Andy

P.S. I would play a moon landing game before I would play 'America's Army'.

Christopher Columbus (Don't like C.C.? Insert your own favorite explorer here.) may have enjoyed captaining a ship and sailing the seas in search of adventure, but the people who stayed at home and paid for his boats wanted spices, gold, slaves, etc.

Even when you're simply exploring for a new place to put a new colony or settlement, you're not just searching for a place to dump people, there's always room for that closeby. You're looking for a place with natural resources your settlers can exploit and send back home.

If someone could think of something profitable to do on the Moon that you absolutely couldn't do on Earth. Then you can bet someone would go back.

No one can think of that though. The best you can find are arguments by people like the Planetary Society who start with the premise "Let's go to the Moon", and then try to figure out the business from there. That's backwards. You need someone who starts with "I have a mega-profitable business idea." and then decides that he needs to go to the Moon.

Probably it's for digitizing audio for a planed microphone add-on that plugs into the Nun-chuck port.

Since when are verbs positive or negative?

Most people seem to be missing a point here. Everyone is assuming that using the remote is the easiest way to turn on the console.
Nonsense. He had to walk up to the machine anyway to put the disk in. Why not just push the button while he's standing there?

I got my Wii from TRU on Black Friday. There was the forced bundle.

However, I came back later that weekend and returned the bundled games for cash. So I ultimately got the Wii for the advertised price with nothing bundled.

Here is an example of a reporter who doesn't ask the hard questions.

If I was that reporter, right after the guy told me he was paying them $100/day, I'd have asked if they still get the money if they don't get a console.

Then (and this is the important part) I would have gone to the people in line and asked if they were really getting $100/day.

Simply asking those two questions and getting solid answers could change the entire tone of the story. Either he's helping the homeless out by paying them good money for easy work, or exploiting the desperate. The reporter doesn't ask the right questions for us to know which.