moderation at slashdot is done by the masses. My personal solution is to just not give a shit, and set my threshold low.
It's not that the moderation system is inherently stupid. I think it's a great idea and pretty well thought out. In the end though, working pretty good most of the time isn't good enough for me to trust the moderation system.
huh? who says that the console processors are inferior to x86 for gaming? There's a lot more to speed than megahertz. And it's a lot easier to build a box that does video games well with no limitations on the chip (well except for the normal limitations such as power, cost, blah blah), than it is to write a state of the art game using an instruction set developed, what, 20 years ago, for general purpose computers. Sure intel and amd have hacked out the processors to run pretty fast. Keep in mind when you are comparing box prices that console makers don't make a lot of money from selling boxes. They make the money from licensing games.
lol, it was actually entertaining to read all of cow's posts. i'm sick of all this "go ac to avoid being moderated down" bullshit.
PEOPLE CARE TOO MUCH ABOUT THEIR KARMA.
Moderation is overrated anyway. It's easier to just set my threshold zero or -1 and wade through the crap. Anyone who sets there threshold above one is just asking to limit themselves to a narrow scope of posts, with the occasional good remark sprinkled in.
"If motiviation is truly irrelevant, than one should have identical punishments for all murders (for example), whether deliberate, accidental, premiditated, or spontaneous. As another noted, the difference isn't in the act, but in the degree of thought that went into it. I leave it as an excersize to the class to recognize the aburdity of that approach."
This is a very good argument for hate crime legislation. In an earlier post I stated that I didn't understand why the reason someone wanted to kill was important, but your argument is compelling. Just as accidental killings are considered to have a less of a detrimental effect on society, singling out someone to kill based on prejudice of a certain population group does have a strong negative effect. In fact I would say that probably does deserve the stiffest punishment for murder. Although I think that the legislation should be worded strongly to prevent abuse and making every case into a hate crime.
IANAL, but I believe 1st-3rd degree murder is primarily based on heat of the moment vs. premeditation, with intent to kill thrown in there somewhere.
What I don't understand is why should the particular reason you hate someone make a difference in the punishment. I agree that "hate crimes" are absolutely deplorable. What I don't feel comfortable with is legislating people's feelings. The crime is not hating someone, the crime is killing someone.
"so you are too demanding for an el cheapo sound card" no, it wasn't my choice. this is what comes with this particular dell computer. So sound cards are following a similar trend as video cards. Today's cheap and standard technology is yesterday's latest and greatest technology.
>Maybe its just me but pretty pictures are impressive for the first hour. After that I want game play. Its the software which is more important to me. I agree, that's why my favorite first person shooter is Starsiege Tribes, unfortunately win95/98/NT only. For those of you who like quake style games but find them a little boring this is a great game. The engine isn't nearly as good as quakes. But the gameplay is great. Typical games are capture the flag. Great weapons balance. Team play with vehicles and objectives that must be held and captured.
"All the action in the consumer marketplace is happening at the low end around cheap PCs, not at the high end around 1GHz Athlons."
I understand what you are trying to say (I think), but the explosion in growth in the low-end is because the prices are falling. This makes PC's more accessible to people who aren't willing to spend $$$ on a computer. In other words, different consumers are buying the cheap PC's, not the older PC consumers who have been buying every couple years. And definitely not the hardcore gamer.
I also believe that this enthusiast 3d market has a chance to expand and grow over time into more main stream. Sure, it's a toy now, but being able to render near photo-realistic worlds in real time in response to user inputs...that has potential. As the internet and technology grow and find new ways to solve problems, I think we may see some very neat applications for 3d technology.
One final note, I just helped my girlfriend order a new Dell computer. It's not bottom of the barrel cheap, but it was only $1100. It included an Aureal 3d chipset sound card. Sound isn't a commodity. Common, "good enough" sound is a commodity
Of course, if no-one has high poly-count cards, then these games will be longer coming, because the market won't be there.
I truly hope that nVidia can gather enough support for the GeForce's geometry engine so that this battle is fought and won on which solution is technically better, not which company bullies the other better.
Good point, the bottom line is 3dfx and nVidia and all the other companies are building these chips and cards to make money. 3dfx has gotten some bad press because they didn't include 32 bit color on their Voodoo3 line. To me, that doesn't seem indicative of a company that is throwing on features mindlessly to market their product. On the other hand, one could argue that 3dfx didn't include 32 bit color for other reasons. 1. 3dfx sucks, nVidia rules 2. they just missed the boat on this one I don't know which is the case, probably no one but employees of 3dfx truly know. I do like 3dfx, but my BS meter goes up a little when they rant about no one needing 32 bit color, 60 fps is more important. Come on, any company is going to say what they have is better.
Exactly... 3dfx has done a good job in the past of making good trade off's in their design. I will definitely be waiting to see how these two technologies compare to each other before buying a card.
Hmm...It's fair to say that most people don't use 100% of the cpu very often. Why is saving 16 dollars (manufacturer's cost, consumer's cost difference will be greater) at the expense of giving up 10% of your cpu so bad? It's not my choice personally. But for the general market, there's no reason not to save a few bucks and let a $50, 3 or 4 hundred mhz cpu do the work.
How do you know more geometry will be better? I'm not sure myself, but IMO 3dfx has been king, more or less, up to this point because they choose the best features to include. That is the heart of engineering. Deciding what to include and what to sacrifice, which trade-offs are the best trade-offs. Other manufacturers have included more and "better" features, yet when you look at price and speed and quality, I feel that 3dfx has been the best so far. Although the TNT2s are very good products also, and I'm sure the GeForce will be too.
Another difference: Screen 43.5" x 11.5" which translates to 3 screens that are 14.5" x 11.5", comparing to my 19" Sony 420GS which has a viewable screen size of 14 3/8" x 10 7/8"
A quick search on Yahoo finds that I can buy a Nokia 800XA for around $3k. It's dimensions are: 14.1" x 11.3".
So that puts the cost of an equivalent home made solution in the $10k ball park
ummmm.... L2 cache ram is more expensive because it costs more to make, not because they gave it some spiffed up name. The whole idea of having layers of cache before main memory is accessed is to reduce system cost, because fast (low latency) memory is very expensive. I believe the main reason is that in order to maintain fast access times with low latency many many transistors must be used for each bit. More transistors == Higher Price.
Your post (and many others) just convinced me to completely ignore moderation points. This post and the one it replied to were two of the best posts of seen in any of the Echelon stories.
This is an excellent point. The real problem is an apathy deeper than getting people to the polls (virtual or real) to vote. Many people just don't care about politics for one reason or another. Why should they vote?
Is everything that gets linux into the hands of end users good exposure? I know everyone thinks yes at first, but bear with me.
Is mass distribution of linux a good thing? Right now the ignorant public may have heard of linux, but most have not used it or installed it first hand. If they suddenly get a linux cd and install it and they can't get it working or it is too complicated for them, then they just had a bad first impression. Millions of bad first impressions could really slow down the awesome momentum that linux has built up.
As others have pointed out, the mass public aren't buying motherboards to pop into their new case or use with their new Athlon. So this argument might not apply to this distribution of linux.
Just for the sake of argument, what did we really gain from having all those card makers based on the same chipset. The only thing I can think of offhand was the shutter glasses...
A professor of mine for my signals and systems class at Purdue University, told us about this. The basic idea (if I mess it up blame me not my professor or Purdue) is to build a black box that undoes the atmospheric distortion.
In order to do this one needs to know what the image "should" look like without atmospheric distortion. Then through some sort of magic build a filter that when applied to the dirty, distorted image returns it to the original. The basic premise is that the atmospheric distortion is an invertible system and that we can build a second system that does the inverting.
The biggest problem with this approach was how the heck do you figure out what things are supposed to really look like? If I remember correctly, there were a few stars that they could use as points of data to build the "black box." The breakthrough for this came when some department of defense guys got involved with their work. The final system (being built? already built?) was to shine a laser at one point in the sky that would excite cesium atoms. There is a layer of cesium atoms around the earth's atmosphere. We know what the excited cesium ion's are supposed to look like. Move the laser around the sky, and voila, you can build a black box that will "undo" the atmospheric distortion across the whole sky.
I would love to hear from anyone who can add more to this or correct me where I was mistaken. Does anyone know how well this works? It seems like the system is not completely invertible. Some data must be lost, but how much? Also I believe they were applying this technology to a telescope in Hawaii.
I agree, although I doubt many will agree. It would go against the mob mentality that seems to be slashdot these days.
I wonder what slashdot would be like if we were talking and interacting in a virtual world instead of posting messages? Would we be lynching all of "them"? Them being your choice of lawyers, businessmen, or stupid people.
Slashdot Mirror
laughing my ass off
moderation at slashdot is done by the masses. My personal solution is to just not give a shit, and set my threshold low.
It's not that the moderation system is inherently stupid. I think it's a great idea and pretty well thought out. In the end though, working pretty good most of the time isn't good enough for me to trust the moderation system.
huh? who says that the console processors are inferior to x86 for gaming? There's a lot more to speed than megahertz. And it's a lot easier to build a box that does video games well with no limitations on the chip (well except for the normal limitations such as power, cost, blah blah), than it is to write a state of the art game using an instruction set developed, what, 20 years ago, for general purpose computers. Sure intel and amd have hacked out the processors to run pretty fast. Keep in mind when you are comparing box prices that console makers don't make a lot of money from selling boxes. They make the money from licensing games.
you can't play quake3 on a voodoo2 in linux??????????
man, that sucks
It's good to see all the competition in 3d. Hopefully, market pressure and competition will help get us open source drivers.
lol, it was actually entertaining to read all of cow's posts. i'm sick of all this "go ac to avoid being moderated down" bullshit.
PEOPLE CARE TOO MUCH ABOUT THEIR KARMA.
Moderation is overrated anyway. It's easier to just set my threshold zero or -1 and wade through the crap. Anyone who sets there threshold above one is just asking to limit themselves to a narrow scope of posts, with the occasional good remark sprinkled in.
"If motiviation is truly irrelevant, than one should have identical punishments for all murders (for example), whether deliberate, accidental, premiditated, or spontaneous. As another noted, the difference isn't in the act, but in the degree of thought that went into it. I leave it as an excersize to the class to recognize the aburdity of that approach."
This is a very good argument for hate crime legislation. In an earlier post I stated that I didn't understand why the reason someone wanted to kill was important, but your argument is compelling. Just as accidental killings are considered to have a less of a detrimental effect on society, singling out someone to kill based on prejudice of a certain population group does have a strong negative effect. In fact I would say that probably does deserve the stiffest punishment for murder. Although I think that the legislation should be worded strongly to prevent abuse and making every case into a hate crime.
IANAL, but I believe 1st-3rd degree murder is primarily based on heat of the moment vs. premeditation, with intent to kill thrown in there somewhere.
What I don't understand is why should the particular reason you hate someone make a difference in the punishment. I agree that "hate crimes" are absolutely deplorable. What I don't feel comfortable with is legislating people's feelings. The crime is not hating someone, the crime is killing someone.
"so you are too demanding for an el cheapo sound card" no, it wasn't my choice. this is what comes with this particular dell computer. So sound cards are following a similar trend as video cards. Today's cheap and standard technology is yesterday's latest and greatest technology.
>Maybe its just me but pretty pictures are impressive for the first hour. After that I want game play. Its the software which is more important to me. I agree, that's why my favorite first person shooter is Starsiege Tribes, unfortunately win95/98/NT only. For those of you who like quake style games but find them a little boring this is a great game. The engine isn't nearly as good as quakes. But the gameplay is great. Typical games are capture the flag. Great weapons balance. Team play with vehicles and objectives that must be held and captured.
"All the action in the consumer marketplace is happening at the low end around cheap PCs, not at the high end around 1GHz Athlons."
I understand what you are trying to say (I think), but the explosion in growth in the low-end is because the prices are falling. This makes PC's more accessible to people who aren't willing to spend $$$ on a computer. In other words, different consumers are buying the cheap PC's, not the older PC consumers who have been buying every couple years. And definitely not the hardcore gamer.
I also believe that this enthusiast 3d market has a chance to expand and grow over time into more main stream. Sure, it's a toy now, but being able to render near photo-realistic worlds in real time in response to user inputs...that has potential. As the internet and technology grow and find new ways to solve problems, I think we may see some very neat applications for 3d technology.
One final note, I just helped my girlfriend order a new Dell computer. It's not bottom of the barrel cheap, but it was only $1100. It included an Aureal 3d chipset sound card. Sound isn't a commodity. Common, "good enough" sound is a commodity
Of course, if no-one has high poly-count cards, then these games will be longer coming, because the market won't be there.
I truly hope that nVidia can gather enough support for the GeForce's geometry engine so that this battle is fought and won on which solution is technically better, not which company bullies the other better.
Good point, the bottom line is 3dfx and nVidia and all the other companies are building these chips and cards to make money. 3dfx has gotten some bad press because they didn't include 32 bit color on their Voodoo3 line. To me, that doesn't seem indicative of a company that is throwing on features mindlessly to market their product. On the other hand, one could argue that 3dfx didn't include 32 bit color for other reasons. 1. 3dfx sucks, nVidia rules 2. they just missed the boat on this one I don't know which is the case, probably no one but employees of 3dfx truly know. I do like 3dfx, but my BS meter goes up a little when they rant about no one needing 32 bit color, 60 fps is more important. Come on, any company is going to say what they have is better.
Exactly... 3dfx has done a good job in the past of making good trade off's in their design. I will definitely be waiting to see how these two technologies compare to each other before buying a card.
Hmm...It's fair to say that most people don't use 100% of the cpu very often. Why is saving 16 dollars (manufacturer's cost, consumer's cost difference will be greater) at the expense of giving up 10% of your cpu so bad? It's not my choice personally. But for the general market, there's no reason not to save a few bucks and let a $50, 3 or 4 hundred mhz cpu do the work.
How do you know more geometry will be better? I'm not sure myself, but IMO 3dfx has been king, more or less, up to this point because they choose the best features to include. That is the heart of engineering. Deciding what to include and what to sacrifice, which trade-offs are the best trade-offs. Other manufacturers have included more and "better" features, yet when you look at price and speed and quality, I feel that 3dfx has been the best so far. Although the TNT2s are very good products also, and I'm sure the GeForce will be too.
What makes geometry better than fillrate?
Rejection doesn't feel good in any form. Not to meddle, but IMHO you shouldn't let this one bad experience sour you too much.
Another difference:
Screen 43.5" x 11.5"
which translates to 3 screens that are 14.5" x 11.5", comparing to my 19" Sony 420GS which has a viewable screen size of 14 3/8" x 10 7/8"
A quick search on Yahoo finds that I can buy a Nokia 800XA for around $3k. It's dimensions are:
14.1" x 11.3".
So that puts the cost of an equivalent home made solution in the $10k ball park
ummmm.... L2 cache ram is more expensive because it costs more to make, not because they gave it some spiffed up name. The whole idea of having layers of cache before main memory is accessed is to reduce system cost, because fast (low latency) memory is very expensive. I believe the main reason is that in order to maintain fast access times with low latency many many transistors must be used for each bit. More transistors == Higher Price.
Your post (and many others) just convinced me to completely ignore moderation points. This post and the one it replied to were two of the best posts of seen in any of the Echelon stories.
If someone had the ability to press a dvd that was a duplicate of another, wouldn't that dvd play just the same as the original?
No one is doing anything to other people's DVD discs. If I decided to crack my own DVD disc to get at the data unencrypted, who have I stolen from?
This is an excellent point. The real problem is an apathy deeper than getting people to the polls (virtual or real) to vote. Many people just don't care about politics for one reason or another. Why should they vote?
Is everything that gets linux into the hands of end users good exposure? I know everyone thinks yes at first, but bear with me.
Is mass distribution of linux a good thing? Right now the ignorant public may have heard of linux, but most have not used it or installed it first hand. If they suddenly get a linux cd and install it and they can't get it working or it is too complicated for them, then they just had a bad first impression. Millions of bad first impressions could really slow down the awesome momentum that linux has built up.
As others have pointed out, the mass public aren't buying motherboards to pop into their new case or use with their new Athlon. So this argument might not apply to this distribution of linux.
Just for the sake of argument, what did we really gain from having all those card makers based on the same chipset. The only thing I can think of offhand was the shutter glasses...
A professor of mine for my signals and systems class at Purdue University, told us about this. The basic idea (if I mess it up blame me not my professor or Purdue) is to build a black box that undoes the atmospheric distortion.
In order to do this one needs to know what the image "should" look like without atmospheric distortion. Then through some sort of magic build a filter that when applied to the dirty, distorted image returns it to the original. The basic premise is that the atmospheric distortion is an invertible system and that we can build a second system that does the inverting.
The biggest problem with this approach was how the heck do you figure out what things are supposed to really look like? If I remember correctly, there were a few stars that they could use as points of data to build the "black box." The breakthrough for this came when some department of defense guys got involved with their work. The final system (being built? already built?) was to shine a laser at one point in the sky that would excite cesium atoms. There is a layer of cesium atoms around the earth's atmosphere. We know what the excited cesium ion's are supposed to look like. Move the laser around the sky, and voila, you can build a black box that will "undo" the atmospheric distortion across the whole sky.
I would love to hear from anyone who can add more to this or correct me where I was mistaken. Does anyone know how well this works? It seems like the system is not completely invertible. Some data must be lost, but how much? Also I believe they were applying this technology to a telescope in Hawaii.
I agree, although I doubt many will agree. It would go against the mob mentality that seems to be slashdot these days.
I wonder what slashdot would be like if we were talking and interacting in a virtual world instead of posting messages? Would we be lynching all of "them"? Them being your choice of lawyers, businessmen, or stupid people.