Well, off the top of my head, how about Computer City, Packard Bell, Circuit City, SCO, SGI, DIVX (not the codec), Commodore, Amiga, XM Radio (with Sirius XM following closely behind), Atari, 3DO... most of these are companies who were once dominant until their consumers took their dollars to greener fields.

Oh, wait... You didn't want me to answer that, did you? You just wanted me to concede the point? My bad.

As for building schools and bridges; that's a different topic and one which I think is totally suited to government. I'm not anti-government across the board, I just think it ought to be kept in check and that it's not the miracle cure to all problems.

The federal government is too big for my tastes at the moment. I have an infinitesimally small influence on the federal government because my one vote is a molecule in a drop in the bucket. I have no real choice or say in any matter. All I can do is pick the preselected candidate whose lies I find most comforting. They're going to do whatever they want once the election is over.

If the local governments were the focus of power, at least the people would have more influence. There my one vote is a far bigger portion of the pie and it's not even unrealistic for me to run for office myself if I really don't feel represented. If power were more distributed it would be more difficult for lobbyists to buy power.

I like the idea of moving an hour away and having a drastically different government if I'm unhappy with how things are run where I live. Moving from state to state can give you a little bit of that nowadays, but I think it ought to be taken further.

I agree that neither smaller == better and larger == better are universal truths and that there's a happy medium to be found, but it sounds like my happy medium is smaller than yours. I guess that's why you're so popular with the ladies.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Can you give me a meaningful example of consumers bringing down a corporation by "wallet voting"? Of course not, because it is a ridiculous notion. Consumerism doesn't challenge corporate power, it increases it. At best, consumerism has the power to stop Coca-Cola from marketing a new cola that tastes like ass. Consumerism doesn't build schools or bridges. Consumerism is reactive, not proactive.

In a democracy, the power rests in the hands of the people, by way of 1 person: 1 vote. It was a populist response to older forms of government based around wealth, power and nobility. It is a testament to the success of democracy that so many now can take it for granted. Government power is people power (read=your power). Limiting the power of government limits the power of the people, and if you are interested in stopping corrupt corporations, public government is the only thing big enough and powerful enough to get that done.

It is very true that our democracy has been subverted in many ways, but through democracy, we can change this. I agree with you that apathy is one of the big enemies here, but I see much reason for hope. With increased access to information, the public has become much more aware of corporate abuse, and has become much more politically involved. Despite what Obama may or may not do in his 4-8 years in office, I think it is significant that he was able to break through the corporate propaganda and win on a very pro-people platform.

Last point, one of the great red herrings in this debate is that of 'size'. Notions about 'big' or 'small' government are completely arbitrary and meant to distract you from the more important qualities that you wisely mentioned: efficiency and effectiveness.

Government should not be shoehorned into some arbitrary concept of big or small. Government should be just the right size in needs to be, to be both efficient and effective. Getting rid of valuable social services in order to make the government smaller only makes the it less efficient and less effective.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Brick House, Commodores, 70s' to 'Brick House, Commodores, 70s, Git Funky' - edited by EndAll

Not as much as I used to, and sadly since I wish I had more time to play some of the stuff today. The earliest games I would play were on the Atari 2600 and Commodore 64.

I would agree though, I picked up Mass Effect now that its only $20 on Steam despite already having it on the 360... because I cannot stand playing a game like that with a controller. I have played just about every fps game from even before Wolfenstein 3D (Catacombs of the Abyss anyone?) to whats available now with a mouse and keyboard.

My Steam username is *cough* Croccydile but I have not really played Left4Dead since it got boring to me. I can only get a decent group for Expert with people I know at LANs.

Oh yeah, um, we do try to get in WC3 play at lans with most of what everyone likes to play... mostly tower defense maps and I think one called Seven Heroes?

I completely agree with those sticking up for the Mac here.

While I have posted elsewhere (the sub $1000 laptop sift most recently) that Mac has zero entry level pcs/laptops, the comparison you're making here is a little off base.

I just bought myself a sub $AU900 Dell laptop, with a 15" screen. The cheapest Mac Laptop with a screen that size is $2600. That's an insane divide, and one I cannot justify at all.

The gap you're showing here though is not as much, and you would have to start weighing up the pros of the Mac.

For me, I would LOOOOVE iLife. iMovie and iDVD, from my brief playing with them, run absolute bloody rings around Windows Movie Maker and Windows DVD Maker.

Having unix type OS under the hood would indeed make my coding tasks easier also (running local servers etc.).

So these things ARE worth a premium.

Are Macs better built and more reliable? Don't really think so, recently when being with some Mac users, one of their quite new Mac Book Pro's fan was whirring away maniacally. I mentioned how noisy the Mac was compared to the Dell I was using (which I couldn't even hear) and he said that the fan was about to die, and it was a really common issue with the Macs.

Right.

Buying a Mac is NOT 'simply fucking rediculous[sic]', it is a matter of choice. If a PC does all you want, then yeah, you can get a laptop for a lot less. BUT if you start to value some of the software that Macs have included with them, and having a unix backend, then you may start to think the extra dosh is worth it.

YOU don't want one.

Why do you feel the need to loudly justify yourself to everyone and try to shout down those that think Macs are worthwhile? Seems pretty juvenile, and the sort of thing I used to do when I was 9 about my ZX Spectrum compared to Commodore 64s.

it's nice but its no Commodore 64

There must be pictures of my progression through computers... which were:
Sinclair ZX Spectrum. 1983 Hey... same year, although I was 7 I learned to program on this thing... in Basic. And saved those programs to tape damn you... tape!

Atari ST Didn't have one, but my best friend at the time did... and I coveted it.

Amstrad of some description Again, didn't have it, my uncle did, and we'd use it weekly. Not really a huge leap in power over the Spectrum... but it did have a disc drive instead of tape.

Some form of 8088 based PC

Then a steady progression of PCs, from CGA to EGA to VGA to the now monster power of a dual core, directx 10 beast.

My exposure to Apples? We used Apple IIes in primary school and I think into early high school before they upgraded them all to PCs. And for some reason there was a Commodore 64 in the corner... weird.

I did not grow up on console gaming like most, but the Spectrum and then into the PC... in fact the Wii is the first console I've ever owned.

commodore 64 / hyperlink 2.5

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Commodore 64, iPhone, app, rejected' to 'Commodore 64, iPhone, app, rejected, c64' - edited by burdturgler

Once a few nice phones supporting Google Android come out I'm definitely getting one. It's open source, anyone can make apps without approval. So lets get commodore and then MAME, and then lets point and laugh at all the iPhone users with their limited phones, that don't even support Flash

^dag
^It's a slippery slope. You let this in, next it's MAME - then how about a DS or PSP emulator?

But as I understand it these people have a license from Commodore. Nintendo and Sony would never allow a license for a DS or PSP emulator.

I had one of those computers.  It was a great machine for its time — too bad Commodore was so inept.

nice little article about this demonstration (which was part of the amiga's original unveiling) here

We had Archon for the Commodore 64 when I was growing up... And Adept, the sequel. Adept was more versatile, but in the end I think Archon was the more solid game. That was a classic!

http://www.videosift.com/video/Brick-House-The-Commodores

The beat reminds me of Commodore 64 SID tunes -- that scrunch sound, soooo nostalgic!