Because if you're creating a 2d game, it can be rendered reasonably fast in your browser.

Full 3d is a different problem.

However, a game like Monaco, with super simple controls but really interesting game play, could absolutely be built in the browser. This gives an easier distribution medium, more control over who is using the game, and if you're already a webdev it fits in nicely with your pre-existing skill set.

The bar is significantly lowered for a lot of weekend warrior game makers if you're going the 2d route.

As a recently graduated student... ohmygod I wish I had this in college (only because I don't use matlab daily). The tutorials are lovely and I don't have to haul myself to a lab to run it.

I would have paid out of my own pocket in college to have that convenience.

>"They haven’t excited the front-line developers -- the ones who made Amazon who they are," he said. "Those will be hard to influence."

That may be true, but at the end of the day, startups aren't generating multi-millions/billions to spend on large server deployments.

After Aliens: Colonial Marines, I really hope they don't spread their teams too thin across too many products...

Borderlands was great, but given they've done almost exclusively first person shooters, I'm definitely concerned for the Homeworld IP.

Edit* Let me rephrase, I'm terrified for the Homeworld IP.

To be totally honest, if you heard a huge explosion behind you, would YOU stop to see what happened? Personally I'd book it harder.

"Windows is done". What a final statement.

PC sales may be mostly done. A desktop that was bought 10 years ago can still run fine today - and many still are.

We reached a point in computing where upgrading doesn't make that big of a difference. You can use the same machine for a decade or more without problem if you're an end user, especially given so many rich web apps that don't require high processing power.

A Pentium 4 or Athlon XP 2700+ from 10 years ago has been unusable for all but the simplest tasks for years. It would have also needed to be upgraded along the way - it came from the factory with just 256MB or 512MB RAM. You can still edit office documents and do some light web-surfing, but for todays interactive sites and content it falls far behind the experience that an iPad can provide.

My mom still has no problem using QuickBooks and doing all the required web stuff at work with a Pentium 4 and 512mb ram. She literally just bought a new desktop because quickbooks requires it.

In an office environment, she really doesn't need more.

I'm not so sure. A Chromebook provides a significantly better experience than an iPad, at least for me and my wife.

Our iPad 2 is now almost exclusively the province of my toddler daughter.

A decade is a bit much. I'll give you 5 years, but that's about it.

Why don't they fix Facebook on android before releasing a new product? It frequently "shooooops" for me - crashes, lags, hogs resources, and otherwise does unexpected things.

I'm very wary to install any software from Facebook on Android.

Wow, they built this when their Facebook app on android still consumes an ungodly amount of system resources?

I have no faith in this from a technical perspective.

I have to agree. This whole thing puzzles me. The Android FB app is terrible. Absolutely terrible. Some basic functions don't work. Like when someone tags me in a photo and a notification pops up, I click the notification and their app crashes. It can't display a friggin picture from a website. FB is just a website, how can they not get their own app to work with their own website?

Seriously if you cant make an app in Android that works, how are you going to roll your own version of the OS?

> How is the non-tech user ever going to be able to use this with anywhere near level of trust/safety they do with current traditional currencies.

Near everyone I know, regardless of age, does their banking online. I don't see how this is any different than a username/password being stored on some banking server, and getting stolen.

Best case? You boot to a clean ISO, make a wallet, generate an address, write down the public/private key, transfer all your btc to it, and call it a day. There is no digital trace, and you have a paper wallet.

This is wrong in so many ways.

If your bank is hacked you as the user are not liable for the loss. Online transactions are traceable and reversible. Banks are heavily regulated and the legal regime is well defined. Etc etc etc.

Having your online banking hacked is a bit like being mugged on the way out of the bank. Having an online wallet service hacked is like someone driving in a truck, emptying the vault and leaving without a trace.

And then the mugger shows up the next day and gives you your money back.

It's different because FDIC.

I'm not really sure why you say it's so hard.

You install the bitcoin wallet.

You sell something for bitcoins, and you give them your private key address in your wallet.

You receive bitcoins.

You buy something with bitcoins else where, and you just hit send and specify an address.

Simple as an account # + routing number.

Now funding your wallet with fiat currency is a little harder, but Coinbase has mostly taken care of that. It's as hard as paying a credit card off - link your current bank account, press buy or sell.

Er, wouldn't you give out your public key to receive bitcoins?

Yes, correct. Typo.

That's not anonymous. Anonymity is one of the benefits of bitcoin, but it's tricky to do.

Your current banking transactions aren't anonymous either. It's a nice additional security layer for people that want it, but by no means is it required.