I don't understand where your numbers come from. Firstly, it would make no sense to use the parents' income in place of the son's, since they weren't behind bars and thereby lost no income. Secondly, if we do assume they could, and we do assume an income of 30-50k, we're looking at $100-200 per day. So, for 12 days, we arrive at $1200-2400 lost, meaning they could sue for a whopping $2400-4800 based off of income. Remember, it is *lost* income that they get to sue for.
Not at mine. We had a couple annoying ones who were despised for being annoying, but that had nothing to do with being computer nerds. We had a few that nobody really knew or cared about, but nobody really thought they were particularly bad or anything. Then there were some, like me, who were pretty much the most well-known and well-liked people in the school. And, in case you think this has to do with a certain demographic, my school was an intersection of Redneck Town, Stoner Central, and a retirement town, so make of that what you will.
No. CS degrees should be theory with small focus on programming. That is what computer science is. What you are talking about is called a software engineering degree. Do not duplicate software engineering in my computer science, thank you very much.
I would like to think you are correct, but the large number of people jumping on the bandwagon, liking a certain band until the RIAA is done with them. A year or two later, the mainstream populous is wondering "why the hell did I ever listen to them?" Just to clarify, by mainstream populous I refer here to the largest market, teenage to young adult.
But the point is that a lot of people determine their tastes based on what the RIAA tells them to want. I don't believe GP was trying to necessarily say his taste is better than anyone else's (though he certainly thinks so, of course), but rather that the RIAA's audience is people who have their taste determined by the RIAA.
Not all cops have the mental preparedness and life experience you speak of. My low-crime hometown seems to be a good example of this, where most of the cops have little if any relevant experience that the average citizen wouldn't have.
Given that most of a police officer's gun training is the sort of target shooting an average citizen who actually cared about owning a gun could get, I think it's quite a relevant example.
But a console empire isn't good if it's not you don't make money. I don't know the numbers, but MS went in the hole big to build that empire and it's going to take a lot better sales or margins to dig themselves out. Someday they might, in which case it will have been worth it, but they still have to dig until they get there.
I believe the point is that, since both are receiving regular restocking and the Wii cannot be found as easily as the PS3, the Wii is therefore being sold more than the PS3. This is *entirely* different from DVDs if only because of the quantities of production, so that's a crappy analogy, too. I sympathize with your point, but, quite simply, "you're doing it wrong".
The difference here is that EA created a different control interface to take advantage of the Wii controller's technology. It's not just that it's Madden, but that it's Madden using the motion sensing in good capacity. There is no reason to assume that the 360's version of Madden has been sold more than the Wii's version because they are in many ways different games this time around.
Okay, here's a user with several posts,a somewhat lower UID, and who's moderated every few weeks:
The first post can be Redundant even if it's the first time it's been stated in the discussion. This can happen if it's the same crap we hear in every discussion about a topic (the topic in this case being Microsoft) without adding anything meaningful to the discussion or that has elsewise been discussed to death. I know perfectly well that this definition would make a lot of Slashdot posts Redundant (though a tiny handful being non-Redundant is quite an exaggeration). However, if you look at it, a lot of Slashdot posts *are* redundant anyway, so I don't see that as a problem.
I remember when I first picked this one up. I got it at a yard sale for a buck during the N64 era. I had never heard of it. Then I played it. I spent a good long time on it, but I finally beat it. Then I picked a different group of people and tried again and found myself getting stuck again. The realization that there were multiple paths was the moment that realized the gravity of how awesome the game was. Now, suddenly, the past few years I've been seeing it all over the Internet, somewhat surprised that it was so popular and still took me so long to even hear of it.
Does my 4 digit UID give me the right to smack you down for suggesting that the absence of evidence is the same as the evidence of absence?
No, because you would be wrong in saying it. The phrase you are looking for is "absence of proof is not proof of absence". As it turns out, the absence of evidence being evidence of absence is one of the bases of scientific reasoning.
Now that also depends on points of view. In one point of view, that's enough to make it "science". In more prevalent points of view, that does only moves the fantasy element from the person to something within the person without any sort of even technobabble explanation about how that makes the Force physically possible. Or the point of view where the prequels don't count as Star Wars. This is just another case of the fuzziness of the science-fiction definition.
The main argument against Star Wars being sci-fi is that it is better considered science-fantasy. More to the point, the whole Force thing is generally considered to kill the science fiction-ness and turn it into science-fantasy.
In reality, science fiction is fairly loosely defined and Star Wars fits very well under some definitions and not at all under others. Firefly is given more science-fiction credit because of the fact that it didn't have random fantasy elements (well, except for River's psychic-ness, but we never got around to getting a good enough explanation of whether it would be better classified as a faux-science or a fantasy element, but from what we did get, it seemed as if they wanted to at least try to make it more the faux-science route.)
Now you're just making assumptions. 12:53 PM March 30 EDT is 2:53 AM March 31 in Melbourne, Australia. It is quite possible, indeed, that GP was correct.
That's one possibility. It's also a possibility that inflation occurs, but the price of an opinion is constant at two cents. He throws in his two cents which is effectively only 1.5 cents. I'm not saying that it's the only possible outcome, but it's plausible and quite likely what OP meant.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand where your numbers come from. Firstly, it would make no sense to use the parents' income in place of the son's, since they weren't behind bars and thereby lost no income. Secondly, if we do assume they could, and we do assume an income of 30-50k, we're looking at $100-200 per day. So, for 12 days, we arrive at $1200-2400 lost, meaning they could sue for a whopping $2400-4800 based off of income. Remember, it is *lost* income that they get to sue for.
However, by common corollary, the one to invoke a Nazi comparison loses the argument.
Not at mine. We had a couple annoying ones who were despised for being annoying, but that had nothing to do with being computer nerds. We had a few that nobody really knew or cared about, but nobody really thought they were particularly bad or anything. Then there were some, like me, who were pretty much the most well-known and well-liked people in the school. And, in case you think this has to do with a certain demographic, my school was an intersection of Redneck Town, Stoner Central, and a retirement town, so make of that what you will.
No. CS degrees should be theory with small focus on programming. That is what computer science is. What you are talking about is called a software engineering degree. Do not duplicate software engineering in my computer science, thank you very much.
I would like to think you are correct, but the large number of people jumping on the bandwagon, liking a certain band until the RIAA is done with them. A year or two later, the mainstream populous is wondering "why the hell did I ever listen to them?" Just to clarify, by mainstream populous I refer here to the largest market, teenage to young adult.
But the point is that a lot of people determine their tastes based on what the RIAA tells them to want. I don't believe GP was trying to necessarily say his taste is better than anyone else's (though he certainly thinks so, of course), but rather that the RIAA's audience is people who have their taste determined by the RIAA.
Not all cops have the mental preparedness and life experience you speak of. My low-crime hometown seems to be a good example of this, where most of the cops have little if any relevant experience that the average citizen wouldn't have.
Given that most of a police officer's gun training is the sort of target shooting an average citizen who actually cared about owning a gun could get, I think it's quite a relevant example.
Asians are inhabitants from anywhere in Asia, not just the Orient.
But a console empire isn't good if it's not you don't make money. I don't know the numbers, but MS went in the hole big to build that empire and it's going to take a lot better sales or margins to dig themselves out. Someday they might, in which case it will have been worth it, but they still have to dig until they get there.
I believe the point is that, since both are receiving regular restocking and the Wii cannot be found as easily as the PS3, the Wii is therefore being sold more than the PS3. This is *entirely* different from DVDs if only because of the quantities of production, so that's a crappy analogy, too. I sympathize with your point, but, quite simply, "you're doing it wrong".
The difference here is that EA created a different control interface to take advantage of the Wii controller's technology. It's not just that it's Madden, but that it's Madden using the motion sensing in good capacity. There is no reason to assume that the 360's version of Madden has been sold more than the Wii's version because they are in many ways different games this time around.
Yeah, but trolls will be trolls.
The first post can be Redundant even if it's the first time it's been stated in the discussion. This can happen if it's the same crap we hear in every discussion about a topic (the topic in this case being Microsoft) without adding anything meaningful to the discussion or that has elsewise been discussed to death. I know perfectly well that this definition would make a lot of Slashdot posts Redundant (though a tiny handful being non-Redundant is quite an exaggeration). However, if you look at it, a lot of Slashdot posts *are* redundant anyway, so I don't see that as a problem.
I remember when I first picked this one up. I got it at a yard sale for a buck during the N64 era. I had never heard of it. Then I played it. I spent a good long time on it, but I finally beat it. Then I picked a different group of people and tried again and found myself getting stuck again. The realization that there were multiple paths was the moment that realized the gravity of how awesome the game was. Now, suddenly, the past few years I've been seeing it all over the Internet, somewhat surprised that it was so popular and still took me so long to even hear of it.
The RIAA is making the same assumption.
Don't worry, it's just somebody who's replying to an early post in an attempt to get their own post higher.
No, because you would be wrong in saying it. The phrase you are looking for is "absence of proof is not proof of absence". As it turns out, the absence of evidence being evidence of absence is one of the bases of scientific reasoning.
Now that also depends on points of view. In one point of view, that's enough to make it "science". In more prevalent points of view, that does only moves the fantasy element from the person to something within the person without any sort of even technobabble explanation about how that makes the Force physically possible. Or the point of view where the prequels don't count as Star Wars. This is just another case of the fuzziness of the science-fiction definition.
In reality, science fiction is fairly loosely defined and Star Wars fits very well under some definitions and not at all under others. Firefly is given more science-fiction credit because of the fact that it didn't have random fantasy elements (well, except for River's psychic-ness, but we never got around to getting a good enough explanation of whether it would be better classified as a faux-science or a fantasy element, but from what we did get, it seemed as if they wanted to at least try to make it more the faux-science route.)
Now you're just making assumptions. 12:53 PM March 30 EDT is 2:53 AM March 31 in Melbourne, Australia. It is quite possible, indeed, that GP was correct.
Haha, I get it! Electrons spin! Get it? Get it?
That's one possibility. It's also a possibility that inflation occurs, but the price of an opinion is constant at two cents. He throws in his two cents which is effectively only 1.5 cents. I'm not saying that it's the only possible outcome, but it's plausible and quite likely what OP meant.
No, he throws in his 2 pennies that are only worth 1.5 cents due to inflation.
I believe you mean 2038....