They have Asian basketball leagues, you just have to watch Asian TV to hear about them, as they are not good enough to compete with teams filled with African players. And you have to go to Asia to join them.
There are no professional Asian teams in America because no one would pay to see that. But they will pay to see the world class teams compete, and they will pay to watch women jump around a court though, so profession women's leagues exist.
And I think it is likely that if women were allowed in 0 would make it. It was only a few years ago that the best women tennis players thought that maybe they could compete in the men's league, and it only took an hour playing against a man ranked 204th to make them give up this idea. We know that all the world class runners, of all races and genders are actually all Black Men. And in fact I think they are all specifically Jamaica, or some other very small sub-category of black men.
So I think we do need different categories. If there are white men who want to be basketball players or runners, and there is interest from the public to watch this, then they should form a league.
"I'd love to watch you go up to a professional athlete and tell them with a straight face that the reason they're not better is because subconsciously they want to be imperfect in order to preserve the sport."
I think there is just less drive. I once, for example, heard the training regiment of the 203th best tennis player in the word described as drinking whisky and smoking.
These sports, even world class professional sports, do not necessarily recruit the best of the best, and they do not necessaries inspire complete dedication.
Some sports inspire 12 hour a day, 7 day a week training regiments. Training is simply your life if you want to stand a chance. But even these do not necessarily get the best of the best to work with. Sports, to a large degree, recruit from the poor and less determined, exclusively. The best humanity has to offer are too busy getter doctorates, building billion dollar companies, or solving mathematical problems or philosophising in some shack in the woods. The same people who are really good scientists are not necessarily the same people would make the best bowlers, but I do not think that there is any reason to assume that the people who would have made the absolute best bowlers have any reason to become professional bowlers. I think it is quite likely that the person who would of been the absolute best Starcraft player of all time is instead performing surgeries for millions of dollars a year somewhere.
I do not even know what Snooker is, so I have no idea if I would find it impressive or not. But I think I can safely say, you can exclude some sports from my blanket statement. I have seen Tiger Woods do incredible things. And in general would consider golf a decent sport. I do not think you can compare getting a 1-inch ball in a 1.2 inch hole 5 miles away over a infinity complete, detailed, and varied surface to getting a 1 foot wide ball down a perfectly level surface with a minimal amount of accuracy for only like 15 feet (indoors) [I am talking about bowling].
The problem is that every sport in existence was created as a leisure activity. Perfectly fine and enjoyable for people to do in-between work. And they have turned into entertainment for the masses; Which works as well. What both these things are not are mediums through which to test, strive for, and topple perfection. Mainstream sports cannot be too complex, as they are for the masses, and they were all historically designed for amateurs to play. Even chess is simply too deterministic and simple, as it is designed to just pick up and play; Really all you need is some autistic man with a perfect computer like memory to memorise billions and possible situations. E-sports like SC, and real sports like golf, are not like this. Their are infinity complex and cannot be modelled like that. There is no perfection, only the striving to be better. Also, it is important for a sport, in my opinion, for to test what it is to be human. It is simple to build a program that would play chess perfectly. Given improved sensors, a robot would easily be better at golf than a human. but it would be very hard to build a AI that would be better at the full complexity of SC, even though speed is such a huge issue in the game; Yes, they could probably micro-manage their way to a victory, but they would suck at many aspects of the game.
You very well might be, I do not follow darts. But from what I understand from Wikipedia there is nothing stopping them from enrolling in mens tournaments. And I find it hard to believe that their never existed a woman darter who wanted to be the universal world champion. "although no restrictions on women competing against men [exist]."
And for example, I did find this excerpt for some dart world records, separated by gender (http://www.sentex.net/~pmartin/patdarts/guinness.htm). Which shows gender having a huge difference. "MEN (8 players) 1,722,249 by Broken Hill Darts Club in New South Wales, Australia on September 28-29, 1985." "WOMEN (8 players) 744,439 by a team from the Lord Clyde in Leyton, London on October 13-14, 1990."
Maybe you mean than in amateur darts, women are as good as men? Because I also found a few conversations of actual fans who follow both gender's tournaments bemoaning how unskilled the women are compared to the men.
People are capable of perfection. Someone who dedicates their life to something should be incredibly good at something. As another example, I have no idea how professional basketball players can ever miss a shot, from any distance within a basketball court. It is not plausible to me that someone who dedicated their lives to it can ever miss.
Not common, just possible with millions of hours of practice. After ten years, and your brain has be completely rewired to be basket ball dominating machine, being so incapable of perfection is astounding to me. People achieve this perfection in other disciplines.
Well playing a dozen games a year does not really effect RL sports players either. It is the heavy training, including a lot of gym time, that makes sure they are all in top physical condition.
Purely subjective. I have never been impressive by any RL sport. The results we see seem completely plausible for someone who has dedicated their lives to it. In fact, they have always disappointed me. I do not understand how someone would dedicate their life to being the best archer, dart-er, bowler (etc.) and ever make a less than absolutely perfect shoot/performance. I myself, having bowled 3 times in my life have gotten a large number of strikes. In my opinion, any professional bowler that ever bowls a less than perfect 300 point game is a failure. Professional athletes should be roboticly perfect.
The problem with this is that it would make professional bowling (and so many other sports) obsolete. After you got to a certain level, their would be no reason to complete as you have reached the plateau of perfection where everyone is equally perfect at the game. I think it is likely that this huge incentive to not be perfect subconsciously prevents people from getting this good.
Starcraft does not have this. You can always be faster, and the strategy (intellectual level) in the game is not even comparable to football of any other RL sport (in many ways even far beyond chess). But for whatever reason, in my opinion these sport's athletes do push what is is to be human beyond what you might think is possible.
There are no overweight professional e-sport athletes. Every team I have ever heard of needed to maintain an extremely strict and intensive gym regime to stay at the top of their game.
But women do not, in 90% of the cases, play Starcraft.
Also, I think you should research more into darts, snooker, etc. In more sports like this Women are allowed to complete in male tournaments (the male leagues are actually unisex), they just are not able to actually win or qualify. Hand-eye coordination is a physical ability, and tends to have huge gender based differences. The real professional athletes know this, as they actually follow the sport. We have decades of hard data on this, and do you think professional women athlete never interact with their male peers? The only people who think that women and men should compete in the same leagues are people who do not even watch the sports they are suggesting be changed.
There is not a single sport that I know of that women and men actually compete at the same level at. They are different in every single way (their brains are wired more differentially than their physical bodies are), so they do better or worse based on these differences in every sport out there.
I have to disagree. When the competitors have to train harder than real sports athletes and have shorter shelf lives than Olympic athletes, it is a real sport.
E-sports simply is more competitive, and shows of far more impressive, super-human, skill than its RL analogue.
Well you make me want to try it again. All I know is I re-imaged it the very same day when I did give it a try, because I could not get it to do the same things.
I know you specifically ruled this out, but it seems like the only reasonable way to me.
I know the camera I have does not really work well at all in the same room as my computer. I always assumed low levels of electrical interference were the issue here.
Assuming all digital cameras are the same level of magnitude susceptible to this interference it would be easy to create low level non-damaging electrical interference that would prevent any non static ridden photos from being taken, and this interference would be easy to block for your own cameras.
I would try taking pictures next to some running microwaves/ect. and see if you get consistently bad results without destroying the cameras.
But basically what struck me was. DDWRT has like 40 option pages with like 40 options each, and a command line. Tomato has like 3 option pages with like 3 options each.
I installed Tomato once, went back to DD-WRT less than an hour latter. Tomato does some cool stuff, but its complete lack of pretty much every feature that DD-WRT has was a deal breaker.
Are you/the article saying that it is possible to have a single connection to your ISP, but for every computer, fridge, toaster, TV, etc. to have its own global IP address?
Your ISP can give you a block of dynamic/static IP addresses, which your router assigns instead of 192.168.1.X?
Except you already agreed to a plan that legally spells out what happens when you fail to return it, charges and fines. Assuming that this is not the only rental story in the history of rental stores that does not have overdue-charges, she did not legally steal the movie, she just owed them thousands of dollars in late fees and interest.
I sort of thought they get rid of most debt based arrests.
Re:An overly-romantic view of hunter-gatherer soci
on
Star Trek Economics
·
· Score: 1
hunter-gatherer tribal cooperation is no way similar to Western charity. These are completely different things.
And the entire discussion of either is useless. Both Hunter Gather economies and charity have been researched in depth.
And I have no interest in being brought into a discussion about merits of free market capitalism. Which has nothing to do with this article or my comment.
Well I was mostly referring to hoarding, but yes of course. Like any mechanism, money, by the very basic principals of science is not perfectly efficient. It costs resources to create money, which itself is unless. For example. To create a single gold coin, worth X, it costs X+the work involved; Or to create a $20 bill, it costs the work and resources involved, both which needs to replicated on decaying bills. Creating currency, enforcing it, and protecting it always costs resources, and never adds any. But these are all necessary inefficiencies in abundance based economic systems.
Slashdot Mirror
They have Asian basketball leagues, you just have to watch Asian TV to hear about them, as they are not good enough to compete with teams filled with African players. And you have to go to Asia to join them.
There are no professional Asian teams in America because no one would pay to see that. But they will pay to see the world class teams compete, and they will pay to watch women jump around a court though, so profession women's leagues exist.
And I think it is likely that if women were allowed in 0 would make it. It was only a few years ago that the best women tennis players thought that maybe they could compete in the men's league, and it only took an hour playing against a man ranked 204th to make them give up this idea.
We know that all the world class runners, of all races and genders are actually all Black Men. And in fact I think they are all specifically Jamaica, or some other very small sub-category of black men.
So I think we do need different categories. If there are white men who want to be basketball players or runners, and there is interest from the public to watch this, then they should form a league.
"I'd love to watch you go up to a professional athlete and tell them with a straight face that the reason they're not better is because subconsciously they want to be imperfect in order to preserve the sport."
I think there is just less drive. I once, for example, heard the training regiment of the 203th best tennis player in the word described as drinking whisky and smoking.
These sports, even world class professional sports, do not necessarily recruit the best of the best, and they do not necessaries inspire complete dedication.
Some sports inspire 12 hour a day, 7 day a week training regiments. Training is simply your life if you want to stand a chance.
But even these do not necessarily get the best of the best to work with. Sports, to a large degree, recruit from the poor and less determined, exclusively. The best humanity has to offer are too busy getter doctorates, building billion dollar companies, or solving mathematical problems or philosophising in some shack in the woods. The same people who are really good scientists are not necessarily the same people would make the best bowlers, but I do not think that there is any reason to assume that the people who would have made the absolute best bowlers have any reason to become professional bowlers. I think it is quite likely that the person who would of been the absolute best Starcraft player of all time is instead performing surgeries for millions of dollars a year somewhere.
I do not even know what Snooker is, so I have no idea if I would find it impressive or not. But I think I can safely say, you can exclude some sports from my blanket statement. I have seen Tiger Woods do incredible things. And in general would consider golf a decent sport. I do not think you can compare getting a 1-inch ball in a 1.2 inch hole 5 miles away over a infinity complete, detailed, and varied surface to getting a 1 foot wide ball down a perfectly level surface with a minimal amount of accuracy for only like 15 feet (indoors) [I am talking about bowling].
The problem is that every sport in existence was created as a leisure activity. Perfectly fine and enjoyable for people to do in-between work. And they have turned into entertainment for the masses; Which works as well. What both these things are not are mediums through which to test, strive for, and topple perfection. Mainstream sports cannot be too complex, as they are for the masses, and they were all historically designed for amateurs to play. Even chess is simply too deterministic and simple, as it is designed to just pick up and play; Really all you need is some autistic man with a perfect computer like memory to memorise billions and possible situations. E-sports like SC, and real sports like golf, are not like this. Their are infinity complex and cannot be modelled like that. There is no perfection, only the striving to be better. Also, it is important for a sport, in my opinion, for to test what it is to be human. It is simple to build a program that would play chess perfectly. Given improved sensors, a robot would easily be better at golf than a human. but it would be very hard to build a AI that would be better at the full complexity of SC, even though speed is such a huge issue in the game; Yes, they could probably micro-manage their way to a victory, but they would suck at many aspects of the game.
You very well might be, I do not follow darts.
But from what I understand from Wikipedia there is nothing stopping them from enrolling in mens tournaments. And I find it hard to believe that their never existed a woman darter who wanted to be the universal world champion.
"although no restrictions on women competing against men [exist]."
And for example, I did find this excerpt for some dart world records, separated by gender (http://www.sentex.net/~pmartin/patdarts/guinness.htm).
Which shows gender having a huge difference.
"MEN (8 players) 1,722,249 by Broken Hill Darts Club in New South Wales, Australia on September 28-29, 1985."
"WOMEN (8 players) 744,439 by a team from the Lord Clyde in Leyton, London on October 13-14, 1990."
Maybe you mean than in amateur darts, women are as good as men? Because I also found a few conversations of actual fans who follow both gender's tournaments bemoaning how unskilled the women are compared to the men.
People are capable of perfection. Someone who dedicates their life to something should be incredibly good at something.
As another example, I have no idea how professional basketball players can ever miss a shot, from any distance within a basketball court. It is not plausible to me that someone who dedicated their lives to it can ever miss.
Not common, just possible with millions of hours of practice. After ten years, and your brain has be completely rewired to be basket ball dominating machine, being so incapable of perfection is astounding to me. People achieve this perfection in other disciplines.
Professional ones, world class e-sport athletes?
Well playing a dozen games a year does not really effect RL sports players either. It is the heavy training, including a lot of gym time, that makes sure they are all in top physical condition.
Purely subjective.
I have never been impressive by any RL sport. The results we see seem completely plausible for someone who has dedicated their lives to it. In fact, they have always disappointed me. I do not understand how someone would dedicate their life to being the best archer, dart-er, bowler (etc.) and ever make a less than absolutely perfect shoot/performance. I myself, having bowled 3 times in my life have gotten a large number of strikes. In my opinion, any professional bowler that ever bowls a less than perfect 300 point game is a failure. Professional athletes should be roboticly perfect.
The problem with this is that it would make professional bowling (and so many other sports) obsolete. After you got to a certain level, their would be no reason to complete as you have reached the plateau of perfection where everyone is equally perfect at the game. I think it is likely that this huge incentive to not be perfect subconsciously prevents people from getting this good.
Starcraft does not have this. You can always be faster, and the strategy (intellectual level) in the game is not even comparable to football of any other RL sport (in many ways even far beyond chess). But for whatever reason, in my opinion these sport's athletes do push what is is to be human beyond what you might think is possible.
There are no overweight professional e-sport athletes. Every team I have ever heard of needed to maintain an extremely strict and intensive gym regime to stay at the top of their game.
But women do not, in 90% of the cases, play Starcraft.
Also, I think you should research more into darts, snooker, etc. In more sports like this Women are allowed to complete in male tournaments (the male leagues are actually unisex), they just are not able to actually win or qualify. Hand-eye coordination is a physical ability, and tends to have huge gender based differences. The real professional athletes know this, as they actually follow the sport. We have decades of hard data on this, and do you think professional women athlete never interact with their male peers? The only people who think that women and men should compete in the same leagues are people who do not even watch the sports they are suggesting be changed.
There is not a single sport that I know of that women and men actually compete at the same level at. They are different in every single way (their brains are wired more differentially than their physical bodies are), so they do better or worse based on these differences in every sport out there.
Well that is what they call the leagues/events, what else would they call it.
If you are talking about the events themselves, they have a lot more than traction. They are bigger than RL sports in many countries.
Make up your mind. The summery keeps switching between the two, like they are the same thing.
SO the solution is simple. Make Farmville into a professional e-sport.
Oh God, No.
I have to disagree.
When the competitors have to train harder than real sports athletes and have shorter shelf lives than Olympic athletes, it is a real sport.
E-sports simply is more competitive, and shows of far more impressive, super-human, skill than its RL analogue.
Well you make me want to try it again. All I know is I re-imaged it the very same day when I did give it a try, because I could not get it to do the same things.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
I know you specifically ruled this out, but it seems like the only reasonable way to me.
I know the camera I have does not really work well at all in the same room as my computer. I always assumed low levels of electrical interference were the issue here.
Assuming all digital cameras are the same level of magnitude susceptible to this interference it would be easy to create low level non-damaging electrical interference that would prevent any non static ridden photos from being taken, and this interference would be easy to block for your own cameras.
I would try taking pictures next to some running microwaves/ect. and see if you get consistently bad results without destroying the cameras.
But basically what struck me was.
DDWRT has like 40 option pages with like 40 options each, and a command line.
Tomato has like 3 option pages with like 3 options each.
Only used it for half an hour, so all I remember is that I could not do anything that I wanted to do.
I installed Tomato once, went back to DD-WRT less than an hour latter.
Tomato does some cool stuff, but its complete lack of pretty much every feature that DD-WRT has was a deal breaker.
Committing genocide on foot is tiring work.
How does it even work any other way?
Are you/the article saying that it is possible to have a single connection to your ISP, but for every computer, fridge, toaster, TV, etc. to have its own global IP address?
Your ISP can give you a block of dynamic/static IP addresses, which your router assigns instead of 192.168.1.X?
and probably spend most of its time debunking climate change.
Except you already agreed to a plan that legally spells out what happens when you fail to return it, charges and fines.
Assuming that this is not the only rental story in the history of rental stores that does not have overdue-charges, she did not legally steal the movie, she just owed them thousands of dollars in late fees and interest.
I sort of thought they get rid of most debt based arrests.
hunter-gatherer tribal cooperation is no way similar to Western charity. These are completely different things.
And the entire discussion of either is useless. Both Hunter Gather economies and charity have been researched in depth.
And I have no interest in being brought into a discussion about merits of free market capitalism. Which has nothing to do with this article or my comment.
Well I was mostly referring to hoarding, but yes of course. Like any mechanism, money, by the very basic principals of science is not perfectly efficient. It costs resources to create money, which itself is unless. For example. To create a single gold coin, worth X, it costs X+the work involved; Or to create a $20 bill, it costs the work and resources involved, both which needs to replicated on decaying bills. Creating currency, enforcing it, and protecting it always costs resources, and never adds any. But these are all necessary inefficiencies in abundance based economic systems.