Well more than create a new game you could just use existing ones. RPG (role playing games... for the uninitiated if there are..) are a perfect example of non zero sum game where its possible to create a lot of prisoners dilemna-like situations. RPG allows players to play it as a zero sum game in case they are all evil aligned;), but in general is more a collaboration game in wich every player contributes its unique skills and are compensated (with experience points for example) for their achievements and contributions to the game more than anything else (sounds familiar?;))
That evolution brings species to their optimum capabilites its probably wrong. You can say that it brings it to a better state than it was before, but that doesnt means that the state at wich you arrive is the optimum state (think it as a tree with many branches, we could be following one way up, but that is not the only way;) What i can't understand is why people always say that the things that humans create are unnatural things. That medicine, genetic manipulation, robotics, are not natural because humans made them. Well, when i see a birds nest i still consider it natural, even if it was created by a bird. Why is not possible to believe that human society and advancement is in fact just another form of natural evolution? We are just another kind of animals, but we are animals. Anyway, its possible that making people live longer would bring other problems, like overpopulation, and social security crisis;).SantiagoEvolution, There's More Than One Way To Do It:)
XML only has a real use in b2b if people know how your XML is structured. If they dont, then you are stuck with your documents because no one can send you a XML that you can understand.
Besides, publishing your DTD will give you positive feedback. It doesn't really matters if the competition tries to start using your XML structure. You are the ones who already have all their systems developed to support than kind of XML documents. In fact, if your competitors also start trying to use your DTD then more and more customers will start to use it But your competitor will start from zero, while you have the knowledge, the prestige from having invented it, the actual systems already working, etc. etc.
However, if you are planing to do this, dont use a DTD, they are probably sentenced for a quick death. XML Schema definition are better, not only because they allow you to describe your XML document more precisely, but because they are XML themselves.
Actually, if you can convince your customers to send you their data according to your DTD, then you are already doing a good thing in bringing all that people to the beautifull world of XML;)
Well, just as humans can know what "that" is refering by the context in wich "that" appears, so could computers.
However, i think that the trade-off of making an extremely complex (as it must be) system for interpreting human language its just to great just for simplifying shell commands. I think that the concept of managing objects graphically allows for a much higher abstraction that specifing what you have to do using words (in fact, my mother can understand that files can be stored in directories because she can drag and drop it, otherwise it would take a year to explain her that the things called "files" can go inside "directories";)).
I agree, computer languages are much more specific than human language (saying "i want more free disk space" juts wont cut it, or well, it may cut it, but not what you wanted to cut;)).
Adding some kind of human to computer language interface will result in some other kind of sintaxis, similar to human maybe, but in result you will need to learn how to speak to computers.
Its true, it may help to democratize computers. But honestly, as years go by, it wont be this kind of systems what will bring the democratization, but the continual exposure to computers systems. (i mean, i dont want to be cold blooded but i dont expect my 80 years granma to learn to use a computer, she just dont need it now, but 5 year kids are already having computer courses in some schools, and really, they will learn to use computers with or without a human to computer shell).
The answer is extremely simple, the D&D worlds have excelent histories to tell. Settings such as Dragonlance have a lot of top selling novels (specially Weiss-Hickman), so do novels about the Forgotten Realms (specially R.A. Salvatore, and his excellent character Drizzt Do'Urden). Those novels are not only readed by D&D players. I have quite a lot of friends that liked the novels but never before had played a D&D game. The question is not why do they make a D&D movie, but why they dont use the existing settings for the movie plot. What would be my dream, and most of my friends dreams? Seeing characters such as Raistlin interpreted by, i dont know, Jeremy Irons (a bit old now, maybe before;)). What would be really cool is watching our all time loved characters on the big screen. D&D is not a game only for nerds. Its an extremely flexible game that can be shaped in almost every fashion you want. Obviously, making a D&D movie is saying something to vague. Legend could be a D&D movie, Krull too. I think they are making a big mistake calling it a D&D movie, and not making it a "Dragonlance" or "Forgotten Realms" movie... but thats is way out of my power to decide.
Slashdot Mirror
Well more than create a new game you could just use existing ones. RPG (role playing games... for the uninitiated if there are..) are a perfect example of non zero sum game where its possible to create a lot of prisoners dilemna-like situations. RPG allows players to play it as a zero sum game in case they are all evil aligned ;), but in general is more a collaboration game in wich every player contributes its unique skills and are compensated (with experience points for example) for their achievements and contributions to the game more than anything else (sounds familiar? ;))
That evolution brings species to their optimum capabilites its probably wrong. You can say that it brings it to a better state than it was before, but that doesnt means that the state at wich you arrive is the optimum state (think it as a tree with many branches, we could be following one way up, but that is not the only way ;) What i can't understand is why people always say that the things that humans create are unnatural things. That medicine, genetic manipulation, robotics, are not natural because humans made them. Well, when i see a birds nest i still consider it natural, even if it was created by a bird. Why is not possible to believe that human society and advancement is in fact just another form of natural evolution? We are just another kind of animals, but we are animals. Anyway, its possible that making people live longer would bring other problems, like overpopulation, and social security crisis ;).SantiagoEvolution, There's More Than One Way To Do It:)
XML only has a real use in b2b if people know how your XML is structured. If they dont, then you are stuck with your documents because no one can send you a XML that you can understand.
;)
Besides, publishing your DTD will give you positive feedback. It doesn't really matters if the competition tries to start using your XML structure. You are the ones who already have all their systems developed to support than kind of XML documents. In fact, if your competitors also start trying to use your DTD then more and more customers will start to use it But your competitor will start from zero, while you have the knowledge, the prestige from having invented it, the actual systems already working, etc. etc.
However, if you are planing to do this, dont use a DTD, they are probably sentenced for a quick death. XML Schema definition are better, not only because they allow you to describe your XML document more precisely, but because they are XML themselves.
Actually, if you can convince your customers to send you their data according to your DTD, then you are already doing a good thing in bringing all that people to the beautifull world of XML
Well, just as humans can know what "that" is refering by the context in wich "that" appears, so could computers.
;)).
;)).
However, i think that the trade-off of making an extremely complex (as it must be) system for interpreting human language its just to great just for simplifying shell commands. I think that the concept of managing objects graphically allows for a much higher abstraction that specifing what you have to do using words (in fact, my mother can understand that files can be stored in directories because she can drag and drop it, otherwise it would take a year to explain her that the things called "files" can go inside "directories"
I agree, computer languages are much more specific than human language (saying "i want more free disk space" juts wont cut it, or well, it may cut it, but not what you wanted to cut
Adding some kind of human to computer language interface will result in some other kind of sintaxis, similar to human maybe, but in result you will need to learn how to speak to computers.
Its true, it may help to democratize computers. But honestly, as years go by, it wont be this kind of systems what will bring the democratization, but the continual exposure to computers systems. (i mean, i dont want to be cold blooded but i dont expect my 80 years granma to learn to use a computer, she just dont need it now, but 5 year kids are already having computer courses in some schools, and really, they will learn to use computers with or without a human to computer shell).
The answer is extremely simple, the D&D worlds have excelent histories to tell. Settings such as Dragonlance have a lot of top selling novels (specially Weiss-Hickman), so do novels about the Forgotten Realms (specially R.A. Salvatore, and his excellent character Drizzt Do'Urden). Those novels are not only readed by D&D players. I have quite a lot of friends that liked the novels but never before had played a D&D game. The question is not why do they make a D&D movie, but why they dont use the existing settings for the movie plot. What would be my dream, and most of my friends dreams? Seeing characters such as Raistlin interpreted by, i dont know, Jeremy Irons (a bit old now, maybe before ;)). What would be really cool is watching our all time loved characters on the big screen. D&D is not a game only for nerds. Its an extremely flexible game that can be shaped in almost every fashion you want. Obviously, making a D&D movie is saying something to vague. Legend could be a D&D movie, Krull too. I think they are making a big mistake calling it a D&D movie, and not making it a "Dragonlance" or "Forgotten Realms" movie... but thats is way out of my power to decide.