I have to agree, I wouldn't be surprised if we are only getting part of the story. It wouldn't really make sense for Google to give someone the power to delete any video they saw fit, and obviously that's not how its being used seeing as this is the first mention we have heard of this secret deal. It seems more likely that they gave UMG delete privileges on the grounds that they only be used on things they have copyrighted. Some mindless office drone at UMG made the mistake of deleting it and Google didn't catch it in time to restore it.

Google has learned that creating a quality product without being sued is not an easy task and sometimes you have to shake hands and play nice with other corporations. There are groups of people who flag videos as inappropriate just because they don't like the message in it and yet no one called Google evil for giving stupid people sitting at home the ability to get videos taken down.

Computers are far more powerful and should be able to demolish consoles in performance but they don't. With all the mobile technology advancements consoles now have the oppertunity to really rival desktop performance since consoles seem to be so much more efficient in playing games. As long as the console developers compete on price the average person will likely prefer to just buy one of the three main consoles at a few hundred dollars than look through the thousands of "gaming computers" available ranging from the same price as a console to up and over a thousand dollars.

The mouse and keyboard keep many gamers on the computer but developers could easily start supporting mouse and keyboard for consoles. At this point it seems like if Steam wasn't around the PC game market would be anywhere near as large as it is now.

I may have not expressed my stance correctly. I do not deny climate science but we are constantly learning more. To state that everyone who believes in "Global Warming" is in agreement on what it actually implies would be very ignorant. I have heard so many (sometimes contradicting) views on what causes global warming and what it will lead to, that I have a hard time developing a stationary stance against them.

What I should have stated more clearly is that I am thankful to climate science. Smog in LA had reached unacceptable conditions and were only getting worse. Desiring to lessen the damage we are doing to our world is very admirable. That is, in moderation. We are still learning how everything that influences our climate work together, only in recent years have we noticed that things such as sun spots may have a profound influence.

I simply do not want a scientist to get carried away and do some permanent damage. If we start to see dramatic changes in climate then I will argue that we need to look in to a solution. However, recently the weather has been fairly nice where I live and I don't think we need to jump the gun to "fix" it.

Seriously I can put up with this global warming hype as long as the scientists just use it to get free grants, but they better not start getting carried away and actually screwing stuff up.

I can totally see it in 100 years when we have caused an ice age after releasing something in to the atmosphere in an attempt to stop global warming.

Lets just sit back and see what happens, I remember not to long ago when people were afraid of global cooling.

Except that here apple is clearly not out to make a new standard, this is for their products only and they have shown many times before that they don't like to share. Sony will come up with their own and apple will sue them anyway and we can add 5 new cases to the list of patents being brought to court.

I was actually referring to the PSVita, guess I should have made that clearer but I wouldn't be surprised if down they road they looked in to combining the projects.

I meant the PSVita can do most of what a smart phone can do in that it has internet, can play music, play movies, can store files, and who knows what else will be added with software updates. The 3DS on the other hand does very little besides play games. While the PSVita could be considered multimedia device that your could get a ton of use out of without ever playing a game on it the 3DS has a very focused purpose.

Stow your sarcasm, don't you realize this could mean I wouldn't have to volunteer to be designated driver ever again!

Suddenly I don't think people are giving Google enough support, if China's cars can't drive at night what good are they, I'm not gonna start getting hammered mid day cause that's the only time my car can take me home.

but where is the proof behind that?

  Facebook requiring a real name was a rare case on the internet seeing as most similar sites that had gotten big up to that point did not require real names (yes I know there are exceptions). Now during Facebook's reign there have been tons of sites that work almost exactly the same as Facebook that do not require real names and yet have failed to gain ground. Now the biggest threat that we have seen yet is google+ and it has the same name policy.

I understand that there are way to many factors to consider here for us to use these examples to answer the question posed. However, I think what can be seen is that whether a site requires real names or not may not be very important to the majority of users. While most people here on /. are very careful about what they post on the internet I think we have seen most people on social networking sites have much lower bars on what they consider private.

I think you may be taking it to an extreme, it was inevitable that powerful phones that could play game would steal some of the handheld market but I wouldn't go so far as to say it doomed all handhelds. Just as it was inevitable that netflix would steal money from cable providers, but then it became the job of cable providers to adapt (something they are doing poorly).

However, just because many of technologies have died because they failed to evolve with the times doesn't mean handheld gaming devices will, in fact Sony and Nintendo are both very aware of the changes and have each developed new strategies.

*Apple has designed a phone that can play games. Problem is the games available are nowhere near as powerful or well developed as the competition, and will have a very hard time luring real gamers away from their current devices.

*Sony move the same direction but from the opposite starting point and is creating a gaming device that can do the same functions as a smart phone. This allows gamers to still play their favorite games while being able to get rid of their smart phone, however, it will turn away people who want the their device to be for more serious applications.

*Nintendo on the other hand has taken what I think is a very smart move, while Sony and Apple head in the same direction where one inevitably has to win, Nintendo has decided to distinguish their device and go their own direction. While many would argue Nintendo is doing a poor job currently, I would like to remind people how Nintendo has come from behind and turned a silly childish idea into a huge success. Just because they released one flop doesn't mean they have met their end, many didn't really like the GB Advanced but then they release the GB Advanced SP and sales shot through the roof.

The time may come where technology advances so far that there is no reason why our handheld device doesn't have a phone in it but that time isn't now. Apple may want to claim they are winning but Nintendo would state that they aren't really competing in the same arena.

It an unfair complaint to make because it grades all game on the same scale. It not a question of are the games realistic compared to real life, its are they close enough to realistic in the world they are in. A super hero game can exist on earth but in their "world" having powers is normal and we don't complain but even still in that world there are limits to what those powers can be.

I wouldn't say so much that games like CoD is unrealistic but pushing the bounds of realism. We don't mind health regenerating because that makes the game more fun but if a person can survive a headshot from a sniper rifle that's a step to far. Real life is boring but if a game goes to far over the edge then the player cant feel immersed.

The same can be said for movies, Bruce Willis does some highly improbable stuff (never thought Id state it like that), but it is just inside the bounds of reality that most people can sit back and enjoy the movie, while many other movies push the bounds too far. It's a very careful balance that must be maintained and games that do it well are the ones that are remembered.