Support Tek Syndicate:
The Links:
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://teksyndicate.com/videos/tek-0238-google-censoring-internet
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://teksyndicate.com/videos/tek-0238-google-censoring-internet
2 Likes
Anyone else not able to see the video in this thread?
Here you go:
Does Logan and Wendell stream this episodes live on Twitch at very least. I feel like they should get on that bandwagon.
aww, i wanna watch this but its 1am for meeee.....
guess ill wait till the morning/////.....
when experimenting with DNA it is always better to make a drug that suppresses the gene/ selected DNA sequence for a certain amount of time rather that replace the gene/DNA sequence to mitigate the risk until more is know of the long term. not to mention the FDA would never allow a drug that replaces/alters the DNA ATM. these kinds of drugs could be made at home, but the materials would have to become more available and have lower costs to be worth it. theoretically if the process was know and the DNA sequence was know anyone could make these drugs. everyone could have their own personal fountain of youth if the DNA sequence was know that instructs the cells to repair or lengthen the telomeres if that is what actually makes us capable of immortality.
googlebook eh?
linux liners?
@Logan @wendell do I think google should be a good steward? Yes. Do I think they should be responsible if they decide not to be? No. After all they are a company in the private sector and the only people they really owe anything to are their share holders. I hope they're better than that though. Also the thing about people searching for a URL is one of the most infuriating things I've seen. Professors at my university do it all the time and it drives me crazy.
About there being 'too many games':
I believe that the issue isn't so much there being a large volume of games, but rather the lack of quality control for consumer markets. One of the reasons why the NES was so successful was the fact that only games that Nintendo approved of was allowed on their consoles. While indie games on the PC have made popularity, they have only been able to do so by word of mouth (for the most part) as opposed to being marketed like the next Call Of Duty.
The issue arises when just anybody has been enabled to sell games on easily accessible storefronts (Google Play store and Steam Greenlight). While you do have an opportunity to sell your game through significantly less hurdles, other people can do the same. While really awesome indie games came out of it, you also got a lot of knockoffs, or games that were made quickly and sold for the money.
Another issue is the fact that developers of AAA titles have the ability to do bugfixes on games POST LAUNCH by updating their games. This have allowed them to sell games that are possibly broken, and have some sort of plan to patch after launch. This is assuming that they would, as they don't really have any incentive to fix their stuff after they already have your money. A decade ago you could not patch games on console markets, and PC patches required more effort from the user to apply than it currently does today. This meant that if you shipped a broken game, it stayed broken, and you couldn't fix it once it was in the consumer's hands. All of this means is that developers today could get away with QA failures that would have possibly killed a product ages ago.
I'm not going to say there should be fewer games, but if you are going to have a portal for developers to publish games, you need to set a benchmark as to what the quality of the games should be. Games like Angry Birds and Clash of Clans did not make the mobile market being broken on day 1.
Dude it's 4:30AM here and I have a work meeting at 8AM...
I agree. I don't think there can be too many games however I'm not a huge fan of the mobile market. I feel like it's just a bunch of mediocre games with far far too many micro-transactions.
Please make the Games for Windows live shirt! I will buy it!
1 Like
On Netflix, to answer Wendell's question. Yes. I despise ads. If I can avoid watching or seeing them I will. I don't want more useless information assaulting my senses than I need and I don't feel like wasting 30 - 120+ seconds of my time listening to something when I'm trying to do something.
It's hard to put my finger on but there is more about it too. It's also feels kind of insulting for some reason. I think it's because I feel the manipulation built into it like a creepy salesman breathing down my neck. I also look at it kind of like salesmen walking up to me at a store and asking "Could I help you save 10% on your purchase today?" <-- actual thing I got asked at a Best Buy when I wasn't even buying anything.
It may sound obstinate and arrogant but if Netflix put ads on their service then I would cancel it instantly. I don't even watch it more than a few times a month. It's not worth it to me.
Mobile games
Clash of Candy Birds. Brought to you by Games for Windows Live!
Why no squirrel videos?
2 Likes
Seconded. They should really look into it and perhaps make a full vid to review it and give their opinions.
1 Like
I feel assailed :)
weight vs power is a curve where people cant be dinosaurs and getting off the floor is a struggle.
lol at the pateroun sons Im one and I want to see where it leads :)
not planning for cacki
It probably wasn't Zuckerfuck's laptop. He just happened to be there and someone took a random picture of him.
Apparently that really is his desk (he posted a video of it on FB 9 months earlier), so it's fair to assume that the laptop is his too.