No they don't actually come out and say that you'll be damned for not sponsoring the church. They imply it through stories such as tithing (commanded to the Jews and no one else, along with the 10 commandments and the entire Old Testament), and through Christ's instruction to have nothing to do with people who don't support spreaders of the word, but to warn them of Damnation (Luke 10:1-15). Yes the Church really does imply very heavily that if you don't support it through donations, you will be damned.
The "value" of the IP was never in question. The issue is weather the software would be more useful in the public domain, or closed and generating revenue for the advancement of more "valuable" software. The ideal copyright (benefitting everyone) would give the software producer (individual or company) the lion's share of the first controllable market return, and thereafter freeing the software for the public to benefit from the software and build upon it. The trick would actually be to find a good balance between the first controllable market return, and the time where the public could benefit from public domain uses of the software. Currently, there is NO enforcement of the public domain, due to Congress extending copyright every time it would expire. I blame special interest and big business lobbying.
Wast heat is being generated by the primary energy source. The cold part is the ambient temperature. How is this not a sustained heat difference until the primary energy source is depleted?
You flip the 1st switch. Wait 10 minuts. Flip it off and flip on the next switch. Go in the room. If the light is on, it's the second switch. If the light is off and hot its the first switch. If it's off and cold, it's the third switch.
You replying to the burning your finger thread tipped me off.
It seams odd to me that he started the project because of rain, and then completely ignored rain in his observations. Otherwise, the study was very cool.
I dont know what yer talkin about, eh? ARe ye just trollin for the grammr coppers, or di d you just think that yer postage would actally put the fear o' God inter the submiter's braain? Braains. . . Brains . . . .
Halo: Doom. This article was not about console revolutions, but genre revolutions. Doom was the first multiplayer first person shooter, and boy did it kick ass.
Worms: Yes. Definately.
Unreal: Unreal's big innovation was having multiple fire modes on the weapons. Kick ass, but still just an evolution from Doom, or Wolfstein if you go past the multi-player barrier.
Command and Conquer: No. The article was about multi-player. Not simply online. Warcraft takes the win here.
Gears Of War: I haven't played this game, but it appears to be a 3d evolution of Ikari warriors.
It's hard to say that these drastically changed online play. The question is a bit to subjective. There are so many games that brought just a little something new that has been adopted by others that it is really hard to say. I so much agree here. The point that I disagree with is the "of all time" part. That's why I'm rebutting with truly revolutionary games, rather than ones with obvious predecessors.
The problem with those games is not gameplay. It's not graphics. It's not entertainment value. All those qualities were and are completely adequate to the awsome games that they are. The real problems with those games, and why new people don't hold them in the same awe is this: The don't play on new hardware. From hardware cycle timing to obsolete graphic modes, they just don't play the same as they did. God I wish we could have decent ports to current OS's.
I've never read it, but that would still fit into my definition, even with the altered past. You see, time-travel science fiction still STARTS with our own unaltered history, and then proceeds to use technology to go wherever the plot takes it.
Still Fantasy. Sci-fi is the genre that imagines human progress, especially through technology. Anything that starts in another timeline that is obviously contradictory to our history, or anything from a completely fictional timeline such as another planet or reality, is fantasy.
Slashdot Mirror
No they don't actually come out and say that you'll be damned for not sponsoring the church. They imply it through stories such as tithing (commanded to the Jews and no one else, along with the 10 commandments and the entire Old Testament), and through Christ's instruction to have nothing to do with people who don't support spreaders of the word, but to warn them of Damnation (Luke 10:1-15). Yes the Church really does imply very heavily that if you don't support it through donations, you will be damned.
You're wrong. The big difference is the subscription fee. TV was adopted because the airwaves were free.
R2's actor was replaced with computers as well.
The "value" of the IP was never in question. The issue is weather the software would be more useful in the public domain, or closed and generating revenue for the advancement of more "valuable" software. The ideal copyright (benefitting everyone) would give the software producer (individual or company) the lion's share of the first controllable market return, and thereafter freeing the software for the public to benefit from the software and build upon it. The trick would actually be to find a good balance between the first controllable market return, and the time where the public could benefit from public domain uses of the software. Currently, there is NO enforcement of the public domain, due to Congress extending copyright every time it would expire. I blame special interest and big business lobbying.
Watermelon and Wild Cherry.
You're jumping ahead of us. You'd have to emulate sensory organs in order to sense "movement".
Doesn't he ponder the age-old question: Is the frogs ass watertight?
And then Uberchicken wet himself trying to think of a logical end to this thread. He ran out of juice after his 1111th idea.
Forgive my ignorance, but what's the difference? If it's the source of his or her funds, I'm going to be severely disappointed.
Best Headline ever!
Wast heat is being generated by the primary energy source. The cold part is the ambient temperature. How is this not a sustained heat difference until the primary energy source is depleted?
You replying to the burning your finger thread tipped me off.
It seams odd to me that he started the project because of rain, and then completely ignored rain in his observations. Otherwise, the study was very cool.
You're not in Wal-mart. You're in a chop shop. Small surprise you got associated with criminals.
I dont know what yer talkin about, eh? ARe ye just trollin for the grammr coppers, or di d you just think that yer postage would actally put the fear o' God inter the submiter's braain? Braains. . . Brains . . . .
Yes, but at this point, EVERYTHING, is old software. I'm not going to pick up Vista until games work BETTER in Vista than XP.
Worms: Yes. Definately.
Unreal: Unreal's big innovation was having multiple fire modes on the weapons. Kick ass, but still just an evolution from Doom, or Wolfstein if you go past the multi-player barrier.
Command and Conquer: No. The article was about multi-player. Not simply online. Warcraft takes the win here.
Gears Of War: I haven't played this game, but it appears to be a 3d evolution of Ikari warriors.
It's hard to say that these drastically changed online play. The question is a bit to subjective. There are so many games that brought just a little something new that has been adopted by others that it is really hard to say. I so much agree here. The point that I disagree with is the "of all time" part. That's why I'm rebutting with truly revolutionary games, rather than ones with obvious predecessors.Don't laugh. My Doom (and Doom2) days were filled with one on one deathmatch with a null modem cable, or even a parallel cable and 2 PC's. Good times.
(x+2)(x+3) the work was done in my head. My teacher hated that.
Impossible. My stiffy is much firmer.
The problem with those games is not gameplay. It's not graphics. It's not entertainment value. All those qualities were and are completely adequate to the awsome games that they are. The real problems with those games, and why new people don't hold them in the same awe is this: The don't play on new hardware. From hardware cycle timing to obsolete graphic modes, they just don't play the same as they did. God I wish we could have decent ports to current OS's.
I've never read it, but that would still fit into my definition, even with the altered past. You see, time-travel science fiction still STARTS with our own unaltered history, and then proceeds to use technology to go wherever the plot takes it.
No, then she builds a Harry Potter empire from spin-offs and royalties.
That's why it's fantasy and not sci-fi!!!!!
Still Fantasy. Sci-fi is the genre that imagines human progress, especially through technology. Anything that starts in another timeline that is obviously contradictory to our history, or anything from a completely fictional timeline such as another planet or reality, is fantasy.