Now maybe I'm completely wrong here - if I am please correct me - but I got the impression that the higher the mega/gigahertz that your processor is running, the more power it needs. Would a 110 gigahertz computer send my electric bills sky high, or would this be a trivial concern?
Who the heck buys anything off of spam. The one common denominator of spam is that almost everything advertised that way is something that you would never want. If I got spam telling me about really good deals on blank cds, legitimately discounted airfare, and vegetarian resturants in Seattle, I wouldn't mind spam nearly as much. However it's always Make Money Fast, Nigeran scams, sketchy sounding health stuff, and the ilk.
"Too tired to fight with a device I supposedly own just to get it to do what it's capable of. "
How exactly do you have to fight with a DVD player? At most, you have to input a region unlocking code if your player has one. I put DVDs in my player, hit play, and they work.
One example of this that really annoys me is Grand Turismo 2. I live in Seattle, so I bought it solely to race around downtown on their Seattle course. It took me about 10 days of playing before I passed enough tests that the game condescended to let me race it.
Over New Year's I was at a friend who had GT3. It had a better Seattle course. I was hoping to try it, but after spending 3 hours at a party trying to pass tests, the controller was taken away from me. That's an extreme disincentive towards me ever buying GT3, even if I get a Playstation 2.
Here's the other problem with newer games. They're all about the great graphics. In addition to the usual complaint about graphics intensive games (They sacrifice game play for the thrill of "oooooooh, that blood looks real.), I find at least that almost real graphics look worse that the most cartoonish ones.
Take Fifa 2000 for the playstation. The players look almost real... almost being the key word. Whenever I see their blocky heads, I think about how bad the graphics are. By coming close to realism, you're forced to see how far away they still are.
On the other hand, a more cartoonish game doesn't invite that comparism at all. Take Super Mario brothers for example. No one thinks that the graphics on that game suck, even though Mario doesn't look like a real person. They get sucked into the game world because they don't even think about how much better he would look with a few tweaks.
Moral of this story? Don't worry about the graphics people, just make fun games.
...of course this is a moral from someone who doesn't really play games much, so take it with a grain or 10,000 of salt.
Personally, I've been addicted to Mame's emulation of 10 Yard Fight (ummmmmm... that is I WOULD be if I had the rom of course;) ). I'd much rather play a football simulation that is actually fun and can be played in 10 minutes or so, then go get one of those ubersimulation games that require 2 weeks or so just to learn how to play it. I don't want to devote my life to a game, I just want something fun to do every now and then. If there were more games like that being sold, I would own more playstation games.
Ok first, as a Deadhead - and someone who likes SCI for that matter - the statement, "I'm writing now for String Cheese Incident, which is like Grateful Dead 2.0..." is just ridiculous. I don't think the most diehard SCI fan would agree with that. SCI is a fun little jamband, the Dead was the focus of many people's lives. They're not in the same league at all.
Having said that, the problem with John Barlow is that he can't answer any questions. The interviewer was extremely friendly, led him a lot, and he still couldn't make many points.
It's easy to say now that Microsoft will be able to keep doing well because of their market share, but how did they get that in the first place? Barlow has no answer. "[Apple] blew that one," is not much of a response.
I like the guy. I like some of his ideas. Interviews like that though, only harm his cause.
Well yeah, your main point is valid. I just saw, "Look a band like Phish who built a huge cult following by live touring before they even signed a contract with a record company," and my anal retentive nature felt compelled to respond.
...now if only Phish would try to restore their cult following with, say, a 2 month fall tour...
Actually not quite. Alas my copy of The Phish Companion is at home, but as I recall, The White Tape and Junta were the only completely self produced album. Lawn Boy - well if you ignore the 20 or so tapes that they sold in February 1990 - was released by Absolute A Go-Go (a division of Rough Trade). When they went under, A Picture of Nectar was released by Elektra. Elektra even tried to promote it a bit. I have a promotional poster of the album cover that I got from an rep when he was visiting a record store.
Anyway, according to Amazon.com's PoN site, PoN was released on 2/18/92. Here's a sample of some of the venues that Phish played in March of 92:
Now your point is valid in that Elektra did little to help Phish out; few people saw Phish due to the Down With Disease video after all. Word of mouth and tape trading helped Phish out a lot, but they also used a record company too.
It's only with the recent grouping of jambands that they're really taking advantage of the internet. Bands like String Cheese Incident and The Disco Biscuits are better examples of growth without needing the record companies. If Phish were a few years younger, they would have done it this way too I suspect, but the structure wasn't quite there yet for them.
"Bands that grow beyond club size need the labels or they won't ever see the stage of a major arena. Flaunting the major players will assure that a band, no matter how many CDs they sell online will never get to play before the big crowds and make the big money. "
String Cheese Incident have their own label. They never get played on the radio. Most people have never heard of them. In 2001, they played Deer Creek, Sandstone Ampitheate, Riverport Ampitheatre, and Alpine Valley as coheadliners with Widespread Panic and Phil and Friends. They also played a two show run at Red Rocks where they headlined. Jambands operate under their own rules.
Watching football, I noticed a slight problem even at best mode. Anything other than that, it's barely noticable even in good or average mode.
Re:There's a slight problem here
on
Peek-a-Boo(ty)
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yes but are the instructions on how to do that on that website? I still think there's a chicken and egg problem here.
There's a slight problem here
on
Peek-a-Boo(ty)
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So you mean I can go to any website out there, even if my websurfing is blocked? Great! How do I get this software? Oh go to this website. Hey. It's blocked.
What does Microsoft gain from this? Sure it would make you happy, but it would be extra work for them and cut into their sales, with no benefit at all.
The problem with people agreeing to do this is that it will be very hard for them to get real programming jobs again. Write anything that appears to be based on Microsoft source code, and they'd sue so fast.
"The only way to stop this is to make the code PUBLIC for everyone to see. If they don't Microsoft will do their standard dirty tricks and poison the case again. "
I'm sure that the government won't have any problem with destroying the countries largest company in a recession in order to appease some people on slashdot. Can we be a little realistic here?
Among traders of live music, there's a similar debate about soundboards vs audience tapes. Audiences are said to be warmer and boards are sterile. Personally, when I listen to a cd, all I want to hear is music. When I watch a movie, all I want to see is the movie. I think the warmth argument is mainly associations. People who grew up on vinyl, associate clicks and pops with hearing music. People who grew up on film, associate "random scattering of those silver molecules" with movies. If you don't have those associations, the whole thing seems silly.
The sex on Buffy has been one thing - episode filler. Look at the themes that Suprise/Innocence managed to plumb without wasting 5 minutes an ep with the details. I just get the sense that the Buffy/Spike scenes are there to make the writers life easier, along with the "everyone look moody while a song plays" scene.
I wasn't speaking to the concept of whether or not guns should be allowed. I'm not a huge fan of gun control laws, mainly because I doubt that they work all that well. I was referring to, "Our ( America's) new gov't was framed in the idea that gov't can't be perfect, and that if it gets really screwed up, citizens should have the power to revolt, and to create a new gov't."
I've seen that rhetoric around a lot on the net, and a lot of times it's used in a context like, "Our tax rates went from 24% to 24.3%. It's revolution time." *
Should guns be legal? Maybe. Should armed revolt against the government whenever you think your rights are being infringed upon be encouraged? No.
* exageration for humorous purposes, not an actual quote
"Regular common people, it was written, should have the right to bear arms, form up a non-state controlled militia, and fight for their rights if they need to."
Unfortunately, some people translate that to things like "Regular common people should have the right to bear arms to prevent their high school from being integrated."
The utopia that many 2nd Amendment people espouse is a scary place for the rest of us, a world where endless Timothy McVeighs feel like they have the right to blow stuff up whenever any law passes that they don't like, while the rest of us who just want to play with our computers and see music and hang out with our friends get caught in the crossfire.
Where do I draw the line? I'm not sure. People should have the right to violently resist a government that is trying to kill them. Beyond a self-defense of you and/or your loved ones, it's hard for me to see many reasons why killing is a valid action. When you can make a case that your life is at stake and you have no other way of redressing your grievances, then maybe it's time to think about arms. Before that, you're part of the problem.
Anyone want to fund the ACLU setting up cameras all over DC to be able to examine questionable police activity? It's the David Brin solution; if you can't outlaw cameras, give them to everyone.
Re:Intelligent Systems
on
Arguing A.I.
·
· Score: 1
Actually, if it uses java, I'm much better than the computer at math.
At least when I add 2 and 1.1, I get 3.1 everytime, instead of getting 3.100000001 and 3.09999999.
AI still seems to be a distant goal
on
Arguing A.I.
·
· Score: 1
Ok admittedly a lot of what I know about AI progress comes from slashdot forums. However, it seems like no real progress has been made. Everytime someone points to a new impressive AI bot, it turns out that the most basic tricks confuse it. I'm not convinced that we've really made any progress from Eliza. Sure, as long as you stick to a script, it'll look real, but as soon as you say anything off of it, the bot gets confused. Until we have something that makes AI look vaguely possible , I'm not going to worry about the morality of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Now maybe I'm completely wrong here - if I am please correct me - but I got the impression that the higher the mega/gigahertz that your processor is running, the more power it needs. Would a 110 gigahertz computer send my electric bills sky high, or would this be a trivial concern?
Who the heck buys anything off of spam. The one common denominator of spam is that almost everything advertised that way is something that you would never want. If I got spam telling me about really good deals on blank cds, legitimately discounted airfare, and vegetarian resturants in Seattle, I wouldn't mind spam nearly as much. However it's always Make Money Fast, Nigeran scams, sketchy sounding health stuff, and the ilk.
"Too tired to fight with a device I supposedly own just to get it to do what it's capable of. "
How exactly do you have to fight with a DVD player? At most, you have to input a region unlocking code if your player has one. I put DVDs in my player, hit play, and they work.
One example of this that really annoys me is Grand Turismo 2. I live in Seattle, so I bought it solely to race around downtown on their Seattle course. It took me about 10 days of playing before I passed enough tests that the game condescended to let me race it.
Over New Year's I was at a friend who had GT3. It had a better Seattle course. I was hoping to try it, but after spending 3 hours at a party trying to pass tests, the controller was taken away from me. That's an extreme disincentive towards me ever buying GT3, even if I get a Playstation 2.
Here's the other problem with newer games. They're all about the great graphics. In addition to the usual complaint about graphics intensive games (They sacrifice game play for the thrill of "oooooooh, that blood looks real.), I find at least that almost real graphics look worse that the most cartoonish ones.
Take Fifa 2000 for the playstation. The players look almost real... almost being the key word. Whenever I see their blocky heads, I think about how bad the graphics are. By coming close to realism, you're forced to see how far away they still are.
On the other hand, a more cartoonish game doesn't invite that comparism at all. Take Super Mario brothers for example. No one thinks that the graphics on that game suck, even though Mario doesn't look like a real person. They get sucked into the game world because they don't even think about how much better he would look with a few tweaks.
Moral of this story? Don't worry about the graphics people, just make fun games.
...of course this is a moral from someone who doesn't really play games much, so take it with a grain or 10,000 of salt.
Personally, I've been addicted to Mame's emulation of 10 Yard Fight (ummmmmm... that is I WOULD be if I had the rom of course ;) ). I'd much rather play a football simulation that is actually fun and can be played in 10 minutes or so, then go get one of those ubersimulation games that require 2 weeks or so just to learn how to play it. I don't want to devote my life to a game, I just want something fun to do every now and then. If there were more games like that being sold, I would own more playstation games.
Ok first, as a Deadhead - and someone who likes SCI for that matter - the statement, "I'm writing now for String Cheese Incident, which is like Grateful Dead 2.0..." is just ridiculous. I don't think the most diehard SCI fan would agree with that. SCI is a fun little jamband, the Dead was the focus of many people's lives. They're not in the same league at all.
Having said that, the problem with John Barlow is that he can't answer any questions. The interviewer was extremely friendly, led him a lot, and he still couldn't make many points.
It's easy to say now that Microsoft will be able to keep doing well because of their market share, but how did they get that in the first place? Barlow has no answer. "[Apple] blew that one," is not much of a response.
I like the guy. I like some of his ideas. Interviews like that though, only harm his cause.
Will a new /. joke start up about if you can make a Microsoft Cluster out of everything?
Well yeah, your main point is valid. I just saw, "Look a band like Phish who built a huge cult following by live touring before they even signed a contract with a record company," and my anal retentive nature felt compelled to respond.
...now if only Phish would try to restore their cult following with, say, a 2 month fall tour...
Anyway, according to Amazon.com's PoN site, PoN was released on 2/18/92. Here's a sample of some of the venues that Phish played in March of 92:
(source, the HPB).
Now your point is valid in that Elektra did little to help Phish out; few people saw Phish due to the Down With Disease video after all. Word of mouth and tape trading helped Phish out a lot, but they also used a record company too.
It's only with the recent grouping of jambands that they're really taking advantage of the internet. Bands like String Cheese Incident and The Disco Biscuits are better examples of growth without needing the record companies. If Phish were a few years younger, they would have done it this way too I suspect, but the structure wasn't quite there yet for them.
"Bands that grow beyond club size need the labels or they won't ever see the stage of a major arena. Flaunting the major players will assure that a band, no matter how many CDs they sell online will never get to play before the big crowds and make the big money. "
String Cheese Incident have their own label. They never get played on the radio. Most people have never heard of them. In 2001, they played Deer Creek, Sandstone Ampitheate, Riverport Ampitheatre, and Alpine Valley as coheadliners with Widespread Panic and Phil and Friends. They also played a two show run at Red Rocks where they headlined. Jambands operate under their own rules.
Watching football, I noticed a slight problem even at best mode. Anything other than that, it's barely noticable even in good or average mode.
Yes but are the instructions on how to do that on that website? I still think there's a chicken and egg problem here.
So you mean I can go to any website out there, even if my websurfing is blocked? Great! How do I get this software? Oh go to this website. Hey. It's blocked.
What does Microsoft gain from this? Sure it would make you happy, but it would be extra work for them and cut into their sales, with no benefit at all.
The problem with people agreeing to do this is that it will be very hard for them to get real programming jobs again. Write anything that appears to be based on Microsoft source code, and they'd sue so fast.
"The only way to stop this is to make the code PUBLIC for everyone to see. If they don't Microsoft will do their standard dirty tricks and poison the case again. "
I'm sure that the government won't have any problem with destroying the countries largest company in a recession in order to appease some people on slashdot. Can we be a little realistic here?
They did this in a scene of Monsters Inc too when Sulley was on the mountain.
Among traders of live music, there's a similar debate about soundboards vs audience tapes. Audiences are said to be warmer and boards are sterile. Personally, when I listen to a cd, all I want to hear is music. When I watch a movie, all I want to see is the movie. I think the warmth argument is mainly associations. People who grew up on vinyl, associate clicks and pops with hearing music. People who grew up on film, associate "random scattering of those silver molecules" with movies. If you don't have those associations, the whole thing seems silly.
The sex on Buffy has been one thing - episode filler. Look at the themes that Suprise/Innocence managed to plumb without wasting 5 minutes an ep with the details. I just get the sense that the Buffy/Spike scenes are there to make the writers life easier, along with the "everyone look moody while a song plays" scene.
Having said that, I loved the musical.
I wasn't speaking to the concept of whether or not guns should be allowed. I'm not a huge fan of gun control laws, mainly because I doubt that they work all that well. I was referring to, "Our ( America's) new gov't was framed in the idea that gov't can't be perfect, and that if it gets really screwed up, citizens should have the power to revolt, and to create a new gov't."
I've seen that rhetoric around a lot on the net, and a lot of times it's used in a context like, "Our tax rates went from 24% to 24.3%. It's revolution time." *
Should guns be legal? Maybe. Should armed revolt against the government whenever you think your rights are being infringed upon be encouraged? No.
* exageration for humorous purposes, not an actual quote
"Regular common people, it was written, should have the right to bear arms, form up a non-state controlled militia, and fight for their rights if they need to."
Unfortunately, some people translate that to things like "Regular common people should have the right to bear arms to prevent their high school from being integrated."
The utopia that many 2nd Amendment people espouse is a scary place for the rest of us, a world where endless Timothy McVeighs feel like they have the right to blow stuff up whenever any law passes that they don't like, while the rest of us who just want to play with our computers and see music and hang out with our friends get caught in the crossfire.
Where do I draw the line? I'm not sure. People should have the right to violently resist a government that is trying to kill them. Beyond a self-defense of you and/or your loved ones, it's hard for me to see many reasons why killing is a valid action. When you can make a case that your life is at stake and you have no other way of redressing your grievances, then maybe it's time to think about arms. Before that, you're part of the problem.
Anyone want to fund the ACLU setting up cameras all over DC to be able to examine questionable police activity? It's the David Brin solution; if you can't outlaw cameras, give them to everyone.
Actually, if it uses java, I'm much better than the computer at math.
At least when I add 2 and 1.1, I get 3.1 everytime, instead of getting 3.100000001 and 3.09999999.
Ok admittedly a lot of what I know about AI progress comes from slashdot forums. However, it seems like no real progress has been made. Everytime someone points to a new impressive AI bot, it turns out that the most basic tricks confuse it. I'm not convinced that we've really made any progress from Eliza. Sure, as long as you stick to a script, it'll look real, but as soon as you say anything off of it, the bot gets confused. Until we have something that makes AI look vaguely possible , I'm not going to worry about the morality of it.