There are ways other than just signals/slots and MVC to architect a GUI. Anyone interested in being able to test an app with an interface (not just graphical) should look at Presenter First design. It's a simple design pattern that helps guide you in decoupling your view from your presentation logic and it's data model. Combined with Mock Objects and Dependency Injection, esp. constructor injection, MVP can provide a strong backbone for any GUI application.
Let's see... click... browse... oh, it's a "product". Move along.
The blog entry compares this to Bittorrent. That's great that they've exceeded BT's abilities, but BT would never have taken off if you had to pay for it. That's the whole point. That's like coming up with a wicked new IP algorithm and trying to sell it. Good luck with that.
> the author to 'put it all together' and produce an excellent image.
The parent post marginalizes the amount of work that goes into lighting and texturing and composition, even when using photos as source textures or billboarded props. Getting that slick pavement look, the hazy atmosphere, modelling vehicles and taillights that look that realistic are all amazing feats of creativity and patience, and more than just 'putting it all together'!
Gilles Tran has many other stunning renders with POV-ray, many are at http://www.oyonale.com
Does the whole ARG movement seem too scary to anybody else? When suspension of disbelief in trade for deep alternate realities gets crossed with careful plot and planning by media marketing departments, I can't help but think of it as mind control at it's finest.
How far do these things have to go before your "game" calls you at night and players are no longer able to stop playing? As if Evercrack wan't bad enough. People lost jobs and friends over "The Beast" http://www.seanstewart.org/beast/intro/ and it's ilk. The whole idea is fascinating to any escapist mind (a large demographic on this site I'm sure), yet it is deeply troubling. I get a creepy "Total Recall" feeling when I think about actually stepping into one of these games. How easy would it be to hide criminal intent behind the thick veil of these "games"?
When we open our minds to these things we are leaving room for any corporation who cares to set them up (Microsoft having the most notable track record!) to lead us down whatever paths they choose, and we'll believe it because it's invaded our information flow. We'll get emails, faxes, phone calls; all exist only in the game world.
Anyway, there's some more interesting reading about these ideas in this paper. I hope I never see these mind traps on my news sites again, frankly.
I know YMMV, but seriously this is a poorly executed mod. The idea is great and they suceeded to a point but this is no Counterstrike. The front-end sucks almost completely, and the resulting game seems often buggy. The trigger for multiplay involved some sort of insane action sequence like getting into and out of a car or something. Until they improve their interface immensely, I recommend you don't bother.
I see the problem coming when the unknowing masses start downloading this patch and thus making all of our "it's just an optional patch" handwaiving seem like inaction.
So here's my advice: start sending those stupid f**king "I've given you a virus!" emails to people, like the one about jdbgmgr.exe (the teddybear icon). Except instead of being aimed at system lint, say it's this new patch's executable.
The brainless masses will eat this up as they usually do, and all of/.'s readers will get it filtered out of their masterfully protected inboxes anyway.
Maybe DRM is an argument for technical know-how haves and have-nots, in the end: If you care to share, figure it out. Otherwise, DRM you to hell:)
Slashdot readers seem really embarassing on this topic:
Most of what has been described above is wrong: Assigning colors to a 3d object only projects it's surface, so that can't describe a (for instance) concave 4d surface.
Other posters have described "The 4th Dimension" by instead describing a tesseract which is just a helpful device to help our 3D brains understand the extended connectedness of 4D objects. The 7 cubes method does not describe a hypercube, it describes a hypercube that is "unfolded" into a wholly-3d object so that we can "see" it. Six sqaures on paper is 3d since the paper is in the 3d world, but it's not a 3d cube until you fold it up...
4 dimensions simply means adding a coordinate to our world's three. You have x, y, z. Add w, and you have a four-dimensional system that can be used to describe things like Rubiks puzzles. Einstein simply used the convenient method of thinking of time as a value for a similar extra coordinate to describe his theories, he was not defining "the" 4th dimension "as time".
Really, the various stories like Flatland are good at helping people understand these concepts, but you have to realize that it's not magic, it's just another degree of freedom in space. For the puzzle, this means a large order more possible states == harder == higher nerd points for solving it!
Well, to answer the last question in the post, yes, it's hopelessly naive.
Sorry, but there will always be people out there who started early and worked their ass off to get solid experience and skills. They may even be younger than you. You will not be chosen over these people, unless it is for a company that is doomed to failure for lack of HR smarts...
My advice: Find your own 20 worker bees, and work hard to make something to show to companies. Then they might be willing to take the considerable risk you allude to.
Re: What use is AI without an operating platform
on
AI Going Nowhere?
·
· Score: 1
Mathematics may be beautiful, but spending time trying to use "some very complicated math to solve problems" is what wastes the AI field's time, and is probably why it has ended up driven by evil capitalism like most things in the US.
Nature did not sit down and solve equations on paper, draw out plots, and then engineer a brain to "solve problems." Problems invented brains to help themselves replicate. If we want to simulate this with modern computers, it shouldn't be done with Grand Unified Smart Equations or whatever the parent poster's poor soul is working on.
But the other notes brought up in this thread don't help much. No crap it's all "just an assemblage of many, many simpler systems", that doesn't take much to prove anymore. But the response that we've covered that ground with NN's and that didn't help is missing the point entirely (not to mention misapplying NN's)
I think AI research is just afraid to get dirty with things like breeding and self-assembly and error and mutation. No, GA's didn't produce Deus Ex Machina either, but it's pretty stupid to try and make a mind by looking at the one we have now without the context of how we got it. That's like trying to make a car by painting a picture of one. We should stop focusing on "common sense" and finish what Brooks started with subsumption: bottom-up, just like fishes from the sea...
And PS, let the kids build their little robots: there's not much proof that ant colonies aren't smarter than us.
Sure, evolt.org has old ones, but only for Windows... didn't you need Trumpet TCP/IP back then?
Didn't anyone browse the NCSA FTP directory? I found source code for version 1.2, the oldest I could get that has a chance of compiling in Linux... maybe I'll try it out on a Sun machine tomorrow...
Maybe someone else can try this out? I can't get it all to compile in Gentoo, even after hunting down few easy bugs...
Wouldn't it be cool to use xmosiac, rather than talk about how great things were back in the day? Where is./'s retro sense gone?
I used to play SSG's Warlords2 like a crack addict. I recently found an open source
project to clone it, much like freecraft did for warcraft. It's still in development, but projects like this are the bread and butter of classic gaming (sans emulators, of course.)
I grow weary of misled programmers trashing XP/Agile because of the name, or because it's ill defined in popular (web) media. PLEASE check this stuff out, it may be EXACTLY what you've been looking for:
How about a CPU that has one fiber line for each opcode, and the processing happens as the signal passes down the pipe: 1 "cycle" per op. New parallel arch? Can't bandgaps do this?
Slashdot Mirror
There are ways other than just signals/slots and MVC to architect a GUI. Anyone interested in being able to test an app with an interface (not just graphical) should look at Presenter First design. It's a simple design pattern that helps guide you in decoupling your view from your presentation logic and it's data model. Combined with Mock Objects and Dependency Injection, esp. constructor injection, MVP can provide a strong backbone for any GUI application.
Let's see... click... browse... oh, it's a "product". Move along.
The blog entry compares this to Bittorrent. That's great that they've exceeded BT's abilities, but BT would never have taken off if you had to pay for it. That's the whole point. That's like coming up with a wicked new IP algorithm and trying to sell it. Good luck with that.> the author to 'put it all together' and produce an excellent image.
The parent post marginalizes the amount of work that goes into lighting and texturing and composition, even when using photos as source textures or billboarded props. Getting that slick pavement look, the hazy atmosphere, modelling vehicles and taillights that look that realistic are all amazing feats of creativity and patience, and more than just 'putting it all together'!
Gilles Tran has many other stunning renders with POV-ray, many are at http://www.oyonale.com
Does the whole ARG movement seem too scary to anybody else? When suspension of disbelief in trade for deep alternate realities gets crossed with careful plot and planning by media marketing departments, I can't help but think of it as mind control at it's finest.
How far do these things have to go before your "game" calls you at night and players are no longer able to stop playing? As if Evercrack wan't bad enough. People lost jobs and friends over "The Beast" http://www.seanstewart.org/beast/intro/ and it's ilk. The whole idea is fascinating to any escapist mind (a large demographic on this site I'm sure), yet it is deeply troubling. I get a creepy "Total Recall" feeling when I think about actually stepping into one of these games. How easy would it be to hide criminal intent behind the thick veil of these "games"?
When we open our minds to these things we are leaving room for any corporation who cares to set them up (Microsoft having the most notable track record!) to lead us down whatever paths they choose, and we'll believe it because it's invaded our information flow. We'll get emails, faxes, phone calls; all exist only in the game world.
Anyway, there's some more interesting reading about these ideas in this paper. I hope I never see these mind traps on my news sites again, frankly.
I know YMMV, but seriously this is a poorly executed mod. The idea is great and they suceeded to a point but this is no Counterstrike. The front-end sucks almost completely, and the resulting game seems often buggy. The trigger for multiplay involved some sort of insane action sequence like getting into and out of a car or something. Until they improve their interface immensely, I recommend you don't bother.
I see the problem coming when the unknowing masses start downloading this patch and thus making all of our "it's just an optional patch" handwaiving seem like inaction. So here's my advice: start sending those stupid f**king "I've given you a virus!" emails to people, like the one about jdbgmgr.exe (the teddybear icon). Except instead of being aimed at system lint, say it's this new patch's executable. The brainless masses will eat this up as they usually do, and all of /.'s readers will get it filtered out of their masterfully protected inboxes anyway.
Maybe DRM is an argument for technical know-how haves and have-nots, in the end: If you care to share, figure it out. Otherwise, DRM you to hell :)
Most of what has been described above is wrong: Assigning colors to a 3d object only projects it's surface, so that can't describe a (for instance) concave 4d surface.
Other posters have described "The 4th Dimension" by instead describing a tesseract which is just a helpful device to help our 3D brains understand the extended connectedness of 4D objects. The 7 cubes method does not describe a hypercube, it describes a hypercube that is "unfolded" into a wholly-3d object so that we can "see" it. Six sqaures on paper is 3d since the paper is in the 3d world, but it's not a 3d cube until you fold it up...
4 dimensions simply means adding a coordinate to our world's three. You have x, y, z. Add w, and you have a four-dimensional system that can be used to describe things like Rubiks puzzles. Einstein simply used the convenient method of thinking of time as a value for a similar extra coordinate to describe his theories, he was not defining "the" 4th dimension "as time".
Really, the various stories like Flatland are good at helping people understand these concepts, but you have to realize that it's not magic, it's just another degree of freedom in space. For the puzzle, this means a large order more possible states == harder == higher nerd points for solving it!
My advice: Find your own 20 worker bees, and work hard to make something to show to companies. Then they might be willing to take the considerable risk you allude to.
Nature did not sit down and solve equations on paper, draw out plots, and then engineer a brain to "solve problems." Problems invented brains to help themselves replicate. If we want to simulate this with modern computers, it shouldn't be done with Grand Unified Smart Equations or whatever the parent poster's poor soul is working on.
But the other notes brought up in this thread don't help much. No crap it's all "just an assemblage of many, many simpler systems", that doesn't take much to prove anymore. But the response that we've covered that ground with NN's and that didn't help is missing the point entirely (not to mention misapplying NN's)
I think AI research is just afraid to get dirty with things like breeding and self-assembly and error and mutation. No, GA's didn't produce Deus Ex Machina either, but it's pretty stupid to try and make a mind by looking at the one we have now without the context of how we got it. That's like trying to make a car by painting a picture of one. We should stop focusing on "common sense" and finish what Brooks started with subsumption: bottom-up, just like fishes from the sea...
And PS, let the kids build their little robots: there's not much proof that ant colonies aren't smarter than us.
Sure, evolt.org has old ones, but only for Windows... didn't you need Trumpet TCP/IP back then?
Didn't anyone browse the NCSA FTP directory? I found source code for version 1.2, the oldest I could get that has a chance of compiling in Linux... maybe I'll try it out on a Sun machine tomorrow...
Maybe someone else can try this out? I can't get it all to compile in Gentoo, even after hunting down few easy bugs...
Wouldn't it be cool to use xmosiac, rather than talk about how great things were back in the day? Where is ./'s retro sense gone?
They should take a note from Nintendo...
"Be there in a sec, I just gotta blast these MicroPayments to get the gold Peppercoin..."
Online gamers are hilarious when they get miffed about cheaters. Spoils their clean little virtual world, it does.
Bottom line is:
In the real world, people cheat. Often.
I used to play SSG's Warlords2 like a crack addict. I recently found an open source project to clone it, much like freecraft did for warcraft. It's still in development, but projects like this are the bread and butter of classic gaming (sans emulators, of course.)
- The Rules
- The Wiki Roadmap
And more on-topic: A nice IBM article about automation w/ Ant and JUnit.How about a CPU that has one fiber line for each opcode, and the processing happens as the signal passes down the pipe: 1 "cycle" per op. New parallel arch? Can't bandgaps do this?