"Let's Flip A Coin To See Which One Of Us Hits The Other On The Head With A Hammer" also combines skill with chance, but that doesn't make it a very good game.
In your article: "I was taking a series of time-lapse pictures of the build-up of clouds," Mr Pryde said.
In the APOD post: "Meteor experts don't think it's a meteor. Atmospheric scientists don't think it's lightning. The photographer insists that the streak and flash on the above image has not been created digitally. So what is it? Nobody is sure. APOD's editors do not claim to know - one purpose of posting this image is to mine the eclectic brain trust of APOD's readers to help see if some unusual phenomenon was caught serendipitously. The strange features were captured on a series of images intended to monitor cloud changes in the background. Images taken just before and after the above frame show no streak or flash. The light pole near the flash has been inspected and does not show any damage, although the light inside was not working. If you think you know what is going on, instead of sending us email please participate in an online discussion. If a convincing argument or consensus is reached, the answer will be posted on APOD at a later date."
Now, what was that you were saying about "cloud monitoring" being only mentioned by APOD?
It would be nice if it was reviewed by somebody who actually had to work with that kind of hardware and actually had an idea of what was important, but I guess if you really just don't know you could always Ask Slashdot.
Apparently the second hardest thing for scientists and psychologists to figure out is how to spell the word "congratulations" without using the letter 'D'.
"While I applaud the notion behind Freer distribution (as in speech) it's also highly probable that Intel doesn't have much ground make them freer - we've seen this before on machines like the HP nw8000; basically, the wireless stuff is owned by someone else, licensed by Intel."
Oh no! If this sort of thing is allowed to happen then before long we will start seeing seperate kernel forks for people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Hans Reiser. It could even lead to every major Linux distribution applying their own patches to their own forked kernels.
By the way, and this has absolutely nothing to do with your recent statements, would you mind posting your home address and a recent photo here? Just so, you know, the nice folks here at GlobalMegaCorp can sent you a "Thank you" ham or something.
But source code can be a red herring too. If a voting machine is to be programmed to cheat it is easy enough to load it with different code.
If you were particularly clever you could even have the "cheat code" designed to run once, rig the election results, and then erase itself leaving only a copy of the original, sanctioned code for the auditors to find.
Unless the people trying to fix the election were slightly too stupid to qualify as villains on "Scooby Doo", then open source code won't make any difference at all. You need the procedure to be completely transparent at every stage, and I believe that a verifiable paper trail which can be confirmed by the voters and recounted by hand is the best way to do that.
Slashdot Mirror
When you write an overarching plot that 3000 players can all participate in and affect at the same time, let us know.
Can't you get fired from Circuit City for saying things like that?
Next you're going to tell me that my new laptop doesn't _really_ need this 1200W subwoofer.
What it showed me is that "Wankers play JKII online", "Macroing is rewarded" and "There is no reason not to cheat".
That made me even less interested in playing it than I was before.
"Let's Flip A Coin To See Which One Of Us Hits The Other On The Head With A Hammer" also combines skill with chance, but that doesn't make it a very good game.
"I was taking a series of time-lapse pictures of the build-up of clouds," Mr Pryde said.
In the APOD post:
"Meteor experts don't think it's a meteor. Atmospheric scientists don't think it's lightning. The photographer insists that the streak and flash on the above image has not been created digitally. So what is it? Nobody is sure. APOD's editors do not claim to know - one purpose of posting this image is to mine the eclectic brain trust of APOD's readers to help see if some unusual phenomenon was caught serendipitously. The strange features were captured on a series of images intended to monitor cloud changes in the background. Images taken just before and after the above frame show no streak or flash. The light pole near the flash has been inspected and does not show any damage, although the light inside was not working. If you think you know what is going on, instead of sending us email please participate in an online discussion. If a convincing argument or consensus is reached, the answer will be posted on APOD at a later date."
Now, what was that you were saying about "cloud monitoring" being only mentioned by APOD?
Nah. The real aolution is here.
Well, there goes my alt.com account...
Shhh... You're thinking too hard.
That kind of thing will only cause discontent.
As opposed to someone more qualified for his job, like the janitor.
It would be nice if it was reviewed by somebody who actually had to work with that kind of hardware and actually had an idea of what was important, but I guess if you really just don't know you could always Ask Slashdot.
That's what the gin glass is for.
It's strong in The Force, too.
No, that's the proposed standard for the "Evil Bit".
Apparently the second hardest thing for scientists and psychologists to figure out is how to spell the word "congratulations" without using the letter 'D'.
Remember, there is no Half Life 2 in the champagne room.
There is also Worldforge, a GPLed MMORPG client and server framework.
So, um, don't play.
How hard a decision can that be?
Which is exactly why the cybersquatters at whitehouse.gov need to be shut down. They're giving the real whitehouse a bad name.
That's what the teeny little Pringles cans are for.
Is that supposed to be a sentence, or has Hemos been playing around with the Monkey / Shakespeare Simulator again?
Oh no! If this sort of thing is allowed to happen then before long we will start seeing seperate kernel forks for people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Hans Reiser. It could even lead to every major Linux distribution applying their own patches to their own forked kernels.
Then where would we be?
By the way, and this has absolutely nothing to do with your recent statements, would you mind posting your home address and a recent photo here? Just so, you know, the nice folks here at GlobalMegaCorp can sent you a "Thank you" ham or something.
But source code can be a red herring too. If a voting machine is to be programmed to cheat it is easy enough to load it with different code.
If you were particularly clever you could even have the "cheat code" designed to run once, rig the election results, and then erase itself leaving only a copy of the original, sanctioned code for the auditors to find.
Unless the people trying to fix the election were slightly too stupid to qualify as villains on "Scooby Doo", then open source code won't make any difference at all. You need the procedure to be completely transparent at every stage, and I believe that a verifiable paper trail which can be confirmed by the voters and recounted by hand is the best way to do that.
And then you could drag your disk over to a friend's house and just play.
Wait. Where have I heard that before?
Here's a hacksaw and some soap so you can go wash that mental image out of your brain.