Between the last official patch and the unofficial "fan" patch, it's now more or less playable. In the sense that it won't crash too often, that is (well, no more than Morrowind with more mods than is good for it).
The fan patch even makes it run at an acceptable speed on non-3dfx hardware.
I don't know, I quite enjoyed it. Unfortunately, ADV (surprise) felt it necessary to alter most of the cultural references to American ones. Being British, that doesn't make things much clearer, and is just annoying. I can see it pissing off most American purists as well.
No, a list of translation notes at the end of the book doesn't make things better.
Leaving aside the misuse of the word hentai (someone else can rant about that if they care), they're totally independent concepts. Hentai, as used by Americans, just means perverted, so you can have hentai manga and non-hentai manga.
If it's in a comic form, it's manga. If it's sexually explicit, it's hentai. If it's both, it's hentai manga, and if it's neither, it's... well, neither.
While you're right about the longevity of Jaffa Cakes (mmm, Jaffa Cakes), the issue wasn't about a name change.
It appears that taxation on bicuits and cakes is lower than that on chocolate biscuits. The latter are considered luxury items. Since Jaffa Cakes are definitely chocolate covered, McVities had an argument over whether they are biscuits or cakes, and whether tax should be paid on them. I believe McVities won.
Ahem. According to the Bluffer's Guide to Maths, which is pretty much my sole maths book these days (the other one wasn't returned by the last person to borrow it, and I mostly use notes and/or Mathworld), QED does indeed stand for Quite Easily Done. And QEF in fact stands for Quite Easily Fiddled, not Quod Erat Faciendum as previously thought.
Certainly, but is it itself science? It doesn't follow scientific method (unless you really stretch the definition of scientific method and claim proofs are the same as experiments). One could start talking about languages and meta-languages and whether they can be the same, but I'm not a philosopher, so I'll stop there.
(Don't get me wrong - I'm a theoretical computer scientist, and I agree that maths is fundamental to both CS and other science. I'm just not sure exactly what maths is.)
I think there's something more fundamental than just bad acting. Christopher Lee has a long history of making otherwise shitty movies entertaining, and it was still awful. Probably doesn't help that he was killed off near the start.
You can't really blame the bad dialogue on the actors, though, just their delivery of it (which didn't generally help, either).
I think there's a difference between "unreasonably low prices" and "prices students can afford".
Clearly, if they have to be that low for students to buy the stuff, there's a reason for lowering prices. Unless they're making a huge loss on every sale.
Re:How did they cause these injuries?
on
Slacker or Sick
·
· Score: 1
It doesn't need to be impervious to hackers (although that would be nice, of course). It's a matter of unvalidated data, and where important decisions are made.
For example, if someone attacks your character, the server shouldn't be asking your machine whether it hits - it should be telling you. In an FPS, if you fire at someone, it should be up to the server to decide whether you hit, not the client.
In the latter case, there's a problem: the client's knowledge of other players' positions lags behind the server slightly. Well, deal with it. One of the players is going to lose out due to lag (however little there may be), so declare the server to be right and hope it balances out.
Wallhacks can be foiled by only sending the data the player can see. Aimbots are irrelevent in RPGs, where hits are determined by dice rolls not player skill. Anything else should be validated by the server. The client should always be untrusted. Design the protocols properly, and you only need to worry about buffer overruns and the normal security issues.
Most technical people (read: network programmers) do know this. Most game programmers don't, and that's why Blizzard are trying to keep their users honest, instead of fixing their system and making dishonesty impossible.
While it's fiction, Pratchett managed to put security holes in a mechanical device in Thud! (well, it's a DoS attack, really). Given an appropriate state and sequence of inputs, the whole device literally locks up. It's a relatively unimportant point, so not really spoiler material.
In some ways, a clockwork device is more susceptible to such attacks - a computer just has to be rebooted, while the clockwork device can be physically destroyed.
As far as I know, nobody's made a real-life clockwork device complex enough to have security flaws, though.
I don't know what sort of impact printers you've been using, but 72dpi was standard for 9-pin printers, and almost all could do two passes to achieve 144dpi (I believe it was also possible to obtain 216dpi horizontally, but it's a long time since I've used one).
24-pin printers normally used a base resolution of 180dpi, and could get 360 with two passes. Current inkjets get at least 720dpi, and the marketing blurb usually claims several times that.
I'd say it's unenforcable on a purely technical level: how do you prove the code was developed with the free version? Scrub the original timestamps from the files, and leave at least a couple of weeks between buying the license and releasing, and there's enough reasonable doubt that you can get away with it.
While I don't much like the idea of the printer's serial number being encoded in the watermark, I could see some genuine uses for the timestamp.
Suppose you have a contract whose watermark says it was printed after the date it was signed...
If the printer's internal clock is factory set and can't be changed, then it can be used both for proving a document was printed before another (think prior art, or even just handling plagiarism), and for invalidating forged documents and contracts.
Of course, the fact that the watermarking is secret indicates that such uses weren't intended.
I'd be most surprised if they haven't. Toshiba made a 9" player with a 1024x600 screen at least two years ago. The original Libretto was 640x480 on a 6" screen, so it seems reasonable to make it a little wider. Unfortunately, I haven't paid much attention to that market since.
Re:Did someone mention the Fantastic Four?
on
Vim 6.4 Released
·
· Score: 1
Great idea. And as an added bonus, it'll cut the bandwidth bills by at least 50%.
Slashdot Mirror
Should that not be passport? Of course, it's a while since I've seen that film, so I could be wrong.
However, the punishment for refusing to reveal your keys may well be less than that for the crime they'd charge you with if they did.
Gives an easy way out for the child porn rings: two years for not revealing keys versus God knows how much for dealing in child porn.
Between the last official patch and the unofficial "fan" patch, it's now more or less playable. In the sense that it won't crash too often, that is (well, no more than Morrowind with more mods than is good for it).
The fan patch even makes it run at an acceptable speed on non-3dfx hardware.
I don't know, I quite enjoyed it. Unfortunately, ADV (surprise) felt it necessary to alter most of the cultural references to American ones. Being British, that doesn't make things much clearer, and is just annoying. I can see it pissing off most American purists as well.
No, a list of translation notes at the end of the book doesn't make things better.
Leaving aside the misuse of the word hentai (someone else can rant about that if they care), they're totally independent concepts. Hentai, as used by Americans, just means perverted, so you can have hentai manga and non-hentai manga.
If it's in a comic form, it's manga. If it's sexually explicit, it's hentai. If it's both, it's hentai manga, and if it's neither, it's ... well, neither.
While you're right about the longevity of Jaffa Cakes (mmm, Jaffa Cakes), the issue wasn't about a name change.
It appears that taxation on bicuits and cakes is lower than that on chocolate biscuits. The latter are considered luxury items. Since Jaffa Cakes are definitely chocolate covered, McVities had an argument over whether they are biscuits or cakes, and whether tax should be paid on them. I believe McVities won.
Torches, pitchforks, and praying. You'd never know it was supposed to be a peaceful religion.
Ahem. According to the Bluffer's Guide to Maths, which is pretty much my sole maths book these days (the other one wasn't returned by the last person to borrow it, and I mostly use notes and/or Mathworld), QED does indeed stand for Quite Easily Done. And QEF in fact stands for Quite Easily Fiddled, not Quod Erat Faciendum as previously thought.
Certainly, but is it itself science? It doesn't follow scientific method (unless you really stretch the definition of scientific method and claim proofs are the same as experiments). One could start talking about languages and meta-languages and whether they can be the same, but I'm not a philosopher, so I'll stop there.
(Don't get me wrong - I'm a theoretical computer scientist, and I agree that maths is fundamental to both CS and other science. I'm just not sure exactly what maths is.)
I think there's something more fundamental than just bad acting. Christopher Lee has a long history of making otherwise shitty movies entertaining, and it was still awful. Probably doesn't help that he was killed off near the start.
You can't really blame the bad dialogue on the actors, though, just their delivery of it (which didn't generally help, either).
That's OK, malaria isn't a virus. It's a parasite, specifically one of a few species of Plasmodium.
And I'm afraid it isn't a worm, either.
I think there's a difference between "unreasonably low prices" and "prices students can afford".
Clearly, if they have to be that low for students to buy the stuff, there's a reason for lowering prices. Unless they're making a huge loss on every sale.
Interspecies? Kinky.
I assume this is being marketed in America?
The rest of us don't have laps that big.
Indeed. If you shoot the reviewer before he's written the thing, the chances of a bad review are greatly decreased.
Of course, you could then save money by not bothering with the screeners at all and just sending assassins round to all film reviewers.
Problem solved: no leaked screeners, no bad reviews.
If your device driver is flopping over a million times a second, you might want to look into a debugger, regardless of microkernel / monolithic wars.
It doesn't need to be impervious to hackers (although that would be nice, of course). It's a matter of unvalidated data, and where important decisions are made.
For example, if someone attacks your character, the server shouldn't be asking your machine whether it hits - it should be telling you. In an FPS, if you fire at someone, it should be up to the server to decide whether you hit, not the client.
In the latter case, there's a problem: the client's knowledge of other players' positions lags behind the server slightly. Well, deal with it. One of the players is going to lose out due to lag (however little there may be), so declare the server to be right and hope it balances out.
Wallhacks can be foiled by only sending the data the player can see. Aimbots are irrelevent in RPGs, where hits are determined by dice rolls not player skill. Anything else should be validated by the server. The client should always be untrusted. Design the protocols properly, and you only need to worry about buffer overruns and the normal security issues.
Most technical people (read: network programmers) do know this. Most game programmers don't, and that's why Blizzard are trying to keep their users honest, instead of fixing their system and making dishonesty impossible.
And in fact, whether an exchange is necessary depends on the jurisdiction. Under Scottish law, an exchange is not necessary.
For that matter, oral contracts are technically binding here, but very difficult to prove.
IANAL, you know the drill.
While it's fiction, Pratchett managed to put security holes in a mechanical device in Thud! (well, it's a DoS attack, really). Given an appropriate state and sequence of inputs, the whole device literally locks up. It's a relatively unimportant point, so not really spoiler material.
In some ways, a clockwork device is more susceptible to such attacks - a computer just has to be rebooted, while the clockwork device can be physically destroyed.
As far as I know, nobody's made a real-life clockwork device complex enough to have security flaws, though.
Would that not be single sided, then?
I don't know what sort of impact printers you've been using, but 72dpi was standard for 9-pin printers, and almost all could do two passes to achieve 144dpi (I believe it was also possible to obtain 216dpi horizontally, but it's a long time since I've used one).
24-pin printers normally used a base resolution of 180dpi, and could get 360 with two passes. Current inkjets get at least 720dpi, and the marketing blurb usually claims several times that.
I'd say it's unenforcable on a purely technical level: how do you prove the code was developed with the free version? Scrub the original timestamps from the files, and leave at least a couple of weeks between buying the license and releasing, and there's enough reasonable doubt that you can get away with it.
While I don't much like the idea of the printer's serial number being encoded in the watermark, I could see some genuine uses for the timestamp.
Suppose you have a contract whose watermark says it was printed after the date it was signed...
If the printer's internal clock is factory set and can't be changed, then it can be used both for proving a document was printed before another (think prior art, or even just handling plagiarism), and for invalidating forged documents and contracts.
Of course, the fact that the watermarking is secret indicates that such uses weren't intended.
I'd be most surprised if they haven't. Toshiba made a 9" player with a 1024x600 screen at least two years ago. The original Libretto was 640x480 on a 6" screen, so it seems reasonable to make it a little wider. Unfortunately, I haven't paid much attention to that market since.
Great idea. And as an added bonus, it'll cut the bandwidth bills by at least 50%.