Before MC there was no chance to be THAT elitist. Blue gear was actually EPIC and not THAT better than the rest. Elitism existed because you were good, UBRS gear would give you an edge, but you weren't out of everybody else's league.
First, it already tries to group you with gear in mind. When everyone is missing tanks though, it then allows a few undergeared tanks to slip through so that the queue times don't become ridiculous.
And second, the problem I was addressing is exactly that no one should be able to "blast through" a dungeon. Gear nowadays makes everyone too strong, so they can, but on the 10th unchallenging dungeon run they quit for the day, or the week, or even forever. You need to challenge your players to get them to commit to your game, and you can't expect raids 2 times per week to do that. If gear wasn't the great differentiator, everyone would need to be on their heels in dungeon runs...
But then you say "if gear doesn't improve your character, no one will run dungeons". This is simple... Just make dungeon gear strong at pvp or at specific raid fights (Abilities that can only be countered if someone has equipment A, or bosses that will be weaker if a certain item is present). This would also impose artificial blocks to avoid content being mastered in two or 3 weeks.
You missed the point. Every dungeon is beatable by people that just turned 80 (in blue/green gear). In that kind of gear you will have a challenge is quite a few of the new raids. But then, after 10 or so runs you get way better gear and you're able to run through content (and kick people that isn't as well geared as you).
Gear should make you better, but wow makes the difference between the different tiers way too big, so in the end you'll steamroll pretty much everything.
In UBRS you needed tactics because even the gear you got from those dungeons wouldn't make them trivial (at least until MC or even BWL appeared). The gear you get from the dungeons and first tier heroics is enough to overgear everything that isn't a raid
Actually, in the beginning of a new expansion, dungeons are challenging and require skill. And that makes people kick anyone that doesn't meet their gear requirements.
What "ruined" wow wasn't blizzard, it was the players. In the beginning, everyone was the same. Ignorant and in crappy gear. Nowadays there is this huge pit between the new guy and the old one, leading to elitism and the behavior you expressed. And these guys outgear the dungeon by so much (remember, it was designed to be beaten with crap gear) that there is no need for any kind of organization
There should be different levels of gear, but with smaller benefits from one tier to the other, so that nothing becomes trivial after you get some "epics". Easier would be ok, trivial is, in my opinion, what killed Wow.
About as much time as it takes on most datacenters that already are monitored remotely. With news like this some would think Nagios or Ganglia did not provide the admins with a web interface.
PS: They might want to, at least, man it with a security guard to sound the alarm in case of fire or robbery
Have you ever done a mac app? The problem is not how to use the code, but the frameworks involved to program for iOS / Mac.
Also, you'll find people saying that LISP is great and easy to learn, but those are full of bullshit too. It's your opinion, but the majority of people I know complain about this, so...
Ok, you can dislike Android, but you're blindly full of crap.
I do. I can make a video with it if it makes you happy, but having a phone with as much horsepower as iOS without the clutter actually makes it way smother. iOS is full of little hangs and stutters that are hidden under "cool" animations, but they're there.
Second, Android is not slow out of the box. Android on a 100$ phone might be slow out of the box, but if you're comparing a 700$ iPhone with an Android phone, at least have the decency to chose an equivalent phone. The user experience on the top-of-the line Android phones has been the same (if not better) than on iOS. So, yes, my modified Android (because I can modify it to run smoother than your iPhone) runs faster than iOS. If you missed the part where I talked about pre-caching of applications, read it again. It's actually the secret for an instantly responsive apps (that, again, any top of the line android phone will do - the ones 200$ cheaper than an iPhone).
I've programmed in Objective-C. And I never said it was impossible, and good for Apple that there's talent where there's money. But when you say that everything runs through Google's VM as if that makes everything slow, you're an idiot. They might run inside a VM, but the code is native code and it runs as is. If you're doing processor intensive stuff on your mobile phone (physics simulations, video decoding, etc) you'll benefit immensely by using c code. And google's VM is actually highly optimized and way faster than the Java VM you're complaining about.
My "buddy" is actually not the only one. Remember the researchers that found the iOS tracking? ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GynEFV4hsA0&t=10m40s ). They also seem to run from it around 10:50. And the thing about going for the webview actually shows intelligence. If you only want some menus to show some photos with music / sound / whatever, why bang your head against the wall? You don't need a ferrari to go on a groceries run.
And again, read the part where my 2yo Desire (that actually came out 3 months before the iPhone 4) does everything the other one does, but smoother. Try running iOS4 on an iPhone 3G and you'll be crying for your lack of horspower the same way a 100$ Android phone will. But if you level yourself from the top, nowadays, the top of the line Androids WILL beat your iPhone out of the park on pretty much everything.
You're entitled to your opinion, but keep in mind that you're the exception, not the rule. And I've done both android and iOS, so I can tell you now that my hair turned white trying to do simple things on iOS that took me 30 minutes on Android.
On the other hand, it seems to be impossible to do a bad looking GUI for iOS. I tip my hat to apple in that - but only that.
Just my 2c... My 2 yo HTC Desire with launcherpro and cyanogenmod will outsmooth an iPhone 4 every day of the week. Apart from that, I could swear that since 2.3 the GPU could be used to render the UI, if available, but that's beside the point. ( And that's from a phone that when launched you could get for 200$ less than an iPhone and that now costs less than half the price an iPhone 4 does (unlocked). )
Also, Android will try, when resources are free, to pre-load the applications you use the most, so that when you click them, they're just there. Most android phones run at 55% of full capacity all the time because of this, and you need almost no user interaction with the tasks (if you really want to it's there, but there is no need to do anything).
Also, citing objective-C as a reason for better and faster apps also shows ignorance. Ignoring the fact the Objective-C is a nightmare to program to (and that it has a stupidly steep learning curve), you can write c/c++ for android ( http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html ). That means that you can have the performance of C for what needs performance and still have the user-friendliness of java for the rest. When someone trying to explain to me iOS programming starts by saying "first, you try to get to a webview as fast as possible!" (true story), it must mean something.
Is iOS bad? Not by a longshot. But trying to justify your point of view with "facts" that haven't been true for years now makes you look bad. Really really bad.
It's a simple question, really. How much does DC comics does from B&N floor sales, and how much did Amazon pay for the deal?
Unless DC is run by idiots, they are not losing money on this, I'm sure.
And B&N forgot something. Doing a stunt like this is actually free publicity... I didn't know DC was an Amazon had signed this exclusivity deal... But now I do. Thank you for telling me, the consumer, where I can buy DC.
"With up to 1,000 times faster rendering performance over Flash Player 10 and AIR 2, developers can animate millions of objects with smooth 60 frames per second rendering and deliver cinematic, console-quality games both in browsers and in apps." and " And a production release with support for Stage 3D for mobile platforms including Android, Apple iOS and BlackBerry Tablet OS is expected in an upcoming release"
So, consuming "oodles of processing power" should be fixed. If it runs on mobile phones, I'd bet it'll run on your PC.
Next, did you watch the videos? It's the iPhone demo. The video quality is far far away from what you can get with the Unreal Engine kit, I saw no shader action at all actually, so the similar hardware requirement point is moot. You won't be able to do the same things, much less compare one to the other.
Well, my 2 years old mbp runs spotlight well enough...
But true, quicksilver is better. But it had a issue with the source of the bookmarks it uses, so I uninstalled it. Might give it another chance soon, though.
The main point remains though. Launchy is good, but it's a spotlight clone. Claiming osx is bad because launchy is the future is a contradiction
If you think OSX blows because of the dock, you clearly never used it. Not only spotlight is actually where launchy gets it's inspiration, the way things are organized in OSX, docks or not, they just make sense.
I'd mod you down, but I wasn't sure if you were trolling or ignorant (or both).
The machines are not the weak link. The security surrounding the machines is. And simple procedures like an inspection to each and every machine prior to voting should be enough to foil the attack described in the article.
That's like saying that if someone leaves the the votes for something unatended and someone switches them out the weak link is the paper or the room.
No, the weak link is the person and all the procedures surrounding a vote. Do it right and it's safer than paper.
First, I've been answering to the guy who says there is no "secure voting protocol". I just described a secure voting protocol. A Man in the Middle attack on the voting protocol I described would do nothing.
I also addressed the article when I said: "PS: If you have enough access to a machine that should be guarded from any such attempt... true, you might be able to tweek the outcome of a vote, but if you want to influence something you could simply go after the weakest link in the chain: Human beings."
You were complaining about anonymous voting. The protocol I described would allow anonymous encrypted voting (and if well applied could even be used to safeguard the machine from the attack described in the article, by encrypting the communication from the screen to the computer, if I understand correctly they gather the input and then change it).
Either way, please explain where does anonymous and the article come in contact anywhere?
ok, I think you're trolling me, but I'm willing to give you one more chance:
1- If the table where you won't got 90% in party A then there is a 90% chance you voted A. Anonymous would be a national count with every single vote.
2- Do you know what a man in the middle attack is? It has nothing to do with the machine. I means picking up the packets half way (after they left the machine), changing them to your liking and sending them on with the value you want.
If you encrypt your communication with the key that the table gives you, or your security token (all things that can't be directed linked to you) you have a secure channel. Those tokens could be: time based (tokens), exchanged using asymmetric keys (since it would be a low number of messages, this is perfectly doable).
This is just an example. A man in the middle of either communication would not be able (with current tech) to do anything to alter the packets unless he knew the keys beforehand (and lets be honest, if he did, then it means he didn't have to go to all the trouble of intercepting anything, he'd be sending the votes himself while emulating a voting booth). And even then, there would be nothing wrong with the protocol, just the people handling sensitive information.
Even today it never is 100% anonymous. And the signing doesn't have to be linked to you, it could be generated on the spot by someone, for example, on the voting tables. That key could be used for that vote and that vote alone and it would never leave the room and expire in, lets say, 1 minute.
So many ways to do this. You just need to think outside the "what's usual" box.
Slashdot Mirror
Telnet smtp server on port 25. HELO pcname - MAIL FROM: address_you_want - RCPT TO: destination_email - DATA message .
There, someone just wrote a bot to spamm you 25 times per minute.
Can't it still make me sad? You're a bit naive if that's the only use you're seeing. I see a glorified sex doll...
This makes me sad in so many levels... ):
Before MC there was no chance to be THAT elitist. Blue gear was actually EPIC and not THAT better than the rest. Elitism existed because you were good, UBRS gear would give you an edge, but you weren't out of everybody else's league.
two problems with your approach:
First, it already tries to group you with gear in mind. When everyone is missing tanks though, it then allows a few undergeared tanks to slip through so that the queue times don't become ridiculous.
And second, the problem I was addressing is exactly that no one should be able to "blast through" a dungeon. Gear nowadays makes everyone too strong, so they can, but on the 10th unchallenging dungeon run they quit for the day, or the week, or even forever. You need to challenge your players to get them to commit to your game, and you can't expect raids 2 times per week to do that. If gear wasn't the great differentiator, everyone would need to be on their heels in dungeon runs...
But then you say "if gear doesn't improve your character, no one will run dungeons". This is simple... Just make dungeon gear strong at pvp or at specific raid fights (Abilities that can only be countered if someone has equipment A, or bosses that will be weaker if a certain item is present). This would also impose artificial blocks to avoid content being mastered in two or 3 weeks.
You missed the point. Every dungeon is beatable by people that just turned 80 (in blue/green gear). In that kind of gear you will have a challenge is quite a few of the new raids. But then, after 10 or so runs you get way better gear and you're able to run through content (and kick people that isn't as well geared as you).
Gear should make you better, but wow makes the difference between the different tiers way too big, so in the end you'll steamroll pretty much everything.
In UBRS you needed tactics because even the gear you got from those dungeons wouldn't make them trivial (at least until MC or even BWL appeared). The gear you get from the dungeons and first tier heroics is enough to overgear everything that isn't a raid
Actually, in the beginning of a new expansion, dungeons are challenging and require skill. And that makes people kick anyone that doesn't meet their gear requirements.
What "ruined" wow wasn't blizzard, it was the players. In the beginning, everyone was the same. Ignorant and in crappy gear. Nowadays there is this huge pit between the new guy and the old one, leading to elitism and the behavior you expressed. And these guys outgear the dungeon by so much (remember, it was designed to be beaten with crap gear) that there is no need for any kind of organization
There should be different levels of gear, but with smaller benefits from one tier to the other, so that nothing becomes trivial after you get some "epics". Easier would be ok, trivial is, in my opinion, what killed Wow.
No new gold was created when gold farmers that hack accounts send gold from point a to point b, and it's general knowledge that it ruins the game.
On the other hand, this item will become so common that it'll be useless as a source of gold in no time.
About as much time as it takes on most datacenters that already are monitored remotely. With news like this some would think Nagios or Ganglia did not provide the admins with a web interface.
PS: They might want to, at least, man it with a security guard to sound the alarm in case of fire or robbery
I also use Slashdot with javascript enabled, but noscript, by default, also blocks the loading of those plugins in untrusted sites.
Have you ever done a mac app? The problem is not how to use the code, but the frameworks involved to program for iOS / Mac.
Also, you'll find people saying that LISP is great and easy to learn, but those are full of bullshit too. It's your opinion, but the majority of people I know complain about this, so...
Ok, you can dislike Android, but you're blindly full of crap.
I do. I can make a video with it if it makes you happy, but having a phone with as much horsepower as iOS without the clutter actually makes it way smother. iOS is full of little hangs and stutters that are hidden under "cool" animations, but they're there.
Second, Android is not slow out of the box. Android on a 100$ phone might be slow out of the box, but if you're comparing a 700$ iPhone with an Android phone, at least have the decency to chose an equivalent phone. The user experience on the top-of-the line Android phones has been the same (if not better) than on iOS. So, yes, my modified Android (because I can modify it to run smoother than your iPhone) runs faster than iOS. If you missed the part where I talked about pre-caching of applications, read it again. It's actually the secret for an instantly responsive apps (that, again, any top of the line android phone will do - the ones 200$ cheaper than an iPhone).
I've programmed in Objective-C. And I never said it was impossible, and good for Apple that there's talent where there's money. But when you say that everything runs through Google's VM as if that makes everything slow, you're an idiot. They might run inside a VM, but the code is native code and it runs as is. If you're doing processor intensive stuff on your mobile phone (physics simulations, video decoding, etc) you'll benefit immensely by using c code. And google's VM is actually highly optimized and way faster than the Java VM you're complaining about.
My "buddy" is actually not the only one. Remember the researchers that found the iOS tracking? ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GynEFV4hsA0&t=10m40s ). They also seem to run from it around 10:50. And the thing about going for the webview actually shows intelligence. If you only want some menus to show some photos with music / sound / whatever, why bang your head against the wall? You don't need a ferrari to go on a groceries run.
And again, read the part where my 2yo Desire (that actually came out 3 months before the iPhone 4) does everything the other one does, but smoother. Try running iOS4 on an iPhone 3G and you'll be crying for your lack of horspower the same way a 100$ Android phone will. But if you level yourself from the top, nowadays, the top of the line Androids WILL beat your iPhone out of the park on pretty much everything.
You're entitled to your opinion, but keep in mind that you're the exception, not the rule. And I've done both android and iOS, so I can tell you now that my hair turned white trying to do simple things on iOS that took me 30 minutes on Android.
On the other hand, it seems to be impossible to do a bad looking GUI for iOS. I tip my hat to apple in that - but only that.
http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html
Also, davilk is not Java. You might write things in java, but it's interpreted in a much faster and more efficient way.
Just my 2c... My 2 yo HTC Desire with launcherpro and cyanogenmod will outsmooth an iPhone 4 every day of the week. Apart from that, I could swear that since 2.3 the GPU could be used to render the UI, if available, but that's beside the point. ( And that's from a phone that when launched you could get for 200$ less than an iPhone and that now costs less than half the price an iPhone 4 does (unlocked). )
Also, Android will try, when resources are free, to pre-load the applications you use the most, so that when you click them, they're just there. Most android phones run at 55% of full capacity all the time because of this, and you need almost no user interaction with the tasks (if you really want to it's there, but there is no need to do anything).
Also, citing objective-C as a reason for better and faster apps also shows ignorance. Ignoring the fact the Objective-C is a nightmare to program to (and that it has a stupidly steep learning curve), you can write c/c++ for android ( http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html ). That means that you can have the performance of C for what needs performance and still have the user-friendliness of java for the rest. When someone trying to explain to me iOS programming starts by saying "first, you try to get to a webview as fast as possible!" (true story), it must mean something.
Is iOS bad? Not by a longshot. But trying to justify your point of view with "facts" that haven't been true for years now makes you look bad. Really really bad.
It's a simple question, really. How much does DC comics does from B&N floor sales, and how much did Amazon pay for the deal?
Unless DC is run by idiots, they are not losing money on this, I'm sure.
And B&N forgot something. Doing a stunt like this is actually free publicity... I didn't know DC was an Amazon had signed this exclusivity deal... But now I do. Thank you for telling me, the consumer, where I can buy DC.
Don't underestimate monkeys writing Shakespeare
"With up to 1,000 times faster rendering performance over Flash Player 10 and AIR 2, developers can animate millions of objects with smooth 60 frames per second rendering and deliver cinematic, console-quality games both in browsers and in apps." and " And a production release with support for Stage 3D for mobile platforms including Android, Apple iOS and BlackBerry Tablet OS is expected in an upcoming release"
So, consuming "oodles of processing power" should be fixed. If it runs on mobile phones, I'd bet it'll run on your PC.
Next, did you watch the videos? It's the iPhone demo. The video quality is far far away from what you can get with the Unreal Engine kit, I saw no shader action at all actually, so the similar hardware requirement point is moot. You won't be able to do the same things, much less compare one to the other.
Did you read the article?
Well, my 2 years old mbp runs spotlight well enough...
But true, quicksilver is better. But it had a issue with the source of the bookmarks it uses, so I uninstalled it. Might give it another chance soon, though.
The main point remains though. Launchy is good, but it's a spotlight clone. Claiming osx is bad because launchy is the future is a contradiction
If you think OSX blows because of the dock, you clearly never used it. Not only spotlight is actually where launchy gets it's inspiration, the way things are organized in OSX, docks or not, they just make sense.
I'd mod you down, but I wasn't sure if you were trolling or ignorant (or both).
The machines are not the weak link. The security surrounding the machines is. And simple procedures like an inspection to each and every machine prior to voting should be enough to foil the attack described in the article.
That's like saying that if someone leaves the the votes for something unatended and someone switches them out the weak link is the paper or the room.
No, the weak link is the person and all the procedures surrounding a vote. Do it right and it's safer than paper.
First, I've been answering to the guy who says there is no "secure voting protocol". I just described a secure voting protocol. A Man in the Middle attack on the voting protocol I described would do nothing.
I also addressed the article when I said: "PS: If you have enough access to a machine that should be guarded from any such attempt... true, you might be able to tweek the outcome of a vote, but if you want to influence something you could simply go after the weakest link in the chain: Human beings."
You were complaining about anonymous voting. The protocol I described would allow anonymous encrypted voting (and if well applied could even be used to safeguard the machine from the attack described in the article, by encrypting the communication from the screen to the computer, if I understand correctly they gather the input and then change it).
Either way, please explain where does anonymous and the article come in contact anywhere?
ok, I think you're trolling me, but I'm willing to give you one more chance:
1- If the table where you won't got 90% in party A then there is a 90% chance you voted A. Anonymous would be a national count with every single vote.
2- Do you know what a man in the middle attack is? It has nothing to do with the machine. I means picking up the packets half way (after they left the machine), changing them to your liking and sending them on with the value you want.
If you encrypt your communication with the key that the table gives you, or your security token (all things that can't be directed linked to you) you have a secure channel. Those tokens could be: time based (tokens), exchanged using asymmetric keys (since it would be a low number of messages, this is perfectly doable).
This is just an example. A man in the middle of either communication would not be able (with current tech) to do anything to alter the packets unless he knew the keys beforehand (and lets be honest, if he did, then it means he didn't have to go to all the trouble of intercepting anything, he'd be sending the votes himself while emulating a voting booth). And even then, there would be nothing wrong with the protocol, just the people handling sensitive information.
Even today it never is 100% anonymous. And the signing doesn't have to be linked to you, it could be generated on the spot by someone, for example, on the voting tables. That key could be used for that vote and that vote alone and it would never leave the room and expire in, lets say, 1 minute.
So many ways to do this. You just need to think outside the "what's usual" box.