Slashdot Mirror

sonofabitch, Geocities is still up

sonofabitch, Geocities is still up

You are referring to the climatic memetic demographic prisoner's dilemma. The idea there was to try to have the most primitive form of "meme" imaginable: A speech act which could take one of two states "defect" or "cooperate", in the context of a population which may, or may not, repeat memes and which -- independent of repetition behavior -- may or may not comply with the meme it "hears". Tit for tat during iteration of the PD was simulated by allowing a variation in which the behavior (cooperate or defect) was based on what the organism had last experienced, as opposed to what the organism had last "heard". The "climate" was the degree to which the environment provided "food" to make up for loss of points in the PD score keeping.

The notion that one can _reliably_ "experience" defection _as_ defection is what I claim is an unrealistic assumption -- deception being such a central strategy in evolution -- hence tit for tat is a poor assumption.

Seriously, chill out, you seem way too angry and uptight about this. You're also attributing meanings to things I've said which simply aren't there. Anyway, some examples back at you: http://www.atarimuseum.com/computers/8BITS/XL/xlperipherals/1030.html
"Just like the Atari 850 interface, the Atari 1030 modem had not only its device driver in ROM which would automatically upload into the computers memory, but also its software as well. The Atari 1030 came with an on-board software package called ModemLink which would automatically upload into the computers memory. "

So both driver and software loaded during boot. Also.. http://www.geocities.ws/SiliconValley/Lakes/6757/1030.HTML

The 850 interface did the same i.e. loaded a driver. As I'm sure you know, when booting, the 8bit attempts to boot from a floppy drive, if present. These devices respond to that request as if they were a floppy drive and the 8bit is non the wiser and loads the drivers/progs as needed. That's how the trick was achieved during the boot process.

I still stand by my comments that the OS was very powerful *for it's day*. We're talking 1978/79 here. The only thing that was obviously missing compared to it's peers, such as they were then was the lack of monitor, hence 3rd party OS replacements that added that and better FP performance.

I would prefer having real people from the companies instead of models.

I'd prefer having booth babes style themselves like this, http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina74.html though the dress may get kind of hot in the convention center.

Stupid companies. Stop using booth babes. It makes the industry look adolescent in nature, and is disrespectful to all women, and even more disrespectful to women in tech.

Perhaps get someone like this, http://blog.makezine.com/2012/05/19/jeri-ellsworth-rocks-a-commodore-64-keytar/

Might as well drape the clothes over a wire hanger if that's what they're aiming for.

That is ***exactly*** what they are aiming for. Fashion design is hard, getting your designs in a show is harder. Then gotta find a model to walk the runway to show off the dress. If all your models are skinny stick women then you don't have to deal with design variables of a more fuller figure gal. There was a time when acceptable sizes more than a 6, and dress design was more challenging considering way back designers worked with fitted gowns. You have to balance the woman's bust, waist, hips, torso length, shoulder width, and neckline. Then need to design so it complements the face and hair style. This used to be done way before Photoshop, software design, numerically controlled machines, and cheap Chinese labor. I sometimes wonder if much of this design knowledge is lost.

http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie104.jpg
http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie5.jpg
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina74.html
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina123.html

Of course some may say above were specifically designed just for that specific show or movie. However also back then much of this could be store bought, with a little alterations such as this from Kleins on 14th St in New York back in 1960: http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie169.jpg

Might as well drape the clothes over a wire hanger if that's what they're aiming for.

That is ***exactly*** what they are aiming for. Fashion design is hard, getting your designs in a show is harder. Then gotta find a model to walk the runway to show off the dress. If all your models are skinny stick women then you don't have to deal with design variables of a more fuller figure gal. There was a time when acceptable sizes more than a 6, and dress design was more challenging considering way back designers worked with fitted gowns. You have to balance the woman's bust, waist, hips, torso length, shoulder width, and neckline. Then need to design so it complements the face and hair style. This used to be done way before Photoshop, software design, numerically controlled machines, and cheap Chinese labor. I sometimes wonder if much of this design knowledge is lost.

http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie104.jpg
http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie5.jpg
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina74.html
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina123.html

Of course some may say above were specifically designed just for that specific show or movie. However also back then much of this could be store bought, with a little alterations such as this from Kleins on 14th St in New York back in 1960: http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie169.jpg

http://www.geocities.ws/ has been doing it for a while already.

Actually most of it was backed up http://www.geocities.ws/