Oh come on... robots wont get damaged, any more than american football player do. Now, if you had robots that play rugby, it'd be a different thing indeed and you'd need a lot of half time repairs.
I wont argue over if thats actually true or not, since there have been accidents, but that is I believe the theory.
There is a lot to be said for "if it aint broke, dont fix it", and the problem with continually updating systems is that they get more and more complex, and thus bugs creep in, no matter how well you test things. NASA wont use anything unless they can see exactly how all of it works and make damned sure it wont go wrong and cost anyone their life, or a several billion dollar bit of equipment.
Old technology does have one advantage over new. Its much less complex and thus much easier to understand.
Well, actually, it is yeah, its sometimes biased, which is between never biased and always biased (not exactly what I said, in my (very limited) expierence of american news sources, it is very often biased, but it would be foolish to say always, just as it is foolish to say never, without a universal knowladge of all that has ever been and ever will be)
Oh come come, american news is just as biased, just from the other side, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, as is almost always the case in any situation. Each side presents their viewpoint as the one and only truth and only by carefully looking at what all sides are saying can one ever understand the whole picture.
As a brit, whenever I see american news it makes me cringe to see how biased the coverage is, of practically any subject, not just iraq. What is more scary is that my strong reaction is based on the shift from the news sources I am familiar with, and often I clearly see their bias as well, which just goes to show quite how much the american public get told what to think.
So we should listen to the opinions about family welfare from someone who endorses polygamy?
And why the hell not?
Polygamy works well in various human cultures, modern and historical, and is the basis of society for many other species that live here.
Just what exactly is your prejudice against it and why is it so strong that you refuse to even listen to fair and well reasoned debate* on the subject?
I am reminded of a fitting quote: "One need not burn a book if one does not allow it to be published"
* This is, by the way, one of the best debates I've read in a long time, and I'd like to personally thank everyone who has posted with an opinion.
Cause there's a hell of a lot less stress than working in, for example, a bank. If you screw up (or just are feeling lazy that day) the computers in a school, nobody cares, a few teachers complain they cant get any work done, who you can fob off as they dont know a thing about the system usually, and the kids, well, you can lock the door hehe, life is good, and nobody measures down time in millions of pounds/dollars/etc.
Perhaps this will be the proverbial "kick in the nuts" that will wake up the whole of the EU to firmly reject software patents once and for all, and to laugh at any american company attempting to use them for such an underhand tactic as this.
Hmm... a quick trip round some ST game archives found nothing, and a look on google turned up two versions for the MSX, and a possable conversion for the amiga, but no mention of an ST version.
However, ST's are easy to get hold of, perhaps less so in the states, but a look round ebay should yeild results, or you could always visit an ST user group or community type site and ask there. There are many people still using the system and even some commercial software developments afaik.
Now, getting hold of a Falcon, that might be more tricky, as they're still in great demand and fetch prices roughly equal to their launch price, partly due to their upgrade potential (with projects such as the CT60) and partly due to the fact the US postal service buys lots of them for spares, as some sorting machines are powered by a Falcon.
I understand in the US, there are analog phones which can also display the caller ID, but that particular technology is not used in Europe. Here, anyone who needs more than a single plain analog phone line just gets an ISDN one.
Caller ID has been available on all analog networks for a long time here in the UK. Not all that many people use it afaik, but its available (as are phones that support it).
Surely however, if there is a god, and he created us, then he too is part of nature, and thus anything he does, like creating us, and the things we, in turn, create, are also all part of natute.
Of course, we're getting into quite abstract realms here without a solid definition of what a god is or what causes them to develop, so perhaps best to take this as an attempt at humor and nothing more.
The bitness of the Jaguar has been contended for a long time, and as with many of the attacks directed against it, the words get repeated endlessly almost by rote, without thought or research. I will thusly correct your mistakes.
The Jaguar consists of 5 main units: 3 processors, a blitter, and the object processor (an advanced sprite engine in effect). They all share a common 64 bit wide data bus. The "CPU" is a 68k yes, which has 32 bit instructions and registers and a 16 bit bus, but it is the CPU in name only, as its so slow most games use the risc chips exclusively. They are the GPU and DSP, each of which is primarily a 32 bit chip with 32 bit registers and instructions, but can perform 64 bit load/store operations.
The blitter and object processor are both entirely 64 bit engines, but they are not turing complete processors.
Because the main bus is 64 bit wide, and because some of the processing units are 64 bits wide, it is generally considered that the system as a whole is 64 bit, in so much as the bit-ness of systems matters. It was mostly a marketing thing back "in the day" as to how many bits a system has, much in the way that the number of polygons a system can push around now is touted as a comparison between systems that really means very little.
If you really want to bash the Jaguar, for whatever personal reasons you may have, please, do so about some of its real failings, like the way the two risc processors are limited to running from their internal cache because they will crash on a jump or branch instruction into or out of main memory, or some of the bizare behaviours of the A1 clipping flag of the blitter, and stop dragging up the old flawed arguments.
We're going widely off topic here but as a jaguar homebrew coder I feel the need to set the facts right.
What I dont understand is why people use the wall-eyed stereograms (ie pretend you're looking through the image) rather than cross-eyed stereograms (pretend you're looking in front of the image). Its physically impossible to go wall-eyed enough to look at pictures much bigger than this without distress to your eyes, whereas with cross-eyed stereograms its easy.
I can only conclude these people are fuckwits and haven't got a clue what they are doing. I hope they are all dead by tomorrow.
Agreed, I was considering posting some versions with the two images swapped over so people could see them properly, but then I realised I dont have anywhere to host them and that any geek worth his sort can simply load them into a gaphics program of choice and mirror the whole image for the same effect.
Imvho it should be considered a general convention that SIRD (Single Image Random Dot) steriograms (the ones which look like static) should use the "wall-eyed" technique while the ones with two photos side by side should use the "cross-eyed" technique, as for images with any degree of detail, its impossible to defocus enough to see them (most people I believe cannot focus to points beyond infinity, and thus cannot see images wider than the width between their eyes).
As a slightly unrelated, but very fun application of steriograms, google for Quake2 abSIRD, most upwardly f*cked mod I've seen for any game (more so than text mode quake even).
Ah the joy of the distributed power of geeks... while reading the wikipedia article linked in the story, I noticed a malformed link, but by the time I went to edit it, someone else had already corrected it. Gotta love the world we're collectively making.
Now see, its hard to tell if your being sarcastic or are deadly serious. The first (ugly) I would agree is quite hideous, at least not in that shot, the second (ugly), while not to my taste, is quite pretty, and the third (women) is, to my eyes at least, one of the most stunningly gorgeous creatures I've seen in a long time.
Beauty is of course in the eye of the beholder, so YMMV, but perhaps more extreme examples might have been better.
13. Name that incorporate titles. The term "Titles" as used herein shall include 'rank' titles (e.g. , "CorporalTed," or "GeneralVlad") and/or fantasy titles (e.g., "KingMike", "LordSanchez")
Umm.... since when have King and Lord become "fantasy" titles?!
I happen to be British, and we happen to have quite a lot of Lords, and when our Queen dies, we shall have a King too....You insensitive clod!
We also have audio viri... next time your in a university lecture or open plan office, try quietly humming Tetris tune B, after a while, stop, and its nearly gaurenteed someone else will pick it up and carry on without even being consiously aware of it.
Yes, I've tried it, many times, yes it works, no you dont have to believe me, try yourself.
The port of Doom for the Atari Jaguar was done largely by an automated tool which turned the C code into risc assembly, thus removing all meaningful lables, variable names, and comments from the source. It was then patched to get round the bugs in the processors, and thus contains no comments at all except for one, which apears often, of "FUCKING DSP!!!"
Slashdot Mirror
Oh come on... robots wont get damaged, any more than american football player do. Now, if you had robots that play rugby, it'd be a different thing indeed and you'd need a lot of half time repairs.
For the simple fact that its proved reliable.
I wont argue over if thats actually true or not, since there have been accidents, but that is I believe the theory.
There is a lot to be said for "if it aint broke, dont fix it", and the problem with continually updating systems is that they get more and more complex, and thus bugs creep in, no matter how well you test things. NASA wont use anything unless they can see exactly how all of it works and make damned sure it wont go wrong and cost anyone their life, or a several billion dollar bit of equipment.
Old technology does have one advantage over new. Its much less complex and thus much easier to understand.
Well, actually, it is yeah, its sometimes biased, which is between never biased and always biased (not exactly what I said, in my (very limited) expierence of american news sources, it is very often biased, but it would be foolish to say always, just as it is foolish to say never, without a universal knowladge of all that has ever been and ever will be)
.sig =)
Btw, love the
Oh come come, american news is just as biased, just from the other side, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, as is almost always the case in any situation. Each side presents their viewpoint as the one and only truth and only by carefully looking at what all sides are saying can one ever understand the whole picture.
As a brit, whenever I see american news it makes me cringe to see how biased the coverage is, of practically any subject, not just iraq. What is more scary is that my strong reaction is based on the shift from the news sources I am familiar with, and often I clearly see their bias as well, which just goes to show quite how much the american public get told what to think.
So we should listen to the opinions about family welfare from someone who endorses polygamy?
And why the hell not?
Polygamy works well in various human cultures, modern and historical, and is the basis of society for many other species that live here.
Just what exactly is your prejudice against it and why is it so strong that you refuse to even listen to fair and well reasoned debate* on the subject?
I am reminded of a fitting quote: "One need not burn a book if one does not allow it to be published"
* This is, by the way, one of the best debates I've read in a long time, and I'd like to personally thank everyone who has posted with an opinion.
IT people suck. Why work for the school anyway?
Cause there's a hell of a lot less stress than working in, for example, a bank. If you screw up (or just are feeling lazy that day) the computers in a school, nobody cares, a few teachers complain they cant get any work done, who you can fob off as they dont know a thing about the system usually, and the kids, well, you can lock the door hehe, life is good, and nobody measures down time in millions of pounds/dollars/etc.
Perhaps this will be the proverbial "kick in the nuts" that will wake up the whole of the EU to firmly reject software patents once and for all, and to laugh at any american company attempting to use them for such an underhand tactic as this.
Hmm... a quick trip round some ST game archives found nothing, and a look on google turned up two versions for the MSX, and a possable conversion for the amiga, but no mention of an ST version.
However, ST's are easy to get hold of, perhaps less so in the states, but a look round ebay should yeild results, or you could always visit an ST user group or community type site and ask there. There are many people still using the system and even some commercial software developments afaik.
Now, getting hold of a Falcon, that might be more tricky, as they're still in great demand and fetch prices roughly equal to their launch price, partly due to their upgrade potential (with projects such as the CT60) and partly due to the fact the US postal service buys lots of them for spares, as some sorting machines are powered by a Falcon.
Pah! Real men have a dedicated 486 for the XCom games.
Then again real men are not afraid of Lobstermen so I guess I fail on that one, those b*stards are evil.
I understand in the US, there are analog phones which can also display the caller ID, but that particular technology is not used in Europe. Here, anyone who needs more than a single plain analog phone line just gets an ISDN one.
Caller ID has been available on all analog networks for a long time here in the UK. Not all that many people use it afaik, but its available (as are phones that support it).
Surely however, if there is a god, and he created us, then he too is part of nature, and thus anything he does, like creating us, and the things we, in turn, create, are also all part of natute.
Of course, we're getting into quite abstract realms here without a solid definition of what a god is or what causes them to develop, so perhaps best to take this as an attempt at humor and nothing more.
The bitness of the Jaguar has been contended for a long time, and as with many of the attacks directed against it, the words get repeated endlessly almost by rote, without thought or research. I will thusly correct your mistakes.
The Jaguar consists of 5 main units: 3 processors, a blitter, and the object processor (an advanced sprite engine in effect). They all share a common 64 bit wide data bus. The "CPU" is a 68k yes, which has 32 bit instructions and registers and a 16 bit bus, but it is the CPU in name only, as its so slow most games use the risc chips exclusively. They are the GPU and DSP, each of which is primarily a 32 bit chip with 32 bit registers and instructions, but can perform 64 bit load/store operations.
The blitter and object processor are both entirely 64 bit engines, but they are not turing complete processors.
Because the main bus is 64 bit wide, and because some of the processing units are 64 bits wide, it is generally considered that the system as a whole is 64 bit, in so much as the bit-ness of systems matters. It was mostly a marketing thing back "in the day" as to how many bits a system has, much in the way that the number of polygons a system can push around now is touted as a comparison between systems that really means very little.
If you really want to bash the Jaguar, for whatever personal reasons you may have, please, do so about some of its real failings, like the way the two risc processors are limited to running from their internal cache because they will crash on a jump or branch instruction into or out of main memory, or some of the bizare behaviours of the A1 clipping flag of the blitter, and stop dragging up the old flawed arguments.
We're going widely off topic here but as a jaguar homebrew coder I feel the need to set the facts right.
Agreed, I was considering posting some versions with the two images swapped over so people could see them properly, but then I realised I dont have anywhere to host them and that any geek worth his sort can simply load them into a gaphics program of choice and mirror the whole image for the same effect.
Imvho it should be considered a general convention that SIRD (Single Image Random Dot) steriograms (the ones which look like static) should use the "wall-eyed" technique while the ones with two photos side by side should use the "cross-eyed" technique, as for images with any degree of detail, its impossible to defocus enough to see them (most people I believe cannot focus to points beyond infinity, and thus cannot see images wider than the width between their eyes).
As a slightly unrelated, but very fun application of steriograms, google for Quake2 abSIRD, most upwardly f*cked mod I've seen for any game (more so than text mode quake even).
Ah the joy of the distributed power of geeks... while reading the wikipedia article linked in the story, I noticed a malformed link, but by the time I went to edit it, someone else had already corrected it. Gotta love the world we're collectively making.
Now see, its hard to tell if your being sarcastic or are deadly serious. The first (ugly) I would agree is quite hideous, at least not in that shot, the second (ugly), while not to my taste, is quite pretty, and the third (women) is, to my eyes at least, one of the most stunningly gorgeous creatures I've seen in a long time.
Beauty is of course in the eye of the beholder, so YMMV, but perhaps more extreme examples might have been better.
13. Name that incorporate titles. The term "Titles" as used herein shall include 'rank' titles (e.g. , "CorporalTed," or "GeneralVlad") and/or fantasy titles (e.g., "KingMike", "LordSanchez")
...You insensitive clod!
Umm.... since when have King and Lord become "fantasy" titles?!
I happen to be British, and we happen to have quite a lot of Lords, and when our Queen dies, we shall have a King too.
A slight exageration on his part there, but according to many world religions, fish dont have souls.
We also have audio viri... next time your in a university lecture or open plan office, try quietly humming Tetris tune B, after a while, stop, and its nearly gaurenteed someone else will pick it up and carry on without even being consiously aware of it.
Yes, I've tried it, many times, yes it works, no you dont have to believe me, try yourself.
The port of Doom for the Atari Jaguar was done largely by an automated tool which turned the C code into risc assembly, thus removing all meaningful lables, variable names, and comments from the source. It was then patched to get round the bugs in the processors, and thus contains no comments at all except for one, which apears often, of "FUCKING DSP!!!"
No, really.