What it will take? I think huge steps forward in technology and science. We know it's possible to use anti-matter as fuel for interstellar journeys, however it's an extremely expensive and slow process... and then we need more experience of living and travelling through outer space - so far we've gone to the moon only. It's a huge step to do that, but nothing to what we need to accomplish. And even if we reach near speed of light, that will cause problems as well, in a speed that high, even the smallest dust particle (let alone a huge meteorite) is dangerous. I'm sad to say that we wont be going to any stars for the next 100 years... maybe not for another 500 years, unless some new Einstein or Hawkings makes a crucial discovery, making production of antimatter a piece of cake, or to find out how to travel through worm holes or whatever. I know that we will go to the stars, no doubt about it. Question is only when.
I wonder why I didn't have a better subject line. Hm. Anyway, you're right, the cars could be flying in weird trajectories, it made the game very funny, very playable!
I remember a good old game called "4D Stunts Driving" or something... That had a pretty interesting physic. Often it was sufficient to just bump into another car and you would go up in flames and millions of pieces. Or, if you reached high enough speed in the jumps, you could get such an angle, you would fly right into the athmosphere, and if you changed the camera POV, you could maybe see the car as a few pixels high in the sky. I think that, though, is part of the charm with this game. That, and the music:)
Usenet was established in 1979, and I wonder if it's even possible to find those first messages made back then? That would be some interesting reading, in a way.
Will they hire a lot of people checking out every link and then make a decision, should this go or not? As the brittish censor John Trevelyan said: "We are paid to have dirty minds".
I just mentioned a few things that would be cool in a handheld PC, when someone thought I was using these words just to sound intelligent. I was trying to explain I wasn't doing that. Is there anything wrong with doing that, and if so, how is that more wrong than to imply why I use certain words?
With classics such as the Odyssey series (although 3001 wasn't so good) and the Rama series, his work will be read in 50 years from now, even in hundreds of years from now.
I remember when I first read about the Tunguska blast several years ago. Many stories told us that some eye witnesses had seen the object make strange turns, for example flying in an S-shaped path. Are these stories completely wrong, or can a low density asteroid behave like that in the athmosphere?
The web has never and will never be a place where anyone can use any browser to view any web site. Ever heard of browsers that doesn't support all standards? Even if you don't WANT to block people out, you still are, if you use the latest WWW standards. If you want any web site to be viewable by any browser, you will need to use nothing more than HTML 1.0. No HTML 4.0, no frames, no CSS...
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly what I have been thinking lately - that democracy and freedom necessarily are not tied together.
Freedom is not a consequence of democracy, and democracy is not a requirement for freedom.
If you click agree, then there's your consent.
and good luck!
Yes in AI they have been useful - LISP was made for this purpose actually. Although I do like Prolog a lot more.
Why should NASA tell other enterprises what people they should send into space? NASA wont be a space tourist company anyway...
What it will take? I think huge steps forward in technology and science. We know it's possible to use anti-matter as fuel for interstellar journeys, however it's an extremely expensive and slow process... and then we need more experience of living and travelling through outer space - so far we've gone to the moon only. It's a huge step to do that, but nothing to what we need to accomplish. And even if we reach near speed of light, that will cause problems as well, in a speed that high, even the smallest dust particle (let alone a huge meteorite) is dangerous. I'm sad to say that we wont be going to any stars for the next 100 years... maybe not for another 500 years, unless some new Einstein or Hawkings makes a crucial discovery, making production of antimatter a piece of cake, or to find out how to travel through worm holes or whatever. I know that we will go to the stars, no doubt about it. Question is only when.
I wonder why I didn't have a better subject line. Hm. Anyway, you're right, the cars could be flying in weird trajectories, it made the game very funny, very playable!
yep, that's another funny characteristics of that game!
I remember a good old game called "4D Stunts Driving" or something... That had a pretty interesting physic. Often it was sufficient to just bump into another car and you would go up in flames and millions of pieces. Or, if you reached high enough speed in the jumps, you could get such an angle, you would fly right into the athmosphere, and if you changed the camera POV, you could maybe see the car as a few pixels high in the sky. I think that, though, is part of the charm with this game. That, and the music :)
Usenet was established in 1979, and I wonder if it's even possible to find those first messages made back then? That would be some interesting reading, in a way.
Some very interesting computer history to check out. "Oldest post in the archive", "First mention of Microsoft" etc., very cool.
Will they hire a lot of people checking out every link and then make a decision, should this go or not? As the brittish censor John Trevelyan said: "We are paid to have dirty minds".
Companies keeping their secrets does not restrict free speech... if that's what you're saying it does?
Well, since both are global systems, it really doesn't matter which system you are using!
I just mentioned a few things that would be cool in a handheld PC, when someone thought I was using these words just to sound intelligent. I was trying to explain I wasn't doing that. Is there anything wrong with doing that, and if so, how is that more wrong than to imply why I use certain words?
With classics such as the Odyssey series (although 3001 wasn't so good) and the Rama series, his work will be read in 50 years from now, even in hundreds of years from now.
Maybe. Why, are you using them frequently?
I do not use words just to sound intelligent. Question is, why do you think I need to do that?
It would be much smaller than A4, maybe half that size. Some sort of holographic memory would be cool and also neural network built in.
According to their website, it will be possible to edit the civilizations
.: Pentium II 300mhz
.: 32 megs of ram
.: 400 megs hd
.: 4X CD-Rom
.: DirectX 8.0a vid. card
.: 1024x768 Req.
.: Windows
.: Mac coming soon
I remember when I first read about the Tunguska blast several years ago. Many stories told us that some eye witnesses had seen the object make strange turns, for example flying in an S-shaped path. Are these stories completely wrong, or can a low density asteroid behave like that in the athmosphere?
The web has never and will never be a place where anyone can use any browser to view any web site. Ever heard of browsers that doesn't support all standards? Even if you don't WANT to block people out, you still are, if you use the latest WWW standards. If you want any web site to be viewable by any browser, you will need to use nothing more than HTML 1.0. No HTML 4.0, no frames, no CSS...
I hope the computers wont have names like... WOPR
Or else my chemistry text books have been all wrong. Everyone else, too.
If the constitution is not in effect at all times, then what is the point?