I doubt you would be *drinking* illegally, it's the ones giving you access that would be at fault (and not many countries in the world make it illegal when you are in your own home drinking your parent's whiskey).
Irony definitely doesn't need to be negative (and often isn't), are you maybe confusing it with sarcasm? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
"incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result."
So in this case, of all the publishers, Nintendo is the last you'd expect to apply for this rating exactly because they're known for their family-friendly games (implying they wouldn't need 18+ ratings) , hence the irony.
Well this isn't the consumer model, that will come later and will most likely include headphones, who knows maybe even a mic, but this is probably more to see if the important tech can work out, headphones and mics are not the problem.
Oh yes, let's have MORE court cases! Especially the ones where it's this low-wage single mother going up against a multi-billion dollar company, those always turn out well. In the movies at least.
> that's own developers have shown no interest in creating a linux port, as I imagine will be the case with many many of the games that are on steam currently.
True, on the other hand many of the indie games have Linux versions, so if they all suddenly show up on Steam (hopefully they will finally apply a filter that won't show games you can't install, like Windows games showing up on OSX) other might start feeling the heat, especially when Valve can show the sales figures for those games to the ones that are doubting that there is any market. (One can hope hehe)
Wine is really cool, but it's just no good for many demanding games. You'll probably have to turn down your graphics settings (and some settings won't even be available) and even then it'll run slower than the original game. And that makes it a no-go for many online games. I remember playing WoW on Wine, which was okay because it doesn't require optimal frame rates, but over the years I tried again and again to play Counter Strike Source (not really a game that requires much from your CPU/GPU these days) and it's just unplayable (if you're not a total beginner).
Well, we only just started on Ceylon and are not even finished yet, so it's a bit early to start comparing how many times it gets mentioned in relation to the rest, but people have to start some time:)
Maybe it's a bit like this: with quantum mechanics stating that you can't know all the properties of a particle at the same time it might be similar to taking a snowflake and wanting to detect if it's from the north or the south pole, but the moment you do that you can't measure it's shape, color or temperature anymore, in fact turning your snowflake into a southflake because that's the only thing you (can) know about it.
As a hobbyist photographer (you know the kind that has spent an inordinate amount of money of equipment, can take some decent pictures but has found out that he has no real talent) I concur completely. A really nice gimmick but I hardly see any practical value.
If you have over 300ms latencies to servers inside your ISP's own network then I would definitely call that unacceptable. With my ISP and fastpath enabled I often get 20ms to servers within the same country. Anything over 60 and I wouldn't be able to feed my Counter Strike addiction;)
For me it definitely had to do with the fact that I could afford spending the money, but still, I would spend it on games I *knew* I liked but I still wanted to play many others. So for a long time I kept pirating the games I'd never have bought, and of course once in a while I'd encounter something I really liked, just as sometimes I'd buy something that turned out to be really shitty. But when Steam came along I completely stopped pirating, exactly because their service is even better than downloading pirated games: I don't have to look for it, I don't have to check the source is more or less okay (trojans, viruses, etc), don't have to go look for NoCd or similar patches. It's just there, almost instantly.
That's just playing word games, the "faith" we talk about here is in its well-known meaning of: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof : complete trust" (Merriam-Webster)
But if one was to say that "at one time or another science will be able to answer most questions", now *that* might be called faith.
But when pressed on that matter Einstein also said:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
You present a list of religious scientists without ever knowing what they "really" thought, because we can't ask them anymore. We're talking about people who lived in a time where atheism often just wasn't an option. Heck, even in modern day US you will commit political suicide if you try to run for any kind of office while admitting you're an atheist.
Even so I can understand perfectly that there are scientists who are religious people, but only because they put some kind of artificial barrier between those two sides of their personality and refusing to let their beliefs be tainted by their reason (the faith part). But that doesn't take away from the fact that they can be extraordinary scientists.
Knowing 5 languages I can at least say that they definitely not get completely different and isolated areas, which would be as expected because probably the "machinery" that makes it possible at all is highly specific and sophisticated. I imagine that vocabulary and the grammar are stored in some way together but almost as if they get "tagged" with a specific language. But when you speak multiple languages you will have many moments when you mix up words or grammar rules and when learning them you will have doubts if a certain word or rule is part of language A or B (especially when they have similar roots).
I don't need a religious text telling me that I need to cook pork better than beef. And if you think that people in the wilderness get their knowledge from religious teachings your sadly mistaken, just like the Bible doesn't tell you not to put your hand in the fire, your parents/community are more than capable enough to teach young people how to survive. In the best case religious text can teach you about spiritual things, you know, the things that don't immediately have to do with survival so you need special people to remember and teach it. But on mundane questions it's almost always hopelessly out of date.
In the same way it could be said that religion predicts pretty well if you're ever going to strap bombs to your body and blow yourself up in a crowded public place. Personally I have the feeling that an invisible being checking what you're doing have exactly ZERO effect because if that was right it could be shown statistically that many more atheists commit crimes than religious people and that's just not the case.
Sorry, but most prohibitions in religious texts are entirely without value. Even if they were valid once, the world changes, religious texts do not. So stuff that was once dangerous to eat might be perfectly safe now and you can't update the Bible/Koran/etc to include stuff that is dangerous today. And in any case people have been surviving perfectly without the written word, that is what local healers and shamans were for (and for the Bible/Koran being more correct/useful than those local people see my previous sentence) and at least they are able to change to the changing circumstances in the world, they can (and do) learn and adapt.
It's because cords to ring a bell (even if it's electronic at the very end of the cord) harkens back to the days of horse driven trams!
It just shows that if there is so little money invested in the public transport system that they start cutting back on the small expenses like a cord instead of just a bunch of simple buttons (which is what I am used to see).
It also means that you can't easily have different kinds of stop signals. Or at different hights. In several European countries for example they will have buttons at a height where people in a wheelchair can reach them. For the same people (or a parent with a baby in a stroller) there is a button they can use to ask to lower the bus or a ramp so they can get off (more easily), depending on the type of bus.
I don't think it has to do with age, but seeing a use for it. I know many wonder "what for"? But besides the fact that many said the same when mobile phones started becoming popular, nowadays you're somewhat "special" if you don't have one yourself.
For myself I knew I wanted something like a tablet when many years ago I saw the firt laptop "convertables": you could turn the screen 180 degrees and let y lie flush against the keybaord and it would turn into a "pen computer". I saw it and thought: "wow! now if they would only loose the keyboard and make it much much tinner it would be perfect". Tablets are coming pretty close to that "vision" I had.
I know several people already who are seriously considering getting rid of their PC, thinking it way to clunky, unwieldy and difficult to use for the few things they use it for.
Dunno, Apple products are pretty popular in many parts of the world where Apple Stores are non-existent or few and far between (I think Spain has 2 in the entire country? And the one I've seen was a complete let-down, nothing like the stories I heard). So I really doubt Apple Stores have much to do with it.
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt you would be *drinking* illegally, it's the ones giving you access that would be at fault (and not many countries in the world make it illegal when you are in your own home drinking your parent's whiskey).
Irony definitely doesn't need to be negative (and often isn't), are you maybe confusing it with sarcasm? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
"incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result."
So in this case, of all the publishers, Nintendo is the last you'd expect to apply for this rating exactly because they're known for their family-friendly games (implying they wouldn't need 18+ ratings) , hence the irony.
Well this isn't the consumer model, that will come later and will most likely include headphones, who knows maybe even a mic, but this is probably more to see if the important tech can work out, headphones and mics are not the problem.
Monopoly is waaay older than that, it's at least from the 30s possibly even older! ^^
Oh yes, let's have MORE court cases! Especially the ones where it's this low-wage single mother going up against a multi-billion dollar company, those always turn out well. In the movies at least.
> that's own developers have shown no interest in creating a linux port, as I imagine will be the case with many many of the games that are on steam currently.
True, on the other hand many of the indie games have Linux versions, so if they all suddenly show up on Steam (hopefully they will finally apply a filter that won't show games you can't install, like Windows games showing up on OSX) other might start feeling the heat, especially when Valve can show the sales figures for those games to the ones that are doubting that there is any market. (One can hope hehe)
Wine is really cool, but it's just no good for many demanding games. You'll probably have to turn down your graphics settings (and some settings won't even be available) and even then it'll run slower than the original game. And that makes it a no-go for many online games. I remember playing WoW on Wine, which was okay because it doesn't require optimal frame rates, but over the years I tried again and again to play Counter Strike Source (not really a game that requires much from your CPU/GPU these days) and it's just unplayable (if you're not a total beginner).
It's not really, but of the 3 it's the most similar maybe. We're trying not to stray too far away from familiar territory for Java developers.
Well, we only just started on Ceylon and are not even finished yet, so it's a bit early to start comparing how many times it gets mentioned in relation to the rest, but people have to start some time :)
Maybe it's a bit like this: with quantum mechanics stating that you can't know all the properties of a particle at the same time it might be similar to taking a snowflake and wanting to detect if it's from the north or the south pole, but the moment you do that you can't measure it's shape, color or temperature anymore, in fact turning your snowflake into a southflake because that's the only thing you (can) know about it.
As a hobbyist photographer (you know the kind that has spent an inordinate amount of money of equipment, can take some decent pictures but has found out that he has no real talent) I concur completely. A really nice gimmick but I hardly see any practical value.
If you have over 300ms latencies to servers inside your ISP's own network then I would definitely call that unacceptable. With my ISP and fastpath enabled I often get 20ms to servers within the same country. Anything over 60 and I wouldn't be able to feed my Counter Strike addiction ;)
Same here and I actually thought it looked nicer without the glasses, the colors were more vibrant, but maybe the glasses were just bad quality...
For me it definitely had to do with the fact that I could afford spending the money, but still, I would spend it on games I *knew* I liked but I still wanted to play many others. So for a long time I kept pirating the games I'd never have bought, and of course once in a while I'd encounter something I really liked, just as sometimes I'd buy something that turned out to be really shitty.
But when Steam came along I completely stopped pirating, exactly because their service is even better than downloading pirated games: I don't have to look for it, I don't have to check the source is more or less okay (trojans, viruses, etc), don't have to go look for NoCd or similar patches. It's just there, almost instantly.
That's just playing word games, the "faith" we talk about here is in its well-known meaning of: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof : complete trust" (Merriam-Webster)
But if one was to say that "at one time or another science will be able to answer most questions", now *that* might be called faith.
But when pressed on that matter Einstein also said:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
You present a list of religious scientists without ever knowing what they "really" thought, because we can't ask them anymore. We're talking about people who lived in a time where atheism often just wasn't an option. Heck, even in modern day US you will commit political suicide if you try to run for any kind of office while admitting you're an atheist.
Even so I can understand perfectly that there are scientists who are religious people, but only because they put some kind of artificial barrier between those two sides of their personality and refusing to let their beliefs be tainted by their reason (the faith part). But that doesn't take away from the fact that they can be extraordinary scientists.
Knowing 5 languages I can at least say that they definitely not get completely different and isolated areas, which would be as expected because probably the "machinery" that makes it possible at all is highly specific and sophisticated. I imagine that vocabulary and the grammar are stored in some way together but almost as if they get "tagged" with a specific language. But when you speak multiple languages you will have many moments when you mix up words or grammar rules and when learning them you will have doubts if a certain word or rule is part of language A or B (especially when they have similar roots).
I don't need a religious text telling me that I need to cook pork better than beef.
And if you think that people in the wilderness get their knowledge from religious teachings your sadly mistaken, just like the Bible doesn't tell you not to put your hand in the fire, your parents/community are more than capable enough to teach young people how to survive.
In the best case religious text can teach you about spiritual things, you know, the things that don't immediately have to do with survival so you need special people to remember and teach it. But on mundane questions it's almost always hopelessly out of date.
In the same way it could be said that religion predicts pretty well if you're ever going to strap bombs to your body and blow yourself up in a crowded public place.
Personally I have the feeling that an invisible being checking what you're doing have exactly ZERO effect because if that was right it could be shown statistically that many more atheists commit crimes than religious people and that's just not the case.
Sorry, but most prohibitions in religious texts are entirely without value. Even if they were valid once, the world changes, religious texts do not. So stuff that was once dangerous to eat might be perfectly safe now and you can't update the Bible/Koran/etc to include stuff that is dangerous today.
And in any case people have been surviving perfectly without the written word, that is what local healers and shamans were for (and for the Bible/Koran being more correct/useful than those local people see my previous sentence) and at least they are able to change to the changing circumstances in the world, they can (and do) learn and adapt.
It's because cords to ring a bell (even if it's electronic at the very end of the cord) harkens back to the days of horse driven trams!
It just shows that if there is so little money invested in the public transport system that they start cutting back on the small expenses like a cord instead of just a bunch of simple buttons (which is what I am used to see).
It also means that you can't easily have different kinds of stop signals. Or at different hights. In several European countries for example they will have buttons at a height where people in a wheelchair can reach them. For the same people (or a parent with a baby in a stroller) there is a button they can use to ask to lower the bus or a ramp so they can get off (more easily), depending on the type of bus.
You "pull the cord"? Please tell me that was a figure of speech because otherwise your public transport is in worse shape than I thought! :)
should learn to proof-read before hitting submit *sigh*
I don't think it has to do with age, but seeing a use for it. I know many wonder "what for"? But besides the fact that many said the same when mobile phones started becoming popular, nowadays you're somewhat "special" if you don't have one yourself.
For myself I knew I wanted something like a tablet when many years ago I saw the firt laptop "convertables": you could turn the screen 180 degrees and let y lie flush against the keybaord and it would turn into a "pen computer". I saw it and thought: "wow! now if they would only loose the keyboard and make it much much tinner it would be perfect". Tablets are coming pretty close to that "vision" I had.
I know several people already who are seriously considering getting rid of their PC, thinking it way to clunky, unwieldy and difficult to use for the few things they use it for.
Dunno, Apple products are pretty popular in many parts of the world where Apple Stores are non-existent or few and far between (I think Spain has 2 in the entire country? And the one I've seen was a complete let-down, nothing like the stories I heard). So I really doubt Apple Stores have much to do with it.