So it's evil when Google mines my data and makes no attempt to hide the fact that they do, but it's ok when congress creates fusion centers that create profiles of average american citizens that have never committed any crimes and places wire taps on phones without proper warrants or just cause. I'm sorry, but I actually feel much safer trusting Google with my information than I do the federal government. Google just wants to make a profit, the federal government wants to control my life.
You mean by turning it into a profitable business? Or should things remain like twitter and just be a giant money pit for the pleasure of the proletariat.
Google is successful and will continue to remain successful both in a quality product sense and a fiscal sense because of one thing, they continue to think like a startup instead of a conglomerate. Things like 20% time have been major assets to their success, and as long as they keep that focus on fresh ideas from within, Google will continue to be successful. A few stumblings here and there aside.
The altered ending made a lot more sense. A giant alien squid is cheesy and we've already seen that an attack on New York City doesn't unite the whole world (See: 9/11). I loved the movie. It isn't without it's faults. I thought by changing the scene where Rorschach kills the guy in the house with a machete instead of burning him alive actually took away from the darkness by making it more brutal. In contrast, there were things about the movie that were better than the comic, such as Rorschach's death scene. You actually see the build up and emotion in his eyes, something that 2-3 comic panels couldn't do justly. All-in-all this was an extremely faithful adaptation within the confines of the limits of a film. There is a version of the film with Curse of the Black Freighter in it, but that also makes the film 4 hours long. They definitely gave the fans the best they could while still keeping it a good and watchable film to anyone who wasn't in love with graphic novels.
It's a quality build, sure, I'll giver you that. but it lacks in features and performance. Every argument about the hardware being great for RIM can be summed up with 1) It takes a beating 2) it has a keyboard. How about capable hardware with quality features. HTC and Samsung blow anything RIM has out to kingdom come. Arguing that RIM makes great hardware because it's a quality build is like arguing that a pioneer wagon is a great vehicle because it can handle rough terrain.
Now if only RIM didn't make horrible hardware. If this is true, nothing but good news for the consumer. I'm not so sure we're going to like a Google response.
Right, but that actually is much better, because it doesn't get in the way of you using the Wii as Nintendo sold it to you. If I never crack my Wii, I never notice any issues. Sony is making it inconvenient for you to use the PS3 no matter what you do. Hacking should come with certain risks and understandings that this is not what the manufacturer intended it to be used as, but that's the game and most of us that do so understand that going into it. Running homebrew and pirated copies of games is in general counter-productive to the business model these companies have set up. Now granted I'm not saying I agree with that model, and it should change, but it is what it is, and it is never inconvenient to someone who just purchases a Wii/Xbox 360 and never breaks the EULA.
Microsoft has handled the situation appropriately, by putting in fixes and banning consoles and user accounts that break the EULA by hacking the system. Such behavior doesn't end piracy (something that is impossible to do, See: The Fallacy of Perfect Security), it only makes it less convenient, but it doesn't get in the way of honest individuals who purchase content fairly. I fully support Microsoft's behavior as it is a much more reasonable response that keeps both gamers and studios as happy as possible. It may not be as ideal to me as a consumer who wants to do what I want with the console and run homebrew and custom hacks on it, but it never gets in the way of me using the console as Microsoft presented it when I purchased it.
Sony is just farking with us now. That or all future games are going to have online-connection necessary DRM. Xbox 360 and Wii were cracked ages ago, yet only Sony is behaving like a 2-year old about it.
I will believe the myths about Archimedes over the attempts of Jamie and Adam any day. They definitely are smart, but they are no Archimedes. This is a man who died as the result of refusing to leave the city as it was sacked by Romans because he was busy working on an equation. As such, any rumors of his greatness that we cannot currently prove, I will simply call it lost technology. There are so many things about ancient civilizations in human history that we know they did, but still can't figure out how they did it.
I would disagree in this case. I think by launching a phone line that actually competes against the NGP is just another way that they're going to cannibalize their sales and fracture their install basis. If the Playstation Suite catches on outside of Sony Phones, they might have a chance at success, but that's asking a lot. It may be a cool product, but Sony is going to be another android phone in an already fractured market, where the key to their success is having a solid install basis. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about the tech and software entirely, but I question the potential market success of this product. "If nothing goes wrong" is asking for a dream scenario of success. You're going 100:1 in the 4th quarter with 3 seconds left on the shot clock to score a grand slam blern.
Normally I'm pro-legalization, but I'm much more pro-catapult. So if anti-drug legislation can bring us the catapults of our dreams, then may it is the answer. Then again, we could legalize and then just require all distribution to be done via catapult. It's a win/win.
That's a good point, and I think you may get some hardcore gamers on board, but I don't think you can get mass market with that approach. Buying a tablet that can play games with 3g connectivity is a much clearer value proposition than buying a gaming device that can do tablet things with 3g connectivity. Also I wouldn't be surprised if the data plans for the NGP are higher as a gaming device is surely going to use more data than a tablet or a smartphone. Note, in all of this I'm not saying that the NGP won't be a great product or that it won't have it's successes, but I highly doubt it will have mass market success. It's going to follow a similar path the PSP, but I don't think it's going to do as well towards the end. I think Sony is going to find much more success with the Playstation Suite and the PS Phone line, when that comes out. Come to think of it, the PS Phone is even further reason why I don't think the NGP is going to have mass success, because that is going to cannibalize NGP sales more than it will other smart phones.
I highly disagree. Sony has blurred the line between the devices it's competing against rather than making a distinction, and I don't think that is going to translate into success. I think the hardware looks great, and I plan on buying one. I'm a tech nerd afterall, but they're launching a device pushed at media success that is going to have to compete much more directly with the smart phone and tablet market which gets frequent updates and a much clearer value proposition. Do I want a simple smart phone and a high tech gaming media device with tons of features, or vice versa? I don't think a significant portion of consumers are going to pay for both. Granted, I think Sony will take a loss on hardware to comp some of the disadvantages of running high end hardware. Other device manufacturers make profit on their hardware, Sony doesn't have to, but cell phone carriers often subsidize the price as well. I don't think sony can eat the $200 price drop that at&t, verizon, etc can. It's going to be an interesting piece of hardware to study, but unfortunately I don't think Sony has a homerun. People already complained at the 3DS's $250 price. This is clearly going to be at least $100 higher, even after taking a loss.
It's definitely less novel than the 3DS, and a lot more capable, but then again, if I'm going to drop ~$400* on something like that, I might as well buy an iPad or a fancy smart phone. I think by making this thing ultra feature-full, they're blurring the line between the things they're competing against a lot more, and I think that does carry some risk at backfiring. Would I rather have a fancy gaming/media device and a simple phone, or vice versa. It's asking a lot for people to purchase high end devices on both fronts, and so they're going to have to make a choice. I don't think that choice is going to be overwhelmingly in favor of Sony.
*Yes I realize there has been no official price announced, but looking at the specs, the device has to cost sony around ~$450 to manufacture. I expect a ~$400 price point.
If you look at the history of the human race, who do we remember more, the great legislators or the great leaders. We revere the presidents, the civil rights leaders, the activists who inspired us as a people, seldom the ones who wrote important pieces of legislation, and those that speak to us as a people have an influence that extends far greater as well. Across cultures, across nations, and across generations.
Where am I saying that individuals can't make choices? If I don't want a corporation to push certain material for whatever reason, be it too violent, immoral, or what not, then I don't support it. I am in no way saying that an individual who wants that content can't get it. They will just have to go somewhere else to get it.
And you say that corporations can lobby congress and eliminate our choices, but what very few situations is anything like that even close to happening, and even then, my point is that we don't realize this power enough. If we as a society realized this power, no government official would be free to take such action, and no evil corporation would be able to lobby to gain such control. Rather than fighting an impossible battle that we're currently fighting, we should be pushing for people to wake up and realize their power as consumers.
Actually, I highly support social censorship as opposed to government enforced censorship. Now granted, in this case that the force is highly misdirected and makes a huge deal out of something that shouldn't be, but at the same time it shows the very power that the proletariat possesses. These corporations typically enforce such censorship upon themselves for the same reason basic cable tv censors itself, because this is what the general populace wants. Unfortunately, this power is seldom realized by the individual, because as individuals, we feel powerless. But this power is all we need to control corporations. We vote every day with the power of our dollar.
Slashdot Mirror
So it's evil when Google mines my data and makes no attempt to hide the fact that they do, but it's ok when congress creates fusion centers that create profiles of average american citizens that have never committed any crimes and places wire taps on phones without proper warrants or just cause. I'm sorry, but I actually feel much safer trusting Google with my information than I do the federal government. Google just wants to make a profit, the federal government wants to control my life.
But who were they cleared by? Scientists! I think I smell some collaboration!
It doesn't list Insight as a provider for my area, yet that's what I have and it's far faster than anything on the list.
You mean by turning it into a profitable business? Or should things remain like twitter and just be a giant money pit for the pleasure of the proletariat.
Google is successful and will continue to remain successful both in a quality product sense and a fiscal sense because of one thing, they continue to think like a startup instead of a conglomerate. Things like 20% time have been major assets to their success, and as long as they keep that focus on fresh ideas from within, Google will continue to be successful. A few stumblings here and there aside.
Since when is it news that a second rate basic cable channel gets the rights to air a show? Call be when they buy the rights to make new episodes.
And Dr Manhattan, this freak of nature now living on Mars, doesn't accomplish that?
The altered ending made a lot more sense. A giant alien squid is cheesy and we've already seen that an attack on New York City doesn't unite the whole world (See: 9/11). I loved the movie. It isn't without it's faults. I thought by changing the scene where Rorschach kills the guy in the house with a machete instead of burning him alive actually took away from the darkness by making it more brutal. In contrast, there were things about the movie that were better than the comic, such as Rorschach's death scene. You actually see the build up and emotion in his eyes, something that 2-3 comic panels couldn't do justly. All-in-all this was an extremely faithful adaptation within the confines of the limits of a film. There is a version of the film with Curse of the Black Freighter in it, but that also makes the film 4 hours long. They definitely gave the fans the best they could while still keeping it a good and watchable film to anyone who wasn't in love with graphic novels.
I tried in every way possible to scrub that atrocity from my memory. MichaelBayEXPLOSIONSRAHHHHHH!!
It's a quality build, sure, I'll giver you that. but it lacks in features and performance. Every argument about the hardware being great for RIM can be summed up with 1) It takes a beating 2) it has a keyboard. How about capable hardware with quality features. HTC and Samsung blow anything RIM has out to kingdom come. Arguing that RIM makes great hardware because it's a quality build is like arguing that a pioneer wagon is a great vehicle because it can handle rough terrain.
Now if only RIM didn't make horrible hardware. If this is true, nothing but good news for the consumer. I'm not so sure we're going to like a Google response.
Removal of features like install otherOS and online connection required DRM in several games.
Right, but that actually is much better, because it doesn't get in the way of you using the Wii as Nintendo sold it to you. If I never crack my Wii, I never notice any issues. Sony is making it inconvenient for you to use the PS3 no matter what you do. Hacking should come with certain risks and understandings that this is not what the manufacturer intended it to be used as, but that's the game and most of us that do so understand that going into it. Running homebrew and pirated copies of games is in general counter-productive to the business model these companies have set up. Now granted I'm not saying I agree with that model, and it should change, but it is what it is, and it is never inconvenient to someone who just purchases a Wii/Xbox 360 and never breaks the EULA.
Microsoft has handled the situation appropriately, by putting in fixes and banning consoles and user accounts that break the EULA by hacking the system. Such behavior doesn't end piracy (something that is impossible to do, See: The Fallacy of Perfect Security), it only makes it less convenient, but it doesn't get in the way of honest individuals who purchase content fairly. I fully support Microsoft's behavior as it is a much more reasonable response that keeps both gamers and studios as happy as possible. It may not be as ideal to me as a consumer who wants to do what I want with the console and run homebrew and custom hacks on it, but it never gets in the way of me using the console as Microsoft presented it when I purchased it.
Sony is just farking with us now. That or all future games are going to have online-connection necessary DRM. Xbox 360 and Wii were cracked ages ago, yet only Sony is behaving like a 2-year old about it.
I will believe the myths about Archimedes over the attempts of Jamie and Adam any day. They definitely are smart, but they are no Archimedes. This is a man who died as the result of refusing to leave the city as it was sacked by Romans because he was busy working on an equation. As such, any rumors of his greatness that we cannot currently prove, I will simply call it lost technology. There are so many things about ancient civilizations in human history that we know they did, but still can't figure out how they did it.
I would disagree in this case. I think by launching a phone line that actually competes against the NGP is just another way that they're going to cannibalize their sales and fracture their install basis. If the Playstation Suite catches on outside of Sony Phones, they might have a chance at success, but that's asking a lot. It may be a cool product, but Sony is going to be another android phone in an already fractured market, where the key to their success is having a solid install basis. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about the tech and software entirely, but I question the potential market success of this product. "If nothing goes wrong" is asking for a dream scenario of success. You're going 100:1 in the 4th quarter with 3 seconds left on the shot clock to score a grand slam blern.
Normally I'm pro-legalization, but I'm much more pro-catapult. So if anti-drug legislation can bring us the catapults of our dreams, then may it is the answer. Then again, we could legalize and then just require all distribution to be done via catapult. It's a win/win.
That's a good point, and I think you may get some hardcore gamers on board, but I don't think you can get mass market with that approach. Buying a tablet that can play games with 3g connectivity is a much clearer value proposition than buying a gaming device that can do tablet things with 3g connectivity. Also I wouldn't be surprised if the data plans for the NGP are higher as a gaming device is surely going to use more data than a tablet or a smartphone. Note, in all of this I'm not saying that the NGP won't be a great product or that it won't have it's successes, but I highly doubt it will have mass market success. It's going to follow a similar path the PSP, but I don't think it's going to do as well towards the end. I think Sony is going to find much more success with the Playstation Suite and the PS Phone line, when that comes out. Come to think of it, the PS Phone is even further reason why I don't think the NGP is going to have mass success, because that is going to cannibalize NGP sales more than it will other smart phones.
I highly disagree. Sony has blurred the line between the devices it's competing against rather than making a distinction, and I don't think that is going to translate into success. I think the hardware looks great, and I plan on buying one. I'm a tech nerd afterall, but they're launching a device pushed at media success that is going to have to compete much more directly with the smart phone and tablet market which gets frequent updates and a much clearer value proposition. Do I want a simple smart phone and a high tech gaming media device with tons of features, or vice versa? I don't think a significant portion of consumers are going to pay for both. Granted, I think Sony will take a loss on hardware to comp some of the disadvantages of running high end hardware. Other device manufacturers make profit on their hardware, Sony doesn't have to, but cell phone carriers often subsidize the price as well. I don't think sony can eat the $200 price drop that at&t, verizon, etc can. It's going to be an interesting piece of hardware to study, but unfortunately I don't think Sony has a homerun. People already complained at the 3DS's $250 price. This is clearly going to be at least $100 higher, even after taking a loss.
It's definitely less novel than the 3DS, and a lot more capable, but then again, if I'm going to drop ~$400* on something like that, I might as well buy an iPad or a fancy smart phone. I think by making this thing ultra feature-full, they're blurring the line between the things they're competing against a lot more, and I think that does carry some risk at backfiring. Would I rather have a fancy gaming/media device and a simple phone, or vice versa. It's asking a lot for people to purchase high end devices on both fronts, and so they're going to have to make a choice. I don't think that choice is going to be overwhelmingly in favor of Sony. *Yes I realize there has been no official price announced, but looking at the specs, the device has to cost sony around ~$450 to manufacture. I expect a ~$400 price point.
If you look at the history of the human race, who do we remember more, the great legislators or the great leaders. We revere the presidents, the civil rights leaders, the activists who inspired us as a people, seldom the ones who wrote important pieces of legislation, and those that speak to us as a people have an influence that extends far greater as well. Across cultures, across nations, and across generations.
Where am I saying that individuals can't make choices? If I don't want a corporation to push certain material for whatever reason, be it too violent, immoral, or what not, then I don't support it. I am in no way saying that an individual who wants that content can't get it. They will just have to go somewhere else to get it. And you say that corporations can lobby congress and eliminate our choices, but what very few situations is anything like that even close to happening, and even then, my point is that we don't realize this power enough. If we as a society realized this power, no government official would be free to take such action, and no evil corporation would be able to lobby to gain such control. Rather than fighting an impossible battle that we're currently fighting, we should be pushing for people to wake up and realize their power as consumers.
Actually, I highly support social censorship as opposed to government enforced censorship. Now granted, in this case that the force is highly misdirected and makes a huge deal out of something that shouldn't be, but at the same time it shows the very power that the proletariat possesses. These corporations typically enforce such censorship upon themselves for the same reason basic cable tv censors itself, because this is what the general populace wants. Unfortunately, this power is seldom realized by the individual, because as individuals, we feel powerless. But this power is all we need to control corporations. We vote every day with the power of our dollar.
I'm guessing no one else is getting this judging by the lack of responses and points. Awesome movie.