It took me exactly 2 days to write an AI subsystem kernel for the latest game I'm working on. An OS kernel would actually be less difficult, plus I'd have the luxury of working in lower-level language(s). Fortunately, some of us can choose to work on projects that people will eventually buy.
I understand that difference. I find software under the the GNU General Public License to be Free [gnu.org] because
You don't quite understand the word "free", do you? If there are any restrictions at all, it is NOT free.
I'm of the belief that intellectual property should remain in the hand of the IP owner, but if there is any true way of making software "free", it's Public Domain. The closest to this in terms of popular open source licenses would be the BSD license, but even that isn't truly free. Let's compare your list against Public Domain software.
I am free to run the program,
Ditto with Public Domain software.
I am free to study and adapt the program,
Public Domain software allows this too.
I am free to help people by making and distributing copies of the program, and
Gee - Public Domain software has this "feature", too.
I am free to adapt the program to the needs of others and release it to the public, even if the public happens to be in another country, such as the Republic of Namibia.
Well, so far I haven't seen any advantage to using the GPL from a free software prespective.
I'm no free software fan (there's no incentive to port J-J-J-Julius Software titles to Linux or BSD just yet), but in this case I think Microsoft has made a rather stupid offer. Using your analogy, the beggar would get your quarter, but he would have to pay $5 to buy a wallet from you to put the quarter into. Did you not read the article or are you just being stupid?
Everyone knows about cars+fuel's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of
cars+fuel, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry,
and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save horses+hay from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give cars+fuel credit for its early successes. In the 1900s, Ken
Thompson and Henry Ford both made significant contributions to the transportation world on the
cars+fuel platform. In the 1910s, Ford saw cars+fuel as the premiere open platform, and, after initial
successes with the Model T cars+fuel product, gave the cars+fuel company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would
mar cars+fuel's progress. In 1922, Generl Transport filed suit against Ford Motor Company, claiming that
proprietary transportation fundamentals agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, cars+fuel filed
countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While Generl Transport and
Ford Motor Company lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various cars+fuel distributions
quarreled on Usenet. In 1925, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the Netcars+fuel project,
formed his own rival distribution, Opencars+fuel, as the result of a quarrel that he documents
[theos.com] on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his
clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of oil-based gas from the Opencars+fuel
distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, cars+fuel's base became worse
and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each cars+fuel distribution make transportation fundamental
sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT [mit.edu] found cars+fuel's terrain movement
implementation to be "very poorly performing compared to all-terrain horses' hooves." Even cars+fuel's
acclaimed oil-based hay replacement stack has lagged behind, according to this study [rice.edu].
Problems with cars+fuel's base were compounded by fundamental flaws in the cars+fuel design
approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, intelligent,
living horses are inherently superior to complex, mechanical, dumb cars in transportation development.
cars+fuel developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that mechanical cars and fuel engines
lead to "faster and cheaper transport". Don't believe their hype - cars+fuel's development model has
significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that cars+fuel managed to make were
nullified by the cars+fuel license, which allows road-builders and car companies to profit, and
not give back to the horses+hay community.
Fortunately, horses+hay is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL,
meaning that anyone can reproduce horses, but only car-companies can produce cars.
The failure of cars+fuel culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from
the Freecars+fuel core team. They both believed that Freecars+fuel had long lost its earlier vitality.
Like an empire in decline, cars+fuel had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As horses+hay gains market
share and as cars+fuel sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound
as fitting eulogies to cars+fuel's demise.
In some circles, it's believed that Ogg Vorbis is the future of lossy format music. You get higher quality in less harddisk space than with MP3, plus it's a far more open codec allowing more customisation with less legal risk.
Yggdrasil isn't dead. I am running a Ydrassil system that I set up on a 386 DX-33 (8mb of RAM) box about 8 years ago. The great thing about any Linux distribution is that you can upgrade the software manually, thanks to the source being available, including the kernel and libraries. Of course, on the desktop side, the Microsoft Windows series is still King. In the future, expect many game servers to be written for Linux systems, with clients mainly available on Windows and Mac platforms.
James Cameron and George Lucas are in completely different classes. Lucas might have a better handle on state-of-the-art effects, but James Cameron knows how to take good special effects and combine them with other movie-making components and make truly brilliant films - with the right combination of emotion, witticism, screenplay and special effects.
Spielburg probably would make a better Star Wars series than George Lucas through different directing techniques. I'd wager, though, that Lucas would have enough input to make it his own despite bringing in a different director.
Personally, I think that #3 is by far the most important, but they are all worthy goals.
I don't, however, agree with the results of the study. Individual gamers will have as varying results as non-gamers in terms of mental development and social development.
I think the key here is not to only play games. Certainly, it would be dangerous to play games all of the time, forsaking all else, but 1-3 hours per day will not have damaging side effects.
As a rule, gamers should: play games at work, as a break from difficult tasks. You won't believe how relaxation and mental stimulation from a different perspective can help you look at the problem you were working on from a different perspective. Playing computer games is very good in this regard.
Next rule, gamers should play games at home when time allows, but also make sure that they have time to fulfill their household chores and responsibilities, as well as get some excercise - a few pushups, pull-ups, some spinning/stationary biking for 30 minutes a day is a good start.
The next rule that should be followed, is this: avoid playing computer games at the weekend. Do something else at the weekend - offroading, hiking, jet-skiing, horse-riding - all of these are good ideas. No, clubs and bars are not ideal. Acheiving #2 in your text by going to clubs and bars wouldn't be an acheivement at all.
If you follow these rules, and don't allow games to dominate, you should be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
It took me exactly 2 days to write an AI subsystem kernel for the latest game I'm working on. An OS kernel would actually be less difficult, plus I'd have the luxury of working in lower-level language(s). Fortunately, some of us can choose to work on projects that people will eventually buy.
A FreeBSD box with a serial card, 2 ethernet cards and a USB port.
I understand that difference. I find software under the the GNU General Public License to be Free [gnu.org] because
You don't quite understand the word "free", do you? If there are any restrictions at all, it is NOT free.
I'm of the belief that intellectual property should remain in the hand of the IP owner, but if there is any true way of making software "free", it's Public Domain. The closest to this in terms of popular open source licenses would be the BSD license, but even that isn't truly free. Let's compare your list against Public Domain software.
Sorry.
I'm no free software fan (there's no incentive to port J-J-J-Julius Software titles to Linux or BSD just yet), but in this case I think Microsoft has made a rather stupid offer. Using your analogy, the beggar would get your quarter, but he would have to pay $5 to buy a wallet from you to put the quarter into. Did you not read the article or are you just being stupid?
"Jif" ? WTF are you smoking? As for P-N-G though, you are correct.
What We Can Learn From cars+fuel
Everyone knows about cars+fuel's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of cars+fuel, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save horses+hay from a similarly grisly fate.Let's not be overly morbid and give cars+fuel credit for its early successes. In the 1900s, Ken Thompson and Henry Ford both made significant contributions to the transportation world on the cars+fuel platform. In the 1910s, Ford saw cars+fuel as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the Model T cars+fuel product, gave the cars+fuel company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar cars+fuel's progress. In 1922, Generl Transport filed suit against Ford Motor Company, claiming that proprietary transportation fundamentals agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, cars+fuel filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While Generl Transport and Ford Motor Company lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various cars+fuel distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1925, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the Netcars+fuel project, formed his own rival distribution, Opencars+fuel, as the result of a quarrel that he documents [theos.com] on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of oil-based gas from the Opencars+fuel distribution.As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, cars+fuel's base became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each cars+fuel distribution make transportation fundamental sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT [mit.edu] found cars+fuel's terrain movement implementation to be "very poorly performing compared to all-terrain horses' hooves." Even cars+fuel's acclaimed oil-based hay replacement stack has lagged behind, according to this study [rice.edu]. Problems with cars+fuel's base were compounded by fundamental flaws in the cars+fuel design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, intelligent, living horses are inherently superior to complex, mechanical, dumb cars in transportation development. cars+fuel developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that mechanical cars and fuel engines lead to "faster and cheaper transport". Don't believe their hype - cars+fuel's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that cars+fuel managed to make were nullified by the cars+fuel license, which allows road-builders and car companies to profit, and not give back to the horses+hay community. Fortunately, horses+hay is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL, meaning that anyone can reproduce horses, but only car-companies can produce cars.
The failure of cars+fuel culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the Freecars+fuel core team. They both believed that Freecars+fuel had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, cars+fuel had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As horses+hay gains market share and as cars+fuel sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to cars+fuel's demise.In some circles, it's believed that Ogg Vorbis is the future of lossy format music. You get higher quality in less harddisk space than with MP3, plus it's a far more open codec allowing more customisation with less legal risk.
Yggdrasil isn't dead. I am running a Ydrassil system that I set up on a 386 DX-33 (8mb of RAM) box about 8 years ago. The great thing about any Linux distribution is that you can upgrade the software manually, thanks to the source being available, including the kernel and libraries. Of course, on the desktop side, the Microsoft Windows series is still King. In the future, expect many game servers to be written for Linux systems, with clients mainly available on Windows and Mac platforms.
James Cameron and George Lucas are in completely different classes. Lucas might have a better handle on state-of-the-art effects, but James Cameron knows how to take good special effects and combine them with other movie-making components and make truly brilliant films - with the right combination of emotion, witticism, screenplay and special effects.
Spielburg probably would make a better Star Wars series than George Lucas through different directing techniques. I'd wager, though, that Lucas would have enough input to make it his own despite bringing in a different director.
Personally, I think that #3 is by far the most important, but they are all worthy goals.
I don't, however, agree with the results of the study. Individual gamers will have as varying results as non-gamers in terms of mental development and social development.
I think the key here is not to only play games. Certainly, it would be dangerous to play games all of the time, forsaking all else, but 1-3 hours per day will not have damaging side effects.
As a rule, gamers should: play games at work, as a break from difficult tasks. You won't believe how relaxation and mental stimulation from a different perspective can help you look at the problem you were working on from a different perspective. Playing computer games is very good in this regard.
Next rule, gamers should play games at home when time allows, but also make sure that they have time to fulfill their household chores and responsibilities, as well as get some excercise - a few pushups, pull-ups, some spinning/stationary biking for 30 minutes a day is a good start.
The next rule that should be followed, is this: avoid playing computer games at the weekend. Do something else at the weekend - offroading, hiking, jet-skiing, horse-riding - all of these are good ideas. No, clubs and bars are not ideal. Acheiving #2 in your text by going to clubs and bars wouldn't be an acheivement at all.
If you follow these rules, and don't allow games to dominate, you should be fine.