Treaties are above and outside of the Constitution. You see, we violate treaties all the time when they are inconvenient, but since the Constitution gives the President with consent of 2/3rds of Congress the right to enter into treaties without limit.
He [The President ]shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made,
Treaties are pretty much unlimited, as long as they are ratified by 2/3rds of the Senate. Of course, the Judiciary has to agree to a certain interpretation, and in the past they've been known to completely throw them out because they were inconvenient, not because they were wrong or unjust. So, the President and Senate can use a treaty to get around a inconvenient law, or he can just stop enforcing an existing treaty, and unless the other country has the muscle to enforce it, the treaty is broken.
Metamatic makes an excellent point here. Most people say they want to buy the safe, reliable car that gets them from here to there, but when shown the shiny convertable while under the fMRI, you can see what their brain is really saying. "Zoom!!!"
In this case, there are many points that have been made by others. In our high-tech field, we often advance by changing jobs, so we are off the radar of the corporate climbers. Most of us don't want to go into management, so career advancement isn't as important as it is to an exectutive on his way up the ladder. Because working crystal balls are in short supply, there is a tendency to promote people for reasons that aren't directly related to how well they will do in the new job, but instead how well liked they are by the people doing the promoting. It's hard to be liked, if you aren't seen. If you want to stay at one company for a long time, the only way to profit is to be liked.
On the other hand, if you don't have a need to stay in one place, or at one company, you can get away with being unseen. Do good work. On the next job, submit a higher bid/rate. Constantly move around, increasing your talent, and your rates with them. Publish. Get to be known in the industry as the go to guy for a certain type of job. Turn down any job you don't think you can do well. Network electronically if you don't like face to face time. Guys like Don Lancaster have made an art of this and have made a lot of money in the process, but haven't "advanced their careers" in the traditional sense.
This is excellent stuff to put on your resume. (just leave off the "dark ages" language) If you can put specific dollar amounts (rounded is ok) that's even better. Potential employers love have specific examples of where you made or saved a company large amounts of money. (At least the ones worth working for)
Ok, I wasn't very clear. You use the big mass driver to send your bulky stuff into orbit. If you have extreme accuracy, you plan your shots to clump together, if not, you plan them to be in the same orbit, but in a line with some separation. Your space tug would be sent up via conventional means and would start at the tail, picking up the cargo as it went along. With good planning and design, you shouldn't have to do much maneuvering along the way. The space tug could take a week or months to boost everything into proper orbit. If you are running continuously, it's just a big pipeline.
All in all, it may be more cost effective to send up one fuel container for the space tug for every 10 cargo containers and use more conventional fuels like the hydrazine rockets that the shuttle uses to adjust orbit. Either way, your tug needs to be able to automatically attach to the fuel containers and refuel itself.
When the space tug reaches the top you either turn it around to go collect more supplies, or leave it up there as parts for whatever you are building, then send another one. Extra credit if you can build your space tug to survive the 1000G trip up the rail gun and collect cargo containers sent previously. (obviously that kind would be much smaller, but you'd just send more)
There was this engineer who wanted to build a conventional gun to blast things into orbit. Unfortunately, he was talking to the Iraqies and then died mysteriously. A big rail gun to orbit is much more realistic, and one that is fixed to the side of a mountain could overcome many of the limitations that a mobile one would have.
$1000 to launch 3.2 kilos into space. Damn straight. The price has to come down with volume. You just need to install the thing up the side of a mountain. You don't even need the fins and electronics onboard, just some end of the muzzle steering pushes should be enough to change the orbit the thing arrives in. Use it for fuel, water, and supplies that can take the G's, making it that much safer for the astronauts.
You'd need to build a space tugboat that can hunt down and gather the payloads, then boost them to a higher orbit. No biggy, you can use robots with ion drives for that stuff.
Yet upper management sees nothing wrong with dictating exactly what tools can be used in what circumstances. That, for example, car windshields should be cleaned right-to-left.
Management often has no idea of the difference, in IT, between 'policy' decisions, which they certainly can, and must make, and 'how to implement policy' decisions, which they really shouldn't.
I've had this explained thusly. The reason you have to use crappy Lotus software is VP Jones has made a super secret backroom deal with Lotus that's making the company "Millions". So, even though, you, in your lowly position, can see this decision losing the company thousands with every glitch, the "Millions" of super secret, invisible money make up for it. So trust your illustrious leaders and suck it up.
While there's some truth that the higher ups often have knowledge of special deals that we never hear about, in this case I'm pretty sure VP Jones was mostly lining his own pockets. More than likely it wasn't money, but he or someone he controled was put on the board of Lotus Corp.
Anyway, the point is that companies don't always make every decision with a profit motive. Sometimes they'll lose money one division X, in order to make twice as much in division Y. (And then flog everyone in division X for failing when they were set up)
I am SICK of the poverty pimps of America describing the "plight" of the American poor. With very little effort, and one can get a job, find a place to stay, and have a life, as evidenced by the MILLIONS of Latinos streaming across the boarder to take jobs that no American wants.
Most of the poor in America are children, who aren't even allowed by law to take a job if they could even find one they could do. The only thing they did wrong was pick the wrong parents.
The childern are poor because their parent is poor. (usually it's just one, and usually it's just the mother) She may be poor because she is lazy, sick, mentally disturbed or all of the above. When you find the formula that allows us to raise all the children out of poverty without giving a handout the the parents, while keeping the families intact, you will be elected to sainthood.
386BSD was "Good enough", but now we have FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and that Linux upstart. With Free & Open Source, "Good Enough" doesn't seem to cause the stagnation like DOS and Windows did.
I think you need to look into "Gift Enconomies". University Research used to be exclusivly a gift economy. Professors actually *pay* people to publish their work. What they get back is prestige, which helps them to earn tenure and get grants.
Let's ask the question, what if the air were free? What if you didn't have to pay for the air you breath, but could use as much of it as you wanted. All the air sellers would go out of business, and you couldn't start a new business selling air.
Um, you can buy air, there are several sellers in the yellow pages selling special purpose air. (for SCUBA, rescue, and the like) There are air service companies that specialize in the cleaning of air, many companies make money selling air fresheners that put scents into the air. All this for a free product that anyone can have.
Free and open software will make for a different economy than closed source software. Some people think it'll be better. I'm one of those.
P.S. I'm a SysAdmin for a large company. We buy a lot of software. Recently Sun opened up it's source code, making Solaris free of charge. We still pay them megabucks for maintenance. Lots of the software we pay for is composed of free parts, but our management would still rather pay someone else to maintain it than take that headache on ourselves.
And most of those swear at it at least daily. As far a being ready to get a new device anyway, I'd like to be the one to decide that, not some company that may not even be in business anymore.
Use the example of cars. I drive a '91 Volvo wagon. It's a great car, and has features that newer Volvos don't have. It may not be right for everyone, but it works for me. I'd be greatly annoyed if there was an upgrade to the highway system, (like the smartpass system) and Volvo (now owned by Ford) told me to buy a new car or stop driving.
Every year there's a steam show just up the street where I live, and I see people driving their Ford Model T's and Model A's. Does Ford support them anymore? Probably not. But Ford doesn't say they *can't* support these cars themselves if they want to.
There've been a bunch of articles on how we're dumping tons of electronic waste on 3rd world contries. (or trying to recycle it here) Most of the time, these are closed, proprietary systems that don't even run DOS or Windows. (Lots of bank systems that were special purpose) I used to be in the hardware recycling business and anything that you could get data on could have a 2nd or 3rd life instead of going to the dump. A multi-thousand dollar bank system would be worth just the value of the scrap metal, but my friends and I could clean and sell Wyse terminals to college students for $50 each. (This was 15 years ago) These are not completely open, but the interface and protocols are published and known.
Thought experiment: What if everyone subscribed to the Free Software movement? What if RMS had shown up a few years earlier and replaced BillG in history?
But.... You can't really use closed source, proprietary software, because the inevitable bugs will eventually bring it down, and the vendor will refuse to support you. One of RMS's motivations was a closed printer driver that kept him from getting a printer from working.
Raise your hand if you've never had a piece of hardware go unused because of a driver problem and a unresponsive vendor.
The problem is, no one is selling the same model car. The instructions are free of charge, but you have to buy the parts and assemble them yourself.* This seems to scare most people from driving what is arguably a better car.
*Ok, nowdays, you can hire someone to assemble the parts for you, but it's the same priciple.
Nice theory, but it's not working. Apple's market share has been in the single digits ever since BillG and company released Windows 3.1.
Most business courses will not teach you which computer will work best for you, but they will teach you which is the best computer company to invest in.
I ask you. If you are going to invest your hard earned dollars, that are going to take care of you in your retirement, are you going to invest them in the loon that wants "To Change the World", (Steve) or the guy that wants to take over the computer business and make money? (Bill)
That's the philosophy of Judo. Before you can knock something over, you must support it. Once Wikipedia is dependent on any source of funding, then that source has control over Wikipedia.
To counter this, Wiki could build in rules that disallow any one source to spend more than N dollars where N is a percent of the operating budget. (something like.1%) Then, no one source can take it's ball and bat and go home, stopping the ball game.
Of course, someone looking to exert control over the Wiki would create a zillion shell corporations, each start buying ads. Once Wikipedia is dependent on their funding, they can have the shell corps all act together to influence articles.
No, Apple is not out to make money. As hard as this is to understand, it's true. Many years ago, Bill Gates gave Steve Jobs the outline of how to dominate the computer industry. Steve, arguably a smarter guy than Bill, didn't follow that advice. Who's on top now.
If Apple's not out to make money, "what are they business in for?", you ask. Like most businesses, they make their decisions based on the egos of the leaders, not on the basis of maximizing profits. Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel prize by combining economics and psychology to show that people often don't make decisions that fit what mathetmatical models say are optimal. One would think that leaders of multi-billion dollar companies would always choose the path of maximal long term profit, but they don't. (Some times they don't even pick maximal short term profit)
Steve really wants to change the world. He doesn't want the world changed, he wants Steve Jobs to be the world changer. Money is just a means to that end.
You can, and some people do, escape by digging a hole in your back yard and moving in. (The deeper, the better the escape)
Video games are more fulfilling than the hole. Better games are more fulfilling than not so good games, although we are seeing some MMOGs that are achieving a low-level, lizard-brain kind of fulfillment that is more adicting than good-for-you.
2. Ask for extensive access to all the equipment that will be used during the investigation to verify that the said equipment may not accidently harm your devices and data.
Everytime you power up a harddrive, there's a chance that you've powered it up for the last time. While it may be recoverable, you might crash the heads, and trash all the data on the disk. Thus, short of some sort of non-invasive quantum interference device, there's no way to read a drive that doesn't involve some level of risk.
So is he saying that no game developer has hit the wall w.r.t. performance with this machine. They never, ever had to leave something out, or make something not quite as pretty as they'd like because the machine couldn't handle it. sneBUeeLLeeSHeeITeeeze.
Since copyright lasts a long time and doesn't depend on being defended like trademark, there will be some allowances "for promotional reasons" like this:
Leak copywritten material in easy to copy format to places where it will be copied
that guy will have enormous troubles filling inmigration and other legal forms here...
Not really. I was born overseas on an Army base. My parents just had to fill out some forms when they came back to the states. There was a girl in my class whose parents didn't, and she had problems when she applied for her first job and found out she was an illegal alien. (it was cleared up tho, it's not like they'd deport her to the US from the US)
Technically, I'm a naturalized citizen, and it's unclear if I'm allowed to run for President.
Also, many local elections have things like "vote for exactly two" from a pool of many candidates. The computer can verify that the voter voted for exactly two, but if you have two clear votes and one smudge near another candidate, is the vote invalid? That's the hanging chad problem.
With a paper verified trail, it can print a human readable form followed by checksums that will allow you to correct for smudges and printing errors. Also if the human doesn't like the printout, it can be invalidated, and redone.
The Dread Pirate [R]oberts & [V]izzini have a battle of wits to decide whoh shall win the Princess, based on the old posioned goblet trick...
R: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right...and who is dead.
V: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R:You've made your decision then?
V: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
R:Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
V: Yes, Australia. And you must have suspected I would have known the powder's origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R: You're just stalling now.
V: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong, so you could've put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R: You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
V: IT HAS WORKED! YOU'VE GIVEN EVERYTHING AWAY! I KNOW WHERE THE POISON IS!
R: Then make your choice.
V: I will, and I choose-- What in the world can that be?
[Vizzini gestures up and away from the table. Roberts looks. Vizzini swaps the goblets]
R: What? Where? I don't see anything.
V: Well, I- I could have sworn I saw something. No matter.First, let's drink. Me from my glass, and you from yours.
R: You guessed wrong.
V: You only think I guessed wrong! That's what's so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha--
[Vizzini stops suddenly, and falls dead to the right]
By 2012, you won't have to worry about the video making you ill while riding on a bus or car, because screens will be fast enough to do anti image-stabilization. (my invention) Your iPod will have a G sensor in it, and will compensate for the bouncing so that your brain doesn't get the idea that the image is wonky.
It requires a display bigger than the actual image, and little or no persistence, but it fools your eyes into thinking that the images are being displayed on a motionless screen outside the vehicle.
Slashdot Mirror
Treaties are above and outside of the Constitution. You see, we violate treaties all the time when they are inconvenient, but since the Constitution gives the President with consent of 2/3rds of Congress the right to enter into treaties without limit.
He [The President ]shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made,
Treaties are pretty much unlimited, as long as they are ratified by 2/3rds of the Senate. Of course, the Judiciary has to agree to a certain interpretation, and in the past they've been known to completely throw them out because they were inconvenient, not because they were wrong or unjust. So, the President and Senate can use a treaty to get around a inconvenient law, or he can just stop enforcing an existing treaty, and unless the other country has the muscle to enforce it, the treaty is broken.
Metamatic makes an excellent point here. Most people say they want to buy the safe, reliable car that gets them from here to there, but when shown the shiny convertable while under the fMRI, you can see what their brain is really saying. "Zoom!!!"
In this case, there are many points that have been made by others. In our high-tech field, we often advance by changing jobs, so we are off the radar of the corporate climbers. Most of us don't want to go into management, so career advancement isn't as important as it is to an exectutive on his way up the ladder. Because working crystal balls are in short supply, there is a tendency to promote people for reasons that aren't directly related to how well they will do in the new job, but instead how well liked they are by the people doing the promoting. It's hard to be liked, if you aren't seen. If you want to stay at one company for a long time, the only way to profit is to be liked.
On the other hand, if you don't have a need to stay in one place, or at one company, you can get away with being unseen. Do good work. On the next job, submit a higher bid/rate. Constantly move around, increasing your talent, and your rates with them. Publish. Get to be known in the industry as the go to guy for a certain type of job. Turn down any job you don't think you can do well. Network electronically if you don't like face to face time. Guys like Don Lancaster have made an art of this and have made a lot of money in the process, but haven't "advanced their careers" in the traditional sense.
This is excellent stuff to put on your resume. (just leave off the "dark ages" language) If you can put specific dollar amounts (rounded is ok) that's even better. Potential employers love have specific examples of where you made or saved a company large amounts of money. (At least the ones worth working for)
Ok, I wasn't very clear. You use the big mass driver to send your bulky stuff into orbit. If you have extreme accuracy, you plan your shots to clump together, if not, you plan them to be in the same orbit, but in a line with some separation. Your space tug would be sent up via conventional means and would start at the tail, picking up the cargo as it went along. With good planning and design, you shouldn't have to do much maneuvering along the way. The space tug could take a week or months to boost everything into proper orbit. If you are running continuously, it's just a big pipeline.
All in all, it may be more cost effective to send up one fuel container for the space tug for every 10 cargo containers and use more conventional fuels like the hydrazine rockets that the shuttle uses to adjust orbit. Either way, your tug needs to be able to automatically attach to the fuel containers and refuel itself.
When the space tug reaches the top you either turn it around to go collect more supplies, or leave it up there as parts for whatever you are building, then send another one. Extra credit if you can build your space tug to survive the 1000G trip up the rail gun and collect cargo containers sent previously. (obviously that kind would be much smaller, but you'd just send more)
There was this engineer who wanted to build a conventional gun to blast things into orbit. Unfortunately, he was talking to the Iraqies and then died mysteriously. A big rail gun to orbit is much more realistic, and one that is fixed to the side of a mountain could overcome many of the limitations that a mobile one would have.
$1000 to launch 3.2 kilos into space. Damn straight. The price has to come down with volume. You just need to install the thing up the side of a mountain. You don't even need the fins and electronics onboard, just some end of the muzzle steering pushes should be enough to change the orbit the thing arrives in. Use it for fuel, water, and supplies that can take the G's, making it that much safer for the astronauts.
You'd need to build a space tugboat that can hunt down and gather the payloads, then boost them to a higher orbit. No biggy, you can use robots with ion drives for that stuff.
It has to be here by 2038...
For the non UNIX geeks, that's when UNIX'es time runs out, the equivalent of Y2K, except much worse.
While there's some truth that the higher ups often have knowledge of special deals that we never hear about, in this case I'm pretty sure VP Jones was mostly lining his own pockets. More than likely it wasn't money, but he or someone he controled was put on the board of Lotus Corp.
Anyway, the point is that companies don't always make every decision with a profit motive. Sometimes they'll lose money one division X, in order to make twice as much in division Y. (And then flog everyone in division X for failing when they were set up)
The childern are poor because their parent is poor. (usually it's just one, and usually it's just the mother) She may be poor because she is lazy, sick, mentally disturbed or all of the above. When you find the formula that allows us to raise all the children out of poverty without giving a handout the the parents, while keeping the families intact, you will be elected to sainthood.
386BSD was "Good enough", but now we have FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and that Linux upstart. With Free & Open Source, "Good Enough" doesn't seem to cause the stagnation like DOS and Windows did.
I think you need to look into "Gift Enconomies". University Research used to be exclusivly a gift economy. Professors actually *pay* people to publish their work. What they get back is prestige, which helps them to earn tenure and get grants.
Let's ask the question, what if the air were free? What if you didn't have to pay for the air you breath, but could use as much of it as you wanted. All the air sellers would go out of business, and you couldn't start a new business selling air.
Um, you can buy air, there are several sellers in the yellow pages selling special purpose air. (for SCUBA, rescue, and the like) There are air service companies that specialize in the cleaning of air, many companies make money selling air fresheners that put scents into the air. All this for a free product that anyone can have.
Free and open software will make for a different economy than closed source software. Some people think it'll be better. I'm one of those.
P.S. I'm a SysAdmin for a large company. We buy a lot of software. Recently Sun opened up it's source code, making Solaris free of charge. We still pay them megabucks for maintenance. Lots of the software we pay for is composed of free parts, but our management would still rather pay someone else to maintain it than take that headache on ourselves.
And most of those swear at it at least daily. As far a being ready to get a new device anyway, I'd like to be the one to decide that, not some company that may not even be in business anymore.
Use the example of cars. I drive a '91 Volvo wagon. It's a great car, and has features that newer Volvos don't have. It may not be right for everyone, but it works for me. I'd be greatly annoyed if there was an upgrade to the highway system, (like the smartpass system) and Volvo (now owned by Ford) told me to buy a new car or stop driving.
Every year there's a steam show just up the street where I live, and I see people driving their Ford Model T's and Model A's. Does Ford support them anymore? Probably not. But Ford doesn't say they *can't* support these cars themselves if they want to.
There've been a bunch of articles on how we're dumping tons of electronic waste on 3rd world contries. (or trying to recycle it here) Most of the time, these are closed, proprietary systems that don't even run DOS or Windows. (Lots of bank systems that were special purpose) I used to be in the hardware recycling business and anything that you could get data on could have a 2nd or 3rd life instead of going to the dump. A multi-thousand dollar bank system would be worth just the value of the scrap metal, but my friends and I could clean and sell Wyse terminals to college students for $50 each. (This was 15 years ago) These are not completely open, but the interface and protocols are published and known.
Thought experiment: What if everyone subscribed to the Free Software movement? What if RMS had shown up a few years earlier and replaced BillG in history?
But.... You can't really use closed source, proprietary software, because the inevitable bugs will eventually bring it down, and the vendor will refuse to support you. One of RMS's motivations was a closed printer driver that kept him from getting a printer from working.
Raise your hand if you've never had a piece of hardware go unused because of a driver problem and a unresponsive vendor.
The problem is, no one is selling the same model car. The instructions are free of charge, but you have to buy the parts and assemble them yourself.* This seems to scare most people from driving what is arguably a better car.
*Ok, nowdays, you can hire someone to assemble the parts for you, but it's the same priciple.
Nice theory, but it's not working. Apple's market share has been in the single digits ever since BillG and company released Windows 3.1.
Most business courses will not teach you which computer will work best for you, but they will teach you which is the best computer company to invest in.
I ask you. If you are going to invest your hard earned dollars, that are going to take care of you in your retirement, are you going to invest them in the loon that wants "To Change the World", (Steve) or the guy that wants to take over the computer business and make money? (Bill)
That's the philosophy of Judo. Before you can knock something over, you must support it. Once Wikipedia is dependent on any source of funding, then that source has control over Wikipedia.
.1%) Then, no one source can take it's ball and bat and go home, stopping the ball game.
To counter this, Wiki could build in rules that disallow any one source to spend more than N dollars where N is a percent of the operating budget. (something like
Of course, someone looking to exert control over the Wiki would create a zillion shell corporations, each start buying ads. Once Wikipedia is dependent on their funding, they can have the shell corps all act together to influence articles.
Haven't you heard? The UN has already started bombing smurf hideouts. http://blog.reidreport.com/2005/10/smurfageddon.ht ml
No, Apple is not out to make money. As hard as this is to understand, it's true. Many years ago, Bill Gates gave Steve Jobs the outline of how to dominate the computer industry. Steve, arguably a smarter guy than Bill, didn't follow that advice. Who's on top now.
If Apple's not out to make money, "what are they business in for?", you ask. Like most businesses, they make their decisions based on the egos of the leaders, not on the basis of maximizing profits. Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel prize by combining economics and psychology to show that people often don't make decisions that fit what mathetmatical models say are optimal. One would think that leaders of multi-billion dollar companies would always choose the path of maximal long term profit, but they don't. (Some times they don't even pick maximal short term profit)
Steve really wants to change the world. He doesn't want the world changed, he wants Steve Jobs to be the world changer. Money is just a means to that end.
You can, and some people do, escape by digging a hole in your back yard and moving in. (The deeper, the better the escape)
Video games are more fulfilling than the hole. Better games are more fulfilling than not so good games, although we are seeing some MMOGs that are achieving a low-level, lizard-brain kind of fulfillment that is more adicting than good-for-you.
Dude, you are never, ever going to be paid for that post. Ever. Yet you posted. Why?
So is he saying that no game developer has hit the wall w.r.t. performance with this machine. They never, ever had to leave something out, or make something not quite as pretty as they'd like because the machine couldn't handle it. sneBUeeLLeeSHeeITeeeze.
Technically, I'm a naturalized citizen, and it's unclear if I'm allowed to run for President.
Also, many local elections have things like "vote for exactly two" from a pool of many candidates. The computer can verify that the voter voted for exactly two, but if you have two clear votes and one smudge near another candidate, is the vote invalid? That's the hanging chad problem.
With a paper verified trail, it can print a human readable form followed by checksums that will allow you to correct for smudges and printing errors. Also if the human doesn't like the printout, it can be invalidated, and redone.
The Dread Pirate [R]oberts & [V]izzini have a battle of wits to decide whoh shall win the Princess, based on the old posioned goblet trick...
R: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right...and who is dead.
V: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R:You've made your decision then?
V: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
R:Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
V: Yes, Australia. And you must have suspected I would have known the powder's origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R: You're just stalling now.
V: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong, so you could've put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
R: You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
V: IT HAS WORKED! YOU'VE GIVEN EVERYTHING AWAY! I KNOW WHERE THE POISON IS!
R: Then make your choice.
V: I will, and I choose-- What in the world can that be?
[Vizzini gestures up and away from the table. Roberts looks. Vizzini swaps the goblets]
R: What? Where? I don't see anything.
V: Well, I- I could have sworn I saw something. No matter.First, let's drink. Me from my glass, and you from yours.
R: You guessed wrong.
V: You only think I guessed wrong! That's what's so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha--
[Vizzini stops suddenly, and falls dead to the right]
By 2012, you won't have to worry about the video making you ill while riding on a bus or car, because screens will be fast enough to do anti image-stabilization. (my invention) Your iPod will have a G sensor in it, and will compensate for the bouncing so that your brain doesn't get the idea that the image is wonky.
It requires a display bigger than the actual image, and little or no persistence, but it fools your eyes into thinking that the images are being displayed on a motionless screen outside the vehicle.