Pick a store in my area (Phoenix, Arizona). Best Buy, Circuit City, Gamestop, even EB-Games (NOTE: The one by me NEVER has anything in stock, despite supposedly having the same stocking as the 2 gamestops near it) had Wiis all summer, up until about a month ago. I would get pics, but I don't (yet) have a time travel device.
I've noticed that the 'it's sold out' crowd is almost always crowded in 2 or 3 states that seem to either get less or buy more Wiis, or they just sit quietly, ignoring the current stock, until it sells out, at which point they start declaring how they've been trying to get a Wii but can't find one. Don't know what category you're in, but if you wanted to buy a Wii about 3 months ago I could have shown you 20+ in my area, you could have had your pic (and you can still have your pick of PS3s:P, no one's sold out of those that I know of).
In decimal, I calculate that as 22(26^2) or 14872 to be precise. By god, it's 911 times 16.3249!:-P Nuh uh! My copy of excel tells me that 911*16.3249 is 100000, not 14872!
Re:Couple Thoughts
on
Where are Wii?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's not like the 360 is cheap to begign with, at least not the way most people set them up.
360 - $350 Extra Controller - $60 HD Cable - $20
And you're at $430 without buying ANY games, at regulare retail price. Toss in sales tax and a handful of games and you've broke $700.
The Wii is the cheapest current gen (the PS2 and them are now last gen) console. That is a fact, no matter how the other console fanbois may boost the price by including accessories.
I see your anecdote and raise you another anecdote. My family and I have been huge tech users for a while now, we've all had cell phones for 10 years, our landline phones use the 2.4 GHz spectrum to tranmit to each other wirelessly, and we have a powerful G router, and have had a wireless router for 5+ years now. None of us have ever been diagnosed with any cancer, nor any ailments worse than some bone issues due to running. In fact, the only person in my family who has even been affected by cancer was a bit of an oldtimer, having neither a cellphone nor a wireless router and living far from any sort of tower (didn't get any bars at his house).
So that's 5 anecdotes to your one, take it as you will. Brain tumors have been around for far longer than wireless transmissions, as has almost all types of cancer. Perhaps there is a statistical significance, but anecdotes can't prove that.
Naw, the FSF explained to them what they believe is right, that the principle is that stealing code is stealing code. Frankly, right is right and wrong is wrong, particularly when a government agency is talking to an extremely powerful corporation. A bright line around moral responsibility is very important. They can assure you the RIAA no longer does that.
There's a tech store ladder now? Last time I checked they were all atrocious enough to lump in the same category of 'never listen to these people, they just want your money and have no clue what they're talking about'.
The day I ask a Best Buy, or CompUSA person to try and fix something for me, or even to point me to a computer related item I'm looking for, is the day I know I'll be paying 2x what I need to pay and now having the problem solved.
(don't waste your breath saying some joke about violence being nature) Oh! Violence isn't natural? Geez...those predators have been doing things wrong for a long time, how 'bout you go tell them that?
Natural is a word with no well-defined meaning, it's a completely relative term. If you try to define it as anything that is done naturally by creatures then that includes every act ever performed, as humans are creatures too, and trying to define them out of the picture means it's no longer that which is done in nature, but that which is done in nature by creatures other than humans. Well you know what? School's unnatural then, name one animal that sends it's young off to another parent to learn math? Math's unnatural too, and so is Physics and, well, just about everything else. No matter how you define natural you'll end up either stating that most of human behavior is unnatural, or it's all natural (if you try to say 'done by a significant number' then you have to define significant, and you'll end up either defining perfectly normal behavior as unnatural or all behavior as natural).
Violence is just as natural as Sex. There, I said it, bring on the hating. Plenty of predators kill other creatures, even if they have no intention to eat the carcass. There's little difference between that and human violence, or at least human violence isn't anymore unnatural than that.
My School went over to Gmail not to long ago, and simultaneously banned sending grade information via e-mail...which means the only way to find out your grade is to go to the website (extremely slow, both when trying to get it running on your computer and at getting the data online) or asking the teacher (basic mail is either banned or extremely rare, as I've never gotten anything from them).
So for us it's not worrying about our grades being sent over google's routers that's the problem, it's worrying about when grades are going to be put on the website, and whether it'll be up (stupid daily site maintanance...why couldn't you just use HTML and CSS? Why do you need AJAX and Javascript to give me my grade, a constant value!?).
Though there is one flaw in your reasoning, the data already has to travel via ISP routers, and certain ISPs have shown that they're perfectly willing to manipulate/delete certain types of data, while all have shown they're willing to log that data. I'd be less worried about Google than my ISP if they sent my grades along Gmail ('course I wouldn't really be worried at all, but that's another issue)
And this is the main problem I have with the anti-Taser crowd. I have no problem with your ideals, or with the concept of banning Tasers, but all too often it seems like the main argument against Tasers is that a few (the number of misuses vs. the number of normal uses isn't a very large ratio) cops have misused them, and so no cop should have them. Were that argument used fairly cops would be forced to try and subdue subjects with words alone, because their guns would be banned, hitting people would be banned, and tackling would be banned...and come to think of it words might be banned also, especially if some cop verbally assaulted a little kid.
The point is, you can't argue against a weapon by saying that some have misused it. If you accept that argument as valid then you can't condone cops having ANY weapons, because they can be (and have all been) misused.
And yet at the same time science is supposed to investigate anecdotal matters, or at least that's where most of our scientific understanding has come from. Most leaps forward are not preceded by large quantities of statistical evidence, but rather one or two anecdotal happenings that someone gets curious about and decides to investigate. Sure, the scientists did all that was expected of them, they examined their evidence and found that these waves were impossible according to what they'd observed. However from what I've seen and heard this was treated as another case of one group of scientists saying something's impossible and other groups simply accepting their findings as fact without examining them or gathering their own data. As they say, hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean the scientists shouldn't have studied the subject a little more before making their statements.
Last time I checked there aren't 2 deaths a year from UFOs, or reportedly from UFOs. Sure there's somewhat of a correlation, but when people are dying semi-commonly (I figure 2 deaths a year means 1 ship sunk every 5 years or so) that's when you should be looking into the subject, not simply ignoring it and saying it's not possible and that the photos are proof of nothing.
The scientists aren't fully to blame for the fact that these waves were so long thought impossible, but neither are they completely blameless, they were so set in their ways that they couldn't see any way such a wave could exist, and that's a problem. In other words it's not bad to say that these waves, or UFOs, probably don't exist, but it is a problem to say that there's no possible way such a phenomenon could happen. As Douglas Adams once postulated (paraphrasing a good amount) 'the difference between something that's unlikely and something that's impossible is that, when you find out the impossible thing can actually happen you look a lot worse than the statistically unlikely thing'
Sorry, but you're the one missing the quantum physics. The GP posed a good question, does conscious observation differ from unconscious. The answer (so far as we know) is no, ergo quantum physics doesn't support this. Perhaps those are are going to be pedantic should first read up on the subject before telling others too?
Fair enough, that scene does have a few problems. However the ship's repulsor's do have to be taken into account, unless I'm mistaken they would be capable of countering gravity to an extent, enough that the ship's acceleration would be pretty minor, as well as giving it some maneuverability. It is one of those 'suspend your disbelief because this is really cool' scenes though.
"There are perfectly good arguments against this proposal but "won't somebody thing of the children (who can't secure their own networks)" isn't one of them. If you get your first warning and don't realize that you need to clamp down on your network, then too bad for you."
Ah but the problem in this case is that your first warning is a total shut-down, that's a little extreme wouldn't you say?
Considering the fact that this is a government agency, and so likely to be lazy and simply shut down internet access without looking at who's using it, I think that WiFi cafes should prepare for hard days (if they have any, I'd assume they do though).
Seriously, I'd bet money that at least half of these shut downs are going to be against people who did nothing more than have poor network security (if any). I mean, if you know that the government will shut down your internet if you download illegally, and your neighbor has a weakly secured network, there's going to be an awful lot of people taking advantage of that, and an awfully lot of unhappy innocents.
Wait...they sang "I hear the secrets that you keep, when you're talking in your sleep"? Oh man...I hope they lose it all in this suit (I kid, I kid...I actually enjoyed both their songs...no please, don't burst my bubble and claim they had other songs...I refuse to believe that)
Oh how I wish I had mod points right now, you nailed it on the head. If MS sells even one copy of Halo 3 that doesn't work on their system then they have to be willing to take it back. Third Party games don't count quite the same way because both sides can claim it was the other side that caused the problem but in this case both sides are MS so no matter what's actually causing the problem (Halo 3 or the 360) MS is responsible, they have no one to blame.
Honestly I hope they lose this one. It would be a good blow against the whole 'we don't take returns on video games' mentality, probably not enough to stop it but it would at least help.
It seems like a lot of companies are calling the 360 just the XBox now, I've seen 3 ads (2 for Black Friday, one just for the week) where they are apparently selling an XBox Arcade pack, with an XBox and a number of XBox Live Arcade titles. Of course that's actually a 360, but it seems like companies have decided that the 360 is the XBox now or something.
I don't know about that. They did do a metal cover of The Devil Went Down to Georgia for the GH3 finale:). Unless I'm remembering something that never happened that metal version's been around for a while, I'm pretty sure I heard it on the radio more than once. It's not a particularly good song (and I like metal, and The Devil Went Down to Georgia) but I don't think GHIII made it up.
'Course I don't have the game so it could be a different metal version, but I'm pretty sure I've heard a version of that song that could be considered metal on the radio before.
The previously rejected patent is not the different patent from the one that is[...] Something's still missing...hmm
The previously rejected patent is not the different patent from the one that is purchasable through a shopping cart model. There. Fixed that for ya.
Slashdot Mirror
Pick a store in my area (Phoenix, Arizona). Best Buy, Circuit City, Gamestop, even EB-Games (NOTE: The one by me NEVER has anything in stock, despite supposedly having the same stocking as the 2 gamestops near it) had Wiis all summer, up until about a month ago. I would get pics, but I don't (yet) have a time travel device.
:P, no one's sold out of those that I know of).
I've noticed that the 'it's sold out' crowd is almost always crowded in 2 or 3 states that seem to either get less or buy more Wiis, or they just sit quietly, ignoring the current stock, until it sells out, at which point they start declaring how they've been trying to get a Wii but can't find one. Don't know what category you're in, but if you wanted to buy a Wii about 3 months ago I could have shown you 20+ in my area, you could have had your pic (and you can still have your pick of PS3s
Don't forget satellites, you need that to build the crew center, otherwise your ship will never launch.
It's not like the 360 is cheap to begign with, at least not the way most people set them up.
360 - $350
Extra Controller - $60
HD Cable - $20
And you're at $430 without buying ANY games, at regulare retail price. Toss in sales tax and a handful of games and you've broke $700.
The Wii is the cheapest current gen (the PS2 and them are now last gen) console. That is a fact, no matter how the other console fanbois may boost the price by including accessories.
Oblig Penny Arcade http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/09/14
Okay, raise your hand if you think the concept of Styrofoam armor that actually stops bullets is pure awesome.
*Raises Hand*
I see your anecdote and raise you another anecdote. My family and I have been huge tech users for a while now, we've all had cell phones for 10 years, our landline phones use the 2.4 GHz spectrum to tranmit to each other wirelessly, and we have a powerful G router, and have had a wireless router for 5+ years now. None of us have ever been diagnosed with any cancer, nor any ailments worse than some bone issues due to running. In fact, the only person in my family who has even been affected by cancer was a bit of an oldtimer, having neither a cellphone nor a wireless router and living far from any sort of tower (didn't get any bars at his house).
So that's 5 anecdotes to your one, take it as you will. Brain tumors have been around for far longer than wireless transmissions, as has almost all types of cancer. Perhaps there is a statistical significance, but anecdotes can't prove that.
Naw, the FSF explained to them what they believe is right, that the principle is that stealing code is stealing code. Frankly, right is right and wrong is wrong, particularly when a government agency is talking to an extremely powerful corporation. A bright line around moral responsibility is very important. They can assure you the RIAA no longer does that.
I'm just gonna go ahead and wait for MP48's, so I can play them on my HHDDVVDDBVD player.
There's a tech store ladder now? Last time I checked they were all atrocious enough to lump in the same category of 'never listen to these people, they just want your money and have no clue what they're talking about'.
The day I ask a Best Buy, or CompUSA person to try and fix something for me, or even to point me to a computer related item I'm looking for, is the day I know I'll be paying 2x what I need to pay and now having the problem solved.
Natural is a word with no well-defined meaning, it's a completely relative term. If you try to define it as anything that is done naturally by creatures then that includes every act ever performed, as humans are creatures too, and trying to define them out of the picture means it's no longer that which is done in nature, but that which is done in nature by creatures other than humans. Well you know what? School's unnatural then, name one animal that sends it's young off to another parent to learn math? Math's unnatural too, and so is Physics and, well, just about everything else. No matter how you define natural you'll end up either stating that most of human behavior is unnatural, or it's all natural (if you try to say 'done by a significant number' then you have to define significant, and you'll end up either defining perfectly normal behavior as unnatural or all behavior as natural).
Violence is just as natural as Sex. There, I said it, bring on the hating. Plenty of predators kill other creatures, even if they have no intention to eat the carcass. There's little difference between that and human violence, or at least human violence isn't anymore unnatural than that.
My School went over to Gmail not to long ago, and simultaneously banned sending grade information via e-mail...which means the only way to find out your grade is to go to the website (extremely slow, both when trying to get it running on your computer and at getting the data online) or asking the teacher (basic mail is either banned or extremely rare, as I've never gotten anything from them).
So for us it's not worrying about our grades being sent over google's routers that's the problem, it's worrying about when grades are going to be put on the website, and whether it'll be up (stupid daily site maintanance...why couldn't you just use HTML and CSS? Why do you need AJAX and Javascript to give me my grade, a constant value!?).
Though there is one flaw in your reasoning, the data already has to travel via ISP routers, and certain ISPs have shown that they're perfectly willing to manipulate/delete certain types of data, while all have shown they're willing to log that data. I'd be less worried about Google than my ISP if they sent my grades along Gmail ('course I wouldn't really be worried at all, but that's another issue)
And this is the main problem I have with the anti-Taser crowd. I have no problem with your ideals, or with the concept of banning Tasers, but all too often it seems like the main argument against Tasers is that a few (the number of misuses vs. the number of normal uses isn't a very large ratio) cops have misused them, and so no cop should have them. Were that argument used fairly cops would be forced to try and subdue subjects with words alone, because their guns would be banned, hitting people would be banned, and tackling would be banned...and come to think of it words might be banned also, especially if some cop verbally assaulted a little kid.
The point is, you can't argue against a weapon by saying that some have misused it. If you accept that argument as valid then you can't condone cops having ANY weapons, because they can be (and have all been) misused.
And yet at the same time science is supposed to investigate anecdotal matters, or at least that's where most of our scientific understanding has come from. Most leaps forward are not preceded by large quantities of statistical evidence, but rather one or two anecdotal happenings that someone gets curious about and decides to investigate. Sure, the scientists did all that was expected of them, they examined their evidence and found that these waves were impossible according to what they'd observed. However from what I've seen and heard this was treated as another case of one group of scientists saying something's impossible and other groups simply accepting their findings as fact without examining them or gathering their own data. As they say, hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean the scientists shouldn't have studied the subject a little more before making their statements.
Last time I checked there aren't 2 deaths a year from UFOs, or reportedly from UFOs. Sure there's somewhat of a correlation, but when people are dying semi-commonly (I figure 2 deaths a year means 1 ship sunk every 5 years or so) that's when you should be looking into the subject, not simply ignoring it and saying it's not possible and that the photos are proof of nothing.
The scientists aren't fully to blame for the fact that these waves were so long thought impossible, but neither are they completely blameless, they were so set in their ways that they couldn't see any way such a wave could exist, and that's a problem. In other words it's not bad to say that these waves, or UFOs, probably don't exist, but it is a problem to say that there's no possible way such a phenomenon could happen. As Douglas Adams once postulated (paraphrasing a good amount) 'the difference between something that's unlikely and something that's impossible is that, when you find out the impossible thing can actually happen you look a lot worse than the statistically unlikely thing'
Still not creative enough...hmm
Patent Application Form J2124, Patent for 'Good Service for Good Customers on the Internet in a Shopping Cart Model'
There's no way it could fail!
Sorry, but you're the one missing the quantum physics. The GP posed a good question, does conscious observation differ from unconscious. The answer (so far as we know) is no, ergo quantum physics doesn't support this. Perhaps those are are going to be pedantic should first read up on the subject before telling others too?
Fair enough, that scene does have a few problems. However the ship's repulsor's do have to be taken into account, unless I'm mistaken they would be capable of countering gravity to an extent, enough that the ship's acceleration would be pretty minor, as well as giving it some maneuverability. It is one of those 'suspend your disbelief because this is really cool' scenes though.
"There are perfectly good arguments against this proposal but "won't somebody thing of the children (who can't secure their own networks)" isn't one of them. If you get your first warning and don't realize that you need to clamp down on your network, then too bad for you."
Ah but the problem in this case is that your first warning is a total shut-down, that's a little extreme wouldn't you say?
Considering the fact that this is a government agency, and so likely to be lazy and simply shut down internet access without looking at who's using it, I think that WiFi cafes should prepare for hard days (if they have any, I'd assume they do though).
Seriously, I'd bet money that at least half of these shut downs are going to be against people who did nothing more than have poor network security (if any). I mean, if you know that the government will shut down your internet if you download illegally, and your neighbor has a weakly secured network, there's going to be an awful lot of people taking advantage of that, and an awfully lot of unhappy innocents.
Wait...they sang "I hear the secrets that you keep, when you're talking in your sleep"? Oh man...I hope they lose it all in this suit (I kid, I kid...I actually enjoyed both their songs...no please, don't burst my bubble and claim they had other songs...I refuse to believe that)
Oh how I wish I had mod points right now, you nailed it on the head. If MS sells even one copy of Halo 3 that doesn't work on their system then they have to be willing to take it back. Third Party games don't count quite the same way because both sides can claim it was the other side that caused the problem but in this case both sides are MS so no matter what's actually causing the problem (Halo 3 or the 360) MS is responsible, they have no one to blame.
Honestly I hope they lose this one. It would be a good blow against the whole 'we don't take returns on video games' mentality, probably not enough to stop it but it would at least help.
It seems like a lot of companies are calling the 360 just the XBox now, I've seen 3 ads (2 for Black Friday, one just for the week) where they are apparently selling an XBox Arcade pack, with an XBox and a number of XBox Live Arcade titles. Of course that's actually a 360, but it seems like companies have decided that the 360 is the XBox now or something.
'Course I don't have the game so it could be a different metal version, but I'm pretty sure I've heard a version of that song that could be considered metal on the radio before.