Slashdot Mirror

If you want to take games in a slightly different context, they make the learning of certain lessons fun and enjoyable. If a game isn't fun, it isn't a game.

Here are games that are fun that teach us things:

Monopoly/Chess/Checkers/Risk==strategy

Twister==How to interact with people of the other sex

The game doesn't have to be presented as an object lesson for it to be an effective one, right?

So kids don't have to think about zero sum, or game theory, or that life is depressing or unfair and unhappy.

As an adult, it's very valid to try to shape the kids perceptions by trying to present them games that happen to teach them lessons. The kids don't have to know this, of course!

Geek dating!

They also happen to be very popular!

I think any constructive long term game is non-zero sum; people have already mentioned the Sim games. There's also Civilization, the ThemeX games, and a bunch of other management/resource type games.

While they are definitely competitive, they aren't zero sum.

Then there are actually games like QuakeArena in which players ally themselves into teams. While teams may be zero sum, within a team itself the game is non-zero sum, with cooperation, strategy, and interaction dictating the effectiveness or lack thereof of a team.

Louis

Geek dating!

Resistance is futile.

I wouldn't predict 'direct neural tapping' to be as mindblowing as you suggest.

If we all have our brains wired up to computers, they can perhaps become extensions of ourselves, the way a watch, a shoe, a sword can become an extension of a person.

But that does not mean we can become extensions of each other. People with quick and adaptable brains, in the neuro-plasticity sense, and not the smart and gifted sense, might be able to quickly learn how to communicate with each other, any more than two people from the same school speaking the same language are extensions of each other.

One would *still* have to interpret each person, the same way we interpret our vision, our sounds, our smells, our reality. We gain one more sensory organ, perhaps, but that's about it. We'd probably have to invent a synchronization language to allow ourselves to taste our SO's ice cream, but it still wouldn't mean *we* would be tasting it. It would probably still route it through our own taste centers, just that our two different taste centers may start to synchronize more.

Geek dating!

A car currently only allows for two/three degrees of freedom, what with the accelerator/brake and steering.

The proper analogy is if we use the muscles to actually control/dictate the ABS system, the 4 wheel independent suspension (anticipating speedbumps and potholes with active control), and 4 wheel drive.

Geek dating!

I think it's one of the goals of Apple, as per their digital lifestyle.

Walk up to an Apple Cube+SE with Bluetooth and wireless firewire and, miraculously...

It detects your PDA and starts synching
It detects your MP3 player and starts up background processes to configure and transfer music
It detects your cell phone/pager unit and starts updating information

Then when you sit down to the OS, and start on a document, that application gains central focus. They tried this in OS X with the one application mode, but that sorta lost out to general opinion.

Their view that the Finder is just an application into browsing and viewing the PC and network, and not the PC or network itself, is one step I think. It's a very strong bias into the shaping of what the user thinks the PC or network is, but it can be swapped out into an email program, so that the network appears to be email lists, users, websites, emails, notes, attachments, and local storage. Or switch it into a web browser, and the device starts to look like web pages, music, movies, external sites, local storage, and information.

Does that sound right?

Geek dating!

It's an entirely new interface, and is not limited by the older constraints of older interfaces.

Meaning that, unlike a cheap Power Glove, you are not limited to the degrees of freedom that your fingers and hand have. If you want to tap the muscular controls of your entire body, you can. If you want to tap into the muscles of just your arm, you can. If you just want the hand, you can. So it is already a superset of the powerglove. It would also mean that you aren't limited to on/off switches, but also the more analog like nature of muscle response over time and signal strength.

What use can the complex neural net have? Why not do an analogy?

We have fly by wire systems in which a computer device controls an aircraft and multiple control surfaces in ways and at rates that humans cannot, because there is too much information too process.

Not lets switch the direction of logic; you have a human controller, with much more sensitive and flexible control points than a Power Glove or joystick can sense. The neural net would allow one to almost directly map the human musculature to the airplane control surface, allowing both more control and higher reliability, without reducing flexibility or increasing complexity. It's not perfect, of course, but it's conceivable that all one needs to do is don a light slave suit and control a plane in the same way one would control rollerblades or skis; muscle control!

Geek dating!

I don't think what this guy is proposing works against Apple's design goals.

As per the OS as an interface between applications and the computer, that is *always* necessary even if it's nothing more than an abstraction layer that allows applications and devices to communicate with a uniform series of APIs. In which case OS X is bundles, Quartz, Cocoa, XML configuration files, Quicktime, a filesystem, the Finder, and a few other things.

Aqua, as a GUI, is an interface between which a human user can interact with the network, the applications, documents, data, and other tools. It is, as the name implies, just a Graphical User Interface into which all the other components plug in. Apple is espousing the digital lifestyle, in which you work with PDAs, mp3 players, camcorders, cameras, VCRs, TVs, radios, what have you, as these little tools Jeff may be talking about, but using OS X, Aqua, and all the other little things as a glue to network them all together.

Nothing is conflicting or contradictory, except perhaps in the analysis that OS X gets in the way, or enhances one's 'digital lifestyle'. Steve thinks it's a multiplier. I have to agree, in that having iMovie, which sits on top of the OS X, using the Aqua interface, allows us to do non linear editing and connects our camcorders, our imaginations, our CD-RW and DVD-R devices together in ways that cannot happen without an OS and without a UI, especially a GUI.

The same can be said with MP3s, mp3 players, CDs, and iTunes. Or Final Cut Pro, DVD-R, camcorders, digital cameras, CDs, MP3s, and DVD players. Aqua is the interface between all the software, the software is enabled with Quicktime, Quartz, and firewire, and all of the above sits on OS X.

It's like arguing language is an impediment to understanding; it is, because it's constructs and semantics can create misunderstanding, when one needs to also see that without language, there doesn't exist a medium from which communication exists (yet).

When devices all talk to each other wirelessly with XML packets and have AI to the point of 'grokking' each other, then OSes and such will not be needed. Until then, OSes and GUIs will allow such devices to interface with each other and with us.

Geek dating!

Um... the G5?

I don't think 64bit transitioning is as tough as you make it; 64bit PowerPC would be much simpler to architect for, especially if they have 32bit compatibility and transparency, so that for a generation or two things run at par or slightly faster until the software is updated and optimized towards 64bit processing.

But that's just a Guess

Geek dating!

They have their respective SoftWindows and VirtualPC software, as well as their own copies of games released on their platform, that isn't currently released under Linux. Is the emulation software on those platforms stopping the porting and production of games for that market?

So it isn't the emulation issue that seems to stop the games (though admittedly the performance of x86 on PowerPC isn't very hot either)

Louis

Geek dating!

How about a nod towards the PowerPC for balancing power and performance?

AMD for now has a huge performance lead, at the sacrifice of power. Intel has a huge marketing and manufacturing lead, with slightly less power and slightly less performance.

Transmeta wipes the floor with power, at the sacrifice of performance.

How bout something in between?
PowerPC, with good power, and good performance?

Geek dating!

Why do you think faster processors are the only way to beat Intel?

You know what I'm desperately hoping for?

Computers that are Fast Enough. Are Macs? I dunno, I guess they might be.

Not only are they *fast enough*, but they are engineered. Quiet. Cool. Easy to upgrade and fix. Useable. Reliable.

I'm drawing qualities from cars; at first they were simple, crude, and very expensive. Elite, even. Eventually they became extensions and expressions of our personality. They became specialized, tailored, fashionable, and above all, reliable. They don't regularly crash and stall, now.

I want computers the same. Notebooks, desktops, TiVos, communications devices, consoles, etc.

Geek dating!

Explosive means uncontrolled/uncontrollable, where almost explosive would mean, um, almost controlled/controllable?

An explosive chemical reaction is one where there is a chain reaction. Combustion is where it is merely self sustaining. I think.

Geek dating!

Yes.

Geek dating!

If you want to run an experiment, you don't want something with *more* dimensions! You want something with one, or two, at most!

Maybe something like Tetris, which has two dimensions; critical thinking, and reflexes.

Or something like Solitaire, which involves planning and resource management.

Try simple games, like Pacman, etc.

Geek dating!

So we can have several valid comparisons:
Clock for Clock
$$ for $$
'Performance' for 'Performance

Clock for Clock, it would seem that both dissipate the same amount of power; 14W
That, however, doesn't tell us how much 'performance' the processor generates per Watt, as it were. A Gateway Select 1200 with similar options (but a faster processor) $2341 vs an Apple G4 667MHz tower for $2799.

So there is definitely a $450 delta between the two. The G4 gives off 14W, the Athlon at ~55W. If we want, we can do the math that 2x MHz and 3.7x energy dissapation.

As per performance, everyone thinks/knows that a G4 on Photoshop beats the pants off anything else on the market, supposedly, but we have that on a clock per clock, the G4 supposedly outperforms but has the same wattage, while at max MHz, the G4 *still* supposedly outperforms and uses much less watts.

Now, how about non-Photoshop? I dunno.

Geek dating!

Noble? It seems emminently practical if the whole world were Open-Source. If NT or 9X is giving you one too many BSoDs, you can fire up your VC++ debuggers, your MingWin devtools, your VI editors, and actually fix, debug, and diagnose your problem.

That's one aspect. The other aspect is 'freedom', in the sense that having bought a copy of NT, or 9X, I should be able to tinker with it, in the same way that if I bought a Ford or Chevy, I can pop open the hood, tweak the manifolds, bores, or just do my monthly maintainence, without *having* to go to the mechanic, if I am so skilled or inclined.

NT or 9X is not so generous towards us. We bought it, but we cannot tinker, fix, or modify.

Your scheme of a giant shareable code-base that others can use as they see fit is equivalent to a world where everything is GPL, in the sense that all the code is out there, and everything is open sourced, and anyone can tinker, load, compile, modify, etc.

The minute your world of shareable code starts to hide and obscure code is the minute the GPL would kick in to force the world to *remain* shareable code.

Yet without the GPL as an enforcing mechanism, what would stop the shareable code base from evaporating with time, as people keep developments and changes private and proprietary?

The GPL is one method towards which we can attain this giant shareable code base, as well as a method towards which we maintain it's status.

Otherwise, if there were no clauses of returning code to the public benefit, just through attrition and age, code would probably just disappear with time.

Geek dating!

Let's see if I have this straight:

EVAS is an API or library that allows for the WM, in this case E, to utilize hardware accelerated OpenGL hardware, not just the standard 2d raster stuff found on most video cards, right?

Does this mean E will only work on NVIDIA and 3dfx hardware, under Linux? I've heard other people mention this too.

Is this canvas software, EVAs, akin to Apple's DisplayPDF layer? Will it eventually mature into a display layer that sits between the hardware and the WM? I'm curious if Apple was an inspiration, or not.

Or is it literally just a wrapper around OpenGL? Instead of calling a 2d api, it just remaps to an equiv 3d function call to get the alpha blending and scaling?

If this is literally in it's infancy, maybe a long term design plan to create a Quartz type API would be nice.

Geek dating!

It was despite the PS2 hype; if Sony could produce as many PS2 machines as it wanted, I'm sure they would have had the PS2 outselling the PS1.

What happened was that they could produce the PS1 in mass quantaties, but could not produce the PS2 in similarly large amounts.

Geek dating!

I dunno; I would think the hype machine, if it were turned on, would steal as many sales away from the PS2 as it would from the Xbox and the GCube.

Geek dating!

It isn't FUD. It is generally true if Nintendo, Sony, or MS says 'our next generation of consoles will be more powerful than our current generation'

If this were FUD to freeze sales of X-Box and G-Cube, it would also have the same effect on PS2; people would wait for the PS3 instead of buying PS2s!

As for the 1000x more powerful, that's debateable. If it's expected to be 5 years from now, in the same age of operation as the PSX, then it will be at least 30-50 times more powerful, if only using Moore's respective laws. If they optimize and plan carefully, they may realistically get 100-200 times more powerful, but 1000x seems a bit, well, generous.

As for vapor, it's long term planning. Lack of long term planning wouldn't bode Sony, or any corporation, well!

As for PS2 killer games? What about Sons of Liberty? Don't forget FF10!

Geek dating!

How ironic! How karmic! How fitting!

If half a million Windows OSes are out there now, then during the next upgrade cycle, and if there are manufacturers that wan't to beat the system, all they have to do is buy back the OSes from their customers and sell it again with the next cycle of systems created.

M$ may argue that there are unlicensed systems, but then there is always the argument that people are running Linux, BSD, Be, or Darwin!

Even better, it means M$ has to out-innovate itself to force people to buy the newer OS at the same or similar price to the older OS; if they charge too much, people will generally opt for the older OS, and if they don't charge enough, the M$ loses out on profits!

Geek dating!

They might be pricing at the same rate that M$ charged them?

So if they were already paying $30-$40 or more by M$, they lose nothing by paying this much to consumers!

This is also gotta hurt M$. They now compete against themselves, and they *have* to innovate against themselves, if this catches on!

Geek dating!

Hey, I wrote the original post!

say, start an antijunk mail company, where people become stockholders by sending in checks of $10 a year, and then using that money to 'buy' services from the USPS to prevent being sent junk mail?

That's what I said. So my point was to start a non-profit organization that had the clout and the resources to 'buy', in the sense of getting the USPS to listen to us, the same way environmentalists buy land to place into trusts and parks, not 'buy' as in paying companies not to send spam.

The company should be more than spam and junk mail; it can be about privacy, personal rights, and personal preferences, including telemarketing, bulk mail, and electronic spam. I'm not sure what I said wrong that got people thinking about sending money to a company to prevent them from spamming you!

Geek dating!

Hey, is it extortion then when we send money to the ALCU to protect our civil liberties? Money to the EFF to protect our digital rights? Random charities to protect our environment, our countryside, our landmarks, our history?

Is all that extortion?

Geek dating!

Is the only thing the government can do? Regulate?

At least I was thinking that the gov could create an atmosphere and situations where people have the power and the ability to create their own lifestyle. Is that only possible through regulation? I guess you could call laws, fines, taxes, purchases, research, production, and fees regulation. Govt runs public services, programs, research institutions, etc.

Well?

Geek dating!

If the US had dropped it's paranoid fear of government a loooong time ago, we'd have never left the UK in the first place!

Irrespective of socialism or anything, the role of government is is to empower and protect the people. Regulation may or may not be that answer, but I'd lean against it, as the same measures can be used against people as much as it protects people.

If there are methods that work without regulation, then that would be preferrable... say, start an antijunk mail company, where people become stockholders by sending in checks of $10 a year, and then using that money to 'buy' services from the USPS to prevent being sent junk mail?

Geek dating!

NeXT/Apple and Linux/DOS?

Unless I'm severely mistaken, Apple's overriding philosophy has, generically, been to engineer towards excellence. Which lead to the adoption of SCSI over IDE, early on, and Motorola over Intel, wireless networking, and USB over serial, and to engineer those standards when none existed, like Firewire, or ADB, or fanless cubes, or optical drives, or using NeXT over Be, etc.

There is no IBMesque philosophy; each manufacturer, like Apple, has their own design goals. Some try to make nifty hardware, like Sony, some try to make high volume low margin devices, like Gateway or Dell, and some are just mediocre pieces of crap.

Apples today, at least, use standard memory, standard IDE drives, standard Firewire drives, standard USB buses, standard PCI and AGP slots, and standard networking protocols.

The only thing proprietary inside an Apple machine is the engineering done to make it possible; the chipsets, the ROMs, the motherboard layout, the CPU and logic, etc. I've always noticed how exacting the engineering inside Apples have been, ever since MacIIs.

Cannot talk much about NeXTs.

They lack the diversity? Excuse me? That's an irrelevant concept. Apple is a vendor and purveyor of PCs as much as Gateway. They purchase and compete for ATI chips against Dell, have to buy and use harddisks no different than IBM, compete against Sony for firewire implementations, Compaq for USB connectors, Micron for IDE interfaces, etc.

If you mean by lack of diversity that there weren't multiple manufacturers of Apples... well, there wasn't exactly many manufacturers of HP computers either. Nor could you swap CPUs, motherboards, or fans on an HP computer, today, with that of a Compaq. Try, HP sooo engineers their cases, it's almost custom.

HD, CD-ROMs, memory, CPUs, video cards, and sound cards, maybe. But with sound and ethernet increasingly being included on the motherboard, many of today's PCs are starting to look more and more like Apple's machines.

I dunno, I think you're over-generalizing with your comparison to Apple/NeXT and Linux/DOS.

Geek dating!

Apple will do this next/first?

After all, they have the color-space and color-sync issues handled (for years now, to boot), and they are pushing their PCs as the center of the digital lifestyle hub.

Why wouldn't the next step, after high fidelity color, fanless/noiseless devices, and digital video, be digital audio?

Perfect digital signals, no interference, shielding and such, etc, with an external standalone amp and speakers? Why not?

Even better if they can figure out how to do this without wires!

Geek dating!

Yes, Nintendo is bullying, that's the norm here.

But Nintendo has a legal onus to protect it's IP and copyrights.

See this? There's Pokemon Trading Card artwork, as well as other artwork, that Nintendo believes is infringed upon without due compensation or licensing from Nintendo.

Geek dating!

It would be like... someone printing and selling NFL logoed shirts, without licensing said logos from the NFL.

Specifically addressed by copyright law and not a fair use issue.

See this? There's Pokemon Trading Card artwork, as well as other artwork, that Nintendo believes is infringed upon without due compensation or licensing from Nintendo.

Geek dating!

Specifically addressed by copyright law and not a fair use issue.

See this? There's Pokemon Trading Card artwork, as well as other artwork, that Nintendo believes is infringed upon without due compensation or licensing from Nintendo.

Geek dating!

Specifically addressed by copyright law and not a fair use issue.

See <a href="http://media.dailyradar.com/images/misc/nvi/ nvi_page_02.gif">this</a>? There's Pokemon Trading Card artwork, as well as other artwork, that Nintendo believes is infringed upon without due compensation or licensing from Nintendo.

Geek dating!

Its more than just about the Strategy Guides. There is info at this link

Besides the screenshots(which I think are bogus allegations and fair use) there's also the artwork from the Pokemon trading cards as well as other promotional/product artwork.

That's clearly a violation, if they haven't licensed such artwork from Nintendo.

Geek dating!

One moderator, so far, thinks I'm trolling.
Another moderator thinks I'm interesting.

Anyway, a virus/worm that spread in this manner, of alternating, would take advantage of a couple of common distributions.

Houses that use Linux in server environments with masses of NT boxes on the desktop. It would affect all members equally. I guess Macs and SCOs and BSDs would be discriminated against, in this case...

Geek dating!

There goes the assertion/urban myth that Linux was proof against virii and such.

I would think a *horrible* vector would be one that alternated Windows/Linux targetting.

A Windows virus that targets Linux, transmutes itself, than looks for other Windows machines on the network.

Rinse, lather, and repeat.

Geek dating!

I always get the initial stuff confused.

ESR and RMS ^^; Oops.

Yeah, but you get the point of my post, right?

Geek dating!

Being facetious, but isn't this why ESR is so pissed off?

It's GNU that we've fallen in love with, that everyone keeps calling Linux, that happens to be so powerful and wonderful.

Emacs, GCC, gmake, etc...

Geek dating!

What are you talking about? I have a natural +1 bonus that I like to flaunt.

I actually do say useful things, generally. It's not like my 3 identical posts got modded up 3 times...

Geek dating!

(oops, repost, with easier to follow links!)
(second time. I keep forgetting POT!)
Here's what *I'm* curious about.

Without being very authoritative, various google searches for:
'watts G4'
and
'watts G3'

It speaks of the G4(non mobile) as sucking up 20+ watts as high power. A fast G3 sucks something something like 4 to 5 watts.

Soooo... Is this hype, or are the PowerPC chips *really* that cool, in comparison? And why are we settling for such power sucking PCs? Are we just that cheap? Or that greedy? In terms of ecological effects (heating and noise), PCs are fine room warmers... but still, that's a side effect we can engineer out, can't we?

I'm sooo tempted to buy an Apple. It would seem powerful *enough*(of course, not the most powerful), and featured, enough, what with Firewire, USB, ethernet and modems, and cool enough, what with Airport antennas, some systems with CD-R and DVD-R, gigabit, etc...

I guess Mac OS X will seal my doom, what with the strength and stability of BSD, the slickness of Aqua, and display pdf...

Geek dating!

(oops, repost, with easier to follow links!)
Here's what *I'm* curious about.

Without being very authoritative, various google searches for:
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=watts+g4"> 'watts G4'</a>
and
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=watts+g3"> 'watts G3'</a>

It speaks of the G4(non mobile) as sucking up <a href="http://macweb.macol.net/~PowerMacG4Central/" >20+ watts</a> as high power. A fast G3 sucks something something like <a href="http://macweek.zdnet.com/2000/06/04/0606newp pcchips.html">4 to 5 watts.</a>

Soooo... Is this hype, or are the PowerPC chips *really* that cool, in comparison? And why are we settling for such power sucking PCs? Are we just that cheap? Or that greedy? In terms of ecological effects (heating and noise), PCs are fine room warmers... but still, that's a side effect we can engineer out, can't we?

I'm sooo tempted to buy an Apple. It would seem powerful *enough*(of course, not the most powerful), and featured, enough, what with Firewire, USB, ethernet and modems, and cool enough, what with Airport antennas, some systems with CD-R and DVD-R, gigabit, etc...

I guess Mac OS X will seal my doom, what with the strength and stability of BSD, the slickness of Aqua, and display pdf...

Geek dating!

Here's what *I'm* curious about.

Without being very authoritative, various google searches for <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=watts+g4"> 'watts G4'</a> and <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=watts+g3"> 'watts G3'</a>

It speaks of the G4(non mobile) as sucking up <a href="http://macweb.macol.net/~PowerMacG4Central/" >20+ watts</a> as high power. A fast G3 sucks something something like <a href="http://macweek.zdnet.com/2000/06/04/0606newp pcchips.html">4 to 5 watts.</a>

Soooo... Is this hype, or are the PowerPC chips *really* that cool, in comparison? And why are we settling for such power sucking PCs? Are we just that cheap? Or that greedy? In terms of ecological effects (heating and noise), PCs are fine room warmers... but still, that's a side effect we can engineer out, can't we?

Geek dating!

of the world in 100 years?

Will it be Steve Jobs? I hear he has personality issues...

Bill Gates? His corporation seems to heavy handed, for my tastes...

Linus Torvalds? Steve Wozniak? ESR?

Geek dating!

Anime is more removed from reality than film and television?

Like, say the Matrix, or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, or on TV, Star Trek, or Teletubbies, or Power Rangers?

Anime is a medium, like any other.

About the only thing true you said in the first sentance was that it is drawn. *All* mediums are subjective!

You also say geeks like it more than other socio-cultural groups. What other groups would you be talking about? Aren't you actually defining geek by the correlation with anime?

I dunno, I sorta feel insulted by your second comment altogether. People, in general, are scared of reality, and tend to run away from it if given the chance, and do this in perfectly rational and reasonable manners. Some people become mass murderers, of course, but most people have dreams and goals and ambitions, all of which are technically fantasy and not one whit reality.

Is anime healthy? Is wrestling? Is fashionable clothing? Is participating in an online forum? Is being popular?

There is no 'we' in encouraging geeks to do anything. There is 'I', and then there is the collective side effects of a million 'I', but no 'we'. So to rephrase, You should surely be encouraging geeks to confront the world you think they are so afraid of.

Anime is a medium in which we can express the thoughts of our most creative individuals, no more or less than talk, music, books, pictures, art, movies, performance, dance, etc. It is no more or less removed from reality than, say, jazz dance, or interpretive ballet, or a Picasso. The danger or lack thereof has nothing to do with it's degree of separation from reality.

You can be careful with it, and take it in small doses, and not give it to your children.

Geek dating!

I'm already doing that, thank you very much!

No halogens, half my house is 25W flourescent, I don't do Christmas lights, my computers are off at night when I'm not home, etc.

So, what's my next step? I still have to face the stupid power problems. What else can I do? I'm planning on replacing my windows with double paned low E versions, upgrading my ventilation with a HRV unit sometime. I can go as low as I want, but if that means everyone else starts to use it instead, I want a solution that helps to loosely couple me from the rest of the problems. A 24 hour energy cache would be marvelous, but I'm not sure that can even be accomplished!

So, what other suggestions do you have?

Geek dating!

Well... my obvious thought was that cars do it...

And, well, this kind of resource wasn't available for 'decades', ultra efficient flywheels.

IIRC, it was Roseman Motors, or someone similar, doing research on ultra high speed ultra efficient flywheels?

You are a dork. Oh well.

Geek dating!

Can a energy cache be built and maintained?

Say, a ultra efficient flywheel that charges up at night(anytime, really, but at night when power is supposedly cheapest) and store energy for the household for the coming day?

Say, store X kWh.

Then, if X+b kWh is used, the next day start storing X+ b/2 at night.

And so on, iteratively.

If only X-d kWh is used, then only store X-d the next night. (This actually does decrease!)

X
X(we only charge X-d, but d is already in the system)
X-d(we only used X-d, so X-2d is charged...)

Anyway, gives us 1 day protection, and as the systems get more efficient, we can lengthen the charge period to, say a week, or a month, or whatever.

And if we want to, we can connect this to banks of solar cells, etc?

Geek dating!

I like the idea of assigning points to people;

But I might want it on a per user basis, and not as a community wide thing. Or a blend of the two. I don't like raw mob rule.

So I can assign points to people, akin to handicaps. To use a popular example, Sig11 automatically gets -3, -2, -1, 0, or +1, because I like his posts.

This gets modified by the moderation system, which is a per discussion ranking, and then is also modified by a global karma; Sig11 tends to have high Karma because a lot of people like him, respond to him, mod him up, or assign bonuses to him; a general -1, 0, or +1.

This may devolve into a popularity contest, unfortunately.

But if this is configurable (ignore global ranking, double global ranking, ignore local ranking, etc), it should be okay.

I for one don't want to listen to '-' no matter that sometimes he's a real treat, and sometimes he's a real pain. I just don't want to deal with it.

I dunno, maybe it's a bad idea...

Geek dating!

Then how to promote diversity?

Allegedly, the electoral college system in the US voting scheme is supposed to allow for that;

Gaining the majority vote is not enough to win, you need to get the majority vote in several geographic areas, and thus force yourself to appeal to several demographics, and not just general mob rule.

Can something like that occur here?

Something like that happens, in the sense that supposedly anyone can moderate. If an even distribution of moderators exist, then the statistical model should represent the views of slashdot. Supposedly.

But then there are other problems; even I sometimes don't read at -1 or 0, because I want to avoid the trolls. I try to avoid modding up +2 or +3, unless they are *really* good, and concentrate on modding the +1s and the responses to +2 or +3, that provide good counterarguments.

Is that appropriate? I dunno, is there a moderator's training page to provide good behavior? That's the best I can do, for now.

Geek dating!

Well, one thing I am slightly bothered by is that moderators shouldn't be the ones judging on or off topicness; interesting (as a personal interest), overrated (again, personal judgement), insightful (personal), etc.

I can trust a moderator to make judgements concerning themselves, but not for the judgement of the community.

Metamoderation is a way to determine if a person can moderate intelligently, hopefully.

I can't agree to your view that a +5 interesting doesn't get comments. A really powerful, interesting, insightful, whatever, comment, doesn't need to be provocative or controversial. It doesn't need to generate comments, though obviously it would be nice if it did; I always enjoy getting comments!

Geek dating!

Regardless of the philosophical implacations of the GPL, you *can* sell software that you give the source away too.

You're a programmer; you sell your service to write code, for whoever will buy your program, whether it be a business, end user, or whatever.

As a personal preference, you have every right not to want to give away your source code. But there is a distinction between selling software and writing source.

Software has been tested, debugged, packaged, polished and marketed.

Source is just that, source, like the distinction between architectural blueprints and a house.

If a GPL based company actually wanted to buy your source, is that any less or more a transaction than buying the software? The intent of some people, as regards Open Source, is that when you buy the software, you can get access to the source, otherwise you're relegated to a 'service', of providing support and fixes and improvements to a program, where the purchaser cannot fix, modify, or tweak the code to their taste.

That's just one view, at least.

Geek dating!