Do you have references for these two cases? If yes, please provide them.

According to the summary, with %n you can write a killer app that kills other apps:

"Then there’s the %n format string specifier – the one that crashes applications because it writes addresses to the stack."

I was going to make a comment like the one you made. The stakes for historians is not overcoming a lack of information, tout court, but to overcome a lack of reliable information. Life reviews are not it.

Another problem is that, even assuming perfect reliability (which we both agree is unlikely), additional documents may have a very low signal to noise ratio. In know from experience that an overabundance of data is not a blessing when combing through it for relevant information has to be done by hand. Something like a full-text search helps but is not nearly enough to solve the problem.

I owned two Palm devices. In their heyday these were great devices. In their heyday I would not have wanted any other type of PDA. But I feel no nostalgia whatsoever today for those devices. My old Palm devices don't hold a candle to my Android devices. There is nothing, absolutely not-a-thing, that my Palm devices did that my Android devices do not do better. Handwriting recognition? How about entering note using real-time *voice* recongition.

In case it need be said...

The reason for filters is that for every candidate who actually reads the job posting and is sending an application that shows that the candidate's experience and skills intersect with what the posting is looking for, there are dozens of morons whose method of applying is spray and pray, or do not know that the people reading applications are not mindreaders.

No, no, no. It's not *building* unless you grew the tree, cut it down, and milled it yourself.

Good points you raise there.

I'd also want to know about the shipping costs associated with any quoted prices. I've done my share of building systems. I know from experience that the strategy of seeking the cheapest cost on each and every part is easily undone by shipping fees.

===

Commenting now on the larger discussion, it's not always about getting the cheapest price. Building my own NAS cost me more money than buying an off-the-shelf solution, but what I got with my own build was better specs and much more flexibility than what vendors offered. I've performed experiments with it that I'm sure I would have had a hard time performing with an off-the-shelf solution, even with one whose firmware I could have replaced with somethig more palatable. There was no direct equivalent to what I ended up building.

It's a shame I have no mod points right now, because your contribution is definitely worthy of being read.

Tell her the reason she got a shock is because of her negative emotions.

You missed this bit: "There may be good reasons for this figure, since they have to recoup their costs."

All the graphs, charts, calculations are "good reasons." I did not say they were just pulling numbers out of thin air. Their opinion is an informed one but it is still an opinion. Even with all the good reasons, they have to realize that there is difference in kind between their assessment that the game should cost $60 and the assessment of a natural quality. But they don't. They think that their $60 assessment is on part with finding that a bunch of apples weighs 10kg. For the industry, their $60 assessment should elicit the same agreement from other folks as the assessment that a bunch of apples weighs 10kg. When they find that folks do not agree with them, it is as puzzling to them as finding that people claim their 10kg bunch of apples weights 1kg or 3kg.

(Postmodernists like to claim that there is no difference between opinions and facts. So for them measuring the bunch of apples to be 10kg is just as much opinion as saying the game is worth $60. And saying "seeing this movie cost me $12" or "the running time of this movie was 93 minutes" is just as much opinion as saying "this movie sucked!" Then again, for postmodernists, gravity is also opinion, that the moon is not made of cheese is also opinion, that lightning is not caused by gremlins is also opinion, etc.)

You say:

Part of it is our fault, because we just accept that games cost $60 (or whatever).

The industry lamenting that people are not going to pay $60 when there are games available for $1 (or 99 cents) is proof that a good deal of people are no longer accepting the $60 figure. If I can derive the same enjoyment from buying a $1 game than I can get from buying a $60 game, why on earth should I pay $60? Probably the $60 game has "better" graphics but better graphics does not mean greater enjoyment. When a lot of people perform this reasoning and consequently stop buying $60 games, those who think that $60 is the way things ought to be --- that it is the natural order of things --- are completely confused.

'If there's anything that's killing us [in the traditional games business] it's dollar apps. How do you sell someone a $60 game that's really worth it? They're used to 99 cents

And again, the fat cats in the industry are looking at things backwards. Once the costs are calculated, they figure each copy of the game should go for $60. There may be good reasons for this figure, since they have to recoup their costs. In their head, they think that this $60 figure they discovered is a natural fact, like weight, for instance, is a natural fact. If you take a bunch of apples and put them on a scale, you'll get a certain weight. Give the same bunch of apples to someone else and they'll get the same weight. (Those who would like to quibble can go jump off a cliff a this point.) You can repeat the experiment with 10, 100, 1000 people and maybe after discovering that their scale needs recalibrating, they'll agree on the weight.

The $60 figure is not like this. It is not a natural fact. It is an opinion that the game holds such value to potential buyers that they'll willingly give up $60 for it. And then if you ask 10, 100, 1000 people about how much they value the game, they'll give very different answers. It may very well be that no one agrees that the value of the game is such that it is worth $60. Now, if it so happens that there are games which are sold for $1 which provide what people seek in a game, why should they be willing to pay $60?

So the fat cats say "$60", the market says "no way!" but because the fat cats think their opinion is a natural fact, they then assume that there is something terribly wrong with the world. They do not ever consider that their opinion that their $60 game is "really worth $60" could be mistaken because they think the $60 figure is a natural fact rather than an opinion.

(Other entertainment media also think like this. CD sales declining? It is not because we do not deliver the value people want. It is because something external (e.g. piracy) is interfering with the order of nature.)

"In the US, the spirit of rugged individualism is held up an an ideal to aspire to. In the US, the government imposing mandates saying "You WILL use THIS system." is likely to result in a backlash. More so than in many other places."

Good grief! Go ahead. Invent your own "ruggedly individual" system of measurements and then try to communicate with the government in your own units or do regulated business in those units. That's gonna go really well. The government already mandates by law and de facto the use of certain units.

Quest Title: "Fruit Flies Hold the Key To Faster Computing"

Walkthrough:

Diplomatic route:

1. Go to the flies.
2. Talk them into cooperating with you. (You'll get a 75 Speech check at some point.)
3. The flies are going to agree to cooperate but they'll ask you to gather 10 issues of "Flies Monthly" in exchange for the key. (Follow this link for the locations of the issues.)
4. Once you get the magazines, go back to the flies.
5. Give them the issues. They'll give you a "Key to Faster Computing."
6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."

Non-diplomatic route:

1. Sneak on the flies.
2. Plant live grenade.
3. Walk away.
4. Boom.
5. Go back to the corpse of the flees and grab the "Key to Faster Computing."
6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."

Note: If Miss Puss is in your party, she'll eat the flies at first sight. You'll then have to wait for her to pass them and the key. Wait for about 24 hours. You'll eventually see her... hmm... do her business. Click on the business to open it, get the key. By the way, this business of hers is just a regular locker so you could use it as a convenient location to hoard stuff.

Mom: "It's okay, Timmy. Our carpet is coprophage."