The idea is that the comet started fires that wiped out these people. They would not have affected the rest of the globe hugely due to the interfering presence of oceans. Although you would expect the smoke of a burning continent to have an effect.
According to TFA, the suggested impact happened at a time when "35 genera of the continent's mammals went extinct". Would that count as "seeing it in the ground?"
Why are you telling me this? I'm in favor of short copyright terms, if at all, but what has this got to do with which works an infinite copyright extension act would affect?
You probably also would have had more luck with a pen than with oil paints (unless you're already a painter). This says more about you and what kind of modeler you want to be than about how good a program Blender is.
N.B. Pov-ray isn't actually open source. It's open-ish source in that one can download the source and create modified versions, but only under strict terms. Not a bad model for what they want to do though.
You also want to look into LADSPA effects. Ardour is the program for recording what you come up with (and thanks to jack, there's no reason you couldn't record your live sets without extra work) and playing back any background sound you might want. Hydrogen is a great drum machine. Thanks to jack, you can make several programs play along together (e.g. backing tracks) as well as doing whatever it is you do.
The problem with this is that it implies fitness for a particular purpose, and, worse, that the Internet is a linear construction rather than a web. I like to think of passing notes around a classroom or something.
Best analogy: The Internet is a worldwide crowd of computers passing little notes to one another. Pass enough notes, and you can say the lengthiest thing you want.
This analogy is best because packets and notes written on paper are very similar, and the issues of the Internet are similar to those involved in note passing. Congestion in this model results from one computer getting more notes than it can easily handle at once. Contrast this with a lame tubes analogy, which makes it sound like tubes themselves can get clogged. In the Internet, the actions of the nodes are the important things, and the medium over which they communicate is largely irrelevant except to those responsible for making it work.
An open source project has the luxury of making publicly available pre-releases, and updating them as they improve. Beryl, for one, is still down in the.2 releases. It's around 20% done, and it's unreasonable to expect it to be as stable as finished software (not that I ever had instability or crashes in the time I ran it).
I sort of agree, but in AI I'm also looking for something other than more skilled opponents. One thing AI can provide is characters that seem real. In a game like Thief, it's very important that the NPCs behave in a realistic fashion, because you spend most of your time watching them rather than forcing them to react. When you do want them to notice you, they behave in an entirely predictable fashion (they always run to investigate noises when you fire an arrow or throw something into a corner). The better you are, the more you watch them, and the less real they seem. But online play isn't a substitute in this instance, because it's impossible to put a player into a guard's position. A human player would always know there was a thief about, since that's the point of the game. Human players can't provide the same range of characters that NPCs can. Neither can they emote in the same way.
Sometimes I wonder what motivates a troll like this. It's not really annoying, and no one is going to click on an obviously worthless link labeled [goat.cx]. Do they get a thrill just from taking up four lines on someone's computer screen?
Right on. I think Halo shows us that in a lot of cases, acting smart will get you farther than actually being smart. Yelling things and diving around (and sometimes napping) made the Covenant seem much more real and made it so easy to assume that they were brighter than they were. Especially when you coupled that with an ability and willingness to use vehicles.
I think implementing telepathy along with AI is a big mistake. I'd like to see individual NPCs learn (and communicate what they learn if they witness something), but if they all share a mind it's lame.
I think a lot of people *do* want that. I certainly do. Mostly we have to play multiplayer games if we want opponents who behave in an interesting manner, but I don't always want a quick online deathmatch. One reason I enjoyed Thief so much was that interacting with the NPCs was more than just who could shoot most while getting hit the least. Even then, the fact that they were so dumb was kind of a pain. Sure, it would be a much more difficult game if AIs had some brainpower, but a lot of gamers like a challenge. I would be thrilled if it took at least a tiny bit of thought to predict the AIs actions. Obviously it would spell trouble if all the AIs in a level just ganged up on you and they all knew your style, but what if AIs in other rooms didn't necessarily know you were there unless you tipped them off with noises or corpes, and didn't know what you were up to unless someone who had escaped you told them? That would be an interesting and dynamic game.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you pretend to RTFA?
The idea is that the comet started fires that wiped out these people. They would not have affected the rest of the globe hugely due to the interfering presence of oceans. Although you would expect the smoke of a burning continent to have an effect.
According to TFA, the suggested impact happened at a time when "35 genera of the continent's mammals went extinct". Would that count as "seeing it in the ground?"
Why are you telling me this? I'm in favor of short copyright terms, if at all, but what has this got to do with which works an infinite copyright extension act would affect?
Perpetual copyright wouldn't necessarily be retroactive. They could apply only to works created after a certain date.
su -c 'rm -rf /', of course.
Note: don't.
You probably also would have had more luck with a pen than with oil paints (unless you're already a painter). This says more about you and what kind of modeler you want to be than about how good a program Blender is.
N.B. Pov-ray isn't actually open source. It's open-ish source in that one can download the source and create modified versions, but only under strict terms. Not a bad model for what they want to do though.
You're assuming that a strange and different interface is flawed.
Typical whiner.
That's what I'd expect... but every time I see or read about the guy it's a snooze.
For someone with such a reputation you would expect him to be more interesting.
You also want to look into LADSPA effects. Ardour is the program for recording what you come up with (and thanks to jack, there's no reason you couldn't record your live sets without extra work) and playing back any background sound you might want. Hydrogen is a great drum machine. Thanks to jack, you can make several programs play along together (e.g. backing tracks) as well as doing whatever it is you do.
Yeah pretty scary. Binoculars that pick out hard-to-see things for you.
Would it have killed you to do five minutes of research before posting this?
The problem with this is that it implies fitness for a particular purpose, and, worse, that the Internet is a linear construction rather than a web. I like to think of passing notes around a classroom or something.
Best analogy:
The Internet is a worldwide crowd of computers passing little notes to one another. Pass enough notes, and you can say the lengthiest thing you want.
This analogy is best because packets and notes written on paper are very similar, and the issues of the Internet are similar to those involved in note passing. Congestion in this model results from one computer getting more notes than it can easily handle at once. Contrast this with a lame tubes analogy, which makes it sound like tubes themselves can get clogged. In the Internet, the actions of the nodes are the important things, and the medium over which they communicate is largely irrelevant except to those responsible for making it work.
Oh, I don't know, maybe 5% of its features are really useful?
An open source project has the luxury of making publicly available pre-releases, and updating them as they improve. Beryl, for one, is still down in the .2 releases. It's around 20% done, and it's unreasonable to expect it to be as stable as finished software (not that I ever had instability or crashes in the time I ran it).
I sort of agree, but in AI I'm also looking for something other than more skilled opponents. One thing AI can provide is characters that seem real. In a game like Thief, it's very important that the NPCs behave in a realistic fashion, because you spend most of your time watching them rather than forcing them to react. When you do want them to notice you, they behave in an entirely predictable fashion (they always run to investigate noises when you fire an arrow or throw something into a corner). The better you are, the more you watch them, and the less real they seem. But online play isn't a substitute in this instance, because it's impossible to put a player into a guard's position. A human player would always know there was a thief about, since that's the point of the game. Human players can't provide the same range of characters that NPCs can. Neither can they emote in the same way.
Case in point: every time you type "awful," my browser renders it as "aweful."
An algorithm that does what, now? Invents new sounds to fill the supersonic range?
Sometimes I wonder what motivates a troll like this. It's not really annoying, and no one is going to click on an obviously worthless link labeled [goat.cx]. Do they get a thrill just from taking up four lines on someone's computer screen?
Did you even read the thread? It is clearly written that Michael Buesch is actually *inhuman*.
(Just kidding -- I think he did exactly the right thing, and was very polite)
Right on. I think Halo shows us that in a lot of cases, acting smart will get you farther than actually being smart. Yelling things and diving around (and sometimes napping) made the Covenant seem much more real and made it so easy to assume that they were brighter than they were. Especially when you coupled that with an ability and willingness to use vehicles.
I think implementing telepathy along with AI is a big mistake. I'd like to see individual NPCs learn (and communicate what they learn if they witness something), but if they all share a mind it's lame.
I think a lot of people *do* want that. I certainly do. Mostly we have to play multiplayer games if we want opponents who behave in an interesting manner, but I don't always want a quick online deathmatch. One reason I enjoyed Thief so much was that interacting with the NPCs was more than just who could shoot most while getting hit the least. Even then, the fact that they were so dumb was kind of a pain. Sure, it would be a much more difficult game if AIs had some brainpower, but a lot of gamers like a challenge. I would be thrilled if it took at least a tiny bit of thought to predict the AIs actions. Obviously it would spell trouble if all the AIs in a level just ganged up on you and they all knew your style, but what if AIs in other rooms didn't necessarily know you were there unless you tipped them off with noises or corpes, and didn't know what you were up to unless someone who had escaped you told them? That would be an interesting and dynamic game.
Are you thinking of Riker in Insurrection?