It sounds to me like the genre you're after is Turn-based Strategy. The pressure of having to get everything done quickly and cope with multiple demands on your attention are the very essence of what makes an RTS different. Most RTS games follow a simple formula:
Click on "Build Dwarf".
Assemble Dwarf Army.
CHARGE!!!
There are extremely few people that are troubled by this formula - IF the game is created correctly. The most notable example of a poor interface would be Dune 2, where you could only give one order to one unit at a time (which makes a siege more difficult.) With this as the main exception, various other interface errors have been repeated over and over again:
Units stopping whenever after they complete an "attack" order, even if it causes the selected group to remain scattered throughout the map. This was fixed in C&C:TS and C&C:RA2, and possibly a few other games - but regressed in C&C:Generals.
Units having no understanding of damage tolerance, especially in RTS games that have the option of free or for-pay repairs. Some players would prefer them to flee or rout before their investment is gone forever. Fixed partially in C&C:RA2, but not entirely as ultra-elite units have a self-repair option (and auto-retreating them could be even more devistating). Also fixed in Dark Reign, given an intersting supporting feature in it's sequel, implemented in Warzone 2100 (with a bug), and is rather inconsistant on which games allow that feature. You can make this bug more annoying - for example, design a new unit in Supreme Commander that inflicts 1 point of damage to all enemy buildings on a map every ~30 seconds.
Units have no concept of grouping. All units appear to behave as if they were the only unit on the battlefield, similar to most action or platform games. At the very least, they could stick together in their selection groups. Granted, the Cossacks series simply shows that the most basic implementation causes the units of focus shift from being solders to armies with the same problem.
RTS games have followed a one-way-trip to becoming unmanagable as the newer releases raise the bar. At best, you can try a workaround by playing Dune 2 or Warcraft on a higher speed, in order to make the successors look less frustrating.
Actually since "Cannuck" isn't a real word you can spell it however you damn well please. And in fact, I've seen both. Granted canuck is the more popular way to spell it, the point is it doesn't matter. Proper nouns are real words. See http://canucks.nhl.com/
Honestly, why not just configure it to destruct after 1 failed password? I've experienced a few cases where I mistyped a password that I did know. This resulted in an account lockout (and thus preventing me from doing some of my work properly), as I took around three attempts. Normally, typing in a password is not an issue, but if you are tired, hyperactive or confused, you will encounter this problem.
Also, if you have an acceptable-strength password (e.g. random alphanumeric of 8 characters), there's no practical difference in security between 1 attempt and 10 attempts. A converntional brute force or dictionary attack would wear out the attempts with no progress, while the rubber hose algorithm would remain just as effective.
True, but if Office 2007 is what the kids will be learning at school, then Office 2007 is what they need to be using. Students should have no problem switching from one word-processor to another (aside from some keyboard shortcuts). If you know how to use Microsoft Office 2007, you can just as easily use Wordperfect 6.0 for Windows even though you won't be able to use the more advanced features of modern word processors.
Likewise, you can easily switch between Corel Draw, Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, and MSPaint without problem. All these apps simply adjust pixels on an image, where the difference is in the procedure (which could be learned thorough trial and error or be reading the basic docs.)
As a more practical example - would you hire a secretary that is so used to computers to a degree where pen-and-paper would be useless backup?
In college all of our high-level math courses were geared around the TI calculators. They are great machines, and I finally got my hands on a couple of them, including the TI-92. However, at the time I borrowed a friend's Casio, because I was dirt friggen poor. Guess what? I spent a LOT more time translating operations between the calculators than I spent on the course work. Most likely, that's a flawed college course (unless it is meant to teach a specific calculator) - even if the calculator is the best in the world.
In day-to-day use, I don't have access to a TI calculator - instead, I have access to a notebook-sized programmable calculator (where I can use either the stock config, or grab an alternate skin from a recent contest). Depending on how the course content was written, it may either help me, slow me down, or force me to study another section.
I've NEVER had the huge memory leaks everyone reports... biggest it has ever grown 98MB, Most people consider that to be inefficient use of resources - especially on a notebook with 512MB Ram. While Firefox alone doesn't cause problems, I usually need to run it alongside another application (e.g. MSVC).
Whenever it grows in memory, it's because I have 20+ tabs open. I use it on quite a few P3s at the office, on lab boxes, however IE6 runs just as well on these boxes, and security is not so much of an issue. Those fall more under the ID 10 T errors. For quite a long time under Win98/ME, I've been able to open enough Netscape or Mozilla windows to exceed the maximum number of GDI handles with other applications not encountering performance issues right up until the handles were exhausted. Unless I had moderator access to Slashdot (those combo boxes chew a lot of handles), this would mean 30+ windows. This was on older computers with So I don't understand the need for an even lighterweight version of Firefox? Are there REALLY that many sub P3 computers still out there, that are also being used as web boxes? The minimum memory requirement for Firefox is currently listed as either 64MB or 128MB (which is identical to Windows XP). It should be able allow at least one other application to run concurrently without engaging swap.
Taking the gameplay out of the equation, Command and Conquer is a "B" movie. Einstein going back in time, shooting hitler, and then stalin invading anyway; giant towers that shoot electricity with vicious guard dogs; even a hot, buxom woman with two pistols that likes to blow things up. All these things are a formula for a bad movie plot, and yet Red Alert is one of the great RTS games. From a technical aspect, Red Alert was simply an interface improvement over the original C&C. It would be considered clunky by modern standards (especially by the standards of the two following sequels).
As an example, I'll create a concept for a new game - you control a small number of units rather than large armies (usually 9 or 10). You also have a few buildings which can either create these units, or upgrade modules for them. These modules will improve the weaponry and armor of the unit, although can be destroyed (weakening the unit). The modules will also move themselves to their assigned unit in question, and have the potential to defend themselves when attacked. Should their main unit be destroyed - no problem, they can link together somewhere else (either on another unit, or by one suddenly declaring itself a new unit.)
This may seem alien to most people, but they should get the hang of it, especially when you treat those powerful units in the same way you would treat large armies (as in Red Alert). The only difference is that this implementation will not have a nasty bug where upgrades suddenly stop in their tracks as soon as a target gets destroyed.
Maybe I should patent this software idea. Nobody else seems to be implementing it, which means I've made a discovery no-one else thought of.
Until there is a GoogleBot ready for handling the way I discover relevant intellectual information, I will need some human piece of advice. That's why journalists always were for I think. That's why they would stay. That started without an audience, I don't think audience is that relevant for journalism Actually, there is. Google gives recommendations on which pages you want to visit. It's available from the "Web History" link, which in turn provides an "Interesting items" link. Alternativly, you can add the Interesting items to your Google homepage - in either case, "Free registration required", and it requires you to at least search for information online (or simply view if you have the toolbar installed).
Stumbleupon came earlier, and it does require you to "seed" your general insterests - however, it will provide relevant sites that you may be interested in.
As they are both automated systems, they are prone to quirks - for example, they may sometimes provide a link to a site that isn't really that good (e.g. a site that attributes known Quayleisms to GWB.) But in any case, those sites are a start on trying to find something new.
I used to do it for fun, because it gets interesting when you can infect multiple file types,.com,.sys,.exe, and you can play around with self-modification. I haven't seen those kinds of file-infectors for a long time - mainly because the modern executable format doesn't support this kind of stuff as well. If you write a virus in that way, it might not be able to handle Protected-mode dos applications (although I'm not willing to test this for obvious reasons.) It's not a problem with Windows.EXE files, but most modern virus scanners know that trick and report a new unknown virus.
I've also haven't seen Boot-sector viruses either - the last one I had was the NYB virus, and that caused W95 to complain that there was a problem with the hard drive (e.g. it had to use real-mode drivers.)
As a voter (not in Japan, but in another country), I found the easiest methof to find out who I was voting for is the Internet - a quick way to determine the platform of each political candidate. Some of the candidates don't have a website, but a quick search on other information didn't pull up anything - which usually indicates a minor candidate.
In my opinion, restricting the use of websites would make research more difficult - if everyone was serious about voting (which isn't the case) where they would contact or do quick research on each candidate, it would bog down the campaign offices with questions (especially if a statement gets made that may need clarification.)
I'm for keeping the campaign serious, but it shouldn't lock down the methods used to contact the candidates (unless such methods are disruptive - another story.)
The only way to fight is through civil disobedience -- and that's exactly what you are seeing. No more. No less. It's just a fact that people are NOT willing to pay $17/cd anymore. Civil disovedience is breaking the law for the purpose of being the poster boy on getting it changed. Doing so requires you to overtly break the law, such as going to the doorsteps of Microsoft corporation with a sign stating you are installing a pirated version of Windows Vista.
Most people who are doing "piracy" are either doing it because: - They feel the work isn't generating revenue for the copyright holder anymore (as with "abandonware".) - They want to gain access to a specific work without paying for it. - They don't know any better (e.g. children.) - They want to leechfest.
Right now, iTunes is selling music for lower amounts (although some are DRMed.) There's also second-hand stores where CDs are much cheaper then factory sealed packages. In either case, it's easy to get music for less than $17 for a CD's worth of music.
The solution has been around: "Easy to play, hard to master." An easier solution is difficulty levels, as long as there's a noticable difference between them without being an order of magnitude apart. A poor implementation would be with Half-Life, which doesn't make many changes. A so-so implementation would be with Doom/Quake, which adjusts the quantity of monsters without much change to the difficulty. It's hard to get a good example, but the closest ones seem to give a larger degree of control over difficulty for a wide profile of players, although most games tend to use "# of HP" or "# of monsters".
Of course, I've seen a bit more interesting implementation. In a few of the shumps published in 2006 (listed on Independent Gaming), some of them are rather difficult to complete especially on higher difficulty levels. However, as you try to go through the game, the maximum amount of credits you may use gradually increases - but it's expected to be possible using only one credit.
Yeah that'd be a big drawback, what with that abstinence thing being so popular with kids these days. Around here, abstinence is at a near-100% rate. You can say this has to do with social factors, but for some, it's compounded by the fact that they don't want to yet be a father.
"Normal society" is half-abstinent. While the age for initiation is on the low side, it's above the age of consent for most places. Read what you will here: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/fact sheet/fsprotective.htm
Also it's a Strawman argument unless you are advocating the elimination of the birth control pill as well. Yes, I'm opposed to the pill as well, on moral grounds. This is another story.
It's not a true strawman since the original advocation doesn't give much of a good reason on why to implement it in the first place - it's your argument, why not give sometime even remotely plausible? The argument also doesn't take into account that it is yet another extension of childhood (now boosting it to 21 rather than the current 18) and is perhaps an overreaction to what isn't a pandemic. Unless there is severe poverty, a couple can receive support from either parental group - and if there is... well they somehow are still able to pull through.
A part time job offsets some expenses, which isn't unusual at 17/18. If they're targeting university instead of a job, see above concerning financial support.
Besides, I'd prefer the Slippery Slope argument, where Big Brother somehow decides that you shouldn't reproduce and claims that you haven't really passed whatever test is necessary.
Sadly, the sourceforge page appears to have been taken down. I'm some what disappointed that there wasn't enough interest to sustain this project. No, it's just been compressed.
I also advocate compulsory, reversible, sterilisation of all pre-teens. Allowing for the positive aspects of you-know-what without the negative aspects of pregnancy. This will be a bad thing, as it spreads various STDs during adolescent periods.
Not only are you robbing them of learning social mores, Such as abusive behaviour displayed by most high-school students?
There's some influcenses that you just don't need. They need to be taken out when they are trying to learn, especially since such behaviour is not normal in a day-to-day adult world. Once they can handle the basics of how social interaction work, they can then be taught how to handle exceptional cases such as people being angry for no good reason.
The way they've worked around it probably goes like this: "Free pr0n sets! See more of this hot chick! We don't want automated downloads of these sets, so you need to solve this code to get the download. What? It looks just like the hotmail cpachas? Yeah, we're using the same advanced technology here." This can be fixed quite quickly - watermark the Hotmail/Yahoo logo onto the turning test so that it's distinctive but not obstructive. This way, it will look obvious that it is taken directly from the Hotmail/Yahoo site and that the site in question is supporting spamming.
Some people will go through the capitchas anyway, as they figure it's free anyway, but it allows Yahoo to identify that the sites are tunnelling their tests to various users.
i'm not quite sure how to parse this... Your quotes are in the wrong position. Try Such "wonders" aren't exactly wonderous...
Think of this example: An invention, the lightbulb, was considered sometime quite marvelous - where the first one was important enough to receive a patent. Now, they are commonplace (until LEDs replace them) where any factory can do a production run.
We're now capable of far bigger feats of engineering and architecture so why not take a look at some of the modern wonders. e.g. The Panama canal, the 3 Gorges Dam, Taipei 101 etc etc. Such wonders aren't exactly wonderous - to qualify, it needs to be a feat for it's time (e.g. be something that is rather difficult to reproduce, or is "expensive".) It's also the reason why the Civilization series of games moves away from physical wonders as you approach the Modern age and towards "abstract" wonders such as the Cure for Cancer, Universal Sufferage, etc.
Building the Great Pyramid using ancient technology is impressive - as it either causes modern engineers to wonder how it was built, or causes considers forign reproductions to be treated as "cheap plastic imitations". However, building an extra-large bridge or structure nowadays isn't as impressive. Any country con build what's equivalant to the CN Tower, and thus such towers aren't considered to be wonders.
Is there any effective methods of fighting back against identity theves?
The tactic that I've recently started involved visiting the sites found in spam e-mails that I receive (for example, the My Canadian Pharmacy series of spams), take an identity generated from a fake name generator (that also provides CC and CVV numbers), and place an order. This series of companies tends to queue up the order for processing in 24 hours before shipping.
While fun, it doesn't seem directly productive if I'm the only one doing it (or using a modified Lad Vampire). Thus, is there some other method I can use?
Capitalism and Ethics are diametrically opposed concepts. Not really. Ethics is simply behaving properly. Capitalism is simply trying to get as much money as possible. Combining the two is getting as much money as possible while behaving properly.
You can switch capitalism with communism, but it will have no difference on ethics - there will always be those who game whatever they can from the system (e.g. Animal Farm has a pony that leaves work early because of a stone in her shoe. Later, that pony leaves the farm for luxurious sugar cubes.)
On the other side, ethics does have an impact on capitalism. While behaving unethically does allow you to get money more quickly, there's a slight problem - a "free market" would correct itself when customers go to other places to avoid getting burned (sites such as PriceGrabber keep track of merchant rating.) The effect is that unethical behaviour burns the long-term capitalism in favour of shorter-term gain. In reality, the government can get involved with these companies, shutting them down in extreme circumstances.
His appeal to those in power (also of older generations) Do you mean his ability to product anti-video game laws? Those were shot down instantly.
The ease with which his pet issue can be used as a "save the children" issue. In the latest incident with Virgina Tech, the media (other than Fox) was beginning to show that they were tired of that argument, especially when it was discovered that there was minimal involvement with videogames.
In addition, the neologism "massacre chaser" was created right after this incident as well.
Again, by ignoring his strengths, you ignore what he can actually do -- which, unless countered, can have a serious effect on free speech. His strengths are easily countered. Each time you see statements, whether it is from him or from other anti-video game "expert", you can have cut-n-paste material: - If you see comments where video games cause murder, make your own by stating that the killers are "not guilty by reason of insanity" since they were compelled by the videogames to do so, and that removing their access to video games temporarly (combined with modern medication) will fix whatever insanity they have. - If you see comments where 'M' allows minors to play games - simply state that 'M' is 17+, which properly enforced (it is, btw), doesn't bring these games in the hands of minors. In addition, ask whether or not you are willing to show an 'R'-rated or 'NC-17'-rated movie to your child. If so, it's not an issue since the child is mature enough to handle the content. If not, it's not an issue since the child isn't getting the content. - If you see simple personal attacks... ignore them. Don't feed the trolls, unless you know how to properly steal the spotlight. (e.g. Stealing the spotlight involved making an attack of your own - for example stating that since he can't win his argument, he violently acts out on his hatred of my ethnicity - while pointing out an exact word/phrase that could be construed as such.) - The thing about moving the Wii back-and-forth to simulate a sawing motion? Ask why it took 10 years to think of that argument, when the computer mouse had the same capability. Not that it matters, since there aren't many games (read: zero) that are going to require that situation.
Why DOESN'T 7-11 become Kwik-E mart? Nationwide? Perhaps it's a trademark issue?
There's already something called Quickie Convenience stores in Canada. The stores were founded in 1973, when the Simpsons debuted in 1987 (as short sketches.) Even if it isn't a protected trademark in the United States, there will be a problem should Quickie expand across countries.
I'm not a lawyer and thus can't really tell if a trademark is being "violated" here. However, the name sounds very similar to each other.
All software anti-cheat systems are flawed because they include things other than cheating. I get kicked by Punkbuster for high ping on gaming servers. That means you were cheating without realizing it.
While it is not an issue for Quake (there was no prediction), it became an issue with QuakeWorld when prediction was invented. This "prediction" allowed game clients to see the game more smoothly, and worry less about ping and random latancy messing up game activity (hence the Thunderbolt and other instant-hit weapons were the most popular weapons for aimbots.)
An excessivly high ping means the predictions cause other players to appear as if they were walking around a corner when they stopped short. The result was that you were able to shoot them "around the corner" in the split second when they stopped. Alternativly, the prediction causes the player to move against the wall, which slows down their velocity.
This is why you won't find cheating in a good RTS or MMO, the server or peers can run everything in parallel. Actually, there are easy ways to cheat in RTS/MMOs:
Maphacks/wall hacks allw you to see through obstacles. This obstacle is FoW in RTS games, and due to their nature, most RTS clients tend to be syncronized and require having a copy of the game.
MMOs can be botted. While not "cheating", it is an unfair advantage since it allows you to get powerful players more quickly than what is normally accepted.
RTSs, as they generally need a copy of the game state on each client, can have critical information about other players displayed (e.g. how much resources they have/spent.)
Maybe the AI could run on a cheater's system, but I have never seen good AI in an RTS. The AIs you see on most RTSs are lobotomized - they are written to be "good enough", whether it's through scripts or through randomness.
As an example, look at Starcraft - while the AI is relativly strong for new players, it is weak compared to the "build orders" that are posted on various websites, which are then memorized by master players. There's no reason why this can't be placed in an AI to make it stronger.
Another example is Galactic Civilizations (which isn't an RTS, but the same concept applies.) In most difficulty levels, the AI is crippled but is still a threat to most players - the only "cheat" is that it knows the location of good planets (which isn't much of an issue, since they were probing the universe before your race invented hyperspace). The threat is caused by the economic optimization - it picks the best tax rates and maximizes production efficiency. As a side note, there were reports of the AI somehow bypassing tech tree requirements - this complaint was eventually resolved, either through a patch or by identifying how they did it (e.g. tech trading with other races.)
The AI discussions were common with the game Total Annihilation, as it was the only game at the time that allowed AI patching. No matter how well you made your AI script, it was limited with implementation bugs - for example, the AI engine had a failsafe in case the script was faulty (or if it got nuked) where it would start building resource production on an economic shortage, but would never turn off the failsafe. Another bug would be the "5 peewee" rush, which could paralize the enemy AI commander and kill it.
It's not a lack of technology that limits RTS AIs - it's the lack of implementation. There hasn't been any serious attempts to make a strong AI.
Slashdot Mirror
There are extremely few people that are troubled by this formula - IF the game is created correctly. The most notable example of a poor interface would be Dune 2, where you could only give one order to one unit at a time (which makes a siege more difficult.) With this as the main exception, various other interface errors have been repeated over and over again:
RTS games have followed a one-way-trip to becoming unmanagable as the newer releases raise the bar. At best, you can try a workaround by playing Dune 2 or Warcraft on a higher speed, in order to make the successors look less frustrating.
Also, if you have an acceptable-strength password (e.g. random alphanumeric of 8 characters), there's no practical difference in security between 1 attempt and 10 attempts. A converntional brute force or dictionary attack would wear out the attempts with no progress, while the rubber hose algorithm would remain just as effective.
Likewise, you can easily switch between Corel Draw, Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, and MSPaint without problem. All these apps simply adjust pixels on an image, where the difference is in the procedure (which could be learned thorough trial and error or be reading the basic docs.)
As a more practical example - would you hire a secretary that is so used to computers to a degree where pen-and-paper would be useless backup? In college all of our high-level math courses were geared around the TI calculators. They are great machines, and I finally got my hands on a couple of them, including the TI-92. However, at the time I borrowed a friend's Casio, because I was dirt friggen poor. Guess what? I spent a LOT more time translating operations between the calculators than I spent on the course work. Most likely, that's a flawed college course (unless it is meant to teach a specific calculator) - even if the calculator is the best in the world.
In day-to-day use, I don't have access to a TI calculator - instead, I have access to a notebook-sized programmable calculator (where I can use either the stock config, or grab an alternate skin from a recent contest). Depending on how the course content was written, it may either help me, slow me down, or force me to study another section.
As an example, I'll create a concept for a new game - you control a small number of units rather than large armies (usually 9 or 10). You also have a few buildings which can either create these units, or upgrade modules for them. These modules will improve the weaponry and armor of the unit, although can be destroyed (weakening the unit). The modules will also move themselves to their assigned unit in question, and have the potential to defend themselves when attacked. Should their main unit be destroyed - no problem, they can link together somewhere else (either on another unit, or by one suddenly declaring itself a new unit.)
This may seem alien to most people, but they should get the hang of it, especially when you treat those powerful units in the same way you would treat large armies (as in Red Alert). The only difference is that this implementation will not have a nasty bug where upgrades suddenly stop in their tracks as soon as a target gets destroyed.
Maybe I should patent this software idea. Nobody else seems to be implementing it, which means I've made a discovery no-one else thought of.
Stumbleupon came earlier, and it does require you to "seed" your general insterests - however, it will provide relevant sites that you may be interested in.
As they are both automated systems, they are prone to quirks - for example, they may sometimes provide a link to a site that isn't really that good (e.g. a site that attributes known Quayleisms to GWB.) But in any case, those sites are a start on trying to find something new.
I've also haven't seen Boot-sector viruses either - the last one I had was the NYB virus, and that caused W95 to complain that there was a problem with the hard drive (e.g. it had to use real-mode drivers.)
As a voter (not in Japan, but in another country), I found the easiest methof to find out who I was voting for is the Internet - a quick way to determine the platform of each political candidate. Some of the candidates don't have a website, but a quick search on other information didn't pull up anything - which usually indicates a minor candidate.
In my opinion, restricting the use of websites would make research more difficult - if everyone was serious about voting (which isn't the case) where they would contact or do quick research on each candidate, it would bog down the campaign offices with questions (especially if a statement gets made that may need clarification.)
I'm for keeping the campaign serious, but it shouldn't lock down the methods used to contact the candidates (unless such methods are disruptive - another story.)
Most people who are doing "piracy" are either doing it because:
- They feel the work isn't generating revenue for the copyright holder anymore (as with "abandonware".)
- They want to gain access to a specific work without paying for it.
- They don't know any better (e.g. children.)
- They want to leechfest.
Right now, iTunes is selling music for lower amounts (although some are DRMed.) There's also second-hand stores where CDs are much cheaper then factory sealed packages. In either case, it's easy to get music for less than $17 for a CD's worth of music.
Of course, I've seen a bit more interesting implementation. In a few of the shumps published in 2006 (listed on Independent Gaming), some of them are rather difficult to complete especially on higher difficulty levels. However, as you try to go through the game, the maximum amount of credits you may use gradually increases - but it's expected to be possible using only one credit.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_c
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_c
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/19/hollywoods_c
"Normal society" is half-abstinent. While the age for initiation is on the low side, it's above the age of consent for most places. Read what you will here: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/fac
It's not a true strawman since the original advocation doesn't give much of a good reason on why to implement it in the first place - it's your argument, why not give sometime even remotely plausible? The argument also doesn't take into account that it is yet another extension of childhood (now boosting it to 21 rather than the current 18) and is perhaps an overreaction to what isn't a pandemic. Unless there is severe poverty, a couple can receive support from either parental group - and if there is... well they somehow are still able to pull through.
A part time job offsets some expenses, which isn't unusual at 17/18. If they're targeting university instead of a job, see above concerning financial support.
Besides, I'd prefer the Slippery Slope argument, where Big Brother somehow decides that you shouldn't reproduce and claims that you haven't really passed whatever test is necessary.
There's some influcenses that you just don't need. They need to be taken out when they are trying to learn, especially since such behaviour is not normal in a day-to-day adult world. Once they can handle the basics of how social interaction work, they can then be taught how to handle exceptional cases such as people being angry for no good reason.
Some people will go through the capitchas anyway, as they figure it's free anyway, but it allows Yahoo to identify that the sites are tunnelling their tests to various users.
i'm not quite sure how to parse this... Your quotes are in the wrong position. Try Such "wonders" aren't exactly wonderous...
Think of this example: An invention, the lightbulb, was considered sometime quite marvelous - where the first one was important enough to receive a patent. Now, they are commonplace (until LEDs replace them) where any factory can do a production run.
Building the Great Pyramid using ancient technology is impressive - as it either causes modern engineers to wonder how it was built, or causes considers forign reproductions to be treated as "cheap plastic imitations". However, building an extra-large bridge or structure nowadays isn't as impressive. Any country con build what's equivalant to the CN Tower, and thus such towers aren't considered to be wonders.
Is there any effective methods of fighting back against identity theves?
The tactic that I've recently started involved visiting the sites found in spam e-mails that I receive (for example, the My Canadian Pharmacy series of spams), take an identity generated from a fake name generator (that also provides CC and CVV numbers), and place an order. This series of companies tends to queue up the order for processing in 24 hours before shipping.
While fun, it doesn't seem directly productive if I'm the only one doing it (or using a modified Lad Vampire). Thus, is there some other method I can use?
You can switch capitalism with communism, but it will have no difference on ethics - there will always be those who game whatever they can from the system (e.g. Animal Farm has a pony that leaves work early because of a stone in her shoe. Later, that pony leaves the farm for luxurious sugar cubes.)
On the other side, ethics does have an impact on capitalism. While behaving unethically does allow you to get money more quickly, there's a slight problem - a "free market" would correct itself when customers go to other places to avoid getting burned (sites such as PriceGrabber keep track of merchant rating.) The effect is that unethical behaviour burns the long-term capitalism in favour of shorter-term gain. In reality, the government can get involved with these companies, shutting them down in extreme circumstances.
In addition, the neologism "massacre chaser" was created right after this incident as well. Again, by ignoring his strengths, you ignore what he can actually do -- which, unless countered, can have a serious effect on free speech. His strengths are easily countered. Each time you see statements, whether it is from him or from other anti-video game "expert", you can have cut-n-paste material:
- If you see comments where video games cause murder, make your own by stating that the killers are "not guilty by reason of insanity" since they were compelled by the videogames to do so, and that removing their access to video games temporarly (combined with modern medication) will fix whatever insanity they have.
- If you see comments where 'M' allows minors to play games - simply state that 'M' is 17+, which properly enforced (it is, btw), doesn't bring these games in the hands of minors. In addition, ask whether or not you are willing to show an 'R'-rated or 'NC-17'-rated movie to your child. If so, it's not an issue since the child is mature enough to handle the content. If not, it's not an issue since the child isn't getting the content.
- If you see simple personal attacks... ignore them. Don't feed the trolls, unless you know how to properly steal the spotlight. (e.g. Stealing the spotlight involved making an attack of your own - for example stating that since he can't win his argument, he violently acts out on his hatred of my ethnicity - while pointing out an exact word/phrase that could be construed as such.)
- The thing about moving the Wii back-and-forth to simulate a sawing motion? Ask why it took 10 years to think of that argument, when the computer mouse had the same capability. Not that it matters, since there aren't many games (read: zero) that are going to require that situation.
There's already something called Quickie Convenience stores in Canada. The stores were founded in 1973, when the Simpsons debuted in 1987 (as short sketches.) Even if it isn't a protected trademark in the United States, there will be a problem should Quickie expand across countries.
I'm not a lawyer and thus can't really tell if a trademark is being "violated" here. However, the name sounds very similar to each other.
While it is not an issue for Quake (there was no prediction), it became an issue with QuakeWorld when prediction was invented. This "prediction" allowed game clients to see the game more smoothly, and worry less about ping and random latancy messing up game activity (hence the Thunderbolt and other instant-hit weapons were the most popular weapons for aimbots.)
An excessivly high ping means the predictions cause other players to appear as if they were walking around a corner when they stopped short. The result was that you were able to shoot them "around the corner" in the split second when they stopped. Alternativly, the prediction causes the player to move against the wall, which slows down their velocity.
- Maphacks/wall hacks allw you to see through obstacles. This obstacle is FoW in RTS games, and due to their nature, most RTS clients tend to be syncronized and require having a copy of the game.
- MMOs can be botted. While not "cheating", it is an unfair advantage since it allows you to get powerful players more quickly than what is normally accepted.
- RTSs, as they generally need a copy of the game state on each client, can have critical information about other players displayed (e.g. how much resources they have/spent.)
Maybe the AI could run on a cheater's system, but I have never seen good AI in an RTS. The AIs you see on most RTSs are lobotomized - they are written to be "good enough", whether it's through scripts or through randomness.As an example, look at Starcraft - while the AI is relativly strong for new players, it is weak compared to the "build orders" that are posted on various websites, which are then memorized by master players. There's no reason why this can't be placed in an AI to make it stronger.
Another example is Galactic Civilizations (which isn't an RTS, but the same concept applies.) In most difficulty levels, the AI is crippled but is still a threat to most players - the only "cheat" is that it knows the location of good planets (which isn't much of an issue, since they were probing the universe before your race invented hyperspace). The threat is caused by the economic optimization - it picks the best tax rates and maximizes production efficiency. As a side note, there were reports of the AI somehow bypassing tech tree requirements - this complaint was eventually resolved, either through a patch or by identifying how they did it (e.g. tech trading with other races.)
The AI discussions were common with the game Total Annihilation, as it was the only game at the time that allowed AI patching. No matter how well you made your AI script, it was limited with implementation bugs - for example, the AI engine had a failsafe in case the script was faulty (or if it got nuked) where it would start building resource production on an economic shortage, but would never turn off the failsafe. Another bug would be the "5 peewee" rush, which could paralize the enemy AI commander and kill it.
It's not a lack of technology that limits RTS AIs - it's the lack of implementation. There hasn't been any serious attempts to make a strong AI.