I think we should take it a step further. All of my points and health should be automatically given to other players in the game if they have less than me. This would not only make a great game, but a great way of living.

"Yes we can!" If Obama was only a game designer... I could finally complete with all you stoners who used to torture me on Mortal Combat.

Yeah, I wouldn't exactly call it a black mark either. However, I believe software engineers have an ethical responsibility to adhere to regarding who they work for and what type of work they are willing to do. For example, I once refused to have my resume submitted to Equifax. They are not a bad company, but in my experience. However, they are the type of company that would push me to violate the privacy of individuals. While I probably wouldn't be asked to break laws, that doesn't mean I have to be happy or comfortable about the creative ways that they wish to collect data. A gambling company falls into the same genre for me. They are going to ask you to manipulate the end user, make them feel like they are about to win, or make them feel like they have accomplished something outside of losing their money... that kind of stuff. You have to ask yourself if you are ok with doing that and frankly, if that's the type of contribution to society you want to make.

I implemented a time-based licensing scheme in 2002. Which is very much the same as the product microsoft launched to do this. I thought of patenting it, but didn't. I would like to object as well. We still use it...

I think this is even better because you can demand a refund of your $0.13. That's when things could get interesting.

You're hardly even worth responding too.

He is not 'trying' to do more than anyone else. He's not trying to show you or anyone else up. He feels called to do a lot of things. Rolling over and dying just isn't one of them. He is not a "one of kind" breed either. The mindset of the 'pious' struggling with major health issues is simply nothing like yours.

Sure, for some it may be an issue of simple fear. However, from my experience. It is quite the opposite. It is a lack there of.

Moreover, if the root cause was fear of death, then you and just about everyone else in this thread have a lot of explaining to do regarding thousands of years of bizarre self-sacrifice in the name of religious callings.

Sure, resolution of the innate human fear of death is part of the religious appeal. However, you are forgetting that religion does offer effective resolution of this fear. If it didn't, then like I said, you have a lot of explaining to do.

My point exactly, you are speaking in terms of ignorance.

While sick he has written and published a book. He currently teaches two classes at West Georgia University. He learned Microsoft CRM and implemented version 4.0 for my company. He was inducted as a Steinway Artist Hall Of fame for his work in Jazz Gospel fusion. And I am just getting started. You has recorded 2 CD's, one of which sells fairly well on iTunes.

The man has about 3 good hours a day. And he does more with them than you probably do.

With all due respect. Storm, you sir, are the ignorant arsehole

.

I can talk about this first hand. You are all wrong. My father is very religious. He has had cancer twice. The second time was seven years ago. The doctor's gave him a 3% chance of living. He lived. And to this day, his medical bills are nuts. He works everyday to prolong his life in a manner which I know any normal mortal would be able to handle. I would have rolled over and died years ago. His quality of life sucks. He has been on a 90%liquid diet for seven years. For the past two years, he coughs up half of what he eats because it goes into his lungs. It takes him an hour and a half to eat a snack. It is an everyday battle for calories and strength. His oxygen levels are so low, that nearly every regular doctors visit, they send him to the emergency room. In fact, he went today.

So what is it? Is it a fear of death? Hell no. If you met my father for as little as one hour, then you would know that isn't it. He isn't scared to die. It is the combination of two things,

1) His faith gives him strength. What we may see as an unbearable life style, he has ways of dealing with it. It simply doesn't break will. He still finds joy in life.

2) My father believes in purpose. If God has given him a way to live, then God still has plans for him. Suffering everyday means something completely different to him.

---------------

I should not that, personally, I am agnostic. All of you pining over the idea that the religious fight death hardest because they are scared of death, which does follow some logic, are VERY wrong.

My point also remains the same. He learned an important lesson about platform and distribution. If he is a fool for having learned the hard way, then so am I.

I had build a thin client website building tool that was far superior than anything on the market. I spent a tremendous amount of time on it (years) and spent money on resources. I invented an XML Object Request Broker because none existed and a dozen other technologies to make it work right. Only to discover that I couldn't compete with a simple page builder offered by Yahoo which probably didn't cost more than $15,000 for the initial version.

This guy tried to create a great color matching game where the market was flooded with other lesser (in his opinion) color matching games. I tried to create a great website builder where the market was controlled by other lesser (in my opinion) web building tools.

We both got fleeced. In hindsight, it seems easy to call. I believe the lesson's learned is more complex than what you are giving credit. The idea that you can simply launch an application, market it, and make money is very complex farce.

And yes, there is a "if every bar west of the Mississippi" scenario. Of course, I don't do games, but that is very much the game I play today. Its a game of chess and the customer is the king. Take a long hard look at Microsoft Office. Why do people buy that? Rinse, repeat (in a smaller market segment). You don't learn this game in school. $32,000 is cheap.

K, I can see that I am doing more antagonizing than I toward making my point. So let me take a step back.

What I learned in my first attempt which resulted in a $125,000 loss (not including an $ estimate for my own time) was that "customer is king".

By that, I don't mean "listen to your customers needs" and all that stuff. Anybody and everybody can do that. If you don't already know that, then you really are a moron.

I mean that "customer is king" in a chess board sort of way. If you don't have a king, then your game is over. You can't play.

So given that, "Yes" you can make $32,000 on a color matching game. Say you own 10,000 well placed bar top quarter machines. People will sit and drink beer and plop quarters in. Your app will easily make $32,000 if you have the customer base

I don't exactly see how jumping off of a roof on a skateboard is the same thing as spending $32,000 on a business venture. But if you say so guy, then ok. I spent (and lost) a lot more than that on my first attempt to build and launch a software product into the market place. I guess that makes me a Brooklyn bridge jumper with a pogo stick as well as a massive moron. Especially considering that my reasons for failure weren't terribly different that the Dapple guy. Its pretty amazing how a huge fool like myself made another attempt several years later which has now sold in the millions of dollars range. However, I kneel to your wisdom. You are clearly more knowledgeable on this topic than I.

You made me LOL. iSnot was your "Aha" moment?

My Dad taught me as a youngster: "If you can say you learned something, then you came out ahead."

This guy took $32,000, built a product, launched it, and marketed it. He probably learned as much from this as he would in some class room. Not only did he learn something, but he is sharing what he learned. Its not easy to announce to the world that you were clueless, chased some hype, and took a bit of a beating.

Sticking $32,000 in the bank is a shameful alternative to growing some balls and jumping out into the "real" world. Next time he gets excited about something, he is likely to take a significantly better approach.

I would have to agree with you there. However, I like fantasy land. I have a new truck, a suite of offices, employees, and time to sit and goof off on Slashdot because of my frequent trips there. I launched my company with a product I built myself. The friend who helped me launch was hoping to buy 12 pack of beer off of what I paid him for managing the website & shopping cart stuff. Turned out he got to buy lots and lots of beer. FYI) I did it all without Obama's stimulus package, government loans, or Angel investors. Further, if we had a good economy back in 2002, I wouldn't have done any of it. We need our ups and downs. We need everyone to take risks on their own Dapples. When it works, hire people whose Dapples didn't sell so well.

I do know that when the big card shufflers first came out, they had a bit of a flaw. They could shuffle the cards so much that the cards essentially might become un-shuffled. Then some math guy to figure out the optimal number of random shuffles per X decks to ensure maximum randomness of each card dealt. Naturally, they then fixed the deck shufflers. I remember learning the story in a college math class. It had something to do with chaos theory. Pretty cool stuff. Card counters can't beat it because it shuffles between every hand.

You mean, the lottery is a tax on stupidity.

Gambling is part of life. You can't walk out your door without gambling that a satellite won't fall out of the sky and strike you on the head.

Seriously though, I like sports betting. My favorite bet to make is when two teams are fairly even matches, but the odds are very lopsided. Like the Super Bowl, the Cardinals were going to give the Steelers a good game. But the Steelers were a heavy favorite, cause... they are playing the Cardinals. It was easy money with the 6.5 point spread.

Point being, if someone bets you 3 to 1 that a coin will land on heads and you know your odds are 2 to 1. Then you take the bet. Its still gambling, but it is far from stupid. In sports gambling and all variety of casino games, the astute gambler can make it pay.

The one big exception to this is the lotto. (Though, at one point I believed the lotto was beatable. Then I found out that they switch out the balls regularly). Regardless, I find it especially puzzling that this is the only legal form of gambling in most states. Both the lotto and slots have a guaranteed percent on house odds. However, the lotto stands alone in that there is no way you can game it to your advantage. I have often said that the lotto is a tax on people who don't know math.