BallGum

True but it cant hurt to play on a nice framerate. It's definitely annoying to me to play Civ 5 that keeps alternating between 60 fps and 30fps.

I think there is a low end snapdragon (I believe it is the 410) that is designed for budget devices that is 64bit capable. Hopefully more SoC's like this will help push for 64 bit capability in the lower end of Android. Till then, I wonder if allowing developers to include two versions of their app will help? Then the play store itself can identify your device and serve up the correct version for you to install.

Another one of those rimes where I wish I was a bit more educated about architecture to filly appreciate this. Oh well. @Lawlz or @patrickjp. Anything to add to this?

Sure. All I'm saying is metal != Build quality.

Build quality is ensuring it won't bend or break and has no general rough edges. Pretty much all the major manufacturers have this covered.What you're enjoying about apple products is their build materials; metals. To you, metal = premium. That's subjective i.e. not a fact. Phones aren't catching up in build materials either. In 2010 HTC had their HTC Legend, an aluminium unibody phone. They've been making metal devices for years and they looked pretty cool IMO.

Beyond the scope of the discussion. It's all about journalistic ethics. If you get dragged down into a discussion about feminism, ignore it and move on. It has absolutely nothing to do with the gamergate movement.

Ah, I understand. I disagree though, but to each his own

Guys he is basically just trying to say "we're not spying" despite the fact that they are.

Posing a question with a premade assumption / statement in it is a logical fallacy. This is black and white.The assumption in your first question was that the article is bringing to light misogynistic vitriol. I can assure myself I know about the two sides. Look at your comment. Look how angry it is. Now look at the other Pro-GGer's and their comments. See the difference? It's in news site's interests to deflect critique by calling GG-ers misogynistic. It is textbook ad hominem. They're conflating two different issues. The only thing GG-ers really care about are journalistic ethics. Zoe Quinn is a different issue, and Anita Sarkesian's "feminist" (that's an insult to feminism IMO) views are another. We need to talk about misogyny in the industry but it is a different discussion for another place.

Logical fallacy right there: asking a question that has an assumption already in it so that no matter what you answer will be wrong.One side is willing to have discussion about the points, while the other rejects discussion. That alone is pretty telling.

And that is perhaps the great irony here. All we've gotten are highly opinionated pieces that prove the pro-gamergate movement more and more correct.The r/kotakuInAction is a great subreddit dedicated to allowing everyone express their views.

So many issues have been conflated into that one movement (just as intended by the media). If Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkesian with their cons could be dealt separately to the actually issue at hand it would be awesome.Also @ the guys blaming gamergate for the shitstorm, seems like you've got the wrong guy. Go to YouTube and see the videos on it there to get a better and less biased understanding.

I don't understand what compels *all* of the major news outlets to lie about this. Even something like the Guardian did a similar article. Why would they completely tarnish their reputation over just games...? Anyhow, seems like gamergate is getting larger and more powerful as a movement as time goes on. I just think it needs a lot of focus and really needs to get rid of the claims of misogyny.

I think you're missing the point Mr moose is making. If Apple hadn't done it someone else would have. It's simply the nature of technological evolution. If Apple hadn't made a good touchscreen phone someone else would have. It would likely be different, sure, but that's all.Let's continue with iOS. We know for a fact that Android was pretty much in development around the same time, it was just a case of who came first, not who invented it and who copied it.

Cheap build quality of Android... What?If you mean Android devices in general, there are plenty of well built devices out there. If you mean the software itself then... :huh:

I don't know if it is just me but it's always seemed like they act far too much in American news shows.

*RageQuit*

2^W - 20W = 50. I know I can use power to the front rule for 2^W, and that I can split up -20W if I take logs by using simple rules, but I still end up with W on both sides. The simplest way is likely to be using a hand drawn graph with trial and error but I really wanted to solve this with just algebra.

I'm just gonna try working it out here using what I can recall. I presume we're trying to find a variable to link the growth of the seaweed and the size of the lake. Call it W for week. Total area of the lake (call it A_l) alone is A_l = 500 + 200W. This is equation 1 describing the growth of the lake in relation to time. Equation 2 will be for seaweed with regard to weeks: A_S = (2^W) * 10 Equate them to find out when the lake is covered. 500 + 200W = 10(2^W) = 50 + 20W = 2^W Ok having trouble at this point, but I'm certain I've come across this part before.

Wow I messed up. Give me a second.

Wow I messed up. Give me a sec.

Idiocy continued and redefined.

I'm just gonna try working it out here using what I can recall. I presume we're trying to find a variable to link the growth of the seaweed and the size of the lake. Call it W for week. Total area of the lake (call it A_l) alone is A_l = 500 + 200W. This is equation 1 describing the growth of the lake in relation to time. Equation 2 will be for seaweed with regard to weeks: A_S = W^2 * 10 (and so the fuck-up began). With me so far?

I should be able to substitute any value and expect it to hold true, if it is an equation. Also, I'd like a little more detail on the question. What precisely should I be finding out here?

Are you certain your initial equation is correct? I substituted x=0 just to check and it ends up as: 200(0)+500=10*2^(0) simplifies: 500 = 10, which is clearly untrue. Can you try giving the initial question and then we can work it out from there? Nothing will work if the initial equation is erroneous.