Not to mention how much of the central parts of North America, Europe, Africa and Asia are mostly farmland, Grains and Veggies are amongst the most important to our diet, and we don't even have enough food to feed the world as it is.
So even if the dust was somehow not an issue, the kind of devestation that would happen on land is far worse than anything on the coasts. Having a few dozen cities evacuated and rebuilt is far preferable to mass starvation.
Bots still tend to outplay in that they have instant communication amongst other bots (Like the voice chat) and have quicker reaction times.
Even "on Equal Footing" Bots tend to play better, the only time they don't is when you purposefully detriment their regular abilities like accuracy and detection. Essentially if you and a bot were walking near each other, just a grenade lob away, the bot would be able to instantly know you are there because the instant the sound is registered in their detection range they can tell where your location is better than a human trying to generalize with their imperfect 5.1 audio setup and they don't have the split second reaction time involved.
Simply put, the computer is just plain faster at everything else, which in FPS is the main difference between winning and losing - twitch reflexes.
Bots in FPS ARE a completely different thing, as setting up an auto-headshot sniper that will hit the player before he can get the bot into view is not that difficult to make. That field will never be an even battle.
Strategy games are a little different though. A Bot essentially has no "better" way to evaluate the player than any other player would evaluate the player. Say in Starcraft, the Bot scouts the player - and determines he is a little behind in what he would expect the player's army count to be. This could mean a number of things: The player made a mistake, the player is saving up, or theres something the player has that you have not found yet. How do you proceed?
Now - when you get to the pro level of gaming, you worry a little less about your opponent's build and worry more about not letting them know yours. Walling and other defensive techniques become just as important as scouting your opponent. The game becomes highly a higly reactive scenario as opposed to proactive. If you know what your opponent is doing, you can counter it and that puts you much further ahead, possibly ahead enough to crush them.
So the problem eventually lies in getting an AI to properly counter a players actions. Making an AI react to players is much harder than giving an AI a plan and telling him to execute. Because essentially the reaction is only as smart as whoever is programming the AI. And if you are a better player, capable of keeping other people from determining your plan, you can beat an AI who is trying to determine yours.
Don't get me wrong, the ability for computers to instantly Micro and Macromanage all of the units and resources at once does give it some serious advantages, but deep in the heart of it: The AI will only be a little better of a player than the person who programs him. (Or her, if you program female AI's like GLaDOS)
Uses Broodwar, not Starcraft 2, and not just the original.
Just saying. (Cause when they mentioned Ultralisk Microing, I thought about SC2 and how Ultralisks are terrible units there simply because they block your units making Micro a huge pain, and it wasn't so bad in BW when your units could take a bit more of a beating).
That's only if you believe the troops NEED to be in Afghanistan to begin with.
As far as I'm concerned - the amount of danger Wikileaks put on soldiers pales in comparison to the amount of danger Bush has put on them. They'd be far safer on US Soil protecting the actual US Borders instead of it's foreign interests;
It's like me breaking into your house and complaining that your dog pointed me out.
my brain just exploded with the IRONY there and where this was posted
What better place to say it than to your face?
Man, could you be any more trollish? You are saying that they shouldn't spend all their day at/. yet it looks like you've spent at least 10 minutes here or there every other hour from 11 till 2 drafting up responses to people responding to your post!
(Expect a retort about how efficient you are at your job so you can afford these luxuries.)
The point was that you basically state that a good employee doesn't do this 1 thing, you call yourself a good employee, then do this 1 thing. That's the irony he was trying to point out.
And PS:
My only requirement is that they be able to communicate effectively, look presentable, and understand the business on a broad scale as well as in the minutiae.
Do you know how many IT Professionals DO that, and are either still earning shit wages or are out of a job? Just because you've got a sweet gig going doesn't mean you know how it works. If you are so damn confident in your skillset, I dare you to jump around to a few different companies to test the waters, see if you can get a bigger paycheck, just knowing that in 2 years time that the company you work for now will still want you back.
You need to point out what in the Patent actually relates to rollovers first. It's so hard to decipher what its actually saying that you could say its a patent for buttons you click and no one would know the difference.
My first language and I wish my only. I don't know if it is because it was my first, but it's the only one that I feel like can accomplish everything I need in a very logical and clean fashion.
I think its that way with everyone's first language.
I just hate that my first language was VB, because after doing years of C++ and finally getting used to it, it comes back to haunt me when I'm the only one on the team comfortable enough with VB to go through the old VB6 code and figure out why Invoicer A can run functions that will break for Invoicer B.
Well, I'm not the ONLY one who can, but once you get that label as "The guy who is better at it" all that stuff gets dumped on you. You know how it goes.
Sometimes I hate being the kind of person who gets those jokes...
You know, when you chuckle, and then the guy across the room asks, "What?". And you say "Oh, just a programming joke" and then you feel bad because it makes you sound smug about it but really you're just saving each other some time by not explaining something that they wouldn't get initially to finally resolve to a joke that wouldn't be so funny after you explain it.
I almost made a try/catch 22 joke, but I think we can all agree those have been overdone.
Our company is even worse than that - we have shown them the cost savings of switching from Microsoft Office (Standard) to Open Office, demo'd the interoperability and the ease of switching, but because it's not Microsoft they just can't consider it "reliable".
It makes me want to rip my hair out. Then glue it on their faces as silly mustaches. Point is it makes me have crazy thoughts.
Then you are misunderstanding the problem entirely. If EVERYONE were a great employee, the need for IT professionals would be even less (because you could do more with less IT professionals) and you'd have even more IT pros out of jobs.
So not everyone is perfect, we get that, that's life. All industries are like that. What seperates IT? It's not like everyone in the sales team has 300% ROI either, but you don't see sales positions being offshored to people in India. That's because your sales person NEEDS to be here. They need to be schmoozing with clients, they need to make the appearance.
Straight up: Not all companies want to pay 10 guys 130K+ a year. Some of them would rather pay 90 people 13K a year. Especially in the positions that simply require bodies: Answering phone calls, debugging, etc.
We went and made Transglobal communication such a simple process that we're now bypassable. Don't get me wrong, IT isn't the only industry that suffers from Offshoring, but it's just ironic that good IT is the reason why it suffers over here.
Sometimes we all dislike icefrog but if he's developing and defending DoTA then no other wrongs he does matter, IMO.
So basically what you're saying is that the end justifies the means?
How'd that get insightful? That's like saying "I'd like to make more money, the fact that I'm stealing bank account info doesn't matter."
No - if Icefrog isn't going to play nicely, he shouldn't be allowed to play. Video games can be as collaberative or co-operative or competitive as the developers wish to be with each other. We don't need these kind of rogues running around screwing things up for everyone.
It's not so much that people misunderstand the internet, it's that they misunderstand computers and automation and what all that is capable of.
It's because everyone else assumes that the massive amount of information put on the internet makes their little tidbit just another drop in the ocean, and that in order for people to find it they have to be actively looking for it, and no one would look for it if they didn't know it already existed.
For example: My mother. She knows the Ballet has a phone number, but she doesn't know what it is. She'll go use the internet to look it up. Now the effort is there, she finds it, it makes sense.
But no one knows she would have vacation photos from 1995, so how are they possibly going to find them without searching them? They see the internet as the kind of place where everything can sit, and only the people you want to find stuff will be able to find it because they will be the only ones looking for it. Phone number? Yeah put it on your facebook because only your friends will see your Facebook. That's the kind of mentality there is. They think no one they don't know will bother looking at their facebook. And they figure it's better to have that accessibility to your friends and loved ones and it outweighs the "off chance" that someone you don't want to grab that information will find it.
The missing piece of the puzzle is that they don't seem to know that people can set up scripts to run through facebook profiles, and grab all the data it can, store it, analyze it, and be used by a variety of people in many different forms. From police work to advertising to far more malicious intents.
Everyone just thinks "It can't or won't happen to me" - you know like drunk driving or World of Warcraft.
Well, you should say "doing" minecraft, not "did" minecraft, because Minecraft is no where near finished.
If you load it up and try it out, you'll see that its still in its infant Alpha stages. He hasn't finished filling in the content, tackled many bugs, nor has he stuck to his guns of doing it alone. He's hiring other programmers in his City, I believe, because even he knows that with everything he wants in there it's too much to tackle.
Getting something you can sell and developing a complete game are two completely different things. You'll notice even the indie products that are actually completed sport more than 1 person on them. Simply put: Sound engineering, Artwork, AND programming, are usually too much for one person to get done within any reasonable amount of time unless you can actually sit down and commit to a startup, which requires more money than most people have.
Go look at the credits for ANY indie game out there thats selling, ANY of them. I Guarantee you'll find 3 or more people on there, (exclude testers).
How many computers total are in the US compared to other countries of the world?
Simple counts don't cut it in the real world of statistics.
I bet 100% of Canadian computers could be infected and we still might not beat out the US. Considering the Population of California alone is greater than our national population (or at least it was last time I checked).
"Surely all your friends were once strangers, yes?" True but irrelevant.
How so? If they strangers once, how did they get to be friends? Perhaps there was some, I dunno... mechanism involved? Something to do with how you each responded to the other, maybe?
I'd say about 99% of the time it has to deal with similar interests combined with spending extensive time with the person, not always by choice. (School, work, online gaming, etc)
I'm actually a bit more inclined to know if they recorded the gender with their results.
See, if I were to assume that what they consider "brain response" to correlate to social interaction; than there is of course the obvious "You're going to talk to your friends more than people you don't know." Which can often be a barrier.
However, I've noticed one thing amongst men that seems to differ from women: a lot of guys tend to hang out with other guys who have the same interests. The guys who are into sports tend to be friends with other guys who are into sports. The guys into comics are friends with other comic lovers. Now you'd think this would be a natural progression for just about everyone: You are friends with the people who have similar interests.
But specifically in my girlfriend's scenario, she doesn't have a lot of similarities with even her closest friends. One of her friends has gotten so "Witchy" recently that everyone is starting to hate her. I posed the question one day, "If you don't like hanging out with her, why do you?" To which she paused, and hesitantly responded, "Because she's my friend. I've known her since like grade 1, I can't just cut that off." Which absolutely baffles me. I'm not saying she needs to burn any bridges, but I definately take a more active approach in choosing my friends. I have evaluated each of my friends for the qualities I admire and actively make plans with the ones I enjoy the most.
Is that just me, or is it a gender based thing, or is this completely anecdotal and not worth the bandwidth used when posting it?
I only bring up genders because you'll notice a lot more "Drama" seems to happen amongst women, which I think is because of the shakey foundations of their friendships, which always seem to be based on time they had spent together (or familiarity) as opposed to actual social interests. Keep in mind I'm generalizing things a lot, clearly not everyone is like this.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention how much of the central parts of North America, Europe, Africa and Asia are mostly farmland, Grains and Veggies are amongst the most important to our diet, and we don't even have enough food to feed the world as it is.
So even if the dust was somehow not an issue, the kind of devestation that would happen on land is far worse than anything on the coasts. Having a few dozen cities evacuated and rebuilt is far preferable to mass starvation.
I don't know why they mentioned CERN instead of Michelle Hunziker, I didn't think Slashdot was THAT bad...
Yes. It's the one they show in the looney toons when Wile E Coyote is trying to catch the RoadRunner.
Bots still tend to outplay in that they have instant communication amongst other bots (Like the voice chat) and have quicker reaction times.
Even "on Equal Footing" Bots tend to play better, the only time they don't is when you purposefully detriment their regular abilities like accuracy and detection. Essentially if you and a bot were walking near each other, just a grenade lob away, the bot would be able to instantly know you are there because the instant the sound is registered in their detection range they can tell where your location is better than a human trying to generalize with their imperfect 5.1 audio setup and they don't have the split second reaction time involved.
Simply put, the computer is just plain faster at everything else, which in FPS is the main difference between winning and losing - twitch reflexes.
Yeah but were those studies Danish?
Bots in FPS ARE a completely different thing, as setting up an auto-headshot sniper that will hit the player before he can get the bot into view is not that difficult to make. That field will never be an even battle.
Strategy games are a little different though. A Bot essentially has no "better" way to evaluate the player than any other player would evaluate the player. Say in Starcraft, the Bot scouts the player - and determines he is a little behind in what he would expect the player's army count to be. This could mean a number of things: The player made a mistake, the player is saving up, or theres something the player has that you have not found yet. How do you proceed?
Now - when you get to the pro level of gaming, you worry a little less about your opponent's build and worry more about not letting them know yours. Walling and other defensive techniques become just as important as scouting your opponent. The game becomes highly a higly reactive scenario as opposed to proactive. If you know what your opponent is doing, you can counter it and that puts you much further ahead, possibly ahead enough to crush them.
So the problem eventually lies in getting an AI to properly counter a players actions. Making an AI react to players is much harder than giving an AI a plan and telling him to execute. Because essentially the reaction is only as smart as whoever is programming the AI. And if you are a better player, capable of keeping other people from determining your plan, you can beat an AI who is trying to determine yours.
Don't get me wrong, the ability for computers to instantly Micro and Macromanage all of the units and resources at once does give it some serious advantages, but deep in the heart of it: The AI will only be a little better of a player than the person who programs him. (Or her, if you program female AI's like GLaDOS)
Uses Broodwar, not Starcraft 2, and not just the original.
Just saying. (Cause when they mentioned Ultralisk Microing, I thought about SC2 and how Ultralisks are terrible units there simply because they block your units making Micro a huge pain, and it wasn't so bad in BW when your units could take a bit more of a beating).
That's only if you believe the troops NEED to be in Afghanistan to begin with.
As far as I'm concerned - the amount of danger Wikileaks put on soldiers pales in comparison to the amount of danger Bush has put on them. They'd be far safer on US Soil protecting the actual US Borders instead of it's foreign interests;
It's like me breaking into your house and complaining that your dog pointed me out.
You can't steal your own ideas.
So everything along the way was his idea - is your claim?
my brain just exploded with the IRONY there and where this was posted
What better place to say it than to your face?
Man, could you be any more trollish? You are saying that they shouldn't spend all their day at /. yet it looks like you've spent at least 10 minutes here or there every other hour from 11 till 2 drafting up responses to people responding to your post!
(Expect a retort about how efficient you are at your job so you can afford these luxuries.)
The point was that you basically state that a good employee doesn't do this 1 thing, you call yourself a good employee, then do this 1 thing. That's the irony he was trying to point out.
And PS:
My only requirement is that they be able to communicate effectively, look presentable, and understand the business on a broad scale as well as in the minutiae.
Do you know how many IT Professionals DO that, and are either still earning shit wages or are out of a job? Just because you've got a sweet gig going doesn't mean you know how it works. If you are so damn confident in your skillset, I dare you to jump around to a few different companies to test the waters, see if you can get a bigger paycheck, just knowing that in 2 years time that the company you work for now will still want you back.
I dare anyone to reword the patent, read it back to the owner, and see if they understand it.
You need to point out what in the Patent actually relates to rollovers first. It's so hard to decipher what its actually saying that you could say its a patent for buttons you click and no one would know the difference.
If what he's doing can basically be considered stealing trade secrets - than its more than just "hiding his past history".
I was drawing your sentence to sound more like
"As long as he protects DotA I don't care if he's a thief"
I do actually. I Expect the Next 3 versions of Open Office to work a lot more seemlessly than the past 3 versions of Microsoft Office.
My first language and I wish my only. I don't know if it is because it was my first, but it's the only one that I feel like can accomplish everything I need in a very logical and clean fashion.
I think its that way with everyone's first language.
I just hate that my first language was VB, because after doing years of C++ and finally getting used to it, it comes back to haunt me when I'm the only one on the team comfortable enough with VB to go through the old VB6 code and figure out why Invoicer A can run functions that will break for Invoicer B.
Well, I'm not the ONLY one who can, but once you get that label as "The guy who is better at it" all that stuff gets dumped on you. You know how it goes.
Sometimes I hate being the kind of person who gets those jokes...
You know, when you chuckle, and then the guy across the room asks, "What?". And you say "Oh, just a programming joke" and then you feel bad because it makes you sound smug about it but really you're just saving each other some time by not explaining something that they wouldn't get initially to finally resolve to a joke that wouldn't be so funny after you explain it.
I almost made a try/catch 22 joke, but I think we can all agree those have been overdone.
Our company is even worse than that - we have shown them the cost savings of switching from Microsoft Office (Standard) to Open Office, demo'd the interoperability and the ease of switching, but because it's not Microsoft they just can't consider it "reliable".
It makes me want to rip my hair out. Then glue it on their faces as silly mustaches. Point is it makes me have crazy thoughts.
Then you are misunderstanding the problem entirely. If EVERYONE were a great employee, the need for IT professionals would be even less (because you could do more with less IT professionals) and you'd have even more IT pros out of jobs.
So not everyone is perfect, we get that, that's life. All industries are like that. What seperates IT? It's not like everyone in the sales team has 300% ROI either, but you don't see sales positions being offshored to people in India. That's because your sales person NEEDS to be here. They need to be schmoozing with clients, they need to make the appearance.
Straight up: Not all companies want to pay 10 guys 130K+ a year. Some of them would rather pay 90 people 13K a year. Especially in the positions that simply require bodies: Answering phone calls, debugging, etc.
We went and made Transglobal communication such a simple process that we're now bypassable. Don't get me wrong, IT isn't the only industry that suffers from Offshoring, but it's just ironic that good IT is the reason why it suffers over here.
If it was, I didn't even get it until you mentioned it.
I don't know if that's the best kind of pun, or the very very worst...
Sometimes we all dislike icefrog but if he's developing and defending DoTA then no other wrongs he does matter, IMO.
So basically what you're saying is that the end justifies the means?
How'd that get insightful? That's like saying "I'd like to make more money, the fact that I'm stealing bank account info doesn't matter."
No - if Icefrog isn't going to play nicely, he shouldn't be allowed to play. Video games can be as collaberative or co-operative or competitive as the developers wish to be with each other. We don't need these kind of rogues running around screwing things up for everyone.
It's not so much that people misunderstand the internet, it's that they misunderstand computers and automation and what all that is capable of.
It's because everyone else assumes that the massive amount of information put on the internet makes their little tidbit just another drop in the ocean, and that in order for people to find it they have to be actively looking for it, and no one would look for it if they didn't know it already existed.
For example: My mother. She knows the Ballet has a phone number, but she doesn't know what it is. She'll go use the internet to look it up. Now the effort is there, she finds it, it makes sense.
But no one knows she would have vacation photos from 1995, so how are they possibly going to find them without searching them? They see the internet as the kind of place where everything can sit, and only the people you want to find stuff will be able to find it because they will be the only ones looking for it. Phone number? Yeah put it on your facebook because only your friends will see your Facebook. That's the kind of mentality there is. They think no one they don't know will bother looking at their facebook. And they figure it's better to have that accessibility to your friends and loved ones and it outweighs the "off chance" that someone you don't want to grab that information will find it.
The missing piece of the puzzle is that they don't seem to know that people can set up scripts to run through facebook profiles, and grab all the data it can, store it, analyze it, and be used by a variety of people in many different forms. From police work to advertising to far more malicious intents.
Everyone just thinks "It can't or won't happen to me" - you know like drunk driving or World of Warcraft.
Well, you should say "doing" minecraft, not "did" minecraft, because Minecraft is no where near finished.
If you load it up and try it out, you'll see that its still in its infant Alpha stages. He hasn't finished filling in the content, tackled many bugs, nor has he stuck to his guns of doing it alone. He's hiring other programmers in his City, I believe, because even he knows that with everything he wants in there it's too much to tackle.
Getting something you can sell and developing a complete game are two completely different things. You'll notice even the indie products that are actually completed sport more than 1 person on them. Simply put: Sound engineering, Artwork, AND programming, are usually too much for one person to get done within any reasonable amount of time unless you can actually sit down and commit to a startup, which requires more money than most people have.
Go look at the credits for ANY indie game out there thats selling, ANY of them. I Guarantee you'll find 3 or more people on there, (exclude testers).
How many computers total are in the US compared to other countries of the world?
Simple counts don't cut it in the real world of statistics.
I bet 100% of Canadian computers could be infected and we still might not beat out the US. Considering the Population of California alone is greater than our national population (or at least it was last time I checked).
"Surely all your friends were once strangers, yes?"
True but irrelevant.
How so? If they strangers once, how did they get to be friends? Perhaps there was some, I dunno... mechanism involved? Something to do with how you each responded to the other, maybe?
I'd say about 99% of the time it has to deal with similar interests combined with spending extensive time with the person, not always by choice. (School, work, online gaming, etc)
I'm actually a bit more inclined to know if they recorded the gender with their results.
See, if I were to assume that what they consider "brain response" to correlate to social interaction; than there is of course the obvious "You're going to talk to your friends more than people you don't know." Which can often be a barrier.
However, I've noticed one thing amongst men that seems to differ from women: a lot of guys tend to hang out with other guys who have the same interests. The guys who are into sports tend to be friends with other guys who are into sports. The guys into comics are friends with other comic lovers. Now you'd think this would be a natural progression for just about everyone: You are friends with the people who have similar interests.
But specifically in my girlfriend's scenario, she doesn't have a lot of similarities with even her closest friends. One of her friends has gotten so "Witchy" recently that everyone is starting to hate her. I posed the question one day, "If you don't like hanging out with her, why do you?" To which she paused, and hesitantly responded, "Because she's my friend. I've known her since like grade 1, I can't just cut that off." Which absolutely baffles me. I'm not saying she needs to burn any bridges, but I definately take a more active approach in choosing my friends. I have evaluated each of my friends for the qualities I admire and actively make plans with the ones I enjoy the most.
Is that just me, or is it a gender based thing, or is this completely anecdotal and not worth the bandwidth used when posting it?
I only bring up genders because you'll notice a lot more "Drama" seems to happen amongst women, which I think is because of the shakey foundations of their friendships, which always seem to be based on time they had spent together (or familiarity) as opposed to actual social interests. Keep in mind I'm generalizing things a lot, clearly not everyone is like this.