Whether you are aware of it or not, a human opponent will usually be a more interesting challenge than a computer. It may be that a computer would be better, and win more often, but it will be more balanced versus another human player, and the opponent won't just be following a script based on some rules. For example, Counterstrike: I can trounce the bots like cheddar but once in a while I come up against someone who actually gives me a run for my money instead of watching as I shit all over them, like they somehow can't see me or aim at me in a reasonable amount of time.
The fact that the page has been annihilated doesn't bode well for the game. If you can't handle the curiosity load for a game release on the website, you probably can't handle the player load on the game itself.
The trend of apple products market share declining as Android products skyrocket in market share is akin to the tipping of Lady Justice's scales. Apple is going downhill because they haven't come out with anything actually new in quite some time(the same thing, only smaller does not count) and people who pay attention are starting to hate them for their anti-comptetitive actions on the world stage - vis a vis patent lawsuits, injoining product sales that are more unique than their own, etc.
I have no problem writing simple apps, compiling, and running them on my Kindle Fire or even my friggin' phone running Android. I have had no end of trouble just using the Apple products, let alone trying to develop for them. The only problem I have with the KFire is no bluetooth/usb for keyboardage, which is why I frequently use my phone for the typing part.
They are just too black-box for anyone to really work professionally from, and LUA/Python is hardly a choice when doing REAL actual development. I need some full featured language, like Java or C, preferably with access to native/low-level code functions. Even Flash/AS3 would be acceptable, but I suppose Apple would have to unban their apps first, no?
It would be nice to bring home the humans and leave some rats with cameras and a transmitter over there instead. It would certainly be cheaper and less cost to human lives. Is it so bad if we just know what's going on over there without shooting at things we disagree with? Do we really need so many humans killing and dying over...what exactly?
The government still doesn't seem to know what the condition of the 'war' is. The president (Bush) just clicked 'agree' without reading the terms and therefore doesn't know who we are actually fighting and what we have to do to 'win' this war. Obama has done nothing to break this cycle and continues to rubber stamp anything that comes across his desk relating to the war.
Trying to figure out the target or purpose of this war quickly makes any logical person realize that the answer is nothing on both counts. We are 'at war' in an undeclared conflict with an abstract concept called 'terrorism' in an ever-shifting arena of brown people who just so happen to be sitting over a really big puddle of dino-juice. Meanwhile, back home, the country is falling apart and the government is systematically dismantling our civil rights and coming up with new big-brotherish ways to fuck with us civilly and economically. Yay!
So basically, it seems we will just be at war with whomever we want until there are no more people in this world that our government deems terrorists, and soon disagreeing with the government will label you a terrorist and get you locked up indefinitely. Well, this should end soon, I'm sure.
It would appear that the global unpopularity of our country's 'wars' on 'terror' is a flamebait subject to the mods. Now where are these naysayers when there's some shill adspam blog article?
2) you don't have to alert authorities about it at all, and it does NOT need to be certified by the FAA if it's under weight guidelines. 3) it's perfectly legal to fly whatever you want, whenever you want as long as you keep it under weight specifications for "ultra-light" aircraft. Seriously, if you lack the skills to build, you can go buy an ultra-light, find some dude who can fly to teach you to fly it... and fly it whenever you want, all legally, all without telling any authority or regulating body. You can actually make an ultralight that can carry a passenger and nobody will bother you.
There's a few problems with your argument. Firstly, you cannot fly whatever you want. The requirements for ultralights are basically down to cardboard-and-aluminum style construction. They must weight less than 254 lbs empty, carry less than 5 gallons of fuel, meet certain speed requirements, and obey some serious restrictions compared to regular light sport or private pilot aircraft. Furthermore, it can only carry one person when piloted without a license. If you use a tandem(two-seater) ultralight, the pilot will need at least a recreational certificate to not get bothered. Honestly, as long as you don't crash or annoy people, they are unlikely to come after you about it.
Secondly, you have some serious restrictions on *where* you are allowed to fly. You cannot fly over populated areas, you cannot fly more than a certain distance over the ocean and I believe some of the great lakes area as well, you cannot fly at night, you cannot fly IFR(instrument or non-visual flight). There is also the matter of airspace. While you are not required to have radios or transponders on ultralights, to enter class B airspace, and often class C, you need a Mode-C transponder and permission from the tower. As the airspace extends down to as low as 200' in some areas, it can be really difficult to comply and putt-putt your way out of the controlled airspace right above the tree line. The maneuvering of the ultralight flocks inbound to AirVenture in Oshkosh every year is one of my favorite sights.
The kit itself isn't certified as airworthy by the FAA, just the actual put-together plane. In this regard, if you want to buy a bunch of spruce and build your own plane from your own plans from scratch, you are more than able to do so. Just keep in mind, if you want that FAA dude to sign off on your plane, there is a massive bible-sized tome of regulations your plane will need to adhere to. Some of them are easy, like it has to have a minimum speed below some certain point, so you don't get a bunch of propeller-driven lawn darts flying around up there. Some are a little more specific like requirements for speed testing and weight and balance configurations.
For example, all of the little arcs and lines on an ASI are customized to the plane, so the Vne is specific to the airframe, the Vmax is specific to the engine, the Vflap is specific to the design, etc. Someone has to do that testing for a plane that nobody has ever flown before. Kits, when followed to the letter, allow you to bypass this as someone has already built a few of them and taken an average of all the critical numbers among them.
Only Ultralights are restricted to E and G airspaces. Kit planes, particularly the sleek, modern, fast ones, are used in normal airspace all the time. I have flown the EAA's Vans RV-6A around Whitman quite a bit, and that is full-on class C airspace, even taking off from Pioneer Field.
The FAA actually does certify the aircraft in the form of an airworthiness certificate and aircraft license/tail number, but only once you have assembled the kit. The aircraft needs to be inspected many times throughout the construction of the aircraft so they can see and sign off that it is being built properly. The experimental/kit planes cannot be mass-produced and sold(as complete aircraft). They can, however, be built one-off and flown by the builder or any appropriately-licensed pilot they certify to fly it. For an experimental class aircraft, to do authorized maintenance on the plane, you must have built more than 51% of the aircraft yourself. This is why many kits are sold as a 49% complete kits.
Alternately, you can fly an 'ultralight' aircraft without any license, with certain limitations, as long as that vehicle: -Weighs less than 254lbs empty weight. -Carries less than 5 Gallons of fuel -Only carries one person -Meets a specific max speed and stall speed -A bunch of other small stuff under FAR part 103 A paraphrasing of the regulations is that you don't require a license or any specific equipment on the aircraft, but you aren't allowed in controlled airspace without permission, you can't fly above a certain altitude, you can't fly at night(pretty sure even with lights), and a few other specific no-nos like flying over populated areas or dropping anything from the aircraft.
If you ever do undertake building a plane, the hands-down best place I have ever picked up supplies is AS&S (nice dudes from MN) at http://www.aircraftspruce.com/
I worked with the EAA in Oshkosh for several years, and we built most of a plane each summer from raw materials. Wood and fabric, all the way. Last one I worked on was an AcroSport II.
I will waste the mod point I used above to tell you: it actually requires quite a great deal of coordination and collective agreement to do what Anonymous does. If you have ever tried to promote an event via Facebook or email, I'm sure you know what a daunting task it can be to organize a large number of people via a non-face-to-face method like chat, the internet, email, etc. I'm sure Anonymous and its activities could provide material for a panacea of sociological studies, and I can't figure out why more serious research isn't being done into their organization and interaction protocols.
The fact that Anonymous is able to get literally thousands of people to agree on a common target, launch a program(which they developed), and stick with running it for more than a few seconds with little to no feedback from it is truly a remarkable feat of organization. I would say I am not as impressed with their programming skills, which are moderate at best. The programs they develop are about as complex as a first-year tools programmer would make, with a single straightforward intent. Their 'hacking' is largely nothing more than exploiting poor security in scripts and databases, though I can't deny its effectiveness at exposing 'hidden' information. Still, the way they are able to get their shit together and move people to a common goal, even if they are angry teenaged people, is pretty impressive.
I like this analogy. I can't decide if I am a 'linux professional' even though I am very familiar with various distros, installing, running, administrating them. At what point to I become a professional. Is it the first time I build a LAMP server for a company? Is it when I get some random certification? I guess it really depends on your definition of professional. There are plenty of linux admins I know who I would not even dream of calling 'professional'.
It is profoundly clear you have no idea what this article, discussion, or any prior comments are about. It is unlikely you actually read any part of this article/discussion.
Your signature is about the only thing that applies to a hacker sleeping on someone's couch to borrow free internet provided *BY* Google to a resident. This has nothing to do with companies ripping people off, and in fact, it is about companies providing a valuable commodity to people for free.
Are you an iPhone user who has never used Android? It's nothing like iOS and most of the features can't remotely be construed as a copy of anything Apple has ever done. The same can be said for the Windows phones and their new 'metro' UI, which is what Nokia is currently working most with.
This is clearly nothing more than a move to slow their fall into oblivion after they lost the market lead for cell phones to Android, by leveraging unfair business practices like injunctions to prevent sales of competitors' products. I'm sure the verdict came from something along the lines of "Oh look, Juror #5, you now have $5000 in your iTunes account and they're shipping you free iPads for life!"
Except Samsung didn't copy Apple, despite what this moron ruling says. Their patents that Samsung 'infringed' were obvious, or not unique to Apple, and Apple is doing this for the sole purpose of trying to regain its rapidly dwindling market share for phones by injoining the sales of their competitor over some nonsense bullshit patents.
I wonder what dirt Apple found on the court officials that would allow them to completely turn around the previous rulings and the way that this court was tending on this case. They were all but ready to throw it out and say 'fuck off, Apple'. Anyone with a pair of eyes and the ability to read can see this is Apple pursuing unfair business practices far more than it has anything to do with patents, and a legitimate, fair court would have ruled as such.
As a long-time Windows user(hey, it's easy, I like it) I see Windows 8 barreling toward us like the four horsemen.
The interface is pure shit, the compatibility is pure shit, the security is pure shit, and I can't think of a single good reason why XP or 7 is in need of replacing. It is only a move to squeeze more money out of people and push their trendy Apple-wannabe MetroUI, which rightfully never should have leapt off the cell phone to desktop environment....ever.
Happily written from XP without any fucking colored boxes or Win Defender nonsense.
The witch hunt is the bullshit charges being piled against him by various governments, having nothing to do with the actual leaked documents, designed specifically to reel him in so the US Gov'ment can do all the nasty things they want to him behind closed doors.
If you really believe Assange is at fault for the release of these embarrassing documents, please drink bleach and return to Nazi Germany where you belong.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether you are aware of it or not, a human opponent will usually be a more interesting challenge than a computer. It may be that a computer would be better, and win more often, but it will be more balanced versus another human player, and the opponent won't just be following a script based on some rules. For example, Counterstrike: I can trounce the bots like cheddar but once in a while I come up against someone who actually gives me a run for my money instead of watching as I shit all over them, like they somehow can't see me or aim at me in a reasonable amount of time.
It's also, you know, just a word in the English language which has been used for hundreds of years...
The fact that the page has been annihilated doesn't bode well for the game. If you can't handle the curiosity load for a game release on the website, you probably can't handle the player load on the game itself.
The trend of apple products market share declining as Android products skyrocket in market share is akin to the tipping of Lady Justice's scales. Apple is going downhill because they haven't come out with anything actually new in quite some time(the same thing, only smaller does not count) and people who pay attention are starting to hate them for their anti-comptetitive actions on the world stage - vis a vis patent lawsuits, injoining product sales that are more unique than their own, etc.
I have no problem writing simple apps, compiling, and running them on my Kindle Fire or even my friggin' phone running Android. I have had no end of trouble just using the Apple products, let alone trying to develop for them. The only problem I have with the KFire is no bluetooth/usb for keyboardage, which is why I frequently use my phone for the typing part.
They are just too black-box for anyone to really work professionally from, and LUA/Python is hardly a choice when doing REAL actual development. I need some full featured language, like Java or C, preferably with access to native/low-level code functions. Even Flash/AS3 would be acceptable, but I suppose Apple would have to unban their apps first, no?
It would be nice to bring home the humans and leave some rats with cameras and a transmitter over there instead. It would certainly be cheaper and less cost to human lives. Is it so bad if we just know what's going on over there without shooting at things we disagree with? Do we really need so many humans killing and dying over...what exactly?
The government still doesn't seem to know what the condition of the 'war' is. The president (Bush) just clicked 'agree' without reading the terms and therefore doesn't know who we are actually fighting and what we have to do to 'win' this war. Obama has done nothing to break this cycle and continues to rubber stamp anything that comes across his desk relating to the war.
Trying to figure out the target or purpose of this war quickly makes any logical person realize that the answer is nothing on both counts. We are 'at war' in an undeclared conflict with an abstract concept called 'terrorism' in an ever-shifting arena of brown people who just so happen to be sitting over a really big puddle of dino-juice. Meanwhile, back home, the country is falling apart and the government is systematically dismantling our civil rights and coming up with new big-brotherish ways to fuck with us civilly and economically. Yay!
So basically, it seems we will just be at war with whomever we want until there are no more people in this world that our government deems terrorists, and soon disagreeing with the government will label you a terrorist and get you locked up indefinitely. Well, this should end soon, I'm sure.
And you wonder why I call it a waste. /tinfoilhat
It would appear that the global unpopularity of our country's 'wars' on 'terror' is a flamebait subject to the mods. Now where are these naysayers when there's some shill adspam blog article?
And here I thought the war in Aghaniraqistaniran was the biggest waste our military could come up with. I stand corrected.
So, basically, we're talking about Google becoming Apple?
No thank you.
We wouldn't.
Sincerely,
Some of the AdBlock Plus crowd.
2) you don't have to alert authorities about it at all, and it does NOT need to be certified by the FAA if it's under weight guidelines.
3) it's perfectly legal to fly whatever you want, whenever you want as long as you keep it under weight specifications for "ultra-light" aircraft. Seriously, if you lack the skills to build, you can go buy an ultra-light, find some dude who can fly to teach you to fly it... and fly it whenever you want, all legally, all without telling any authority or regulating body. You can actually make an ultralight that can carry a passenger and nobody will bother you.
There's a few problems with your argument. Firstly, you cannot fly whatever you want. The requirements for ultralights are basically down to cardboard-and-aluminum style construction. They must weight less than 254 lbs empty, carry less than 5 gallons of fuel, meet certain speed requirements, and obey some serious restrictions compared to regular light sport or private pilot aircraft. Furthermore, it can only carry one person when piloted without a license. If you use a tandem(two-seater) ultralight, the pilot will need at least a recreational certificate to not get bothered. Honestly, as long as you don't crash or annoy people, they are unlikely to come after you about it.
Secondly, you have some serious restrictions on *where* you are allowed to fly. You cannot fly over populated areas, you cannot fly more than a certain distance over the ocean and I believe some of the great lakes area as well, you cannot fly at night, you cannot fly IFR(instrument or non-visual flight). There is also the matter of airspace. While you are not required to have radios or transponders on ultralights, to enter class B airspace, and often class C, you need a Mode-C transponder and permission from the tower. As the airspace extends down to as low as 200' in some areas, it can be really difficult to comply and putt-putt your way out of the controlled airspace right above the tree line. The maneuvering of the ultralight flocks inbound to AirVenture in Oshkosh every year is one of my favorite sights.
The kit itself isn't certified as airworthy by the FAA, just the actual put-together plane. In this regard, if you want to buy a bunch of spruce and build your own plane from your own plans from scratch, you are more than able to do so. Just keep in mind, if you want that FAA dude to sign off on your plane, there is a massive bible-sized tome of regulations your plane will need to adhere to. Some of them are easy, like it has to have a minimum speed below some certain point, so you don't get a bunch of propeller-driven lawn darts flying around up there. Some are a little more specific like requirements for speed testing and weight and balance configurations.
For example, all of the little arcs and lines on an ASI are customized to the plane, so the Vne is specific to the airframe, the Vmax is specific to the engine, the Vflap is specific to the design, etc. Someone has to do that testing for a plane that nobody has ever flown before. Kits, when followed to the letter, allow you to bypass this as someone has already built a few of them and taken an average of all the critical numbers among them.
Only Ultralights are restricted to E and G airspaces. Kit planes, particularly the sleek, modern, fast ones, are used in normal airspace all the time. I have flown the EAA's Vans RV-6A around Whitman quite a bit, and that is full-on class C airspace, even taking off from Pioneer Field.
The FAA actually does certify the aircraft in the form of an airworthiness certificate and aircraft license/tail number, but only once you have assembled the kit. The aircraft needs to be inspected many times throughout the construction of the aircraft so they can see and sign off that it is being built properly. The experimental/kit planes cannot be mass-produced and sold(as complete aircraft). They can, however, be built one-off and flown by the builder or any appropriately-licensed pilot they certify to fly it. For an experimental class aircraft, to do authorized maintenance on the plane, you must have built more than 51% of the aircraft yourself. This is why many kits are sold as a 49% complete kits.
Alternately, you can fly an 'ultralight' aircraft without any license, with certain limitations, as long as that vehicle:
-Weighs less than 254lbs empty weight.
-Carries less than 5 Gallons of fuel
-Only carries one person
-Meets a specific max speed and stall speed
-A bunch of other small stuff under FAR part 103
A paraphrasing of the regulations is that you don't require a license or any specific equipment on the aircraft, but you aren't allowed in controlled airspace without permission, you can't fly above a certain altitude, you can't fly at night(pretty sure even with lights), and a few other specific no-nos like flying over populated areas or dropping anything from the aircraft.
If you ever do undertake building a plane, the hands-down best place I have ever picked up supplies is AS&S (nice dudes from MN) at http://www.aircraftspruce.com/
I worked with the EAA in Oshkosh for several years, and we built most of a plane each summer from raw materials. Wood and fabric, all the way. Last one I worked on was an AcroSport II.
I will waste the mod point I used above to tell you: it actually requires quite a great deal of coordination and collective agreement to do what Anonymous does. If you have ever tried to promote an event via Facebook or email, I'm sure you know what a daunting task it can be to organize a large number of people via a non-face-to-face method like chat, the internet, email, etc. I'm sure Anonymous and its activities could provide material for a panacea of sociological studies, and I can't figure out why more serious research isn't being done into their organization and interaction protocols.
The fact that Anonymous is able to get literally thousands of people to agree on a common target, launch a program(which they developed), and stick with running it for more than a few seconds with little to no feedback from it is truly a remarkable feat of organization. I would say I am not as impressed with their programming skills, which are moderate at best. The programs they develop are about as complex as a first-year tools programmer would make, with a single straightforward intent. Their 'hacking' is largely nothing more than exploiting poor security in scripts and databases, though I can't deny its effectiveness at exposing 'hidden' information. Still, the way they are able to get their shit together and move people to a common goal, even if they are angry teenaged people, is pretty impressive.
I see your blatant and likely baseless hatred of Windows, and raise you a "linux is too hard to install and configure for Grandma".
I like this analogy. I can't decide if I am a 'linux professional' even though I am very familiar with various distros, installing, running, administrating them. At what point to I become a professional. Is it the first time I build a LAMP server for a company? Is it when I get some random certification? I guess it really depends on your definition of professional. There are plenty of linux admins I know who I would not even dream of calling 'professional'.
It is profoundly clear you have no idea what this article, discussion, or any prior comments are about. It is unlikely you actually read any part of this article/discussion.
Your signature is about the only thing that applies to a hacker sleeping on someone's couch to borrow free internet provided *BY* Google to a resident. This has nothing to do with companies ripping people off, and in fact, it is about companies providing a valuable commodity to people for free.
XP/Windows in general is only insecure if you use it in an insecure manner.
I am on XP, because Win7 uses double the ram just to display the desktop, and programs I compile on 7 don't work on previous versions of Windows.
Do your worst, hackers.
google powered apple work-alikes
Are you an iPhone user who has never used Android? It's nothing like iOS and most of the features can't remotely be construed as a copy of anything Apple has ever done. The same can be said for the Windows phones and their new 'metro' UI, which is what Nokia is currently working most with.
This is clearly nothing more than a move to slow their fall into oblivion after they lost the market lead for cell phones to Android, by leveraging unfair business practices like injunctions to prevent sales of competitors' products. I'm sure the verdict came from something along the lines of "Oh look, Juror #5, you now have $5000 in your iTunes account and they're shipping you free iPads for life!"
Except Samsung didn't copy Apple, despite what this moron ruling says. Their patents that Samsung 'infringed' were obvious, or not unique to Apple, and Apple is doing this for the sole purpose of trying to regain its rapidly dwindling market share for phones by injoining the sales of their competitor over some nonsense bullshit patents.
I wonder what dirt Apple found on the court officials that would allow them to completely turn around the previous rulings and the way that this court was tending on this case. They were all but ready to throw it out and say 'fuck off, Apple'. Anyone with a pair of eyes and the ability to read can see this is Apple pursuing unfair business practices far more than it has anything to do with patents, and a legitimate, fair court would have ruled as such.
As a long-time Windows user(hey, it's easy, I like it) I see Windows 8 barreling toward us like the four horsemen.
The interface is pure shit, the compatibility is pure shit, the security is pure shit, and I can't think of a single good reason why XP or 7 is in need of replacing. It is only a move to squeeze more money out of people and push their trendy Apple-wannabe MetroUI, which rightfully never should have leapt off the cell phone to desktop environment....ever.
Happily written from XP without any fucking colored boxes or Win Defender nonsense.
"They accused me in absentia, they tried me in absentia, they convicted me in absentia. Let them execute me in absentia."
The witch hunt is the bullshit charges being piled against him by various governments, having nothing to do with the actual leaked documents, designed specifically to reel him in so the US Gov'ment can do all the nasty things they want to him behind closed doors.
If you really believe Assange is at fault for the release of these embarrassing documents, please drink bleach and return to Nazi Germany where you belong.