What do they do when a stronger force shows up? They run away. God forbid they actually fight something that might beat them. Of course, this is the 'intelligent' thing to do in EVE, so you can't fault them.
IF anything it just shows how stupid eve is. Its called a greifer paradise because that's what the mechanics have dictated it must be. The game rewards preying on the weak, and brutally punishes standing up for yourself when outmatched.
I've never played EVE before (despite amazing CCP advertising like this story), but this part of your description caught my interest. Your description of the preconditions for a greifer's paradise matches real-life. And your description of the consequences matches much of human history. It sounds like CCP are building quite a good simulation, regardless of whether or not it makes for a good game.
I wonder if they will find the right conditions to cause player-run high-sec areas to develop that mirror modern life, or the class of "sporting" games that you describe inside of them.
Well there is your basic problem - you don't have reliable broadband, and you won't get it in the UK. When I lived there I would count an ISP as decent if we only lost service 5-10 times a year. Now that I live somewhere with reliable service I can actually rely on it being there. In the past two months our router hasn't dropped the line a single time.
The ubisoft DRM scheme is evil and I will never buy one of their games that uses it (although to be fair I might get Assassin's Creed 2 on the ps3). Phoning home during a single-player game is nothing short of crazy. Of course Ubisoft will take the lack of PC sales as evidence of piracy so it's not like there is any way to win.
Well I'm used to software companies claiming that they are not selling you a physical product. Value are not alone there. At least they are on record as saying they will switch off the authentication if they do go down, so yeah I do believe that I've paid for something that I'll get to keep. Not quite buying it, but close enough.
But lets be clear about who is being "cute" here. It's a clear choice between three options:
"Buy" a game on Steam and accept the small risks that it may not last forever. Developer gets paid.
"Buy" a physical game, accept the smaller risks that the disk gets damaged. Developer gets paid.
Download a ripped off copy, developer doesn't get paid
My internet connection doesn't go down because I pay for a decent connection and I live in a country that expects broadband to be permanently available. If I'm going to be away from home then offline mode seems to work fine in Steam.
DRM is inconvenient. At the minimum, you have to insert a disc
Nah, doesn't work like that. It used to be the case that DRM had to work that way, but then Steam came along and changed things. I've always preferred to buy games than pirate them, but then I value something that wasn't on your list of features: honesty. I prefer to make sure the developer gets paid instead of ripping them off.
Steam is convient and reliable: I can find the game that I want instantly and it downloads at line-speed regardless of how old or popular it is. I know that there are no trojans in the download, something that you can never be sure of with a torrent.
Blaming DRM is an excuse, it's an excuse to make your conscience feel better about ripping off the developer and taking their work for free.
If access to a system is disabled the strength of the password is irrelevant.
Verizon used a hidden backdoor to his system. How this is a favour is anyone's guess.
A company has supplied thousands of routers that have a hidden backdoor in them, with an unknown (but probably weak) level of security.
So yes he has informed people about it. Because that would be the best thing to do when you discover that an ISP that many people rely on has screwed them over in this fashion.
Those who have had a bad experience with Paypal and stopped using them.
Those who haven't had that experience yet.
For me it was a refund over a graphics card from ebay that was dead on arrival. They lied to me about the refund process until the card was returned to the seller and then once it was posted switched their line and insisted that they would never have agreed to a refund. I never used them again.
Nice service. I've used for a while to get around Ryanair's charges, and then for other online purchases.
I doubt that I'll continue using it though as I've got a Visa Debit turning up in the post that doesn't skim 5%. You considered cheaper payment options?
I pointed out the GP that avoiding writing in the first person was not grounds to dismiss the paper that he was criticising. I pointed out that given that writing in the first person was frowned upon in the majority of venues his criticism was bogus and cast doubts upon his opinions on what should be in the literature.
So while your two posts have conclusively proven that the Royal Society operates that way it doesn't change anything that I have said.
I hope you've learned something today.
Yes indeed. I've learnt that your reading comprehension is terrible.
The correct pronoun in a single author paper is still "we". If you are unaware of this then why would anything else that you say about the state of the literature be credible?
I'm guessing that you've only used a trackpad on windows? Apple have a different algorithm to convert motion (not position) on the trackpad into motion of the cursor on the screen. It's like a windows box with mouse acceleration turned up to max but it doesn't kick in as easily. Hard to explain, you just have to play with it to feel the difference.
Typing this on a MBP I can get to anywhere on the screen in a single swipe yet it retains enough control that I can select single pixels with precision. It's a joy to use and it just seems right - you don't really notice the difference until you switch back to windows and then trackpads are the most annoying thing in the world.
I only actually read the article after I replied to you but from the description it does look like just a list of URLs that is being passed over so it probably wouldn't be personal data. There are some corner cases though and TalkTalk have just opened up a huge can of worms as URLs can and do include things like user names.
Expectations of privacy seem to differ wildy. I don't consider myself to be paranoid but I assume that any data being routed across a network can (and will be) freely inspected by any intermediate point. I've always thought of privacy as something that the user has to supply on-top (ie SSL or VPN depending on what should be private).
In this case the information being extracted by "DPI" is the URL of http connections. Hardly an invasion of privacy - it's something that transparant proxies have been doing for years without provoking this kind of reaction. When you expect your ISP not to eavesdrop on your packets, would you really include URLs in your private data?
In the UK it is illegal to monitor a person priate converstaion on the phone... Talk-Talk customsers should report them to the police.
Is that because TalkTalk are recording telephone calls as well? Or perhaps you are suggesting that TalkTalk should be reported for this because there are lots of other unrelated things that they are not doing? Murder would be pretty high up the list I guess, drug running, terrorism....
They both resolve to hardware comparison / shopping sites. If you see either of them as something different then you need to check your machine for trojans.
A more appropriate comparison would be "did your phone company sign a contract not to look at the numbers that you call" given that we are talking about URLs here.
That's a very cool site, best description of the data protection act that I've read. It still leaves me wondering how the DPI that TalkTalk performed would breach it though. If they pass URLs to a third party without anyway to lookup who requested each URL then it doesn't count as personal data under the act. I also see that any personal data they did pass on would have been legal as long as it was correct and TalkTalk actually told people what they were doing (not that they did).
Why would wiretapping legislation be relevant? It wouldn't be a great stretch if this were some third-party breaking into the line between TalkTalk and its customers, but it is not. This is the ISP looking at the data that it has been sent - that is a huge stretch of wiretapping legislation and it is not clear that it would apply at all.
Sans encryption, nothing you do on the Internet is private
Very true, and yet within ten minutes there will still be several hundred posts in this story decrying the evil wiretappers of the man and how this is breach of basic civil liberties.
So here is a question (and it's only half devil's advocate) : If you send your data to a private company who has not signed any kind of contract to say that they will keep the data private: why wouldn't they look at it?
You seem to be lagging behind in your predictions somewhat. There have already been several stories this year about OSX trojans being discovered in the wild. This was the first hit on Google just now, there are many others.
OS-X has much bigger market-share than any of the linux distros so it makes sense it would be the first target. Once more of these are established I would expect more linux distros to be targeted, and then finally the emergence of unix-wide trojans.
The article doesn't say that the trojan was written for Windows either. Are you under the mistaken belief that there are no trojans out there for OSX or Linux?
I'm guessing that you replied to the post you intended to because you posted part of it. But seriously, did you reply to the right post?
I didn't mention Starcraft, or compare anything to it so I've got no idea what you are talking about.
Re:IBM PCs compared extremely poorly with Amigas
on
The Amiga Turns 25
·
· Score: 1
Bullshit. While bitplane graphics gave the Amiga the edge during the days of 2D sprite graphics, as soon as we started working out how to fake 3D it was the death of the platform. Raycasting and voxels require chunky displays to hit high performance. This is because data-locality (keeping all of the bits of the colour in the same location) reduces memory bandwidth when you are spitting out graphics one pixel at a time.
The only two ways around this were to perform a costly chunky -> bitplane conversion after rendering, or accept a huge penality in the number of live values in the renderer as you try and do pixels in batches of eight. This causes more spills and thus you get memory bandwidth and latency problems.
Both Doom and Comanche ran perfectly well on the Amiga.
Never saw either of them. Sure later on Doom got ported to every platform under the sun, but I never saw it released on the Amiga.
Commanche : Maximum Overkill was the game of the year. It was a huge revolution in PC gaming, you couldn't move without seeing it running demos in computer shops. Never saw the Amiga version. I've just had a look for it now, and while I can find hundreds of videos of the PC version / screenshots / nostalgic review etc I can't find anything about an Amiga version. What did it look like? Which models did it run on?
Slashdot Mirror
What do they do when a stronger force shows up? They run away. God forbid they actually fight something that might beat them. Of course, this is the 'intelligent' thing to do in EVE, so you can't fault them.
IF anything it just shows how stupid eve is. Its called a greifer paradise because that's what the mechanics have dictated it must be. The game rewards preying on the weak, and brutally punishes standing up for yourself when outmatched.
I've never played EVE before (despite amazing CCP advertising like this story), but this part of your description caught my interest. Your description of the preconditions for a greifer's paradise matches real-life. And your description of the consequences matches much of human history. It sounds like CCP are building quite a good simulation, regardless of whether or not it makes for a good game.
I wonder if they will find the right conditions to cause player-run high-sec areas to develop that mirror modern life, or the class of "sporting" games that you describe inside of them.
Well there is your basic problem - you don't have reliable broadband, and you won't get it in the UK. When I lived there I would count an ISP as decent if we only lost service 5-10 times a year. Now that I live somewhere with reliable service I can actually rely on it being there. In the past two months our router hasn't dropped the line a single time.
The ubisoft DRM scheme is evil and I will never buy one of their games that uses it (although to be fair I might get Assassin's Creed 2 on the ps3). Phoning home during a single-player game is nothing short of crazy. Of course Ubisoft will take the lack of PC sales as evidence of piracy so it's not like there is any way to win.
Well I'm used to software companies claiming that they are not selling you a physical product. Value are not alone there. At least they are on record as saying they will switch off the authentication if they do go down, so yeah I do believe that I've paid for something that I'll get to keep. Not quite buying it, but close enough.
But lets be clear about who is being "cute" here. It's a clear choice between three options:
Remind me, which option are you advocating again?
My internet connection doesn't go down because I pay for a decent connection and I live in a country that expects broadband to be permanently available. If I'm going to be away from home then offline mode seems to work fine in Steam.
Nah, doesn't work like that. It used to be the case that DRM had to work that way, but then Steam came along and changed things. I've always preferred to buy games than pirate them, but then I value something that wasn't on your list of features: honesty. I prefer to make sure the developer gets paid instead of ripping them off.
Steam is convient and reliable: I can find the game that I want instantly and it downloads at line-speed regardless of how old or popular it is. I know that there are no trojans in the download, something that you can never be sure of with a torrent.
Blaming DRM is an excuse, it's an excuse to make your conscience feel better about ripping off the developer and taking their work for free.
Don't you just love Apple innovation...
Oh my god the irony is blinding.
Here are the errors in your "thinking" :
So yes he has informed people about it. Because that would be the best thing to do when you discover that an ISP that many people rely on has screwed them over in this fashion.
There are only two kinds of people:
For me it was a refund over a graphics card from ebay that was dead on arrival. They lied to me about the refund process until the card was returned to the seller and then once it was posted switched their line and insisted that they would never have agreed to a refund. I never used them again.
Nice service. I've used for a while to get around Ryanair's charges, and then for other online purchases.
I doubt that I'll continue using it though as I've got a Visa Debit turning up in the post that doesn't skim 5%. You considered cheaper payment options?
Scientists have called this part of the sky "The Sun".
Ah I've done that a few times myself. Thought it made a strange reply :)
I pointed out the GP that avoiding writing in the first person was not grounds to dismiss the paper that he was criticising. I pointed out that given that writing in the first person was frowned upon in the majority of venues his criticism was bogus and cast doubts upon his opinions on what should be in the literature.
So while your two posts have conclusively proven that the Royal Society operates that way it doesn't change anything that I have said.
Yes indeed. I've learnt that your reading comprehension is terrible.
The correct pronoun in a single author paper is still "we". If you are unaware of this then why would anything else that you say about the state of the literature be credible?
For the [citation needed] crowd.
I don't know, for theory research we could just drop the Practical and then it is onomatopoeic
I'm guessing that you've only used a trackpad on windows? Apple have a different algorithm to convert motion (not position) on the trackpad into motion of the cursor on the screen. It's like a windows box with mouse acceleration turned up to max but it doesn't kick in as easily. Hard to explain, you just have to play with it to feel the difference.
Typing this on a MBP I can get to anywhere on the screen in a single swipe yet it retains enough control that I can select single pixels with precision. It's a joy to use and it just seems right - you don't really notice the difference until you switch back to windows and then trackpads are the most annoying thing in the world.
I only actually read the article after I replied to you but from the description it does look like just a list of URLs that is being passed over so it probably wouldn't be personal data. There are some corner cases though and TalkTalk have just opened up a huge can of worms as URLs can and do include things like user names.
Expectations of privacy seem to differ wildy. I don't consider myself to be paranoid but I assume that any data being routed across a network can (and will be) freely inspected by any intermediate point. I've always thought of privacy as something that the user has to supply on-top (ie SSL or VPN depending on what should be private).
In this case the information being extracted by "DPI" is the URL of http connections. Hardly an invasion of privacy - it's something that transparant proxies have been doing for years without provoking this kind of reaction. When you expect your ISP not to eavesdrop on your packets, would you really include URLs in your private data?
Is that because TalkTalk are recording telephone calls as well? Or perhaps you are suggesting that TalkTalk should be reported for this because there are lots of other unrelated things that they are not doing? Murder would be pretty high up the list I guess, drug running, terrorism....
They both resolve to hardware comparison / shopping sites. If you see either of them as something different then you need to check your machine for trojans.
A more appropriate comparison would be "did your phone company sign a contract not to look at the numbers that you call" given that we are talking about URLs here.
That's a very cool site, best description of the data protection act that I've read. It still leaves me wondering how the DPI that TalkTalk performed would breach it though. If they pass URLs to a third party without anyway to lookup who requested each URL then it doesn't count as personal data under the act. I also see that any personal data they did pass on would have been legal as long as it was correct and TalkTalk actually told people what they were doing (not that they did).
Why would wiretapping legislation be relevant? It wouldn't be a great stretch if this were some third-party breaking into the line between TalkTalk and its customers, but it is not. This is the ISP looking at the data that it has been sent - that is a huge stretch of wiretapping legislation and it is not clear that it would apply at all.
Very true, and yet within ten minutes there will still be several hundred posts in this story decrying the evil wiretappers of the man and how this is breach of basic civil liberties.
So here is a question (and it's only half devil's advocate) :
If you send your data to a private company who has not signed any kind of contract to say that they will keep the data private: why wouldn't they look at it?
You seem to be lagging behind in your predictions somewhat. There have already been several stories this year about OSX trojans being discovered in the wild. This was the first hit on Google just now, there are many others.
OS-X has much bigger market-share than any of the linux distros so it makes sense it would be the first target. Once more of these are established I would expect more linux distros to be targeted, and then finally the emergence of unix-wide trojans.
The article doesn't say that the trojan was written for Windows either. Are you under the mistaken belief that there are no trojans out there for OSX or Linux?
I'm guessing that you replied to the post you intended to because you posted part of it. But seriously, did you reply to the right post?
I didn't mention Starcraft, or compare anything to it so I've got no idea what you are talking about.
Bullshit. While bitplane graphics gave the Amiga the edge during the days of 2D sprite graphics, as soon as we started working out how to fake 3D it was the death of the platform. Raycasting and voxels require chunky displays to hit high performance. This is because data-locality (keeping all of the bits of the colour in the same location) reduces memory bandwidth when you are spitting out graphics one pixel at a time.
The only two ways around this were to perform a costly chunky -> bitplane conversion after rendering, or accept a huge penality in the number of live values in the renderer as you try and do pixels in batches of eight. This causes more spills and thus you get memory bandwidth and latency problems.
Never saw either of them. Sure later on Doom got ported to every platform under the sun, but I never saw it released on the Amiga.
Commanche : Maximum Overkill was the game of the year. It was a huge revolution in PC gaming, you couldn't move without seeing it running demos in computer shops. Never saw the Amiga version. I've just had a look for it now, and while I can find hundreds of videos of the PC version / screenshots / nostalgic review etc I can't find anything about an Amiga version. What did it look like? Which models did it run on?