Human's have never had anything like the ability for anonymous, private communications that we've developed in the last 3-5 years.
Well, for the millenia before microphones were invented, you could always just wispher in someone's ear if you wanted your communication to be private.
The problem is most of the people bitching, IMO, were children when they saw the movie. They saw with a child's eyes and a child's viewpoint on life.
Enough of this "Star Wars was really a child's movie" BS. Star Wars was a very violent movie. It portrayed acts of violence and the results of violence in a much more adult-oriented manner than the bloodless droid destruction fest and impotent darth-boogeymanning that was Episode 1. How, you ask? Let me count the ways...
as the movie begins we find ourselves in the midst of a heated battle on a captured ship where there are heavy human casualties and bodies littering the hallways
follow the battle, Vader brutally kills a man he is interrogating by crushing his throaght (lets not forget we are just moments past the opening credits)
fast forward a bit and we find Luke being beaten by sand people as he searches for R2
Luke & Co. come across a devastated Jawa caravan - corpses of the little creatures litter the ground. They creamate the bodies
Luke returns home to find the very-visible charred skeletons of his aunt and uncle still smoldering in the ashes of their house.
Luke is roughed up at a seedy pub in Mos Eisley - Obi Wan comes to his aid and a scuffle ensues where the instigator's bloody, severed arm ends up on the floor.
Han Solo, a shady smuggler, shoots from the hip to kill a bounty hunter that has come to capture him (none of this revisionist Greedo-shot-first bullcrap)
I could go on, but I think I've made my point and and there are at least two whole acts left to the movie.
The metric functions that they use are good for randomly connected maps, but they don't apply to the internet, where nodes are not randomly connected.
Actually the article describes the finding that the connectivity of nodes on the web and Internet follow a power-law distribution instead of the poisson distribution one would expect with a randomly connected graph. Maybe we should read beyond the introduction of the article before we post?
Why can't someone just go into a map editor and replace all the surface textures to ones that have alpha-channels? I'm sure a Geforce3 could handle all that alpha-blending.
IMO, an artist is one who creates works of wit or insight for the inspiration or enjoyment of some group of persons. This definition does not rule out the programmer as an artist, for surely code can be written that will be enjoyed by some group of people (for example: directly enjoyment of code through clever obfuscation, or the indirect enjoyment of code through a videogame). Thus programming can be considered another medium for artistic expression.
Of course, not all programers are artists, just as not everyone who uses a pencil is an artist. The key lies in the intent.
This is why Oni will be a breakthrough game. Combine action, 3rd person, and fighting games, and you got a new genre.
3D Action/Fighting has been done before - ever heard of "Fighting Force"? Oh, wait, Oni is 3D Action/Fighting/Anime and thus an entirely new genre.
I trust that Oni will probably be a very good game, but I wouldn't start getting carried away and labelling a combination of existing genres and styles as a "new genre".
My bet is that Oni will feel like an action-heavy Metal Gear: Solid.
Someone explain to me how the 3D brawler Oni's little plot-compass thingy is new and innovative compared to the "GO! -->" indicators from 2D brawlers of yore such as Golden Axe. Smells like more of the same, but this time with cutting edge 3D graphics and a trendy anime-style setting as opposed to cutting 256 color graphics and a trendy fantasy-style setting! New games, please!
In the Unix philosphy, each little script is totally self-contained, its operation can be analyzed independently of the context, and combining several scripts will just yield the combination of their results.
This may be true on the application level. The original analogy works when you consider the reuse of dynamically linked object-code on a modern *nix system. Context, in the case of *nix can be just as sensitive as that of a MS Windows - as anyone who has encountered glibc incompatabilities will tell you.
What about celphone browsers? PalmOS? WebTV? Crappy WindowsCE appliances in the airport business lounge?
Please! Like the servers aren't detecting the special-case client and sending them some specialized version of the site that is optimized for PalmOS or etc.
There is no way to refute that in this day an age a web site is about more than just content - it is also about presentation. Presentation means more than just formatting for more utilitarian digestion of content. Presentation gets into areas such as public image and public perception. Most everybody on the web is interested in being percieved by others to some degree of specificity.
For those sites that wish to very specific in how they distinguish themselves, tight artistic control is neccesary. W3C be dammned, web designers will always turn to the technology with the features that best achieves their own artistic design goals.
any league that has their stats in order so quickly is Ok in my book.
as for the gameplay, who says that entertainment value is proportional to skill level? if this is true, then why are collegiate sports so much more fun to watch than pro sports? i like to think that the unpredictability introduced into the game by higher variation in performance makes for a more exciting game.
These problems with memory would go away if we all improved our relationship with information. Far too often we have the one-night-stand, storing information in our minds one evening, only to discard them after the exam the very next day. In order to hone our capacity for memory, we need to develop a long-term relationship with our information. We need to give it all attention it deserves. That way it will be there for us in times of need.
i see. so what i had was a sort of mish-mash of the skittles version with the original version. as for learning tools - my point was that a game can be designed to get across any idea, so using a game to teach a lesson is about as good as using a work of fiction. neither are neccesarily based in reality.
The version of the game that you have proposed has different victory conditions for the players. Your version makes the implicit assumption that the students want to maximize their own individual collection of skittles. You also allow the players to communicate and therefore adopt a cooperative strategy that allows for the players to pursue the goal of maximizing total skittles accumulated. Seen this way, the players as a team have a choice between recieving 6, 5 or 2 skittles per round based on their strategy. This is an interesting variant on the game, but very different from the original.
The original game is more of a winner-take-all as the player with more credits is let off the hook (the "credits" are in and of themselves not valuable). As well, the players are not allowed to communicate and therefore cannot strategize, coerce, or otherwise influence eachother. I will assume that players are aware of their own running score, and therefore aware of the other player's last move. I will assume that if the prisoners tie in score, that neither will be let off (why would the prison be so generous?) Gaining more credits puts you in a better position to be let off than your opponent - therefore the original game is zero-sum. In addition, it only makes sense to make moves that will possibly increase your score relative to the other inmate. Cooperation yeilds only relative increases of 0 (both get 3 credits) or -5 (opponent competes) , while competition yields relative increases of 0 (both get 1 credit) or 5 (opponent cooperates). It is clear that you will never win unless at some point you compete when the other player cooperates, however if you only compete, and the other player only competes, then you are both up the creek. So then the game becomes "how can i convince the other player to cooperate without losing relative points?"
Theoretically you could try to communicate with the other player by encoding a message in binary into your moves, but unless the game lasts a signficant number of turns, the opponent knows to look for the message, the opponent knows ascii (or whatever you send yor code in), the opponent knows what parity you are using, and the opponent cares at all that you've handed over the release from prison to him by trowing in so many cooperative moves...
in any case, it just goes to show that different games teach different lessons, and it is not valid to assert that just because coooperating in one variant of a game is beneficial, that the same is true for the real world (tm).
> And by the way, is my CD-RW burner illegal because I could use it to "circumvent" the fact that there didn't use to be a way to copy audio CDs? certainly a cd-rw is not inherintly illegal. what is at question is now you use it. for instance, a kitchen knife is perfectly legal, but the act of using a kitchen knife to "circumvent" the fact that another human's body hasn't been designed to withstand a slit throat is not. i do not intend to imply the value judgement that copying CDs is akin to slitting throats. i am simply emphesizing the abstract separation of an object from its use. the only case where an object is illegal would be if it only has illegal use - in effect the posession of the object implies the intention of the illegal use. i suppose any object with a reasonable mass could be used as an innocent paper weight though... "that crate of crack? its just making sure the draft from the air-vent doesn't blow my paperwork away!" so the heart of the argument is about the legality of uses for information rather than the legality of the mechanisms themsleves.
Slashdot Mirror
as for the act of "virtual child porn" I cannot see why it should be illegal
my favorite analogy: killing someone else is illegal, yet depicting someone killing someone else is not (otherwise all of hollywood would be in jail!)
The easiest way to show record labels that you won't buy their crap is to not buy their crap. democracy through capitalism. bleah.
Human's have never had anything like the ability for anonymous, private communications that we've developed in the last 3-5 years.
Well, for the millenia before microphones were invented, you could always just wispher in someone's ear if you wanted your communication to be private.
one of my perl scripts that sorted some stuff via timestamp broke over the billenium because i was using "cmp" instead of "<=>". silly me.
Good to know that a relevant comment gets attention, while all the silly CmdrTaco jokes are ignored.
Enough of this "Star Wars was really a child's movie" BS. Star Wars was a very violent movie. It portrayed acts of violence and the results of violence in a much more adult-oriented manner than the bloodless droid destruction fest and impotent darth-boogeymanning that was Episode 1. How, you ask? Let me count the ways
I could go on, but I think I've made my point and and there are at least two whole acts left to the movie.
The metric functions that they use are good for randomly connected maps, but they don't apply to the internet, where nodes are not randomly connected.
Actually the article describes the finding that the connectivity of nodes on the web and Internet follow a power-law distribution instead of the poisson distribution one would expect with a randomly connected graph. Maybe we should read beyond the introduction of the article before we post?
Why can't someone just go into a map editor and replace all the surface textures to ones that have alpha-channels? I'm sure a Geforce3 could handle all that alpha-blending.
IMO, an artist is one who creates works of wit or insight for the inspiration or enjoyment of some group of persons. This definition does not rule out the programmer as an artist, for surely code can be written that will be enjoyed by some group of people (for example: directly enjoyment of code through clever obfuscation, or the indirect enjoyment of code through a videogame). Thus programming can be considered another medium for artistic expression.
Of course, not all programers are artists, just as not everyone who uses a pencil is an artist. The key lies in the intent.
This is why Oni will be a breakthrough game. Combine action, 3rd person, and fighting games, and you got a new genre.
3D Action/Fighting has been done before - ever heard of "Fighting Force"? Oh, wait, Oni is 3D Action/Fighting/Anime and thus an entirely new genre.
I trust that Oni will probably be a very good game, but I wouldn't start getting carried away and labelling a combination of existing genres and styles as a "new genre".
My bet is that Oni will feel like an action-heavy Metal Gear: Solid.
Someone explain to me how the 3D brawler Oni's little plot-compass thingy is new and innovative compared to the "GO! -->" indicators from 2D brawlers of yore such as Golden Axe. Smells like more of the same, but this time with cutting edge 3D graphics and a trendy anime-style setting as opposed to cutting 256 color graphics and a trendy fantasy-style setting! New games, please!
In the Unix philosphy, each little script is totally self-contained, its operation can be analyzed independently of the context, and combining several scripts will just yield the combination of their results.
This may be true on the application level. The original analogy works when you consider the reuse of dynamically linked object-code on a modern *nix system. Context, in the case of *nix can be just as sensitive as that of a MS Windows - as anyone who has encountered glibc incompatabilities will tell you.
Linux is "free" (as in open AND beer)
/beer/in/as/free-software free-software /speech/in/as/free-software liberated-software
We've got to come up with something a bit more aesthetic than this whole free-as-in-X qualified adjective. I prefer something more along the lines of:
ln -s
ln -s
well if i were speaking in japanese it would probably sound something like :
google's such data acquiring's odds are what do you think?
What about celphone browsers? PalmOS? WebTV? Crappy WindowsCE appliances in the airport business lounge?
Please! Like the servers aren't detecting the special-case client and sending them some specialized version of the site that is optimized for PalmOS or etc.
There is no way to refute that in this day an age a web site is about more than just content - it is also about presentation. Presentation means more than just formatting for more utilitarian digestion of content. Presentation gets into areas such as public image and public perception. Most everybody on the web is interested in being percieved by others to some degree of specificity. For those sites that wish to very specific in how they distinguish themselves, tight artistic control is neccesary. W3C be dammned, web designers will always turn to the technology with the features that best achieves their own artistic design goals.
any league that has their stats in order so quickly is Ok in my book.
as for the gameplay, who says that entertainment value is proportional to skill level? if this is true, then why are collegiate sports so much more fun to watch than pro sports? i like to think that the unpredictability introduced into the game by higher variation in performance makes for a more exciting game.
These problems with memory would go away if we all improved our relationship with information. Far too often we have the one-night-stand, storing information in our minds one evening, only to discard them after the exam the very next day. In order to hone our capacity for memory, we need to develop a long-term relationship with our information. We need to give it all attention it deserves. That way it will be there for us in times of need.
i see. so what i had was a sort of mish-mash of the skittles version with the original version. as for learning tools - my point was that a game can be designed to get across any idea, so using a game to teach a lesson is about as good as using a work of fiction. neither are neccesarily based in reality.
The version of the game that you have proposed has different victory conditions for the players. Your version makes the implicit assumption that the students want to maximize their own individual collection of skittles. You also allow the players to communicate and therefore adopt a cooperative strategy that allows for the players to pursue the goal of maximizing total skittles accumulated. Seen this way, the players as a team have a choice between recieving 6, 5 or 2 skittles per round based on their strategy. This is an interesting variant on the game, but very different from the original.
...
The original game is more of a winner-take-all as the player with more credits is let off the hook (the "credits" are in and of themselves not valuable). As well, the players are not allowed to communicate and therefore cannot strategize, coerce, or otherwise influence eachother. I will assume that players are aware of their own running score, and therefore aware of the other player's last move. I will assume that if the prisoners tie in score, that neither will be let off (why would the prison be so generous?) Gaining more credits puts you in a better position to be let off than your opponent - therefore the original game is zero-sum. In addition, it only makes sense to make moves that will possibly increase your score relative to the other inmate. Cooperation yeilds only relative increases of 0 (both get 3 credits) or -5 (opponent competes) , while competition yields relative increases of 0 (both get 1 credit) or 5 (opponent cooperates). It is clear that you will never win unless at some point you compete when the other player cooperates, however if you only compete, and the other player only competes, then you are both up the creek. So then the game becomes "how can i convince the other player to cooperate without losing relative points?"
Theoretically you could try to communicate with the other player by encoding a message in binary into your moves, but unless the game lasts a signficant number of turns, the opponent knows to look for the message, the opponent knows ascii (or whatever you send yor code in), the opponent knows what parity you are using, and the opponent cares at all that you've handed over the release from prison to him by trowing in so many cooperative moves
in any case, it just goes to show that different games teach different lessons, and it is not valid to assert that just because coooperating in one variant of a game is beneficial, that the same is true for the real world (tm).
> And by the way, is my CD-RW burner illegal because I could use it to "circumvent" the fact that there didn't use to be a way to copy audio CDs? certainly a cd-rw is not inherintly illegal. what is at question is now you use it. for instance, a kitchen knife is perfectly legal, but the act of using a kitchen knife to "circumvent" the fact that another human's body hasn't been designed to withstand a slit throat is not. i do not intend to imply the value judgement that copying CDs is akin to slitting throats. i am simply emphesizing the abstract separation of an object from its use. the only case where an object is illegal would be if it only has illegal use - in effect the posession of the object implies the intention of the illegal use. i suppose any object with a reasonable mass could be used as an innocent paper weight though ... "that crate of crack? its just making sure the draft from the air-vent doesn't blow my paperwork away!" so the heart of the argument is about the legality of uses for information rather than the legality of the mechanisms themsleves.