Slashdot Mirror

"But I need Windows for..." *SMACK!* NO! You don't!

LOL! You should typeset it. The Gimp works really well, although most popular Live distros have it by default.

But I still like this one for anime fans and this one for dog lovers . :-)

When clicking on the genesis link

"With updates permanently disabled? I doubt it."

That doesn't matter. If you updated Skype or installed the recent Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributable for a newer game (The Culling, in my specific example,) you got your security settings overwritten and changed without your permission.

http://imgur.com/a/ERYYN - have a peep at the three screenshots I snagged after making sure I re-forced windows update back off. Took about twenty minutes of checking timestamps in the filesystem to figure out what happened, and when. In my case, it was installing the Culling, which needed a more recent MSVC++ redist install, that changed everything.

You may think you've got updates permanently disabled - you do not if you use ANYTHING ELSE Microsoft-related.

The actual license paperwork that was attached as Exhibit B to the court filing may not have actually put it in the public domain. Parts are similar, but there also were restrictions (single-use, attribution requirements) that in my IANAL opinion prevent it from actually being in the public domain.

It's going to depend on interpretation of Exhibit B that is mentioned in the original complaint. I'd think that it would trump the LoC webpage if the LoC can't produce a superseding agreement regarding the copyrights. It does say that the Highsmith "dedicate to the public all rights, including copyrights throughout the world". I'm not sure if "dedicate" legally means the same as putting it in the public domain or otherwise relinquishing the copyrights. It also includes restrictions for single-copy reproductions and reproduction credit be given back to Highsmith.

Let me first be very clear here - when the Clinton's are smiling with Trump at Trump's first wedding, I don't trust ANY of these bastards. NOT ONE. Trump and Clinton are statists with different agendas, but statists nonetheless. Madam Clinton is, despite her horrendous dishonesty, is a far more eloquent and disciplined speaker with far fewer gaffes.

That said, the headline implies that Trump approves of the hacking that Russia allegedly accomplished, when the obvious context from the video is that he doesn't approve of any of it and is talking sarcastically about Madam Clinton's 30k+ still-missing e-mails being recovered by Russia. This goes precisely and correctly to the point about the current executive branch's lackadaisical enforcement of security of the e-mail within established government structures where I or anyone else would be permanently disqualified from any secret clearance had I engaged in such egregiously negligent or wilful behavior. He implies as much only a few seconds later in his speech, and he is definitely not joking then, but using the hyperbole (i.e. "joke") as a vehicle to establish a critical point because he feels fed up with this nonsense. I really believe that this is serious to him as well because the same weapons that were used against his opponent can definitely be used against him at any time.

So please, don't put words in my mouth the way the Clinton-oriented press is doing to Trump here. That the message should have been delivered differently (in a much more serious way) is obvious and would've prevented this ridiculous debate and the opportunity for mudslingers like Gawker to even attempt such a false characterization of the statement itself. But I never said I approved of how he did it nor implied it, nor anything else Trump or Clinton says or does.

^ This.

Proof:

Yahoo homepage vs Google homepage history

--
Slashtard / Redditard, noun, Someone too immature / ignorant / stupid to understand the down-vote is NOT "I disagree" but rather "this post adds nothing interesting to the discussion."

What's extra funny is that it's a lowercase a-with-tilde in the box -- even in the text box you get after you hit 'preview' -- but it gets converted to an uppercase a-with-tilde when submitted.

http://i.imgur.com/NgoUR8w.png

Bonus funny: the story still isn't fixed, 3 days later.

Here's an illustration of the boost-back to RTLS trajectory. You can see that it very definitely goes up. And to prove from observation, you can actually see where the two trajectories separate in photos from yesterday's launch. It's a rather dim curl up, and another continuing East, in Jason Ruck's photo and John Kraus's photo.

At the speed of stage separation, they rocket isn't going fast enough to stay in orbit, but it is definitely in the regime where orbital mechanics has a macroscopic effect. If you think about it, this is going to be the case at some reasonable fraction of orbital velocity.

Regular Americans

Nothing regular about it.

https://i.imgur.com/Pa0IOhB.jp...

Here is the launch profile. http://i.imgur.com/D9BdO86.png

Launches to GTO need to be going a lot faster (7.7 km/s for ISS, vs 9.88 km/s for GTO). The Falcon 9 uses up enough fuel that it cannot execute the "boostback" burn listed in the image.

Instead it continues on in a parabolic arc until it hits the atmosphere to slow down, firing the rocket at the last minute to stop over the drone ship.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

Only 3 screens? Awww http://i.imgur.com/slP7Eje.jpg

I partieds so hard when I heard this, that i made a mess

I tried that too and got the same thing: http://imgur.com/JPgt5RI. If it's a joke I don't get it.

Here is the proof
http://i.imgur.com/TWOedY7.png

The reality is that they are a tiny minority in a large population.

Much like Trump's hands among other Cheeto-colored body parts apparently.

This guy does. Really, he cares. A lot.

Just in case Amazon actually manages to remove some of the fake offers, here is what it looks like right now: http://i.imgur.com/sG86jsG.png

I think there might actually be a third option: Take responsibility, be a parent.

Here's how the British public would respond to that...

It's a good thing you can disable those.

http://m.imgur.com/M8okElv,HAR... Given that the cisco is on board, it was all prepared beforehand

How IS it ray tracing? Modern VR requires a lens-correction distortion be performed after rendering so that the image you see through the lens matches what was rendered. Lens matched shading breaks the image up into four quadrants and renders four projected views that are a closer match to where the detail will be in the final result.

Here you can see an example done traditionally:

http://i.imgur.com/FA56wzN.jpg

And here you can see the same scene rendered with lens matched shading:

http://i.imgur.com/CsDouw0.jpg

When a rendered scene normally goes through the distortion shader, most of the pixels around the edges are going to be lost as the distortion is strongest at the edges. This particular technique avoids that by starting out rendering less detail at the edges.

You could also take this to another level and use it for foveated rendering (where you render detail based on where the eye is looking), rather than the current technique of rendering multiple viewports at different resolutions and blending between them. Foveated rendering is a huge win for performance in that it results in a drastic reduction in pixels rendered, but the hardware (very accurate and very low latency eye tracking) and software required to do it isn't quite ready for consumer use.

How IS it ray tracing? Modern VR requires a lens-correction distortion be performed after rendering so that the image you see through the lens matches what was rendered. Lens matched shading breaks the image up into four quadrants and renders four projected views that are a closer match to where the detail will be in the final result.

Here you can see an example done traditionally:

http://i.imgur.com/FA56wzN.jpg

And here you can see the same scene rendered with lens matched shading:

http://i.imgur.com/CsDouw0.jpg

When a rendered scene normally goes through the distortion shader, most of the pixels around the edges are going to be lost as the distortion is strongest at the edges. This particular technique avoids that by starting out rendering less detail at the edges.

You could also take this to another level and use it for foveated rendering (where you render detail based on where the eye is looking), rather than the current technique of rendering multiple viewports at different resolutions and blending between them. Foveated rendering is a huge win for performance in that it results in a drastic reduction in pixels rendered, but the hardware (very accurate and very low latency eye tracking) and software required to do it isn't quite ready for consumer use.

I stopped using AVG years ago due to this... not to mention the new policy of selling your data to third parties[1]. Avast wants you to 'register' once a year which involves trying to sell you the payed service, though it shuts up after a few clicks.

The main issue I have with Avast is that the latest versions (within the past six months) occasionally freak out and absolutely peg the CPU; when that happens nothing can shut it down except a hard reboot.[2]

[1] http://www.zdnet.com/article/a...
[2]pic related https://imgur.com/sE2FbNN

OB Batman.

I feel as if KDE is the beset Desktop Environment Linux ever produced. with maybe the exception of KDE 2, it has been one of the most methodical, configurable environment there is. It should have been the defacto Environment space for Linux.

KDE has been my preferred desktop until four or five years ago when I discovered #!. I run Debian Sid, and in the past few years have taken *box about as far as I cared to and decided to give Plasma5 a spin - and was pleasantly surprised. I found a service menu on kde-apps that gave me the right-click application menu I missed in *box and I still have to edit .kickoffrc to get it to display the way I want, but my seven or eight most-used applications are just a right-click away now. Not a fan of the flat theme either (or the fact that the KDE team doesn't love any color but blue) and fixed both of those - here are a couple of screenshots, one clean and one dirty. Linked images are kinda big - 1920x1080.

clean screenshot

dirty screenshot

I feel as if KDE is the beset Desktop Environment Linux ever produced. with maybe the exception of KDE 2, it has been one of the most methodical, configurable environment there is. It should have been the defacto Environment space for Linux.

KDE has been my preferred desktop until four or five years ago when I discovered #!. I run Debian Sid, and in the past few years have taken *box about as far as I cared to and decided to give Plasma5 a spin - and was pleasantly surprised. I found a service menu on kde-apps that gave me the right-click application menu I missed in *box and I still have to edit .kickoffrc to get it to display the way I want, but my seven or eight most-used applications are just a right-click away now. Not a fan of the flat theme either (or the fact that the KDE team doesn't love any color but blue) and fixed both of those - here are a couple of screenshots, one clean and one dirty. Linked images are kinda big - 1920x1080.

clean screenshot

dirty screenshot

You can see the trajectory here: http://i.imgur.com/d3TiJAt.gif

Broken link.

Loads for me.
http://imgur.com/a/wubpr

But I made a pastebin, just for you.
http://pastebin.com/cw9tbwXB

I said nothing about solitary confinement â" only the sleep-deprivation, which you alleged has taken/ place.
So you wouldn't argue that the solitary is also punishment? Now you'll split hairs as to say, "the solitary confinement was punishment, but the sleep deprivation was not"? And if you'd concede that some of his treatment was punishment, how can you claim to know which aspects of his treatment were or were not?

On top of that, forcing someone to sleep facing a lightsource meets the ends of making them "survive to stand trial", how?

I'm sure, you can find an ex MP to tell you any of that. ... Oh, wow, listening to the psychologist's protests must've been torturous indeed.
In other words, we should take those in the military's word at everything, except for when those in the military have any disagreement with prior decisions of others, at which point, hey, that's just their opinion, man. And also, we can't trust the word of anyone who has left the military--they'll just say anything! How convenient that you would take the word of the OIC (not his jailor, like you claimed) over the word of his psychologist OR the marines' chief of corrections. Neither of those people are mentioned to have left, but you don't won't even consider their inconvenient opinions over that of someone who you called an "asshole". How much of an asshole was he in your eyes if you agree with the absurdity that Manning was being disrespectful by asking why he was shouting?

Clearly, you exercise very selective reading or hearing when it comes to the treatment of those you hate.

Not in my dictionary [princeton.edu].
Actually, "extreme mental distress" is the first entry, which describes solitary confinement perfectly. If you think that depriving a person of all social contact beyond a single person who does not communicate with them is not mental distress, I have a bridge to sell you.

http://solitarywatch.com/facts...

"In New York, California and Texas, it has been found that suicide rates are significantly higher among people held in solitary confinement than in general population. In 2013, forensic psychiatrist Dr. Raymond Patterson reported prisoners in Californiaâ(TM)s Security Housing Units and Administrative Segregation Units have a 33 times greater chance of suicide than someone in the prison systemâ(TM)s general population."

Now this is where you try to argue that treatment which demonstrably increases the suicide rate among its participants is not "extreme mental distress".

Now this is where you bring about the excuse that they were placed on solitary because they were suicidal to begin with... after conceding to me earlier that Manning was placed on solitary because he was a "security risk". Was he placed in solitary because he was a security risk, or on suicide watch? Which was it? Isn't military prison treatment meant to be chosen for a given reason, not a mishmash of halfassed sentiment?

Thousands of inmates are subjected to that regularly in prisons nation-wide.
That anything would be OK because it occurs regularly in the US prison system is one of the most pathetic arguments I've ever heard.

Conditions and treatment of prisoners in America's prisons bother me a great deal
...after saying that Manning's solitary confinement is NOT troubling because "thousands of inmates are subjected to that regularly in prisons nation-wide... it is justified". Solitary is arguably the worst legal treatment of US inmates next to botched executions, so I'm curious what other treatment "bothers you a great deal" compared to thos

"Just a camera..."

"Just an antenna..."

"Little need for this extra fuel..."

Maybe you could learn math and physics one day. Once you get into high school.

The pound has not recovered significantly after the Brexit crash, and is way down over the long term from its usual level of around 200.

I've personally lost a small fortune this year because the Pound has lost 30% of its value when exchanged with the Yen.

The real long term damage hasn't really started yet. If we come out of the Single Market then several major companies have already announced that they will leave, for obvious reasons. We will probably just suffer a few more years of austerity and some long term slow down if we stay in, but if we come out we will be really screwed. In fact, I expect there will be a sharp correction when the new PM is announced, depending on their position.

As for cyber security, I think it will get worse. At the moment European companies are suing GCHQ for hacking. Unrestrained and emboldened by the human rights-busting and illegal under EU law Snooper's Charter the computers of UK citizens will be all the more vulnerable.

The pound has not recovered significantly after the Brexit crash, and is way down over the long term from its usual level of around 200.

I've personally lost a small fortune this year because the Pound has lost 30% of its value when exchanged with the Yen.

The real long term damage hasn't really started yet. If we come out of the Single Market then several major companies have already announced that they will leave, for obvious reasons. We will probably just suffer a few more years of austerity and some long term slow down if we stay in, but if we come out we will be really screwed. In fact, I expect there will be a sharp correction when the new PM is announced, depending on their position.

As for cyber security, I think it will get worse. At the moment European companies are suing GCHQ for hacking. Unrestrained and emboldened by the human rights-busting and illegal under EU law Snooper's Charter the computers of UK citizens will be all the more vulnerable.

How dare you speak like this about Martian Citizen Zero?

Why not use his official title, the Elon of Mars?

"Good luck with that frivolous lawsuit though"

http://imgur.com/a/OGVCl

I've got 7 gigs of screenshots, downloaded data, and system logs.

Notice something off in that picture? How can the last-run check for updates be NEVER if the fucking last date of download and install was just a few days ago?

I also guess you failed to notice that someone won their little court fight against Microsoft. It's been a story posted here in the past week.

Go back to school and learn some law; you could stand to do so.

http://i.imgur.com/S4d18lw.png

You're right, even Slashdot is being [censored] by those evil freedom hating mods!

You need to work on your critical reading skills a bit. Take /r/subredditcancer, the first link on there is a to this image. The poster claims that "/R/Politicaldiscussion mod shut down political discussion that's in favor of brexit", but when you look at the image it's just enforcing the rules against racial discrimination.

The really odd thing is that it's an image, and in the discussion people have posted archive links to said image. Why not post an archive link to the reddit page in question? I can't find this post now, maybe you have a link?

Looking at KiA, aka those awful "gamergate" people, we see more examples of this. For example, they cite this as an example of a censored thread, but when you actually look at the original it's not censored at all. As usual, none of the links have any context or even before and after shots, so it's impossible to know what the real deal is. Censoring talk of TPP seems bizarre anyway, since it is openly discussed elsewhere on Reddit.

Another classic example is this. Note how the moderator says "all of your recent posts". We don't know if the other one in the image was the trigger. Even if it was, for statements like that context matters and we have none.

Can yous see a pattern here? Images used to mislead you. Lack of context and links to the original threads that would let you investigate yourself. For extraordinary claims like this you need extraordinary proof, so I remain unconvinced.

You need to work on your critical reading skills a bit. Take /r/subredditcancer, the first link on there is a to this image. The poster claims that "/R/Politicaldiscussion mod shut down political discussion that's in favor of brexit", but when you look at the image it's just enforcing the rules against racial discrimination.

The really odd thing is that it's an image, and in the discussion people have posted archive links to said image. Why not post an archive link to the reddit page in question? I can't find this post now, maybe you have a link?

Looking at KiA, aka those awful "gamergate" people, we see more examples of this. For example, they cite this as an example of a censored thread, but when you actually look at the original it's not censored at all. As usual, none of the links have any context or even before and after shots, so it's impossible to know what the real deal is. Censoring talk of TPP seems bizarre anyway, since it is openly discussed elsewhere on Reddit.

Another classic example is this. Note how the moderator says "all of your recent posts". We don't know if the other one in the image was the trigger. Even if it was, for statements like that context matters and we have none.

Can yous see a pattern here? Images used to mislead you. Lack of context and links to the original threads that would let you investigate yourself. For extraordinary claims like this you need extraordinary proof, so I remain unconvinced.

http://i.imgur.com/A47KJbH.jpg

Why only list DMCAs? Because they're a special subset of cases that sometimes makes Github look like the good guy? How about listing the repos they forced offline themselves for petty ideological reasons?

The 2014 report failed to list the takedown of the Gamergate hub, and this 2015 report doesn't mention how Github took down WebMConverter to strongarm the developer into changing its content.

Instead of using a broad, feel-good word like "transparency," they should just call it the DMCA report since that's the one specific kind of censorship it discloses.

Solution!
http://i.imgur.com/Hv56Zcs.png

http://imgur.com/a/O5Fj4

Where is the line drawn between "homage" and direct-rip off thats been slightly painted/rearranged differently to maybe get away with it?

Thats one crazy looking M14: http://imgur.com/a/O5Fj4

Did you even bother to research before posting or did you just take the image in TFA as the gospel truth? They used two completely different guns to be intentionally misleading. The devs have a history of shady tactics anyway and from the vast quantity of comparisons floating around the net Activision's next move will be to litigate. DCMA abuse, this is not.

You are either blind or a shill:

http://i.imgur.com/ZQeBNGs.png
http://imgur.com/a/ua3Nc

You can sidestep the argument all you want but the facts speak for themselves.

You are either blind or a shill:

http://i.imgur.com/ZQeBNGs.png
http://imgur.com/a/ua3Nc

You can sidestep the argument all you want but the facts speak for themselves.

Link to some pics just to help:
http://imgur.com/a/ua3Nc

http://i.imgur.com/ZQeBNGs.png

Seeing as the M8A7 doesn't have a real-life counterpart, most especially for the parts of the gun that were seemingly copied, I think Activision is well within their right to protect their IP. Can anyone link to a real-life picture of any of the parts claimed to be copied? I think prior-art is really the only thing that could save the devs of Orion here. Its pretty unquestionable that they copied or at least extremely closely imitated some of their assets from other games. The first link to the imgur gallery really shows as much. The copies are sometimes more accentuated in areas but they are like-for-like in terms of their overall design.

Link to some pics just to help:
http://imgur.com/a/ua3Nc

http://i.imgur.com/ZQeBNGs.png

Seeing as the M8A7 doesn't have a real-life counterpart, most especially for the parts of the gun that were seemingly copied, I think Activision is well within their right to protect their IP. Can anyone link to a real-life picture of any of the parts claimed to be copied? I think prior-art is really the only thing that could save the devs of Orion here. Its pretty unquestionable that they copied or at least extremely closely imitated some of their assets from other games. The first link to the imgur gallery really shows as much. The copies are sometimes more accentuated in areas but they are like-for-like in terms of their overall design.

Indeed. While some of the CoD assets were based on real-life items, they were also clearly created specifically for that game since they had various embellishments and details unique to that game (as one of the examples floating around suggests, in much the same way that AK-47s look different in different games)...which were meticulously reproduced in Orion's models, even if they covered them up with different textures.

Moreover, it sounds like Orion's developer has a history of copyright infringement. For instance, the reddit post that's blowing up links to a a set of examples of plagiaraized artwork used for achievement images in one of their other games (in fact, it may be the game they renamed and re-released, allegedly so that they could dodge the bad scores the game had on Metacritic and trick people into buying it again). And after the developer created an Indiegogo campaign with a goal of $500 to help cover their legal fees and whatnot for this DMCA takedown, the first "donation" was $500 from the developer themselves.

Everything about this dev just smells fishy, and while I typically can't stand Activision as a company (nor have I ever had a desire to play any of their CoD games, let alone actually done so), I'm having trouble finding fault with them here. It sounds like this dev is ripping off their 3D art assets and slapping some new textures on them to try and call them their own. And it seems clear that they know they're in the wrong, since when they tried to defend their models as being their own, they didn't do the obvious thing someone who was innocent would do by posting like-for-life, side-by-side shots of both their model and CoD's asset so that we could all see that theirs was unique. Instead, they posed Activision's and their guns at wildly different angles, seemingly with the intent of obscuring the similarities that would be glaringly obvious if they had provided useful side-by-shots shots...as the side-by-side shots posted by others have demonstrated.

That said, it does seem like there's some Activision shilling going on in the comments here too, what with all these ACs posting the same stuff over and over again. Not sure what to make of that, but regardless of any shilling, it doesn't change that at least from a layman's perspective, it looks like this dev lifted models from Activision, along with all of the embellishments and details that make them uniquely Activision's, and now they're being rightfully called out on it.

Indeed. While some of the CoD assets were based on real-life items, they were also clearly created specifically for that game since they had various embellishments and details unique to that game (as one of the examples floating around suggests, in much the same way that AK-47s look different in different games)...which were meticulously reproduced in Orion's models, even if they covered them up with different textures.

Moreover, it sounds like Orion's developer has a history of copyright infringement. For instance, the reddit post that's blowing up links to a a set of examples of plagiaraized artwork used for achievement images in one of their other games (in fact, it may be the game they renamed and re-released, allegedly so that they could dodge the bad scores the game had on Metacritic and trick people into buying it again). And after the developer created an Indiegogo campaign with a goal of $500 to help cover their legal fees and whatnot for this DMCA takedown, the first "donation" was $500 from the developer themselves.

Everything about this dev just smells fishy, and while I typically can't stand Activision as a company (nor have I ever had a desire to play any of their CoD games, let alone actually done so), I'm having trouble finding fault with them here. It sounds like this dev is ripping off their 3D art assets and slapping some new textures on them to try and call them their own. And it seems clear that they know they're in the wrong, since when they tried to defend their models as being their own, they didn't do the obvious thing someone who was innocent would do by posting like-for-life, side-by-side shots of both their model and CoD's asset so that we could all see that theirs was unique. Instead, they posed Activision's and their guns at wildly different angles, seemingly with the intent of obscuring the similarities that would be glaringly obvious if they had provided useful side-by-shots shots...as the side-by-side shots posted by others have demonstrated.

That said, it does seem like there's some Activision shilling going on in the comments here too, what with all these ACs posting the same stuff over and over again. Not sure what to make of that, but regardless of any shilling, it doesn't change that at least from a layman's perspective, it looks like this dev lifted models from Activision, along with all of the embellishments and details that make them uniquely Activision's, and now they're being rightfully called out on it.

http://imgur.com/a/O5Fj4

It's a direct lift. Probably "vertex for vertex". Definitely a copyright violation.

Take a look at this:
http://i.imgur.com/ZQeBNGs.png
Direct copy of CoD assets, like it or not.

That doesn't actually prove anything. After all, this is exactly the same as the one found in the game. But the models were redone by hand. You can even prove that by looking at the very basic information in nifskope. The only thing that image actually proves? It looks exactly the same, nothing more.

Until the assets from both games are pulled and compared using 3DS, nifskope, maya and so on, this actually boils down to a whole lot of "he said/they said/etc." Even that thread on PCMR doesn't prove shit except they "look the same" and basing anything off that is fully useless. Since a modeller can make it look the same and have vastly different methods to create the same effect.