I am not exposing any theory of any type. You gave a link to a graphical image that I think it doesn't give any conclusive information as it is subject to interpretation. You can look for the numbers yourself and try to make a point instead of saying "look, this is the coverage of GSM in the US". I'm not sure what you're supposed to be exposing? My point is that the original poster said "most of the country doesn't have GSM coverage." At the minimum, most of the country would be just over 50%, yeah? Nobody has been able to back up that argument, or really tried--everything that's been posted has been "subject to interpretation." Furthermore, we're talking one network, and one network only--the whole thing is nuts! That's my point.
Please elaborate in which ways. Gladly! One, you seem think the numbers are invalid because of the possible inclusion of some ESMR and PCS devices, you assume they should not count as "cell phones," and you assume the number is large enough to distort the overall mobile picture in the US.
One thing you might be confused about is that for instance you may have heard of Sprint PCS? Not so anymore!
As I said, I think you're misinterpreting all of the above, but i any case, I went to wikipedia, added up the top 5 cell providers and came up with ~220 million reported subscribers. There are TONS of local cell companies in the US--particularly in those rural areas where some people think there's no coverage (I'm not sure if there are small providers in Europe or if it is more dominated by the big corporations?)--and it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me that 20-30 million people could subscribe to such companies. In any case, all that shows is that the numbers in the article are, at worst, pretty darn close.
I wonder if the average American is just greener, and doesn't want to worry about the EM pollution, as well as the vast amount of electricity lost to charging batteries and "wall wart" chargers left plugged in?;-)
If counting all GSM providers, coverage is much better, but still not even close to half the area, and nowhere near the coverage situation in Europe. Still waiting on numbers. Gifs can only tell us so much:) Besides which, the base statement about GSM is not applicable to the cell situation in the US since Verizon/Sprint have huge networks (disputably bigger than ATT).. Anyway, if you have any facts about this, I would love to see them. I haven't been able to find any.
And to those who say that the population density is higher in Europe, that's only true for some European country. The Nordic countries, for example, has a much lower population density than the US, but still around 95% geographical coverage, and a similar number of teens and adults using at least one cell phone. Wow, you're right, America SUCKS. I don't think anyone has brought up population density, other than you? Don't quite know what your bone is... Sweden/Norway have MARGINALLY lower population densities than the US, Denmark has far greater. ~shrug~ what does that tell us? Not a lot...
The OP was refering to GSM exclusively. Whether this is important for a regular user or is "cell coverage of any type" is different. OTOH don't be confused by the colors of the map of ATT you provide. Zoom in one step and you will see a better picture of poor and no coverage areas. Your theory is no more authoritative than my posting the link the graphic! I'm still waiting for numbers, which nobody has provided yet. I haven't been able to find any myself...so it's still open.
I also think you're misinterpreting the second link.
That's a "truth with modifications". If you subtract the areas in the US where there's no GSM coverage, i.e. most of the country, you get a GSM population density that's higher. Wow wow, that sounds nuts to me? Where did you get the idea that in "most of the country" there's no GSM coverage? I'd love to see the statistics about that.. I don't suppose you have any? Here's the coverage map for ATT btw http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/. I guess it's possible that including Alaska covered vs uncovered could be CLOSE... but I'm not sure. If you count any cell coverage, (CDMA, smaller companies, etc) you're dead wrong.
One difference is that in the US, the market is largely a profit-driven free-for-all, where the actors can choose to only put towers where it will be profitable to do so. That means the big cities, their suburbs, and the highways between them. In most of Europe, there's coverage requirements to get a license to operate (and consumers that historically have bought things based also on quality and not features-for-the-price alone). I'm suddenly forced to realize I've been blinded by the economic prosperity of the US my entire life! You're right, the European way IS best! I--and my fellow Americans--are living in filth and squalor, and even worse--we have subpar cellphone plans! I hope we can get arrogant attitudes along with our conversion to the European way;-) I apologize for the poor attempt at humor, but your tone is so typical of anti-American arrogance--and of all things about cell phones! (it's always the cell phone conversations that brings it out the most)
Another difference is that in Europe there's not a near 100% lock-in for phones to a certain provider, like in the US. Most people in the US aren't even aware that phones don't have to be locked to a provider. Some have heard of unlocking of phone, but even of those, almost none know that you can get phones that weren't unlocked, but never locked in the first place. Probably true. At my local mall there's a LARGE kiosk that advertises and sells unlocked phones from around the world...so I'm not sure how true your supposition is overall.
In Europe, if a provider hasn't given a good enough service or coverage, you have historically been able to take your phone elsewhere and get a new plan for your existing phone. The lock-in of the iPhone to a single provider is going to be a lesson in how good the "old" system was, and make European users understand the terrible situation US users have, and why so few Americans have cell phones. I was able to cancel my AT&T contract ~5 years ago when I had no poor in my house. Can't comment on the practice more generally.
"So few American have cell phones"... I gotta see your statistics on this, the only people I know that don't have phones are my 85-90 year old grandparents. Do you really believe this bull? Just what do Europeans believe about us?! most of the US doesn't have coverage and most people don't have cellphones? Gotta say, when you're so wrong about the basic facts upon which you make your slander, it really makes me take the rest of your post less seriously. 82% of Americans Own Cell Phones
Because I think the GP post was referring to citizens of Baltimore when he said: "It's one more reason for those heavily dependent on government services to flock to and continue to live in the state..." I would think it far more likely the GP was referring to the HUGE influx of illegal immigrants in certain DC-area jurisdictions.
And, continuing to stay on topic, most citizens of Baltimore really are irrelvant to a tax on custom programming and IT. They are certainly relevant--what's that tax money for? Didn't MD just pass some major insurance subsidies/legislation? Don't you think that a very large percentage of Maryland's uninsured live in Baltimore, and that they'll be getting the lions share of the money? Where tax money goes seems hugely relevant to me!
Baltimore pays less of a role in the Maryland economy than you think. Its population is about a third of what you think it is, and it only serves to make Maryland look more poor than it is. While I acknowledge you're 100% right, and I was totally wrong about Baltimore's pop (I was thinking metro area..)... you're again displaying the exact "ignore Baltimore" attitude I'm talking about! I mean seriously "it only serves to make Maryland look more poor than it is" ?! Come on, that even sounds ridiculous. I'm absolutely serious that when I say--as someone not from Maryland or "the area" natively--that when native Marylanders make that kind of statement it really comes across as racist or at the very least bigoted (it sounds horribly like "ignore those blacks in Baltimore, they just make Maryland seem poorer than it is"). I'm not trying to accuse you of racism or anything like that--I know absolutely nothing about you and even if I did wouldn't presume to judge you like that.. I'm just saying what it always sounds like to me..
Of course merely by saying this, since race / racism is such a tricky topic, it looks like a personal attack on you... so, I preemptively apologize:p
IMHO, Europeans like to bash on X aspects of American life, Americans like to bash on Y aspects of European life. Is there truth in both sets? Probably.. Doesn't mean X and Y are completely accurate though!
A year or two ago, my office's alarm system went off--called my cellphone. We've been broken into before, so I ran to my laptop and logged into our security cameras--I see the front door swinging open. I call 911. From the time I made the call, cops were at the building in about 6 minutes. Maybe not great, but not too shabby either. The 911 person was very professional, I didn't have to repeat myself, I gave the address once, had it read back to me, and that was about it. That's really my only experience with 911, but I was happy.
Health care is another topic entirely (and offtopic at that) but I'm sure you would be shocked to hear that I would far and away rather have my system than any of the systems in Europe I know about!:)
1) AFAIK most cell providers in the US give you free unlimited calls to other people on your network. in my case, that's verizon, and easily 3/4 of the people I ever talk to are on verizon. In addition, free nights and weekends, and I never once have come close to my (small number of) minutes.
2) Branded phones are obnoxious. If that's a big deal to you, pick a provider that doesn't do them--they're out there!
3) A lot of subsidized phones? I don't understand, When I extended my verizon contract most recently, I got a LG vx8600 for like $50. Subsidized? Is that good or bad?
4) Data is expensive? Do you mean in Europe or the US--I can get a evdo card (which I believe is faster than any of the wireless in Europe?) and unlimited bandwidth (with some restrictions--but no per/mb charge) for I believe $60. Plans for phones are similar. I can use mg VX8600 as a bluetooth modem with my laptop to get on evdo broadband. I actually did this from the rim of the Grand Canyon a couple weeks ago--very cool:)
Thanks for correction re: Baltimore's population--I was thinking Metro Baltimore, but the 650k number is really the one that should be discussed--we're still talking over a tenth of the state's population in one city though.
I find it ironic that you reply to my post, but did you actually READ it? You do the same exact same thing the parent does, ignore Baltimore. The poverty rate in Baltimore according to US census site is 22.9% -- higher than New York City. As I mentioned in my post, the cost of living in Maryland is fairly high--housing costs very high, etc. As far as I know (and please, correct me if I'm wrong) poverty rates are calculated to a national standard--with MD having higher median income and higher cost of living, even the poor are going to be paid more--of course there is going to be a lower poverty rate.
Not to mention that fact that all your taxes have gotten yourself the #2 murder rate in the country in Baltimore !
I'm not trying to argue that MD is a bad place or anything--on the contrary, if you're fortunate enough to live in one of the many rich communities outside of Baltimore or some of the rural areas, you've got a pretty nice and well yuppified area! I just don't understand the "let's ignore Baltimore" reflex that so many Marylandians (Marylanders?) have, especially when attempting to justify higher tax rates and government involvement.
I love comments like "ignore Baltimore"... Baltimore is what--some 2 million people? That's a pretty large chunk of the state to just ignore! I'm not sure if this is some kind of coded racism or not?? But I've heard statements like yours from a lot of people I know living in MAryland...
I think MD does have one of the highest, if not the highest, median per capita income. Many of the north east state are right up there--the cost of living is so high that it's a somewhat misleading number. I live in northern virginia and from what I can tell, Maryland is more expensive to live in than VA. I recently moved here from farther south, and with a salary well above what I was making, I can afford much less of a house, pay way more taxes, etc.
My question is, why should we "ignore Baltimore" --aren't all of those taxes supposed to be helping people? Are they not working?
Out of curiosity, then, is this the brainchild of the Democrats or the Republicans? Hah, there mere fact that you had to ask shows just how far the GOP has fallen from its glory days!
But in some cases they can require you surrender or turn over certain documents--you always have the option NOT to do so (and going to jail). Which is essentially the same thing that's going on here. Actually, there's no evidence the person was even threatened with going to jail, or required to turn anything over..
"I don't know what happened to these files officer, they must have just fallen into the shredder! I don't know how it could have hapened, I'm completely ignorant!"
~shrug~ It's up to courts to decide situations like this. I don't see why encrypted files should be any different than hardcopy or anything else that could be seized under sub poena. It's not like these are new legal questions or problems, it's just that--for instance--on slashdot, encryption is a hot button issue.. Besides which--the woman allegedly claims police "stole" her computer, and she calls them "thugs"... that they are "her enemy" and that (??) they are responsible for hospitalizing her.. Just from reading her quotes, she seems unstable.. Obviously I don't know the details of the case, but I don't any (or many) other commentors here know much more either!:p
It does seem however that you (a pancake) could stand to at least RTFM a little bit... quote -- "It's unclear if the woman was given an official Section 49 notice or simply "invited" to hand over the data voluntarily as part of a bluff by the authorities."
I also don't know exactly how these issues operate in British law.. any inputs on how this fits into current frameworks?
Wow, I didn't mean to upset you, it's really not worth getting mad over this, especially when we mostly agree!
The point--that you've apparently completely and utterly missed, or misunderstood--is that WoW runs on OpenGL, and without DirectX, on the Mac! There's already a complete, well-supported and well-running version that runs without DirectX. Furthermore, you can even run WoW on windows without Direct3D, using the openGL rendering engine. if you can run it OpenGL on windows, you can do it on linux with Wine. (or you can try)
Hope that all makes sense, I'd be glad to provide more details if you're interested or something I said wasn't clear.
Blizzard has simultaneously released Starcraft, Warcraft3, and WoW for Mac and PC--on the same CDs even. They have excellent mac ports--if you can even call it a port.
Clearly it's not DirectX holding them back...
I do however agree with you that for Blizzard a linux version is highly unlikely to be profitable--especially considering the number of linux-ONLY people who would buy WoW. Most linux people who are gamers are going to have a windows box / boot to play games on already.
What an absolutely insular view!
I disagree. I think that terrorists very much care about chemistry sets. You think OBL cares about a chemistry set? You think Ahmadi-Nejad / Hamas / Hezballah / al-Qa'ida whatever group of the day you want to talk about cares about a chemistry set? Do you REALLY think that they are sitting around plotting different ways of subtly limiting American's civil rights? I think that's absolutely bonkers.
They care that they aren't offered and they care that people are pissed about it. Show me any evidence, anywhere, that anyone / group / whatever is even aware of this as an issue? I'll accept any evidence at all.
They care about kids having less and less of a chance to educate themselves and they care that kids curiosity isn't being fulfilled nearly as much. So the same people who blew up the Buddha's at Bamian and prefer for women to not be educated care about American kid's educations? Ok, well maybe I'll buy that--they would rather everyone study Islamic education first and foremost.
They definitely care. They care that the US is becoming a more and more demoralized nation and the educated are having to fight less and less fights that matter and about more and more like this. Can't quite parse what you're saying here?
They care that the people that think are being distracted and rendered useless. Because with them out of way, and with the idiots that are in power today, the current situation will favour them more and mootere and... Ah yes, because with al-Qa'ida's leadership in Iraq being popped off every couple months, gains being made there, the Taliban strongly beat back in Afghanistan, and crackdowns across Europe and the rest of the world, things truly have never been better for Islamists. Victory! Of course, very good of you to get in your jabs about the people you don't agree with being stupid--the last refuge of those without evidence to make their points, insult their opponents' intelligence...
Take care of the thinkers of tomorrow, take care of the thinkers of today and take care that the terrorists are very very happy about this. *yawn*
I think restrictions on chemistry sets are every bit as moronic and f'ed up as you do, but if you think this is what drives Islamists worldwide, I'd say you are both amazingly naive and uninformed.
Well, on the other hand, maybe if windows were cheaper and didn't have the same restrictions, more people would buy it retail? Apple hasn't seemed to feel the need to add more copy protection schemes over the years, even when software like iWork DOES have serial numbers.
Re:And what is the point?
on
Cracking Go
·
· Score: 1
I'm not quite sure that follows my reasoning:-)
Somebody wants to design a program that is the best Go player--a bunch of people on slashdot seem to object to this (yourself included?). It strikes me as an almost luddite type of response--"these computers are taking over our games!" Go is a game, you're right--I don't know about the meditation aspect, I know a lot of people on slashdot DO like to hold Go in a semi-mystical / holy position, but utlimately, it's a game. If someone wants to research and design a computer and software to play a game, I really don't know why a bunch of people who are primarily computer geeks should object to this! The drive to design the best chess playing program was widely cheered on and heralded, I guess I don't see what's different about researchers having mastered one game, and moving on to another?
The design of a program that can beat Go isn't going to change how you play, nobody is going to make you play, or stop playing.. in fact the only thing I can think of it changing for current Go players is the pseudo-mystical position it seems to hold in the minds of some!
Re:Artificial Intelligence?
on
Cracking Go
·
· Score: 1
AI involves a lot of search questions, but an algorithm that performs an exhaustive search to find its next move is *not* artificial intelligence. You're turning things around. You can define the 'study of artificial intelligence' any way you like, but finding the best answer by comparing all alternatives is not what I call 'intelligence', so having a computer do exactly that is not what I call 'artificial intelligence'. It does not resemble human intelligence in any way.
Also I think I do know pretty well what's involved in AI, having followed AI courses, courses on cognitive algorithms and courses on intelligent agents as part of my CS degree. Solving a game like chess or Go the way it's done right now is not 'artificial intelligence', and I think the majority of AI researchers agree with me on that point. Chess programs *do not do an exhaustive search of all possible moves*. If that where true, a chess program would *never* lose, only draw against really, really good human players. A chess computer combines statistical data from a game database with a bounded search on the utility of the possible game states it considers. It's just statistical processing + Markov chains. Ok, well that's pretty much complete BS! You're saying I'm wrong because my definition of AI is incorrect--yet you fail to offer up any definition of AI, or offer any proof that anyone else understands AI to be what you seem to think it is. I'll say it again, AI is not some magical thing that gives computers consciousness, or anything like that. It does not mean that a chess program is going to be able to watch the kids, do the laundry AND beat you at chess. This complete misunderstanding of the term AI is one of the things the professor went out of his way to beat out of ours heads in my first AI class! (while noting how silly the term really is, because it leads to misunderstandings exactly like yours)
If a program can play chess, it's AI. If a program can play how to stores boxes in a warehouse, it's AI. If a program can simulate human conversation, it's AI. The methods involved can vary greatly, but the methods used to get there don't really matter--the end result is what matters!
I'm also unsure how/why you are using the term "exhaustive" -- in the case of chess it doesn't literally mean that EVERY position is checked, as you say, there can be some statistical analysis, and more likely other normal search pruning techniques used to narrow down the possibilities a bit. EVEN SO, current software can't search an infinite number of ply ahead. You seem to think that we could be making chess programs much more powerful than they are now, but aren't? I don't understand your logic, it's only in the last several years that computers can reliably beat the best chess masters in the world--you think programmers have been holding back??
I also thought you might find the following link informative about chess programs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_chess
That's fine by me, You can call stuff whatever you like. But please don't tell me I don't know whay I'm talking about, because I think I do. I don't mean to be rude, so I apologize if you took offense. But, your idea of what AI is just seems to be incredibly off the mark! The wikipedia article on AI defines it as "the study and design of intelligent agents" where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximizes its chances of success." It doesn't say a system...which maximizes its chances of success WITHOUT USING ANY TYPE OF SEARCH. In fact it doesn't say anything about the implementation at all!
Slashdot Mirror
What's your point? We've done both, they've done both. How is it a question of "smarter" and "luckier."
You don' repeatedly get to the moon on luck alone.
One thing you might be confused about is that for instance you may have heard of Sprint PCS? Not so anymore!
As I said, I think you're misinterpreting all of the above, but i any case, I went to wikipedia, added up the top 5 cell providers and came up with ~220 million reported subscribers. There are TONS of local cell companies in the US--particularly in those rural areas where some people think there's no coverage (I'm not sure if there are small providers in Europe or if it is more dominated by the big corporations?)--and it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me that 20-30 million people could subscribe to such companies. In any case, all that shows is that the numbers in the article are, at worst, pretty darn close.
I wonder if the average American is just greener, and doesn't want to worry about the EM pollution, as well as the vast amount of electricity lost to charging batteries and "wall wart" chargers left plugged in? ;-)
I also think you're misinterpreting the second link.
"So few American have cell phones"
"It's one more reason for those heavily dependent on government services to flock to and continue to live in the state..." I would think it far more likely the GP was referring to the HUGE influx of illegal immigrants in certain DC-area jurisdictions. And, continuing to stay on topic, most citizens of Baltimore really are irrelvant to a tax on custom programming and IT. They are certainly relevant--what's that tax money for? Didn't MD just pass some major insurance subsidies/legislation? Don't you think that a very large percentage of Maryland's uninsured live in Baltimore, and that they'll be getting the lions share of the money? Where tax money goes seems hugely relevant to me! Baltimore pays less of a role in the Maryland economy than you think. Its population is about a third of what you think it is, and it only serves to make Maryland look more poor than it is. While I acknowledge you're 100% right, and I was totally wrong about Baltimore's pop (I was thinking metro area..)
Of course merely by saying this, since race / racism is such a tricky topic, it looks like a personal attack on you... so, I preemptively apologize
Wow, that's pretty impressive, I hadn't realized that was rolled out yet. What is pricing and coverage like currently?
IMHO, Europeans like to bash on X aspects of American life, Americans like to bash on Y aspects of European life. Is there truth in both sets? Probably.. Doesn't mean X and Y are completely accurate though!
:)
A year or two ago, my office's alarm system went off--called my cellphone. We've been broken into before, so I ran to my laptop and logged into our security cameras--I see the front door swinging open. I call 911. From the time I made the call, cops were at the building in about 6 minutes. Maybe not great, but not too shabby either. The 911 person was very professional, I didn't have to repeat myself, I gave the address once, had it read back to me, and that was about it. That's really my only experience with 911, but I was happy.
Health care is another topic entirely (and offtopic at that) but I'm sure you would be shocked to hear that I would far and away rather have my system than any of the systems in Europe I know about!
1) AFAIK most cell providers in the US give you free unlimited calls to other people on your network. in my case, that's verizon, and easily 3/4 of the people I ever talk to are on verizon. In addition, free nights and weekends, and I never once have come close to my (small number of) minutes.
:)
2) Branded phones are obnoxious. If that's a big deal to you, pick a provider that doesn't do them--they're out there!
3) A lot of subsidized phones? I don't understand, When I extended my verizon contract most recently, I got a LG vx8600 for like $50. Subsidized? Is that good or bad?
4) Data is expensive? Do you mean in Europe or the US--I can get a evdo card (which I believe is faster than any of the wireless in Europe?) and unlimited bandwidth (with some restrictions--but no per/mb charge) for I believe $60. Plans for phones are similar. I can use mg VX8600 as a bluetooth modem with my laptop to get on evdo broadband. I actually did this from the rim of the Grand Canyon a couple weeks ago--very cool
Thanks for correction re: Baltimore's population--I was thinking Metro Baltimore, but the 650k number is really the one that should be discussed--we're still talking over a tenth of the state's population in one city though.
I find it ironic that you reply to my post, but did you actually READ it? You do the same exact same thing the parent does, ignore Baltimore. The poverty rate in Baltimore according to US census site is 22.9% -- higher than New York City. As I mentioned in my post, the cost of living in Maryland is fairly high--housing costs very high, etc. As far as I know (and please, correct me if I'm wrong) poverty rates are calculated to a national standard--with MD having higher median income and higher cost of living, even the poor are going to be paid more--of course there is going to be a lower poverty rate.
Not to mention that fact that all your taxes have gotten yourself the #2 murder rate in the country in Baltimore !
I'm not trying to argue that MD is a bad place or anything--on the contrary, if you're fortunate enough to live in one of the many rich communities outside of Baltimore or some of the rural areas, you've got a pretty nice and well yuppified area! I just don't understand the "let's ignore Baltimore" reflex that so many Marylandians (Marylanders?) have, especially when attempting to justify higher tax rates and government involvement.
I love comments like "ignore Baltimore" ... Baltimore is what--some 2 million people? That's a pretty large chunk of the state to just ignore! I'm not sure if this is some kind of coded racism or not?? But I've heard statements like yours from a lot of people I know living in MAryland...
I think MD does have one of the highest, if not the highest, median per capita income. Many of the north east state are right up there--the cost of living is so high that it's a somewhat misleading number. I live in northern virginia and from what I can tell, Maryland is more expensive to live in than VA. I recently moved here from farther south, and with a salary well above what I was making, I can afford much less of a house, pay way more taxes, etc.
My question is, why should we "ignore Baltimore" --aren't all of those taxes supposed to be helping people? Are they not working?
And how far the Democrats have yet to fall?
But in some cases they can require you surrender or turn over certain documents--you always have the option NOT to do so (and going to jail). Which is essentially the same thing that's going on here. Actually, there's no evidence the person was even threatened with going to jail, or required to turn anything over..
"I don't know what happened to these files officer, they must have just fallen into the shredder! I don't know how it could have hapened, I'm completely ignorant!"
... that they are "her enemy" and that (??) they are responsible for hospitalizing her.. Just from reading her quotes, she seems unstable.. Obviously I don't know the details of the case, but I don't any (or many) other commentors here know much more either! :p
... quote -- "It's unclear if the woman was given an official Section 49 notice or simply "invited" to hand over the data voluntarily as part of a bluff by the authorities."
~shrug~ It's up to courts to decide situations like this. I don't see why encrypted files should be any different than hardcopy or anything else that could be seized under sub poena. It's not like these are new legal questions or problems, it's just that--for instance--on slashdot, encryption is a hot button issue.. Besides which--the woman allegedly claims police "stole" her computer, and she calls them "thugs"
It does seem however that you (a pancake) could stand to at least RTFM a little bit
I also don't know exactly how these issues operate in British law.. any inputs on how this fits into current frameworks?
As they say ignorance of the law is no excuse...
I agree with that.
It's interesting because blizzard has always had great mac support--at least since Warcraft 2. But they have zippo linux.
Not to mention the fact that it seems like everything EXCEPT CO2 has been completely forgotten! Pretty annoying...
Wow, I didn't mean to upset you, it's really not worth getting mad over this, especially when we mostly agree!
The point--that you've apparently completely and utterly missed, or misunderstood--is that WoW runs on OpenGL, and without DirectX, on the Mac! There's already a complete, well-supported and well-running version that runs without DirectX. Furthermore, you can even run WoW on windows without Direct3D, using the openGL rendering engine. if you can run it OpenGL on windows, you can do it on linux with Wine. (or you can try)
Hope that all makes sense, I'd be glad to provide more details if you're interested or something I said wasn't clear.
Blizzard has simultaneously released Starcraft, Warcraft3, and WoW for Mac and PC--on the same CDs even. They have excellent mac ports--if you can even call it a port.
Clearly it's not DirectX holding them back...
I do however agree with you that for Blizzard a linux version is highly unlikely to be profitable--especially considering the number of linux-ONLY people who would buy WoW. Most linux people who are gamers are going to have a windows box / boot to play games on already.
I think restrictions on chemistry sets are every bit as moronic and f'ed up as you do, but if you think this is what drives Islamists worldwide, I'd say you are both amazingly naive and uninformed.
Well, on the other hand, maybe if windows were cheaper and didn't have the same restrictions, more people would buy it retail? Apple hasn't seemed to feel the need to add more copy protection schemes over the years, even when software like iWork DOES have serial numbers.
I'm not quite sure that follows my reasoning :-)
Somebody wants to design a program that is the best Go player--a bunch of people on slashdot seem to object to this (yourself included?). It strikes me as an almost luddite type of response--"these computers are taking over our games!" Go is a game, you're right--I don't know about the meditation aspect, I know a lot of people on slashdot DO like to hold Go in a semi-mystical / holy position, but utlimately, it's a game. If someone wants to research and design a computer and software to play a game, I really don't know why a bunch of people who are primarily computer geeks should object to this! The drive to design the best chess playing program was widely cheered on and heralded, I guess I don't see what's different about researchers having mastered one game, and moving on to another?
The design of a program that can beat Go isn't going to change how you play, nobody is going to make you play, or stop playing.. in fact the only thing I can think of it changing for current Go players is the pseudo-mystical position it seems to hold in the minds of some!
Also I think I do know pretty well what's involved in AI, having followed AI courses, courses on cognitive algorithms and courses on intelligent agents as part of my CS degree. Solving a game like chess or Go the way it's done right now is not 'artificial intelligence', and I think the majority of AI researchers agree with me on that point. Chess programs *do not do an exhaustive search of all possible moves*. If that where true, a chess program would *never* lose, only draw against really, really good human players. A chess computer combines statistical data from a game database with a bounded search on the utility of the possible game states it considers. It's just statistical processing + Markov chains. Ok, well that's pretty much complete BS! You're saying I'm wrong because my definition of AI is incorrect--yet you fail to offer up any definition of AI, or offer any proof that anyone else understands AI to be what you seem to think it is. I'll say it again, AI is not some magical thing that gives computers consciousness, or anything like that. It does not mean that a chess program is going to be able to watch the kids, do the laundry AND beat you at chess. This complete misunderstanding of the term AI is one of the things the professor went out of his way to beat out of ours heads in my first AI class! (while noting how silly the term really is, because it leads to misunderstandings exactly like yours)
If a program can play chess, it's AI. If a program can play how to stores boxes in a warehouse, it's AI. If a program can simulate human conversation, it's AI. The methods involved can vary greatly, but the methods used to get there don't really matter--the end result is what matters!
I'm also unsure how/why you are using the term "exhaustive" -- in the case of chess it doesn't literally mean that EVERY position is checked, as you say, there can be some statistical analysis, and more likely other normal search pruning techniques used to narrow down the possibilities a bit. EVEN SO, current software can't search an infinite number of ply ahead. You seem to think that we could be making chess programs much more powerful than they are now, but aren't? I don't understand your logic, it's only in the last several years that computers can reliably beat the best chess masters in the world--you think programmers have been holding back??
I also thought you might find the following link informative about chess programs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_chess That's fine by me, You can call stuff whatever you like. But please don't tell me I don't know whay I'm talking about, because I think I do. I don't mean to be rude, so I apologize if you took offense. But, your idea of what AI is just seems to be incredibly off the mark! The wikipedia article on AI defines it as "the study and design of intelligent agents" where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximizes its chances of success." It doesn't say a system...which maximizes its chances of success WITHOUT USING ANY TYPE OF SEARCH. In fact it doesn't say anything about the implementation at all!
Interesting! I had always seen it attributed to Mark Twain.. learn something new every day.. thanks for the heads up!