Comment Re:should be higher (Score 1) 229
Yeah, you're right. $5 seems like a good threshold to keep out the spammers.
Yeah, you're right. $5 seems like a good threshold to keep out the spammers.
I seriously don't even understand what you are asking here. Or confused about?
You are clearly the one who is confused, both previously and now. I am not asking anything. I am calling attention to your failure.
Do you think that there should be an RFC before the protocol is fully baked?
Do you know what the acronym "RFC" fucking means?!
If you have no intention of accepting "Comments" suggesting changes to your protocol, then WTF is the point of submitting a "Request For" them?
To really handle it, you have to be able to prevent solar producers from putting power on the lines if there's too much production for the consumers.
Or come up with new ways to use the power, which ought to be pretty easy. Make carbon fiber, or hydrogen. If the power is just going to waste anyway, and the power company is serving as a waste load, efficiency doesn't matter.
Unfortunately, the power company is still expected to make sure that the power comes in at the right voltage and frequency. And with control on only part of the inputs, that's a lot harder. The fewer inputs they control, the harder...
Yeah, but as it turns out, they're not actually very good at it. Any inverter worth more than a couple hundred bucks is better at producing a reliable sine wave than PG&E, for example.
As the amount of electricity you draw from their generators goes down, they're going to reach the point of needing to charge you a flat fee just for the connection to the power lines,
I sure hope it's a flat fee. I live in the sticks.
We can get toys from Amazon instead of Toys R Us, true, but we will no longer have the EXPERIENCE of going to a toy store.
That's for the best. When the focus of the experience moved from toys to packaging, it all went wrong. Now parents can read reviews before they click buy.
they'll have to steal cards or spend money.
This is not correct. You can pay cash.
Try again.
I prefer games with off-line/stand-alone play as my internet isn't reliable during the summer, when I have the time to play.
You don't need to be online to play games you bought on Steam, unless they are online games, in which case, guess what? you need to be online to play anyway.
Because the game bought in Wal-Mart includes features such as "Access to community updates" and "play with your friends".
The Steam version has exactly the same features. And you don't have to support Wal-Mart.
The people who are being shut out of Steam Workshop are not people who are buying games at Wal-Mart, and if you don't want to use Steam, then why would you complain about not being able to access Steam Workshop?
I want to hear from one single person who is being legitimately put out because of this $5 purchase requirement.
in a real disaster you won't be able to grab it and the phone may be the only device you have.
Not really. Only if I go on a long trip. Around town, not so much. If need be I can walk across this county.
What you are offering up is no different than the *I was just following orders* routine.
No, he's not saying that the hitman is innocent. He's saying that the hitman and his employer are both guilty.
Can you cite a source for that kind of prohibition?
Here's an example, when I worked for Cisco in Santa Cruz we couldn't have a generator fuel supply on site because of local regulations, so we had a natgas generator. That's great, except that in a real situation you're supposed to shut off the gas. It's only useful for riding out simple power outages, which we never had.
I would say some people may get annoyed due to following limitations:
So wait for a sale, buy a game for $5 that was $49 a year ago, and then you're good to go in Steam Workshop.
And why should Steam give you credit for buying games at Wal-Mart?
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
