I am sorry to say that most of the native English speakers on/. can't even hold a simple conversation in English. After all, it requires the dreaded social skills.
real time updating without restarting is entirely possible, i don't know why people are still not implementing it. since most objects/methods/declarations are actually pointers to memory locations, all you need is a memory map for 1 to 1 function mapping after load the new kernel in to memory, then replace the function call pointers one by one when the function is being called. when all function calls are switched over, free the old memory space where the kernel was sitting in.
I also agree with the concept and spirit of copyright, but disagree with the implementation of it. Copyright by its nature should be none transferable. Meaning if John Doe wrote a piece of literature, you shouldn't say the the company xyz that bought the copyright wrote it, nor should the company package a group with the same name but fire the original authors and claim the packaged group wrote it. Further more, in no cases should any company bar the original author from using their own work. What it comes down to, and I ask this without reservation, is "why does copyright protect business entities more than authors?" Even in cases of work for hire, the work is only the way they are because of the authors. In that case, the contracting entity should be a co-owner of the copyright rather than sole owner. A second part of the problem would be the length of the copyright. Why is length of the copyright longer than a patent? It makes absolutely no sense that something which has no practical use would receive more benefits than something that does have practical benefits. What are the governments trying to say? That we should spend more of our time doing things that will not bring physical improvements to our daily lives? That is absolutely ridiculous. I think that copyright is about giving credit where credits' due. So, even when work fall into public domain, they still should hold certain restrictions. Meaning that all work that copied from others should be required have a work cited section, and this requirement should last forever; but economic perks such as distribution, public performance, and modifications should be time limited.
it is a "corporate policy" because most of the HR software works only in IE6, and the reason most of the HR software works only in IE6 is because the HR departments demand IE6 compatibility... get where this one is going?
This is a terrible survey, the base demography are of terminal cancer patients. Have the surveyor ever consider the possibility of people become pious due to fear of death? Many soldiers get sent to the battle field also suddenly become more pious. That's not something new. It'd pretty much be the same as "We've surveyed slashdot, and it seems people who post on slashdot also tend to be avid computer users." All I can say about that is "well duh!"
That argument has been used over and over, and no, it doesn't really excuse a company from behaving badly. By the same token, you can say that hey, it's ok for murderers to kill people, because all you have to do is run away from him/her. Or, hey, it's ok for Enron to cook its books because by god you don't have to work for them. Maybe it's ok for comcast to snoop in to your packets because you can always switch to dsl...
No, you sir are missing the point. It's much more than the issue of implementation, it is all about diligence. You can be as brilliant as you want, but if your code is full of bugs, you will get fired. What you see here is a classic case of trying to do something smart and cool but end up screwing up. That is why kids need to go through QC and QA before actually become developers. They need to learn how to catch their own mistakes. If this were happen to slip into production code, your company might be liable for a lot of money.
You _ARE_ wrong, integers have signs. Your solution only solves the problem for unsigned int, as soon as there is a negative sign in front of the number, your code will break. Neither does it check if the string given is really an integer or not.
"I said population can be a problem, that was one of the issues on the server I was on. Eventually people switch sides and it balances out. Once again, in WoW almost all the servers were heavy Alliance when the game launched."
You obviously never played warhammer to any depth, once you set yourself to order, you are stuck with it on that sever, YOU CANNOT SWITCH TO DESTRO SO YOUR BALANCE THEORY DOESN'T WORK... The same goes for destro players, they cannot change to order on the very same server. Your comments are getting more and more ignorant.
"I can't really discuss how balanced the game is at the level cap because I didn't get there. However, I didn't enjoy when Order got their knockback about 10 levels before Destruction. That made many of the scenarios heavily favored for Order until things balanced out. When I left, at level 26, ranged casters (Bright Wizards/Sorceress') were doing far too much damage and 3 shotting melee before they got in range. But Balancing issues are somewhat par for the course in MMOs. Everyone talks as though WoW was perfectly balanced since launch, which obviously isn't true."
I have never said WoW was perfectly balanced, but compare to warhammer, it was much more polished in that department. warhammer is simply lacking and you can pretty much tell by the level of effort they put in to balancing the game. You did make a good point class based game is very different from go or chess, 10 men melee team works very different than a 10 men wizard team. and frankly, in some cases you will end up with no viable strategies. That was the point i was trying to get across.
"Good god, you're probably happy with the abortion that is WoW's new arena ranking system. Plain fact is that MMOs aren't as simple as a ranking system for Chess or Go. In those games there isn't one type of player that can move a knight differently, move more pieces at once, etc. So some people would match up better than others. In those cases if you get unlucky and meet a a player around your ranking that you don't match up against and you lose you'll go down - and you might not be able to win no matter what you do. There's no simple or even complex math that would probably work to deal with all the combinations of races, classes, and talents. Welcome to class based games."
What you are saying only applies to random team ups. In prebuilt team vs. team, the ranking system works as it should because people are performing as expected. Now what you are pretty much saying is there aren't always viable strategies in random match up, but wouldn't that pretty much be a design and balance issue?
"So because I don't agree that the game is 'absolute junk' all my comments are 'baseless and invalid'. Great job. So you are saying that PQs and public parties suck? I totally disagree, they are revolutionary. As for the seige mechanics, they are better. Busting down the door to a keep takes more than just a mindless zerg (that's how Wintergrasp works)."
Well, no. I am saying your comments were baseless and invalid because you didn't have any examples to back yourself up, you just spew out
"The idea and implementation of the public quest was great, and the open parties were awesome too. These are things you will probably see in every MMO from here on out. The siege mechanics were light-years better than the Wintergrasp crap that Blizzard is trying to throw into WoW."
without telling us why. I am simply stating warhammer siege isn't light-years ahead of WoW, nor is it that good. Further more, i backed up my claims with examples and points that are real issues in warhammer.
"So you are saying that PQs and public parties suck?"
Nowhere in my post said PQs suck, don't make up things and tag them onto what i said. As for public parties, yes, they suck, for obvious reasons. Siege too, the problem is siege requires you not to zerg, but public party group dynamics are so bad that zerg is your only option, and that is _NOT_ a viable strategy. Separately and in theory they look great; but when put together in practice... they work against each other.
No, The PvP is done wrong, very very wrong. There's something wrong when you have to wait over 2 hours for instance based PvP. Balancing issue is an extreme understatement. Why? Because when you lock down an account to play only order or destro, you better make sure there are even numbers of order vs. destro on the server, and even so it still can be uneven due to the fact not everybody plays PvP. The classes are far from balanced, so what you can do tons of damage, if you die in 3 hits, your attack power means nothing. And how convenient for the melees that almost every one of them got a ranged attack that can slow people down. The RvR level is a good concept, but they implemented in such a bad way that made RvR level totally pointless. In games such as Go or Chess, you go up or down in level by your win/lose ratio. PvP level should be done in the same way since just because you have a lv 40 character doesn't mean you are a lv 40 player. So what really should happen is: 1) Allow RvR level to go up or down base on kill/death ratio. 2) RvR scenarios should group people with similar RvR rating together. 3) Have level cap in each and every RvR zone as opposed of turning people into chicken. 4) in 1vs1 situations, the chance of winning should be 50% if the players have the same RvR level rating. The siege mechanics are horrible in warhammer, i don't know what you are talking about. First, it is a matter of money. The team with more money buying engine/weapon have advantage. Second, offense is a nightmare, without 18+ people you aren't going to do anything and the keep lord will slaughter your team. Third, with public parties, what you end up with are an unorganized band of noobs that are really unfit to go for keeps/castles. There are way too many Leeroy Jenkins wannabes. Fourth, people should be barred from siege 3 am in the morning where noone is on to defend. I am not saying Blizzard is doing any better, but Mythic simply are not up to par and what you said are baseless and invalid.
Free games are actually very bad for new development. Large game dev houses can afford to make free game because they are widely known, they can get the sponsors, they can get advertisement deals, and they have the capitol to kick start game projects. This is however not the case with starters. In an economic stand point of view, free games are very bad for diversity and competition. I remember testing this theory out in one of the games I played. I made a high level blacksmith in an MMO, and offered people to forge for them for free as long as they provided materials. While I became the most widely known blacksmith and the best due to many people coming to me, I decimated the industry because I made it prohibitively expensive for new players to start making blacksmiths, and they can't make any money even after they become fairly high level. Further more, other players actually prefer coming to me due to the fact I have established myself and I break less. Real economy is fairly close to that as well.
It's not surprising. PVP is horribly one sided, and waiting for an RVR instance is an exercise in itself due to everyone and their dog plays destruction on most servers. numbers don't match up, skill levels don't match up, so what you are end up with, is a constant exercise in futility. The chicken thing is amusing at first but quickly turned annoying as well. Basically you have three races per faction, but in order to do the quests in other races of the same faction, you risk of accidentally turning chicken constantly and getting one shotted by some newbie. The client itself is horrible, the game crashes a lot, for no reason. It got so bad that they introduced a patch to scale back graphics just for stability. Of course that didn't help much at all. Crash happens just the same. switch between zones lag badly. and some towns sit right at the switch line, causing all sorts of problems. Apparently their programmers are not competent enough to write threaded zone proximity loading with lower priority threads. This game is absolute junk and I wouldn't recommend it for anyone.
My miss then, but i am a bit confused on why they don't just enable SSL by default for all. I mean it isn't so much that people don't end up switching to full SSL anyways.
You are not alone. Using google apps are fine for your run of the mill type up needs. But for government documents especially that of the sensitive issue, google apps are horribly inadequate. For starters, google stores the documents on their server farms and do not really delete anything. This can be a security issue. Second, the default for ssl is log in only, potential for unencrypted transmission of sensitive data being intercepted is huge. Data retention, data backup, and data recovery are also huge issues with google docs. This guy is obviously an idiot and a business man wearing an IT guy suit. When the requirement can't even be met, saving money is a moot point.
Speak of not making any sense, how is assuming that the application of situation A stays in the scope of situation A? The world would be so much better of a place if everything we intend to do cannot be exploited, cannot be modified, and only serves the purpose they are designated, no more, no less. Are you saying that potential exploits should not be discussed in a ethical overview of a medical practice? Are you implying that it is perfectly ethical to serve people a medcine that can cure cancer, but is known to causes immediate heart failure? Let's go with your carrot issue, would it be morally correct to convince your next door neighbor to eat a carrot in front of you knowing you are going to shoot people who eat carrot with a gun? Even though eating a carrot is good for his/her health in situation A where for all intended purpose, it would help with their vitamin A deficiency? I am sorry, but your arguments fail on so many fronts and are full of holes. The train of thought you presented makes less sense than my arguments.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyday's Caturday.
I am sorry to say that most of the native English speakers on /. can't even hold a simple conversation in English. After all, it requires the dreaded social skills.
Maybe i am missing something, but...
real time updating without restarting is entirely possible, i don't know why people are still not implementing it. since most objects/methods/declarations are actually pointers to memory locations, all you need is a memory map for 1 to 1 function mapping after load the new kernel in to memory, then replace the function call pointers one by one when the function is being called. when all function calls are switched over, free the old memory space where the kernel was sitting in.
I also agree with the concept and spirit of copyright, but disagree with the implementation of it. Copyright by its nature should be none transferable. Meaning if John Doe wrote a piece of literature, you shouldn't say the the company xyz that bought the copyright wrote it, nor should the company package a group with the same name but fire the original authors and claim the packaged group wrote it. Further more, in no cases should any company bar the original author from using their own work. What it comes down to, and I ask this without reservation, is "why does copyright protect business entities more than authors?" Even in cases of work for hire, the work is only the way they are because of the authors. In that case, the contracting entity should be a co-owner of the copyright rather than sole owner.
A second part of the problem would be the length of the copyright. Why is length of the copyright longer than a patent? It makes absolutely no sense that something which has no practical use would receive more benefits than something that does have practical benefits. What are the governments trying to say? That we should spend more of our time doing things that will not bring physical improvements to our daily lives? That is absolutely ridiculous.
I think that copyright is about giving credit where credits' due. So, even when work fall into public domain, they still should hold certain restrictions. Meaning that all work that copied from others should be required have a work cited section, and this requirement should last forever; but economic perks such as distribution, public performance, and modifications should be time limited.
you might as well pipe water pass the walls next to the racks and install heat collectors, you'd be able to have free hot water for the bathrooms.
it is a "corporate policy" because most of the HR software works only in IE6, and the reason most of the HR software works only in IE6 is because the HR departments demand IE6 compatibility... get where this one is going?
Hahahahaha yes, linux marketing must pass the slashdot test first.
Really? I thought for sure slackware would be it.
This is a terrible survey, the base demography are of terminal cancer patients. Have the surveyor ever consider the possibility of people become pious due to fear of death? Many soldiers get sent to the battle field also suddenly become more pious. That's not something new. It'd pretty much be the same as "We've surveyed slashdot, and it seems people who post on slashdot also tend to be avid computer users." All I can say about that is "well duh!"
That argument has been used over and over, and no, it doesn't really excuse a company from behaving badly. By the same token, you can say that hey, it's ok for murderers to kill people, because all you have to do is run away from him/her. Or, hey, it's ok for Enron to cook its books because by god you don't have to work for them. Maybe it's ok for comcast to snoop in to your packets because you can always switch to dsl...
Agreed to a certain point, now days QA/QC are more reliant on running automated scripts instead of old fashioned debugging.
No, you sir are missing the point. It's much more than the issue of implementation, it is all about diligence. You can be as brilliant as you want, but if your code is full of bugs, you will get fired. What you see here is a classic case of trying to do something smart and cool but end up screwing up. That is why kids need to go through QC and QA before actually become developers. They need to learn how to catch their own mistakes. If this were happen to slip into production code, your company might be liable for a lot of money.
You _ARE_ wrong, integers have signs. Your solution only solves the problem for unsigned int, as soon as there is a negative sign in front of the number, your code will break. Neither does it check if the string given is really an integer or not.
Obviously, you skipped out on econ 101, shame on you!
"I said population can be a problem, that was one of the issues on the server I was on. Eventually people switch sides and it balances out. Once again, in WoW almost all the servers were heavy Alliance when the game launched."
You obviously never played warhammer to any depth, once you set yourself to order, you are stuck with it on that sever, YOU CANNOT SWITCH TO DESTRO SO YOUR BALANCE THEORY DOESN'T WORK... The same goes for destro players, they cannot change to order on the very same server. Your comments are getting more and more ignorant.
"I can't really discuss how balanced the game is at the level cap because I didn't get there. However, I didn't enjoy when Order got their knockback about 10 levels before Destruction. That made many of the scenarios heavily favored for Order until things balanced out. When I left, at level 26, ranged casters (Bright Wizards/Sorceress') were doing far too much damage and 3 shotting melee before they got in range. But Balancing issues are somewhat par for the course in MMOs. Everyone talks as though WoW was perfectly balanced since launch, which obviously isn't true."
I have never said WoW was perfectly balanced, but compare to warhammer, it was much more polished in that department. warhammer is simply lacking and you can pretty much tell by the level of effort they put in to balancing the game. You did make a good point class based game is very different from go or chess, 10 men melee team works very different than a 10 men wizard team. and frankly, in some cases you will end up with no viable strategies. That was the point i was trying to get across.
"Good god, you're probably happy with the abortion that is WoW's new arena ranking system. Plain fact is that MMOs aren't as simple as a ranking system for Chess or Go. In those games there isn't one type of player that can move a knight differently, move more pieces at once, etc. So some people would match up better than others. In those cases if you get unlucky and meet a a player around your ranking that you don't match up against and you lose you'll go down - and you might not be able to win no matter what you do. There's no simple or even complex math that would probably work to deal with all the combinations of races, classes, and talents. Welcome to class based games."
What you are saying only applies to random team ups. In prebuilt team vs. team, the ranking system works as it should because people are performing as expected. Now what you are pretty much saying is there aren't always viable strategies in random match up, but wouldn't that pretty much be a design and balance issue?
"So because I don't agree that the game is 'absolute junk' all my comments are 'baseless and invalid'. Great job. So you are saying that PQs and public parties suck? I totally disagree, they are revolutionary. As for the seige mechanics, they are better. Busting down the door to a keep takes more than just a mindless zerg (that's how Wintergrasp works)."
Well, no. I am saying your comments were baseless and invalid because you didn't have any examples to back yourself up, you just spew out
"The idea and implementation of the public quest was great, and the open parties were awesome too. These are things you will probably see in every MMO from here on out. The siege mechanics were light-years better than the Wintergrasp crap that Blizzard is trying to throw into WoW."
without telling us why. I am simply stating warhammer siege isn't light-years ahead of WoW, nor is it that good. Further more, i backed up my claims with examples and points that are real issues in warhammer.
"So you are saying that PQs and public parties suck?"
Nowhere in my post said PQs suck, don't make up things and tag them onto what i said. As for public parties, yes, they suck, for obvious reasons. Siege too, the problem is siege requires you not to zerg, but public party group dynamics are so bad that zerg is your only option, and that is _NOT_ a viable strategy. Separately and in theory they look great; but when put together in practice... they work against each other.
McDonalds Energy,
Solving home heating crisis by providing clean deep fryer vegetable oil!
No, The PvP is done wrong, very very wrong. There's something wrong when you have to wait over 2 hours for instance based PvP. Balancing issue is an extreme understatement. Why? Because when you lock down an account to play only order or destro, you better make sure there are even numbers of order vs. destro on the server, and even so it still can be uneven due to the fact not everybody plays PvP.
The classes are far from balanced, so what you can do tons of damage, if you die in 3 hits, your attack power means nothing. And how convenient for the melees that almost every one of them got a ranged attack that can slow people down.
The RvR level is a good concept, but they implemented in such a bad way that made RvR level totally pointless. In games such as Go or Chess, you go up or down in level by your win/lose ratio. PvP level should be done in the same way since just because you have a lv 40 character doesn't mean you are a lv 40 player. So what really should happen is:
1) Allow RvR level to go up or down base on kill/death ratio.
2) RvR scenarios should group people with similar RvR rating together.
3) Have level cap in each and every RvR zone as opposed of turning people into chicken.
4) in 1vs1 situations, the chance of winning should be 50% if the players have the same RvR level rating.
The siege mechanics are horrible in warhammer, i don't know what you are talking about. First, it is a matter of money. The team with more money buying engine/weapon have advantage. Second, offense is a nightmare, without 18+ people you aren't going to do anything and the keep lord will slaughter your team. Third, with public parties, what you end up with are an unorganized band of noobs that are really unfit to go for keeps/castles. There are way too many Leeroy Jenkins wannabes. Fourth, people should be barred from siege 3 am in the morning where noone is on to defend.
I am not saying Blizzard is doing any better, but Mythic simply are not up to par and what you said are baseless and invalid.
Free games are actually very bad for new development. Large game dev houses can afford to make free game because they are widely known, they can get the sponsors, they can get advertisement deals, and they have the capitol to kick start game projects. This is however not the case with starters. In an economic stand point of view, free games are very bad for diversity and competition. I remember testing this theory out in one of the games I played. I made a high level blacksmith in an MMO, and offered people to forge for them for free as long as they provided materials. While I became the most widely known blacksmith and the best due to many people coming to me, I decimated the industry because I made it prohibitively expensive for new players to start making blacksmiths, and they can't make any money even after they become fairly high level. Further more, other players actually prefer coming to me due to the fact I have established myself and I break less. Real economy is fairly close to that as well.
It's not surprising. PVP is horribly one sided, and waiting for an RVR instance is an exercise in itself due to everyone and their dog plays destruction on most servers. numbers don't match up, skill levels don't match up, so what you are end up with, is a constant exercise in futility. The chicken thing is amusing at first but quickly turned annoying as well. Basically you have three races per faction, but in order to do the quests in other races of the same faction, you risk of accidentally turning chicken constantly and getting one shotted by some newbie. The client itself is horrible, the game crashes a lot, for no reason. It got so bad that they introduced a patch to scale back graphics just for stability. Of course that didn't help much at all. Crash happens just the same. switch between zones lag badly. and some towns sit right at the switch line, causing all sorts of problems. Apparently their programmers are not competent enough to write threaded zone proximity loading with lower priority threads. This game is absolute junk and I wouldn't recommend it for anyone.
The funny part is, belated dx in linux still has better hardware support than OpenGL...
My miss then, but i am a bit confused on why they don't just enable SSL by default for all. I mean it isn't so much that people don't end up switching to full SSL anyways.
That's great, please make sure to not only clear out data on disk, but in index and cache as well.
You are not alone. Using google apps are fine for your run of the mill type up needs. But for government documents especially that of the sensitive issue, google apps are horribly inadequate. For starters, google stores the documents on their server farms and do not really delete anything. This can be a security issue. Second, the default for ssl is log in only, potential for unencrypted transmission of sensitive data being intercepted is huge. Data retention, data backup, and data recovery are also huge issues with google docs. This guy is obviously an idiot and a business man wearing an IT guy suit. When the requirement can't even be met, saving money is a moot point.
AJAX + self updating js saved in cookies
Speak of not making any sense, how is assuming that the application of situation A stays in the scope of situation A? The world would be so much better of a place if everything we intend to do cannot be exploited, cannot be modified, and only serves the purpose they are designated, no more, no less. Are you saying that potential exploits should not be discussed in a ethical overview of a medical practice? Are you implying that it is perfectly ethical to serve people a medcine that can cure cancer, but is known to causes immediate heart failure? Let's go with your carrot issue, would it be morally correct to convince your next door neighbor to eat a carrot in front of you knowing you are going to shoot people who eat carrot with a gun? Even though eating a carrot is good for his/her health in situation A where for all intended purpose, it would help with their vitamin A deficiency? I am sorry, but your arguments fail on so many fronts and are full of holes. The train of thought you presented makes less sense than my arguments.