True, but the only reason they removed it is because people used it to pirate games.
So, your reasoning is that if Sony modifies their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy,
then we should not worry about Sony modifying their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy?
Well, A.C. at least you have maintained the reputation of your noble collective name.
Consider how much energy we would save as a species if IE never existed. I remember all the wasted time debugging and breaking my code to work with IE6. I still do have to write code that works in EVERY OTHER BROWSER without change, and then consistently does not work in IE, and requires additional effort to create. Consider that continuing to use IE means every web business wastes time making code that specifically panders to IE's broken rendering and javascript environments. I'm sorry. I remember the years of abuse. With their lack of adoption of WebGL I see only more abuse in the future. Screw IE.
..way back in the 90's for a while it was "a thing" to attach fake "false positive" sentences and words to online posts and e-mails to "gum up" the data collected by echelon. How come American's haven't immediately started that up again? I haven't even heard the idea mentioned. You'd think Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would think of and be on board with something like that.
From certain doom now. Just let them deal with it.
Both my aunt and neighbor told me the same crap when I asked why they don't recycle. They'll be dead before the world goes to hell.
I went through their trash and recycled for them. Each time I was scolded for going through their trash. I said I would stop...
However, to each I also told that research in neuroscience, cybernetics, and stem cells will give us the ability bring our dead back to life by scanning in their brain.
I promised that I would stop recycling for them, and also swore that if they do not start recycling that after they are dead,
I will have their bodies exhumed by whatever means necessary, and their brains scanned and I will bring them back to life
after the carelessness of people like them has caused the world they leach life from to truly "go to hell".
They both now have incentive to recycle, and have continued to do so; Even gotten some of their friends to recycle too.
These "God Fearing" people would throw the world away. It took someone putting the fear of life into them to change them.
Nuclear energy is most important. Once the last specs of coal and drops of oil are sucked from the Earth, we will look back at our fearful folly and think: "All that useful material for making plastics and things, and the fools fucking burned it all."
It is time to realize the startling truth. You may literally have to live with the consequences of your actions forever.
The first cloud would be the humidity and condensation sort. The second cloud would be the online service itself. The third cloud, would be the open Internet between the endpoints in a network graph.
What do all these clouds have in common? They're dangerous. The less clouds in your diagram the more you know about your network architecture, latency, and data integrity. The less clouds the better! When a packet goes into the shroud of the cloud in the diagram there's a much higher chance we'll never see it again. This cloud is the one where we must encrypt our data and protect against spoofing and hacking and all forms of data manipulation and latency. The receiving end must be very careful to sanitize the inputs and verify the requests vigorously all because the packet has encountered the cloud. Likewise if we want to interact with an online "cloud" service, we shift the name packet to "our stuff" our login credentials and even bank account info, we have to worry about availability and bandwidth caps when streaming, and unwanted prying eyes from folks we may not desire to have looking, everything becomes far more risky because our stuff touched the cloud service; Far more risky than physically going to the bank or visiting a friend in person would not be subject to. If someone hacks the ATM, the entire bank doesn't lose everyone's credentials. As for the mist filled variety of cloud: It can not only get wet, but if you have a big enough cloud, it can strike you with lightning. We must have surge protections and battery backups against this cloud too.
When I hear people talking about embracing the "cloud" I cringe. "To The Cloud!", in my mind means, "Danger Will Robinson!"
You don't get to define hack. Culture does. Don't get me wrong. I'm a hacker in the original classic sense. However, Science, or even just Progress is about compression. Compression is the ability to Sense observation Decide the likely outcome based on prior observation, and Act with predictive powers given by the prior observation. If you and I have different dictionaries, we have less progress; More wasted time building a conversion table, clarifying the symbolics of communication. When faced with a more broadly adopted definition it is not only foolish, but against progress to not adopt the new meaning.
TL;DR: The media Hacked your term for Hacking. Call yourself a Hacker and you'll be rightly considered a Hack.
Tisk. Tisk. I checked to see. I used the emulator to create an MS Excel file in Office 97 format on Windows 98. I went through each version of Office I have, that is to say: Not every version. I successively pulled up the Excel file, converted and re-saved it. It now works in MS Office 2013. To me this just reinforces the idea that continuous duplication across formats is the answer. I still assert that open source programs and open formats are needed, otherwise you could lose access to a program -- I noticed that XP said it wasn't a legit copy, which I know it is.... DRM fail.
If a company goes out of business and there is no provision for its software to become accessible to others, all the products running that software may become inaccessible, Cerf said. "There are hard, complicated technical and legal problems that will have to be resolved."
The problem is recognized and there are efforts internationally to address it. Cerf said he's been in meetings about this issue attended by 400 people.
"It may be that the cloud computing environment will help a lot. It may be able to emulate older hardware on which we can run operating systems and applications," he said.
Does it take 400 of the finest minds you can muster to simultaneously shout. "OPEN SOURCE" ? If the company goes out of business, and their code was open source, it really doesn't require any further action to ensure the data will always be usable by the end users, eh? Businesses need to stop using artificial scarcity, stop selling infinitely reproducible bits, and simply Do Work to make money. What happens if the buzzword compliant "Cloud Computing Environment" goes out of business? Why then you can't even try to reverse engineer your data -- It's really fucking gone then, eh, Genius?
Bullshit. You're merely enjoying the consequences of voluntary DRM. If you don't care about your data you'll lose it, just like those pictures you used to draw in crayon that hung on the fridge. If they ARE important then you can keep them and use the data indefinitely.
I still run the GWBASIC programs, and even 16 bit x86 DOS code I wrote as a child to edit images and color palettes via keyboard in (M)CGA video modes which BIOS still emulates, and OSs like Free DOS can still make use of (Watercolor isn't extinct because Oil paint exists, Platforms are to game makers what Canvas and Paint is to Painters). Hell even my very 1st 386 bootloader can be written to an MBR and booted on a brand new x86-64 system (disable Security Theater Boot). This is NATIVE support. With an emulator, I can even run programs I wrote for my dad's old PDP-8 -- A completely different architecture... 12 bit bytes!. I cared enough about the little dinky things I did as a kid to make sure they were preserved across every major storage format change. I can still read the comments my dad thankfully added to some of my code all those years ago -- a valuable lesson indeed; My kids find gramps' snark quite funny. That's several generations of data compatibly for my family's directory tree...
It's not useful to bitch about compatibility by citing programs created by companies that willfully suck at compatibility. MS DOS requires an emulator, but DR DOS can still be installed on my new systems. Though it doesn't recognize my sound card I can still program a driver for it though -- just like I did to get my old custom IR transceiver devices to control my new home theater setup (lights, screen, volume, etc) via my aging Osborne-1's serial port.... It's a functional "conversation-piece" to hear that familiar 5.25" drive access as the signal tables are loaded for TV instead of the stereo. That same data format which has been in use now for decades and even works on new hardware w/ Linux via LIRC now -- thanks to the kids... old Ozy will give out someday. Thats a future proof protocol compatibility across several generations of hardware, simultaneously.
There is NOTHING stopping me from converting the palettes and images created in my PAL_EDIT.COM into a GIMP.PAL / indexed.TGA or.TIFF, or.PNG, etc. I can (and do) frequently convert files in both directions, to go from GIMP to PAL_EDIT.COM to get new images and new "mods" into my really old game "engines". That's the thing about open formats and programs with source code available. Remember the push back against non-textual network protocols and even in email?) We won this battle already. I wasn't aware anyone had stopped fighting it. This page is written in TEXT. It's JavaScript and HTML... FFS: The 1st damn web page on the Internet still renders.
The authors can ALWAYS create data converters if they want, the problem is giving up that right and not demanding source code access. If my own data formats can survive the transition from kid to teen to adult and even be shared and passed on to my own kids (who love "real" retro games, BTW, such hipsters), then surely multi-billion dollar companies can do it too. Or, are you implying that despite all that money they are more inept than I can even imagine? If so, that's a pretty big dig at Microsoft there Vint... Bravo. Kind of makes me wonder WTF you're paying them for, eh?
I expect this kind of BS from you now Vint. I mean, you don't even realize the usefulness of your own contributions to mankind, Saying that the Internet is not a human right. Look up human: A characteristic of humans; A human being. It is a human right. It's the right to bear technology. That's what the 2nd amendment is really about, they just worded it wrong, they're imperfect. Just because some old farts can't understand the future the way we do now, doesn't make new technology NOT a human right. The Internet is the equivalent of access to spee
Unsurprisingly, also addressed in Planetes. Space terrorists believed the unfair regulations against lesser nations were being used to the economic and political gain of the more powerful nations while creating an even wider gulf between more and less powerful nations.
TLDNW: When you look down on our precious blue planet from space, there are no borders.
All the politics, greed, and fear in the Universe is dwarfed by the vulnerability of the planet, and our need for progress outside our home among the stars in order to protect it and thus all life in this corner of the cosmos. If that progress be spurned by power and greed, so be it. If cautiousness is not minded proportionate to the risk, we stand more to loose than a few years of progress. I say let the small space satellites and shuttles advance. Just like nuclear weapons, if the enemy were to bombard us with mass from orbital platforms, then so will we be able to.
Mutually assured destruction sounds evil, but when I think about it, that's all we've ever had since before the first tribe of man came to trust their members. The only way to gain trust and prosper as a species is to cautiously operate in the same spaces of technology and industry; To shake hands and mutually cause any hidden knives to fall from our sleeves; To become more interdependent on each other; To cautiously take equal risks while never loosing sight of the worlds all mankind is charged to protect.
It's easy to dismiss such caution as irrational fear, corrupt greed, and political control. The truth is that right now we only have one world. One basket carries all our eggs at present. I would say extreme cautiousness is warranted, but should be proscribed according to actual risk, not perceived threat. If we can not take the risk of shaking hands with those we feel threatened by, they can never prove non threatening and can never become our friends. The more self sustaining footholds life wins itself in the Universe, the more reckless we can be, the more progress we can take at risk.
TLDR: Let's not throw caution to the wind and fuck it all up forever.
Online or off, just about everyone has to hide half of themselves to attract the other sex.
I've found the opposite is true. Offline, you have to start off showing only the half of yourself you don't mind everyone seeing. However, Online you can show whatever half you want up front, and then graduate to showing your full self. Just because you start off with the web cam aimed at your face doesn't mean you can't tilt it down... Or, you could just start off with the web cam aimed at your crotch, and build a "satisfying" relationship from there.
It's true that a 1st date IRL can lead to sex right then and there, but a one night cyber-stand is basically masturbation, but you'll still be fist pumping especially after you're married, so it makes no difference either way. I kind of like having a mute button.
OK. I just want to explain this to you because you're ignorant and don't realize what's going on here. Note that I'm not jumping to the conclusion that you're dumb as a box of rocks... Just that's you're as ignorant as them at present. That's right. I consider myself teaching a box of rocks.
Think of a sail boat. Now put that sail on a wheeled land vehicle. Can we agree that the wind can move the vehicle without requiring the water? Yes? Good. Now, I want you to think of a wind mill. Notice how the wind causes the fan blades to circulate? Yes? Good. That force can be harnessed and even geared down to grind wheat or geared up to turn a generator dynamo and generate electricity? Yes? Ah, good, so we now agree that Wind Powered Generators aren't pointless. OK, now forget about that electricity. Think of how you can gear the fan's crank shaft such that it spins that little dynamo really fast. Now, imagine that instead of a generator, you've hooked those gears up to the wheels of your sail-car.
Do you think the tiny wheels can be geared to the wind mill such that they will spin relatively faster than the wind, or do you think that electrical current is not possible to create from the wind because it requires a cycles per second that is faster than the wind changes direction?
If you prove smarter than a box of rocks, then you'll agree that it's pretty damn simple to make a car that moves faster that the wind. We don't make wind generators by having a sail on a magnet and moving it back and forth by gusts of wind.
...please check out the jet plane on a treadmill that I'm auctioning off - free shipping if it gets airborne!
Your jet plane's engine will be pulling in air through its prop and pushing it out the back. This means the relative air movement through the engine and across the wings must exist in order for it to begin to roll forward on your treadmill. The angle of attack of the wing is what generates lift. So the air moving across the wing will be forced downward, under the wing, compressing the air, and causing upward lift through simple Newtonian forces. So, yes, it can get air born. It'll hover in mid air above the treadmill if it allowed to get up to speed and enough wind is moved across the wing, or especially if it has VTOL. You've effectively created a wind tunnel just above the tread mill. In such structures we actually do see airfoils becoming airborne, or borne into the air... Or, are you under the assumption that a helicopter, sitting on a weight scale, can not take off because of the gravity pulling downward on it equal to its weight? If you do that experiment you will notice that as the helicopter's propeller spins up the weight scale will show a bit more weight -- This is the added pressure of the air striking the scale. When the force of air moving down is greater than the helicopter's weight then the device will rise into the air. As the helicopter hovers just above the scale's surface, but not touching it, examine the numbers on the scale -- They're the same as before the helicopter became airborn. The downward force remains equivalent to the force of gravity applied to the mass of the helicopter as it hovers.
Additionally, the shape of a plane's wing does not cause much of the lift. It's the angle of attack. Any fool who's ever used a ceiling fan knows that flat blades of the airscrew can generate wind when spun. Otherwise how would stunt planes fly upside down? When they tried to teach me about the curvature of the wing causing all the airplane lift in school, I went home and instead of doing the brain damaging homework I replaced my model airplane's wings with the barn doors from my train set. The next morning I made my science teacher cry by flying it around the school in front of her. She couldn't believe how wrong the books she taught from actually were...
people who like to compile their own software from source code... that is their target market.
There are two models, ones lower powered, ones higher end. So, what about folks who want to use the same app on their desktop as on their phone? It's HTML5. That means THE EXACT SAME development time I put in to make that web app, or HTML5 game can be leveraged both on the web, and with little or no effort (a manifest file and zipped directory) I can sell that app for Firefox OS -- Remove the damn ads. (Because you chuckle heads won't pay for an app available through a browser, but put the same code in an app store, all of a sudden 99 cents isn't a bad price for no ads... grr). Here's the interesting thing. My HTML5 apps / games have tools built in HTML5. That means my engine dev kit can be used ON THE PHONE. That means you can use your mobile device TO MAKE MONEY by creating apps that your can use on the moble OR on the Desktop.
Look at iOS, Android, Blackberry....... What's the one thing a PC can do that these devices can not do? MAKE SOFTWARE. "compile their own source code" -- You Fool! How do you think you're able to render this page, hu?! YOU COMPLIED AND RAN THE SOURCE CODE.
See that dust mote wafting in the air? That dust on your computer screen, or the mantle? That's your dead skin. Your DNA. You left DNA in the disposable coffee cup you threw in the trash. Your hair fell out as you sat in a waiting room. Your DNA is everywhere you've been. But just because your DNA is somewhere, doesn't mean you have been.
What if I were planning a crime? Hmm, well, DNA evidence means an open and shut case. So, perhaps I hang out and look for someone who matches my physical build and appearance somewhat, what if that someone is you? Why, I could simply follow you around. Collect that hair from the seat you left. Accidentally drop my phone in the trash and come out with the disposed cup you tossed, with your saliva and fingerprints all over it. Note your schedule and ensure you won't have an alibi when I make the murder.
Currently we collect the evidence at the scene, but also look for motive and do real detective work, but we can do less of that now. The DNA Database pointed straight at you. You've got no motive, but your DNA and Fingerprints were all over the place and you match the description of a few eye witnesses, even if they couldn't pick you out of a lineup. You've got no alibi. The police "Like You" for the crime, and they've got no other suspects to go after... It's curtains for you. Of course you'll insist you're innocent, everyone does. I'm sure they can come up with some speculative reason why you would do the crime. Some past childhood event perhaps. Maybe I prey on victims I that you know, just to make it all the more easier to convict you.
With the evidence against you it'll be an open and shut case. If you confess and show you're remorseful for the brutal act, then maybe the courts will be merciful -- you'll be promised a less harsh sentence by the prosecution. I mean, what IS the truth? "It wasn't ME! Some guy who looked like me collected my DNA and fingerprints and observed my habits and killed someone I know to frame me!"
I can hear the gears turning now. Well, it IS all a VERY unlikely scenario isn't it? No one's actually going to do such a thing. Right? That's exactly what I'm betting the detectives, judge, and jurors will think, too...
DNA should NOT be held up as a magic bullet. It's everywhere. Everyone has access to your DNA. It should be used to prove innocence through non-matching DNA, or multiple different samples under the fingernails... If your DNA is found, that should just prove you exist, that's all. That could have came from anywhere. We don't need a DNA Database to prove two sets of DNA don't match, do we? We need a Database to quickly find someone to go after, right?
In the near future I'll be able to use a home stem cell kit to create whatever cells I want of yours, even semen. No jury will believe that some serial killer is cleverly plotting to use DNA against you, growing your DNA in a home lab to commit the perfect crime. It's a paranoid's delusion, not a "reasonable" doubt. Besides, if there were a string of serial killings, wouldn't the police notice that there were a bunch of murders that went unsolved? No. They wouldn't, eh? They'd have "their man" in those cases too...
As someone who makes native cross platform games, I disagree. Other 3D engines with open source licenses exist, like Ogre3D, Cube2, etc. Unity is marketed heavily. I see their marketing everywhere. Like this damn slashvertizement. They are not needed.
We give you a decentralized network self healing near instantly even when whole cities disappearing off the map, and you put your data in a centralized data silo, then market it as "Big Data". It's not outright stupid, just a bit ignorant, eh?
Slashdot Mirror
True, but the only reason they removed it is because people used it to pirate games.
So, your reasoning is that if Sony modifies their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy,
then we should not worry about Sony modifying their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy?
Well, A.C. at least you have maintained the reputation of your noble collective name.
Say you do convince Goldfinger to give your balls the Midas touch.
Are there even enough laser mounted sharks to sizzle all the scrotes?
Consider how much energy we would save as a species if IE never existed. I remember all the wasted time debugging and breaking my code to work with IE6. I still do have to write code that works in EVERY OTHER BROWSER without change, and then consistently does not work in IE, and requires additional effort to create. Consider that continuing to use IE means every web business wastes time making code that specifically panders to IE's broken rendering and javascript environments. I'm sorry. I remember the years of abuse. With their lack of adoption of WebGL I see only more abuse in the future. Screw IE.
Ridiculous bullshit. Focus on your damn core competency MS. You know, that shit you actually suck at now?
It's called "black humor".
That's RACIST!
..way back in the 90's for a while it was "a thing" to attach fake "false positive" sentences and words to online posts and e-mails to "gum up" the data collected by echelon. How come American's haven't immediately started that up again? I haven't even heard the idea mentioned. You'd think Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would think of and be on board with something like that.
They could call it "talk like a terrorist" month.
They see what You did there!
+1 worked for me.
[Our Children's Children's Children Will Save Us]
From certain doom now. Just let them deal with it.
Both my aunt and neighbor told me the same crap when I asked why they don't recycle. They'll be dead before the world goes to hell.
I went through their trash and recycled for them. Each time I was scolded for going through their trash. I said I would stop...
However, to each I also told that research in neuroscience, cybernetics, and stem cells will give us the ability bring our dead back to life by scanning in their brain.
I promised that I would stop recycling for them, and also swore that if they do not start recycling that after they are dead,
I will have their bodies exhumed by whatever means necessary, and their brains scanned and I will bring them back to life
after the carelessness of people like them has caused the world they leach life from to truly "go to hell".
They both now have incentive to recycle, and have continued to do so; Even gotten some of their friends to recycle too.
These "God Fearing" people would throw the world away. It took someone putting the fear of life into them to change them.
Nuclear energy is most important. Once the last specs of coal and drops of oil are sucked from the Earth, we will look back at our fearful folly and think:
"All that useful material for making plastics and things, and the fools fucking burned it all."
It is time to realize the startling truth. You may literally have to live with the consequences of your actions forever.
Like the dinosaurs that came before us, we will claim the sky is not falling right up until it actually does.
The first cloud would be the humidity and condensation sort. The second cloud would be the online service itself. The third cloud, would be the open Internet between the endpoints in a network graph.
What do all these clouds have in common? They're dangerous. The less clouds in your diagram the more you know about your network architecture, latency, and data integrity. The less clouds the better! When a packet goes into the shroud of the cloud in the diagram there's a much higher chance we'll never see it again. This cloud is the one where we must encrypt our data and protect against spoofing and hacking and all forms of data manipulation and latency. The receiving end must be very careful to sanitize the inputs and verify the requests vigorously all because the packet has encountered the cloud. Likewise if we want to interact with an online "cloud" service, we shift the name packet to "our stuff" our login credentials and even bank account info, we have to worry about availability and bandwidth caps when streaming, and unwanted prying eyes from folks we may not desire to have looking, everything becomes far more risky because our stuff touched the cloud service; Far more risky than physically going to the bank or visiting a friend in person would not be subject to. If someone hacks the ATM, the entire bank doesn't lose everyone's credentials. As for the mist filled variety of cloud: It can not only get wet, but if you have a big enough cloud, it can strike you with lightning. We must have surge protections and battery backups against this cloud too.
When I hear people talking about embracing the "cloud" I cringe. "To The Cloud!", in my mind means, "Danger Will Robinson!"
You don't get to define hack. Culture does. Don't get me wrong. I'm a hacker in the original classic sense. However, Science, or even just Progress is about compression. Compression is the ability to Sense observation Decide the likely outcome based on prior observation, and Act with predictive powers given by the prior observation. If you and I have different dictionaries, we have less progress; More wasted time building a conversion table, clarifying the symbolics of communication. When faced with a more broadly adopted definition it is not only foolish, but against progress to not adopt the new meaning.
TL;DR: The media Hacked your term for Hacking. Call yourself a Hacker and you'll be rightly considered a Hack.
Tisk. Tisk. I checked to see. I used the emulator to create an MS Excel file in Office 97 format on Windows 98. I went through each version of Office I have, that is to say: Not every version. I successively pulled up the Excel file, converted and re-saved it. It now works in MS Office 2013. To me this just reinforces the idea that continuous duplication across formats is the answer. I still assert that open source programs and open formats are needed, otherwise you could lose access to a program -- I noticed that XP said it wasn't a legit copy, which I know it is.... DRM fail.
If a company goes out of business and there is no provision for its software to become accessible to others, all the products running that software may become inaccessible, Cerf said. "There are hard, complicated technical and legal problems that will have to be resolved."
The problem is recognized and there are efforts internationally to address it. Cerf said he's been in meetings about this issue attended by 400 people.
"It may be that the cloud computing environment will help a lot. It may be able to emulate older hardware on which we can run operating systems and applications," he said.
Does it take 400 of the finest minds you can muster to simultaneously shout. "OPEN SOURCE" ? If the company goes out of business, and their code was open source, it really doesn't require any further action to ensure the data will always be usable by the end users, eh? Businesses need to stop using artificial scarcity, stop selling infinitely reproducible bits, and simply Do Work to make money. What happens if the buzzword compliant "Cloud Computing Environment" goes out of business? Why then you can't even try to reverse engineer your data -- It's really fucking gone then, eh, Genius?
Bullshit. You're merely enjoying the consequences of voluntary DRM. If you don't care about your data you'll lose it, just like those pictures you used to draw in crayon that hung on the fridge. If they ARE important then you can keep them and use the data indefinitely.
I still run the GWBASIC programs, and even 16 bit x86 DOS code I wrote as a child to edit images and color palettes via keyboard in (M)CGA video modes which BIOS still emulates, and OSs like Free DOS can still make use of (Watercolor isn't extinct because Oil paint exists, Platforms are to game makers what Canvas and Paint is to Painters). Hell even my very 1st 386 bootloader can be written to an MBR and booted on a brand new x86-64 system (disable Security Theater Boot). This is NATIVE support. With an emulator, I can even run programs I wrote for my dad's old PDP-8 -- A completely different architecture... 12 bit bytes!. I cared enough about the little dinky things I did as a kid to make sure they were preserved across every major storage format change. I can still read the comments my dad thankfully added to some of my code all those years ago -- a valuable lesson indeed; My kids find gramps' snark quite funny. That's several generations of data compatibly for my family's directory tree...
It's not useful to bitch about compatibility by citing programs created by companies that willfully suck at compatibility. MS DOS requires an emulator, but DR DOS can still be installed on my new systems. Though it doesn't recognize my sound card I can still program a driver for it though -- just like I did to get my old custom IR transceiver devices to control my new home theater setup (lights, screen, volume, etc) via my aging Osborne-1's serial port.... It's a functional "conversation-piece" to hear that familiar 5.25" drive access as the signal tables are loaded for TV instead of the stereo. That same data format which has been in use now for decades and even works on new hardware w/ Linux via LIRC now -- thanks to the kids... old Ozy will give out someday. Thats a future proof protocol compatibility across several generations of hardware, simultaneously.
There is NOTHING stopping me from converting the palettes and images created in my PAL_EDIT.COM into a GIMP .PAL / indexed .TGA or .TIFF, or .PNG, etc. I can (and do) frequently convert files in both directions, to go from GIMP to PAL_EDIT.COM to get new images and new "mods" into my really old game "engines". That's the thing about open formats and programs with source code available. Remember the push back against non-textual network protocols and even in email?) We won this battle already. I wasn't aware anyone had stopped fighting it. This page is written in TEXT. It's JavaScript and HTML... FFS: The 1st damn web page on the Internet still renders.
The authors can ALWAYS create data converters if they want, the problem is giving up that right and not demanding source code access. If my own data formats can survive the transition from kid to teen to adult and even be shared and passed on to my own kids (who love "real" retro games, BTW, such hipsters), then surely multi-billion dollar companies can do it too. Or, are you implying that despite all that money they are more inept than I can even imagine? If so, that's a pretty big dig at Microsoft there Vint... Bravo. Kind of makes me wonder WTF you're paying them for, eh?
I expect this kind of BS from you now Vint. I mean, you don't even realize the usefulness of your own contributions to mankind, Saying that the Internet is not a human right. Look up human: A characteristic of humans; A human being. It is a human right. It's the right to bear technology. That's what the 2nd amendment is really about, they just worded it wrong, they're imperfect. Just because some old farts can't understand the future the way we do now, doesn't make new technology NOT a human right. The Internet is the equivalent of access to spee
A sentence of 10 Years? What are they trying to do? Get folks to take up the less illegal crime of muggings?
Unsurprisingly, also addressed in Planetes. Space terrorists believed the unfair regulations against lesser nations were being used to the economic and political gain of the more powerful nations while creating an even wider gulf between more and less powerful nations.
TLDNW: When you look down on our precious blue planet from space, there are no borders.
All the politics, greed, and fear in the Universe is dwarfed by the vulnerability of the planet, and our need for progress outside our home among the stars in order to protect it and thus all life in this corner of the cosmos. If that progress be spurned by power and greed, so be it. If cautiousness is not minded proportionate to the risk, we stand more to loose than a few years of progress. I say let the small space satellites and shuttles advance. Just like nuclear weapons, if the enemy were to bombard us with mass from orbital platforms, then so will we be able to.
Mutually assured destruction sounds evil, but when I think about it, that's all we've ever had since before the first tribe of man came to trust their members. The only way to gain trust and prosper as a species is to cautiously operate in the same spaces of technology and industry; To shake hands and mutually cause any hidden knives to fall from our sleeves; To become more interdependent on each other; To cautiously take equal risks while never loosing sight of the worlds all mankind is charged to protect.
It's easy to dismiss such caution as irrational fear, corrupt greed, and political control. The truth is that right now we only have one world. One basket carries all our eggs at present. I would say extreme cautiousness is warranted, but should be proscribed according to actual risk, not perceived threat. If we can not take the risk of shaking hands with those we feel threatened by, they can never prove non threatening and can never become our friends. The more self sustaining footholds life wins itself in the Universe, the more reckless we can be, the more progress we can take at risk.
TLDR: Let's not throw caution to the wind and fuck it all up forever.
Linux. BSD. Haiku. ALMOST ANY OTHER OS. you're damn proposal to make thing the way you like can actually be acted upon.
The best way to "fix" windows, is to say "fuck it" and not use the shit.
Online or off, just about everyone has to hide half of themselves to attract the other sex.
I've found the opposite is true. Offline, you have to start off showing only the half of yourself you don't mind everyone seeing. However, Online you can show whatever half you want up front, and then graduate to showing your full self. Just because you start off with the web cam aimed at your face doesn't mean you can't tilt it down... Or, you could just start off with the web cam aimed at your crotch, and build a "satisfying" relationship from there.
It's true that a 1st date IRL can lead to sex right then and there, but a one night cyber-stand is basically masturbation, but you'll still be fist pumping especially after you're married, so it makes no difference either way. I kind of like having a mute button.
OK. I just want to explain this to you because you're ignorant and don't realize what's going on here. Note that I'm not jumping to the conclusion that you're dumb as a box of rocks... Just that's you're as ignorant as them at present. That's right. I consider myself teaching a box of rocks.
Think of a sail boat. Now put that sail on a wheeled land vehicle. Can we agree that the wind can move the vehicle without requiring the water? Yes? Good. Now, I want you to think of a wind mill. Notice how the wind causes the fan blades to circulate? Yes? Good. That force can be harnessed and even geared down to grind wheat or geared up to turn a generator dynamo and generate electricity? Yes? Ah, good, so we now agree that Wind Powered Generators aren't pointless. OK, now forget about that electricity. Think of how you can gear the fan's crank shaft such that it spins that little dynamo really fast. Now, imagine that instead of a generator, you've hooked those gears up to the wheels of your sail-car.
Do you think the tiny wheels can be geared to the wind mill such that they will spin relatively faster than the wind, or do you think that electrical current is not possible to create from the wind because it requires a cycles per second that is faster than the wind changes direction?
If you prove smarter than a box of rocks, then you'll agree that it's pretty damn simple to make a car that moves faster that the wind. We don't make wind generators by having a sail on a magnet and moving it back and forth by gusts of wind.
...please check out the jet plane on a treadmill that I'm auctioning off - free shipping if it gets airborne!
Your jet plane's engine will be pulling in air through its prop and pushing it out the back. This means the relative air movement through the engine and across the wings must exist in order for it to begin to roll forward on your treadmill. The angle of attack of the wing is what generates lift. So the air moving across the wing will be forced downward, under the wing, compressing the air, and causing upward lift through simple Newtonian forces. So, yes, it can get air born. It'll hover in mid air above the treadmill if it allowed to get up to speed and enough wind is moved across the wing, or especially if it has VTOL. You've effectively created a wind tunnel just above the tread mill. In such structures we actually do see airfoils becoming airborne, or borne into the air... Or, are you under the assumption that a helicopter, sitting on a weight scale, can not take off because of the gravity pulling downward on it equal to its weight? If you do that experiment you will notice that as the helicopter's propeller spins up the weight scale will show a bit more weight -- This is the added pressure of the air striking the scale. When the force of air moving down is greater than the helicopter's weight then the device will rise into the air. As the helicopter hovers just above the scale's surface, but not touching it, examine the numbers on the scale -- They're the same as before the helicopter became airborn. The downward force remains equivalent to the force of gravity applied to the mass of the helicopter as it hovers.
Additionally, the shape of a plane's wing does not cause much of the lift. It's the angle of attack. Any fool who's ever used a ceiling fan knows that flat blades of the airscrew can generate wind when spun. Otherwise how would stunt planes fly upside down? When they tried to teach me about the curvature of the wing causing all the airplane lift in school, I went home and instead of doing the brain damaging homework I replaced my model airplane's wings with the barn doors from my train set. The next morning I made my science teacher cry by flying it around the school in front of her. She couldn't believe how wrong the books she taught from actually were...
people who like to compile their own software from source code... that is their target market.
There are two models, ones lower powered, ones higher end. So, what about folks who want to use the same app on their desktop as on their phone? It's HTML5. That means THE EXACT SAME development time I put in to make that web app, or HTML5 game can be leveraged both on the web, and with little or no effort (a manifest file and zipped directory) I can sell that app for Firefox OS -- Remove the damn ads. (Because you chuckle heads won't pay for an app available through a browser, but put the same code in an app store, all of a sudden 99 cents isn't a bad price for no ads... grr). Here's the interesting thing. My HTML5 apps / games have tools built in HTML5. That means my engine dev kit can be used ON THE PHONE. That means you can use your mobile device TO MAKE MONEY by creating apps that your can use on the moble OR on the Desktop.
Look at iOS, Android, Blackberry....... What's the one thing a PC can do that these devices can not do? MAKE SOFTWARE. "compile their own source code" -- You Fool! How do you think you're able to render this page, hu?! YOU COMPLIED AND RAN THE SOURCE CODE.
See that dust mote wafting in the air? That dust on your computer screen, or the mantle? That's your dead skin. Your DNA. You left DNA in the disposable coffee cup you threw in the trash. Your hair fell out as you sat in a waiting room. Your DNA is everywhere you've been. But just because your DNA is somewhere, doesn't mean you have been.
What if I were planning a crime? Hmm, well, DNA evidence means an open and shut case. So, perhaps I hang out and look for someone who matches my physical build and appearance somewhat, what if that someone is you? Why, I could simply follow you around. Collect that hair from the seat you left. Accidentally drop my phone in the trash and come out with the disposed cup you tossed, with your saliva and fingerprints all over it. Note your schedule and ensure you won't have an alibi when I make the murder.
Currently we collect the evidence at the scene, but also look for motive and do real detective work, but we can do less of that now. The DNA Database pointed straight at you. You've got no motive, but your DNA and Fingerprints were all over the place and you match the description of a few eye witnesses, even if they couldn't pick you out of a lineup. You've got no alibi. The police "Like You" for the crime, and they've got no other suspects to go after... It's curtains for you. Of course you'll insist you're innocent, everyone does. I'm sure they can come up with some speculative reason why you would do the crime. Some past childhood event perhaps. Maybe I prey on victims I that you know, just to make it all the more easier to convict you.
With the evidence against you it'll be an open and shut case. If you confess and show you're remorseful for the brutal act, then maybe the courts will be merciful -- you'll be promised a less harsh sentence by the prosecution. I mean, what IS the truth? "It wasn't ME! Some guy who looked like me collected my DNA and fingerprints and observed my habits and killed someone I know to frame me!"
I can hear the gears turning now. Well, it IS all a VERY unlikely scenario isn't it? No one's actually going to do such a thing. Right? That's exactly what I'm betting the detectives, judge, and jurors will think, too...
DNA should NOT be held up as a magic bullet. It's everywhere. Everyone has access to your DNA. It should be used to prove innocence through non-matching DNA, or multiple different samples under the fingernails... If your DNA is found, that should just prove you exist, that's all. That could have came from anywhere. We don't need a DNA Database to prove two sets of DNA don't match, do we? We need a Database to quickly find someone to go after, right?
In the near future I'll be able to use a home stem cell kit to create whatever cells I want of yours, even semen. No jury will believe that some serial killer is cleverly plotting to use DNA against you, growing your DNA in a home lab to commit the perfect crime. It's a paranoid's delusion, not a "reasonable" doubt. Besides, if there were a string of serial killings, wouldn't the police notice that there were a bunch of murders that went unsolved? No. They wouldn't, eh? They'd have "their man" in those cases too...
As someone who makes native cross platform games, I disagree. Other 3D engines with open source licenses exist, like Ogre3D, Cube2, etc. Unity is marketed heavily. I see their marketing everywhere. Like this damn slashvertizement. They are not needed.
We give you a decentralized network self healing near instantly even when whole cities disappearing off the map, and you put your data in a centralized data silo, then market it as "Big Data". It's not outright stupid, just a bit ignorant, eh?
Why not a reboot?
No. That's not actually the damn answer to everything. Typical Windows User
Confuseya Say: He who run blade but do not "enhance", get no romance, only split pants.