I doubt that a congressman really cares if the 10-20 max DVDs that he buys a year ends up costing him $100 more. I think the idea here is more "Tax anything that my constituents don't buy." When you consider that the majority of gamers are young, most young people don't vote, seniors tend to vote in massive numbers, and very very few seniors play videogames, this is an almost transparent tax to the people that matter to the congressman from Texas. In his mind, he's happy to let the 25 crowd bitch all they want about paying $52.50 instead of $50 for a videogame, as long as the dominant voting force doesn't care. The part about it going to schools will also help assauge the fears of parents who have to pay the 5% tax for their kids' games, because after all--it's going straight to their kids' schools anyway.
So on the surface it appears to be a very popular idea across the board. The only issue I would have with it is how long will it actually be used solely for schools? What will it take for the funds to be 'temporarily diverted' for some 'emergency need' which seems to last just long enough so people forget the original purpose of the tax, and just accept it?
Put a tax on, oh, say, food? That would generate more revenue than a tax on games.
Food qualifies as a necessity, and different states do have taxes on it. However, some states have their tax structure setup specificially so that necessities aren't taxed. So such a proposal would require several states to restructure their whole tax system. Good luck there.
It's not like having a choppy picture is anything new. Back before cable was very popular, and 95% of consumers used only antennaes, static was everywhere. Reception was horrible at times, and yet still people used the technology. One of the major issues was that watching national stations was free while cable was very expensive. It's a trade off that people make between quality and cost, and they know that.
Where that tradeoff comes in now is in time and attention. People like watching tv on the internet because it's the only thing they have to do, and the few sites that actually try commercials probably don't get as much viewer attention as a tv. People just minimize it and go do something else until the commercials are over. This is different than walking away from a TV, namely because there is no walking involved. People are lazy, yes, but they aren't lazy enough to not minimize a window.
So in general, I would agree that free internet video will likely bring down the major broadcasters. It will take time of course, and things like poor bandwidth or resolution are definitely a hinderance right now, it's nothing we haven't seen before.
"We want to translate that same feeling of watching the TV show into playing a Bob Ross game"
Err..mind-numbing boredom?
"Whether you are an eight-year-old child, or a 65-year-old grandma, we want anyone to be able to pick up the game to create and play to your heart's content.'"
Done.
Seriously, I can only see one hope for this game: a series of lessons on how to paint ponies.
"Specific criticisms sometimes put forth by AA's critics (some of whom go so far as to call AA a cult) include:
* There have been at least three randomized clinical trials that studied the effectiveness of AA. Specifically: Ditman et al. 1967; Brandsma et al. 1980; Walsh et al. 1991.
o Dr. Ditman found that participation in A.A. increased the alcoholics' rate of rearrest for public drunkenness.[1]
o Dr. Brandsma found that A.A. increased the rate of binge drinking. After several months of indoctrination with A.A. 12-Step dogma, the alcoholics in A.A. were doing five times as much binge drinking as a control group that got no treatment at all, and nine times as much binge drinking as another group that got Rational Behavior Therapy. Brandsma alleges that teaching people that they are alcoholics who are powerless over alcohol yields very bad results and that it becomes a self-fulfilling prediction -- they relapse and binge drink as if they really were powerless over alcohol.[2]
o And Dr. Walsh found that the so-called "free" A.A. program was actually very expensive -- it messed up patients so that they required longer periods of costly hospitalization later on.[3]"
So here's what companies see when the learn about sites like Facebook or MySpace:
- Huge number of people
- Vast majority are under 25
- Rapid word of mouth and hype spreading
Now they think to themselves: "WOW, it's just like a TV show that gets millions and millions of teenage viewers---imagine the advertising potential! We'll make a fortune!"
Unfortunatly for them, they're wrong. Commercials and product placements on TV are wildly different from those on the internet. TV requires you to watch them, and things can be soaked in subliminally with relatively little effort on the advertiser's behalf. Why is this? It's because people's attention is focused on what's going on, and the advertisements just slip in there most of the time. It's a fairly benign form of advertisement if you're engrossed in the program.
Websites like Facebook on the other hand would require advertisements to distract the users from what they want to do. Banner ads and flash animations don't blend into webpages like a race car driver wearing 800 different brand names or a supermodel drinking a soda on TV. All internet ads do is to cause frustration and resentment among the users towards the product.
So, while I'm sure advertisers wish that they could keep the same strategies and ideas that they have been using in TV, film, and radio for the last 100 years--sorry, you can't. The internet doesn't work that way.
---
Just my 2 cents.
All this is going to do is encourage people to forgo using the direct deposit features most sites offer, opting for indirect funds deposits.
Right now, most sites offer the ability to write an e-check directly from a player's bank account to the poker site. However, virtually all sites also offer deposit via Neteller or Firepay. Since the latter method is not traceable since the 2 companies are not based in the US, players will just opt to use that method now.
So what this bill is effectively doing is encouraging people to launder how they cash in and out of poker sites. It will do nothing to stop people from actually playing.
That's a really big....
on
Golf in Space
·
· Score: 0, Troll
"However it seems as though some of Abramoff's biggest clients -- brick and mortar casinos -- are really the big winners from passage of this bill, since it does not prohibit gambling in person, only online."
You may not realize it, but B&M casinos are some of the largest proponents for online gambling. Harrah's, among others, has already setup their own online casino which does not allow American players (in order to comply with current legislation). B&M casinos have the experience, they have the trusted name(s) in the gambling industry, and they want in on the action.
Most of the time if you simply run HijackThis and then search google for any of the suspicious log entries, you'll quickly be directed to a page where someone had a similar log entry, and you'll find out if it's malicious or not.
From my perspective in the IT industry, no, there is not hardly any discrimination in hiring practices. I've worked in a few different jobs and all were fairly diverse (proportional probably to the actual racial/sex representations). What people look at is your accomplishments, research, etc.
However, I would be willing to say that there are discriminatory practices with regards to internships and scholarships. I come from a very poor family which currently has no income at all. My high school was horrible, e.g. only 20% of the students in 10th-12th grade could pass a basic algaebra 1 standardized test. I have a very respectable gpa, with a constant 3.5, in major and out. Yet I doubt many people would believe the lack of opportunities and/or assistance available to me. I would say somewhere around 50% of the internships, and around 80% of the scholarships for CS students focus heavily on race instead of economic/educational background.
Companies like Microsoft are notorious for being eager to deal out internships to people of any race which isn't white (and, recently, isn't Indian), as can be noted here. From the link:
While all candidates who meet the criteria for eligibility described below may apply, a large majority of our scholarships will be awarded to female students, underrepresented minority students, and students with disabilities. Minority applicants must be a member of one of the following groups underrepresented in the software field: African-American, Hispanic, or Native American.
But it isn't just private corporations trying to make themselves look culturally sensitive, many universities have similar practices. I was extremely excited last semester when I received an email telling me about a summer internship at UC Berkeley, which the email described as targeting "first generation, low income, students with little chance for research", I matched all 3 criteria and was very excited. However, when I went to look at the application I noticed something very peculiar--there was nothing about income, instead it requires your ethnicity.
Now I'm not saying that all schools do things like that, and yes it's possible that my advisor simply misunderstood the description she was given about the scholarship. I'm actually not even very upset about most of it all. My problem is that people seem to use the argument that because of past racism, other races need to be helped along wherever possible, so as to create a better and more equal society. The problem is, how is any of that equal? You're just saying that people need extra help soley because of their race. It seems like if you're concerned that there are so many people of race x in economic class y, then maybe you should be looking at people's economic status instead of their race. If this is the case, then scholarships will go out to the people of race x that really need them, instead of giving them to both the poor and the more fortunate simply because of their skin color.
Even after they cut their costs in half..
on
EA's Best-kept Secret
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Yeah...I'd like to see a show that has real journalists that know their stuff! What G4 needs is a staff of experts! Here's a list of the areas they're lacking and who I think would fill the positions nicely:
- An expert in finding underground tweaking apps and hacks (Kevin) - An expert in physical mods and hacks for gaming hardware (Yoshi) - Someone to explain issues in gaming technology to a lay audience (Leo) - Someone that people interested in gaming technology can actually relate to (Patrick)
Hmm...now if only they could assemble such an elite team of experts.
My friend is an addicted WoW player and was friends with a gold farmer from a poor area of China. From what he has told me, the $20-$30 or so they make a day by gold farming is more than they could get working at a real job.
Nintendo would have to go out of its way to ruin the launch.
I think more accurately, the developers would have to go out of their way to ruin the launch. It seems to me that with the stale game market these days, developers would have to be tied up to keep them from flocking to this console.
Just imagine the current proposal for a game now: "Ok, it's a [insert genre] game where you play a [insert catchy character type] who has to [choose: save, kill, defeat] this [choose: victim, enemy]."
Now think about some of the game ideas you could have with the Revolution--just from the unique controller: Drums player (2 controllers for sticks), pilot games (tilt/turn the plane with the controller).
Then there are the improvements to current games: aiming a rifle, using a sword, etc.
All that needs to happen is for a decent initial lineup of games to come out, which will attract a lot of users, and a lot more companies will follow. If all that can happen, the Revolution may really live up to its name.
I was in your same spot (although I had never heard of the hackers' diet) about 4 years ago. I had gone through surgery and gained significant weight due to being bed ridden for 3 months and having a mother that loved to buy junk food for me. At the point where I finally stepped on the scale and said "enough is enough", I had gained about 45lbs in 5 months, and I was consuming ~8 cans of mountain dew every day (this was when I was in high school, so that's 8 cans after 3pm when I got home), 2 ice cream bars, and 3 sugary meals a day.
Now, I've never been one for exercise. I played a few sports occassionally just for fun, but didn't really exert myself. Since my operation I hadn't played any, and lost the desire to do it. I had to lose the weight somehow, and I reasoned myself into a simple diet: no desserts, only a bowl of cereal for breakfast and one for dinner, and drink ONLY water. This last part was probably the biggest kicker. I lost 15lbs just from cutting the sugary drinks out of my diet. The best way to go on a diet cold turkey is to use water--whenever you want anything that you aren't supposed to have, cram water down your throat. That may sound extreme, but drinking 100 ounces of water a day is what made me lose 90 lbs.
I never really started to notice the 'fade' as you're calling it until I got to college though. The key was that, because of my course schedule and economic status (I couldn't really afford to eat that often), I had to start cutting back my meals. I started eating just 1 meal a day (dinner), and made it a big one. While I got used to that diet, and did continue to lose weight on it, I started to notice that midway through the day I got really tired. I needed more and more sleep if I wanted to feel truly rested, and even then I didn't feel great the whole day.
The main difference between the two diets was that I was eating the two bowls of cereal at regular intervals, everyday, and keeping my glucose levels high. Interestingly, I've recently tried to fix the fade I get now by cutting various things out of my diet and have realized that without a lot of meat in my diet I have a lot more energy. The fade isn't ever going to be completely gone if you aren't having a small meal in the middle of the day, so a snack might be a good idea.
So my 3 suggestions for cutting out the fade is to eat cereal for breakfast (keep cutting down bowl sizes also if you're like me and are used to much larger portions), eat something relatively small for lunch (nothing more than another bowl of cereal would give you (~300 calories)), and cut back on the meat you're eating.
Scientist 1: "Ok here's the thing: we need to kill off these mosquitos." Scientist 2: "Right, so how do we kill em?" Scientist 1: "Well first we round up as many as we can possibly find." Scientist 2: "Ahhh...then we kill em." Scientist 1: "No no no, then we make their privates glow--but just the males." Scientist 2: "Uh....why?" Scientist 1: "So that they won't breed." Scientist 2: "Right....but won't killing them also have the same effect?" Scientist 1: "Sorry, can't hear you, this machine is busy sorting the 50,000 larvae I gathered this morning into male and females!"
Seriously, why would you spend all that time and money building a machine to sort 18,000 larvae per hour instead of just building an equally impressive FLY KILLING MACHINE.
She is verrrrry much a hypochondriac that turns to the web to confirm her fears. One particular instance which comes to mind is her calling me at 3am one night, crying in pain, because she convinced herself that she had a yeast infection, looked up how to cure one online (douching with a mixture of vinegar and some other things), and tried to 'fix it'....yeah that was a fun night.
For a generic book on game programming, check out Andre LaMothe's book Tricks of the Windows Game Programming Guru's (assuming you're developing for windows...and if you're trying to find a decent sized audience, you really should be) That provides the technical introduction you'll need, from COM to DirectX. Note that you can skip a lot of it if you're a seasoned windows developer. If you're not though, this is the best book to start with IMO, since it has a great windows primer.
When it comes time for you to consider programming game AI, look no further than Programming Game AI By Example by Mat Buckland. He goes over a LOT of material in the book dealing with very practical game programming. He starts out with very basic examples of Finite State Machines (FSMs) and works his way into building a bot for a full blown FPS game called Raven. His website (http://ai-junkie.com/)also has a very nice introduction to Neural Networks and Genetic Algorithms--some of the more 'exotic' approaches to game AI.
He writes all his code in the book in C++, so obviously it would be helpful to know it. Also you will need to be slightly adept at math if you want to understand completely the physics code, but luckily he provides a very detailed and lengthy refresher chapter and references it constantly whenever introducing a math-intensive portion of code.
Slashdot Mirror
"parents will have a hard time pronouncing it ("Nintendo...why?") ...""
That didn't seem to stop Pokemon.
I doubt that a congressman really cares if the 10-20 max DVDs that he buys a year ends up costing him $100 more. I think the idea here is more "Tax anything that my constituents don't buy." When you consider that the majority of gamers are young, most young people don't vote, seniors tend to vote in massive numbers, and very very few seniors play videogames, this is an almost transparent tax to the people that matter to the congressman from Texas. In his mind, he's happy to let the 25 crowd bitch all they want about paying $52.50 instead of $50 for a videogame, as long as the dominant voting force doesn't care. The part about it going to schools will also help assauge the fears of parents who have to pay the 5% tax for their kids' games, because after all--it's going straight to their kids' schools anyway.
So on the surface it appears to be a very popular idea across the board. The only issue I would have with it is how long will it actually be used solely for schools? What will it take for the funds to be 'temporarily diverted' for some 'emergency need' which seems to last just long enough so people forget the original purpose of the tax, and just accept it?
Put a tax on, oh, say, food? That would generate more revenue than a tax on games.
Food qualifies as a necessity, and different states do have taxes on it. However, some states have their tax structure setup specificially so that necessities aren't taxed. So such a proposal would require several states to restructure their whole tax system. Good luck there.
It's not like having a choppy picture is anything new. Back before cable was very popular, and 95% of consumers used only antennaes, static was everywhere. Reception was horrible at times, and yet still people used the technology. One of the major issues was that watching national stations was free while cable was very expensive. It's a trade off that people make between quality and cost, and they know that.
Where that tradeoff comes in now is in time and attention. People like watching tv on the internet because it's the only thing they have to do, and the few sites that actually try commercials probably don't get as much viewer attention as a tv. People just minimize it and go do something else until the commercials are over. This is different than walking away from a TV, namely because there is no walking involved. People are lazy, yes, but they aren't lazy enough to not minimize a window.
So in general, I would agree that free internet video will likely bring down the major broadcasters. It will take time of course, and things like poor bandwidth or resolution are definitely a hinderance right now, it's nothing we haven't seen before.
"We want to translate that same feeling of watching the TV show into playing a Bob Ross game"
Err..mind-numbing boredom?
"Whether you are an eight-year-old child, or a 65-year-old grandma, we want anyone to be able to pick up the game to create and play to your heart's content.'"
Done.
Seriously, I can only see one hope for this game: a series of lessons on how to paint ponies.
Right, and just look at how quickly South Park fell down the tubes and got cancelled..oh..wait...nvm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous# AA.27s_Critics
From the wiki:
"Specific criticisms sometimes put forth by AA's critics (some of whom go so far as to call AA a cult) include:
* There have been at least three randomized clinical trials that studied the effectiveness of AA. Specifically: Ditman et al. 1967; Brandsma et al. 1980; Walsh et al. 1991.
o Dr. Ditman found that participation in A.A. increased the alcoholics' rate of rearrest for public drunkenness.[1]
o Dr. Brandsma found that A.A. increased the rate of binge drinking. After several months of indoctrination with A.A. 12-Step dogma, the alcoholics in A.A. were doing five times as much binge drinking as a control group that got no treatment at all, and nine times as much binge drinking as another group that got Rational Behavior Therapy. Brandsma alleges that teaching people that they are alcoholics who are powerless over alcohol yields very bad results and that it becomes a self-fulfilling prediction -- they relapse and binge drink as if they really were powerless over alcohol.[2]
o And Dr. Walsh found that the so-called "free" A.A. program was actually very expensive -- it messed up patients so that they required longer periods of costly hospitalization later on.[3]"
So here's what companies see when the learn about sites like Facebook or MySpace: - Huge number of people - Vast majority are under 25 - Rapid word of mouth and hype spreading Now they think to themselves: "WOW, it's just like a TV show that gets millions and millions of teenage viewers---imagine the advertising potential! We'll make a fortune!" Unfortunatly for them, they're wrong. Commercials and product placements on TV are wildly different from those on the internet. TV requires you to watch them, and things can be soaked in subliminally with relatively little effort on the advertiser's behalf. Why is this? It's because people's attention is focused on what's going on, and the advertisements just slip in there most of the time. It's a fairly benign form of advertisement if you're engrossed in the program. Websites like Facebook on the other hand would require advertisements to distract the users from what they want to do. Banner ads and flash animations don't blend into webpages like a race car driver wearing 800 different brand names or a supermodel drinking a soda on TV. All internet ads do is to cause frustration and resentment among the users towards the product. So, while I'm sure advertisers wish that they could keep the same strategies and ideas that they have been using in TV, film, and radio for the last 100 years--sorry, you can't. The internet doesn't work that way. --- Just my 2 cents.
All this is going to do is encourage people to forgo using the direct deposit features most sites offer, opting for indirect funds deposits.
Right now, most sites offer the ability to write an e-check directly from a player's bank account to the poker site. However, virtually all sites also offer deposit via Neteller or Firepay. Since the latter method is not traceable since the 2 companies are not based in the US, players will just opt to use that method now.
So what this bill is effectively doing is encouraging people to launder how they cash in and out of poker sites. It will do nothing to stop people from actually playing.
"Four!"
"However it seems as though some of Abramoff's biggest clients -- brick and mortar casinos -- are really the big winners from passage of this bill, since it does not prohibit gambling in person, only online."
You may not realize it, but B&M casinos are some of the largest proponents for online gambling. Harrah's, among others, has already setup their own online casino which does not allow American players (in order to comply with current legislation). B&M casinos have the experience, they have the trusted name(s) in the gambling industry, and they want in on the action.
For those who don't know about it, you can read up on HijackThis here and the direct link to the zip dl can be found here.
Most of the time if you simply run HijackThis and then search google for any of the suspicious log entries, you'll quickly be directed to a page where someone had a similar log entry, and you'll find out if it's malicious or not.
From my perspective in the IT industry, no, there is not hardly any discrimination in hiring practices. I've worked in a few different jobs and all were fairly diverse (proportional probably to the actual racial/sex representations). What people look at is your accomplishments, research, etc.
However, I would be willing to say that there are discriminatory practices with regards to internships and scholarships. I come from a very poor family which currently has no income at all. My high school was horrible, e.g. only 20% of the students in 10th-12th grade could pass a basic algaebra 1 standardized test. I have a very respectable gpa, with a constant 3.5, in major and out. Yet I doubt many people would believe the lack of opportunities and/or assistance available to me. I would say somewhere around 50% of the internships, and around 80% of the scholarships for CS students focus heavily on race instead of economic/educational background.
Companies like Microsoft are notorious for being eager to deal out internships to people of any race which isn't white (and, recently, isn't Indian), as can be noted here. From the link:
While all candidates who meet the criteria for eligibility described below may apply, a large majority of our scholarships will be awarded to female students, underrepresented minority students, and students with disabilities. Minority applicants must be a member of one of the following groups underrepresented in the software field: African-American, Hispanic, or Native American.
But it isn't just private corporations trying to make themselves look culturally sensitive, many universities have similar practices. I was extremely excited last semester when I received an email telling me about a summer internship at UC Berkeley, which the email described as targeting "first generation, low income, students with little chance for research", I matched all 3 criteria and was very excited. However, when I went to look at the application I noticed something very peculiar--there was nothing about income, instead it requires your ethnicity.
Now I'm not saying that all schools do things like that, and yes it's possible that my advisor simply misunderstood the description she was given about the scholarship. I'm actually not even very upset about most of it all. My problem is that people seem to use the argument that because of past racism, other races need to be helped along wherever possible, so as to create a better and more equal society. The problem is, how is any of that equal? You're just saying that people need extra help soley because of their race. It seems like if you're concerned that there are so many people of race x in economic class y, then maybe you should be looking at people's economic status instead of their race. If this is the case, then scholarships will go out to the people of race x that really need them, instead of giving them to both the poor and the more fortunate simply because of their skin color.
They still won't drop game prices a penny.
Yeah...I'd like to see a show that has real journalists that know their stuff! What G4 needs is a staff of experts! Here's a list of the areas they're lacking and who I think would fill the positions nicely:
- An expert in finding underground tweaking apps and hacks (Kevin)
- An expert in physical mods and hacks for gaming hardware (Yoshi)
- Someone to explain issues in gaming technology to a lay audience (Leo)
- Someone that people interested in gaming technology can actually relate to (Patrick)
Hmm...now if only they could assemble such an elite team of experts.
Hmm, G4...ohhh that's the station with all those videogame commercials all the time right? ...
What do you mean "those are the shows"?
My friend is an addicted WoW player and was friends with a gold farmer from a poor area of China. From what he has told me, the $20-$30 or so they make a day by gold farming is more than they could get working at a real job.
Overheard in the EA Boardroom: "Ohhh, so THAT'S where we got that idea from. I told you guys it sounded familiar."
Nintendo would have to go out of its way to ruin the launch.
I think more accurately, the developers would have to go out of their way to ruin the launch. It seems to me that with the stale game market these days, developers would have to be tied up to keep them from flocking to this console.
Just imagine the current proposal for a game now: "Ok, it's a [insert genre] game where you play a [insert catchy character type] who has to [choose: save, kill, defeat] this [choose: victim, enemy]."
Now think about some of the game ideas you could have with the Revolution--just from the unique controller: Drums player (2 controllers for sticks), pilot games (tilt/turn the plane with the controller).
Then there are the improvements to current games: aiming a rifle, using a sword, etc.
All that needs to happen is for a decent initial lineup of games to come out, which will attract a lot of users, and a lot more companies will follow. If all that can happen, the Revolution may really live up to its name.
I was in your same spot (although I had never heard of the hackers' diet) about 4 years ago. I had gone through surgery and gained significant weight due to being bed ridden for 3 months and having a mother that loved to buy junk food for me. At the point where I finally stepped on the scale and said "enough is enough", I had gained about 45lbs in 5 months, and I was consuming ~8 cans of mountain dew every day (this was when I was in high school, so that's 8 cans after 3pm when I got home), 2 ice cream bars, and 3 sugary meals a day.
Now, I've never been one for exercise. I played a few sports occassionally just for fun, but didn't really exert myself. Since my operation I hadn't played any, and lost the desire to do it. I had to lose the weight somehow, and I reasoned myself into a simple diet: no desserts, only a bowl of cereal for breakfast and one for dinner, and drink ONLY water. This last part was probably the biggest kicker. I lost 15lbs just from cutting the sugary drinks out of my diet. The best way to go on a diet cold turkey is to use water--whenever you want anything that you aren't supposed to have, cram water down your throat. That may sound extreme, but drinking 100 ounces of water a day is what made me lose 90 lbs.
I never really started to notice the 'fade' as you're calling it until I got to college though. The key was that, because of my course schedule and economic status (I couldn't really afford to eat that often), I had to start cutting back my meals. I started eating just 1 meal a day (dinner), and made it a big one. While I got used to that diet, and did continue to lose weight on it, I started to notice that midway through the day I got really tired. I needed more and more sleep if I wanted to feel truly rested, and even then I didn't feel great the whole day.
The main difference between the two diets was that I was eating the two bowls of cereal at regular intervals, everyday, and keeping my glucose levels high. Interestingly, I've recently tried to fix the fade I get now by cutting various things out of my diet and have realized that without a lot of meat in my diet I have a lot more energy. The fade isn't ever going to be completely gone if you aren't having a small meal in the middle of the day, so a snack might be a good idea.
So my 3 suggestions for cutting out the fade is to eat cereal for breakfast (keep cutting down bowl sizes also if you're like me and are used to much larger portions), eat something relatively small for lunch (nothing more than another bowl of cereal would give you (~300 calories)), and cut back on the meat you're eating.
Scientist 1: "Ok here's the thing: we need to kill off these mosquitos."
Scientist 2: "Right, so how do we kill em?"
Scientist 1: "Well first we round up as many as we can possibly find."
Scientist 2: "Ahhh...then we kill em."
Scientist 1: "No no no, then we make their privates glow--but just the males."
Scientist 2: "Uh....why?"
Scientist 1: "So that they won't breed."
Scientist 2: "Right....but won't killing them also have the same effect?"
Scientist 1: "Sorry, can't hear you, this machine is busy sorting the 50,000 larvae I gathered this morning into male and females!"
Seriously, why would you spend all that time and money building a machine to sort 18,000 larvae per hour instead of just building an equally impressive FLY KILLING MACHINE.
She is verrrrry much a hypochondriac that turns to the web to confirm her fears. One particular instance which comes to mind is her calling me at 3am one night, crying in pain, because she convinced herself that she had a yeast infection, looked up how to cure one online (douching with a mixture of vinegar and some other things), and tried to 'fix it'....yeah that was a fun night.
For a generic book on game programming, check out Andre LaMothe's book Tricks of the Windows Game Programming Guru's (assuming you're developing for windows...and if you're trying to find a decent sized audience, you really should be) That provides the technical introduction you'll need, from COM to DirectX. Note that you can skip a lot of it if you're a seasoned windows developer. If you're not though, this is the best book to start with IMO, since it has a great windows primer.
When it comes time for you to consider programming game AI, look no further than Programming Game AI By Example by Mat Buckland. He goes over a LOT of material in the book dealing with very practical game programming. He starts out with very basic examples of Finite State Machines (FSMs) and works his way into building a bot for a full blown FPS game called Raven. His website (http://ai-junkie.com/)also has a very nice introduction to Neural Networks and Genetic Algorithms--some of the more 'exotic' approaches to game AI.
He writes all his code in the book in C++, so obviously it would be helpful to know it. Also you will need to be slightly adept at math if you want to understand completely the physics code, but luckily he provides a very detailed and lengthy refresher chapter and references it constantly whenever introducing a math-intensive portion of code.
I mean we all remember those famous Technical Demos:
- Mortal Kombat characters executing fatalities to demonstrate advancments in sprite scripting technology.
- Serious Sam's technical display of hugely explorable levels and efficient creation (and removal) of hundreds of agents simultaneously.
- The Playboy series of games which push the boundaries of graphics and strive for photorealism.
- Duke Nukem feeding strippers money and getting them to take their clothes off displayed revolutionary bounce-physics.