firehose

For Rhiannon Maher, the suffering began last August. Maher, then a 20-year-old college student, had recently been hospitalized for colitis after experiencing a bout of vomiting and diarrhea, but her doctors soon diagnosed her with a far more serious condition: Clostridium difficile, or C. diff, a debilitating intestinal bacterium that kills an estimated 14,000 Americans every year.

Her mother, Paula Peters, spent the next nine months taking care of Rhiannon, tending to the girl as she endured high fevers, chills, and a seemingly endless cycle of diarrhea. Bedridden and gaunt, Rhiannon was forced to drop out of her local Massachusetts college, quit her job at a candy factory, and was too embarrassed to tell her friends why she couldn't go out with them on weekends. The expensive antibiotics her doctors prescribed at first showed promise, but within weeks, the C. diff would come roaring back.

"The C. diff took over my life," Maher said in an interview with The Verge. "It never really occured to me that I might die, but then I was in so much pain sometimes that I was like, maybe that wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world."

---

Rhiannon Maher, pictured here just before she was diagnosed with C. diff. (Photo courtesy of Paula Peters)

Desperate for a solution and tight on money, Peters begged her physician to give Rhiannon a fecal transplant — a rather experimental, yet remarkably effective treatment whereby feces from a healthy donor are placed within a C. diff patient’s intestines, either through an enema, colonoscope, or tube inserted through the nose.

The technique has been widely touted as a cure for C. diff, with success rates of up to 90 percent. But Peters' physician and other specialists declined to administer it in Rhiannon's case, citing new and seemingly onerous regulations from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA claims that such regulations are designed to ensure safety and good practices, but some experts contend that they pose an unnecessary barrier to those who, like Rhiannon, are in desperate need.

"No one wanted to touch this shit. Literally."

"No one wanted to touch this shit," Peters says. "Literally."

Fecal transplants have been used in some form since at least the 1950s, but they’ve gained new momentum in recent years, with a small but growing number of physicians hailing them as a miracle cure for C. diff. The C. diff pathogen is commonly transmitted within hospitals, where more than 300,000 Americans contract it each year. Overall, researchers estimate that the bacteria may affect more than 3 million people in the US every year, with annual treatment costs in excess of $1 billion.

Doctors have long used the antibiotic Vancomycin to combat the pathogen, but relapse rates remain high — around 20 percent — largely because Vancomycin tends to wipe out both malicious and healthy intestinal bacteria, making patients more susceptible to contracting C. diff later on. Many, like Rhiannon, undergo multiple bouts that can last for months, trapping them in a vicious and costly treatment cycle. According to Peters, a freelance writer and consultant, Rhiannon's prescriptions alone have cost the family more than $15,000 over the past nine months.

Fecal transplants, by contrast, have thus far shown to be an effective one-time cure. After implanting patients with healthy bacteria from a fecal donor, doctors have seen C. diff sufferers recover within a matter of days, with only scattered cases of relapse. But the procedure itself is far from glamorous, often requiring donor stools to be run through a blender, and its long-term impacts or potential side effects remain largely unknown.

Promising results have emboldened transplant proponents

An encouraging study published in the New England Journal of Medicine earlier this year showed that fecal transplants cured 15 out of 16 subjects with C. diff, compared to the three out of 14 that antibiotics cured. These results raised hopes among practitioners that fecal transplants may become more commonplace, but some have now had those hopes quashed by the FDA.

Earlier this year, the federal agency quietly introduced a policy that classifies fecal transplants as an "investigational new drug," or IND. Under these guidelines, doctors must submit a lengthy application to the FDA before administering any fecal transplant, including a detailed medical analysis of both the patient and donor. Upon completing the process, physicians must wait up to 30 days to receive the FDA's green light.

FDA regulations have forced some to abandon transplants altogether

"It is FDA's duty to ensure that a drug is safe, effective and does not expose a patient to unreasonable risks," FDA spokesperson Curtis Allen said in an email to The Verge. Allen acknowledged that he "can't speculate on what might constitute an unreasonable risk," though he said the agency is working toward developing a more streamlined regulatory framework.

Allen also noted that doctors can bypass the 30-day wait period in some instances by filing an emergency IND over the phone, but critics say that the majority of C. diff cases don't qualify as emergencies, and that the FDA's extensive paperwork makes it difficult to justify the effort.

Clostridium difficile kills an estimated 14,000 people in the US every year.

Dr. Michael Edmond, a doctor of internal medicine at Virginia Commonwealth University, is among the most outspoken critics of the FDA's policy. For years, he was one of the few doctors regularly administering fecal transplants to C. diff patients, some of whom traveled more than 800 miles for treatment at his Richmond office. When he found out about the FDA's rules earlier this month, Edmond decided it was no longer worth his time to continue the practice.

"it got to a point where I couldn't really justify the time."

"It's really burdensome, it's just an enormous amount of time to invest," Edmond tells The Verge, noting that fecal transplants are time-intensive in their own right, and often result in comparatively small reimbursements for physicians. If he were to perform them now, he would have to get approval not only from the FDA, but from his own institution as well, adding even more paperwork and hours to every case.

"I feel bad about it because I of course want to help the patients, but it just got to a point where I couldn't really justify the time," he says. "You can only do what you can do."

Dr. Sahil Khanna, a researcher at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, acknowledges that the FDA's regulations may involve more hurdles, but he argues that the agency is simply trying to ensure that transplants are conducted safely.

"I think it's a good thing that the FDA is trying to regulate this, because this practice is in its infancy right now," Khanna says. "We don't know what the long-term outcomes are, we don't know what the risks from donors are, and there are physicians in the community who are doing this without the proper donor screening."

Typically, donors are tested to make sure they won’t infect recipients with Hepatitis, HIV, or any other communicable disease, though Khanna says he's spoken with some patients whose doctors didn't require any testing whatsoever. In one case, a patient suffered from a failed transplant because her doctor told her to prepare her donor's stool at home before bringing it into the lab for transplant.

"I don't think the FDA is saying this is something we shouldn't be doing."

He also notes that the treatment has spawned a small industry among some practitioners who tout fecal transplants as a solution for everything from irritable bowel syndrome to obesity, despite a lack of supporting evidence.

"I don't think the FDA is saying this is something we shouldn't be doing," Khanna says. "I think the FDA is acknowledging that it's beneficial, but that it's something that should be done safely, or as safely as it can be done."

But considering the comparatively small number of doctors currently offering the procedure, Edmond says the FDA may end up stunting the spread of fecal transplants just as they've started to gain momentum. A more realistic approach, he says, would be to convene a panel of experts and establish clear guidelines and protocol, rather than subject every patient to an arduous 30-day wait.

"I don't have a problem with them trying to regulate it — in fact, I think it's probably a good idea," he says. "I just think the way they went about it is misguided. You either have C. diff or you don't. It's not rocket science."

The FDA, for its part, held a conference earlier this month where they discussed fecal transplants with experts from the National Institutes of Health, though it's not clear whether the agency will publish a more streamlined protocol anytime soon.

some patients have taken matters into their own hands

Until it does, Edmond says, patients will likely take it upon themselves to perform fecal transplants at home. Unappetizing as it may be, the procedure is actually straightforward, and guides and tutorials are widely available online. Edmond says several of his patients have successfully performed their own transplants, though he acknowledges that it's far from an ideal solution.

"The irony of it all is that by trying to make fecal transplants safer, the FDA is actually pushing them underground," he explains. "It's pretty counterproductive."

Rhiannon Maher counts herself among the growing number of self-treated C. diff success stories. Earlier this month, her mother prepared and transplanted her own stool to her daughter, using online video tutorials as a guide. Rhiannon says she began feeling healthy again just five days after the transplant, as her diarrhea subsided and energy levels gradually returned to normal. Now, more than a week later, she's looking forward to seeing her friends and returning to everyday life once she weans herself off her mom's transplants.

"I still can't go anywhere overnight because my mom has to be there to give me the transplant in the morning, but the payoff is worth it," she says. "I'll be going back to school, too, and I'll get back to studying. But I think I'll have a whole different perspective on things."

Developers in Argentina have begun receiving letters from Google informing them that "Google Play will no longer be able to accept payments on behalf of developers registered in Argentina starting June 27, 2013." The change applies to both paid apps and apps that use in-app purchases. The move appears to be related to new, restrictive regulations the Argentine government has imposed on currency exchanges, which The Telegraph detailed this past September. Twitter has quite a few developers complaining about the changes, but it's not clear how many people will be affected. Android customers in Argentina will still be able to purchase apps in the Play store and developers from the country can continue to offer free apps.

Celularis has a copy of the letter Google has sent to Argentine developers, which states that a final payment will be made on July 22nd and, strangely, lacks anything like an apology for those affected by the changes. Developers in Argentina who do want to continue to make money off apps in the Google Play store will have to transfer their account to another country — and Google even goes so far as to suggest that very option in its letter. Google hopes to restore payments at some point in the future, though "no specific plans are in place at the moment."

Chet Kanojia, CEO and founder of Aereo

The nation's largest television broadcasters filed a copyright lawsuit against FilmOn.TV and its Aereokiller service yesterday, alleging that the service retransmits TV programming without authorization or compensating them, according to a story in Variety. Aereokiller is the flippantly-named competitor to Aereo, the company that uses dime-sized antennas to capture over-the-air TV transmissions and then streams them to subscribers by way of the internet.

This is part of an escalating fight for control of the country's TV airwaves. The broadcasters say that if Aereo, or any other company is allowed to distribute their programming without licensing it then nobody will. A big chunk of the broadcasters' revenue comes from retransmission fees it charges cable companies. Aereo, which is also defending itself against a copyright suit filed by the broadcasters, argues that it only enables subscribers to access the freely available over-the-air broadcasts, which they have every right to do.

---

This is part of an escalating fight for control of the country's TV airwaves The broadcasters appear to be suing Aereokiller again because it has proven to be a far less formidable opponent in court than Aereo. Last year, a federal district judge in New York rejected the broadcasters' request to issue a preliminary injunction that would have required Aereo to shut down. A federal appeals court followed agreed with the lower court's decision and found that the broadcasters were unlikely to win the case based on the evidence.

But out in California, the broadcasters prevailed in another district Court against Aereokiller. They are obviously hoping to win a similar decision in Washington DC, where the most recent suit against Aereokiller was filed. It's interesting to note that the big media companies typically file their copyright suits in New York, a venue that perhaps doesn't look as friendly to them now.

Media companies typically file their copyright suits in New York, a venue that perhaps doesn't look as friendly to them now Aereo has accused the broadcasters of venue shopping and using up the public's legal resources while they search for sympathetic courts. But if the broadcasters were to again prevail over Aereokiller, it's unclear what advantage it would have over Aereo, which has its own favorable court rulings. It's too early to tell where this case is headed but when there are conflicting court decisions on an issue, the parties will often look for a Supreme Court ruling.

Who knows? Maybe the Aereo conflict becomes the digital era's equivalent of Sony Betamax case, when the high Court ruled that Sony's video recorder wasn't illegal in part because creating video copies of TV shows for personal use was legal. It's important to remember that the Betamax decision eventually led to the creation of the home-video market, which for decades was one of Hollywood's most lucrative sources of revenue.

Xbox One voice chat quality will be much improved compared to Microsoft's current-generation console thanks to the One's Skype integration, a Microsoft representative confirmed to Polygon.

"In-Game Chat, Party Chat and Skype are all available on Xbox One," the representative wrote. "Skype technologies are used in Xbox One which improves voice quality during multiplayer game sessions. Skype can also be used to call any of your Skype contacts for voice or video chat exclusively or while playing a game. Additionally, we have improved the Kinect hardware, from microphone configuration to dedicated audio processing, which contributes to providing a high-quality voice experience whether you are chatting in a game or through Skype."

We reached out to Microsoft to confirm Skype's integration into other aspects of Xbox One chat after speaking to Ben Kilgore, corporate vice president of interactive entertainment business, at the console's reveal event. Speaking to Polygon about the changes coming to the Xbox One's parental control settings, Kilgore mentioned that voice chat on the console would be much clearer, "because we're leveraging Skype." Microsoft confirmed Skype calls and group video chats would be available on the Xbox One during its reveal presentation, but didn't show how — if at all — it would affect traditional voice chat over the platform.

Chat quality on Xbox 360 has struggled behind other VoIP services offered on PCs, but has improved slightly over the years as Microsoft gradually upgraded its bit rate codec, and as player connection speeds grew faster. In January of this year, CVG reported Skype — which Microsoft purchased in 2011 for $8.5 billion — would power chat on the Xbox One as Microsoft began "consolidating all their communications technology."

A few hours after we got a look at a potential Gmail for Android redesign, a new screenshot for Gmail on the web has apparently leaked to The Next Web. The new interface shows four tabs at the top of the inbox: Primary, Social, Promotions, and Updates — with a reported fifth tab for offers. Apparently, incoming mail will be split between these different buckets depending on its content. For example, Twitter and Google+ emails would be shuttled off to the Social tab, while mailing list emails would go into the Forums tab. Alongside the new tabs for the web, a second screenshot revealed similar functionality for Gmail on Android.

---

Both features would be a natural replacement for Gmail's current "Multiple Inbox" option. Assuming the leak turns out to be true, it's odd that Google decided not to unveil the changes at its I/O developer conference. It also could be a sign that Google is finally beginning to feel the need to play catch-up with other email providers — the newly revamped Outlook.com still retains the "Quick View" filters that were added way back in 2010. A spokesperson for Google told The Next Web that it doesn't comment on rumors or speculation.

The Xbox One will not require gamers to pay a fee to reactivate a used game, but it will require a regular online spot check to verify the authenticity of games being played, according to sources familiar with the system.

While an internet connection will be required for the console, the company is also experimenting with special exemption codes that could be given to select people in very particular, internet-free situations, like active-duty soldiers serving in war zones, sources tell Polygon.

The ultimate system that Xbox One will use for used games and online authentication sounds like it is still in open debate on some level internally, which may explain the company's reticence in more directly clarifying the matter this week. Microsoft executives have been discussing the reaction to the confused messaging surrounding used games and internet requirements and plan to detail the console's take on both sometime before E3, according to our sources.

During this week's Xbox One unveiling, Microsoft officials gave conflicting answers to questions about used games and online requirements. According to an official Q&A from Microsoft, the Xbox One does not "have to be always connected, but does require a connection to the Internet." Speaking with Kotaku, Microsoft's Phil Harrison said that the console would require an internet check every 24 hours.

Microsoft officials later said that was one potential scenario.

According to Polygon's sources, Microsoft officials haven't yet settled on the specific amount of time that can pass between checks, but that some form of regular check will be required to play games.

The Xbox One will automatically authenticate a game using an encryption code built into a game's disc, when it is installed on the machine. That authentication on the console's hard drive tied to the game is then verified regularly through an internet connection.

When a person sells the game or it is installed and played on another system, the game is deauthenticated on the original machine until the disc is brought back and used to re-authenticate the installation.

Our sources also said that there are no plans to charge gamers a fee to sell or reactive a used game. Earlier today, Microsoft's Larry Hryb touched on the topic of used games on his blog, but didn't say whether fees will be required.

"The ability to trade in and resell games is important to gamers and to Xbox," according to the official statement he included in his post. "Xbox One is designed to support the trade in and resale of games. Reports about our policies for trade in and resale are inaccurate and incomplete. We will disclose more information in the near future."

We reached out to Microsoft for comment and they pointed us to Hryb's statement.

A number of experimental features in Google Glass have been uncovered by the Android hacking community, including one that puts the headset in a constant listening mode awaiting an owner's command. Another lets you quickly snap a photo with an eye wink. These and other experiments remain hidden from regular users, however. Not only must the Glass hardware be rooted for you to gain access. but you'll also need to modify settings files on the device — a risky proposition for $1,500 Explorer Edition buyers. But as Android Police reports, those willing to take the plunge will be rewarded with some useful functionality.

After enabling an "OK_GLASS_EVERYWHERE" option, the device will constantly listen for your command regardless of where you are in the operating system. Currently, "OK Glass" voice instructions are only accepted from the home screen. The experimental change makes interacting with the device far more convenient and we'd hope to see it rolled out to all users, assuming impact on Glass' battery life is minimal. Another setting lets Glass wearers take photos simply by winking their right eye — a feat one developer has already enabled in his own Glass app. It's certainly faster (and quieter) than blurting out "OK Glass, take a picture," but the shortcut stands to raise some privacy concerns. For the full list of ideas Google is toying with (and a video of some in action), head over to Android Police.

I added a design to a blank tote bag using light-sensitive Inkodye and a stencil cut from freezer paper.


Inkodye is a water-based dye that works on natural materials like fabric and wood, and develops its color in the sun. It dyes fabrics permanently, and I like it better than fabric paint since it soaks into the fabric and keeps it soft and flexible, unlike fabric paints that can be stiff and sit on the surface of a textile. Plus, it's really fun watching the color develop!


To make a similar tote, you can create your own design or download the Big Fun stencil I made.

Print the design and trace it onto the dull side of plastic-coated freezer paper, available at grocery stores. Or, save yourself a step and print directly on freezer paper cut to fit through your printer. Tape a piece of freezer paper, shiny side down, to a sheet of copy paper and print on it. It will come out a bit curly and lightly fused to the carrier sheet if you use a laser printer like I did, but it should peel off easily.


Cut out the letters and shapes. Remember that any empty hole will get filled with color, and no dye will go where the pieces of paper sit.

With an iron set to the appropriate temperature for your fabric (likely the cotton setting), iron the paper pieces to the tote, shiny side down. The iron will very slightly melt the plastic coating, sticking the paper to the canvas. Give the pieces an initial quick, light press to make sure they're where you want them. If not, peel them up and reposition. Then press down firmly with the iron and make sure all the edges are sealed so no dye will seep under them. Once they're stuck down, the pieces are really stuck, and will probably tear if you try to peel them off.

If there are any areas you're worried about getting dye— you know, if you tend to lose your mind a little and start painting outside the lines— mask those off with painter's tape. Place a piece of freezer paper inside the tote to prevent any dye from soaking through to the back side.


Then, in a dimly lit room, brush on Inkodye with a foam brush. Or any kind of brush or roller will do the job! Try for even coverage. The fabric doesn't have to be completely saturated; you just need a nice even coat on the surface of the textile.

(You can mix Inkodye with water to make it go further, if you like. A 1:1 ratio of dye to water will still yield maximum vibrance. Add more water to make pastels, or mix colors as you would paint.)


Blot off any excess dye with a paper towel.


Place the tote in the sun. The color will start to develop instantly! Here's the tote after 30 seconds, a minute or two, and fully exposed after 10 minutes.


Peel off the paper, my favorite part.


If you like, you can wash the tote with laundry detergent to remove any excess dye. Or just let it air dry and call it a day.

By Craig Pearson on May 24th, 2013 at 9:00 pm.

There is nothing wrong in not being very good at Kerbal Space Program. Being bad at it is a state almost everyone will be in for a very long time indeed. Join me in admitting how tough it is. The elite rocketmen will sneeringly deride your honesty, saying: “It’s not rocket science”, but then you can point to the tube of metal and fuel that you’ve spent hours preparing, and then point to the sky, and it’ll dawn on them that it definitely is rocket science, and that everyone is in fact laughing at them.

Anyway, I’ve spent the day playing KSP and I’m not very good at it.

Your mission in KSP is to build a rocket capable of escaping the planet Kerbin’s orbit and exploring the solar system. But KSP’s tutorial only imparts odd chunks of knowledge. You’ll be able to build a basic ship that’s able to touch orbit, but it won’t land. You’ll be told how to manoeuvre a craft from orbit into another planet or moon’s gravitational grasp, but you won’t know what all the various parts do in the vehicle assembly building. It’s one of those games where the tutorial is well-meaning, but leaves you confused and disoriented when you try to apply what it taught you, because it only covers the basics. And that’s sort of the point.

This part of the game is interested only in getting the Kerbalnaut into orbit, and all that takes is a command pod, a rocket, and some fuel. They’re all clicked easily into place in the vehicle assembly building, a sort of shop and ship-builder in one. It reminds me of Spore’s Creature Creator. No safety precautions are taken, of coursem but then the tutorial doesn’t have to look at the smiling face of Jebediah Kerman in the bottom corner of the screen. I did. I built the tutorial ship and launched it, jabbing at the surprisingly simple controls: throttle and various directional prods that aren’t much more complicated than an FPS. I was with Jebediah all the way, the pair of us grinned as we thrust through the atmosphere and into the edge of space, his smile mirrored in the slice of Kerbin that poked up from the bottom of the screen. We were one as we watched the blue day peel away and the stars wink into place.

The orbit wasn’t quite enough to keep the ship ‘up’, though: it slowly tilted towards the ground, and there was nothing I could do to stop it. All the while the idiot Kerbalnaut was still emoting happily at me. I stabbed at my keyboard (and reminded myself for the millionth time that I had Stickykeys enabled). I swiveled the craft, hoping that the additional forces would knock him unconscious. Nothing worked, and he grinned all the way to his death.

RIP, Jebediah Kerman. You were one of the good ones. I vowed then to never risk another Kerbalnaut.

KSP really requires a second monitor. Right now I have the controls wiki, and this video series open on mine.

I could hug you, Wernher Von Kerman. It’s a bit out-of-date, but the basics of the game remain the same. Along with the command pod, rocket, and fuel, all I needed was an Advanced S.A.S. module to enable flight control, a decoupler to uncouple the command pod, and a parachute. I took off, we hit orbit, I hit “space” and the pod split from the fuel tank, and as it plummeted back to the surface the parachute popped open and slowed the drop. Why the tutorial doesn’t go that extra few steps is bizarre, but the above series honestly took me from scared to cautiously optimistic. I felt more Tom Hanks in Apollo 13 than Tom Hanks in The ‘Burbs.

So it gave me the confidence to take on an orbital transfer to the Mün. This is where I figured I’d mess up, because it involves understanding complicated flight paths, but Kerbal had me covered. In space a press of ‘M’ will pop-up a map of the solar system. It’s a functional overview that allows you to control the craft while looking at the bigger picture. That’s a huge boost, as it enables the player to predict their orbit. Maneuvering up here is functionally the same as the on the planet: you can thrust, and control the yaw and tilt of the craft. But unlike in the atmosphere, you’ll need to counter every move with an opposite thrust to arrest the movement.

It’s not like Elite, where moving from the planet to the moon is a case of pointing the craft at it and speeding up. Kerbal requires you to swap orbits, increasing the ellipse around Kerbin until you get close enough to the Mün for its gravity to capture the craft. That involves a few considerations: your prograde and retrograde vectors, which basically means where your velocity is taking you and where the opposite of that would be. They’re marked on the craft’s navball. You’ll mostly use these to alter your apoapsis and parapsis, the highest and lowest points of your orbit. Confusingly, in order to raise the apoapsis you’ll need to thrust towards the prograde vector while at the parapsis.

It’s one of those concepts that becomes second-nature when you’ve had a shot at it, but sounds horrendous when written down. Don’t panic. It’s just terminology, and the instruments in the craft are there to help. The Advanced SAS is really handy in this case, enabling you to aim the craft knowing that if things get a bit too spinny, all you need to do is hit “T” and it’ll stabilise.

You should take further comfort in the knowledge that I, yes me, made it to Mün orbit. It took a few goes, because once again the tutorial fumbled a required nugged of information (it told me to aim at the moon, but didn’t really explain the best way to do so), but I eventually managed to align all those elements and burn the craft out to Mün orbit. I watched as the ellipses changed, and instead of immediately circling my home planet, I was in the grip of its child. I celebrated as a NASA technician would, before noticing I was zooming past it: I’d forgotten to slow down. But that wasn’t the end. There was no script at that moment. Just me and everything I’d learned. I swung the craft around and burned fast and hard. I hadn’t pushed too far off course, and achingly crept back into position. I was in orbit.

What now? I still have to learn how to land, which my brain tells me I should have known before I got into the ship, and I expect the tutorial to only show me 50% of that, so instead I’m going to watch more of Wernher Von Kerman’s series before even attempting it. There’s a lot more to KSP than I first realised. It seems like the solar system is persistent, so it’s possible to leave ‘bases’ on planets and return to them. This is exciting and frightening: I’m not sure I can be a fully functional human being and know what Kerbal’s capable of.

But now I need some help. Any must-have mods, or a mod-manager? I’m thinking higher-res textures and a camera helper for taking screenshots, and something that might help automate a few systems. The community site doesn’t really have a helpful tag system, and search has failed me. Is any of what I want possible? I don’t want to add new ships or big old hunks of equipment until I’m comfortable, but if there’s a ‘must-have’, I’ll absolutely toss it on my equipment pile.

Help me reach the stars, people.

The top 1 percent of monetizers account for 32.68 percent of money spent in "non-arcade" mobile games, according to a report from Playnomics (PDF link).

The company's analysis defines "non-arcade" games as those "designed and intended for longer term play experiences often featuring levels, campaigns and collectables." Playnomics studied more than 1.7 million players, observing spending patters over a three-month period. According to the report, the spending habits represent a "power law distribution," similar to the "whales" who spend disproportionate amounts of money over time in casinos. Playnomics expects 20 percent of monetizers to account for 80 percent of revenue.

Playnomics seeks to find out how and why people play games, and you can learn more about the company by reading our interview with Playnomics CEO and co-founder Chethan Ramachandran.