no, no, no...we have planned for this. Instead of having to wait for interstellar travel we will move the Scientists Group for the Study of an Existing Ecosystems to the other nearby planet. We promise we won't bother you there.
And to prepare for your arrival on Venus we are planning to send a space ship ahead full of those individuals who are among the most important part of our society.
I think everything you can think of that can be depicted on screen and is generated content, is fair game.
I was going to ask if you think the same about depicting things like 'racism', but then I figured that that is prohibited by law. Murder is against the law, but depicting murder isn't. There are some interesting corner cases I guess, like terrorism. Planning terrorism is against the law...making a game where you plan terrorist attacks...haha, Homeland Security is going to have a ball with that. Not sure what the law says about 'virtual' child porn.
The very idea of banning ANYTHING entertainment-related in a 1st world country/area is completely stupid.
The key here is "entertainment-related". So where do you draw the line when games cross from entertainment into objectionable content? Which of the following do you consider harmless fun if depicted in a video game:
killing monsters killing people killing cops clubbing baby seals sadism extreme brutal violence sex porn kiddie porn snuff
For me, there are a few things on that list that I have no problem with if they are banned. There is no entertainment value to be gotten from them except for people who need help.
You have a touch screen for God's sake, why in the world are you still dealing with the "binary choice" UI of old phones? Easy: single hand access! You try using a touchscreen with your thumb.
What's next from the razor-sharp minds of the shaving industry?
Attention, consumers with bodily hair: The razor industry has news for you! You will never in a million years guess what this news is, unless your IQ is higher than zero, in which case you're already thinking: "Not another blade! Don't tell me they're adding ANOTHER BLADE!!"
Shut up! Don't spoil the surprise for everybody else!
Before I tell you the news, let's put it in historical context by reviewing:
THE HISTORY OF SHAVING
Human beings are one of only two species of animals that shave themselves (the other one is salamanders). The Internet tells us that humans have been shaving since the Stone Age. Of course, the Internet also tells us that hot naked women want to befriend us, so we can't be 100 percent sure about everything we read there.
But assuming that www.quikshave.com/ timeline.htm is telling the truth, Neanderthal Man used to pluck his facial hairs "using two seashells as tweezers." No doubt Neanderthal Woman found this very attractive. "You smell like a clam," were probably her exact words. It was during this era that the headache was invented.
By 30,000 B.C., primitive man was shaving with blades made from flint, which is a rock, so you had a lot of guys whose faces were basically big oozing scabs. The next shaving breakthrough came when the ancient Egyptians figured out how to make razors from sharp metal, which meant that, for the first time, the man who wanted to be well-groomed could, without any assistance or special training, cut an ear completely off.
This was pretty much the situation until the late 19th century, at about 2:30 p.m., when the safety razor was invented. This introduced a wonderful era known to historians as "The Golden Age of Not Having Razor Companies Introduce Some Ludicrously Unnecessary New Shaving Technology Every 10 Damn Minutes."
I, personally, grew up during this era. I got my first razor when I was 15, and I used it to shave my "beard," which consisted of a lone chin hair approximately one electron in diameter. (I was a "late bloomer" who did not fully experience
puberty until many of my classmates, including females, were bald.) My beard would poke its wispy head out of its follicle every week or so, and I, feeling manly, would smother it under 14 cubic feet of shaving cream and lop it off with my razor. Then I would stand in front of the bathroom mirror, waiting for it to grow again. Mine was a lonely adolescence.
The razors of that era had one blade, and they worked fine; ask any older person who is not actively drooling. But then, in 1971, a very bad thing happened: Gillette, looking for a way to enhance the shaving experience (by which I mean "charge more") came out with a razor that had TWO blades. This touched off a nuclear arms race among razor companies, vying to outdo one another by adding "high-tech" features that made the product more expensive, but not necessarily better. This tactic is called "sneakerization," in honor of the sneaker industry, which now has people paying upwards of $200 a pair for increasingly weird-looking footwear boasting the durability of thinly sliced Velveeta.
Soon everybody was selling two-blade razors. So the marketing people put on their thinking caps, and, in an astounding burst of creativity, came up with the breakthrough concept of: THREE BLADES. Gillette, which is on the cutting edge (har!) of razor sneakerization, currently has a top-of-the-line three-blade razor -- excuse me, I mean "shaving system" -- called the "Mach3Turbo," which, according to the Gillette Web site (www.gillette.com) has more technology than a nuclear submarine, including "open cartridge architecture" and an "ergonomic handle" featuring "knurled ela
sorry, but that won't do. When 'they' claim that the earth was created some thousands of years ago, they mean that the universe was created some thousand years ago. With the oil in place for us to find, and light bending around a black hole for us to see and marvel at the ingenious of the creator for including the sight of earth as if it existed before creation. Just like all those cute dinosaur bones. That was put there for the unbeliever!/making this up as I go along
As for disproving any of that crap, what works for me is to prove that it is not possible to create a valid scientific hypothesis that includes god. So he doesn't exist. QED.
I still wonder why people don't use the Firefix / Adblock / Filterset.G combination as a basic starting point.
I used that for a while but now switched to the better managed and easier to install (1 extension instead of 2) Firefox / AdBlock Plus, then initialize Adblock Plus with the following subscription: EasyList + EasyElement.
If you read Bill Bryson's "A short History of nearly everything" you will read some wonderful stories on how in archeology as well as the field of paleontology wild speculation is used frequently to fill in the gaps. Books upon books have been written on the findings of sometimes just a single bone, even when that bone wasn't shared among scientists! Fascinating fields of science:-)
If you blame the U.S. Government why stop there? Who put that government there I wonder? Whoops, that was the people of the United States. You want to blame them for what the RIAA is pulling now?
Sure everyone deserves some blame. The people should elect responsible representatives who in the form of a government should prevent corporate crimes like the RIAA is pulling. But don't forget that the RIAA is a company. So is Google. One is evil, one isn't (yet).
If you are going to spend that much on a TV, why not buy a decent project TV for slightly more.
The Sony Pro 4K SRX-R110S can do up to 4096 x 2160. High contrast ration and 10,000 ANSI lumen gives quite the impressive result. I witnessed this during the Electronic theater at Siggraph last year where one of the animations was shown at the projector's native resolution. The difference between what I thought was good, HDTV's 1080p, and the full 4096x2160 was stunning.
Given the amazing amount of information we have to go on from this story...without any links...I'll just fill in the missing information by making it up.
What was the most likely scenario:
1) The WAN gave those students access to only the following 2 sites: wikipedia and slashdot. And they decided to ban wikipedia because they discovered (on slashdot) that all wikipedia articles are written by 2 dudes who live in some other moms basement. And we all know that those 2 dudes don't know everything!
2) The WAN has free access to the internets, including pr0n, warez, myspace, yourspace, backspace, etc. The teachers decided to ban wikipedia because they figured that if all the students would actually start reading that they would all be out of a job soon.
3) Some teacher who had been living under a rock had been told about how wikipedia really worked and decided to rightfully ban wikipedia because of the potential danger of a student running into a story that wasn't 100% based on verified facts. Unfortunatly this same teacher hasn't actually ever been on the web and doesn't yet know what the internet is. When this gets explained to him, we can all hear his head exploded (pictures at 11).
Thanks! Just subscribed to EasyList and EasyElement. Just for the ease of not having to install another extension (Filterset.G) this seems a good idea.
Adblock and Adblock Plus Obviously, we have some bias when it comes to ad-blocking extensions, as Computerworld is an ad-supported site. We also understand that these are very popular extensions. But if everyone blocked ads, how would sites such as ours continue to offer content free of charge?
I stopped reading right there. That's not obvious bias, that is straight "we want to make money of YOU, so drink our cool-aid!!".
I use Adblock because I don't ever click ad's on random sites like Computerworld. To be honest, I don't click on ad's period. So Adblock (and more accurately AdblockPlus + Filterset.G) are among the most useful and wonderful extensions for Firefox. It is 'the' extension that have made several people around me (engineers, friends, family) switch to Firefox when they saw what it could do.
Sorry Computerworld, a little bias is one thing but this is just pathetic.
Wouldn't it be better if Universities where exempt from patents. This way they could take existing research (which was possibly patented) and continue working on this and refining it without the hassle and limitations of patents.
I mean, it's all fine that the University of Wisconsin is offering their patented technology free of charge to other Universities, but they didn't have to. I'm guessing that most Universities can't afford the $75,000 to $400,000, or wouldn't want to waist their research funds on this buy-in. I'm also guessing that these fees are tiny compared to potential license fees for similar technology if in the hands of a for-profit company.
You buy a company, you buy the people that work there. If you work for a company like double-click you know what the company does, and it ain't pretty. If Google buys them they will either have to strip double-click clean of their employees and lose most all of the intellectual property that have put double-click on the money board or claim that they will teach all the employees how to "not be evil". Rrrrrright.
Same goes for Microsoft, I just can't believe even they will sink this low.
Children of Men was a Hollywood-style blockbuster, a dime a dousin. And it was only recently released. How is it a "cult hit"?
I triple checked with our marketing department and they convinced me that there is a "cult" out there that loved this movie!
My silly explanation is probably pretty close to the truth though. Ii might well have been some marketing sleaze who came up with calling this not-as-successful-as-Hollywood-hoped movie a "cult hit".
Anyways, I personally liked the movie. The single neatest thing about the movie where the seamless action scenes. Especially the attack on the car in the forest and the following car chase by police. Explosions, people hanging on cars, motorbike crashes and a fatal shooting. Not all that special for a Hollywood movie, except for the fact that it was all shot in a single take!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing this guy is reinventing the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator
In other words, yet another pseudo perpetual machine.
It is possible that this guy doesn't know his science, but I'm betting on a scam.
no, no, no...we have planned for this. Instead of having to wait for interstellar travel we will move the Scientists Group for the Study of an Existing Ecosystems to the other nearby planet. We promise we won't bother you there.
And to prepare for your arrival on Venus we are planning to send a space ship ahead full of those individuals who are among the most important part of our society.
I think everything you can think of that can be depicted on screen and is generated content, is fair game.
I was going to ask if you think the same about depicting things like 'racism', but then I figured that that is prohibited by law. Murder is against the law, but depicting murder isn't. There are some interesting corner cases I guess, like terrorism. Planning terrorism is against the law...making a game where you plan terrorist attacks...haha, Homeland Security is going to have a ball with that. Not sure what the law says about 'virtual' child porn.
haha, yeah I added the baby seal clubbing as a joke. As for the Wii controller and baby seal clubbing...been done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxFU-nlgub0
The very idea of banning ANYTHING entertainment-related in a 1st world country/area is completely stupid.
The key here is "entertainment-related". So where do you draw the line when games cross from entertainment into objectionable content? Which of the following do you consider harmless fun if depicted in a video game:
killing monsters
killing people
killing cops
clubbing baby seals
sadism
extreme brutal violence
sex
porn
kiddie porn
snuff
For me, there are a few things on that list that I have no problem with if they are banned. There is no entertainment value to be gotten from them except for people who need help.
You have a touch screen for God's sake, why in the world are you still dealing with the "binary choice" UI of old phones?
Easy: single hand access! You try using a touchscreen with your thumb.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A61952-20 03Jul15
Blade Inflation
By Dave Barry
What's next from the razor-sharp minds of the shaving industry?
Attention, consumers with bodily hair: The razor industry has news for you! You will never in a million years guess what this news is, unless your IQ is higher than zero, in which case you're already thinking: "Not another blade! Don't tell me they're adding ANOTHER BLADE!!"
Shut up! Don't spoil the surprise for everybody else!
Before I tell you the news, let's put it in historical context by reviewing:
THE HISTORY OF SHAVING
Human beings are one of only two species of animals that shave themselves (the other one is salamanders). The Internet tells us that humans have been shaving since the Stone Age. Of course, the Internet also tells us that hot naked women want to befriend us, so we can't be 100 percent sure about everything we read there.
But assuming that www.quikshave.com/ timeline.htm is telling the truth, Neanderthal Man used to pluck his facial hairs "using two seashells as tweezers." No doubt Neanderthal Woman found this very attractive. "You smell like a clam," were probably her exact words. It was during this era that the headache was invented.
By 30,000 B.C., primitive man was shaving with blades made from flint, which is a rock, so you had a lot of guys whose faces were basically big oozing scabs. The next shaving breakthrough came when the ancient Egyptians figured out how to make razors from sharp metal, which meant that, for the first time, the man who wanted to be well-groomed could, without any assistance or special training, cut an ear completely off.
This was pretty much the situation until the late 19th century, at about 2:30 p.m., when the safety razor was invented. This introduced a wonderful era known to historians as "The Golden Age of Not Having Razor Companies Introduce Some Ludicrously Unnecessary New Shaving Technology Every 10 Damn Minutes."
I, personally, grew up during this era. I got my first razor when I was 15, and I used it to shave my "beard," which consisted of a lone chin hair approximately one electron in diameter. (I was a "late bloomer" who did not fully experience
puberty until many of my classmates, including females, were bald.) My beard would poke its wispy head out of its follicle every week or so, and I, feeling manly, would smother it under 14 cubic feet of shaving cream and lop it off with my razor. Then I would stand in front of the bathroom mirror, waiting for it to grow again. Mine was a lonely adolescence.
The razors of that era had one blade, and they worked fine; ask any older person who is not actively drooling. But then, in 1971, a very bad thing happened: Gillette, looking for a way to enhance the shaving experience (by which I mean "charge more") came out with a razor that had TWO blades. This touched off a nuclear arms race among razor companies, vying to outdo one another by adding "high-tech" features that made the product more expensive, but not necessarily better. This tactic is called "sneakerization," in honor of the sneaker industry, which now has people paying upwards of $200 a pair for increasingly weird-looking footwear boasting the durability of thinly sliced Velveeta.
Soon everybody was selling two-blade razors. So the marketing people put on their thinking caps, and, in an astounding burst of creativity, came up with the breakthrough concept of: THREE BLADES. Gillette, which is on the cutting edge (har!) of razor sneakerization, currently has a top-of-the-line three-blade razor -- excuse me, I mean "shaving system" -- called the "Mach3Turbo," which, according to the Gillette Web site (www.gillette.com) has more technology than a nuclear submarine, including "open cartridge architecture" and an "ergonomic handle" featuring "knurled ela
even though everyone else iGnored you...
:-)
If you say it the way I read it "I...Gnored you" it sounds dirty!
To sink :-)
sorry, but that won't do. When 'they' claim that the earth was created some thousands of years ago, they mean that the universe was created some thousand years ago. With the oil in place for us to find, and light bending around a black hole for us to see and marvel at the ingenious of the creator for including the sight of earth as if it existed before creation. Just like all those cute dinosaur bones. That was put there for the unbeliever! /making this up as I go along
As for disproving any of that crap, what works for me is to prove that it is not possible to create a valid scientific hypothesis that includes god. So he doesn't exist. QED.
I still wonder why people don't use the Firefix / Adblock / Filterset.G combination as a basic starting point.
I used that for a while but now switched to the better managed and easier to install (1 extension instead of 2) Firefox / AdBlock Plus, then initialize Adblock Plus with the following subscription: EasyList + EasyElement.
you got that all wrong, the idea is to patent step 2.
If you read Bill Bryson's "A short History of nearly everything" you will read some wonderful stories on how in archeology as well as the field of paleontology wild speculation is used frequently to fill in the gaps. Books upon books have been written on the findings of sometimes just a single bone, even when that bone wasn't shared among scientists! Fascinating fields of science :-)
If you blame the U.S. Government why stop there? Who put that government there I wonder? Whoops, that was the people of the United States. You want to blame them for what the RIAA is pulling now?
Sure everyone deserves some blame. The people should elect responsible representatives who in the form of a government should prevent corporate crimes like the RIAA is pulling. But don't forget that the RIAA is a company. So is Google. One is evil, one isn't (yet).
If you are going to spend that much on a TV, why not buy a decent project TV for slightly more.
;-)
The Sony Pro 4K SRX-R110S can do up to 4096 x 2160. High contrast ration and 10,000 ANSI lumen gives quite the impressive result. I witnessed this during the Electronic theater at Siggraph last year where one of the animations was shown at the projector's native resolution. The difference between what I thought was good, HDTV's 1080p, and the full 4096x2160 was stunning.
The SRX-R110S only costs about $125,000
You think you are in pain for having to swallow that our great Google bought doubleclick?
Ha, you could imagine it like this: The people at doubleclick just got paid 3.1 BILLION dollars.
By Google.
Have a great weekend.
Given the amazing amount of information we have to go on from this story...without any links...I'll just fill in the missing information by making it up.
What was the most likely scenario:
1) The WAN gave those students access to only the following 2 sites: wikipedia and slashdot. And they decided to ban wikipedia because they discovered (on slashdot) that all wikipedia articles are written by 2 dudes who live in some other moms basement. And we all know that those 2 dudes don't know everything!
2) The WAN has free access to the internets, including pr0n, warez, myspace, yourspace, backspace, etc. The teachers decided to ban wikipedia because they figured that if all the students would actually start reading that they would all be out of a job soon.
3) Some teacher who had been living under a rock had been told about how wikipedia really worked and decided to rightfully ban wikipedia because of the potential danger of a student running into a story that wasn't 100% based on verified facts. Unfortunatly this same teacher hasn't actually ever been on the web and doesn't yet know what the internet is. When this gets explained to him, we can all hear his head exploded (pictures at 11).
4) All of the above.
You know they are going to "balance" the Mouse+Keyboard vs Joypad very soon after those 360 whiners are getting whooped silly right?
One horrible scenario: On the 360 your targets will 'lock' on when you are aiming roughly in the right direction.
Next, auto aim.
*shrug*
As a member of Clan Erinyes, from the awesome era of Team Fortress Classic (anyone remember us?), I am still really looking forward to TF2.
Traa-[CE]
Thanks! Just subscribed to EasyList and EasyElement. Just for the ease of not having to install another extension (Filterset.G) this seems a good idea.
From TFA:
Adblock and Adblock Plus
Obviously, we have some bias when it comes to ad-blocking extensions, as Computerworld is an ad-supported site. We also understand that these are very popular extensions. But if everyone blocked ads, how would sites such as ours continue to offer content free of charge?
I stopped reading right there. That's not obvious bias, that is straight "we want to make money of YOU, so drink our cool-aid!!".
I use Adblock because I don't ever click ad's on random sites like Computerworld. To be honest, I don't click on ad's period. So Adblock (and more accurately AdblockPlus + Filterset.G) are among the most useful and wonderful extensions for Firefox. It is 'the' extension that have made several people around me (engineers, friends, family) switch to Firefox when they saw what it could do.
Sorry Computerworld, a little bias is one thing but this is just pathetic.
Suplies?
Wouldn't it be better if Universities where exempt from patents. This way they could take existing research (which was possibly patented) and continue working on this and refining it without the hassle and limitations of patents.
I mean, it's all fine that the University of Wisconsin is offering their patented technology free of charge to other Universities, but they didn't have to. I'm guessing that most Universities can't afford the $75,000 to $400,000, or wouldn't want to waist their research funds on this buy-in. I'm also guessing that these fees are tiny compared to potential license fees for similar technology if in the hands of a for-profit company.
Perhaps because Google search is a service, not a product.
You buy a company, you buy the people that work there. If you work for a company like double-click you know what the company does, and it ain't pretty. If Google buys them they will either have to strip double-click clean of their employees and lose most all of the intellectual property that have put double-click on the money board or claim that they will teach all the employees how to "not be evil". Rrrrrright.
Same goes for Microsoft, I just can't believe even they will sink this low.
AOL, yeah...they swim around the same depth.
Children of Men was a Hollywood-style blockbuster, a dime a dousin. And it was only recently released. How is it a "cult hit"?
I triple checked with our marketing department and they convinced me that there is a "cult" out there that loved this movie!
My silly explanation is probably pretty close to the truth though. Ii might well have been some marketing sleaze who came up with calling this not-as-successful-as-Hollywood-hoped movie a "cult hit".
Anyways, I personally liked the movie. The single neatest thing about the movie where the seamless action scenes. Especially the attack on the car in the forest and the following car chase by police. Explosions, people hanging on cars, motorbike crashes and a fatal shooting. Not all that special for a Hollywood movie, except for the fact that it was all shot in a single take!