eXistenZ and Primer are using the onion layering as a plot device in a manner that would not make sense in The Matrix.
And story-wise, Inception isn't half of what it's cracked up to be. You slashdot'ers are supposed to be bright - are there ACTUALLY anyone here who thought that movie was hard to understand? They explain EVERYTHING as it happens. Claiming that the movie is brilliant, just cause the closing scene leaves you with 2 possible interpretations is weak. It was a pretty good action movie, but they definitely could've exploited the whole dream-world theme a bit more than a folding city, a single ultra-slow-motion scene, and a single anti-gravity scene.
Onion layering would not make sense in The Matrix, because it's too obvious. I bet some 70% of all the people who saw Matrix considered the option, so the obvious problem is: why wouldn't the people who were woken up consider this option? If the machines are able to prevent humans from waking up, onion layering would not be neccesary. If they're not able to prevent people from waking up, people who had already woken up from the inner layer would be that much more well suited to wake up again and again and again, and assuming there was such a thing as a final layer, reaching it would be delayed by an insignificant amount, and any one truly free person could probably penetrate straight down to the innermost layer, and bypass all other layers entirely.
Supposedly, "new IP" means "an IP that is new", as opposed to "old IP which is a different old IP than the old IP that some subset of people would consider an obvious candidate". Besides, in terms of IP, Ghost = SC.
Have you played Warcraft? Apparently, World of Starcraft is to Starcraft what World of Warcraft is to Warcraft (clever, huh?)
In case you haven't - it's a completely different game in a completely different genre.
The original Warcraft is a realtime strategy game, where you control an army of either orcs or humans, and need to destroy the opposing force through a combination of resource management (macro) and direct control of your trained army units (micro). Warcraft 2 and 3 are sequels.
World of Warcraft is, as you probably know, an MMORPG, set in the world of Warcraft (now you know how they came up with the name too)
Starcraft is Warcraft in a sci-fi setting.
Imagine two groups of dissidents in China: a thousand-strong group with guns and a few tanks, and a lone guy who manages to send a message to half the population -- which one would their government fear more?
Stop equating copyright with the downfall of freedom of speach. Copyright is not about restricting what people can say. Your single chinese guy does not *WANT* to utilize copyright if he wants his message to reach as far and wide as possible. Copyright is about giving the author of any given intellectual material the right to choose who he wishes to share it with (the answer usually being anyone willing to pay).
Copyright doesn't restrict who you can talk to, and what you can say to them. It allows you to restrict who you'll allow to listen.
Depends which north, from which north pole. I'm sure the popular opinion assumes that "walking north", whether meaning "towards magnetic north" or "towards rotational north", assumes that the north pole mentioned is the same kind of north. In which case, no, it's not possible.
Or, differently put, your claim to be understanding the existance of two sets of poles is somewhat contradicted by your reference to "the north pole", as if there is only one.
However, it's possible to be walking north even though your compass tells you you're heading south.
"I know my product X, competing with product Y, does task A really really good, but is lacking on task B, so I'm gonna pay a third party to compare products X and Y in terms of how well they perform task A, and try not to mention task B"
Yes, it's marketing, but it might very well be true that product X is better than Y at A. If third party concludes that X is in fact better at A, we can't consider this false simply because the maker of X paid for the study.
What I think is awesome about these games is how they are what you make of them. Apparently, you decided to abuse the mechanics to gain any edge possible, and you blame the game for letting you.
I can totally imagine it must've sucked. Constantly worrying about your notes, playing in the most counter-intuitive way imagineable, actively trying to avoid leveling up because you don't want the world to scale.
I designed a custom class which majored in the exact abilities I planned to use, and I didn't care about maximizing stat bonuses. Guess what? I was well able to beat the game. Actually, I even felt OP from being a master at both destruction, healing and melee combat, all while wearing armor and being accompanied by my conjured companion.
Ideally, I agree that sandbox games shouldn't scale. But replacing rats with pumas, and fur armor with glass armor at least served to keep the challenge up.
If you're gonna claim they'll use Engine B specifically, you probably should attempt to find a better quote than "Engine A might not be the obvious choice".
Each to its own indeed. I'm generally more of a fantasy-person, but I found Fallout 3 very very impressive. For a few hours. Then I caught myself actually being being influenced by the ingame atmosphere to the point were I was almost downright depressed. I suspect this is kind of the intention, and I would never describe Fallout 3 as bad. On the contrary, I think it's *too* good.
Do you even know the first thing about the magazin you're referring to here?
Sure enough, it wouldn't be the #1 recommended newspaper if you asked a danish academic. It would probably not even be considered objective. Still, I truly don't know any dane who would be embarrased to have Ekstra Bladet lying around in plain sight in their living room.
I've heard this claim before. Can you actually explain to me how this works?
You lie alone in your couch, doing humping moves, while looking at the TV where an animated chick tells you that it feels good?
You jerk off, while an animated character undresses and tells you how big you are?
Not really.
My religious view doesn't even need to be adjusted to cope with this.
Granted, I'm not saying that Jesus is the son of God, or that Muhammed was a prophet, or that the jews were chosen by God.
I just consider the idea of the universe popping into existance utterly absurd. Just like you consider it absurd that something beyond our understanding may exist, despite the fact that actual scientists are quite well aware that several aspects of the universe are beyond our current understanding.
Religious people might claim a lot of funky shit, but the idea that life should be carbon-based... doesn't that come from science?
Asenic-based lifeforms doesn't shake my faith the slightest.
Is your reasoning behind questioning this number any deeper than "1.3 billion is a lot of money"?
Everything is relative. Oracle is an expensive product.
Slashdot Mirror
eXistenZ and Primer are using the onion layering as a plot device in a manner that would not make sense in The Matrix.
And story-wise, Inception isn't half of what it's cracked up to be. You slashdot'ers are supposed to be bright - are there ACTUALLY anyone here who thought that movie was hard to understand? They explain EVERYTHING as it happens. Claiming that the movie is brilliant, just cause the closing scene leaves you with 2 possible interpretations is weak. It was a pretty good action movie, but they definitely could've exploited the whole dream-world theme a bit more than a folding city, a single ultra-slow-motion scene, and a single anti-gravity scene.
Onion layering would not make sense in The Matrix, because it's too obvious. I bet some 70% of all the people who saw Matrix considered the option, so the obvious problem is: why wouldn't the people who were woken up consider this option? If the machines are able to prevent humans from waking up, onion layering would not be neccesary. If they're not able to prevent people from waking up, people who had already woken up from the inner layer would be that much more well suited to wake up again and again and again, and assuming there was such a thing as a final layer, reaching it would be delayed by an insignificant amount, and any one truly free person could probably penetrate straight down to the innermost layer, and bypass all other layers entirely.
Supposedly, "new IP" means "an IP that is new", as opposed to "old IP which is a different old IP than the old IP that some subset of people would consider an obvious candidate". Besides, in terms of IP, Ghost = SC.
Have you played Warcraft? Apparently, World of Starcraft is to Starcraft what World of Warcraft is to Warcraft (clever, huh?)
In case you haven't - it's a completely different game in a completely different genre.
The original Warcraft is a realtime strategy game, where you control an army of either orcs or humans, and need to destroy the opposing force through a combination of resource management (macro) and direct control of your trained army units (micro). Warcraft 2 and 3 are sequels.
World of Warcraft is, as you probably know, an MMORPG, set in the world of Warcraft (now you know how they came up with the name too)
Starcraft is Warcraft in a sci-fi setting.
Imagine two groups of dissidents in China: a thousand-strong group with guns and a few tanks, and a lone guy who manages to send a message to half the population -- which one would their government fear more?
Stop equating copyright with the downfall of freedom of speach. Copyright is not about restricting what people can say. Your single chinese guy does not *WANT* to utilize copyright if he wants his message to reach as far and wide as possible. Copyright is about giving the author of any given intellectual material the right to choose who he wishes to share it with (the answer usually being anyone willing to pay).
Copyright doesn't restrict who you can talk to, and what you can say to them. It allows you to restrict who you'll allow to listen.
"Don't worry! It's only YOU and everyone you care about that's going to die! It's not the fishes, the bears and the wolfes! Don't worry!"
Indeed. By that logic, I'd claim AI got too commonplace by the time I could carry an electronic device capable of multiplication.
False. It may not always be pretty, but I do not know a single person who can't create a doodle.
Depends which north, from which north pole. I'm sure the popular opinion assumes that "walking north", whether meaning "towards magnetic north" or "towards rotational north", assumes that the north pole mentioned is the same kind of north. In which case, no, it's not possible.
Or, differently put, your claim to be understanding the existance of two sets of poles is somewhat contradicted by your reference to "the north pole", as if there is only one.
However, it's possible to be walking north even though your compass tells you you're heading south.
"We've lost control! Please, won't someone think of the children!"
And then, the IF became a WHEN.
"I know my product X, competing with product Y, does task A really really good, but is lacking on task B, so I'm gonna pay a third party to compare products X and Y in terms of how well they perform task A, and try not to mention task B"
Yes, it's marketing, but it might very well be true that product X is better than Y at A. If third party concludes that X is in fact better at A, we can't consider this false simply because the maker of X paid for the study.
Wow, aren't you objectivity incarnate.
I can say that simply playing your character the way it made sense did not render the game impossible.
What I think is awesome about these games is how they are what you make of them. Apparently, you decided to abuse the mechanics to gain any edge possible, and you blame the game for letting you.
I can totally imagine it must've sucked. Constantly worrying about your notes, playing in the most counter-intuitive way imagineable, actively trying to avoid leveling up because you don't want the world to scale.
I designed a custom class which majored in the exact abilities I planned to use, and I didn't care about maximizing stat bonuses. Guess what? I was well able to beat the game. Actually, I even felt OP from being a master at both destruction, healing and melee combat, all while wearing armor and being accompanied by my conjured companion.
Ideally, I agree that sandbox games shouldn't scale. But replacing rats with pumas, and fur armor with glass armor at least served to keep the challenge up.
"the game" is "a fact"? I thought it was a noun.
If you're gonna claim they'll use Engine B specifically, you probably should attempt to find a better quote than "Engine A might not be the obvious choice".
finalAnswer = "What is " + answer + "?"
Each to its own indeed. I'm generally more of a fantasy-person, but I found Fallout 3 very very impressive. For a few hours. Then I caught myself actually being being influenced by the ingame atmosphere to the point were I was almost downright depressed. I suspect this is kind of the intention, and I would never describe Fallout 3 as bad. On the contrary, I think it's *too* good.
For instance, if we really did see a Crocaduck, that would pretty much be the end of the theory.
Yet, the theory persists despite the platypus.
Vague rhetorical questions without value are now rated insightful?
I'm danish too, and I can honestly say that parent should be modded Informative, not Funny.
Do you even know the first thing about the magazin you're referring to here?
Sure enough, it wouldn't be the #1 recommended newspaper if you asked a danish academic. It would probably not even be considered objective. Still, I truly don't know any dane who would be embarrased to have Ekstra Bladet lying around in plain sight in their living room.
I've heard this claim before. Can you actually explain to me how this works?
You lie alone in your couch, doing humping moves, while looking at the TV where an animated chick tells you that it feels good?
You jerk off, while an animated character undresses and tells you how big you are?
Seems sad to me, even by slashdot standards.
Not really.
My religious view doesn't even need to be adjusted to cope with this.
Granted, I'm not saying that Jesus is the son of God, or that Muhammed was a prophet, or that the jews were chosen by God.
I just consider the idea of the universe popping into existance utterly absurd. Just like you consider it absurd that something beyond our understanding may exist, despite the fact that actual scientists are quite well aware that several aspects of the universe are beyond our current understanding.
Religious people might claim a lot of funky shit, but the idea that life should be carbon-based... doesn't that come from science?
Asenic-based lifeforms doesn't shake my faith the slightest.
That was the first thought that popped into my head when reading the summary as well.
Is your reasoning behind questioning this number any deeper than "1.3 billion is a lot of money"?
Everything is relative. Oracle is an expensive product.