You know, all the "mature" technical congnescenti here can whine that this is reprehensible and a breach of our freedom, but I have to say, I agree.
First, if I were a parent without a clue about computers, I'd certainly want to be made aware of what was in this game - I've seen it (and though I used to play some of these games when I had the time) was impressed with the detail of the deaths et. al.
Now, we limit a lot of other things which may be considered "dangers" in society. I am supportive of this to a degree, simply because I know there are wackos out there.
Where does the simulation stop and reality end? Will we stop SOF 4 Virtual Reality Center? Is there really a difference? These games simulate, in this case, rather graphically, killing. Sure, mature, normal, well-adjusted people can handle it fine and keep it once removed. But can everone? Can you allow every 14 year old boy to make this choice for himself? I'd say probably not.
Remember, the games aren't banned (such as they are in Germany - another interesting point), they're restriced, like alcohol, until the majority of people are first able to, hopefully maturely, decide for themselves.
Re:Was Linux the competitor?
on
Endgame For SCO
·
· Score: 1
SGIs are o.k. (I used to work there in the summers) but getting outdated except for very specific applications. We have an number of nice linux boxes here (TCH) including a dual p3/600 with 1024M ram and I know MGH it pretty solidly into linux. What do you mean they don't handle the load well? Are the kernels setup to detect the second proc?
Re:Was Linux the competitor?
on
Endgame For SCO
·
· Score: 2
I can tell you one thing - I've been in a number of labs (brain imaging) here in Boston during the summers. A few years ago, every thing was SGI, SGI, SGI. Now, everything is linuxboxes. I haven't seen an exception yet.
Re:nVidia has incentive to remain closed-source...
on
GPL Violation - NVIDIA
·
· Score: 1
This is probably the best post I've read on this discussion yet. But, unfortunately, it won't get moderated up because it was posted as #88, not #10.
And I suppose it is also non-standard in view. Pity.
O.k., this article states that Intel and AMD underestimated demands. While I'm not saying that this is directly related, isn't it interesting that:
Standalone sales of Windows grew 14 per cent. Microsoft blames - even now - Y2K concerns and a slowdown in the business PC market, (from This Register Article)
Now, either there is too much demand, or too little supply, or, alternatively, windows sales really are down.
Perhaps, I'm making false assumptions, but it's interesting either way. Perhaps there's a little bit of everything...
Why did you use frames on the homepage (and _only_ on the homepage I might add) ?
I didn't use frames and don't really care for them. There have been some changes to those pages since I was there. (And in response to the other individual, I use nedit).
Well Well, That was a nasty shock to get so late in the evening!:) I used to work there as a research associate. And if you look at the bottom of some of the pages at that link, I'm hall@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu. Hello world. (Granted, I can't claim to have done any of that development outside setting up the web pages.)
Here's news from John Pritchett, developer of the TWGS..
"On the 3rd anniversary of Martech's release of Trade Wars 2002 v3, I would like to announce that EIS has purchased all rights to Trade Wars 2002. In the future, all registrations and support will be handled through EIS. I have taken possession of Martech's customer base, and I intend to honor the Martin's promise of free upgrades from all previous versions to TWv3. I will continue to support TWv3 in an attempt to release a final, stable version. It is also my hope to begin development of a modern, client/server version of the game, not as a replacement of the classic, but as the next step in the long evolution of the game. Thank you all for your support of Trade Wars. If interest continues, perhaps it will continue to evolve well beyond its namesake, 2002. Funny how that date seemed so distant back in the mid eighties..."
Then why don't you write your own? Do something about it.
Contrary to what I'm sure is the norm, if given the choice between closed-source and none-at-all, (especially for DVD, man, I'd love to watch movies at home), I'll take the closed source at all times.
Note, this doesn't mean I don't think we shouldn't push in the right directions. But an interesting thought would be, if there was no unix/linux, would we all be using windows, or would we all be gardeners or accountants?
Hey, I have no problem with unix - I've used it since 91 both as an admin at sgi, and with computational neurosci now. I just refuse to install 32 different packages for a desktop with the hope that one package somewhere may make it less bug-ridden. I've just got better things to do with my time.
I agree. I see a small flame-war has already started, and I don't mean to stoke it. But I do have to say that (I'm a bb user myself), last time I tried both, Gnome was a buggy, dis-unified heap of programs.
Also, what's the deal with the packages? If I wanted to install the latest KDE, I'd have no problem getting the 1.1.2 or whatever packages together. When I go to the Gnome dist, everything is all over the place! There's 1.0.50 for somethings 1.0.31 for this, 1.0.44 for that. I have to take a look at what I do have, then see wat they have, then get it and hope it really works together.
I'm sorry, Gnome still looks like Redhat's hasty attempt to counter a { once) non-free widget set. That's not innovation in my book.
Hi All - just wanted to say that mass linux seemed to have some of it's own internal problems too. I was going to move there because of the great price but I was getting loads of bad vibes from the place - for example, my user had no quotas! I just seemed shoddily done. I know they're great guys, but I couldn't trust them on how nice they were.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, all the "mature" technical congnescenti here can whine that this is reprehensible and a breach of our freedom, but I have to say, I agree.
First, if I were a parent without a clue about computers, I'd certainly want to be made aware of what was in this game - I've seen it (and though I used to play some of these games when I had the time) was impressed with the detail of the deaths et. al.
Now, we limit a lot of other things which may be considered "dangers" in society. I am supportive of this to a degree, simply because I know there are wackos out there.
Where does the simulation stop and reality end? Will we stop SOF 4 Virtual Reality Center? Is there really a difference? These games simulate, in this case, rather graphically, killing. Sure, mature, normal, well-adjusted people can handle it fine and keep it once removed. But can everone? Can you allow every 14 year old boy to make this choice for himself? I'd say probably not.
Remember, the games aren't banned (such as they are in Germany - another interesting point), they're restriced, like alcohol, until the majority of people are first able to, hopefully maturely, decide for themselves.
SGIs are o.k. (I used to work there in the summers) but getting outdated except for very specific applications. We have an number of nice linux boxes here (TCH) including a dual p3/600 with 1024M ram and I know MGH it pretty solidly into linux. What do you mean they don't handle the load well? Are the kernels setup to detect the second proc?
I can tell you one thing - I've been in a number of labs (brain imaging) here in Boston during the summers. A few years ago, every thing was SGI, SGI, SGI. Now, everything is linuxboxes. I haven't seen an exception yet.
This is probably the best post I've read on this discussion yet. But, unfortunately, it won't get moderated up because it was posted as #88, not #10.
And I suppose it is also non-standard in view. Pity.
This argument is a ham sandwich.
(And I'll take the bad karma for that one.)
O.k., this article states that Intel and AMD underestimated demands. While I'm not saying that this is directly related, isn't it interesting that:
Standalone sales of Windows grew 14 per cent. Microsoft blames - even now - Y2K concerns and a slowdown in the business PC market,
(from This Register Article)
Now, either there is too much demand, or too little supply, or, alternatively, windows sales really are down.
Perhaps, I'm making false assumptions, but it's interesting either way. Perhaps there's a little bit of everything...
Why did you use frames on the homepage (and _only_ on the homepage I might add) ?
I didn't use frames and don't really care for them. There have been some changes to those pages since I was there. (And in response to the other individual, I use nedit).
Well Well, That was a nasty shock to get so late in the evening!
Here's news from John Pritchett, developer of the TWGS..
"On the 3rd anniversary of Martech's release of Trade Wars 2002 v3, I would like to announce that EIS has purchased all rights to Trade Wars 2002. In the future, all registrations and support will be handled through EIS. I have taken possession of Martech's customer base, and I intend to honor the Martin's promise of free upgrades from all previous versions to TWv3. I will continue to support TWv3 in an attempt to release a final, stable version. It is also my hope to begin development of a modern, client/server version of the game, not as a replacement of the classic, but as the next step in the long evolution of the game. Thank you all for your support of Trade Wars. If interest continues, perhaps it will continue to evolve well beyond its namesake, 2002. Funny how that date seemed so distant back in the mid eighties..."
Why is he making an effort to distance himself from VA?
Hey, I thought Guaranteed Ratio IO wasn't going to be put in at all? Have things changed?!?
Yippie!
From the Announcement:
Many of the more advanced XFS features are yet to be completed:
Then why don't you write your own? Do something about it.
Contrary to what I'm sure is the norm, if given the choice between closed-source and none-at-all, (especially for DVD, man, I'd love to watch movies at home), I'll take the closed source at all times.
Note, this doesn't mean I don't think we shouldn't push in the right directions. But an interesting thought would be, if there was no unix/linux, would we all be using windows, or would we all be gardeners or accountants?
Ah, Bah!!
When I was working at SGI we used to play quake on Infinite Realities with 3 1280x1024 monitors side-by-side. Now that's peripheral vision!
What would loki's plan be after the rest of the world learns what we know; when they start porting games themselves to linux?
Hey, I have no problem with unix - I've used it since 91 both as an admin at sgi, and with computational neurosci now. I just refuse to install 32 different packages for a desktop with the hope that one package somewhere may make it less bug-ridden. I've just got better things to do with my time.
I agree. I see a small flame-war has already started, and I don't mean to stoke it. But I do have to say that (I'm a bb user myself), last time I tried both, Gnome was a buggy, dis-unified heap of programs.
Also, what's the deal with the packages? If I wanted to install the latest KDE, I'd have no problem getting the 1.1.2 or whatever packages together. When I go to the Gnome dist, everything is all over the place! There's 1.0.50 for somethings 1.0.31 for this, 1.0.44 for that. I have to take a look at what I do have, then see wat they have, then get it and hope it really works together.
I'm sorry, Gnome still looks like Redhat's hasty attempt to counter a { once) non-free widget set. That's not innovation in my book.
Congratulations. You've written something with no coherent meaning whatsoever.
Hi All - just wanted to say that mass linux seemed to have some of it's own internal problems too. I was going to move there because of the great price but I was getting loads of bad vibes from the place - for example, my user had no quotas! I just seemed shoddily done. I know they're great guys, but I couldn't trust them on how nice they were.