Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:IBTimes - noscript required (Score 4, Insightful) 70

While I hate LBOs as much as the next person (in fairness probably even more), I expect Dell's shareholders to want that extra 50c and to damn the company and its employees. Unless you're both an employee and a shareholder... the plan is to take the shares off of your hand, why would you care what happens to the company afterwards? The Board of Directors is responsible to shareholders, not employees. Rationally, they'd probably vote for Dell to get gutted. Yay, unbridled capitalism.

Comment: Re:Employer has not be heard of for about ever (Score 2) 915

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43164003) Attached to: New Pope Selected
In real life, assume you've been given the reigns of a company that issues new shares every quarter, produces nothing but annual letters, and pays your every expenses and allows you to live in luxury, with no Board of Directors to oversee your actions. Would you really tell your shareholders "y'know, that Board of Directors doesn't exist and we're selling you pipe dreams?"

Comment: Re:Gobble bobble wobblywob? (Score 1) 351

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43153201) Attached to: Bitcoin Blockchain Forked By Backward-Compatibility Issue
Uhm. Yes, yes it sounds like they've lost.

Nothing was _lost_ for BitCoin, or for the employer, or for the market as a whole. But you, the individual that had a winning number and got told "oops, sorry, not for you this time", you'll feel as if you lost something. Now you have to toil for another month to wait for a chance to win.

It may be a simple technical flaw that is easily fixed, but for the person impacted, it's not just that. It doesn't build confidence. Would you work for such an employer?

Comment: Re:Iran cut off from the Internet... (Score 2) 176

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43138965) Attached to: Iran Blocks 'Illegal' VPNs, Google, and Yahoo
Moderate Islam? No, Islam is the religion, with its list of dogmas and its holy book. Most religions, to me, seem to be founded by nutjobs and have their share of crazy things, but not every believer thinks everything in their holy book is real and must be followed to the letter. That's why we have moderate Muslims.

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

But you know what? Most Christians and Jews are moderate, and don't seek to put my head to the sword.

Comment: Re:Also just "voting with your dollars" is stupid (Score 1) 369

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43049589) Attached to: Cliff Bleszinski: Vote With Your Dollars
I fully agree with you but you also have to think that EA has accumulated years of bad press and anger, from DRM, bad treatment of its employees, buying up beloved studios and burning them down to the most recent "please insert your newborn baby to refuel your car."

I don't blame EA for Origins. It's annoying, but as you say, it's equivalent to Steam. For the rest though? Companies like Valve are liked because they (so far) haven't released a game that was "free-to-play" but in reality pay-to-play (yes, I'm thinking of having to pay to service your car in Real Racing 3), a game with annoying DLC reminders (Dragon Age or whatever else) and because Valve doesn't behave like a douchebag bully with its customers and employees. That's why in a EA vs Valve fight, Valve wins.

This goodwill is however not eternal. 7-8 years ago, Google was amazing, everyone loved them. "Do no evil", it was said... and yet now, there is slowly some creeping criticism. Don't sow what you're not willing to reap. EA's ripe for the reaping.

Comment: Re:Doesn't work (Score 4, Insightful) 369

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43049359) Attached to: Cliff Bleszinski: Vote With Your Dollars
Y'know it's not _quite_ the same, depending on what type of DLC we're talking about?

Back then, you could buy a game, play it, finish it, and enjoy it, and nothing mentioned any expansion packs. If you got an expansion, it was usually adding a new storyline, brand new levels, whatever, but a "new" game using the same game engine and same game universe.

Example:
Diablo 1: Finished the game, enjoyed it? Good. Oh wow, an expansion. Want to play as a monk, explore two new levels? Get the expansion. Don't want to? That's okay, no one will force you
Dragon Age Origins: Hey look, an area on my map. *goes to area* Hey look, an NPC with a quest! *talks to NPC* Uh. What do you mean, I have to pay to download a DLC to play the quest you just offered?... I don't want to. Why do you have an area, why do you exist in my freaking game?

And _that_ is the difference. Expansions don't prompt me, within my original game, to spend more money. It's entirely voluntary. DLCs just tease you.

Comment: Re:Manufacturing (Score 1) 268

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43046067) Attached to: When It's Time To Scale, US Manufacturing Hits a Wall
It's not your fault, not directly.

The western world had its industrial revolution more than a hundred years ago. It polluted its own rivers, its own cities, and had adults and children alike working in terrible conditions. Slowly but surely, its population realized this was not sustainable, that the costs were too great, and instigated changes such as environmental controls, laws on working conditions, etc. Businesses and factories had to adapt to the changing conditions and the lack of close-to-slave labour, but the price was worth paying.

Fast-forward to the future, and with the advent of new technologies and speedier communication methods and transports, we live in a globalized world. It is now possible to manufacture goods in another country than yours at a lower cost. These countries have just started their industrial revolution, do not know better or are dealing with a very accelerated developmental process and its growing pains, while usually having the short end of the stick due to an imbalance in power in global politics. Capitalists everywhere jump at the opportunity to maximize their profits, but at the same time, they also offer cheaper goods to their customers. Everyone wins.

Everyone wins? No, everyone wins here, in the western world. You and I enjoy products (of varying quality, I must admit) that are cheaper than if they were produced here. Consumers rejoice, and send a clear message: keep it coming, that's what we want. We are happy to maintain a high quality of life, in a a safe and healthy environment. Someone, somewhere though is paying the price, and that is the workers in south-east Asia or elsewhere, who die in their cancer villages. Is it your fault, my fault, our fault? Not directly. I sure as hell don't control environmental politics in China. I also am not responsible for managing the development of a country of a billion people. I do however have the choice of buying products that were made by companies respectful of the environment and its employees. Slashdot likes to decry the conditions of the Foxconn workers, and the western world pointing fingers at it and sending that message to Apple makes them care just a tad bit more, but somehow when the environment is concerned, it's their own goddamn problem? A lot of the pollution problems in developing countries is incurred because they are developing, because of _us_ caring only about a cheaper price and results and not one iota about their conditions. We're not willing to pay for them to have environmental regulations.

The Chinese industrial revolution is barely 30 years old, and they haven't yet learned to stand up for themselves. They're starting though, slowly. Give them time, give them the hundred years the western world had. We'll see then. Meanwhile, enjoy your cheap stuff and keep blaming them for the world's environmental problems.

PS: This post is not against _you_ in particular. I'm just trying to argue that fault is not very clear-cut, but I do think that part of it is ours.

Comment: Re:Waiting for the other shoe (Score 1) 437

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#43013969) Attached to: World's First Bitcoin ATM
No no. Google, Dell, Apple, Microsoft.. those are all companies that _make money_. They make money by producing something, by _creating_ something. That's not what Bitcoin is doing.

The proper analogy is that a few people found shiny rocks in a riverbed. They then go "nice, shiny!", get together and discover few people own those shiny rocks. They then proceed to convince everyone that these shiny rocks should be worth something and that it can be used as a currency, since it's rare and easily transportable. In the beginning, most people don't care, and so the founders accumulate a lot of shiny rocks. By the time shiny rocks become popular, there are few to be found in the riverbed, but some suckers still come by and look for fragments of shiny rocks.

It's not exactly a Ponzi scheme because no new member is directly paying old members through the scheme. They are all increasing the value of shiny rocks however, as they become more commonly used. The only problem is that those shiny rocks have absolutely no use, and do not produce anything (that's why I didn't say gold; gold has uses). While it's fun for as long as it works, one day people might realize they could use something else than shiny rocks, and their values will drop. Or, or maybe the feudal lord ruling over the place decides that he won't accept shiny rocks but prefers paper bills written "United States of America" and "legal tender" for you to pay your taxes and dues, who knows.

Comment: Re:touch-typing? (Score 1) 240

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#42982729) Attached to: Compared to my immediate peers, my typing
Uh well.. I thought everyone on Slashdot would be a pretty fast typer, by which I mean, they touch-type. The survey results seem to indicate most people here think they're faster than average, so I'd hope they all touch-type.

Of course, playing MUDs for a great number of years does influence your typing skills, in my case...

Comment: Re:Pffft... "Education" (Score 1) 248

Well.. I'll repeat a comment I wrote elsewhere. Dawson College is a CEGEP, which in the Quebec education system, serves as both an intermediary between high school and university and as a trade school. Computer Science, at the CEGEP level, _is_ a trade school. He wouldn't have the requirements necessary to enter Computer Science at the university level (for that he would have to go into Science in CEGEP).

Now, bearing in mind Dawson is not a university but a trade school, and that in Montreal they're known for not being very.. rigorous or competent (which I can't judge, but people will scoff and go "oh, so.. you're studying liberal arts/communications?..."), it's not altogether surprising. I know of no computer science program in university (at least in Montreal) that is a trade school.

Comment: Re:Ridiculous (Score 2) 633

Minor correction: Dawson is not a university, it's a college. In Quebec, it's the step before university, but since he was studying computer science it was akin to a trade school. He would be lacking the prerequisites with that program to go into computer science at the university level, except at ETS in Montreal.

Comment: Re:so why would i buy a blackberry? (Score 1) 193

by AnonyMouseCowWard (#42608141) Attached to: RIM Attracts 15,000 Apps For BlackBerry 10 In 2 Days
I have a Blackberry for work, and while I'm underwhelmed by the software, the presence of a physical keyboard is amazing. As an e-mailing/texting device, it's so much better than a touchscreen, coming from someone who has a personal iPhone and a Nexus 7 (the latter has amazing error correction on the keyboard and Swype is a pleasure to use, but I still prefer the physical keys for speed).

As soon as RIM loses its physical keyboard, they will lose their appeal to me, unfortunately, regardless of improvements in software.

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...