> What you might be able to do is reduce the mass to get closer to the speed of light, but you still can't break it.
That's an assumption. People used to assume breaking the sound barrier was impossible at one point too.
No one has proved one way or the other that FTL is (or isn't) possible. The jury is still out. Lowering mass is only one potential way to do it -- there are other theorized ways.
Because why would you support their dishonesty when they pull shenanigans like intentionally crippling run-time performance of their code when run on non Intel hardware?? http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#49
And the biggest problem with the fundamentalist scientific people is they refuse to acknowledge that EVERYONE has Faith.
If you have beliefs you have faith; else why would you even have those beliefs in the _first_ place?
I mean, how many scientists understand that time is non-physical yet will flip out the instance anyone uses the word meta-physical. Time is by _definition_.
> Such as if God created the world, why does the world suck so much?/sarcasm Right, because "obviously" God is responsible when someone exercises their free-will to be an asshole. Tell me, how do you give a person free-will if they aren't allowed to make their own choices??
Do you micro-manage your children's Behavior ALL their life? Or do you _allow_ them to make mistakes so that they may learn? Hint: When do they learn the most? When they are successful? Or when they fail?
*sigh* Another capitalist-idiot-pig who doesn't understand Civilization is built upon the sharing of ideas.
Who invented Mathematics, Trigonometry, Boolean Algebra, Computer Science, Calculus, Language, again? Oh wait, they are LONG DEAD and we _all_ benefit from them sharing their discoveries without having to pay idiotic patent / license fees.
> Science as an institution is the most trustworthy source of "real world insight" that YOU have. FTFY
> Indeed it is one of the only mechanisms by which beings who suffer from the aforementioned flaws can produce real insight. You seem to be under the delusion that only Science can understand/produce Truth. This is your first fallacy.
> To believe otherwise is to regard the fundamental principles upon which our considerable corpus of technology rests This is your second fallacy. You are falsely assuming a mutual exclusive; rejecting the first premise does not imply your second conclusion.
> and in which we trust our lives and livelihoods, as unsound and/or mysterious, despite the fact that we observe devices and practices based on them to function daily
1. Uh, you might want to check your history because mankind didn't need "devices" to survive daily for thousand of years. Although I will say Technology certainly makes it _easier_ to survive. As the say "Better living through chemistry!":-)
2. Technology (built upon the Wisdom of Science) is indeed a wonderful invention, however you are still missing the point that the domain of Science is constrained to the physical. It is unable to know the answers to certain questions particularly in respect to the meta-dimensions where time no longer exists. i.e. Scientists and Science will _never_ be able to understand "What _caused_ the Big Bang? What existed _before_ it?" because Science is artificially constrained to only the physical reality. Until Science leaves its kindergarten roots it won't have the balls to probe the depths of these questions such as: Who/what you are before you were born, and what/who you will be after you die.
For example, Scientists are still completely ignorant of the fact that a) we are not alone in the universe, b) that there are 6 fundamental forces, c) that white-holes recycle energy back and forth from black-holes, d) that the age of the Universe is 20 billion years, e) about Quantum Communication, etc. One does not need the shackles of "Science" to know these truths about the "real world."
> To maintain that science offers no real world insight reflects either profound ignorance or intellectual dishonesty to the point of idiocy. You're the one imposing a false duality of tossing out the baby with the bathwater. The grand-parent did no such thing; he was simply stating the fact that Science has its own set of limitations. You are in denial over this fact.
Science is indeed useful. HOWEVER, it is NOT the _only_ way to understand the nature of reality.
As a mystic I will say you are like the blind man saying "There is no knowledge about color!" when instead it is "YOU have no knowledge about color". You keep assuming that physical reality is all that there is. This is false. To start with: You _do_ realize that Time is non-physical right?
The truth is there are _2_ ways to understand the universe//mind: Science And/inclusive-Or Intuition. By developing your Intuition to higher levels it becomes Gnosis / Mysticism.
BOTH systems have their time/place.
You keep drinking the Masculine Kool-Aid (TM) path of Science and keep rejecting the Feminine-path of Intuition because you have failed to learn the second wisdom about truth:
Know Thyself.
By rejecting your Super-conscious* you are ignorant of a way to explore ALL answers.
* N.B.: The Super-conscious/Higher-Self is commonly mistakenly called the sub-conscious by those that have never woken up.
> without ads 3/4 of the internet would not exist.
And nothing of value was lost.
IF a company serving ads wants to pay for _MY_ bandwidth costs then I have no problem with them serving ads. Until then, they can fuck off with their cross-hosts Flash, Java, and Javascript ads that don't respect my eyes and ears.
Blocking ads makes loading their website FASTER so I can tell if the CONTENT _and_ COMMUNITY is worth paying for (or not.)
>> Hopefully EA will learn from the experience and buff up its servers ahead of the game's official European launch on Friday. > The lesson EA needs to learn here is the same one that every other video game publisher has to learn: don't build inherently single-player games with always-on requirements!
Sadly, that will never happen. A quick "history" lesson:
You _will_ be forced to always-online-DRM from the big boys whether or not you like it. These companies don't respect you, all they care about is your money.
The only* thing you can do as a customer is stop supporting this stupid shit -- as in, don't buy it in the first place. Sadly, there are far too many fanboi's who want the latest shiny so "Good Luck with that" of convincing these companies to stop fucking up the single player experience.
To clarify, support indie games where they treat customers with respect not disrespect.
0:35:11 Although you are a technical person and interested in [OS] programming and not interested in other areas, UI, etc. Whatever you say influences a lot of other areas. How do you feel about your influences in those other areas you are not interested in?
Sometimes I am a bit upset that people take me too seriously. I use strong language on the internet to the point where some people feel offended and that is their problem. I think that especially in a community like open source other developers need to know how I feel about things. I'm impolite because I'm impolite, I'm not making excuses for that. I also believe when you work with a lot of people it is better to be really open about your feelings so you don't have people who by mistake misread you. I've had that happen. I have literally had developers who working on things that I didn't like but didn't shut down early enough They worked on it for a long time. I've had developers who worked on things a long time. They felt it was ready. They submitted it to me An I said "No, this is horrible."... Partially it is my personality. I am blunt. I tell people what I feel like.... But no I'm not going to tone it down because somebody might be hurt.
I believe the differences are due to the way the 2 OS licenses approach the definition 'community' differently:
* BSD - Here is our community -- you can take what you want; you don't have to give anything back.
* GPL - Here is our community - you can use what you want but you must also give back.
The true strength of community comes not only from what you can take from it, but also what you can give back.
Both licenses have enabled fantastic engineering and applied ideology in practical cooperation -- but it appears GPL is more focused on the long-term and BSD is focused on the short-term.
You're a big boy perfectly capable of understanding that there almost always exceptions for every rule. You're not a little kid who needs everything spelt out in black and white.
> You never rollover, it encourages the bastards
There are 2 words IMO that everyone should removed from their dictionary: 'never' and 'always' -- because there are almost always edge cases where the assumptions don't hold. There is a time to surrender, a time to fight going down dieing, to flee, to dig your heels in, and everything in between all the extremes.
> Being large, I ran into more of the 'find the big guy' and start a fight to prove something
In your case I would mostly agree with you -- if some little shit wants to pull the pseudo-alpha-male crap then one would be quite justified 'it is your obligation to put him in his place.' The difference is that you STILL have some choices. Even though they probably haven't given you any choice you need to consider your options: If they are civilized enough to understand reason then great; if not then you can only respond to him in the only manner they understand. The 3rd option would be to be aware of the situation BEFORE it escalates and leave. e.g. Why are you in a place that those types of events happen regularly? THAT is the point -- learning to recognize the patterns. i.e. Evaluating "Is it really necessary to teach this dumb-schmuck a lesson?" The answer is not a dualistic yes-no one, but a trinity: yes-no-maybe.
> something cathartic about beating the snot out of someone
That's the adrenaline rush. There are other safer methods (for everyone involved) that are even more powerful.
Anyone who wants to watch (or be involved) with 2 men beating the crap out of another I have to question "How does this bring you closer to your respecting yourself and your fellow man?"
> Think headphones will help? Try it, and find out what a heart attack feels like when some asshole comes up behind you and taps you on the shoulder to get your attention.
But a small convex desk mirror on your monitor. Use noise canceling headphones.
> nobody wants to watch videos of you playing games, especially not your family or coworkers who are not 60-hour-a-week gamers, so please stop sending us Youtube links
Total Nonsense. I completed one of the maps on Payday The Heist last year on the hardest difficulty solo stealth just to prove that it could be done and have a few thousand views. Clearly a few people are interested.
Sometimes walkthroughs can be informative. i.e. "Cult of the Vault" symbols for Borderlands 2, Portal 1 & 2 challenges, etc.
I've completed Mirror's Edge but I could understand if someone just wanted to watch a play through of "Mirrors Edge" as it would certainly be a hell of a lot less aggravating then trying to get all the perfect timing to pull off moves.
Just because _you_ don't find game solution to be all that interesting does not imply no one else does.
Thanks for the catch. The return type is a typo -- should be int, else the compiler will be doing unnecessary casts.
floor() ceil() are slow as hell as they will promote a float to a double. floorf() and ceilf() should be available but may be unportable / unavailable.:-/
One of C's design flaws is that it will silently upcast char to int to float to double and there is no way portable nor standard way to stop the idiotic compiler from doing so or to print a compile-type "info", "warning", or "error" if it happens. Likewise there is no portable or standard way to inform the user of downcasts either, or to disable them entirely.
Slashdot Mirror
> What you might be able to do is reduce the mass to get closer to the speed of light, but you still can't break it.
That's an assumption. People used to assume breaking the sound barrier was impossible at one point too.
No one has proved one way or the other that FTL is (or isn't) possible. The jury is still out. Lowering mass is only one potential way to do it -- there are other theorized ways.
Only cowards attempt to use censorship.
People / Groups / Countries / etc., that hold onto archaic thinking should be named and shamed for their stupidity.
> Just like how you cannot yell "fire" in a theater
YES, you can IF the theater is burning.
Besides that is a PROPERTY RIGHTS issue NOT a "Free Speech" issue.
Because why would you support their dishonesty when they pull shenanigans like intentionally crippling run-time performance of their code when run on non Intel hardware??
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#49
And of course they put the disclaimer as a "gif" so text engines won't find it.
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/optimization-notice/#opt-en
When Intel learns to respect their customers then I'll respect and support them.
> Actually first hand experience is one of the poorest methods for determining the truth
Uhm, you _do_ understand what Science is, right?
You are _personally_ able to verify the results that someone says they got.
And the biggest problem with the fundamentalist scientific people is they refuse to acknowledge that EVERYONE has Faith.
If you have beliefs you have faith; else why would you even have those beliefs in the _first_ place?
I mean, how many scientists understand that time is non-physical yet will flip out the instance anyone uses the word meta-physical. Time is by _definition_.
> Such as if God created the world, why does the world suck so much? /sarcasm Right, because "obviously" God is responsible when someone exercises their free-will to be an asshole. Tell me, how do you give a person free-will if they aren't allowed to make their own choices??
Do you micro-manage your children's Behavior ALL their life? Or do you _allow_ them to make mistakes so that they may learn? Hint: When do they learn the most? When they are successful? Or when they fail?
Who built the tap?
Who put the water in the tap?
Who decided the laws for _how_ hydrogen and oxygen would combine?
Who created the water?
Bzzt. Thanks for playing.
> But then by definition, no one religious knows what they are talking about. And therefore they should be ignored.
As a Mystic/Gnostic that is a fallacy.
The _only_ TRUE knowledge is the one you have _experienced_. Everything else is subjective.
The rest of us just don't care about the gender of who successfully runs a company.
Only when they unsuccessfully run it does someone get their panties in a knot by playing some imaginary gender card.
The majority "Don't give a fuck." I don't see too many men (or women) complaining that only women can give birth.
*sigh* Another capitalist-idiot-pig who doesn't understand Civilization is built upon the sharing of ideas.
Who invented Mathematics, Trigonometry, Boolean Algebra, Computer Science, Calculus, Language, again? Oh wait, they are LONG DEAD and we _all_ benefit from them sharing their discoveries without having to pay idiotic patent / license fees.
> Science as an institution is the most trustworthy source of "real world insight" that YOU have.
FTFY
> Indeed it is one of the only mechanisms by which beings who suffer from the aforementioned flaws can produce real insight.
You seem to be under the delusion that only Science can understand/produce Truth. This is your first fallacy.
> To believe otherwise is to regard the fundamental principles upon which our considerable corpus of technology rests
This is your second fallacy. You are falsely assuming a mutual exclusive; rejecting the first premise does not imply your second conclusion.
> and in which we trust our lives and livelihoods, as unsound and/or mysterious, despite the fact that we observe devices and practices based on them to function daily
1. Uh, you might want to check your history because mankind didn't need "devices" to survive daily for thousand of years. Although I will say Technology certainly makes it _easier_ to survive. As the say "Better living through chemistry!" :-)
2. Technology (built upon the Wisdom of Science) is indeed a wonderful invention, however you are still missing the point that the domain of Science is constrained to the physical. It is unable to know the answers to certain questions particularly in respect to the meta-dimensions where time no longer exists. i.e. Scientists and Science will _never_ be able to understand "What _caused_ the Big Bang? What existed _before_ it?" because Science is artificially constrained to only the physical reality. Until Science leaves its kindergarten roots it won't have the balls to probe the depths of these questions such as: Who/what you are before you were born, and what/who you will be after you die.
For example, Scientists are still completely ignorant of the fact that a) we are not alone in the universe, b) that there are 6 fundamental forces, c) that white-holes recycle energy back and forth from black-holes, d) that the age of the Universe is 20 billion years, e) about Quantum Communication, etc. One does not need the shackles of "Science" to know these truths about the "real world."
> To maintain that science offers no real world insight reflects either profound ignorance or intellectual dishonesty to the point of idiocy.
You're the one imposing a false duality of tossing out the baby with the bathwater. The grand-parent did no such thing; he was simply stating the fact that Science has its own set of limitations. You are in denial over this fact.
Science is indeed useful. HOWEVER, it is NOT the _only_ way to understand the nature of reality.
As a mystic I will say you are like the blind man saying "There is no knowledge about color!" when instead it is "YOU have no knowledge about color". You keep assuming that physical reality is all that there is. This is false. To start with: You _do_ realize that Time is non-physical right?
The truth is there are _2_ ways to understand the universe//mind: Science And/inclusive-Or Intuition. By developing your Intuition to higher levels it becomes Gnosis / Mysticism.
BOTH systems have their time/place.
You keep drinking the Masculine Kool-Aid (TM) path of Science and keep rejecting the Feminine-path of Intuition because you have failed to learn the second wisdom about truth:
Know Thyself.
By rejecting your Super-conscious* you are ignorant of a way to explore ALL answers.
* N.B.: The Super-conscious/Higher-Self is commonly mistakenly called the sub-conscious by those that have never woken up.
> It's about building a web of evidence.
1. Which is nothing more then a popularity contest. Truth does not depend on popularity.
2. ALL Objective truth rests on the Subjective experience.
--
Only cowards use censorship.
> without ads 3/4 of the internet would not exist.
And nothing of value was lost.
IF a company serving ads wants to pay for _MY_ bandwidth costs then I have no problem with them serving ads. Until then, they can fuck off with their cross-hosts Flash, Java, and Javascript ads that don't respect my eyes and ears.
Blocking ads makes loading their website FASTER so I can tell if the CONTENT _and_ COMMUNITY is worth paying for (or not.)
--
Only cowards use censorship.
This is a sad tale -- but a good example of how being book smart doesn't translate into being street smart. :-/
Damn straight.
Idiotic airport logic used by the TSA goons ...
http://iwantsomefun.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/airport-logic-liquids-3oz-dangerous.jpg
>> Hopefully EA will learn from the experience and buff up its servers ahead of the game's official European launch on Friday.
> The lesson EA needs to learn here is the same one that every other video game publisher has to learn: don't build inherently single-player games with always-on requirements!
Sadly, that will never happen. A quick "history" lesson:
Blizzard's (Diablo 3): Battle.net 2.0
Ubisoft (Splinter Cell Chaos Theory) Uplay
EA (Dragon Age): Origin
You _will_ be forced to always-online-DRM from the big boys whether or not you like it. These companies don't respect you, all they care about is your money.
The only* thing you can do as a customer is stop supporting this stupid shit -- as in, don't buy it in the first place. Sadly, there are far too many fanboi's who want the latest shiny so "Good Luck with that" of convincing these companies to stop fucking up the single player experience.
To clarify, support indie games where they treat customers with respect not disrespect.
There are always idiots who don't understand the new medium.
Movies, Jazz, Rock, Gaming (Interactive stories).
50 - 100 years later the new medium is "recognized" as being "legitimate" expressions of the human spirit.
Here is a partial transcript
0:35:11 Although you are a technical person and interested in [OS] programming and not interested in other areas, UI, etc. Whatever you say influences a lot of other areas. How do you feel about your influences in those other areas you are not interested in?
Sometimes I am a bit upset that people take me too seriously. ... ...
I use strong language on the internet to the point where some people feel offended and that is their problem.
I think that especially in a community like open source other developers need to know how I feel about things.
I'm impolite because I'm impolite, I'm not making excuses for that.
I also believe when you work with a lot of people it is better to be really open about your feelings so you don't have people who by mistake misread you. I've had that happen.
I have literally had developers who working on things that I didn't like but didn't shut down early enough
They worked on it for a long time.
I've had developers who worked on things a long time.
They felt it was ready.
They submitted it to me
An I said "No, this is horrible."
Partially it is my personality.
I am blunt.
I tell people what I feel like.
But no I'm not going to tone it down because somebody might be hurt.
I believe the differences are due to the way the 2 OS licenses approach the definition 'community' differently:
* BSD - Here is our community -- you can take what you want; you don't have to give anything back.
* GPL - Here is our community - you can use what you want but you must also give back.
The true strength of community comes not only from what you can take from it, but also what you can give back.
Both licenses have enabled fantastic engineering and applied ideology in practical cooperation -- but it appears GPL is more focused on the long-term and BSD is focused on the short-term.
> Make up your mind.
You're a big boy perfectly capable of understanding that there almost always exceptions for every rule. You're not a little kid who needs everything spelt out in black and white.
> You never rollover, it encourages the bastards
There are 2 words IMO that everyone should removed from their dictionary: 'never' and 'always' -- because there are almost always edge cases where the assumptions don't hold. There is a time to surrender, a time to fight going down dieing, to flee, to dig your heels in, and everything in between all the extremes.
> Being large, I ran into more of the 'find the big guy' and start a fight to prove something
In your case I would mostly agree with you -- if some little shit wants to pull the pseudo-alpha-male crap then one would be quite justified 'it is your obligation to put him in his place.' The difference is that you STILL have some choices. Even though they probably haven't given you any choice you need to consider your options: If they are civilized enough to understand reason then great; if not then you can only respond to him in the only manner they understand. The 3rd option would be to be aware of the situation BEFORE it escalates and leave. e.g. Why are you in a place that those types of events happen regularly? THAT is the point -- learning to recognize the patterns. i.e. Evaluating "Is it really necessary to teach this dumb-schmuck a lesson?" The answer is not a dualistic yes-no one, but a trinity: yes-no-maybe.
> something cathartic about beating the snot out of someone
That's the adrenaline rush. There are other safer methods (for everyone involved) that are even more powerful.
Anyone who wants to watch (or be involved) with 2 men beating the crap out of another I have to question "How does this bring you closer to your respecting yourself and your fellow man?"
> Think headphones will help? Try it, and find out what a heart attack feels like when some asshole comes up behind you and taps you on the shoulder to get your attention.
But a small convex desk mirror on your monitor.
Use noise canceling headphones.
This isn't rocket science people.
> nobody wants to watch videos of you playing games, especially not your family or coworkers who are not 60-hour-a-week gamers, so please stop sending us Youtube links
Total Nonsense. I completed one of the maps on Payday The Heist last year on the hardest difficulty solo stealth just to prove that it could be done and have a few thousand views. Clearly a few people are interested.
Sometimes walkthroughs can be informative. i.e. "Cult of the Vault" symbols for Borderlands 2, Portal 1 & 2 challenges, etc.
I've completed Mirror's Edge but I could understand if someone just wanted to watch a play through of "Mirrors Edge" as it would certainly be a hell of a lot less aggravating then trying to get all the perfect timing to pull off moves.
Just because _you_ don't find game solution to be all that interesting does not imply no one else does.
Get off your high horse already.
> ability to detect with consistent frame rates, and ability to detect a stutter
This a thousand times!
Lag is OK as long as it is consistent.
The nice thing about targeting a _minimum_ of 120+ Hz is that you can get proper 3D 60 Hz "for free." :-)
Thanks for the catch. The return type is a typo -- should be int, else the compiler will be doing unnecessary casts.
floor() ceil() are slow as hell as they will promote a float to a double. floorf() and ceilf() should be available but may be unportable / unavailable. :-/
One of C's design flaws is that it will silently upcast char to int to float to double and there is no way portable nor standard way to stop the idiotic compiler from doing so or to print a compile-type "info", "warning", or "error" if it happens. Likewise there is no portable or standard way to inform the user of downcasts either, or to disable them entirely.