Real and WMA? I think I'd rather just stab myself with an icepick. What the hell is wrong with these morons? More restictive DRM attached to EXTREMELY crappy players is going to somehow take the web by storm, despite all historical evidence to the contrary?
Nah, I heard it on the soundtrack to a Jet Li movie. It's also pretty commonly played on a local radio station near my house (WYNF, 96.5) though the edit out the profanity, which makes it significantly shorter.
There was also an excellent "Lounge Singer Style" cover of it on Dawn of the Dead
I'm older than Pac-Man, and while I agree that Blink 182 sucks, you're bound to have heard them if you listen to any modern alternative. And Disturbed's Down with the Sickness is excellently angry, and I just heard a cover they did of Genesis's Land of Confusion on the radio this morning.
Just because you don't keep up with modern music, doesn't mean anything you haven't heard sucks.
Sure. I mean, in terms of actual caliber, there is very little difference between a.22 (target rifle) and a.3030 (or a.3006) which are both high powered rifles with a hefty recoil. The.22 is hampered in all of it's forms by the fact that it is a very light bullet, propelled by not so much powder...Even if you're firing the "long" ammunition (which most people do), it's not very powerful, though the magnum ammo is a bit nastier.
With pistols, usually the larger caliber translates to a larger shell, with more powder, a weightier bullet, etc, all of which bear on recoil. Sometimes you get larger caliber handguns that are capable of being modified to fire different calibers of ammunition, which would effect the recoil, etc. Also high end guns can have recoil compensation built in which confuses the whole issue, and the weight of the individual gun matters...
All good reasons why GTA isn't much good for training elite teen assassins.
Think so? Do you know how many shooting guides there are out in the world?
The whole point is, there is no way to become an expert marksman without shooting a gun. Even that doesn't guarantee expert status. It's practice practice practice.
There are two other "oddball" things that you have to have actual experience to know about. One is the fact that most people have a "dominant" eye, same as they have a dominant hand...You can tell which is which by using a simple test. Line up two distant points, so that the close one obscures the far one when you have both eyes open...Then close one eye at a time...If the second object becomes visible when you have one eye closed, the closed eye is dominant (because the picture you see with both eyes is from that eye's "perspecitive" with the other eye mainly filling in depth information). So you have to make sure you're sighting with the correct eye for optimum results.
The other thing is how you pull the trigger. Lot of people sight very carefully, then jerk the trigger...Even the slightest movement will fractionally alter the direction the barrel is pointing, and that tiny shift is significant over distance. Exhale, and squeeze the trigger...Pulling on it with any force will cause solid deflection.
It all depends on the weapon. A.22 is pretty pathetic, in terms of recoil, though it can be an effective weapon due to penetrating power and accuracy. Likewise, 9mm's and.38's. A beefier pistol like a.44,.45, or.357 has surprising recoil.
Even discounting recoil, pistols are suprisingly difficult to shoot. A rifle target's outer ring is about the same size as the inner ring of a pistol target, and it takes a lot of practice to be able to make the bullets go where you want 'em to. They're simply not accurate weapons, and very few video games I've ever played took that into account to the degree it actually applies in my experience.
I've occasionally run across games that had something resembling an authentic sight on their weapons, but even there, there is no way to prepare an individual for the actual weight and sway of a weapon. It takes decent arm strength to hold a rifle steady enough for accurate shooting, in every position except prone. Likewise for a pistol, especially since pistol accuracy is notional for all but experienced shooters.
In games, the protagonist is often considered to have arm strength sufficient to hold a weapon steady, as well as the sort of ingrained experience you need to effectively compensate for the different recoil of different weapons. A 30.06 caliber rifle, for example, has very little barrel deflection when the trigger is pulled (despite substantial kick), whereas even a 9mm pistol has significant upward deflection after a shot. I've seen many a dumbass with a.45 empty half a clip and end up more a danger to birds than their target.
The only weapon I've ever seen that was usually rendered with any sort of accuracy was the shotgun, but "aiming" a shotgun is pretty simple. The problem with the shotgun is recoil, ammunition, and reloading, and those are not rendered accurately. Unless you're using a.410 or something small, you're going to be dealing with significant recoil...I've seen people try to "shoot from the hip" without firmly seating the butt of the gun against their hip, and actually have the recoil jerk the gun right out of their hand.
Ammunition for a shotgun is another issue...While all shotgun ammunition is lethal against humans at the right range (the "right" range for birdshot would probably involve actually touching the target with the barrel), the extreme variety of ammunition commonly available would probably confound a gamer who is used to having only one option, usually suitable for large targets (e.g. slugs or buckshot).
Then comes the loading issue...Unless you end up with a semi-auto, you're going to have to learn to work a pump slide, and it is trickier than it looks when you're in a hurry...Very easy to "short-shuck" and jam a shell. New pump shotguns also tend to have very stiff action, which can result in some humiliating moments while you're wrestling with the slide. Even with a semi-auto loading is awkward, and, unless you modify the gun, you're going to be limited to 3 or 4 shots, rather than the 10 or 12 from the game-style riot shotgun.
I've been around guns my whole life, and I've been playing games for about the same amount of time (though true shooters didn't come out until I was in my teens). My aim tends to be good in games and in rl, but I couldn't say which one came first. I'd go so far as to say that games definitely helped me improve my kinesthetic sense, but the ability to sort of "know" where you're pointing your weapon is only the tiniest part of being able to use one effectively.
The antenna part is obvious to me...I remember a while back an article about some people snooping those RFID gas cards using a high gain antenna, and it only makes sense that you're going to be able to pick up a radio signal with a sensitive antenna, once that signal is in the open.
I'm not as clear on the "energizing" process. I understand that you get a stronger signal based on the amount of energy imparted to the chip, same as you would with any other radio transmitter. But what kind of upper limit exists on the process? Obviously the transmitter must have a physical limit, beyond which more power just burns it out. And since the transmission medium for the charge is air, I'd think your range there would also be pretty limited. I know you can jack the power on those RFID door card readers so that you can wave the card within a couple of feet of the door for it to trip.
Is there any way to energize an unshielded card from more than, say, 5 feet away, or is the danger primarily from people with readers brushing up against you for a reading?
The Silmarillion is basically a collection of notes shuffled into chronological order. While I am glad they were made available, it doesn't change the fact that C. Tolkien is a talentless profiteering hack, who went well beyond any normal standard in overmarketing.
It's almost like you're saying Chris Tolkien is only pimping incomplete scraps of his fathers work to make a cheap buck for himself. If that were true, you'd expect him to have written a bunch more books with "Tolkien" in really big print on the back, in an attempt to fool the ignorant into buying what amounts to extremely amaturish fanfict.
(Special place in hell reserved for Chris Tolkien and Frank Herbert Jr.)
Yea, yea Pullman, we all know yer deep, and with deepness comes pretentious liberal-arty technosnobbery. "Oh think of the children, they should be out exercising their imaginations, not playing mindless things on their computers." Like a working knowledge of the literary cannon equals having imagination.
Newsflash buddy: I'm a gamer. I've been one my whole life. Some of my first memories are playing Pac-Man on the old table top consoles, with my knees folded up under me so I could actually see what was going on. I'm also a published author, I acted Shakespeare in college, I married someone who has a masters in fricking STORYTELLING. I've got a degree in Philosophy and Computer Science. I've got three lvl 60's in WoW, and I am a hardcore rocket bitch who's mowed down his share of innocent bystanders in GTA. I read yer books, and I've read better.
So I want to know, I really want to know, what my life of gaming has "cost" me? I guess I could have been a one dimensional liberal arts geek, utterly convinced of my own self-worth, and so narrowminded as to think that there is only one way to grow into a mature well-rounded adult...Though knowing as many pretentious snobs as I know, "well-rounded" and "mature" seem to be optional.
Why is it that knowledge of the arts makes you "well-rounded" and knowledge of the sciences doesn't? I think well-rounded means you know both not just the fluffy stuff. Guess that's just me.
I've got the book, and it is amusing, though not so much for the advanced student. Usually it's more along the lines of taking bad physics, and explaining why it's bad.
From memory (so take with a grain of salt), I can remember an example dealing with a little known superhero named "Ant Man" who, obviously could become super small (or was always super small?), and yet had strength and inertia comperable to a full grown man...Wonder why he didn't catch on?
There was another one...I believe it was some villian trying to locate batman...The method was setting off bombs around the city, and measuring the seismic shockwaves to map the location of local caves, which of course is actually feasable, and he goes into the physics behind it.
Struck me as more of a novelty gag, but he did seem to have a solid grounding in physics (and comics =)
This doesn't mean that public schools are doing a good job. The more I help my cousins with their school work, the more I consider homeschooling my own kids.
The thing that absolutely kills me is how much emphasis is put on method as opposed to results. Isn't the idea to get the right answer, and if so, does it matter how you get it? That's my beef with the analytical side. With the fluffy side it's just the opposite...Okay, fine, we want kids to be creative, but that doesn't mean every half-assed bullshit answer is "right in it's own way". If they can't support their answer with a reasoned argument, it's wrong.
It all comes down to the empahsis. Logic, critical thought, and reasoned argument are all missing from our current curriculum, on all levels. Until that changes, we're going to keep slipping.
Beyond that, the question of health effects isn't even addressed. That's the whole point right? How do environmental nanoparticles effect those who are exposed to them? So they had nanoparticles, and ancient egypt existed, so it must not be too bad, right? Or maybe there was more than one reason that they died young...Just because something existed in the past doesn't mean it's not a danger in the here and now.
Regardless, if they were using lead based cosmetics they're not exactly a model to emulate.
It's just a design philosophy. I don't do it in Windows, but with linux the PAM source is easy to obtain and I code a decent number of webapps, so that authentication code is easily available to me.
I got 'sploited early in my admin career, and since then I've made it a policy to leave (documented) backdoors in the code...A changed root password automagically emails the new root password (encrypted) to the designated root administrator...This has caused issues in the past, but it's usually sellable to management. I know people who install BackOrifice on their own servers for the same purpose.
With PAM, it's pretty easy to just kludge a little conditional logic into your custom authentication to make it check for a username/password combination, and then call the apps of your choice. Catching and emailing a picture is easy. You can also route people into a honeypot, log their activities, or just give 'em the finger...Don't reccomend this one for the outside world. Piss off the script kiddies only if your bandwidth and server power is unlimited.
I've got a honeypot mentality...If someone wants in, they can probably outsmart me given enough time, so I give 'em an early target...a misconfigued webapp that's "vulnerable" to sql injection, password stored in an insecure spot, an unpatched server. All that stuff is worthless if it faces the web (too many false positives) but if your primary concern is internal, it's gold.
Anyone else use the post-it-on-the-monitor as a booby trap? If anyone uses the post-it password on my monitor it sets off a series of security cascades that culminates with me getting a picture of them on my phone.
One day I hope to catch someone other than a janitor trying to surf porn. =P
My biggest problem with them is the crappy mobo's they install by default. Substandard bios, breaks the standard for power connectors, and lower bus/bridge performance...Run a machine with the same stats and a better motherboard, and the difference is night and day.
Just not kosher...If I wanted to have to buy an entirely new machine to upgrade every time, or pay dell an obscene amount for any sort of upgrade, I'd just rent the damn things.
Also, I saw this one the other day, after the whole "we can take stem cells from embryo's without hurting the embryo" announcement...Some fundie immediately spouted up with the logic that that solitary stem cell could also grow into a person, therefore to use it was still to kill an embryo.
Cloning! Even if you're just building something silly like a bladder, that's a whole host of issues. And what happens when we start using them to treat brain damage?
Nothing will kill the controvercy around stem cells. If we found a way to turn post-consumer styrofoam into stems cells, while whitening teeth and curing cancer at the same time, the religious groups would still scream about it.
It's not about stem cells, see? Or rather, it is but it's not how they're obtained...That's just a nice straw man that they've been holding up (Your godless science is eating our unborn babies!).
What they're really scared of is all the stuff that they see stem cells leading to. Build a new kidney, fine. Does that kidney have a soul? Why not build a whole new, soulless, person? It's a whole new bio-medical can of worms, and it scares the hell out of them.
Fortunately, most people are in favor of stem cell research, so it's unlikely the fundies will be able to halt it forever.
Slashdot Mirror
Real and WMA? I think I'd rather just stab myself with an icepick. What the hell is wrong with these morons? More restictive DRM attached to EXTREMELY crappy players is going to somehow take the web by storm, despite all historical evidence to the contrary?
Too many idiots are buying into the Zune hype.
Nah, I heard it on the soundtrack to a Jet Li movie. It's also pretty commonly played on a local radio station near my house (WYNF, 96.5) though the edit out the profanity, which makes it significantly shorter.
There was also an excellent "Lounge Singer Style" cover of it on Dawn of the Dead
I'm older than Pac-Man, and while I agree that Blink 182 sucks, you're bound to have heard them if you listen to any modern alternative. And Disturbed's Down with the Sickness is excellently angry, and I just heard a cover they did of Genesis's Land of Confusion on the radio this morning.
Just because you don't keep up with modern music, doesn't mean anything you haven't heard sucks.
You sir, are beyond retarded.
.22 is pretty pathetic, in terms of recoil, though it can be an effective weapon due to penetrating power and accuracy.
A
Talk about your fact-free cherry-picked quote.
Sure. I mean, in terms of actual caliber, there is very little difference between a .22 (target rifle) and a .3030 (or a .3006) which are both high powered rifles with a hefty recoil. The .22 is hampered in all of it's forms by the fact that it is a very light bullet, propelled by not so much powder...Even if you're firing the "long" ammunition (which most people do), it's not very powerful, though the magnum ammo is a bit nastier.
With pistols, usually the larger caliber translates to a larger shell, with more powder, a weightier bullet, etc, all of which bear on recoil. Sometimes you get larger caliber handguns that are capable of being modified to fire different calibers of ammunition, which would effect the recoil, etc. Also high end guns can have recoil compensation built in which confuses the whole issue, and the weight of the individual gun matters...
All good reasons why GTA isn't much good for training elite teen assassins.
Think so? Do you know how many shooting guides there are out in the world?
The whole point is, there is no way to become an expert marksman without shooting a gun. Even that doesn't guarantee expert status. It's practice practice practice.
There are two other "oddball" things that you have to have actual experience to know about. One is the fact that most people have a "dominant" eye, same as they have a dominant hand...You can tell which is which by using a simple test. Line up two distant points, so that the close one obscures the far one when you have both eyes open...Then close one eye at a time...If the second object becomes visible when you have one eye closed, the closed eye is dominant (because the picture you see with both eyes is from that eye's "perspecitive" with the other eye mainly filling in depth information). So you have to make sure you're sighting with the correct eye for optimum results.
The other thing is how you pull the trigger. Lot of people sight very carefully, then jerk the trigger...Even the slightest movement will fractionally alter the direction the barrel is pointing, and that tiny shift is significant over distance. Exhale, and squeeze the trigger...Pulling on it with any force will cause solid deflection.
It all depends on the weapon. A .22 is pretty pathetic, in terms of recoil, though it can be an effective weapon due to penetrating power and accuracy. Likewise, 9mm's and .38's. A beefier pistol like a .44, .45, or .357 has surprising recoil.
.45 empty half a clip and end up more a danger to birds than their target.
.410 or something small, you're going to be dealing with significant recoil...I've seen people try to "shoot from the hip" without firmly seating the butt of the gun against their hip, and actually have the recoil jerk the gun right out of their hand.
Even discounting recoil, pistols are suprisingly difficult to shoot. A rifle target's outer ring is about the same size as the inner ring of a pistol target, and it takes a lot of practice to be able to make the bullets go where you want 'em to. They're simply not accurate weapons, and very few video games I've ever played took that into account to the degree it actually applies in my experience.
I've occasionally run across games that had something resembling an authentic sight on their weapons, but even there, there is no way to prepare an individual for the actual weight and sway of a weapon. It takes decent arm strength to hold a rifle steady enough for accurate shooting, in every position except prone. Likewise for a pistol, especially since pistol accuracy is notional for all but experienced shooters.
In games, the protagonist is often considered to have arm strength sufficient to hold a weapon steady, as well as the sort of ingrained experience you need to effectively compensate for the different recoil of different weapons. A 30.06 caliber rifle, for example, has very little barrel deflection when the trigger is pulled (despite substantial kick), whereas even a 9mm pistol has significant upward deflection after a shot. I've seen many a dumbass with a
The only weapon I've ever seen that was usually rendered with any sort of accuracy was the shotgun, but "aiming" a shotgun is pretty simple. The problem with the shotgun is recoil, ammunition, and reloading, and those are not rendered accurately. Unless you're using a
Ammunition for a shotgun is another issue...While all shotgun ammunition is lethal against humans at the right range (the "right" range for birdshot would probably involve actually touching the target with the barrel), the extreme variety of ammunition commonly available would probably confound a gamer who is used to having only one option, usually suitable for large targets (e.g. slugs or buckshot).
Then comes the loading issue...Unless you end up with a semi-auto, you're going to have to learn to work a pump slide, and it is trickier than it looks when you're in a hurry...Very easy to "short-shuck" and jam a shell. New pump shotguns also tend to have very stiff action, which can result in some humiliating moments while you're wrestling with the slide. Even with a semi-auto loading is awkward, and, unless you modify the gun, you're going to be limited to 3 or 4 shots, rather than the 10 or 12 from the game-style riot shotgun.
I've been around guns my whole life, and I've been playing games for about the same amount of time (though true shooters didn't come out until I was in my teens). My aim tends to be good in games and in rl, but I couldn't say which one came first. I'd go so far as to say that games definitely helped me improve my kinesthetic sense, but the ability to sort of "know" where you're pointing your weapon is only the tiniest part of being able to use one effectively.
The antenna part is obvious to me...I remember a while back an article about some people snooping those RFID gas cards using a high gain antenna, and it only makes sense that you're going to be able to pick up a radio signal with a sensitive antenna, once that signal is in the open.
I'm not as clear on the "energizing" process. I understand that you get a stronger signal based on the amount of energy imparted to the chip, same as you would with any other radio transmitter. But what kind of upper limit exists on the process? Obviously the transmitter must have a physical limit, beyond which more power just burns it out. And since the transmission medium for the charge is air, I'd think your range there would also be pretty limited. I know you can jack the power on those RFID door card readers so that you can wave the card within a couple of feet of the door for it to trip.
Is there any way to energize an unshielded card from more than, say, 5 feet away, or is the danger primarily from people with readers brushing up against you for a reading?
The Silmarillion is basically a collection of notes shuffled into chronological order. While I am glad they were made available, it doesn't change the fact that C. Tolkien is a talentless profiteering hack, who went well beyond any normal standard in overmarketing.
It's almost like you're saying Chris Tolkien is only pimping incomplete scraps of his fathers work to make a cheap buck for himself. If that were true, you'd expect him to have written a bunch more books with "Tolkien" in really big print on the back, in an attempt to fool the ignorant into buying what amounts to extremely amaturish fanfict.
(Special place in hell reserved for Chris Tolkien and Frank Herbert Jr.)
Yea, yea Pullman, we all know yer deep, and with deepness comes pretentious liberal-arty technosnobbery. "Oh think of the children, they should be out exercising their imaginations, not playing mindless things on their computers." Like a working knowledge of the literary cannon equals having imagination.
Newsflash buddy: I'm a gamer. I've been one my whole life. Some of my first memories are playing Pac-Man on the old table top consoles, with my knees folded up under me so I could actually see what was going on. I'm also a published author, I acted Shakespeare in college, I married someone who has a masters in fricking STORYTELLING. I've got a degree in Philosophy and Computer Science. I've got three lvl 60's in WoW, and I am a hardcore rocket bitch who's mowed down his share of innocent bystanders in GTA. I read yer books, and I've read better.
So I want to know, I really want to know, what my life of gaming has "cost" me? I guess I could have been a one dimensional liberal arts geek, utterly convinced of my own self-worth, and so narrowminded as to think that there is only one way to grow into a mature well-rounded adult...Though knowing as many pretentious snobs as I know, "well-rounded" and "mature" seem to be optional.
Why is it that knowledge of the arts makes you "well-rounded" and knowledge of the sciences doesn't? I think well-rounded means you know both not just the fluffy stuff. Guess that's just me.
I've got the book, and it is amusing, though not so much for the advanced student. Usually it's more along the lines of taking bad physics, and explaining why it's bad.
From memory (so take with a grain of salt), I can remember an example dealing with a little known superhero named "Ant Man" who, obviously could become super small (or was always super small?), and yet had strength and inertia comperable to a full grown man...Wonder why he didn't catch on?
There was another one...I believe it was some villian trying to locate batman...The method was setting off bombs around the city, and measuring the seismic shockwaves to map the location of local caves, which of course is actually feasable, and he goes into the physics behind it.
Struck me as more of a novelty gag, but he did seem to have a solid grounding in physics (and comics =)
This doesn't mean that public schools are doing a good job. The more I help my cousins with their school work, the more I consider homeschooling my own kids.
The thing that absolutely kills me is how much emphasis is put on method as opposed to results. Isn't the idea to get the right answer, and if so, does it matter how you get it? That's my beef with the analytical side. With the fluffy side it's just the opposite...Okay, fine, we want kids to be creative, but that doesn't mean every half-assed bullshit answer is "right in it's own way". If they can't support their answer with a reasoned argument, it's wrong.
It all comes down to the empahsis. Logic, critical thought, and reasoned argument are all missing from our current curriculum, on all levels. Until that changes, we're going to keep slipping.
Beyond that, the question of health effects isn't even addressed. That's the whole point right? How do environmental nanoparticles effect those who are exposed to them? So they had nanoparticles, and ancient egypt existed, so it must not be too bad, right? Or maybe there was more than one reason that they died young...Just because something existed in the past doesn't mean it's not a danger in the here and now.
Regardless, if they were using lead based cosmetics they're not exactly a model to emulate.
It's just a design philosophy. I don't do it in Windows, but with linux the PAM source is easy to obtain and I code a decent number of webapps, so that authentication code is easily available to me.
I got 'sploited early in my admin career, and since then I've made it a policy to leave (documented) backdoors in the code...A changed root password automagically emails the new root password (encrypted) to the designated root administrator...This has caused issues in the past, but it's usually sellable to management. I know people who install BackOrifice on their own servers for the same purpose.
With PAM, it's pretty easy to just kludge a little conditional logic into your custom authentication to make it check for a username/password combination, and then call the apps of your choice. Catching and emailing a picture is easy. You can also route people into a honeypot, log their activities, or just give 'em the finger...Don't reccomend this one for the outside world. Piss off the script kiddies only if your bandwidth and server power is unlimited.
I've got a honeypot mentality...If someone wants in, they can probably outsmart me given enough time, so I give 'em an early target...a misconfigued webapp that's "vulnerable" to sql injection, password stored in an insecure spot, an unpatched server. All that stuff is worthless if it faces the web (too many false positives) but if your primary concern is internal, it's gold.
Anyone else use the post-it-on-the-monitor as a booby trap? If anyone uses the post-it password on my monitor it sets off a series of security cascades that culminates with me getting a picture of them on my phone.
One day I hope to catch someone other than a janitor trying to surf porn. =P
Free speech applies even to speech you don't agree with, that's the whole point.
As long as no one is harmed during the filming (which is covered by existing laws), then who are you to decide what other people are allowed to see?
My biggest problem with them is the crappy mobo's they install by default. Substandard bios, breaks the standard for power connectors, and lower bus/bridge performance...Run a machine with the same stats and a better motherboard, and the difference is night and day.
Just not kosher...If I wanted to have to buy an entirely new machine to upgrade every time, or pay dell an obscene amount for any sort of upgrade, I'd just rent the damn things.
That's got nothing to do with the game economy, that has to do with the real economy.
How do you plan on fixing that?
Also, I saw this one the other day, after the whole "we can take stem cells from embryo's without hurting the embryo" announcement...Some fundie immediately spouted up with the logic that that solitary stem cell could also grow into a person, therefore to use it was still to kill an embryo.
Cloning! Even if you're just building something silly like a bladder, that's a whole host of issues. And what happens when we start using them to treat brain damage?
There are tons of ethical issues surrounding stem cells. Where we get them is just the first step.
Meh. Life is only sacred until it's born, remember? After it's born you can harvest all the stem cells you want!
Nothing will kill the controvercy around stem cells. If we found a way to turn post-consumer styrofoam into stems cells, while whitening teeth and curing cancer at the same time, the religious groups would still scream about it.
It's not about stem cells, see? Or rather, it is but it's not how they're obtained...That's just a nice straw man that they've been holding up (Your godless science is eating our unborn babies!).
What they're really scared of is all the stuff that they see stem cells leading to. Build a new kidney, fine. Does that kidney have a soul? Why not build a whole new, soulless, person? It's a whole new bio-medical can of worms, and it scares the hell out of them.
Fortunately, most people are in favor of stem cell research, so it's unlikely the fundies will be able to halt it forever.