I wasn't commenting on the game, but the tech. It's a fast-paced full 3d game with dynamic lighting. That was the point. JS is not a serious limitation to apps and games on the platform.
I'm sure that, if we wait long enough, an example more to your liking will pop up in the marketplace.
It seems to work just fine. I have a ZTE Open -- which makes low-end phones look futuristic -- running FFOS. There are some pretty impressive games that run just fine on that antique hardware. Asteroid Mania is my go-to example, as it's the only (I think?) 3d game on the platform. It's not something you'd expect would work well in HTML5, let alone on a seriously low-end phone.
Yeah, I know all the JS sucks memes, but it should be obvious by that that they're simply not true.
Unrelated, but I feel the need to say it anyway: This whole thing reminds me of all the folks complaining about how old BB apps were all Java while praising Android.
The biggest problem is the media posting confusing a hypothesis with a theory.
Nonsense. It would appear that the majority of the people who lack that understanding are those who complain that the public are confused!. It's probably because the only people who raise a fuss over this are not scientists, but laypersons.
So average joe who doesn't know the difference, see those scientists getting it wrong again!
Yeah, I've seen other scientists get it wrong. It drives me batty. The dirty little secret is that this sort of thing isn't emphasized in some fields. I wouldn't expect, for example, a physicist to know or even care about the difference. A sociologist, however, had better damn well know the difference as it's far more relevant to them.
Let's be honest here. The only reason you bring that up is that it was a popular talking point when the creation/evolution "debate" was relevant to you. Can you tell me why you believe that it's a problem? What would change if this "problem" no longer existed? How do you know?
It's not science or scientists so much as it is the thundering hoard of scientifically illiterate science cheerleaders -- the self-appointed elite defenders of "science".
I'm willing to bet that there has never been a time in recorded human history when every person believed in a god or gods. That means in no point in recorded human history has god shown himself to all humanity, beyond any reasonable doubt.
How about that. Even atheists can be laughably irrational.
Then you put them on external storage and make use of them via a variety of connection means - wireless or wired. You can do that from an iPad or iPhone.
Or you could just buy a better device and toss in an SD Card. Carry a few around with you if you need more. They're very small.
See how ridiculous you look? From top to bottom: 1) Not a non sequitur. 2) Not in context. 3) Not even wrong. (This post would get very long if I tried to explain why just the second half of that is wrong, let alone all of it.) 4) Not a non sequitur. 5) Not a logical fallacy. 6) Not an ad hominem. (Really. Look it up.) 7) Not a non sequitur (Do you even know what that term means?) 8) Not an ad hominem (Hint: it doesn't mean "insult") 9) Not in context.
Please don't bother responding to this post.
Yeah, someone might discover how laughably incompetent you truly are. I replied anyway, just because you put so much effort in to that silly nonsense. You earned a good shaming.
I can recommend a few textbooks for you, if you're actually interested in learning about logic. I suspect, however, that you're more interested in shouting "logical fallacy" incompetently on the internet to make yourself feel important.
I see that you don't understand, well, anything at all about philosophy. I can safely assume, then, that you also have no understanding of basic science.
Go ahead and work on that. Don't bother posting when you figure it out -- there's no need to humiliate yourself further.
Isn't it funny how people who makes lists of "logical fallacies" never take the time to point them out?
I don't blame them. They'd look very foolish if they tried! See, it turns out that those folks usually have no formal training in logic and are just repeating nonsense they read on a blog.
To quote... er... you: "Do you understand how hard you make it for yourself to be taken seriously? If you want to tell people about what is true and what is false, you have to follow the rules that allow you to determine what is true and false."
I read that too. I wouldn't honor it with a place on my shelf. It's... not that great. It's a mix of bad philosophy and simple-minded theology written by a guy who, quite clearly, has little to no understanding of either.
The only purpose that collection of mad scribblings serves, as far as I can see, is to extract money from poorly educated atheists of below-average intelligence.
I fought with their stupid Playbook tablet and I have watched people fight with their stupid new QNX phones. I know people who are long term BB customers (often via work) who deeply resent the latest models.
Odd, my experience has been completely different. My wife loves her PlayBook and Z10. Everyone I've shown either device to has been impressed. The slick UI, solid hardware, and fantastic dev tools... I don't know what anyone could possibly complain about!
But oddly enough the main reason that I think that QNX is a complete bowl of stupid is that I have known exactly one programmer who loved QNX and he was a useless tool.
Consensus on Slashdot is meaningless, I know, but the sentiment here is quite clear: QNX is an excellent OS. What, specifically, do you dislike about it?
Slashdot Mirror
What's the advantage of the FFOS phone over the cheap Android phones?
Isn't it obvious? It doesn't run Android!
I don't doubt that. The problem, of course, is that they'll run Android.
I wasn't commenting on the game, but the tech. It's a fast-paced full 3d game with dynamic lighting. That was the point. JS is not a serious limitation to apps and games on the platform.
I'm sure that, if we wait long enough, an example more to your liking will pop up in the marketplace.
It seems to work just fine. I have a ZTE Open -- which makes low-end phones look futuristic -- running FFOS. There are some pretty impressive games that run just fine on that antique hardware. Asteroid Mania is my go-to example, as it's the only (I think?) 3d game on the platform. It's not something you'd expect would work well in HTML5, let alone on a seriously low-end phone.
Yeah, I know all the JS sucks memes, but it should be obvious by that that they're simply not true.
Unrelated, but I feel the need to say it anyway: This whole thing reminds me of all the folks complaining about how old BB apps were all Java while praising Android.
Laws have been settled and theories haven't.
No.
Where you guys come up with the nonsense?
The biggest problem is the media posting confusing a hypothesis with a theory.
Nonsense. It would appear that the majority of the people who lack that understanding are those who complain that the public are confused!. It's probably because the only people who raise a fuss over this are not scientists, but laypersons.
So average joe who doesn't know the difference, see those scientists getting it wrong again!
Yeah, I've seen other scientists get it wrong. It drives me batty. The dirty little secret is that this sort of thing isn't emphasized in some fields. I wouldn't expect, for example, a physicist to know or even care about the difference. A sociologist, however, had better damn well know the difference as it's far more relevant to them.
Let's be honest here. The only reason you bring that up is that it was a popular talking point when the creation/evolution "debate" was relevant to you. Can you tell me why you believe that it's a problem? What would change if this "problem" no longer existed? How do you know?
It's not science or scientists so much as it is the thundering hoard of scientifically illiterate science cheerleaders -- the self-appointed elite defenders of "science".
They're worse than creationists.
Yes, because if we know anything it's that you need to lie to people about science because a few nutters might post nonsense on the internet.
It was to help the slower folks, like you, to better understand the argument he was making.
I guess it wasn't help enough.
I'm willing to bet that there has never been a time in recorded human history when every person believed in a god or gods. That means in no point in recorded human history has god shown himself to all humanity, beyond any reasonable doubt.
How about that. Even atheists can be laughably irrational.
Lol, okay. Whatever you say.
Read the study? I'm impressed when someone here takes the time to read the summary!
Then you put them on external storage and make use of them via a variety of connection means - wireless or wired. You can do that from an iPad or iPhone.
Or you could just buy a better device and toss in an SD Card. Carry a few around with you if you need more. They're very small.
Can you morons PLEASE STFU up now about people not creating anything on mobile devices?
I can write a book with a telegraph key as well. That doesn't make it as good as a word processor.
If that's not to your liking, try this: I can finger-paint on my tablet yet Adobe is not concerned about losing my future business.
WebOS didn't die, it was murdered.
Why do you think it was a bad idea?
Really? They work just fine on my BlackBerry and FireFox OS phones. Chrome and FireFox for Android have had support for a while as well.
iOS seems to be the big stand-out here. Though they do support WebGL in iAds and I think you can enable it in the browser if you jailbreak.
See how ridiculous you look? From top to bottom: 1) Not a non sequitur. 2) Not in context. 3) Not even wrong. (This post would get very long if I tried to explain why just the second half of that is wrong, let alone all of it.) 4) Not a non sequitur. 5) Not a logical fallacy. 6) Not an ad hominem. (Really. Look it up.) 7) Not a non sequitur (Do you even know what that term means?) 8) Not an ad hominem (Hint: it doesn't mean "insult") 9) Not in context.
Please don't bother responding to this post.
Yeah, someone might discover how laughably incompetent you truly are. I replied anyway, just because you put so much effort in to that silly nonsense. You earned a good shaming.
I can recommend a few textbooks for you, if you're actually interested in learning about logic. I suspect, however, that you're more interested in shouting "logical fallacy" incompetently on the internet to make yourself feel important.
Insightful? Amazing. You'd think that even the thickest mod would know that theology is not religion!
I'd have never believed it would work. You are truly the karma whore master.
I see that you don't understand, well, anything at all about philosophy. I can safely assume, then, that you also have no understanding of basic science.
Go ahead and work on that. Don't bother posting when you figure it out -- there's no need to humiliate yourself further.
Isn't it funny how people who makes lists of "logical fallacies" never take the time to point them out?
I don't blame them. They'd look very foolish if they tried! See, it turns out that those folks usually have no formal training in logic and are just repeating nonsense they read on a blog.
To quote ... er ... you: "Do you understand how hard you make it for yourself to be taken seriously? If you want to tell people about what is true and what is false, you have to follow the rules that allow you to determine what is true and false."
So, go ahead. Give it a go. I'll wait.
I read that too. I wouldn't honor it with a place on my shelf. It's ... not that great. It's a mix of bad philosophy and simple-minded theology written by a guy who, quite clearly, has little to no understanding of either.
The only purpose that collection of mad scribblings serves, as far as I can see, is to extract money from poorly educated atheists of below-average intelligence.
I fought with their stupid Playbook tablet and I have watched people fight with their stupid new QNX phones. I know people who are long term BB customers (often via work) who deeply resent the latest models.
Odd, my experience has been completely different. My wife loves her PlayBook and Z10. Everyone I've shown either device to has been impressed. The slick UI, solid hardware, and fantastic dev tools ... I don't know what anyone could possibly complain about!
But oddly enough the main reason that I think that QNX is a complete bowl of stupid is that I have known exactly one programmer who loved QNX and he was a useless tool.
Consensus on Slashdot is meaningless, I know, but the sentiment here is quite clear: QNX is an excellent OS. What, specifically, do you dislike about it?
With QNX, what do they get?
All of those things and a superior OS?
Oh, sorry. That's not what you wanted to hear.
I can't argue with that. Ray Kurzweil is to AI what Jenny McCarthy is to medicine.
Yes, it does.
In related news, the earth is round and revolves around the sun.