The firm said it had two titles under development: a Facebook game developed by a German studio (presumably Star Trek: Infinite Space), and another release by a studio in California.
So those of us who are not sad enough^W^Won Facebook won't be able to play? Or what? I'm not signing up to the world's biggest self-incrimination website just to play a DS9 game.
Shouldn't that be HHTTTTPP? Or are we being silly now? Also I can't read two consecutive letter P's without snickering in my head. God I love being so childish.
That's NoScript at work.
If you use BetterPrivacy (another FF extension), it removes the LSO at
browser shutdown.
YMMV
I take your point, but most people use neither of these things and will be at the mercy of persistent tracking. Of course anyone who doesn't know what a cookie is probably won't be affected by this in any way (i.e. they're already being tracked through regular cookies). Especially since "Private Browsing" modes have been shown to retain information.
If they're going to handle the peer review process automatically, the artificial intelligence that makes the decisions needs to be improved.
I don't think it's a massive problem, it just relies on people being ethical about declining to review something if they have an interest (in the legal sense) in the work. People have a lot to lose if they try and cheat the system and get caught.
I think you're not entirely clear on how peer review works. Once a paper is published the peer review process is over, bar someone seriously questioning the results or conclusions and forcing the paper to be withdrawn post-publication. This is pretty rare. The usual peer review process goes something like this: Someone submits a paper to a journal. The editor will sometimes take a cursory look to determine if it's totally crap, but often will simply assume that people wouldn't waste their time by . If it's OK then they'll send it to reviewers which they have on record, often people who themselves have submitted papers to the journal and have agreed to be reviewers. These reviewers receive the paper, read it and then make comments and/or score it and make their reccomendation as to whether or not the paper should be published. There are often conditions set by reviewers that the authors have to comply with, such as "do this part again, tidy up this figure, expand this section" etc.
A referee is something else entirely. They make sure sports are played according to the rules.
Well that's not always the case. Different journals have different review processes. Some ask for numerical choices on a scale, others want choices in terms of "strongly agree", "somewhat agree" etc. for specific questions, others want only written comments and a final choice. Even this final choice is different in many cases, sometimes restricted to Accept, Accept with minor corrections, Accept with major corrections, Invite for resubmission and simply Reject, while others take the final choice as an aggregate of multiple choice responses or numerical averages. Some systems are obviously easier to be biased with than others.
Regardless of all this though, sometimes you'll find out that only two of three reviewers responded, and at least one of those probably got one of their postdocs or even a PhD student to do the review. Some reviews will have empty parts where a reviewer was supposed to write a paragraph but couldn't be bothered, or because they didn't want to reveal the fact that they were totally unfamiliar with the subject matter. Getting a journal paper published is more hit and miss than you'd think. I used to think that a good paper with good ideas was enough, but it's not always the case.
If you're a reasonably active researcher in a specific discipline (even more so if you work in a small sub-field) then you'll likely get to know your peers when you meet them at conferences and when you collaborate with other groups in projects. These same people will be the first to be asked to review a paper in their (and your) field, and will either recognise your work or simply see your name at the top. Now if they have no specific involvement in the work then ethically they're not in the wrong for reviewing it. They of course must be unbiased, but that's a subjective term in the world of paper reviewing.
Disclaimer: I both write and review journal articles in a few fairly narrow Computer Science sub-disciplines.
While we're quoting the article - this rather tickled me. Particularly strange when it's taken out of context, but nicely indicative of the sort of language you get in tech articles trying to cater to laymen:
"The researchers blasted that sandwich with sound waves, which at 100 decibels were not quite as loud as a rock concert."
"Sorry Junior, you'll have to go to that blasphemous town library to research your report on dinosaurs, because in this household the Internet remains pure and as God intended!"
Just realised that this is a silly example anyway, as fanatical Christians wouldn't allow their kid to go to a school that was unholy enough to teach them about dinosaurs, the fossil record or how the we all evolved from a common ancestor with those damn dirty apes.
Just saying "being robbed" is terribly rude. Bad form old boy, bad form. With a 60 character limit any polite person would be horrified to find that the salient information in their message was truncated off and lost forever, thus:
"Dear Sir/Madam. I must be brief. I believe that my house is "
Wait a second. He told you to mellow out and that you were coming across like an arrogant prick and you agreed with him? Clearly you have no idea how the Internet works. The correct response in that situation is "UP YOURS PAL! I'M GONNA FIND YOU AND BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!!!111".
Well that's an interesting response, but totally irrelevant to my question. Apparently you don't know what he was arrested for, but it sure as hell wasn't for presenting a paper as you originally wrote. Also it wasn't Adobe that brought the case against him, it was the US government. Try to get your facts right before you begin preaching.
These are the guys that are so incredibly useless that they used ROT-13 for encryption (yes, a fucking kids code wheel) and so incredibly nasty that they put a man in jail for weeks because he was going to present a paper on how useless their encryption was.
Wasn't it more to do with the fact that he wrote and was selling for profit (or his company were selling) a program that exploited the horrible encryption they were using to allow people to break copyright restrictions? Or have I got that all wrong?
The day Valve go under and my Steam games no longer work is the day I pirate each and every one of them. Sure, the online ones won't work at first, but I'm sure people will get servers running again.
While I understand that your post was humerous, I feel somehow compelled to point out that you'd have a 0% true positive rate with your rock, a 0% false positive rate, a 99% true negative rate and a 1% false negative rate.
Hmm, I think I might be autistic myself judging by my inability to resist making this post.
Responses to some of you misinformed points: The BBC reported the story - they are not the subject of it. The licence fee is not mandatory; simply throw away your televisions and radios and, hey presto, you don't have to pay a penny. Just because you (and I) don't like the majority of crap programmes they put out doesn't mean everyone else hates them too, you just need to appreciate the decent stuff that they do make and broadcast. Yes the BBC news is biased, but it's a lot less biased than most by sheer virtue of their fear of legal action. My God why am I wasting time with an AC...
Meh, I bought a M15x last year and it's worked flawlessly ever since. I don't exactly treat it well either, it's constantly under high-load situations for gaming and programming.
As a UK lecturer on a CS course I can confirm that this is part of the problem. The prevalanence of computers means that all Universities have expanded their computing facilities and continue to do so. This means they can offer more computing places, which means more and more people who don't really know anything about computers can enroll on a CS course. Lots of students stare blankly at you when you talk about directories as a tree structure, or tell them they'll be using a command line interface. They think that checking their e-mails, browsing YouTube and managing to cheat in their college computing coursework means that a CS degree will be easy. Gone are the days when a computing degree would be full of nerds and geeks. Now it's full of people that really should be out there getting a job instead of wasting time and resources in Universities that are financially stretched as it is.
What do you mean exactly? You don't like the way you have to decide which unit attacks out of a stack? If that's the case then you can change certain options to resolve stack combat automatically. You select your unit stack, tell them what tile to attack and it automatically attacks with the best possible unit, again and again until either your stack or the enemy stack is gone.
Slashdot Mirror
And thank the prophets it isn't on Facebook.
Dude, I strongly suggest you read the article before rejoicing...
The firm said it had two titles under development: a Facebook game developed by a German studio (presumably Star Trek: Infinite Space), and another release by a studio in California.
So those of us who are not sad enough^W^Won Facebook won't be able to play? Or what? I'm not signing up to the world's biggest self-incrimination website just to play a DS9 game.
Shouldn't that be HHTTTTPP? Or are we being silly now? Also I can't read two consecutive letter P's without snickering in my head. God I love being so childish.
What kind of a protocol is hhttp
Well according to this page of Internet Protocols it's identical to regular HTTP. Good to know that typing errors are documented as standards.
That's NoScript at work. If you use BetterPrivacy (another FF extension), it removes the LSO at browser shutdown. YMMV
I take your point, but most people use neither of these things and will be at the mercy of persistent tracking. Of course anyone who doesn't know what a cookie is probably won't be affected by this in any way (i.e. they're already being tracked through regular cookies). Especially since "Private Browsing" modes have been shown to retain information.
I'm not your buddy, pal.
There's actually a reasonably intelligent discussion going on in there...
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable on that site then. I prefer the casual trolling, mis-modding and general idiocy right here on /.
If they're going to handle the peer review process automatically, the artificial intelligence that makes the decisions needs to be improved.
I don't think it's a massive problem, it just relies on people being ethical about declining to review something if they have an interest (in the legal sense) in the work. People have a lot to lose if they try and cheat the system and get caught.
I think you're not entirely clear on how peer review works. Once a paper is published the peer review process is over, bar someone seriously questioning the results or conclusions and forcing the paper to be withdrawn post-publication. This is pretty rare. The usual peer review process goes something like this: Someone submits a paper to a journal. The editor will sometimes take a cursory look to determine if it's totally crap, but often will simply assume that people wouldn't waste their time by . If it's OK then they'll send it to reviewers which they have on record, often people who themselves have submitted papers to the journal and have agreed to be reviewers. These reviewers receive the paper, read it and then make comments and/or score it and make their reccomendation as to whether or not the paper should be published. There are often conditions set by reviewers that the authors have to comply with, such as "do this part again, tidy up this figure, expand this section" etc.
A referee is something else entirely. They make sure sports are played according to the rules.
Well that's not always the case. Different journals have different review processes. Some ask for numerical choices on a scale, others want choices in terms of "strongly agree", "somewhat agree" etc. for specific questions, others want only written comments and a final choice. Even this final choice is different in many cases, sometimes restricted to Accept, Accept with minor corrections, Accept with major corrections, Invite for resubmission and simply Reject, while others take the final choice as an aggregate of multiple choice responses or numerical averages. Some systems are obviously easier to be biased with than others.
Regardless of all this though, sometimes you'll find out that only two of three reviewers responded, and at least one of those probably got one of their postdocs or even a PhD student to do the review. Some reviews will have empty parts where a reviewer was supposed to write a paragraph but couldn't be bothered, or because they didn't want to reveal the fact that they were totally unfamiliar with the subject matter. Getting a journal paper published is more hit and miss than you'd think. I used to think that a good paper with good ideas was enough, but it's not always the case.
If you're a reasonably active researcher in a specific discipline (even more so if you work in a small sub-field) then you'll likely get to know your peers when you meet them at conferences and when you collaborate with other groups in projects. These same people will be the first to be asked to review a paper in their (and your) field, and will either recognise your work or simply see your name at the top. Now if they have no specific involvement in the work then ethically they're not in the wrong for reviewing it. They of course must be unbiased, but that's a subjective term in the world of paper reviewing.
Disclaimer: I both write and review journal articles in a few fairly narrow Computer Science sub-disciplines.
This was a hell of a game, and I was kind of disappointed when I discovered the MMO was almost totally unrelated.
While we're quoting the article - this rather tickled me. Particularly strange when it's taken out of context, but nicely indicative of the sort of language you get in tech articles trying to cater to laymen:
"The researchers blasted that sandwich with sound waves, which at 100 decibels were not quite as loud as a rock concert."
"Sorry Junior, you'll have to go to that blasphemous town library to research your report on dinosaurs, because in this household the Internet remains pure and as God intended!"
Just realised that this is a silly example anyway, as fanatical Christians wouldn't allow their kid to go to a school that was unholy enough to teach them about dinosaurs, the fossil record or how the we all evolved from a common ancestor with those damn dirty apes.
Just saying "being robbed" is terribly rude. Bad form old boy, bad form. With a 60 character limit any polite person would be horrified to find that the salient information in their message was truncated off and lost forever, thus:
"Dear Sir/Madam. I must be brief. I believe that my house is "
That wouldn't do at all.
You're right
Wait a second. He told you to mellow out and that you were coming across like an arrogant prick and you agreed with him? Clearly you have no idea how the Internet works. The correct response in that situation is "UP YOURS PAL! I'M GONNA FIND YOU AND BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!!!111".
Well that's an interesting response, but totally irrelevant to my question. Apparently you don't know what he was arrested for, but it sure as hell wasn't for presenting a paper as you originally wrote. Also it wasn't Adobe that brought the case against him, it was the US government. Try to get your facts right before you begin preaching.
These are the guys that are so incredibly useless that they used ROT-13 for encryption (yes, a fucking kids code wheel) and so incredibly nasty that they put a man in jail for weeks because he was going to present a paper on how useless their encryption was.
Wasn't it more to do with the fact that he wrote and was selling for profit (or his company were selling) a program that exploited the horrible encryption they were using to allow people to break copyright restrictions? Or have I got that all wrong?
The day Valve go under and my Steam games no longer work is the day I pirate each and every one of them. Sure, the online ones won't work at first, but I'm sure people will get servers running again.
While I understand that your post was humerous, I feel somehow compelled to point out that you'd have a 0% true positive rate with your rock, a 0% false positive rate, a 99% true negative rate and a 1% false negative rate.
Hmm, I think I might be autistic myself judging by my inability to resist making this post.
Responses to some of you misinformed points: The BBC reported the story - they are not the subject of it. The licence fee is not mandatory; simply throw away your televisions and radios and, hey presto, you don't have to pay a penny. Just because you (and I) don't like the majority of crap programmes they put out doesn't mean everyone else hates them too, you just need to appreciate the decent stuff that they do make and broadcast. Yes the BBC news is biased, but it's a lot less biased than most by sheer virtue of their fear of legal action. My God why am I wasting time with an AC...
This would be a good point if it were the BBC spending the money. In fact the BBC just reported on the Government's spending on these nonsense apps.
Meh, I bought a M15x last year and it's worked flawlessly ever since. I don't exactly treat it well either, it's constantly under high-load situations for gaming and programming.
As a UK lecturer on a CS course I can confirm that this is part of the problem. The prevalanence of computers means that all Universities have expanded their computing facilities and continue to do so. This means they can offer more computing places, which means more and more people who don't really know anything about computers can enroll on a CS course. Lots of students stare blankly at you when you talk about directories as a tree structure, or tell them they'll be using a command line interface. They think that checking their e-mails, browsing YouTube and managing to cheat in their college computing coursework means that a CS degree will be easy. Gone are the days when a computing degree would be full of nerds and geeks. Now it's full of people that really should be out there getting a job instead of wasting time and resources in Universities that are financially stretched as it is.
What do you mean exactly? You don't like the way you have to decide which unit attacks out of a stack? If that's the case then you can change certain options to resolve stack combat automatically. You select your unit stack, tell them what tile to attack and it automatically attacks with the best possible unit, again and again until either your stack or the enemy stack is gone.