I don't know which mystics you have been interacting with, or where you read your definition, but that is why you are not a mystic - because that is not its definition.
A mystic is someone who realizes, understands, knows, and is able to tap into deeper insights that there is significantly more then what the usualy limited 5 perceptions led us to believe. Their true knowledge is based on gnosis, not pseudo-intellectual knowledge that others tell them.
i.e. You could be told "You are not your physical body. You are a spiritual being having a human experience in a physical body. You are dreaming -- the goal of life is 'wake up', or 'enter the light', or as it is more commonly called 'enlightenment.' (which is also a journey, not only a destination.)", but all this wouldn't mean anything, until _you_ have proved it to yourself.
A mystic is also someone who realizes that True Religion is a way to prove your beliefs, by the way you live. If you do nothing with your beliefs, they are just that, beliefs.
The same way that a child can't do advanced math until it develops its mind, is exactly why people are generally ignorant of the consciousness of the universe, let alone themselves. A few scientists realize there is much, much more...
* "Today there is a wide measure of agreement... that the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine
- Astronomer James Jeans
* "The stuff of the universe is mind-stuff"
- Astronomer Arthur Eddington
* "... our brains mathematically construct hard reality by interpreting frequencies from a dimension transcending time and space. The brain is a hologram, interpreting a holographic universe."
- Cyberneticist David Foster
* "The scientist has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." - Robert Jastrow, (was head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies), in his book "God and the Astronomers"
The "problem" with mystics is that they are unable to communicate precisely what they know, because others don't have the same frame of reference. i.e. If you were color blind, someone telling you about the color "red", or "green" would be absolutely meaningless to you because you have no valid frame of reference.
The more important question is, "How did they get to know what they know":-)
I concur. Folders are like tagging an item only once. With tags, you can place multiple tags on items, which is analogous to it being in multiple directories, but yet only one copy is stored.
You have never worked on rendering code for a game have you?
You are wrong. I can tell the different between a game running at 30 fps and 60 fps because games rendering does not have temporal aliasing that movies do.
There is no reason to still use C nowadays. Everything you can do in C, you can in C++, plus you get better type safety for free. Using archaic languages from the 70's ignores all positive changes since then.
You don't understand how Law is supposed to work. _People_ create Laws, and created Government to work/serve the best interests of everyone, not the other way around. Law is not some "absolute" codified rule -- thats why we have the Spirit of the Law (Theory), and the Letter of the Law (Application). When the Law no longer works, we have things such as civil disobediance. Copyright is an archaic hold-over from when publishers didn't want competition. Imaginary Property rights are the next absurd idea that will eventually collapse. i.e. In Canada, copying music is Legal because people understand that there is no difference in loaning your CD to a friend, or giving him a copy.
> Q. What's the difference between "mouse look" and looking around with one of the joysticks?
A. Sensitivity.
The mouse is more accurate from small motions to large motions. The dead-zone area of a joystick, unfortunately, varies over time. On a mouse, there is _never_ a dead zone.
As a game dev, I totally concur. The gaming market has shifted to consoles, and to causal gaming. In the 90's upgrading your system was fun. In the 00's there are less and less games I want to play, and the money is being spent elsewhere -- family, or other recreations / hobbies.
For gamers, the one BIG advantage consoles have is that "stuff just works." I don't have to worry about getting a new video card (or drivers), or any other upgrades (cpu/ram.) I think one of the biggest frustrations is playing PC Ports where the controls are just abysmal.
The only real big hold outs are Strategy games (real-time or not), where a standard mouse+keyboard is not standard on consoles yet. Once the console manufactors realize I _don't_t want a sepearet propietary interface for every periphal, but want it standardized like USB, then that will "barrier" will fall to.
The problems are 1) Science has Evolution backwards, and 2) Religion doesn't understand the Evolution of the Universe, let alone God. Both contains truth, but one truth does not negate another.
Evolution is NOT the process BUT the purpose, which is why there are gaps [*].
_Every_ single "thing" in the universe grows/evolves over (unlimited) time, because everything has a consciousness (life) and a reason to exist; that is what it was _designed_ to do so -- to experience. This are no such thing as accidents or chaos. It is only a limited understand that makes it appear that way, because one is not able to view the underlying laws or forces.
Science is unable to answer the eternal questions "Why does the universe even bother to exist at all?" because it is looking for an answer "out" there, instead of "in" here.
* Darwin questioned the validity of his theory when he wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain, and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory" -- Charles Darwin, On The Origin Of Species)
Society ignores the much larger problem (violent images/movies) and focuses on something totally natural (nakedness). Leave it to politicians to treat the symptom, and not the cause.
> No. An automobile is wealth. An airplane is wealth. A book is wealth.
Actually those are just things of _arbitrary_ value. If someone can't use it, it is worthless for _that_ person.
Wealth is the ability to _generate_ income.
If you own a house are you wealthy? That depends -- does it COST you to have it (thus it is a liability), or does it GENERATE revenue for you (thus it is an asset)?
Open Source is the perfect example of the new "monetary" system that humans are progressing towards. It is not about the "things" that will determine wealth (since in the future everyone's basic needs will be met), but about what you can do for others.
-- Money is in invention that represents time & skill.
While I agree that Fantasy is not everyone's cup of tea, the alternatives are not popular for a reason. You are ignoring one big problem when attempting to use a different theme.
"Frame of Reference" with respect to the in-game Tech/Skill Level.
Let's say we have our Sci-Fi MMORPG. Quick, tell me what is better? Plasma, Laser, Gravitron, Proton, or Neutron Guns? Let's say we also have the same "type" of shields. Again, what shields protect from type of weapons? Without spending time in the game, you have _no_ idea or "frame of reference" to infer what each strength's and weaknesses are (of the guns & shields.) Most women tune out this "techno-babble" -- they usually want a social aspect. Social aspects are hard to make into games.
Magic is popular because _everyone_ can relate to it, due to the fact that it is based on physical events, and doesn't break the overall "expected" tech level in the game. It's a (fun!) "hack" to get "alternate tech" into a game world, without alienating anyone.
Would a western MMORPG do (financially) well? I don't know...
I suspect that Fantasy MMORPGs do well because they are the "virtual doll house for boys." Men like all the "phat loot" and the virtual deer hunting aspect of the game. i.e. A sense of accomplishment about how "uber" they are -- _our_ guild can take down Dragon X, etc. Most companies only want to go with what works. Almost anything non-fantasy is "too risky". The most popular theme is "reality", which is why Sims is the best selling PC game of all time. This was single player though, not a MMORPG. Why did the MMORPG version bomb? Because it wasn't fun enough. Could this type of genre be fun enough? Again, another interesting question.
I understand where you are coming from, and hopefully you can see that this is a hard problem to solve. Hopefully this sheds some light onto your question - it is a very good one! Sometimes the catalyst for change is to ask "Why are things the way they are?"
Slashdot Mirror
> Or to put it in human terms, we cannot comprehend something that did not have a beginning.
That's a fallacy: Draw a circle. It has no beginning or end.
The universes is like a circle.
> Mysticism is a response to the unknown.
:-)
I don't know which mystics you have been interacting with, or where you read your definition, but that is why you are not a mystic - because that is not its definition.
A mystic is someone who realizes, understands, knows, and is able to tap into deeper insights that there is significantly more then what the usualy limited 5 perceptions led us to believe. Their true knowledge is based on gnosis, not pseudo-intellectual knowledge that others tell them.
i.e. You could be told "You are not your physical body. You are a spiritual being having a human experience in a physical body. You are dreaming -- the goal of life is 'wake up', or 'enter the light', or as it is more commonly called 'enlightenment.' (which is also a journey, not only a destination.)", but all this wouldn't mean anything, until _you_ have proved it to yourself.
A mystic is also someone who realizes that True Religion is a way to prove your beliefs, by the way you live. If you do nothing with your beliefs, they are just that, beliefs.
The same way that a child can't do advanced math until it develops its mind, is exactly why people are generally ignorant of the consciousness of the universe, let alone themselves. A few scientists realize there is much, much more...
* "Today there is a wide measure of agreement... that the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine
- Astronomer James Jeans
* "The stuff of the universe is mind-stuff"
- Astronomer Arthur Eddington
* "... our brains mathematically construct hard reality by interpreting frequencies from a dimension transcending time and space. The brain is a hologram, interpreting a holographic universe."
- Cyberneticist David Foster
* "The scientist has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
- Robert Jastrow, (was head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies), in his book "God and the Astronomers"
The "problem" with mystics is that they are unable to communicate precisely what they know, because others don't have the same frame of reference. i.e. If you were color blind, someone telling you about the color "red", or "green" would be absolutely meaningless to you because you have no valid frame of reference.
The more important question is, "How did they get to know what they know"
I concur. Folders are like tagging an item only once. With tags, you can place multiple tags on items, which is analogous to it being in multiple directories, but yet only one copy is stored.
My question to Bill would be...
If you invent a drug to cure cancer, or aids, what price do you put on a human life? And, second, how do you justify it?
--
Imaginary Property Rights are an archaic hold-ever from the last millennium. Information has no owner, only users.
Boy are you in for a rude shock in the 2030s ....
You have never worked on rendering code for a game have you?
You are wrong. I can tell the different between a game running at 30 fps and 60 fps because games rendering does not have temporal aliasing that movies do.
How the hell can you lose a patent that is _named_ after you?!
Independent Discovery is exactly one of the reasons the Patent system is f-'d up.
> In the last couple of years with GarageBand etc providing the ability for anyone to make reasonable music at home
Oh wow; just checked if GarageBand supports SoundFonts2; support was added in v1.1 back '04.
http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/20/0921224
http://www.thegaragedoor.com/tutorials/sftutorial.html
There is no such thing as true randomness. You can't measure something without effecting it.
Consciousness can effect randomness, as this Princeton page proves.
There is no reason to still use C nowadays. Everything you can do in C, you can in C++, plus you get better type safety for free. Using archaic languages from the 70's ignores all positive changes since then.
Isn't there a function to determine the cube parity?
Are in this order?
/. going to update the reverse layout of the "older news"
Cancel = Back (Left), OK = Forward (Right)
Slightly off-topic: When the hell is
YesterdayDate | DayBeforeYesterday
It should be:
PrevDate | SelectedDate | NextDate
And there sould be at least button of whitespace between Preview and Submit.
Noob UI designers...
A. mu
The question implies you are not a man if you don't walk down any paths.
You don't understand how Law is supposed to work. _People_ create Laws, and created Government to work/serve the best interests of everyone, not the other way around. Law is not some "absolute" codified rule -- thats why we have the Spirit of the Law (Theory), and the Letter of the Law (Application). When the Law no longer works, we have things such as civil disobediance. Copyright is an archaic hold-over from when publishers didn't want competition. Imaginary Property rights are the next absurd idea that will eventually collapse. i.e. In Canada, copying music is Legal because people understand that there is no difference in loaning your CD to a friend, or giving him a copy.
Let me know your name, so I can avoid what you create, because all you care about is money, and not doing it because you enjoy it.
"Stealing" is not the same as duplicating. And no, you don't have the right to tell others what they can, or can not, share with others.
I completely agree with that -- but as far as the end user is concerned, s/he doesn't care about the reasons -- they just want their hardware to work.
IAAGD (I am a game developer)
> Q. What's the difference between "mouse look" and looking around with one of the joysticks?
A. Sensitivity.
The mouse is more accurate from small motions to large motions. The dead-zone area of a joystick, unfortunately, varies over time. On a mouse, there is _never_ a dead zone.
Sounds like energy -- can't be created or destroyed...
As a game dev, I totally concur. The gaming market has shifted to consoles, and to causal gaming. In the 90's upgrading your system was fun. In the 00's there are less and less games I want to play, and the money is being spent elsewhere -- family, or other recreations / hobbies.
For gamers, the one BIG advantage consoles have is that "stuff just works." I don't have to worry about getting a new video card (or drivers), or any other upgrades (cpu/ram.) I think one of the biggest frustrations is playing PC Ports where the controls are just abysmal.
The only real big hold outs are Strategy games (real-time or not), where a standard mouse+keyboard is not standard on consoles yet. Once the console manufactors realize I _don't_t want a sepearet propietary interface for every periphal, but want it standardized like USB, then that will "barrier" will fall to.
The problems are
1) Science has Evolution backwards, and
2) Religion doesn't understand the Evolution of the Universe, let alone God.
Both contains truth, but one truth does not negate another.
Evolution is NOT the process BUT the purpose, which is why there are gaps [*].
_Every_ single "thing" in the universe grows/evolves over (unlimited) time, because everything has a consciousness (life) and a reason to exist; that is what it was _designed_ to do so -- to experience. This are no such thing as accidents or chaos. It is only a limited understand that makes it appear that way, because one is not able to view the underlying laws or forces.
Science is unable to answer the eternal questions "Why does the universe even bother to exist at all?" because it is looking for an answer "out" there, instead of "in" here.
* Darwin questioned the validity of his theory when he wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain, and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory" -- Charles Darwin, On The Origin Of Species)
Yup, totally spot on.
Society ignores the much larger problem (violent images/movies) and focuses on something totally natural (nakedness). Leave it to politicians to treat the symptom, and not the cause.
> No. An automobile is wealth. An airplane is wealth. A book is wealth.
Actually those are just things of _arbitrary_ value. If someone can't use it, it is worthless for _that_ person.
Wealth is the ability to _generate_ income.
If you own a house are you wealthy? That depends -- does it COST you to have it (thus it is a liability), or does it GENERATE revenue for you (thus it is an asset)?
Open Source is the perfect example of the new "monetary" system that humans are progressing towards. It is not about the "things" that will determine wealth (since in the future everyone's basic needs will be met), but about what you can do for others.
--
Money is in invention that represents time & skill.
You are correct about things being abstracted away -- the problem is, a lot of these things are not "fun"
Totally agree that a "static world" is a boring world!
What themes would you like to see instead?
While I agree that Fantasy is not everyone's cup of tea, the alternatives are not popular for a reason. You are ignoring one big problem when attempting to use a different theme.
"Frame of Reference" with respect to the in-game Tech/Skill Level.
Let's say we have our Sci-Fi MMORPG. Quick, tell me what is better? Plasma, Laser, Gravitron, Proton, or Neutron Guns? Let's say we also have the same "type" of shields. Again, what shields protect from type of weapons? Without spending time in the game, you have _no_ idea or "frame of reference" to infer what each strength's and weaknesses are (of the guns & shields.) Most women tune out this "techno-babble" -- they usually want a social aspect. Social aspects are hard to make into games.
Magic is popular because _everyone_ can relate to it, due to the fact that it is based on physical events, and doesn't break the overall "expected" tech level in the game. It's a (fun!) "hack" to get "alternate tech" into a game world, without alienating anyone.
Would a western MMORPG do (financially) well? I don't know...
I suspect that Fantasy MMORPGs do well because they are the "virtual doll house for boys." Men like all the "phat loot" and the virtual deer hunting aspect of the game. i.e. A sense of accomplishment about how "uber" they are -- _our_ guild can take down Dragon X, etc. Most companies only want to go with what works. Almost anything non-fantasy is "too risky". The most popular theme is "reality", which is why Sims is the best selling PC game of all time. This was single player though, not a MMORPG. Why did the MMORPG version bomb? Because it wasn't fun enough. Could this type of genre be fun enough? Again, another interesting question.
I understand where you are coming from, and hopefully you can see that this is a hard problem to solve. Hopefully this sheds some light onto your question - it is a very good one! Sometimes the catalyst for change is to ask "Why are things the way they are?"
Cheers
--
Yes, I am a game programmer & designer.
Does it _always_ face the earth 100%, or does the moon have a precession?
I can't seem to find any info on this...