Actually, it has a great deal in the skill department - it takes a lot of practice to memorize every single combo for every single player and the proper reaction to each.
Of course, that says nothing about how little brains it takes. I could teach a team of cockroaches to play SF.
For 2) just don't actually give the person any official looking document for the vote number. Just display the confirmation number on the receipt or screen (receipt does not get to be kept - it just goes into an old fashioned ballot box) and let the voter jot it down. Provide pieces of scrap paper to jot down the number - but no official-looking paper or pen, so voters can forge a confirmation number trivially.
On one hand, this means that a voter can know "the DB doesn't show me voting for the person I voted for" but can't prove it, on the other, nobody else can say "let me see your slip, so I know who you voted for" - the user can . I think its better this way - enough people can still complain in an emergency and force a second look. The reciept can be fished out of the ballot box, confirming the vote.
The "confirmation number" idea is good - just don't let people keep it.
Yes, but the point is that there is a way to verify how person X voted. So, people can be coerced into voting a certain way. No proof of a person's vote, voluntary or otherwise, should be possible.
The receipt is shown to the user- but goes right into the backup-ballot box.
Umm, do we sing "Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead"... or just panic? I am quite perturbed.
Hooray for the pyram^H^H^H^H^H^H stock market for allowing such wierdness and flagrant disregard for sound business practices become modus operandi in the tech industry.
IE is not breaking any standards doing so. Redirecting failed DNS lookups on the _client_ side is actually a reasonable idea. Honestly, if Google had a good browser-plugin for Moz or IE that delivered a properly verbose "that site doesn't exist, here are some similarly spelled sites" I might use it.
Verisign is fscking every client that would want to do this.
First of all, anyone with a non-shitty browser can configure it to redirect the standard error to a custom error page - one more useful then "error: you suck" that most browsers do by default. So this "feature" should have been implemented on client side if it was desired. This breaks the browsers that have that feature intelligently implemented. For those of us who don't want our typos to line Verisign's pockets and instead want to use our own redirect - now we can't.
Second: repeat after me: the WWW is not the Internet. When a non-WWW service (be it FTP, IRC, or Quake) tries to contact the wrong domain, it will now get the wrong error, as the system will think it hit a server where the given service was not running, instead of the truth: there is no server - that domain does not exist.
Basically, a lot of people invested design time in a given standard. It will cost them money to change to Verisign's non-standard behavior. Verisign was paid by a public agency to run a standard conforming system. This means that Verisign is making money and costing other people money, when they are legally mandated not to.
Basically, Verisign is stealing from software developers.
H.323 is actually the biggest problem with VoIP. Unless you're operating in a one-computer-per-IP environment with no to minimal firewalling, its unusable - and its the de rigeur standard.
Almost all software and services available use open protocols, even MS Netmeeting.
Unfortunately, most of which are wholly unusable unless you have you're own IP address and full control over its routing/firewalls. Here's a hint - just because the ports above 1024 aren't specified for use, that doesn't mean you can take _all_ of them.
Until someone can provide a VoIP solution that can actually be configured to work behind a NAT for a normal user, this shit will always be impossible.
I have spent _years_ looking for a good VoIP solution - but for some reason, the average videogame is more network-friendly than this major enterprise app.
I'll explain it plain and simple: I want to connect to Port X on IP Y and have a voice chat conversation.
Alternately, if I cannot directly point Port X to IP Y to computer Z, I want computer Z to register its name with a third party, and I use the name and that third party to connect to computer Z.
I don't want to have to forward 90% of the IP range to my computer. I don't want to upgrade my NAT to a "compatible" router - everyone else has to program for the hardware, yet for some reason the VoIP standards bodies thought the hardware should conform to them.
I don't want to need a 3rd party unless I'm connecting to something otherwise unreachable from the outside (anonymous user behind a NAT).
Thats it.
Why is it in every game I can say: I want to run a server, and I want it to run on ports X, Y and Z, and just tell everybody else "hey, connect to my IP on port X" I can, and they do, and we play. But, if I want a voice chat, I have to rewire the whole friggin' internet. No, I can't change what ports it runs on. No, all users involved need to leave all their ports open.
Its pretty sad when X-fucking-box-live is outdoing the entire tech-industry for usable cheap VoIP.
Not to mention that the C system causes boatloads of programmer error.
IMHO, we should abandon the pseudometricism of memory storage sizes and come up with a new one from scratch - besides, 2^10 is a poor exponent to use. So, I have my own proposal. 4 bits = 1 nibble 2 nibbles = 1 byte
there are the familiar units (nibble only occasionally used)... lets go with that. First of all, lets use normal exponents - 2^8 for each interval... perhaps 2^16 should be used?
Umm, actually, its not the taxes, its the debt thats causing the recall. After all, every dittohead I've heard that's screaming for Davis' heart is because he lied about the deficit. Not the taxes.
Economic recovery != job recovery. If the IT industry can rake in American money selling foreign-made programs to foreign buyers, the american economy does well, American citizens (except those remaining in said IT companies) don't see dick all of it.
Um, read the friggin' blurb again. Anti-spammers - the good guys in this (unless you object to the more overactive vigilantes like SPEWS).
Localization of Princess Mononoke
on
Ask Neil Gaiman
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
As I udnerstand it, you were responsible for the english translation dialogue of Princess Mononoke. Now, at the risk of sounding like the cliche anime fan screaming "the sub was better" I wonder what made you make certain decisions. I watched an early fansub of the film that elected not to find translations for the names of the gods of the story - they were simply introduced as "a Tatagami" and "the Shishigiri". I found this a much more effective approach.
By contrast, your dub directly called them "a Demon God" and suchlike. When watching this version of the film with friends who hadn't seen the traditional dub, I was surprised at how confused they were by the film. The general problem seemed to be that terms like "Deer god" and "Demon god" created confusing concepts in their head, particularly in the religious folks. The idea that a god becomes a demon when consumed by hate was not intuitive in the story.
I wonder, did you consider the other approach? I found that, with simple untranslated names, there were no preconceptions to confuse the viewer.
Is there anything you might have done differently with that work?
Actually - this is a good point. After all, if you deliberately installed a plug-in that would advertise alternatives to services you were viewing on the internet - which is exactly what U-Haul is fighting against - would that be a bad thing? In the end, it would be similar to the "if you like this, you'd like" features found on many music/book sites.
People shouldn't knee-jerk bash this ruling because it finds in favour of pop-ups. The problem with pop-up plug-ins is _not_ that they advertise competing products to the web-sites being viewed - if the user wants their computer to offer that service, that's up to them. The problem with pop-up plug-ins is that they install themselves with subterfuge and deceit.
If the installers/ads were honest a la "Bonzi Buddy will be your internet friend and also take over your computer and force feed you ads" then this whole plug-in mess wouldn't be such a problem.
That, and sites that pop-up auto-installs on entry with such software as Bonzi and Gator should be boycotted. Any site that attempts to install without warning or request should be considered an attempted attack.
These programs aren't malicious because they produce pop-ups and have a better advertising system than the viewed websites - they're malicious because they install themselves forcefully, deceitfully, and with false pretenses.
Whoa, it took you that long to decide that Anthony is filthy? Nearly every series of his has some point where he tries to justifiy his lusting after young flesh. When ever he tries to discuss social issues (like prostitution, a frequent subject) he sounds like Kathy Lee or Connie Chung - someone with lots of opinions and no knowledge or brains.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it has a great deal in the skill department - it takes a lot of practice to memorize every single combo for every single player and the proper reaction to each.
Of course, that says nothing about how little brains it takes. I could teach a team of cockroaches to play SF.
For 1) that can happen anyway.
For 2) just don't actually give the person any official looking document for the vote number. Just display the confirmation number on the receipt or screen (receipt does not get to be kept - it just goes into an old fashioned ballot box) and let the voter jot it down. Provide pieces of scrap paper to jot down the number - but no official-looking paper or pen, so voters can forge a confirmation number trivially.
On one hand, this means that a voter can know "the DB doesn't show me voting for the person I voted for" but can't prove it, on the other, nobody else can say "let me see your slip, so I know who you voted for" - the user can . I think its better this way - enough people can still complain in an emergency and force a second look. The reciept can be fished out of the ballot box, confirming the vote.
The "confirmation number" idea is good - just don't let people keep it.
Yes, but the point is that there is a way to verify how person X voted. So, people can be coerced into voting a certain way. No proof of a person's vote, voluntary or otherwise, should be possible.
The receipt is shown to the user- but goes right into the backup-ballot box.
IE does this, and you can get a plugin for IE that even makes the search page Google-based instead of MSN.
Umm, do we sing "Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead"... or just panic? I am quite perturbed.
Hooray for the pyram^H^H^H^H^H^H stock market for allowing such wierdness and flagrant disregard for sound business practices become modus operandi in the tech industry.
IE is not breaking any standards doing so. Redirecting failed DNS lookups on the _client_ side is actually a reasonable idea. Honestly, if Google had a good browser-plugin for Moz or IE that delivered a properly verbose "that site doesn't exist, here are some similarly spelled sites" I might use it.
Verisign is fscking every client that would want to do this.
I'm assuming this is a troll, but I'll bite.
First of all, anyone with a non-shitty browser can configure it to redirect the standard error to a custom error page - one more useful then "error: you suck" that most browsers do by default. So this "feature" should have been implemented on client side if it was desired. This breaks the browsers that have that feature intelligently implemented. For those of us who don't want our typos to line Verisign's pockets and instead want to use our own redirect - now we can't.
Second: repeat after me: the WWW is not the Internet. When a non-WWW service (be it FTP, IRC, or Quake) tries to contact the wrong domain, it will now get the wrong error, as the system will think it hit a server where the given service was not running, instead of the truth: there is no server - that domain does not exist.
Basically, a lot of people invested design time in a given standard. It will cost them money to change to Verisign's non-standard behavior. Verisign was paid by a public agency to run a standard conforming system. This means that Verisign is making money and costing other people money, when they are legally mandated not to.
Basically, Verisign is stealing from software developers.
H.323 is actually the biggest problem with VoIP. Unless you're operating in a one-computer-per-IP environment with no to minimal firewalling, its unusable - and its the de rigeur standard.
Unfortunately, most of which are wholly unusable unless you have you're own IP address and full control over its routing/firewalls. Here's a hint - just because the ports above 1024 aren't specified for use, that doesn't mean you can take _all_ of them.
Until someone can provide a VoIP solution that can actually be configured to work behind a NAT for a normal user, this shit will always be impossible.
I have spent _years_ looking for a good VoIP solution - but for some reason, the average videogame is more network-friendly than this major enterprise app.
I'll explain it plain and simple: I want to connect to Port X on IP Y and have a voice chat conversation.
Alternately, if I cannot directly point Port X to IP Y to computer Z, I want computer Z to register its name with a third party, and I use the name and that third party to connect to computer Z.
I don't want to have to forward 90% of the IP range to my computer. I don't want to upgrade my NAT to a "compatible" router - everyone else has to program for the hardware, yet for some reason the VoIP standards bodies thought the hardware should conform to them.
I don't want to need a 3rd party unless I'm connecting to something otherwise unreachable from the outside (anonymous user behind a NAT).
Thats it.
Why is it in every game I can say: I want to run a server, and I want it to run on ports X, Y and Z, and just tell everybody else "hey, connect to my IP on port X" I can, and they do, and we play. But, if I want a voice chat, I have to rewire the whole friggin' internet. No, I can't change what ports it runs on. No, all users involved need to leave all their ports open.
Its pretty sad when X-fucking-box-live is outdoing the entire tech-industry for usable cheap VoIP.
Not to mention that the C system causes boatloads of programmer error.
IMHO, we should abandon the pseudometricism of memory storage sizes and come up with a new one from scratch - besides, 2^10 is a poor exponent to use. So, I have my own proposal.
4 bits = 1 nibble
2 nibbles = 1 byte
there are the familiar units (nibble only occasionally used)... lets go with that. First of all, lets use normal exponents - 2^8 for each interval... perhaps 2^16 should be used?
256 bytes = 1 munch
256 munches = 1 crunch
256 crunches = 1 gnaw
256 gnaws = 1 chomp
256 chomps = 1 devour
256 devours = 1 masticate
Really? That's freaking ridiculous. Why do they even bother to stick to binary nominal sizes anyway then?
Maybe its 'cause the small MB numbers look like RAM numbers to laymen, so they want to market it like RAM.
Umm, it was the same people - just like it took only Lucas himself to fuck star wars, it took only the Warshowski brothers to fuck their own Matrix.
I think the problem was the same: they got cocky and thought they were right, even if people told them otherwise.
From the pics, it looks like this is just a cut-up PC stuck to a jacket.
IMHO, the only thing revolutionary about it is that its the worst case-mod ever.
Umm, actually, its not the taxes, its the debt thats causing the recall. After all, every dittohead I've heard that's screaming for Davis' heart is because he lied about the deficit. Not the taxes.
Economic recovery != job recovery. If the IT industry can rake in American money selling foreign-made programs to foreign buyers, the american economy does well, American citizens (except those remaining in said IT companies) don't see dick all of it.
Jesus = conservative? Have you read the new testament? Something along the lines of..
"it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven".
Jesus was a hippie. BTW, I'm engaged to a devout Anglican, and she thinks that people like Coulter are an embarrasment to Christians worldwide.
Um, read the friggin' blurb again. Anti-spammers - the good guys in this (unless you object to the more overactive vigilantes like SPEWS).
As I udnerstand it, you were responsible for the english translation dialogue of Princess Mononoke. Now, at the risk of sounding like the cliche anime fan screaming "the sub was better" I wonder what made you make certain decisions. I watched an early fansub of the film that elected not to find translations for the names of the gods of the story - they were simply introduced as "a Tatagami" and "the Shishigiri". I found this a much more effective approach.
By contrast, your dub directly called them "a Demon God" and suchlike. When watching this version of the film with friends who hadn't seen the traditional dub, I was surprised at how confused they were by the film. The general problem seemed to be that terms like "Deer god" and "Demon god" created confusing concepts in their head, particularly in the religious folks. The idea that a god becomes a demon when consumed by hate was not intuitive in the story.
I wonder, did you consider the other approach? I found that, with simple untranslated names, there were no preconceptions to confuse the viewer.
Is there anything you might have done differently with that work?
Ohhhhhhh CAAAANAADAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
Our home and native land!!!!
w00t!
Hmm - gathering info on children is illegal, innit? And yet they use a childish object to garner attention.
You may be right about the Joe Camel point. There's real precedent there.
Actually - this is a good point. After all, if you deliberately installed a plug-in that would advertise alternatives to services you were viewing on the internet - which is exactly what U-Haul is fighting against - would that be a bad thing? In the end, it would be similar to the "if you like this, you'd like" features found on many music/book sites.
People shouldn't knee-jerk bash this ruling because it finds in favour of pop-ups. The problem with pop-up plug-ins is _not_ that they advertise competing products to the web-sites being viewed - if the user wants their computer to offer that service, that's up to them. The problem with pop-up plug-ins is that they install themselves with subterfuge and deceit.
If the installers/ads were honest a la "Bonzi Buddy will be your internet friend and also take over your computer and force feed you ads" then this whole plug-in mess wouldn't be such a problem.
That, and sites that pop-up auto-installs on entry with such software as Bonzi and Gator should be boycotted. Any site that attempts to install without warning or request should be considered an attempted attack.
These programs aren't malicious because they produce pop-ups and have a better advertising system than the viewed websites - they're malicious because they install themselves forcefully, deceitfully, and with false pretenses.
Whoa, it took you that long to decide that Anthony is filthy? Nearly every series of his has some point where he tries to justifiy his lusting after young flesh. When ever he tries to discuss social issues (like prostitution, a frequent subject) he sounds like Kathy Lee or Connie Chung - someone with lots of opinions and no knowledge or brains.
Funny, me too! We call it the DataFridge, or the paperweight.
Stop reading Pournelle. He's an asshat. BTW - here in Canada the eco-freaks bitched out the government for _shutting down_ nuclear plants. STFU.