Though obviously games will be cracked fairly quickly to bypass whatever rating they have (in this case, get knocked down to the "G" equivalent for games--possibly still just G?).
I'm still in the camp of trying to reason to a kid why you don't want them playing a game, or sitting down with them while they do, explaining the parts you find objectionable and why... generally if people are treated with respect, they tend to listen better.
I just got an email from the guy who organizes a Meetup event that I sometimes go to. He pointed out http://www.mypeopleconnection.com/ as an alternative.
A quick look at it, and it seems to suffer from a terribly US-centric viewpoint. Their global page has the inspiring text, "My People Connection brings new friends together through a variety of events in cities around the globe," and yet only lists a handful of cities in the US. Not even any in Canada. I'm not familiar enough with meetup.com to know if their service went outside the borders of the US of A, but this "alternative" seems lacking.
Oh, don't worry, our cafeterias have a field day with that one. How often would you like to eat a Fried Egg-McMaster(with bacon or ham) or a McMaster Maurader Burger?
Woooh!!! Ok, gotta get over my excitement -- it's not everyday that I find an article relating to something that took place in a building no more than 300m away from my bedroom. I go to McMaster and have actually walked on said Pac-Man board.
Generally the Kipling pranks here at Mac are rather well-done (cars are a common theme -- putting them on roofs, hanging them on sides of buildings, etc.) but this year things were slightly lackluster, if you will. I may have just not been out before some got taken down, who knows. That said, the Pac-Man board is still around (I've been in my room for a few days, so I don't know for sure) and still looks impressive.
There was a comment questioning the "life-sizedness" of the board, and being 6'1", 200lbs. I can say I fit most comfortably in the maze. The dots may have been slightly insubstantial for consumption (they were only the labels off beer, not the actual product itself... damn Engineers probably drank it all before hand, come to think of it) and the aliens/ghosts (please, no flames from those who know Pac-Man far better than I and who think I'm an idiot for not knowing at the very least what those things are called) weren't so large as to be intimidating. Other than that the "life-sized" label fits very well (they didn't just follow the pattern of the floor tiles, as this post suggested -- it's all measured out on their own scale).
I'm going to have to run over to the Computer department after I finish studying for this exam and observe the smoulding hulk of server that I'm sure now exists:). Wheee, what a fun day already, and all because of slashdot!
Adam, I don't know if you read slashdot, but my compliments on the good work. That and nice pics.
A couple of thoughts after a cursory (not much else is possible) read of their somewhat sparse site.
Echoing the above (as of my writing, of course -- things may have changed as of your reading) comment: what is the big deal? Not trying to troll, but as a site looking for community support, there isn't an easily-accessible, clear condensation of the issue in getting a second-level.nz domain. It seems to be a case of getting approval by a controlling body, which can be swayed by public opinion to a certain extent. I think their campaign would be more successful if they made it clear why support of other wordly geeks is a good thing (sorry Martha).
Secondly, from a geeky perspective, geek.nz would be wickedly, uber-cool. Unfortunately I think it may be also possible to have the other, non-geek part of the population to look at the whole operation with a little disdain or perhaps disrespect (insert faviourite geek stereotype). I can certainly see some people (those outsiders) losing/not having respect for a project or company because it's on the geek.nz domain. That said, as an internal (within the geek community) testing ground, as was somewhat suggested on the site, it'd be pretty darn cool.
Does anyone else have their site read by Bert? They seem to be on Bert's good list. Care to make a few spurious correlations?
No, no, no... they speak of a right-handed guy. See, you have to hold the mouse with your right hand (as most mice nowadays are egonomically designed for the right and would be pretty hard to handle with the left), thus leaving the left hand to venture off for other tasks.
Invisibility cloak? Using nanotech paints, I think this is much further from reality than the article suggests.
The idea, I assume, of "invisibility" would br to paint an object (in this case a tank or a private's helmet - "Aieeee!!! These guys have no heads! Attack of the zombies, run for your lives!!!") the same colour and pattern as the background, thus making it indistinguishible from those objects behind it (similar concept to those noise-cancelling headphones)
The fundamental problem with this is, what perspective do you assume the object is being viewed from? There will be a different background for every different position from which you view the object. You could assume the viewer was a certain distance from the object, making the number of discernable perspectives fewer in number (not even taking into consideration multiple heights at which a viewer could be), but then you still have to conquer the idea of projecting a few (ten, hundred) thousand colours of light from each point on the object (and in many different directions).
I believe it was misleading to state a practical possibility of attaining invisibility with nanotech paint. It sounds very exciting in terms of applying a general camoflage or solid-colour paint (wouldn't mind some for my car - Cops: "crrrrck... um, yeah, we have a black 2002 Volkswagon golf speeding West on the 401... car 41, do you copy? crrrck..." Me: "hmmm, black? I think not. Yellow seems good right about now."
Slashdot Mirror
Though obviously games will be cracked fairly quickly to bypass whatever rating they have (in this case, get knocked down to the "G" equivalent for games--possibly still just G?).
I'm still in the camp of trying to reason to a kid why you don't want them playing a game, or sitting down with them while they do, explaining the parts you find objectionable and why... generally if people are treated with respect, they tend to listen better.
I just got an email from the guy who organizes a Meetup event that I sometimes go to. He pointed out http://www.mypeopleconnection.com/ as an alternative.
," and yet only lists a handful of cities in the US. Not even any in Canada. I'm not familiar enough with meetup.com to know if their service went outside the borders of the US of A, but this "alternative" seems lacking.
A quick look at it, and it seems to suffer from a terribly US-centric viewpoint. Their global page has the inspiring text, "My People Connection brings new friends together through a variety of events in cities around the globe
Aye,
Thank you very much for the mirror--greatly appreciated.
Oh, don't worry, our cafeterias have a field day with that one. How often would you like to eat a Fried Egg-McMaster(with bacon or ham) or a McMaster Maurader Burger?
Yeah.
Woooh!!! Ok, gotta get over my excitement -- it's not everyday that I find an article relating to something that took place in a building no more than 300m away from my bedroom. I go to McMaster and have actually walked on said Pac-Man board.
Generally the Kipling pranks here at Mac are rather well-done (cars are a common theme -- putting them on roofs, hanging them on sides of buildings, etc.) but this year things were slightly lackluster, if you will. I may have just not been out before some got taken down, who knows. That said, the Pac-Man board is still around (I've been in my room for a few days, so I don't know for sure) and still looks impressive.
There was a comment questioning the "life-sizedness" of the board, and being 6'1", 200lbs. I can say I fit most comfortably in the maze. The dots may have been slightly insubstantial for consumption (they were only the labels off beer, not the actual product itself... damn Engineers probably drank it all before hand, come to think of it) and the aliens/ghosts (please, no flames from those who know Pac-Man far better than I and who think I'm an idiot for not knowing at the very least what those things are called) weren't so large as to be intimidating. Other than that the "life-sized" label fits very well (they didn't just follow the pattern of the floor tiles, as this post suggested -- it's all measured out on their own scale).
I'm going to have to run over to the Computer department after I finish studying for this exam and observe the smoulding hulk of server that I'm sure now exists :). Wheee, what a fun day already, and all because of slashdot!
Adam, I don't know if you read slashdot, but my compliments on the good work. That and nice pics.
And this is why I just spent $140 on a straight razor -- I'll make back my money in 6 years and in the meantime it looks darn cool!
"What the hell?!?" yourself.
Now, maybe it's just me, but how on earth can a JPG have multiple layers?? (a la PSD-format you claim it does)
I think there is a greater chance your claim is, "an obvious hoax."
Echoing the above (as of my writing, of course -- things may have changed as of your reading) comment: what is the big deal? Not trying to troll, but as a site looking for community support, there isn't an easily-accessible, clear condensation of the issue in getting a second-level .nz domain. It seems to be a case of getting approval by a controlling body, which can be swayed by public opinion to a certain extent. I think their campaign would be more successful if they made it clear why support of other wordly geeks is a good thing (sorry Martha).
Secondly, from a geeky perspective, geek.nz would be wickedly, uber-cool. Unfortunately I think it may be also possible to have the other, non-geek part of the population to look at the whole operation with a little disdain or perhaps disrespect (insert faviourite geek stereotype). I can certainly see some people (those outsiders) losing/not having respect for a project or company because it's on the geek.nz domain. That said, as an internal (within the geek community) testing ground, as was somewhat suggested on the site, it'd be pretty darn cool.
Does anyone else have their site read by Bert? They seem to be on Bert's good list. Care to make a few spurious correlations?
.ca.uk? .ca.fr?
.us.uk? (Ignoring the small issue of that Civil War thing...)
Yes, as well all know Canada is owned by either the British or the French -- really, we're still a colony, not an independant country at all =).
By this logic, shouldn't it be
I must say I'm annoyed at your ignorance and audacity to think that a US state would take precedence over our country!
The site has held up just fine since the story was posted -- no need for concern, I believe.
Click away!!
-- speak for yourself, lefty
No, no, no... they speak of a right-handed guy. See, you have to hold the mouse with your right hand (as most mice nowadays are egonomically designed for the right and would be pretty hard to handle with the left), thus leaving the left hand to venture off for other tasks.
Invisibility cloak? Using nanotech paints, I think this is much further from reality than the article suggests.
The idea, I assume, of "invisibility" would br to paint an object (in this case a tank or a private's helmet - "Aieeee!!! These guys have no heads! Attack of the zombies, run for your lives!!!") the same colour and pattern as the background, thus making it indistinguishible from those objects behind it (similar concept to those noise-cancelling headphones)
The fundamental problem with this is, what perspective do you assume the object is being viewed from? There will be a different background for every different position from which you view the object. You could assume the viewer was a certain distance from the object, making the number of discernable perspectives fewer in number (not even taking into consideration multiple heights at which a viewer could be), but then you still have to conquer the idea of projecting a few (ten, hundred) thousand colours of light from each point on the object (and in many different directions).
I believe it was misleading to state a practical possibility of attaining invisibility with nanotech paint. It sounds very exciting in terms of applying a general camoflage or solid-colour paint (wouldn't mind some for my car - Cops: "crrrrck... um, yeah, we have a black 2002 Volkswagon golf speeding West on the 401... car 41, do you copy? crrrck..." Me: "hmmm, black? I think not. Yellow seems good right about now."