The decay thing is a stroke of genius. If you set the half-life right, the mighty Hulks will march out, smash puny enemy army, and by the time they are about to turn around and smash puny you, they rot into a pile of goo.
" Now imagine preparing for the "invading force" and 10,000 of these come marching into town. You shoot them, they keep coming forward, you throw bombs at them and their legs fall off, but they still keep coming after you"
You saw that same episode of The Simpsons with the itchy and scratchy amusement park too!
Getting a little tired of games like this in which just about everything is either gray, black, or brown with brightness ranging from dark to very dark. (and for that matter, shows like "Enterprise" that look similar).
We've come along way from "Yar's Revenge", but at least those games had a decent contrast and visibility that seems to have been lost along the way.
I use www.google.com (not www.goohle.com or gogle!).
The third result is a site with bee cartoons. It contains "2Bee", etc. Close, but not a match. (The word referring to that insect was not in my search request).
Link 9 goes to a book at Amazon called "Or Not To Be". That partial phrase appears throughout the link. However, the entire phrase that I asked for does not appear.
Link 10 is to the papermsce site. It contains no funny but false variations on the phrase, nor any fragments lerger than "to be" found here and there in the text.
Three of these top 10 links were not accurate results. I searched on the phrase "to be or not to be", not variations or mispellings. Phrases that capitalize on it, but do not match it, are close (but not accurate matches).
" Why is a non-zero failure rate such an abominable thing? At some times, maybe finding something you weren't expecting is a positive."
If you reach into the freezer without really looking, thinking that you are grabbing a freezer-pop, and get an 8 month old leg of lamb instead, are you going to shrug and eat the lamb anyway?
" Why is a non-zero failure rate such an abominable thing? "
Come to think of it, I have to ask. Which development team has Steve Ballmer assigned you to?
" An unbiased search engine is completely useless."
Unbiased is fine for me. When I search, I am just looking for matches. That is all. I don't care so much about ranking decisions as long as the search produces accurate results. (that is, words or phrases found in the resulting documents).
That is the problem. The reason I put such words in phrases is because I want an exact match.
" It does this to eliminate words that show up to frequently and make the searches faster"
I would hope that Google solves this by getting faster servers, instead of producing bad results. Besides, if I did not want the results to include all the words in the phrase, I would not have included them in the phrase in the first place.
" If you really want that text, then either quote the whole thing, or place a '+' in front of those words"
I did quote the whole thing, and got 70% accuracy. By putting plusses in front of the words, I still got 70% accuracy.
"So there is no problem with it's acurracy when you understand the proper way to ask it for something."
Quotes around the phrase do not work. Plus in front of all the words fails too. What is the secret of "the proper way"? more importantly, why won't it do the most intuitive thing: try to match the phrase as it is typed?
To me, accuracy is the most important "Relevance".
The problem with Google is that there are errors in it: you ask for something and sometimes you get something else.
A search on "to be or not to be" produces an error (non-matching results) in three of the first ten results: a 30% search failure rate. It used to be worse, when most of the links were bad.
Since it seems like Google will never fix this problem, I'm looking forward to something with all of Google's great features, plus accuracy.
It would save people a lot of bother if we posted links to new stories in the past so that the news stories would appear on Slashdot with pre-slashdotted links.
Slashdot Mirror
Just how do you propose keeping those Hulks chained to those treadmills powering the turbines?
The decay thing is a stroke of genius. If you set the half-life right, the mighty Hulks will march out, smash puny enemy army, and by the time they are about to turn around and smash puny you, they rot into a pile of goo.
What country is going to be able to stop the might of a vast army of Hulks once they get this gamma-process down pat?
The only challenge is to get them to stop smashing any tank they see.
"SCO, they're about to get on the wrong side of Microsoft too, since MS..."
Are you hoping for a Battle of Stalingrad situation, where there is really no site to cheer for?
Or is the Godzilla vs Rodan analogy more appropriate? Or would a simple shark feeding-frezny do.
This is what it's like when worlds collide....
Since you can only make one copy at a time, can't this be used to to unravel their "logic"?
Or, is the GPL valid if you are making one copy of a copy (according to their twist)?
I always wondered what was behind some of the moderation decisions I've been seeing!
"Ben: Again I am shrugging."
Sounds like something from.... oh, never mind.
All your bot are belong to us.
If you have one of these robots, who needs an air force.
The robot dog in "Red Planet" surely had some of Jonny-5 in its ancestry...
" Now imagine preparing for the "invading force" and 10,000 of these come marching into town. You shoot them, they keep coming forward, you throw bombs at them and their legs fall off, but they still keep coming after you"
You saw that same episode of The Simpsons with the itchy and scratchy amusement park too!
Ah, to my great regret, I did not miss Phantom Menace. Thankfully, as you have shown, I have forgotten parts of it.
I fear that the damnable tongue will be the last thing that "meesa" will forget, however.
" "a full 80% of people that are hit by lightning recover","
The remaining 20% develop superpowers and endeavor to save the Earth or destroy it.
Don't forget the legacy 1970s technology in which the robots were programmed by inserting 8-track tapes in their square-slot mouths...
As far as I know, the R2 units sit in the back like co-pilots.
For the ones that can crawl around on the outside of the ship and fix things, look to the drones from "Silent Running".
Getting a little tired of games like this in which just about everything is either gray, black, or brown with brightness ranging from dark to very dark. (and for that matter, shows like "Enterprise" that look similar).
We've come along way from "Yar's Revenge", but at least those games had a decent contrast and visibility that seems to have been lost along the way.
Did someone forget to pay the electric bill?
You are right: one more of these was a bad result. That's 40% error.
I use www.google.com (not www.goohle.com or gogle!).
The third result is a site with bee cartoons. It contains "2Bee", etc. Close, but not a match. (The word referring to that insect was not in my search request).
Link 9 goes to a book at Amazon called "Or Not To Be". That partial phrase appears throughout the link. However, the entire phrase that I asked for does not appear.
Link 10 is to the papermsce site. It contains no funny but false variations on the phrase, nor any fragments lerger than "to be" found here and there in the text.
Three of these top 10 links were not accurate results. I searched on the phrase "to be or not to be", not variations or mispellings. Phrases that capitalize on it, but do not match it, are close (but not accurate matches).
" Why is a non-zero failure rate such an abominable thing? At some times, maybe finding something you weren't expecting is a positive."
If you reach into the freezer without really looking, thinking that you are grabbing a freezer-pop, and get an 8 month old leg of lamb instead, are you going to shrug and eat the lamb anyway?
" Why is a non-zero failure rate such an abominable thing? "
Come to think of it, I have to ask. Which development team has Steve Ballmer assigned you to?
" An unbiased search engine is completely useless."
Unbiased is fine for me. When I search, I am just looking for matches. That is all. I don't care so much about ranking decisions as long as the search produces accurate results. (that is, words or phrases found in the resulting documents).
"Google will toss the words 'to' 'be' and 'or'."
That is the problem. The reason I put such words in phrases is because I want an exact match.
" It does this to eliminate words that show up to frequently and make the searches faster"
I would hope that Google solves this by getting faster servers, instead of producing bad results. Besides, if I did not want the results to include all the words in the phrase, I would not have included them in the phrase in the first place.
" If you really want that text, then either quote the whole thing, or place a '+' in front of those words"
I did quote the whole thing, and got 70% accuracy. By putting plusses in front of the words, I still got 70% accuracy.
"So there is no problem with it's acurracy when you understand the proper way to ask it for something."
Quotes around the phrase do not work. Plus in front of all the words fails too. What is the secret of "the proper way"? more importantly, why won't it do the most intuitive thing: try to match the phrase as it is typed?
Don't worry. It is just a stepping stone to full project maturity reached when it is fully coded in Borland Turbo Pascal.
"Google has WON the search engine war, probably forever. Find some other mountain to climb, guys."
At one time, Oldsmobile won the auto company wars. Where are they now?
IBM ruled the PC roost. Hmmmm....
Command-line OS's were king. But now???
Altavista and infoseek and Lycos were search engine kings at one time. Whither this trio?
The point is, it is not over.
To me, accuracy is the most important "Relevance".
The problem with Google is that there are errors in it: you ask for something and sometimes you get something else.
A search on "to be or not to be" produces an error (non-matching results) in three of the first ten results: a 30% search failure rate. It used to be worse, when most of the links were bad.
Since it seems like Google will never fix this problem, I'm looking forward to something with all of Google's great features, plus accuracy.
It would save people a lot of bother if we posted links to new stories in the past so that the news stories would appear on Slashdot with pre-slashdotted links.