I never read more than a dozen pages of "1984". I was skipping through it and found part about rat torture, and that was it for me. Arthur C. Clarke gives his vision in "Odyssey 3000" that everyone will be screened through brain/mind scans for deviant behaviour among other things. He thinks it will be necessary to ensure safe society. But at least he recognizes the consequences: there are almost no exceptionally bright and original people in 3000's (they all get "reprogrammed" effectively). However, his view is that benefits are going to be bigger than loses. That really scared me. I am glad I'll be long dead then anyhow.
> People aren't going to give their money away. > People aren't going to start being nice to > each other What do these have to do with population growth? (And I have to say that my experience contradicts both of these claims.)
Then, my friend, you are VERY lucky and/or haven't experienced much of the real world. Pray you never find out (or ignore the clues that are all around you) how foul and bad this world really is. Too many works of art have covered this topic for me to hope to add anything new.
Ever wonder why warez links on sites like Xoom or Geocities go down usually within a day or two? I am sure most reasonably big companies *have* people searching the web on daily basis, probably using AltaVista. Or more likely, they subcontract that work to someone else.
That's why I said "the article claims they use Gaussian for this and that". I thought someone will have more insight. Yeah, I also heard that insurance companies employ a few good men/women. I would imagine they would use some extrapolated curve based on claims data for a century back or something, not just some silly distribution.
In which case, you're absolutely right: WTF is the target audience for the article? Someone speculating on insurance companies stock?
Aren't you guys missing a point? We have different distributions and none are "good" or "bad" by default, as anyone with science degree knows, but:
1. This article is in financial times 2. Scientist proposing the new distribution have established partially based on data about frequency of forest fires and air turbulences 3. Article claims that for natural disasters insurance companies currently use Gaussian distribution 4. Insurance comapanies = Tera $$$ = what "financial" stands for in the web site's name
So simply, if it is true that insurance companies use Gaussian d. for e.g. forest fires, and research shows that the actual data doesn't fit that distribution, then there's a good chance those companies will utilize this research and insurance premiums for such events will change. For finance world, that IS big news.
If this wasn't related to $$$, you wouldn't see an article like this in financial times. They don't give a damn about chaos theory or anything, unless it means $$$.
For the implications of this new distribution in science, a better article with formulas and such would do the rest of us good.
Ahem... I play - rather, finish - like 40-50 games A YEAR. Played D1 and D2, Forsaken and just about any kind of game except sports (even that sometimes), and I have no problem shooting from upside down or whatever. I usually play with joystick but had to switch to mouse for this one - joystick is so slow that you get killed before you see the enemy. The game should be hard on hard setting. Period. On average it should be exactly that - average, for a player like me. I'm not too good, but at least average. But it's not just that the game is hard - it's buggy and graphics is jumpy. Look at Heavy Gear 2 or Quake 3 - those games have great graphics and it's still smooth. D3 is not. Unreal from last year was playable at 800x600 if you had V2 and fast enough machine (that was industry standard then, 800x600, not a P2-450). Even PC Gamer admits that D3 cannot be played on full setting on anything that now exists (and still gives it 93%!). You're partially right, though. I might be getting old for this. Oh well, RPG genre is back and doesn't require 0.1 microsecond ping between brain, eyes and hands...
No, you're not the only one. Unfortunately, as I spend 90% of my time playing games, win98 is my primary OS. I'm considering moving at least to NT. Second problem is that new hardware takes long time to get supported, and I'm HW junkie. I actually bought AccelX commercial X-server to help me with that, but e.g. SB Live support is still flaky. Both KDE and Gnome beat win98 GUI, but even then Netscape is easier to use in Windows - and looks better, although AccelX does much better job of rendering fonts than XFree. UNIX version of netscape is worse because of crappy motif dialog boxes. I deal with motif at work as well, and I don't like it at all.
I played at normal difficulty, is it ace? It sounds like hard but then I think there were 2 harder levels above it and 2 below so I took it as normal. Maybe I should've eaten that pill and called myself rookie just to get further in the game. Humunculous is the one... are you saying that if you're over/under him he can't hit you? Because you can't run from him, afterburners are still slower than he is (bigger mass = faster move ?!). What I eventually did is hide in those dark places left and right of where he emerges from, and sometimes - takes try&pray, save/load a dozen times, he won't follow so you have "only" cops to deal with, and after they're done you can try your luck on him. Unfortunately the game is buggy so once he just disappeared and I couldn't finish the level - guided missiles still went for him but God knows where he was. So only on the third try (first save bug, then dissapearance bug) I finished it... took me the whole evening. 4 direct hits with mega missiles and he still doesn't even slow down while advancing:( And that's only level 5 or so?
True, I couldn't see much of the difference between 16 and 32 bit, both in looks but in speed as well... plus 32 bit setting is lost every time you reload (another bug) - which is every minute or so. I did have to switch down to 800x600 a few times... My point is, 1024 is industry standard right now and should be playable on a high end machine. What's the point of wasting your money on a TNT2 Ultra if there's no benefit... Oh well, I built me one of those dual celeron 550s last week - linux flies on it! - maybe NOW I should get the game again if I find it used somewhere for cheap... Btw, you use NT, can you install it on a logical partition? I tried and it won't:(
Just how did you destroy all those bosses? The one in the mission right after your base was stormed (after that one you get a new ship) took me hours and literarly dozens of saves/loads (incl. loosing it all in that crash bug). Plus, the boss - being as big as it is - was still *faster* than me even if I use jets! Can't run, can't hide, (almost) can't destroy and at the same time several of those cop bots beat the crap out of you with their arms, as if the boss wasn't enough? Next mission after that was just too much for me and I sold the game. If you finished the game you must have some of those cyber implants from System Shock 2...
Re:1280x1024 V3 3k, AMD K6-2 400, 128MB Ram smokes
on
Descent 3 Linux Client
·
· Score: 1
Yes, indeed Glide is considerably faster that D3D or GL in Descent 3. Problem is not in frame rates (I didn't measure them anyway) but in the general jumpiness of the graphics. I do get about 24 fps in Q3 demo with all candy on and 32bit color, but the game still plays very smooth and I had no problem to frag.
Don't get me wrong, linux *needs* more mainstream games like this to be ported, but...
D3 SUCKS. 1024x768x32 is JERKY on a P2-504, 256M RAM and a TNT2 Ultra at 175/183. It constantly crashes if you try to save during heavy firefights. You cannot finish more than 5-6 missions even on normal difficulty because you need to reload every 10 seconds (no kidding!). And I have played games, including D1 and D2 for more than 10 years... Great graphics, yes, and levels are cool, but it's all for nothing if programmers did a crappy job optimizing framerate - and they did. Great for showing off your PC but not more than that. It may be good for multiplayer, wouldn't know that, but for single-player it sucks. That's probably why Parallax split, as Volition's FreeSpace is simply FANTASTIC. So when I got too close to a hearth attack, I've put CD back in the box and put it on consignment. Games should be *fun*, not frustration...
You're wrong. I'd rather risk my life by a scientific mishap than have things stay at status quo. If this civilization is to survive we *need* progress in physics and space exploration. We are not getting any, all money goes to stort-sighted business ventures. And then people object to even that little that IS being done. People like that will be the first to get a weapon and go on killing and looting if a world collapses in a few decades due to lack of energy or whatever. The same people who believe only *they* have any rights. People who tell you what color to use on your house, what plants to plant, and that no nudity is to be seen in theatres. Or don't give a shit about their economies exploiting other nations or even killing people just to keep their industries going.
I'd take scientific risk over human risk any time. I'm sick of people's "righteousness".
I remember seeing original article (by Lempel & Ziv ?) in an IEEE magazine way back. How can it be patented if it was published in a scientific magazine? Isn't it used in just about any compressing algorithm today (winzip, gzip and what not)?
Elite ruled... I remember that in Europe the general opinion was that Privateer was just an Elite ripoff. Was Elite distributed in US at all? That would explain why people here speak so highly of it, just like Elite is treated in Europe.
Get WC4, turn on cheats and enjoy! As a game, WC4 is essentialy WC3 and many people didn't like it, but as a movie... nothing in the game business comes close. It's now cheap if you can find it so it's worth for the movie alone. Prophecy engine was great but story sucked and acting was horrible, except for the Maniac. The story had a great potential but they screwed it up. And they are aware of it: the upcoming sequels will all be multiplayer only (=no story).
WC4 had one of the best stories in a computer game EVER and the movie made out of it sequences was better than the 90% of what Hollywood makes (if not the effect, the story was for sure). It was WAY more believable than WC3 because it was all about humans and their flaws. The way it was unfolding was astounding. The game itself was incredibly tough so I went through almost all of it with cheats and just to see movies. So as a game, WC4 wasn't much. But I still remember those days I spent at work feverishly waiting for time to go home and watch more of WC4... Heck, I even bought several WC books after that. That's what makes this WC movie quite dissapointing. I was expecting much more.
Slashdot Mirror
I never read more than a dozen pages of "1984". I was skipping through it and found part about rat torture, and that was it for me.
Arthur C. Clarke gives his vision in "Odyssey 3000" that everyone will be screened through brain/mind scans for deviant behaviour among other things. He thinks it will be necessary to ensure safe society. But at least he recognizes the consequences: there are almost no exceptionally bright and original people in 3000's (they all get "reprogrammed" effectively). However, his view is that benefits are going to be bigger than loses. That really scared me. I am glad I'll be long dead then anyhow.
> People aren't going to give their money away. >
People aren't going to start being nice to > each other What do these have to do with
population growth? (And I have to say that my experience contradicts both of these
claims.)
Then, my friend, you are VERY lucky and/or haven't experienced much of the real world. Pray you never find out (or ignore the clues that are all around you) how foul and bad this world really is. Too many works of art have covered this topic for me to hope to add anything new.
Ever wonder why warez links on sites like Xoom or Geocities go down usually within a day or two?
I am sure most reasonably big companies *have* people searching the web on daily basis, probably using AltaVista. Or more likely, they subcontract that work to someone else.
That's why I said "the article claims they use Gaussian for this and that". I thought someone will have more insight. Yeah, I also heard that insurance companies employ a few good men/women. I would imagine they would use some extrapolated curve based on claims data for a century back or something, not just some silly distribution.
In which case, you're absolutely right: WTF is the target audience for the article? Someone speculating on insurance companies stock?
Aren't you guys missing a point?
We have different distributions and none are "good" or "bad" by default, as anyone with science degree knows, but:
1. This article is in financial times
2. Scientist proposing the new distribution have
established partially based on data about frequency of forest fires and air turbulences
3. Article claims that for natural disasters insurance companies currently use Gaussian distribution
4. Insurance comapanies = Tera $$$ = what "financial" stands for in the web site's name
So simply, if it is true that insurance companies use Gaussian d. for e.g. forest fires, and research shows that the actual data doesn't fit that distribution, then there's a good chance those companies will utilize this research and insurance premiums for such events will change. For finance world, that IS big news.
If this wasn't related to $$$, you wouldn't see an article like this in financial times. They don't give a damn about chaos theory or anything, unless it means $$$.
For the implications of this new distribution in science, a better article with formulas and such would do the rest of us good.
It's ok... I was asking for it... I was just frustrated about very high marks every site/magazine was giving to this game.
Ahem... I play - rather, finish - like 40-50 games A YEAR. Played D1 and D2, Forsaken and just about any kind of game except sports (even that sometimes), and I have no problem shooting from upside down or whatever. I usually play with joystick but had to switch to mouse for this one - joystick is so slow that you get killed before you see the enemy. The game should be hard on hard setting. Period. On average it should be exactly that - average, for a player like me. I'm not too good, but at least average. But it's not just that the game is hard - it's buggy and graphics is jumpy. Look at Heavy Gear 2 or Quake 3 - those games have great graphics and it's still smooth. D3 is not. Unreal from last year was playable at 800x600 if you had V2 and fast enough machine (that was industry standard then, 800x600, not a P2-450). Even PC Gamer admits that D3 cannot be played on full setting on anything that now exists (and still gives it 93%!). You're partially right, though. I might be getting old for this. Oh well, RPG genre is back and doesn't require 0.1 microsecond ping between brain, eyes and hands...
No, you're not the only one. Unfortunately, as I spend 90% of my time playing games, win98 is my primary OS. I'm considering moving at least to NT.
Second problem is that new hardware takes long time to get supported, and I'm HW junkie. I actually bought AccelX commercial X-server to help me with that, but e.g. SB Live support is still flaky.
Both KDE and Gnome beat win98 GUI, but even then Netscape is easier to use in Windows - and looks better, although AccelX does much better job of rendering fonts than XFree. UNIX version of netscape is worse because of crappy motif dialog boxes. I deal with motif at work as well, and I don't like it at all.
I played at normal difficulty, is it ace? It sounds like hard but then I think there were 2 harder levels above it and 2 below so I took it as normal. Maybe I should've eaten that pill and called myself rookie just to get further in the game. :( And that's only level 5 or so?
Humunculous is the one... are you saying that if you're over/under him he can't hit you? Because you can't run from him, afterburners are still slower than he is (bigger mass = faster move ?!). What I eventually did is hide in those dark places left and right of where he emerges from, and sometimes - takes try&pray, save/load a dozen times, he won't follow so you have "only" cops to deal with, and after they're done you can try your luck on him. Unfortunately the game is buggy so once he just disappeared and I couldn't finish the level - guided missiles still went for him but God knows where he was. So only on the third try (first save bug, then dissapearance bug) I finished it... took me the whole evening. 4 direct hits with mega missiles and he still doesn't even slow down while advancing
True, I couldn't see much of the difference between 16 and 32 bit, both in looks but in speed as well... plus 32 bit setting is lost every time you reload (another bug) - which is every minute or so. I did have to switch down to 800x600 a few times... My point is, 1024 is industry standard right now and should be playable on a high end machine. What's the point of wasting your money on a TNT2 Ultra if there's no benefit... Oh well, I built me one of those dual celeron 550s last week - linux flies on it! - maybe NOW I should get the game again if I find it used somewhere for cheap... :(
Btw, you use NT, can you install it on a logical partition? I tried and it won't
Just how did you destroy all those bosses? The one in the mission right after your base was stormed (after that one you get a new ship) took me hours and literarly dozens of saves/loads (incl. loosing it all in that crash bug). Plus, the boss - being as big as it is - was still *faster* than me even if I use jets! Can't run, can't hide, (almost) can't destroy and at the same time several of those cop bots beat the crap out of you with their arms, as if the boss wasn't enough? Next mission after that was just too much for me and I sold the game. If you finished the game you must have some of those cyber implants from System Shock 2...
Yes, indeed Glide is considerably faster that D3D or GL in Descent 3. Problem is not in frame rates (I didn't measure them anyway) but in the general jumpiness of the graphics. I do get about 24 fps in Q3 demo with all candy on and 32bit color, but the game still plays very smooth and I had no problem to frag.
Don't get me wrong, linux *needs* more mainstream games like this to be ported, but...
D3 SUCKS. 1024x768x32 is JERKY on a P2-504, 256M RAM and a TNT2 Ultra at 175/183. It constantly crashes if you try to save during heavy firefights. You cannot finish more than 5-6 missions even on normal difficulty because you need to reload every 10 seconds (no kidding!). And I have played games, including D1 and D2 for more than 10 years...
Great graphics, yes, and levels are cool, but it's all for nothing if programmers did a crappy job optimizing framerate - and they did. Great for showing off your PC but not more than that. It may be good for multiplayer, wouldn't know that, but for single-player it sucks. That's probably why Parallax split, as Volition's FreeSpace is simply FANTASTIC.
So when I got too close to a hearth attack, I've put CD back in the box and put it on consignment. Games should be *fun*, not frustration...
You're wrong.
I'd rather risk my life by a scientific mishap than have things stay at status quo. If this civilization is to survive we *need* progress in physics and space exploration. We are not getting any, all money goes to stort-sighted business ventures. And then people object to even that little that IS being done. People like that will be the first to get a weapon and go on killing and looting if a world collapses in a few decades due to lack of energy or whatever. The same people who believe only *they* have any rights. People who tell you what color to use on your house, what plants to plant, and that no nudity is to be seen in theatres. Or don't give a shit about their economies exploiting other nations or even killing people just to keep their industries going.
I'd take scientific risk over human risk any time. I'm sick of people's "righteousness".
The idea is cool... so cool that they would probably outlaw vacations (as in "day off"). Be careful what you wish for...
I remember seeing original article (by Lempel & Ziv ?) in an IEEE magazine way back. How can it be patented if it was published in a scientific magazine? Isn't it used in just about any compressing algorithm today (winzip, gzip and what not)?
Elite ruled...
I remember that in Europe the general opinion was that Privateer was just an Elite ripoff. Was Elite distributed in US at all? That would explain why people here speak so highly of it, just like Elite is treated in Europe.
Get WC4, turn on cheats and enjoy!
As a game, WC4 is essentialy WC3 and many people didn't like it, but as a movie... nothing in the game business comes close.
It's now cheap if you can find it so it's worth for the movie alone.
Prophecy engine was great but story sucked and acting was horrible, except for the Maniac. The story had a great potential but they screwed it up. And they are aware of it: the upcoming sequels will all be multiplayer only (=no story).
WC4 had one of the best stories in a computer game
EVER and the movie made out of it sequences was better than the 90% of what Hollywood makes (if not the effect, the story was for sure).
It was WAY more believable than WC3 because it was all about humans and their flaws. The way it was unfolding was astounding.
The game itself was incredibly tough so I went through almost all of it with cheats and just to see movies. So as a game, WC4 wasn't much.
But I still remember those days I spent at work feverishly waiting for time to go home and watch more of WC4... Heck, I even bought several WC books after that.
That's what makes this WC movie quite dissapointing. I was expecting much more.