In a simulation like a video game, there are no road imperfections, steering dead zones, alignment, or tire balancing issues, and therefore mastering the joystick is quite possible (but by no means simple).
Not exactly; in GTA 4, there are surface imperfections that can cause your (stupid fucking) Comet to flip over, after hitting something much, much less high than a curb. Damned game.:) Oh, also, when a tire is flat it affects the steering, and if you bash in the front of your car such that a tire drags, that's noticeable too.
But, more seriously: why not a "blade"? Not a sharp edge; just say a piece of plastic about 6" long, 2" tall, and not very thick (1/4" or so). At rest it's pointing straight forward and backwards; as you drive, you rotate the blade so that the part pointing forward indicates the direction the car will travel in (i.e., direction the wheels should point).
This could have similar characteristics as a steering wheel, like being more difficult to turn at higher speeds (reducing the chance of over-steer). In fact, if mounted on the driver's door, the user could keep their arm relaxed on the arm-rest while operating the blade -- eliminating the issue of gorilla arm. Note that steering wheels are also the cause of RSI injuries, so I'm not sure I'd say "they got it right" -- generally there's always room for improvement.
Thinking even further, the blade itself could provide the acceleration and deceleration; either through moving it forward and backward, or perhaps by having it rotate. And, I would design it like my wheelchaired friend's car's control, which has a positive feedback braking loop: it's a stick that he uses with his right hand, left hand on the wheel; pull back to accelerate, and push forward to stop. This at first seemed backwards, but as soon as I drove it I understood -- as you start braking, you will tend to continue braking, much better than having to struggle (pulling it backwards) as the momentum built up in the car and yourself keeps trying to make everything go forward.
A slight modification to the above: have two blades, with the user's hand resting between them. But, then, this would be flexing the user's wrist, especially at hard cornering (since it would require more force to make the turn), so it too is not perfect. And, another downside to operating the vehicle with one arm, which is kept relaxed on the arm-rest at all times, is that the user might be less inclined to remain alert. And, of course, what should happen if the user needs both hands? That, at least, has an easy answer: do what it does now, slowly drift back to center.
I'm giving away this idea here, because first I don't have the resources to develop it, and second I believe that we will have automated vehicles before we go through even a single "systemic UI change", let alone two.
After my first trip to Vegas, I wrote a program to simulate this.:) It turned out that by tripling my bet, I was able to make the ultimate pay-out increase with successive losses, instead of just being the initial bet. (Also I believe there are 20 losing positions, as you need to count both 0 and 00.) And, of course, it's all theoretical because you'd need a huge bankroll, and a fool for a casino (since as you mentioned, all tables have limits). I loved the 90s, I remember learning how to make a small fortune in teh stock market -- start with a large one.
Now that's just funny -- trading one potentially financially-expensive-in-a-short-time activity for a potentially time-expensive one. ('Course, there are people who spend a considerable amount of their time playing e.g. slots as well; I just enjoyed the contrast.)
Danger both makes the phones and runs the service [...]
You'd think that their name would at least give customers pause as to the safety of their data... (Or, perhaps their name gives them some legal wiggle room?)
Oh, I completely agree that some social projects are worth pointing a gun at everyone and demanding that they contribute to them. For instance, keeping people alive (or at least frozen) until the Singularity occurs, so that we all can continue our experiences until the heat death of the universe. But then, I'm different.
Socialism is not absolutely negative. But it makes sense for us to recognize it for what it is; depriving someone of income (or, merely property! -- witness real estate taxes, and the root of that phrase, "royal estate") at the threat of death, to benefit someone else. (No, they won't be killed immediately if they don't pay up; only if they try to defend themselves and their property.)
Waitaminit. People (especially software types) pay in far more than they will ever receive in benefits. Isn't that a form of "saving", except that their "savings account" is locked out to them?
I think everyone should be eligible for unemployment regardless of income prior to unemployment.
Didn't we dump tea over the opposite? (I.e., "taxation without representation" =~ "taxation without recompense".)
I mean, if you're paying into the unemployment system, and significantly more so the more you make, what possible sense can it make to say "you made too much, no unemployment for you"?
None, as far as I can tell. But I live in MA, where you can be fined for not having health insurance...
And while I can agree that there should be some sort of cap, when that cap means that I can never possibly take out the amount that I put in, then that means that I'm subsidizing other citizens when they are unemployed, and that makes even less sense. Unless we just up and admit that USA is Socialism.
Weren't you warned, decades ago, not to cross the streams? I think colliding the devices creating the streams is even more serious. Regardless of how large, or in your case, they are.
Yeah, a single click used to give me what I want. Now it takes two clicks, and I don't know how to change it back to what it was. Hey, maybe in a couple months, it'll change so it'll take 3 or 4 clicks! That's progress!
What I do when I want to see my comments: click on my name, then in the right column about 1/2 way down the page (of around 1100 pixels, Firefox on XP), I click the "Comments" heading (in white text on a gray background).
Although, I just noticed that if I click the "Thing 1" link which is just under the "Post Comment" heading, I get the original "user info" page that I was used to. Of course, that's not exposed via a single click on any of the regular pages, I just happened to notice it was here and clicked on it while I was (and in order to help with) documenting the above, and found that it behaved differently. Yay, progress!!!11!
Well, even worse, last week I had to return my Xbox 360 for the third time, and when I called there was some board-jockey fielding the call; a computer voice would ask me a question, I'd answer it, and if he didn't have a button to generate a response in the computer voice, I heard a completely different voice be interactive with me. Good god that was so frustrating to deal with, especially because the computer was reading off a script. Called back and got a female who knew how to speak, and should have it back soon. Sad part is, they don't have a "3 strikes" policy where I would get new kit after the third time it died for the same reason; but, at least they're extending the warranty. At this rate, I'll be covered for life! (Or, perhaps just the life of the company...)
In other words you like the service but don't like paying what the provider charges for it. Got it.
Hmm, I read it more as, "you like the service, and don't like the illegal collusion going on among the carriers to keep text messages at an obscenely high rate."
I mean, it's tacked onto a packet that needs to be sent anyway, so they're not using any extra bandwidth. That's the technical response (which is somewhat flawed, because similarly, it could be argued that each Windows 7 DVD costs a few pennies to produce as well).
However, the critical point is that the carriers are refusing "wink wink" to compete with each other, so the rates stay high for all of them. With real competition in the text message market, we'd see carriers promoting much lower prices. And, in fact, T Mobile is doing just that, with their $50 unlimited everything plan. So perhaps there's hope -- but the poster you were replying to was not just wanting something for nothing, or even something for less than it costs the carrier; they were just wanting something even and fair. (Yes, good luck with that today, or really, at any time in history.)
That's why we get such inflammatory rhetoric, likening Linux to a cancer, for instance; from Microsoft's viewpoint that's exactly what it is. Cancer of the business model.
Wasn't the original premise to take the traditionally shared software, and use copyright et al laws to close it off?
I'd say that Microsoft's business model is the cancer. (Oh, and, thank $deity that APL symbols were difficult to reproduce on terminals of that era. Although, that said, if LISP or Forth were available...)
Excuse me; "evidence" includes "being able to reproduce the experiments, and the results" and the books you cite as "evidence" do not allow me to do so. But, thanks for playing, I'm not going to believe "faith" when I can know things I can reproduce myself.
And, "hating on germs" almost got me an appendectomy when it was not necessary. I had a sinus infection, my doctor gave me antibiotics, but forgot to tell me to eat yogurt. Ended up in serious pain in the hospital, said "cut me open", but they waited 24 hours (with me not taking that medicine), and turned out it was the antibiotics that had destroyed the beneficial bacteria in my intestines that was causing my pain. But, sure, go on believing that your God exorcises all things, bad and good included, as that helps to account for the fact (fact, not belief) that religion is responsible for more deaths than disease and war, combined.
If your religion states that we're all "sinful and corrupt" then it means your religion is abandoning you, and nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
Not exactly; in GTA 4, there are surface imperfections that can cause your (stupid fucking) Comet to flip over, after hitting something much, much less high than a curb. Damned game. :) Oh, also, when a tire is flat it affects the steering, and if you bash in the front of your car such that a tire drags, that's noticeable too.
But, more seriously: why not a "blade"? Not a sharp edge; just say a piece of plastic about 6" long, 2" tall, and not very thick (1/4" or so). At rest it's pointing straight forward and backwards; as you drive, you rotate the blade so that the part pointing forward indicates the direction the car will travel in (i.e., direction the wheels should point).
This could have similar characteristics as a steering wheel, like being more difficult to turn at higher speeds (reducing the chance of over-steer). In fact, if mounted on the driver's door, the user could keep their arm relaxed on the arm-rest while operating the blade -- eliminating the issue of gorilla arm. Note that steering wheels are also the cause of RSI injuries, so I'm not sure I'd say "they got it right" -- generally there's always room for improvement.
Thinking even further, the blade itself could provide the acceleration and deceleration; either through moving it forward and backward, or perhaps by having it rotate. And, I would design it like my wheelchaired friend's car's control, which has a positive feedback braking loop: it's a stick that he uses with his right hand, left hand on the wheel; pull back to accelerate, and push forward to stop. This at first seemed backwards, but as soon as I drove it I understood -- as you start braking, you will tend to continue braking, much better than having to struggle (pulling it backwards) as the momentum built up in the car and yourself keeps trying to make everything go forward.
A slight modification to the above: have two blades, with the user's hand resting between them. But, then, this would be flexing the user's wrist, especially at hard cornering (since it would require more force to make the turn), so it too is not perfect. And, another downside to operating the vehicle with one arm, which is kept relaxed on the arm-rest at all times, is that the user might be less inclined to remain alert. And, of course, what should happen if the user needs both hands? That, at least, has an easy answer: do what it does now, slowly drift back to center.
I'm giving away this idea here, because first I don't have the resources to develop it, and second I believe that we will have automated vehicles before we go through even a single "systemic UI change", let alone two.
Huh, looks like they used the white ball from The Prisoner, to achieve lift.
Cool music as well!
After my first trip to Vegas, I wrote a program to simulate this. :) It turned out that by tripling my bet, I was able to make the ultimate pay-out increase with successive losses, instead of just being the initial bet. (Also I believe there are 20 losing positions, as you need to count both 0 and 00.) And, of course, it's all theoretical because you'd need a huge bankroll, and a fool for a casino (since as you mentioned, all tables have limits). I loved the 90s, I remember learning how to make a small fortune in teh stock market -- start with a large one.
Now that's just funny -- trading one potentially financially-expensive-in-a-short-time activity for a potentially time-expensive one. ('Course, there are people who spend a considerable amount of their time playing e.g. slots as well; I just enjoyed the contrast.)
Contracts with corporations are stacked in the corporations' favor.
You'd think that their name would at least give customers pause as to the safety of their data... (Or, perhaps their name gives them some legal wiggle room?)
Good luck competing with your manager.
Oh, I completely agree that some social projects are worth pointing a gun at everyone and demanding that they contribute to them. For instance, keeping people alive (or at least frozen) until the Singularity occurs, so that we all can continue our experiences until the heat death of the universe. But then, I'm different.
Socialism is not absolutely negative. But it makes sense for us to recognize it for what it is; depriving someone of income (or, merely property! -- witness real estate taxes, and the root of that phrase, "royal estate") at the threat of death, to benefit someone else. (No, they won't be killed immediately if they don't pay up; only if they try to defend themselves and their property.)
Waitaminit. People (especially software types) pay in far more than they will ever receive in benefits. Isn't that a form of "saving", except that their "savings account" is locked out to them?
Didn't we dump tea over the opposite? (I.e., "taxation without representation" =~ "taxation without recompense".)
I mean, if you're paying into the unemployment system, and significantly more so the more you make, what possible sense can it make to say "you made too much, no unemployment for you"?
None, as far as I can tell. But I live in MA, where you can be fined for not having health insurance...
And while I can agree that there should be some sort of cap, when that cap means that I can never possibly take out the amount that I put in, then that means that I'm subsidizing other citizens when they are unemployed, and that makes even less sense. Unless we just up and admit that USA is Socialism.
Weren't you warned, decades ago, not to cross the streams? I think colliding the devices creating the streams is even more serious. Regardless of how large, or in your case, they are.
Learn the broken window fallacy, please.
Huh. So, the Republicans get the dollars, and the Democrats get the change? Now I understand what the campaign was about!
Yeah, a single click used to give me what I want. Now it takes two clicks, and I don't know how to change it back to what it was. Hey, maybe in a couple months, it'll change so it'll take 3 or 4 clicks! That's progress!
What I do when I want to see my comments: click on my name, then in the right column about 1/2 way down the page (of around 1100 pixels, Firefox on XP), I click the "Comments" heading (in white text on a gray background).
Although, I just noticed that if I click the "Thing 1" link which is just under the "Post Comment" heading, I get the original "user info" page that I was used to. Of course, that's not exposed via a single click on any of the regular pages, I just happened to notice it was here and clicked on it while I was (and in order to help with) documenting the above, and found that it behaved differently. Yay, progress!!!11!
Well, even worse, last week I had to return my Xbox 360 for the third time, and when I called there was some board-jockey fielding the call; a computer voice would ask me a question, I'd answer it, and if he didn't have a button to generate a response in the computer voice, I heard a completely different voice be interactive with me. Good god that was so frustrating to deal with, especially because the computer was reading off a script. Called back and got a female who knew how to speak, and should have it back soon. Sad part is, they don't have a "3 strikes" policy where I would get new kit after the third time it died for the same reason; but, at least they're extending the warranty. At this rate, I'll be covered for life! (Or, perhaps just the life of the company...)
What's more, they help somewhat with poster recognition. (Until it gets changed, of course...)
You have stopped swinging from a chain?
Hmm, I read it more as, "you like the service, and don't like the illegal collusion going on among the carriers to keep text messages at an obscenely high rate."
I mean, it's tacked onto a packet that needs to be sent anyway, so they're not using any extra bandwidth. That's the technical response (which is somewhat flawed, because similarly, it could be argued that each Windows 7 DVD costs a few pennies to produce as well).
However, the critical point is that the carriers are refusing "wink wink" to compete with each other, so the rates stay high for all of them. With real competition in the text message market, we'd see carriers promoting much lower prices. And, in fact, T Mobile is doing just that, with their $50 unlimited everything plan. So perhaps there's hope -- but the poster you were replying to was not just wanting something for nothing, or even something for less than it costs the carrier; they were just wanting something even and fair. (Yes, good luck with that today, or really, at any time in history.)
Wasn't the original premise to take the traditionally shared software, and use copyright et al laws to close it off?
I'd say that Microsoft's business model is the cancer. (Oh, and, thank $deity that APL symbols were difficult to reproduce on terminals of that era. Although, that said, if LISP or Forth were available...)
I love the Woody Allen quote, "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work -- I want to achieve immortality through not dying!"
Good question. Another good question: what is the replacement cost for the Einstein that just died? (I'm glad we're researching this stuff.)
Yeah, yeah, IHBRT.
Wow. I just (earlier today) did a "random" click on bash.org, and one of the entries I got was:
So, if they're manufacturing it ... left as an exercise to the reader.
Excuse me; "evidence" includes "being able to reproduce the experiments, and the results" and the books you cite as "evidence" do not allow me to do so. But, thanks for playing, I'm not going to believe "faith" when I can know things I can reproduce myself.
And, "hating on germs" almost got me an appendectomy when it was not necessary. I had a sinus infection, my doctor gave me antibiotics, but forgot to tell me to eat yogurt. Ended up in serious pain in the hospital, said "cut me open", but they waited 24 hours (with me not taking that medicine), and turned out it was the antibiotics that had destroyed the beneficial bacteria in my intestines that was causing my pain. But, sure, go on believing that your God exorcises all things, bad and good included, as that helps to account for the fact (fact, not belief) that religion is responsible for more deaths than disease and war, combined.
If your religion states that we're all "sinful and corrupt" then it means your religion is abandoning you, and nothing else.
Go away, and taunt someone else.