A man can be blunt to another man and tell him "You're being a fuckwad. Don't do this." Hell, bitter sports rivals will go for a beer afterwards. The "trash talk" is par for the course and men think nothing of it.
A woman will perceive as the man not being "sensitive."
So who's right?
Both. Men need to learn to communicate _differently_ with women and consider their feelings. And women need to learn not to take everything so fucking personal./Oblg joke. "Can you show me a woman who doesn't take everything personal? No, because you'd be left with a man!" (With apologies to Jack Nicholson in "As good as it gets.")
US has negotiated in secret with 600 private corporations. Only 5 chapters are about trade, the rest aren't. Public companies suing counties over public health measures? Gee, what could go wrong!?
This country was founded upon no taxation without representation -- meaning an _open_ government.
Governments and business who negotiate in secret are cowards. Chances are they have self-interests that don't serve the public good.
/sarcasm I only we could read ALL of it so we ALL can collectively decide if this is good for the nation or not. Yet this politicians just want everyone to lube up and take it with empty promises of "Trust us." Gee, where have we heard THAT before.
There is a HUGE disconnect between with what your eyes are telling your brain and what your ears are. Your brain is getting mixed messages. We've been able to somewhat "get over" it in 2D monitors because of lack of immersion. I've been gaming since the early 80's and *never* get motion sickness. I do with VR.:-/ A certain percentage of the population gets sick on boats. That's not a great "strength" for VR.
I think it is way too early to write VR off. (I tend to as well but I also want to wait-and-see.) There are some fantastic *niche* markets.
Want to get over your fear of heights? Parachuting? Sky diving? Take a VR course!:-)
Science is completely deficientregardless of which semantic games you want to play.
As a mystic I find your stance on evolution to be highly ignorant. Parent's, especially mothers, have an innate ability to love their offspring. This has *nothing* to do with evolution although you can keep trying to pretend it does.
Science teaches The Iron Rule (Might Makes Right) which has long been the status quo.
Religion teaches The Golden Rule (Love *is* the highest principle)
> Science doesn't tell us, but it sure explains it.
No it doesn't. It will tell you how to build a bomb, but not whether you should use it or not. Trying to distill morality (who lives and who dies) down to a numbers game is inhumane.
> Individuals who do not commit murder, torture and other disruptive actions have a greater chance of survival and their offspring surviving.
Gee, if only the governments would get the message.
If you "Ignore the messenger because you don't like the message" you'll miss out on a lot of great wisdom. You'll find the following links to be a lot more palatable.
Mike Acton reviewed Ogre 1.9's OrgreNode.cpp pointing out its horrible design and performance.
As a result Orge 2.x game up with a gameplan -- they put together a PDF of how OOP screwed their performance over.
Turns out, Mike Acton was right. They ended up with a 5x performance increase by ditching OOP and using DOD.
> Game programmers often use C++ (for various reasons).
Performance is the #1 of reason, but yeah, C++ gets the right balance of power, compactness, performance, and multi-paradigm design which builds upon C's foundation.
> What do you typically use to write programs?
Just because I'm vocal, and passionate, doesn't mean I toss the baby out with the bath water.
* the ones people complain about and * the ones nobody uses.
To answer your question:
Pragmatic C++. (With some Javascript, since WebGL is my (current) day job)
Which is the balance of the middle ground between basic C and the modern over-engineered clusterfuck of C++. Why do you think there was an "Embedded C++" movement years ago which removed all the Templates, Exception Handling, and RTTI junk? Gee, look, Ubisoft C++ usage does the exact same thing.
To clarify, I use _only_ templates when it makes sense. Most of the time it doesn't. I use #define macro's where it makes sense. Most of the time it doesn't. I don't use Boost because it is over engineered 99% of the time. I uses classes where it makes sense. I use 3rd party libraries only when necessary. I use design patterns only when the model fits - instead of trying to shoehorn the code+data into a broken model.
I've shipped enough games where a full build was 45+ minutes. This is insanity.
Minimal C++ is the mantra. Use the expressive complexity and power of the language when it matters. Most of the time it doesn't.
I just want the insanity of C++ to stop and address the common core issues instead of adding yet-another-flavor-of-the-month concept. Retarded ideas like 2D Graphics Rendering API proposal is the epitome of everything wrong with the committee. Completely out-of-touch with reality and solutions in search of a problem.
When you _even_ have a C++ committee memberadmitting he writes in a sub-set of C++ himself you know the language has gotten too big./Oblg. Murphy Computer Law: Inside every large programming language is a smaller one struggling to get out.
*ALL* programming languages suck. Most suck even more.
Want to know someone else who hates C++? Andrei Alexandrescu. *Every* C++ programmer should read until they grok Modern C++ Design: Generic Programming and Design Patterns Applied Guess where he works on now? D (All Things D (programming language) - A Conversation with Andrei Alexandrescu.)
When you even have Scott Meyers at a D Conference (DConf 2014: The Last Thing D Needs (Scott Meyers), you know the language has potential. D has its own problems but I would keep my eye on it.:-)
As bad as C++ is, for my needs it is better then the alternatives.
> What part of C++ OO imposes runtime performance costs?
Uh, the fact that it is designed for the uncommon single case instead of the common multi case. You want to optimize for the throughput, notlatency.
OOP (Object Orientated Programming) has terrible performance scalability since it has terrible D$ (Data Cache) usage. For high performance OOP is completely ditched in favor of DOD (Data Orientated Design). DOD is used heavily in modern game development, and HFT (High Frequency Trading.)
> Why let us sit around with just enough tech to kill all of ourselves for some arbitrary century or so?
1. You don't ruin (interfere) the Experiment of Free-Will by interfering with it until consciousness has evolved enough to think bigger then itself.
2. You underestimate just how crippling xenophobia would have been in the 20th century. There is (finally) enough consciousness not afraid of the unknown hat the effect for First Contact will be more beneficial then negative.
3. **Everything** happens in a cosmic time schedule.
> enlightened first world philosopher
There have been many of those. They usually end up getting killed by the ignorant masses as the many have not yet learnt the Law of Karma: Only cowards use violence; every time you hurt others you hurt yourself. The philosophy of Might Makes Right is a spiritual childish one; hell, most of the planet STILL hasn't grown up.
> It doesn't seem reasonable.
Things don't seam reasonable because you're only viewing 1/10 of (physical) reality. Without understanding the nature of Truth that is both Absolute and Relative, nothing at a higher level of human intelligence will.
> If they are waiting for just the proper brand of communism or what the fuck every ideology,
The **balance** of the needs-of-the-one vs the needs-of-the-many is still severely out of balance. Japan is the perfect example how disastrous putting others above oneself, you end up with a generation of people stuffing their emotions with the highest suicide rate. Conversely, America is the perfect example of putting one's needs above everyone else, where Wall St. and Big Religion fucks everyone over in the name of (false) profits.
That's true however there is a more important point.
Science by definition is amoral.
And that is the litmus test between scientists and engineers. Engineers do care about moral issues -- because the Science part itself is incomplete; it completely ignores the human aspect and consequences.
Unfortunately when engineers point out potential problems they have little recourse when upper management ignores them. Whistleblower protection has often failed. Companies that abuse this need to be fined heavily so they understand that morality is important then legality.
I would actually argue Apple is a trinity company:
* Hardware * Software (What works + doses of innovation) * User Experience (aka Branding)
This approach started back in the Apple days. Use as few parts as possible (to significantly reduce the raw cost of the final product far below what it costs the competition to make), jack it up to what the market will sustain, and sell the "brand" -- the complete Apple package. e.g. I never saw Microsoft with an Microsoft Care"
Apple's success is not only due to hardware, software, and user experience, but the psychology of marketing. Creating a brand that has a perceived value.
His original task on the disk controller was to reduce the chip count from the 40 chips used on the controllers for S-100 machines. In his redesign, he decided to use a single 8-bit ROM for tracking and reacting to the changing states of the disk controller as it decoded the bit stream being read from the disk. This concept eliminated more than a dozen of the chips used on the standard SA400 controller. Beyond that, he made additional design changes that reduced the total chip count to only nine. This eventually reduced further to eight, since two 555 timers were replaced by a single 556 timer.
And of course Apple didn't stop there. They kept pushing the aesthetics of their products to the non-techy user.
By controlling every single link in the chain they have been able to leverage their unique brand.
Slashdot Mirror
A man can be blunt to another man and tell him "You're being a fuckwad. Don't do this." Hell, bitter sports rivals will go for a beer afterwards. The "trash talk" is par for the course and men think nothing of it.
A woman will perceive as the man not being "sensitive."
So who's right?
Both. Men need to learn to communicate _differently_ with women and consider their feelings. And women need to learn not to take everything so fucking personal. /Oblg joke. "Can you show me a woman who doesn't take everything personal? No, because you'd be left with a man!" (With apologies to Jack Nicholson in "As good as it gets.")
Oh I agree wholeheartedly. The Corporation did a fantastic analysis identifying them as psychopaths.
The problem is, what is everyone else doing about it? :-(
Oh please, enough rhetoric already.
Why don't you actually educate yourself
US has negotiated in secret with 600 private corporations. Only 5 chapters are about trade, the rest aren't. Public companies suing counties over public health measures? Gee, what could go wrong!?
This country was founded upon no taxation without representation -- meaning an _open_ government.
Governments and business who negotiate in secret are cowards. Chances are they have self-interests that don't serve the public good.
/Oblg. /sarcasm America has the best government money can buy!
1. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils still doesn't change the fact that there are still 2 evils.
2. First Past the Goal Post is the bigger problem.
Just watched the excellent The Salt of the Earth
Doctors Without Borders are truly doing humane work.
America: The terrorists of the new millennium.
> and GPL is anti-developer
That's complete nonsense.
GPL prevents other developers from hijacking the freedom to lock everyone OUT
The goal is FREEDOM for FOR ALL.
That indeed is the elephant in the room:
* Nausea
There is a HUGE disconnect between with what your eyes are telling your brain and what your ears are. Your brain is getting mixed messages. We've been able to somewhat "get over" it in 2D monitors because of lack of immersion. I've been gaming since the early 80's and *never* get motion sickness. I do with VR. :-/ A certain percentage of the population gets sick on boats. That's not a great "strength" for VR.
I think it is way too early to write VR off. (I tend to as well but I also want to wait-and-see.) There are some fantastic *niche* markets.
Want to get over your fear of heights? Parachuting? Sky diving? Take a VR course! :-)
Apparently Tim Sweeney is betting the farm on VR
We'll probably see more hologram phone hacks like this in the meantime which is WAY more accessible.
Exactly. That or melted cheese. :-)
* Broccoli + Cheddar
* Cauliflower + Swiss
* Spinach + Mozzarella
* Asparagus + Parmesan
Won't work if the kid is lactose intolerant obviously ,,, just like this "finding".
Probably easier to give the kid natural consequences. "Eat your veggies and you get pie"
Just need the right motivation ! :-)
Science is completely deficient regardless of which semantic games you want to play.
As a mystic I find your stance on evolution to be highly ignorant. Parent's, especially mothers, have an innate ability to love their offspring. This has *nothing* to do with evolution although you can keep trying to pretend it does.
Science teaches The Iron Rule (Might Makes Right) which has long been the status quo.
Religion teaches The Golden Rule (Love *is* the highest principle)
> Science doesn't tell us, but it sure explains it.
No it doesn't. It will tell you how to build a bomb, but not whether you should use it or not. Trying to distill morality (who lives and who dies) down to a numbers game is inhumane.
> Individuals who do not commit murder, torture and other disruptive actions have a greater chance of survival and their offspring surviving.
Gee, if only the governments would get the message.
As opposed to Science which is amoral by definition !?!?
If you "Ignore the messenger because you don't like the message" you'll miss out on a lot of great wisdom. You'll find the following links to be a lot more palatable.
Mike Acton reviewed Ogre 1.9's OrgreNode.cpp pointing out its horrible design and performance.
As a result Orge 2.x game up with a gameplan -- they put together a PDF of how OOP screwed their performance over.
Turns out, Mike Acton was right. They ended up with a 5x performance increase by ditching OOP and using DOD.
Wow. As if Mozilla couldn't get any more stupid.
I love that Tim Berners-Lee called them out on their bullshit:
* Web Security - "HTTPS Everywhere" harmful
And Andrea Ronchetti gives perfect use case that this retarded move would break:
> If people are paying for an ad-blocker, that means they are willing to PAY for sites without ads.
HUH?
You pay for an ad-blocker ONCE.
There is no need nor desire to pay for EACH site, which is just a money grab. It is not my responsibility to pay for your broken business model.
Wow.
That's just plain retarded. But then again i'm not surprised.
Mozilla has a long history of not knowing what the fuck they are doing. i.e. Denial over memory leaks has been going on since FF 2.x
> Game programmers often use C++ (for various reasons).
Performance is the #1 of reason, but yeah, C++ gets the right balance of power, compactness, performance, and multi-paradigm design which builds upon C's foundation.
> What do you typically use to write programs?
Just because I'm vocal, and passionate, doesn't mean I toss the baby out with the bath water.
I would be stupid to ignore the wisdom of Bjarne Stroustrup:
To answer your question:
Pragmatic C++. (With some Javascript, since WebGL is my (current) day job)
Which is the balance of the middle ground between basic C and the modern over-engineered clusterfuck of C++. Why do you think there was an "Embedded C++" movement years ago which removed all the Templates, Exception Handling, and RTTI junk? Gee, look, Ubisoft C++ usage does the exact same thing.
To clarify, I use _only_ templates when it makes sense. Most of the time it doesn't. I use #define macro's where it makes sense. Most of the time it doesn't. I don't use Boost because it is over engineered 99% of the time. I uses classes where it makes sense. I use 3rd party libraries only when necessary. I use design patterns only when the model fits - instead of trying to shoehorn the code+data into a broken model.
I've shipped enough games where a full build was 45+ minutes. This is insanity.
Minimal C++ is the mantra. Use the expressive complexity and power of the language when it matters. Most of the time it doesn't.
I just want the insanity of C++ to stop and address the common core issues instead of adding yet-another-flavor-of-the-month concept. Retarded ideas like 2D Graphics Rendering API proposal is the epitome of everything wrong with the committee. Completely out-of-touch with reality and solutions in search of a problem.
When you _even_ have a C++ committee member admitting he writes in a sub-set of C++ himself you know the language has gotten too big. /Oblg. Murphy Computer Law: Inside every large programming language is a smaller one struggling to get out.
*ALL* programming languages suck. Most suck even more.
Want to know someone else who hates C++? Andrei Alexandrescu. *Every* C++ programmer should read until they grok Modern C++ Design: Generic Programming and Design Patterns Applied Guess where he works on now? D (All Things D (programming language) - A Conversation with Andrei Alexandrescu.)
When you even have Scott Meyers at a D Conference (DConf 2014: The Last Thing D Needs (Scott Meyers), you know the language has potential. D has its own problems but I would keep my eye on it. :-)
As bad as C++ is, for my needs it is better then the alternatives.
Which is why EVERY updated is blocked until I personally verify exactly what it is doing.
If Microsoft wants to data mine my machine they can go fuck themselves.
This forced artificial obsolescence of DirectX12 not being available for Windows 7 (or 8, 8.1) is complete bullshit.
I'm not downgrading to the privacy fuckfest of Windows 10 just to run a benchmark.
> What part of C++ OO imposes runtime performance costs?
Uh, the fact that it is designed for the uncommon single case instead of the common multi case. You want to optimize for the throughput, not latency.
OOP (Object Orientated Programming) has terrible performance scalability since it has terrible D$ (Data Cache) usage. For high performance OOP is completely ditched in favor of DOD (Data Orientated Design). DOD is used heavily in modern game development, and HFT (High Frequency Trading.)
I would recommend starting here:
* Pitfalls of Object Oriented Programming
Even Bjarne Stroustrup was ignorant of D$ usage and how it effects performance:
* Why you should avoid Linked Lists, where someone subtitled it: Stroustrup learns how L1 Cache usage is critical for performance sensitive code.
I would also read Mike Acton's presentation:
* Typical C++ Bullshit
> Why let us sit around with just enough tech to kill all of ourselves for some arbitrary century or so?
1. You don't ruin (interfere) the Experiment of Free-Will by interfering with it until consciousness has evolved enough to think bigger then itself.
2. You underestimate just how crippling xenophobia would have been in the 20th century. There is (finally) enough consciousness not afraid of the unknown hat the effect for First Contact will be more beneficial then negative.
3. **Everything** happens in a cosmic time schedule.
> enlightened first world philosopher
There have been many of those. They usually end up getting killed by the ignorant masses as the many have not yet learnt the Law of Karma: Only cowards use violence; every time you hurt others you hurt yourself. The philosophy of Might Makes Right is a spiritual childish one; hell, most of the planet STILL hasn't grown up.
> It doesn't seem reasonable.
Things don't seam reasonable because you're only viewing 1/10 of (physical) reality. Without understanding the nature of Truth that is both Absolute and Relative, nothing at a higher level of human intelligence will.
> If they are waiting for just the proper brand of communism or what the fuck every ideology,
The **balance** of the needs-of-the-one vs the needs-of-the-many is still severely out of balance. Japan is the perfect example how disastrous putting others above oneself, you end up with a generation of people stuffing their emotions with the highest suicide rate. Conversely, America is the perfect example of putting one's needs above everyone else, where Wall St. and Big Religion fucks everyone over in the name of (false) profits.
OT, but thanks for that discount code! $12 off the initial $25 is a nice deal !
... and that right there is why this is a "No Shit, Sherlock" moment. Stock fell 75%. /sarcasm You don't say!
3D Printing is still too expensive, and a niche market for the general masses.
I know you're being funny, but on a more serious note:
No need. The friendly ones _already_ know about us.
When First Contact happens by 2022~2024 the mass populous will (finally) be allowed to know about our progenitors.
That's true however there is a more important point.
Science by definition is amoral.
And that is the litmus test between scientists and engineers. Engineers do care about moral issues -- because the Science part itself is incomplete; it completely ignores the human aspect and consequences.
Unfortunately when engineers point out potential problems they have little recourse when upper management ignores them. Whistleblower protection has often failed. Companies that abuse this need to be fined heavily so they understand that morality is important then legality.
I would actually argue Apple is a trinity company:
* Hardware
* Software (What works + doses of innovation)
* User Experience (aka Branding)
This approach started back in the Apple days. Use as few parts as possible (to significantly reduce the raw cost of the final product far below what it costs the competition to make), jack it up to what the market will sustain, and sell the "brand" -- the complete Apple package. e.g. I never saw Microsoft with an Microsoft Care"
Apple's success is not only due to hardware, software, and user experience, but the psychology of marketing. Creating a brand that has a perceived value.
* http://apple2history.org/histo...
And of course Apple didn't stop there. They kept pushing the aesthetics of their products to the non-techy user.
By controlling every single link in the chain they have been able to leverage their unique brand.