Why do PC games still cost $40 to $50? I've always heard the excuse that they're paying for licensing. While I accept that's true to some extent the reason console games are so expensive is because that's what the market will bear. From everything I've seen console gamers are less discriminating. Even when they feel they've been wronged by a developer or publisher they'll go right on buying those games. I suspect console gamers skew younger which means they're often not spending their own money and if they are, gaming is still a very important thing to them. Look at the lengths people are willing to go to in order to get a game the day of release. Like you're somehow getting a better game because you're first in line.
I'd say PC gamers tend to more cost-conscious and shop around for deals. However, probably more importantly, there are fewer people buying PC games which means publishers need to work harder to entice gamers to buy a new game. This is why I can walk into a retailer and find a brand new PC game on sale but with console games how quickly the price is dropped is dictated by the popularity of the game.
If the vast majority of gamers stopped buying games in protest of their pricing I guarantee you within a couple of weeks prices would drop dramatically. Unfortunately people value entertainment more highly than they do principles.
While in general this thing is completely pointless, the way the wheel itself works is really cool. It's composed of cylinders which form the ring for the main wheel but allow sideways movement. Leave it up to the Japanese to dream up the most useless application for advanced technology, but it's cool that they're exploring unconventional concepts.
Southern California, Spain and Greece have always had a tendency to be arid. It's one of the reasons why California and Spain in particular have such great wine country. They're certainly not turning into deserts. The reason why people are noticing it more is because more people are living out there. More people are putting more strain on local resources and there are more people around to notice conditions. When fires happen, for example, people notice because it's their property being destroyed and certainly they increase the chance of starting these fires. I always found it a bit ridiculous that people who've decided to live in the deserts of Southern California are now basically complaining to the rest of the country about how hot and dry it is.
On your second point, what tail ends of hurricanes hitting Canada are you talking about? The only thing I was able to find in reference to that on Google was some Canadian environmental group back in 1999 making a claim that more hurricanes MAY hit Canada. From what I've seen so far that hasn't turned out to be true. About the only part of Canada they could hit is Newfoundland and Nova Scotia and in that case they'd likely be making landfall in the American northeast and we haven't had a real hurricane up here in about 20 years. So I fail to see the threat.
People are always making these threats which are supposedly just around the corner. Then years go by and nothing predicted comes true. But then we get a weather event, the sort of which was observed maybe 100 years ago, and people freak out claiming it's evidence of global warming. Oh wait, the term is now an all-encompassing climate change like somehow the climate was static for the past 4 billion years. I suppose if you believe in the 6000-year-old Earth you might also believe that climate shouldn't be changing.
Perhaps your European country has barely noticed economic problems but my family, which live primarily in Portugal and France are constantly complaining. The government is always screwing them over and ignores the will of the people, job market sucks, they're taxed too heavily but the benefits they receive in return are crap and are constantly being trimmed back.
Two examples specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insurance because the government wasn't covering what he needed, in fact, they seem to be moving towards privatization like we currently have in the US. Second example, another uncle in Portugal was diagnosed with prostate cancer. His doctor highly recommended he pay out of pocket otherwise he'd have to wait 6 months for treatment.
And I always find it interesting that whenever they visit they're shocked by how inexpensive things are here; clothing, electronics, cars, anything. What do they expect when they've got to pay for tariffs, local taxes and the VAT?
I don't understand why Americans are convinced Europe is some kind of wonderland where everything is perfect. There's a lot wrong with the US, but it isn't inherently worse than it is in Europe. And Europe is a lot further along than the US in trying to tightly control their people.
Otherwise, I completely agree that Europeans identify themselves with their own country first. And quite a few are resentful of the changes the EU has forced on them. Although in some ways it has helped smaller, less wealthy countries like Portugal.
I have basically the last version of the 80GB PS3 before the slim was introduced; I got it at the end of last year. It failed on me this past summer. I try powering it up after several days of no use and it fails to start. The fan starts up, the LED goes yellow for a moment, it beeps a few times, shuts down and the LED starts blinking red.
It seems like a different fault than is described here, and from what little I was able to learn online the blinking red LED would normally indicate overheating. So I wonder if it was a bad temperature sensor or a bad contact. All I know if that upon describing the problem I was told they'd be replacing the unit. The day they got my old one they sent out a new unit. As for the warranty, I got a 90 day extension. Well, it would have been an extension if I were out of warranty. Otherwise, being only 7 months into my original warranty that was the one still valid.
Details online regarding failures seem to be a bit scarce which implies to me that the problems aren't on the level of those faced by Xbox360 owners. Of course, this may be an issue that only becomes apparent with time. But when you're looking at problems nearly 2 years into the life of the console it's difficult to conclusively say it's solely Sony's fault. I'm not saying it necessarily isn't; Sony is notorious for dodging these kinds of issues.
We'll see if it is actually faithful to the original Sonic or if it ends up being more like the crap, Sonic Rush on the DS. Excluding the frustrating boss fights, the game was completely 2D. The sense of speed was present, but the stages were poorly designed with all sorts of traps, obstacles and falls to constantly trip up a player. The game was constant trial and error trying to figure how to get past sections. But even worse, pacing was awful. The game encouraged, even required high speeds but then would throw obstacles in your way that would disrupt movement and usually kill you. The rest of the game wasn't much better; having to replay stages and the embarrassingly bad story in particular. The game got better ratings that it deserved, I think mainly because people were turned on by more traditional gameplay and every other Sonic game excluding the originals was so atrocious.
It could be argued that Sonic, the original, didn't quite have the personality and charm of the Super Mario Bros series. It could also be argued that it didn't quite have the depth of those games. But for what it did it was great. The sense of speed could be exhilarating; there haven't been many platform games with that sense of speed. And every stage was well designed, with the appropriate pace for each stage established right at the start.
While I'd like Sega to hark back to the original as much as possible, I also want to see some level of evolution. Unfortunately, given Sega's history with the Sonic series I don't expect anything good outside of them just remaking the original.
I don't see how console makers are scaling back their push to HD by simply not offering HDMI cables. Sony has never offered them and Microsoft just decided to not include it recently. And given that more and more people have HDTVs I fail to see how standard definition is becoming more relevant.
However, I'm curious to know how much either company is saving by not offering these cables. The cheapest I've seen HDMI cables go for in stores is about $30, which makes no sense to me. I'm convinced HDMI pricing is one of the biggest scams in electronics; apparently once you get into talk of HD it's easy to sucker people into overpaying. Other than the style of the plug I fail to see how they fundamentally differ from a lot of other cables. I've been able to find some good ones online in the range of $10, for version 1.3 cable. Either way, this means that both Sony and Microsoft should be paying far less for them. Although, I suppose even a dollar or two in the volumes these consoles are manufactured at adds up.
It sounds like the author of that story is trying to find meaning where there is none. How do developers accommodate SD, assuming they even care? They make fonts larger and ensure that menus and HUDs fit within SD resolution. And I'm willing to bet an upgraded Wii with HD resolution will arrive sooner than later.
When I first saw a photo of this thing without the rider a few days ago I couldn't even figure out how the hell to sit on it. Seeing it now the thing looks like an awful safety hazard. The center of gravity rests too far forward. It's like riding a tricycle, minus the second rear wheel, by sitting on the handlebars. Hit any bump that causes the thing to stop suddenly and the rider is going to find him or herself sprawled all over the ground. Even small bumps that simply slow the vehicle would risk having the rider stumble out of this thing. Then there's the fact that your face is pretty much going to be the first part of your body that comes in contact with whatever you hit.
And why the carbon fiber frame? I can appreciate the strength and weight benefits. But I think a good plastic shell and an aluminum frame would do the job just find and would dramatically reduce the price of this thing. But I have to say, the prospect of riding that thing freaks me out.
This contraption is a gimmick, pure and simple. I'm not quite sure why the penny-farthing is pictured in the article. Is it there to serve as a justification for this thing? That was another bad idea which was limited by the technology available at the time, unlike this YikeBike.
The impression I get is that the creator wanted to remake the Segway but was hard-pressed to come up with an idea that wasn't derivative. There's a reason why bikes are designed the way they are. Need to get around efficiently? Get a bike, and if you get one at Goodwill for a few bucks you won't even have to worry much about theft or exposing it to the elements.
I thought the definition of broadband was already quite low. I'm guessing they basically want to redefine the limits to more appropriately reflect what end users are experiencing, likely so that they don't have to be held liable for under-performing.
I'm currently subscribed to Optimum which advertises 15Mbps down. I'm lucky if I get 8 or 9Mbps. Over the past few months performance has been even worse. The only other option I have is AT&T DSL, which isn't offered at the same speeds as cable, but at least seems to perform closer to those promised speeds. Verizon advertises FIOS constantly which is ridiculous considering the service isn't even available in my state.
I'm curious to know how many people in foreign nations actually experience the high speeds we hear about here. From my experience people aren't getting anything near what I hear about, often they get worse performance than I do. I mean, for a country that supposedly lags behind the developed world in terms of broadband I find it a bit odd that the US is the world leader in terms of rich web content. One important distinction, however, is that because providers in other countries seem to compete more directly, and often there are more competitors, their prices tend to be lower. I'm convinced that improper and excessive regulation has led to the situation we face in the US where only a handful of providers can thrive and they pretty much get to control the market. Companies don't need to innovate and they don't feel the pressure to lower prices.
Japan's deficit is actually estimated by some to be larger than the US. They spend and spend and spend believing that it will pull them out of their on-going economic problems. I think at best it's probably kept things from getting too bad.
They have a few advantages over the US, however, which has allowed them to sustain this level of spending. One is that although Japan has outsourced a decent amount of manufacturing they still do much of it themselves. It's actually surprising the kinds of products still manufactured in Japan, stuff as insignificant as plastic containers. But they have enough sense to realize that they aren't going to compete on price and instead compete on quality. Another extremely important thing is that unlike Americans, Japanese still have substantial savings. Although, I believe this is starting to change both in terms of cost of living and how Japanese are spending their money.
And there are a whole host of other issues that hindering the US; the entitlement culture, congress, substandard but overpriced work, the list goes on.
Well, considering how the vast majority of people today, at all social levels, are educated to one extent or another, even compared to a mere 100 years ago, it certainly is very impressive.
On the other hand, judging from the quality of writing I see online and work submitted by my own college students I beg to differ. But then, the more people we have going through the educational system the more likely the overall standard will decline somewhat.
I thought it was already quite common to pay for things via a mobile phone in Europe and Asia. The transactions and billing show up on the phone statement. My company has a client who was interested in this sort of thing for their service and instead had to go with a clumsy workaround. Apparently credit card companies and banks have lobbied quite hard to keep anyone else from encroaching on their business.
So I'm curious to see if Nokia's service will ever see the light of day in the US. American financial institutions are so in bed with the government that they're basically protected from the need to actually be competitive.
While I'm very interested in watching the movie, at this point Avatar looks like it's going to feature the same old contrived storyline featured in sci-fi over the last decade: humanity and industrialization are evil and nature and those connected to it are good. There's been this tendency to depict humans are awful, uncaring monsters.
It's reminiscent of District 9 where humans and the multinational corporation central to the story were so over-the-top evil it was almost comical. I will add that I did very much enjoy District 9 as far as favorite sci-fi movies go for me it's near the top of the list. I can appreciate the point of the message and liked the impact, but I would have preferred it to not be so simplistic in it's worldview. There are multiple sides to every story and I'm fairly certain that in this day and age there would be a lot of outrage to see extraterrestrials being treated this way.
Basically, my point is while I do think we need to be reminded of the problems of the world I would prefer movies sophisticated in it's presentation. Sometimes I feel like these people in Hollywood are conflicted about the lavish lifestyles they enjoy and are trying to foist their guilt trips on us.
This bullshit people love to spout on a regular basis is infuriating. This notion that the middle class is disappearing. I find it particularly absurd what people define as poor. Are you poor because you're struggling to put food on the table or because you can't rush out to buy the latest offerings from Apple on a yearly basis? I find, far too often that it's the latter.
The vast majority of people in this country own things that we practically unimaginable a few decades ago; large-format flat screen tvs, computers, mobile phones all kinds of media players and the list goes on. Not only do they own these things, but many own several of each. Home ownership isn't that far off of the all-time high. Most families own more than one car. The size of the average home has risen from a bit over 900sq-ft in 1950 to just over 2000sq-ft today. I could go on and on describing how much better off and how much more widespread the middle-class is today compared to any time in the past.
I'll tell you what the real problem is. People are spoiled. They hit a rough spot and suddenly it's the end of the world. They put themselves in debt, have a hard time with the bills because of it, then they start crying poverty. At the height of the housing meltdown I recall sob story after sob story about some person or another losing their home. Only to learn that they overbought and made constant poor decisions with their finances. We've got this entitlement culture, constantly encouraged by the government, where people believe they should be guaranteed a life in the lap of luxury.
You're comparing a pre-rendered trailer to a video made from actual in-game assets. Keep in mind that those graphics in Diablo 3 are not viewed so close up during gameplay. But if you're going to make this sort of comparison you should be showing an in-game cutscene from Warcraft 3.
I agree, and another problem I have with better graphics is that developers inevitably use them to try to achieve photo-realism. This means we get stuck with bland, uninspired art where, in fantasy games anyway, everything looks like an Oblivion clone. The in-game characters look like second-rate actors from b-movies and monsters are unimpressive to say the least. It looks particularly ridiculous when you've got realistic looking characters performing cartoonishly unrealistic actions.
Some people don't like the cartoony look of WoW, but I can appreciate it for it's style and personality. It's colorful and fun. There are certainly other styles which take a more serious tone, but far too often developers go for "gritty" realism.
That interpretation for 42 is kind of cool, but I recall reading that Adams had nothing in mind when he chose the number. It was just a number.
And I'm fairly certain Adams explained that the reason for the tone of the 5th book was that he was dealing with a number of personal issues. In fact, he started that he wasn't happy with how he ended the series, that he would have preferred ending it on an upbeat not, perhaps in a 6th book. In fact, the Wikipedia entry on the book states this as well.
Maybe for you they're nothing more than artifacts. But I read them for the first time less than 5 years ago, only having known about HHGTTG previously from the text game, and I thought they were great. Very witty, entertaining and in some ways insightful. I wouldn't call them science fiction, but then that wasn't the point. It's not unusual for a novel to lose it's charm on the second read once that initial sense of discovery is lost. But that shouldn't distract from the quality of the books.
I had my PS3 die and had the same experience. Got the box within days, sent it off with proof of purchase and whatnot and got a new one back within a week and a half. It's pretty much expected for any product covered under warranty.
And my failure, like I suspect is the case with most Xbox360's is the sort where they just replace the console. Either that, or it's trivial to swap out the failed component in the Xbox, hence the quick turn around.
For me the problem is that the console failed to begin with. I briefly considered just selling or giving away my games, especially if Sony started giving me a hard time about proof of purchase which I was worried they would. I received the console as a gift. Fortunately I got the purchase information and it was a non-issue. But if this PS3 fails I likely will just get rid of my games.
Well, one important factor here is that new consoles are significantly more complex than those from 10 or 20 years ago. And despite that it's not like those back then weren't prone to failure.
I recall several friends having Nintendo consoles that wouldn't load cartridges properly. The common technique used to try to get them to work was to blow into the cartridge; I'm not sure that it actually helped, but everyone tried it.
Then there were the various problems with the original Playstation. A friend of mine had the CD player in his fail and apparently it was a known issue which Sony addressed quietly.
That said, it is inexcusable that the failure rate is so high for the Xbox, even if it isn't nearly as high as this likely flawed study indicated. In fact, I'd argue that a 10% failure rate is high, but then I don't know what's an accepted failure rate for complex electronics. I do know that I've very rarely have had a problem with any PC I've owned, despite extensive use. And I did have my PS3 crap out a bit over a month ago after only 7 months of use.
Interestingly, I have heard that some electronics, like televisions are far more reliable than they've ever been before. So I can't help but wonder, has quality declined (something I sometimes feel) or is it simply that people are more informed, there are more channels today for voicing complaints.
It's fringe idiots who are calling for Obama's birth certificate. They're no different than the idiots who insist that the World Trade Center's destruction was controlled demolition by the US government. I agree that all they do is hurt all conservatives. But I don't recall anyone connecting the fringe on the left to liberals in general. Why is it okay to make similar generalizations with conservatives?
I don't have a problem with a president being mocked as part of a political statement. But if it's okay with Bush then it's okay with Obama. People upset with Obama are as justified in their actions, and have as legitimate complains as did people unhappy with Bush. You might not necessarily agree with them, but it doesn't automatically negate the complaints they have.
I know if it had happened to Bush, the neocons would have had pitchforks in hand.
What do you mean, "if it had happened?" It happened all the freaking time. And not just in the form of photoshopped images, but there was the never ending barrage of insults from celebrities, blogs and other sources.
Where were the pitchforks? Without a doubt there are a ton of people who were upset, but I didn't see anyone taking down images, or apologizing for their comments in response.
About the only time I recall anyone coming to Bush's defense, including a few democrats, was after that speech Hugo Chavez gave.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do PC games still cost $40 to $50? I've always heard the excuse that they're paying for licensing. While I accept that's true to some extent the reason console games are so expensive is because that's what the market will bear. From everything I've seen console gamers are less discriminating. Even when they feel they've been wronged by a developer or publisher they'll go right on buying those games. I suspect console gamers skew younger which means they're often not spending their own money and if they are, gaming is still a very important thing to them. Look at the lengths people are willing to go to in order to get a game the day of release. Like you're somehow getting a better game because you're first in line.
I'd say PC gamers tend to more cost-conscious and shop around for deals. However, probably more importantly, there are fewer people buying PC games which means publishers need to work harder to entice gamers to buy a new game. This is why I can walk into a retailer and find a brand new PC game on sale but with console games how quickly the price is dropped is dictated by the popularity of the game.
If the vast majority of gamers stopped buying games in protest of their pricing I guarantee you within a couple of weeks prices would drop dramatically. Unfortunately people value entertainment more highly than they do principles.
While in general this thing is completely pointless, the way the wheel itself works is really cool. It's composed of cylinders which form the ring for the main wheel but allow sideways movement. Leave it up to the Japanese to dream up the most useless application for advanced technology, but it's cool that they're exploring unconventional concepts.
Southern California, Spain and Greece have always had a tendency to be arid. It's one of the reasons why California and Spain in particular have such great wine country. They're certainly not turning into deserts. The reason why people are noticing it more is because more people are living out there. More people are putting more strain on local resources and there are more people around to notice conditions. When fires happen, for example, people notice because it's their property being destroyed and certainly they increase the chance of starting these fires. I always found it a bit ridiculous that people who've decided to live in the deserts of Southern California are now basically complaining to the rest of the country about how hot and dry it is.
On your second point, what tail ends of hurricanes hitting Canada are you talking about? The only thing I was able to find in reference to that on Google was some Canadian environmental group back in 1999 making a claim that more hurricanes MAY hit Canada. From what I've seen so far that hasn't turned out to be true. About the only part of Canada they could hit is Newfoundland and Nova Scotia and in that case they'd likely be making landfall in the American northeast and we haven't had a real hurricane up here in about 20 years. So I fail to see the threat.
People are always making these threats which are supposedly just around the corner. Then years go by and nothing predicted comes true. But then we get a weather event, the sort of which was observed maybe 100 years ago, and people freak out claiming it's evidence of global warming. Oh wait, the term is now an all-encompassing climate change like somehow the climate was static for the past 4 billion years. I suppose if you believe in the 6000-year-old Earth you might also believe that climate shouldn't be changing.
Perhaps your European country has barely noticed economic problems but my family, which live primarily in Portugal and France are constantly complaining. The government is always screwing them over and ignores the will of the people, job market sucks, they're taxed too heavily but the benefits they receive in return are crap and are constantly being trimmed back.
Two examples specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insurance because the government wasn't covering what he needed, in fact, they seem to be moving towards privatization like we currently have in the US. Second example, another uncle in Portugal was diagnosed with prostate cancer. His doctor highly recommended he pay out of pocket otherwise he'd have to wait 6 months for treatment.
And I always find it interesting that whenever they visit they're shocked by how inexpensive things are here; clothing, electronics, cars, anything. What do they expect when they've got to pay for tariffs, local taxes and the VAT?
I don't understand why Americans are convinced Europe is some kind of wonderland where everything is perfect. There's a lot wrong with the US, but it isn't inherently worse than it is in Europe. And Europe is a lot further along than the US in trying to tightly control their people.
Otherwise, I completely agree that Europeans identify themselves with their own country first. And quite a few are resentful of the changes the EU has forced on them. Although in some ways it has helped smaller, less wealthy countries like Portugal.
I have basically the last version of the 80GB PS3 before the slim was introduced; I got it at the end of last year. It failed on me this past summer. I try powering it up after several days of no use and it fails to start. The fan starts up, the LED goes yellow for a moment, it beeps a few times, shuts down and the LED starts blinking red.
It seems like a different fault than is described here, and from what little I was able to learn online the blinking red LED would normally indicate overheating. So I wonder if it was a bad temperature sensor or a bad contact. All I know if that upon describing the problem I was told they'd be replacing the unit. The day they got my old one they sent out a new unit. As for the warranty, I got a 90 day extension. Well, it would have been an extension if I were out of warranty. Otherwise, being only 7 months into my original warranty that was the one still valid.
Details online regarding failures seem to be a bit scarce which implies to me that the problems aren't on the level of those faced by Xbox360 owners. Of course, this may be an issue that only becomes apparent with time. But when you're looking at problems nearly 2 years into the life of the console it's difficult to conclusively say it's solely Sony's fault. I'm not saying it necessarily isn't; Sony is notorious for dodging these kinds of issues.
We'll see if it is actually faithful to the original Sonic or if it ends up being more like the crap, Sonic Rush on the DS. Excluding the frustrating boss fights, the game was completely 2D. The sense of speed was present, but the stages were poorly designed with all sorts of traps, obstacles and falls to constantly trip up a player. The game was constant trial and error trying to figure how to get past sections. But even worse, pacing was awful. The game encouraged, even required high speeds but then would throw obstacles in your way that would disrupt movement and usually kill you. The rest of the game wasn't much better; having to replay stages and the embarrassingly bad story in particular. The game got better ratings that it deserved, I think mainly because people were turned on by more traditional gameplay and every other Sonic game excluding the originals was so atrocious.
It could be argued that Sonic, the original, didn't quite have the personality and charm of the Super Mario Bros series. It could also be argued that it didn't quite have the depth of those games. But for what it did it was great. The sense of speed could be exhilarating; there haven't been many platform games with that sense of speed. And every stage was well designed, with the appropriate pace for each stage established right at the start.
While I'd like Sega to hark back to the original as much as possible, I also want to see some level of evolution. Unfortunately, given Sega's history with the Sonic series I don't expect anything good outside of them just remaking the original.
I don't see how console makers are scaling back their push to HD by simply not offering HDMI cables. Sony has never offered them and Microsoft just decided to not include it recently. And given that more and more people have HDTVs I fail to see how standard definition is becoming more relevant.
However, I'm curious to know how much either company is saving by not offering these cables. The cheapest I've seen HDMI cables go for in stores is about $30, which makes no sense to me. I'm convinced HDMI pricing is one of the biggest scams in electronics; apparently once you get into talk of HD it's easy to sucker people into overpaying. Other than the style of the plug I fail to see how they fundamentally differ from a lot of other cables. I've been able to find some good ones online in the range of $10, for version 1.3 cable. Either way, this means that both Sony and Microsoft should be paying far less for them. Although, I suppose even a dollar or two in the volumes these consoles are manufactured at adds up.
It sounds like the author of that story is trying to find meaning where there is none. How do developers accommodate SD, assuming they even care? They make fonts larger and ensure that menus and HUDs fit within SD resolution. And I'm willing to bet an upgraded Wii with HD resolution will arrive sooner than later.
When I first saw a photo of this thing without the rider a few days ago I couldn't even figure out how the hell to sit on it. Seeing it now the thing looks like an awful safety hazard. The center of gravity rests too far forward. It's like riding a tricycle, minus the second rear wheel, by sitting on the handlebars. Hit any bump that causes the thing to stop suddenly and the rider is going to find him or herself sprawled all over the ground. Even small bumps that simply slow the vehicle would risk having the rider stumble out of this thing. Then there's the fact that your face is pretty much going to be the first part of your body that comes in contact with whatever you hit.
And why the carbon fiber frame? I can appreciate the strength and weight benefits. But I think a good plastic shell and an aluminum frame would do the job just find and would dramatically reduce the price of this thing. But I have to say, the prospect of riding that thing freaks me out.
This contraption is a gimmick, pure and simple. I'm not quite sure why the penny-farthing is pictured in the article. Is it there to serve as a justification for this thing? That was another bad idea which was limited by the technology available at the time, unlike this YikeBike.
The impression I get is that the creator wanted to remake the Segway but was hard-pressed to come up with an idea that wasn't derivative. There's a reason why bikes are designed the way they are. Need to get around efficiently? Get a bike, and if you get one at Goodwill for a few bucks you won't even have to worry much about theft or exposing it to the elements.
I thought the definition of broadband was already quite low. I'm guessing they basically want to redefine the limits to more appropriately reflect what end users are experiencing, likely so that they don't have to be held liable for under-performing.
I'm currently subscribed to Optimum which advertises 15Mbps down. I'm lucky if I get 8 or 9Mbps. Over the past few months performance has been even worse. The only other option I have is AT&T DSL, which isn't offered at the same speeds as cable, but at least seems to perform closer to those promised speeds. Verizon advertises FIOS constantly which is ridiculous considering the service isn't even available in my state.
I'm curious to know how many people in foreign nations actually experience the high speeds we hear about here. From my experience people aren't getting anything near what I hear about, often they get worse performance than I do. I mean, for a country that supposedly lags behind the developed world in terms of broadband I find it a bit odd that the US is the world leader in terms of rich web content. One important distinction, however, is that because providers in other countries seem to compete more directly, and often there are more competitors, their prices tend to be lower. I'm convinced that improper and excessive regulation has led to the situation we face in the US where only a handful of providers can thrive and they pretty much get to control the market. Companies don't need to innovate and they don't feel the pressure to lower prices.
Japan's deficit is actually estimated by some to be larger than the US. They spend and spend and spend believing that it will pull them out of their on-going economic problems. I think at best it's probably kept things from getting too bad.
They have a few advantages over the US, however, which has allowed them to sustain this level of spending. One is that although Japan has outsourced a decent amount of manufacturing they still do much of it themselves. It's actually surprising the kinds of products still manufactured in Japan, stuff as insignificant as plastic containers. But they have enough sense to realize that they aren't going to compete on price and instead compete on quality. Another extremely important thing is that unlike Americans, Japanese still have substantial savings. Although, I believe this is starting to change both in terms of cost of living and how Japanese are spending their money.
And there are a whole host of other issues that hindering the US; the entitlement culture, congress, substandard but overpriced work, the list goes on.
Apparently the government does care about what happens to these soldiers, otherwise we wouldn't be discussing these findings.
Well, considering how the vast majority of people today, at all social levels, are educated to one extent or another, even compared to a mere 100 years ago, it certainly is very impressive.
On the other hand, judging from the quality of writing I see online and work submitted by my own college students I beg to differ. But then, the more people we have going through the educational system the more likely the overall standard will decline somewhat.
I thought it was already quite common to pay for things via a mobile phone in Europe and Asia. The transactions and billing show up on the phone statement. My company has a client who was interested in this sort of thing for their service and instead had to go with a clumsy workaround. Apparently credit card companies and banks have lobbied quite hard to keep anyone else from encroaching on their business.
So I'm curious to see if Nokia's service will ever see the light of day in the US. American financial institutions are so in bed with the government that they're basically protected from the need to actually be competitive.
While I'm very interested in watching the movie, at this point Avatar looks like it's going to feature the same old contrived storyline featured in sci-fi over the last decade: humanity and industrialization are evil and nature and those connected to it are good. There's been this tendency to depict humans are awful, uncaring monsters.
It's reminiscent of District 9 where humans and the multinational corporation central to the story were so over-the-top evil it was almost comical. I will add that I did very much enjoy District 9 as far as favorite sci-fi movies go for me it's near the top of the list. I can appreciate the point of the message and liked the impact, but I would have preferred it to not be so simplistic in it's worldview. There are multiple sides to every story and I'm fairly certain that in this day and age there would be a lot of outrage to see extraterrestrials being treated this way.
Basically, my point is while I do think we need to be reminded of the problems of the world I would prefer movies sophisticated in it's presentation. Sometimes I feel like these people in Hollywood are conflicted about the lavish lifestyles they enjoy and are trying to foist their guilt trips on us.
This bullshit people love to spout on a regular basis is infuriating. This notion that the middle class is disappearing. I find it particularly absurd what people define as poor. Are you poor because you're struggling to put food on the table or because you can't rush out to buy the latest offerings from Apple on a yearly basis? I find, far too often that it's the latter.
The vast majority of people in this country own things that we practically unimaginable a few decades ago; large-format flat screen tvs, computers, mobile phones all kinds of media players and the list goes on. Not only do they own these things, but many own several of each. Home ownership isn't that far off of the all-time high. Most families own more than one car. The size of the average home has risen from a bit over 900sq-ft in 1950 to just over 2000sq-ft today. I could go on and on describing how much better off and how much more widespread the middle-class is today compared to any time in the past.
I'll tell you what the real problem is. People are spoiled. They hit a rough spot and suddenly it's the end of the world. They put themselves in debt, have a hard time with the bills because of it, then they start crying poverty. At the height of the housing meltdown I recall sob story after sob story about some person or another losing their home. Only to learn that they overbought and made constant poor decisions with their finances. We've got this entitlement culture, constantly encouraged by the government, where people believe they should be guaranteed a life in the lap of luxury.
You're comparing a pre-rendered trailer to a video made from actual in-game assets. Keep in mind that those graphics in Diablo 3 are not viewed so close up during gameplay. But if you're going to make this sort of comparison you should be showing an in-game cutscene from Warcraft 3.
I agree, and another problem I have with better graphics is that developers inevitably use them to try to achieve photo-realism. This means we get stuck with bland, uninspired art where, in fantasy games anyway, everything looks like an Oblivion clone. The in-game characters look like second-rate actors from b-movies and monsters are unimpressive to say the least. It looks particularly ridiculous when you've got realistic looking characters performing cartoonishly unrealistic actions.
Some people don't like the cartoony look of WoW, but I can appreciate it for it's style and personality. It's colorful and fun. There are certainly other styles which take a more serious tone, but far too often developers go for "gritty" realism.
That interpretation for 42 is kind of cool, but I recall reading that Adams had nothing in mind when he chose the number. It was just a number.
And I'm fairly certain Adams explained that the reason for the tone of the 5th book was that he was dealing with a number of personal issues. In fact, he started that he wasn't happy with how he ended the series, that he would have preferred ending it on an upbeat not, perhaps in a 6th book. In fact, the Wikipedia entry on the book states this as well.
Maybe for you they're nothing more than artifacts. But I read them for the first time less than 5 years ago, only having known about HHGTTG previously from the text game, and I thought they were great. Very witty, entertaining and in some ways insightful. I wouldn't call them science fiction, but then that wasn't the point. It's not unusual for a novel to lose it's charm on the second read once that initial sense of discovery is lost. But that shouldn't distract from the quality of the books.
I had my PS3 die and had the same experience. Got the box within days, sent it off with proof of purchase and whatnot and got a new one back within a week and a half. It's pretty much expected for any product covered under warranty.
And my failure, like I suspect is the case with most Xbox360's is the sort where they just replace the console. Either that, or it's trivial to swap out the failed component in the Xbox, hence the quick turn around.
For me the problem is that the console failed to begin with. I briefly considered just selling or giving away my games, especially if Sony started giving me a hard time about proof of purchase which I was worried they would. I received the console as a gift. Fortunately I got the purchase information and it was a non-issue. But if this PS3 fails I likely will just get rid of my games.
Do you realize that you can set your PS3 to shut itself off after a predetermined amount of time?
Well, one important factor here is that new consoles are significantly more complex than those from 10 or 20 years ago. And despite that it's not like those back then weren't prone to failure.
I recall several friends having Nintendo consoles that wouldn't load cartridges properly. The common technique used to try to get them to work was to blow into the cartridge; I'm not sure that it actually helped, but everyone tried it.
Then there were the various problems with the original Playstation. A friend of mine had the CD player in his fail and apparently it was a known issue which Sony addressed quietly.
That said, it is inexcusable that the failure rate is so high for the Xbox, even if it isn't nearly as high as this likely flawed study indicated. In fact, I'd argue that a 10% failure rate is high, but then I don't know what's an accepted failure rate for complex electronics. I do know that I've very rarely have had a problem with any PC I've owned, despite extensive use. And I did have my PS3 crap out a bit over a month ago after only 7 months of use.
Interestingly, I have heard that some electronics, like televisions are far more reliable than they've ever been before. So I can't help but wonder, has quality declined (something I sometimes feel) or is it simply that people are more informed, there are more channels today for voicing complaints.
It's fringe idiots who are calling for Obama's birth certificate. They're no different than the idiots who insist that the World Trade Center's destruction was controlled demolition by the US government. I agree that all they do is hurt all conservatives. But I don't recall anyone connecting the fringe on the left to liberals in general. Why is it okay to make similar generalizations with conservatives?
I don't have a problem with a president being mocked as part of a political statement. But if it's okay with Bush then it's okay with Obama. People upset with Obama are as justified in their actions, and have as legitimate complains as did people unhappy with Bush. You might not necessarily agree with them, but it doesn't automatically negate the complaints they have.
What do you mean, "if it had happened?" It happened all the freaking time. And not just in the form of photoshopped images, but there was the never ending barrage of insults from celebrities, blogs and other sources.
Where were the pitchforks? Without a doubt there are a ton of people who were upset, but I didn't see anyone taking down images, or apologizing for their comments in response.
About the only time I recall anyone coming to Bush's defense, including a few democrats, was after that speech Hugo Chavez gave.
Yeah right. I'm curious if you'd use the same argument had they taken down an image of Bush for similar reasons.
Flickr might claim copyright violation, but I'm hard-pressed to see what copyright was actually violated and whatever happened to fair use?