[sarcasm]Yeah, because everyone's been writing programming languages for like 8 billion years, so someone in the '50s wouldn't have anything new to think up.[/sarcasm]
Good point. I shouldn't have assumed that the typical programmer is capable of thinking up a simple one-to-one swapout algorithm if someone hadn't thought of it before. Come to think of it, that's probably why most bogus patents are granted in software:
Patent Examiner(PE): Hm... okay, it looks like they're trying to patent one-click shopping. No good. That's obvious. Patent Examiner Assistant(PEA): But sir, is that obvious to someone competent in the art? PE: I think so... PEA: That means, obvious to a programmer. PE: Oh! Good point! Application granted!
If I remember correclty, she was a US Naval Officer, and won a bet by doing the "impossible", designing a language that could use semi human words, instead of the bytecode that everyone had punched in up until then.
Yeah, I'm sure no one every did that before her, because it's *so* fucking hard to swap out bytecode for partial words and tell the compiler to convert.
She even made it work in three languages...
Yeah, mapping different code words to the same assembly code -- that takes fucking genius.
Uh, dude, if you only know that your age is within an 18-year possible span, I really don't think advertisers are expecting a lot of business out of you -- probably because you're senile.
The only question is why would they do this?In the past Nintendo has made it clear that they dislike the pre-ordering process because it causes retailers to bundle products and gouge their customers; I'm certain that after every (successful) product launch Nintendo has gotten emails/letters complaining that they were forced to buy a battery pack / crappy game and that the consumer was blaiming Nintendo (who had nothing to do with it).
That's a good point about pre-ordering. However, couldn't they have accomplished the same thing in their contracts with retailers? Those usually specify many things regarding how they can sell the product, and they could conceivably say "you may not require additional purchases with pre-orders" and have stiff contractual penalties. Though again, that could leave retailers on the hook for the sales tactics of lower-ranked employees.
1) Accorting to the article, the Wii "could" ship "late September"? It's about mid-September and we *don't know the release date or price*! How close do they plan to cut it?
2) Are the old games going to be updated so that I can e.g. play Super Mario Kart online? I'd pay a lot for that feature alone...
Er no, not in the slightest. I only agreed with you about your assessment of how capitalism "works" and the theory behind it. My preference for how society should work would be some form of anarcho-socialism, up to the point of pragmatism, but I'll leave that for now...
Well, there are lots of versions of "anarcho-socialism" and you seem to be okay with having *some* market, just that the workers should own it. This utterly fails to account for the objection I gave above: if everyone owns their own business, no one can own, share-wise or debt-wise, anyone else's, and both your job and your savings are tied up in one investment, vulnerable to all kinds of things you have no control over. Anarcho-socialists (in my numerous encounters) typically don't themselves know exactly what they mean when they favor a certain system. For some, it's the same as capitalism, just with people making different choices (preferences for worker-owned businesses). For others, it means that selling your shares in your businesses is somehow prohibited (without involving a government). For still others, it means that if certain regulations were merely removed, socialist-favored operations will become much much much more viable. The latter typically involve inconsistent and poor economics. One that I know of claims that you can somehow both a) guarantee easy and cheap access to loans, and b) ensure that such currency isn't worthless; that a fully-secured loan would pay no interest or under 0.25% interest even if the collateral can't actually be seized; and so forth.
If more people invest irrationally than rationally, then it is difficult to claim intelligent behaviour arises through the stock market.
Unless you read my previous response, where I pointed out that a) irrational investors don't matter unless their errors skew one way (truly random errors will cancel out and leave the raitional investors setting the value), and b) the emergent effect is that the prices are such that you cannot predictably make a profit.
Looks like you didn't get as much as you could have out of Second Life. Try the following strategies:
1) Script a device so it acts like a listening bug and plant it in people's houses. (Make sure to have it spawn a copy of itself every 10 hours so it doesn't get deleted!) Confront them when they talk smack about you, and blame any third parties in the room for ratting.
2) Name a device after someone nearby and have it make offensive remarks. By default, objects have green text when they speak, while humans have white text, so be sure to have it preface its statements "Hey, check this out guys, I can make my text green!"
3) Arrange to store your money with someone else before you get your "allowance" so it will think you're poor and given you more Linden Dollars.
If you just did some of those things, I'm sure you'd have more fun.
I *know* you said people make money every day WITHOUT having to beat the market. I never said anything that even implied contraction with that. I don't know why you deemed that statement relevant. Yes, people can invest in an index (not try to beat the market) and make money. Great. Let me know when you can relate that back to the subject matter.
Since when was Michigan anti-trash? It rose based on trash industry (cars), corrupted by trash unions, so they turned into trash factories that sold trash cars, and when the whole thing (inevitably) went down hill, their whole cities got trashed, and now downtown Detroit and Flint are just filled with a bunch of trash people, and trash directors make trash movies (Roger and Me) about it. I mean, I respect their anti-trash position, but quite frankly, this is a textbook case of "too little, too late".
Okay, so it was serious... it's just that when you said "you don't have to 'beat' the market to make money, people do it every day.", it was clear you had no clue what the fuck you were talking about, since the opposite of "trying to beat the market" is investing in an index, in which people obviously do make money, and which I obviously wasn't contradicting.
I'm sure there's something worthwhile in what you said, I just don't have the time to look for it.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you fully appreciate how vital the Cell processor is in order to facilitate real-time weapon changing. I guess you just don't understand the internal architecture of console systems.
Well, a) I was only semi-joking, as some business professors teach things that don't imply entrepreneurial ability, and b) I was talking about business, not economic professors. Most economics professors readily admit they can't come up with a strategy to consistently beat the market.
And the fact that they have no reserves saved up is a stupid reason, to be frank. The median age of business professors is, what, 50? And they don't have enough saved by then? Plus, they can find investors. So no, it's a non-excuse.
You always have to wonder why business professors -- if they know so much about how to read the market -- aren't out there making a fortune instead of making less as a professor.
If I understand you correctly, my idea is slightly different. As you've described it, you can start a new game, save, explore the world, and then reload and re-do your game with knowledge of the world's geography in advance. In my idea, it wouldn't definitely determine any of that stuff until you actually saw it. Think "Shrodinger's cat".
Slashdot Mirror
I have $600. I'm still not getting it. $800 will get me a better value on a Wii + games than PS3 + games.
[sarcasm]Yeah, because everyone's been writing programming languages for like 8 billion years, so someone in the '50s wouldn't have anything new to think up.[/sarcasm]
...
Good point. I shouldn't have assumed that the typical programmer is capable of thinking up a simple one-to-one swapout algorithm if someone hadn't thought of it before. Come to think of it, that's probably why most bogus patents are granted in software:
Patent Examiner(PE): Hm... okay, it looks like they're trying to patent one-click shopping. No good. That's obvious.
Patent Examiner Assistant(PEA): But sir, is that obvious to someone competent in the art?
PE: I think so
PEA: That means, obvious to a programmer.
PE: Oh! Good point! Application granted!
I'll miss the karma, but it had to be said.
If I remember correclty, she was a US Naval Officer, and won a bet by doing the "impossible", designing a language that could use semi human words, instead of the bytecode that everyone had punched in up until then.
Yeah, I'm sure no one every did that before her, because it's *so* fucking hard to swap out bytecode for partial words and tell the compiler to convert.
She even made it work in three languages...
Yeah, mapping different code words to the same assembly code -- that takes fucking genius.
Where would we be without women like her?
I am a white male age 18-35.
Uh, dude, if you only know that your age is within an 18-year possible span, I really don't think advertisers are expecting a lot of business out of you -- probably because you're senile.
Please, someone, restore my faith in /. by modding parent back down -- or at the very least, funny.
Or, XFire could metaphorically refer to Sony's XJob in selling XConsoles.
Maybe after TV's have been in people's homes for 50 years, then we'll have the answer.
I guess we'll just have to wait until that happens.
The only question is why would they do this?In the past Nintendo has made it clear that they dislike the pre-ordering process because it causes retailers to bundle products and gouge their customers; I'm certain that after every (successful) product launch Nintendo has gotten emails/letters complaining that they were forced to buy a battery pack / crappy game and that the consumer was blaiming Nintendo (who had nothing to do with it).
That's a good point about pre-ordering. However, couldn't they have accomplished the same thing in their contracts with retailers? Those usually specify many things regarding how they can sell the product, and they could conceivably say "you may not require additional purchases with pre-orders" and have stiff contractual penalties. Though again, that could leave retailers on the hook for the sales tactics of lower-ranked employees.
1) Accorting to the article, the Wii "could" ship "late September"? It's about mid-September and we *don't know the release date or price*! How close do they plan to cut it?
2) Are the old games going to be updated so that I can e.g. play Super Mario Kart online? I'd pay a lot for that feature alone...
Hey asshole -- some of us *like* living in the past.
Interesting. Were you esperto enough to buy a durable commodity like gold before making that post, during which your currency lost half its value?
Er no, not in the slightest. I only agreed with you about your assessment of how capitalism "works" and the theory behind it. My preference for how society should work would be some form of anarcho-socialism, up to the point of pragmatism, but I'll leave that for now...
Well, there are lots of versions of "anarcho-socialism" and you seem to be okay with having *some* market, just that the workers should own it. This utterly fails to account for the objection I gave above: if everyone owns their own business, no one can own, share-wise or debt-wise, anyone else's, and both your job and your savings are tied up in one investment, vulnerable to all kinds of things you have no control over. Anarcho-socialists (in my numerous encounters) typically don't themselves know exactly what they mean when they favor a certain system. For some, it's the same as capitalism, just with people making different choices (preferences for worker-owned businesses). For others, it means that selling your shares in your businesses is somehow prohibited (without involving a government). For still others, it means that if certain regulations were merely removed, socialist-favored operations will become much much much more viable. The latter typically involve inconsistent and poor economics. One that I know of claims that you can somehow both a) guarantee easy and cheap access to loans, and b) ensure that such currency isn't worthless; that a fully-secured loan would pay no interest or under 0.25% interest even if the collateral can't actually be seized; and so forth.
If more people invest irrationally than rationally, then it is difficult to claim intelligent behaviour arises through the stock market.
Unless you read my previous response, where I pointed out that a) irrational investors don't matter unless their errors skew one way (truly random errors will cancel out and leave the raitional investors setting the value), and b) the emergent effect is that the prices are such that you cannot predictably make a profit.
Does it tell you what the data is based on the rate of gas flow? What if there's an unexpected surge? I'd love to use this with my bank account:
"Transferring one cent from PayPal account...
Current balance: $1,854,459,234.48"
"HOLY #$%*)#(!!! Withdraw, withdraw!"
Looks like you didn't get as much as you could have out of Second Life. Try the following strategies:
1) Script a device so it acts like a listening bug and plant it in people's houses. (Make sure to have it spawn a copy of itself every 10 hours so it doesn't get deleted!) Confront them when they talk smack about you, and blame any third parties in the room for ratting.
2) Name a device after someone nearby and have it make offensive remarks. By default, objects have green text when they speak, while humans have white text, so be sure to have it preface its statements "Hey, check this out guys, I can make my text green!"
3) Arrange to store your money with someone else before you get your "allowance" so it will think you're poor and given you more Linden Dollars.
If you just did some of those things, I'm sure you'd have more fun.
PC gaming is dying out. It's totally a niche market now.
I can't speak for them, but each and every client I have ever defended has been one hundred percent innocent.
--Matlock
I *know* you said people make money every day WITHOUT having to beat the market. I never said anything that even implied contraction with that. I don't know why you deemed that statement relevant. Yes, people can invest in an index (not try to beat the market) and make money. Great. Let me know when you can relate that back to the subject matter.
Since when was Michigan anti-trash? It rose based on trash industry (cars), corrupted by trash unions, so they turned into trash factories that sold trash cars, and when the whole thing (inevitably) went down hill, their whole cities got trashed, and now downtown Detroit and Flint are just filled with a bunch of trash people, and trash directors make trash movies (Roger and Me) about it. I mean, I respect their anti-trash position, but quite frankly, this is a textbook case of "too little, too late".
Okay, so it was serious ... it's just that when you said "you don't have to 'beat' the market to make money, people do it every day.", it was clear you had no clue what the fuck you were talking about, since the opposite of "trying to beat the market" is investing in an index, in which people obviously do make money, and which I obviously wasn't contradicting.
I'm sure there's something worthwhile in what you said, I just don't have the time to look for it.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you fully appreciate how vital the Cell processor is in order to facilitate real-time weapon changing. I guess you just don't understand the internal architecture of console systems.
Is that a serious response?
Well, a) I was only semi-joking, as some business professors teach things that don't imply entrepreneurial ability, and b) I was talking about business, not economic professors. Most economics professors readily admit they can't come up with a strategy to consistently beat the market.
And the fact that they have no reserves saved up is a stupid reason, to be frank. The median age of business professors is, what, 50? And they don't have enough saved by then? Plus, they can find investors. So no, it's a non-excuse.
You always have to wonder why business professors -- if they know so much about how to read the market -- aren't out there making a fortune instead of making less as a professor.
Is that the card that they advertise with washed-up no-name actors who poorly deliver a stupid catchphrase at the end of a commercial?
If I understand you correctly, my idea is slightly different. As you've described it, you can start a new game, save, explore the world, and then reload and re-do your game with knowledge of the world's geography in advance. In my idea, it wouldn't definitely determine any of that stuff until you actually saw it. Think "Shrodinger's cat".