You're like the one person in all of Slashdot that really gets it. *applause*
I completely agree. And until the day someone makes a sexy product that is also free and open powered, openness will maintain the illusion of "a terrible product" and no one wants terrible products, besides freedom apologists. I'm not saying freedom and user rights are a bad thing, I'm just saying hey I have a life and would rather not waste my life with sub par computing experiences.
So the question is, what will it take? What will it take to create an awesome open product? At the rate the world is going, I'm tempted to say it's impossible. Mutually inclusive, at least in reality.
There's probably two versions of the executable: ones you have already running hot and one that's on the file system. If you update Chrome, it's probably updating only the reference copy on the file system and not the one you're running. So if you shut down all of your instances of Chrome, and then start one up again, it uses that new copy without mentioning anything to you.
What would really be neat is if you could run different versions of Chrome simultaneously so that given the organic lifetime of your tabs, you could seamlessly use the new Chrome and phase the old Chrome out (given that each tab is a process).
I feel like I'm the only one who wasn't super impressed by the lecture. I found it cheesy at times. I'd like to hear from people who did like it exactly why you like it and what was so earth-shattering about what he had to say. Sure, he was a nice guy. But of what he said, was it really that good?
It's different though. In DDR, your steps go along with the music. If you miss a step, nothing happens other than a couple boos or dead arrows. But in Guitar Hero and Rock Band, the music of the instrument will actually cut out if you aren't performing it properly. So it's a different sort of feedback mechanism, and a better one, I think. It feels like the music is caused by you, which makes it feel like you're really rocking out. That and it's more of a group experience. The game gives a lot of bonuses for coordinated effort, while in DDR, there really wasn't any sort of synergy between players at all (strictly versus).
I was wondering if anyone would be so kind as to explain multiple dispatch, as mentioned in the State. What is it that multiple dispatch solves that an if tree that detects object types doesn't do currently?
People keep using asteroids and windows as examples but I still don't understand. I figure collisions would be a function of The Universe and window handling would be written as a function of, well, the window.
Could anyone take a stab at explaining what this discovery actually means, in layman's terms? What is the significance of a univeral turing machine? What if the turing machine wasn't universal?
What's the significance of 2,3? (Bit states, color?)
What did this discovery actually teach us? How is it useful?
Hate to break it to you, but UI designers have been facing this dilemma forever. Even if the new interface is better (and I'm not saying it's bad, I kinda like it too), *change* is already setting it back. Asking anyone to "do some research" or learn something new is already too much to ask of someone who already has a groove going.
I'm hesitant to post about it since I love the idea so much but... The gambit system has made me wonder. Is there a market/arena/research about human-assisted artificial intelligence? That's what I see the gambits as. They allow the other player characters to make smart decisions on their own, in the event you don't explicitly tell them what to do. You can make characters that take care of the post-battle nitty-gritty, you can make characters that use normal attacks intelligently, or you can aim to make fully automating parties, where your only role is to acquire a target by proximity and the gambits handle the rest.
I'm completely fascinated by the idea and anything resembles it. And I'd love to hear anyone's opinions on it or where I can find more resources about this type of AI.
/played is a slash command in the game (you type it in the chat box)
it tells you how long you've played the character you're currently logged on to since it got created, and also how long you've been playing since you last logged on
I just recently quit wow... I mean, I didn't full on cancel my account or delete my character, so it's still there should I ever wish to go back... But I did uninstall and plan on keeping away from it, at least for a while.
You know what did me in though?/played
Thanks to the glory that is mathematics, I found out that on average, I played for three hours a day. Worst part about averages, I don't even play on the weekdays that much (which means very VERY loaded weekends).
What a waste. Three hours of my life. Every single day! I could be learning how to juggle or searching for a significant other or reading a book or hacking! Something!
If you're like me... On the verge of quitting... And trying to look for that extra push... Look at/played. Find out for yourself what large, large portion of your life you're throwing away at this game.
Don't get me wrong, it's a great game, and I loved playing it. But it's a lot. Moderation, please.
PS - I just bought Civ 4 (crack for crystal, I know). I don't get it.
No, the quests don't get more varied. That's why the jab is that there are only three (or so) types of quests. It's literally true.
Find. Loot. Kill. Report back.
There's only so many things you can do to make a quest interesting or different, in terms of the mechanics. Sometimes you have to interact with a doodad or just explore a location...
The only difference in quests ends up being the storyline, which Warcraft is full of. Some people tend to forget that. Sure, kill 10 troggs, but troggs are people too. With wants and needs...
It's what you make of it. Try partying with others or role playing to help emerse yourself in the experience.
It pretty much beats every other popular MMO out there combined. That's impressive.
Also, considering the expansion coming out, I'm sure that will attract either new players or players who quit before and then want to see what the Burning Crusade is about (new content, new characters, new spells, bug fixes, enhancements, etc).
With versioning systems, damage was never difficult to repair. Consider this: if you approve an article that isn't really kosher, your name shows up in the history as the one who approved it. If you have a history of approving unfit articles, maybe your privilages should be taken away. Your reputation with the Wikipedia community is at stake, just because you want to support Colbert?
Therein lay the balance. You want the visual feedback to be there, but you don't want it to be too long.
Think of a standard Windows visual alert (if you have accessibility options turned on). The screen border will blink, sorta, whenever there is an audio alert (it's a visual supplement for the hard of hearing). Compare this to OSX which will do the same, but in a "flash" manner, where the blink effect actually dies down and lasts more than two frames (on/off).
This is the sort of "jumpiness" the OOOP (whatever) was referring to. The OSX flash "jumps less" than a quick BLEEP sort of notifcation.
The whole jumpiness/smoothness thing is subtle... It's not something you can readily quantify. And it does seem superfluous. Which is why power users, such as yourself, may be accustomed to living with it out. But enhancements like this are generally received as "less harsh" or "more friendly" and just more enjoyable. Very non-technical attributes that give OSX and products like it their coolness feel that users have difficulty quantifying, but are attracted to nonetheless.
As another example, see the iPod menus. When you click on a menu item on an iPod, the screen actually slides over to the next menu, as if they were shuffling in place, instead of doing what most programmers would implement, a drop in replacement (screen refresh).
In each of these cases, user feedback was nearly universally negative, and yet the "improvements" remain in place.
As an interface/interaction designer, your product is like your baby, with all of its quirks and whatnot. Even in the face of criticism, rarely would designers "go back" on their decisions. That would force them to acknowledge two things: 1) my baby is ugly! 2) i was wrong!
You would aim to get a degree in either Human-Computer Interaction, Interaction Design, or any one of its many names... (People in this field have a fixation on the precision of the name, or the lack thereof)
Last time I checked, as I researched this very question when I went to university, the number one school in America to study HCI is Carnegie Mellon. It's the only school to have a three-tier (BS, Masters, PhD) degree program, as well as the most popular and well developed.
My degree actually says BS in HCI (I did not attend CMU).
Also, when it comes to real world HCI, there are two flavors... One, academic types who are usually into research and numbers and cognition and all that jazz... The second type is the one that's actually in the workforce. These people come from all different backgrounds and have different titles (Information Architect, User Experience Designer, User Interaction Specialist). The list goes on and on and they can keep sipping their lattes telling you about it. They're all basically the same, and poorly defined. But the key is this: you don't need to have any sort of background to do this kind of work, you just need to get into it. It's very chicken and egg, but I assure you the industry as a whole is still figuring themselves out.
With neither experience in parallel development or MATLAB, here's something I've read before (regarding Ruby and C++)...
Start in whatever language happens to be easiest/most high level. Easiest in that whatever helps you express your final product the fastest. Then, when this prototype is up and running, go ahead and reprogram it in C++ for speed.
Think of using the first language as a roadmap, where you can concentrate on organizing your thoughts and getting user requirements out of the way. Done purely in C++, you may be subject to premature optimization or just wasting time re-inventing constructs and concepts that are trivial in the other language.
I call lack of citation on the original poster's mention that MLB sponsors the event. The linked blog says that the virtual event would be held in conjunction with an MLB real-life event, but it does not say that MLB sponsors the virtual event.
While reading the list, I was about to recommend some over-the-counter drug like Nyquil, but when I reached divorce, I was at a loss. Nyquil can aid many things, but probably not divorce. =)
In my experience as a web developer, unless we're talking about high-end, intensive, cutting edge dynamic content, rarely ever are sites optimized for one browser or another. And usually, certain features are a path of exclusivity, so optimized really isn't the word. IE supports these visual filters, this that and the other, and Mozilla supports some xyz new CSS attributes. Whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you need to view the source of a web page on a device like this? That's like a highly technical use case for a not-so-technical device.
You're like the one person in all of Slashdot that really gets it. *applause*
I completely agree. And until the day someone makes a sexy product that is also free and open powered, openness will maintain the illusion of "a terrible product" and no one wants terrible products, besides freedom apologists. I'm not saying freedom and user rights are a bad thing, I'm just saying hey I have a life and would rather not waste my life with sub par computing experiences.
So the question is, what will it take? What will it take to create an awesome open product? At the rate the world is going, I'm tempted to say it's impossible. Mutually inclusive, at least in reality.
I cried... So beautiful, this comment. Baa on, my brother. Baa on.
This is an unsupported guess.
There's probably two versions of the executable: ones you have already running hot and one that's on the file system. If you update Chrome, it's probably updating only the reference copy on the file system and not the one you're running. So if you shut down all of your instances of Chrome, and then start one up again, it uses that new copy without mentioning anything to you.
What would really be neat is if you could run different versions of Chrome simultaneously so that given the organic lifetime of your tabs, you could seamlessly use the new Chrome and phase the old Chrome out (given that each tab is a process).
It was called spawning. To spawn a copy.
I don't get it. Could someone explain the reference?
I feel like I'm the only one who wasn't super impressed by the lecture. I found it cheesy at times. I'd like to hear from people who did like it exactly why you like it and what was so earth-shattering about what he had to say. Sure, he was a nice guy. But of what he said, was it really that good?
It's different though. In DDR, your steps go along with the music. If you miss a step, nothing happens other than a couple boos or dead arrows. But in Guitar Hero and Rock Band, the music of the instrument will actually cut out if you aren't performing it properly. So it's a different sort of feedback mechanism, and a better one, I think. It feels like the music is caused by you, which makes it feel like you're really rocking out. That and it's more of a group experience. The game gives a lot of bonuses for coordinated effort, while in DDR, there really wasn't any sort of synergy between players at all (strictly versus).
I was wondering if anyone would be so kind as to explain multiple dispatch, as mentioned in the State. What is it that multiple dispatch solves that an if tree that detects object types doesn't do currently?
People keep using asteroids and windows as examples but I still don't understand. I figure collisions would be a function of The Universe and window handling would be written as a function of, well, the window.
Could anyone take a stab at explaining what this discovery actually means, in layman's terms? What is the significance of a univeral turing machine? What if the turing machine wasn't universal?
What's the significance of 2,3? (Bit states, color?)
What did this discovery actually teach us? How is it useful?
Hate to break it to you, but UI designers have been facing this dilemma forever. Even if the new interface is better (and I'm not saying it's bad, I kinda like it too), *change* is already setting it back. Asking anyone to "do some research" or learn something new is already too much to ask of someone who already has a groove going.
I'm hesitant to post about it since I love the idea so much but... The gambit system has made me wonder. Is there a market/arena/research about human-assisted artificial intelligence? That's what I see the gambits as. They allow the other player characters to make smart decisions on their own, in the event you don't explicitly tell them what to do. You can make characters that take care of the post-battle nitty-gritty, you can make characters that use normal attacks intelligently, or you can aim to make fully automating parties, where your only role is to acquire a target by proximity and the gambits handle the rest.
I'm completely fascinated by the idea and anything resembles it. And I'd love to hear anyone's opinions on it or where I can find more resources about this type of AI.
All hail the power of the multi-tap! Play as the Boy, Girl, and the Sprite, or...
Face each other in the four-for-all (with CPU as fill-in) in Bomberman or Smash Brothers
/played is a slash command in the game (you type it in the chat box)
it tells you how long you've played the character you're currently logged on to since it got created, and also how long you've been playing since you last logged on
I just recently quit wow... I mean, I didn't full on cancel my account or delete my character, so it's still there should I ever wish to go back... But I did uninstall and plan on keeping away from it, at least for a while.
/played
/played. Find out for yourself what large, large portion of your life you're throwing away at this game.
You know what did me in though?
Thanks to the glory that is mathematics, I found out that on average, I played for three hours a day. Worst part about averages, I don't even play on the weekdays that much (which means very VERY loaded weekends).
What a waste. Three hours of my life. Every single day! I could be learning how to juggle or searching for a significant other or reading a book or hacking! Something!
If you're like me... On the verge of quitting... And trying to look for that extra push... Look at
Don't get me wrong, it's a great game, and I loved playing it. But it's a lot. Moderation, please.
PS - I just bought Civ 4 (crack for crystal, I know). I don't get it.
No, the quests don't get more varied. That's why the jab is that there are only three (or so) types of quests. It's literally true.
Find. Loot. Kill. Report back.
There's only so many things you can do to make a quest interesting or different, in terms of the mechanics. Sometimes you have to interact with a doodad or just explore a location...
The only difference in quests ends up being the storyline, which Warcraft is full of. Some people tend to forget that. Sure, kill 10 troggs, but troggs are people too. With wants and needs...
It's what you make of it. Try partying with others or role playing to help emerse yourself in the experience.
To see its perspective compared to other MMOs, check out this chart:
n s_8846_image001.gif
http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1_files/Subscriptio
It pretty much beats every other popular MMO out there combined. That's impressive.
Also, considering the expansion coming out, I'm sure that will attract either new players or players who quit before and then want to see what the Burning Crusade is about (new content, new characters, new spells, bug fixes, enhancements, etc).
With versioning systems, damage was never difficult to repair. Consider this: if you approve an article that isn't really kosher, your name shows up in the history as the one who approved it. If you have a history of approving unfit articles, maybe your privilages should be taken away. Your reputation with the Wikipedia community is at stake, just because you want to support Colbert?
Therein lay the balance. You want the visual feedback to be there, but you don't want it to be too long.
Think of a standard Windows visual alert (if you have accessibility options turned on). The screen border will blink, sorta, whenever there is an audio alert (it's a visual supplement for the hard of hearing). Compare this to OSX which will do the same, but in a "flash" manner, where the blink effect actually dies down and lasts more than two frames (on/off).
This is the sort of "jumpiness" the OOOP (whatever) was referring to. The OSX flash "jumps less" than a quick BLEEP sort of notifcation.
The whole jumpiness/smoothness thing is subtle... It's not something you can readily quantify. And it does seem superfluous. Which is why power users, such as yourself, may be accustomed to living with it out. But enhancements like this are generally received as "less harsh" or "more friendly" and just more enjoyable. Very non-technical attributes that give OSX and products like it their coolness feel that users have difficulty quantifying, but are attracted to nonetheless.
As another example, see the iPod menus. When you click on a menu item on an iPod, the screen actually slides over to the next menu, as if they were shuffling in place, instead of doing what most programmers would implement, a drop in replacement (screen refresh).
As an interface/interaction designer, your product is like your baby, with all of its quirks and whatnot. Even in the face of criticism, rarely would designers "go back" on their decisions. That would force them to acknowledge two things: 1) my baby is ugly! 2) i was wrong!
And who wants to do that?
You would aim to get a degree in either Human-Computer Interaction, Interaction Design, or any one of its many names... (People in this field have a fixation on the precision of the name, or the lack thereof)
Last time I checked, as I researched this very question when I went to university, the number one school in America to study HCI is Carnegie Mellon. It's the only school to have a three-tier (BS, Masters, PhD) degree program, as well as the most popular and well developed.
My degree actually says BS in HCI (I did not attend CMU).
Also, when it comes to real world HCI, there are two flavors... One, academic types who are usually into research and numbers and cognition and all that jazz... The second type is the one that's actually in the workforce. These people come from all different backgrounds and have different titles (Information Architect, User Experience Designer, User Interaction Specialist). The list goes on and on and they can keep sipping their lattes telling you about it. They're all basically the same, and poorly defined. But the key is this: you don't need to have any sort of background to do this kind of work, you just need to get into it. It's very chicken and egg, but I assure you the industry as a whole is still figuring themselves out.
With neither experience in parallel development or MATLAB, here's something I've read before (regarding Ruby and C++)...
Start in whatever language happens to be easiest/most high level. Easiest in that whatever helps you express your final product the fastest. Then, when this prototype is up and running, go ahead and reprogram it in C++ for speed.
Think of using the first language as a roadmap, where you can concentrate on organizing your thoughts and getting user requirements out of the way. Done purely in C++, you may be subject to premature optimization or just wasting time re-inventing constructs and concepts that are trivial in the other language.
I call lack of citation on the original poster's mention that MLB sponsors the event. The linked blog says that the virtual event would be held in conjunction with an MLB real-life event, but it does not say that MLB sponsors the virtual event.
While reading the list, I was about to recommend some over-the-counter drug like Nyquil, but when I reached divorce, I was at a loss. Nyquil can aid many things, but probably not divorce. =)
(or "wife aggro" as I've recently learned it)
In my experience as a web developer, unless we're talking about high-end, intensive, cutting edge dynamic content, rarely ever are sites optimized for one browser or another. And usually, certain features are a path of exclusivity, so optimized really isn't the word. IE supports these visual filters, this that and the other, and Mozilla supports some xyz new CSS attributes. Whatever.