Who says? What's to prevent scramjet/rocket hybrids? We have LOTS of experience with building rockets, we've got that part down.
What I really want to see is a graph or something depicting the ratio of successful and failed rocket launches for each year starting with the first rocket. (Not every rocket ever launched, so lets just say rockets meant to launch into space)
I just think it'd be interesting to see how far we've come.
Unfortunatly, the XBox 2 will not be backwards compatible with original XBox games. This could potentially really hurt XBox2 sales I would think. When GT3 came out for PS2, I debated getting one. I eventually opted to buy one on the basis that even though it was expensive, I could play GT3 and some of my old PS1 games to tide me over.
It's funny that MS, who is now looking for compatibility and ease of porting won't have the XBox2 be able to run XBox games.
"Software will be the single most important force in digital entertainment over the next decade,"
I've always thought it would be the other way around. It always seems like hardware is usually the lacking component. I guess the quote is still true, given that even if hardware is behind, software drives the need for better hardware. But my main point is that it seems software can always be written to take advantage of, and even surpass hardware capabilities, so wouldn't hardware still be the single most important force?
Speaking of leaving the PC open, I've always wondered something. I know it's better to keep it closed because otherwise air doesn't flow nicely through it, but what if you had a desk fan or larger blowing against the open case? Would that be more efficient than leaving the case closed with the case/psu fans?
I understand people act differently on IRC than IRL. However, the way they acted led me to believe that IRC had consumed their lives, as they didn't even seem capable of a normal conversation. Everywhere else I go where people just use IRC to chat, rather than to use it as their social life, can hold normal conversations without it breaking down into chaos.
As for the "as if they happened in the real world" comment was meant more as they took it as seriously as they might something that happened outside, in a normal social context. An example is someone wouldn't op someone, and they got into an arguement, and started name calling. Then, one of them left because she was so distraught she was going to go lay down, and later she told someone she cried for a couple hours. That is just plain unhealthy if you ask me.
I never said, nor implied all people take IRC too seriously. If you notice, I use the word "these", as in "these people took it way too seriously".
In fact, I was referring to that select channel, and also people like the frequenters of said channel. I never said "some people who take IRC a little more serious than others necessarily "destroy any social skills they had before [IRC]" as you seem to imply I did. All I said that it seemed possible for some people to become so hooked, and almost dependant on IRC that they lose any normal social abilities they once had. Essentially, it becomes their social life, and once that happens, they may forget what it's like to actually interact with people face to face.
I agree. I still use the internet a lot to talk to friends and stuff, especially ones who live out of state now, and people on IRC I've known for years.
Not sure how it is with IM, but I recently joined a channel on IRC that I used to go to years back. To my suprise it was there. Then I realised it wasn't really suprising considering how seriously these people took IRC. I can understand making casual friends and whatnot through IRC, but these people just took it so seriously. What I wonder though, is if it affected their actual social lives (IRC is NOT a social life people!). The way they acted on IRC, and talked about events that happened on IRC as if they happened out in the real world leads me to believe it has utterly destroyed any social skills they had before. This is why I've always seen (and this just confirmed it) the internet as a way of communication, not as a whole different way of life.
As for friendster, my friend got me to sign up, saying I could stay in touch with all these people from high school. I signed up, forgot I did, didn't login for a couple weeks/months and realised there's a reason I didn't stay in touch with half those people. I've never really gotten any emails saying someone wants to be my friend on friendster though. I don't think I filled out any of the profile stuff, or if I did it was all garbage.
Why not just have it focus on whatever object the crosshairs are aimed at?
Not a perfect solution, as usually in 3d FPS games I don't always move the crosshairs to exactly where I want to look, instead I move it to generally where I want to look and then use my eyes to actually look at the screen. This could however add an extra element to gameplay that could make it more exciting.
How suitable is hardware these days for doing real time depth of field?
Yes, you could just blur the reflections of the reflection map. IF you're just using a reflection map for reflections, which look terrible. You want to actually reflect an actual (ie, modelled and textured and in the same scene) environment.
Now, I haven't done any realtime rendering stuffs, but when I want to blur/soften a reflection for pre-rendered animations and stuff, it adds a noticeable to difference to the rendering time.
Actually, the haven't committed any crime. They downloaded what they thought to be a crack (okay, that *might* be a crime) and ran it, and all it did was post their IP. I think the only criminals here are the people who made this software.
You know, I'm starting to notice that he isn't answering some of the more important questions that have been asked, and he seems to be reitirating a lot of the same stuff. I hope he's either away from his computer, busy with work, or has some good excuse not to be answering all these questions that he so far seems to be avoiding.
Okay, sort of off topic, but what if you asked if they wanted to buy some grass (as in slang for weed), and then you sold them real grass? Is that still illegal? Technically you offered to sell them grass, and you did.
Exactly. His whole "what if they left a note saying they arrived" is just trying to deflect some heat if you ask me. The analogy might not exist, but the principle would be the same. It would just take on a different name or analogy.
3. We dissagree with the notion that this is a "Trojan".
A trojan horse gains access to a system through deviant methods. Not through user initiated downloads on a P2P network. Secondly, a trojan horse by definition has a payload or attempts to give the author access by working from the inside. Our program is aboslutely dormant unless specifically and purposefully executed by the downloader. And the program is riddled with cues to what the contents might be. For instance, the company name is "C.R.A.P. Citizens Raging Against Pirates". Not what you'd expect from a "legitimate" crack or keygen.
So, claiming to be something other than what it is isn't a deviant way to get inside? Get a fucking clue man.
Okay, I'm next. Why didn't you just log the IP at the time of download instead of having it sent when the program is run? Yeah, yeah, you're going to say you wanted to see how it propogated through other users...... Still, my point still stands when put along the others who have said transmitting info without permission is basically wrong.
2. The software acts with the confines of its own entity.
The program does not compromise their system in any way, shape, or form. Every action it performs it performs soley for the purposes of logging an event. We are not in this to compromise downloader's systems, only to learn a little bit about who they are. It's a social experiment.
Let me ask you something, if you went to install something, say what you thought was the google search bar for your browser, and instead found out it was giving out information, wouldn't you be a bit pissed? It's doing something other than what was intended. Sure, the software you're replacing might be illegal, but nonetheless, my point still stands.
We believe so. People spread it willingly, not covertly like mass-mailing viruses. Other then rewriting itself, it doesn't add, delete, or modify any files. It doesn't remain active or start on boot. It's not destructive or malicious in anyway.
It is malicious. It' using bandwidth that people didn't agree to use. Also, it is being spread covertly, because you are tricking people.
Another thing that seems rather inventive is the death system, where upon your death you become a ghost and wander/go resurrect yourself.
I haven't seen the videos yet, but the way you describe it doesn't seem that inventive. In Ultima Online, when you die, you become a ghost and have to wonder around and look for a healer to bring you back to life. Once brought back to life, you can go back to your corpse and grab your stuff, assuming someone else hasn't looted it.
Or at least that's the way it was when I played a few years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Who says? What's to prevent scramjet/rocket hybrids? We have LOTS of experience with building rockets, we've got that part down.
What I really want to see is a graph or something depicting the ratio of successful and failed rocket launches for each year starting with the first rocket. (Not every rocket ever launched, so lets just say rockets meant to launch into space)
I just think it'd be interesting to see how far we've come.
Whenever you append "&partner=google" to the end of a NYTimes URL, you're in sans registration.
But what if San wants to use his registration when we already are? Then what will he do?!
What the fuck?
Did I bitch or complain at all? No. I merely made a point.
It isn't their fault that you didn't know it was for sale.
What the fuck does that comment have to do with anything? What didn't I know was for sale?
Oh, and btw, the reason they won't be compatible is they're switching from nVidia to ATI for their graphics solution.
A word of advice, stop huffing paint before posting nonsensical dribble.
Agreed.
However, if people don't buy the consoles, they're not going to buy the games.
Unfortunatly, the XBox 2 will not be backwards compatible with original XBox games. This could potentially really hurt XBox2 sales I would think. When GT3 came out for PS2, I debated getting one. I eventually opted to buy one on the basis that even though it was expensive, I could play GT3 and some of my old PS1 games to tide me over.
It's funny that MS, who is now looking for compatibility and ease of porting won't have the XBox2 be able to run XBox games.
"Software will be the single most important force in digital entertainment over the next decade,"
I've always thought it would be the other way around. It always seems like hardware is usually the lacking component. I guess the quote is still true, given that even if hardware is behind, software drives the need for better hardware. But my main point is that it seems software can always be written to take advantage of, and even surpass hardware capabilities, so wouldn't hardware still be the single most important force?
Speaking of leaving the PC open, I've always wondered something. I know it's better to keep it closed because otherwise air doesn't flow nicely through it, but what if you had a desk fan or larger blowing against the open case? Would that be more efficient than leaving the case closed with the case/psu fans?
I understand people act differently on IRC than IRL. However, the way they acted led me to believe that IRC had consumed their lives, as they didn't even seem capable of a normal conversation. Everywhere else I go where people just use IRC to chat, rather than to use it as their social life, can hold normal conversations without it breaking down into chaos.
As for the "as if they happened in the real world" comment was meant more as they took it as seriously as they might something that happened outside, in a normal social context. An example is someone wouldn't op someone, and they got into an arguement, and started name calling. Then, one of them left because she was so distraught she was going to go lay down, and later she told someone she cried for a couple hours. That is just plain unhealthy if you ask me.
I never said, nor implied all people take IRC too seriously. If you notice, I use the word "these", as in "these people took it way too seriously".
In fact, I was referring to that select channel, and also people like the frequenters of said channel. I never said "some people who take IRC a little more serious than others necessarily "destroy any social skills they had before [IRC]" as you seem to imply I did. All I said that it seemed possible for some people to become so hooked, and almost dependant on IRC that they lose any normal social abilities they once had. Essentially, it becomes their social life, and once that happens, they may forget what it's like to actually interact with people face to face.
And if their server(s) are in these wooden cases, it might just burn up.
I agree. I still use the internet a lot to talk to friends and stuff, especially ones who live out of state now, and people on IRC I've known for years.
Not sure how it is with IM, but I recently joined a channel on IRC that I used to go to years back. To my suprise it was there. Then I realised it wasn't really suprising considering how seriously these people took IRC. I can understand making casual friends and whatnot through IRC, but these people just took it so seriously. What I wonder though, is if it affected their actual social lives (IRC is NOT a social life people!). The way they acted on IRC, and talked about events that happened on IRC as if they happened out in the real world leads me to believe it has utterly destroyed any social skills they had before. This is why I've always seen (and this just confirmed it) the internet as a way of communication, not as a whole different way of life.
As for friendster, my friend got me to sign up, saying I could stay in touch with all these people from high school. I signed up, forgot I did, didn't login for a couple weeks/months and realised there's a reason I didn't stay in touch with half those people. I've never really gotten any emails saying someone wants to be my friend on friendster though. I don't think I filled out any of the profile stuff, or if I did it was all garbage.
It must be, what with RMS moving in the William Gates building at MIT....
AC's posting stupid anti-american (as in US) sterotypical BS lack the basic requirements as well.
I'm guessing it's sort of along the lines of anti-capitalism.
Or perhaps MS is seen as a big bad bully, and so is the US?
I'm sure there are other reasons, but those are the ones that popped into my head right away.
Why not just have it focus on whatever object the crosshairs are aimed at?
Not a perfect solution, as usually in 3d FPS games I don't always move the crosshairs to exactly where I want to look, instead I move it to generally where I want to look and then use my eyes to actually look at the screen. This could however add an extra element to gameplay that could make it more exciting.
How suitable is hardware these days for doing real time depth of field?
Yes, you could just blur the reflections of the reflection map. IF you're just using a reflection map for reflections, which look terrible. You want to actually reflect an actual (ie, modelled and textured and in the same scene) environment.
Now, I haven't done any realtime rendering stuffs, but when I want to blur/soften a reflection for pre-rendered animations and stuff, it adds a noticeable to difference to the rendering time.
Actually, the haven't committed any crime. They downloaded what they thought to be a crack (okay, that *might* be a crime) and ran it, and all it did was post their IP. I think the only criminals here are the people who made this software.
Yet again, it all depends on what they do....we don't collect anything without them making defined, deliberate actions.
Seems a defined, deliberate action would be if they clicked a button saying "Click here to send your IP to our database"
You really didn't think this, or any of your arguements for it through, did you?
You know, I'm starting to notice that he isn't answering some of the more important questions that have been asked, and he seems to be reitirating a lot of the same stuff. I hope he's either away from his computer, busy with work, or has some good excuse not to be answering all these questions that he so far seems to be avoiding.
Me thinks he's in over his head.
Okay, sort of off topic, but what if you asked if they wanted to buy some grass (as in slang for weed), and then you sold them real grass? Is that still illegal? Technically you offered to sell them grass, and you did.
Exactly. His whole "what if they left a note saying they arrived" is just trying to deflect some heat if you ask me. The analogy might not exist, but the principle would be the same. It would just take on a different name or analogy.
3. We dissagree with the notion that this is a "Trojan". A trojan horse gains access to a system through deviant methods. Not through user initiated downloads on a P2P network. Secondly, a trojan horse by definition has a payload or attempts to give the author access by working from the inside. Our program is aboslutely dormant unless specifically and purposefully executed by the downloader. And the program is riddled with cues to what the contents might be. For instance, the company name is "C.R.A.P. Citizens Raging Against Pirates". Not what you'd expect from a "legitimate" crack or keygen.
So, claiming to be something other than what it is isn't a deviant way to get inside? Get a fucking clue man.
Okay, I'm next. Why didn't you just log the IP at the time of download instead of having it sent when the program is run? Yeah, yeah, you're going to say you wanted to see how it propogated through other users...... Still, my point still stands when put along the others who have said transmitting info without permission is basically wrong.
2. The software acts with the confines of its own entity. The program does not compromise their system in any way, shape, or form. Every action it performs it performs soley for the purposes of logging an event. We are not in this to compromise downloader's systems, only to learn a little bit about who they are. It's a social experiment.
Let me ask you something, if you went to install something, say what you thought was the google search bar for your browser, and instead found out it was giving out information, wouldn't you be a bit pissed? It's doing something other than what was intended. Sure, the software you're replacing might be illegal, but nonetheless, my point still stands.
We believe so. People spread it willingly, not covertly like mass-mailing viruses. Other then rewriting itself, it doesn't add, delete, or modify any files. It doesn't remain active or start on boot. It's not destructive or malicious in anyway.
It is malicious. It' using bandwidth that people didn't agree to use. Also, it is being spread covertly, because you are tricking people.
Another thing that seems rather inventive is the death system, where upon your death you become a ghost and wander/go resurrect yourself.
I haven't seen the videos yet, but the way you describe it doesn't seem that inventive. In Ultima Online, when you die, you become a ghost and have to wonder around and look for a healer to bring you back to life. Once brought back to life, you can go back to your corpse and grab your stuff, assuming someone else hasn't looted it.
Or at least that's the way it was when I played a few years ago.