EVE takes so much time and the people involved there are part of the group that takes it "seriously" (not really, but they do care about the game), so chances are their significant other understands it -- or at least tolerates it.
You could probably have an ARM, low load, low energy comsumption processor and a nice High-Performace processor on the same board. You'd just then manage when the high-performance activates, and you could probably switch any (assuming hot-plug) without taking it offline.... It's nice to dream, isn't it?
I would be more worried about when will these searches only reinforce your belief instead of allowing you to be exposed to many different things. Unless, of course, you have polarities among your friends. However, the question still stands.
And not having a facebook account? Well, if this becomes an stigma... this would be my reaction. [youtube.com]
Playing eve with a touchscreen should be awesome, if you ask me. Why? So many menus you could just use your fingers on. I will hand you the fact I haven't thought yet where I would put that touchscreen interface, but I believe it would work nicely on that set up. Oh, and drawing, but I might aswell get a dedicated tool for that.
Please note that you still have to be awake and in the driver seat for the duration of the trip and you also need to not be intoxicated. Law says so. But yeah, the future will be less boring. I just hope they let me kill all those safety measures and drive the car myself is so I want.
Carciphona http://carciphona.com/... NavComic http://navcomic.com/... Yeah. I think these two are pretty good. Then there is also Rain over at devianart.
Funny that nobody post a damn link to the website. Can I have one please? I'd like to see by myself what is it that caused a trial. You know, first hand experience instead of just reported.
Or they could think a little a form some kind of poison and release enough inside a mall or something. Or you know, get the guns illegally.
If I were to snap, though, I'd go with a fire with closed exits. See them all burn as they scream for their lives and the firemen try to save them. Or use a/multiple nail bombs. Those are always pretty. A few boxes that activate on cellphone in some crowded areas around the city. Make a call. Emergency services go crazy all around. And you can't ban nails. Though maybe you can make it hard to find the necessary components to make the explosive. I could also be an ass and get some kind of radioactive/poisonous substance into the water system. Or if I really want to be in the news, I'd close a school and drop some gas in it. Common gas, like the one that you use at your kitchen.
Oh shh--- I let my inner dwarf fortress player out of his cage. The community's idea of a minecart fire shotgun was priceless. Along with the catsplosion.
All in all, I'd be more scared of the screenwriter(s) of SAW series.
That it's broken doesn't mean there is a better alternative out there. You can objectively tell when an engine is "broken" (doesn't work), regardless of there being a better alternative out there. Then again, you're also right the rest of the world is probably broken too!
The promotion of weapons is not the promotion of weapons AS TOYS, though I'd see why they would fail to think and... think a gun is a toy. Unless you mean those silly toy guns that.. ARE TOYS and not machines designed to injure (often fatally).
Those would be: a) the not intelligent people, or b) those that decided to NOT give a fuck and just enjoy it while they can. Either way you're right. Sadly. Anybody up for some half-life 2 style action? We just need to convince the government of naming the police "combine" and then get a Gordon Freeman.
Or, you know, they just don't see the traffic. I'm sure if you see fully encrypted traffic that is undistinguishable from chaos, they aren't going to count that towards BitTorrent traffic, even if it was. Or then you have seedboxes.
Well, it is a mistake in the copy process. Or mutation. Of course, it had been established that those mistakes are, in fact, important and the result of such is called Evolution. Not that we didn't know that already.
Well... considering most facebook users (me included! D:) accept and send friend request from almost everyone even if they do not know the person, that they end up accepting/sending a friend request to a teacher seems rather unimportant. Might as well start by teaching people to not accept friend request by people they don't know and using privacy settings correctly (and beware of the consequences.
Now. Do not get me wrong. I am not in favour of harmful relationships between students and teachers (by harmful, well, you intend what you want by that). I am also aware for such relationships it is needed at least two willing parties (unless somebody is forcing somebody else, in which case it is another case). But I am not in favour of "just because I decided to be a formal teacher" I can't use social networks like everybody else. Please, do note the use of "formal". Your mother teaches you things. You learn from your friends. Some may even learn from a stranger in a bar whom they just happened to meet by chance. What about the young adults that explain math (and other subjects) to teenagers for a bit of cash? Of course, they don't fit in the definition of teacher that teaches in a school (thus why the "formal teacher"). My point is, formal teachers - unlike most like to think - are humans who have their own problems, who work like everybody else (who has a job). The only difference is that their job is to pass on knowledge from their generation to the next one. Sure, it'd be bad for what's supposed to be the role model of your kids (wait, you're supposed to be the role model of your kids!!!!!!!) doing some rather questionable actions (but smoking is alright, because students already do it anyway), but then as a human you should NEVER engage in such behaviour in front of kids, or anyone, since you never know when they might be passing by.
I just find this rather unfair for teachers, considering they already have to put up with today's kids and get around putting something in their heads. And going beyond the teacher profession, you should also prevent medical doctors from friending patients. I mean, a rather large number of professions would need such restrictions.
I am also more worried about xbox exclusive content than kinect support. Why xbox only? Why not for ps3 too? What about PC gamers? It makes no sense to me for it to be exclusive for xbox UNLESS it's related directly to kinect, in which case.. uh... yeah, you probably can keep it for yourself. Let's just hope bethesda doesn't shoot itself in the foot with this exclusivity move.
Perhaps I didn't express myself enough. The Internet, as it is today, exists due to the vast amount of users. It exists because it's a cheap (open to discussion) and convenient way of communicating. For research, for entertainment, for whatever. IF prices go up, or restrictions, then it stops being as cheap or convenient. What if they charged to go to facebook? Millions of users would probably stop using it. What if they charged for watching youtube? Less people will go there. And using the alternative isn't always a realistic choice. Where are you going to find the millions of videos youtube has? How are you going to keep in touch with those that are not in the alternative your ISP chooses?
It's kind of what is happening to netflix. Some ISPs are giving alternatives that don't count towards you monthly data limit. But, if they start charging for accessing netflix, then netflix will start loosing costumers, and the local ISP's service may or may not have what you want to watch. Even more worrying is when you start saying: If you go with this ISP, you'll have access to this set of services, while if you choose for that other, you get access to that other set of services. Right now, the internet, and any business that works on it, work because it doesn't matter through who you connect. You just connect, your request gets to their site, and you get an answers. If you begin creating bundles of services along with ISPs, then you are also killing any possible new player, because before they can get costumers, they would have to make a deal with n ISPs, just so they can reach costumers without them[the costumers] having to pay for the privilege.
Besides, it is not realistic to have multiple connections to multiple ISPs on today's set of low-price hardware/firmware. And honestly, most costumers wouldn't bother trying to figure that one out. It's not just about ISPs providing services, or charging you more for some things. It's about whether or not you allow new, starting players enter the market with low budget and become big, or ask them to need n money for something that's not certain; whether or not you allow the current generation of business to be replaced by something better, instead of staying there - possibly making what would become a duel between giants with no possibilities for the smaller players to get a hold on the market. It would be destroying a section of the free market that was built upon the premise that, on the Internet, you have a chance whether or not you are small, because if you offer something good, costumers will go to you at no added price for them (what the site may charge is not included) except the connection they already have and use for something else entirely.
But, of course, we can always set up our own ISP that follows our rules, right? Right?
Except it would mess with how the internet is supposed to work. And this could lead to some serious drawbacks if Universities/Research Labs have to start paying MORE for Internet access. This could potentially lead on an increase on price on a lot of things. Internet access is a cost. If you let them go free on whatever they want, that cost may(will) go up.
I guess the whole point of it is to say that it is rather easy to create a (although perhaps rather ugly) HMD. Which is nowhere for use by common folk. The whole point of it proving that there is no real excuse for there not to be on the market other than no demand for it.
Say what you want, but he at least managed to get it working. Which I didn't, and I haven't seen somebody selling one of those.
I think that the article/they wanted to imply that without bad guys that look for security holes, and others, there would be no need to make secure software (which should be done, with or without the presence of bad guys. It's good practice). I mean, why would a company spend money trying to make a piece of software secure (from scratch or otherwise) if there is nobody to break into that, put them into shame, and cause damage? From a company POV, there is no reason - unless the administrative head feels compelled to force their employees to make secure software.
IMO, instead of having "bad guys" that cause damage, ideally we could pay people to look for security holes in software in a controlled environment where they cause no damage and flaws are still identified. Note I said we replace the "bad guys" with "good guys paid to act as bad guys".
You just present a point of view in the most light and easy to read way. Ever tried comedy? (no joke here)
It is true that such supercomputers could be used to analyze huge amounts of data regarding activities of the civilians. And this is both amazing and scary. Amazing because we've got far enough that we have the data AND the power to process it in a timely manner; scary because of what could be done with the results of such analysis. I understand the pros and cons of the government (or any company or individual, for that matter) having such information at their fingertips, and since I believe myself not be exactly paranoid, I'd rather hope such supercomputers will be used for something useful (read scientific, technological or social advance) and not for control. This is, of course, certainly ignoring the fact that some governments do like to spy on it's people to prevent terrorism, and we still have the "think of the children!" argument
You are right that nowadays it's easy to link you with your past. But being able to link you with your past shouldn't be a reason to judge you by it. Instead of claiming we must have a mechanism to be able to forget online, we (as humanity) should move forward and judge somebody by who they are today, instead of who they were*. I think it's more of a problem to be solved by growing as humans than by creating laws.
*Of course if you know somebody committed murder, it'd be good to be wary and not dismiss it completely. But I don't think slashdotters are dumb enough to not understand what I mean.
I'll assume that the beeping I hear so loud is the sarcasm-meter.
It's a move that'll give them good PR with the Open Source guys AND possibly leave them off the hook on maintaining the tool. Or maybe they just want to be good guys and let the tool evolve by other means (if it evolved at all in these past few years). No idea, tho.
Slashdot Mirror
EVE takes so much time and the people involved there are part of the group that takes it "seriously" (not really, but they do care about the game), so chances are their significant other understands it -- or at least tolerates it.
You could probably have an ARM, low load, low energy comsumption processor and a nice High-Performace processor on the same board. You'd just then manage when the high-performance activates, and you could probably switch any (assuming hot-plug) without taking it offline.... It's nice to dream, isn't it?
I would be more worried about when will these searches only reinforce your belief instead of allowing you to be exposed to many different things. Unless, of course, you have polarities among your friends. However, the question still stands.
And not having a facebook account? Well, if this becomes an stigma... this would be my reaction. [youtube.com]
Playing eve with a touchscreen should be awesome, if you ask me. Why? So many menus you could just use your fingers on. I will hand you the fact I haven't thought yet where I would put that touchscreen interface, but I believe it would work nicely on that set up. Oh, and drawing, but I might aswell get a dedicated tool for that.
Please note that you still have to be awake and in the driver seat for the duration of the trip and you also need to not be intoxicated. Law says so. But yeah, the future will be less boring. I just hope they let me kill all those safety measures and drive the car myself is so I want.
Carciphona http://carciphona.com/... NavComic http://navcomic.com/... Yeah. I think these two are pretty good. Then there is also Rain over at devianart.
Funny that nobody post a damn link to the website. Can I have one please? I'd like to see by myself what is it that caused a trial. You know, first hand experience instead of just reported.
Or they could think a little a form some kind of poison and release enough inside a mall or something. Or you know, get the guns illegally.
If I were to snap, though, I'd go with a fire with closed exits. See them all burn as they scream for their lives and the firemen try to save them. Or use a/multiple nail bombs. Those are always pretty. A few boxes that activate on cellphone in some crowded areas around the city. Make a call. Emergency services go crazy all around. And you can't ban nails. Though maybe you can make it hard to find the necessary components to make the explosive. I could also be an ass and get some kind of radioactive/poisonous substance into the water system. Or if I really want to be in the news, I'd close a school and drop some gas in it. Common gas, like the one that you use at your kitchen.
Oh shh--- I let my inner dwarf fortress player out of his cage. The community's idea of a minecart fire shotgun was priceless. Along with the catsplosion.
All in all, I'd be more scared of the screenwriter(s) of SAW series.
The way I read it, you can get Assault Rifles with a special permit. You can do it, just gotta pass that test.
But then you're probably the one generating it. Or should be :p
That it's broken doesn't mean there is a better alternative out there. You can objectively tell when an engine is "broken" (doesn't work), regardless of there being a better alternative out there. Then again, you're also right the rest of the world is probably broken too!
The promotion of weapons is not the promotion of weapons AS TOYS, though I'd see why they would fail to think and... think a gun is a toy. Unless you mean those silly toy guns that.. ARE TOYS and not machines designed to injure (often fatally).
Those would be: a) the not intelligent people, or b) those that decided to NOT give a fuck and just enjoy it while they can. Either way you're right. Sadly. Anybody up for some half-life 2 style action? We just need to convince the government of naming the police "combine" and then get a Gordon Freeman.
Or, you know, they just don't see the traffic. I'm sure if you see fully encrypted traffic that is undistinguishable from chaos, they aren't going to count that towards BitTorrent traffic, even if it was. Or then you have seedboxes.
Well, it is a mistake in the copy process. Or mutation. Of course, it had been established that those mistakes are, in fact, important and the result of such is called Evolution. Not that we didn't know that already.
Well... considering most facebook users (me included! D:) accept and send friend request from almost everyone even if they do not know the person, that they end up accepting/sending a friend request to a teacher seems rather unimportant. Might as well start by teaching people to not accept friend request by people they don't know and using privacy settings correctly (and beware of the consequences.
Now. Do not get me wrong. I am not in favour of harmful relationships between students and teachers (by harmful, well, you intend what you want by that). I am also aware for such relationships it is needed at least two willing parties (unless somebody is forcing somebody else, in which case it is another case). But I am not in favour of "just because I decided to be a formal teacher" I can't use social networks like everybody else. Please, do note the use of "formal". Your mother teaches you things. You learn from your friends. Some may even learn from a stranger in a bar whom they just happened to meet by chance. What about the young adults that explain math (and other subjects) to teenagers for a bit of cash? Of course, they don't fit in the definition of teacher that teaches in a school (thus why the "formal teacher"). My point is, formal teachers - unlike most like to think - are humans who have their own problems, who work like everybody else (who has a job). The only difference is that their job is to pass on knowledge from their generation to the next one. Sure, it'd be bad for what's supposed to be the role model of your kids (wait, you're supposed to be the role model of your kids!!!!!!!) doing some rather questionable actions (but smoking is alright, because students already do it anyway), but then as a human you should NEVER engage in such behaviour in front of kids, or anyone, since you never know when they might be passing by.
I just find this rather unfair for teachers, considering they already have to put up with today's kids and get around putting something in their heads. And going beyond the teacher profession, you should also prevent medical doctors from friending patients. I mean, a rather large number of professions would need such restrictions.
I am also more worried about xbox exclusive content than kinect support. Why xbox only? Why not for ps3 too? What about PC gamers? It makes no sense to me for it to be exclusive for xbox UNLESS it's related directly to kinect, in which case.. uh... yeah, you probably can keep it for yourself. Let's just hope bethesda doesn't shoot itself in the foot with this exclusivity move.
I don't have mod points, but you sir, deserve a medal.
Perhaps I didn't express myself enough. The Internet, as it is today, exists due to the vast amount of users. It exists because it's a cheap (open to discussion) and convenient way of communicating. For research, for entertainment, for whatever. IF prices go up, or restrictions, then it stops being as cheap or convenient. What if they charged to go to facebook? Millions of users would probably stop using it. What if they charged for watching youtube? Less people will go there. And using the alternative isn't always a realistic choice. Where are you going to find the millions of videos youtube has? How are you going to keep in touch with those that are not in the alternative your ISP chooses?
It's kind of what is happening to netflix. Some ISPs are giving alternatives that don't count towards you monthly data limit. But, if they start charging for accessing netflix, then netflix will start loosing costumers, and the local ISP's service may or may not have what you want to watch. Even more worrying is when you start saying: If you go with this ISP, you'll have access to this set of services, while if you choose for that other, you get access to that other set of services. Right now, the internet, and any business that works on it, work because it doesn't matter through who you connect. You just connect, your request gets to their site, and you get an answers. If you begin creating bundles of services along with ISPs, then you are also killing any possible new player, because before they can get costumers, they would have to make a deal with n ISPs, just so they can reach costumers without them[the costumers] having to pay for the privilege.
Besides, it is not realistic to have multiple connections to multiple ISPs on today's set of low-price hardware/firmware. And honestly, most costumers wouldn't bother trying to figure that one out. It's not just about ISPs providing services, or charging you more for some things. It's about whether or not you allow new, starting players enter the market with low budget and become big, or ask them to need n money for something that's not certain; whether or not you allow the current generation of business to be replaced by something better, instead of staying there - possibly making what would become a duel between giants with no possibilities for the smaller players to get a hold on the market. It would be destroying a section of the free market that was built upon the premise that, on the Internet, you have a chance whether or not you are small, because if you offer something good, costumers will go to you at no added price for them (what the site may charge is not included) except the connection they already have and use for something else entirely.
But, of course, we can always set up our own ISP that follows our rules, right? Right?
Except it would mess with how the internet is supposed to work. And this could lead to some serious drawbacks if Universities/Research Labs have to start paying MORE for Internet access. This could potentially lead on an increase on price on a lot of things. Internet access is a cost. If you let them go free on whatever they want, that cost may(will) go up.
And that is just one side of the issue.
I guess the whole point of it is to say that it is rather easy to create a (although perhaps rather ugly) HMD. Which is nowhere for use by common folk. The whole point of it proving that there is no real excuse for there not to be on the market other than no demand for it.
Say what you want, but he at least managed to get it working. Which I didn't, and I haven't seen somebody selling one of those.
I think that the article/they wanted to imply that without bad guys that look for security holes, and others, there would be no need to make secure software (which should be done, with or without the presence of bad guys. It's good practice). I mean, why would a company spend money trying to make a piece of software secure (from scratch or otherwise) if there is nobody to break into that, put them into shame, and cause damage? From a company POV, there is no reason - unless the administrative head feels compelled to force their employees to make secure software.
IMO, instead of having "bad guys" that cause damage, ideally we could pay people to look for security holes in software in a controlled environment where they cause no damage and flaws are still identified. Note I said we replace the "bad guys" with "good guys paid to act as bad guys".
You just present a point of view in the most light and easy to read way. Ever tried comedy? (no joke here)
It is true that such supercomputers could be used to analyze huge amounts of data regarding activities of the civilians. And this is both amazing and scary. Amazing because we've got far enough that we have the data AND the power to process it in a timely manner; scary because of what could be done with the results of such analysis. I understand the pros and cons of the government (or any company or individual, for that matter) having such information at their fingertips, and since I believe myself not be exactly paranoid, I'd rather hope such supercomputers will be used for something useful (read scientific, technological or social advance) and not for control. This is, of course, certainly ignoring the fact that some governments do like to spy on it's people to prevent terrorism, and we still have the "think of the children!" argument
You are right that nowadays it's easy to link you with your past. But being able to link you with your past shouldn't be a reason to judge you by it. Instead of claiming we must have a mechanism to be able to forget online, we (as humanity) should move forward and judge somebody by who they are today, instead of who they were*. I think it's more of a problem to be solved by growing as humans than by creating laws.
*Of course if you know somebody committed murder, it'd be good to be wary and not dismiss it completely. But I don't think slashdotters are dumb enough to not understand what I mean.
I'll assume that the beeping I hear so loud is the sarcasm-meter.
It's a move that'll give them good PR with the Open Source guys AND possibly leave them off the hook on maintaining the tool. Or maybe they just want to be good guys and let the tool evolve by other means (if it evolved at all in these past few years). No idea, tho.