Seems like a pretty simple answer here. If the mistakes made by making the AI 'weaker' computationally then mistakes that humans can and do make need to be introduced.
- Make a list of mistakes appropriate for the game. Like for example in a FPS the AI could have the NPC trip and fall down. Or they could drop their clip when going to reload. Or stay in a tactically weak position even in the face of oncoming assault. - This list would have to be pretty big or of course it would look just as silly as making the AI stupid computationally. Of course with modern dev cycles I think that spending a day brainstorming a nice big list is not unreasonable. - Add said list to the NPCs with a nice strong preference/situational/random engine driving it. A standard grunt level NPC would be more prone to tactical level mistakes. While an officer level NPC might be a bit more clumsy but tactically aware.
I'm sure that all sorts of refinement could, and very likely has, gone into such a system.
I think rather than the oft repeated idea that PC gaming is dying, gaming itself has just become more platform specific.
MMOs - Any real MMO is going to be all about running on a PC. RTSs - See above, same idea. Sims - Somewhat viable on a console but it depends on the complexity. Still a strong PC game genre. Real FPSs - Trying to play a FPS sans a mouse...lawl.
Now that still leaves a lot of game categories in the console market.
RPGs - While they have do dumb em down a fair amount the seem very willing to do so. I would like to have seen what Mass Effect would have been like as a PC game from the start but cest la vie. Frat Boy FPSs - Strong market for dumbed down FPS games. Hello Halo! 2d Hack'n'Slash/Shooters - Fun on big screens, designed around controllers vs keyboards/mice, and I think we are all ok with them being all about the consoles. Driving - If they are a driving sim see above, if they are an arcade driving game well...
I think I covered most things. Honestly I've watched the PC gaming market spelled out for freaking years now. It's gotten to the point that I wonder if people understand the difference between change and death.
That science, which is the systematic and empirical study of the natural world, can prove the non-existence of a supernatural entity. ("Supernatural" being, by definition, outside of the purview of science.)
The problem with that logic is that you can then 'prove' anything by saying you have to prove that it does not exist. I could rattle off a list of very very stupid things that can't be proven and by your logic they must exist since nobody could not 'prove' that they don't.
Dawkins is an impressive scientist, but when he ventures into theology, he reminds me of a Feynman quote: "I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy."
What dumb here is the idea that proving a negative should be the qualification for the existence of a god. Sorry, your just as full of fail as that quote.
And so in that case, I think that the story is correct to say, "OMG file sharers are breaching national security!" Apparently someone was ignorant to the risk.
The thing is that in your post that I'm quoting here you gave all the needed back story. You are not just going with the 'AMG P2P IS TEH EVIL!!1!'. Your actually presenting the situation correctly.
Instead however what the story itself in question does is present P2P software, and of course the whole model of the internet/net-neutrality and all that, as some sort of unacceptable risk.
I'm sorry, that's just plain straight up fear mongering. Mind you I understand and respect what your saying. However the way this whole thing was presented was poorly done.
He finds it great, and he points out correctly that for avid readers it's wonderful just from the standpoint of space conservation.
Part of me, the part that has been using my PDA in this capacity for many years now, wonders why this was never used as a selling point for them. Given that early PDA sales were poor at best.
But the other more cynical part of me knows that it would have only forced the DRM/fair use/format debate sooner. Not that we seem to be much better equipped to deal with it these days.
Yes every time you do anything actually there is risk. Walk out on the sidewalk? Risk. Light a fire? Risk. Put a computer on the internet? Risk.
The problem is that the word 'risk' without anything else is used often by fear mongers to push an agenda. Are all the people that use P2P software to distribute FOSS putting themselves at risk? Yes. But it's ok, it's a known and controlled risk. Just like when I walk out on the sidewalk I know not to run into oncoming traffic.
If you don't qualify what things really are doing and give a counterpoint to why P2P is not just some 'EVIL BAD RISK!!!one' then your just a fear monger. Your post is borderline doing just that.
[quote]The "I have nothing to hide [so search me]" mentality was never a valid position. Its very basis is the idea that privacy is not legitimate, that the only purpose of privacy is to cover up wrongdoing. If you hear anyone honestly say "I have nothing to hide", I wonder how they'd react if you told them to disrobe, in public. I don't recommend actually doing that, of course, but it illustrates the point. You'd quickly find that even people who think they believe in that BS do in fact have things they don't wish to open up to the scrutiny of strangers.[/quote]
As someone who has been using Plucker on my Palms for years now this thing has 'lockin' written all over it.
As an end user gadget it looks ok. I'd have to handle one to get a feel for how much better it is over a normal PDA. However I'd be willing to bet it's not that much better. Certainly not worth being locked in, likely having your habits tracked, and whatever other type of nonsense that such a propitiatory device would have.
A very good point. In fact I was struggling to explain all the different verbiage to an end user the other day. At a point I realized that while putting an 'anti-virus' package on her system was what most people are used to what they really need anti-malware these days.
Of course I'm sure some hacker would go 'oldschool' and write an actual virus that took out Win32 installs rather than turning them into zombies. So rather it's more these days about overall computer security than anything narrowly defined.
I don't know if you realize this -- I would assume it is implied knowledge, but a business is obligated to be as profitable as lawfully possible to their shareholders and employees.
Your point is well taken but much like how not every corporate attitude is the same, not every corporate attorney(s) will be the same. Some will be more hawkish in their desire to cover everything 'just in case'.
I'd further say that it depends on if they have their own in house group of attorneys or just retain the services from a large firm. Facebook may seem to be 'big' via it's presence on the internet but in reality I doubt they are all that big when compared to many companies. As such I'd venture to guess that they just retain services rather than having their own group in house.
And, in my experience, in house attorneys tend to end up on the more 'just in case' side of things given that their jobs are all about looking out for a singular company. It then follows that since I don't think that Facebook has that type of representation that they did indeed mean exactly what they were saying as they asked their contracted firm to draw up the 'just in case, trust us!' new TOS.
I think the OP's point still stands thou. If they deny anyone an interview based on such a thing, "We Googled this John's app there but it came up that a John was a 'bad person' so we better not invite him in," they fail on a number of levels.
'Newer' is always a tricky thing. Discarding the idea of 'new to you' as something your not using there are a few other things that could have happened.
Older stock that sat around in a warehouse or even a unit that still was manufactured recently but was the last run of the rev right before they implemented that change.
1. Nuke the Win partition. 2. Setup Linux to run on ARM when using batteries, x86 when plugged in. (Yeah yeah, a reboot may be required to switch modes.) 3. Watch as you have nice long battery life as well as good power when you need it. 4. Profit!
It's not just that MS abused it's monopoly by bundling IE and then further integrating it into Windows. It is that they then made up their own standards so that they could force people to use IE.
I can't count the number of people that when talking about other browsers say something to the effect of, "Well yeah but some sites don't work in Firefox/Opera/whatever." Which then in effect forces IE's use on people.
IE needs to be made standard complaint and fully removable. And in that order imo.
Well I think there are a number of issues with Cloud Computing/Web/Thin apps. And they aren't mutually exclusive with wanting to use a Mac or a FOSS desktop.
Privacy and security would be a big one that comes to mind. Those who use Macs or FOSS tend to be more aware of how things work and as such know that CC has some rather serious issues with that.
I also think that well implemented web apps have a place but I'm not sure if I believe as you do that they would impact what OS goes on a desktop in any significant way.
Seriously thou, the rub comes in with what the Win32/64 platform can run more than anything else these days. Both Mac and GNU desktops are plenty mature enough to deal with what most normal users would want. The main thing is now the sheer force of inertia that the Windows platform has in terms of what it runs natively.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems like a pretty simple answer here. If the mistakes made by making the AI 'weaker' computationally then mistakes that humans can and do make need to be introduced.
- Make a list of mistakes appropriate for the game.
Like for example in a FPS the AI could have the NPC trip and fall down. Or they could drop their clip when going to reload. Or stay in a tactically weak position even in the face of oncoming assault.
- This list would have to be pretty big or of course it would look just as silly as making the AI stupid computationally. Of course with modern dev cycles I think that spending a day brainstorming a nice big list is not unreasonable.
- Add said list to the NPCs with a nice strong preference/situational/random engine driving it.
A standard grunt level NPC would be more prone to tactical level mistakes. While an officer level NPC might be a bit more clumsy but tactically aware.
I'm sure that all sorts of refinement could, and very likely has, gone into such a system.
You forgot another big reason for a company to disappear instead of shrink : Governmental involvement.
Good job right wing talking-point machine!
Of course all the signs pointing to how deregulation has hurt our whole economy only is apparent in spades. Keep shilling that party line!
Pity new games releases for the PC are dying off.
I think rather than the oft repeated idea that PC gaming is dying, gaming itself has just become more platform specific.
MMOs - Any real MMO is going to be all about running on a PC.
RTSs - See above, same idea.
Sims - Somewhat viable on a console but it depends on the complexity. Still a strong PC game genre.
Real FPSs - Trying to play a FPS sans a mouse...lawl.
Now that still leaves a lot of game categories in the console market.
RPGs - While they have do dumb em down a fair amount the seem very willing to do so. I would like to have seen what Mass Effect would have been like as a PC game from the start but cest la vie.
Frat Boy FPSs - Strong market for dumbed down FPS games. Hello Halo!
2d Hack'n'Slash/Shooters - Fun on big screens, designed around controllers vs keyboards/mice, and I think we are all ok with them being all about the consoles.
Driving - If they are a driving sim see above, if they are an arcade driving game well...
I think I covered most things. Honestly I've watched the PC gaming market spelled out for freaking years now. It's gotten to the point that I wonder if people understand the difference between change and death.
That science, which is the systematic and empirical study of the natural world, can prove the non-existence of a supernatural entity. ("Supernatural" being, by definition, outside of the purview of science.)
The problem with that logic is that you can then 'prove' anything by saying you have to prove that it does not exist. I could rattle off a list of very very stupid things that can't be proven and by your logic they must exist since nobody could not 'prove' that they don't.
Dawkins is an impressive scientist, but when he ventures into theology, he reminds me of a Feynman quote: "I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy."
What dumb here is the idea that proving a negative should be the qualification for the existence of a god. Sorry, your just as full of fail as that quote.
What is so very wrong with adding a bit of humor to life?
I've been here on /. for a long time now. Adding the silly topic has been the norm every now and then.
Sorry if you noobs can't take it.
And so in that case, I think that the story is correct to say, "OMG file sharers are breaching national security!" Apparently someone was ignorant to the risk.
The thing is that in your post that I'm quoting here you gave all the needed back story. You are not just going with the 'AMG P2P IS TEH EVIL!!1!'. Your actually presenting the situation correctly.
Instead however what the story itself in question does is present P2P software, and of course the whole model of the internet/net-neutrality and all that, as some sort of unacceptable risk.
I'm sorry, that's just plain straight up fear mongering. Mind you I understand and respect what your saying. However the way this whole thing was presented was poorly done.
Good - Quality of stream.
Fast - Amount of bandwidth needed.
Cheap - Dev time/upkeep.
Pick two?
He finds it great, and he points out correctly that for avid readers it's wonderful just from the standpoint of space conservation.
Part of me, the part that has been using my PDA in this capacity for many years now, wonders why this was never used as a selling point for them. Given that early PDA sales were poor at best.
But the other more cynical part of me knows that it would have only forced the DRM/fair use/format debate sooner. Not that we seem to be much better equipped to deal with it these days.
Yes every time you do anything actually there is risk. Walk out on the sidewalk? Risk. Light a fire? Risk. Put a computer on the internet? Risk.
The problem is that the word 'risk' without anything else is used often by fear mongers to push an agenda. Are all the people that use P2P software to distribute FOSS putting themselves at risk? Yes. But it's ok, it's a known and controlled risk. Just like when I walk out on the sidewalk I know not to run into oncoming traffic.
If you don't qualify what things really are doing and give a counterpoint to why P2P is not just some 'EVIL BAD RISK!!!one' then your just a fear monger. Your post is borderline doing just that.
[quote]The "I have nothing to hide [so search me]" mentality was never a valid position. Its very basis is the idea that privacy is not legitimate, that the only purpose of privacy is to cover up wrongdoing. If you hear anyone honestly say "I have nothing to hide", I wonder how they'd react if you told them to disrobe, in public. I don't recommend actually doing that, of course, but it illustrates the point. You'd quickly find that even people who think they believe in that BS do in fact have things they don't wish to open up to the scrutiny of strangers.[/quote]
Well said.
As someone who has been using Plucker on my Palms for years now this thing has 'lockin' written all over it.
As an end user gadget it looks ok. I'd have to handle one to get a feel for how much better it is over a normal PDA. However I'd be willing to bet it's not that much better. Certainly not worth being locked in, likely having your habits tracked, and whatever other type of nonsense that such a propitiatory device would have.
You silly kids. (Get off my lawn!)
So, how many shell companies outside the UK are going to be offering deals on a pre-setup tunneling service soon? Cryptoed of course.
Which will lead to the UK needing to outlaw tunnels, and cryptography, and blah blah blah. Ahhh, good times, good times.
(Score:3, Insightful)
What is it lately with people modding things that are clearly going for 'funny' with other tags.
A very good point. In fact I was struggling to explain all the different verbiage to an end user the other day. At a point I realized that while putting an 'anti-virus' package on her system was what most people are used to what they really need anti-malware these days.
Of course I'm sure some hacker would go 'oldschool' and write an actual virus that took out Win32 installs rather than turning them into zombies. So rather it's more these days about overall computer security than anything narrowly defined.
I don't know if you realize this -- I would assume it is implied knowledge, but a business is obligated to be as profitable as lawfully possible to their shareholders and employees.
/facepalm
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1098065&cid=26528905
Your point is well taken but much like how not every corporate attitude is the same, not every corporate attorney(s) will be the same. Some will be more hawkish in their desire to cover everything 'just in case'.
I'd further say that it depends on if they have their own in house group of attorneys or just retain the services from a large firm. Facebook may seem to be 'big' via it's presence on the internet but in reality I doubt they are all that big when compared to many companies. As such I'd venture to guess that they just retain services rather than having their own group in house.
And, in my experience, in house attorneys tend to end up on the more 'just in case' side of things given that their jobs are all about looking out for a singular company. It then follows that since I don't think that Facebook has that type of representation that they did indeed mean exactly what they were saying as they asked their contracted firm to draw up the 'just in case, trust us!' new TOS.
Oh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Touch#Models
Two models there champ. Why is it you 'proud conservatives' are always such failures when it comes to even the most basic fact checking?
I think the OP's point still stands thou. If they deny anyone an interview based on such a thing, "We Googled this John's app there but it came up that a John was a 'bad person' so we better not invite him in," they fail on a number of levels.
'Newer' is always a tricky thing. Discarding the idea of 'new to you' as something your not using there are a few other things that could have happened.
Older stock that sat around in a warehouse or even a unit that still was manufactured recently but was the last run of the rev right before they implemented that change.
Saying 'newer' is not really saying much.
LOL, 4 posts and counting that did not get the sarcasm. Well done sir.
1. Nuke the Win partition.
2. Setup Linux to run on ARM when using batteries, x86 when plugged in. (Yeah yeah, a reboot may be required to switch modes.)
3. Watch as you have nice long battery life as well as good power when you need it.
4. Profit!
It's not just that MS abused it's monopoly by bundling IE and then further integrating it into Windows. It is that they then made up their own standards so that they could force people to use IE.
I can't count the number of people that when talking about other browsers say something to the effect of, "Well yeah but some sites don't work in Firefox/Opera/whatever." Which then in effect forces IE's use on people.
IE needs to be made standard complaint and fully removable. And in that order imo.
Well I think there are a number of issues with Cloud Computing/Web/Thin apps. And they aren't mutually exclusive with wanting to use a Mac or a FOSS desktop.
Privacy and security would be a big one that comes to mind. Those who use Macs or FOSS tend to be more aware of how things work and as such know that CC has some rather serious issues with that.
I also think that well implemented web apps have a place but I'm not sure if I believe as you do that they would impact what OS goes on a desktop in any significant way.
Apps and games baby...Uhh, uh-huh, yeah.
Seriously thou, the rub comes in with what the Win32/64 platform can run more than anything else these days. Both Mac and GNU desktops are plenty mature enough to deal with what most normal users would want. The main thing is now the sheer force of inertia that the Windows platform has in terms of what it runs natively.