Pachter Predicts PlayStation Domination

[Strazdas]

that seems to be the trend here, and I'm kind of bored with repeating myself.

Then dont.

Except it's the cheapest and healthiest way to do things. I see, so when you were talking about the benefits of PC it was okay to list them in a vacuum, but now you're making excuses for why you don't grow your own food.

Except its neither. It is definatelly more expensive to grow food yourself. this shouldnt even be a discussion.
Due to amount of diseases plants have and varying performance of taking care of them it is hard to sell the "its healthiest way" to anyone that have actually put thougth into it, you know, not the people who will buying anything as long as it "doesnt have E".
People used to grow all the food themselves. The price of such growing was 20 times larger and people lived far shorter lives, partly due to malnutrition. You really got no leg to stand on here.

[quuote]I mean, honestly, if you're going to ignore the context here, which deals with accessibility of PC and level of interest, then you're just being dishonest. You seem to also be relying on word salad in order to obfuscate core issues.[/quote]
Acessibility of PC? are you one of those people that still think that myths of PC gaming is true? really? PC is acessible.
Level of interest, well, to be honest here, whole gaming industry isnt big level of interest if you want to argue interest, so the point is moot.

I didn't know that PCs never needed upgrading. Sweet.

Well you learn something new today then. PCs dont need upgrading. some people chose to do so, because you CAN upgrade it, but you DONT NEED to.

That's not what their own documents claim. Strange.

Yes, because you will admit you ran your car off the cliff because you thought it has learnt to fly. no, youll claim you didnt see it coming.

The people who missed the fiscal cliff and nearly drove an entire country to collapse still get work. In the same fields. for large salaries. And they still get their golden parachutes, so if we go over another cliff, they will still be well off. I don't think I need to go any further to demonstrate why your argument is wrong.

This is the problem with most economic branches. Statisticians have been pointing this sort of thing out for decades. It is commonly said that the definition of insanity is repeating the same steps and expecting a different outcome. This is also called "economics."

But seriously, the "still employed, ergo good at job" fallacy is readily belied by the number of people who aren't good at their jobs and maintain employment.

Being good at your job does not meant keeping economy going though. thier job was to make money. they made money. at an expense of everyone else of course, but still made money. thus, they were good at thier jobs. Thier job is not to save everyone. no. Their job is to hoard as much money at expense of others. Thats capitalism.