They have an unusually low melee limit, for one thing, so they hardly ever melee more than a couple times per minute.
His bots do prioritize saving people. Since they have almost perfect aim, they usually shoot hunters out of the air, and smokers before the pull takes effect. On the off chance you got pounced or pulled, they'll shoot it off near instantly, unless they're mobbed or busy with a tank. (unlikely)
They're even better if you enable friendly fire. Then they basically never miss the undead, and hardly ever get hit by them - but they hit each other way too much to last through an expert game.
It's all variables. The AI could be good, but it's been tweaked not to be.
Microsoft removed the superior method of communicating with hardware that OpenGL had been using since Win9x.
They designed something very similar to what OpenGL did, for DX10, which improved communications efficiency quite a bit. (Takes far less CPU power to talk to the videocards, compared to DX9)
Unfortunately, there's only one of these channels in the kernel now, so OpenGL has to sit on top of it. (Reducing OpenGL's efficiency, since it doesn't need all the overhead that DX10 does)
I don't care about melee weps, beyond this: I want melee to work when a zombie is stuck in a wall or the floor.
Nothing sucks more than a zombie hiding under a table, knawing on your leg, taking you from 70 to 20 health in a few seconds. Worse yet, the table interferes with projectile angles, so shooting the zombie is difficult(not just point and click), on top of meleeing it being impossible.
Oh, and those trash cans. Seriously. It's not proper that a trash can rolling up against my leg completely immobilizes me and prevents me from jumping. If I press forward, and a trash can is trying to roll me to the left, I should move forward; not sit there stuttering while the trash can passes through my legs, then once it has passed through I can proceed.
Better AI? That sounds great, but the zombies were already plenty smart(or stupid; depends how you want to look at it). Special infected AI was pretty weak, but totally acceptable in singleplayer and co-op. Not so good if your allies leave in a versus match, so you're stuck with the AI...
The bots though? Damn they're stupid. Either give me some commands that they respond to("Come here", "Get in the corner", "Melee the zombies back while I shoot.") or make them smarter than bricks. Though to be fair, it's not the engine's fault. I know someone that wrote a modified AI script(tweaks known and hidden cvars for singleplayer and local hosting), and it really was impressive what the bots could do; they hide in closets, cover each other very well; usually one player crouches and melees while the others shoot over his shoulder. They don't waste medkits when they hit 49 health, but they always make sure one player is in the green if possible. Oh yeah, and they almost never get caught by tanks; they're good enough to beat expert mode with an all-bot team!
But that just proves that the engine is already solid/perfect; the game just needs more polish...
One last note - I'm sad they're implementing chainsaws. I'd be happier if they had unworking chainsaws that you could pick up, toss, but not actually use to cut things up. Every zombie game has chainsaws; it's so stereotypical. But I would laugh at finding chainsaws all over the place that can't be used, or have already been used. Maybe you can drop them on the zombies, or toss them down stairs/halls to kill/trip a bunch of zombies.;)
Or the chainsaw could be defensive. Carrying it around reduces damage taken from attacks from behind. Just do something original!
Heh. The thing is, DNF wasn't nearly as open of a project as the Pandora is. If the devs working there had told everyone how things were going, it would've inspired pessimism rather than optimism.
You'd guess in a time where every mobile has camera people would come up with some good pictures, but that hasn't happened.
The answer is clear, then... the aliens must be using advanced computers with scanner technology to detect camera and recording devices, and only show up where those devices aren't present! That way they can remain undetected to continue conducting their nefarious experiments on us!
But the cows know when the aliens are coming, and get real apprehensive about it! If you keep a pet cow in your house, it'll wake you up at night before you can be abducted!
The official site wasn't very good last time I visited. I think 3 pages had some English text on them, every link was broken, and you had to flip it to chinese for the downloads to work. Also, MASSIVE flash banner that does nothing.
They may have corrected the issues, but I wouldn't know, since their site won't load for me right now. (I'm in Canada)
Perhaps it does say something about Google - but perhaps not what you thought...!
Big blocks of code might be moved into a function or put inside an if statement. The indenting is usually stuffed up in the process.
You raise an interesting point. Although from what I know of Python programmers, most would probably just create indentThis.py to solve that problem.;)
To be honest, that's more of an IDE issue than a language issue. In Python, indenting is important. In C, throwing a ; on the end of everything is important. The IDE should be correcting it to make your life easier, when it's obvious what you're doing. Your usage scenario demands it, but the IDE doesn't do it, so that part of the language's style becomes annoying.
I was initially spoiled by having Comment/Uncomment buttons. You select some lines, click the button, and slashes get added. They make it extremely easy to comment away parts of code, but not other parts. I find/**/ quite sloppy by comparison, since there's no easy way to comment inside of comments, so that if uncommented, part is still commented. (Useful for, for example... lines left in to speed up debugging, but only required if the method is rewritten later on)
I also got used to pressing Tab to indent whatever is selected, and pressing Backspace to un-indent it. (applies only when multiple lines are selected) Only delete actually deletes.
Most IDEs either have none of those, or just the Tabbing, so I too am annoyed when indentation or commenting aren't easily manipulatable. But I fault the IDE for not suiting the language, rather than faulting the language. And if I am forced to use some shitty IDE because that's what is available, then I probably would pick a better supported language, even if it's not a better language...
I'm a fan of verbose variable and method names, but simplistic symbol usage.
I find languages like C have far too many unnecessary symbols. Stuff like <<, >>, ->,::, etc. could all be replaced by dots, plusses, etc., and the compiler could figure it all out. Apparently there's even a few IDEs (like QT Creator) that can automatically do it to make it easier on programmers more familiar with other languages.
Code should be readable.
function plotResults(int[] Results) { if(verifyLength(Results))
{
resultsGraph.reset();
resultsGraph.plot(Results);
} }
Most languages can be coded in such a way, but I do find excessive amounts of symbols(C/C++) or keywords(Java) does cloud the cleanliness of the code a bit. And I myself am not in the "Genius OS coder" developer bracket, so having to remember what extra symbols C requires actually distracts me from the design of the program.
I do better in languages with less symbols. Javascript is my best language (I've completed whole 5000 line projects without a single error; once I'm done writing it, it works as predicted), and Java is next best. With Java I usually have a few errors per 1000 lines, always caught the next day when I look through my code with a clear head, unless it's UI code. (I have trouble debugging swing crap:P )
And C... oh hell, you don't want me writing C. I can debug it and spot errors just fine, but I can't write code that compiles for the life of me. I always forget something, which causes the compiler to spit out error messages all day long, or at least until someone bails me out by telling me what I forgot.
I guess our minds all work different. Although mine is very technical and doesn't have a problem understanding what the code is doing, it wants the code in a specific style if possible, and it doesn't want to write styles it doesn't like. (mostly C)
One last note - I recently overheard someone ranting about the usage of indenting in Python. All my code is properly indented, so it would be trivial to remove the {} brackets from my Java code, if Java supported it. Yet more evidence of what languages work for my mind.;)
This isn't really a surprise. The EU got exactly what they asked for. Why would MS leave part of the media player system installed if they were legally required to remove Media Player?
I believe the phrase that applies here is "Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it."
Media Player != codec.
It would be like removing all the email and IM programs too, just because they got told to remove IE. (web browsers can email and IM) They are closely related software, but they are distinct, and there's no reason to cripple other functionality when complying with the request.
But if you judge by past actions, it'd be just like Microsoft to strip out ALL of IE... including the rendering engine... and any programs that depend on it.
My point is merely that they didn't/don't have to. It's a choice, on their part.
Get over it. All my factual posts have been modded troll/flamebait/overrated lately.
I actually had the audacity to suggest that offering multiple browsers is the quickest way to appease EU antitrust concerns. Clearly that's trolling and flaming.
The iPhone is a very solid and well supported product.
But it's by no means perfect, and it got a lot of stuff wrong. (As already pointed out, the app limit is annoying)
And saying the iPhone is better than ____ isn't that impressive. Vista is better than Windows ME, but let me tell you, that comparison means nothing at all.:P The iPhone can still be bad at a specific thing while beating almost every other phone, because the other phones are absolutely atrocious at it.
I have to agree with the guy. Between the BS stunts Microsoft pulled with WGA, IE,.net bundled updates, etc., I really don't think we should be trusting them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. If we do, they'll abuse their power.
His suggestion seems reasonable for a company with bad behaviour.
Lets face it, if Firefox updated and suddenly you had new toolbars/addons/programs installed on your computer(one of which monitors your usage and sends info to Mozilla to ensure you're not engaging in illegal activity), I'm pretty sure everyone would be screaming bloody murder. And yet when Microsoft does it, it's forgive and forget, because damn that EU sure is annoying with all its lawsuits.
There's nothing wrong with selling the complete solution. Apple charges an arm and a leg and doesn't have much market share, which is exactly the opposite of monopolistic.
Now, if they had 80% of PC sales in North America every year, and briefly gave away iMacs for $250 to drive their competition into the ground, then yes, they'd be very anti-competitive and monopolistic.
To me this is just the EU being really fucking dumb, yet again. Anybody remember XP-N? For those that hadn't heard of it, the EU forced MSFT to make an sell a version of XP with no media player called XP-N. I'm sure there is a landfill in Eastern Europe filled with XP-N discs because the retailers said they couldn't give them away and it was more worthless than an AOL CD.
To be fair, Microsoft made that situation way worse than it had to be. They completely stripped out compatibility with windows media videos, when they didn't have to(Proof: nLite), with the argument that they had to. (which was bullshit)
And instead of offering choices of which media player to use, they offered... nothing. They torpedoed the EU's demands on purpose to make them look bad. Very childish, although I suppose if I were being sued by them for hundreds of millions of dollars, I may have done the same.:P
I unistalled IE with nLite, to the point where I can't reinstall it. Tried; it the installer fails with cruddy error messages. I'll have to reinstall my OS if I want it back. (which I don't)
And yet stuff like Steam (which clearly depends on it) functions fine, because almost no programs are dependant on IE. They may be dependent on Trident rendering(referred to as the IE Core in nLite), but definitely not on IE the program.
But it is annoying when I come across a program that tries to launch iexplore.exe, rather than the default browser.
No really - why? It's incredibly simple to implement this. A window with a list of web browsers, some screenshots when you click on one, and a Next button which starts the download.
This is actually what I suggested back when all this antitrust crap started, years and years ago.
Microsoft repeatedly pulls stunts like resetting the default browser back to IE, in addition to not allowing it to be uninstalled. (You can remove the icon) The only way they'll get out from under this antitrust stuff is to over-react now. This is an incredibly easy way to over-react, which shows they're complying and promoting choice.
They should also do it for media players. Eventually people will get annoyed by all the choices, and complain, and then OEMs will just start picking whatever software is most popular - but nobody will be able to pin the blame on them.
The greatest danger to Linux's success is not Microsoft. It's the hubris of many Linux developers, users, and advocates, who are too busy disavowing responsibility and blaming everybody else to fix real user's problems. (And yes, I'm a follower of the Raymond Chen philosophy)
Wonderful post. And I totally agree. Whenever I criticize features of linux, I get modded flamebait or troll, indicating that nobody on/. gives a crap unless it causes them problems like real data loss.
Even then, if the data loss is only for me, then I must be a troll.:P
While i'm aware that a HIG should cover more than just the look and feel, it feels like google bends the rules when it comes to interface guidelines.
No two browsers look alike. I happen to like Google Chrome's look and feel. To me, it's way superior to IE's.
While Google Chrome has a unique look, it does not have a totally unique behviour. The X button is still in the corner of the screen, making it easy to find an click. (Aren't you annoyed by apps with no X button or titlebar?)
It accepts all the standard hotkeys. I don't care if an app looks Win32, if it doesn't let me use the hotkeys I've gotten used to.
All in all, I'd say the unique interface isn't disruptive. It might even be intuitive, to anyone that's used lots of Windows programs.
We need more all-digital elections. I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.
Slashdot Mirror
They have an unusually low melee limit, for one thing, so they hardly ever melee more than a couple times per minute.
His bots do prioritize saving people. Since they have almost perfect aim, they usually shoot hunters out of the air, and smokers before the pull takes effect. On the off chance you got pounced or pulled, they'll shoot it off near instantly, unless they're mobbed or busy with a tank. (unlikely)
They're even better if you enable friendly fire. Then they basically never miss the undead, and hardly ever get hit by them - but they hit each other way too much to last through an expert game.
It's all variables. The AI could be good, but it's been tweaked not to be.
Microsoft removed the superior method of communicating with hardware that OpenGL had been using since Win9x.
They designed something very similar to what OpenGL did, for DX10, which improved communications efficiency quite a bit. (Takes far less CPU power to talk to the videocards, compared to DX9)
Unfortunately, there's only one of these channels in the kernel now, so OpenGL has to sit on top of it. (Reducing OpenGL's efficiency, since it doesn't need all the overhead that DX10 does)
Left4Dead, polished a bit more, is perfect as is.
I don't care about melee weps, beyond this: I want melee to work when a zombie is stuck in a wall or the floor.
Nothing sucks more than a zombie hiding under a table, knawing on your leg, taking you from 70 to 20 health in a few seconds. Worse yet, the table interferes with projectile angles, so shooting the zombie is difficult(not just point and click), on top of meleeing it being impossible.
Oh, and those trash cans. Seriously. It's not proper that a trash can rolling up against my leg completely immobilizes me and prevents me from jumping. If I press forward, and a trash can is trying to roll me to the left, I should move forward; not sit there stuttering while the trash can passes through my legs, then once it has passed through I can proceed.
Better AI? That sounds great, but the zombies were already plenty smart(or stupid; depends how you want to look at it). Special infected AI was pretty weak, but totally acceptable in singleplayer and co-op. Not so good if your allies leave in a versus match, so you're stuck with the AI...
The bots though? Damn they're stupid. Either give me some commands that they respond to("Come here", "Get in the corner", "Melee the zombies back while I shoot.") or make them smarter than bricks. Though to be fair, it's not the engine's fault. I know someone that wrote a modified AI script(tweaks known and hidden cvars for singleplayer and local hosting), and it really was impressive what the bots could do; they hide in closets, cover each other very well; usually one player crouches and melees while the others shoot over his shoulder. They don't waste medkits when they hit 49 health, but they always make sure one player is in the green if possible. Oh yeah, and they almost never get caught by tanks; they're good enough to beat expert mode with an all-bot team!
But that just proves that the engine is already solid/perfect; the game just needs more polish...
One last note - I'm sad they're implementing chainsaws. I'd be happier if they had unworking chainsaws that you could pick up, toss, but not actually use to cut things up. Every zombie game has chainsaws; it's so stereotypical. But I would laugh at finding chainsaws all over the place that can't be used, or have already been used. Maybe you can drop them on the zombies, or toss them down stairs/halls to kill/trip a bunch of zombies. ;)
Or the chainsaw could be defensive. Carrying it around reduces damage taken from attacks from behind. Just do something original!
Heh. The thing is, DNF wasn't nearly as open of a project as the Pandora is. If the devs working there had told everyone how things were going, it would've inspired pessimism rather than optimism.
For Vista, wasn't it OpenGL?
For Windows 7, wasn't it SLI? Or did they back down on that?
You'd guess in a time where every mobile has camera people would come up with some good pictures, but that hasn't happened.
The answer is clear, then... the aliens must be using advanced computers with scanner technology to detect camera and recording devices, and only show up where those devices aren't present! That way they can remain undetected to continue conducting their nefarious experiments on us!
But the cows know when the aliens are coming, and get real apprehensive about it! If you keep a pet cow in your house, it'll wake you up at night before you can be abducted!
The official site wasn't very good last time I visited. I think 3 pages had some English text on them, every link was broken, and you had to flip it to chinese for the downloads to work. Also, MASSIVE flash banner that does nothing.
They may have corrected the issues, but I wouldn't know, since their site won't load for me right now. (I'm in Canada)
Perhaps it does say something about Google - but perhaps not what you thought...!
The Pandora is going to be a very powerful and well designed device. (I hope)
I know how much effort the creators have put into it. They aren't just creating something to sell - they're creating their perfect dream machine.
I've got a pre-order in, so once it arrives I'll review it, unless the 'net is already flooded with reviews. ;)
You are likely right(if not a year, it'll be ebay fodder in 18 months).
It's $80 right now, with free shipping worldwide. Has been that price since it launched.
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.20217
Well, it might be a waste of money, but it shouldn't take long to make up $80 of value from playing old classics. :P
Big blocks of code might be moved into a function or put inside an if statement. The indenting is usually stuffed up in the process.
You raise an interesting point. Although from what I know of Python programmers, most would probably just create indentThis.py to solve that problem. ;)
To be honest, that's more of an IDE issue than a language issue. In Python, indenting is important. In C, throwing a ; on the end of everything is important. The IDE should be correcting it to make your life easier, when it's obvious what you're doing. Your usage scenario demands it, but the IDE doesn't do it, so that part of the language's style becomes annoying.
I was initially spoiled by having Comment/Uncomment buttons. You select some lines, click the button, and slashes get added. They make it extremely easy to comment away parts of code, but not other parts. I find /**/ quite sloppy by comparison, since there's no easy way to comment inside of comments, so that if uncommented, part is still commented. (Useful for, for example... lines left in to speed up debugging, but only required if the method is rewritten later on)
I also got used to pressing Tab to indent whatever is selected, and pressing Backspace to un-indent it. (applies only when multiple lines are selected) Only delete actually deletes.
Most IDEs either have none of those, or just the Tabbing, so I too am annoyed when indentation or commenting aren't easily manipulatable. But I fault the IDE for not suiting the language, rather than faulting the language. And if I am forced to use some shitty IDE because that's what is available, then I probably would pick a better supported language, even if it's not a better language...
I'm a fan of verbose variable and method names, but simplistic symbol usage.
I find languages like C have far too many unnecessary symbols. Stuff like <<, >>, ->, ::, etc. could all be replaced by dots, plusses, etc., and the compiler could figure it all out. Apparently there's even a few IDEs (like QT Creator) that can automatically do it to make it easier on programmers more familiar with other languages.
Code should be readable.
function plotResults(int[] Results)
{
if(verifyLength(Results))
{
resultsGraph.reset();
resultsGraph.plot(Results);
}
}
Most languages can be coded in such a way, but I do find excessive amounts of symbols(C/C++) or keywords(Java) does cloud the cleanliness of the code a bit. And I myself am not in the "Genius OS coder" developer bracket, so having to remember what extra symbols C requires actually distracts me from the design of the program.
I do better in languages with less symbols. Javascript is my best language (I've completed whole 5000 line projects without a single error; once I'm done writing it, it works as predicted), and Java is next best. With Java I usually have a few errors per 1000 lines, always caught the next day when I look through my code with a clear head, unless it's UI code. (I have trouble debugging swing crap :P )
And C... oh hell, you don't want me writing C. I can debug it and spot errors just fine, but I can't write code that compiles for the life of me. I always forget something, which causes the compiler to spit out error messages all day long, or at least until someone bails me out by telling me what I forgot.
I guess our minds all work different. Although mine is very technical and doesn't have a problem understanding what the code is doing, it wants the code in a specific style if possible, and it doesn't want to write styles it doesn't like. (mostly C)
One last note - I recently overheard someone ranting about the usage of indenting in Python. All my code is properly indented, so it would be trivial to remove the {} brackets from my Java code, if Java supported it. Yet more evidence of what languages work for my mind. ;)
This isn't really a surprise. The EU got exactly what they asked for. Why would MS leave part of the media player system installed if they were legally required to remove Media Player?
I believe the phrase that applies here is "Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it."
Media Player != codec.
It would be like removing all the email and IM programs too, just because they got told to remove IE. (web browsers can email and IM) They are closely related software, but they are distinct, and there's no reason to cripple other functionality when complying with the request.
But if you judge by past actions, it'd be just like Microsoft to strip out ALL of IE... including the rendering engine... and any programs that depend on it.
My point is merely that they didn't/don't have to. It's a choice, on their part.
Oxygen free "magnetically aligned" copper, hand twisted, and manually rubbed between the breasts of virgins for extra "lustre."
They just won't tell you that the virgins look like Rush Limbaugh.
They just won't tell you that the virgins post on Slashdot.
Fixed.
They post on slashdot? Well that means they're men... Lustrous man boobs, eeew!!
Get over it. All my factual posts have been modded troll/flamebait/overrated lately.
I actually had the audacity to suggest that offering multiple browsers is the quickest way to appease EU antitrust concerns. Clearly that's trolling and flaming.
The iPhone is a very solid and well supported product.
But it's by no means perfect, and it got a lot of stuff wrong. (As already pointed out, the app limit is annoying)
And saying the iPhone is better than ____ isn't that impressive. Vista is better than Windows ME, but let me tell you, that comparison means nothing at all. :P The iPhone can still be bad at a specific thing while beating almost every other phone, because the other phones are absolutely atrocious at it.
Hey, ever use a Nokia N95? That sure was fun. ;)
I have to agree with the guy. Between the BS stunts Microsoft pulled with WGA, IE, .net bundled updates, etc., I really don't think we should be trusting them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. If we do, they'll abuse their power.
His suggestion seems reasonable for a company with bad behaviour.
Lets face it, if Firefox updated and suddenly you had new toolbars/addons/programs installed on your computer(one of which monitors your usage and sends info to Mozilla to ensure you're not engaging in illegal activity), I'm pretty sure everyone would be screaming bloody murder. And yet when Microsoft does it, it's forgive and forget, because damn that EU sure is annoying with all its lawsuits.
There's nothing wrong with selling the complete solution. Apple charges an arm and a leg and doesn't have much market share, which is exactly the opposite of monopolistic.
Now, if they had 80% of PC sales in North America every year, and briefly gave away iMacs for $250 to drive their competition into the ground, then yes, they'd be very anti-competitive and monopolistic.
To me this is just the EU being really fucking dumb, yet again. Anybody remember XP-N? For those that hadn't heard of it, the EU forced MSFT to make an sell a version of XP with no media player called XP-N. I'm sure there is a landfill in Eastern Europe filled with XP-N discs because the retailers said they couldn't give them away and it was more worthless than an AOL CD.
To be fair, Microsoft made that situation way worse than it had to be. They completely stripped out compatibility with windows media videos, when they didn't have to(Proof: nLite), with the argument that they had to. (which was bullshit)
And instead of offering choices of which media player to use, they offered... nothing. They torpedoed the EU's demands on purpose to make them look bad. Very childish, although I suppose if I were being sued by them for hundreds of millions of dollars, I may have done the same. :P
I unistalled IE with nLite, to the point where I can't reinstall it. Tried; it the installer fails with cruddy error messages. I'll have to reinstall my OS if I want it back. (which I don't)
And yet stuff like Steam (which clearly depends on it) functions fine, because almost no programs are dependant on IE. They may be dependent on Trident rendering(referred to as the IE Core in nLite), but definitely not on IE the program.
But it is annoying when I come across a program that tries to launch iexplore.exe, rather than the default browser.
Why?
No really - why? It's incredibly simple to implement this. A window with a list of web browsers, some screenshots when you click on one, and a Next button which starts the download.
This is actually what I suggested back when all this antitrust crap started, years and years ago.
Microsoft repeatedly pulls stunts like resetting the default browser back to IE, in addition to not allowing it to be uninstalled. (You can remove the icon) The only way they'll get out from under this antitrust stuff is to over-react now. This is an incredibly easy way to over-react, which shows they're complying and promoting choice.
They should also do it for media players. Eventually people will get annoyed by all the choices, and complain, and then OEMs will just start picking whatever software is most popular - but nobody will be able to pin the blame on them.
The greatest danger to Linux's success is not Microsoft. It's the hubris of many Linux developers, users, and advocates, who are too busy disavowing responsibility and blaming everybody else to fix real user's problems. (And yes, I'm a follower of the Raymond Chen philosophy)
Wonderful post. And I totally agree. Whenever I criticize features of linux, I get modded flamebait or troll, indicating that nobody on /. gives a crap unless it causes them problems like real data loss.
Even then, if the data loss is only for me, then I must be a troll. :P
While i'm aware that a HIG should cover more than just the look and feel, it feels like google bends the rules when it comes to interface guidelines.
No two browsers look alike. I happen to like Google Chrome's look and feel. To me, it's way superior to IE's.
While Google Chrome has a unique look, it does not have a totally unique behviour. The X button is still in the corner of the screen, making it easy to find an click. (Aren't you annoyed by apps with no X button or titlebar?)
It accepts all the standard hotkeys. I don't care if an app looks Win32, if it doesn't let me use the hotkeys I've gotten used to.
All in all, I'd say the unique interface isn't disruptive. It might even be intuitive, to anyone that's used lots of Windows programs.
I find this funny, because over 90% of wikipedia is totally accurate. :P
Maybe I should be citing it as a source, rather than scientific journals. ;)
http://www.ventrilo.com/dlprod.php?id=1
Exact same restrictions!
We need more all-digital elections. I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.
This should be modded insightful; not funny.