I pretty much stopped reading there, as you proved to be another pseudo-Nietzsche with no capacity for logical thought.
Isn't "deity worship" and "logical thought" mutually exclusive?
I mean, it's fine to worship deities.. just don't tell people it's a "logical thought". (Or did I miss the research paper you published proving the existence of your deity over all others?)
Please recognize that your worship of deities IS a dangerous thing. It does NOT derive from logical thought. Let's encourage people to think of it in terms of its irrationality. Whining about it isn't going to solve problems. "boo hoo the person doesnt believe in a god therefore his economic policies are probably bad".
Back to the point: let's recognize the dangers of the voting public.
Having said that, I'd be happier still if the average person would simply become smarter. It's not like everyone needs to be an Einstein, all it needs is for people to be "not a screaming, poo flinging, mouth breathing retard".
I would even presume that to be too much of an effort. We can't expect everyone to have read every research paper on every issue they're discussing. Let's just go ahead and assume everyone is a mouth-breathing retard.
Once we assume that, we can then start to limit their votes.
Throughout the years, has it been demonstrated that Americans, or even the general public, have been anything BUT paranoid right-wing fascists lunatics?
These dumbasses still worship deities, after all. So, what makes you think they're going to act rationally? They don't give a shit about privacy, as long as they can continue to establish their favorite god, and make babies, and keep brown people out of their neighborhoods.
Democracy IS a failure. Let's not give the public any credibility. Being born should not be a qualification for voting, and subsequently influencing the rest of the world. Why should a dumbass from Alabama be given the same weight on economics as a PhD economics professor from Chicago?
Actually, why do we even assume that a person votes for their own interests? Kansas demonstrates that conservatives are out to vote AGAINST themselves, because they hold onto false principles that weaken them, such as Christianity.
We really need to instill into people's minds that voting IS a bad thing. Governance should NOT be a right. It is a skill you need to qualify for, like you would need to in any other job. A representative system of government does NOT prove this skill. The public, after all, votes for the guy with the prettiest hair. (they DO believe in deities, after all) Or, the public votes for the common guy that they feel they can empathize with, which clearly has nothing to do with how well they can govern. Too bad the public can't seperate the issues out. "He seems like a nice guy. That probably means his economic policies are good." Riiight.
Let's encourage elitism. Let's make elitism a good thing, instead of a bad one.
Everyone who cries that they're screwed (by the government) and that there is no way to change things are right... as long as you keep sitting on your stoop and crying "poor me" you're not going to change anything.
Unfortunately, this is a problem. The public should NOT be given the right to vote. Governance is an actual skill, and voting is part of that. Governance does not come naturally. Voting should be a PRIVELEDGE, and NOT a right. Like drivers licenses. You should be qualified about the issues you are voting for before you are allowed to vote one it.
To illustrate, consider that a dumb retard in Alabama is gonna vote for a president about issues like economics and diplomacy. Now, how is that retard supposed to be any more qualified in economics than a PhD economics professor in Chicago? Why SHOULD that alabama retard be given ANY influence over society? Just because he's alive? Being alive does NOT qualify you influence over other people. Heck, most people don't even have the capability to control their OWN lives.
The failure in a voting public is apparent here. You people have been bred to believe that voting is somehow 'good'. Unfortunately, it results in the most average of political leadership: the candidate with the most mass appeal will win. And, mass appeal doesn't mean success. The public is going to vote for the guy with the prettiest hair, or is "like them", which has nothing to do with how sound their economic policies are. Policy and pretty hair have nothing to do with each other, no matter how hard conservatives try to their correlation.
Democracy is no better than any other system. It GUARANTEES that your leaders are, at best, average. At least with a monarchy or dictatorship, it's possible to come up with a leader that's above average.
Democracy is a horrible idea. In addition, representative democracy is a horrible idea. In our system, we elect a representative on issues like economics and diplomacy. Why are we defining ONE reprsentative to handle EVERY issue? Does a PhD in economics automatically qualify you as an expert diplomat? Does the fact that you own a pest-removal company or run a baseball team mean you're going to also make the best decisions about free-trade or human rights? Of course not.
The idea of a single unified government is a suck-ass idea. It's why we have things like "lobbyists", because independent issues are hijacked on top of other issues. There really should be a mechanism for seperating powers. We really need a seperate government on each issue. Government is just a simple legal agreement between people. We need one government to handle the interstate highway system. We need another government to handle social security. We need a seperate government to handle coal trade between states. And so on. Possibly hundreds or thousands of seperate governments, with independent representatives and leaders and enforcement mechanisms. Each government funded independently by local governments.
Europe does this. Although it's a continent, many Europeans identify with each other. But, there isn't a central European government. It's a system of anarchy. They have various legal agreements between states, to handle things like coal trade, currency, military, etc.. America also needs to do this. We do need to do the same in the US, and break up the federal government. Let the 50 states be their own seperate countries.
I'd actually go further and state that all forms of design by human is art.
Just right now I see the art in the things on my desk, not the least of which is the desk itself. The clothes people wear, the font used on a car's speedometer, the color of the vinyl wrapping on a cable, the Galois-field math of CDMA, the shape of the can of soda, the selection of grain on a wooden counter, the sounds of a keyboard click... some guy spent a long time figuring out the beauty of each one of those things.
Really, everything is art, and the people that only say a painting, or a movie, or a song, are the ONLY art forms, are seriously lacking in any creativity - they could very well be the LEAST artistic of the people around.
You'll also find that people with actual 'artist' personality types tend to be creative about everything. That's why you see fashion designers also design homes and cars and paint colors and computers. Same with ancient artists such as Da Vinci: they did it all, from paintings to designing helicopters. Artists generally perceive everything to be art, and are certainly not limited to small-scale conservative definitions of what 'art' is.
The real issue is that, as games get bigger, they end up targeting the blandest possible demographics, to keep the audience as large as possible. Wal-mart does all the marketing research for the game-publisher for them, telling them what they should/should-not do to make big sales.
No one is forcing game developers to limit creativity. They can always do what they want, but at the expense of a wide audience.
ummm it's well known that commercialism DESTROYS creativity.
For most profit to occur, you need the largest audience. Television producers routinely design their shows to gain maximum target demographics.
Creativity, on the other hand, needs no audience.
There are art-school television projects that focus on creativity. They will never be commercially successful, because they have no need to maintain an audience.
Remember, a business exists solely for the sake of providing profit to its shareholders. If a business has control of a telecommunication service, there is no incentive for them to do ANYTHING that enhances value to you.
Capitalism ONLY works when there's millions of sellers and millions of buyers selling commodity goods. If there's only 1, or 2, or 3 sellers, it becomes monopolistic, and ANTI capitalist. In that case, socialism is best. Regulation and control of the market is needed, since at that point, you can only buy "what you get" instead of "what you want". You do NOT get an infinite variety of choices.
In addition, there is no morality to a monopolistic business model. If a business could buy slaves, they would. If a business could kill you for your money, they would. If a business could cause dangerous blackouts in California for profit, they would.
*NEVER* claim deregulation is a good thing. It IS a fault of the Republican philosophy, since they serve the pro-business agenda. All corporations seek to be Enron, a wholly Republican supported institution. Corporations ONLY serve their shareholder's interests, not the consumer's. Democrats tend to (only slightly) favor the consumers.
The thing is, the brain does adapt to its signals. You should be able to send any type of signal to any part of the brain, and eventually the brain learns what that signal is about.
Perhaps the people that were never able to see need their vision senses reroute to a different section of the brain?
Or, it may be possible through stem cells to regrow the brain neurons that are damaged or wired incorrectly, or just never grew. Something needs to guide it, to let it develop. And that would be the sensor signals.
Stimulating specific optic nerves is tricky, but fortunately your brain is good at dealing with odd input even if you don't get the connection quite right.
The cameras don't even have to stimulate the optic nerves. The brain adapts to what it senses. If you start to stimulate the finger-tips with image sensors, then guess what? You're going to be "seeing" through your fingertips...
No reason a non-blind person can't have image sensors (or any kind of sensors like motion, magnetic, neutrinos..) attached to nerve cells of another part of their body. This would probably mean they're going to be losing whatever sense that it replaced, but then again, maybe stem-cells can be used to grow new nerve cells to attach new sensors./someone should fund me.
ATI 1900XTX series is best for this game
on
Living In Oblivion
·
· Score: 1
But that's probably related to the similiarities to the 360 and its subsequent optimizations.
Because the thought of even having an.XXX domain somehow causes them to think they're enabling it, so they try to sweep it under the rug. The initial shock of "XXX" freaks them out too much for them to cause them to think rationally about it.
Unfortunately, this is one of those things that requires maturity, something porn-hating people don't have.
MMORPGs are a completely different genre and can't be placed in the same category as games like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Fallout, Neverwinter Nights, Morrorwind or Oblivion.
WoW still is the firt western RPG I've gotten into since the old ones from the 80s (not counting other Blizzard titles, which have some RPG elements). I've briefly tried some of the others you mentioned, but they lack the interaction with other people that WoW, and a table-top-RPGs, would normally have.
If they can go with 90nm, this can sell for under a $100, at which point, I'm there. This shouldn't cost more than the gamecube. They might even be able to sell it for $80 if they can fab it in 65nm.
My guess is that they're planning a portable around it as well for the 45nm generation.
Just because a company manufactures something itself, doesn't mean it's free. The prices aren't actually out of line, and a blu-ray drive can indeed cost $300 and the GPU can cost $150 and CPU another $150 and so on. These include the actual raw costs of the materials themselves. A blue laser diode isn't cheap to make, nor is a GPU. They all have costs, such as wafers, materials, capital cost depreciation (one silicon stepper can cost $15 million) and so on.
Again, these ARE the actual costs for the parts themselves. To give you an example, a wafer might cost $10000 - it is a single piece of silicon crystal developed from molten silicon. Lets say you print about 400 chips on it. That means it costs you $25 just for the wafer alone. Meanwhile, only half the parts work, because a defects (dust, crystalline defects, and so on). Suddenly, that number goes to $50/part, just for the wafer cost alone. Add up everything else (chemicals, power, labor, etc) and it does mean your chips are going to cost $150.
I think that's the main reason they decided to delay it. They probably made the first revs of the chips, and decided that, at $900 component costs, thought it would be WAY too much. So, they go ahead with their die shrink versions of the CPU and GPU, which I'm sure they've already planned on doing anyways as the standard course in a console's lifetime.
I think the machines they release later this year are going to be die-shrink parts. That'll sell for about 500.
Patents are the exact opposite of a true free-market capitalistic system. In this case, the "goods" are ideas, and there is only one seller that controls the market for it. That seller determines the price and who can/cannot buy this idea. This is clearly a monopoly. Capitalism can only work when there's millions of sellers and millions of buyers. When such conditions do not exist, socialism needs to be instituted.
Patents prevent a true free market for ideas, and yet, in our current system, the value of the ideas are controlled by the patent holder. The system of patents need to change, to include things like price controls of the ideas, or to allow multiple patent holders if developed independently.
There's a setting in the video display, that you should try. Adjust "Terrain Distance" to something low (around 10% of the bar). IF you still have low frame rates, then it's your GPU that's the bottleneck. Get a faster video card. If you can adjust "Terrain Distance" to something around 90% before you start getting crappy framerates, then it's your CPU that's the bottleneck - your GPU is plenty fast.
With the estimated costs at $900 to manufacture, the PS3 is a non-launch.
First, they screw up by trying to use the Cell processor for the GPU, and having to backtrack and go with a standard NVidia GPU instead (1-2 year delay), and now they're screwing up by trying to use Blu-Ray (another 1 year delay).
Sorry Sony, this product isn't going to launch anywhere this year. Microsoft wins. By the time PS3 launches at the end of 2007, Microsoft will probably be on their second generation of Xbox360 hardware, at a lower price point, with big A List titles to go with it.
Slashdot Mirror
I pretty much stopped reading there, as you proved to be another pseudo-Nietzsche with no capacity for logical thought.
Isn't "deity worship" and "logical thought" mutually exclusive?
I mean, it's fine to worship deities.. just don't tell people it's a "logical thought". (Or did I miss the research paper you published proving the existence of your deity over all others?)
Please recognize that your worship of deities IS a dangerous thing. It does NOT derive from logical thought. Let's encourage people to think of it in terms of its irrationality. Whining about it isn't going to solve problems. "boo hoo the person doesnt believe in a god therefore his economic policies are probably bad".
Back to the point: let's recognize the dangers of the voting public.
They should NOT be given the right to vote.
Having said that, I'd be happier still if the average person would simply become smarter. It's not like everyone needs to be an Einstein, all it needs is for people to be "not a screaming, poo flinging, mouth breathing retard".
I would even presume that to be too much of an effort. We can't expect everyone to have read every research paper on every issue they're discussing. Let's just go ahead and assume everyone is a mouth-breathing retard.
Once we assume that, we can then start to limit their votes.
Throughout the years, has it been demonstrated that Americans, or even the general public, have been anything BUT paranoid right-wing fascists lunatics?
These dumbasses still worship deities, after all. So, what makes you think they're going to act rationally? They don't give a shit about privacy, as long as they can continue to establish their favorite god, and make babies, and keep brown people out of their neighborhoods.
Democracy IS a failure. Let's not give the public any credibility. Being born should not be a qualification for voting, and subsequently influencing the rest of the world. Why should a dumbass from Alabama be given the same weight on economics as a PhD economics professor from Chicago?
Actually, why do we even assume that a person votes for their own interests? Kansas demonstrates that conservatives are out to vote AGAINST themselves, because they hold onto false principles that weaken them, such as Christianity.
We really need to instill into people's minds that voting IS a bad thing. Governance should NOT be a right. It is a skill you need to qualify for, like you would need to in any other job. A representative system of government does NOT prove this skill. The public, after all, votes for the guy with the prettiest hair. (they DO believe in deities, after all) Or, the public votes for the common guy that they feel they can empathize with, which clearly has nothing to do with how well they can govern. Too bad the public can't seperate the issues out. "He seems like a nice guy. That probably means his economic policies are good." Riiight.
Let's encourage elitism. Let's make elitism a good thing, instead of a bad one.
"We are aweseme! We don't know why.. we JUST ARE!"
You know, you COULD attempt to justify your statements.. No point being smug about it.
Everyone who cries that they're screwed (by the government) and that there is no way to change things are right... as long as you keep sitting on your stoop and crying "poor me" you're not going to change anything.
Unfortunately, this is a problem. The public should NOT be given the right to vote. Governance is an actual skill, and voting is part of that. Governance does not come naturally. Voting should be a PRIVELEDGE, and NOT a right. Like drivers licenses. You should be qualified about the issues you are voting for before you are allowed to vote one it.
To illustrate, consider that a dumb retard in Alabama is gonna vote for a president about issues like economics and diplomacy. Now, how is that retard supposed to be any more qualified in economics than a PhD economics professor in Chicago? Why SHOULD that alabama retard be given ANY influence over society? Just because he's alive? Being alive does NOT qualify you influence over other people. Heck, most people don't even have the capability to control their OWN lives.
The failure in a voting public is apparent here. You people have been bred to believe that voting is somehow 'good'. Unfortunately, it results in the most average of political leadership: the candidate with the most mass appeal will win. And, mass appeal doesn't mean success. The public is going to vote for the guy with the prettiest hair, or is "like them", which has nothing to do with how sound their economic policies are. Policy and pretty hair have nothing to do with each other, no matter how hard conservatives try to their correlation.
Democracy is no better than any other system. It GUARANTEES that your leaders are, at best, average. At least with a monarchy or dictatorship, it's possible to come up with a leader that's above average.
Democracy is a horrible idea. In addition, representative democracy is a horrible idea. In our system, we elect a representative on issues like economics and diplomacy. Why are we defining ONE reprsentative to handle EVERY issue? Does a PhD in economics automatically qualify you as an expert diplomat? Does the fact that you own a pest-removal company or run a baseball team mean you're going to also make the best decisions about free-trade or human rights? Of course not.
The idea of a single unified government is a suck-ass idea. It's why we have things like "lobbyists", because independent issues are hijacked on top of other issues. There really should be a mechanism for seperating powers. We really need a seperate government on each issue. Government is just a simple legal agreement between people. We need one government to handle the interstate highway system. We need another government to handle social security. We need a seperate government to handle coal trade between states. And so on. Possibly hundreds or thousands of seperate governments, with independent representatives and leaders and enforcement mechanisms. Each government funded independently by local governments.
Europe does this. Although it's a continent, many Europeans identify with each other. But, there isn't a central European government. It's a system of anarchy. They have various legal agreements between states, to handle things like coal trade, currency, military, etc.. America also needs to do this. We do need to do the same in the US, and break up the federal government. Let the 50 states be their own seperate countries.
DRUNKEN giant panda..
*sigh*
no more triple-fun for me...
I'd actually go further and state that all forms of design by human is art.
Just right now I see the art in the things on my desk, not the least of which is the desk itself. The clothes people wear, the font used on a car's speedometer, the color of the vinyl wrapping on a cable, the Galois-field math of CDMA, the shape of the can of soda, the selection of grain on a wooden counter, the sounds of a keyboard click... some guy spent a long time figuring out the beauty of each one of those things.
Really, everything is art, and the people that only say a painting, or a movie, or a song, are the ONLY art forms, are seriously lacking in any creativity - they could very well be the LEAST artistic of the people around.
You'll also find that people with actual 'artist' personality types tend to be creative about everything. That's why you see fashion designers also design homes and cars and paint colors and computers. Same with ancient artists such as Da Vinci: they did it all, from paintings to designing helicopters. Artists generally perceive everything to be art, and are certainly not limited to small-scale conservative definitions of what 'art' is.
The real issue is that, as games get bigger, they end up targeting the blandest possible demographics, to keep the audience as large as possible. Wal-mart does all the marketing research for the game-publisher for them, telling them what they should/should-not do to make big sales.
No one is forcing game developers to limit creativity. They can always do what they want, but at the expense of a wide audience.
A pro-capitalist political organization puts out a press release questioning a study that may possibly hurt the communications industry?
THERES A FUCKING SURPRISE.
ummm it's well known that commercialism DESTROYS creativity.
For most profit to occur, you need the largest audience. Television producers routinely design their shows to gain maximum target demographics.
Creativity, on the other hand, needs no audience.
There are art-school television projects that focus on creativity. They will never be commercially successful, because they have no need to maintain an audience.
How does "profit" relate to "better service"?
Remember, a business exists solely for the sake of providing profit to its shareholders. If a business has control of a telecommunication service, there is no incentive for them to do ANYTHING that enhances value to you.
Capitalism ONLY works when there's millions of sellers and millions of buyers selling commodity goods. If there's only 1, or 2, or 3 sellers, it becomes monopolistic, and ANTI capitalist. In that case, socialism is best. Regulation and control of the market is needed, since at that point, you can only buy "what you get" instead of "what you want". You do NOT get an infinite variety of choices.
In addition, there is no morality to a monopolistic business model. If a business could buy slaves, they would. If a business could kill you for your money, they would. If a business could cause dangerous blackouts in California for profit, they would.
*NEVER* claim deregulation is a good thing. It IS a fault of the Republican philosophy, since they serve the pro-business agenda. All corporations seek to be Enron, a wholly Republican supported institution. Corporations ONLY serve their shareholder's interests, not the consumer's. Democrats tend to (only slightly) favor the consumers.
The thing is, the brain does adapt to its signals. You should be able to send any type of signal to any part of the brain, and eventually the brain learns what that signal is about.
Perhaps the people that were never able to see need their vision senses reroute to a different section of the brain?
Or, it may be possible through stem cells to regrow the brain neurons that are damaged or wired incorrectly, or just never grew. Something needs to guide it, to let it develop. And that would be the sensor signals.
Stimulating specific optic nerves is tricky, but fortunately your brain is good at dealing with odd input even if you don't get the connection quite right.
/someone should fund me.
The cameras don't even have to stimulate the optic nerves. The brain adapts to what it senses. If you start to stimulate the finger-tips with image sensors, then guess what? You're going to be "seeing" through your fingertips...
No reason a non-blind person can't have image sensors (or any kind of sensors like motion, magnetic, neutrinos..) attached to nerve cells of another part of their body. This would probably mean they're going to be losing whatever sense that it replaced, but then again, maybe stem-cells can be used to grow new nerve cells to attach new sensors.
But that's probably related to the similiarities to the 360 and its subsequent optimizations.
c rolls_oblivion/4.html
Benchmarks:
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2006/03/31/elder_s
They indicate that even the GeForce 7900 has framerate difficulties when set to highest image-quality settings.
Because the thought of even having an .XXX domain somehow causes them to think they're enabling it, so they try to sweep it under the rug. The initial shock of "XXX" freaks them out too much for them to cause them to think rationally about it.
Unfortunately, this is one of those things that requires maturity, something porn-hating people don't have.
WoW is *not* an RPG.
LOL
MMORPGs are a completely different genre and can't be placed in the same category as games like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Fallout, Neverwinter Nights, Morrorwind or Oblivion.
WoW still is the firt western RPG I've gotten into since the old ones from the 80s (not counting other Blizzard titles, which have some RPG elements). I've briefly tried some of the others you mentioned, but they lack the interaction with other people that WoW, and a table-top-RPGs, would normally have.
And, in an MMORPG, environment = other people.
Should count as the one that brought back the western RPG...
If they can go with 90nm, this can sell for under a $100, at which point, I'm there. This shouldn't cost more than the gamecube. They might even be able to sell it for $80 if they can fab it in 65nm.
My guess is that they're planning a portable around it as well for the 45nm generation.
Just because a company manufactures something itself, doesn't mean it's free. The prices aren't actually out of line, and a blu-ray drive can indeed cost $300 and the GPU can cost $150 and CPU another $150 and so on. These include the actual raw costs of the materials themselves. A blue laser diode isn't cheap to make, nor is a GPU. They all have costs, such as wafers, materials, capital cost depreciation (one silicon stepper can cost $15 million) and so on.
Again, these ARE the actual costs for the parts themselves. To give you an example, a wafer might cost $10000 - it is a single piece of silicon crystal developed from molten silicon. Lets say you print about 400 chips on it. That means it costs you $25 just for the wafer alone. Meanwhile, only half the parts work, because a defects (dust, crystalline defects, and so on). Suddenly, that number goes to $50/part, just for the wafer cost alone. Add up everything else (chemicals, power, labor, etc) and it does mean your chips are going to cost $150.
I think that's the main reason they decided to delay it. They probably made the first revs of the chips, and decided that, at $900 component costs, thought it would be WAY too much. So, they go ahead with their die shrink versions of the CPU and GPU, which I'm sure they've already planned on doing anyways as the standard course in a console's lifetime.
I think the machines they release later this year are going to be die-shrink parts. That'll sell for about 500.
Patents are the exact opposite of a true free-market capitalistic system. In this case, the "goods" are ideas, and there is only one seller that controls the market for it. That seller determines the price and who can/cannot buy this idea. This is clearly a monopoly. Capitalism can only work when there's millions of sellers and millions of buyers. When such conditions do not exist, socialism needs to be instituted.
Patents prevent a true free market for ideas, and yet, in our current system, the value of the ideas are controlled by the patent holder. The system of patents need to change, to include things like price controls of the ideas, or to allow multiple patent holders if developed independently.
There's a setting in the video display, that you should try. Adjust "Terrain Distance" to something low (around 10% of the bar). IF you still have low frame rates, then it's your GPU that's the bottleneck. Get a faster video card. If you can adjust "Terrain Distance" to something around 90% before you start getting crappy framerates, then it's your CPU that's the bottleneck - your GPU is plenty fast.
I wonder if Apple is going to go this route next. It would be certainly far more usable than a dedicated gaming console.
With the estimated costs at $900 to manufacture, the PS3 is a non-launch.
First, they screw up by trying to use the Cell processor for the GPU, and having to backtrack and go with a standard NVidia GPU instead (1-2 year delay), and now they're screwing up by trying to use Blu-Ray (another 1 year delay).
Sorry Sony, this product isn't going to launch anywhere this year. Microsoft wins. By the time PS3 launches at the end of 2007, Microsoft will probably be on their second generation of Xbox360 hardware, at a lower price point, with big A List titles to go with it.