As I recall, Johnhamsta asked him about having Spore and other such games on the Wii very early on, and it looks like it did some good.
Now, a more intriguing question is - what will the next gaming console be when America converts over to 80 percent HDTV somewhere in 2009?
I've seen how the PS3 is now shipping features that are part of the Wii in an attempt to catch up - what other features do we think we're likely to see? One can assume it will be an HD-DVD version capable of running both DVD and HD-DVD, with probably a base aspect of 720p, but will it be designed for 1080p for optimal usage?
And will we see things like lightsaber and gun attachments become standard add-ons (much like the Guitar Hero III addon) or will the controllers morph into this usage (traditional Wiimote and nunchuk used as if they were those add-ons).
And will I be able to use my Barbie and Bratz Princess Fairy and Wicked Pr1nc3zz controllers as well? (no, I don't have them, but if more than half of the market will be women and girls...)
Unfortunately, the Wall Street Journal charges for their online content, but in brief Walter S. Mossberg said that OS X: Leopard is faster and easier than Vista and beats Microsoft, in addition to being more secure.
He particularly liked Time Machine (automatically backs up your entire computer in the background), Cover Flow and Quick Look (so you can view file contents without opening programs), and the built in networking and remote access features.
The only thing he wasn't as excited by was the menu bar being translucent, since if you had a dark screen image it was sometimes hard to see.
It can also coexist with Linux and has excellent backwards compatibility (Vista only got Fair for backwards compatibility).
One wonders if this is just a chrome PR spin on the original plans to have Animal Crossing on the Wii have an online component that allows you to visit your friend's villages, or is it more of an attempt to allow multiple players to all take trains to the next town so they can whap the locals with their nets?
The main question - are we talking true MMORPG or are we talking multi-instance MMO where each time I visit your village it's a virtual copy, so that I can't jack your fruit (the stuff is always nailed down, even though you can turn it on or off)?
Originally, Will Wright told my son that he was going to make a Wii version (and he said something about a Nintendo DS version) of Spore. I hope that's still on track.
As I said, BC is building two large hydroelectric dams, one is about 20 miles from where I lived (Kaslo BC) - the other is about 4 miles from where I lived (Trail BC).
I wouldn't call that doing "nothing".
In addition, solar energy continues to contribute, as does wind energy and tidal energy.
Canada has a long tradition of operating safe non-breeder nuclear fission plants, actually.
But, as someone who lived along the Columbia River in BC for years, and bought his first software package in Alberta (up in Edmonton), I can attest that there is a lot of untapped potential hydroelectric and wind power in both British Columbia and Alberta.
Try arguing the pro-oil-sands extraction argument with someone who didn't spend seven years in the Canadian Armed Forces (Army)... you might be more successful. And you might also want not to choose someone who did an eight-part cable program on energy that was broadcast in BC...
I'm just going off of the weather simulations of what happens when you pop a few more degrees into the system, and thus reduce snowpack which reduces water flow, while increasing the base temperature of the much-drier wood.
Something about physics - it has a truthiness to it no amount of anti-evolution anti-reality arguing will fix.
Canadians use far more energy per capita than Americans. FACT.
Canadians use most of their energy for heating.
The second highest usage is for industry (which includes it's own heating).
Thus, for Canada it's not just cars, trucks, planes, and trains.
You actually have to get more insulation in your homes and use solar where it makes sense. And switch your fuel sources from coal and heating oil to hydro, wind, tidal, geothermal, and other sources. For example, like the two Columbia River Treaty dams you're now building at Waneta BC and the one near Revelstoke BC.
Of course, if you could just nuke Alberta, your major problems would go away. Too bad you have such an energy-inefficient province like Alberta.
In the initial claim, California is filing suit, with Oregon, Washington, and Vermont joining, so it's more that the Northeastern states are following the West's lead on this issue. You can see that in the Seattle PI lead editorial today.
However, due to the fact that we're kind of distracted by more than one million internal refugees from the global warming enhanced wildfires in California, we didn't file today so the Northeast jumped the gun.
Regardless, this represents more than 60 percent of the US economy filing suit, and most of the US population.
Good interrogation (not torture) involves tracking inconsistencies and cross-referencing responses.
Much like detective work.
In various scientific studies (one came out last week) it has been shown that people who use torture - let's call them torturers - self-justify their actions and alter their own perceptions to reinforce their own actions, so that they come to believe that what they do is necessary and effective, when it can be proven not to be so (e.g. ineffective and unnecessary).
This is normal human behavior.
However, it makes torture a very ineffective method, as information gathered from such sources is more highly prized (yet less worthy and less informative in a true empirical valuation) when it should be devalued on an absolute scale.
In short, torture basically doesn't work.
But, if one uses torture, one will self-alter one's own valuation and scoring systems to believe that it does work (even tho it doesn't).
If by working well, you mean it makes the torturer believe that they are getting the truth, sure.
But they're not.
They get what the person being tortured thinks they want to hear.
It is also virtually certain to not give you time-sensitive information.
A far more effective method is interrogation - questioning - by a person or people that the information holder bonds with.
How you bond with them is up to you. Normally you do it with a modified Good Cop Bad Cop approach. But the Bad Cop doesn't have to torture them. That doesn't help, as it makes the person being questioned more resistant and suspicious.
Saudi Arabia was - and today is - the source of more than 95 percent of all funding and volunteers for al-Qaeda.
Pakistan has played us for decades, getting effective pardons for building nuclear bombs and our continual looking the other way as they basically dangle the odd al-Qaeda sacrificial lamb in front of us.
And, as you well know, Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9-11.
Facts are just that. Facts.
Torturing people also doesn't work. Another fact.
Now, I don't wish to digress further - the main question was torture and it's effectiveness in revealing Truth.
If by Truth you mean, will a tortured person tell you what they think you want to hear? Sure.
You probably don't realize that not only does torture not work, it actually gives you incredibly bad information.
The suggestion by a poster that they "give him warm milk and cookies" is actually one of many proven methods of interrogation.
Interrogation - the act of questioning. One has a number of people interact with the subject, and one or more of those people takes "the side" of the person being interrogated, bonding with them on many levels.
This works very very often.
It is far more effective, gives highly reliable results, and if cross-referenced, will yield even more results.
In short: Torture does not work. Interrogation - not involving torture - does work.
We'd be far better off spending 1/1000th as much as we waste on military ops against terrorists and hiring trained police interrogators (not torturers) and detectives who understand the social and cultural background of the terrorists.
Mind you, a few nukes in Saudi Arabia would solve the whole problem, since Iraq has nothing to do with 9-11. FYI, Pakistan is not our ally, no matter what they tell you.
Slashdot Mirror
As I recall, Johnhamsta asked him about having Spore and other such games on the Wii very early on, and it looks like it did some good.
...)
Now, a more intriguing question is - what will the next gaming console be when America converts over to 80 percent HDTV somewhere in 2009?
I've seen how the PS3 is now shipping features that are part of the Wii in an attempt to catch up - what other features do we think we're likely to see? One can assume it will be an HD-DVD version capable of running both DVD and HD-DVD, with probably a base aspect of 720p, but will it be designed for 1080p for optimal usage?
And will we see things like lightsaber and gun attachments become standard add-ons (much like the Guitar Hero III addon) or will the controllers morph into this usage (traditional Wiimote and nunchuk used as if they were those add-ons).
And will I be able to use my Barbie and Bratz Princess Fairy and Wicked Pr1nc3zz controllers as well? (no, I don't have them, but if more than half of the market will be women and girls
It was on page B1 of the print edition today.
Unfortunately, the Wall Street Journal charges for their online content, but in brief Walter S. Mossberg said that OS X: Leopard is faster and easier than Vista and beats Microsoft, in addition to being more secure.
He particularly liked Time Machine (automatically backs up your entire computer in the background), Cover Flow and Quick Look (so you can view file contents without opening programs), and the built in networking and remote access features.
The only thing he wasn't as excited by was the menu bar being translucent, since if you had a dark screen image it was sometimes hard to see.
It can also coexist with Linux and has excellent backwards compatibility (Vista only got Fair for backwards compatibility).
One wonders if this is just a chrome PR spin on the original plans to have Animal Crossing on the Wii have an online component that allows you to visit your friend's villages, or is it more of an attempt to allow multiple players to all take trains to the next town so they can whap the locals with their nets?
The main question - are we talking true MMORPG or are we talking multi-instance MMO where each time I visit your village it's a virtual copy, so that I can't jack your fruit (the stuff is always nailed down, even though you can turn it on or off)?
Originally, Will Wright told my son that he was going to make a Wii version (and he said something about a Nintendo DS version) of Spore. I hope that's still on track.
As I said, BC is building two large hydroelectric dams, one is about 20 miles from where I lived (Kaslo BC) - the other is about 4 miles from where I lived (Trail BC).
I wouldn't call that doing "nothing".
In addition, solar energy continues to contribute, as does wind energy and tidal energy.
We weren't talking about that.
We were talking about whether or not Canada has the means to accomplish this goal.
Given oil at $100 a barrel, it's not that hard.
Canada has a long tradition of operating safe non-breeder nuclear fission plants, actually.
... you might be more successful. And you might also want not to choose someone who did an eight-part cable program on energy that was broadcast in BC ...
But, as someone who lived along the Columbia River in BC for years, and bought his first software package in Alberta (up in Edmonton), I can attest that there is a lot of untapped potential hydroelectric and wind power in both British Columbia and Alberta.
Try arguing the pro-oil-sands extraction argument with someone who didn't spend seven years in the Canadian Armed Forces (Army)
This, however, would fall under interstate commerce, which under Article I Section 8 falls under the Federal government's jurisdiction, not the states
LOL.
How could a regulation on emissions fall under an interstate commerce clause?
No one is stopping you from importing or selling a vehicle.
They just won't license it to operate in their state if it doesn't meet air emission requirements.
Which California and all the other signatory states using California's emissions standards are entitled to choose.
Sigh.
You twist yourselves in knots - one day it's "states rights!" - the next day it's "you can't do that!"
At least be consistent.
I'm just going off of the weather simulations of what happens when you pop a few more degrees into the system, and thus reduce snowpack which reduces water flow, while increasing the base temperature of the much-drier wood.
Something about physics - it has a truthiness to it no amount of anti-evolution anti-reality arguing will fix.
That has more to do with you living in Canada.
Canadians use far more energy per capita than Americans. FACT.
Canadians use most of their energy for heating.
The second highest usage is for industry (which includes it's own heating).
Thus, for Canada it's not just cars, trucks, planes, and trains.
You actually have to get more insulation in your homes and use solar where it makes sense. And switch your fuel sources from coal and heating oil to hydro, wind, tidal, geothermal, and other sources. For example, like the two Columbia River Treaty dams you're now building at Waneta BC and the one near Revelstoke BC.
Of course, if you could just nuke Alberta, your major problems would go away. Too bad you have such an energy-inefficient province like Alberta.
That would be a statistic altered by a number of factors.
One: Unlike the Northeast, we don't have a publicly-financed high speed passenger rail system. So we have to fly.
Two: Unlike the Northeast, we don't have commuter rail systems mostly paid for by federal taxes. So we have to drive.
Three: Unlike the Northeast, we live in wide open spaces. Sometimes the next town is 100 miles away or more. So we drive further.
I could go on.
But, at least we're trying to do something, instead of sticking our heads in the sands.
Amusing. The party of "State's Rights" arguing against the right of states to make their own tougher regulations.
Ironic.
In the initial claim, California is filing suit, with Oregon, Washington, and Vermont joining, so it's more that the Northeastern states are following the West's lead on this issue. You can see that in the Seattle PI lead editorial today.
However, due to the fact that we're kind of distracted by more than one million internal refugees from the global warming enhanced wildfires in California, we didn't file today so the Northeast jumped the gun.
Regardless, this represents more than 60 percent of the US economy filing suit, and most of the US population.
Does this mean it will be Christmas 2008 before I can play Spore on my Wii?
And will this finally be released for the Mac (or Linux) instead of just Windoze, since I've given up on future "upgrades" of Windows since WinVista?
I thought we were talking about foreign anti-American terrorists.
But, sure, I wouldn't miss Idaho.
Good interrogation (not torture) involves tracking inconsistencies and cross-referencing responses.
Much like detective work.
In various scientific studies (one came out last week) it has been shown that people who use torture - let's call them torturers - self-justify their actions and alter their own perceptions to reinforce their own actions, so that they come to believe that what they do is necessary and effective, when it can be proven not to be so (e.g. ineffective and unnecessary).
This is normal human behavior.
However, it makes torture a very ineffective method, as information gathered from such sources is more highly prized (yet less worthy and less informative in a true empirical valuation) when it should be devalued on an absolute scale.
In short, torture basically doesn't work.
But, if one uses torture, one will self-alter one's own valuation and scoring systems to believe that it does work (even tho it doesn't).
good arguments.
... hmmm. I see your point. They'd have to be competent.
Sure, basic ramped up police work and basic honor and decency would work.
But about six neutron bombs would do a fair job, if combined with an effective competent foreign diplomatic strategy.
Oh, wait
If by working well, you mean it makes the torturer believe that they are getting the truth, sure.
But they're not.
They get what the person being tortured thinks they want to hear.
It is also virtually certain to not give you time-sensitive information.
A far more effective method is interrogation - questioning - by a person or people that the information holder bonds with.
How you bond with them is up to you. Normally you do it with a modified Good Cop Bad Cop approach. But the Bad Cop doesn't have to torture them. That doesn't help, as it makes the person being questioned more resistant and suspicious.
Never underestimate the power of kind words.
Sadly, I was not kidding.
Saudi Arabia was - and today is - the source of more than 95 percent of all funding and volunteers for al-Qaeda.
Pakistan has played us for decades, getting effective pardons for building nuclear bombs and our continual looking the other way as they basically dangle the odd al-Qaeda sacrificial lamb in front of us.
And, as you well know, Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9-11.
Facts are just that. Facts.
Torturing people also doesn't work. Another fact.
Now, I don't wish to digress further - the main question was torture and it's effectiveness in revealing Truth.
If by Truth you mean, will a tortured person tell you what they think you want to hear? Sure.
But that will usually not be the truth.
So how do you get information out of someone who just flat out refuses to speak?
...
You cut out his tongue.
Oh, wait, that's what a torturer would do
Never underestimate the power of a comfy chair.
Especially if you've been standing for 14 hours with metal clips attached to your outstreched arms while your head is covered by a hood.
You probably don't realize that not only does torture not work, it actually gives you incredibly bad information.
The suggestion by a poster that they "give him warm milk and cookies" is actually one of many proven methods of interrogation.
Interrogation - the act of questioning. One has a number of people interact with the subject, and one or more of those people takes "the side" of the person being interrogated, bonding with them on many levels.
This works very very often.
It is far more effective, gives highly reliable results, and if cross-referenced, will yield even more results.
In short: Torture does not work. Interrogation - not involving torture - does work.
We'd be far better off spending 1/1000th as much as we waste on military ops against terrorists and hiring trained police interrogators (not torturers) and detectives who understand the social and cultural background of the terrorists.
Mind you, a few nukes in Saudi Arabia would solve the whole problem, since Iraq has nothing to do with 9-11. FYI, Pakistan is not our ally, no matter what they tell you.
It's a prediction. For a set that is marked down after the Christmas rush.
I hope I'm right, because I'm trying to hold out until then.
Would you like to permit this song to be played?
How about this song?
How about this one?
(repeat 50 times)
(user unchecks security check)
I disabled that on my WinXP a looooooonnnnnnnngggg time ago.