Do they know any other letters to use than those three? By the way, everyone notice that even across the world, the recording industry is a four letter word:)
It depends on the purpose of the game. If the overall purpose of the game is to be visually stunning and expansive, rather than focusing on gameplay or how fun it is, then yes it should be considered art by the media. However, it is rare for this to be the focus of the game. Books are considered art, however crossword puzzle books are not, because they are supposed to be games. The only game I can really think of that was actually considered art by some would be Myst. Back when Myst first came out, the graphics were incredible. While the game was fun as well, many people bought and played the game simply due to the wonderous visuals. The purpose of Myst was not just to be a fun game, but to be a visual masterpiece. That is why it was considered art as well as a game.
This is another one of those laws that may have been made with good intentions in mind, but will either not work or actually unintentionally harm those who aren't the real culprits. The problem with this law, much like the DMCA, is that the computer world is changing rapidly, and it is often hard to draw lines as to what is or isn't spamming. Instead you end up with huge loopholes for the real spammers and lots of red tape and problems for those who aren't. Laws regarding online crime or problems need to be updated at least a few times a year, if not monthly. However, the speed at which governments are willing to change laws is far too slow to do this.
I think there needs to be a lot more changes at NASA than just shuttle design before they try to go back to space. Repeated failures seems to be the norm for this agency, and the Columbia disaster, while tragic, should not have been that surprising. I feel the problem isn't jsut the technology, but the organization behind the program.
My best friend's father is actually an engineer at NASA and I would sometimes talk with him about some of the problems there. He said NASA has become too bureaucratic and that the management barely communicates with the engineers or with other managers. He also said that NASA was lacking an atmosphere where innovation would be welcomed and that there was no big goals for them to strive for.
I personally think that NASA either needs to completely recreate itself or it should be replaced with a new organization altogether.
**Manufacturers/programmers/whatever should never be responsible for what anyone does outside the intended uses.**
This is also the reason that gun manufacturers can't be held responsible for crimes commited with guns. If the intended use is hunting or self protection, then they cannot be held responsible for any other use. However, if there is reasonable evidence to suggest that the guns have a forseealbe intended use to commit crimes, the manufacturer can be held responsible. This is why the more powerful assault rifles and machine guns are illegal to be sold to civilians.
The same law should apply to digital technology. A hacking tool like a port scanner should be legal as it can have an intended use to check your own network for security holes. However, a trojan horse program is obviously intended for illegal remote access to a computer, and should be illegal.
I haven't heard of or played most of those games, but the ones I did play were really good. Unfortunately in today's game market, there is too much competition for some games to get popular. When so many FPS and RTS games come out each month, often times a good one is overshadowed by a better known game solely due to that games hype. Some of these games do eventually rise from near ashes by word of mouth, but that is rare.
There are also a few other reasons that some good games never make it big. One major reason is the lack of quality graphics or multiplayer support. While multiplayer is not required to make a game popular(Ex:Max Payne), it is a big turnoff to buying a game. Also, much of the focus for newer games go into graphics and textures, rather than the actual gameplay itself. Back before graphics mattered, games just had to be fun to become popular. Now without professional artists and designers, it is almost impossible for a game to even make it to the shelf.
I remember back when games were made by one or two guys in their basement and were just made to maximize fun. Back then the only concern for graphics was that the player could see and understand what was going on. Even now with all our hot new games, many of those old classics are still fun to go back and play.
I was just throwing out examples, I knew that not all of them were Nintendo, just most of them. I didn't feel like looking up whether they were or not since it made no difference to my point.
Sega is surviving, which it wasn't doing while trying to support a console.
As for the second question, the hardware does not make a ton of difference so long as it is used correctly. PSX used discs to make great sound and visuals. N64 instead focused on fast loading games and games with savable memory.
With Microsoft jumping into the market with XBOX, you can expect Nintendo to be hurting. Nintendo has always stood for quality, adn often "better" systems. The N64 clearly surpassed PSX and Saturn. However, Nintendo didn't have the resources to compete technologically with someone like Microsoft, who was willing to take a huge dive on this console.
However, Nintendo still has a lot of things going for it. Besides the obvious name recognition and willingness to drop prices often, Nintendo has over a decade of classic games and franchises from which it can exploit. Zelda, Kirby, MegaMan, Mario, Castlevania, and Metroid are just a few of the classics that Nintendo owns. In recent years the number of new classics has decreased, but there still are games like Pokemon, Super Smash Bros., and Mario Party.
Eventually, Nintendo may end up like Sega, without their own console, but with enough clout and game franchises to still do very well. Besides, in this economy and given how badly the other systems seem to be generating revenue, I don't think Nintendo has too much to worry about yet.
Life does not require liquid water, only life on Earth does. Seeing how all life on Earth also evolved from the same original single cell organism, it is absurd to think that it is the only possible form of life. Life does not need cells, liquid water, or to be carbon based. There could be a methane cloud on Titan using fusion to communicate with another cloud a joke he heard about Uranus right this second.
I took calc based physics II over the summer and remember specifically that monopoles either don't exist, or are so small that it wouldn't matter either way. I somewhat doubt that monopoles do exist, merely at such a small size it appears to have only one pole.
Magnitism, much like gravity, is one of those invisible forces that we don't truly understand why they exist. We understand the properties and interactions of these forces, and can apply both when beign used to solve a problem. But our understanding of why masses attract each other or why magnetic particles attract each other is still unknown.
Without this fundamental understanding of these forces, we can never truly understand their nature. It is entirely possible that what we think of as magnitism is completely wrong. Much like how centrifugal forces appear to exist but don't, magnetism could actually just be a trick created by another phenomenon.
Besides, monopoles sound too much like monopolies.
I am curios to see just how popular such a device is. I am not sure who the exact target would be. Anyone highly skilled or professional level could just build and setup their own with more stuff at a cheaper price. Those who don't have much computer skills will never hear of or have any need for this device. I guess if it is cheap enough so that someone would rather buy it then take the time to build one themselves, it could do well. My personal opinion is that it won't be priced low enough. They will sell a few, but not a ton.
My father actually had it, but now there is medication for it. In that time though, no one knew why it happened. It went away after a while for Franklin though.
If I remember my history correctly, Franklin was not the perfect inventor people think he was. Once he become famous he drank a lot and did a lot of women. He stopped several years later after developing Gaout(a disease, spelling is wrong). He thought the disease was caused by his womanizing and drinking.
So in actuallity, he didn't invent to make the world better, he did it to make money and become famous.
In some places in the world, women are still seen as property or lesser individuals. While most of these places are in the Middle East and Africa, even in more developed countries it can be found. In America, there are still very few female politicians, business executives, and military leaders. In the Far East, women are often seen as second class citizens and treated as such. They believe that a womans place is to take care her husband, raise her husbands children, and obey any command of her husband.
We look at an article like this we laugh and think back at how foolish we were to think women shouldn't have the right to vote. But when we do we should also remember that this isn't just some issue long resolved, but a continuing struggle. We should look at this article and think about how truly serious this issue is. It should be apparent in the fact that the police and intelligence organizations in what are considered the great democracies of freedom did things such as this not even a century ago.
Rare has made some of the best games ever in the past(Goldeneye, DKC). We know they are capable of great things, so I'd rather that they take the time to use the maximum of their abilities to make another truly great game. Too many games that could have been great have flopped because the hype and pressure to release early forced the game to be completed too soon. However, I would warn them not to pull a Duke Nukem Forever and wait so long to get it out that all hype has passed.
However, if DNF comes out and is groundbreaking and one of the best games ever, then I think the wait will have been worht it.
There seems to be this great importance in discovering things that no one cares about. It is one thing to look at our own solar system or even nearby stars. But to actually waste money to detect galaxies that far away is a joke. The problem is that too many scientists see space as the final frontier. Most of the scifi movies and books over the last century have either been about space, about beings from space, or use space travel as a backdrop. These movies and books are extremely popular and with good reason, they are fun, imaginative, and give a setting in which anything is possible.
We always dreamed of going into space to other planets and then other solar systems. We decided in the 60s to get to the moon in a decade, and we did. This sucess has lead many to believe that space travel will be viable soon(few centuries). Everyone not only is hoping for, but expects faster than light travel to be possible. I don't think it is. But even if it was, it is so far away from us that it is unlikely the human race will even exist long enough to discover it.
Looking out at the stars is fine, but to have our money and best minds working on ways to find galaxies so far away that even in our most imaginative science fiction it would still take a very long time to reach is just pointless. Focusing on the problem won't help either. The technology used to get to the moon wasn't developed for that purpose, it was created for war. The rockets, the computers, and the aerodynamics were all developed for military purposes. It is more likely that the technology for space travel would be originally made for something else, then converted.
Why not focus on things we know we can solve one day(maybe even one day soon), like disease, hunger, aging, psychological disorders, overpopulation, crime, and the RIAA. There is plenty of real problems and real unexplored fields here on earth. Space isn't the final frontier, its just one of many to be explored.
It would be possible to automate these boards with just a very small chip/computer and a contrallable rudder. If so, it could be used to transport drugs, weapons, or explosives to some areas. The board is relatively small compared to a boat, but can still carry a good amount of payload. It would be undetectable to sonar or satallite(if camoflauged) and could be remotely controlled. I am not a specialist or anything, but I learned in high school the technical knowledge that would be needed to add a remote controller chip(digital electronics senior year) and and a rudder with a motor to direct it. In total that would cost $100 at most. Then you would just need to strap on some explosives or something and send it at a ship or dock.
Is it for commercial "space activities", or "commercial space" activities? Cause I can think of plenty of "commercial space" activities...even if they are dirty
Slashdot Mirror
Do they know any other letters to use than those three? By the way, everyone notice that even across the world, the recording industry is a four letter word:)
It depends on the purpose of the game. If the overall purpose of the game is to be visually stunning and expansive, rather than focusing on gameplay or how fun it is, then yes it should be considered art by the media. However, it is rare for this to be the focus of the game. Books are considered art, however crossword puzzle books are not, because they are supposed to be games. The only game I can really think of that was actually considered art by some would be Myst. Back when Myst first came out, the graphics were incredible. While the game was fun as well, many people bought and played the game simply due to the wonderous visuals. The purpose of Myst was not just to be a fun game, but to be a visual masterpiece. That is why it was considered art as well as a game.
This is another one of those laws that may have been made with good intentions in mind, but will either not work or actually unintentionally harm those who aren't the real culprits. The problem with this law, much like the DMCA, is that the computer world is changing rapidly, and it is often hard to draw lines as to what is or isn't spamming. Instead you end up with huge loopholes for the real spammers and lots of red tape and problems for those who aren't. Laws regarding online crime or problems need to be updated at least a few times a year, if not monthly. However, the speed at which governments are willing to change laws is far too slow to do this.
I think there needs to be a lot more changes at NASA than just shuttle design before they try to go back to space. Repeated failures seems to be the norm for this agency, and the Columbia disaster, while tragic, should not have been that surprising. I feel the problem isn't jsut the technology, but the organization behind the program.
My best friend's father is actually an engineer at NASA and I would sometimes talk with him about some of the problems there. He said NASA has become too bureaucratic and that the management barely communicates with the engineers or with other managers. He also said that NASA was lacking an atmosphere where innovation would be welcomed and that there was no big goals for them to strive for.
I personally think that NASA either needs to completely recreate itself or it should be replaced with a new organization altogether.
**Manufacturers/programmers/whatever should never be responsible for what anyone does outside the intended uses.**
This is also the reason that gun manufacturers can't be held responsible for crimes commited with guns. If the intended use is hunting or self protection, then they cannot be held responsible for any other use. However, if there is reasonable evidence to suggest that the guns have a forseealbe intended use to commit crimes, the manufacturer can be held responsible. This is why the more powerful assault rifles and machine guns are illegal to be sold to civilians.
The same law should apply to digital technology. A hacking tool like a port scanner should be legal as it can have an intended use to check your own network for security holes. However, a trojan horse program is obviously intended for illegal remote access to a computer, and should be illegal.
We are now one step closer to nanoporn!
I haven't heard of or played most of those games, but the ones I did play were really good. Unfortunately in today's game market, there is too much competition for some games to get popular. When so many FPS and RTS games come out each month, often times a good one is overshadowed by a better known game solely due to that games hype. Some of these games do eventually rise from near ashes by word of mouth, but that is rare. There are also a few other reasons that some good games never make it big. One major reason is the lack of quality graphics or multiplayer support. While multiplayer is not required to make a game popular(Ex:Max Payne), it is a big turnoff to buying a game. Also, much of the focus for newer games go into graphics and textures, rather than the actual gameplay itself. Back before graphics mattered, games just had to be fun to become popular. Now without professional artists and designers, it is almost impossible for a game to even make it to the shelf. I remember back when games were made by one or two guys in their basement and were just made to maximize fun. Back then the only concern for graphics was that the player could see and understand what was going on. Even now with all our hot new games, many of those old classics are still fun to go back and play.
I was just throwing out examples, I knew that not all of them were Nintendo, just most of them. I didn't feel like looking up whether they were or not since it made no difference to my point.
Sega is surviving, which it wasn't doing while trying to support a console. As for the second question, the hardware does not make a ton of difference so long as it is used correctly. PSX used discs to make great sound and visuals. N64 instead focused on fast loading games and games with savable memory.
With Microsoft jumping into the market with XBOX, you can expect Nintendo to be hurting. Nintendo has always stood for quality, adn often "better" systems. The N64 clearly surpassed PSX and Saturn. However, Nintendo didn't have the resources to compete technologically with someone like Microsoft, who was willing to take a huge dive on this console. However, Nintendo still has a lot of things going for it. Besides the obvious name recognition and willingness to drop prices often, Nintendo has over a decade of classic games and franchises from which it can exploit. Zelda, Kirby, MegaMan, Mario, Castlevania, and Metroid are just a few of the classics that Nintendo owns. In recent years the number of new classics has decreased, but there still are games like Pokemon, Super Smash Bros., and Mario Party. Eventually, Nintendo may end up like Sega, without their own console, but with enough clout and game franchises to still do very well. Besides, in this economy and given how badly the other systems seem to be generating revenue, I don't think Nintendo has too much to worry about yet.
Life does not require liquid water, only life on Earth does. Seeing how all life on Earth also evolved from the same original single cell organism, it is absurd to think that it is the only possible form of life. Life does not need cells, liquid water, or to be carbon based. There could be a methane cloud on Titan using fusion to communicate with another cloud a joke he heard about Uranus right this second.
I took calc based physics II over the summer and remember specifically that monopoles either don't exist, or are so small that it wouldn't matter either way. I somewhat doubt that monopoles do exist, merely at such a small size it appears to have only one pole.
Magnitism, much like gravity, is one of those invisible forces that we don't truly understand why they exist. We understand the properties and interactions of these forces, and can apply both when beign used to solve a problem. But our understanding of why masses attract each other or why magnetic particles attract each other is still unknown.
Without this fundamental understanding of these forces, we can never truly understand their nature. It is entirely possible that what we think of as magnitism is completely wrong. Much like how centrifugal forces appear to exist but don't, magnetism could actually just be a trick created by another phenomenon.
Besides, monopoles sound too much like monopolies.
I am curios to see just how popular such a device is. I am not sure who the exact target would be. Anyone highly skilled or professional level could just build and setup their own with more stuff at a cheaper price. Those who don't have much computer skills will never hear of or have any need for this device. I guess if it is cheap enough so that someone would rather buy it then take the time to build one themselves, it could do well. My personal opinion is that it won't be priced low enough. They will sell a few, but not a ton.
My father actually had it, but now there is medication for it. In that time though, no one knew why it happened. It went away after a while for Franklin though.
If I remember my history correctly, Franklin was not the perfect inventor people think he was. Once he become famous he drank a lot and did a lot of women. He stopped several years later after developing Gaout(a disease, spelling is wrong). He thought the disease was caused by his womanizing and drinking.
So in actuallity, he didn't invent to make the world better, he did it to make money and become famous.
In some places in the world, women are still seen as property or lesser individuals. While most of these places are in the Middle East and Africa, even in more developed countries it can be found. In America, there are still very few female politicians, business executives, and military leaders. In the Far East, women are often seen as second class citizens and treated as such. They believe that a womans place is to take care her husband, raise her husbands children, and obey any command of her husband.
We look at an article like this we laugh and think back at how foolish we were to think women shouldn't have the right to vote. But when we do we should also remember that this isn't just some issue long resolved, but a continuing struggle. We should look at this article and think about how truly serious this issue is. It should be apparent in the fact that the police and intelligence organizations in what are considered the great democracies of freedom did things such as this not even a century ago.
Rare has made some of the best games ever in the past(Goldeneye, DKC). We know they are capable of great things, so I'd rather that they take the time to use the maximum of their abilities to make another truly great game. Too many games that could have been great have flopped because the hype and pressure to release early forced the game to be completed too soon. However, I would warn them not to pull a Duke Nukem Forever and wait so long to get it out that all hype has passed.
However, if DNF comes out and is groundbreaking and one of the best games ever, then I think the wait will have been worht it.
There seems to be this great importance in discovering things that no one cares about. It is one thing to look at our own solar system or even nearby stars. But to actually waste money to detect galaxies that far away is a joke. The problem is that too many scientists see space as the final frontier. Most of the scifi movies and books over the last century have either been about space, about beings from space, or use space travel as a backdrop. These movies and books are extremely popular and with good reason, they are fun, imaginative, and give a setting in which anything is possible. We always dreamed of going into space to other planets and then other solar systems. We decided in the 60s to get to the moon in a decade, and we did. This sucess has lead many to believe that space travel will be viable soon(few centuries). Everyone not only is hoping for, but expects faster than light travel to be possible. I don't think it is. But even if it was, it is so far away from us that it is unlikely the human race will even exist long enough to discover it. Looking out at the stars is fine, but to have our money and best minds working on ways to find galaxies so far away that even in our most imaginative science fiction it would still take a very long time to reach is just pointless. Focusing on the problem won't help either. The technology used to get to the moon wasn't developed for that purpose, it was created for war. The rockets, the computers, and the aerodynamics were all developed for military purposes. It is more likely that the technology for space travel would be originally made for something else, then converted. Why not focus on things we know we can solve one day(maybe even one day soon), like disease, hunger, aging, psychological disorders, overpopulation, crime, and the RIAA. There is plenty of real problems and real unexplored fields here on earth. Space isn't the final frontier, its just one of many to be explored.
It would be possible to automate these boards with just a very small chip/computer and a contrallable rudder. If so, it could be used to transport drugs, weapons, or explosives to some areas. The board is relatively small compared to a boat, but can still carry a good amount of payload. It would be undetectable to sonar or satallite(if camoflauged) and could be remotely controlled. I am not a specialist or anything, but I learned in high school the technical knowledge that would be needed to add a remote controller chip(digital electronics senior year) and and a rudder with a motor to direct it. In total that would cost $100 at most. Then you would just need to strap on some explosives or something and send it at a ship or dock.
RIAA = Readily Ingestable Annoying Advocates If only it were that easy.
Is it for commercial "space activities", or "commercial space" activities? Cause I can think of plenty of "commercial space" activities...even if they are dirty
I wanna move to Japan. They get all the coolest stuff; Anime, Ninjas, Godzilla...
actually it was a small house, mine. thats right I lived in space...or at least I used to.