One game isn't exactly a very good sample size is it? think of the unsuccessful games that came before EQ burst open the floodgates. And what game has surpassed EQ since, closed or open? I'd say none -- theyre all chasing EQ.
Im not saying definitively that an OSS MMORPG *would* succeed, im saying of any game genre, its the one mostly likely to succeed under an open source model. a small distinction, to be sure, but one nonetheless.
There is one obvious game genre that lends well to Open Source models: MMORPGs. These are games with LONG interest times and thousands of geeky people playing it, many with too much spare time. It is also a game genre that, even in closed source, is undergoing constant incremental updates. I think well organized communities could easily make a solid, innovative and awesome MMORPG.
The problem of course, is the costs of bandwidth and server space needed.
Not yet anyway. Regardless of the shady posting motives of the story poster and the somewhat shady newsvalue, I'll still post my opinion of the tableau software.
I'm a Data Manager for a medical reasearch non-profit and one of the most time consuming and difficult things to do is get good, reliable, interesting data out of the mountain of collected data in the database. I've had to fire off some very nasty sql queries and sit with doctors redoing statistics over and over until they are right...there's just so much room for error and so much complexity. I've also written tools to give some instant analysis to the doctors, similar to what the tableau software does. (of course, my stuff is super-simple and rudimentary, tableau has lots more functionality, but thats to be expected). The bottom line is, big deal. While that sort of data analysis is good and mildly useful, its not worth $1600 to my company when I can do it on demand in a few minutes. Plus I know what I'm doing, who knows what the tableau software is spitting out -- I'm my own QC guy. Until Natural Language Queries on databases start working right and become well featured, well implemented and widespread, its going to take human intelligence and personal knowledge of the database structure to get good data out. The tableau software is pretty, but its just not enough -- its not going to replace what I can do, and its not going to worth it enough for companies who have data managers to buy. In which case, its overpriced. It's not the next google -- its just pretty graphics. Its a nice program at $100, not $1000.
xbox - why does the xbox suck? its pretty damn popular and works better/faster/prettier than the ps2.
msn -whats the competition? AOL? yahoo? define that first. also, what exactly is "MSN" -- the microsoft internet portal strategy has never been very good.
mice -? I prefer ms mice to logitech. I've just never liked the feel of logitech -- but thats an opinion thing.
bob -wow keep bringing this up eh? hehe -- bob wasn't that bad, it was a fine product. it was just horribly mismarketed and mismanaged. the product itself was fine. have you even ever used it?
But they will. What many people forget is that Microsoft tends to make good, if not great, products when they don't have a monopoly. Once they have that monopoly, they tend to abandon it and/or lose focus on improving it.
What the hell, this is front page news? Is/. going to start posting job ads for Apple, Redhat, IBM, and on to maybe Microsoft and SCO now? How about turning the IT section into Dice.com.
Can the rumored MS/NBC split be far off now? Slate criticized IE, gets put on the block. We hear rumors of an ms/nbc split, and now msnbc is running positive reviews of MS' competition.
At least this proves that there's some speech left in the media not being controlled by the coporate overlords (who, if they're reading this, I for one welcome...)
Uh yeah, that was my point. It's not designed to find life, but if it hits a Titanian Giraffe, we'll know. To prove life exists on Titan by 2010, we'd need to send a life detecting probe there, by 2010. Since Cassini, which just arrived (along with Huygens), left 7 years ago, and since 2010 is 6 years in the future, IF we launched this hypothetical life-detecting probe to Titan today, it wouldn't get there until after the 2010 deadline is up. Clearer what I meant now?
Find out by 2010? That's a loser of a bet. Unless Huygens crashes into a Titanian Giraffe, we won't know anything definitive by 2010. It took Cassini 7 years to get there, and 2010 is only 6 years away...
I mentioned the sun earlier as the #1 target. Jupiter was #2. If you take away the gas giants, Earth becomes the #2. Yes, #s 3,4,5 add up to more mass than #2, but its still #2. If you take away the gas giants, of any planet left, its most likely to be hit.
You have some points but you're thinking a little too anecdotally. If something came at the earth from way outside the plane of the ecliptic, youre absolutely right that Jupiter couldnt do anything about it. It's a good thing that there's almost NOTHING way outside the plane of the ecliptic -- to come in at such an angle, it would most likely have been gravitationally deflected from something else. Most stuff to worry about comes in from the oort cloud, which is more amorphous than the kuiper belt or asteroid belt (hence the term cloud, not belt). Anything out of the belts will most likely be affected, or has been affected, by Jupiter at some point.
Now, as for something having to pass through Jupiter's orbit at just the right time, you're right -- its a big solar system. But the junk flying around doesnt fly very fast....and its not likely to hit anything. It's most likely to hit either the sun, or Jupiter, and thats the key. without the gas giants, all that junk is mostly likely to hit...earth.
Of course, stuff still does (ask the dinosaurs or the trilobytes) but at a low enough rate, and its small enough, that life can handle it.
Yeah no kidding. I mean, imagine all the discoveries small science could make if they just had astronomers and telescopes!
Gimme a break. Why pit one type of science vs. another? Why not just say all science and all scientific discoveries are great and are great for all of science?
I kinda doubt that. There's only so much gas a core the size and mass of earth can hold. I doubt it could hold gas giant amounts of gas -- but i could be wrong. It just doesn't "seem" right.
Gravity is gravity. maybe its got a plasmic atmosphere or something wildly exotic like that. who knows! but i say we find out. science is cool that way.
Well yeah, but Galileo found the moons of jupiter too, not his telescope. the telescope has no analytical properties, it takes an analyzer to do that (whether that be software or human brain wetware). The information analyzed by the software came from a "small" telescope, so you're nitpicking and being disingenuous. Everyone knows the telescope doesn't deserve congratulations, the people who designed the software do. I bet if you ask them how they found this planet, they'll say "well we started with a telescope of 4 inches, and THEN fed the information into a computer...." -- so technically, the telescope saw the planet first.;)
Anything that size is a gas giant. I mean i guess a rocky planet would be possible, but i somehow doubt it as well. It just seems that something bad would happen...it would probably have to be some sort of weird molten ball of magma....and it would be gathering all kinds of gas around it too due to its massive gravity, so I guess it would still be a gas giant. This is what i get for thinking as I type.
The hydrogen would only be captured by the star if the gravity of the planet was too weak to hold the hydrogen, or the gravity at the planet's "surface" or whatnot was weaker than the gravity exerted at that surface by the star. Which is rather unlikely...sure its real close to the star but its a real big planet too.
Yes -- thats why there's plans for a space telescope in the next 10 or 20 years to look specifically for terrestrial planets.
also, jovian planets are good info too. One strong hypothesis is that life couldnt exist on earth without a big planet (jupiter) out there sweeping up most of the space junk (asteroids, comets, etc) that comes falling into the solar system. Big planets help out the inner planets by keeping collisions down.
Slashdot Mirror
One game isn't exactly a very good sample size is it? think of the unsuccessful games that came before EQ burst open the floodgates. And what game has surpassed EQ since, closed or open? I'd say none -- theyre all chasing EQ.
Im not saying definitively that an OSS MMORPG *would* succeed, im saying of any game genre, its the one mostly likely to succeed under an open source model. a small distinction, to be sure, but one nonetheless.
college students. they have too much free time on their hands as it is.
There is one obvious game genre that lends well to Open Source models: MMORPGs. These are games with LONG interest times and thousands of geeky people playing it, many with too much spare time. It is also a game genre that, even in closed source, is undergoing constant incremental updates. I think well organized communities could easily make a solid, innovative and awesome MMORPG.
The problem of course, is the costs of bandwidth and server space needed.
Or english, since it's an english word.
Not yet anyway. Regardless of the shady posting motives of the story poster and the somewhat shady newsvalue, I'll still post my opinion of the tableau software.
I'm a Data Manager for a medical reasearch non-profit and one of the most time consuming and difficult things to do is get good, reliable, interesting data out of the mountain of collected data in the database. I've had to fire off some very nasty sql queries and sit with doctors redoing statistics over and over until they are right...there's just so much room for error and so much complexity. I've also written tools to give some instant analysis to the doctors, similar to what the tableau software does. (of course, my stuff is super-simple and rudimentary, tableau has lots more functionality, but thats to be expected). The bottom line is, big deal. While that sort of data analysis is good and mildly useful, its not worth $1600 to my company when I can do it on demand in a few minutes. Plus I know what I'm doing, who knows what the tableau software is spitting out -- I'm my own QC guy. Until Natural Language Queries on databases start working right and become well featured, well implemented and widespread, its going to take human intelligence and personal knowledge of the database structure to get good data out. The tableau software is pretty, but its just not enough -- its not going to replace what I can do, and its not going to worth it enough for companies who have data managers to buy. In which case, its overpriced. It's not the next google -- its just pretty graphics. Its a nice program at $100, not $1000.
xbox
- why does the xbox suck? its pretty damn popular and works better/faster/prettier than the ps2.
msn
-whats the competition? AOL? yahoo? define that first. also, what exactly is "MSN" -- the microsoft internet portal strategy has never been very good.
mice
-? I prefer ms mice to logitech. I've just never liked the feel of logitech -- but thats an opinion thing.
bob
-wow keep bringing this up eh? hehe -- bob wasn't that bad, it was a fine product. it was just horribly mismarketed and mismanaged. the product itself was fine. have you even ever used it?
But they will. What many people forget is that Microsoft tends to make good, if not great, products when they don't have a monopoly. Once they have that monopoly, they tend to abandon it and/or lose focus on improving it.
RTFA. Pay your respects. Many Dothans died for this information.
What the hell, this is front page news? Is /. going to start posting job ads for Apple, Redhat, IBM, and on to maybe Microsoft and SCO now? How about turning the IT section into Dice.com.
Can the rumored MS/NBC split be far off now? Slate criticized IE, gets put on the block. We hear rumors of an ms/nbc split, and now msnbc is running positive reviews of MS' competition.
At least this proves that there's some speech left in the media not being controlled by the coporate overlords (who, if they're reading this, I for one welcome...)
Uh yeah, that was my point. It's not designed to find life, but if it hits a Titanian Giraffe, we'll know. To prove life exists on Titan by 2010, we'd need to send a life detecting probe there, by 2010. Since Cassini, which just arrived (along with Huygens), left 7 years ago, and since 2010 is 6 years in the future, IF we launched this hypothetical life-detecting probe to Titan today, it wouldn't get there until after the 2010 deadline is up. Clearer what I meant now?
Find out by 2010? That's a loser of a bet. Unless Huygens crashes into a Titanian Giraffe, we won't know anything definitive by 2010. It took Cassini 7 years to get there, and 2010 is only 6 years away...
You mean to tell me that the thing that, according ot the media, "may or may not happen" didn't actually happen?
So in that case, the media was right. Why are we upset with them?
I think I may or may not get back to work now. Hey, at least I'm not lying.
I mentioned the sun earlier as the #1 target. Jupiter was #2. If you take away the gas giants, Earth becomes the #2. Yes, #s 3,4,5 add up to more mass than #2, but its still #2. If you take away the gas giants, of any planet left, its most likely to be hit.
5 digit UIDs are considered "low" now? wow. how long do I have to wait until mine is considered low?
You have some points but you're thinking a little too anecdotally. If something came at the earth from way outside the plane of the ecliptic, youre absolutely right that Jupiter couldnt do anything about it. It's a good thing that there's almost NOTHING way outside the plane of the ecliptic -- to come in at such an angle, it would most likely have been gravitationally deflected from something else. Most stuff to worry about comes in from the oort cloud, which is more amorphous than the kuiper belt or asteroid belt (hence the term cloud, not belt). Anything out of the belts will most likely be affected, or has been affected, by Jupiter at some point.
Now, as for something having to pass through Jupiter's orbit at just the right time, you're right -- its a big solar system. But the junk flying around doesnt fly very fast....and its not likely to hit anything. It's most likely to hit either the sun, or Jupiter, and thats the key. without the gas giants, all that junk is mostly likely to hit...earth.
Of course, stuff still does (ask the dinosaurs or the trilobytes) but at a low enough rate, and its small enough, that life can handle it.
Yeah no kidding. I mean, imagine all the discoveries small science could make if they just had astronomers and telescopes!
Gimme a break. Why pit one type of science vs. another? Why not just say all science and all scientific discoveries are great and are great for all of science?
Yeah, as long as you have amateur (open source?) planet detection data gathering and analyzing software too.
I kinda doubt that. There's only so much gas a core the size and mass of earth can hold. I doubt it could hold gas giant amounts of gas -- but i could be wrong. It just doesn't "seem" right.
Gravity is gravity. maybe its got a plasmic atmosphere or something wildly exotic like that. who knows! but i say we find out. science is cool that way.
Well yeah, but Galileo found the moons of jupiter too, not his telescope. the telescope has no analytical properties, it takes an analyzer to do that (whether that be software or human brain wetware). The information analyzed by the software came from a "small" telescope, so you're nitpicking and being disingenuous. Everyone knows the telescope doesn't deserve congratulations, the people who designed the software do. I bet if you ask them how they found this planet, they'll say "well we started with a telescope of 4 inches, and THEN fed the information into a computer...." -- so technically, the telescope saw the planet first. ;)
Anything that size is a gas giant. I mean i guess a rocky planet would be possible, but i somehow doubt it as well. It just seems that something bad would happen...it would probably have to be some sort of weird molten ball of magma....and it would be gathering all kinds of gas around it too due to its massive gravity, so I guess it would still be a gas giant. This is what i get for thinking as I type.
The hydrogen would only be captured by the star if the gravity of the planet was too weak to hold the hydrogen, or the gravity at the planet's "surface" or whatnot was weaker than the gravity exerted at that surface by the star. Which is rather unlikely...sure its real close to the star but its a real big planet too.
Yes -- thats why there's plans for a space telescope in the next 10 or 20 years to look specifically for terrestrial planets.
also, jovian planets are good info too. One strong hypothesis is that life couldnt exist on earth without a big planet (jupiter) out there sweeping up most of the space junk (asteroids, comets, etc) that comes falling into the solar system. Big planets help out the inner planets by keeping collisions down.
A coordinated online strike against Internet servers by terrorists, dubbed "electronic jihad," may or may not strike this week, security experts said.
Well, I may or may not be concerned then.
yeah but imagine if i was in plane and it hit me. DOOMED!