It clues me in to the fact that an organization made up mostly of dictatorships (60% of UN nations are non-democratic) has been predictably unwilling to deal appropriately with one of their own.
How many more UN resoultions were you willing to allow Hussein to defy? 12 wasn't enough?
Frankly I'm a bit surprised that an entity of the U.S. Government would have published a game on a non-Microsoft platform, but kudos to the Army for it!
Now I'll just have to see if it will run on my laptop...
With
the huge number of postings on all the various forums, concerning this update,
most people don't know where to start looking for information about the recent
Google update. The following is an attempt to put down rationally (I hope) most
of the information that is known and the (unproven) theories behind the update
algo.
Introduction.
Starting on the 16th of November, a major shift in results was seen on Google.
Veterans recognised that Google appeared to be doing a major update, not seen
for many months, as reported first on WebMasterWorld
who named it Florida, continuing the tradition of naming updates
rather like hurricanes. In this case it was a hurricane! As was usual with many
updates, there were moans and groans as people complained about their sites
falling. Many people were unaffected (including us) but the symptoms of the
sites being dropped were not usual. No penalties, such as PR0, seem to have
been applied against pages that had fallen - yet none of the pages targeted at
specific key phrases, particularly index/home pages, appeared in the top
results for these search terms. Indeed some had dropped hundreds of places and,
in some cases reported, off the scale. Yet these pages did appear for obscure phrases
and were obviously still in the index.
It appeared to us and to several other respected names (though hotly disputed
by others) that some sort of over-SEOd filter had been applied to check if
overt SEO had been done for that particular phrase. It was as if Google were
checking to see if external links to the site included the phrase, on-page
optimisation was being done for the phrase and even if the domain included the
phrase. If the density of the optimisation, both on and off the page, appeared
too artificial, then a filter was tripped and down went the page - solely for
that phrase.
Google had never looked favourably on abuse of their systems and many
established SEOs looked upon this algo tweak as a way of Google getting rid of
the abuses of links and stopping the scrambling for getting (and sometimes
buying) links including your required anchor text from other high PR, but
probably irrelevant to your subject, sites. It seemed to make sense.
On Friday, 21st November, Google decided to tighten the filter. All
hell broke loose as tens of thousands of sites disappeared from positions they
had held (in some cases) for years. We noticed some of our client sites
plummeting for their major key phrase from being #1 to total invisibility. Yet
this was only in highly competitive areas, not for their secondary phrases.
These sites were, in most cases, not highly optimised, had not sought
reciprocal links but had achieved their rankings through being on the web for 4
or 5 years. The bad news was that their company name and domain included the
key phrase, sites (including directories) linking to those sites included the
key phrase in their links and Google interpreted this as over-optimisation and
down they plunged. In many areas all the top 20 ranking sites disappeared,
including industry leaders, to be replaced by educational sites, news review
sites, government sites, major shopping portals or directories. Something major
had happened - but what?
The Facts!
Thousands of web pages have been suddenly demoted in the Google search results,
primarily on the main commercial search terms for which they targeted their
pages to be replaced by other sites who, in the main, referred to the search
term obliquely. Several were the main shopping portals or business directories
which gave listings for companies who may provide the services requested, many
were not.
Very high-ranking authority sites seemed to be unfiltered.
The changes were starkly obvious on regional English language Googles where a
regional filter was employed and there were less commercial sites with
authority.
An example for Google UK is the search for the word shelving. On
the
...RedHat is still, hands-down, the most well-supported distro. out there.
Even without RHN's impending disappearance, there is simply a greater volume of knowledge out there for RedHat users.
While the expiration of a valuable resource like RHN is a bit discouraging for the OSS movement in general, there is simply no other distribution out there with as large a user and knowledge base as RedHat.
It's pathetic posts like the parent that really exemplifies the term "electronic teat".
While normal people are out with friends being social or (heaven forbid) spending time in the great outdoors, people like you are constantly searching ways to get more of that addictive mother's milk, that sweet nectar you call television (the idiot box).
"Life-affirming technology"? That doesn't say much about your life, my friend.
OK, so I'll admit, it doesn't sound at all on the up-and-up, but really people, who here has ANY of this stuff (PATRIOT) affected?? You obviously aren't in jail, but are somehow convinced (quite pretentiously, I might add) that the FBI may be watching you.
As much power as the FBI has been given, I'd hardly claim that they've been abusing it. If you want to get the tinfoil hats out when they start abusing these powers, fine. But until then, enough with the "sky is falling" doomsday rhetoric.
The number if Windows users far exceed the number of *nix users. How can you honestly suggest that Unix compatibility issues are the important aspect of this story? This is going to affect FAR more Windows users, no matter how important your little hobby-OS is to you and you alone.
So Joe Schmoe with the Geforce2MX getting 50FPS has a built-in (read: deliberately programmed into the engine) disadvantage relative to the guy with the new Radeon 9700? Somehow I don't think Id would intentionally sabotage players using slower machines.
"I can easily see a difference between 30fps and 120fps"
But your eyes/brain can't distinguish each individual frame at that high a framerate... that's why insanely fast timedemos appear to be a blur.
Slashdot Mirror
How many more UN resoultions were you willing to allow Hussein to defy? 12 wasn't enough?
Frankly I'm a bit surprised that an entity of the U.S. Government would have published a game on a non-Microsoft platform, but kudos to the Army for it!
Now I'll just have to see if it will run on my laptop...
With the huge number of postings on all the various forums, concerning this update, most people don't know where to start looking for information about the recent Google update. The following is an attempt to put down rationally (I hope) most of the information that is known and the (unproven) theories behind the update algo.
Introduction.
Starting on the 16th of November, a major shift in results was seen on Google. Veterans recognised that Google appeared to be doing a major update, not seen for many months, as reported first on WebMasterWorld who named it Florida, continuing the tradition of naming updates rather like hurricanes. In this case it was a hurricane! As was usual with many updates, there were moans and groans as people complained about their sites falling. Many people were unaffected (including us) but the symptoms of the sites being dropped were not usual. No penalties, such as PR0, seem to have been applied against pages that had fallen - yet none of the pages targeted at specific key phrases, particularly index/home pages, appeared in the top results for these search terms. Indeed some had dropped hundreds of places and, in some cases reported, off the scale. Yet these pages did appear for obscure phrases and were obviously still in the index.
It appeared to us and to several other respected names (though hotly disputed by others) that some sort of over-SEOd filter had been applied to check if overt SEO had been done for that particular phrase. It was as if Google were checking to see if external links to the site included the phrase, on-page optimisation was being done for the phrase and even if the domain included the phrase. If the density of the optimisation, both on and off the page, appeared too artificial, then a filter was tripped and down went the page - solely for that phrase.
Google had never looked favourably on abuse of their systems and many established SEOs looked upon this algo tweak as a way of Google getting rid of the abuses of links and stopping the scrambling for getting (and sometimes buying) links including your required anchor text from other high PR, but probably irrelevant to your subject, sites. It seemed to make sense.
On Friday, 21st November, Google decided to tighten the filter. All hell broke loose as tens of thousands of sites disappeared from positions they had held (in some cases) for years. We noticed some of our client sites plummeting for their major key phrase from being #1 to total invisibility. Yet this was only in highly competitive areas, not for their secondary phrases. These sites were, in most cases, not highly optimised, had not sought reciprocal links but had achieved their rankings through being on the web for 4 or 5 years. The bad news was that their company name and domain included the key phrase, sites (including directories) linking to those sites included the key phrase in their links and Google interpreted this as over-optimisation and down they plunged. In many areas all the top 20 ranking sites disappeared, including industry leaders, to be replaced by educational sites, news review sites, government sites, major shopping portals or directories. Something major had happened - but what?
The Facts!
Thousands of web pages have been suddenly demoted in the Google search results, primarily on the main commercial search terms for which they targeted their pages to be replaced by other sites who, in the main, referred to the search term obliquely. Several were the main shopping portals or business directories which gave listings for companies who may provide the services requested, many were not.
Very high-ranking authority sites seemed to be unfiltered.
The changes were starkly obvious on regional English language Googles where a regional filter was employed and there were less commercial sites with authority.
An example for Google UK is the search for the word shelving. On the
Even without RHN's impending disappearance, there is simply a greater volume of knowledge out there for RedHat users.
While the expiration of a valuable resource like RHN is a bit discouraging for the OSS movement in general, there is simply no other distribution out there with as large a user and knowledge base as RedHat.
It's pathetic posts like the parent that really exemplifies the term "electronic teat".
While normal people are out with friends being social or (heaven forbid) spending time in the great outdoors, people like you are constantly searching ways to get more of that addictive mother's milk, that sweet nectar you call television (the idiot box).
"Life-affirming technology"? That doesn't say much about your life, my friend.
As much power as the FBI has been given, I'd hardly claim that they've been abusing it. If you want to get the tinfoil hats out when they start abusing these powers, fine. But until then, enough with the "sky is falling" doomsday rhetoric.
Of course it's easier to sound principled by saying "That's it, I'm leaving!" instead of actually doing it.
And exactly who is going to beat him? DEAN?? BWAHAHAHAHAAH!!! Even his own party hates his guts!
Now I can get my kiddie pr0n off of FreeNet from my home, on the road, and even in the sky! Isn't open source great!
Really folks, what benefit does this provide except an outlet for people who have too much time to kill?
Which is it, folks?
The number if Windows users far exceed the number of *nix users. How can you honestly suggest that Unix compatibility issues are the important aspect of this story? This is going to affect FAR more Windows users, no matter how important your little hobby-OS is to you and you alone.
So Joe Schmoe with the Geforce2MX getting 50FPS has a built-in (read: deliberately programmed into the engine) disadvantage relative to the guy with the new Radeon 9700? Somehow I don't think Id would intentionally sabotage players using slower machines.
"I can easily see a difference between 30fps and 120fps"
But your eyes/brain can't distinguish each individual frame at that high a framerate... that's why insanely fast timedemos appear to be a blur.
I hate to tell you, but framerate has NOTHING to do with what the game's engine will let you do.
And if I recall from other discussions here, the human eye/brain cannot process much more than 30-35 FPS.
Not a single mention of any of this has appeared on Tom's Hardware. I guess NVIDIA is optimized *cough payoffs* for good benchmark reviews there too.