the point is: the deep blue software does not do pure lookahead. it does very sophistcated selective lookahead, and by doing that it could certainly beat a computer 100 times as fast as long as that machine would do pure lookahead.
Linux users are aware of compiling java code natively
the only scenarios i can think of where gcj really makes any sense is when you have some java code (preferrably some that does not make very extensive use of the class library) that you want to link to from a statically compiled language or when you are writing little command line tools in java where jvm startup time and jitc warmup are the two major performance bottlenecks and not runtime speed.
Umm, no. The continents are "The Americas". As in, the three of them.
And consequently, each of them is an America. Which in turn, makes the peop... (i guess there's no need to type any further)
ps: seems like this "american" thing has become some kind of a pet flame of mine, although personally i am only bothered if any of those people who consider feeling hurt when they are called "USian" are reacting equally negative on "US American", which is my preferred way of putting it, at least whenever context does not provide enough clarity itself.
> While some people don't understand it, the whole reason Gordon > doesn't talk is because you are Gordon. If Gordon talked, it > would ruin the character-as-player that the games run on.
This used to be a brilliant idea at the time of half-life 1 and worked great in that game, but only because all those dialogs were so much shorter than the ones in hl2. Same thing with the "no cutscenes" policy, both were working perfectly when NPCs never talked for longer than something like 5 seconds or so, but in hl2 the same thing completely ruined the storytelling.
Those long minutes in the dr kleiner lab could have worked very well if they pushed you out of gordon and did some camera work, but this way the player would ineviteably start jumping and throwing things around while the NPCs reeled off text line after text line, completely ruining any trace of immersion.
but the bar you need to jump to get beyond point and click has risen, relative to what the user needs to, say, get a game running.
on the c64 once you got to the point where you could actually do anything with the system the step into programming wasn't very big (even though that programming was certainly not as comfortable as today's IDEs).
in addition to that motivation was bigger since while the stuff you could achieve as a beginner was certainly not on par with professionally written software the gap was much smaller than today.
ps: a quite unrelated thing: i guess many of the people who would start basic or pascal on the homecomputer back in the old days have been stepping into HTML "programming" in more recent years. very friendly learning curve until you get to the point where you see colors on the screen but nearly impossible to scale up to some serious programming skill
i had a similar situation a while ago and to no surprise i was the one who did 95% of the coding, since both of us had the priority on "getting the job done" instead of "learning as much as possible".
still i quickly noticed how my code got better whenever i at least tried to keep a pace at which the other guy could understand most of what i did, so in the end i got into that teaching role (that always teaches yourself a lot too) without deliberately forcing me there and the other guy got more than we initially expected.
if you now deliberately let the other guy solve some of the easier problems himself (which is not "alone") then the learning result might even be close to optimal, because doing little things right will teach you more than barely finding something that might pass as a solution to a bigger problem if that means employing bad practices.
> Do I have to play certain particular games to know what you mean? If so, which ones?
That one's easy: Tropico and Tropico 2.
Got Tropico 2 (that's about pirate economy in the carribean) for 2.99 one or two months ago, good fun. Technically very similar to the first Tropico (you're a Fidel Castro like dictator over a few hundred "sims") but a completely inversed economy.
Wasn't there rumors on a forced merging of firaxis with top-pop?
Thinking of "CivCity" this could be a really nice excuse to steal as much gameplay concepts as possible from the tropico games, because they are really great games to steal from.
A problem i see with the 3 and 4 of the series is how little space it gives you to turn around a botched game - you usually know wether you win or not by the time you reach the middle ages.
In the original civilization (which had a number of conceptual bugs that allowed for a few completely failsafe strategies) the most interesting games where those in which you would greatly fall behind the other empires but still somehow managed to gain the upper hand again by strategically sacrificing half your cities (or so) just to steal that one technology you so desperately needed...
the diplomacy system of 3, while being crude compared to 4, was the only one that did really lead to "alliance catastrophies" like the one that lead to ww1 or block building like after ww2.
anyways, personally i still think alpha centauri is the best civ.
> To resolve this one might come up with a sort of USB hub > that plugs directly into the wall and supplies power only, > and no serial connection, but if you're going to go to > those lengths, why not create a new standard and design it > for powering things, instead of re-using an old standard?
If there was any chance of this to happen then it would have already happened one or two decades ago. I see the obvious absence of such a standard as a very good proof that creating such a standard is not in the interest of the gadget manufacturers.
But with usb powering it is an entirely different story, manufacturers include the usb power option not because they have been waiting for a low-power plug standard all the time but because the devices need usb connectivity anyways and if you already have that then it's just convenient to have it as a power option too.
And being able to charge your phone, camera, mp3 player or pda virtually anywhere where power is available without bringing a vendor-specific cable would be such a great thing, sadly we are not there yet, most of those toys do not come with a standard usb type "b" jacks but need custom adaptor cables. and taking a powered hub + _one_ wall with you while traveling is definitely less of a mess than one for each device (multiply wall-warts by two for in-car power supply, but soon we will see usb blugs in cars, only for attaching mp3 media first but i guess once that becomes mainstream people/carmakers will soon understand the usefullness of a whole array of usb jacks under the dashboard, for powering stuff)
Oh, and i'd bet that before we see a specialized low-voltage short range (the first implies the second) power distribution standard that actually makes it to widespread real world use we will see an usb specification that is updated to the needs of more power-hungry applications, like quick-charging batteries.
while this is interesting, don't we, as double-helix driven beings, have a lot of dormant genes that are only triggered by extreme environmental conditions?
these things could mutate over hundreds of generations without ever harming individual fitness and then suddenly get triggered, exposing a shitload of mutations at once, spread in different variations over the whole population.
Those new findings would only strengthen an already strong mechanism.
> Still, if it came down to dollar terms, I'd be willing > to share my office with a colleague or even move into a > cubicle in exchange for a mere $5,000/year pay rise
But will your efficiency be the same in a cubicle? If you put that into the calculation as well your pay rise could easily be much smaller, probably even negative for some tasks.
Which brings us to the most important point: some kinds of work benefit more from a nice seperate office, some less, some even benefit from a shared room.
And don't underestimate the incentive factor, a wage rise might be more attractive for the individual employee than getting a separate office, but his coworkers won't take much notice of that. Promoting someone to a better office on the other hand can provide a much greater "i can accomplish that too" motivation boost for his coworkers.
agreeing a little more, i would even like to see an fps without a health level indicator at all. doom3 made me realize this, i was more trying not to get hit because of the random rotation and visual blur penalty than because of some abstract numerical value decreasing. of course you would probably want to lower the overall level of difficulty then, but i'm sure that games that focus less on challenge but more on atmosphere (doom3 did that for example) would benefit from that change. the challenge-aspect is in decline in single player shooters anyways, since nobody in their right mind would choose an "spfps" to put his aiming to the test if mpfps is always available.
speaking of the ammo-counter, it's definitely useless in an intense fight, you either roughly guess (or even count) bullets used and therefore have an idea when you have to reload or you just don't care and then no ammo display in the world could change that. an exception are some of the hl2 guns that have an audible warning for "low ammo" which is very intuitive (took a very long while until i consciously realized what it was, before that i just knew when ammo was low, had no idea why).
one last idea to throw in the pool: in reality being able to count bullets while being under fire is one of those important differences between a skilled veteran and a greenhorn, so giving the player hud displays (or a crosshair) could be the list of goodies you get for experience points in games with a skill system like enemy territory.
so of all "that's the end of..." stories, this is the one about the end of laptop cases;)
but if there is enough hype over this thing to make really useful applications pop up everywhere then i guess it would only be a matter of time until the same api will be used to push content to your bluetooth appliance of choice (mine happens to be a phone) and then that combination could be successful, even if the initial system could get degraded to a mere stepping stone.
so, does this mean the cia will sooner or later deploy botnets for distributed editwars?
wikipedia might end up as the surprisingly unglamorous battleground of the long-awaited "cyberwarfare"... i mean it's such an inviting target for groups who are out to mess with people's opinions and there's no group that fits that description as good as a gouvernment at war.
Giving a crappy game high ratings to appease the publisher hurts your reputation among gamers. That means less visitors, ad clicks, presence, and relevancy. Game reviewers exist to provide a service to gamers interested in purchasing games, not publishers wishing to sell them.
but do you see that happen? of course there are games that get lower ratings than others, but those are games where the publisher probably would not expect a score reminiscent of hl2 themselves. as long as you "vote with the crowd" (your reviewer peers at other game mags) the fact that the publishers need the game mags as much as the game mags need the publisher works in favor of the reviewer, but as soon as he dares to give a significantly lower rating than the others he might damage "good relations" and suffer from lessened likelyhood of getting invited to on-site previews, rejected interview requests and stuff like that.
And that's how it is, most pages in game mags are filled with hyped up previews, because the games of tomorrow are always much more exciting to the reader than the games of today (or than the same games once they hit the cold floor of reality)
to conclude: reviews can only really be reliable if they are either from a noncommercial source (but beware of fanboyism) or if they are from a more general source that does not primarily focus on games.
(ps: how many weeks would it take to give a meaningful judgement about a game like civ4 for example? imagine the sales of a game mag that would make a civ4 cover story 4 weeks after the release of the game...)
while the suggestion to increase the actually used "dynamic range" of the scoring system used is certainly a step into the right direction, why does he stick to the an overall numerical rating system at all?
i could imagine very good reviews that would group the usual categories into pairs of that are contradicting each other or at least are quite opposite to each other, like "this game focuses on replayability" vs "this game focuses on an intense story", "focuses on technical aspects" vs "focuses on other qualities", or just distribute a _fixed_ number of points on the various categories, to describe the game, give it a rough position in an n-dimensional matrix, not rate it.
a serious review should never pretend to be able give ratings with more precision than something along the lines of "you will love it"/"you will like it"/"you might enjoy it"/"pain" (all assuming you generally enjoy the genre).
"game x is 3.5% better than game y" is pure bullshit and a sure sign of a review that is actually nothing more than comparing technical specs and skipping through the game with cheat codes to provide some screenshots.
and yeah, pissing off game publishers with honest ratings is a really bad idea in a business that mostly depends on hyping up "exclusive" previews to lure customers.
the threat of losing "early screenshot" benefits is probably an even bigger threat than the whole dependency on ad money from publishers, not only because it looks less like bribery but also because customers lost due to lack of exciting "next gen" cover stories will affect the ad-income from all companies, not only the one in question.
"I think you should skip most of that. At least keep them extraordinarily brief."
I deeply disagree with that: there are already tons of "click by click" books for all those everyday tasks and they are all hughely successfull at keeping the users as dumb as possible while operating the core set of applications described.
I really think that people should hear about the difference between the internet and the web - no technical details, but that "history of the internet" chapter will greatly help giving context and it could even be a joy to read (because of said lack of technical details).
Another important chapter would be "UI principles", introduce all those concepts like windows (this is where the OS allows an app to paint, not much more needed to be known about OS imho), buttons (make the computer do something), menus, drag&drop. This would not have to be long and i think something about the historical development could also make it more interesting to read.
Insanely important (and not too difficult) to understand is the difference between data and code - and the perfect way to explain security holes: "security holes are when data becomes code where it is not supposed to". This would be a very accurate description that still does not require any more technical understanding.
The obvious "don't trust email", i think we all agree how important that is to tell to the computer illiterate.
A last chapter, and i'm not sure if it would really make any sense, could be something about the relationship between a programmer and his code, still nothing technical, just something to give a feeling for how we try to handle complexity, what's easy to do and what's not, maybe in the form of a few interview snippets with programmers of well known freeware apps or something like that
Me: Ok, tell me what the screen says now. Mom: It's blue. Me: What do you mean "it's blue"? What does it say? Mom: It says, "9F D8 34 7B..." Me: Um, that's ok, ma, I don't speak hex. Mom: "... FA 25 3C A2..."
That's a very important point, no matter how much we know about the technical details of computer operation, the biggest difference between "us" and "them" ( = the proverbial mum) remains the mental "spam filter" that allows us to focus on the relevant parts of the UI presentation.
heh, sunday afternoon, not totally focused and i had to read your post 3 times to finally see "RC Pig" instead of "PC Rig" (i even compared to the headline and thought "what? it's the same 5 letters" before finally seeing the difference).
i have to agree with you that "RC Pig" would have been a more interesting story
Slashdot Mirror
the point is: the deep blue software does not do pure lookahead. it does very sophistcated selective lookahead, and by doing that it could certainly beat a computer 100 times as fast as long as that machine would do pure lookahead.
Linux users are aware of compiling java code natively
the only scenarios i can think of where gcj really makes any sense is when you have some java code (preferrably some that does not make very extensive use of the class library) that you want to link to from a statically compiled language or when you are writing little command line tools in java where jvm startup time and jitc warmup are the two major performance bottlenecks and not runtime speed.
Umm, no. The continents are "The Americas". As in, the three of them.
And consequently, each of them is an America. Which in turn, makes the peop... (i guess there's no need to type any further)
ps: seems like this "american" thing has become some kind of a pet flame of mine, although personally i am only bothered if any of those people who consider feeling hurt when they are called "USian" are reacting equally negative on "US American", which is my preferred way of putting it, at least whenever context does not provide enough clarity itself.
> While some people don't understand it, the whole reason Gordon
> doesn't talk is because you are Gordon. If Gordon talked, it
> would ruin the character-as-player that the games run on.
This used to be a brilliant idea at the time of half-life 1 and worked great in that game, but only because all those dialogs were so much shorter than the ones in hl2. Same thing with the "no cutscenes" policy, both were working perfectly when NPCs never talked for longer than something like 5 seconds or so, but in hl2 the same thing completely ruined the storytelling.
Those long minutes in the dr kleiner lab could have worked very well if they pushed you out of gordon and did some camera work, but this way the player would ineviteably start jumping and throwing things around while the NPCs reeled off text line after text line, completely ruining any trace of immersion.
yet another sack of rice fell victim to misalignment with gravity
(the first sentences were interesting, but the OMG MAC CAN DO STUFF part in the summary ruined it completely)
but the bar you need to jump to get beyond point and click has risen, relative to what the user needs to, say, get a game running.
on the c64 once you got to the point where you could actually do anything with the system the step into programming wasn't very big (even though that programming was certainly not as comfortable as today's IDEs).
in addition to that motivation was bigger since while the stuff you could achieve as a beginner was certainly not on par with professionally written software the gap was much smaller than today.
ps: a quite unrelated thing: i guess many of the people who would start basic or pascal on the homecomputer back in the old days have been stepping into HTML "programming" in more recent years. very friendly learning curve until you get to the point where you see colors on the screen but nearly impossible to scale up to some serious programming skill
> ARM and Intel are operating in very different market areas these days
a sheet4.htm
how so, if intel is building so many ARM CPUs?
http://www.intel.com/design/intelxscale/xscaledat
But of course i agree that ARM are in no way comparable to x86 and of no smaller importance
i had a similar situation a while ago and to no surprise i was the one who did 95% of the coding, since both of us had the priority on "getting the job done" instead of "learning as much as possible".
still i quickly noticed how my code got better whenever i at least tried to keep a pace at which the other guy could understand most of what i did, so in the end i got into that teaching role (that always teaches yourself a lot too) without deliberately forcing me there and the other guy got more than we initially expected.
if you now deliberately let the other guy solve some of the easier problems himself (which is not "alone") then the learning result might even be close to optimal, because doing little things right will teach you more than barely finding something that might pass as a solution to a bigger problem if that means employing bad practices.
> Do I have to play certain particular games to know what you mean? If so, which ones?
That one's easy: Tropico and Tropico 2.
Got Tropico 2 (that's about pirate economy in the carribean) for 2.99 one or two months ago, good fun. Technically very similar to the first Tropico (you're a Fidel Castro like dictator over a few hundred "sims") but a completely inversed economy.
Wasn't there rumors on a forced merging of firaxis with top-pop?
Thinking of "CivCity" this could be a really nice excuse to steal as much gameplay concepts as possible from the tropico games, because they are really great games to steal from.
A problem i see with the 3 and 4 of the series is how little space it gives you to turn around a botched game - you usually know wether you win or not by the time you reach the middle ages.
In the original civilization (which had a number of conceptual bugs that allowed for a few completely failsafe strategies) the most interesting games where those in which you would greatly fall behind the other empires but still somehow managed to gain the upper hand again by strategically sacrificing half your cities (or so) just to steal that one technology you so desperately needed...
the diplomacy system of 3, while being crude compared to 4, was the only one that did really lead to "alliance catastrophies" like the one that lead to ww1 or block building like after ww2.
anyways, personally i still think alpha centauri is the best civ.
heh, why did you have to mention progressquest? now i'm heading back to the killing fields, only because of you!
"Placate the Ochre Jellies"
"Seek the Crafted Spangle"
"Seek the Proverbial Galoon"
> To resolve this one might come up with a sort of USB hub
> that plugs directly into the wall and supplies power only,
> and no serial connection, but if you're going to go to
> those lengths, why not create a new standard and design it
> for powering things, instead of re-using an old standard?
If there was any chance of this to happen then it would have already happened one or two decades ago. I see the obvious absence of such a standard as a very good proof that creating such a standard is not in the interest of the gadget manufacturers.
But with usb powering it is an entirely different story, manufacturers include the usb power option not because they have been waiting for a low-power plug standard all the time but because the devices need usb connectivity anyways and if you already have that then it's just convenient to have it as a power option too.
And being able to charge your phone, camera, mp3 player or pda virtually anywhere where power is available without bringing a vendor-specific cable would be such a great thing, sadly we are not there yet, most of those toys do not come with a standard usb type "b" jacks but need custom adaptor cables. and taking a powered hub + _one_ wall with you while traveling is definitely less of a mess than one for each device (multiply wall-warts by two for in-car power supply, but soon we will see usb blugs in cars, only for attaching mp3 media first but i guess once that becomes mainstream people/carmakers will soon understand the usefullness of a whole array of usb jacks under the dashboard, for powering stuff)
Oh, and i'd bet that before we see a specialized low-voltage short range (the first implies the second) power distribution standard that actually makes it to widespread real world use we will see an usb specification that is updated to the needs of more power-hungry applications, like quick-charging batteries.
while this is interesting, don't we, as double-helix driven beings, have a lot of dormant genes that are only triggered by extreme environmental conditions?
these things could mutate over hundreds of generations without ever harming individual fitness and then suddenly get triggered, exposing a shitload of mutations at once, spread in different variations over the whole population.
Those new findings would only strengthen an already strong mechanism.
> Still, if it came down to dollar terms, I'd be willing
> to share my office with a colleague or even move into a
> cubicle in exchange for a mere $5,000/year pay rise
But will your efficiency be the same in a cubicle? If you put that into the calculation as well your pay rise could easily be much smaller, probably even negative for some tasks.
Which brings us to the most important point: some kinds of work benefit more from a nice seperate office, some less, some even benefit from a shared room.
And don't underestimate the incentive factor, a wage rise might be more attractive for the individual employee than getting a separate office, but his coworkers won't take much notice of that. Promoting someone to a better office on the other hand can provide a much greater "i can accomplish that too" motivation boost for his coworkers.
agreeing a little more, i would even like to see an fps without a health level indicator at all. doom3 made me realize this, i was more trying not to get hit because of the random rotation and visual blur penalty than because of some abstract numerical value decreasing. of course you would probably want to lower the overall level of difficulty then, but i'm sure that games that focus less on challenge but more on atmosphere (doom3 did that for example) would benefit from that change. the challenge-aspect is in decline in single player shooters anyways, since nobody in their right mind would choose an "spfps" to put his aiming to the test if mpfps is always available.
speaking of the ammo-counter, it's definitely useless in an intense fight, you either roughly guess (or even count) bullets used and therefore have an idea when you have to reload or you just don't care and then no ammo display in the world could change that. an exception are some of the hl2 guns that have an audible warning for "low ammo" which is very intuitive (took a very long while until i consciously realized what it was, before that i just knew when ammo was low, had no idea why).
one last idea to throw in the pool: in reality being able to count bullets while being under fire is one of those important differences between a skilled veteran and a greenhorn, so giving the player hud displays (or a crosshair) could be the list of goodies you get for experience points in games with a skill system like enemy territory.
so of all "that's the end of..." stories, this is the one about the end of laptop cases ;)
but if there is enough hype over this thing to make really useful applications pop up everywhere then i guess it would only be a matter of time until the same api will be used to push content to your bluetooth appliance of choice (mine happens to be a phone) and then that combination could be successful, even if the initial system could get degraded to a mere stepping stone.
so, does this mean the cia will sooner or later deploy botnets for distributed editwars?
wikipedia might end up as the surprisingly unglamorous battleground of the long-awaited "cyberwarfare"... i mean it's such an inviting target for groups who are out to mess with people's opinions and there's no group that fits that description as good as a gouvernment at war.
Giving a crappy game high ratings to appease the publisher hurts your reputation among gamers. That means less visitors, ad clicks, presence, and relevancy. Game reviewers exist to provide a service to gamers interested in purchasing games, not publishers wishing to sell them.
but do you see that happen? of course there are games that get lower ratings than others, but those are games where the publisher probably would not expect a score reminiscent of hl2 themselves. as long as you "vote with the crowd" (your reviewer peers at other game mags) the fact that the publishers need the game mags as much as the game mags need the publisher works in favor of the reviewer, but as soon as he dares to give a significantly lower rating than the others he might damage "good relations" and suffer from lessened likelyhood of getting invited to on-site previews, rejected interview requests and stuff like that.
And that's how it is, most pages in game mags are filled with hyped up previews, because the games of tomorrow are always much more exciting to the reader than the games of today (or than the same games once they hit the cold floor of reality)
to conclude: reviews can only really be reliable if they are either from a noncommercial source (but beware of fanboyism) or if they are from a more general source that does not primarily focus on games.
(ps: how many weeks would it take to give a meaningful judgement about a game like civ4 for example? imagine the sales of a game mag that would make a civ4 cover story 4 weeks after the release of the game...)
while the suggestion to increase the actually used "dynamic range" of the scoring system used is certainly a step into the right direction, why does he stick to the an overall numerical rating system at all?
i could imagine very good reviews that would group the usual categories into pairs of that are contradicting each other or at least are quite opposite to each other, like "this game focuses on replayability" vs "this game focuses on an intense story", "focuses on technical aspects" vs "focuses on other qualities", or just distribute a _fixed_ number of points on the various categories, to describe the game, give it a rough position in an n-dimensional matrix, not rate it.
a serious review should never pretend to be able give ratings with more precision than something along the lines of "you will love it"/"you will like it"/"you might enjoy it"/"pain" (all assuming you generally enjoy the genre).
"game x is 3.5% better than game y" is pure bullshit and a sure sign of a review that is actually nothing more than comparing technical specs and skipping through the game with cheat codes to provide some screenshots.
and yeah, pissing off game publishers with honest ratings is a really bad idea in a business that mostly depends on hyping up "exclusive" previews to lure customers.
the threat of losing "early screenshot" benefits is probably an even bigger threat than the whole dependency on ad money from publishers, not only because it looks less like bribery but also because customers lost due to lack of exciting "next gen" cover stories will affect the ad-income from all companies, not only the one in question.
"I think you should skip most of that. At least keep them extraordinarily brief."
I deeply disagree with that: there are already tons of "click by click" books for all those everyday tasks and they are all hughely successfull at keeping the users as dumb as possible while operating the core set of applications described.
I really think that people should hear about the difference between the internet and the web - no technical details, but that "history of the internet" chapter will greatly help giving context and it could even be a joy to read (because of said lack of technical details).
Another important chapter would be "UI principles", introduce all those concepts like windows (this is where the OS allows an app to paint, not much more needed to be known about OS imho), buttons (make the computer do something), menus, drag&drop. This would not have to be long and i think something about the historical development could also make it more interesting to read.
Insanely important (and not too difficult) to understand is the difference between data and code - and the perfect way to explain security holes: "security holes are when data becomes code where it is not supposed to". This would be a very accurate description that still does not require any more technical understanding.
The obvious "don't trust email", i think we all agree how important that is to tell to the computer illiterate.
A last chapter, and i'm not sure if it would really make any sense, could be something about the relationship between a programmer and his code, still nothing technical, just something to give a feeling for how we try to handle complexity, what's easy to do and what's not, maybe in the form of a few interview snippets with programmers of well known freeware apps or something like that
Me: Ok, tell me what the screen says now. ..." ..."
Mom: It's blue.
Me: What do you mean "it's blue"? What does it say?
Mom: It says, "9F D8 34 7B
Me: Um, that's ok, ma, I don't speak hex.
Mom: "... FA 25 3C A2
That's a very important point, no matter how much we know about the technical details of computer operation, the biggest difference between "us" and "them" ( = the proverbial mum) remains the mental "spam filter" that allows us to focus on the relevant parts of the UI presentation.
good pedantery
maybe it's a 9x9x9?
heh, sunday afternoon, not totally focused and i had to read your post 3 times to finally see "RC Pig" instead of "PC Rig" (i even compared to the headline and thought "what? it's the same 5 letters" before finally seeing the difference).
i have to agree with you that "RC Pig" would have been a more interesting story