Can I run my Windows version of The Sims in WineX?
No. Unfortunately to make The Sims run under Linux Transgaming Technologies had to make some substantial changes to the original source code. This change makes it impossible to run The Sims for Windows under WineX
They must think Linux users are stupid or something , just how does making substantial changes to the source code (to make a linux version) affect the retail windows version of The Sims?
That makes perfect sense. The Sims for Windows does not run under WineX, because it does something funky that WineX doesn't support. When they were porting it, they found it much easier to fix the original program to play nicely than to add workarounds to WineX. They didn't cripple the Windows version to make it impossible to play or anything, and they didn't say it'll never be playable - if somebody else wants to do the reverse-engineering, no problem. They're just not going to put any effort into it themselves.
I've seen people complain about that scene quite a bit, which is strange, since that's my single favourite scene in the first movie. (There are only three or four scenes I like *at all* in the first movie, but that one and Palpatine's final line are the only two worth mentioning.) I thought it was a great way to show the difference between the two traditions without distracting dialogue (seriously, based on the rest of the script, how good do you think the dialogue would have been, anyway?)
Just to give perspective, I am a physicist who thinks that the Many Worlds interpretation (along with other things like the anthropic principle) is not only incorrect but is bad science.
Ok, many worlds you can argue with on many levels.
But the anthropic principle? That's not even science - it's a logical proposition. You can't be against the anthropic principle any more than you can be against the Pythagorean theorem. It's proved by pure reason.
Deutsch formally described the quantum mechanical analogue to the Turing machine in 1985. Feynman did some earlier work on that, but Deutsch was the first to give a universal model that could be used to reason about quantum computability. (Although there were some problems with his model, so it's not as clear cut as the Turing machine.)
That realistic Zelda looks just like Morrowind. Sure it's technically impressive, but it could be any fantasy game. The cel-shaded Zelda at least had some character to it.
I remember doing the frosh week scavenger hunt at Waterloo, oh so many years ago.
I mooned for "chemical weapons factory". It was the proudest moment of my university career.
Much older than that. System Shock (1994), where you wander around the 3D world, but most backstory and all character interaction other than fighting comes through email and diaries you discover. The earliest I know of is Portal (1986), which takes place entirely in a simulated computer interface.
Just a couple of days ago I found out about a cool metaclass hack to turn Python (the regular Python with the regular interpreter) into a metaclass based language. I posted about it on my Advogato journal.
I mention this because I think it's pretty cool, and because I think people should see the alternative before thinking Phython is the only way to do this. That's not to say the new language isn't also a good choice.
I thought it was pretty obvious the "redesigns" were all intended as jokes. Nobody could possible take the first two seriously coming from a company with Google's track record, and the third looked like a parody of what it might look like post-IPO. It looked more like, after the first two pointed out how horrible Google *could* be (don't you all know sites that look just like those?), the third artist showed a more reasonable step backward that might happen if the design firms got their hands on it.
And then there's the Google Button... brilliant idea, if done right (and I have no idea where to start doing it right). In this case it's the cartoons that are the joke, not the concept.
I mean, come on. How can you read that last panel and take the rest of it seriously? It works too well as a punchline!
Never investigated the daughter's physical state to see if she had been battered (turns out, she hit her father, not the other way around...)
Of course he didn't. As soon as he pulled up, Hiibel walked up to him. Obviously he's going to deal with the guy who's standing right in front of him first before turning his back on him to stick his head in the truck and check on the daughter. And based on his response to, "Can I see your ID?" it's pretty obvious, "Can I look in your truck," would have made him just blow up. At least, if I was the cop, that's what I'd have assumed.
Never told Mr. Hiibel why he stopped to investigate
It was the first thing he said. It was on the video and the transcript. I have no idea why the summary claims otherwise.
Simply told Mr. Hiibel that he was "investigating an investigation" and asked for ID
He should have repeated what he was investigating, sure. But Hiibel was being pretty deliberately obtuse himself. He responded, "I don't know about that," when the officer first mentioned the fighting report, so it's obvious he heard him. But then he kept repeating, "But I'm parked legally," pretending he thought it was just a traffic stop.
What does an ID give a cop in an investigation?
The ability to check for outstanding arrest warrants? He's investigating a possible domestic abuse. Now if he walks up to the girl and she has a bruise on her arm, but says she just whacked it on the door getting in, should he believe her or not? Well, if there's no reason except the vague report of "a guy in a pickup with a cowboy hat", probably he does. But if he runs the ID and finds out there have been a dozen prior complaints in this family, that makes a big difference.
Sure, if he has probable cause that something illegal happened,
Which he did...
he'll need to ID the person, but that can wait until he's taken back to the station.
But the results of running the ID affect whether he'll be taken back to the station. Say it's a relatively minor crime, and the cop gets enough evidence to arrest him. A normal guy with just this one offence might go quietly, but if he's got an outstanding murder conviction the cop doesn't know about, he's gonna want to stay out of custody at all costs. The cop's gotta know this, or the first he'll realize there's something out of the ordinary is when the guy turns on him.
Probable suspicion is not enough to arrest a person, or even ask for an ID.
I don't know US law, but in my opinion it's not enough for an arrest but it's certainly enough to ask for an ID.
A much more interesting question is, what is probable suspicion? An anonymous tip? A profile match? A black man in a posh neighbourhood? (Before you flame me, those are all examples of things that aren't good enough but cops will try to get away with.)
This is different, though. If they can *find* the guy to take him to court, they'll definitely win. The problem is that this spam is coming through hacked broadband users, so it's harder to trace back.
Of course, they could come at it through the registry of the.biz doman (I assume the one linked in the story is the one that's being spammed), but that's less certain to hold up in court. It could be joe job, after all.
This is pretty much how Jesse Cook got his break - the TV Guide channel started playing his flamenco guitar as background music, and thousands of people called them to find out where they could get a copy.
I'm not gonna touch the issue of the artists' permission, here, but it's a shame they don't plan to have an accessible song list.
The News.com article linked in one of the previous articles on this topic points out that not only would the browser have to be revised, but far too many web pages as well.
I think the web right now is an unholy mess, and forcibly invalidating most of it would be a good thing.
This lawsuit won't make plugins illegal. The patent holder can do whatever he likes with the patent, and it sounds like he wants to use the patent specifically against Microsoft (see the interview linked from the previous story). It'll definitely change the browser landscape, but it sounds like it could just as easily make it better as worse.
I used to be able to return CD's because I didn't like them. But I dunno if that would fly now.
My thought was this: find out how much of the purchase price normally goes to the shop owner, and how much normally goes to the RIAA. Then shoplift the CD, leave the store's cut on the counter and mail the the rest direct to the artist, including a note with both explaining why. (Of course, this still screws the government out of its share via taxes.)
Seems pretty clear that the average home use needs to be firewalled. People who even care will probably be the same people who want static IP's, guaranteed uptime, and other goodies: business users and geeks. So even if they do lock down the basic service, you can always get a business account.
The best would be for there to be a mid-range account which doesn't have to pay the full business price (and doesn't have the same service guarantees) but does get have no-hassles access. I'd be willing to pay $5 more per month or so for that.
Here's a neat idea: you get your account, and they ship you a cable modem and personal firewall device. You're free not to use it (well, maybe the TOS say you have to, but nobody listens to them anyway) but they tell you that if you don't you'll leave yourself open to hackers and viruses. 90% of people will plug it in and forget about it, while the geeks will disassemble it to see how it works and then set up their own.
We don't present id every time we speak to someone in real life because it's not efficient. But this isn't real life - it's a computer, and if it can do it automatically, why not?
He IS combining it with a Monsters, Inc. motif. Did you not read the - no, no you didn't.
He pitched a film, which got turned down, in which: a green, wisecracking eyeball character and his bigger, dumber buddy lived in Monster City and worked at the Monster Corporation. His plagiarism claims are: the Pixar eyeball looks almost exactly like his eyeball (note, it's not just 'an eyeball' - it's a green sphere of about the same size with a single eye, a big toothy mouth, and spindly arms and legs), they both have a buddy relationship with a bigger monster (note, it's not just 'a buddy relationship', it's very similar characters in a buddy relationship), and they live in similar cities and work at similar jobs.
> Yes, but will it run on my DoCoMo Java phone? (:
I wouldn't be surprised. ZPlet will run them as Java applets (it's the one that's used to put The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy on the web). I'm not sure how resource intensive it is, or how tied to being an applet instead of an app, but it wouldn't be too hard to modify.
It runs on the Gameboy. ISTR it runs on a toaster somewhere.
Yes, throwing a bunch of random solutions at the problem may find an answer and allow a population to continue living in a stressful environment, but it's a bit assuming to try to say the system has evolved to break down in this manner (though it is a rather elegant failure mode).
Well, at least we can say that since there appears to be a beneficial effect, there's no pressure to evolve away from this failure mode. How meaningful is the distinction between "evolved into" and "started that way and didn't evolve out of", really?
I avoid nVidia products on Linux because they lock up their driver core in a proprietary binary. I support ATi products on Linux. While the open source driver development is a little behind the curve, at least it exists. ATi Radeon 7500 works great on my box, and some newer boards are getting support now.
Well, that's fine, but nVidia's closed-source driver is updated often. And the developers are very responsive (or so I've heard), so if a crashing bug exists you could always do the old-fashioned thing and report it to them.
So, while I would prefer an open-source driver, I don't think it's worth dropping back to one which is "behind the curve".
Slashdot Mirror
That makes perfect sense. The Sims for Windows does not run under WineX, because it does something funky that WineX doesn't support. When they were porting it, they found it much easier to fix the original program to play nicely than to add workarounds to WineX. They didn't cripple the Windows version to make it impossible to play or anything, and they didn't say it'll never be playable - if somebody else wants to do the reverse-engineering, no problem. They're just not going to put any effort into it themselves.
I've seen people complain about that scene quite a bit, which is strange, since that's my single favourite scene in the first movie. (There are only three or four scenes I like *at all* in the first movie, but that one and Palpatine's final line are the only two worth mentioning.) I thought it was a great way to show the difference between the two traditions without distracting dialogue (seriously, based on the rest of the script, how good do you think the dialogue would have been, anyway?)
Deutsch formally described the quantum mechanical analogue to the Turing machine in 1985. Feynman did some earlier work on that, but Deutsch was the first to give a universal model that could be used to reason about quantum computability. (Although there were some problems with his model, so it's not as clear cut as the Turing machine.)
That realistic Zelda looks just like Morrowind. Sure it's technically impressive, but it could be any fantasy game. The cel-shaded Zelda at least had some character to it.
I remember doing the frosh week scavenger hunt at Waterloo, oh so many years ago. I mooned for "chemical weapons factory". It was the proudest moment of my university career.
Hell, here's one from 1978, and the URL's enough to tell you that it's hilarious.
Much older than that. System Shock (1994), where you wander around the 3D world, but most backstory and all character interaction other than fighting comes through email and diaries you discover. The earliest I know of is Portal (1986), which takes place entirely in a simulated computer interface.
Just a couple of days ago I found out about a cool metaclass hack to turn Python (the regular Python with the regular interpreter) into a metaclass based language. I posted about it on my Advogato journal. I mention this because I think it's pretty cool, and because I think people should see the alternative before thinking Phython is the only way to do this. That's not to say the new language isn't also a good choice.
I thought it was pretty obvious the "redesigns" were all intended as jokes. Nobody could possible take the first two seriously coming from a company with Google's track record, and the third looked like a parody of what it might look like post-IPO. It looked more like, after the first two pointed out how horrible Google *could* be (don't you all know sites that look just like those?), the third artist showed a more reasonable step backward that might happen if the design firms got their hands on it.
And then there's the Google Button... brilliant idea, if done right (and I have no idea where to start doing it right). In this case it's the cartoons that are the joke, not the concept.
I mean, come on. How can you read that last panel and take the rest of it seriously? It works too well as a punchline!
This is different, though. If they can *find* the guy to take him to court, they'll definitely win. The problem is that this spam is coming through hacked broadband users, so it's harder to trace back.
Of course, they could come at it through the registry of the .biz doman (I assume the one linked in the story is the one that's being spammed), but that's less certain to hold up in court. It could be joe job, after all.
This is pretty much how Jesse Cook got his break - the TV Guide channel started playing his flamenco guitar as background music, and thousands of people called them to find out where they could get a copy.
I'm not gonna touch the issue of the artists' permission, here, but it's a shame they don't plan to have an accessible song list.
This lawsuit won't make plugins illegal. The patent holder can do whatever he likes with the patent, and it sounds like he wants to use the patent specifically against Microsoft (see the interview linked from the previous story). It'll definitely change the browser landscape, but it sounds like it could just as easily make it better as worse.
I used to be able to return CD's because I didn't like them. But I dunno if that would fly now. My thought was this: find out how much of the purchase price normally goes to the shop owner, and how much normally goes to the RIAA. Then shoplift the CD, leave the store's cut on the counter and mail the the rest direct to the artist, including a note with both explaining why. (Of course, this still screws the government out of its share via taxes.)
Seems pretty clear that the average home use needs to be firewalled. People who even care will probably be the same people who want static IP's, guaranteed uptime, and other goodies: business users and geeks. So even if they do lock down the basic service, you can always get a business account.
The best would be for there to be a mid-range account which doesn't have to pay the full business price (and doesn't have the same service guarantees) but does get have no-hassles access. I'd be willing to pay $5 more per month or so for that.
Here's a neat idea: you get your account, and they ship you a cable modem and personal firewall device. You're free not to use it (well, maybe the TOS say you have to, but nobody listens to them anyway) but they tell you that if you don't you'll leave yourself open to hackers and viruses. 90% of people will plug it in and forget about it, while the geeks will disassemble it to see how it works and then set up their own.
We don't present id every time we speak to someone in real life because it's not efficient. But this isn't real life - it's a computer, and if it can do it automatically, why not?
He IS combining it with a Monsters, Inc. motif. Did you not read the - no, no you didn't.
He pitched a film, which got turned down, in which: a green, wisecracking eyeball character and his bigger, dumber buddy lived in Monster City and worked at the Monster Corporation. His plagiarism claims are: the Pixar eyeball looks almost exactly like his eyeball (note, it's not just 'an eyeball' - it's a green sphere of about the same size with a single eye, a big toothy mouth, and spindly arms and legs), they both have a buddy relationship with a bigger monster (note, it's not just 'a buddy relationship', it's very similar characters in a buddy relationship), and they live in similar cities and work at similar jobs.
Joe
> I think we can ALL agree that any form of "wonder number" is a bad thing.
We can? No we can't. I don't.
If you want to find some universal common ground, you're gonna have to pick something a lot narrower than that.
> Yes, but will it run on my DoCoMo Java phone? (:
I wouldn't be surprised. ZPlet will run them as Java applets (it's the one that's used to put The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy on the web). I'm not sure how resource intensive it is, or how tied to being an applet instead of an app, but it wouldn't be too hard to modify.
It runs on the Gameboy. ISTR it runs on a toaster somewhere.
Well, at least we can say that since there appears to be a beneficial effect, there's no pressure to evolve away from this failure mode. How meaningful is the distinction between "evolved into" and "started that way and didn't evolve out of", really?
JoePsi, the Jabber client
A good music player - how's freeamp doing these days?
Don't forget the emulators!
Well, that's fine, but nVidia's closed-source driver is updated often. And the developers are very responsive (or so I've heard), so if a crashing bug exists you could always do the old-fashioned thing and report it to them.
So, while I would prefer an open-source driver, I don't think it's worth dropping back to one which is "behind the curve".
Joe