I don't think marketing or even release date issues effected my choice to not buy Ubisoft games as much as the fact that *every single game* I have that they published was buggy, unentertaining garbage.
Someone making 1/6th the salary will live just as well if things cost 1/6th as much. From the prices quoted in the article about lunch options, it looks as though things cost about 1/10th as much.
Being a rocket scientist in training [actually a rocket scientist that failed the training and now does computer work, so you've been warned]
You can't exactly abort a re-entry.
There will be a point where the thrusters can no longer reach escape velocity, and I'd wager it's about a few seconds after the first firing to begin the re-entry. I'd wager a longish time [relatively] before the shuttle even reaches the atmosphere.
And then there's a bunch of trickery involved to make sure the shuttle resumes a stable orbit, or even a semi-stable orbit that allows for re-entry near a landing site window.
I think that on the third hand, there's enough legal education and know-how in the system right now to know that any legal recourse against such an unconstitutional law will take about 3-4 years. About the length of most governmental appointments... *hrmmm*
I must kind of agree with the article when it comes to most modern games. Counterstrike being the *prime* example.
However, sniper rifles have been used properly in games without being totally imbalancing. Take the original Quake Team Fortress modification. Before the prevelance of broadband connections, the sniper was extremely well balanced. Their role [and really, their only role] was to provide suppressive fire over open ground. Snipers were easy to counter with your own snipers, or via spamming [no, not silly idiotic spamming, but firing a fair amount of unaimed ammunition to make the snipers pay attention to that rather than you...].
The growth of low latency connections made the rifle a bit too accurate, and powerful.
UT's sniper rifle is very well balanced [albeit a little weak on most every map imo]
Q3a's railgun is very well balanced [albeit a little powerful on most every map imo]
But these games are all "unrealistic". Realism is not good game design. In fact it's usually the antithesis of good game design.
They're not making the place safe for kids. They're implimenting filters, which have been proven time and again to be wholy ineffective in even doing censorship effectively, let alone making kids safe.
It's always been my impression that sending a man to Mars would teach us far more about the man [and how humans react under long term isolation, radiation, microgravity...] than it will about Mars.
Indeed, but it's not meant to be a complete emulator. It gives you a bit of the common tools, and allows you to move around on the command line using standard *nix commands, calls and conventions. It doesn't make the box a unix box, and it doesn't provide full feldged applications.
Overall, services for unix is good. It provides many of the common unix utilities, and it integrates them into the shell [even just cmd] very well. Much better, and 'cleaner' than cygwin. Cygwin has *many* more tools though, and they work 'well enough'.
In my experience, using the two together [having SFU's directory in the path before cygwin's] gives you the best of both releases.
What quake *was* the first to do was allow "drop in" network play. If you've ever actually played doom or other games of the era, you'll know what a godsend being able to just drop in a game and start playing instead of trying to track down your buddies to startup the game... restarting when someone gets dropped...
Pain in the ass. Duke Nukem was a much more entertaining game, but you'd have to get everyone together beforehand to play it!
With Quake you could just start up a game, and people on the network would spontaneously join in. Then there was Quakeworld, and then everyone could join in...
Heh, I'm a little younger, so on ~486es connected to a novell network printer, you could compile pascal to print to the printer rather than to the console.
Simple enough to infinately print newlines or random characters. Great fun as it never registered the computer doing it into the printer spooler admin tool.
Everyone would give the possessed printer an evil look before they shut it off.
Unfortunately for the teacher there were probably a half dozen other kids who were faaaar more michevous than me.
Come now, the stock market is legalized gambling these days. It's a nice easy way to invest in a company. Investments are risks. The stock buyers are taking the risk that SCO is successful. I mean, what if they were? Certainly their stock would be worth probably what? 1000x current with actual Linux licensing fees?
Hell, do you know anyone who wouldn't take 1000 to 1 odds when the American legal system is involved?
No offense, but the only reason those words have such assigned implications is because... well, there's no good reason really.
The only reason we can't just say fuck is a few hundred years ago, witches said these nasty words and cursed people! We learned to not burn the witches, but the lingering superstition puts meaningless implication to words.
I'm not a lawyer, and not terribly up to speed with marriage law. Personally, I think it is a reasonable question to ask if the intent of the framers was to restrict marriage to that of a male/female monogamy. Unfortunately I think you'll find that there are many many marriage laws, and the intent was different for each.
Personally, I think that extending the rights and privileges is the least that should be done. Calling it marriage probably the right thing to do. And in the end, I expect the judiciary to usher that change, because the legislators haven't been representatives of the public for a long time now.
No offense, but it *is* the judiciary's role to make some law. As all courts follow the rules and rulings set down by previous courts all rulings made by courts are, in effect, law.
IIRC the MA court ruled about the scope of a law that is not terribly specific about what it entails. The MA court merely clarified what the existing law covers.
Or at least I'll disagree it should be prevented on legal grounds. I don't like the idea of a camera based police state as much as anyone. I absolutely think that the entire scope and purpose of the EZpass system should be out in the open. I don't think it should be used in the ways described in the article, but I also know that I wouldn't have a problem with toll booth operators testifying that such and such went through the booth at a specific time.
Since the two are very similar legally, I lean towards allowing testimony about my whereabouts.
Okay, let's use an analogy then. Say you're walking on a sidewalk. Same deal, you pretty much have to use the sidewalk [or anything really, you have to traverse the intermediary to go between two points...].
Do you have a problem with someone looking at you?
It isn't invading your life, it's recording available information.
If I remember correctly, the compelling evidence at the time was the temporal accuracy of the paper ticket machine. You can't prove [or couldn't at the time] that the two ticket machine clocks were synced.
Also you cannot prove that the ticket was in the car the entire time. It's not against the law for the ticket [or the EZ pass] to say... fly in a plane over 55-70 MPH.
Slashdot Mirror
Such as Moissanite, which is nearly as hard, just as clear, and *more* luminescent all for a fraction of the price?
I don't think marketing or even release date issues effected my choice to not buy Ubisoft games as much as the fact that *every single game* I have that they published was buggy, unentertaining garbage.
I mean after all, the majority of people who don't want cruft around their phones probably don't have cell phones...
How do you figure?
Someone making 1/6th the salary will live just as well if things cost 1/6th as much. From the prices quoted in the article about lunch options, it looks as though things cost about 1/10th as much.
Being a rocket scientist in training [actually a rocket scientist that failed the training and now does computer work, so you've been warned]
You can't exactly abort a re-entry.
There will be a point where the thrusters can no longer reach escape velocity, and I'd wager it's about a few seconds after the first firing to begin the re-entry. I'd wager a longish time [relatively] before the shuttle even reaches the atmosphere.
And then there's a bunch of trickery involved to make sure the shuttle resumes a stable orbit, or even a semi-stable orbit that allows for re-entry near a landing site window.
Ahem... the command cacls does the equivalent user level permission changing on windows.
I think that on the third hand, there's enough legal education and know-how in the system right now to know that any legal recourse against such an unconstitutional law will take about 3-4 years. About the length of most governmental appointments... *hrmmm*
I must kind of agree with the article when it comes to most modern games. Counterstrike being the *prime* example.
However, sniper rifles have been used properly in games without being totally imbalancing. Take the original Quake Team Fortress modification. Before the prevelance of broadband connections, the sniper was extremely well balanced. Their role [and really, their only role] was to provide suppressive fire over open ground. Snipers were easy to counter with your own snipers, or via spamming [no, not silly idiotic spamming, but firing a fair amount of unaimed ammunition to make the snipers pay attention to that rather than you...].
The growth of low latency connections made the rifle a bit too accurate, and powerful.
UT's sniper rifle is very well balanced [albeit a little weak on most every map imo]
Q3a's railgun is very well balanced [albeit a little powerful on most every map imo]
But these games are all "unrealistic". Realism is not good game design. In fact it's usually the antithesis of good game design.
Let's see, my folks blocked 1900 numbers, so I used the neighbor's phone? Each and every telemarketting call I've ever gotten?
Look folks, nice and simple. Your kids will get what they want. Saying they can't have it will only make them want it more.
Filters [read censorship] don't work. They've never worked, and will never work.
They're not making the place safe for kids. They're implimenting filters, which have been proven time and again to be wholy ineffective in even doing censorship effectively, let alone making kids safe.
It's always been my impression that sending a man to Mars would teach us far more about the man [and how humans react under long term isolation, radiation, microgravity...] than it will about Mars.
Hrm... I wonder if I could patent assigning the website fake.name.com to people with the fake@name.com email address and then sue these guys...
Indeed, but it's not meant to be a complete emulator. It gives you a bit of the common tools, and allows you to move around on the command line using standard *nix commands, calls and conventions. It doesn't make the box a unix box, and it doesn't provide full feldged applications.
You're still on a windows box.
If you want a unix box, install unix.
Overall, services for unix is good. It provides many of the common unix utilities, and it integrates them into the shell [even just cmd] very well. Much better, and 'cleaner' than cygwin. Cygwin has *many* more tools though, and they work 'well enough'.
In my experience, using the two together [having SFU's directory in the path before cygwin's] gives you the best of both releases.
No, quake was not the first 'real' 3d FPS.
What quake *was* the first to do was allow "drop in" network play. If you've ever actually played doom or other games of the era, you'll know what a godsend being able to just drop in a game and start playing instead of trying to track down your buddies to startup the game... restarting when someone gets dropped...
Pain in the ass. Duke Nukem was a much more entertaining game, but you'd have to get everyone together beforehand to play it!
With Quake you could just start up a game, and people on the network would spontaneously join in. Then there was Quakeworld, and then everyone could join in...
Heh, I'm a little younger, so on ~486es connected to a novell network printer, you could compile pascal to print to the printer rather than to the console.
Simple enough to infinately print newlines or random characters. Great fun as it never registered the computer doing it into the printer spooler admin tool.
Everyone would give the possessed printer an evil look before they shut it off.
Unfortunately for the teacher there were probably a half dozen other kids who were faaaar more michevous than me.
I've a nice speedy 1.1 sdsl connection from Speakeasy, and have never had any problems from them, dispite a generally high, constant legitimate usage.
But then again it's Speakeasy, who's got one of the best AUP's in the business...
Come now, the stock market is legalized gambling these days. It's a nice easy way to invest in a company. Investments are risks. The stock buyers are taking the risk that SCO is successful. I mean, what if they were? Certainly their stock would be worth probably what? 1000x current with actual Linux licensing fees?
Hell, do you know anyone who wouldn't take 1000 to 1 odds when the American legal system is involved?
No offense, but the only reason those words have such assigned implications is because... well, there's no good reason really.
The only reason we can't just say fuck is a few hundred years ago, witches said these nasty words and cursed people! We learned to not burn the witches, but the lingering superstition puts meaningless implication to words.
So, how is the judiciary not representatives of the public?
They're not elected directly, no. Then again, neither are our legislators technically.
I'm not a lawyer, and not terribly up to speed with marriage law. Personally, I think it is a reasonable question to ask if the intent of the framers was to restrict marriage to that of a male/female monogamy. Unfortunately I think you'll find that there are many many marriage laws, and the intent was different for each.
Personally, I think that extending the rights and privileges is the least that should be done. Calling it marriage probably the right thing to do. And in the end, I expect the judiciary to usher that change, because the legislators haven't been representatives of the public for a long time now.
No offense, but it *is* the judiciary's role to make some law. As all courts follow the rules and rulings set down by previous courts all rulings made by courts are, in effect, law.
IIRC the MA court ruled about the scope of a law that is not terribly specific about what it entails. The MA court merely clarified what the existing law covers.
I disagree that it's invasion.
Or at least I'll disagree it should be prevented on legal grounds. I don't like the idea of a camera based police state as much as anyone. I absolutely think that the entire scope and purpose of the EZpass system should be out in the open. I don't think it should be used in the ways described in the article, but I also know that I wouldn't have a problem with toll booth operators testifying that such and such went through the booth at a specific time.
Since the two are very similar legally, I lean towards allowing testimony about my whereabouts.
Okay, let's use an analogy then. Say you're walking on a sidewalk. Same deal, you pretty much have to use the sidewalk [or anything really, you have to traverse the intermediary to go between two points...].
Do you have a problem with someone looking at you?
It isn't invading your life, it's recording available information.
If I remember correctly, the compelling evidence at the time was the temporal accuracy of the paper ticket machine. You can't prove [or couldn't at the time] that the two ticket machine clocks were synced.
Also you cannot prove that the ticket was in the car the entire time. It's not against the law for the ticket [or the EZ pass] to say... fly in a plane over 55-70 MPH.