Best guess is that it was lag from loading up after the jump.
In EVE, all solar systems are loaded individually and are connected by jump gates- you want to go from system A to system B, you jump through the gate.
In my day, most deaths as described above were caused when a fleet tried to jump into a system. One fleet would be sat waiting on one side, the other jumps through to meet them. Network lag causes the attacking fleet to load so slowly that the defending fleet (which is already all loaded up and ready to go) can kill them one by one at their leisure.
I agree, and I also own a Razr. I'd love to upgrade, but my carrier doesn't offer any flip-phone style devices at all except for the absolute cheapest entry level devices (the sort of thing that you give to kids for their first phone, all hard plastic and tiny screen).
My flip phone is much longer, when opened, than a brick making it easy to talk on. It's screen is huge (essentially the full length of the phone), and the screen is miraculously unscratched despite years of heavy use (no small feat for something that lives in the same pocket as my keys).
While I thoroughly agree with your sentiments, I'm not sure I understand all of the fury (not just yours) at TFA.
There is nothing wrong with saying that NASA TV lacks presentation. There is a marked difference between an engrossing, in depth documentary and a dull monotone monologue, and a marked difference again from dumbed down trash.
As mentioned by a poster above, try to catch some of the BBC's excellent documentaries commentated by the likes of David Attenborough. No-one can accuse them of being dumbed down, but equally they're far from bland.
If NASA TV is really guilty of poorly written commentary, long camera shots that show nothing of relevance, and periods of prolonged silence which serve no purpose, they should shape up. There's no excuse for shoddy productions, not least when riding on public funding.
I'm not sure it'd be realistically possible to ban home-brewing. Leave a bottle of apple juice out at room temperature and you'll end up (if it doesn't go rancid first) with what is essentially cider. Controlling something so incredibly simple would be impossible.
Secondly, if you allow a third party direct access to your hardware, then that third party can at any time access all your data, no matter what you do software-wise. Encryption just makes it a little harder.
While technically true, and literally true when talking about omnipotent government agents and such what, that isn't necessarily true in reality. A good encryption regime would stop the sort of casual snooping Jo Tech-Support might embark on, as in the summary, and can put your data beyond the practical reaches of your ISP.
Given enough effort any encryption can be beaten and any security broken- but lets not credit the OP's data with that much importance.
In the book, the monster only calls himself Adam in passing (when discussing Paradise Lost) before deciding that he's probably more like Milton's Satan (before dismissing that idea too, on the grounds that Satan was never as lonely as he is). He doesn't seriously take the name Adam; he remains nameless throughout.
You don't need econ101 voodoo where something of infinite value which lasts forever is discounted to nothing to show that more efficient cells that don't cost much more and have a similar long lifespan are worth it (and especially so if they cost less than some things in use).
Cost is all important. 2 devices might both last 500 years, and one might be 3 times as efficient as the other. But if it costs 10 times as much, it's not going to fly with average Mr Commercial.
If I want to kit my house out with solar panels, it wouldn't make sense to buy the more expensive one. Sure it might pay off as the centuries tick by, but that just doesn't enter in to it. You want something affordable now, which will pay off over the next few years before you move house/die.
So in the same week that Microsoft has been forced to implement the infamous "ballot screen" for web browsers after a humiliating judgment on the illegality of forcing a single company-specific product on the user, we get this news story?
Sometimes I think that big corporations just like court cases.
Yes, but the player can change their ship fittings as often as they like (within the aforementioned limits).
As per TFA, the discussion is about locking players into set playing styles,and the difficulty of breaking out of that. In EVE you can change your playing style frequently, as well as go for hybrid or balanced fits which would fall between the cracks of the traditional class system. Most ships and equipment can be turned to multiple uses too- Nanothron, a Tankathron and a Gankathron are all traditional fittings for the Megathron ship, and they all involve very similar equipment and skills, only in different quantities.
Specifically, EVE doesn't have any classes at all, in effect. All "specialty" is dealt with by different equipment- some ships are fast, some tough, some have lots of turrets, some have lots of utility slots, some have bonuses in this and that, etc. The leveling system, as it is, is used to ensure players only unlock usable equipment at a certain rate and in a certain order, and money (coupled with non-recoverable losses after death) acts as a limiting factor in exactly what you can have in your armory at any given point. Other than that, players can do what they like.
It works well, and was probably no more difficult to code and balance than having fixed classes- all the potential "options" are the same, just open to all players.
There are aircars, there have been for decades. They're called "helicopters". Sure they're expensive, noisy, use a butt-load of fuel, and you need a library of qualifications to fly one. But well, no-one ever specified any of that...
And if other intelligent life has done this, then there would be space probes flying around through our solar system. Maybe we're just missing them.
There are literally billions of stars in the galaxy- even if a thousand civilizations spent a sizable portion of their energy lobbing (largely pointless) space probes all over the place, there're still no guarantees that one would be in the solar system during the (astonishingly brief) period that humanity have been looking for them.
Games Workshop, incidentally, took a lot of "inspiration" from D&D, which itself was heavily based on Tolkien's fiction. And Tolkien took a lot of his ideas from folk lore and mythology...
It's funny how creativity works. One man's "knock off" is another's loving tribute.
"Tabbing", correct me if I'm wrong, is where you have the name of various different pages or programmes lined up next to each other, where clicking them brings that page/programme to the front.
On an application level, isn't that just the taskbar? Surely "tabbed browsing" and such is just bringing the main taskbar concept to an individual programme.
Not only that, but there are very few game/book/film bans that have stayed in place forever. The AU will change their mind eventually, at some point in the future; and when they do, the "been banned for x years" tag will ensure it gets a boost in sales.
Just look at the huge commercial success of, for example, the thoroughly mediocre Lady Chatterley's Lover.
The same can be said of The Times in the UK. One of Britain's longest running papers and holder of all sorts of semi-official roles (newspaper of record, for example) it was bought by Murdoch in the '80s. Many of it's best editors were replaced or quit (highly respected Robert Fisk, for example, resigned because of political censorship), and it's focus shifted onto more popular subjects (celebrities, sport, etc).
It has also always backed Murdoch's candidate-of-choice in elections; during his support for New Labour it made many attacks on the Tories, and since Murdoch started backing the Tories again their focus has swung back the other way (although they're more natural Tory supporters anyway, so at least we're back where we started).
They shouldn't. But equally, abandoning about 6 thousand years of lessons learned just because you can makes no sense.
We have keyboards. They're swell. But in this age of high-technology, shouldn't we be able to take the "pressing buttons" approach and come up with something better? Does "trying out new stuff" have to involve waggling Wii Remotes around? I mean they're a nice toy and fun video game controller, but whoever thought they were the best tool for emulating musical instruments really needs to sit down and think about it a bit harder.
What you're basically saying (and I agree) is that the quality of an "orchestra" is directly related to the quality of the instruments.
Classic instruments and nuanced and perfected over centuries of development- and this thing in TFA looks like just a silly Wiimusic-style toy.
But I disagree that there can't be any such thing as a genuinely good synthetic instrument. There might not be yet (or there might be- I just don't know), but there's nothing fundamentally wrong about the concept. We can already make computers produce stunning quality of sound- the main problem is getting the control system right. A violin or a grand piano is a hugely nuanced device- if a similarly complex but intuitive system could be developed for computerized music, I don't doubt that it would be possible to create stunning musical sound out of one.
I don't really see what the problem is with "buttons".
Pianos, organs, etc. overcame essentially this problem centuries ago with a combination of hand and foot buttons (keyboard and pedals). Wind instruments came to the same conclusion too- most wind instruments (eg., trumpet, flute, clarinet) essentially have a small number of buttons which are held in various combinations whilst blowing. And percussion instruments (such as drums) are easily emulateable with big, appropriately shaped buttons that you can bash. String instruments seem to me to be about the only family which don't easily conform.
Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel with Wii remote waggling and breakable lasers and whatnot? I mean sure, if they work brilliantly then why not- but why force it when it so blatantly doesn't?
EVE is often cited as a good example of a "different breed of MMO". And in many ways it is- but the repetition rears it's ugly head very similar.
With MMOs, I think you're either the kind of person who can enjoy playing with other people, and create drama out of the human dynamics, or you're not. The ones who are not should stick with non-MMO games- they'll always be better.
Frankly they seem to miss the difference between secret and private.
I like Wikileaks, as both a concept and a general implementation, but I tend to agree with you in this instance.
Uncovering the sordid secrets which governments and corporations would rather keep under wraps is a laudable activity which should be encouraged. Publishing deeply personal messages, some of which will have been the last communications ever made between the dying and their loved ones, and which have no intrinsic value to anyone except morbid voyeurs, reeks of nothing more than red-top sensationalism.
I feel they let themselves down a bit with this one.
If the civil suit is successful, that implies that the plaintiff (who obviously shoulders the burden of proof) was able to convince a judge that a major American and multi-national organization illegally enslaved him in a secure compound for a decade and a half.
The DA might take an interest considering a lot of the leg work will already have been done for them.
Why would they? If someone lives in a big city, why would they cross-post their ad in all the microsites within a 50 mile radius, just on the off chance that some poor person lives halfway between them and any given neighbour?
And more importantly, why should they? This is the 21st century- websites should have this sort of problem solved.
No, it really is shit. I live halfway between 2 major towns, but too far from either to conveniently pick up any purchases. My own town has no microsite of it's own. So, I have to search the individual different craigslist site for each of the surrounding areas and scan by eyeball in the hope of catching a local ad by chance.
Could be easily improved by ditching the "every town has a site" model and just going with a "location of ad" and "miles from postcode" system, like just about every other ad posting site I've ever seen.
Sure we did. You can't pick and choose how democracy works- this is how it always works all the time, on every issue.
I voted for my local representative (I'm in the UK, so that means an MP, an MEP and some local councilors). They formed a government (specifically and relevantly, the MP forms the national Labour government). That government, who had my democratic mandate, signed a treaty.
We don't get referendums on anything in this country- we always just vote for a government, give them a democratic mandate, and then let them make the decisions. It's no good kicking up a fuss just because they won't hold a referendum on this one issue, among many. If you want referendums then you should be asking for much deeper democratic reform- and good luck to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Best guess is that it was lag from loading up after the jump.
In EVE, all solar systems are loaded individually and are connected by jump gates- you want to go from system A to system B, you jump through the gate.
In my day, most deaths as described above were caused when a fleet tried to jump into a system. One fleet would be sat waiting on one side, the other jumps through to meet them. Network lag causes the attacking fleet to load so slowly that the defending fleet (which is already all loaded up and ready to go) can kill them one by one at their leisure.
I agree, and I also own a Razr. I'd love to upgrade, but my carrier doesn't offer any flip-phone style devices at all except for the absolute cheapest entry level devices (the sort of thing that you give to kids for their first phone, all hard plastic and tiny screen).
My flip phone is much longer, when opened, than a brick making it easy to talk on. It's screen is huge (essentially the full length of the phone), and the screen is miraculously unscratched despite years of heavy use (no small feat for something that lives in the same pocket as my keys).
No bricks for me, thanks.
While I thoroughly agree with your sentiments, I'm not sure I understand all of the fury (not just yours) at TFA.
There is nothing wrong with saying that NASA TV lacks presentation. There is a marked difference between an engrossing, in depth documentary and a dull monotone monologue, and a marked difference again from dumbed down trash.
As mentioned by a poster above, try to catch some of the BBC's excellent documentaries commentated by the likes of David Attenborough. No-one can accuse them of being dumbed down, but equally they're far from bland.
If NASA TV is really guilty of poorly written commentary, long camera shots that show nothing of relevance, and periods of prolonged silence which serve no purpose, they should shape up. There's no excuse for shoddy productions, not least when riding on public funding.
I'm not sure it'd be realistically possible to ban home-brewing. Leave a bottle of apple juice out at room temperature and you'll end up (if it doesn't go rancid first) with what is essentially cider. Controlling something so incredibly simple would be impossible.
Secondly, if you allow a third party direct access to your hardware, then that third party can at any time access all your data, no matter what you do software-wise. Encryption just makes it a little harder.
While technically true, and literally true when talking about omnipotent government agents and such what, that isn't necessarily true in reality. A good encryption regime would stop the sort of casual snooping Jo Tech-Support might embark on, as in the summary, and can put your data beyond the practical reaches of your ISP.
Given enough effort any encryption can be beaten and any security broken- but lets not credit the OP's data with that much importance.
In the book, the monster only calls himself Adam in passing (when discussing Paradise Lost) before deciding that he's probably more like Milton's Satan (before dismissing that idea too, on the grounds that Satan was never as lonely as he is). He doesn't seriously take the name Adam; he remains nameless throughout.
You don't need econ101 voodoo where something of infinite value which lasts forever is discounted to nothing to show that more efficient cells that don't cost much more and have a similar long lifespan are worth it (and especially so if they cost less than some things in use).
Cost is all important. 2 devices might both last 500 years, and one might be 3 times as efficient as the other. But if it costs 10 times as much, it's not going to fly with average Mr Commercial.
If I want to kit my house out with solar panels, it wouldn't make sense to buy the more expensive one. Sure it might pay off as the centuries tick by, but that just doesn't enter in to it. You want something affordable now, which will pay off over the next few years before you move house/die.
So in the same week that Microsoft has been forced to implement the infamous "ballot screen" for web browsers after a humiliating judgment on the illegality of forcing a single company-specific product on the user, we get this news story?
Sometimes I think that big corporations just like court cases.
Yes, but the player can change their ship fittings as often as they like (within the aforementioned limits).
As per TFA, the discussion is about locking players into set playing styles,and the difficulty of breaking out of that. In EVE you can change your playing style frequently, as well as go for hybrid or balanced fits which would fall between the cracks of the traditional class system. Most ships and equipment can be turned to multiple uses too- Nanothron, a Tankathron and a Gankathron are all traditional fittings for the Megathron ship, and they all involve very similar equipment and skills, only in different quantities.
So, EVE Online then?
Specifically, EVE doesn't have any classes at all, in effect. All "specialty" is dealt with by different equipment- some ships are fast, some tough, some have lots of turrets, some have lots of utility slots, some have bonuses in this and that, etc. The leveling system, as it is, is used to ensure players only unlock usable equipment at a certain rate and in a certain order, and money (coupled with non-recoverable losses after death) acts as a limiting factor in exactly what you can have in your armory at any given point. Other than that, players can do what they like.
It works well, and was probably no more difficult to code and balance than having fixed classes- all the potential "options" are the same, just open to all players.
There are aircars, there have been for decades. They're called "helicopters". Sure they're expensive, noisy, use a butt-load of fuel, and you need a library of qualifications to fly one. But well, no-one ever specified any of that...
Aircar's and aircar.
And if other intelligent life has done this, then there would be space probes flying around through our solar system. Maybe we're just missing them.
There are literally billions of stars in the galaxy- even if a thousand civilizations spent a sizable portion of their energy lobbing (largely pointless) space probes all over the place, there're still no guarantees that one would be in the solar system during the (astonishingly brief) period that humanity have been looking for them.
Games Workshop, incidentally, took a lot of "inspiration" from D&D, which itself was heavily based on Tolkien's fiction. And Tolkien took a lot of his ideas from folk lore and mythology...
It's funny how creativity works. One man's "knock off" is another's loving tribute.
"Tabbing", correct me if I'm wrong, is where you have the name of various different pages or programmes lined up next to each other, where clicking them brings that page/programme to the front.
On an application level, isn't that just the taskbar? Surely "tabbed browsing" and such is just bringing the main taskbar concept to an individual programme.
Not only that, but there are very few game/book/film bans that have stayed in place forever. The AU will change their mind eventually, at some point in the future; and when they do, the "been banned for x years" tag will ensure it gets a boost in sales.
Just look at the huge commercial success of, for example, the thoroughly mediocre Lady Chatterley's Lover.
The same can be said of The Times in the UK. One of Britain's longest running papers and holder of all sorts of semi-official roles (newspaper of record, for example) it was bought by Murdoch in the '80s. Many of it's best editors were replaced or quit (highly respected Robert Fisk, for example, resigned because of political censorship), and it's focus shifted onto more popular subjects (celebrities, sport, etc).
It has also always backed Murdoch's candidate-of-choice in elections; during his support for New Labour it made many attacks on the Tories, and since Murdoch started backing the Tories again their focus has swung back the other way (although they're more natural Tory supporters anyway, so at least we're back where we started).
And let's not even get started on The Sun...
They shouldn't. But equally, abandoning about 6 thousand years of lessons learned just because you can makes no sense.
We have keyboards. They're swell. But in this age of high-technology, shouldn't we be able to take the "pressing buttons" approach and come up with something better? Does "trying out new stuff" have to involve waggling Wii Remotes around? I mean they're a nice toy and fun video game controller, but whoever thought they were the best tool for emulating musical instruments really needs to sit down and think about it a bit harder.
What you're basically saying (and I agree) is that the quality of an "orchestra" is directly related to the quality of the instruments.
Classic instruments and nuanced and perfected over centuries of development- and this thing in TFA looks like just a silly Wiimusic-style toy.
But I disagree that there can't be any such thing as a genuinely good synthetic instrument. There might not be yet (or there might be- I just don't know), but there's nothing fundamentally wrong about the concept. We can already make computers produce stunning quality of sound- the main problem is getting the control system right. A violin or a grand piano is a hugely nuanced device- if a similarly complex but intuitive system could be developed for computerized music, I don't doubt that it would be possible to create stunning musical sound out of one.
I don't really see what the problem is with "buttons".
Pianos, organs, etc. overcame essentially this problem centuries ago with a combination of hand and foot buttons (keyboard and pedals). Wind instruments came to the same conclusion too- most wind instruments (eg., trumpet, flute, clarinet) essentially have a small number of buttons which are held in various combinations whilst blowing. And percussion instruments (such as drums) are easily emulateable with big, appropriately shaped buttons that you can bash. String instruments seem to me to be about the only family which don't easily conform.
Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel with Wii remote waggling and breakable lasers and whatnot? I mean sure, if they work brilliantly then why not- but why force it when it so blatantly doesn't?
EVE is often cited as a good example of a "different breed of MMO". And in many ways it is- but the repetition rears it's ugly head very similar.
With MMOs, I think you're either the kind of person who can enjoy playing with other people, and create drama out of the human dynamics, or you're not. The ones who are not should stick with non-MMO games- they'll always be better.
Frankly they seem to miss the difference between secret and private.
I like Wikileaks, as both a concept and a general implementation, but I tend to agree with you in this instance.
Uncovering the sordid secrets which governments and corporations would rather keep under wraps is a laudable activity which should be encouraged. Publishing deeply personal messages, some of which will have been the last communications ever made between the dying and their loved ones, and which have no intrinsic value to anyone except morbid voyeurs, reeks of nothing more than red-top sensationalism.
I feel they let themselves down a bit with this one.
If the civil suit is successful, that implies that the plaintiff (who obviously shoulders the burden of proof) was able to convince a judge that a major American and multi-national organization illegally enslaved him in a secure compound for a decade and a half.
The DA might take an interest considering a lot of the leg work will already have been done for them.
Why would they? If someone lives in a big city, why would they cross-post their ad in all the microsites within a 50 mile radius, just on the off chance that some poor person lives halfway between them and any given neighbour?
And more importantly, why should they? This is the 21st century- websites should have this sort of problem solved.
No, it really is shit. I live halfway between 2 major towns, but too far from either to conveniently pick up any purchases. My own town has no microsite of it's own. So, I have to search the individual different craigslist site for each of the surrounding areas and scan by eyeball in the hope of catching a local ad by chance.
Could be easily improved by ditching the "every town has a site" model and just going with a "location of ad" and "miles from postcode" system, like just about every other ad posting site I've ever seen.
There are 100 other improvements they could make.
Sure we did. You can't pick and choose how democracy works- this is how it always works all the time, on every issue.
I voted for my local representative (I'm in the UK, so that means an MP, an MEP and some local councilors). They formed a government (specifically and relevantly, the MP forms the national Labour government). That government, who had my democratic mandate, signed a treaty.
We don't get referendums on anything in this country- we always just vote for a government, give them a democratic mandate, and then let them make the decisions. It's no good kicking up a fuss just because they won't hold a referendum on this one issue, among many. If you want referendums then you should be asking for much deeper democratic reform- and good luck to you.