...or Ripley:
Ripley: How many drops is this for you, Lieutenant?
Gorman: Thirty eight... simulated.
Vasquez: How many *combat* drops?
Gorman: Uh, two. Including this one.
Drake: Shit.
Hudson: Oh, man...
With both engadget and Gizmodo getting their hands on the "next iPhone" in different bars in different cities,
If you read the Endgadet article, they make it clear that they didn't get their hands on it. Instead, they comment on the Gizmodo story. This makes it less likely a press stunt. However, it does underscore the importance of carriers having a kill switch for specific phone serial numbers. Implementing such a kill switch for lost phones would kill the market for stolen equipment.
Patents aren't necessarily the worst problem ahead for the poster.
Another, potentially bigger problem he may encounter is that (depending on his contractual relationship with his current "clients") he may not own the software - they may claim that it was a work for hire. There position will be that the software was created for them and they are the "owners".
In that case he doesn't just have to worry about the trolls he doesn't know...but also about the ones that have already paid him.
Not all work created by independent contractors are "works for hire", though, so he may not run afoul of this issue.
Are you aware of any open api to AOM or, for that matter, any macros that can control movement of troops in AOM? I'm not aware of any such software. I'd sure be interested, because it would make a huge difference in on-line play.
Is anyone else skeptical about the premise of this piece? How did the researchers get access to the AI of AOM? The game is not open source and there is certainly no provision within the off the shelf version of the game for creating your own AI. From the article: "They created aggressive, defensive, normal and neurotic versions of the AI software in the war strategy game Age of Mythology." One might suspect that Microsoft/Ensemble would be very reluctant to have their underlying AI code out in the wild.
If it was a hack, are they publishing their code? If not, how can the results be truly analyzed? However, if it is a hack publishing their code might be an infringement.
Had it been almost any other publishing house I'd be less suspicious, but I don't think MS just gave them the source code to their program and said "have at it". I'd be more interested in the science of how they cracked the internals of the game than their results about neurotic playing styles.
My biggest gripe about MusicMatch is that if your library is large it can take minutes from the time you start it to the time that you can do anything (like select a song). Its database is very slow on large databases. iTunes, on the other hand loads almost instantly regardless of how many files spanning however many hard drives thrown at it.
Slashdot Mirror
...or Ripley: Ripley: How many drops is this for you, Lieutenant? Gorman: Thirty eight... simulated. Vasquez: How many *combat* drops? Gorman: Uh, two. Including this one. Drake: Shit. Hudson: Oh, man...
Take a look at the recommendation of the American Academy of Pediatrics: "Television and other entertainment media should be avoided for infants and children under age 2. A child's brain develops rapidly during these first years, and young children learn best by interacting with people, not screens." http://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/Pages/Media-and-Children.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3A+No+local+token
Wasn't it Obi Wan who first used this technique: "These are not the bars on your cell phone that you're looking for." --Obi Wan
With both engadget and Gizmodo getting their hands on the "next iPhone" in different bars in different cities,
If you read the Endgadet article, they make it clear that they didn't get their hands on it. Instead, they comment on the Gizmodo story. This makes it less likely a press stunt. However, it does underscore the importance of carriers having a kill switch for specific phone serial numbers. Implementing such a kill switch for lost phones would kill the market for stolen equipment.
Israel has been working on the Oy Vasimir engine for some time. Gevult.
Patents aren't necessarily the worst problem ahead for the poster. Another, potentially bigger problem he may encounter is that (depending on his contractual relationship with his current "clients") he may not own the software - they may claim that it was a work for hire. There position will be that the software was created for them and they are the "owners". In that case he doesn't just have to worry about the trolls he doesn't know...but also about the ones that have already paid him. Not all work created by independent contractors are "works for hire", though, so he may not run afoul of this issue.
Are you aware of any open api to AOM or, for that matter, any macros that can control movement of troops in AOM? I'm not aware of any such software. I'd sure be interested, because it would make a huge difference in on-line play.
Is anyone else skeptical about the premise of this piece? How did the researchers get access to the AI of AOM? The game is not open source and there is certainly no provision within the off the shelf version of the game for creating your own AI. From the article: "They created aggressive, defensive, normal and neurotic versions of the AI software in the war strategy game Age of Mythology." One might suspect that Microsoft/Ensemble would be very reluctant to have their underlying AI code out in the wild. If it was a hack, are they publishing their code? If not, how can the results be truly analyzed? However, if it is a hack publishing their code might be an infringement. Had it been almost any other publishing house I'd be less suspicious, but I don't think MS just gave them the source code to their program and said "have at it". I'd be more interested in the science of how they cracked the internals of the game than their results about neurotic playing styles.
In October 2000 Congress addressed this issue. Please see the informative article at: http://www.cfg-lawfirm.com/articles/oneclick.html.
My biggest gripe about MusicMatch is that if your library is large it can take minutes from the time you start it to the time that you can do anything (like select a song). Its database is very slow on large databases. iTunes, on the other hand loads almost instantly regardless of how many files spanning however many hard drives thrown at it.