OH, well then, I guess I'm the one just making stuff up! I reread that three times before I posted to make sure it was hogwash and my brain just added that "of" every time.
Haha! I love the quote for the cable elevators (emphasis mine):
The damn things do lower noise, increase dynamics, remove haze, and open up the top of octaves
That's complete bullshit. Octaves are an arbitrary concept, and the "top of an octave" can be any note ever played anywhere. Proof that these supposed audiophile reviewers are just speaking out of their ass.
I see what you mean, other people have responded in this thread with 2 year programs that actually give them way more programming experience than I'll probably get in my 4 year program.
I still hold that those commercials that basically say "Hey, YOU can design the next big game" are a load of crap. I'm not denying the 2 year programs any more, but I'm wary of colleges that display a Bamzu page as their website.
The first thing I thought of in regards to the EA quote was those ITT Tech and other TV commercials who advertise making games after 2 years. That's bullshit, in my humble opinion. I've been programming as a hobby for a while and am in the middle of a 4 year university CS program and, at the moment, would have absolutely nothing worthwhile to add to a game programming team. Or modeling team. Or anything. I could be a beta tester, that's about it. And I have a feeling those aren't in demand. Now granted, I probably have less experience than a person leaving a 2 year game design program because that's so targeted and CS is so general. But I at least have a feeling for how much you can learn in a year.
Point is, games these days are incredibly complex. We're talking multi million dollar budgets, with blockbuster titles reaching the hundred millions. 100+ person programming teams. Kids coming out of a quickie game design degree are going to be poorly prepared, if at all, for this complexity. And it's not fair, because designing games is a process that strengthens programming and general logic abilities.
Don't you think copy pasting this inevery discussion to do with google is getting a little old? And before that it was just the same argument without the Wired "good to bad".
No. Any person who's ever used Adobe's flash cannot develop code for the Gnash project, no exceptions. Gnash is a completely clean room, reverse engineering project. This is due to the Adobe EULA.
Actually, I imagine this as some late 30s, early 40s year old guy living in his mom's basement with trollish rants ready to copy and paste. He also has a barbecue sauce stain on his shirt.
Actually, I think we would be glad if Microsoft was holding back a release because of critical bugs. Sure, there would be the occasional jackhole who said Microsoft sucks because they can't keep a release date. But, if they were being as open as Debian and admitting to fixing critical bugs (and presenting them for us to see), I'm sure there would be some insightful comments about the increased quality being worth the wait.
I don't know, becuase Debian and Ubuntu both have different purposes and combining the two would cause community strife and lowered productivity overall?
OK, I agree. That was a poor argument. Here's my specific points:
Bleeding edge packages. For a desktop OS, this is great in my humble opinion. I would be pretty pissed if I was using OpenOffice 2.0 and Firefox 1.5. But for a server, I'd rather use packages that have been around for a little while and have been seen to be stable. More like Debian's policy.
Ubuntu, being a desktop focused distribution, gets a lot of attention on desktop related problems. That's great, but I'd like a distribution which focuses on enterprise style server problems more than desktop issues. If you check out launchpad, you're going to see tons of bugs related to desktop issues. Community support is also geared towards the desktop.
Convenience and security are a well known tradeoff. I don't have solid proof on this one, so I apologize if I'm just making stuff up. But I would imagine Ubuntu does some things for convenience that could provide security issues. Then again they might rectify these in the Server edition. Again, correct me if I'm wrong about this point.
Ah ok, I understand what you mean now. That would indeed be quite helpful. Especially if they had icons and English (not legalese) descriptions of the different licenses like the CC.
I love Ubuntu, I've been playing with different distros since early 2000 and when I tried Ubuntu in 2006, I got hooked. I've been using it as my OS ever since. I've switched my parents to Ubuntu because I find it easy to administer and it makes it easy for me to help them. Plus, I can SSH into their box to solve problems remotely. Bottom line, as a desktop distribution I love Ubuntu. It may not work for everyone, but for me it's a perfect fit.
But as a server distro, I'm not so sure. I'm surprised that Wikimedia didn't go with a distribution that's more established for server needs.
Yes but the GPL says what you can and cannot do to the source of a project, a pretty standardized action. Privacy policies say what the website can and cannot do with your info. That's going to be different on a per website basis. Google could get everything I searched for, Facebook knows what college I go to and some of my friends, Youtube knows what videos I watched, etc. Unfortunately, one boilerplate policy would not cover all of these websites.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because no two users can have the same password. Wait, what?
Well played sir.
OH, well then, I guess I'm the one just making stuff up! I reread that three times before I posted to make sure it was hogwash and my brain just added that "of" every time.
Haha! I love the quote for the cable elevators (emphasis mine):
The damn things do lower noise, increase dynamics, remove haze, and open up the top of octaves
That's complete bullshit. Octaves are an arbitrary concept, and the "top of an octave" can be any note ever played anywhere. Proof that these supposed audiophile reviewers are just speaking out of their ass.
Yeah I get that part :)
I put on my robe and wizard's hat.
As long as you don't follow that by locking your wife in your car.
I see what you mean, other people have responded in this thread with 2 year programs that actually give them way more programming experience than I'll probably get in my 4 year program.
I still hold that those commercials that basically say "Hey, YOU can design the next big game" are a load of crap. I'm not denying the 2 year programs any more, but I'm wary of colleges that display a Bamzu page as their website.
The first thing I thought of in regards to the EA quote was those ITT Tech and other TV commercials who advertise making games after 2 years. That's bullshit, in my humble opinion. I've been programming as a hobby for a while and am in the middle of a 4 year university CS program and, at the moment, would have absolutely nothing worthwhile to add to a game programming team. Or modeling team. Or anything. I could be a beta tester, that's about it. And I have a feeling those aren't in demand. Now granted, I probably have less experience than a person leaving a 2 year game design program because that's so targeted and CS is so general. But I at least have a feeling for how much you can learn in a year.
Point is, games these days are incredibly complex. We're talking multi million dollar budgets, with blockbuster titles reaching the hundred millions. 100+ person programming teams. Kids coming out of a quickie game design degree are going to be poorly prepared, if at all, for this complexity. And it's not fair, because designing games is a process that strengthens programming and general logic abilities.
At least, that's my very opinionated two cents.
i think Tesla would be better off allying itself with a foreign company
They did, it's been done. Lotus makes the frame (it's very similar to an Elise).
Don't you think copy pasting this in every discussion to do with google is getting a little old? And before that it was just the same argument without the Wired "good to bad".
Come on man, be original.
No. Any person who's ever used Adobe's flash cannot develop code for the Gnash project, no exceptions. Gnash is a completely clean room, reverse engineering project. This is due to the Adobe EULA.
Don't forget Swfdec as well.
Actually, I believe they try to recreate asexually, but realize their attempts are futile. Then they forget and try again the next day.
Actually, I imagine this as some late 30s, early 40s year old guy living in his mom's basement with trollish rants ready to copy and paste. He also has a barbecue sauce stain on his shirt.
Actually, that's how I see all trolls.
Actually, I think we would be glad if Microsoft was holding back a release because of critical bugs. Sure, there would be the occasional jackhole who said Microsoft sucks because they can't keep a release date. But, if they were being as open as Debian and admitting to fixing critical bugs (and presenting them for us to see), I'm sure there would be some insightful comments about the increased quality being worth the wait.
Thanks, I thought it up after smoking two joints.
I don't know, becuase Debian and Ubuntu both have different purposes and combining the two would cause community strife and lowered productivity overall?
Nahh, that's not it. Nevermind.
Shocking!!!
Seriously, this doesn't seem unusual. I'm happy that the team is waiting until all the bugs are squashed.
Robin Hood? Is that you?
No, he's just robbin' the 'hood. Easy mistake to make.
Yeah, and an actual starry night looks far better than The Starry Night
OK, I agree. That was a poor argument. Here's my specific points:
Ah ok, I understand what you mean now. That would indeed be quite helpful. Especially if they had icons and English (not legalese) descriptions of the different licenses like the CC.
I love Ubuntu, I've been playing with different distros since early 2000 and when I tried Ubuntu in 2006, I got hooked. I've been using it as my OS ever since. I've switched my parents to Ubuntu because I find it easy to administer and it makes it easy for me to help them. Plus, I can SSH into their box to solve problems remotely. Bottom line, as a desktop distribution I love Ubuntu. It may not work for everyone, but for me it's a perfect fit.
But as a server distro, I'm not so sure. I'm surprised that Wikimedia didn't go with a distribution that's more established for server needs.
Yes but the GPL says what you can and cannot do to the source of a project, a pretty standardized action. Privacy policies say what the website can and cannot do with your info. That's going to be different on a per website basis. Google could get everything I searched for, Facebook knows what college I go to and some of my friends, Youtube knows what videos I watched, etc. Unfortunately, one boilerplate policy would not cover all of these websites.
200 hours a year? I would be spending 200 hours a month if I read all of the EULAs I encountered.
Oh ok. I'll send him another copy of the memo :)