What constitutes the lot? From my limited vantage, I see only Linux, OSX, and Windows. Of course, this just shows my myopia.

It does seem to be profitable venture.

This is about as likely to happen as North Korea landing a man on the moon.
I'll volunteer to be the first man to arm wrestle an alien.

It seems as though, since no one asked the question "how crazy are you?", he's simply steered all of his responses into answering it anyway. It also seems like half of what he does is only valuable to him if he can tell other people about it. Why does he care? It reminds me of a 12 year old bragging about the time he stole a car or slept with a teacher. They probably didn't happen, and even if they did, it's childish to broadcast it. And this guy's 67? Agh.

We're doing it right now!

If use it boom

I'll still buy a console anyway. I just won't play any games that I'm not truly interested in (ones I'd buy used). My favorite games I bought new, and my Internet connection is up 99% of the time. Now, if their system for enforcement is glitchy, I'm gonna be pissed. It's got to be perfect. No "validation servers" down issues.

Also, I think this could work if they lowered the price of games. Instead of $60 for a new title, discount them the amount they calculate new enforcement will save the publishers in lost revenue. Maybe $40 a game now, since everyone buys their own copy. It'd be a gesture of goodwill to balance the stranglehold they'd be introducing.

I agree with this for games, but I think it's because you're actually controlling it instead of merely viewing it. It's satisfying to have more immediate feedback to your inputs. Watching a mouse cursor move at 24fps (say, in an instructional screen captured video) isn't as frustrating as operating a cursor at that rate. Feedback is always better when it's faster.

Why tolerate bugs? It's just a video game. It's not a surgery or airplane. It's all make believe. The fun and enjoyment derived outweighs (or doesn't) the irritation. I enjoyed the new game, despite the numerous bugs. Hell, I've enjoyed the Xbox, despite having 2 of them die.

I guess it's about the games. We love certain stories and franchises, and there are only 1 or 2 paths to them. Sure, I could play a less buggy game, but I want to play a particular one.

Now, if I'm paying for an online course and it's buggy, I'll make some noise.

Not absurd, just not economical. Systems are born in a finite community.

Engineers seem to have emotional difficulties - a poverty of emotion at times and excess emotions at other times. They also aren't great communicators, so the feelings they do have aren't expressed clearly, or at all. This leads to frustration and isolation. When you present a flat personality most of the time, people disregard you as an emotional being. When you then develop strong feelings about something, you don't have the usual outlets for them, as you haven't cultured any. You can only stew about it and resent the people who "don't understand you." Without others to help mirror and redefine your feelings, they can only be chewed over and warped within.

A terrorist act (or suicide, murder) is an exertion of those warped emotions, and a way to communicate. It's done for an audience, as a statement. It forces people to "feel your pain" and appreciate/validate your emotions.

PepsiCo as an organization is not interested in any layman's definition of "nutrition."

So what? It's a democracy. People vote with their dollars. If people cared out nutrition, they'd educate themselves, as you have. Would the world be better without snacks?

This is a company designed to maximize profit by exploiting the still-ingrained hunter-gatherer instincts in us all

Yup. They wouldn't exist if they didn't. And what about using sex to sell? Damn our primitive urges!

You're right in that no one has explicitly stated how they "naturally" got to the mission statement, you're just supposed to know that it's an obvious bit of text to check against this hashing algorithm, and then shout "stupid" at people like you.

Exactly. My brother, who works for a Dow 30 company, said that during a company seminar on HR, the speaker made an analogy regarding an individual's role in the organization. He asked them to think of putting their hand in a bucket of water, and then withdrawing it, then asked "how fast does the water replace your hand when you take it out?" Instantly. "That's how quickly you can be replaced."

They don't care if you're exceptional, only that you're adequate, because it's a lot of work to identify exceptional workers and there aren't many of them. Unless you're the CEO or a VP, you're not setting policies, you're only following them, so followers are needed.