Talking about consoles in general. Though, even a Wii could generate BSP trees. it might not be something you'd want to do while sitting there. The problem with the Wii is storage. Where do you put the map data? I suppose if USB drives became the norm with the Wii you could just have the user plug in a USB drive [or stick] and store the data there.
I wouldn't mind the Wii crunching overnight to generate a new map for some FPS if it meant I'd have a new map to play on that I haven't seen before.
Like I said, it wouldn't have to be super detailed, just something you haven't seen yet. And not all FPS fans are fans of multiplayer [well online play]. Would be nice to kick up the console and play on a map I haven't seen yet.
Heck, could make it a compute task, e.g. before you head to work [or bed] get the box to compute a new map [with BSP trees, light maps] then when you get back you have a new map.
I think it's definitely doable with the right clever developers.
Speaking of replay value, what I'd want more than anything out of an FPS, is dynamic levels. I mean we pack these things with uber-fast processors and tons of ram, can't they resolve a BSP tree or two. I mean it wouldn't have to be a very intricate random level designer, just something that can place walls, doors, windows, obstacles. Even if the levels were linear, having a random map to play on would be cool.
Not saying it would be a trivial task though, just that it would be really kickass.
Sorry I don't buy it. I mean yeah, sure the RIAA probably does finger innocent folk. But it sounds like in this case she did have the files in question, just trying to find a loophole out of it. Anyone above the age of 10 should know that downloading music that you don't have permission to is wrong. Heck, I knew about software piracy when I was 6. (we're talking 1988 here).
Using the "I didn't know sneaking around on a P2P program and downloading copyrighted material from random people all over the world was wrong" defense is just lame.
Thanks for the compliment. It's not that I don't like the idea of working on OSS projects like it. Just after the crap I went through I re-organized my life and shifted priorities. Not like I didn't meet really cool people through working on the projects, and if I had to do it over I probably would. They proved useful both professionally and personally.
Only so much abuse a person is willing to take before they just move on. What the trolls did on usenet though represents all that is wrong with modern "civilized" society. They didn't like that fact that I was an outspoken advocate of open source crypto (and opposed to proprietary closed source). So what did they do? Joe-job me with kiddie porn, spam my 2nd book before it was in print, re-post all my research posts all over usenet, steal my domain. I actually received death threats as a result of what they did to me. My 2nd book was released with all sorts of negative comments on amazon even before it was printed.
All I wanted to do was have a project to pour energy into, share research results, and have something to talk about. And because some people on usenet didn't like me [or whatever their reasons] they took that from me. Five years of work, poof, gone. I used to get a kick out of posting implementation observations (like doing fast math, fast ECC, etc). Now the idea of posting in usenet scares me, and I lost all desire to do research. Last I checked sci.crypt was still being flooded, probably by the same person.
And if Martin Marcel somehow reads this/. post... you're a mean obtuse little person. You could have worked with me to have a library to use for profit. Instead you served only to hamper my progress and try to character assassinate me at every turn. I hope you fail in all your endeavours, and that you end your life as miserable as you had made mine.
In a way I'm lucky I had music to fall back on. At least there I can spend my time and energy, and there aren't "trolls" to steal the enthusiasm away. Nowadays, I spend quite a bit of time studying piano, guitar, music theory, and composing. That is when I'm not at work (in crypto field). If I didn't have the music to fall back on, I don't know where I would have ended up. LT projects were my life at the time. They're what made me me. Now all I have to do is study hard at my music and hopefully make that me too.../rant
While my rant wasn't so much about the language (I actually like the pascal language), but since you made it about that I'll answer.
I've heard the "pascal lets no error occur" bullshit argument, also paraphrased for C++, Java, C#, etc.
I don't know about you, but I try to develop software that I can verify, or at the very least test properly. I also write code with buffer management, type management, etc, in mind. I also use as many warning flags as practical, etc.
If you don't just sit down and crack out line after line of code it's not hard to write C code that is secure and purposeful.
Hahaha, you tried to make it personal to prove a point. Nice.
Well, OpenSSL and LibTomCrypt are not the same type of projects. OpenSSL provides SSL. LibTomCrypt provides more generic crypto services (and more of them). You should also note that I don't actively push LTC anymore (I use it, but after what happened to me on usenet I don't give a fuck if anyone else uses it). So please, stop beating the dead horse. LibTomCrypt is the past, not future.
So anyways, if you're going to dig up the past and flog it, at least get your fucking facts straight you half-breed troll.
It's called a complete sentence you fuckwad. A complaint could read like "he was charged with getting in his car and running over a child."
The charge isn't
Count 1: Getting in a car
Count 2: Running over a child
The charge is getting into a car _and_ then running over a child.
I suppose you can leave off the first bit, but it's called "reporting" and usually you want to flesh out details like, say, how the crime was committed.
I'm not against Pascal as a language, I just question why we need yet another toolchain. Why not write a good pascal frontend for GCC and then take advantage of all the platforms they support + optimizers, etc. The optimizers in GCC are hardly language specific, most of them work on very abstract machine representations after the language has been compiled to an independent machine type.
And yeah, I would be for ranting against Cobol as it's ancient and not very useful. Fortran from what I hear still serves the math niche well.
Suppose I'm a developer in a company. We work with, say, crypto software, on a variety of embedded platforms [not all of which run Linux]. Please tell me why I should consider Pascal. Or, suppose I've been dropped into a company with millions of dollars of existing software toolkits [all written in C]. Please tell me why we should port it all to Pascal?
Pascal is cool and all, but until I can be reasonably assured to find it everywhere, in a project [like GCC] that I can be assured will be here in 5 years, I can't really promote it in any of my projects.
GCC has been around for 2 decades or so. It has scores of contributors from all walks of life and industry. Can you say the same for Free Pascal?
I suspected as much, but the point is how many others are going to make the same mistake? Why isn't dynamic [shared] objects the default on Linux platforms? etc...
Normally it's the opposite that you want static binaries in only odd situations [e.g. to make an application binary-wise portable, to use it when glibc or other libs may not be available, to free up a register on non-PIC friendly platforms, e.g. x86-32].
I just installed 2.2.0 on my x86_64 box and this is what I got for hello world...
tom@core2 ~ $ ls -lrt test? -rwxr-xr-x 1 tom users 145208 Sep 10 19:03 testp -rwxr-xr-x 1 tom users 6384 Sep 10 19:05 testc
Both were run through "strip" to remove any possible debug/extra details. testp is from this pascal program
begin
writeln('hello world'); end.
And testc from
#include <stdio.h> int main(void) {
puts("Hello World");
return 0; }
Aside from the ubiquity of C, the fact that there are few moving targets [e.g. aim for C90 and you're usually fine], and that it seems to produce smaller binaries... why would I want Pascal?
Don't get me wrong, I was a pascal whore when I was kid too. But let's face it. Everything [that matters] is written in C, C compilers are everywhere, and their optimizers are highly kick ass. I just don't see why FPC matters beyond being a nice hobby project to rekindle "the old days."
If you RTFA the complaint is that a rival car dealership bought adwords containing the trademark names/terms of a competitor. The idea being to trick users into going to their website.
The complaint ISN'T that google does this for every company, or that Google did it on purpose even (note that doesn't limit liability).
No, they're suing because google is profiting from the misappropriation of other peoples trademarks.
Should I be able to open stores called K-Mart just because I feel like it? Then why should google be able to run pay-per-click ads using trademarked names they WEREN'T GIVEN PERMISSION FOR.
As for the "hate speech" line... unless they're a common carrier (which blogspot is not) they are liable for all of their published content. Let's go over a basic concept of reality. Just because something is possible doesn't mean you should do it. If blogspot cannot monitor their content with reasonable efficiency they shouldn't do it. I fell victim to this myself, when my 2nd book came out haters were talking smack about my book [which wasn't even out yet]. Amazon STILL has the posts there to this day. All else being equal, I can't reasonably assume that their comments are neutral w.r.t. my sales. At least Amazon removed the fraudulent reviews, I'll give them that much.
Anyways, long story short, just because the net technically permits the publication of any random content, doesn't mean our laws permit said actions. You're still responsible for what you publish directly or indirectly. It's part and parcel of being a publisher.
Yes. You can't publish libel, regardless if you're the author or not. Why would copyright or trademark laws be any different?
It's part of the "value" you contribute to society as a publisher that you check facts, authorship, etc. Any jackass can run a printing mill, or website.
Unfortunately, Google is also liable since they're publishing the infringing material. They should do some due diligence and background check adword purchases. Except, the goal there is to just shovel fistfuls of cash into their coffers. Not run a legit business.
No, the FTA states that selling adwords to COMPETITORS is deceptive. If you read past the first sentence you'll note that a competitor bought adwords including trademarks of a rival and have it link to them instead.
The complaint isn't stating that adwords or sponsored links is deceptive. It's talking about how in this instance it's being abused.
Here's what their complaint states [in simple terms]. Company B bought adwords that included the trademarks of company A. Company B is paying Google so that when you search for company A it gives links that point to Company B instead.
E.g. a google for [say] Pepsi brings links that *say* Pepsi but instead go to Coke when you click on them.
Since Google is selling this service they have no rights to use other peoples trademarks (making the distinction between this and their non-profit web search).
This is akin to company B buying ads in the local paper that say "Come to Company A's new sale, located at 123 Front St." and when you get to 123 Front St, you find Company B selling the same products. They're using the name (which is presumably trademarked) to draw attention. Trademark law says you can't do that.
Having used lotus notes while on assignment at IBM I can attest to it's evilness and lack of "straightforwardness." It's a bitch to setup without an IT support dude sitting at your... wait a tick... IBM makes money out of service contracts? No way...
It appears that they have to etch something on the platter to get this to work, probably the yield of 3.5" platters isn't worth the cost, since you can't just use multiple platters (3.5" == desktop remember).
I don't know why more people don't just get a PVR and skip over commercials. That way you can watch crap shows and not be subject to lame advertisements for
Doesn't work well when you get into a traffic accident because you're zooming from one lane to another to try and get 3 seconds ahead.
Also doesn't work well on decisions that are of a longer standing impact. Oh gee, that 50-year mortgage looks great! just put it next to the $60K lease for my 8MPG land yacht.
Being able to consume and deliberate over more things [over a longer period] isn't a bad thing.
I'd say a mixture of both is probably better. Being able to skim over things of little importance to focus on those things of higher importance...
Slashdot Mirror
FPS not RPG. FPS == run around and shoot things. Get the blue skull key, open the door, get the red skull key, etc...
Talking about consoles in general. Though, even a Wii could generate BSP trees. it might not be something you'd want to do while sitting there. The problem with the Wii is storage. Where do you put the map data? I suppose if USB drives became the norm with the Wii you could just have the user plug in a USB drive [or stick] and store the data there.
I wouldn't mind the Wii crunching overnight to generate a new map for some FPS if it meant I'd have a new map to play on that I haven't seen before.
Like I said, it wouldn't have to be super detailed, just something you haven't seen yet. And not all FPS fans are fans of multiplayer [well online play]. Would be nice to kick up the console and play on a map I haven't seen yet.
Heck, could make it a compute task, e.g. before you head to work [or bed] get the box to compute a new map [with BSP trees, light maps] then when you get back you have a new map.
I think it's definitely doable with the right clever developers.
Is it out yet? Doesn't seem so. At anyrate I only own a Wii and a PS2 so I doubt it will be for me :-( hehehe
But if I got caught up on my bills a game like that [with the random level designer thingy] might persuade me to buy a new console...
Speaking of replay value, what I'd want more than anything out of an FPS, is dynamic levels. I mean we pack these things with uber-fast processors and tons of ram, can't they resolve a BSP tree or two. I mean it wouldn't have to be a very intricate random level designer, just something that can place walls, doors, windows, obstacles. Even if the levels were linear, having a random map to play on would be cool.
Not saying it would be a trivial task though, just that it would be really kickass.
Sorry I don't buy it. I mean yeah, sure the RIAA probably does finger innocent folk. But it sounds like in this case she did have the files in question, just trying to find a loophole out of it. Anyone above the age of 10 should know that downloading music that you don't have permission to is wrong. Heck, I knew about software piracy when I was 6. (we're talking 1988 here).
Using the "I didn't know sneaking around on a P2P program and downloading copyrighted material from random people all over the world was wrong" defense is just lame.
Tom
I don't see how GCC is dangerous, but seeing as you're talking out your ass I don't expect an explanation.
And can we stop having AC posts on slashdot already? I mean, man up and attach your username to a post for a change.
Thanks for the compliment. It's not that I don't like the idea of working on OSS projects like it. Just after the crap I went through I re-organized my life and shifted priorities. Not like I didn't meet really cool people through working on the projects, and if I had to do it over I probably would. They proved useful both professionally and personally.
/. post ... you're a mean obtuse little person. You could have worked with me to have a library to use for profit. Instead you served only to hamper my progress and try to character assassinate me at every turn. I hope you fail in all your endeavours, and that you end your life as miserable as you had made mine.
/rant
Only so much abuse a person is willing to take before they just move on. What the trolls did on usenet though represents all that is wrong with modern "civilized" society. They didn't like that fact that I was an outspoken advocate of open source crypto (and opposed to proprietary closed source). So what did they do? Joe-job me with kiddie porn, spam my 2nd book before it was in print, re-post all my research posts all over usenet, steal my domain. I actually received death threats as a result of what they did to me. My 2nd book was released with all sorts of negative comments on amazon even before it was printed.
All I wanted to do was have a project to pour energy into, share research results, and have something to talk about. And because some people on usenet didn't like me [or whatever their reasons] they took that from me. Five years of work, poof, gone. I used to get a kick out of posting implementation observations (like doing fast math, fast ECC, etc). Now the idea of posting in usenet scares me, and I lost all desire to do research. Last I checked sci.crypt was still being flooded, probably by the same person.
And if Martin Marcel somehow reads this
In a way I'm lucky I had music to fall back on. At least there I can spend my time and energy, and there aren't "trolls" to steal the enthusiasm away. Nowadays, I spend quite a bit of time studying piano, guitar, music theory, and composing. That is when I'm not at work (in crypto field). If I didn't have the music to fall back on, I don't know where I would have ended up. LT projects were my life at the time. They're what made me me. Now all I have to do is study hard at my music and hopefully make that me too...
While my rant wasn't so much about the language (I actually like the pascal language), but since you made it about that I'll answer.
I've heard the "pascal lets no error occur" bullshit argument, also paraphrased for C++, Java, C#, etc.
I don't know about you, but I try to develop software that I can verify, or at the very least test properly. I also write code with buffer management, type management, etc, in mind. I also use as many warning flags as practical, etc.
If you don't just sit down and crack out line after line of code it's not hard to write C code that is secure and purposeful.
Hahaha, you tried to make it personal to prove a point. Nice.
Well, OpenSSL and LibTomCrypt are not the same type of projects. OpenSSL provides SSL. LibTomCrypt provides more generic crypto services (and more of them). You should also note that I don't actively push LTC anymore (I use it, but after what happened to me on usenet I don't give a fuck if anyone else uses it). So please, stop beating the dead horse. LibTomCrypt is the past, not future.
So anyways, if you're going to dig up the past and flog it, at least get your fucking facts straight you half-breed troll.
It's called a complete sentence you fuckwad. A complaint could read like "he was charged with getting in his car and running over a child."
The charge isn't
Count 1: Getting in a car
Count 2: Running over a child
The charge is getting into a car _and_ then running over a child.
I suppose you can leave off the first bit, but it's called "reporting" and usually you want to flesh out details like, say, how the crime was committed.
I'm not against Pascal as a language, I just question why we need yet another toolchain. Why not write a good pascal frontend for GCC and then take advantage of all the platforms they support + optimizers, etc. The optimizers in GCC are hardly language specific, most of them work on very abstract machine representations after the language has been compiled to an independent machine type.
And yeah, I would be for ranting against Cobol as it's ancient and not very useful. Fortran from what I hear still serves the math niche well.
Suppose I'm a developer in a company. We work with, say, crypto software, on a variety of embedded platforms [not all of which run Linux]. Please tell me why I should consider Pascal. Or, suppose I've been dropped into a company with millions of dollars of existing software toolkits [all written in C]. Please tell me why we should port it all to Pascal?
Pascal is cool and all, but until I can be reasonably assured to find it everywhere, in a project [like GCC] that I can be assured will be here in 5 years, I can't really promote it in any of my projects.
GCC has been around for 2 decades or so. It has scores of contributors from all walks of life and industry. Can you say the same for Free Pascal?
I suspected as much, but the point is how many others are going to make the same mistake? Why isn't dynamic [shared] objects the default on Linux platforms? etc...
Normally it's the opposite that you want static binaries in only odd situations [e.g. to make an application binary-wise portable, to use it when glibc or other libs may not be available, to free up a register on non-PIC friendly platforms, e.g. x86-32].
Tom
I just installed 2.2.0 on my x86_64 box and this is what I got for hello world ...
... why would I want Pascal?
tom@core2 ~ $ ls -lrt test?
-rwxr-xr-x 1 tom users 145208 Sep 10 19:03 testp
-rwxr-xr-x 1 tom users 6384 Sep 10 19:05 testc
Both were run through "strip" to remove any possible debug/extra details. testp is from this pascal program
begin
writeln('hello world');
end.
And testc from
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
puts("Hello World");
return 0;
}
Aside from the ubiquity of C, the fact that there are few moving targets [e.g. aim for C90 and you're usually fine], and that it seems to produce smaller binaries
Don't get me wrong, I was a pascal whore when I was kid too. But let's face it. Everything [that matters] is written in C, C compilers are everywhere, and their optimizers are highly kick ass. I just don't see why FPC matters beyond being a nice hobby project to rekindle "the old days."
If you RTFA the complaint is that a rival car dealership bought adwords containing the trademark names/terms of a competitor. The idea being to trick users into going to their website.
The complaint ISN'T that google does this for every company, or that Google did it on purpose even (note that doesn't limit liability).
No, they're suing because google is profiting from the misappropriation of other peoples trademarks.
... unless they're a common carrier (which blogspot is not) they are liable for all of their published content. Let's go over a basic concept of reality. Just because something is possible doesn't mean you should do it. If blogspot cannot monitor their content with reasonable efficiency they shouldn't do it. I fell victim to this myself, when my 2nd book came out haters were talking smack about my book [which wasn't even out yet]. Amazon STILL has the posts there to this day. All else being equal, I can't reasonably assume that their comments are neutral w.r.t. my sales. At least Amazon removed the fraudulent reviews, I'll give them that much.
Should I be able to open stores called K-Mart just because I feel like it? Then why should google be able to run pay-per-click ads using trademarked names they WEREN'T GIVEN PERMISSION FOR.
As for the "hate speech" line
Anyways, long story short, just because the net technically permits the publication of any random content, doesn't mean our laws permit said actions. You're still responsible for what you publish directly or indirectly. It's part and parcel of being a publisher.
Yes. You can't publish libel, regardless if you're the author or not. Why would copyright or trademark laws be any different?
It's part of the "value" you contribute to society as a publisher that you check facts, authorship, etc. Any jackass can run a printing mill, or website.
Unfortunately, Google is also liable since they're publishing the infringing material. They should do some due diligence and background check adword purchases. Except, the goal there is to just shovel fistfuls of cash into their coffers. Not run a legit business.
No, the FTA states that selling adwords to COMPETITORS is deceptive. If you read past the first sentence you'll note that a competitor bought adwords including trademarks of a rival and have it link to them instead.
The complaint isn't stating that adwords or sponsored links is deceptive. It's talking about how in this instance it's being abused.
Here's what their complaint states [in simple terms]. Company B bought adwords that included the trademarks of company A. Company B is paying Google so that when you search for company A it gives links that point to Company B instead.
E.g. a google for [say] Pepsi brings links that *say* Pepsi but instead go to Coke when you click on them.
Since Google is selling this service they have no rights to use other peoples trademarks (making the distinction between this and their non-profit web search).
This is akin to company B buying ads in the local paper that say "Come to Company A's new sale, located at 123 Front St." and when you get to 123 Front St, you find Company B selling the same products. They're using the name (which is presumably trademarked) to draw attention. Trademark law says you can't do that.
Having used lotus notes while on assignment at IBM I can attest to it's evilness and lack of "straightforwardness." It's a bitch to setup without an IT support dude sitting at your ... wait a tick ... IBM makes money out of service contracts? No way...
Tom
It appears that they have to etch something on the platter to get this to work, probably the yield of 3.5" platters isn't worth the cost, since you can't just use multiple platters (3.5" == desktop remember).
No. See Density. Last I checked there aren't any affordable 500+GB flash disk systems.
And even still, flash wears out too. So it's not like we have a never-failing non-volatile memory system yet.
I lol'ed. Thanks.
I don't know why more people don't just get a PVR and skip over commercials. That way you can watch crap shows and not be subject to lame advertisements for
Oh look a Bunny on top of the TV.
Doesn't work well when you get into a traffic accident because you're zooming from one lane to another to try and get 3 seconds ahead.
Also doesn't work well on decisions that are of a longer standing impact. Oh gee, that 50-year mortgage looks great! just put it next to the $60K lease for my 8MPG land yacht.
Being able to consume and deliberate over more things [over a longer period] isn't a bad thing.
I'd say a mixture of both is probably better. Being able to skim over things of little importance to focus on those things of higher importance...