Slashdot Mirror

http://powerpuff.wikia.com/wiki/HIM

Never heard of Steam's offline mode? There's also this list of DRM-free games. You'll notice that all of Valve's games are on that list (except the multiplayer games). Steam is a distribution platform. Valve doesn't decide the DRM that people put into their games. Stop spreading FUD and do some research.

Does not compute.

Also, I'm fairly certain that certain games on Steam don't have any DRM whatsoever and can be used without Steam (though, they're probably a minority).

That is correct. The amount of DRM that goes into a Steamworks game is controlled by the publisher, not by Valve.

http://steam.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games

Sounds like the first step to creating Orson Scott Card's "descadola" virus. When reality imitates fiction....

We'll always be writing code.

Humans barely understand other humans. How do you expect humans to make a machine that can do better?
Writing code is the easy part of software development.
If we get to the 23rd century and we're using natural language to command magic-nobody-knows-how-they-work robots I'm glad I'll be dead by then.
Endlessly clarifying everything you say to a machine would be the most tedious thing I can imagine. Since the real world is not a finite state machine, there will always be an endless list of clarifications to be made.

Ciao, bambino!

Who are you really? Frostini?

No, Code.org is a front to allow Fuckerberg and Billy Bob Gates to claim that there's a lack of talent in this country and that H1B Visas should be increased.

Read the two citations in my previous post. This isn't about developing talent it's about pushing their alternate agenda. I've taught programming to students for a time and yes, it can be rewarding but that was in a casual learning environment. I do believe one or two have careers in the profession but that's beside the point. You always have to look for ulterior motives when talking about high tech execs who have lobbied, for years, for an increase in H1B candidates and now all of a sudden there's a mad rush for "We need more software developers here" while there are thousands out of work who already have the skills. Think of it as "Batman Returns" where Max Shreck wants to build a power plant, all the while it's a capacitor to store energy, consume it and not to produce it. At one point Bruce Wayne points out that there's already a surplus of power so why the new plant? We have a surplus of talent in this country, it's just that these two want what WalMart has, a minimum wage labor force yet still build their products and rake in billions. Another analogy is that you want a Ferrari but you have only $10,000 to spend so you state "There are no Ferraris for sale" when in fact if you increased your budget, you'd find that there were a lot for sale you're just looking too get one too cheaply.

The original submission was a little less wide-eyed. Guess the editor cut the Harold Hill reference (that's Lyle Lanley, for you Simpsons fans!) in the interest of objectivity (or perhaps it was just too obcure!) :-)

I'm now an IT manager over our hardware repair and oncall function, and I owe it to the day I went "PC Compatible"... over a freakin' video game.

Kinda sad.

http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/NEXTSTEP

for the other way around, IF we get a way to run homebrew there will be emulators ported.. see
http://dev360.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Emulators

There's no doubt that the PS4 and Xbone will be jailbroken. Probably quite quickly - they ARE x86 units after all. They really are really fancy derivatives of the original Xbox, and that thing was cracked 10 ways to sunday.

Hell, it might be preferable to have a launch unit where it's easily hacked than a later model where the hacks are far less available and definitely not soft-moddable.

well, it took me two times to read the blurb but now I'm fairly certain that what they're referring to is emulators that would play the games from ps4 and xboxone(and fanbois are now yelling that we don't want that since h4x0000rrss would ruin our games. well guess fucking what they'll ruin your games anyways if the game is stupidly coded and you'll get some programmed bots anyways soon enough on your online games).

for the other way around, IF we get a way to run homebrew there will be emulators ported.. see
http://dev360.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Emulators

Just hope they work out the overheating issues.

No they need a bro.

Frank: "You want me to wear a bra?" Kramer: "No. A bra is for ladies. Meet...the Bro." Maybe Bill Gates can get licensing rights for Microsoft from his pal Jerry Seinfeld. :-)

For each station, we have (priced at Newark):
$40 Raspberry Pi B w/ NOOBS SD card.
$25 Camera module
$34 Piface display/control (seriously? why? aren't they controlled over the network? why aren't they headless? Oh, right: because this whole project is advertisement for Piface, even though their hardware contributes nothing of value to it...)

Making a total of $99 at each station. That's not counting ethernet cable, switches, and for no obvious reason, a separate 5V PSU for each Pi -- I left that out of the per-station cost, because anyone sane would use one power supply for multiple stations.

Now for $99, I can damn sure buy a cheap digital camera for each station, (and an SD card for each of them, if necessary), and have larger sensors, better glass, and crazy features like not being fixed-focus vs. the Raspberry Pi camera module. Sadly, remote shutter is not a common thing on the sort of cheap camera we're looking at, so some hardware hacking (*gasp*) might be required, and many camera models have issues like automatic power off that will make your life miserable -- so for an arbitrary cheap camera, this is better in some ways, worse in others, and not necessarily better on the whole. But with CHDK, we can beat it easily.

It'd be great if we had $120 a station -- for that money, we can easily rock CHDK. $99 is just on the edge, but I think you can find CHDK-compatible Canons for less (e.g. this one; note that other colors are cheaper, but very limited quantity, and without more research, I'm not sure that any of them will actually have firmware revisions supported by CHDK) -- if so, or if we can agree that the combination of better image quality, extra features, and reduced ethernet hardware, is worth a few extra bucks, you should have two options:
1. use USB hubs with CHDK's PTP extensions to control multiple CHDK-loaded cameras from each Raspberry Pi -- this will allow staggering individual cameras for the true bullet-time effect where the viewpoint revolves around a slow-motion (not completely frozen) subject, as well as the all-at-once mode described in TFA, and any combination.
2. forget the Raspberry Pis, and control the cameras using CHDK's USB remote shutter capability -- this is very simple in the all-at-once case, as you can simply wire 48 USB ports to a single 5V PSU, and switch it on and off. The proper effect is a little more complicated, but still no-CPU-required, e.g. use a single debounced pushbutton to generate a pulse, and clock source + a half-dozen 8-bit shift registers to sequence that pulse to all 48 USB cables. Or use a microcontroller with those shift registers to generate the pulse and the clock -- by varying the clock, you speed/slow the ratio of subject motion to viewpoint motion. Or use a microcontroller with enough GPIO to control all the cameras directly.

For each station, we have (priced at Newark):
$40 Raspberry Pi B w/ NOOBS SD card.
$25 Camera module
$34 Piface display/control (seriously? why? aren't they controlled over the network? why aren't they headless? Oh, right: because this whole project is advertisement for Piface, even though their hardware contributes nothing of value to it...)

Making a total of $99 at each station. That's not counting ethernet cable, switches, and for no obvious reason, a separate 5V PSU for each Pi -- I left that out of the per-station cost, because anyone sane would use one power supply for multiple stations.

Now for $99, I can damn sure buy a cheap digital camera for each station, (and an SD card for each of them, if necessary), and have larger sensors, better glass, and crazy features like not being fixed-focus vs. the Raspberry Pi camera module. Sadly, remote shutter is not a common thing on the sort of cheap camera we're looking at, so some hardware hacking (*gasp*) might be required, and many camera models have issues like automatic power off that will make your life miserable -- so for an arbitrary cheap camera, this is better in some ways, worse in others, and not necessarily better on the whole. But with CHDK, we can beat it easily.

It'd be great if we had $120 a station -- for that money, we can easily rock CHDK. $99 is just on the edge, but I think you can find CHDK-compatible Canons for less (e.g. this one; note that other colors are cheaper, but very limited quantity, and without more research, I'm not sure that any of them will actually have firmware revisions supported by CHDK) -- if so, or if we can agree that the combination of better image quality, extra features, and reduced ethernet hardware, is worth a few extra bucks, you should have two options:
1. use USB hubs with CHDK's PTP extensions to control multiple CHDK-loaded cameras from each Raspberry Pi -- this will allow staggering individual cameras for the true bullet-time effect where the viewpoint revolves around a slow-motion (not completely frozen) subject, as well as the all-at-once mode described in TFA, and any combination.
2. forget the Raspberry Pis, and control the cameras using CHDK's USB remote shutter capability -- this is very simple in the all-at-once case, as you can simply wire 48 USB ports to a single 5V PSU, and switch it on and off. The proper effect is a little more complicated, but still no-CPU-required, e.g. use a single debounced pushbutton to generate a pulse, and clock source + a half-dozen 8-bit shift registers to sequence that pulse to all 48 USB cables. Or use a microcontroller with those shift registers to generate the pulse and the clock -- by varying the clock, you speed/slow the ratio of subject motion to viewpoint motion. Or use a microcontroller with enough GPIO to control all the cameras directly.

For each station, we have (priced at Newark):
$40 Raspberry Pi B w/ NOOBS SD card.
$25 Camera module
$34 Piface display/control (seriously? why? aren't they controlled over the network? why aren't they headless? Oh, right: because this whole project is advertisement for Piface, even though their hardware contributes nothing of value to it...)

Making a total of $99 at each station. That's not counting ethernet cable, switches, and for no obvious reason, a separate 5V PSU for each Pi -- I left that out of the per-station cost, because anyone sane would use one power supply for multiple stations.

Now for $99, I can damn sure buy a cheap digital camera for each station, (and an SD card for each of them, if necessary), and have larger sensors, better glass, and crazy features like not being fixed-focus vs. the Raspberry Pi camera module. Sadly, remote shutter is not a common thing on the sort of cheap camera we're looking at, so some hardware hacking (*gasp*) might be required, and many camera models have issues like automatic power off that will make your life miserable -- so for an arbitrary cheap camera, this is better in some ways, worse in others, and not necessarily better on the whole. But with CHDK, we can beat it easily.

It'd be great if we had $120 a station -- for that money, we can easily rock CHDK. $99 is just on the edge, but I think you can find CHDK-compatible Canons for less (e.g. this one; note that other colors are cheaper, but very limited quantity, and without more research, I'm not sure that any of them will actually have firmware revisions supported by CHDK) -- if so, or if we can agree that the combination of better image quality, extra features, and reduced ethernet hardware, is worth a few extra bucks, you should have two options:
1. use USB hubs with CHDK's PTP extensions to control multiple CHDK-loaded cameras from each Raspberry Pi -- this will allow staggering individual cameras for the true bullet-time effect where the viewpoint revolves around a slow-motion (not completely frozen) subject, as well as the all-at-once mode described in TFA, and any combination.
2. forget the Raspberry Pis, and control the cameras using CHDK's USB remote shutter capability -- this is very simple in the all-at-once case, as you can simply wire 48 USB ports to a single 5V PSU, and switch it on and off. The proper effect is a little more complicated, but still no-CPU-required, e.g. use a single debounced pushbutton to generate a pulse, and clock source + a half-dozen 8-bit shift registers to sequence that pulse to all 48 USB cables. Or use a microcontroller with those shift registers to generate the pulse and the clock -- by varying the clock, you speed/slow the ratio of subject motion to viewpoint motion. Or use a microcontroller with enough GPIO to control all the cameras directly.

Looking at this page, most particularly the "what MPD is not" section, I see very little that's light years ahead of anything at all. A daemon that plays music (on the local system) at the requests of client applications. Consider my mind totally fucking blown.

And what does "light years ahead" mean in a music player anyway?

Required features:

• * Play music

Optional features:

• * everything else

Do you have a source? According to Business Insider, the mantle is held by World of Warcraft (> $10 billion), but that may be unfair since it is a subscription model at $15 a month, on top of the inital $50-$100 dollar purchase (look at original WoW at $50, then 4 expansions at $40 a piece, worst case). Take a step back to console/pc single purchase, and it's CoD: Black Ops at $1.5 Billion. Or maybe the crown goes to GTA 5, which topped $1 Billion in sales in 3 days.

Or you could mean total sales. I see on wikipedia Wii Sports as the best with almost 83 million copies sold. Unless you look at the numbers released by Amazon.co.uk, which has the CoD franchise taking the cake. Or you could mean fastest selling, which was CoD: Black Ops. Though sales numbers don't really mean a whole lot, since they don't take development cost into account, or the fact that Wii Sports was bundled (i.e. how many were independant purchases? how many could have been?).

It must be the Church of the Children of Atom equivalent of kosher/halal.

http://marvelvscapcom.wikia.com/wiki/Amingo

*snicker*

Although fictional, this is not a new idea. KITT from Knight Rider could do this back in 1982 with its Micro Jam system: http://knight-rider.wikia.com/wiki/Micro_Jam

Only when they play Terran!

"While expendable, the massive losses of terran Marines during the Great War began to become cost prohibitive. The Medic's use of chemical modifiers has greatly enhanced the survival rate of UED forces, lengthening the expected battlefield life expectancy to over nine seconds."

Sounds like what the B'omarr monks try to achieve.

Could be worse

WANTZ UNCYCLOPEDIA

Is Tesla stumped? Can the issue be fixed? Tune in tomorrow — same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!

But on a serious note - I'm pretty sure the issue has something to do with this: http://sanctuary.wikia.com/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

Well, to be fair it was a good price for 12 pounds of nutmeg

RIP American Monarchist Party
 
  http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/American_Monarchist_Party

Or is it?

Considering the amount of content on the web related towards large breastesses this could culminate in the creation of a singular perverted AI that will lead towards the creation of more advanced AI perversion.

So, we are in the process of creating Bob

Computers have moved on to more intellectually challenging games . . . like Jeopardy.

Don't forget Rock, Paper, Scissors.

http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Daes_Dae'mar

It's just a big fucking game to them. All of them.

Now, all of you please stop with the OT political bullshit, thanks.

Here in the USA, the grid is 68% fossil fuels. So unless Tesla is including a free ZPM with every purchase, "Zero Emissions" is a crock of shit, just like a 5.4 star safety rating.

I am surprised there are no references yet to Larry Niven's Sunflowers.

Until Dreamworks sue them for infringing their copyright on Hispanic cats.

Both of these claims cannot simultaneously be true. You just said that both increases and decreases in the value of the currency increase the pool of funds available for investment and that one is good and the other is bad because they produce the same result.

You misconstrue my statement (which isn't mine, of course, it is a core theory of Austrian/free market economics a la Mises, Rothbard, et. al. AKA "Austrian Business Cycle Theory"). Better than I can explain it here:
http://austrianeconomics.wikia.com/wiki/Malinvestment

I doubt you'll take the time to read it, but you should.

And it's hardly my own definition of "inflation" - it is a far more accurate and technical definition that has been intentionally obfuscated by central banking propaganda.

... if it were FLOSS!

Let's do the FLOSS dance!

http://suitelife.wikia.com/wiki/Floss_Dance
Youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8JPDg3DkSM

We're sorry but you're no longer needed Or wanted, or even cared about here
Machines can do a better job than you And this is what you get for asking questions

The unions agree sacrifices must be made Computers never go on strike
To save the working man You got to put him out to pasture


Looks like we'll have to let you go
Doesn't it feel fulfilling to know
That you, the human being, are now obsolete
And there's nothing in hell we'll let you do about it


Soup is good food
You make a good meal
Now how do you feel to be shit out our ass
And thrown in the cold like a piece of trash?
(etc. etc.)

Link: http://lyrics.wikia.com/Dead_Kennedys:Soup_Is_Good_Food. You'll need it, because Jello Biafra sings very unclearly even at the best of times.

No shit, their stock has been taking it on the chin. Down from 175 from when the story hit to below 140.. Analysts think it's more appropriately valued at this price while others like Deutsche Bank are bullish at $200/share.

Buy on the rumor, sell on the fact.

Silly question, but how can one put out an RFI for a system which did not exist in law until March 23, 2010 ??

Unless, of course, they've ALSO got the Wayback Machine at Stargate Command, excuse me, Cheyenne Mountain. . . .

This was predicted in an episode of Captain Planet 22 fucking years ago! Another worthy episode to check out would be the one where this person in a latin community finds a way to clone themselves, leading to an overpopulation problem. When the moral of the episode is explained in plain English at the end of the episode, it is a plea to breed responsibly and have only as many kids as you can properly raise.

-- Ethanol-fueled

...how long can it be until Slashdotters are reported using the avatar to get a hand job that feels like somebody else?

"Oh, yeah, just like a real hand" - http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/The_Robotic_Manipulation

A real-life public defender instead of a Saul Goodman?

I don't get it.

...and not stab humans.

Tell that to Roberto:

"I need to stab someone! Where's my stabbing knife?!"
--Roberto

Wow. Yet another story showing how low Slashdot has fallen. Here is a story about knife wielding robots without mention of Roberto.

And let's not forget the clacks towers!

... can finally replace their old beater with something a little more hip and modern. Party at the mansion!
.
.
.
.
http://marvel.wikia.com/X-Men_Blackbird

All that goes through my head is Bad Religion's "The Answer". And yes, I know the song is referring to religious zealotry, but it just happens any time I hear anything about "the answer to everything is...".

Although you're correct about the 1877 case, it has since been expanded by both Congressional amendments to the statute in the 1952 act, and Supreme Court opinions - see Gottschalk v. Benson in 1972, noting in dicta: "It is said that the decision precludes a patent for any program servicing a computer. We do not so hold."

Having recently reviewed the three major USSC cases relating to patentable subject matter ( Gottschalk v. Benson (1972), Parker v. Flook (1978), and Diamond v. Diehr (1981)), I can only conclude that in each case software patents as such were rejected outright. The language generally cited to the contrary seems only to exist to make it clear that an otherwise patentable discovery which happens to include software as a component is not rendered unpatentable merely by the presence of software. (You can patent a novel mousetrap which happens to use software as part of the trigger, but similar software wouldn't violate the patent if used in a context other than a similar mousetrap.)

The common arguments that "software on a computer" (Benson) or "software with an insignificant post-solution step" (Flook) are somehow different from pure software were explicitly rejected.

Regarding Bilski, the USSC still ended up rejecting that particular business method patent using logic similar to that in Benson and Flook. The majority opinion cast some doubt on the exclusive authority of the "machine or transformation" test (as did Benson and Flook), but only because they considered the prohibition on patents on abstract ideas sufficient. The two concurring opinions both rejected the idea that business methods could be patentable subject matter under other circumstances.

In short, I don't see how Bilski could be said to change anything. It upheld the Benson and Flook ruling to the letter, and while they carefully didn't rule that business methods are excluded subject matter, the ruling did strongly imply that such patents would be invalid on the basis that they cover abstract ideas, which amounts to the same thing.

Although you're correct about the 1877 case, it has since been expanded by both Congressional amendments to the statute in the 1952 act, and Supreme Court opinions - see Gottschalk v. Benson in 1972, noting in dicta: "It is said that the decision precludes a patent for any program servicing a computer. We do not so hold."

Having recently reviewed the three major USSC cases relating to patentable subject matter ( Gottschalk v. Benson (1972), Parker v. Flook (1978), and Diamond v. Diehr (1981)), I can only conclude that in each case software patents as such were rejected outright. The language generally cited to the contrary seems only to exist to make it clear that an otherwise patentable discovery which happens to include software as a component is not rendered unpatentable merely by the presence of software. (You can patent a novel mousetrap which happens to use software as part of the trigger, but similar software wouldn't violate the patent if used in a context other than a similar mousetrap.)

The common arguments that "software on a computer" (Benson) or "software with an insignificant post-solution step" (Flook) are somehow different from pure software were explicitly rejected.

Regarding Bilski, the USSC still ended up rejecting that particular business method patent using logic similar to that in Benson and Flook. The majority opinion cast some doubt on the exclusive authority of the "machine or transformation" test (as did Benson and Flook), but only because they considered the prohibition on patents on abstract ideas sufficient. The two concurring opinions both rejected the idea that business methods could be patentable subject matter under other circumstances.

In short, I don't see how Bilski could be said to change anything. It upheld the Benson and Flook ruling to the letter, and while they carefully didn't rule that business methods are excluded subject matter, the ruling did strongly imply that such patents would be invalid on the basis that they cover abstract ideas, which amounts to the same thing.

Although you're correct about the 1877 case, it has since been expanded by both Congressional amendments to the statute in the 1952 act, and Supreme Court opinions - see Gottschalk v. Benson in 1972, noting in dicta: "It is said that the decision precludes a patent for any program servicing a computer. We do not so hold."

Having recently reviewed the three major USSC cases relating to patentable subject matter ( Gottschalk v. Benson (1972), Parker v. Flook (1978), and Diamond v. Diehr (1981)), I can only conclude that in each case software patents as such were rejected outright. The language generally cited to the contrary seems only to exist to make it clear that an otherwise patentable discovery which happens to include software as a component is not rendered unpatentable merely by the presence of software. (You can patent a novel mousetrap which happens to use software as part of the trigger, but similar software wouldn't violate the patent if used in a context other than a similar mousetrap.)

The common arguments that "software on a computer" (Benson) or "software with an insignificant post-solution step" (Flook) are somehow different from pure software were explicitly rejected.

Regarding Bilski, the USSC still ended up rejecting that particular business method patent using logic similar to that in Benson and Flook. The majority opinion cast some doubt on the exclusive authority of the "machine or transformation" test (as did Benson and Flook), but only because they considered the prohibition on patents on abstract ideas sufficient. The two concurring opinions both rejected the idea that business methods could be patentable subject matter under other circumstances.

In short, I don't see how Bilski could be said to change anything. It upheld the Benson and Flook ruling to the letter, and while they carefully didn't rule that business methods are excluded subject matter, the ruling did strongly imply that such patents would be invalid on the basis that they cover abstract ideas, which amounts to the same thing.