Infinity Ward didn't just hand off some cool game ideas to Activision. They developed CoD4 from an idea to an implementation. Activision simply publishes the finished game.
I had a friend who would destroy people in Mortal Kombat. He would then offer to sell the a move sheet for $5. They would often oblige. They wanted to play just as well.
He didn't stick around long enough for them to figure out that move sheets had all bogus information.
Damn Small Linux is very convenient. I have an old ThinkPad from '97 with DSL. This allows me to connect it to the wireless network and run all my apps remotely from my main box.:)
Applications run faster that way than they do from the harddrive.
As you've demonstrated, "blue shell" mechanics allow new people to play with old hats. The seasoned players, in turn, have to rely on strategy more than brute force.
I enjoy these kinds of mechanics. Playing most games at a certain skill level alienates most other players. This makes it difficult to find other players. Everyone hates playing against "that guy."
Google fuck you! Tbh all search is pretty equal, i only stick with google because i thought they were generally a pretty good company, even if i can't get the clean results i like from google (because the fucks patented that too), i will most definitely be searching elsewhere!
It is the other way around: You patent something so you can publish it, without fear of your competitors. Otherwise you could propose a really good idea, get it established and widely used, patent it and sue world+dog.
A patent is a grant of exclusive rights to an invention in exchange for publishing. You don't acquire a patent so that you can publish something; you publish it so that you can dictate who can't use an invention.
IANAAL in any sense, but it seems to me that the Google front page being so horribly public would count as prior art. Everything I can find indicates that ANY publication in ANY form can constitute prior art.
Re:Don't trust anyone
on
Virtual Bank Woes
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It's been a while since I played, but I believe players can place a bounty on players that's visible to all players.
I'm not really sure why the bank wouldn't do this.
A dialog could appear on whenever a user tries to use a.desktop file for the first time that gives them an option to set the execute bit and some ominous text that briefly explains what it may meanâ"though the same set of people tend to click the Yes/Ok/InstallMyMalware button without reading.
I can scarcely imagine something more annoying. It's also totally unnecessary. A shortcut explicitly created by a user would be given execute. A downloaded shortcut would not have it. Like anything else in *nix.
I'm not sure technical arguments are really necessary to demonstrate this as bunk. Google's services add a lot of value to a consumer's bandwidth. I would wager that their contributions exceed their consumption.
Bah. Not being able to tell which are my "quick launch" buttons and which are my running applications is a pain in the ass. Why have the exact same interface option for two completely different things?
You can tell which buttons are "quick launch" and which are running. Running application icons are indicated by a little marker under the icon.
The idea, presumably, is to use as little screen space as possible to show as much information as possible.
That said, who needs the Dock for launching applications? Quicksilver is where it's at.
Slashdot Mirror
This already kind of happens. Certain games can cause the room to heat the room almost unbearably at times.
Sure, 15% of scientists feel that science and religion are not incompatible. Why doesn't someone do the same study on clergy?
Infinity Ward didn't just hand off some cool game ideas to Activision. They developed CoD4 from an idea to an implementation. Activision simply publishes the finished game.
It will be what it's supposed to be quicker if developers can afford to concentrate their efforts on it.
I had a friend who would destroy people in Mortal Kombat. He would then offer to sell the a move sheet for $5. They would often oblige. They wanted to play just as well.
He didn't stick around long enough for them to figure out that move sheets had all bogus information.
Now THAT is enterprising.
I suspect that cranky Slashdot posters don't often reflect the views of the the open source community that benefit from said contributions.
I'm not sure he would, but it's not hard for me to imagine Mozilla courting Microsoft.
why in the world is Bing better for privacy?
My guess is that Mozilla is looking for new sources of funding now that Google has released Chrome.
Damn Small Linux is very convenient. I have an old ThinkPad from '97 with DSL. This allows me to connect it to the wireless network and run all my apps remotely from my main box. :)
Applications run faster that way than they do from the harddrive.
As you've demonstrated, "blue shell" mechanics allow new people to play with old hats. The seasoned players, in turn, have to rely on strategy more than brute force.
I enjoy these kinds of mechanics. Playing most games at a certain skill level alienates most other players. This makes it difficult to find other players. Everyone hates playing against "that guy."
Mad science doesn't kill people. People kill people.
George Selden did.
Certainly no one would start a nuclear holocaust to make a point, but they might very well start one in order to fulfill a divine mandate.
I wouldn't put so much faith in base instincts.
They fought 5 years for it, so i doubt it.
Google fuck you! Tbh all search is pretty equal, i only stick with google because i thought they were generally a pretty good company, even if i can't get the clean results i like from google (because the fucks patented that too), i will most definitely be searching elsewhere!
Stanford University owns the PageRank patent.
It is the other way around: You patent something so you can publish it, without fear of your competitors. Otherwise you could propose a really good idea, get it established and widely used, patent it and sue world+dog.
A patent is a grant of exclusive rights to an invention in exchange for publishing. You don't acquire a patent so that you can publish something; you publish it so that you can dictate who can't use an invention.
IANAAL in any sense, but it seems to me that the Google front page being so horribly public would count as prior art. Everything I can find indicates that ANY publication in ANY form can constitute prior art.
It's been a while since I played, but I believe players can place a bounty on players that's visible to all players.
I'm not really sure why the bank wouldn't do this.
Of course. Since when do corporations do anything OTHER than make money?
If ever there was a question more deserving of facetious response...
That was a great game. Unfortunately, it was buggy and hard to get to run even when it was new.
Your best bet would probably be to run it from Windows 98. *shudder*
Some sort of physical DRM for printed copies?
That sort of thing has been available for quite some time.
A dialog could appear on whenever a user tries to use a .desktop file for the first time that gives them an option to set the execute bit and some ominous text that briefly explains what it may meanâ"though the same set of people tend to click the Yes/Ok/InstallMyMalware button without reading.
I can scarcely imagine something more annoying. It's also totally unnecessary. A shortcut explicitly created by a user would be given execute. A downloaded shortcut would not have it. Like anything else in *nix.
I'm not sure technical arguments are really necessary to demonstrate this as bunk. Google's services add a lot of value to a consumer's bandwidth. I would wager that their contributions exceed their consumption.
If GPL'd code was used in such a system, there is no requirement that the software be distributed in any form.
How does code being GPL'd make it incompatible with security restrictions?
According to this, Obama has been facing similar problems. That link comes from an article from the EFF.
Bah. Not being able to tell which are my "quick launch" buttons and which are my running applications is a pain in the ass. Why have the exact same interface option for two completely different things?
You can tell which buttons are "quick launch" and which are running. Running application icons are indicated by a little marker under the icon.
The idea, presumably, is to use as little screen space as possible to show as much information as possible.
That said, who needs the Dock for launching applications? Quicksilver is where it's at.
I had to stop using that screensaver because the only person it ever fooled was me. :(