The idea I've always had is that you need several layers of people to do this right. Have generals controlling armies, giving orders to REAL people. Those people control smaller groups, down to either people controlling 4 or five troops, or just a F.P.S. With this layering, you don't need ai. You can tell your underlings to "support me on the left flank," they will (or won't) and the game will be far more dynamic. Control of large amounts of people and units is a bit more manageable (and fun)!
There are a couple problems. First, this requires massive coordination to get one big game together. The number of people who have to be online at once is tough. Then, if you really do a FPS (with tanks and mortars, etc), the graphics will kill you, since you may have 60 people in a skirmish.
Seems like this would be a great style, tho. You can play several different types of game (strategy, tactics, FPS), it has a lot more "life" to it, you can rise up the ranks or perhaps just start your own army.
I just "patched" opera so that the word "opera" in the user agent string is "opero" works great. Search using any hex editor for the string MSIE (it is unicode, so the hex is 4D00 5300 4900 4500). Just following that is a line that has Opera in it. Change the 'a' to an 'o' and viola! Fixed. I did this with opera 5.12
You are giving up *A* freedom, however, given that we never possessed it (in a legal sense, since it was never stated in the Constitution), it can't be "your" ["my"] freedom.
Trust me.. I think this is abominal (sp???), but there is a large difference between absolute freedom, aka anarchy, and the freedoms (which are not unlimited) that we enjoy in the US. If you want unlimited freedom, go buy an unincorporated island somewhere, since unlimited freedom means anyone can freely kill anyone else. The point of law is to mitigate the conflicts of ultimate freedom. My freedom to do whatever I want WILL conflict with your freedom to do whatever you want.
No, I don't think he is saying no laws. He said "Give up any freedoms." The police still have the right to search with warrants. We have freedom from unreasonable searches, not from any. Just because you don't give up your freedoms does not mean you don't have laws. BIG difference. We don't have absolute freedom here, but the constitution outlines a good framework for freedom within a set of laws. So stop spouting accusations of anarchy and think for a second.
A lot of what I read here doesn't take into account the human factor. No matter how good of a card or system you get, people can and will always screw it up. Thats what has already happened. People don't examine ID's closely enough. People don't watch the x-ray machines closely enough. Airport personel lose their badges, etc, etc, etc.
Even if we can have a perfect, unforgeable, unique card biometrically linked for any and every security purpose, it still doesn't rule out the fact that those who have legit access can be turned or used.
Being a former student in MA (just graduated), I can say that you are 100% wrong (at least in practice). I only have a CA DL, and bought alcohol in bars and in stores all the time. I know of people who have used BAD fakes in bars in MA. Yes, MA has rough blue laws regarding WHEN you can purchase alcohol. But trust me, at least in practice, it doesn't take much to buy alcohol.
Your local music store is probably more willing to simply let you return it when threatened, unlike a beast like Microsoft. While the local music store isn't the villian, they would soon remove the CD from their shelves if it happened enough.
Actually... that is mostly false. The main reason the Hindenburgh made such a huge flame so quickly was its skin. It was highly flamable (far more so than the hydrogen), and when combined with the wires (carrying static electricity) which ran all over, a small spark ignited the skin and cause the disaster. This misconception is one of the reasons hydrogen has had so much trouble being made a viable fuel - the fear factor made it too hard to market.
Not really an entirely valid arguement. Just because it "plays there," the store is not removed of liability. The are essentially selling a product that they advertise (by the very nature of having it on their shelves) meets a certain standard. Just because they can "get it to play," doesn't mean it is valid. Of course, you may have trouble convincing them of this.
I actually work at a game company who has done development on a lot of consoles. I bet that you will find the PXS stifling. I have spoken with many of the artists here and they found themselves very limited by the memory requirements. The PSX has 2 Megs of memory.. thats not much. Makes those old PSX games that much more impressive.
I've never programmed the PSX itself, but I would venture to guess that you would probably be better off working on a PC. Probably easier to program and allows for a lot more flexibilty. Even so, writing games at all is a major effort.
The US Mail isn't techincally a government institution. It is heavily protected by the US government, but as far as I know, it is a separate entity, which had a protected monopoly for many years.
But I understand your point. There are certain things that the government can, and in fact needs to be involved to kick things off. They need to help create the demand.
Re:No financial incentive for good software
on
Software Aesthetics
·
· Score: 1
This arguement suffers from one problem. Its called the "Not my problem" problem. Given the amount of rotation in staff and projects, quite often, the person who originally wrote the code need not maintain it. So they can write code poorly, as long as they can understand it at the time of writing. Even if they do come back much later, they still only need to write it to the minimum clarity level that they will need, which is far less than the random schmo that comes along later to maintain it.
I'm actually fairly disappointed in what lego puts out these days. Lots of the parts in the kits are complex pieces that only work as one thing - the arm on a given robot or something. The joy I remember of legos was having TONS of simple blocks (2's and 4's and 8's), a mismash of castle and space and regular legos, and building towns, cars, boats, or whatever out of this collection. Even the space and castle legos were pretty simple, usually (except for castle walls) just a color change and the addition of a few parts. My projects always ended up looking like some 70's disco, since the colors never matched, but the simple block gave so much more freedom. Seems to me that the new kits aim at a much older audience than the original lego did (or maybe I'm just seeing older people play with them).
Seems like the simple block would be better business too. The manufacturing is much simpler. When you have only a few parts, most of which are just variations in size of each other, its not that hard (or expensive) to make. Now, lego has complex pieces that are far less useful in general, and each new kit requires a new mold.
Maybe the problem is marketting such a simple concept as clickable blocks in the age of computer games and FPS's.
It would be a damn shame to see lego go down. Maybe I should stock up on some classic legos.
My only response is that Microsoft simply saying "We can't affirm (confirm?) that" would do very little for them. If they out right lied, we have a different story.
Interesting point.. I didn't realize that they use different licenses. Makes sense.
However, I do disagree that it wouldn't affect MS's licensing power. I doubt very much that the overall gist of the licenses varies.. probably is more or less parameterized on number of licenses at a given price. Plus, even if that is not the case, one license that shows very anti-competitive behavior is really enough, especially when the rest are trade secrets.
In regards to the license that binds dealers from selling dual boot computers...
Given the nature of trade secrets, if someone managed to get that license into public hands, there's not a whole lot that microsoft could do. It could be extremely bad PR for them. The only danger is that whoever releases it is probably subject to breech of contract of some sort. It seems like we need media members with anonymous sources to get their hands on it. Could do some damage..
It doesn't say "clockless." Its says they "don't abide by a global clock pulse" which is VERY different. Each subsystem may have its own clock, but the subsystems are so assembled so they can run asychronously. Don't ask me how... its still pretty impressive.
This does help eliminate the miscount problem, but one could still stuff the ballot box, but then I'm not sure if they're looking to authenticate as well. Also consider running out of toner, or dirt.. printing isn't perfect either.
There's one "easy" way to get a whole city to subscribe for a public service (like traffic reports or whatever) - its called taxes. =) Not that people will do it willingly, but I imagine it could be spun well enough to work in a few cities.
"15 minute webcam shots" would NEVER work for missile guidance. Even real time video would not be sufficient. Those missiles are moving just too fast to track and intercept using what is essentially a vision system. Vision systems are rough even under pretty good situations. Now add haze, smoke and clouds. Plus the missiles are traveling so fast that most cameras that could resolve them would not be fast enough to freeze them.
If you are thinking using this as a spy sat to track slow moving land based things, well, I'm sure the US military has far better sattelites anyway. Plus this sat was not designed to give close up views of the earth. Instead it is designed to sit where the gravity of the earth and sun are equal and take pictures of the lit earth as a whole.
Sorry.. this thing can't really be of much *military* use. Its purpose was to track climate changes, which could be of great use in analyzing the greenhouse effects, etc.
I actually had a few questions that I thought weren't mentioned in the article. Please excuse my ignorance of the actual medical proceedings:
1. Lack came from an extremely poor family, the article says. If this is the case, she probably wasn't paying for the hospital bills for cervical cancer. What was her treatment, and how much (if any) did she pay?
2. If the hospital did provide any services for free, it seems very possible that she may have signed waivers at some point. In addition, seems like going to the hospital to have a cancer removed is pretty much relinqueshing it.
I'm not trying to troll here, just raise a few points. Maybe she was compensated, to some extent (not necessarily enough) by free/cheap medical service. Maybe that when we go to the hospital to have something removed (like an appendix, tonsils), we do give it to the hospital. Maybe she did sign some waivers giving the hospital rights here.
The other issue is, can we expect hospitals to ask you to sign a wavier for every urine, blood or other type of sample? You're giving up your cells to them, and, if they have anything of interest, they could very well end up in a lab without your permission!
Please be kind.. I know I may be making a few points against a woman who should have been compensated.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea I've always had is that you need several layers of people to do this right. Have generals controlling armies, giving orders to REAL people. Those people control smaller groups, down to either people controlling 4 or five troops, or just a F.P.S. With this layering, you don't need ai. You can tell your underlings to "support me on the left flank," they will (or won't) and the game will be far more dynamic. Control of large amounts of people and units is a bit more manageable (and fun)!
There are a couple problems. First, this requires massive coordination to get one big game together. The number of people who have to be online at once is tough. Then, if you really do a FPS (with tanks and mortars, etc), the graphics will kill you, since you may have 60 people in a skirmish.
Seems like this would be a great style, tho. You can play several different types of game (strategy, tactics, FPS), it has a lot more "life" to it, you can rise up the ranks or perhaps just start your own army.
A guy can dream, can't he?
Forgot to add - you are hex editting opera.exe. Worked for me, no guarantees on the legality, functionality or any other ality there is.
I just "patched" opera so that the word "opera" in the user agent string is "opero" works great. Search using any hex editor for the string MSIE (it is unicode, so the hex is 4D00 5300 4900 4500). Just following that is a line that has Opera in it. Change the 'a' to an 'o' and viola! Fixed. I did this with opera 5.12
You are giving up *A* freedom, however, given that we never possessed it (in a legal sense, since it was never stated in the Constitution), it can't be "your" ["my"] freedom.
Trust me.. I think this is abominal (sp???), but there is a large difference between absolute freedom, aka anarchy, and the freedoms (which are not unlimited) that we enjoy in the US. If you want unlimited freedom, go buy an unincorporated island somewhere, since unlimited freedom means anyone can freely kill anyone else. The point of law is to mitigate the conflicts of ultimate freedom. My freedom to do whatever I want WILL conflict with your freedom to do whatever you want.
No, I don't think he is saying no laws. He said "Give up any freedoms." The police still have the right to search with warrants. We have freedom from unreasonable searches, not from any. Just because you don't give up your freedoms does not mean you don't have laws. BIG difference. We don't have absolute freedom here, but the constitution outlines a good framework for freedom within a set of laws. So stop spouting accusations of anarchy and think for a second.
A lot of what I read here doesn't take into account the human factor. No matter how good of a card or system you get, people can and will always screw it up. Thats what has already happened. People don't examine ID's closely enough. People don't watch the x-ray machines closely enough. Airport personel lose their badges, etc, etc, etc.
Even if we can have a perfect, unforgeable, unique card biometrically linked for any and every security purpose, it still doesn't rule out the fact that those who have legit access can be turned or used.
Just my 2 cents.
Being a former student in MA (just graduated), I can say that you are 100% wrong (at least in practice). I only have a CA DL, and bought alcohol in bars and in stores all the time. I know of people who have used BAD fakes in bars in MA. Yes, MA has rough blue laws regarding WHEN you can purchase alcohol. But trust me, at least in practice, it doesn't take much to buy alcohol.
Your local music store is probably more willing to simply let you return it when threatened, unlike a beast like Microsoft. While the local music store isn't the villian, they would soon remove the CD from their shelves if it happened enough.
Actually... that is mostly false. The main reason the Hindenburgh made such a huge flame so quickly was its skin. It was highly flamable (far more so than the hydrogen), and when combined with the wires (carrying static electricity) which ran all over, a small spark ignited the skin and cause the disaster. This misconception is one of the reasons hydrogen has had so much trouble being made a viable fuel - the fear factor made it too hard to market.
Not really an entirely valid arguement. Just because it "plays there," the store is not removed of liability. The are essentially selling a product that they advertise (by the very nature of having it on their shelves) meets a certain standard. Just because they can "get it to play," doesn't mean it is valid. Of course, you may have trouble convincing them of this.
I actually work at a game company who has done development on a lot of consoles. I bet that you will find the PXS stifling. I have spoken with many of the artists here and they found themselves very limited by the memory requirements. The PSX has 2 Megs of memory.. thats not much. Makes those old PSX games that much more impressive.
I've never programmed the PSX itself, but I would venture to guess that you would probably be better off working on a PC. Probably easier to program and allows for a lot more flexibilty. Even so, writing games at all is a major effort.
The US Mail isn't techincally a government institution. It is heavily protected by the US government, but as far as I know, it is a separate entity, which had a protected monopoly for many years.
But I understand your point. There are certain things that the government can, and in fact needs to be involved to kick things off. They need to help create the demand.
This arguement suffers from one problem. Its called the "Not my problem" problem. Given the amount of rotation in staff and projects, quite often, the person who originally wrote the code need not maintain it. So they can write code poorly, as long as they can understand it at the time of writing. Even if they do come back much later, they still only need to write it to the minimum clarity level that they will need, which is far less than the random schmo that comes along later to maintain it.
Furthermore, Berlin's archicture allows for anything to be transparent, from a single widget to the entire desktop
So.. if the entire desktop is transparent.. what do you see.. the inside of your monitor??
I'm actually fairly disappointed in what lego puts out these days. Lots of the parts in the kits are complex pieces that only work as one thing - the arm on a given robot or something. The joy I remember of legos was having TONS of simple blocks (2's and 4's and 8's), a mismash of castle and space and regular legos, and building towns, cars, boats, or whatever out of this collection. Even the space and castle legos were pretty simple, usually (except for castle walls) just a color change and the addition of a few parts. My projects always ended up looking like some 70's disco, since the colors never matched, but the simple block gave so much more freedom. Seems to me that the new kits aim at a much older audience than the original lego did (or maybe I'm just seeing older people play with them).
Seems like the simple block would be better business too. The manufacturing is much simpler. When you have only a few parts, most of which are just variations in size of each other, its not that hard (or expensive) to make. Now, lego has complex pieces that are far less useful in general, and each new kit requires a new mold.
Maybe the problem is marketting such a simple concept as clickable blocks in the age of computer games and FPS's.
It would be a damn shame to see lego go down. Maybe I should stock up on some classic legos.
My only response is that Microsoft simply saying "We can't affirm (confirm?) that" would do very little for them. If they out right lied, we have a different story.
Interesting point.. I didn't realize that they use different licenses. Makes sense.
However, I do disagree that it wouldn't affect MS's licensing power. I doubt very much that the overall gist of the licenses varies.. probably is more or less parameterized on number of licenses at a given price. Plus, even if that is not the case, one license that shows very anti-competitive behavior is really enough, especially when the rest are trade secrets.
In regards to the license that binds dealers from selling dual boot computers...
Given the nature of trade secrets, if someone managed to get that license into public hands, there's not a whole lot that microsoft could do. It could be extremely bad PR for them. The only danger is that whoever releases it is probably subject to breech of contract of some sort. It seems like we need media members with anonymous sources to get their hands on it. Could do some damage..
It doesn't say "clockless." Its says they "don't abide by a global clock pulse" which is VERY different. Each subsystem may have its own clock, but the subsystems are so assembled so they can run asychronously. Don't ask me how... its still pretty impressive.
This does help eliminate the miscount problem, but one could still stuff the ballot box, but then I'm not sure if they're looking to authenticate as well. Also consider running out of toner, or dirt.. printing isn't perfect either.
Pencil can be erased.. hehe =)
There's one "easy" way to get a whole city to subscribe for a public service (like traffic reports or whatever) - its called taxes. =) Not that people will do it willingly, but I imagine it could be spun well enough to work in a few cities.
"15 minute webcam shots" would NEVER work for missile guidance. Even real time video would not be sufficient. Those missiles are moving just too fast to track and intercept using what is essentially a vision system. Vision systems are rough even under pretty good situations. Now add haze, smoke and clouds. Plus the missiles are traveling so fast that most cameras that could resolve them would not be fast enough to freeze them.
If you are thinking using this as a spy sat to track slow moving land based things, well, I'm sure the US military has far better sattelites anyway. Plus this sat was not designed to give close up views of the earth. Instead it is designed to sit where the gravity of the earth and sun are equal and take pictures of the lit earth as a whole.
Sorry.. this thing can't really be of much *military* use. Its purpose was to track climate changes, which could be of great use in analyzing the greenhouse effects, etc.
Same experience here.. although I don't run the web server. I *JUST* tested my email server.. works fine!
I actually had a few questions that I thought weren't mentioned in the article. Please excuse my ignorance of the actual medical proceedings:
1. Lack came from an extremely poor family, the article says. If this is the case, she probably wasn't paying for the hospital bills for cervical cancer. What was her treatment, and how much (if any) did she pay?
2. If the hospital did provide any services for free, it seems very possible that she may have signed waivers at some point. In addition, seems like going to the hospital to have a cancer removed is pretty much relinqueshing it.
I'm not trying to troll here, just raise a few points. Maybe she was compensated, to some extent (not necessarily enough) by free/cheap medical service. Maybe that when we go to the hospital to have something removed (like an appendix, tonsils), we do give it to the hospital. Maybe she did sign some waivers giving the hospital rights here.
The other issue is, can we expect hospitals to ask you to sign a wavier for every urine, blood or other type of sample? You're giving up your cells to them, and, if they have anything of interest, they could very well end up in a lab without your permission!
Please be kind.. I know I may be making a few points against a woman who should have been compensated.