Slashdot Mirror

Ummm...That's not Google's blog. This is.

That's not the actual google blog

personally, i have a lot of fun doing podcasts. even though mine isn't anything amazing. i don't think we should be using the word we're using, however. eck!


http://post-radio.blogspot.com/

for music, i enjoy
http://post-radio.blogspot.com/

it's a new project so bare with him.

I don't know why you think a couple hundred titles is so far fetched by 2007.
According to a report from an industry research firm there are already 160 titles in development and we're still in mid-2005.

1) Boobies = No women gamers
A good point, but they don't seem to get to the root of the issue. It's not just the shabby treatment of women in games that turns them off. It's or the violence, or the language either. The fact is, your average "mature" title these days is dripping with pure unadulterated testosterone. Developers are too busy trying to grab their current target audience (males 17 to 25) to cultivate new audiences.
The biggest games- the ones that sell millions of copies to non-traditional gamers- are almost all aimed at a wider audience. Halo 2 was big, there's no denying that- but it pales in comparison to The Sims or Rollercoaster Tycoon in raw staying power- they're practically cultural phenomena. The same can be said for Nintendogs in Japan, which helped the DS steamroll Sony's entire console family in May (haven't seen sales figures since then). That's the kind of stuff that will bring gaming to the masses, not a game designed to appeal to some 19 year-old trying to look cool sitting alone in his parents' basement.


No. I think you're basically wrong here. I think women just don't play video games period. I've made this point before.

http://oblivionboy.blogspot.com/2005/07/do-women-p lay-video-games.html

Let me ask you a question. How often have you ever gone somewhere and met women, and found out that they loved video games. You just don't. I'm sure if you ask them why, and you think about their answer, you'll find that its not the big breasted women that are the problem. Many of my female friends *love* Angelina Jolie, and she seems to be one of those few women that have a kind of universal appeal across both sexes. Also the Tomb Raider example never really made any sense to me. I mean: So what you're telling me is a babe that kicks ass and goes adventuring and essentially does what Indiana Jones does, isn't appealing to women because her breats are too big? In other words if she was flat chested suddenly you'd see women flocking in droves to play the game? Is there some correct breast size that we should have that will make games appeal to women?

Na-huh. Of course not.

No the variables involved are much more complex, and have alot to do with how men and women react differently to media (why are soaps popular with women and not so much men? Why do we have movies we call "chick flicks", and the opposite for men?). Maybe women would really just rather spend that time with their friends being social. Maybe thats really where the video games for women should be...interactivity and socialization.

I'm interning with Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC) in Arden Hills, MN, working on their Windchill enterprise PDM application. PTC is known in the manufacturing world for their Pro/E CAD software as well, and is based in Needham, MA. I have learned an amazing amount of things in 3 months and been exposed to loads of enterprise apps and technologies. Luckily I have a good combination of management in that my Group Leader is a hardcore code monkey, and my Manager makes the less glamorous corporate side of software engineering (CMMI, etc.) interesting and useful. We are working on client development using an XML based framework for the next major version of the software, and they just asked me to stay on into the schoolyear. I would recommend PTC to other CSci/equiv. majors looking for a great internship at a commercial software company. Hit up my blog for a little more.

I thought a DC deskjob internship would be boring, until I read this!

I have devised, as part of my system of ethical ironicism, a special vipassana meditation specifically for people like you.

(1) Stand facing away from a mirror.

(2) Calm your mind, take a deep cleansing breath.

(3) Focus on the most contemptible, stupid thing you can remember somebody doing.

(4) Fan the feelings of contempt until they blossom into a sense of self-righteous superiority.

(5) Assemble a look of disapproval on your face if there isn't one there yet. If you don't know how, try this: draw your brows down like you're slightly angry, raise your chin so you are looking down your nose, and wrinkle your nose slightly like you're smelling something a bit on the distasteful side.

(6) Raise your index finger like you're instructing a willful and somewhat stupid child.

(7) Keeping all these elemements in place, turn around and examine your reflection.

Now for the meditation:

I. Fix the image in your reflection in step 7 in your mind, and ask yourself whether this is how you really want the world to see you.

II. Fix the feeling you generated in step 4 in your mind. Is it familiar? Good. Now ask yourself whether you really want to be part of the Gravitas Police, and go around pissing on other people's fun.

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/08/president-and -intelligent-design.html

Don't confuse us Amerikuns with facts, we ain't too smert here and we like it dat wey! Praise Jeebus and pass the Chinese-manufactured, Indian-designed, Japanese-researched cel phoon so I cun call in to Russ Limbaw.

http://cipher-text.blogspot.com/2005/08/court-case -falls-apart-because-of-md5.html

Just wanted to say, "you think vaguely like me, so hi".

And yes, the lawyer's statement is quite stunning.

I sure as hell wouldn't. The man doesn't live in the real world if he thinks open source will continue to thrive without GPL type licensing... just look at how booming the BSD community is compared to the Linux one...there's a reason for that.

I've got a longer version of my argument here if anyone cares to read it.

"I'm sure the various BSD/MIT license advocates, who are "using" the additional rights granted to them under copyright by the GPL to use, say GCC, would love to have a "say" in it. Specifically, they would like it to give free reign for redistribution. Shut your pie hole."

The BSD license is great if you don't want any contributions back from the community, thus defeating the entire point of open source development... I've got alot more to say about this here.

I agree with you completely. However, I was thinking why Smalltalk is not in so wide use today. Largest problem of Smalltalk is, that it is too ahead, even at this time... People do not understand it, because it does not fit into "mainstream" technologies. I believe that Smalltalk or Smalltalk-like technology will emerge once again...

Btw. GNUstep is trying to bring back Smalltalk in other form than a whole stand-alone environment. It uses Smalltalk as a scripting language that glues objects together and creates not real, but illusion of single object environment. The Smalltalk thingy is included in the StepTalk scripting framework.

More information about Smalltalk based scripting can be found here and on a blog here

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/08/fill-in-bla nks.html

I'm much more interested in that. I've always wanted that feature.

"The only BIG problem left is easy, next-next-finish style, standart installation packages across every distro. But hopefully they'll handle this one too."

I agree, this is a big one. I think the best system is the one OS X uses, application folders.

I like the fact that DesktopBSD has helpful "control panels" and configuration/installation wizards, it's good stuff.

However, PC-BSD has application folders and that's why I'm going with that. I just think it's the most usable system of progam installation and more importantly, the easiest system for getting RID of programs. Getting rid of a program that's installed it's files all over your HD demands the help of a thing called a package manager or "uninstall wizard" which need a perfect log of where all the little files were installed to.

In practice, the perfect installation log system is never perfect. It happens that it's either not recorded correctly or something changed after the installation which causes the uninstall to fail. If you want to be SURE you just install every program into it's own folder and you'll know that you've gotten rid of everything if you see the folder gone. It's conceptually easier to get your head around and it's just more usable in practice (drag the folder to another PC and it's "installed" there).

Hopefully DesktopBSD will see the light, they're doing well in every other departement.

Good luck guys.

Don't forget that Hollywood is a big user of open source software such as CinePaint, which is basically a "Son of GIMP". Hollywood studios like DreamWorks, Sony, ILM use CinePaint. A bit ironic if you think about it -- the most profit-driven business, Hollywood, uses free open-source software.

Personally, I use GIMP extensively to create graphics for my blog (http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/), and have written a blog entry in praise of the good old GIMP (http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/2005/04/in-praise-o f-gimp.html).

Oh, yeah, open source all the way!!!!

Don't forget that Hollywood is a big user of open source software such as CinePaint, which is basically a "Son of GIMP". Hollywood studios like DreamWorks, Sony, ILM use CinePaint. A bit ironic if you think about it -- the most profit-driven business, Hollywood, uses free open-source software.

Personally, I use GIMP extensively to create graphics for my blog (http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/), and have written a blog entry in praise of the good old GIMP (http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/2005/04/in-praise-o f-gimp.html).

Oh, yeah, open source all the way!!!!

truly, sdr is the smartest way to go.

we (as consumers) need to demand it--that's the only way we're gonna get the push to go where we need to go. once a good (i.e. solid and efficient) hardware platform has been worked out and tested, nothing will be able to compete with software controlled radio again.

when new networks and protocols come out, all you need is a firmware update.

--cid

0wn yourself
http://cidviscous.blogspot.com

My blog post on this matter. Lazy to paste it here anyway. Anyway I'm a kid myself, so pardon my n00bness in anyway displayed.

Actually, robot revolution is also happening in China and Korea as well, but there's indeed very little in a way of practical accomplishments coming from west.

http://plyojump.com/ has some in-depth info and couple good essays on these topics and why exactly this is happening. The core problem seems to lie in deeply rooted cultural issues

Also check out Marshall Brain's ( the howstuffworks.com guy ) http://roboticnation.blogspot.com/ blog

You have a valid point about Garfield, but much of the reasons for the popularity of Garfield are precisely the reasons you have given - the well engineered mediocrity and conformity hard coded into the Garfield universe. Read this slate piece about it: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102299/


--------
My Pop Culture Theme Quizzes, have fun reading and solving them.
The First
The Second
The Third
Solutions to #1

You have a valid point about Garfield, but much of the reasons for the popularity of Garfield are precisely the reasons you have given - the well engineered mediocrity and conformity hard coded into the Garfield universe. Read this slate piece about it: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102299/


--------
My Pop Culture Theme Quizzes, have fun reading and solving them.
The First
The Second
The Third
Solutions to #1

You have a valid point about Garfield, but much of the reasons for the popularity of Garfield are precisely the reasons you have given - the well engineered mediocrity and conformity hard coded into the Garfield universe. Read this slate piece about it: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102299/


--------
My Pop Culture Theme Quizzes, have fun reading and solving them.
The First
The Second
The Third
Solutions to #1

You have a valid point about Garfield, but much of the reasons for the popularity of Garfield are precisely the reasons you have given - the well engineered mediocrity and conformity hard coded into the Garfield universe. Read this slate piece about it: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102299/


--------
My Pop Culture Theme Quizzes, have fun reading and solving them.
The First
The Second
The Third
Solutions to #1

"No, creationists are making up new terms that sound cool, but really are just admissions that change does occur, but they think it doesn't occur across "kinds"."

Everyone agrees that change occurs. To say that creationists don't think that change occurs is simply a caricature, not reality. Creationists have believed in change since Linnaeus.

"Take this change and add billions of years and there is nothing yet seen which it cannot explain. And there is, further, much evidence in the fossil record showing exactly what one would expect from this hypothesis."

That's incorrect. Evolution supposes that diversity precedes disparity, but the fossil records shows the opposite.

"So which is it? "Semantic information" cannot be created or it can be created in 9 days?"

It is semantic information which cannot be created. Think about it this way: a program can use non-deterministic methods to devise solutions to problems, but what makes the non-deterministic methods usable is the fact that they are based on a very stable system that has such changes planned in. It is the stable constraints and systems that are the semantic information. The organism has simply inferred a set of enzymes from the environment, but was ultimately able to do so because it is specifically programmed to adapt in that way. I argue this in greater detail here.

"Ok. So the allegation is that it could not have occured without divine intervention."

Nope. You misunderstood my argument. The allegation is that it could not have occurred if the cell was not specifically designed to search and find adaptations for a new food source, and that the ability of a genome to adapt is fundamentally constrained because if it weren't the adaptation mechanism would fall into error catastrophe. This is why, even though pseuodomas can generate genes in 9 days, it has been fundamentally stable for over a hundred years -- it's basic foundational programming around which change occurs has remained the same.

The alternatives are (a) pseudomonas has been subject to random mutations at this rate, and it just happened upon this one that worked. This would lead almost immediately to error catastrophe if the general mutation rate throughout the genome occurred at this speed. The other alternative (b) is that pseudomonas already had the ability to do this, which has been confirmed to be untrue.

One site I've started reading in the past several months is The Housing Bubble 2 blog. (It has a "2" because the Illuminati convinced Blogspot to shut down the original site.) This guy collects real estate news from all over the world and he has a comments section that attracts an interesting crowd with some good information.

This bubble is not just something that affects places like San Diego- it's worldwide and echo bubbles are infecting markets that hadn't yet been reached. Even sh8tholes like Bakersfield are seeing a 33% year over year appreciation and people are falling over themselves to buy crap land in West Texas. People are leveraging themselves with interest-only ARMs to buy houses they otherwise could never afford and many are already on the edge of bankruptcy even though rates are still low. When the credit crunch hits it won't be pretty. Close to 40% of all jobs created since the last recession have been in construction and real estate, and this country has built millions of unoccupied units at a ferocious rate in the past few years.

The mere fact that everyone is yakking about real estate is a sign that the smart money is cashing out and moving on.

Just wanted to say I'm running my own blog now, and I've basically restated the previously linked GameDev.Net post in my first blog post. For the more sane of you, please try to spread the link around, just to keep things properly in perspective. This is a major problem, but it is not the end of OpenGL. I want to encourage people to realise that.

CWS being spyware is nothing new, and the article does seem to contain a lot of scaremongering, but Sunbelt did discover something new: they found the actual stolen/recorded information, including a lot of stuff that is considerably more invasive than surfing habits, real names, etc. And I thought they only made junk food...
Sunbelt's blog entries are, in my opinion, better than the ars article.

CWS being spyware is nothing new, and the article does seem to contain a lot of scaremongering, but Sunbelt did discover something new: they found the actual stolen/recorded information, including a lot of stuff that is considerably more invasive than surfing habits, real names, etc. And I thought they only made junk food...
Sunbelt's blog entries are, in my opinion, better than the ars article.

Since I am a fan of the Robotic Nation, I find this post to be right on target: Robotic Education. Computer aided instruction using a video-game-like interface could radically improve the delivery of science education to students. Many schools, apparently, are starting to head in that direction: Why millions of teachers will be out of work soon....

Since I am a fan of the Robotic Nation, I find this post to be right on target: Robotic Education. Computer aided instruction using a video-game-like interface could radically improve the delivery of science education to students. Many schools, apparently, are starting to head in that direction: Why millions of teachers will be out of work soon....

"So ID people accept that mutations are random?"

ID people think that there are both random and non-random mutations.

"And the earth is several billion years old."

Most ID'ers agree with this, though it is not part of ID per se.

"And many species can be traced back to a common ancestor."

All creationists believe that many species can be traced back to a common ancestor, even YEC. In fact, the most prevalent YEC opinion is that for vertebrates, the original created "kind" diverged roughly into the family level of taxonomic classification. ID'ers have a range of opinion, some holding to _universal_ common ancestry (I know Behe is of this opinion, for instance), others hold to a small number of original kinds (the Cambrian explosion contained most of the created kinds), and others agreeing more-or-less with the YECs.

In fact, "progressive creationism" (a la Hugh Ross) can include universal common ancestry, with the major jumps between taxa accomplished by God divinely adding the information necessary to make the jump.

Many of those in ID who believe in universal common ancestry believe that evolution was "front-loaded" -- i.e. all of the parts that cannot come about by natural mechanisms were built into the first organism which then diversified.

"All plant cells are basically the same, All vertebrate cells are basically the same, but there is enough difference between plant and animal cells to say that they need to have a different ancestor?"

In my view, yes very much so. Here I defend why.

"Granted all tree cells are closer to each other than they are to say grass cells so do trees get a common ancestor or just plants? How about Apple trees vs Pines?"

YECs use hybridization as the primary means of determining what the original created kinds were. You can see their online hybridization database here. You can see other YEC biosystematic methods in this book.

"Evolution as a thery provides a clean link between all life on earth so which of these are ID people complaning about and what do they find annoying about these links?"

Except that it doesn't. The links are neither clean nor obvious. The fossil record, especially for non-vertebrates, provides very little support for evolution. In addition, the mechanism supposed is inadequate in many people's view.

"The first fallacy is its claim that evolution is a "random" process. Evolution is not random at all, as its progress is determined by natural selection (or the selection of God, if you prefer)."

(a) if it were the selection of God, it would be ID, though not creationism.

(b) for the use of the term "random" as it is popularly use, evolution is indeed random.

As always, Giblets knows best

"I was pointing out why saying ID vs. Natural Selection was a poor expression of the idea."

Except that many people in the ID community believe in Universal Common Ancestry.

As for the differences between creationists and evolutionists, I think this best sums up the differences.

FOSS isn't going to make people homeless. It's not a zero sum game. In FOSS everyone wins because it's not not about giving software away gratis, it's about having the freedom to build on the giants that are previously written software.

Soon you will no longer need to continually reinvent the wheel every time you write a new program. Instead you can build upon the work of others. Consequently you will get your work done much faster. Your emplyer will be happy, since they get their product faster and hence cheaper. You'll be availabe to work on other additional things, you won't find yourself sitting on your arse simply because you were able to get your assignment done on 10% of the time, you'll just be 10 times more productive and hence produce 10 times more software.

Would you prefer to go back to the days before the industrial revolution? The FOSS revolution will produce similar productivity gains and it's nothing to fear.

Ben's Questions and Answers

I not only laughed, I linked to your comment in my blog as the perfect articulation of what I was laughing about. Nice.

While this is intersting it will have very little use since not that many people have blue tooth head sets. Plus, you will only get a few seconds before the car has driven past you. -- http://www.kunae.blogspot.com/

Baidu IPO Fact Sheet: http://china-netinvestor.blogspot.com/2005/08/baid u-ipo-fact-sheet-on-chinese-search.html

I try to post the link: :-) http://china-netinvestor.blogspot.com/ And the one for the fact sheet: http://china-netinvestor.blogspot.com/2005/08/baid u-ipo-fact-sheet-on-chinese-search.html

I try to post the link: :-) http://china-netinvestor.blogspot.com/ And the one for the fact sheet: http://china-netinvestor.blogspot.com/2005/08/baid u-ipo-fact-sheet-on-chinese-search.html

http://www.start.com/1/ and http://www.start.com/2/ have been out long before Google's homepage (evidence: http://spaces.msn.com/members/startcom/). I would argue that Google is doing the copying here. Google admits that theirs came out in May (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/07/more-of-wh at-i-want.html).

For a video to see two of only three people who work on start.com, you can go here: http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=9022 9

Yes, Microsoft has only two developers on this project.

Look for the Buy 1; Get For Free sale soon at MacMice!

Can't take credit for that joke ... saw it here

Operawatch posted some info on Opera's progress toward Acid2 yesterday.

I'm quite close on my blog at 80% when you combine XP and 2003.

See stats here.

How about the US Army and California National Guard spying on American dissidents, then covering it up when legislatures investigate? Does that make you proud to be an American? Bringing the full force of the US military to bear on domestic spying on grannies? Bringing the full force of their lawyers to bear on covering it up?

At least this , hopefully, means we won't start having a wifi standard war like what always goes on with dvds +/-, blue ray, hd dvd -_- -- http://kunae.blogspot.com/

My main concern with the mouse is that it seems like it provides no tactile feedback when you click. This may be very annoying. I'd want to try one of them out before deciding if I wanted to purchase it. -- http://www.kunae.blogspot.com/

I hope this is a step to getting the national ignition facility back on track.

the "tuna can" is a lot bigger than the NIF-envisioned holraum, but perhaps a step on the way?

So many disgruntled employees:

http://lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com/2005/05/la nl-is-leaderless.html