He never really says that. He's talking about killing mobs together. In existing games you always get less XP or level slower if you're playing in a party, and if you happen to be in the same area you can't just join them in a fight. If another player has already pulled the mob, you won't get any XP or rewards for helping to kill it.
Besides, joining a party with other unknown players isn't as easy as it should be. Currently you have to ask them to invite you to their party and if they have the same quests you have, you know, actually talk with people instead of just joining the fight.
It's interesting that people complain how Africa is a third world country and how we should help them, but interestingly everyone sets artificial restrictions on them and restricts them from the other world. Many countries in the world ship food help and money there but if African countries are banned from using the services the rest of the world uses their region will never develop to the same level.
Instead of spending billions dollars to help Africa every year, what about if we open the services and let African countries develop normally like rest of the world?
Obviously theres the danger of fraud single they're still developing countries, but it's better to think long term. We can use the aid to cover the cost from frauds, and maybe in a few years we can stop spending so much money to help them. It will save us a lot more, especially in the long run.
I'm glad theres those single individuals who fight for it and try to make the world a better place.
This is the more likely situation. The address price wont just run out but the prices will increase. Cost of one ip address is $0.5-$1 currently. IPv6 is not ready for mainstream use yet. If we ever run out of addresses, it doesn't mean they won't be available. It just means you have pay more for them.
Not really, I'm just expressing my opinion. And it looks like every negative comment about Google in this story got modded as -1 troll as well as anyone who defended them, even while they were sensible and just honest opinions. Way to go slashdot.
Can you already get VDSL2? Otherwise it's not going to help much. Currently it has a maximum of 250 Mbit/s at source to and 50 Mbit/s at 1km/0.6miles. This is just improving that existing speed.
VDSL2 deteriorates quickly from a theoretical maximum of 250 Mbit/s at 'source' to 100 Mbit/s at 0.5 km (1640 ft) and 50 Mbit/s at 1 km (3280 ft), but degrades at a much slower rate from there, and still outperforms VDSL. Starting from 1.6 km (1 mile) its performance is equal to ADSL2+.
I have tried to get a VDSL2 for a few times during the past 5 years, but the prices are high and availability really bad. Even 100 Mbit/s fiber is a lot more common. ISP's also always responded that I live too far away from the center, even while it really was only about 1-1.5km (but that would had got me "just" 50 Mbit/s anyway, now with this 100 Mbit/s)
The nice thing about VDSL2 is that unlike ADSL, it's symmetric. The 300Mbps over a distance of 400 meters is damn good too, but theres no centers in every corner.
Ask.com (formerly Ask Jeeves) Baidu (Chinese,Japanese) Bing (formerly MSN Search and Live Search) Cuil Duck Duck Go Google Kosmix Sogou (Chinese) Yodao (Chinese) Yahoo! Search Yandex (Russian) Yebol
Lets see the general English search engines from your list and exclude Yahoo because it will start using Bing search engine. Duck Duck Go "uses information from crowd-sourced sites (like Wikipedia)", so I don't think you can really count it as it doesn't search the other web. Kosmix also seems gather information only from Wikipedia, Flickr and the likes. So the list comes down to:
General Ask.com (formerly Ask Jeeves) Bing (formerly MSN Search and Live Search) Cuil Google Yebol
Cuil and Yebol are having difficulties just for the same reason as Bing and who is actually using them? I was surprised Ask is still around. The fact is, if Bing quit, it would be 99% marketshare for Google.
No one is saying Google, the search engine part, cant take advertising from other companies. Just that the entities should be separated, not the same company.
Google is still using the PageRank algorithm, but it's far from the only thing they're using. It's just a one factor. Can you imagine how spammy the results would be if it all was based on spidering and links?
I wasn't also talking about your prior search history, but all of the data combined. You're right, it's separate from which ads you get based on your prior search history. But all of the data combined they can use it to have a much more relevant search results than their competitors or new search engines can, just because of the mere amount of data they get.
Your alternative is actually quite good. The search engine and advertising should be separated. There's no reason why Google couldn't finance them that way too, and then the user data and algorithms would be separate.
The only thing you need to do search properly is spidering.
That's not true. Why do you think Google does so much datamining? Why do you think they have a wide amount of data what people search for and how much? Why do you think they send a hidden javascript GET request in the background on what search result you click on?
Maybe in the 90's you could make a search engine with only by spidering, but that's completely different now.
The other point is that to improve a search engine you need to know a lot about what people search for and which result they click on (which most likely is a good result). Google's monopoly gets it massive amount more of this data than Bing, or any other starting search engine. This is also why they can offer better search results, and keep competition away.
What's plenty of competition? Bing? Baidu in China? There's no other independent search engines, all the others are using either Google or Bing. If MS decided to end Bing, western users would have exactly one search engine - Google.
No one can also start competing with them. They just don't have the amount of data Google gets from leveraging all their services together and because of the monopoly they have in search. Even Bing has said they have problems with their engine because the amount of data (especially long-tail keywords) they get is so much less than Google.
If you search for a trailer of some movie or a game, what result comes as first? YouTube, complete with a thumbnail of the trailer to distinct from the other results.
Same for Book Search and other services.
But that's not even the point. The point is that because of the amount of datamining Google does, no one can even compete with them. Bing can't get enough long-tail keyword data so they can improve their service. No one else can either.
The outcome is that no other company can compete in Google's area. That's pure anti-competition. Technology changes and laws regarding it should too. Before Google no one could gain anti-competitive position by datamining just because there wasn't any technology to do so.
There were talks that Microsoft needed to separate Windows from their main corporation too. It didn't even make much sense, but this one does.
Google is being anti-competitive. All the datamining and lose of privacy is done so that Google has always more and more data about you. Then they can use this data across all their services, from YouTube to Gmail to Book Search. They can promote their other products freely. Just like if you wanted to use Windows, you had to take IE too. If you use Google Search, you have to take all of their other services too.
The massive amount of datamining and gluing all the services together also makes sure no one is even able to compete with Google. There's anti-competitive laws against such.
Yeah because people always need to paid to have an opinion. Can't nobody think and have an opinion on their own anymore? It's the same "he must be a shill" mentality here on slashdot too.
Steve Jobs thinks sex is immoral? And the fanbois follow "I think this is a good feature and opinion. We are a lot more productive if we don't engage in any fun activity such as sex. I am not having sex, so no one should be!"
Apple devices are like the combination of forced opinions, ban on alcohol, tobacco, sex, open source and freedom, and Apple and Steve Jobs being a tyranny and a dictator. Still fanbois think it's "think different". I take back the "it's marketing and PR" - it's also propaganda how you should be living, almost like a church.
The nice thing about these types of browser games is that they require real time to advance, meaning the game is playing even while you are not. I saw that your resources keep growing in the game and you can easily choose how much and how often you check the game. On the top it says my city is protected for the next 7 days until April 28th, and if I click on it theres a menu screen for Incoming Attacks (which will probably get populated if someone chooses to attack me). Perfect for playing even if you don't have that much time for it - just check every few days and issue some orders to queue.
Another such "real-time" game I have played is a trucking simulator Trukz, where you cant drive your truck more than a 10-11 hours at a time. Then you have to wait that time to drive more, and unless you want to you aren't really required to get to the company stuff or other aspects in the game.
I wonder why more traditional games haven't had such systems much. There's auctions in MMO's but it's more like a side-effect of the system, not a purpose. Otherwise your character/nation/whatever doesn't evolve at all if you aren't playing.
Why do you paste this list of where your software have been included at? Sure, good for you and I'm happy for you. But it doesn't back your claims one bit. I'm quite certain many of us here on slashdot have an awesome (in a nerdy way) history. If you want to expand that outside nerdy stuff, I'm quite sure it's even more awesome. Random fact: When I was 14 I slided down a snowy hill, saw a girl I liked and my friend told me to go for it and hug her. We dated for the next 3 years. But what does that have to do with the conversation?
I'm all up for a good debate (do you see how I love it here on slashdot?), but you make no good arguments by assaulting people or telling them they are someone else like you did with me and clone53421. You also do not win anything by claiming you "won" or "beat" someone, or by having multiple personalities and posting under them backing up each other - while by the style of text it's clear it's you.
Make an account, start providing some real information, debating or talk and discuss about real things.
You initially assaulted me about Firefox. Just so you know, like you, I am an Opera user.
I remember once discussing with you on actual things. You know I'm a Opera user and think FF sucks. No, I am not clone53421. I've also seen your mindless threads and how you have trolled a single article for the past 6 years.
Mozilla can use AVC/H.264. They just need to do it via the OS, like I think IE and Safari will do, and Opera already does. H.264 is already directly supported on Windows 7 and Mac OSX. Linux users need to do their tricks, like with MP3.
Theora is a shitty format. I wrote a long post about it before, but like the parent stated, it's fundamentally flawed. You can't improve it because of the initial design and its limitations.
If we want a open source codec, it's way better to support VP8. You do know that Theora is based on VP2, right?
I have no idea why Firefox still fights against the giant and loses money and time on it. Great, they got hw-accelerated Theora to one single mobile phone. What about all the televisions, other mobile phones, computers, airplanes, PS3, 360, and everything else under the sun that has H.264 hw supported? It's a lost battle.
If I were them, I would seriously start concentrating on the next generation of video codecs. It might be closed H.264 for now, but if you want to get an open source product out there, you have to make it technically better, make sure (and contact!) companies to support it in their products, and just do marketing and PR.
Open source has some advantages, but if it's technically lesser and doesn't work with companies, it's not going to win.
Slashdot Mirror
He never really says that. He's talking about killing mobs together. In existing games you always get less XP or level slower if you're playing in a party, and if you happen to be in the same area you can't just join them in a fight. If another player has already pulled the mob, you won't get any XP or rewards for helping to kill it.
Besides, joining a party with other unknown players isn't as easy as it should be. Currently you have to ask them to invite you to their party and if they have the same quests you have, you know, actually talk with people instead of just joining the fight.
They don't even need to start any offshoot series, Activision owns Call of Duty and Modern Warfare series.
It's interesting that people complain how Africa is a third world country and how we should help them, but interestingly everyone sets artificial restrictions on them and restricts them from the other world. Many countries in the world ship food help and money there but if African countries are banned from using the services the rest of the world uses their region will never develop to the same level.
Instead of spending billions dollars to help Africa every year, what about if we open the services and let African countries develop normally like rest of the world?
Obviously theres the danger of fraud single they're still developing countries, but it's better to think long term. We can use the aid to cover the cost from frauds, and maybe in a few years we can stop spending so much money to help them. It will save us a lot more, especially in the long run.
I'm glad theres those single individuals who fight for it and try to make the world a better place.
This is the more likely situation. The address price wont just run out but the prices will increase. Cost of one ip address is $0.5-$1 currently. IPv6 is not ready for mainstream use yet. If we ever run out of addresses, it doesn't mean they won't be available. It just means you have pay more for them.
Mona Lisa was made in Europe. How about bring one shuttle back here?
Not really, I'm just expressing my opinion. And it looks like every negative comment about Google in this story got modded as -1 troll as well as anyone who defended them, even while they were sensible and just honest opinions. Way to go slashdot.
Can you already get VDSL2? Otherwise it's not going to help much. Currently it has a maximum of 250 Mbit/s at source to and 50 Mbit/s at 1km/0.6miles. This is just improving that existing speed.
It looks like they doubled the speed at 1km.
VDSL2 deteriorates quickly from a theoretical maximum of 250 Mbit/s at 'source' to 100 Mbit/s at 0.5 km (1640 ft) and 50 Mbit/s at 1 km (3280 ft), but degrades at a much slower rate from there, and still outperforms VDSL. Starting from 1.6 km (1 mile) its performance is equal to ADSL2+.
I have tried to get a VDSL2 for a few times during the past 5 years, but the prices are high and availability really bad. Even 100 Mbit/s fiber is a lot more common. ISP's also always responded that I live too far away from the center, even while it really was only about 1-1.5km (but that would had got me "just" 50 Mbit/s anyway, now with this 100 Mbit/s)
The nice thing about VDSL2 is that unlike ADSL, it's symmetric. The 300Mbps over a distance of 400 meters is damn good too, but theres no centers in every corner.
Ask.com (formerly Ask Jeeves)
Baidu (Chinese,Japanese)
Bing (formerly MSN Search and Live Search)
Cuil
Duck Duck Go
Google
Kosmix
Sogou (Chinese)
Yodao (Chinese)
Yahoo! Search
Yandex (Russian)
Yebol
Lets see the general English search engines from your list and exclude Yahoo because it will start using Bing search engine. Duck Duck Go "uses information from crowd-sourced sites (like Wikipedia)", so I don't think you can really count it as it doesn't search the other web. Kosmix also seems gather information only from Wikipedia, Flickr and the likes. So the list comes down to:
General
Ask.com (formerly Ask Jeeves)
Bing (formerly MSN Search and Live Search)
Cuil
Google
Yebol
Cuil and Yebol are having difficulties just for the same reason as Bing and who is actually using them? I was surprised Ask is still around. The fact is, if Bing quit, it would be 99% marketshare for Google.
No one is saying Google, the search engine part, cant take advertising from other companies. Just that the entities should be separated, not the same company.
Google is still using the PageRank algorithm, but it's far from the only thing they're using. It's just a one factor. Can you imagine how spammy the results would be if it all was based on spidering and links?
I wasn't also talking about your prior search history, but all of the data combined. You're right, it's separate from which ads you get based on your prior search history. But all of the data combined they can use it to have a much more relevant search results than their competitors or new search engines can, just because of the mere amount of data they get.
Your alternative is actually quite good. The search engine and advertising should be separated. There's no reason why Google couldn't finance them that way too, and then the user data and algorithms would be separate.
The only thing you need to do search properly is spidering.
That's not true. Why do you think Google does so much datamining? Why do you think they have a wide amount of data what people search for and how much? Why do you think they send a hidden javascript GET request in the background on what search result you click on?
Maybe in the 90's you could make a search engine with only by spidering, but that's completely different now.
The other point is that to improve a search engine you need to know a lot about what people search for and which result they click on (which most likely is a good result). Google's monopoly gets it massive amount more of this data than Bing, or any other starting search engine. This is also why they can offer better search results, and keep competition away.
What's plenty of competition? Bing? Baidu in China? There's no other independent search engines, all the others are using either Google or Bing. If MS decided to end Bing, western users would have exactly one search engine - Google.
No one can also start competing with them. They just don't have the amount of data Google gets from leveraging all their services together and because of the monopoly they have in search. Even Bing has said they have problems with their engine because the amount of data (especially long-tail keywords) they get is so much less than Google.
If you search for a trailer of some movie or a game, what result comes as first? YouTube, complete with a thumbnail of the trailer to distinct from the other results.
Same for Book Search and other services.
But that's not even the point. The point is that because of the amount of datamining Google does, no one can even compete with them. Bing can't get enough long-tail keyword data so they can improve their service. No one else can either.
The outcome is that no other company can compete in Google's area. That's pure anti-competition. Technology changes and laws regarding it should too. Before Google no one could gain anti-competitive position by datamining just because there wasn't any technology to do so.
There were talks that Microsoft needed to separate Windows from their main corporation too. It didn't even make much sense, but this one does.
Google is being anti-competitive. All the datamining and lose of privacy is done so that Google has always more and more data about you. Then they can use this data across all their services, from YouTube to Gmail to Book Search. They can promote their other products freely. Just like if you wanted to use Windows, you had to take IE too. If you use Google Search, you have to take all of their other services too.
The massive amount of datamining and gluing all the services together also makes sure no one is even able to compete with Google. There's anti-competitive laws against such.
Yeah because people always need to paid to have an opinion. Can't nobody think and have an opinion on their own anymore? It's the same "he must be a shill" mentality here on slashdot too.
Steve Jobs thinks sex is immoral? And the fanbois follow "I think this is a good feature and opinion. We are a lot more productive if we don't engage in any fun activity such as sex. I am not having sex, so no one should be!"
Apple devices are like the combination of forced opinions, ban on alcohol, tobacco, sex, open source and freedom, and Apple and Steve Jobs being a tyranny and a dictator. Still fanbois think it's "think different". I take back the "it's marketing and PR" - it's also propaganda how you should be living, almost like a church.
The nice thing about these types of browser games is that they require real time to advance, meaning the game is playing even while you are not. I saw that your resources keep growing in the game and you can easily choose how much and how often you check the game. On the top it says my city is protected for the next 7 days until April 28th, and if I click on it theres a menu screen for Incoming Attacks (which will probably get populated if someone chooses to attack me). Perfect for playing even if you don't have that much time for it - just check every few days and issue some orders to queue.
Another such "real-time" game I have played is a trucking simulator Trukz, where you cant drive your truck more than a 10-11 hours at a time. Then you have to wait that time to drive more, and unless you want to you aren't really required to get to the company stuff or other aspects in the game.
I wonder why more traditional games haven't had such systems much. There's auctions in MMO's but it's more like a side-effect of the system, not a purpose. Otherwise your character/nation/whatever doesn't evolve at all if you aren't playing.
It's linked from Wikipedia and they only accept Vorbis/Theora.
Why do you paste this list of where your software have been included at? Sure, good for you and I'm happy for you. But it doesn't back your claims one bit. I'm quite certain many of us here on slashdot have an awesome (in a nerdy way) history. If you want to expand that outside nerdy stuff, I'm quite sure it's even more awesome. Random fact: When I was 14 I slided down a snowy hill, saw a girl I liked and my friend told me to go for it and hug her. We dated for the next 3 years. But what does that have to do with the conversation?
I'm all up for a good debate (do you see how I love it here on slashdot?), but you make no good arguments by assaulting people or telling them they are someone else like you did with me and clone53421. You also do not win anything by claiming you "won" or "beat" someone, or by having multiple personalities and posting under them backing up each other - while by the style of text it's clear it's you.
Make an account, start providing some real information, debating or talk and discuss about real things.
You initially assaulted me about Firefox. Just so you know, like you, I am an Opera user.
APK,
I remember once discussing with you on actual things. You know I'm a Opera user and think FF sucks. No, I am not clone53421. I've also seen your mindless threads and how you have trolled a single article for the past 6 years.
You need to get help.
Eh? If you actually read my post history, you'd know that I defend Opera. Firefox loses on UI response. And no, I'm not clone53421.
hi APK
Until you get an real slashdot account I will not answer to you.
Enjoy.
sopssa
Mozilla can use AVC/H.264. They just need to do it via the OS, like I think IE and Safari will do, and Opera already does. H.264 is already directly supported on Windows 7 and Mac OSX. Linux users need to do their tricks, like with MP3.
I think he is serious, and so am I.
Theora is a shitty format. I wrote a long post about it before, but like the parent stated, it's fundamentally flawed. You can't improve it because of the initial design and its limitations.
If we want a open source codec, it's way better to support VP8. You do know that Theora is based on VP2, right?
I have no idea why Firefox still fights against the giant and loses money and time on it. Great, they got hw-accelerated Theora to one single mobile phone. What about all the televisions, other mobile phones, computers, airplanes, PS3, 360, and everything else under the sun that has H.264 hw supported? It's a lost battle.
If I were them, I would seriously start concentrating on the next generation of video codecs. It might be closed H.264 for now, but if you want to get an open source product out there, you have to make it technically better, make sure (and contact!) companies to support it in their products, and just do marketing and PR.
Open source has some advantages, but if it's technically lesser and doesn't work with companies, it's not going to win.