I like to use a combination of procedural, functional, and OO. I find some things are better for different things. Restricting yourself from options doesn't necessarily make you a better programmer.
If you want to hear a good one that will make you cringe on side effects: When I write personal code for myself that no one else will touch, I use a globally mutable systems and I have no issues. Globally mutable systems are bad in teams if you're trying to track down who's code is causing the problem because side effects could happen anywhere! But when your a solo guy, you know right away.
The way I taught myself to speed read is to skim rapidly across a paper and get the gist of what they're saying. I read in major word concepts and understand what they're trying to say while skipping lesser words. It is dead on that you can't comprehend as much, but you can give yourself a personal TL:DR summary. I don't recommend others to learn speed reading because sometimes it engages itself without trying. It is almost a bad habit that it engages when I have impatience with what I'm reading. I mean there are places it is good to have speed reading, but sometimes its hard to control and can be a bad habit. I mean the pros out weigh the cons, but not by much.
Speed reading isn't as useful of a skill as people think it is when they first hear it. It even ruins things designed to capture your imagination at a certain rate of time like Tolkien. If you speed read Tolkien, it is comparable to watching LOTR in fast forward. I mean you can get the gist of what happens by watching a movie in fast forward, but if you want to sit down and enjoy it, you watch it at the rate it was intended for. Where speed reading is really good is focusing a page of all sorts of information like Reddit, and getting to the stuff you want to read more rapidly.
Heh, I thought I read this was launches to the ISS. Please ignore that. My point stands that we shouldn't be treating Russia like some rogue country, but still try and be cool with them. The guys point that we shouldn't be sending money to the Kremlin sends the wrong message to me. I think we should try and be peaceable and stay out of other country's affairs the best we can. I'd love to say,"Let the professionals deal in international affairs." but when you look at our elected officials just being corporate puppets, it makes me hang my head.
Comcast should be fined for extorting Netflix so they don't throttle their bandwith. The problem is that Comcast buys out politicians so the government no longer regulates monopolies, monopolies regulate the government.
I figured there would eventually be competitive gaming people could hold careers in back in 1983.
Once I heard of Quantum Link for C64, I knew there'd be one MMORPG to rule them all eventually. I even tried making one until Ultima Online came out and I quit mine.
I knew Internet multiplayer games were the way of the future on consoles back as soon as I heard of the Internet.
The second I heard of Ebay forming out of Usenet, I knew it'd get huge.
I knew instant messaging would be huge on Windows before anything was out.
I knew there would be online dating sites before there were any.
There's a couple other ones I pegged too, but I forget.
I'm almost always on target when I think something will be a multimillion or multibillion industry in tech. I don't see everything, but when I know something will take off, it will. Right now, I don't know many things that'd be cash cows outside of video games. My video game techs are:
1) Dig up any successful slow paced multiplayer mouse clicky strategy game of the past, but fix it for modern times, make it into a collectable card game, give it ladder, and it'd probably take off. Reason: Old game worked so people will play it again especially if you make it better. Just like selling the same music to kids works because they haven't heard of it, the mobile generation maybe missed some of those games. The collectable card game means it will be a cash cow. And ladder makes people addicted, so they essentially have a money fight like Magic the Gathering.
2) Xwing vs TieFighter the MMORPG. Go on quests to start, but be able to privateer, build up a big fleet and have big fleet combat. Reason: Everyone knows this would be huge.
A betting site on predictable techs taking off does me no good. My ideas are normally ones that aren't out because people just didn't think into them. All it does is give me confidence in my predictions for the future. I make a good conversation when talking about techs, their implications, and how the future would be. I also make a pretty good sci fi game master, a road I might take here in a few months. Professional paid game masters might becoming more and more of a thing.
I wrote my own software to play RPGs online with a live game master in hopes it would take off, and I'd have a game master network. The game master network would be a way to find quality GMs to hire, and the owner of the network would take a small cut of their hourly rate. It didn't take off because I couldn't find anyone who wanted to beta test with me, but I don't think I gave it a fair shake. I got real discouraged I got banned from posting in www.reddit.com/r/rpg because I was asking for beta testers. Hey, anyone possibly interested here?:)
They did they played people of similar skill. I still think you're right on the premise that the study could be flawed. What they measured apparently was APM if I'm reading this correctly. How else would they measure number of actions over time in Starcraft? I'm of the school of not wasting my clicks and I have low APM like 100-200, but my buddies are of the school of warming up clicking and excess clicking.
If they measured the APM, what appears to be less clicking might be actions that get more accomplished with less clicks by older people.
Anyway, my bro Victor gives me lots of slack in this. We were both Warcraft3 pros, just in different eras, me in ROC and him in TFT. I talk about wanting to go pro in the modern era with all the streaming because it seems so much more social. He says I might be too old. I know better >:)
My main reason for not going pro in Starcraft2 is that I only wanted to go pro to get hired by Blizzard, and during beta, a video game company hired me, so I've been programming video games instead of playing them, but not getting paid very well. I think the road for me to going pro in Starcraft2 would be too long and I wouldn't be surfing the crest of skill. Surfing the crest of skill is something a top level video gamers does when a new game comes out. He invents a a lot of the strategies others use, he practices from day one, so no one has any more practice. In short, when you surf the crest of skill, you start on top and you stay on top. If a top level video gamer starts in the middle of a game's lifecycle, he'll get crushed by players who aren't as good in general as him in video games, but has more specific skill to the game at hand.
I think if I picked up Starcraft2, I'd get crushed under the waves for the first three months, then at best after 9 months I'd be at the top of ladder. Starcraft 2 is a very demanding game, and even small mistakes can bite you big time. You could be doing well, but fail to defend a drop, and he gutted your economy, gg. Winning vs Protoss, but a DT sneaks by when you don't have detection? GG. All the small details is something a refined pro does naturally, but can be frustrating when you're not surfing the crest of skill.
I think Starcraft2 is pretty good compared to Starcraft1, but I do have one complaint. I feel the rush distances are too far away, and build times for t1 units could be shorter. I know why Blizzard made it so the rush is cake to defend, I even campaigned for easy to stop rushes in the beta forums. When the rush is easy to defend, the game gets to later games with bigger army clashing, and it is good for esports spectator views. I don't think it is necessarily good for the game. I'll explain in my next paragraph.
In Starcraft1 when I played at least, and I played at a high level was roughly: Early expand loses to rush. Rush loses to a defense because the rush distance lets you have 1-2 extra defenders to the attackers+ terrain. Once you defend an all in, you have a little bit more money which you could squeek into tech, then you win with teched units. Early tech normally(not always) loses to early expand. At first this looks like paper rock scissors which is lame in a fog of war situation! But look closely, making units both defends vs rush, and beats early expand. If it turns out they made early units in defense, you can go the tech route yourself. It was generally always safe to build some early units(unless you're zerg), and it was nice to get free wins when people tried to early expand on you greedily.
Starcraft2 doesn't have much early play. Sure sometimes someone proxies raxes because early pressure isn't expected then comes with scv+marine rush. But early play past scouting is generally not beneficial in Starcraft2. Making extra units in the beginning just slows your tech or early expand. The game is designed to give you a free pass to the mid game. Besides the queen being pretty good early, Protoss has one better with the Mothership
It's been what, like 50 years we've been using old tech? Nuclear is cleaner than coal barring an accident. Coal is guaranteed to kill and hurt people. With Nuclear you at least have a chance of everyone being healthy. Even if the country doesn't adopt some grand scheme of making a bunch of nuclear plants, making one here or one there would get our technology levels higher and create jobs for smart people.
A lesser known situation is if you actually create an energy surplus, food costs, logistic costs, and transportation costs get cheaper. So if we ramped our energy production up by 2-8x what we got now, people could charge their hybrid car at home for even less than they do now. I think this dream is often grouped up with a superconductor power grid idea which is unrealistic for the short term. I think for a better world, we should be aiming to create energy surpluses.
Sometimes I even have the strange thought that energy conservation ideas hurt society's growth. It would be almost better if we used more power in the short term so energy could invest in itself and provide more power at lower costs down the road. I mean it is better to conserve electricity, but I don't hear people championing the idea of creating a global energy surplus.
I don't care about a limited 2 aps at once, or touchscreen. The one thing Windows needs is the ability to fearlessly run applications. Windows should have been virus proof back since 98 when the Internet was becoming a big thing. It isn't as hard as you'd think to make an OS virus proof if that is what you're designing for.
The moment your platform becomes a fearless platform to try new software, people will try software as a hobby. The way Windows is now, before aps are catching on, no one in their right mind is going to download random.exe from the Internet. We're even wary of.png and.mp3s because of buffer overflow exploits. This should have never been the case.
Now aps won't catch on really fast because only Windows 8 does Aps. If Microsoft was smart, they would have allowed all versions of Windows back to XP use aps. That way more people would make aps. It would have caught on a lot faster. And since Microsoft probably has an "ap store", they'd have made more money even. The short term money isn't what wins you control over the Internet through which gives you the long term money gain. The key is you want more people to buy your OS over a MAC which word on the street says is harder to get viruses.
Aps could be a good thing for Microsoft's future, but they didn't do enough to have them take off with initial velocity. My guess is there's some self proclaimed genius at Microsoft,"Everyone's gonna love aps, they're going to buy new copies of windows just to get aps. If we make old versions of windows use aps, we'll just lose sales!"
Whats funny though is that people are happy to blow through money like a bad drug habit for games like "Hearthstone" or "Magic the Gathering". This is why my next game is probably going to be a CCG myself. I have a great idea for one, but I need to finish my game going up on Facebook in about a month. Throne and Crown, the game I'm working on is a version of what Gauntlet 2 would be like if it had overland exploration. Throne and Crown Interestingly enough it does cost $4.99 to play past 2 hours. I'll have the virtual goods for those who want them, but the game won't need virtual goods to be played fine. The way I look at it is my game is going to be playable and fun, but it is just the beginning. The game is going to be a long 5-10 year progression where it gets new features, more art, and more music culminating into a Kingdom Sim. Instead of asking for money on Kickstarter, people can play a playable game, and if they see the potential or just want to play it some more, they can help a new game development house out. Interestingly enough, this game is 100% revenue share among my artists and musicians, so there's no money invested, just time. I could talk more about how I did the revenue sharing, it is pretty good if anyone wants to hear.
I'd call them griefers too and is why I quit. LOL is a unique beast. Your team needs to help or you lose. So some people put pressure on each other and don't let up. I quit that game because I'd be cursed at as the first thing people said to me and all I did was pick my character in pubs. Its a shame too because the game is pretty easy and fun. There's no such thing as LOL ladder anxiety compared to SC2 for me because SC2 makes you click maybe 20x as often to get the same amount of things done.
My suggestion to Riot was to allow,"Avoid playing with this character again" and "Prefer playing with this character again" buttons. Forming a custom team is often times more work than what you get from it if people aren't responding. If there was a loose method to form a preferred team, that'd be cool. I think someone told me if there was a button "Don't play with this player again", many people would use it for skill reasons and then it'd be hard to find matches. This is why it should be avoid/prefer instead of musts.
I'm having flashbacks to multiplayer Nascar games. Since it is boring to go left all game some people change things up and go right for a lap or two.
Though... If someone makes the device to autodrive a car cheap enough, it could make for some high intensity demo derbys. Look on the plus side, don't need to hose the track down to get lower impact collisions if no one's safety is at risk.
If we wanted to solve the charging fast problem, couldn't we just make battery swapping easy in phones? You'd leave a battery on the charger and when you get home, you swap the batteries in like 5-10 seconds.
Back when I was first to 1500 wins in Warcraft3 and #1 in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 99% win rate in 3v3, I would have people be awed at me when they come into the game. They would just be happy to play against a big name in the game and express it like a kid who meets his favorite sports player or a famous person. They'd say things like,"Man, you're going to win, but its nice to even get a chance to play you." So my name had intimidation factor to it, but I earned that intimidation factor by first being actually good and having a great record. If you play Starcraft2 and you spend more than a few seconds making your screen name, you're doing it wrong:P
That said, I like this screen name more than my ol' gamer tag. If people go visit my website, they can be well on their way to eternal life, and my Bro Jesus will have cool things to say to me when we finally meet.
With 1 gb/s internet, you could have upwards of 2 million people playing FPS in the same zone. Basically with 1 gb/s Internet, you're limited by the number of people who want to play or other hardware concerns.
Not every game needs 2 million players, but once they start digitizing the real world, we could see realistic reenactments of famous wars. Another application would be bigger MMORPGS. Some say,"Who needs that many players at once." But I say games have always trended better when the game play limitations have been lifted.
If bandwith was 1 gb/s, video games would be better as there would be a great deal number of more players allowable in the game at once. AKA: Games could be better if bandwith was higher.
The virus writers who have been holding back XP payload might have vectors that also hit Vista/7/8. With all the juicy XP targets to compromise, they can do more effective random IP address attacks like the days when XP Service Pack 2 wasn't around. So I'm not totally concerned, but just a little bit concerned that this could hose more than just the XP installations.
Re:Only one person in your company needs charisma
on
Hacking Charisma
·
· Score: 1
Ah, I was just making a dumb D&D joke bud. It sucks that so many people are coming out of college and not getting jobs anymore. It's this generation's plight.
Slashdot Mirror
I like to use a combination of procedural, functional, and OO. I find some things are better for different things. Restricting yourself from options doesn't necessarily make you a better programmer.
If you want to hear a good one that will make you cringe on side effects: When I write personal code for myself that no one else will touch, I use a globally mutable systems and I have no issues. Globally mutable systems are bad in teams if you're trying to track down who's code is causing the problem because side effects could happen anywhere! But when your a solo guy, you know right away.
The way I taught myself to speed read is to skim rapidly across a paper and get the gist of what they're saying. I read in major word concepts and understand what they're trying to say while skipping lesser words. It is dead on that you can't comprehend as much, but you can give yourself a personal TL:DR summary. I don't recommend others to learn speed reading because sometimes it engages itself without trying. It is almost a bad habit that it engages when I have impatience with what I'm reading. I mean there are places it is good to have speed reading, but sometimes its hard to control and can be a bad habit. I mean the pros out weigh the cons, but not by much.
Speed reading isn't as useful of a skill as people think it is when they first hear it. It even ruins things designed to capture your imagination at a certain rate of time like Tolkien. If you speed read Tolkien, it is comparable to watching LOTR in fast forward. I mean you can get the gist of what happens by watching a movie in fast forward, but if you want to sit down and enjoy it, you watch it at the rate it was intended for. Where speed reading is really good is focusing a page of all sorts of information like Reddit, and getting to the stuff you want to read more rapidly.
Heh, I thought I read this was launches to the ISS. Please ignore that. My point stands that we shouldn't be treating Russia like some rogue country, but still try and be cool with them. The guys point that we shouldn't be sending money to the Kremlin sends the wrong message to me. I think we should try and be peaceable and stay out of other country's affairs the best we can. I'd love to say,"Let the professionals deal in international affairs." but when you look at our elected officials just being corporate puppets, it makes me hang my head.
I'd say any teams and hopes we had with Russia should be maintained for the idea of brotherly love.
Taking Russia out of the loop in the ISS for now could appear like we're being jerks in times of international crisis.
We need goodwill now. Money is of no concern when you're thinking of the results of what could happen if Russia and USA blood goes bad.
Comcast should be fined for extorting Netflix so they don't throttle their bandwith. The problem is that Comcast buys out politicians so the government no longer regulates monopolies, monopolies regulate the government.
Frivoulous lawsuits are yet another problem too.
I figured there would eventually be competitive gaming people could hold careers in back in 1983.
:)
Once I heard of Quantum Link for C64, I knew there'd be one MMORPG to rule them all eventually. I even tried making one until Ultima Online came out and I quit mine.
I knew Internet multiplayer games were the way of the future on consoles back as soon as I heard of the Internet.
The second I heard of Ebay forming out of Usenet, I knew it'd get huge.
I knew instant messaging would be huge on Windows before anything was out.
I knew there would be online dating sites before there were any.
There's a couple other ones I pegged too, but I forget.
I'm almost always on target when I think something will be a multimillion or multibillion industry in tech. I don't see everything, but when I know something will take off, it will. Right now, I don't know many things that'd be cash cows outside of video games. My video game techs are:
1) Dig up any successful slow paced multiplayer mouse clicky strategy game of the past, but fix it for modern times, make it into a collectable card game, give it ladder, and it'd probably take off. Reason: Old game worked so people will play it again especially if you make it better. Just like selling the same music to kids works because they haven't heard of it, the mobile generation maybe missed some of those games. The collectable card game means it will be a cash cow. And ladder makes people addicted, so they essentially have a money fight like Magic the Gathering.
2) Xwing vs TieFighter the MMORPG. Go on quests to start, but be able to privateer, build up a big fleet and have big fleet combat. Reason: Everyone knows this would be huge.
A betting site on predictable techs taking off does me no good. My ideas are normally ones that aren't out because people just didn't think into them. All it does is give me confidence in my predictions for the future. I make a good conversation when talking about techs, their implications, and how the future would be. I also make a pretty good sci fi game master, a road I might take here in a few months. Professional paid game masters might becoming more and more of a thing. I wrote my own software to play RPGs online with a live game master in hopes it would take off, and I'd have a game master network. The game master network would be a way to find quality GMs to hire, and the owner of the network would take a small cut of their hourly rate. It didn't take off because I couldn't find anyone who wanted to beta test with me, but I don't think I gave it a fair shake. I got real discouraged I got banned from posting in www.reddit.com/r/rpg because I was asking for beta testers. Hey, anyone possibly interested here?
They did they played people of similar skill. I still think you're right on the premise that the study could be flawed. What they measured apparently was APM if I'm reading this correctly. How else would they measure number of actions over time in Starcraft? I'm of the school of not wasting my clicks and I have low APM like 100-200, but my buddies are of the school of warming up clicking and excess clicking.
If they measured the APM, what appears to be less clicking might be actions that get more accomplished with less clicks by older people.
Anyway, my bro Victor gives me lots of slack in this. We were both Warcraft3 pros, just in different eras, me in ROC and him in TFT. I talk about wanting to go pro in the modern era with all the streaming because it seems so much more social. He says I might be too old. I know better >:)
My main reason for not going pro in Starcraft2 is that I only wanted to go pro to get hired by Blizzard, and during beta, a video game company hired me, so I've been programming video games instead of playing them, but not getting paid very well. I think the road for me to going pro in Starcraft2 would be too long and I wouldn't be surfing the crest of skill. Surfing the crest of skill is something a top level video gamers does when a new game comes out. He invents a a lot of the strategies others use, he practices from day one, so no one has any more practice. In short, when you surf the crest of skill, you start on top and you stay on top. If a top level video gamer starts in the middle of a game's lifecycle, he'll get crushed by players who aren't as good in general as him in video games, but has more specific skill to the game at hand.
I think if I picked up Starcraft2, I'd get crushed under the waves for the first three months, then at best after 9 months I'd be at the top of ladder. Starcraft 2 is a very demanding game, and even small mistakes can bite you big time. You could be doing well, but fail to defend a drop, and he gutted your economy, gg. Winning vs Protoss, but a DT sneaks by when you don't have detection? GG. All the small details is something a refined pro does naturally, but can be frustrating when you're not surfing the crest of skill.
I think Starcraft2 is pretty good compared to Starcraft1, but I do have one complaint. I feel the rush distances are too far away, and build times for t1 units could be shorter. I know why Blizzard made it so the rush is cake to defend, I even campaigned for easy to stop rushes in the beta forums. When the rush is easy to defend, the game gets to later games with bigger army clashing, and it is good for esports spectator views. I don't think it is necessarily good for the game. I'll explain in my next paragraph.
In Starcraft1 when I played at least, and I played at a high level was roughly: Early expand loses to rush. Rush loses to a defense because the rush distance lets you have 1-2 extra defenders to the attackers+ terrain. Once you defend an all in, you have a little bit more money which you could squeek into tech, then you win with teched units. Early tech normally(not always) loses to early expand. At first this looks like paper rock scissors which is lame in a fog of war situation! But look closely, making units both defends vs rush, and beats early expand. If it turns out they made early units in defense, you can go the tech route yourself. It was generally always safe to build some early units(unless you're zerg), and it was nice to get free wins when people tried to early expand on you greedily.
Starcraft2 doesn't have much early play. Sure sometimes someone proxies raxes because early pressure isn't expected then comes with scv+marine rush. But early play past scouting is generally not beneficial in Starcraft2. Making extra units in the beginning just slows your tech or early expand. The game is designed to give you a free pass to the mid game. Besides the queen being pretty good early, Protoss has one better with the Mothership
It's been what, like 50 years we've been using old tech? Nuclear is cleaner than coal barring an accident. Coal is guaranteed to kill and hurt people. With Nuclear you at least have a chance of everyone being healthy. Even if the country doesn't adopt some grand scheme of making a bunch of nuclear plants, making one here or one there would get our technology levels higher and create jobs for smart people.
A lesser known situation is if you actually create an energy surplus, food costs, logistic costs, and transportation costs get cheaper. So if we ramped our energy production up by 2-8x what we got now, people could charge their hybrid car at home for even less than they do now. I think this dream is often grouped up with a superconductor power grid idea which is unrealistic for the short term. I think for a better world, we should be aiming to create energy surpluses.
Sometimes I even have the strange thought that energy conservation ideas hurt society's growth. It would be almost better if we used more power in the short term so energy could invest in itself and provide more power at lower costs down the road. I mean it is better to conserve electricity, but I don't hear people championing the idea of creating a global energy surplus.
I don't care about a limited 2 aps at once, or touchscreen. The one thing Windows needs is the ability to fearlessly run applications. Windows should have been virus proof back since 98 when the Internet was becoming a big thing. It isn't as hard as you'd think to make an OS virus proof if that is what you're designing for.
.exe from the Internet. We're even wary of .png and .mp3s because of buffer overflow exploits. This should have never been the case.
The moment your platform becomes a fearless platform to try new software, people will try software as a hobby. The way Windows is now, before aps are catching on, no one in their right mind is going to download random
Now aps won't catch on really fast because only Windows 8 does Aps. If Microsoft was smart, they would have allowed all versions of Windows back to XP use aps. That way more people would make aps. It would have caught on a lot faster. And since Microsoft probably has an "ap store", they'd have made more money even. The short term money isn't what wins you control over the Internet through which gives you the long term money gain. The key is you want more people to buy your OS over a MAC which word on the street says is harder to get viruses.
Aps could be a good thing for Microsoft's future, but they didn't do enough to have them take off with initial velocity. My guess is there's some self proclaimed genius at Microsoft,"Everyone's gonna love aps, they're going to buy new copies of windows just to get aps. If we make old versions of windows use aps, we'll just lose sales!"
Whats funny though is that people are happy to blow through money like a bad drug habit for games like "Hearthstone" or "Magic the Gathering". This is why my next game is probably going to be a CCG myself. I have a great idea for one, but I need to finish my game going up on Facebook in about a month. Throne and Crown, the game I'm working on is a version of what Gauntlet 2 would be like if it had overland exploration. Throne and Crown Interestingly enough it does cost $4.99 to play past 2 hours. I'll have the virtual goods for those who want them, but the game won't need virtual goods to be played fine. The way I look at it is my game is going to be playable and fun, but it is just the beginning. The game is going to be a long 5-10 year progression where it gets new features, more art, and more music culminating into a Kingdom Sim. Instead of asking for money on Kickstarter, people can play a playable game, and if they see the potential or just want to play it some more, they can help a new game development house out. Interestingly enough, this game is 100% revenue share among my artists and musicians, so there's no money invested, just time. I could talk more about how I did the revenue sharing, it is pretty good if anyone wants to hear.
I'd call them griefers too and is why I quit. LOL is a unique beast. Your team needs to help or you lose. So some people put pressure on each other and don't let up. I quit that game because I'd be cursed at as the first thing people said to me and all I did was pick my character in pubs. Its a shame too because the game is pretty easy and fun. There's no such thing as LOL ladder anxiety compared to SC2 for me because SC2 makes you click maybe 20x as often to get the same amount of things done.
My suggestion to Riot was to allow,"Avoid playing with this character again" and "Prefer playing with this character again" buttons. Forming a custom team is often times more work than what you get from it if people aren't responding. If there was a loose method to form a preferred team, that'd be cool. I think someone told me if there was a button "Don't play with this player again", many people would use it for skill reasons and then it'd be hard to find matches. This is why it should be avoid/prefer instead of musts.
I'm having flashbacks to multiplayer Nascar games. Since it is boring to go left all game some people change things up and go right for a lap or two.
Though... If someone makes the device to autodrive a car cheap enough, it could make for some high intensity demo derbys. Look on the plus side, don't need to hose the track down to get lower impact collisions if no one's safety is at risk.
If we wanted to solve the charging fast problem, couldn't we just make battery swapping easy in phones? You'd leave a battery on the charger and when you get home, you swap the batteries in like 5-10 seconds.
I thought I read: Of these there are 2046 winding patterns that take up to 11 movies
I'll do you one better. I'll make an encryption scheme that no one can decrypt, even myself!
Back when I was first to 1500 wins in Warcraft3 and #1 in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 99% win rate in 3v3, I would have people be awed at me when they come into the game. They would just be happy to play against a big name in the game and express it like a kid who meets his favorite sports player or a famous person. They'd say things like,"Man, you're going to win, but its nice to even get a chance to play you." So my name had intimidation factor to it, but I earned that intimidation factor by first being actually good and having a great record. If you play Starcraft2 and you spend more than a few seconds making your screen name, you're doing it wrong :P
That said, I like this screen name more than my ol' gamer tag. If people go visit my website, they can be well on their way to eternal life, and my Bro Jesus will have cool things to say to me when we finally meet.
Where cars have the "peel out" sound in the dirt.
With 1 gb/s internet, you could have upwards of 2 million people playing FPS in the same zone. Basically with 1 gb/s Internet, you're limited by the number of people who want to play or other hardware concerns.
Not every game needs 2 million players, but once they start digitizing the real world, we could see realistic reenactments of famous wars. Another application would be bigger MMORPGS. Some say,"Who needs that many players at once." But I say games have always trended better when the game play limitations have been lifted.
If bandwith was 1 gb/s, video games would be better as there would be a great deal number of more players allowable in the game at once. AKA: Games could be better if bandwith was higher.
Don't link audio in the comments.
My idea was:
Have a MMORPG that players can host on their own server.
Everyone can host their own server.
There's no rules against hacking cuz you can't stop it anyway
Have a main server which allows people to buy virtual goods.
Allow players to make their own meshes they can sell on the main server's virtual good server, and get a cut.
Which would you want to see more: The sequel to History of the World part 2, or Spaceballs: Episode Zero?
The virus writers who have been holding back XP payload might have vectors that also hit Vista/7/8. With all the juicy XP targets to compromise, they can do more effective random IP address attacks like the days when XP Service Pack 2 wasn't around. So I'm not totally concerned, but just a little bit concerned that this could hose more than just the XP installations.
Ah, I was just making a dumb D&D joke bud. It sucks that so many people are coming out of college and not getting jobs anymore. It's this generation's plight.