Please explain how I can legally play Spore without the rootkit.
You can't, its that simple, the cracks are all in breach of the license. Its unlikely you'd find one that let you play online still.
What's the point of playing online? User-created graphics for other species instead of EA-created graphics? I haven't been able to figure out what the selling point of the multiverse thing they're doing.
to run vista, or do you need a RAID array of these drives.
Vista does a lot better with slow hard drives than XP or most other operating systems, thanks to superfetch or whatever silly name they give to the precache of apps.
Gaming PC's need to be cheaper to be competitive with the price point of Console rivals.
I think that this is essentially a meme that needs fixing from PR people, not tech or price changes. The opposite spin on the same idea, and one that's closer to the truth, is that on a console the technical qualities of games on day 1 is roughly the same as it will be on day 1200. On a PC, day 1200 graphics (with brand new hardware installed on day 1200) can generally be set to about 4x higher levels than on day 1, but people with hardware from day 1 can still run the new things and have them look as good as anything from day 1, which was already looking a little better than a console on the same day. PCs allow you to upgrade, they don't force it.
Perhaps the real solution is for graphics to be automatically set during installation to be optimized for the user's PC, and done in a much more successful way than has been done in the past.
Because it's supposed to be a game. If it were truly evolution-style, the player would have nothing to do but watch.
My idea for a game (fine, someone steal it and make it, but let me know and stick me in the credits!) on evolution is to start with a simplified ecosystem (10 species of animals of varying complexity would be fine) that plays itself - predators eat prey, things die to disease, old age, environmental problems - and then give the player the ability to cause natural disasters or various environmental effects. I don't think anything more direct than dropping seeds to spread plant life would be necessary. Accelerate mutation so that it happens regularly, let the player see the effects (not in stats, but through the way the creature handles its world and life), and let the player direct evolution of a species or the whole ecosystem through these indirect techniques. I think it would be awesome. If it seems too passive, let the player directly intervene occasionally through a lightning strike.
Why? It's not fun. It's basically a tech demo pretending to be a game.
Calling games tech demos seems to be a fad now, but you should be careful when do this with a game based on new design ideas instead of new tech. There's no tech to demo. It's more of a concept demo, I think, with the real content coming in the form of expensive expansion packs.
When's the last time Real mattered? They chose the wrong path a long, long time ago and something as stupid as an automatic DRM inserter doesn't get them headed in the right direction. This company seems to have no clue about the realities of digital content use and management.
I remember mocking its 1998 version as obsolete back in 1998, and since then they seem to have fallen farther behind their competition. So maybe 1997.
"St. George, however, points out that Palin couldn't have seen everything through an Evangelical lens. She did, he says, notably resist calls to restrict operating hours for the bars in town. And even if faith did play an unusually large role in her decision-making as mayor, it may have only reflected the continued rise of Evangelicalism in the valley, a growth that continues to this day"
As another poster explained, her friends owned bars and objected to the change. Self interest comes first for Palin (which is why she backs down when caught), then religious doctrine follows. She doesn't seem to be interested in the rest.
C) It is quite possible, very common in fact, that unprinted yet books can be on order for a library and that their contents can be widely anticipated a priori.
This is the only way books are banned in libraries in my experience, but normally it's done by the people who run the library, not higher ups like the mayor.
You can find the videos on Youtube. She probably doesn't sound that scary to anyone who was raised in a modern evangelical church (like myself), but if you step outside of that experience it sounds a little odd to hear someone call the Iraq War and the building of a natural gas pipeline "God's will."
For me it falls more into the "terrifying" category than "odd." I think that this woman has about a 0.5 chance of being vice president, and then about a 0.5 chance of becoming president on McCain's death. The idea that there's a 0.25 chance that this woman who lacks not simply experience, but basic mental capacity, could be the figurehead of a more blatantly evil than ever republican executive branch had given me nightmares for most of the last week.
Republicans are saying that "liberals" should be scared because of Palin. In truth, they should, but so should everyone else. Imagine this person with the power to fire nuclear weapons.
Sorry, but she helped write that speech with the aid of a speechwriter. She;s very much her own person which you'd realize if you studied her past - especially in relation to the Republican party which she had to fight VERY hard to become governor.
Hahahahahahahahahaha.
Evidence, please.
If you've heard her speak on her own, or seen things she writes, you know that she can barely put together a grammatically sensical sentence. Sometimes "with the aid of a speechwriter" means polish, and sometimes it means that the candidate stood there and had maybe a little input.
I've read/. since 1999, though I only signed up in the last year. Over nearly a decade of reading, this is my favorite post, given the context up and down the thread from it.
What does a memory of what a memory being recovered look like?
I sometimes have epileptic seizures which make me spontaneously remember past events. Sometimes it causes me to recall events which may not have happened. I am literally processing garbage data.
The seizure often interferes with the recording of memory, probably because it is messing with the replay of memory at the same time, so it is difficult to report exactly what the experience consists of after the event, beyond a simple outline.
That sounds a lot like dreaming, which (as far as I remember from a basic Psych class) seem to be caused by randomly firing neurons firing off random images or memories and then the fancier parts of the brain linking them together into a narrative or giving them context.
As an aside that 11 year calculation doesn't take into account what happens when you need a new several thousand dollar battery - they supposedly have an 8 year life-cycle; chances are you'll have to replace it and that pushes the break-even point out to 15 years!
8 years is the warranty period, not the expected life-cycle. The Prius has been around for 8 years and (as another poster pointed out in another thread) Toyota has not yet seen a single battery go bad in any Prius anywhere. Most normal car batteries don't last 8 years, so we might want to list battery replacement as a cost of conventional cars not shared by hybrids.
My problem with hybrids is the disappointing mileage. They're better than gasoline generally, but every time I rent a diesel I get better mileage than a Prius for the type of driving I have to do.
Torque yes, fuel efficient yes, quiet? You must be joking. Even the best diesel still sounds like a tractor compared to a petrol engine.
I see you haven't been to Europe. The last Diesel I rented in France had a problem - I couldn't tell by ear when the engine was on unless I completely turned off the fan. It was quieter than any non-hybrid/electric I've heard in America, too. Not to mention getting 50 mpg for 90 mph driving and 40 mpg for city driving and having a pretty peppy engine.
Actually, Slashdot *REPORTED* that the *NORTH POLE* *MAY* be ice free by September. Not that the entire area north of the Arctic Circle would be tropical. But sensationalist hyperbole is fairly common around here I suppose.
You've got a post that's as close to objectively superior to GP's as possible, and you get no mods, he gets +3 Interesting. I'm gonna go meta-moderate to try to prevent this from happening in the future.
Spoken like a person who's never read a paper on the subject.
People like the GP divide the world into a few groups when it comes to belief regarding climate change:
1) "Sheeple" who believe the circumstantial evidence we have proves that global warming is a real and likely man-made phenomenon.
2) Clever, educated people who listen to people with no background in science quote scientists (trying to collect data or refine existing models) out of context. These people learn from their TV/Radio/Blog gods that global warming is a liberal conspiracy. See #1.
3) Scientists, who are either duped by the liberal universities and left shaking their hockey stick plot of T vs. t, or who are ignored by the mainstream (did I mention liberal?) media when they show that global warming doesn't seem real.
This actually reminds me a lot of the creationists' response to evolution. They seem to think that any new evidence describing something previously unknown to the scholarly community is proof that evolution is a broken theory.
I think that it would be better to divide the world (only in our minds) into:
1) People who don't have the background or interest to know whether global warming is real or not, but who are generally pretty strongly polarized one way or the other.
2) People who do have a pretty good idea how likely it is that global warming is a problem and that it's man-made. These people are generally ignored by those in group 1, though they're quoted ad nauseum by both sides of the "debate" held by that group.
EA's sales numbers for the last year show PC gaming as their largest market. The same is true at a lot of other publishers. Things are looking up, financially, for PC gaming. The memes are looking down, though.
I think you don't understand that this gene is supposedly something that improves the likelihood that a man will remain monogamous. Instead, you seem to think that the claim is that the gene forces monogamy in any social or cultural situation. It's not.
In addition, a few specific points:
I seriously doubt that humans were holding on to each other for lifetimes before the dawn of religions. After all, the whole idea of staying together forever and ever is all taken from a few books that people wrote hundreds of years ago.
Monogamy isn't a purely religious (or Judeo-Christian, as I suspect you think) phenomenon. It was an important concept in many ancient cultures as demonstrated in surviving texts and art, and archaeology of cities as old as ÃatalhÃyük (~7000 BC) show pretty good evidence for regularly occurring monogamy.
Many wild animals mate with a single partner for life, as well, and they're not doing it because of a book.
Let's say that we go 10,000 years back. Why would a man not screw around as much as possible? And if love existed, who's to say that it lasted for long periods? I remember reading an article that stated that "love" is a chemical reaction that lasts roughly six months, given or take a couple of months. I guess it's enough time to bond and mate.
There are a lot of reasons not to screw around as much as possible, just as there are non-religious reasons not to steal, kill, or generally be a nuisance. Most people in human societies work under a Nash Equilibrium, maintaining order for common benefit, despite the possible personal benefit associated with breaking the equilibrium.
Also, the love is a six month chemical imbalance story wasn't expressed very well in the mainstream media. Replace "love" with "infatuation" and you get a sense of what was really being said. Personally, I think that infatuation doesn't have much to do with love at all. A lot of people don't agree with this and feel that the relationship is over after a few months once the unfamiliarity is gone, and that's an idea largely spread by fictional and especially Hollywood romance stories, but I think that these people are wrong.
Maybe this "monogamy gene" relates to something totally different, but has altered effects because of traditions that have grown with religions?
And here you come up with the idea that maybe the researchers should suggest that the gene has some effect that doesn't force monogamy in all cultural and social contexts. If you had read even the summary (based on your post you must have only read the title) you would know that they're way ahead of you, making much less dramatic claims than you think, claims that fall within the range of your suggestion.
So, they're comparing a single instance of a multi-tabbed browser to 6 separate instances of a single-tabbed browser. You can account for this by the lack of tabs in IE (a fundamental flaw in today's world), but it's still not a fair comparison.
IE has had tabs for years.
I got modded overrated for correcting a mistake at the heart of the parent's post? Okay.
So, they're comparing a single instance of a multi-tabbed browser to 6 separate instances of a single-tabbed browser. You can account for this by the lack of tabs in IE (a fundamental flaw in today's world), but it's still not a fair comparison.
The orbital trajectory of every piece of debris from a spy satellite that was intentionally blown up isn't so well known, especially when the nation controlling the satellite wants it to be a secret.
Slashdot Mirror
Please explain how I can legally play Spore without the rootkit.
You can't, its that simple, the cracks are all in breach of the license. Its unlikely you'd find one that let you play online still.
What's the point of playing online? User-created graphics for other species instead of EA-created graphics? I haven't been able to figure out what the selling point of the multiverse thing they're doing.
to run vista, or do you need a RAID array of these drives.
Vista does a lot better with slow hard drives than XP or most other operating systems, thanks to superfetch or whatever silly name they give to the precache of apps.
Gaming PC's need to be cheaper to be competitive with the price point of Console rivals.
I think that this is essentially a meme that needs fixing from PR people, not tech or price changes. The opposite spin on the same idea, and one that's closer to the truth, is that on a console the technical qualities of games on day 1 is roughly the same as it will be on day 1200. On a PC, day 1200 graphics (with brand new hardware installed on day 1200) can generally be set to about 4x higher levels than on day 1, but people with hardware from day 1 can still run the new things and have them look as good as anything from day 1, which was already looking a little better than a console on the same day. PCs allow you to upgrade, they don't force it.
Perhaps the real solution is for graphics to be automatically set during installation to be optimized for the user's PC, and done in a much more successful way than has been done in the past.
Because it's supposed to be a game. If it were truly evolution-style, the player would have nothing to do but watch.
My idea for a game (fine, someone steal it and make it, but let me know and stick me in the credits!) on evolution is to start with a simplified ecosystem (10 species of animals of varying complexity would be fine) that plays itself - predators eat prey, things die to disease, old age, environmental problems - and then give the player the ability to cause natural disasters or various environmental effects. I don't think anything more direct than dropping seeds to spread plant life would be necessary. Accelerate mutation so that it happens regularly, let the player see the effects (not in stats, but through the way the creature handles its world and life), and let the player direct evolution of a species or the whole ecosystem through these indirect techniques. I think it would be awesome. If it seems too passive, let the player directly intervene occasionally through a lightning strike.
"I really want this game"
Why? It's not fun. It's basically a tech demo pretending to be a game.
Calling games tech demos seems to be a fad now, but you should be careful when do this with a game based on new design ideas instead of new tech. There's no tech to demo. It's more of a concept demo, I think, with the real content coming in the form of expensive expansion packs.
When's the last time Real mattered? They chose the wrong path a long, long time ago and something as stupid as an automatic DRM inserter doesn't get them headed in the right direction. This company seems to have no clue about the realities of digital content use and management.
I remember mocking its 1998 version as obsolete back in 1998, and since then they seem to have fallen farther behind their competition. So maybe 1997.
"St. George, however, points out that Palin couldn't have seen everything through an Evangelical lens. She did, he says, notably resist calls to restrict operating hours for the bars in town. And even if faith did play an unusually large role in her decision-making as mayor, it may have only reflected the continued rise of Evangelicalism in the valley, a growth that continues to this day"
As another poster explained, her friends owned bars and objected to the change. Self interest comes first for Palin (which is why she backs down when caught), then religious doctrine follows. She doesn't seem to be interested in the rest.
C) It is quite possible, very common in fact, that unprinted yet books can be on order for a library and that their contents can be widely anticipated a priori.
This is the only way books are banned in libraries in my experience, but normally it's done by the people who run the library, not higher ups like the mayor.
Every one of the US leaders has said they believed in a Supreme Being...
There, fixed that for you.
You're brilliant, Ray.
I personally doubt that either McCain or Obama is a serious believer.
You can find the videos on Youtube. She probably doesn't sound that scary to anyone who was raised in a modern evangelical church (like myself), but if you step outside of that experience it sounds a little odd to hear someone call the Iraq War and the building of a natural gas pipeline "God's will."
Anyway, here are the videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG1vPYbRB7k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k84m2orSOaM
For me it falls more into the "terrifying" category than "odd." I think that this woman has about a 0.5 chance of being vice president, and then about a 0.5 chance of becoming president on McCain's death. The idea that there's a 0.25 chance that this woman who lacks not simply experience, but basic mental capacity, could be the figurehead of a more blatantly evil than ever republican executive branch had given me nightmares for most of the last week.
Republicans are saying that "liberals" should be scared because of Palin. In truth, they should, but so should everyone else. Imagine this person with the power to fire nuclear weapons.
Sorry, but she helped write that speech with the aid of a speechwriter. She;s very much her own person which you'd realize if you studied her past - especially in relation to the Republican party which she had to fight VERY hard to become governor.
Hahahahahahahahahaha.
Evidence, please.
If you've heard her speak on her own, or seen things she writes, you know that she can barely put together a grammatically sensical sentence. Sometimes "with the aid of a speechwriter" means polish, and sometimes it means that the candidate stood there and had maybe a little input.
This is fantastic. Your comment disproves itself!
I've read /. since 1999, though I only signed up in the last year. Over nearly a decade of reading, this is my favorite post, given the context up and down the thread from it.
Starry Night, too, and it's a nice, very complete companion for amateur astronomers.
What does a memory of what a memory being recovered look like?
I sometimes have epileptic seizures which make me spontaneously remember past events. Sometimes it causes me to recall events which may not have happened. I am literally processing garbage data.
The seizure often interferes with the recording of memory, probably because it is messing with the replay of memory at the same time, so it is difficult to report exactly what the experience consists of after the event, beyond a simple outline.
That sounds a lot like dreaming, which (as far as I remember from a basic Psych class) seem to be caused by randomly firing neurons firing off random images or memories and then the fancier parts of the brain linking them together into a narrative or giving them context.
You come across to me as 10% ass and 90% compelling, which is a great mix.
I shall honor you by trying out this "biking to work" thing next week.
As an aside that 11 year calculation doesn't take into account what happens when you need a new several thousand dollar battery - they supposedly have an 8 year life-cycle; chances are you'll have to replace it and that pushes the break-even point out to 15 years!
8 years is the warranty period, not the expected life-cycle. The Prius has been around for 8 years and (as another poster pointed out in another thread) Toyota has not yet seen a single battery go bad in any Prius anywhere. Most normal car batteries don't last 8 years, so we might want to list battery replacement as a cost of conventional cars not shared by hybrids.
My problem with hybrids is the disappointing mileage. They're better than gasoline generally, but every time I rent a diesel I get better mileage than a Prius for the type of driving I have to do.
Torque yes, fuel efficient yes, quiet? You must be joking. Even the best diesel still sounds like a tractor compared to a petrol engine.
I see you haven't been to Europe. The last Diesel I rented in France had a problem - I couldn't tell by ear when the engine was on unless I completely turned off the fan. It was quieter than any non-hybrid/electric I've heard in America, too. Not to mention getting 50 mpg for 90 mph driving and 40 mpg for city driving and having a pretty peppy engine.
Actually, Slashdot *REPORTED* that the *NORTH POLE* *MAY* be ice free by September. Not that the entire area north of the Arctic Circle would be tropical. But sensationalist hyperbole is fairly common around here I suppose.
You've got a post that's as close to objectively superior to GP's as possible, and you get no mods, he gets +3 Interesting. I'm gonna go meta-moderate to try to prevent this from happening in the future.
Spoken like a person who's never read a paper on the subject.
People like the GP divide the world into a few groups when it comes to belief regarding climate change:
1) "Sheeple" who believe the circumstantial evidence we have proves that global warming is a real and likely man-made phenomenon.
2) Clever, educated people who listen to people with no background in science quote scientists (trying to collect data or refine existing models) out of context. These people learn from their TV/Radio/Blog gods that global warming is a liberal conspiracy. See #1.
3) Scientists, who are either duped by the liberal universities and left shaking their hockey stick plot of T vs. t, or who are ignored by the mainstream (did I mention liberal?) media when they show that global warming doesn't seem real.
This actually reminds me a lot of the creationists' response to evolution. They seem to think that any new evidence describing something previously unknown to the scholarly community is proof that evolution is a broken theory.
I think that it would be better to divide the world (only in our minds) into:
1) People who don't have the background or interest to know whether global warming is real or not, but who are generally pretty strongly polarized one way or the other.
2) People who do have a pretty good idea how likely it is that global warming is a problem and that it's man-made. These people are generally ignored by those in group 1, though they're quoted ad nauseum by both sides of the "debate" held by that group.
Google's looking into this issue now,
thanks to everybody who reported it.
Just kidding! We are instead working on developing new and exciting beta tools to help us deliver more effective targeted advertising to you.
Love,
Google (The real Google. You can trust me. I'm by definition not evil.)
EA's sales numbers for the last year show PC gaming as their largest market. The same is true at a lot of other publishers. Things are looking up, financially, for PC gaming. The memes are looking down, though.
I think you don't understand that this gene is supposedly something that improves the likelihood that a man will remain monogamous. Instead, you seem to think that the claim is that the gene forces monogamy in any social or cultural situation. It's not.
In addition, a few specific points:
I seriously doubt that humans were holding on to each other for lifetimes before the dawn of religions. After all, the whole idea of staying together forever and ever is all taken from a few books that people wrote hundreds of years ago.
Monogamy isn't a purely religious (or Judeo-Christian, as I suspect you think) phenomenon. It was an important concept in many ancient cultures as demonstrated in surviving texts and art, and archaeology of cities as old as ÃatalhÃyük (~7000 BC) show pretty good evidence for regularly occurring monogamy.
Many wild animals mate with a single partner for life, as well, and they're not doing it because of a book.
Let's say that we go 10,000 years back. Why would a man not screw around as much as possible? And if love existed, who's to say that it lasted for long periods? I remember reading an article that stated that "love" is a chemical reaction that lasts roughly six months, given or take a couple of months. I guess it's enough time to bond and mate.
There are a lot of reasons not to screw around as much as possible, just as there are non-religious reasons not to steal, kill, or generally be a nuisance. Most people in human societies work under a Nash Equilibrium, maintaining order for common benefit, despite the possible personal benefit associated with breaking the equilibrium.
Also, the love is a six month chemical imbalance story wasn't expressed very well in the mainstream media. Replace "love" with "infatuation" and you get a sense of what was really being said. Personally, I think that infatuation doesn't have much to do with love at all. A lot of people don't agree with this and feel that the relationship is over after a few months once the unfamiliarity is gone, and that's an idea largely spread by fictional and especially Hollywood romance stories, but I think that these people are wrong.
Maybe this "monogamy gene" relates to something totally different, but has altered effects because of traditions that have grown with religions?
And here you come up with the idea that maybe the researchers should suggest that the gene has some effect that doesn't force monogamy in all cultural and social contexts. If you had read even the summary (based on your post you must have only read the title) you would know that they're way ahead of you, making much less dramatic claims than you think, claims that fall within the range of your suggestion.
So, they're comparing a single instance of a multi-tabbed browser to 6 separate instances of a single-tabbed browser. You can account for this by the lack of tabs in IE (a fundamental flaw in today's world), but it's still not a fair comparison.
IE has had tabs for years.
I got modded overrated for correcting a mistake at the heart of the parent's post? Okay.
So, they're comparing a single instance of a multi-tabbed browser to 6 separate instances of a single-tabbed browser. You can account for this by the lack of tabs in IE (a fundamental flaw in today's world), but it's still not a fair comparison.
IE has had tabs for years.
The orbital trajectory of every piece of debris from a spy satellite that was intentionally blown up isn't so well known, especially when the nation controlling the satellite wants it to be a secret.