Certainly not. But if an organization like CNN or BBC ran the story, it would give those sensible people more publicity, and it would help the Western world realize that there are moderate voices in the country. Otherwise all we end up with are snarky comments like "they should just start burkha-book".

What is nice to see is that there has been a protest against the ban by students and professors

http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=162813&cid=2

Unfortunately, this probably doesn't make for as exciting news as yet-another-theocracy-bans-facebook. A search on Google News for "bangladesh facebook" doesn't even throw up this link, and I haven't yet seen any mention of these sensible, logical voices on BBC,CNN etc.

I'd highly recommend getting hold of the BBC documentary "Tetris : From Russia with love". Link

Also, there was a game design challenge a few years ago at GDC. Mr. Pajitnov was one of the participants (and the eventual winner I think), and I loved the way he approached the problem

Link

I'm not sure what the plan is now, but when the Nano was first unveiled Ratan Tata (the CEO) said that they would be focusing on selling the car in smaller cities.

The larger cities like Delhi and Mumbai have good public transport systems, and most people are pragmatic enough to realize that a train will get them to work faster (and cheaper) than driving in a car. I worked in Mumbai for two years, and I was earning more than enough money to own a regular car (and pay a driver!) but I still used public transport on a daily basis. The same is true for almost all of my peers.

I don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol. I see it being primarily bought by lower-to-middle income families in the smaller cities, or in villages which are well connected to neighboring cities. If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

This talk between Will Wright and Brian Eno about the joys and challenges of working with procedural content is great

http://blog.longnow.org/2006/06/26/will-wright-and-brian-eno-playing-with-time/

I said "Many of them" and not "all of them". Perhaps I should have said "some of them". I also think that there are more scholarships available for masters/PhD programmes than for undergraduate studies.

It just seems illogical to me that this country would not want to keep the professionals whose education they paid for.

There's also the fact that many of them get scholarships/fellowships/teaching assistantships from US universities. Essentially, American taxpayer money has gone into funding their education, and because of idiotic political reasons they are going back. Of course the layman just sees them as taking up a job, and won't see the fact that
a) They could create more jobs
b) A US-educated immigrant going back is a net loss (in terms of taxpayer money) for the country.

"In my opinion, you're talking out of your ass. Have you ever considered that perhaps controller design has reached a point of mautrity? There's a reason that keyboards and mice are fundamentally the same as they were 20 years ago - the input device works, and it works well."

The keyboard and mouse do not fundamentally deter people from using a computer. Modern controllers do simply because they look too complicated to the layman. I think its pretty obvious what is more intuitive - rotating analog sticks to control your _rate_ of looking around in an FPS, or making small precise movements with your wrist to achieve the same thing.

"The problems with the Revolution controller are numerous.
First, it eliminates compatibility - games that play well on the PS3 or XBox 360 will likely play poorly on the Revolution. And most (if not all) of the first-person-shooters on the Cube were XBox/PS2 simultaneous releases or ports. The "different" controller makes companies like EA question whether they even want to do a port. Now, you may argue that companies will make exclusive Revolution FPS games, but that wasn't the case with the Cube, and there is no reason to believe that it will be the case with the Revolution."

Point taken. I'm having a hard time trying to imagine how certain genres (such as sports) can even be played using the revolution controller. However if you look fundamentally, all the analog sticks + dpad on normal controllers do is capture directional information - the revolution controller just does it differently. So there is still a chance that with a little thought, a developer could come up with a good interface for revolution ports.

"Second, the analog controller is awkward. You're going to need it for movement control in FPS games, but it's attached to the "main" controller with a damn cable. That basically rules out fast movements of the Revolution controller.
Third, you need to make big movements to make small changes with the Revolution controller. That's bad from an ergonomic standpoint. Can you imagine moving your arm around in the air (or, for that matter, twisting your wrist) for multiple hours on end?"

This is completely wrong. If you read what the parent said - and this has been confirmed by a number of people who were present at the demonstration Miyamoto gave at TGS - you make _large_ movements onscreen simply by flicking your wrist. So effectively, you use the analog stick attachment and the 'remote' with your hands resting on your lap comfortably. Nintendo themselves are probably to blame for this misconception because they showed a guy jumping out from behind a sofa waving his arms frantically in the video at TGS.

"Fourth, it has very few buttons. If you use the d-pad for weapon selection, Start for the menu, a for primary fire, and b for secondary fire, you still need to find another button for jumping, a button for "Use", a button for reload, a button for crouch - where are these buttons going to come from? How are you even going to use the buttons at the bottom of the remote?"

The analog attachment has two trigger buttons. Having too many buttons will simply go against their philosophy of trying to make things simpler.

"Nintendo is a very unique and innovative controller. But designing a controller that is radically different is a bad move for a company that very much needs third-party involvement. In the end, the games make the system. And Nintendo cannot deliver a compelling game lineup without 3rd party developers."

Only time will tell if third-party developers are ready to and do make quality games. I surely hope they do, Nintendo needs it and the game industry does need a company like Nintendo.