The security implications of doing it that way have yet to be solved. Expecially important is the point that information must be saved reguardless of network fluctuations... like the only person who has it disconnecting.
That actually makes the bully technique easier for a big enough attacker.
Remember that you do need to successfully defend yourself to win, reguarless of the facts of the case.
So, with looser pays, the statement becomes "You will settle, or you'll get to pay our legal fees. For this case we've retained the entire state of Deleware as legal aid. Due to our high cost in litigating this case, the settlement will be your house, car, and left kidney."
dual masters in Geology and physics (I have no clue why he works in a public school)
Obviously, he works in a public school because he wants to. Money can be cool, but I hear that teaching can be a lot of fun - if you teach high enough level classes that your students want to be there.
The dictionary section of the U.S. code was written after the constitution. Therefore, unless it was approved as a consitutional ammendment, it can't possibly alter the meaning of the constitution from "plain english circa 1780ish".
If you're actually going to play the MMORPG seriously, the first year cost is pretty cheap.
Let's say a minimally serious player is planning on averaging 1.5 hours per day on the game. That's about 550 hours spent playing for the year (or more than 10 times what a good long single player game gets you total). The cost is about 40 cents/hour.
Compare that to most other forms of entertainment: Movies at a theater: $4/hour. Rented movies: $2/hour. Cable TV (average 1.5 hours/day): About $1/hour. A 50 hour single player video game: $1/hour.
I mean, it's no "Counter-Strike for a year" at 10 cents/hour, but it's still a pretty good deal comparitively.
If you only plan on playing it for 20 or 30 hours, you can probably do that in your free month - comes out the same as any other game with the added bonus that you can pay for more game time.
The only time that MMORPGs are a really bad deal is if you don't have the time for them - in which case I'd recommend some nice fun Kotor II.
Re:Did you have to be under 15 to vote?
on
Top 50 DVDs
·
· Score: 1
Hint: Your action cannot be illegal because it violates a contract between two other people/companies.
Forcing the customer to invest $50 in the game up front causes more immediate customer loyalty.
If you've spent $50, you'll be a lot less likely to take your free month, get bored of the game, and then not pay the monthly fee. They'll need to support way less leecher players who never intend to pay on their servers.
The only model that I've seen suggested that doesn't screw up the game developer and still "seems fair" is the "first four even months free" model, where after paying for months 1,3,5,7 you get months 2,4,6,8 free.
Your argument depends on shallowly hidden circular logic. Watch.
In thinking of the applications computers are used for, only those applications that work smoothly with current computing power are "real applications" because other applications don't work yet. Therefore, we don't need faster computers because all "real applications" run fine on current computers.
We won't really know what applications faster computers make possible until we have the faster computers.
Re:What realtime interactive full-motion video?
on
Where's My 10 Ghz PC?
·
· Score: 1
I didn't coment on photorealism, but I'd say that any of the 3D games qualify as "realtime interactive full motion video".
Let's take Quake I for a second:
Realtime - Yes, the scenes are not pre-rendered. Interactive - You can move around. Full Motion - There are 30+ frames per second. Video - It isn't anything else...
My biggest question there is Interactive, and even half-life 2 doesn't have full environment interaction (the inconsistancy on moving cars with the gravity gun annoyed me to no end), but there was *some* interaction even in Quake I, so the game was interactive.
We continue to approach "Photorealistic Realtime Full Motion Video" and I think it's a long way off. Look at some of the CGI scenes in current action movies - it's getting better but we're not to phtorealistic yet - if we can't do it with a renderfarm I don't think we'll get it in realtime any time soon.
But that leaves an obvious domain where an increase in processing power continues to be useful, and another reason why the "The computer I have is fine for the applications I currently run, so technology can just stagnate here - in fact I'd prefer it so I never need to spend money upgrading" crowd won't get their wish.
Just because Windows 3.0 had a workflow model built around copy and paste (and now has gone so far that that's what you do with *files*) doesn't mean that copy and paste of anything other than text is appropriate for a efficient desktop environment.
Go back through your "the benchmark I saw" paragraph, and see if it means anything.
Let me repeat.
Comparing Performance Rating to Clock Speed In Mhz, the Semperon outperforms the Celeron in the vast majority of tests.
Reference: (You may need to remove a space in the URL) http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040728/se mpron- 08.html (That's the first page of results, *all* the results back my claim - note that the Celeron 335 is clocked at 1800mhz)
So you're *absolutely sure* that no killer app will show up as processors get faster? Theres nothing that's waiting on a faster processor? There aren't voice recognition / synthesis methods that become feasable? No-one will want to do voice chat in a 3d virtual environment(i.e. EverQuest)?
Just because you haven't tried anything new with your PC in a while doesn't mean that stuff isn't out there.
Computers on the desks of normal people has only been a reality for fifteen or twenty years. In that time we've moved from "A Typewriter With Pre-Print Proofreading" to "A machine that can do realtime interactive full motion video".
Now, I'll admit that there's a bunch of things we could be doing with current technology that we haven't figured out yet - but there's even more things we could be doing if desktop processors / busses / RAM were operating in THz.
Just because you're not interesting enough to come up with uses for technology that hasn't been produced yet doesn't mean that advances wouldn't be useful - and that's just on the desktop. For those people who already know they want faster hardware, faster hardware is obviously useful, and those people are more common than you'd think.
A couple of things that may offset my statement a bit: - In cities, the owners of buildings may pay for the in building wiring. This allows a utility company to get hundreds of people with one connection. This doesn't actually make it as cheap as one connection, it just makes it that cheap for the utility company. The actual cost to rewire a building may be as or more expensive than rewiring a similar sized section of a rural community - depending on how well designed the building is. - It's more likely for a city government to subsidise this sort of project. Again, just shifting the cost.
Umm... I don't follow. What possible purpose could this serve? Unless there was some sort of user-visible advantage to Hurd over the other choices it's sort of a waste of time. You can't even do any real development work on it.
In context, fiber outside of population centers is free. On the other hand, laying fiber in a city should become more expensive as the complexity of the city's utilities increases (similar but not the same as population).
I think that if you went through all the nessisary effort and factored in everything, you'd discover that the japanese telcos are more efficient and useful than the ones in the USA.
Slashdot Mirror
The security implications of doing it that way have yet to be solved. Expecially important is the point that information must be saved reguardless of network fluctuations... like the only person who has it disconnecting.
That actually makes the bully technique easier for a big enough attacker.
Remember that you do need to successfully defend yourself to win, reguarless of the facts of the case.
So, with looser pays, the statement becomes "You will settle, or you'll get to pay our legal fees. For this case we've retained the entire state of Deleware as legal aid. Due to our high cost in litigating this case, the settlement will be your house, car, and left kidney."
Obviously, he works in a public school because he wants to. Money can be cool, but I hear that teaching can be a lot of fun - if you teach high enough level classes that your students want to be there.
Here's the thing:
The dictionary section of the U.S. code was written after the constitution. Therefore, unless it was approved as a consitutional ammendment, it can't possibly alter the meaning of the constitution from "plain english circa 1780ish".
If you're actually going to play the MMORPG seriously, the first year cost is pretty cheap.
Let's say a minimally serious player is planning on averaging 1.5 hours per day on the game. That's about 550 hours spent playing for the year (or more than 10 times what a good long single player game gets you total). The cost is about 40 cents/hour.
Compare that to most other forms of entertainment:
Movies at a theater: $4/hour.
Rented movies: $2/hour.
Cable TV (average 1.5 hours/day): About $1/hour.
A 50 hour single player video game: $1/hour.
I mean, it's no "Counter-Strike for a year" at 10 cents/hour, but it's still a pretty good deal comparitively.
If you only plan on playing it for 20 or 30 hours, you can probably do that in your free month - comes out the same as any other game with the added bonus that you can pay for more game time.
The only time that MMORPGs are a really bad deal is if you don't have the time for them - in which case I'd recommend some nice fun Kotor II.
Hint: Your action cannot be illegal because it violates a contract between two other people/companies.
Forcing the customer to invest $50 in the game up front causes more immediate customer loyalty.
If you've spent $50, you'll be a lot less likely to take your free month, get bored of the game, and then not pay the monthly fee. They'll need to support way less leecher players who never intend to pay on their servers.
The only model that I've seen suggested that doesn't screw up the game developer and still "seems fair" is the "first four even months free" model, where after paying for months 1,3,5,7 you get months 2,4,6,8 free.
For this product, it looks like worst-case is having a 802.11g item. That's the same story as with the 108meg "HyperSpeed" equpiment.
I don't really see a problem.
Your argument depends on shallowly hidden circular logic. Watch.
In thinking of the applications computers are used for, only those applications that work smoothly with current computing power are "real applications" because other applications don't work yet. Therefore, we don't need faster computers because all "real applications" run fine on current computers.
We won't really know what applications faster computers make possible until we have the faster computers.
I didn't coment on photorealism, but I'd say that any of the 3D games qualify as "realtime interactive full motion video".
Let's take Quake I for a second:
Realtime - Yes, the scenes are not pre-rendered.
Interactive - You can move around.
Full Motion - There are 30+ frames per second.
Video - It isn't anything else...
My biggest question there is Interactive, and even half-life 2 doesn't have full environment interaction (the inconsistancy on moving cars with the gravity gun annoyed me to no end), but there was *some* interaction even in Quake I, so the game was interactive.
We continue to approach "Photorealistic Realtime Full Motion Video" and I think it's a long way off. Look at some of the CGI scenes in current action movies - it's getting better but we're not to phtorealistic yet - if we can't do it with a renderfarm I don't think we'll get it in realtime any time soon.
But that leaves an obvious domain where an increase in processing power continues to be useful, and another reason why the "The computer I have is fine for the applications I currently run, so technology can just stagnate here - in fact I'd prefer it so I never need to spend money upgrading" crowd won't get their wish.
Reference?
So... why is this a nessisary feature? Really?
Just because Windows 3.0 had a workflow model built around copy and paste (and now has gone so far that that's what you do with *files*) doesn't mean that copy and paste of anything other than text is appropriate for a efficient desktop environment.
Go back through your "the benchmark I saw" paragraph, and see if it means anything.
e mpron- 08.html
Let me repeat.
Comparing Performance Rating to Clock Speed In Mhz, the Semperon outperforms the Celeron in the vast majority of tests.
Reference: (You may need to remove a space in the URL)
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040728/s
(That's the first page of results, *all* the results back my claim - note that the Celeron 335 is clocked at 1800mhz)
So you're *absolutely sure* that no killer app will show up as processors get faster? Theres nothing that's waiting on a faster processor? There aren't voice recognition / synthesis methods that become feasable? No-one will want to do voice chat in a 3d virtual environment(i.e. EverQuest)?
Just because you haven't tried anything new with your PC in a while doesn't mean that stuff isn't out there.
I'm running desktop linux. Works for me.
You apparently don't understand. Clock for numerical rating, Semprons are faster than Celerons.
Computers on the desks of normal people has only been a reality for fifteen or twenty years. In that time we've moved from "A Typewriter With Pre-Print Proofreading" to "A machine that can do realtime interactive full motion video".
Now, I'll admit that there's a bunch of things we could be doing with current technology that we haven't figured out yet - but there's even more things we could be doing if desktop processors / busses / RAM were operating in THz.
Just because you're not interesting enough to come up with uses for technology that hasn't been produced yet doesn't mean that advances wouldn't be useful - and that's just on the desktop. For those people who already know they want faster hardware, faster hardware is obviously useful, and those people are more common than you'd think.
By comparison is *exactly* what I mean.
A couple of things that may offset my statement a bit:
- In cities, the owners of buildings may pay for the in building wiring. This allows a utility company to get hundreds of people with one connection. This doesn't actually make it as cheap as one connection, it just makes it that cheap for the utility company. The actual cost to rewire a building may be as or more expensive than rewiring a similar sized section of a rural community - depending on how well designed the building is.
- It's more likely for a city government to subsidise this sort of project. Again, just shifting the cost.
The BSD userland consists of BSD components. Remember that BSD is a direct decendant of UNIX, including all the userland tools.
The one GNU thing you'd probably need is gcc.
What I mean is "How could you usefully try hurd from a LiveCD? What could you do?"
This is nothing new, and not a real problem. Debian Stable has always been a step or two behind the hardware curve.
If you want to run a server on Debian you are almost assuredly capible of getting it installed and working with a custom kernel on SATA drives.
Umm... I don't follow. What possible purpose could this serve? Unless there was some sort of user-visible advantage to Hurd over the other choices it's sort of a waste of time. You can't even do any real development work on it.
No, if you want to show you have balls, build a Unix system with Hurd as the kernel and a BSD userland. And then get Oracle running on it.
This is more efficient than just burning the natural gas why?
In context, fiber outside of population centers is free. On the other hand, laying fiber in a city should become more expensive as the complexity of the city's utilities increases (similar but not the same as population).
I think that if you went through all the nessisary effort and factored in everything, you'd discover that the japanese telcos are more efficient and useful than the ones in the USA.