Just so everyone knows, and does not get this confused with a new version of the original Gnutella protocol: This is not the next version of Gnutella. Gnutella2 is a rogue project brought to fruition by a man who got kicked off the original Gnutella dev team. Its amazing how big a propaganda machine slashdot can be. And its amazing the possible damages that can be amassed by slashdot editors not looking into what they post.
Office 2003 XML has been reported to be almost worthless to non-M$ apps. CLI and C# are great standards, but Microsoft will extend the base classes to the point of complete uninteroperability as quickly as they can, after they get a sufficient user base. Mono can be the answer, if they can get enough of the base classes working before Microsoft extends their own spec.
I like DIPSHITHAT myself:-P. If they ever find him they should hold him responsible for all damages incurred on businesses by this public disclosure. And then they should gut him, and then they should kill him.:-)
No, I haven't seen the remake. Was it developed by Future Crew, or is it a rehash? I have always been an avid Future Crew follower. I probably still have all their demos kicking around my HD somewhere. I follow a lot of the music like Purple Motion and Skaven and such. Recently, I've been tending towards Teque's stuff though. I used to style my own S3Ms after Purple Motion's. Although they sounded nothing like them (hey I was like 13 give me a break:-P). You ever do any tracking? As far as your game outlook goes that is about how I see it too. I guess I grossly misinterpreted your statements (it happens a lot with me).
Well, the fact you talk of demos and the scene and such makes me relinquish all my comments on you not appreciating antiquated hardware (you like 64k demos?:-P ) But I am just saying that I believe that video games are going, too much, the way of the movies. They try to make them mainstream, politically correct (with a few exceptions), and they try to always conform to established game genres. I just think the new flashier games lack the originality of the older ones. I just hate how they refuse to release something with originality now. I know that sounds stereotypical, but everytime I go into Hastings I browse through the video games isles and all I see are generic shooters, crappy rpgs, and glorified generic plot driven linear "interactive" games, which in reality offer very little freedom. Thats just why I'm not too fond of the newer games (although I do still like a lot of Nintendo's more free form games like Mario and Zelda). I've been waiting forever for some sort of immersive title that most companies promised ten years ago. I think really what I'm saying is I'm disappointed in the industry's lack of originality. And just so you know, this isn't me trying to bash you. I just don't understand the appeal of the new systems. And nothing beats being able to sit down with anyone (read not geeks and vid game freaks) and play a few games like tetris or some of those other old school games that everyone already knows. Nostalgia has its place, but so does a simplistically brilliant game.
Yes, so when its small its one hell of a fun game. Whenever it is stretched to fit your TV, you hate it? Sir, I feel you have fallen into the trap that most everyone else has. The better the graphics, sound, etc. the better the game? You ever play chess? I can play that on an 8x8 ascii screen and it would still be fun. I just don't understand people's immediate disqualification of games because of antiquated technology. I'm not saying all those games we used to play are fun, but a lot of them were and still are. Technology can make things look flashier. I guess that still has an effect on you. I think the BS generic crap and overhyped special effects of the movie industry made me lose all interest for the pretty little graphics on new systems. Damn, I really hope we have some kind of retro uprising soon. I haven't played a game I liked in almost a year. The old games were usually simple, and thats what was so beautiful about them. A lot of times simplistic game play = more gaming freedom (a far cry from these new always linear games). Games no longer have a point besides to follow an event plotline, and getting to the end. Tetris will always be my favorite game. It forces you to challenge yourself, without mindlessly following a predesignated unoriginal, uninteresting plot. And any newbie can pickup a controller and play in a matter of seconds. Its simplicity at its best.
Well, all I have to say is: good job protesters and hackers. Show America what a true terrorist is by causing thousands of dollars in damage to your own country. Jeez, you idiots are as bad as Saddam.
Write an obfuscated proggie that roots the system, searches for the file beerlyrics.txt and if it finds it pipes it to stdout (followed by/etc/passwd), and then proceeds to spread over the network following the same actions on each machine
Write a program that calls 911 on the modem, and then drunkenly sings the 99 bottles of beer song to the 911 operator by using 56khz 1-bit audio:-P (calling internationally works also;-) )
Write a karaoke 99 bottles sing-along proggie, which records his vocal patterns and then calls the whitehouses and uses his prerecorded phonetics to generate a terrorist threat towards the president in his voice!
I'm sure you can come up with more than this, but these sure seem to be winners to me.
This bill would be much better if it was a do-not-contact list where you can list phone numbers and email addresses with equal penalties for violations. Oh well.
So, exactly what is the definition of quantum entangled particles. I thought it was something along the lines of: two particles whose spin change at the exact same moment, in the exact same quantity, and in the exact same direction as the other. I am fairly ignorant on the subject. Just wondering.
Yes and no. What you fail to realize is that what I'm describing is a battery. What you and the article are describing is hydrogen and oxygen as the fuel. I'm just saying make the power transfer and storage mechanism universal. Any generator can generate electricity to do hydrolisis. Also, a power plant can generate electricity from the same fuel many times more efficiently than any car engine. But yes the electricity does come from somewhere. But this significantly reduces the problem space to just the domain of the power plants.
Congratulations. You've invented perpetual motion. I hope you publish.
I never said anything about 100% energy conversion. And the machine that seperates the water into hydrogen and oxygen components would be powered just like any electrical appliance.
The car uses the energy stored in the seperated Hydrogen and Oxygen and converts it into electrical (and ultimately kinetic) energy. I did not imply the car converted this back into gas. I am just saying that this is a mechanism that would work with electricity as the Hydrogen and Oxygen generating engine, instead of relying specifically on solar, carbon based, geothermal or any specific type of fuel.
I doubt that exploding population will have enough resources to live for long. It'll balance out. But back to the article. If I'm correct, fuel cell vehicles take hydrogen and oxygen, and combine them using some form of catalyst, yielding electricity and water? Correct? Isn't this process completely reversible? I thought you could take two electrodes submerged in water, and seperate it into hydrogen and oxygen. If this is the case, then why would this be any less efficient than the generator that creates the electricity. Surely, this process only needs to be optimized a little for it to work. Why don't fuel cell cars keep the water they produce anyways, and just exchange it with a cheap seperator that does the process mentioned above?
I don't know anything about quantum physics besides what I casually read about quantum computers. I am by no means an expert. It was a question, nothing more.
You cannot experimentally prove or disprove an oppinion (which that post was nothing more than). You are being ignorant to what science actually reasons about.
Instead of sending out sattelites with a record and pictures and crap like that. Why don't we send out a spacecraft with a particle that is quantum entangled with a particle on earth, and then using quantum superpositioning use this as a method of instantaneous communication with anything the satellite comes into contact with. We could slingshot it around Jupiter and try to send it along the same concentric circle our solar system is in, around our galaxy. Just a thought.
You correlate film subsidies with the collapse of the British film industry, using a weakly quantified statement of before it was good after it was bad. I request more proof, please.
The market can/will thrive regardless of the well being of the people subjected to it. Just because there are several gigantic megacorporations presenting the pseudoreality that the market is thriving, is a misconception. The market will appear healthy according to the terms of capitalism. But capitalism is inherently flawed in that it considers all items of a particular class to be universally swappable (this has proven to almost never be true in the software market). In other words capitalism considers cost vs. quality concerns to be the only driving force as to which product is purchased (but since no standards are forced upon software and dominant established standard specs are often not published, competing products become impossible to "swap"). But the problem with the case here is that after a certain size is attained in a corporation all they have to do is place their bet high enough and the others will have to fold. Capitalism is so imbalanced that competition is the last thing that it encourages. Obviously, government influence is needed to balance things out. Why should this be an exception. Also, do you just have something against people having a voice, also? Big businesses can afford full time lobbyists to voice/pay off/influence congressmen. A person/small business does not have that luxury. They need any break they can get if you want a balanced economy.
Slashdot Mirror
Just so everyone knows, and does not get this confused with a new version of the original Gnutella protocol: This is not the next version of Gnutella. Gnutella2 is a rogue project brought to fruition by a man who got kicked off the original Gnutella dev team. Its amazing how big a propaganda machine slashdot can be. And its amazing the possible damages that can be amassed by slashdot editors not looking into what they post.
Office 2003 XML has been reported to be almost worthless to non-M$ apps. CLI and C# are great standards, but Microsoft will extend the base classes to the point of complete uninteroperability as quickly as they can, after they get a sufficient user base. Mono can be the answer, if they can get enough of the base classes working before Microsoft extends their own spec.
I like DIPSHITHAT myself :-P. If they ever find him they should hold him responsible for all damages incurred on businesses by this public disclosure. And then they should gut him, and then they should kill him. :-)
Whatever, in a year Disney will be producing animatronic wives that are perfect in every respect, in a male dominated society :-P.
No, I haven't seen the remake. Was it developed by Future Crew, or is it a rehash? I have always been an avid Future Crew follower. I probably still have all their demos kicking around my HD somewhere. I follow a lot of the music like Purple Motion and Skaven and such. Recently, I've been tending towards Teque's stuff though. I used to style my own S3Ms after Purple Motion's. Although they sounded nothing like them (hey I was like 13 give me a break :-P). You ever do any tracking? As far as your game outlook goes that is about how I see it too. I guess I grossly misinterpreted your statements (it happens a lot with me).
Well, the fact you talk of demos and the scene and such makes me relinquish all my comments on you not appreciating antiquated hardware (you like 64k demos? :-P ) But I am just saying that I believe that video games are going, too much, the way of the movies. They try to make them mainstream, politically correct (with a few exceptions), and they try to always conform to established game genres. I just think the new flashier games lack the originality of the older ones. I just hate how they refuse to release something with originality now. I know that sounds stereotypical, but everytime I go into Hastings I browse through the video games isles and all I see are generic shooters, crappy rpgs, and glorified generic plot driven linear "interactive" games, which in reality offer very little freedom. Thats just why I'm not too fond of the newer games (although I do still like a lot of Nintendo's more free form games like Mario and Zelda). I've been waiting forever for some sort of immersive title that most companies promised ten years ago. I think really what I'm saying is I'm disappointed in the industry's lack of originality. And just so you know, this isn't me trying to bash you. I just don't understand the appeal of the new systems. And nothing beats being able to sit down with anyone (read not geeks and vid game freaks) and play a few games like tetris or some of those other old school games that everyone already knows. Nostalgia has its place, but so does a simplistically brilliant game.
Yes, so when its small its one hell of a fun game. Whenever it is stretched to fit your TV, you hate it? Sir, I feel you have fallen into the trap that most everyone else has. The better the graphics, sound, etc. the better the game? You ever play chess? I can play that on an 8x8 ascii screen and it would still be fun. I just don't understand people's immediate disqualification of games because of antiquated technology. I'm not saying all those games we used to play are fun, but a lot of them were and still are. Technology can make things look flashier. I guess that still has an effect on you. I think the BS generic crap and overhyped special effects of the movie industry made me lose all interest for the pretty little graphics on new systems. Damn, I really hope we have some kind of retro uprising soon. I haven't played a game I liked in almost a year. The old games were usually simple, and thats what was so beautiful about them. A lot of times simplistic game play = more gaming freedom (a far cry from these new always linear games). Games no longer have a point besides to follow an event plotline, and getting to the end. Tetris will always be my favorite game. It forces you to challenge yourself, without mindlessly following a predesignated unoriginal, uninteresting plot. And any newbie can pickup a controller and play in a matter of seconds. Its simplicity at its best.
Yes, because graphics make a good game. Dude, you're lame. Your probably that person that sold all his old nintendo junk to get an XBox huh?
Well, all I have to say is: good job protesters and hackers. Show America what a true terrorist is by causing thousands of dollars in damage to your own country. Jeez, you idiots are as bad as Saddam.
Write an obfuscated proggie that roots the system, searches for the file beerlyrics.txt and if it finds it pipes it to stdout (followed by /etc/passwd), and then proceeds to spread over the network following the same actions on each machine
Write a program that calls 911 on the modem, and then drunkenly sings the 99 bottles of beer song to the 911 operator by using 56khz 1-bit audio :-P (calling internationally works also ;-) )
Write a karaoke 99 bottles sing-along proggie, which records his vocal patterns and then calls the whitehouses and uses his prerecorded phonetics to generate a terrorist threat towards the president in his voice!
I'm sure you can come up with more than this, but these sure seem to be winners to me.
Just use the google cache :-P. And change what you posted above to a bash script.
This bill would be much better if it was a do-not-contact list where you can list phone numbers and email addresses with equal penalties for violations. Oh well.
So, exactly what is the definition of quantum entangled particles. I thought it was something along the lines of: two particles whose spin change at the exact same moment, in the exact same quantity, and in the exact same direction as the other. I am fairly ignorant on the subject. Just wondering.
Wouldn't the law of conservation of energy dictate you get almost the same amount of energy back when you recombine (minus heat of course)?
Yes and no. What you fail to realize is that what I'm describing is a battery. What you and the article are describing is hydrogen and oxygen as the fuel. I'm just saying make the power transfer and storage mechanism universal. Any generator can generate electricity to do hydrolisis. Also, a power plant can generate electricity from the same fuel many times more efficiently than any car engine. But yes the electricity does come from somewhere. But this significantly reduces the problem space to just the domain of the power plants.
Congratulations. You've invented perpetual motion. I hope you publish.
I never said anything about 100% energy conversion. And the machine that seperates the water into hydrogen and oxygen components would be powered just like any electrical appliance.
The car uses the energy stored in the seperated Hydrogen and Oxygen and converts it into electrical (and ultimately kinetic) energy. I did not imply the car converted this back into gas. I am just saying that this is a mechanism that would work with electricity as the Hydrogen and Oxygen generating engine, instead of relying specifically on solar, carbon based, geothermal or any specific type of fuel.
I doubt that exploding population will have enough resources to live for long. It'll balance out. But back to the article. If I'm correct, fuel cell vehicles take hydrogen and oxygen, and combine them using some form of catalyst, yielding electricity and water? Correct? Isn't this process completely reversible? I thought you could take two electrodes submerged in water, and seperate it into hydrogen and oxygen. If this is the case, then why would this be any less efficient than the generator that creates the electricity. Surely, this process only needs to be optimized a little for it to work. Why don't fuel cell cars keep the water they produce anyways, and just exchange it with a cheap seperator that does the process mentioned above?
I don't know anything about quantum physics besides what I casually read about quantum computers. I am by no means an expert. It was a question, nothing more.
You cannot experimentally prove or disprove an oppinion (which that post was nothing more than). You are being ignorant to what science actually reasons about.
Wow, who installed your insulation? :-P
Instead of sending out sattelites with a record and pictures and crap like that. Why don't we send out a spacecraft with a particle that is quantum entangled with a particle on earth, and then using quantum superpositioning use this as a method of instantaneous communication with anything the satellite comes into contact with. We could slingshot it around Jupiter and try to send it along the same concentric circle our solar system is in, around our galaxy. Just a thought.
I'm sure they have the original data. The only thing they have to do to settle a claim like this is to reprocess the data in question.
You correlate film subsidies with the collapse of the British film industry, using a weakly quantified statement of before it was good after it was bad. I request more proof, please.
The market can/will thrive regardless of the well being of the people subjected to it. Just because there are several gigantic megacorporations presenting the pseudoreality that the market is thriving, is a misconception. The market will appear healthy according to the terms of capitalism. But capitalism is inherently flawed in that it considers all items of a particular class to be universally swappable (this has proven to almost never be true in the software market). In other words capitalism considers cost vs. quality concerns to be the only driving force as to which product is purchased (but since no standards are forced upon software and dominant established standard specs are often not published, competing products become impossible to "swap"). But the problem with the case here is that after a certain size is attained in a corporation all they have to do is place their bet high enough and the others will have to fold. Capitalism is so imbalanced that competition is the last thing that it encourages. Obviously, government influence is needed to balance things out. Why should this be an exception. Also, do you just have something against people having a voice, also? Big businesses can afford full time lobbyists to voice/pay off/influence congressmen. A person/small business does not have that luxury. They need any break they can get if you want a balanced economy.
Yes, but eclipse is quite the amazing beast, also!!!