You really don't think *ANY* of this research money is going into anyone's pockets? Don't you think any of the researchers like being paid for their work or do you think that they all have jobs at the local McDonald's and just do the research for free?
What the previous poster was trying to say was that music in movies, like images for commercial purposes (if money is going to change hands, then it is commercial) should be licensed. MIT used someone else's work as part of an effort to get a $50 million government contract. With that much money changing hands, they could have at least paid a small licensing fee to the artist.
As for your kid using an illustration of a comic book character for a class project having to pay licensing fees: it depends. If he is doing a research paper about comic books, I think we can all agree that using the image would not only be protected by fair use, but also expected. (Though notifying the copyright holder is always a respectufl thing to do.)
However, if your child is just plastering a bunch of comic book characters in his paper for no reason at all, then yes, licensing fees should be paid. And you as his father should explain to him early on why he shouldn't be using the images. It's this type lazy disregard for the works of others that got MIT into this position in the first place. One would think that an MIT professor would have raised his daughter to know the meaning of the world "plagarism" and how serious the matter really is.
It might be possible to get around bandwidth constraints using a different method. If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft's XBOX uses dual-channel DDR memory based on Nvidia's nForce board to get two times the theoretical bandwidth. (Though, based on Tom Hardware's recent review of the board, dual-channel doesn't seem to have as great a real-world performance as one might hope.)
I'm an American but I've never heard of "Texas toast," either. I did, however, learn to stay away from any type of food dish whose name involves the word "Texas." Words to live by. Crazy Texans.
Well, that certainly is elitist shit. No one really cares about your family lineage or how many wars your ancestors may have been involved with. It really doesn't make any difference. Did you personally fight in the Revolutionary War? Did you participate in the Civil War? No you didn't, so shut up.
I'm tired of hearing all this ethnocentric crap from people who think they're the only "Real Americans." As far as I know, you don't need to prove your loyalty to any nation in order to be considered a human being. The whole point of the American ideology is that every person -- regardless of gender, age, race, height, width, national origin, or sexual orientation -- should be afforded the same basic respect and decency. It's what Americans continue to fight for evry day. It's what you claim that your family has fought so hard to protect and what you now claim to be reserved for an "elite class." Your attitudes only serve to bring shame to those Americans who still hold freedom as a a fundamental part of humanity.
Yeah... you're wrong. BeOS is already dead. Be basically killed all of its staff and sold to Palm. Be no longer exists. Palm has already announced that they will do no more development on BeIA, which was Be's last effort to squeeze some revenue out of BeOS. Chances are, there will be no development of BeOS as we know it coming from Palm, even despite the fact that the BeOS community is up in arms with petitions and the like. Hopefully, some of what was in BeOS might show up in future Palm devices, but I doubt it will be at all recognizable.
Windows Media Player has been able to play mp3s since Windows 98 was released. There are still thousands of copies of WinAmp downloaded everyday. If people aren't happy with what they're given, they'll go after something better.
In the Netscape vs. Explorer war, no one really cared about the browser one way or the other. However, Netscape always charged for their browser, so in that respect, IE was better. (Personally, I was dissatisfied by both browsers in the pre-4.0 days. Both were buggy as all hell.)
You're complaining because Microsoft is making it easier to run thier software. Would you like them to put some kind of complicated locking mechanism on the executable? What difference does it make if they're easier to run?
If Joe Blow consumer doesn't mind (and really: he doesn't), then there's not much wrong with that. Competitors will just have to come up with a creative way to deal with it. AOL is doing a pretty damn good job integrating their AIM client with their AOL program -- companiese will adapt.
I really don't have any objections to Microsoft bundling software with their OS and making it preferred. It isn't hard to download new software and make that program preferred. If the "dumb users" don't like Media Player, MSN, or IE, they'll find alternatives. They always do.
Settling out of court has never been an acknowledgement of guilt. Lots of companies settle so that they stay out of the media spotlight and can say they have a clean record. Those companies very often seem guilty and everyone assumes as much.
However, sometimes perfectly innocent people stay out of court because they can't afford lawyer's fees or because it might cause them harm in their personal life.
For example, if the professor in Germany were to be taken to court, he may very well spend thousands defending himself and still lose. Then he'd have to pay damages to Adobe, pay Adobe's lawyers, still have to change the name of the program, might go bankrupt, and may very well lose his job if it reflects negatively on the Univerity where he works.
Another reason for me to be ashamed of living in Los Angeles. There's something seriously wrong with LA County. I'll be glad when all those secessionists start to cut up our gigantically mammoth city into more manageable parts. I need to move out of this fricken city.
The Constitution only prevents the government from invading your right to privacy. Microsoft isn't the government. They're not necessarily bound by the same restrictions as is our government. That's not to say that other non-constitutional laws don't prevent Microsoft from coming into your house and searching through your things. But it's an idiotic statment to say that Microsoft's tactics are un-Constitutional -- that's complete bullshit.
Just remember that the Constitution is the people's protection against the government not against business.
Well, I may not be an expert in Disney movies by any respect, but I do have a love for them. I watch them whenever I can, I have a season pass to Disneyland (I *love* living in LA), and I always make sure that I go out to watch the newest ones (call me a sucker for musical comedies).
I have to say that this movie was not at all what I expected. It reminded me a lot of Titan AE... certainly not you everyday Disney animated feature. Still, it was very good.
I have to say that the PG rating was warranted for the violence. Sure, Disney has killed some of its characters before, but never in such quantities.
First, most of the original city of Atlantis is wiped out. Only the palace and satelite buildings are saved. Besides these unseen citizens, the guys flying around are also swept by the enormous tidal wave.
Later, the submarine sets out with 200 people, about 180 of which die after the attack by the giant lobster. Then later, the villains are thrashed by the heroes (the main characters live, but some unfortunate Antlanteans die on their flying fish), which in the end leaves only the main characters alive.
Finally, the lava that sends fiery rocks towards Atlantis before the giant robots put the force field around the city presumably killed several more people.
In the end, the body count was probably in the thousands, about 200 of which happend during main sequences. I think PG is pretty good considering. At least none of the deaths were bloody.
By the way, I agree that the Italian Florist was easily the funniest character in the movie. His lines are instant classics.
What bothers me is that he compares DeCSS to stealing control of commercial airplanes. It is has been historically held by the Supreme Court that the latter isn't acceptable because it presents a "clear and present danger."
I think that anyone worth half their weight in spit would immediately realize that DeCSS presents no physical danger to anyone. It's ludicrous to even imply otherwise.
Here is a very brief list of games that do and do not comply with the rules. Tell me which list you'd prefer:
Does:
Pong
Tetris
Some Pinball games
Minesweeper
Bust a Move
Does Not:
Quest for Glory (wizards)
Space Quest (carnivorous aliens)
King's Quest (wizards)
Codename: Iceman (Russians)
Half-Life (carnivorous aliens)
Unreal Tournament (first-person shooter)
Commander Keen (side scroller)
Tomb Raider (undead bodies)
Sim City (explosions)
Sim City 2000 (explosions)
The Sims (thieves)
War Craft (arms race)
Star Craft (arms race)
Civilization (arms race)
Solitaire (Hoyle)
Hearts (Hoyle)
PacMan (cinematic sequences)
Ms. PacMan (cinematic sequences)
Super Marios Bros (side-scroller)
Legend of Zelda (wizards)
Ultima (wizards)
Worms (explosions)
Asteroids (explosions)
Galaga (explosions)
Space Invadors (explosions)
Pitfall (side-scroller)
Prince of Persia (death animation)
Zork (conceptual non-sequiturs)
Myst (good and evil)
Double Dragon (special attacks)
Gauntlet (wizards)
Lemmings (explosions)
Alone in the Dark (undead creatures)
Sonic the Hedgehog (side scroller)
Diablo (wizards)
Carmageddon (car simulation)
Tony Hawks Pro Skater (non-interactive movies)
Madden 2000 Football (non-interactive movies)
7th Guest (non-interactive movies)
11th Hour (non-interactive movies)
Quake 3 (non-interactive movies)
Quake 2 (blood)
Quake (undead creatures)
If we were to follow this person's suggestion in game-making, there'd never be another good game -- ever. Would you really want to be playing Pong 2 or a souped up Minesweeper? Most Tetris spin-offs don't even comply with these rules.
Not only that, but some of his rules don't make any sense. No wizards but magicians are allowed? What the hell is that supposed to mean?
These have got to be the gayest suggestions ever made about game design that I've ever heard. I really hope no one takes this person up and creates crappy games based on his crappy rules.
I figured since everyone else was having fun adding their corrections to your "I'm smarter than you" post, I might as well add my own.
You're right in that the word is spelled "Llama" and not "Llama," but you're wrong on pronounciation. The Spanish language pronounces the double-L (Ll) with a "y" sound. Thus, "Llama" would be pronounced "yama." There might exist some difference in the Andean dialect that would cause them to pronounce it incorrectly, but that's no reason to teach the rest of the world the same incorrect pronounciation.
As for Taco's spelling, I think people should really lay off. Why do you give a damn? You're not his English teacher or his employer. I'm sure if Taco were turning in a term paper or something that needed to sound professional, he'd spend a little more time on spelling and grammar. This, however, is just Slashdot... wut duz it matter if the speling iz off? so long az U kan reed it, rite?
Not really. Besides the obvious fact that this isn't a government organization, but rather a private organization that is doing the censoring, one has to remember that not all speech is free in this country.
Basically, the Supreme Court has ruled that certain criteria can be applied to Free Speech. They've ruled that Free Speech and other first amendment rights are limited can be limited by time, place, and manner restrictions. I think the famous example is crying out that there is a fire inside of a crowded movie theatre.
Slander, libel, obscenities, and anything that creates a "clear and present danger" are not necessarily protected under the Consitution. Of course, it really depends on what the courts say is protected and what isn't. It changes all the time.
Actually, Microsoft is a pretty bad example. Though the operating systems leave much to be desired, many of Microsoft's other products are rather good. Their Office Suite is certainly one of the best out there. And some of their video games aren't half bad either.
Microsoft's introduction of the optical mouse into mainstream seems to have reverbed throughout the industry. Logitech and other mouse manufacturers have each come out with their own offerings and Apples are now coming with optical mice as part of the standard setups.
I bought a Microsoft Intellitype Internet Keyboard to replace my old IBM keyboard. (I loved that thing. Heavy, easy to clean, loud clicky keys, and a cord that looks like it came off of a telephone -- a perfect tool in its day.) I found the angled keys very comfortable and actually noticed a 10WPM increase in my typing speed, though it took some getting used to. The internet keys are useful, as are the My Computer and Calculator buttons.
I recently also purchased a Microsoft USB Gamepad Pro. I have to say that it is one of the best controllers I have ever purchased. Though Gravis has one that better simulates a PSX controller, I would never give up my Microsoft Gamepad. The D-pad is extra smooth, and it is built in such a way that different styles (and there are lots) of holding the controller are all conveniently done.
I'm not saying that Microsoft is a great corporation. I'm not saying that I condone their business ethics. But I am saying that they make some damned good USB devices, which kinda refutes what you were saying.
I think this was an typo on the part of the poster. This isn't DOS history as much as it is Microsoft Windows/DOS history. You'll notice that all the operating systems mentioned were owned my MS. DR DOS, Desqview, VisiOn, Novell Netware, and IBM's OS/2 aren't there because Microsoft had nothing to do with them. (In a marketing sense.) The chart was designed to help you understand where MS has gone in the past 15 years in as far as it relates to their OSs.
They shouldn't allow their Vice-Presidents to spew out nonsense about things in which he has no understanding. He's just made because nobody wants to buy his Sony Memory Sticks. They should stick to selling Wegas and Trinitrons instead of pissing off their fans. Firewall my computer... that's good. No no, but a better one is... I'll firewall the brains... BWA HAHAHAHAH!!!!! At least people would laught instead of being pissed off.
Summary of Tech Magazines and Science Fiction
on
The Computer of 2010
·
· Score: 2
To me, it seems as thought the author of this article but absolutely no research into designing his "Computer of 2010." It was almost as though he knows nothing at all about computers and found some old tech magazines and science fiction articles and combined them into a semi-realistic computer.
One of the things that bothered me the most the the appearance of the hardware itself. The author obviously thinks that the computer of 2010 is supposed to look like some kind of ugly disc that plugs into both the house and the desk. However, that is an entirely useless feature for the desktop of the future. If one truly wants his house to be computer operated, than it will be done with devices specifically designed to do so. Much like how cars have special onboard navigation computers to help the driver get around. Though it is possible to hook up a laptop, it certainly won't do the job as well as the onboard computer, nor will it be using the computer itself to its fullest extent. In other words, the technology has existed for over 20 years now, it's just that it is either too expensive or not interesting for the common Joe to go out and buy one.
But lets pretend that he didn't say that stupid thing about the house. Lets move on to the stupid things he said about the desk. You will plug this little module into your desk? Why? What advantages does this offer. What if you want to use this computer on the road? What if you don't have access to a desk? Well then, this idea becomes really retarded. Wouldn't it be easier to just carry around a laptop and hook it into a dock? That's basically what the guy "invented" in his little made-up story.
But let's move past this dock and look at how the thing actually works. You will have some kind of desk that is actually a computer. You will plug it in, wave your arms around and drag your fingers around it? If someone walks into your cubicle, you will look incredibly stupid. Why get rid of the mouse and keyboard when they are such great tools. Why have a magically disappearing/reappearing keyboard. Wouldn't it be a LOT cheaper to have a regular keyboard? The whole interface is retarded. And let's not forget about the cost of this fantasy computer. It costs a fortune to get a 15" LCD screen. I don't think the price is going to come down enough in the future for us to have desk-sized 3D touchscreen LCD. Even if it were, I wouldn't want it built into my desk. I'd want it the way they're dishing them out right now. A little stand but a big screen. A 30" LCD screen with 1600x1200+ resolutions would be much better than what this guy proposes.
Then there's his idea of security. These ideas won't take 10 years to implement. They're perfectly available now. The only reason they haven't caught on yet is because its too much effort for something that can be handled just as easily as a 10-letter password. It seems as though this guy was told to write up a story about the "world's most expensive"/"fantasy" computer.
Once we get past the terrible ideas for user interfaces, we get to terrible techinical rantings by the author about the hardware. It almost seems as though he was paid by different manufacturers to point out their names in his article as a form of advertisements. All the technologies he talks about have been known about for a long time and pretends that when IBM says 5-10 years, that means it will automatically be put into all computers in that time. But I think we all know that none of that is true.
The author seems to have some misconceptions about the way hardware works, and what he says about RAM makes almost no sense at all. All in all, this article seems like a hack. I think its interesting that they put it on slashdot because it gives real geeks the opportunity to poke holes into it and give the rest of the community a place to think about what computers will REALLY be like in 10 years.
This got to be the scariest thing I've ever read on Slashdot. I feel to anger towards the person who wrote this -- I feel genuine pity. What kind of terrible, traumatic experience creates people with such warped hysteria? "BETTER DEAD THAN RED!" This person is genuinely paranoid. He must've watched the McCarthy trials to closely as a child, as he really believes that "Reds" are behind GPL and that they are out to get him. I just thought I'd comment on this, seeing as nobody else has.
Yes, that's certainly impossible. Who would pass out episodes of shows like Family Guy or Futurama or even South Park. That would be silly. But maybe if we wish really hard...
I completely support artists getting compensated for their works. I think voluntary donations are a great way to do so. But I don't see any way at all that this could possibly be a viable business model.
$269 is a good gesture, but its only that -- a gesture. That doesn't pay bills, keep food on the table, or make it worth the hassle for the artist to keep on creating. (He could do better working at McDonald's) An argument might run that an true artist doesn't really need to be rich if he really loves his job, but we have to face reality, artists need money -- real money.
I think this is a good first step, but we need to improve on this idea. You can't really count on the generosity of others to make a living. What if waitresses didn't get a salary but instead relied entirely on tips?
Actually, that analogy is flawed, because in the case of the artist and MP3s, you don't really see the artist's face being polite to you trying to win your favor like a waitress does. People pay much less attention to the artist than the actual music. How do convince people that they are ethically obligated to donate money into this tip jar? Maybe they'll get about 20,000 Slashdot folk to do it, but there are hundreds of millions in the US alone that need convincing.
PPC chips are faster per mhz than P3 chips. However, those blazingly fast speeds that Apple touts are result of Photoshop being optimized for the Altivec instructions.
This proves two points:
1) Never judge a processor by the number of mhz. Apples are faster per mhz than Intel. And I doubt this new Samuel 2 will be anywhere near as fast as an Intel chip.
2) Don't trust benchmarks from the manufacturers, they're always tweaked versions of the programs. The filters that Apple uses to compare to Intel have been tweaked to take advantage of Altivec. To do the test correctly, you would need a dual processor board with two 1000mhz P3 chips with a version of Photoshop that has been tweaked for the Intel chip.
Always do a little research before buying your next chip. Decide what you will be using it for, and buy the best chip per dollar value that you can reasonably afford. I just do gaming. So a $120 Celeron 566 overclocked to 933 is plenty fine for me.
Slashdot Mirror
You really don't think *ANY* of this research money is going into anyone's pockets? Don't you think any of the researchers like being paid for their work or do you think that they all have jobs at the local McDonald's and just do the research for free?
What the previous poster was trying to say was that music in movies, like images for commercial purposes (if money is going to change hands, then it is commercial) should be licensed. MIT used someone else's work as part of an effort to get a $50 million government contract. With that much money changing hands, they could have at least paid a small licensing fee to the artist.
As for your kid using an illustration of a comic book character for a class project having to pay licensing fees: it depends. If he is doing a research paper about comic books, I think we can all agree that using the image would not only be protected by fair use, but also expected. (Though notifying the copyright holder is always a respectufl thing to do.)
However, if your child is just plastering a bunch of comic book characters in his paper for no reason at all, then yes, licensing fees should be paid. And you as his father should explain to him early on why he shouldn't be using the images. It's this type lazy disregard for the works of others that got MIT into this position in the first place. One would think that an MIT professor would have raised his daughter to know the meaning of the world "plagarism" and how serious the matter really is.
It might be possible to get around bandwidth constraints using a different method. If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft's XBOX uses dual-channel DDR memory based on Nvidia's nForce board to get two times the theoretical bandwidth. (Though, based on Tom Hardware's recent review of the board, dual-channel doesn't seem to have as great a real-world performance as one might hope.)
I'm an American but I've never heard of "Texas toast," either. I did, however, learn to stay away from any type of food dish whose name involves the word "Texas." Words to live by. Crazy Texans.
And you'd be right.
Well, that certainly is elitist shit. No one really cares about your family lineage or how many wars your ancestors may have been involved with. It really doesn't make any difference. Did you personally fight in the Revolutionary War? Did you participate in the Civil War? No you didn't, so shut up.
I'm tired of hearing all this ethnocentric crap from people who think they're the only "Real Americans." As far as I know, you don't need to prove your loyalty to any nation in order to be considered a human being . The whole point of the American ideology is that every person -- regardless of gender, age, race, height, width, national origin, or sexual orientation -- should be afforded the same basic respect and decency. It's what Americans continue to fight for evry day. It's what you claim that your family has fought so hard to protect and what you now claim to be reserved for an "elite class." Your attitudes only serve to bring shame to those Americans who still hold freedom as a a fundamental part of humanity.
Yeah... you're wrong. BeOS is already dead. Be basically killed all of its staff and sold to Palm. Be no longer exists. Palm has already announced that they will do no more development on BeIA, which was Be's last effort to squeeze some revenue out of BeOS. Chances are, there will be no development of BeOS as we know it coming from Palm, even despite the fact that the BeOS community is up in arms with petitions and the like. Hopefully, some of what was in BeOS might show up in future Palm devices, but I doubt it will be at all recognizable.
Windows Media Player has been able to play mp3s since Windows 98 was released. There are still thousands of copies of WinAmp downloaded everyday. If people aren't happy with what they're given, they'll go after something better.
In the Netscape vs. Explorer war, no one really cared about the browser one way or the other. However, Netscape always charged for their browser, so in that respect, IE was better. (Personally, I was dissatisfied by both browsers in the pre-4.0 days. Both were buggy as all hell.)
You're complaining because Microsoft is making it easier to run thier software. Would you like them to put some kind of complicated locking mechanism on the executable? What difference does it make if they're easier to run?
If Joe Blow consumer doesn't mind (and really: he doesn't), then there's not much wrong with that. Competitors will just have to come up with a creative way to deal with it. AOL is doing a pretty damn good job integrating their AIM client with their AOL program -- companiese will adapt.
I really don't have any objections to Microsoft bundling software with their OS and making it preferred. It isn't hard to download new software and make that program preferred. If the "dumb users" don't like Media Player, MSN, or IE, they'll find alternatives. They always do.
Settling out of court has never been an acknowledgement of guilt. Lots of companies settle so that they stay out of the media spotlight and can say they have a clean record. Those companies very often seem guilty and everyone assumes as much.
However, sometimes perfectly innocent people stay out of court because they can't afford lawyer's fees or because it might cause them harm in their personal life.
For example, if the professor in Germany were to be taken to court, he may very well spend thousands defending himself and still lose. Then he'd have to pay damages to Adobe, pay Adobe's lawyers, still have to change the name of the program, might go bankrupt, and may very well lose his job if it reflects negatively on the Univerity where he works.
Another reason for me to be ashamed of living in Los Angeles. There's something seriously wrong with LA County. I'll be glad when all those secessionists start to cut up our gigantically mammoth city into more manageable parts. I need to move out of this fricken city.
The Constitution only prevents the government from invading your right to privacy. Microsoft isn't the government. They're not necessarily bound by the same restrictions as is our government. That's not to say that other non-constitutional laws don't prevent Microsoft from coming into your house and searching through your things. But it's an idiotic statment to say that Microsoft's tactics are un-Constitutional -- that's complete bullshit.
Just remember that the Constitution is the people's protection against the government not against business.
Are you 12 years old? You sound like a little kid defending his mommy. I guess this post is off-topic. Yours just struck me as being really weird.
Well, I may not be an expert in Disney movies by any respect, but I do have a love for them. I watch them whenever I can, I have a season pass to Disneyland (I *love* living in LA), and I always make sure that I go out to watch the newest ones (call me a sucker for musical comedies).
... certainly not you everyday Disney animated feature. Still, it was very good.
I have to say that this movie was not at all what I expected. It reminded me a lot of Titan AE
I have to say that the PG rating was warranted for the violence. Sure, Disney has killed some of its characters before, but never in such quantities.
First, most of the original city of Atlantis is wiped out. Only the palace and satelite buildings are saved. Besides these unseen citizens, the guys flying around are also swept by the enormous tidal wave.
Later, the submarine sets out with 200 people, about 180 of which die after the attack by the giant lobster. Then later, the villains are thrashed by the heroes (the main characters live, but some unfortunate Antlanteans die on their flying fish), which in the end leaves only the main characters alive.
Finally, the lava that sends fiery rocks towards Atlantis before the giant robots put the force field around the city presumably killed several more people.
In the end, the body count was probably in the thousands, about 200 of which happend during main sequences. I think PG is pretty good considering. At least none of the deaths were bloody.
By the way, I agree that the Italian Florist was easily the funniest character in the movie. His lines are instant classics.
PS: Bambi didn't die, his mother did!
See... this is exactly the reason why we don't have any women reading Slashdot. You keep scaring the hell out of them. ;-)
What bothers me is that he compares DeCSS to stealing control of commercial airplanes. It is has been historically held by the Supreme Court that the latter isn't acceptable because it presents a "clear and present danger."
I think that anyone worth half their weight in spit would immediately realize that DeCSS presents no physical danger to anyone. It's ludicrous to even imply otherwise.
Here is a very brief list of games that do and do not comply with the rules. Tell me which list you'd prefer:
Does:
Pong
Tetris
Some Pinball games
Minesweeper
Bust a Move
Does Not:
Quest for Glory (wizards)
Space Quest (carnivorous aliens)
King's Quest (wizards)
Codename: Iceman (Russians)
Half-Life (carnivorous aliens)
Unreal Tournament (first-person shooter)
Commander Keen (side scroller)
Tomb Raider (undead bodies)
Sim City (explosions)
Sim City 2000 (explosions)
The Sims (thieves)
War Craft (arms race)
Star Craft (arms race)
Civilization (arms race)
Solitaire (Hoyle)
Hearts (Hoyle)
PacMan (cinematic sequences)
Ms. PacMan (cinematic sequences)
Super Marios Bros (side-scroller)
Legend of Zelda (wizards)
Ultima (wizards)
Worms (explosions)
Asteroids (explosions)
Galaga (explosions)
Space Invadors (explosions)
Pitfall (side-scroller)
Prince of Persia (death animation)
Zork (conceptual non-sequiturs)
Myst (good and evil)
Double Dragon (special attacks)
Gauntlet (wizards)
Lemmings (explosions)
Alone in the Dark (undead creatures)
Sonic the Hedgehog (side scroller)
Diablo (wizards)
Carmageddon (car simulation)
Tony Hawks Pro Skater (non-interactive movies)
Madden 2000 Football (non-interactive movies)
7th Guest (non-interactive movies)
11th Hour (non-interactive movies)
Quake 3 (non-interactive movies)
Quake 2 (blood)
Quake (undead creatures)
If we were to follow this person's suggestion in game-making, there'd never be another good game -- ever. Would you really want to be playing Pong 2 or a souped up Minesweeper? Most Tetris spin-offs don't even comply with these rules.
Not only that, but some of his rules don't make any sense. No wizards but magicians are allowed? What the hell is that supposed to mean?
These have got to be the gayest suggestions ever made about game design that I've ever heard. I really hope no one takes this person up and creates crappy games based on his crappy rules.
I figured since everyone else was having fun adding their corrections to your "I'm smarter than you" post, I might as well add my own.
You're right in that the word is spelled "Llama" and not "Llama," but you're wrong on pronounciation. The Spanish language pronounces the double-L (Ll) with a "y" sound. Thus, "Llama" would be pronounced "yama." There might exist some difference in the Andean dialect that would cause them to pronounce it incorrectly, but that's no reason to teach the rest of the world the same incorrect pronounciation.
As for Taco's spelling, I think people should really lay off. Why do you give a damn? You're not his English teacher or his employer. I'm sure if Taco were turning in a term paper or something that needed to sound professional, he'd spend a little more time on spelling and grammar. This, however, is just Slashdot... wut duz it matter if the speling iz off? so long az U kan reed it, rite?
Not really. Besides the obvious fact that this isn't a government organization, but rather a private organization that is doing the censoring, one has to remember that not all speech is free in this country.
Basically, the Supreme Court has ruled that certain criteria can be applied to Free Speech. They've ruled that Free Speech and other first amendment rights are limited can be limited by time, place, and manner restrictions. I think the famous example is crying out that there is a fire inside of a crowded movie theatre.
Slander, libel, obscenities, and anything that creates a "clear and present danger" are not necessarily protected under the Consitution. Of course, it really depends on what the courts say is protected and what isn't. It changes all the time.
Actually, Microsoft is a pretty bad example. Though the operating systems leave much to be desired, many of Microsoft's other products are rather good. Their Office Suite is certainly one of the best out there. And some of their video games aren't half bad either. Microsoft's introduction of the optical mouse into mainstream seems to have reverbed throughout the industry. Logitech and other mouse manufacturers have each come out with their own offerings and Apples are now coming with optical mice as part of the standard setups. I bought a Microsoft Intellitype Internet Keyboard to replace my old IBM keyboard. (I loved that thing. Heavy, easy to clean, loud clicky keys, and a cord that looks like it came off of a telephone -- a perfect tool in its day.) I found the angled keys very comfortable and actually noticed a 10WPM increase in my typing speed, though it took some getting used to. The internet keys are useful, as are the My Computer and Calculator buttons. I recently also purchased a Microsoft USB Gamepad Pro. I have to say that it is one of the best controllers I have ever purchased. Though Gravis has one that better simulates a PSX controller, I would never give up my Microsoft Gamepad. The D-pad is extra smooth, and it is built in such a way that different styles (and there are lots) of holding the controller are all conveniently done. I'm not saying that Microsoft is a great corporation. I'm not saying that I condone their business ethics. But I am saying that they make some damned good USB devices, which kinda refutes what you were saying.
I think this was an typo on the part of the poster. This isn't DOS history as much as it is Microsoft Windows/DOS history. You'll notice that all the operating systems mentioned were owned my MS. DR DOS, Desqview, VisiOn, Novell Netware, and IBM's OS/2 aren't there because Microsoft had nothing to do with them. (In a marketing sense.) The chart was designed to help you understand where MS has gone in the past 15 years in as far as it relates to their OSs.
They shouldn't allow their Vice-Presidents to spew out nonsense about things in which he has no understanding. He's just made because nobody wants to buy his Sony Memory Sticks. They should stick to selling Wegas and Trinitrons instead of pissing off their fans. Firewall my computer... that's good. No no, but a better one is... I'll firewall the brains... BWA HAHAHAHAH!!!!! At least people would laught instead of being pissed off.
To me, it seems as thought the author of this article but absolutely no research into designing his "Computer of 2010." It was almost as though he knows nothing at all about computers and found some old tech magazines and science fiction articles and combined them into a semi-realistic computer.
One of the things that bothered me the most the the appearance of the hardware itself. The author obviously thinks that the computer of 2010 is supposed to look like some kind of ugly disc that plugs into both the house and the desk. However, that is an entirely useless feature for the desktop of the future. If one truly wants his house to be computer operated, than it will be done with devices specifically designed to do so. Much like how cars have special onboard navigation computers to help the driver get around. Though it is possible to hook up a laptop, it certainly won't do the job as well as the onboard computer, nor will it be using the computer itself to its fullest extent. In other words, the technology has existed for over 20 years now, it's just that it is either too expensive or not interesting for the common Joe to go out and buy one.
But lets pretend that he didn't say that stupid thing about the house. Lets move on to the stupid things he said about the desk. You will plug this little module into your desk? Why? What advantages does this offer. What if you want to use this computer on the road? What if you don't have access to a desk? Well then, this idea becomes really retarded. Wouldn't it be easier to just carry around a laptop and hook it into a dock? That's basically what the guy "invented" in his little made-up story.
But let's move past this dock and look at how the thing actually works. You will have some kind of desk that is actually a computer. You will plug it in, wave your arms around and drag your fingers around it? If someone walks into your cubicle, you will look incredibly stupid. Why get rid of the mouse and keyboard when they are such great tools. Why have a magically disappearing/reappearing keyboard. Wouldn't it be a LOT cheaper to have a regular keyboard? The whole interface is retarded. And let's not forget about the cost of this fantasy computer. It costs a fortune to get a 15" LCD screen. I don't think the price is going to come down enough in the future for us to have desk-sized 3D touchscreen LCD. Even if it were, I wouldn't want it built into my desk. I'd want it the way they're dishing them out right now. A little stand but a big screen. A 30" LCD screen with 1600x1200+ resolutions would be much better than what this guy proposes.
Then there's his idea of security. These ideas won't take 10 years to implement. They're perfectly available now. The only reason they haven't caught on yet is because its too much effort for something that can be handled just as easily as a 10-letter password. It seems as though this guy was told to write up a story about the "world's most expensive"/"fantasy" computer.
Once we get past the terrible ideas for user interfaces, we get to terrible techinical rantings by the author about the hardware. It almost seems as though he was paid by different manufacturers to point out their names in his article as a form of advertisements. All the technologies he talks about have been known about for a long time and pretends that when IBM says 5-10 years, that means it will automatically be put into all computers in that time. But I think we all know that none of that is true.
The author seems to have some misconceptions about the way hardware works, and what he says about RAM makes almost no sense at all. All in all, this article seems like a hack. I think its interesting that they put it on slashdot because it gives real geeks the opportunity to poke holes into it and give the rest of the community a place to think about what computers will REALLY be like in 10 years.
This got to be the scariest thing I've ever read on Slashdot. I feel to anger towards the person who wrote this -- I feel genuine pity. What kind of terrible, traumatic experience creates people with such warped hysteria? "BETTER DEAD THAN RED!" This person is genuinely paranoid. He must've watched the McCarthy trials to closely as a child, as he really believes that "Reds" are behind GPL and that they are out to get him. I just thought I'd comment on this, seeing as nobody else has.
Yes, that's certainly impossible. Who would pass out episodes of shows like Family Guy or Futurama or even South Park. That would be silly. But maybe if we wish really hard ...
I completely support artists getting compensated for their works. I think voluntary donations are a great way to do so. But I don't see any way at all that this could possibly be a viable business model.
$269 is a good gesture, but its only that -- a gesture. That doesn't pay bills, keep food on the table, or make it worth the hassle for the artist to keep on creating. (He could do better working at McDonald's) An argument might run that an true artist doesn't really need to be rich if he really loves his job, but we have to face reality, artists need money -- real money.
I think this is a good first step, but we need to improve on this idea. You can't really count on the generosity of others to make a living. What if waitresses didn't get a salary but instead relied entirely on tips?
Actually, that analogy is flawed, because in the case of the artist and MP3s, you don't really see the artist's face being polite to you trying to win your favor like a waitress does. People pay much less attention to the artist than the actual music. How do convince people that they are ethically obligated to donate money into this tip jar? Maybe they'll get about 20,000 Slashdot folk to do it, but there are hundreds of millions in the US alone that need convincing.
PPC chips are faster per mhz than P3 chips. However, those blazingly fast speeds that Apple touts are result of Photoshop being optimized for the Altivec instructions.
This proves two points:
1) Never judge a processor by the number of mhz. Apples are faster per mhz than Intel. And I doubt this new Samuel 2 will be anywhere near as fast as an Intel chip.
2) Don't trust benchmarks from the manufacturers, they're always tweaked versions of the programs. The filters that Apple uses to compare to Intel have been tweaked to take advantage of Altivec. To do the test correctly, you would need a dual processor board with two 1000mhz P3 chips with a version of Photoshop that has been tweaked for the Intel chip.
Always do a little research before buying your next chip. Decide what you will be using it for, and buy the best chip per dollar value that you can reasonably afford. I just do gaming. So a $120 Celeron 566 overclocked to 933 is plenty fine for me.