into oblivion? How much taxpayer money was spent in the process? Consider that a federal judge recently ruled that virtual porn is not the same thing as real porn and even extended that down to child porn! So what makes these idiots in the Mass. legislature think that they can come up with a law that can successfully supercede such precedent? What, is the Big Dig not enough of a tax money vacuum?
And Jack Thompson?! Wow! What's the Mass. legislature going to do next? Ask Ted Kennedy for help with a law banning alcohol or ask him to help with educating kids about driving safely over bridges? Why not also ask G. W. Bush for help drafting a law supporting embryonic stem-cell research? Asking Dick Cheney to make PSAs about shotgun safety is probably in their list, too. Good grief!
Look, I don't necessarily like those types of games either. I keep joking with my wife about letting my soon-to-be 7-year-old daughter join me in a game of Unreal Tournament 2004. But if I'm not paying attention to what my kids are playing and I'm not teach my kids right from wrong, that's my problem, not the government's. The same goes -- or at least should -- for any parent.
Um ... wouldn't the amount of money in the collection bins of the various vending machines at the contractors' workplace do the same thing? Whichever machine has less product at the end of the day would also be a good clue. ;)
All kidding aside, if this is true it's completely ridiculous. I can't think of one reason where bugging coins would prove to be of any value whatsoever. To track where the money goes? That's what a company's income statements are for. For determining which coins go to which businesses? Again, for what purpose? Or is there such a market in counterfeit, Canadian coins that this is a new way of determining which ones are real and which are fake? I'm being facetious in the last comment, of course, but this strikes be as being either (A) bogus or (B) totally nonsensical. Then again, since we are talking about something that comes from the government, (B) might be understandable.
Okay. I read Danathar's post as though there was a hypothetical situation that Apple could have walked away and by walking away not use the iPhone name because an agreement was never made, but Cisco could still sue them, which didn't make sense. I see what Danathar meant now.
CISCO has owned the iPhone trademark since 2000. Exactly what claim do you think Apple would have been able to make in court? "Hey, they refuse to sell us their intellectual property that they legally own, which is of course their right, but we don't like it! That's why were suing!"
I didn't see anything on CNBC's web site, but CNET says that heard it directly from Cisco.
10:32--Cisco calls CNET News.com reporter with a statement about Apple's use of the term "iPhone" for its new product. "Given Apple's numerous requests for permission to use Cisco's iPhone trademark over the past several years and our extensive discussions with them recently, it is our belief that with their announcement today, Apple intends to agree to the final document and public statements that were distributed to them last night and that address a few remaining items we expect to receive a signed agreement today."
I'll drink to that! Bloody Mary, anyone?
I don't have a DS and I'm really not inclined to get one just for those games, although my daughter does have a GBA.
The problem with your argument (not that it's an argument, but anyway...) is that at least the DS and GBA are portable. The Wii is not. Anyone who has both a Wii and a DS/GBA need to decide for themselves which features are more important - the portability and expense of the DS/GBA with a small screen and lower resolution or the low cost but higher resoluion and permanence of the Wii.
The two really are not in the same market. I can't take the Wii with me on a car trip or a waiting room or other places where a DS/GBA can be used, but I doubt that the GBA/DS would look anywhere near as good if connected to my 55" 16:9 TV via component running at 480p. So I don't see why recent releases of those games on DS/GBA should be a factor on whether or not to release them on the Wii.
That's very true and I'm not ignorant of that fact; however, there are a number of games, particularly in the SNES and N64 lineup, that I'm sure people are aching to purchase -- not including those who are aching to get their hands on a Wii, of course. (Maybe I should rephrase that. Anyway...) Considering the rather large library of games for those two systems alone, it's staggering that they're still holding out. It's not that SMB3 would be the only game that people would buy or that it has the highest demand of all of the games. But I believe that SMB3 would be one of their biggest VC sellers, which could then be used as that much more capital that can be applied to the conversion of other titles that are also in high demand.
I'm at least fortunate that I still have an N64 that works just fine with about ten games for it, but that includes Mario 64, which is the only N64 game available on VC. So, I have no interest in purchasing the Wii version unless my N64 completely craps out. And for games that I don't have on the N64, I'd be more apt to purchase a VC version of an N64 game than a 10+ year old cartridge that could have gone through who-knows-what abuse from its previous user(s).
WHY is Nintnedo delaying the release of Super Mario Bros. 3 and more N64 titles in favor of a lot of the old 8-bit games that (let's face it) not many of us are waiting for? Compatibility problems? Artificial inflation of demand? Not that this list for the VC is all that bad -- hmmm.... Gradius -- but I'm not really looking to spend more Wii points just for the sake of spending Wii points.
Mario, Mario, wherefore art thou a game that Nintendo dost sit upon?
Boy, talk about an extreme exaggeration... :/
:)
But it sort of reminds me of that dad who put coal in his son's XBox 360 box for the expensive, audio equipment. Don't know if that patched the son's attitude, but it probably adjusted the brat's AI not to mess with dad again.
Maybe I'm reading too much into the review, but it seems to me that the problems are issues that might be correctable by an appropriately implemented patch. (I don't have a 360, but from what I'm told it can download patches and install game patches.) With the exception of some frustrating level design, as Zonk mentioned, it sounds like the primary source of frustration comes from AI. AI logic can be tweaked. Game companies have been releasing AI modifications in game patches for years.
I understand that reviews should be "out of the box" reviews, which this is, and I wish more games were rock-solid right off the shelf; but I wonder if this is a game where those who are hesitant to purchase, particularly on the PC side, should just wait a little while until patches are released and the game is no longer "bleeding edge". I don't appreciate the "release-and-patch" approach, but it is unfortunately a common practice in gaming any more. I'm just wondering if this is a situation where an AI patch and minor level adjustment might be what could help to cure this ailing game. Of course, that all depends on Bethesda understanding this and releasing a patch.
In fact, does the PC version suffer from these same AI bugs? I would assume that both versions are based off the same code base.
there is very little to be gained by believing in global warming.
I think that companies that deal in alternative energy - wind, solar, hydrogen, nuclear, etc. - would very strongly disagree with that.
Skepticism is the lazy person's default position.
Nice pseudo-ad-hominem there. Kindly go indulge in self-fornication. This has absolutely nothing to do with laziness. Heaven forbid that someone looks at what's being said (by all sides) and still come to the conclusion that no side has made a complete argument that irrefutably makes their point.
I've seen the studies on various temperature not only recently but throughout history. The earth regularly goes through warming and cooling trends and we're in a warming trend. Have temperatures risen faster in recent years than in other cycles? Yes, as far as we can tell. Is it without question due to humanity? I have not been convinced of it but neither am I against it.
Nothing any moderators could do to you could possibly make what you have to say any less valid.
Considering your willingness to call anyone who dares to question what you happen to believe in "lazy", your opinion means less than nothing.
Attempting to skew any kind of data for any kind of reason regardless of the agenda is wrong. I don't care if the purpose is for evil ("destroying the world"), good ("saving the spotted owl"), negligible (pushing for a politcal ideology), or whatever. The fact that you appear to be willing to condemn one institution because it follows a "money chain" whle denying that there is such a thing as "big environment", which actually entails just about everyone who supports the global warming causality theory, shows that you're just as swayed by FUD as anyone else.
For the record, I don't know either way. Is global warming happening? The average global temperature shows that it is. Are we indisputably and incontrovertably the cause? That has yet to be proven, and as others are so fond of saying on Slashdot correlation != causation. Just because scientists agree doesn't mean anything without the indisputable proof to back it up, and that is so far what I have not seen -- yet.
So, your accusation that I'm swayed by FUD is nothing more than FUD in and of itself.
I realize that you're being a smart ass; but if you really think that he believes all of that then it's clear that you don't really listen to him.
It's too bad that you got a mod or two as "troll" instead of "funny", but that itself should have been expected because you're absolutely correct with respect to what's about to happen. The inflammatory (no pun intended) nature of the article summary itself just begs for the whole damned thing to be marked as "troll" or "flamebait".
Look, the whole idea that any company or organization would attempt to skew any studies to their own viewpoint is universal. Enviornmentalists are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Corporations are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Skeptics are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Conspiracy theorists are always looking to make surveys/studies support their viewpoint. Anyone with any kind of agenda is always looking to make surveys/studies support his viewpoint. But in this case it's "big oil" { insert doom-and-gloom music here }, so therefore their attempts to skew results are somehow more evil than other groups doing it? What a complete and utter crock.
The question of "Would a 'global warming controversy' exist without the millions of dollars spent by fossil fuel companies to discredit scientific conclusions?" is infuriating by itself. Hell, yes there would be a controversy for numerous reasons that have been stated time and time and time again, not the least of which is that without indisputable proof, which I still don't believe we have, there will always be room for skepticism. Honestly, the whole notion that skepticism is unhealthy, as that last line suggests, is an abhorrent idea in itself.
Yeah, yeah, mod me down for actually contesting a Slashdot article and for being somewhat of a global warming skeptic. I have karma to burn, but that doesn't make what I've said any less valid.
:) Well, that's DLT. No wonder you're upset.
We've had incredibly good results with LTO. The one that we got (the StorEdge L8) is six times faster than DLT IV on a single tape drive and has had no media reliability problems. I really would love to get my hands on a used StorEdge L8 for home, even if it's LTO-1.
Of course, it doesn't help that I was thinking about the new $399, 1 TB hard drive that was also annouced today when I typed up my response to you, only to look up at the thread title (after submitting) and realize that you were talking about the 37.5 TB drive.
:/
This day can't end quickly enough.
Here you go.
2 .html 8 .html
:) but one of these bad boys fully loaded will back up that drive.
:) -- you do bring up an interesting question. With drives increasing so rapidly and for such inexpensive prices, you'd think that the tape drive manufacturers would be scrambling to keep up and make appropriate backup solutions more affordable for the home user. I don't mind using a mirror to keep the data redundant, but I'd still feel more comfortable having a mirror and a tape backup.
http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/Systems/C2/C
http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/Systems/L8/L
Now, whether or not the home user will be able to afford one of the damned things is another issue
Although you were being a smart ass -- and I can appreciate that
Hmmm... Intersting idea. I don't know, but it's worth asking on TTG's forums. I'm sure you're not the first one to wonder about that.
About the "$40 game for $60" remark...
Sam and Max - Tall Tale Games
- $8.95 per episode when bought individually, totalling $53.70
- $5.83 per episode when bought as a 6-episode season with CD for cost of shipping after 6th episode is released, totalling $34.95
Granted, that's only one example and it's up to each developer to price as they feel appropriate, but the ones who overprice will quickly lose customers.