Methinks it behooves you to check your history since you seem ignorant of it...
1998 March, SaeHan Information Systems ""MPMan" - the first digital MP3 player 1998 September, Diamond "Rio PMP300" 2000 Creative "NOMAD Jukebox" 2001 October, Apple "iPod"/sarcasm Looks like Creative "ripped off" 2 other companies !
Well one problem was, to qout a common cliche, "It's the interface stupid!" e.g. The fonts on the BB are crap. i.e. The whole UI design suffers the same problem as the UI on the PS3 - it looks like it was designed by an engineer instead of the sexy UI of the iPhone or XBox360:-/
Sexy devices sell. RIM completely under estimated the importance of having a clean, easy, consistent UI - the iPhone showed everybody you don't need to be stuck with shitty UIs on a phone - and sexy sells.
Agreed. Myself and 3 of my RB6:LV2 buddies will not be buying the next RB6
The issues we've run into...
- bullshit login server stops us from playing. We all have reached Elite status and unlocked all guns. We don't give a shit about levels, unlocks, XP anymore anymore --we just want to _play_. - no map editor - retarded decision when hosting a game you are dumped into the game instead of the game lobby - host can't force force "Ready"
Goodbye Ubisoft. Your Rainbow Six games used to be good.
I wouldn't trust Wikipedia's definition for anything religious or spiritual -- it's garbage. e.g. The article on Gnostic is a joke.
a) Wikipedia asserts without any references that religion is external, not internal which is nonsense. Religion doesn't depend on "popularity."
... but religion differs from private belief in that it has a public aspect...
TRUE religion is the act of living the life to prove your beliefs; or said another way "Religion is Applied Philosophy". Thomas Paine also has an interesting perspective on Religion: http://www.deism.com/paine_essay_religion.htm
b) While Sunderland is correct with his definition of Religion he is also [appears? to be] ignorant of the fact that _everyone_ has faith; but he is correct not everyone has Religion or religion. Initially you can't prove your beliefs -- you take them on faith. If you don't have faith in your beliefs then why do you have them [beliefs] in the first place? The belief in God is orthogonal to Religion. Which is what the point he was driving at.
Note: These two reasons are why Science is a Religion: Faith? Check mark. Desire to Prove Beliefs? And Check mark again. QED. Science is only _one_ way to arrive at the answers / proof.
i.e. Scientists take it on faith that the speed of light is constant throughout the universe. Scientists take it on faith that there was no 'time nor space' before the Big Bang. etc.
> Conversely, I can't think of a SP/MP RPG where the multiplayer isn't simply the single-player game with increased difficulty. > These are all examples of some additional content added to the same game for multiplayer.
Thus, your initial assertion/assumption is invalid.
In the future you might want to check your "facts" before talking with someone who has played D2 for 12 years.
However, you forgot the 0th rule: 0. Any ideology when taken to an extreme is harmful.
"Rules" are _guidelines_, not "Laws". What you are championing is Dogma. You can _always_ come up with a valid except to any rule.
There are times to to break the rules -- the hard part is knowing when. But yes, for the majority of the time, the rules should be followed.
P.S. Neither Programmers, nor Designers, nor Users should be used for the Theory+Implementation of Software. You need a person who is ALL THREE, because the 3 perspectives are too myopic / microscopic -- you need BOTH a microscopic and macroscopic view of ALL THREE perspectives: implementation, design, use/work-flow.
> People shoplift. Does this mean that we should abolish our current system of commerce? 1. Apples and Oranges. You are comparing with the act of physical removing an object preventing another person from using that resource, vs the act of copying something that allows BOTH people to enjoy the use of that resource. 2. Economy/Commerce is nethanderal thinking -- literally buying into the false belief that "There is Never Enough." Its time to end archaic thinking.
2. The fact that is is illegal to share a number is insane. The fact that a number can be used to _represent_ audio, video, text, etc. created by someone who doesn't want others to share that number is irrelevant. The basis of civilization is FOUNDED upon the fact that people SHARE.
3. Those who charge for "I.P." are doing it out of greed. It is time the human race grows up, and realizes there is more to life then money -- more then just getting, but giving.
> I read on Steve's and DP Review Yup, Steve's Digicam and Digital Photography Review were (and still are) THE place to check out camera reviews! Luckily I had a friend who caught the shutter bug and he introduced me to those two great review sites before I got my first camera. Nice to see them mentioned. Lots of good memories checking out the latest Canon reviews back in the day. =)
> Kodak cameras were all over the map. They didn't seem to have a focus. They were not a good buy. I think that's one reason Canon and Nikon ate Kodak for lunch. Every year or so they would bring out a new model. You can tell by the fact of Canon + Nikon + others having to compete forced them to innovate -- consumers ended up winning with features & price. i.e. The 2000s were all about the megapixel (MP) war and showed us that once you reach a certain threshold the MP number starts to become pointless. Ease of Use, Shutter lag, Camera Lens options, picture quality (PQ), weight, battery life, etc. all become more important.
The only thing the camera industry fucked up on was batteries. Consumers want STANDARD re-chargeable batteries sizes and power draw, much like how we had a standard for non-rechargeable batteries (A, AAA, C, D) although someone pointed out in the past few months in another thread that we now have this...
I would agree with the importance of branding.. When I bought my first digital camera I never considered Kodak. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Fujifilm were all the brand names that I seemed to be aware of.
The Canon Digital Rebel made quite a stir when it came out and having seen Canon's UI that was easy to pick up and consistent all it camera's line made it a "done deal" for having an "upgrade path" from a simple point-and-shoot, to the Digital Rebel, to the 5D, if I so wanted.
> There is no difference in the intrinsic value of the product. 2. Correct. You are close to a key Insight to reach the next level of understanding but not quite there yet; so let me help you out --> Value is multi-valued! i.e. Two different people can value the same thing differently; what is it "perceived" value then? The High, the Low, the Average? No, it is BOTH the low AND the high. It is a 1-to-many relationship, NOT a 1-to-1 relationship. THIS is the main factor on why [almost] all economic theories are doomed to fail -- they don't accurately model the relationship of value -- multi-valued, not single-valued.
> The real counterfeit is... people are buying fake value People literally buy into the pseudo-cool factor all the time. They are called "fads." Suckers have yet to learn that having object X doesn't matter one bit when you the true value in life is relationships. e.g. The rest of us get on with our lives buying the $20 jeans instead of the $100 designer jeans laughing (and/or feeling sad) at the sucker ^H^H^H financial idiot willing to throw away his money at a lame attempt of being a hipster.
There is a much bigger issue looming on the horizon ( 100 - 400 years) though that you will want to ponder -- what happens to "value" when anyone can simply "print" whatever object they want? =)
Uh, where do you think I originally got 2^4/10 from? =) I intentionally wrote it out long hand so that anyone could do this calc in their head. i.e. constant 1.6 = 2^4 / 10 = 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 / 10 e.g. kmph = double the mph four times and divide by 10
> qualifies as a "major wave of popularity"(!) OK, so 4 major and one minor wave.
> 3D has likely been going *somewhere* pretty much continuously in some form for well over 100 years. I think that was the original point >:-) Much longer then ~ 50 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Does Java have computed goto's ? On some platforms can provide a very nice speedup in the inner loops of interpreters such as Lua, etc.
Methinks it behooves you to check your history since you seem ignorant of it ...
1998 March, SaeHan Information Systems ""MPMan" - the first digital MP3 player /sarcasm Looks like Creative "ripped off" 2 other companies !
1998 September, Diamond "Rio PMP300"
2000 Creative "NOMAD Jukebox"
2001 October, Apple "iPod"
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_media_player
* http://www.randomhistory.com/2008/08/04_ipod.html
* http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/iPod_1_Apple_Continues_MP3_Player_Dominance_In_November/
So basically you gave up and let them win by default ??
May I remind you of a few famous quotes:
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
-- mis-attributed to http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
-- Thomas Jefferson
Well one problem was, to qout a common cliche, "It's the interface stupid!" :-/
e.g.
The fonts on the BB are crap.
i.e.
The whole UI design suffers the same problem as the UI on the PS3 - it looks like it was designed by an engineer instead of the sexy UI of the iPhone or XBox360
Sexy devices sell. RIM completely under estimated the importance of having a clean, easy, consistent UI - the iPhone showed everybody you don't need to be stuck with shitty UIs on a phone - and sexy sells.
Which Apple ][ games? I work on an emulator in my spare time and tend to collect old games... :)
Still can't find a copy of Empire II: Interstellar Sharks and Empire III Armageddon ... :(
I built 3 windows 7 computers over the winter break.
A fresh install of Win 7 x64 takes
- 12 GB Windows
- 8 GB pagefile (deleted & turned off)
- 8 GB hibernate (deleted & turned off)
Not sure where you are pulling 40 GB out of your ass from ? =)
Forgot a few more:
- no more then 4 player coop. It's not 1990 anymore -- allow us that run servers to decide what the max players are.
Forgivable, but extremely annoying
- only 8 terrorists spawn at any one time
- the AI cheats -- spawns right behind you when you've cleared the area
Agreed. Myself and 3 of my RB6:LV2 buddies will not be buying the next RB6
The issues we've run into ...
- bullshit login server stops us from playing. We all have reached Elite status and unlocked all guns. We don't give a shit about levels, unlocks, XP anymore anymore --we just want to _play_.
- no map editor
- retarded decision when hosting a game you are dumped into the game instead of the game lobby
- host can't force force "Ready"
Goodbye Ubisoft. Your Rainbow Six games used to be good.
I wouldn't trust Wikipedia's definition for anything religious or spiritual -- it's garbage. e.g. The article on Gnostic is a joke.
a) Wikipedia asserts without any references that religion is external, not internal which is nonsense. Religion doesn't depend on "popularity."
TRUE religion is the act of living the life to prove your beliefs; or said another way "Religion is Applied Philosophy". Thomas Paine also has an interesting perspective on Religion: http://www.deism.com/paine_essay_religion.htm
b) While Sunderland is correct with his definition of Religion he is also [appears? to be] ignorant of the fact that _everyone_ has faith; but he is correct not everyone has Religion or religion. Initially you can't prove your beliefs -- you take them on faith. If you don't have faith in your beliefs then why do you have them [beliefs] in the first place? The belief in God is orthogonal to Religion. Which is what the point he was driving at.
Note: These two reasons are why Science is a Religion:
Faith? Check mark.
Desire to Prove Beliefs? And Check mark again.
QED.
Science is only _one_ way to arrive at the answers / proof.
i.e.
Scientists take it on faith that the speed of light is constant throughout the universe.
Scientists take it on faith that there was no 'time nor space' before the Big Bang.
etc.
> Today, Reddit is bigger than Slashdot in both volume and content.
Reddit does have some gems, but the S/N makes it useless most of the time. Reddit is the Dig of Slashdot.
I'll take the quality of /.'s S/N over Reddit any day.
> Conversely, I can't think of a SP/MP RPG where the multiplayer isn't simply the single-player game with increased difficulty.
> These are all examples of some additional content added to the same game for multiplayer.
Thus, your initial assertion/assumption is invalid.
In the future you might want to check your "facts" before talking with someone who has played D2 for 12 years.
> Conversely, I can't think of a SP/MP RPG where the multiplayer isn't simply the single-player game with increased difficulty.
Uh, Diablo 2
a) Uber Trist for Hellfire Torch
http://extreme-gamerz.org/diablo2/viewdiablo2/hellfirecharmquest
b) Diablo Clone for Annihilus Charm
http://extreme-gamerz.org/diablo2/viewdiablo2/annihiluscloneguide
c) Ladder only Runewords
http://classic.battle.net/diablo2exp/items/runewords-110.shtml
> but you can always just get online in the same room.
Tell that to Ubisoft and RB6:LV2 (Rainbow Six: Las Vegas 2) You are ASSUMING the login servers NEVER go down.
Why the fuck do I need to go online when I already have friends+family in the same room ??
Interesting link.
However, you forgot the 0th rule:
0. Any ideology when taken to an extreme is harmful.
"Rules" are _guidelines_, not "Laws". What you are championing is Dogma. You can _always_ come up with a valid except to any rule.
There are times to to break the rules -- the hard part is knowing when. But yes, for the majority of the time, the rules should be followed.
P.S.
Neither Programmers, nor Designers, nor Users should be used for the Theory+Implementation of Software. You need a person who is ALL THREE, because the 3 perspectives are too myopic / microscopic -- you need BOTH a microscopic and macroscopic view of ALL THREE perspectives: implementation, design, use/work-flow.
> People shoplift. Does this mean that we should abolish our current system of commerce?
1. Apples and Oranges. You are comparing with the act of physical removing an object preventing another person from using that resource, vs the act of copying something that allows BOTH people to enjoy the use of that resource.
2. Economy/Commerce is nethanderal thinking -- literally buying into the false belief that "There is Never Enough." Its time to end archaic thinking.
> and unlike the other forms of intellectual property
1. Intellectual Property, is neither intellectual, nor property
See:
If Intellectual Property Is Neither Intellectual, Nor Property, What Is It?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080306/003240458.shtml
and
Against Intellectual Monopoly
http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm
2. The fact that is is illegal to share a number is insane. The fact that a number can be used to _represent_ audio, video, text, etc. created by someone who doesn't want others to share that number is irrelevant. The basis of civilization is FOUNDED upon the fact that people SHARE.
3. Those who charge for "I.P." are doing it out of greed. It is time the human race grows up, and realizes there is more to life then money -- more then just getting, but giving.
> We're a democracy,
Uh, no offense, but you might want to try _reading_ the Constitution sometime there buddy ...
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Oblg. Summoner Geeks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zng5kRle4FA
> The laws of physics work the same way there that they do here...
And your proof is ... ?
> I read on Steve's and DP Review
Yup, Steve's Digicam and Digital Photography Review were (and still are) THE place to check out camera reviews! Luckily I had a friend who caught the shutter bug and he introduced me to those two great review sites before I got my first camera. Nice to see them mentioned. Lots of good memories checking out the latest Canon reviews back in the day. =)
> Kodak cameras were all over the map. They didn't seem to have a focus. They were not a good buy.
I think that's one reason Canon and Nikon ate Kodak for lunch. Every year or so they would bring out a new model. You can tell by the fact of Canon + Nikon + others having to compete forced them to innovate -- consumers ended up winning with features & price. i.e. The 2000s were all about the megapixel (MP) war and showed us that once you reach a certain threshold the MP number starts to become pointless. Ease of Use, Shutter lag, Camera Lens options, picture quality (PQ), weight, battery life, etc. all become more important.
The only thing the camera industry fucked up on was batteries. Consumers want STANDARD re-chargeable batteries sizes and power draw, much like how we had a standard for non-rechargeable batteries (A, AAA, C, D) although someone pointed out in the past few months in another thread that we now have this ...
I would agree with the importance of branding.. When I bought my first digital camera I never considered Kodak. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Fujifilm were all the brand names that I seemed to be aware of.
The Canon Digital Rebel made quite a stir when it came out and having seen Canon's UI that was easy to pick up and consistent all it camera's line made it a "done deal" for having an "upgrade path" from a simple point-and-shoot, to the Digital Rebel, to the 5D, if I so wanted.
Kodak never was "on the radar."
Interesting link.
You do realize that GÃdel Incompleteness Theorem is incomplete though, right? =)
Interesting/Informative post, but you miss two key issues:
1. You ARE aware that the whole fashion industry has NO copyright and yet still continues to profit, right?
Johanna Blakley: Lessons from fashion's free culture
http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
> There is no difference in the intrinsic value of the product.
2. Correct. You are close to a key Insight to reach the next level of understanding but not quite there yet; so let me help you out --> Value is multi-valued! i.e. Two different people can value the same thing differently; what is it "perceived" value then? The High, the Low, the Average? No, it is BOTH the low AND the high. It is a 1-to-many relationship, NOT a 1-to-1 relationship. THIS is the main factor on why [almost] all economic theories are doomed to fail -- they don't accurately model the relationship of value -- multi-valued, not single-valued.
> The real counterfeit is ... people are buying fake value
People literally buy into the pseudo-cool factor all the time. They are called "fads." Suckers have yet to learn that having object X doesn't matter one bit when you the true value in life is relationships. e.g. The rest of us get on with our lives buying the $20 jeans instead of the $100 designer jeans laughing (and/or feeling sad) at the sucker ^H^H^H financial idiot willing to throw away his money at a lame attempt of being a hipster.
There is a much bigger issue looming on the horizon ( 100 - 400 years) though that you will want to ponder -- what happens to "value" when anyone can simply "print" whatever object they want? =)
Cheers
Uh, where do you think I originally got 2^4/10 from? =) I intentionally wrote it out long hand so that anyone could do this calc in their head.
i.e.
constant 1.6 = 2^4 / 10 = 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 / 10
e.g.
kmph = double the mph four times and divide by 10
> qualifies as a "major wave of popularity"(!)
OK, so 4 major and one minor wave.
> 3D has likely been going *somewhere* pretty much continuously in some form for well over 100 years.
I think that was the original point >:-) Much longer then ~ 50 years.
(I can't believe there is a Wikipedia entry for those things....)
This is the internet; one man's lack of interest (or even disgust) is another man's fetish ;-)