He has exactly no logic an no facts. Hey, it backs your bias so jump right in.

Except that you are wrong. Name one industry that shows your point.

" One was competent (but a manly lumber dyke), the rest were air thieves."
So you add a worthless antidote, use negative slang to describe them, and imply the more manly one is the better they are?

Nice way to stack up the microaggression right into misogyny AND homophobia.

You people are idiots looking for an excuse to be outraged.
It's just data, and the question is 'why?'. No one is outraged.

Half the population makes less money then the other half, and looking at the data and trying to see if we can find parity is reasonable.

Why do you think we should ignore this issue?

When though? I find it interesting that it's the afternoon.
Why wait that long to leave for a trip? I would have thought the morning would be worse.
In the rare occasion I need to go somewhere the day before TGiv* I leave at 5-6AM Now I might sleep an extra hour.

*You Heard Me.

I cut everyone in the family who are argumentative*, gets sloppy drunk, and like to fight ut of my holidays.
My families holidays are relaxing and stress free. Family is a two way street. If they can't respect my family and home, then I don't need to invite them over.
Frankly, I don't understand people who put up with the crap.

*I don't mean people I can have a civil discusses with who happen to be arguing a different POV.

That would be shocking, and a first for human beings as a whole. New data indicates what I am doing is wrong? well, I'll just change what I do, said hardly anyone, ever.

Probably not 4 times, and it is not extremely dangerous.

There are trade offs, and I am not second guessing the designers because I don't know all their constraints,

Getting and handling could have been done with the assistance of other countries. No, it would not have lost significant amounts of fuel.

They would need one gram per .5 watt.

It' an alpha emitter tat decays into a less energetic alpha emitter.
so scary.

The use of robots weapons has dramatically reduced casualties.
From systems that loiter, to self guiding, civilian casualties, are way down compared to previous wars for similar targets.

Too smart to accept something without thinking about it.

I make judgments about what to do in the future based on what I did or learned in the past.
Of course they exist.

You're parameters are screwy.
"and good enough for most applications "
You don't use most applications on the console. Do you use excel? audacity? Can you write and add any mod you like to minecraft? Use it for your email?

IN your example. the console would be the dragster. It's the specialized device.

I have a PS3, and Xbox, and a Wii. Looking at life time and usage, the PC's are cheaper.

Anyway, I was talking about technical play-ability.
Example: On a PC you can make tighter turns. I think it was Gabe Newall who did a technical write up on that issue when discussion getting PC players and Console playing together. The solution? make PC client slower. In effect lower PC's to console level
  On a PC response times is quicker.

If you never play more technically intensive games, you would n't need to upgrade a PC either.

My rigs generally last a as gaming machine about 5 years. I am just now going to upgrade my sons machine, it's 7 years old and he plays SCII, TF2, minecraft, does movie editing, CAD, and garry's mod, and Crysis. The machines cost 800 when I built it, with one upgrade of 125 dollars for a new video card over 2 years ago

Console are better if:
You want to do head to head on the same screen with someone
As a living room entertainment appliance.

This is what one would expect. The console is an appliance. It has all the pros and cons of an appliance.

None of this has to do with personal enjoyment. Like, dislike, good, bad, these are all different things.

" due to lack of information."
I would say:
  due to lack of infinite information.

Lets say the spread on that game is even.
So if we both pick a team and bet, it's even money.
But you say 'Give me 3 points and it's 2 to 1. Every dollar I bet, you will give me two.

Should I take the bet? 3 to 1? 4 to 1?
If you wanted me to give you 100 points, but you would pay a million to 1, I would probably bet a buck. Not with any hope of winning, but with the ope that I'll have a great story about the time I made a million to 1 bet. Don't ignore ancillary motivation.

Lets change it up.
Lets say you are a sniper, and there is a guy 500 meters away that you are 50% sure is your intended target. Do you shoot? 60%? 99%
Lets say your target is going to enter a code that blows up a large bomb in a random city. Do you now shoot at 50% 60% 99%
What if it's a nuclear bomb in a random city? A nuclear bomb in the city your children are at?

You can NEVER actual have 100% How close you want to get depends on the impact of the events at hand.