You do realize there is a difference between Blind Faith and Normal Faith right?
Normal Faith is belief put in action.
The Wright Brothers had faith that they could build a heavier then air device that could fly because they had seen birds do it. They simply didn't believe this "just because", they believed they could as well,and acted upon it.
One my laptop I use the native 2880x1800 LCD, an external 27" 2560x1440 LED monitor, and 22" 1920x1080 that has been rotated 90 degrees for 1080x1920 which is awesome for coding.
On my Linux box I use the 27" 2560x1440 as my primary monitor, a 27" 1920x1080 for running my game, and the 22" 1080x1920 for coding.
Once those who have never tried multiple monitors for development don't know what they are missing.
* the horizon problem, * the flatness problem, * and the magnetic monopole problem.
The typical kludge is "Cosmic Inflation", but that hack creates even more problems. (" inflation is the expansion of space in the early universe at a rate much faster than the speed of light temporarily.") Paul J. Steinhardt, one of the founding fathers of inflationary cosmology, has recently become one of its sharpest critics.
There are numerous other problems with the Big Bang:
The first law of thermodynamics says Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only change form, yet "magically" the Big Bang appeared out of nothing ?!?!? * The Big Bang attempts to explain "How", but it still doesn't explain why it happened in the first place?
* Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding universe models. * The microwave "background" makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball * Element abundance predictions using the Big Bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work. * The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed "walls" and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years. * The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their average apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely. * The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe. * The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform. * Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe. * The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the highest-redshift quasars. * If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated. * Under Big Bang premises, the Fine Structure Constant must vary with time. WHOOPS! Feynamn, founder of QED, once wrote:
There is a most profound and beautiful question associated with the observed coupling constant, e - the amplitude for a real electron to emit or absorb a real photon. It is a simple number that has been experimentally determined to be close to 0.08542455. (My physicist friends won't recognize this number, because they like to remember it as the inverse of its square: about 137.03597 with about an uncertainty of about 2 in the last decimal place. It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it.) Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man. You might say the "hand of God" wrote that number, and "we don't know how He pushed his pencil." We know what kind of a dance to do experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don't know what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number co
#6. A Bad Mouse Click Leads to Lara Croft's Rack #5. A Racing Game Glitch Gives Birth to Grand Theft Auto #4. Space Invaders Accidentally Invents Difficulty Curves #3. A Disgruntled Employee Invents the Easter Egg #2. Street Fighter Accidentally Invents Combos #1. A Programmer Sucking at Games Gave Us the Konami Code
CRT had the color gamut PQ in spades, especially black level -- it is actually the contrast ratio & gamut range which determines a large part of PQ. Witness how HDR looks substantially closer to what our eyes *really* see and even that is only about 1/4 of the gamut.
With CRTs you never had problems with viewing angles blowing out the colors like you do with LCD.
But yes, the complete lack of "scalability" (the tube depth was proportional to the diagonal size), and geometry was definitely a big problem for CRTs. Damn things weighed a ton.
LCD is "good enough" (price and PQ) for the most part.
The point was that ZeniMax is pissing money away in legal fees instead of pouring money into game development; at least they would actually have something to show for it.
Looks like ZeniMax's argument is that since Carmack used ZeniMax equipment, that all work done by him is owned by ZeniMax.
20. ZeniMax was established in 1999 as the parent company for the acquisition of Bethesda Softworks,
23. In his employment agreement with ZeniMax, Carmack agreed to disclose toZeniMax inventions relating to the companyâ(TM)s current or anticipated research and developmentthat Carmack created during the term of his employment, and further agreed that all suchinventions would be the exclusive property of ZeniMax. Carmack also agreed that ZeniMaxwould also be the author and owner of any copyrightable works that he prepared within the scopeof his employment
24. For years, dating back to the 1990s, ZeniMax and its affiliates had conducted research into virtual reality technology and headsets
They might win this on a technicality aka, literalism.
You're absolutely correct but to be pedantic "high end" is not quite telling the whole story !
Note: I have the Panny 60" VT60 and love it. (Along with an older 42" panny plasma.)
Panasonic's highest end was the ZT60, followed by the VT60. I say 'was' because Panasonic exited the plasma business last year.[1] In March 2014 they were no longer selling plasma TVs (for both consumers and commercial use), so "high end" is becoming "relative". Many videophiles would agree the ZT60 is the Pioneer Kuro Elite "killer", but if plasma is no longer even available... well, "high end" must be judged on what IS actually available.
PQ (Picture Quality) ranked from best to worst is:
Note: ALL of the displays have "problems": price, PQ, scalability, etc. Large OLED won't be affordable for at least another 10+ years due to crappy yields.
Slashdot Mirror
> Faith, which is an unyielding type of belief,
You do realize there is a difference between Blind Faith and Normal Faith right?
Normal Faith is belief put in action.
The Wright Brothers had faith that they could build a heavier then air device that could fly because they had seen birds do it. They simply didn't believe this "just because", they believed they could as well, and acted upon it.
> Science does require belief.
Exactly.
If you don't have belief + faith in
1) the Scientific Method, and
2) If you don't _believe_ the _results_ of the said experiment(s)
then you don't have Science !
You do realize everyone has Faith, right?
If you didn't have faith in your beliefs, then why do you even have them in the first place ??
Once you've been in computers long enough you realize that every 20 years the cycle repeats. From VMs, Thin Client, Fat Client, UI redesigns, etc.
The only thing that hasn't change is that Artificial Ignorance (A.I.) is still a complete and total joke.
Anonymous kids act like tools / griefers / assholes on the internet.
Game at 11.
> Abrash and Forsyth already went to Oculus
When did that happen? ? So [Michael] Abrash and [Tom] Forsynth AND John Carmack are at Oculus now !
It will be interesting to see if VR _finally_ takes off.
Oh, please, some of were ~20 when that episode aired. Hell, I've been on /. for ~14 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
Exactly.
One my laptop I use the native 2880x1800 LCD, an external 27" 2560x1440 LED monitor, and 22" 1920x1080 that has been rotated 90 degrees for 1080x1920 which is awesome for coding.
On my Linux box I use the 27" 2560x1440 as my primary monitor, a 27" 1920x1080 for running my game, and the 22" 1080x1920 for coding.
Once those who have never tried multiple monitors for development don't know what they are missing.
Yes, thanks, I already corrected that mistake 3 hours earlier.
Correction: I meant 1/137.03597 = 0.00729735411805, NOT e = 0.08542455
1/137.03597 with about an uncertainty of about 2 in the last decimal place gives us:
* max 137.03599 = 0.0072973530... still too large
* min 137.03595 = 0.007297355... WAY too large
The modern a = 0.00729735257, looks like Fenyman should of said with about an uncertainty of about 3 in the last decimal place.
Depending on who you talk to, evidence either contradicts or makes the Big Bang incomplete.
Wikipedia Big Bang mentions these 3 problems:
* the horizon problem,
* the flatness problem,
* and the magnetic monopole problem.
The typical kludge is "Cosmic Inflation", but that hack creates even more problems. (" inflation is the expansion of space in the early universe at a rate much faster than the speed of light temporarily.") Paul J. Steinhardt, one of the founding fathers of inflationary cosmology, has recently become one of its sharpest critics.
There are numerous other problems with the Big Bang:
The first law of thermodynamics says Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only change form, yet "magically" the Big Bang appeared out of nothing ?!?!?
* The Big Bang attempts to explain "How", but it still doesn't explain why it happened in the first place?
I've included the top 11 of the full list of 30 Problems of the Big Bang:
* Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding universe models.
* The microwave "background" makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball
* Element abundance predictions using the Big Bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work.
* The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed "walls" and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.
* The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their average apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely.
* The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe.
* The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform.
* Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe.
* The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the highest-redshift quasars.
* If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.
* Under Big Bang premises, the Fine Structure Constant must vary with time. WHOOPS! Feynamn, founder of QED, once wrote:
I have.
The point is time-shifting should NOT be illegal.
> It's also the reason I bought (or more accurately, convinced my father to buy) a very nice joystick.
Agreed. Thrustmaster FLCS F-16 FTW :-)
Cheap keyboards would only accept 2 or 3 simultaneous keypresses. :-(
Thanks for the link!
Wallrunning vs Straferunning is the perfect terms to use. Forgot all about them.
Exactly. Game glitches invented all sorts of new things ...
http://www.cracked.com/article...
#6. A Bad Mouse Click Leads to Lara Croft's Rack
#5. A Racing Game Glitch Gives Birth to Grand Theft Auto
#4. Space Invaders Accidentally Invents Difficulty Curves
#3. A Disgruntled Employee Invents the Easter Egg
#2. Street Fighter Accidentally Invents Combos
#1. A Programmer Sucking at Games Gave Us the Konami Code
Agreed.
You know the Terms of Use are fucked up when you can watch the video (stream), but if you download it to watch later that is against the TOS??
Doom had a ~2x speed movement bug along North-South walls when moving forward and right and looking at a 45 degree off axis.
Descent had it it 3 dimensions. (Look, down, right, move up, left and forward)
Part of the charm of older games were the glitches that made the difficult to master but took gameplay to a whole different level.
This is exactly the greatest danger of modern schooling what Feynman called "Cargo Cult" Education:
"There is only _one_ way to get the right answer, all other paths are wrong." which is the very definition of a "cult"
The lack of critical thinking is not new. :-(
"A Mathematician'ss Lament"
* http://www.maa.org/sites/defau...
Today's society over-engineers everything.
"The Caleb Bonham Show: Common Core Math"
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
CRT had the color gamut PQ in spades, especially black level -- it is actually the contrast ratio & gamut range which determines a large part of PQ. Witness how HDR looks substantially closer to what our eyes *really* see and even that is only about 1/4 of the gamut.
With CRTs you never had problems with viewing angles blowing out the colors like you do with LCD.
But yes, the complete lack of "scalability" (the tube depth was proportional to the diagonal size), and geometry was definitely a big problem for CRTs. Damn things weighed a ton.
LCD is "good enough" (price and PQ) for the most part.
The point was that ZeniMax is pissing money away in legal fees instead of pouring money into game development; at least they would actually have something to show for it.
I don't believe Carmack has any equity in ZeniMax. Him leaving iD seals the deal that ZeniMax can't claim any ownership.
Ironically, you *can* sue yourself, absurd as that is. The full details can be found here:
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn...
That's what I hoping for too. We definitely need to get Carmack's word and get all the facts.
Looks like ZeniMax's argument is that since Carmack used ZeniMax equipment, that all work done by him is owned by ZeniMax.
They might win this on a technicality aka, literalism.
So you are saying we need to chose the lesser of the two weevils ? :-)
You're absolutely correct but to be pedantic "high end" is not quite telling the whole story !
Note: I have the Panny 60" VT60 and love it. (Along with an older 42" panny plasma.)
Panasonic's highest end was the ZT60, followed by the VT60. I say 'was' because Panasonic exited the plasma business last year.[1] In March 2014 they were no longer selling plasma TVs (for both consumers and commercial use), so "high end" is becoming "relative". Many videophiles would agree the ZT60 is the Pioneer Kuro Elite "killer", but if plasma is no longer even available ... well, "high end" must be judged on what IS actually available.
PQ (Picture Quality) ranked from best to worst is:
1. OLED -- true blacks
2. CRT
3. Plasma
4. LED / LCD -- horrible viewing angles
Note: ALL of the displays have "problems": price, PQ, scalability, etc. Large OLED won't be affordable for at least another 10+ years due to crappy yields.
[1] http://www.cnet.com/news/rip-p...