Yes it is.

I agree that we have excess, and am glad you're pro tech. We don't need disposable novelty singing rubber fish or bottled water. It's just an illustration of the level of production we've made possible. And yes, it'd be nice if we all boycotted these things and considered the hidden costs of such tripe.

I just see it as democracy, in a sense. People apparently enjoy all this crap. To deny it is authoritarian, though. I wish we had some benevolent dictatorship running things, but that's another argument.

Ultimately, I see the current state of affairs as a natural offshoot of the processes that lead to canned food, antibiotics, and utilities. Gotta take the bad with the good.

And go nuclear power! Best option that the same people who often claim to defend the planet deride. We need to pick the best of the evils we require.

Mostly, I don't see utility in being an idealist. I understand its purity, but anticipate its futility.

Self indulgence. We turned paradise into shit? I disagree. What we've done is natural and beneficial. We addressed our needs. Food, shelter, disease remedies, mental stimulation. You'd rather starve or die of an infected molar? Freeze to death? Elitist romanticism.

Yes, we're still primitive. We'll never have Star Trek, but we'll hopefully have more control over our lives than we've historically managed. What's so bad about that?

Because no one would believe it if he were 9

My thoughts too. Once any form has taken root, it monopolizes this route. It took all the low hanging fruit that spurred the process to begin with, The environment isn't the same as it once was.

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.