And why should Shamans tank? Granted, I don't know a whole lot about Shamans but they aren't plate users so why would they be deserving of an overhaul that lets them tank as well as the proper tanking classes?
The way I wish the classes were built is the way pokemon balance is built.
Water > Fire > Grass > Electric > Water ..and so on. I don't know how well balanced those games are nor do I know the full details of the "classes" but the type of balance the devs tried to achieve is much more fun than that of WoW.
In WoW, Rogues should be able to open a can of whoop-ass on clothies (Mages, Warlocks, Priests). After all, cloth is generally poor protection against a dagger to the kidneys. At the same time, they should fear plate users as their daggers would realistically go "PLINK" off of the armor of a Warrior or a Death Knight. Because of the clothie's non-existant armor they should have vastly superior damage output, unlike WoW where a tank-spec Warrior can take the beating of a lifetime AND do damage comparable to typical dps classes.
While I applaud Blizzards apparent goal of giving every damn class a fair chance against any other class, I think it kind of ruins a bit of the pvp fun. If this was real world (yes, stupid comparison I know), a Warrior wearing all plate and carrying a huge freaggin' sword would make minced meat of a Rogue wearing leather no matter how sneaky he was. Just like a Rogue sneaking up behind a Warlock/Mage/Priest would mean the end of the targeted clothie. Subsequently, since the Warrior doesn't have the sneaking ability of the Rogue, the clothie would see him coming and have a chance of blasting him with crazy damage. A very simplified example that doesn't take into account healers, hybrids or different builds but it shows the general idea: Mage
Demonology Warlock == Beast Mastery Hunter, send in the pet, do ranged damage.
Destruction Warlock == Mage == Elemental Shaman, fire away with spells, run away.
Protection Warrior == Frost Death Knight == Protection Paladin == Feral Druid, are all viable tanks and at least Warrior, DK and Pala put out an astounding damage while tanking.
There is no class distinction. All the classes have different builds but generally you are either a Healer, a ranged DPS or a tank (who does as much damage as the damage guys) and nearly all classes can fill at least 2 roles.
Wrong. If you put the burden of websites to be compliant with every law in the world, you make every site owner, hosting provider and ISP in the world a criminal.
Their faith leads them to define "reality" in a different way than you or I would. To them reality is not limited to just what can be seen, heard, felt, tasted and proven in by the scientific method. To them there is a Heavan and a Hell and the residents of those places are invisible participants in this place. That's their reality.
If that were true, if faith was (as Jesus the man probably intended it) a personal thing, something to bring comfort during the harsh times people some 2000 years ago surely risked stumbling upon and give some semblance of an explanation for the bigger questions of life.. I might be able to stomach it. When faith becomes what it is today, an opposition to common sense and fact, an excuse to deny atoms*, evolution and just stay ignorant, I react with anger and bitterness.
* This actually happened when I told my grandparents I had no faith because I could not choose to believe in something for which there can be no evidence, something utterly self-contradictory, something like an almighty God who could with a though alleviate all His children of their suffering but chooses not to. My grandmother then, shocked and teary-eyed asked me "So, do you think we are made of.. of.. ATOMS?" to which I replied "Yeah.. apart from the undeniable fact that we are.. what do you think we're made of?". She had no answer, because to her it doesn't matter in the faintest.
I also asked her "How can you be so sure that you believe in the right thing, when billions of people through the ages have been every bit as certain their belief was the right one? And don't tell me you just know, because even the Bible says we can't know, hence the 'faith'-part." Again, she had no answer but it didn't bother her in the least because again, she doesn't care to think. I hate to say this because I love my kind, caring grandmother dearly, but I am ashamed on her behalf that she chooses to be that ignorant.
I think part of it also has to do with the comforting effect faith can have. If you can say "it's God's plan" and beleive it, you never have to worry because somebody else is watching out for you and consequently, nothing is ever your fault.
You generally have to abide by the law and if you combine that with a smidge of compassion and a bit of common sense, chances are very little will ever be your fault. I have no issues what-so-ever with the fact that when I die, I stop existing as surely as my computer's software stops running when I pull the power. I accept that nature's reason for my life is to find a suitable mate and procreate. If I need to give an answer to "What is the meaning of life?" I will say just that and perhaps add that the only things you can do that really matter is either invent something that changes the world or try to make an impact on the lives of the people around you. If that isn't purpose enough, then you have issues.
Why do people insist on needing more than that? Do they really value their lives, their loved ones and the amazing complexity of nature so little that they need to replace it with thousands of years old fairytales?
There are a multitude of laws that no political party with any representation in my country disagrees on. Go wild then, government, prohibit murder, theft, etc. If it is hard to implement controversial laws, they are more likely to be thoroughly debated rather than forced through. That's a good thing, by the way, it is a way of killing bad ideas.
Have you ever been anywhere where there are more than two more-or-less equal parties? Believe me, it's not just the more controversial issues they can't agree on. They can't agree on anything (well, except for the kinds of things you propose)! The result isn't just that bad ideas are killed, all ideas are, because noone has the weight to shift anything in any direction.
Apparently none of your politicians has any ideas compelling enough in their logic and benefits to convince the majority. Why do you want a system that makes the implementation of mediocre ideas easier?
Or, all of them have ideas that are compelling and provide benefints to some part of the majority. It is impossible to please everybody (unfortunate, but no less true), thus the point of democracy is to cater to as big a chunk of the population as possible. If everyone voted for whoever they felt would change the country for the better and one party got 33% of the votes, a few others got 10-20% and the rest was distributed pretty evenly across the smaller parties, I find it rather obvious who ought to be in charge that 4-year period. If they do a great job, chances are they will get even more votes next election. If not, someone else will step ut and try to do a better job.
Yet you don't want real majority rules, you want 33% to rule the rest. In any case, a group of friends choosing to watch a movie together is a voluntary activity. If the other 4 really don't want to watch the Matrix, I suppose they could do something else. In such a situation the majority are not "ruling" in a way comparable to having others political ideas forced on you.
You fail to see my point. Imagine then, that the 10 of us were at a remote cabin for easter and replace the movies with board games. No one could just up and leave, unless they wanted to sit in the neighbouring room and pout. Do we:
Discuss what to do all evening, instead of doing something.
Play whatever the majority wants that evening, and vote again the next evening (election period) and see if people are fed up with last night's game or perhaps the game won over some of the doubters.
You will probably find some flaw in that metaphore but if the democracy is occupied with discussing how to please everyone (which is impossible) to the exclution of acting (because they can't agree how to act), then democracy is flawed. The only way to not have others political ideas "forced" on you is to live someplace where everyone agrees with you which, let's face it, means living alone on an island somewhere.
So the truth emerges, you don't really want majority rule, you want your minority to rule. Yes, 33% is a minority, even if it is the biggest one.
What, to you, constitutes a majority? You would be right that 33% isn't a majority in a 2 or 3 party system, but we are talking about 20 parties here. One party getting 33%, while of the remaining parties the biggest 6 share 55% and the rest get next to nothing.. I think that means the people have spoken, and done so quite clearly. That two or three lesser parties can freely form a coalition government, eventhough they mostly don't agree on anything, or the few things they do manage to agree on might not be what won either party the votes they got.. It's just wrong, that's what it is! The party that gets the most votes is the party that best represents the public, because it represents the biggest chunk of the public! Didn't win? QQ MOAR PLOX! Go door-to-door, start campaigns, win votes for your party so you can get a chance to rule and make things better.
You answered your own question. If they beleive it's a test of faith, it doesn't matter what logic dictates or what evidence indicates. Faith is just that, beleif in the absence of evidence or in the face of contradictory evidence. If you beleive your faith is being tested, you're only going to reject evidence more the more it piles up.
All too true, but what I want to know is why? I guess that question is moot though.. for the Oprah/Big Brother/American Idol-worshipping masses, choosing to believe in something that gives them forgiveness, eternal paradise and the answer "because it's God's grand plan" to every damn question is simple. But still, why? It is eating at my very sanity that people can make these choises! Somewhere deep down they must know that they are blinding themselves in order to not perceive, and thus escape, the harsh realities of.. well.. reality.
What the hell..? I think someone failed to see the point, mate! Heh..
Being smart isn't about doing everything for yourself, from the most basic of components. It's perfectly ok for me to buy beef and veggies at the local supermarket, as long as I know how it got there. Not the gory details of exactly how I'd go about producing it all myself but at least enough to have a general idea and understanding.
Yes, I am quite dependant on all the other pieces of society. I will still claim though, that I know what gasoline is made of and from where it comes and how, that I know where my food and clothes comes from and how they are made, and I understand more than even my friends of the more geeky dialogue in The Big Bang Theory.
Most people don't know, don't care and are more than happy to buy food, gas, electricity, clothes, computers, cellphones and everything else they want and use without one single moment of though in their entire lives spent thinking about what lies behind.
Sure, laugh it up! At least us Europeans know where the US is on a map, and the vast majority of us are fit enough to actually reach behind us to use toilet paper.;)
Thanks! It really is good to see that I'm not unique in my bitterness towards the masses of people who exhibit no more signs of higher intelligence than any other primates inhabiting the planet!
You seem to think anyone too far outside your political bubble is just plain not worth listening to -- not even to know what someone else thinks.
How on earth does this have anything to do with politics? Political bubble..? Ok, I'll bite. Please explain.
My issue here isn't with any "political bubble", it's with people thinking "outside the scientific bubble", i.e. thinking some unseen, unfalsifiable power is responsible or quite simply, not thinking at all. Thinking the earth is a few thousand years old despite indisputable evidence of the opposite. Granted, God could have created fossils and made the earth in such a way that C-14 dating (and other more accurate methods) give a false result, you know, to test our faith or somesuch. But why go there? Why reach so badly, so desperately for a way to reject logic?
Am I not entitled to feel superior to someone who willfully rejects fact and science for archaic, ancient explanations that requires almost constant intervention from a supernatural agent of some sort to fill the gaps and explain the fallacies of their theories? Does not the hours upon hours I have spent gaining at least a very rudimentary understanding of anything from cars to distilling, from electronics and programming to cooking and chemistry give me the right to scoff at people who live far below their potential because it's easy and popular to be a dumbass?
Perhaps I should mention, I am a bitter, bitter person. =P I actually dislike everyone until they prove themselves otherwise worthy. I give them a chance though, but I can't help thinking that someone who listens to the exact same crap as everyone else and who didn't understand at 5kg, 10kg or 15kg overweight that it was perhaps time for some introspection, are unthinking, dumb sheep who probably don't have anything worthwhile to say.
I'm not saying I'm terribly smart. In fact, if people applied the brains they've been given, I'd probably be fairly average and not have this innate bitterness and slight *cough* superiority complex. So go ahead. Mod me flaimbait, post as AC to tell me just how disgusting my personality (and face, body and breath) is. Chances are I will just laugh it off, because if you can't see that people are ants, sheep, the simplest mechanical parts of society they can be.. well, chances are you're just another bleating sheep.;)
Really good science teachers challenge you to do that first. Everything else follows.
My GOD how I wish that were true! Simple fact is, most people are dumb. Plain and simple. Most people don't just lack the curiosity to learn about our world, they completely and utterly lack any common sense and ability to reason! They don't care that their monitor is not their computer, they can't use common sense to understand that no matter what you do you can not parallel park by driving nose first into the lot. They call IT-support to complain angrily that their computers aren't working when the only thing wrong is that they haven't turned it on. They still cling to the stories people 2000 years ago used to try and understand how things work, as if our current explanations (based on observation, experimentation and fact, i.e. science) aren't vastly superior!
It's not just that people aren't shown how to reason for themselves. This is, after all, a logical fallacy: if they had the ability to reason, they'd not really need anyone to teach them how to reason now would they? We live our lives immersed in technology and science and yet, the majority of people out there actually go out of their way to reject common sense because, I assume, anything that means they don't have to waste a kcal thinking for themselves (be it religion, tv, popular culture, whatever) is quite simply easier.
Though I understand that an allmighty, good Father in the sky, eternal paradise and forgiveness for all is a comfy pillow to rest your head on, I am disgusted to see how few actually understand and care that intelligence is humanity's only trump card.
If only we had some sort of small organism that could thrive almost anywhere on Earth, ate CO2 and using some (in the foreseeable future) renewable energy source re-produced as fast as possible. That'd surely tie up carbon! We could even promote carbon sequestering ability by making plants and breeding the most prolific growers and breeders. Hell, perhaps these small carbon-munching critters could even be turned into something useful when they died!/sarcasm
Oh wait.. Algae thrive even in harsh, nutrition-deprived areas, reproduce and die fast (pushing quick adaptation to new environments), eat carbon, and can be turned into perfectly good bio-diesel by anyone who bothers reading a couple of online how-to's. Remind me.. why is this CO2 craze still raging as rampant as ever? Can't some rich entrepreneur just buy a huge patch of otherwise useless land and build algae farms and a bio-diesel refinery already? The stuff produces itself (given dirty water and some sun), is simple to refine, goes straight in the tank of pretty much any diesel vehicle ever built and the infrastructure for distribution is here.
Heh, I'm not American, but the eating habits and general ignorance they have over there seem to be spreading, just like every other type of "americanization" (language, fast-food, coke, advertising, etc.). 10 years ago nearly everyone I knew was into football (soccer), karate, or something and everyone used their bikes to get around if the weather allowed it.
These days, I know one person who works out actively (as in, needing a shower and change of clothes), and that is the guy who owns the basement gym I work out at. Every other friend I know start working out once or twice a year, only to give up after at most a month and go back to their wow-playing-takes-priority-over-outside-stuff couch potato lifestyle.
"I fuck supermodels every day"
Hahaha, that actually made me laugh! As I am sure you understood, I said "I work out" because of the whole "haha, everyone on slashdot is a pasty-pale geek who lives in his moms basement and jerks off to linux conf files and/or night elf screenshots"-gag. I wasn't trying to brag. Trust me, on a site filled with engineers, doctors, lawyers, astronomers and all sorts of other incredibly smart people, saying "I work out" to brag works about as well as saying "I picks ma noses and den I eats it!" with the same intent.;)
Lastly, where is all this hostility coming from? Could you point me to the exact things I have written that makes me come off as "fat, full of entitlement and ignorant"? Because I just re-read my posts, and I don't think I come off as an unfriendly guy.. If anything, I have repeatedly said I don't claim to have any particularly noteworthy programming skills, that I'm not very good looking and that I don't have a lot of earth monies, but that I do what I can with what I've been given.
One person in every twenty probably don't consider themselves insignificant. The Bundestag has 611 members if wikipedia serves me well. If a party got 2% of the vote, why don't they get 12 seats? It's hardly putting them in control, what's the problem with hearing what they have got to say? Is a dissenting view really so threatening? If you don't allow any party with less than 5% to get a seat, you could have 10 minor parties at 4% and have 40% of your population unrepresented with that system.
You make my point for me quite elegantly! What is the point of any governing instance if it cannot agree with itself for 5 minutes and actually, you know.. govern things? Last election here in Norway, FrP (if memory serves me right) got more than 33% of the votes. That is pretty damn significant considering the number of big political parties we have here. Still, they were beat by a three-party union because FrP didn't want to comprimize their views to cooperate with someone with whom they don't really agree that much.
The result is that this last decade has seen Norway controlled by smaller parties, none of which represent the majority of us voters and who can't agree with each other enough to get anything done.
Of course, not every election can be a land slide with the winner crushing the stragglers by miles. If we follow your example (using my limited knowledge of smaller Norwegian parties), you'd have 40% of the government consisting of pot-heads who's only champaign is legalization, the reds who are (excuse my french) complete idiots who claim anarchy is a valid form of government, and people like the Norwegian Democrats who think children should be seen, not heard, women should wash and cook and anyone with a tan is automatically a criminal.
I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't want to live in a country where morons like the above are actually given a fist-full of gravel and pointed at the "machine". People who most likely will for the most part just vote the opposite of "The MAN!" because A) They only have their one champaign issue and B) They're not big enough to do what they want, so they'd use their votes to screw up whatever anyone else tried to do.
I believe everyone with an opinion has a right to voice it. Naturally those who are unable to convince the majority will have limited success influencing society.
I couldn't agree more, on your first point there at least. Everyone has their right to mean what they want and speak their minds freely. However! If you're "pro life", pro racism, pro anarchy or think religion has any place in science class or in the government... well, you can find yourself a box to stand on while you share your drunken rage-rants with the unsuspecting public just like all the other nut cases who will hopefully never rule my country!;)
"Majority rules" means just that. If me and 9 friends are having a movie night and 6 of us want to watch The Matrix and the other 4 want to watch 4 other movies, what do you expect we'd end up watching, hm?
Don't be an idiot. Do you have any idea how much it'd cost Blizzard to run all network data for a SC2 game through their servers? Not counting the actual hardware, a game like that uses.. what? 50KB/sec bandwidth? Probably less. Can you imagine the cost of running servers that handle 1.000.000x that bandwith, 24/7?
Like the Network Engineer further up said, it's pretty obvious that Battle.net will primarily be a game match-making service with tracking of scores, achievements and stuff like that. Seeing how wildly popular achievements have become in WoW, how important stat-tracking is in any game (what would an arcade machine be without the simple highscore list?), how ridiculously much money they make on WoW and how rock solid every single thing Blizzard has ever released was and still is... I feel safe trusting that Blizzard will make SC2 and D3 to please the fans, not to lock us into stupid DRM schemes or require pay-to-play for non-mmo type games.
On the other hand, LAN play wouldn't hurt. As I said, Battle.net will very, very likely just act as a system to help you find games and have fun with stats. This means that a replacement mediator for hosting LAN games won't be far behind once SC2 is released. It's even quite possible that Blizz will release something like that themselves. At the very least, I can't believe they will be dragging people to court for using 3rd party software for private LAN games and such.
Oh man.. oh MAN! What if this awesomeness new B.net Blizzard is talking about is going to allow... *drumroll* Cross-franchise gaming! A few SC2-players playing as they always have, but with D3 players entering as units of their own (like the heroes of WC3)! Aah, the carnage.. the brute force raw power of Sanctuary's heroes, pitted against hundreds and hundreds of (comparatively) worthless crits. xD
A) LAN parties are still huge. A lot of people like sharing a room with people. It's a LAN Party
Sorry, I disagree. Back in 2002/2003 I attended at least 2 LAN Parties a year with a 1000++ people, including The Gathering (world's largest). It was awesome. DivX movies and copies of Photoshop 6 and Carmageddon TDR 2000 were flying all over the place. The smell of hundreds of cd burners furiously working to keep a few GB of hard drive space free. We also met up on weekends to hang out and play Diablo 2 and watch said movies. 4-5 pals having a nerdy blast, discussing the awe-inspiring rumors about Voodoo 5 and Hercules whatnot.
Now, we have The Gathering once a year, and broadband. I am always on msn, so are all my friends. I can download a DVD quality movie in less than an hour, so can all my friends. I have a job so I can afford the games I want to play (after downloading to test so I can avoid absolute crap like the LotR game installments etc.), same with everyone I know. LAN Parties are, sadly, not anywhere near as big as they were a few years back. It might be because Norway is fairly good at broadband and having competing ISP's, at least compared to the rest of the world, but we consider ourselves shamefully old-tech compared to Sweden where 50-100Mbit fiber is almost everywhere and almost free.
B) Nearly everyone has a LAN.
C) Even I you are in a different location, we should still be able to connect our games without needing to get approval from Blizzard.
The moment a hack is made to keep blizzard out of the loop, I will get the game. No sooner.
How can you say something like that? "Blizzard made this, but I get to decide what I should be able to do with it.". Fine. I can go out and get a car that does 200km/h because although the Norwegian government decides the legal speeds, I should be able to drive at whatever speed I want. Also, I should be given free computers, gadgets, clothes and food. Hate to burst your bubble mate, but it doesn't work that way. Blizzard's product, Blizzard's rules, and considering the quality of all their previous products, I don't think that is a bad thing at all.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that LAN-support wouldn't have been nice. I'm just saying, with all these sore emotions flaring up around the subject of broadband, a lot of you guys might consider not living in the great Out-Back or the even greater US-of-A, where the importance of subjects and the effort the government spends on them seem to be roughly equal but opposite (civil rights, health care, war mongering, pollution, education, unemployment, crime, drinking water, broadband, the list goes on).
Now their main objective is to milk the franchises that they've created.
Just have to chime in to say I disagree.
I disagree
Why? Because I love Blizzard. I am not a hater, but I have no love for Microsoft's way of using their costumer's as beta testers for several years after a "completed" product has been out. Blizzard has always made quality games, even if it meant keeping us waiting a year or two longer than anyone else would. Considering lost income, potentially missing "the wave" and having your game be forgotten and obsolete when you finally release it, that's a pretty big risk they take every time they make something just to ensure quality is to be had.
As for milking franchises, StarCraft, WarCraft and Diablo are all so insanely popular and rich in lore I don't think anyone would be dumb enough to not create sequels. If anyone else owned the rights to the titles though... I shudder at the though of EA Games Sancruary of SoccerCraft! They owe it to us fans to make new installments. I generally tire of every game I try after ~30 minutes, but I still keep coming back for Diablo 2 LoD and every now and them I play a few hours of WoW. Deep down, I still feel like their decision to replace the most awesome character ever, the Necromancer, with that hunchback witch docto is a personal let-down. Knowing there are far worse fan boys out there than me, Blizzard probably has the fans in mind when they make Diablo 3 and SC2. I mean damn.. ~12 million people playing WoW, paying a monthny fee, so why would Blizzard need to what everyone else does and milk the licenses they own? I don't think they have a lot of cash flow issues over there.
Oh, and any news on "Project Hydra" or have they still not said anything except it will be a next-gen mmo not following any of their three main franchises?
With the way you get into these personal attacks, I'd love to see what you look like. I'm a perfectly normal guy who tries to stay in shape and keep my diabetes under control. I don't use linux because.. well.. Like c/c++, eventhough I am fairly competent at it, for most my needs it would be a whole hell of a lot more effort to use linux for day-to-day activities than Windows.
And by "normal" I don't mean 20kg++ overweight, and by "diabetes" I mean the type (type 1) you get for no spesific known reason, not the one (type 2) you get for being a lazy, sugar gorging dumbass.
You do realize right that most people work out in one way or another...
Do you have any idea how dumb you sound when you say something as down-right wrong as that? What is your definition of a work out? Walking to the bathroom? To the car, perhaps? Lifting the can of Coke to your mouth and swallowing..? Because that is unfortunately the total amount of physical work your average person gets done in a day. If everyone were working out, why is the average American adult 17 lbs over the "ideal". Even more scary when you take into consideration that this "ideal" they operate with has been adjusted over the last decades to better fit the weight trends we are experiencing. And by "we", I sadly have to include the rest of the world, even fairly reasonable Norway! 10 years ago, at school, there was perhaps 1 somewhat overweight kid per 50. These days the numbers seem reversed to where 1-in-50 work out and stay fit while the other 49 don't give a shit and waddle around, flabby and unhealthy, complaining about lack of energy and why they just can't seem to lose weight no matter how hard they work! (Normally, that last thing is said while chewing furiously at something made mostly from white flour and/or sugar)
So I ask you, Mr. Troll, how can you claim that most people work out and that actually doing something to stay healthy is something to be ashamed of, when you can't walk around town for 3 minutes without seeing at least one morbidly obese schmuck?
To the rest of you most highly respected slashdotters who might stumble on to and read this: I am sorry! I really am! I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but.. I've never really seen one live before! To be able to interact with a moron of this caliber is, to tell the truth, quite hillarious!
Re:Shard of glass in my delicious pie! *gruff*
on
Mario AI Competition
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, I come on a bit strong when I get exited. I'm not saying Java isn't good, I'm not saying I can't write Java if I have to. My reaction was purely based on the fact that if I was hosting that sort of competition, I'd make a TCP-interface as the main option for anyone, regardless of platform or language could use. After all, with all the awesome possibilities here, it should be about the algorithm used not the language used for the implementation.
When you see the Shell eco-marathon, it's all about creativity and the builders skill, not what brand of screwdrivers they used.
Re:Shard of glass in my delicious pie! *gruff*
on
Mario AI Competition
·
· Score: 1
I'm not even going to get into a genitalia-measuring match with you. Nope, na-ah, no way. You know what? Because I am 24 years old and I know what I can and cannot do. Since you seem to be having some issues comprehending what I am trying to say, I will (probably without much hope) try to clear things up for you.
I use php as a recreational platform. Why?
Because it's a very rich language and still fairly snappy for a scriptet language
It's a very light and fast tool to play around with when a cool ideas drops into my head, such as brute forcing hashes and spreading the load over several free webhosts. I think we can all agree that that is rather useless, though doubtless a fun way to spend an evening or two with a fellow geek and good friend!
Because combined with a little jQuery, some MySQL and a backend (yes, written in a compiled language), it's quite easy to make good looking, extremely accessible front ends for things like media playback at our place, as well as a little electronics (tv-remote, etc.)
Because my seniors at work see the huge advantage of throwing out a lot of their old tools and instead having me make them web-based and integrated with other systems, so they can be accessed pretty much where ever my colleagues are.
Also, would you be so kind as to describe this "next level of software development" you have mastered? My previous job was as a developer at a company that makes one of Europe's most used software packages for debt collection companies. Here's a hint: I worked with 2 different compiled languages and Oracle, MSSql and Access *shudder* databases. And no, I didn't get canned for being a script kiddie like you are probably thinking. I resigned, as I was tired of being the lone developer left on the project, with management that was completely unable to act as a buffer between me and stressed out clients. Before that job, like now, I work as an IT-administrator/consultant/whatever-the-correct-title-is-these-days, for which I do in fact have an education. Do I love it? Meh, it's ok, but at least I can enjoy programming and scripting when I get home now.
And just out of curiosity.. What makes me come of as "ignorant and lacking knowledge"? I have not technically made any errononous statements except about the challenge being Java only, and I quickly admitted and excused my temporary selective blindness. I have not claimed to be unnaturally skilled in anything (except php, in which I am quite skilled) nor have I willfully insulted you. You, on the other hand, attack me and call me ignorant. You claim to be so much better than me that you are entitled to act like a complete asshat, and best of all, you post your bullshit superiority rant as Anonymous Coward.
Uh? Sorry if I misunderstood and you have some weird, religious-like definition of "learning" as something only God's special, soul-endowed children can do.
As far as I am concerned, any system that applies knowledge gained from experience to a situation in order to solve it has learned. A tic-tac-toe playing computer program that starts out not knowing the rules of the game but eventually ends up winning or playing you to a draw every time, without you doing anything except playing against it (or, in true Wargames style, pitting it against itself), has most assuredly learned. Ok, so it's not infinitely adaptable. It likely can't do crap outside of the world (board and rules) it was "raised" in. I'd argue that this applies to you as well. I mean, imagine all of a sudden being dragged into some weird n-dimensional world where time and space either don't exist or exist completely differently. You think the aliens inhabiting that place would classify you as particularly intelligent, not having the body to affect things right, the senses to sense things right or the brain to comprehend things right (if at all)?
Granted, the above might be a stupid example but there exists both software and hardware that learns. Nothing anywhere close to human/animal (same thing, really) "wetware" in terms of flexibility or.. well.. any other measure of intelligence. Still, that doesn't mean they don't learn and adapt!
Slashdot Mirror
And why should Shamans tank? Granted, I don't know a whole lot about Shamans but they aren't plate users so why would they be deserving of an overhaul that lets them tank as well as the proper tanking classes?
The way I wish the classes were built is the way pokemon balance is built.
..and so on. I don't know how well balanced those games are nor do I know the full details of the "classes" but the type of balance the devs tried to achieve is much more fun than that of WoW.
Water > Fire > Grass > Electric > Water
In WoW, Rogues should be able to open a can of whoop-ass on clothies (Mages, Warlocks, Priests). After all, cloth is generally poor protection against a dagger to the kidneys. At the same time, they should fear plate users as their daggers would realistically go "PLINK" off of the armor of a Warrior or a Death Knight. Because of the clothie's non-existant armor they should have vastly superior damage output, unlike WoW where a tank-spec Warrior can take the beating of a lifetime AND do damage comparable to typical dps classes.
While I applaud Blizzards apparent goal of giving every damn class a fair chance against any other class, I think it kind of ruins a bit of the pvp fun. If this was real world (yes, stupid comparison I know), a Warrior wearing all plate and carrying a huge freaggin' sword would make minced meat of a Rogue wearing leather no matter how sneaky he was. Just like a Rogue sneaking up behind a Warlock/Mage/Priest would mean the end of the targeted clothie. Subsequently, since the Warrior doesn't have the sneaking ability of the Rogue, the clothie would see him coming and have a chance of blasting him with crazy damage. A very simplified example that doesn't take into account healers, hybrids or different builds but it shows the general idea: Mage
Demonology Warlock == Beast Mastery Hunter, send in the pet, do ranged damage.
Destruction Warlock == Mage == Elemental Shaman, fire away with spells, run away.
Protection Warrior == Frost Death Knight == Protection Paladin == Feral Druid, are all viable tanks and at least Warrior, DK and Pala put out an astounding damage while tanking.
There is no class distinction. All the classes have different builds but generally you are either a Healer, a ranged DPS or a tank (who does as much damage as the damage guys) and nearly all classes can fill at least 2 roles.
Stupid =/
Wrong. If you put the burden of websites to be compliant with every law in the world, you make every site owner, hosting provider and ISP in the world a criminal.
Oh MAN, that typo is so funny it's not even work safe! xD I, in all seriousness, laughed out loud. Good thing I wasn't at work or anything! *cough*
Their faith leads them to define "reality" in a different way than you or I would. To them reality is not limited to just what can be seen, heard, felt, tasted and proven in by the scientific method. To them there is a Heavan and a Hell and the residents of those places are invisible participants in this place. That's their reality.
If that were true, if faith was (as Jesus the man probably intended it) a personal thing, something to bring comfort during the harsh times people some 2000 years ago surely risked stumbling upon and give some semblance of an explanation for the bigger questions of life.. I might be able to stomach it. When faith becomes what it is today, an opposition to common sense and fact, an excuse to deny atoms*, evolution and just stay ignorant, I react with anger and bitterness.
* This actually happened when I told my grandparents I had no faith because I could not choose to believe in something for which there can be no evidence, something utterly self-contradictory, something like an almighty God who could with a though alleviate all His children of their suffering but chooses not to. My grandmother then, shocked and teary-eyed asked me "So, do you think we are made of.. of.. ATOMS?" to which I replied "Yeah.. apart from the undeniable fact that we are.. what do you think we're made of?". She had no answer, because to her it doesn't matter in the faintest.
I also asked her "How can you be so sure that you believe in the right thing, when billions of people through the ages have been every bit as certain their belief was the right one? And don't tell me you just know, because even the Bible says we can't know, hence the 'faith'-part." Again, she had no answer but it didn't bother her in the least because again, she doesn't care to think. I hate to say this because I love my kind, caring grandmother dearly, but I am ashamed on her behalf that she chooses to be that ignorant.
I think part of it also has to do with the comforting effect faith can have. If you can say "it's God's plan" and beleive it, you never have to worry because somebody else is watching out for you and consequently, nothing is ever your fault.
You generally have to abide by the law and if you combine that with a smidge of compassion and a bit of common sense, chances are very little will ever be your fault. I have no issues what-so-ever with the fact that when I die, I stop existing as surely as my computer's software stops running when I pull the power. I accept that nature's reason for my life is to find a suitable mate and procreate. If I need to give an answer to "What is the meaning of life?" I will say just that and perhaps add that the only things you can do that really matter is either invent something that changes the world or try to make an impact on the lives of the people around you. If that isn't purpose enough, then you have issues.
Why do people insist on needing more than that? Do they really value their lives, their loved ones and the amazing complexity of nature so little that they need to replace it with thousands of years old fairytales?
There are a multitude of laws that no political party with any representation in my country disagrees on. Go wild then, government, prohibit murder, theft, etc. If it is hard to implement controversial laws, they are more likely to be thoroughly debated rather than forced through. That's a good thing, by the way, it is a way of killing bad ideas.
Have you ever been anywhere where there are more than two more-or-less equal parties? Believe me, it's not just the more controversial issues they can't agree on. They can't agree on anything (well, except for the kinds of things you propose)! The result isn't just that bad ideas are killed, all ideas are, because noone has the weight to shift anything in any direction.
Apparently none of your politicians has any ideas compelling enough in their logic and benefits to convince the majority. Why do you want a system that makes the implementation of mediocre ideas easier?
Or, all of them have ideas that are compelling and provide benefints to some part of the majority. It is impossible to please everybody (unfortunate, but no less true), thus the point of democracy is to cater to as big a chunk of the population as possible. If everyone voted for whoever they felt would change the country for the better and one party got 33% of the votes, a few others got 10-20% and the rest was distributed pretty evenly across the smaller parties, I find it rather obvious who ought to be in charge that 4-year period. If they do a great job, chances are they will get even more votes next election. If not, someone else will step ut and try to do a better job.
Yet you don't want real majority rules, you want 33% to rule the rest. In any case, a group of friends choosing to watch a movie together is a voluntary activity. If the other 4 really don't want to watch the Matrix, I suppose they could do something else. In such a situation the majority are not "ruling" in a way comparable to having others political ideas forced on you.
You fail to see my point. Imagine then, that the 10 of us were at a remote cabin for easter and replace the movies with board games. No one could just up and leave, unless they wanted to sit in the neighbouring room and pout. Do we:
You will probably find some flaw in that metaphore but if the democracy is occupied with discussing how to please everyone (which is impossible) to the exclution of acting (because they can't agree how to act), then democracy is flawed. The only way to not have others political ideas "forced" on you is to live someplace where everyone agrees with you which, let's face it, means living alone on an island somewhere.
So the truth emerges, you don't really want majority rule, you want your minority to rule. Yes, 33% is a minority, even if it is the biggest one.
What, to you, constitutes a majority? You would be right that 33% isn't a majority in a 2 or 3 party system, but we are talking about 20 parties here. One party getting 33%, while of the remaining parties the biggest 6 share 55% and the rest get next to nothing.. I think that means the people have spoken, and done so quite clearly. That two or three lesser parties can freely form a coalition government, eventhough they mostly don't agree on anything, or the few things they do manage to agree on might not be what won either party the votes they got.. It's just wrong, that's what it is! The party that gets the most votes is the party that best represents the public, because it represents the biggest chunk of the public! Didn't win? QQ MOAR PLOX! Go door-to-door, start campaigns, win votes for your party so you can get a chance to rule and make things better.
You answered your own question. If they beleive it's a test of faith, it doesn't matter what logic dictates or what evidence indicates. Faith is just that, beleif in the absence of evidence or in the face of contradictory evidence. If you beleive your faith is being tested, you're only going to reject evidence more the more it piles up.
All too true, but what I want to know is why? I guess that question is moot though.. for the Oprah/Big Brother/American Idol-worshipping masses, choosing to believe in something that gives them forgiveness, eternal paradise and the answer "because it's God's grand plan" to every damn question is simple. But still, why? It is eating at my very sanity that people can make these choises! Somewhere deep down they must know that they are blinding themselves in order to not perceive, and thus escape, the harsh realities of.. well.. reality.
What the hell..? I think someone failed to see the point, mate! Heh..
Being smart isn't about doing everything for yourself, from the most basic of components. It's perfectly ok for me to buy beef and veggies at the local supermarket, as long as I know how it got there. Not the gory details of exactly how I'd go about producing it all myself but at least enough to have a general idea and understanding.
Yes, I am quite dependant on all the other pieces of society. I will still claim though, that I know what gasoline is made of and from where it comes and how, that I know where my food and clothes comes from and how they are made, and I understand more than even my friends of the more geeky dialogue in The Big Bang Theory.
Most people don't know, don't care and are more than happy to buy food, gas, electricity, clothes, computers, cellphones and everything else they want and use without one single moment of though in their entire lives spent thinking about what lies behind.
Sure, laugh it up! At least us Europeans know where the US is on a map, and the vast majority of us are fit enough to actually reach behind us to use toilet paper. ;)
Sad thing is, I don't even know if you are kidding.. =(
Thanks! It really is good to see that I'm not unique in my bitterness towards the masses of people who exhibit no more signs of higher intelligence than any other primates inhabiting the planet!
You seem to think anyone too far outside your political bubble is just plain not worth listening to -- not even to know what someone else thinks.
How on earth does this have anything to do with politics? Political bubble..? Ok, I'll bite. Please explain.
My issue here isn't with any "political bubble", it's with people thinking "outside the scientific bubble", i.e. thinking some unseen, unfalsifiable power is responsible or quite simply, not thinking at all. Thinking the earth is a few thousand years old despite indisputable evidence of the opposite. Granted, God could have created fossils and made the earth in such a way that C-14 dating (and other more accurate methods) give a false result, you know, to test our faith or somesuch. But why go there? Why reach so badly, so desperately for a way to reject logic?
Am I not entitled to feel superior to someone who willfully rejects fact and science for archaic, ancient explanations that requires almost constant intervention from a supernatural agent of some sort to fill the gaps and explain the fallacies of their theories? Does not the hours upon hours I have spent gaining at least a very rudimentary understanding of anything from cars to distilling, from electronics and programming to cooking and chemistry give me the right to scoff at people who live far below their potential because it's easy and popular to be a dumbass?
Perhaps I should mention, I am a bitter, bitter person. =P I actually dislike everyone until they prove themselves otherwise worthy. I give them a chance though, but I can't help thinking that someone who listens to the exact same crap as everyone else and who didn't understand at 5kg, 10kg or 15kg overweight that it was perhaps time for some introspection, are unthinking, dumb sheep who probably don't have anything worthwhile to say.
I'm not saying I'm terribly smart. In fact, if people applied the brains they've been given, I'd probably be fairly average and not have this innate bitterness and slight *cough* superiority complex. So go ahead. Mod me flaimbait, post as AC to tell me just how disgusting my personality (and face, body and breath) is. Chances are I will just laugh it off, because if you can't see that people are ants, sheep, the simplest mechanical parts of society they can be.. well, chances are you're just another bleating sheep. ;)
Really good science teachers challenge you to do that first. Everything else follows.
My GOD how I wish that were true! Simple fact is, most people are dumb. Plain and simple. Most people don't just lack the curiosity to learn about our world, they completely and utterly lack any common sense and ability to reason! They don't care that their monitor is not their computer, they can't use common sense to understand that no matter what you do you can not parallel park by driving nose first into the lot. They call IT-support to complain angrily that their computers aren't working when the only thing wrong is that they haven't turned it on. They still cling to the stories people 2000 years ago used to try and understand how things work, as if our current explanations (based on observation, experimentation and fact, i.e. science) aren't vastly superior!
It's not just that people aren't shown how to reason for themselves. This is, after all, a logical fallacy: if they had the ability to reason, they'd not really need anyone to teach them how to reason now would they? We live our lives immersed in technology and science and yet, the majority of people out there actually go out of their way to reject common sense because, I assume, anything that means they don't have to waste a kcal thinking for themselves (be it religion, tv, popular culture, whatever) is quite simply easier.
Though I understand that an allmighty, good Father in the sky, eternal paradise and forgiveness for all is a comfy pillow to rest your head on, I am disgusted to see how few actually understand and care that intelligence is humanity's only trump card.
If only we had some sort of small organism that could thrive almost anywhere on Earth, ate CO2 and using some (in the foreseeable future) renewable energy source re-produced as fast as possible. That'd surely tie up carbon! We could even promote carbon sequestering ability by making plants and breeding the most prolific growers and breeders. Hell, perhaps these small carbon-munching critters could even be turned into something useful when they died! /sarcasm
Oh wait.. Algae thrive even in harsh, nutrition-deprived areas, reproduce and die fast (pushing quick adaptation to new environments), eat carbon, and can be turned into perfectly good bio-diesel by anyone who bothers reading a couple of online how-to's. Remind me.. why is this CO2 craze still raging as rampant as ever? Can't some rich entrepreneur just buy a huge patch of otherwise useless land and build algae farms and a bio-diesel refinery already? The stuff produces itself (given dirty water and some sun), is simple to refine, goes straight in the tank of pretty much any diesel vehicle ever built and the infrastructure for distribution is here.
Yes, but does it twitter?
Heh, I'm not American, but the eating habits and general ignorance they have over there seem to be spreading, just like every other type of "americanization" (language, fast-food, coke, advertising, etc.). 10 years ago nearly everyone I knew was into football (soccer), karate, or something and everyone used their bikes to get around if the weather allowed it.
These days, I know one person who works out actively (as in, needing a shower and change of clothes), and that is the guy who owns the basement gym I work out at. Every other friend I know start working out once or twice a year, only to give up after at most a month and go back to their wow-playing-takes-priority-over-outside-stuff couch potato lifestyle.
"I fuck supermodels every day"
Hahaha, that actually made me laugh! As I am sure you understood, I said "I work out" because of the whole "haha, everyone on slashdot is a pasty-pale geek who lives in his moms basement and jerks off to linux conf files and/or night elf screenshots"-gag. I wasn't trying to brag. Trust me, on a site filled with engineers, doctors, lawyers, astronomers and all sorts of other incredibly smart people, saying "I work out" to brag works about as well as saying "I picks ma noses and den I eats it!" with the same intent. ;)
Lastly, where is all this hostility coming from? Could you point me to the exact things I have written that makes me come off as "fat, full of entitlement and ignorant"? Because I just re-read my posts, and I don't think I come off as an unfriendly guy.. If anything, I have repeatedly said I don't claim to have any particularly noteworthy programming skills, that I'm not very good looking and that I don't have a lot of earth monies, but that I do what I can with what I've been given.
One person in every twenty probably don't consider themselves insignificant. The Bundestag has 611 members if wikipedia serves me well. If a party got 2% of the vote, why don't they get 12 seats? It's hardly putting them in control, what's the problem with hearing what they have got to say? Is a dissenting view really so threatening? If you don't allow any party with less than 5% to get a seat, you could have 10 minor parties at 4% and have 40% of your population unrepresented with that system.
You make my point for me quite elegantly! What is the point of any governing instance if it cannot agree with itself for 5 minutes and actually, you know.. govern things? Last election here in Norway, FrP (if memory serves me right) got more than 33% of the votes. That is pretty damn significant considering the number of big political parties we have here. Still, they were beat by a three-party union because FrP didn't want to comprimize their views to cooperate with someone with whom they don't really agree that much.
The result is that this last decade has seen Norway controlled by smaller parties, none of which represent the majority of us voters and who can't agree with each other enough to get anything done.
Of course, not every election can be a land slide with the winner crushing the stragglers by miles. If we follow your example (using my limited knowledge of smaller Norwegian parties), you'd have 40% of the government consisting of pot-heads who's only champaign is legalization, the reds who are (excuse my french) complete idiots who claim anarchy is a valid form of government, and people like the Norwegian Democrats who think children should be seen, not heard, women should wash and cook and anyone with a tan is automatically a criminal.
I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't want to live in a country where morons like the above are actually given a fist-full of gravel and pointed at the "machine". People who most likely will for the most part just vote the opposite of "The MAN!" because A) They only have their one champaign issue and B) They're not big enough to do what they want, so they'd use their votes to screw up whatever anyone else tried to do.
I believe everyone with an opinion has a right to voice it. Naturally those who are unable to convince the majority will have limited success influencing society.
I couldn't agree more, on your first point there at least. Everyone has their right to mean what they want and speak their minds freely. However! If you're "pro life", pro racism, pro anarchy or think religion has any place in science class or in the government... well, you can find yourself a box to stand on while you share your drunken rage-rants with the unsuspecting public just like all the other nut cases who will hopefully never rule my country! ;)
"Majority rules" means just that. If me and 9 friends are having a movie night and 6 of us want to watch The Matrix and the other 4 want to watch 4 other movies, what do you expect we'd end up watching, hm?
Don't be an idiot. Do you have any idea how much it'd cost Blizzard to run all network data for a SC2 game through their servers? Not counting the actual hardware, a game like that uses.. what? 50KB/sec bandwidth? Probably less. Can you imagine the cost of running servers that handle 1.000.000x that bandwith, 24/7?
Like the Network Engineer further up said, it's pretty obvious that Battle.net will primarily be a game match-making service with tracking of scores, achievements and stuff like that. Seeing how wildly popular achievements have become in WoW, how important stat-tracking is in any game (what would an arcade machine be without the simple highscore list?), how ridiculously much money they make on WoW and how rock solid every single thing Blizzard has ever released was and still is... I feel safe trusting that Blizzard will make SC2 and D3 to please the fans, not to lock us into stupid DRM schemes or require pay-to-play for non-mmo type games.
On the other hand, LAN play wouldn't hurt. As I said, Battle.net will very, very likely just act as a system to help you find games and have fun with stats. This means that a replacement mediator for hosting LAN games won't be far behind once SC2 is released. It's even quite possible that Blizz will release something like that themselves. At the very least, I can't believe they will be dragging people to court for using 3rd party software for private LAN games and such.
Oh man.. oh MAN! What if this awesomeness new B.net Blizzard is talking about is going to allow... *drumroll* Cross-franchise gaming! A few SC2-players playing as they always have, but with D3 players entering as units of their own (like the heroes of WC3)! Aah, the carnage.. the brute force raw power of Sanctuary's heroes, pitted against hundreds and hundreds of (comparatively) worthless crits. xD
A) LAN parties are still huge. A lot of people like sharing a room with people. It's a LAN Party
Sorry, I disagree. Back in 2002/2003 I attended at least 2 LAN Parties a year with a 1000++ people, including The Gathering (world's largest). It was awesome. DivX movies and copies of Photoshop 6 and Carmageddon TDR 2000 were flying all over the place. The smell of hundreds of cd burners furiously working to keep a few GB of hard drive space free. We also met up on weekends to hang out and play Diablo 2 and watch said movies. 4-5 pals having a nerdy blast, discussing the awe-inspiring rumors about Voodoo 5 and Hercules whatnot.
Now, we have The Gathering once a year, and broadband. I am always on msn, so are all my friends. I can download a DVD quality movie in less than an hour, so can all my friends. I have a job so I can afford the games I want to play (after downloading to test so I can avoid absolute crap like the LotR game installments etc.), same with everyone I know. LAN Parties are, sadly, not anywhere near as big as they were a few years back. It might be because Norway is fairly good at broadband and having competing ISP's, at least compared to the rest of the world, but we consider ourselves shamefully old-tech compared to Sweden where 50-100Mbit fiber is almost everywhere and almost free.
B) Nearly everyone has a LAN.
C) Even I you are in a different location, we should still be able to connect our games without needing to get approval from Blizzard.
The moment a hack is made to keep blizzard out of the loop, I will get the game. No sooner.
How can you say something like that? "Blizzard made this, but I get to decide what I should be able to do with it.". Fine. I can go out and get a car that does 200km/h because although the Norwegian government decides the legal speeds, I should be able to drive at whatever speed I want. Also, I should be given free computers, gadgets, clothes and food. Hate to burst your bubble mate, but it doesn't work that way. Blizzard's product, Blizzard's rules, and considering the quality of all their previous products, I don't think that is a bad thing at all.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that LAN-support wouldn't have been nice. I'm just saying, with all these sore emotions flaring up around the subject of broadband, a lot of you guys might consider not living in the great Out-Back or the even greater US-of-A, where the importance of subjects and the effort the government spends on them seem to be roughly equal but opposite (civil rights, health care, war mongering, pollution, education, unemployment, crime, drinking water, broadband, the list goes on).
Now their main objective is to milk the franchises that they've created.
Just have to chime in to say I disagree.
I disagree
Why? Because I love Blizzard. I am not a hater, but I have no love for Microsoft's way of using their costumer's as beta testers for several years after a "completed" product has been out. Blizzard has always made quality games, even if it meant keeping us waiting a year or two longer than anyone else would. Considering lost income, potentially missing "the wave" and having your game be forgotten and obsolete when you finally release it, that's a pretty big risk they take every time they make something just to ensure quality is to be had.
As for milking franchises, StarCraft, WarCraft and Diablo are all so insanely popular and rich in lore I don't think anyone would be dumb enough to not create sequels. If anyone else owned the rights to the titles though... I shudder at the though of EA Games Sancruary of SoccerCraft! They owe it to us fans to make new installments. I generally tire of every game I try after ~30 minutes, but I still keep coming back for Diablo 2 LoD and every now and them I play a few hours of WoW. Deep down, I still feel like their decision to replace the most awesome character ever, the Necromancer, with that hunchback witch docto is a personal let-down. Knowing there are far worse fan boys out there than me, Blizzard probably has the fans in mind when they make Diablo 3 and SC2. I mean damn.. ~12 million people playing WoW, paying a monthny fee, so why would Blizzard need to what everyone else does and milk the licenses they own? I don't think they have a lot of cash flow issues over there.
Oh, and any news on "Project Hydra" or have they still not said anything except it will be a next-gen mmo not following any of their three main franchises?
With the way you get into these personal attacks, I'd love to see what you look like. I'm a perfectly normal guy who tries to stay in shape and keep my diabetes under control. I don't use linux because.. well.. Like c/c++, eventhough I am fairly competent at it, for most my needs it would be a whole hell of a lot more effort to use linux for day-to-day activities than Windows.
And by "normal" I don't mean 20kg++ overweight, and by "diabetes" I mean the type (type 1) you get for no spesific known reason, not the one (type 2) you get for being a lazy, sugar gorging dumbass.
You do realize right that most people work out in one way or another...
Do you have any idea how dumb you sound when you say something as down-right wrong as that? What is your definition of a work out? Walking to the bathroom? To the car, perhaps? Lifting the can of Coke to your mouth and swallowing..? Because that is unfortunately the total amount of physical work your average person gets done in a day. If everyone were working out, why is the average American adult 17 lbs over the "ideal". Even more scary when you take into consideration that this "ideal" they operate with has been adjusted over the last decades to better fit the weight trends we are experiencing. And by "we", I sadly have to include the rest of the world, even fairly reasonable Norway! 10 years ago, at school, there was perhaps 1 somewhat overweight kid per 50. These days the numbers seem reversed to where 1-in-50 work out and stay fit while the other 49 don't give a shit and waddle around, flabby and unhealthy, complaining about lack of energy and why they just can't seem to lose weight no matter how hard they work! (Normally, that last thing is said while chewing furiously at something made mostly from white flour and/or sugar)
So I ask you, Mr. Troll, how can you claim that most people work out and that actually doing something to stay healthy is something to be ashamed of, when you can't walk around town for 3 minutes without seeing at least one morbidly obese schmuck?
To the rest of you most highly respected slashdotters who might stumble on to and read this: I am sorry! I really am! I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but.. I've never really seen one live before! To be able to interact with a moron of this caliber is, to tell the truth, quite hillarious!
Sorry, I come on a bit strong when I get exited. I'm not saying Java isn't good, I'm not saying I can't write Java if I have to. My reaction was purely based on the fact that if I was hosting that sort of competition, I'd make a TCP-interface as the main option for anyone, regardless of platform or language could use. After all, with all the awesome possibilities here, it should be about the algorithm used not the language used for the implementation.
When you see the Shell eco-marathon, it's all about creativity and the builders skill, not what brand of screwdrivers they used.
Do I really fail so badly at making my points? I have enough experience to think about programming the same way you do. Language is the tool to do the job but once you're good enough at the job, which tools you use don't matter that much anymore (though I still think php will always be my forté, simply since I love it). I openly admit that I am in no way skilled or experienced with java, so it annoys me that they have not made a working, documented universal interface that would allow me to stay in my comfort zone instead of trying my hand at a hard problem while getting used to a new language.
I'm not even going to get into a genitalia-measuring match with you. Nope, na-ah, no way. You know what? Because I am 24 years old and I know what I can and cannot do. Since you seem to be having some issues comprehending what I am trying to say, I will (probably without much hope) try to clear things up for you.
I use php as a recreational platform. Why?
Also, would you be so kind as to describe this "next level of software development" you have mastered? My previous job was as a developer at a company that makes one of Europe's most used software packages for debt collection companies. Here's a hint: I worked with 2 different compiled languages and Oracle, MSSql and Access *shudder* databases. And no, I didn't get canned for being a script kiddie like you are probably thinking. I resigned, as I was tired of being the lone developer left on the project, with management that was completely unable to act as a buffer between me and stressed out clients. Before that job, like now, I work as an IT-administrator/consultant/whatever-the-correct-title-is-these-days, for which I do in fact have an education. Do I love it? Meh, it's ok, but at least I can enjoy programming and scripting when I get home now.
And just out of curiosity.. What makes me come of as "ignorant and lacking knowledge"? I have not technically made any errononous statements except about the challenge being Java only, and I quickly admitted and excused my temporary selective blindness. I have not claimed to be unnaturally skilled in anything (except php, in which I am quite skilled) nor have I willfully insulted you. You, on the other hand, attack me and call me ignorant. You claim to be so much better than me that you are entitled to act like a complete asshat, and best of all, you post your bullshit superiority rant as Anonymous Coward.
Have I nice day!
I know, I know ^^ I also work out. As in, at the gym, not with our Nintendo Wii. =O
Uh? Sorry if I misunderstood and you have some weird, religious-like definition of "learning" as something only God's special, soul-endowed children can do.
As far as I am concerned, any system that applies knowledge gained from experience to a situation in order to solve it has learned. A tic-tac-toe playing computer program that starts out not knowing the rules of the game but eventually ends up winning or playing you to a draw every time, without you doing anything except playing against it (or, in true Wargames style, pitting it against itself), has most assuredly learned. Ok, so it's not infinitely adaptable. It likely can't do crap outside of the world (board and rules) it was "raised" in. I'd argue that this applies to you as well. I mean, imagine all of a sudden being dragged into some weird n-dimensional world where time and space either don't exist or exist completely differently. You think the aliens inhabiting that place would classify you as particularly intelligent, not having the body to affect things right, the senses to sense things right or the brain to comprehend things right (if at all)?
Granted, the above might be a stupid example but there exists both software and hardware that learns. Nothing anywhere close to human/animal (same thing, really) "wetware" in terms of flexibility or.. well.. any other measure of intelligence. Still, that doesn't mean they don't learn and adapt!
Cheerio, mate!