I think the better solution would be to just not give a shit. If you like the game, you can overlook this. I pity the fuckers that think this is the cause for them, like it's some travesty against their fellow man. Choose your battles, indeed.
Agreed. Really, what's the big deal? What I'm understanding is that we're worried that Sims eating McDonald's hamburgers are going to influence people to eat McDonald's hamburgers... so what? It's an advertisement! And it will no more influence people than Doom III will influence people to go out and shoot people. And I know Slashdot wouldn't have an article in favor of "Organizing Doom Protests." In fact, most of us Slashdotters are extremely opposed to it. So, feel free to buy the game despite the advertisements... I actually wouldn't mind seeing a Coke that heals you in one of those vending machines in a first-person shooter instead of "Generic Cola."
Fireworks indeed... Some of the posts have over 100 moderations done to them, and First Posts/Goatse are modded +5, Insightful. Quite a crazy world over there.
There's always something disappointing about a draw. I would have liked to see a clear winner, either man or machine, but it wasn't meant to be. That being said, I am not disappointed with the overall match. I think it showed human innovation in two ways, one in the powerful AI technology developed over the years used by Deep Fritz, and one in Kramnik being able to attack Fritz's weaknesses.
What's more disappointing than the draw, however, is that this match was not nearly as publicized as Deep Blue vs. Kasparov.
Writing a bot for a human played game may show you have programming skill, but actually using it to defeat other players is just lame.
What about Deep Fritz or Deep Blue, or even the bots in first-person shooters programmed by the game manufacturers themselves? Even the monsters in Diablo could be defined as bots. I would not say using these bots to defeat human players in a human played game is lame (granted I don't think you meant to say this). If you're upfront about using a bot and your opponent agrees to the bot use, then it's definitely OK, possibly not lame, and possibly an interesting battle between human and computer. On the other hand, if you're tricking your opponent into thinking a human is at the controls, that's when it's lame.
From the article post: Neither of these is worth paying much attention to. Perhaps in January some bright Congressperson will introduce a bill which actually takes strong steps toward repealing the DMCA.
These comments are pretty harsh towards Rep. Boucher. I'm glad to see many of the user posts supporting Boucher and this bill. Anything in Congress going against the DMCA to great to see, even if it's small changes for now. If these changes or something like them goes through, then Congress will being going in the right direction against the DMCA.
From the article: "I regrettably got involved with some stuff I shouldn't have and to anybody I affected, I'm sorry."
What stuff did you get involved with that you regret, pirating software, getting caught pirating software, or something else? Or is the quote just BS?
Actually... it's on eBay, which of course means everyone will wait until the last few minutes to bid and increase it to what a Land Speeder/Ford is worth these days, whatever that is. And right now, it has 8 days left, so rest assured! It's not going to go for just $5000.
Voy 1 will likely confuse even modern earthlings-- much less ET. Case in point: In 2002, can we understand that 70's show, when the Polish greeting memorialized as "Welcome, creatures from beyond the outer world"? Unlike those ET creatures we meet daily from the inner world?
Is it just me, or did the article poster really stop making sense at this point?
But who will watch those watchers? And who will watch them?
Sounds like Slashdot! Who moderates the moderators? Meta-moderators! So they can have meta-watchers! Who moderates the meta-moderators? I don't know, but it seems like a good sig!
I especially liked this part in the satire... strangely accurate: Security experts were unfazed by the whole affair. "If it's a Microsoft produced worm it won't work until the third version anyway. I'll get more worried then when Trojan Worm Virus 3.0 is released," said SecurityBreach.com's Lonnie Markow.
After the Lone Gunmen fiasco, you would think that Slashdot has learned its lesson about spoilers. Hell, the new term "Lone Gunmen," meaning "giving SPOILERS", has even fairly popular on Slashdot. But no, now Slashdot is trying to "Lone Gunmen" the Lone Gunmen once again.
Oh yeah, I remember hearing one of their computerized, monotone songs a few years ago. They did get all the pronunciation right but they messed up on the grammar a bit. I think they called it "All Your Base."
If I said "Murder is wrong", and then one of my kids went out and killed someone and I was fined 3 million francs for it, can't I still say that my viewpoint is correct?
a) Just get Kazaa Lite. I agree.
b) Stop worrying about this. I disagree.
What we're seeing here is the most popular spyware on the internet today. So, this Kazaa controversy is going to set a precedent for future programs. Do we want programs to legally be able to run spyware on our computers or not? I vote "No," but some might vote "Yes" or "Only if it tells me about it clearly and I have to Opt-In." Your vote seems to be "I don't care."
Pretty simple. If you don't like Mythic's rules, then either don't buy the game or take your chances and break the rules (but don't sue them!). It's their game, it's their rules, and they have the right to cancel cheater's accounts, just like an NFL player would be thrown out of the NFL for cheating.
These "drone wars" will be more moral and acceptable if the other country doesn't stand a chance in a war, like Katz says, Afganistan. Low sacrifice on our side.
However, it's when there's a war between two technologically advanced countries when the sacrifice again becomes unacceptable. Let's say you are a technologically advanced country. OK, so, Other Country, send your bots to a designed neutral area where only bots will be harmed (Antartica? An ocean? Canada?) and only money will be sacrificed. No, wait, sending your drones to a designed neutral area would be very unstrategic. Especially when you could attack the human drone controllers whereever they might be, or do the drones have AI? Well, then attack their many power sources (you were going to do it anyway), where human employees sacrifice themselves for their country. Or are they drones too? Well, then attack their manufacturers (the barracks for you RTS fans) with human scientists and manufacturers, before they make another legion of bots (you were going to do it anyway). What you say? They're bots too? The entire war force is composed of bots with AI, even the Commander in Chief? Now we're getting out there. Well, attack their economy (no more money to build bots), attack a large city, and there will be plenty of humans there (you were going to do it anyway). Besides, even if that didn't work, you're only losing bots, no sacrifice on YOUR side. Meanwhile, the other technologically advanced country has the same strategy, whichever one it might be. Now, Other Country, would you like to send a diplomat to perhaps design a peace treaty of some sort? Because it seems like it's going to be a grueling war, and a lot is going to be sacrificed.
Google answers more than 150 million searches daily.
(
http://www.google.com/corporate/facts.html) I don't know how many users make a site get slashdotted, but I'm sure it doesn't make a dent in that number.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the better solution would be to just not give a shit. If you like the game, you can overlook this. I pity the fuckers that think this is the cause for them, like it's some travesty against their fellow man. Choose your battles, indeed.
Agreed. Really, what's the big deal? What I'm understanding is that we're worried that Sims eating McDonald's hamburgers are going to influence people to eat McDonald's hamburgers... so what? It's an advertisement! And it will no more influence people than Doom III will influence people to go out and shoot people. And I know Slashdot wouldn't have an article in favor of "Organizing Doom Protests." In fact, most of us Slashdotters are extremely opposed to it. So, feel free to buy the game despite the advertisements... I actually wouldn't mind seeing a Coke that heals you in one of those vending machines in a first-person shooter instead of "Generic Cola."
Hm, I think I'll pass on reading this book, I'm waiting for Teach Yourself UNIX System Administration In 23 Hours.
Fireworks indeed... Some of the posts have over 100 moderations done to them, and First Posts/Goatse are modded +5, Insightful. Quite a crazy world over there.
There's always something disappointing about a draw. I would have liked to see a clear winner, either man or machine, but it wasn't meant to be. That being said, I am not disappointed with the overall match. I think it showed human innovation in two ways, one in the powerful AI technology developed over the years used by Deep Fritz, and one in Kramnik being able to attack Fritz's weaknesses.
What's more disappointing than the draw, however, is that this match was not nearly as publicized as Deep Blue vs. Kasparov.
Writing a bot for a human played game may show you have programming skill, but actually using it to defeat other players is just lame.
What about Deep Fritz or Deep Blue, or even the bots in first-person shooters programmed by the game manufacturers themselves? Even the monsters in Diablo could be defined as bots. I would not say using these bots to defeat human players in a human played game is lame (granted I don't think you meant to say this). If you're upfront about using a bot and your opponent agrees to the bot use, then it's definitely OK, possibly not lame, and possibly an interesting battle between human and computer. On the other hand, if you're tricking your opponent into thinking a human is at the controls, that's when it's lame.
From the article post:
Neither of these is worth paying much attention to.
Perhaps in January some bright Congressperson will introduce a bill which actually takes strong steps toward repealing the DMCA.
These comments are pretty harsh towards Rep. Boucher. I'm glad to see many of the user posts supporting Boucher and this bill. Anything in Congress going against the DMCA to great to see, even if it's small changes for now. If these changes or something like them goes through, then Congress will being going in the right direction against the DMCA.
Require zero force to work with? Is that even physically possible?
Sure!
I use zero force at my job already.
From the article:
"I regrettably got involved with some stuff I shouldn't have and to anybody I affected, I'm sorry."
What stuff did you get involved with that you regret, pirating software, getting caught pirating software, or something else? Or is the quote just BS?
Actually... it's on eBay, which of course means everyone will wait until the last few minutes to bid and increase it to what a Land Speeder/Ford is worth these days, whatever that is. And right now, it has 8 days left, so rest assured! It's not going to go for just $5000.
Voy 1 will likely confuse even modern earthlings-- much less ET. Case in point: In 2002, can we understand that 70's show, when the Polish greeting memorialized as "Welcome, creatures from beyond the outer world"? Unlike those ET creatures we meet daily from the inner world?
Is it just me, or did the article poster really stop making sense at this point?
Everyone hates cats.
Yeah. That's what everyone said at the meeting.
But who will watch those watchers? And who will watch them?
Sounds like Slashdot! Who moderates the moderators? Meta-moderators! So they can have meta-watchers! Who moderates the meta-moderators? I don't know, but it seems like a good sig!
I especially liked this part in the satire... strangely accurate:
Security experts were unfazed by the whole affair. "If it's a Microsoft produced worm it won't work until the third version anyway. I'll get more worried then when Trojan Worm Virus 3.0 is released," said SecurityBreach.com's Lonnie Markow.
They can't do that, it's the United States' moon! Remember? We put a flag on it!
After the Lone Gunmen fiasco, you would think that Slashdot has learned its lesson about spoilers. Hell, the new term "Lone Gunmen," meaning "giving SPOILERS", has even fairly popular on Slashdot. But no, now Slashdot is trying to "Lone Gunmen" the Lone Gunmen once again.
Oh yeah, I remember hearing one of their computerized, monotone songs a few years ago. They did get all the pronunciation right but they messed up on the grammar a bit. I think they called it "All Your Base."
I hate to predict the future, but:
Metallica is to RIAA as George Lucas is to MPAA?
If I said "Murder is wrong", and then one of my kids went out and killed someone and I was fined 3 million francs for it, can't I still say that my viewpoint is correct?
"Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access has an article [cached by google ]
Note to article posters: Do more of that cached by Google stuff, I like that.
a) Just get Kazaa Lite. I agree.
b) Stop worrying about this. I disagree.
What we're seeing here is the most popular spyware on the internet today. So, this Kazaa controversy is going to set a precedent for future programs. Do we want programs to legally be able to run spyware on our computers or not? I vote "No," but some might vote "Yes" or "Only if it tells me about it clearly and I have to Opt-In." Your vote seems to be "I don't care."
Pretty simple. If you don't like Mythic's rules, then either don't buy the game or take your chances and break the rules (but don't sue them!). It's their game, it's their rules, and they have the right to cancel cheater's accounts, just like an NFL player would be thrown out of the NFL for cheating.
Yep, it was a mistake... they just jacked the price up to $399.99.
These "drone wars" will be more moral and acceptable if the other country doesn't stand a chance in a war, like Katz says, Afganistan. Low sacrifice on our side. However, it's when there's a war between two technologically advanced countries when the sacrifice again becomes unacceptable. Let's say you are a technologically advanced country. OK, so, Other Country, send your bots to a designed neutral area where only bots will be harmed (Antartica? An ocean? Canada?) and only money will be sacrificed. No, wait, sending your drones to a designed neutral area would be very unstrategic. Especially when you could attack the human drone controllers whereever they might be, or do the drones have AI? Well, then attack their many power sources (you were going to do it anyway), where human employees sacrifice themselves for their country. Or are they drones too? Well, then attack their manufacturers (the barracks for you RTS fans) with human scientists and manufacturers, before they make another legion of bots (you were going to do it anyway). What you say? They're bots too? The entire war force is composed of bots with AI, even the Commander in Chief? Now we're getting out there. Well, attack their economy (no more money to build bots), attack a large city, and there will be plenty of humans there (you were going to do it anyway). Besides, even if that didn't work, you're only losing bots, no sacrifice on YOUR side. Meanwhile, the other technologically advanced country has the same strategy, whichever one it might be. Now, Other Country, would you like to send a diplomat to perhaps design a peace treaty of some sort? Because it seems like it's going to be a grueling war, and a lot is going to be sacrificed.
Google answers more than 150 million searches daily. ( http://www.google.com/corporate/facts.html) I don't know how many users make a site get slashdotted, but I'm sure it doesn't make a dent in that number.