|
|
|
Six Foods That Change Your Risk Of Cancer
PSA: Japan’s biggest ‘00s RPG series, Monster Hunter, finally on iOS
For years, the Monster Hunter RPG series has served as a Japanese portable-gaming weathervane, determining which way the wind blew. The series' riotous sales on the PSP, including the platform's fastest-selling game of all time, pretty much saved Sony's beleaguered handheld in its home country, while Monster Hunter's shift to the Nintendo 3DS was (arguably) the biggest Japanese sales tide-turner a series has caused since Final Fantasy left Nintendo behind in the '90s.
The game's many iterations—which flip the Pokemon formula of "gotta catch 'em all" into a more brutal, giant-sword-fueled journey to kill 'em all—haven't done as well in the States, possibly because they have each come with years-long delays after their Japanese counterparts. In traditional Monster Hunter fashion, the series also took its sweet time reaching smartphones and tablets. Today marks its first-ever appearance on iOS.
Monster Hunter Freedom Unite, priced at $14.99 for both iPhone and iPad, doesn't crib from last year's Monster Hunter 3G release on 3DS; instead this is a port of the 2009 PSP game Monster Hunter Portable 2nd G, presumably because its wimpier 3D assets would run efficiently across iOS devices. The only changes involve MFi controller support, which includes a camera stick that the original didn't have, along with touch-screen controls. The latter function in a pinch, with touchscreen camera adjustability as well as context-sensitive buttons that appear during less-active scenes. Still, when you're getting into position, wielding giant weapons, and actively dodging huge monsters, you won't want to depend on a touchscreen control stick.
Read 1 remaining paragraphs | Comments
Access Classic Google Maps Through This URL
Search Twitter More Efficiently With These Search Operators
The Ice Cream Rule Helps You Save Without Feeling Deprived
First Drive: 2015 Porsche Macan S and Macan Turbo
We're a long way from the outrage of the first four-door Porsche, and a compact SUV/crossover was almost inevitable. The 2015 Porsche Macan is a direct result of the successes of the Panamera and Cayenne, with a name derived from the Indonesian word for tiger and a surprisingly broad price range depending on your heavy-handedness with both the options sheet … Continue reading
It’s getting harder to tell what’s a real Silicon Valley startup and what’s a parody
Maybe it’s the foolish amounts of venture capital swirling around Silicon Valley, but it often seems as though we are all playing a game in which the contestants have to determine what is a parody and what isn’t, and it’s getting harder instead of easier. Is the app that sends a single word — “Yo” — to another user a parody or a real company? Turns out it’s real. How about one that makes fake reservations at restaurants and then sells them to the highest bidder? Yup, that’s real too. But ReservationHop seems to have triggered a collective feeling of disgust that others haven’t, which may be a sign that there is still some hope left.
Creator Brian Mayer started the service as an experiment after he waited too long for a burrito, and apparently wasn’t intending to make it a big splash with it, but word quickly got out and Twitter had a field day with the idea, turning it into what the founder called “a maelstrom of hate.” The vast majority of the responses — as Mayer noted in a subsequent blog post about the blowback — called him a lowlife scumbag, or variations on that theme, and said his idea was morally bankrupt.
This is irresponsible and sleazy and exactly what people hate about startups sucking the life out of San Francisco reservationhop.com—
mat honan (@mat) July 03, 2014
Reservation Hop is horrifying and can hurt restaurants. Wow, @bmmayer, you are now San Francisco sleaziest tech a-hole.—
(@sarahharbin) July 03, 2014
Part of the problem for Mayer could be that ReservationHop comes on the heels of some other ethically questionable startup ideas, including ParkingMonkey, which allows people to buy and sell public parking spaces (at least until the city said it could no longer do so). Restaurant reservations may not fall into the same category as public parking, but the idea that a business would make bookings under pseudonyms and then sell them seemed to trigger a warning bell for many — in part because, as Redpoint VC partner Ryan Sarver pointed out, it adds risk for restaurants instead of sharing that risk with them.
Ethics? Didn’t really occur to me
To Mayer’s credit, the ethical drawbacks of his idea seems to have occurred to him at some point during the firestorm of criticism, and he says in his blog post that he is thinking of approaching restaurants to see if he can work with them instead of just acting as a kind of parasite that takes advantage of a weakness in the system. But his post also contains a passage that to me at least says a lot — for better or worse — about the downside of the startup mentality. As he puts it:
“Let's talk about the questions/criticisms everyone has. What was I thinking! How dare I sell something that's free! Is this even legal? Is it ethical? Restaurants are going to hate this! To be honest, I haven't spent a lot of time thinking through these questions. I built this site as an experiment in consumer demand for a particular product.”
The assumption in Mayer’s post — and, it seems, the assumption behind similar business models like ParkingMonkey or Sweetch — is that if something can be monetized, then it should be. It’s as though capitalism, or tech-startup life, was a game in which founders try to spot loopholes in the laws or social contracts that govern our behavior, and then figure out ways to get someone to pay to exploit them. This isn’t necessarily a recipe for disaster, but it avoids any question about whether such loopholes *should* be monetized. As Mayer puts it: “If someone does pay for it willingly, is it really unethical?” Well yes, maybe it is.
i wonder if startups will eventually start squatting in emergency rooms and let people pay to get to the front of the line.—
Selena Larson (@selenalarson) July 03, 2014
My new startup stands in front of you at movies until you pay me to sit down—
mat honan (@mat) July 04, 2014
If you're tired of having to share the 911 emergency system with everyone, an SF startup keeps a few operators tied up for highest bidders.—
Andrew Kueneman (@andrewkueneman) July 04, 2014
Should all loopholes be monetized?
As a number of people noted in the Twitter firestorm that occurred after the idea became public on Thursday, there are plenty of other opportunities to exploit monetizable opportunities other than just restaurants or parking spots: why not have a system where people hold a place in the line at the emergency department, and then people could pay to get quicker access to medical care? Or what if someone arranged for a date under an assumed name, and then you could bid on the right to get access to that particular person?
All of these seem absurd in various ways, or clearly unethical. But where is the line? And should that line be drawn before or after a startup founder launches a new app or service to take advantage of that need? Uber and other successful startups have run into similar challenges even after they became substantial businesses: for example, is it unethical and/or in poor taste for Uber to charge more for rides that occur in the aftermath of a massive storm, or is that a necessary way of redistributing the slack in the system?
I think Parker Higgins hinted at a really useful way to think of whether an idea is ethically questionable: Namely, does it produce some kind of value for all endpoints within the service — users, contributors, suppliers, etc. — or is it just about extracting some kind of value that already exists in the system so that the founders can get rich? With ReservationHop, users who bid on open tables clearly get a benefit, but the restaurants arguably don’t.
That’s not to say that a service that takes advantage of a legal loophole or makes questionable ethical decisions can’t make money, or become a successful company. It just means that it is going to continually be fighting an uphill battle to get people to treat it as a respectable business.
Related research and analysis from Gigaom Research:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
Google bans porn in ads
As of this week, no more advertisements incorporating "sexually explicit content" will be promoted by Google's advertising network.
Google's AdWords platform is used to place advertisements on Google-owned sites; other sites can also choose to host AdWord ads on their own sites. The platform is thought to be responsible for the majority of Google's revenue, but although Google has placed restrictions on adult content for a while, the latest changes could potentially have chased some advertisers elsewhere.
According to CNBC, Google sent a message to advertisers at the beginning of June in order to notify them that it will no longer accept ads "that promote graphic depictions of sexual acts." It went on to say that this included content such as hardcore pornography and the depiction of masturbation and genital, anal, and oral sexual acts.
Read 4 remaining paragraphs | Comments
Gallery: Cars Technica’s favorite concept cars
The concept car is a wonderful thing. A way for car companies or designers to let loose and get creative, without being burdened by safety regulations, roadworthiness, or in some cases even common sense. Concept cars get us used to new ideas in car design, preview new models, or serve as way for a company to pay homage to past glory. But mostly, concept cars are just great eye candy.
Since there's no need to worry about being road-legal (or even practical), often a concept will be no more than a painted clay model on wheels, incapable of moving under its own steam. At the far opposite end of the spectrum is the thinly disguised new car, maybe with a bit of plastic cladding to make it look a little funkier. But more often, there's usually a real car involved, often anything that was lying around the office and could donate its chassis or engine to the cause, enabling the concept to be driven—frequently with a 20 mph limit to prevent everything falling apart.
Here at Cars Technica we've decided to put together the following gallery of our favorite concepts to celebrate the art form. Don't be too cross if your favorite car isn't represented: we limited ourselves to concepts that didn't (or won't) make it into production as regular models (so no Mercedes SLK or Porsche Boxster or Audi TT concepts I'm afraid). We were also limited by images we could legally use, either from manufacturers press archives, or those with Creative Commons licenses. However, if you feel we've made a significant omission, feel free to post a photo in the comments thread. With that, bring on the cars!
Read on Ars Technica | Comments
Apply 'Mise En Place' To Your Morning Routine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)