You won't be able to do that with this game, because the game requires the server, and instead of giving the server to the backers so that they can run their own single-player games like they would do if they gave one fuck about the players, they are keeping it for themselves so that they can profit from it. They are keeping half of what they promised to deliver to the backers. That is bait and switch, and therefore fraud, because they are able to provide single-player: simply deliver the server component to the player.

I predict that if they have free servers that they will be shit, and that you will have to pay a monthly fee for access to a server that doesn't lag you into oblivion. As my internet connection is crap, an online-only game is simply not an option for me at all, so I would be livid if I had backed this kickstarter.

I've backed two kickstarters so far. The first one was the new space quest game, which the discerning reader will note is years overdue. YEARS. That is to say, it's still not there. The other was the infrablue photography kit which was actually delivered. Until I get the rewards from my first Kickstarter, though, I'm not even going to look at their site. I am not even considering contributing to any more projects.

Kickstarter is a Bad Deal if you don't have money to throw away.

A competent team would be able to do that on the client. And in fact, they are probably able to do that, too. But they made the decision to make it an online-only game for some reason; either they are going to sell subscriptions and all the people making excuses for them right now are going to be madly pissed off, or they're going to be selling advertisements in-game. Hence they don't want to include their server in the package, because you might figure out how to make it host games without them deriving benefit. And taking the goodies out of the server and putting them into the single player game (as in games of old) would actually be difficult and take work, so they're not doing that.

You gave your word to something you're now not receiving, you no longer have any obligation because in the quid pro quo which you actually gave something for, you're not getting the promised something in return. It may not legally be fraud, since you agreed to the terms, but it's still fraud.

Abject stupidity. At least, they're not changing instruction sets again any time soon. They won't do that until they feel bytecode translation becomes a viable option for a desktop OS.

The question is whether or not you go the way of bnetd, which worked just fine; but couldn't take the legal heat.

(Also, if it's a console, or a PC title with nasty DRM or a 'warden' style thing, convincing it to connect to something that doesn't have the vendor's SSL cert could be a bit of a trick, even if you have a protocol and behavior compatible server.)

Given that a 'tower rig' is basically a server turned on its side, with fewer 40mm fans and some of the classy reliability features cut, that category will take a great deal of killing. On the other hand, the CPU in a server or tower is almost certainly using nearly as many of the power gating, adjustable clock speed, and various other thermal protection and power saving strategies as the mobile CPUs are. Overall efficiency is still going to be lower ('eh, we're on AC, just keep the PSU energized so a USB peripheral can wake the system!' isn't god's gift to brilliant standbye power numbers); but 'mobile' and 'desktop' have been on something of a collision course ever since the P4 flamed out, almost literally, and Pentium M derivatives took over.

It tends to be; but I think regulatory authorities only get nervous if it shows signs of being dangerously effective, or if there is reason to believe that the pockets behind it are deep enough to ignore losses almost indefinitely(as with international dumping/tariff slapfights, where a mixture of xenophobia and the fact that a nation state can typically afford to keep dumping longer than a company can afford to keep competing).

In the case of Intel trying to break into tablets, my understanding is that it's a known matter of fact that Bay Trail parts are being practically given away(along with a nontrivial amount of Intel software work, including an emulator to handle ARM NDK stuff and general porting and polishing to make the x86 Android not look like, say, the blasted hellscape that is MIPS Android); but it is less clear whether Intel has been able to dump hard enough to actually damage competition.

The one product line that they definitely helped bury was Windows RT (which was mostly an unloved bastard child anyway, even before you could cram an x86 into the same chassis, and definitely had no reason to exist afterwards); but that didn't hurt MS much, since the quality of Windows tablets went up. In the wider ARM ecosystem, ARM Ltd, themselves seem to be riding high and unbelievably cheap SoCs continue to pop out of the woodwork.

Their Bay Trail pricing has definitely made x86 Android something you might actually see in the wild, and tablet-Windows something you might actually consider at a sub-Windows Surface price point; but it doesn't seem to have crushed the ARM market very much.

Rising costs are no surprise. There doesn't appear to be direct collusion between insurers, but there is no real competition either. Do you think an insurer would prefer to charge a €100 monthly premium to cover a €1000 average yearly medical bill, or charge €200 premium for a €2000 bill? And prices are further inflated by empire building, ie. setting up and staffing a bunch of auxiliary functions and services that are not directly related to healthcare (and in practise do not work to benefit health either)

Since everybody has mandatory insurance for a fixed package of health care items, what added value do the insurers actually have? There's a few things that are mentioned from time to time:
- efficiency in operation. State-run schemes are notoriously bureaucratic, but there's no indication that private insurers are any more efficient; on the contrary. Especially since there are multiple companies, each with separate administration and management.
- purchasing savvy. Again, there's no indication that they are better at buying care and medicine than, for instance, the New Zealand govt which managed to get a massive discount on medicine.
- value added services like fitness programmes, health awareness campaigns, etc. this amounts to little more than the aforementioned empire building, and appears to add very little value.
I'd much prefer the Dutch government to handle basic insurance themselves, leaving the insurance companies to handle additional insurance packages (additional dental, homeopathic, acupuncture etc). I'm no commie, but universal health care has clear benefits, and if it's truly universal and socialised, it's better to let the state run it instead of a (in case of Dutch health insurance) dysfunctional market.

Soot, CO, CO2, and nitric oxides, besides the water vapor. Just like burning diesel fuel, except the proportions are different and the soot is finer.

Different people will always care about different things. That's why the official "ratings" board's job should be to make objective descriptions of pieces of media (games, movies, whatever) and provide them to different groups which produce their own ratings. Then you get your ratings from whoever, but the information they're basing their ratings on is always the same — or you'll want to know why.

I, personally, would prefer to avoid movies with a lot of vomiting in them, because that puts me off my popcorn. I think there's room for a lot of different ratings systems, but I see the need for standardization. This option provides for both.

Stop me if this is a bad idea, but can't you just load it before and after?

Perhaps that's just what FB want to address, and set up a separate work version that can be unblocked while the private FB remains blocked. Even so, I wouldn't touch it with a 6.096m pole. The main issue with FB is not employees goofing off at work.

I've seen several companies with a successful Yammer network, meaning it added real business value. Rolling out things like wikis, microblogging tools or discussion forums in a company requires more than just installing the software and announcing the new service; you need active champions, community managers, and a strategy to nurture the community continuously. That means you also need to understand the role you want these things to play in your business. . Those who perceive them as mere tools to be rolled out will most likely fail.

There's no reason he can't move on to bigger and better things from here. Perhaps this has whetted his appetite.

I guess this is the age of Oracle but we used to say "Moron Confused by Sun Equipment"

Can we do Novell and Cisco certs next?