In the past, CG technology was driven by ambitious individuals who didn't have a very clear idea how they would pull off what the bigwigs had planned around the table. For example, some of the early commercials done by Omnibus, and the first CG effects to appear in film and television used state-of-the-art techniques and hardware to achieve their goals. The directors and producers had the vision, and it was up to the technicians to make it possible.
Do you think that there will ever be a time that the technicians won't have to write new software in order to achieve the latest visual effect...because it already exists? Will we get to a point when the methodology for such advanced techniques as facial mo-cap and fluid dynamics is so well known that it small studios and home users with little training in computer science will understand them?
I have a long standing argument with my friends about ATOC; I thought it was poorly assembled, they thought it was the "greatest movie EVER!" One reason I am staunch in my critique of the film is that not a single person can speak with me about the story of the film, which leads me to believe that the story has several problems and holes. I was impressed by the visual effects, I was impressed by the soundtrack, I was even impressed by Yoda doing backflips and kung-fu....but that's all it is: impressed. I usually don't agree with Katz on anything, but I agree with him that Attack of the Clones was a lot of hype with lots of glitz and little story-telling.
However. I don't think that Spiderman strayed far from the hype engine, either. I wasn't dramatically impressed by the film, but I was at least taken in by the story. It provided a solid enough basis that the glitz, glamour, and cool CGI was more than just bright lights and sound.
I highly doubt that the modern youth will suddenly decide that hype is bad. It will be with us a while longer, even if we all hope to see films that have a solid foundation in story-telling.
i don't have that much of a problem with lucas borrowing from other sources. that is always done. however, when he borrows a part from a hit movie...that was borrowed from another hit movie(yoda's kung fu pose->matrix->bruce lee), well that's stepping into the realm of tacky.
...just something i noticed: everybody i know who i discuss this movie with who liked it gets VERY upset when i say that i DIDN'T like it(even though i have a solid critique to back my opinion up). on the other hand, i haven't seen people who DIDN'T like it blowing up at those who did. did lucas implant subliminal messages in the film to make people violently react to critics of the film??
I realize that filmmakers are charged with using innovative tactics in order to keep a movie audience at the edge of their seats. I also realize that producers need money in order to make a movie. However one thing should never change: at the core of a great movie lies a great story.
The greatest of all mistakes in AOTC was in the poor development of the story. The characters were all tolerable; some where even fantastic(Windu, Yoda, Palpatine,...even some of the lesser characters). The settings were breathtaking(you get the FEEL of Star Wars alot more than in Phantom Menace). The action sequences were quite nice....but where were the non-action sequences? Where were the scenes that delved into the angst of Anakin, outside of the action, so we can absorb it? Where was the build-up of the Anakin-Padme relationship?(How many people do you know, especially with the female 10 years older than the male, that after 10 years apart and some akward kissing over the course of perhaps a few weeks, decide to get married?!)
A good story requires rising action, wherein the conflict of the story builds to a crescendo, and then a small resolution is made. Watching AOTC, with its engineered wipe-transition-to-wipe-transition "action snippets", was like watching a horror movie without the suspense. Sure, its awesome to see Yoda flipping around and pulling off some crazy Bruce Lee martial arts, but I would have at least liked some indication that he might have been capable of this all.
To address those of you who feel that the love scenes are not classified as action; in the basest sense, they should be. Any scene with intense emotional action is classified as "active" in terms of the story, be it sadness, suspense, love, or "action" as we know and love in Hollywood cinema. The resulting comment from some less critical viewers is, "too much CGI/love story/action/politics/glitz."
The fact that anybody notices the minor details; i.e. cliches used in previous movies/Star Wars movies, CGI looks fake in certain part, Yoda walks on a cane...but can do triple backflip, etc, etc, proves that a non-immersive story can be a distraction. In an immersive story, you are so engrossed in the movie that you don't notice the younger patrons laughing at C3PO when his head gets interchanged with a battle droid's, or the teenage girls whooping for N-SYNC(thank god THAT didn't happen), or the countless continuity errors in the story.
While the movie is only 1/3 of the trilogy, it still requires build-up, climax, and resolution. No movie should require 3.5 hours of waiting for it to get good; it didn't happen in the original series...shouldn't happen in the new one.
What does it all boil down to? A movie can only be as good as it story. Why do you prefer to watch the original Star Wars trilogy over Episode I and II? The effects are definitely better in the newer films. The CGI can be used to construct amazing settings and worlds. The quality of the picture and color is much better in the latest movies. So why do we still like the older ones? Because a great story can make up for several weak visual elements, whereas no amount of glitz and glamour can make up for a bad story.
i have unwittingly been participating in the (H)GSB(really busy....i know its bad when i can't read/.) and wanted to post something. this story...is horrible. malda is right. comments aren't worth much, and its been showing. come on, guys...you can't leave/. ALONE for a week, let alone refrain from posting. however, we need some stories. something better than "burning cds is a part of modern sexual culture." i don't care how this gets modded up or down, just wanted to say something.
bad delivery, but your heart is in the right place. i agree that there needs to be a clear distinction between free software and open source software. "open source" DOESN'T mean "free", and the mindset that it does mean "free" will eventually kill the open source movement. there's nothing wrong with free software, or wanting to write software for research purposes or charities. however, the people who have the power to make or break open source aren't the corporate giants you so vehemently disagreed with; they're the educational, military, and government software developers. these guys understand more fully than any capitalist organization how practical customization can be, AND they have the strict production structure required for creating massive software package.
i disagree with your statement about using code from free open source to make an open source program that costs. when you buy an open source program, you are not paying for the code. you usually aren't even paying for a license to the code. what you are paying for is peace of mind...less hassle, time, - maybe an intuitive interface. you are paying for the pre-assembled kit, rather than the seperate components. as long as the developer isn't charging money for or placing restrictions on the use of the code from the other programs, nothing is keeping somebody from remaking it. however, i agree that ALL original authors deserve credit, and thanks are always in order.:)
I wonder if the government grant for MIT is linked at all to these recent breakthroughs in wearable PCs.... It seems like a lot of these things were a ways off a year ago. Perhaps the military isn't just providing funding for MIT, but also funding many other research groups on the verge of advances in wearable PC technology. Why put all your eggs in one basket? If they have $50 million to give to MIT for a nanotech suit, why wouldn't they have more millions to spend on "subcontractors" developing HUDs, virtual keyboards, communication networks and devices, etc, etc? I have a theory: within the next few years, the public will be flooded with news of breakthroughs in nanotechnology, microcomputers, augmented reality, hands free or heads up display and input devices, real space vertex input, and other technologies related to mobile computing. Now all we need is a hostile alien race! Hold on tight, ladies and gentlemen. It looks like we'll get to LIVE the sci-fi that we grew up on.
ever hear of the stamp acts? the intolerable acts? the boston tea party? lets riot! let's band together as geeks pissed off at the fuckery of the world's shitty governments and loot! break into your local computer store! steal shit! burn entire CD-R shipments! make a stand! it worked in the past. it can work for use today.
i'm a cgi student at the moment, and i talk to industry professionals once in awhile, at siggraph and such. i have a split opinion on the matter of software piracy/software protection. several companies are offering student versions for free, or with discounts(softimage, photoshop).
one of the reasons why software piracy is still present is that these companies cripple their software so much that none of the content generated with it can be put onto a professional demo reel. maya recent strategy, the watermark on all renders, is an excellent work around this issue; it offers all features, plus an employer is likely to appreciate your integrity if its clear that you followed the rules.
in addition to student version's increased availability, software companies are funding more and more schools. softimage xsi has an excellent strategy: train more xsi drivers, market needs xsi, xsi sales increase. everybody wins.
i don't condone thievery, but i also don't condone highway robbery. much of the software seems is in a price range that a production studio may view as nominal, but as a student is much too expensive. i've heard the "it costs money to make these programs, you know" argument a thousand times, and frankly it doesn't cost $10,000(alias wavefront maya 4.0 unlimited) a package to make ANYTHING. these high-end graphics companies are creating software for a high-paying demographic. i believe that they are gradually learning the harmful effects of creating an elitist market.
software piracy probably won't ever go away. too many people like free beer. there's alot that can done to minimize the blow. creating a new student demographic and marketing a seperate package solely for them is a great way to do this.
i'm not naive, but i do see your train of thought. you are afraid of the consequences of letting somebody move to the bounds of legality. i also see this, but i'm afraid of what happens when "might happen" replaces "already happened." for the same reason that you want to head off the possibility of a crime being committed, i want to head off your way of thinking. allowed to run to the extreme, both are dangerous. extremes in general are dangerous. rather than the realist and the idealist meeting at a halfway point, they both run in the opposite direction. i don't think that criminals should get away with committing crimes they are guilty of. but i also don't believe that people should be punished for crimes they haven't committed, or "might commit."
the purpose of hacking, in my opinion, is not to be used in violence, but to inform. an outlaw journalist uses illegal methods to find the facts and make them known to the public, because they feel that the laws prohibiting the release of this information are unconstitutional.
for example, i don't feel that there is anything wrong with exploiting a security hole, as long as the intentions are that the hole will be fixed.
every time i hear about something like this happening, the defendant always whines "free speech", and the whole bill of rights bit. unfortunately, speech is never free. it always comes with consequences. if you want to say something, do it with a little more tact than "Yeah, motherfucker, I'm a terrorist to the U.S. Government"
The actual law may state that such things are prohibited, however, these laws may be unconstitutional. I'm a firm believer that a person should pay the consequences for their actions. However, this is a case wherein the FBI acted as if the person had committed the crimes of using their knowledge in a violent manner. Knowledge in and of itself is never bad, nor is it good. A physics formula used to figure specifications needed to build one of these bombs is not considered lethal. Why should the specifications themselves be considered so? Granted, the FBI had probable cause to search the Austin residence, but not to arrest him unless they had found evidence that Sherman was building these bombs. A person cannot be held responsible for a crime that they are suspected of committing. In this case, I don't think the FBI did anything wrong. Had Sherman said, "I don't agree with the American government because... Here's how to build a bomb.", he wouldn't have done anything wrong. However, he said instead, "Here's how to build a bomb. Now go use it to overthrow the American government."
the problem with ad placement is this:
you can't place an ad for a product that doesn't exist in the universe of the game. if you do, the experience becomes less real. video games are an opportunity to escape reality, not a chance for stupid game companies to take advantage of a large demographic group. i don't want to see ads for the latest n-sync cd while playing wolfenstein because they(thank god) didn't exist during ww2, and i don't want to see ads for irish spring coyly slipped into the latest final fantasy. on the other hand, if it adds to the game to know that lara croft shops at tiffany's, then by all means, advertise! just don't disrupt the entertainment of geeks. we need sanctuary from the fuckery of the modern world.
i believe that the scientific term for this fellow is "hyper-nerd", a nerd that even nerds do not want to associate with. like that kid with really bad acne who always picked his nose. not many people realize this, but it's actually the hypernerd's fault that the nerd gets beaten up in high school for thinking that zork was cool, or being able to create digital porn in 16 bit color.
"i built this innovative and important invention...but i can't tell you how it works. trust me, it's important. i know, i know,...ok fine. it takes energy...and makes energy from that energy. and has energy left over. now, wait, just trust me. it's cool....and it's important. like the wheel. be sure to put that in there. as important...as...the wheel. thank you....want to see my moth collection? trust me...it's cool. and innovative. like the wheel."
Remember, May 25th is Towel Day in honor of Douglas Adams. On this day, you can carry a towel with you everywhere you go. If your boss rips into you during the day, just cover your head with the towel. If you spill your coffee, you can always use the towel to wipe it up.
"Normality, I repeat, we have reached normality. Anything you can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
The idea for the pack hunter sounds like a basic neural network with BEAM robotics. You can get a fairly good idea what BEAM(Biological, Electronic, Aesthetic, and Mechanical) is all about at http://www.solarbotics.net .
Basically, the philosophy of BEAM is that all robotics can be made from imitating the form of nature, and all can be made from the same basic components. You start by replicating single cell organisms and insects, and eventually progress to neural networks. The cool thing about BEAM robots is that they're entirely automated. You don't have to program their behavior, they works by "instinct."
If you want to make your own BEAM robots, just read some of the tutorials on http://www.solarbotics.net . Just don't be tempted to start with a complex robot. The idea behind BEAM robotics is to start simple, and work to complex. All you will need to start is a basic understanding of electronics and some cheap electronic components, which can usually be found at RadioShack(or by tearing apart old household appliances.)
As the article said, the process of setting the standard is going quite slowly. I find it quite humorous that the process for setting the standard is rarely fast enough to keep up with the process of hacking it. Granted, it may be more difficult to hack hardware. But it's still done. Take a look at how long a game console is released before it's hacked. I don't think that they can implement the hardware copyright on all digital media before a solution for this kind of corporate fascism takes hold.
On the other hand...if they do...we'll have plenty to keep us busy for a couple years!
I really don't see how this can be enforced, with VHS recording, or furthermore, video cards with video in/video out connections. Really, I don't think that the TV shows are the reason for copy protection. File sharing of serials only bring a larger audience for the network. Things like network mini-series or first-time-on-TV movie specials are more closely guarded, because all the money that comes from them comes in a much shorter period of time.
Slashdot Mirror
In the past, CG technology was driven by ambitious individuals who didn't have a very clear idea how they would pull off what the bigwigs had planned around the table. For example, some of the early commercials done by Omnibus, and the first CG effects to appear in film and television used state-of-the-art techniques and hardware to achieve their goals. The directors and producers had the vision, and it was up to the technicians to make it possible.
Do you think that there will ever be a time that the technicians won't have to write new software in order to achieve the latest visual effect...because it already exists? Will we get to a point when the methodology for such advanced techniques as facial mo-cap and fluid dynamics is so well known that it small studios and home users with little training in computer science will understand them?
I have a long standing argument with my friends about ATOC; I thought it was poorly assembled, they thought it was the "greatest movie EVER!" One reason I am staunch in my critique of the film is that not a single person can speak with me about the story of the film, which leads me to believe that the story has several problems and holes. I was impressed by the visual effects, I was impressed by the soundtrack, I was even impressed by Yoda doing backflips and kung-fu....but that's all it is: impressed. I usually don't agree with Katz on anything, but I agree with him that Attack of the Clones was a lot of hype with lots of glitz and little story-telling.
However. I don't think that Spiderman strayed far from the hype engine, either. I wasn't dramatically impressed by the film, but I was at least taken in by the story. It provided a solid enough basis that the glitz, glamour, and cool CGI was more than just bright lights and sound.
I highly doubt that the modern youth will suddenly decide that hype is bad. It will be with us a while longer, even if we all hope to see films that have a solid foundation in story-telling.
i don't have that much of a problem with lucas borrowing from other sources. that is always done. however, when he borrows a part from a hit movie...that was borrowed from another hit movie(yoda's kung fu pose->matrix->bruce lee), well that's stepping into the realm of tacky.
...just something i noticed: everybody i know who i discuss this movie with who liked it gets VERY upset when i say that i DIDN'T like it(even though i have a solid critique to back my opinion up). on the other hand, i haven't seen people who DIDN'T like it blowing up at those who did. did lucas implant subliminal messages in the film to make people violently react to critics of the film??
I realize that filmmakers are charged with using innovative tactics in order to keep a movie audience at the edge of their seats. I also realize that producers need money in order to make a movie. However one thing should never change: at the core of a great movie lies a great story.
The greatest of all mistakes in AOTC was in the poor development of the story. The characters were all tolerable; some where even fantastic(Windu, Yoda, Palpatine,...even some of the lesser characters). The settings were breathtaking(you get the FEEL of Star Wars alot more than in Phantom Menace). The action sequences were quite nice....but where were the non-action sequences? Where were the scenes that delved into the angst of Anakin, outside of the action, so we can absorb it? Where was the build-up of the Anakin-Padme relationship?(How many people do you know, especially with the female 10 years older than the male, that after 10 years apart and some akward kissing over the course of perhaps a few weeks, decide to get married?!)
A good story requires rising action, wherein the conflict of the story builds to a crescendo, and then a small resolution is made. Watching AOTC, with its engineered wipe-transition-to-wipe-transition "action snippets", was like watching a horror movie without the suspense. Sure, its awesome to see Yoda flipping around and pulling off some crazy Bruce Lee martial arts, but I would have at least liked some indication that he might have been capable of this all.
To address those of you who feel that the love scenes are not classified as action; in the basest sense, they should be. Any scene with intense emotional action is classified as "active" in terms of the story, be it sadness, suspense, love, or "action" as we know and love in Hollywood cinema. The resulting comment from some less critical viewers is, "too much CGI/love story/action/politics/glitz."
The fact that anybody notices the minor details; i.e. cliches used in previous movies/Star Wars movies, CGI looks fake in certain part, Yoda walks on a cane...but can do triple backflip, etc, etc, proves that a non-immersive story can be a distraction. In an immersive story, you are so engrossed in the movie that you don't notice the younger patrons laughing at C3PO when his head gets interchanged with a battle droid's, or the teenage girls whooping for N-SYNC(thank god THAT didn't happen), or the countless continuity errors in the story.
While the movie is only 1/3 of the trilogy, it still requires build-up, climax, and resolution. No movie should require 3.5 hours of waiting for it to get good; it didn't happen in the original series...shouldn't happen in the new one.
What does it all boil down to? A movie can only be as good as it story. Why do you prefer to watch the original Star Wars trilogy over Episode I and II? The effects are definitely better in the newer films. The CGI can be used to construct amazing settings and worlds. The quality of the picture and color is much better in the latest movies. So why do we still like the older ones? Because a great story can make up for several weak visual elements, whereas no amount of glitz and glamour can make up for a bad story.
i have unwittingly been participating in the (H)GSB(really busy....i know its bad when i can't read /.) and wanted to post something. this story...is horrible. malda is right. comments aren't worth much, and its been showing. come on, guys...you can't leave /. ALONE for a week, let alone refrain from posting. however, we need some stories. something better than "burning cds is a part of modern sexual culture." i don't care how this gets modded up or down, just wanted to say something.
bad delivery, but your heart is in the right place. i agree that there needs to be a clear distinction between free software and open source software. "open source" DOESN'T mean "free", and the mindset that it does mean "free" will eventually kill the open source movement. there's nothing wrong with free software, or wanting to write software for research purposes or charities. however, the people who have the power to make or break open source aren't the corporate giants you so vehemently disagreed with; they're the educational, military, and government software developers. these guys understand more fully than any capitalist organization how practical customization can be, AND they have the strict production structure required for creating massive software package.
i disagree with your statement about using code from free open source to make an open source program that costs. when you buy an open source program, you are not paying for the code. you usually aren't even paying for a license to the code. what you are paying for is peace of mind...less hassle, time, - maybe an intuitive interface. you are paying for the pre-assembled kit, rather than the seperate components. as long as the developer isn't charging money for or placing restrictions on the use of the code from the other programs, nothing is keeping somebody from remaking it. however, i agree that ALL original authors deserve credit, and thanks are always in order.:)
I wonder if the government grant for MIT is linked at all to these recent breakthroughs in wearable PCs.... It seems like a lot of these things were a ways off a year ago. Perhaps the military isn't just providing funding for MIT, but also funding many other research groups on the verge of advances in wearable PC technology. Why put all your eggs in one basket? If they have $50 million to give to MIT for a nanotech suit, why wouldn't they have more millions to spend on "subcontractors" developing HUDs, virtual keyboards, communication networks and devices, etc, etc? I have a theory: within the next few years, the public will be flooded with news of breakthroughs in nanotechnology, microcomputers, augmented reality, hands free or heads up display and input devices, real space vertex input, and other technologies related to mobile computing. Now all we need is a hostile alien race! Hold on tight, ladies and gentlemen. It looks like we'll get to LIVE the sci-fi that we grew up on.
we're one step closer to snow crash and transmetropolitan.
information should never cost money....especially in this pure of a form.
ever hear of the stamp acts? the intolerable acts? the boston tea party? lets riot! let's band together as geeks pissed off at the fuckery of the world's shitty governments and loot! break into your local computer store! steal shit! burn entire CD-R shipments! make a stand! it worked in the past. it can work for use today.
i'm a cgi student at the moment, and i talk to industry professionals once in awhile, at siggraph and such. i have a split opinion on the matter of software piracy/software protection. several companies are offering student versions for free, or with discounts(softimage, photoshop).
one of the reasons why software piracy is still present is that these companies cripple their software so much that none of the content generated with it can be put onto a professional demo reel. maya recent strategy, the watermark on all renders, is an excellent work around this issue; it offers all features, plus an employer is likely to appreciate your integrity if its clear that you followed the rules.
in addition to student version's increased availability, software companies are funding more and more schools. softimage xsi has an excellent strategy: train more xsi drivers, market needs xsi, xsi sales increase. everybody wins.
i don't condone thievery, but i also don't condone highway robbery. much of the software seems is in a price range that a production studio may view as nominal, but as a student is much too expensive. i've heard the "it costs money to make these programs, you know" argument a thousand times, and frankly it doesn't cost $10,000(alias wavefront maya 4.0 unlimited) a package to make ANYTHING. these high-end graphics companies are creating software for a high-paying demographic. i believe that they are gradually learning the harmful effects of creating an elitist market.
software piracy probably won't ever go away. too many people like free beer. there's alot that can done to minimize the blow. creating a new student demographic and marketing a seperate package solely for them is a great way to do this.
so i might as well(to help the hof movement:)). congrulations cmdrtaco. may you and your lady geek have a happy life together.
i'm not naive, but i do see your train of thought. you are afraid of the consequences of letting somebody move to the bounds of legality. i also see this, but i'm afraid of what happens when "might happen" replaces "already happened." for the same reason that you want to head off the possibility of a crime being committed, i want to head off your way of thinking. allowed to run to the extreme, both are dangerous. extremes in general are dangerous. rather than the realist and the idealist meeting at a halfway point, they both run in the opposite direction. i don't think that criminals should get away with committing crimes they are guilty of. but i also don't believe that people should be punished for crimes they haven't committed, or "might commit."
Even the win95 codebase must be millions of lines of code, it would take 10 years for anyone to actually go through and map out what everything does
Did Win95 take ten years to make?
the purpose of hacking, in my opinion, is not to be used in violence, but to inform. an outlaw journalist uses illegal methods to find the facts and make them known to the public, because they feel that the laws prohibiting the release of this information are unconstitutional.
for example, i don't feel that there is anything wrong with exploiting a security hole, as long as the intentions are that the hole will be fixed.
every time i hear about something like this happening, the defendant always whines "free speech", and the whole bill of rights bit. unfortunately, speech is never free. it always comes with consequences. if you want to say something, do it with a little more tact than "Yeah, motherfucker, I'm a terrorist to the U.S. Government"
The actual law may state that such things are prohibited, however, these laws may be unconstitutional. I'm a firm believer that a person should pay the consequences for their actions. However, this is a case wherein the FBI acted as if the person had committed the crimes of using their knowledge in a violent manner. Knowledge in and of itself is never bad, nor is it good. A physics formula used to figure specifications needed to build one of these bombs is not considered lethal. Why should the specifications themselves be considered so? Granted, the FBI had probable cause to search the Austin residence, but not to arrest him unless they had found evidence that Sherman was building these bombs. A person cannot be held responsible for a crime that they are suspected of committing. In this case, I don't think the FBI did anything wrong. Had Sherman said, "I don't agree with the American government because... Here's how to build a bomb.", he wouldn't have done anything wrong. However, he said instead, "Here's how to build a bomb. Now go use it to overthrow the American government."
how bout a bottle of courvosier AND barry white??
the problem with ad placement is this:
you can't place an ad for a product that doesn't exist in the universe of the game. if you do, the experience becomes less real. video games are an opportunity to escape reality, not a chance for stupid game companies to take advantage of a large demographic group. i don't want to see ads for the latest n-sync cd while playing wolfenstein because they(thank god) didn't exist during ww2, and i don't want to see ads for irish spring coyly slipped into the latest final fantasy. on the other hand, if it adds to the game to know that lara croft shops at tiffany's, then by all means, advertise! just don't disrupt the entertainment of geeks. we need sanctuary from the fuckery of the modern world.
have you ever read robert heinlen's the moon is a harsh mistress? you're not safe at all.
i believe that the scientific term for this fellow is "hyper-nerd", a nerd that even nerds do not want to associate with. like that kid with really bad acne who always picked his nose. not many people realize this, but it's actually the hypernerd's fault that the nerd gets beaten up in high school for thinking that zork was cool, or being able to create digital porn in 16 bit color.
...and it's important. like the wheel. be sure to put that in there. as important...as...the wheel. thank you. ...want to see my moth collection? trust me...it's cool. and innovative. like the wheel."
"i built this innovative and important invention...but i can't tell you how it works. trust me, it's important. i know, i know,...ok fine. it takes energy...and makes energy from that energy. and has energy left over. now, wait, just trust me. it's cool.
Somebody needs to slap Spielberg in the face, and say "That's for blasphemy."
Remember, May 25th is Towel Day in honor of Douglas Adams. On this day, you can carry a towel with you everywhere you go. If your boss rips into you during the day, just cover your head with the towel. If you spill your coffee, you can always use the towel to wipe it up.
"Normality, I repeat, we have reached normality. Anything you can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
The idea for the pack hunter sounds like a basic neural network with BEAM robotics. You can get a fairly good idea what BEAM(Biological, Electronic, Aesthetic, and Mechanical) is all about at http://www.solarbotics.net .
Basically, the philosophy of BEAM is that all robotics can be made from imitating the form of nature, and all can be made from the same basic components. You start by replicating single cell organisms and insects, and eventually progress to neural networks. The cool thing about BEAM robots is that they're entirely automated. You don't have to program their behavior, they works by "instinct."
If you want to make your own BEAM robots, just read some of the tutorials on http://www.solarbotics.net . Just don't be tempted to start with a complex robot. The idea behind BEAM robotics is to start simple, and work to complex. All you will need to start is a basic understanding of electronics and some cheap electronic components, which can usually be found at RadioShack(or by tearing apart old household appliances.)
As the article said, the process of setting the standard is going quite slowly. I find it quite humorous that the process for setting the standard is rarely fast enough to keep up with the process of hacking it. Granted, it may be more difficult to hack hardware. But it's still done. Take a look at how long a game console is released before it's hacked. I don't think that they can implement the hardware copyright on all digital media before a solution for this kind of corporate fascism takes hold.
On the other hand...if they do...we'll have plenty to keep us busy for a couple years!
I really don't see how this can be enforced, with VHS recording, or furthermore, video cards with video in/video out connections. Really, I don't think that the TV shows are the reason for copy protection. File sharing of serials only bring a larger audience for the network. Things like network mini-series or first-time-on-TV movie specials are more closely guarded, because all the money that comes from them comes in a much shorter period of time.