Everyone else is pretty much correct, it doesn't matter what you do, just do it, and stop procrastinating. But noone has really answered the ddr pads question, and you don't wanna waste money. I don't know how overweight you are, but that can really affect your enjoyment of the ddr pads. The flat pads (incredibly thin ones, as opposed to the 1-inch thick ones) will fail within 5 months if you play much, the thicker pads...there are all different kind of varieties of them. Anywhere from $30 - $150. Most people will be perfectly fine with $30 pads from ebay, but one of my friends (whose like 7 foot and is massive), can't play on it at all, cause the pad bunches up. Red Octane pads (~$90) are widely known as the best soft thick pads, and the foam inside is quite a bit more firm than the $30 ones. Plus they're more sensitive, which won't really matter unless you're planning on stepping extremely lightly. If you're going to go with soft pads, I'd suggest either Red Octane thick pads, or the flat pads.
Oh, it also depends on what you're planning to play on. The flat pads are mostly unplayable on carpet, unless you take the time to tape them over some hard wood to make them into hard pads. You'll see all sorts of tutorials if you google for it on how to mod flat pads.
Next, if you're okay with spending like $150 per pad, you can get hard plastic, or metal pads. I don't really have much experience with those, as I don't have the cash to afford that. The top of the line hard pad is widely known as cobalt flux. They're absolutely beautiful pads, but they're $300 a pop, a little insane pricing for most players. But, unless you've played the game before, and know that it'll help you, I wouldn't suggest spending much. Actually, I'd suggest buying two flat pads for $12 from ebay and duct taping them down and playing on some concrete or hard wood, until you know you enjoy it.
I may be wrong about this, I easily could be. But, I think programming is one of the fields where experience matters the *most*, not the least. But, I'm talking real experience, as in, not measured in time. That 12 year programmer that has been doing the same thing over and over has very little experience, while the other one has a lot.
There are so many nuances to programming. I've been programming for 10 years, and I still find things in my primary language (C++), that I had either never heard of, or didn't know. For example., how much experience programming does it take to run into the fact that you can't store derived classes in a vector of base classes, or actually understand all of the function objects and such from the STL? Now, sure, simple logic, if you understood the limitations of your system, would figur eout the first one, and the second is rarely used, but the whole STL is part of C++, it's in the C++ standard. And I'd bet very few programmers less than 5 or 6 years into it know much of it.
There are just *way* too many things to have to watch out for, to have to know about, for that long of a difference to make no difference. Now, it may not matter to the company the quality of code that comes out of their programmers, and, from that, it may not matter how much experience their programmers have, but that's not the same as saying it doesn't matter if you have experience.
Driving a car is a hazard. Your friend who nearly died from the car accident knew that. It's not the computer virus that killed them, it's the fact that they were driving an automobile on today's roads. Now, it's practically unavoidable a lot of the time, but the fact that they had a job was ever bit as responsible as the virus.
I definitely think virus writers should be punished, no doubt about that. I wasn't really trying to speak for everyone, just generalizing slashdot's (and my) attitude. Anyway, the thing we need to do is catch more of them, not give them harsher punishments. There are thousands and thousands of viruses out there...how many have been caught? Extremely few. Now, granted, it's extremely difficult to catch them, and to punish them. The thing is, harsher punishments aren't always the answer. I bet that, if the punishment was a $10,000 fine and a month or so in jail (as opposed to years in jail, a huge fine, and inability to touch a computer for years), it'd have the same effect as it does now. These people who write the viruses aren't *gaining* anything by writing them (well, the majority aren't), they're just having some 'fun'. Very few of them would be willing to spend that much money and time because of some 'fun'.
But, since it is so difficult to catch the virus writers (without letting the government control the internet, something much worse in my opinion), I think the only real solution is to *protect* *your* *systems*. Critical systems at a hospital should *not* be online, *ever*. The *only* completely safe system is a system that's turned off, you shouldn't depend upon the law to protect you from virus writers, it won't work. It wouldn't work even if the punishment was death.
Yes, it is good that they caught them. That's a good thing, most people on here would agree.
What we disagree with is the fact that they're enforcing copyright violations as if it's drugs, or terroristic activities, or whatever. Putting someone *in jail* for filming a movie for "a long time" is what I disagree with. I don't think they should even go to jail, that's too harsh for a copyright violation. Simply slap them with a large fine, and be done with it.
It's very similar to slashdot's general attitude towards malevolent hackers. We don't think it's right that someone is spreading a virus, or cracking into systems, and defacing a web site, but we also don't think it's right that these people are being punished like they killed someone.
Heh, this is one of the exact usages of public key encryption, to prove who someone is over an unsecure forum. Just get them to sign something when they first get in there. You could even depend upon the +p to set a password on a channel in IRC, and just distribute the password beforehand, but that password could easily be distributed among non-execs.
They do output stuff though. They could output the chart with the ad on it, maybe in the background or something like that. Yea, the user could cut it out, but the person who used the program still saw the ad, and google should still get credit for that ad. Heck, the program could just display it on the splash screen, or on the main screen of the program, and not even mess with putting ads on the chart.
I think, based on what google has done in the past, google isn't out to make a billion bucks by releasing this programming thing, they just don't wanna lose money by doing it. This would be one possible way for them to do it.
Rather than making the API something ya gotta pay for, couldn't they simply put it into the terms of service that the ads have to be shown in any software that uses the API? They could possibly offer different types of ads(text, pictures, etc.) so that you could even develop a text based app to use it and still stay within the terms of service. Have a nice little "Report a program not following the terms of service" link on the main page, and have all those people who love google help them out by reporting any programs they find that don't show the ads. Oh, and then also offer a pay-for service if they want so that the program dosen't have to show the ads.
I think there should be a 2,6 or even a year long wait on patents...once they're approved by the patent office, put up a web site for each patent. When someone goes to the site who knows of prior art or some other problem with the patent, that person simply types in what's wrong, hits submit. The patent office reads that person's claim, does research for what had been claimed wrong, and can reject the patent upon that.
Then the patent office can afford to get rid of some people....the industry is responsible for keeping care of its own patents...copm sci people scan through the comp sci patents, engineers scan through the engineering patents in their field every now and then...etc. etc.
though, then again, maybe there're just too many patents being filed for this to help much...
There seems to be a mighty fine line between "licenses" and "contracts" nowadays isn't there? Such as the shrinkwrap licenses given with software...How would one differentiate between a contract and a license? Seems as if licenses are getting ever more constrictive, such as the slashdot articles that were posted about them before. And if a license and contract were basically treated the same, wouldn't you be able to negotiate the license with the creator? and if not, wouldn't the fact that it's not negotiable have some effect on the validity of the license when counting in the fact that a person purchased that software?
You're right, it will give us a certain "bad ass" quality to be known as hackers, but is that what we really want? All of the best hackers I've known have gone by a code of honor not to change anything on a remote system that they broke except the data that would allow them access back to the system, and the data that would keep them from being caught(logs, etc.). This dosen't exactly portray that we need a "bad ass" quality. Hackers themselves aren't out to hurt people, or damage systems and cause losses, they're out to explore and learn, its the script kiddies/crackers that are out to hurt/cause loss.
I completly agree with the idea of using a different name for hackers, but will the media begin using it? I don't really think it matters what we call ourselves, the media will still see anyone who can break into a system as a hacker.
"It's what BigCo is selling, so it must be a good computer! It does everything we need. And it only cost us $399!"
I'm not sure if this is what you were specifying exactly, but users do notice speed and power almost as much as they notice the capability. I've had almost completly computer-illiterette friends come over and get on my computer and complain about how its taking a few seconds longer to load a specific program.
Also, the majority of common users wouldn't know a megahertz from a megabyte, but yet, most also aren't stupid, and won't spend their money without checking into it. Most people at least know someone who knows something about computers, and can ask them.
Other than that point, I completly agree with you, my compliments on the reply
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone else is pretty much correct, it doesn't matter what you do, just do it, and stop procrastinating. But noone has really answered the ddr pads question, and you don't wanna waste money. I don't know how overweight you are, but that can really affect your enjoyment of the ddr pads. The flat pads (incredibly thin ones, as opposed to the 1-inch thick ones) will fail within 5 months if you play much, the thicker pads...there are all different kind of varieties of them. Anywhere from $30 - $150. Most people will be perfectly fine with $30 pads from ebay, but one of my friends (whose like 7 foot and is massive), can't play on it at all, cause the pad bunches up. Red Octane pads (~$90) are widely known as the best soft thick pads, and the foam inside is quite a bit more firm than the $30 ones. Plus they're more sensitive, which won't really matter unless you're planning on stepping extremely lightly. If you're going to go with soft pads, I'd suggest either Red Octane thick pads, or the flat pads.
Oh, it also depends on what you're planning to play on. The flat pads are mostly unplayable on carpet, unless you take the time to tape them over some hard wood to make them into hard pads. You'll see all sorts of tutorials if you google for it on how to mod flat pads.
Next, if you're okay with spending like $150 per pad, you can get hard plastic, or metal pads. I don't really have much experience with those, as I don't have the cash to afford that. The top of the line hard pad is widely known as cobalt flux. They're absolutely beautiful pads, but they're $300 a pop, a little insane pricing for most players. But, unless you've played the game before, and know that it'll help you, I wouldn't suggest spending much. Actually, I'd suggest buying two flat pads for $12 from ebay and duct taping them down and playing on some concrete or hard wood, until you know you enjoy it.
I may be wrong about this, I easily could be. But, I think programming is one of the fields where experience matters the *most*, not the least. But, I'm talking real experience, as in, not measured in time. That 12 year programmer that has been doing the same thing over and over has very little experience, while the other one has a lot.
There are so many nuances to programming. I've been programming for 10 years, and I still find things in my primary language (C++), that I had either never heard of, or didn't know. For example., how much experience programming does it take to run into the fact that you can't store derived classes in a vector of base classes, or actually understand all of the function objects and such from the STL? Now, sure, simple logic, if you understood the limitations of your system, would figur eout the first one, and the second is rarely used, but the whole STL is part of C++, it's in the C++ standard. And I'd bet very few programmers less than 5 or 6 years into it know much of it.
There are just *way* too many things to have to watch out for, to have to know about, for that long of a difference to make no difference. Now, it may not matter to the company the quality of code that comes out of their programmers, and, from that, it may not matter how much experience their programmers have, but that's not the same as saying it doesn't matter if you have experience.
Driving a car is a hazard. Your friend who nearly died from the car accident knew that. It's not the computer virus that killed them, it's the fact that they were driving an automobile on today's roads. Now, it's practically unavoidable a lot of the time, but the fact that they had a job was ever bit as responsible as the virus.
I definitely think virus writers should be punished, no doubt about that. I wasn't really trying to speak for everyone, just generalizing slashdot's (and my) attitude. Anyway, the thing we need to do is catch more of them, not give them harsher punishments. There are thousands and thousands of viruses out there...how many have been caught? Extremely few. Now, granted, it's extremely difficult to catch them, and to punish them. The thing is, harsher punishments aren't always the answer. I bet that, if the punishment was a $10,000 fine and a month or so in jail (as opposed to years in jail, a huge fine, and inability to touch a computer for years), it'd have the same effect as it does now. These people who write the viruses aren't *gaining* anything by writing them (well, the majority aren't), they're just having some 'fun'. Very few of them would be willing to spend that much money and time because of some 'fun'.
But, since it is so difficult to catch the virus writers (without letting the government control the internet, something much worse in my opinion), I think the only real solution is to *protect* *your* *systems*. Critical systems at a hospital should *not* be online, *ever*. The *only* completely safe system is a system that's turned off, you shouldn't depend upon the law to protect you from virus writers, it won't work. It wouldn't work even if the punishment was death.
Yes, it is good that they caught them. That's a good thing, most people on here would agree.
What we disagree with is the fact that they're enforcing copyright violations as if it's drugs, or terroristic activities, or whatever. Putting someone *in jail* for filming a movie for "a long time" is what I disagree with. I don't think they should even go to jail, that's too harsh for a copyright violation. Simply slap them with a large fine, and be done with it.
It's very similar to slashdot's general attitude towards malevolent hackers. We don't think it's right that someone is spreading a virus, or cracking into systems, and defacing a web site, but we also don't think it's right that these people are being punished like they killed someone.
Heh, this is one of the exact usages of public key encryption, to prove who someone is over an unsecure forum. Just get them to sign something when they first get in there. You could even depend upon the +p to set a password on a channel in IRC, and just distribute the password beforehand, but that password could easily be distributed among non-execs.
They do output stuff though. They could output the chart with the ad on it, maybe in the background or something like that. Yea, the user could cut it out, but the person who used the program still saw the ad, and google should still get credit for that ad. Heck, the program could just display it on the splash screen, or on the main screen of the program, and not even mess with putting ads on the chart.
I think, based on what google has done in the past, google isn't out to make a billion bucks by releasing this programming thing, they just don't wanna lose money by doing it. This would be one possible way for them to do it.
Rather than making the API something ya gotta pay for, couldn't they simply put it into the terms of service that the ads have to be shown in any software that uses the API? They could possibly offer different types of ads(text, pictures, etc.) so that you could even develop a text based app to use it and still stay within the terms of service. Have a nice little "Report a program not following the terms of service" link on the main page, and have all those people who love google help them out by reporting any programs they find that don't show the ads. Oh, and then also offer a pay-for service if they want so that the program dosen't have to show the ads.
I think there should be a 2,6 or even a year long wait on patents...once they're approved by the patent office, put up a web site for each patent. When someone goes to the site who knows of prior art or some other problem with the patent, that person simply types in what's wrong, hits submit. The patent office reads that person's claim, does research for what had been claimed wrong, and can reject the patent upon that.
Then the patent office can afford to get rid of some people....the industry is responsible for keeping care of its own patents...copm sci people scan through the comp sci patents, engineers scan through the engineering patents in their field every now and then...etc. etc.
though, then again, maybe there're just too many patents being filed for this to help much...
There seems to be a mighty fine line between "licenses" and "contracts" nowadays isn't there? Such as the shrinkwrap licenses given with software...How would one differentiate between a contract and a license? Seems as if licenses are getting ever more constrictive, such as the slashdot articles that were posted about them before.
And if a license and contract were basically treated the same, wouldn't you be able to negotiate the license with the creator? and if not, wouldn't the fact that it's not negotiable have some effect on the validity of the license when counting in the fact that a person purchased that software?
You're right, it will give us a certain "bad ass" quality to be known as hackers, but is that what we really want? All of the best hackers I've known have gone by a code of honor not to change anything on a remote system that they broke except the data that would allow them access back to the system, and the data that would keep them from being caught(logs, etc.). This dosen't exactly portray that we need a "bad ass" quality. Hackers themselves aren't out to hurt people, or damage systems and cause losses, they're out to explore and learn, its the script kiddies/crackers that are out to hurt/cause loss.
I completly agree with the idea of using a different name for hackers, but will the media begin using it? I don't really think it matters what we call ourselves, the media will still see anyone who can break into a system as a hacker.
I'm not sure if this is what you were specifying exactly, but users do notice speed and power almost as much as they notice the capability. I've had almost completly computer-illiterette friends come over and get on my computer and complain about how its taking a few seconds longer to load a specific program.
Also, the majority of common users wouldn't know a megahertz from a megabyte, but yet, most also aren't stupid, and won't spend their money without checking into it. Most people at least know someone who knows something about computers, and can ask them.
Other than that point, I completly agree with you, my compliments on the reply