If it was my job to be in a control group, knowing that people were trying to detect if me or the other is a machine, I'd try my best to fail the turing test. I'd spit out random answers to the questions. It's up to the interviewer to determine if I'm, not by whether my answers are correct, but whether my answers come from being misinformed, unable to interpret the question, or because I'm Jerking them off.
*The Irony scale can be defined as starting at 0 with Alanis Morissette's song "Isn't it Ironic" and ending at 10 with Alanis Morissette's song "Isn't it Ironic"
I can count on one hand: Mass Effect 2: Droid, Humanoid, Geth, Reaver Hunted: Demons/undead who melee, demons/undead who shoot, spiders Fallout: Bandits, bugs, dogs, mutants Doom: Demons who shoot, demons who melee CoD: Other Soldiers, Other players Unreal: Other players Quake: Other players
FPS games, as a whole, don't go into much detail/effort when it comes to the variety of badguys. They are usually just cannon fodder. Why are people continually surprised when another FPS game comes along that only has 3 different types of baddy? And of all of the FPS games that I can think of off the top of my head, Borderlands is the only one that people actually complain about having randomly generated waves of baddies.
There was an article a few weeks back about the Journalist's preview of Rage, and there were many comparisons between it and Borderlands (which officially announced they were making Borderlands 2).
I've played a lot of Borderlands, and seen trailers of Rage, and can tell you that the artistry is vastly different. Sure it may be using the same colours (brown (light), brown (medium) & brown (dark)) in bothe games, but the style of drawing in Borderlands is more cartoony.
In terms of gameplay, there's one huge, mega difference. There'll be no campaign co-op play in Rage. While I may still buy and play Rage, I'm quite disappointed that it won't have full length co-op mode, just a CoD scenario based style. This will make me wait until I can get it second-hand.
Well, that's something I had thought about. But wouldn't the cooling of the sun happen slow enough for any intelligent race to do something about it? Like migrate inwards, to Mars or, ultimately Earth?
There's a lot of assumptions here, as I said I'm not expert. I'm only speaking for a very sketchy background of high-school physics, general interest, and a lot of sci-fi books:)
If we are to consider that some form of life existed on Europa, and there were conditions good enough for them to develop into something (spores) that would survive the trip through space to Earth to seed the planet, then it must be similar enough to the forms of life we have here. If temperatures were higher due to bigger sun, then we add in our assumption that they evolved into intelligent life.
Have they become extinct? Did they evolve enough to escape their slowly freezing moon/planet, and did they move inwards? How many billions of years are we talking about here for the Sun to be too cold to support life on Europa, but not too hot for life on Mars? Was migrating inwards even possible, like us trying to migrate inwards to Venus?
No, I think that if there is/was life on Europa, then it's never been able to develop to a stage where migration was possible, or if it did, it didn't happen at a time where inward migration was feasible. Also, it's been somewhat agreed upon that life started on earth as a primordial ooze. I do not think (again I'm no expert) that ooze would survive the trip on a rock from one planet to another. It would have to be something like a spore, thus bypassing the much simpler forms of life on Earth. There would be no history prior to plantlife if it had come from another planet.
And also, if there was life on Europa because the sun was hotter, then any rock that managed to get from there to here at that time would not have seeded life on this too-hot planet. If it orbited the solar system for long enough for the sun to cool enough to support life on Earth, then whatever life-form was on it, (spore or otherwise) would have died in the interim.
I'm no expert on such things, so feel free to ignore these musings.
I've often wondered if life really originated on another planet in our solar system, then came to Earth, why would it never have developed into something like we have here.
If it happened elsewhere first, then would they not have been more advanced, or did they never get past a certain phase? Or would the life form there be so different that we'd never have anything common enough to be able to identify the other as a life form.
Obviously, if people were subscribing to the idea of seeding life from one rock to another, then you can't expect to have one carbon based model vs silicone based. So things would have to be close enough so that they develop along some common thread. This would mean that the environment never got to a stage on Europa so that the algae decided to become fish, or fish to become mammals.
But then considering the timelines involved, with animal life spanning millions of years, what are the odds that we'll have some form of sentient life capable of detecting eachother within the same 300 year period.
If life could have originated on Europa, then is it still behind Earth developmentally, or is it so far advanced that it's extinct, or moved on. The idea that it's more advanced, and has not contacted us seems unlikely. So it would mean that either we seeded it, or it developed life independently (if there's life there at all) and has not (or cannot) develop to a level equal to us.
So, to sum up: If life began on Europa and seeded Earth, what happened to stop further development on Europa?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing they are going to combine Porn with their love of animals. Furries forever!
Not likely, if you read: http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2422056&cid=37365450 comment above, you'll see the energy requirements to perform such a feat. I suspect it unlikely they have a tractor beam that powerful.
And Harry's cloak isn't big enough. (- whooosh prevention)
Don't forget the time too when some guy had to fix the door shut using The Inanimate Carbon Rod.
I suspect that a number of scientists secretly love him for making their line of work popular and thus getting them significant amounts of funding.
Velociraptors were bad enough to begin with, but now you're saying they can fly? Now we're fucked.
If it was my job to be in a control group, knowing that people were trying to detect if me or the other is a machine, I'd try my best to fail the turing test. I'd spit out random answers to the questions. It's up to the interviewer to determine if I'm, not by whether my answers are correct, but whether my answers come from being misinformed, unable to interpret the question, or because I'm Jerking them off.
They could use the Armoured Core 4+ look'n'feel for a good Desert Strike Relaunch.
I'd say it's about a 6 on the irony scale*.
*The Irony scale can be defined as starting at 0 with Alanis Morissette's song "Isn't it Ironic" and ending at 10 with Alanis Morissette's song "Isn't it Ironic"
My first thought was, "Who's this CmdrTaco and why is this covered on /.? It's not like this is some guys personal blog"
I heard he's keeping a post as chairman of the board.
They both rock my world!
3 SJ 4 EVAH
It's CmdrTaco's fault we have idiotic software patents?
The dimensions are different, and it's based on the 1969 version.
Can anyone tell me, seriously, of a popular (well known) FPS game that has a large variety (more than 6) of bad-guy types?
6+
Borderlands: Ninja, Lancer, Engineer, Rocketeer, Bandit, Brute, Midget, Dog, Bird(various types), Alien, Robot, Clap-traps, Crawmerax Larve, Ants
I can count on one hand:
Mass Effect 2: Droid, Humanoid, Geth, Reaver
Hunted: Demons/undead who melee, demons/undead who shoot, spiders
Fallout: Bandits, bugs, dogs, mutants
Doom: Demons who shoot, demons who melee
CoD: Other Soldiers, Other players
Unreal: Other players
Quake: Other players
FPS games, as a whole, don't go into much detail/effort when it comes to the variety of badguys. They are usually just cannon fodder. Why are people continually surprised when another FPS game comes along that only has 3 different types of baddy? And of all of the FPS games that I can think of off the top of my head, Borderlands is the only one that people actually complain about having randomly generated waves of baddies.
There was an article a few weeks back about the Journalist's preview of Rage, and there were many comparisons between it and Borderlands (which officially announced they were making Borderlands 2).
I've played a lot of Borderlands, and seen trailers of Rage, and can tell you that the artistry is vastly different. Sure it may be using the same colours (brown (light), brown (medium) & brown (dark)) in bothe games, but the style of drawing in Borderlands is more cartoony.
In terms of gameplay, there's one huge, mega difference. There'll be no campaign co-op play in Rage. While I may still buy and play Rage, I'm quite disappointed that it won't have full length co-op mode, just a CoD scenario based style. This will make me wait until I can get it second-hand.
It could be like how hitting the exhaust pipe can be felt while sitting on the bonnet.
How long before Mars becomes warm enough to be more habitable?
But without her, the act just falls apart. Where would be be as a race if we didn't have the fat, stubby, short sister?
Well, that's something I had thought about. But wouldn't the cooling of the sun happen slow enough for any intelligent race to do something about it? Like migrate inwards, to Mars or, ultimately Earth?
There's a lot of assumptions here, as I said I'm not expert. I'm only speaking for a very sketchy background of high-school physics, general interest, and a lot of sci-fi books :)
If we are to consider that some form of life existed on Europa, and there were conditions good enough for them to develop into something (spores) that would survive the trip through space to Earth to seed the planet, then it must be similar enough to the forms of life we have here. If temperatures were higher due to bigger sun, then we add in our assumption that they evolved into intelligent life.
Have they become extinct? Did they evolve enough to escape their slowly freezing moon/planet, and did they move inwards? How many billions of years are we talking about here for the Sun to be too cold to support life on Europa, but not too hot for life on Mars? Was migrating inwards even possible, like us trying to migrate inwards to Venus?
No, I think that if there is/was life on Europa, then it's never been able to develop to a stage where migration was possible, or if it did, it didn't happen at a time where inward migration was feasible. Also, it's been somewhat agreed upon that life started on earth as a primordial ooze. I do not think (again I'm no expert) that ooze would survive the trip on a rock from one planet to another. It would have to be something like a spore, thus bypassing the much simpler forms of life on Earth. There would be no history prior to plantlife if it had come from another planet.
And also, if there was life on Europa because the sun was hotter, then any rock that managed to get from there to here at that time would not have seeded life on this too-hot planet. If it orbited the solar system for long enough for the sun to cool enough to support life on Earth, then whatever life-form was on it, (spore or otherwise) would have died in the interim.
I'm no expert on such things, so feel free to ignore these musings.
I've often wondered if life really originated on another planet in our solar system, then came to Earth, why would it never have developed into something like we have here.
If it happened elsewhere first, then would they not have been more advanced, or did they never get past a certain phase? Or would the life form there be so different that we'd never have anything common enough to be able to identify the other as a life form.
Obviously, if people were subscribing to the idea of seeding life from one rock to another, then you can't expect to have one carbon based model vs silicone based. So things would have to be close enough so that they develop along some common thread. This would mean that the environment never got to a stage on Europa so that the algae decided to become fish, or fish to become mammals.
But then considering the timelines involved, with animal life spanning millions of years, what are the odds that we'll have some form of sentient life capable of detecting eachother within the same 300 year period.
If life could have originated on Europa, then is it still behind Earth developmentally, or is it so far advanced that it's extinct, or moved on. The idea that it's more advanced, and has not contacted us seems unlikely. So it would mean that either we seeded it, or it developed life independently (if there's life there at all) and has not (or cannot) develop to a level equal to us.
So, to sum up:
If life began on Europa and seeded Earth, what happened to stop further development on Europa?
Though somewhat of a spore loser...
Sarah Palin has always been a fun gal.
Hmm, where's the '+0.5 Informative' mod...
Yeah, I modded it up, thanks for the heads up.
wait,
Dohp
"Ahh I really love driving my Mercedes Benz. It has to be the most relaxing driving experience --" *FOGHORN BLARES*