'Someone invented something which otherwise would not have existed,YET'
Fixed that for you. It's a bold claim that the world would have been forever deprived of such n such 'novel' invention. Most patents are trival, and someone else would have came up with it. I would say most of these unique inventions were practically inevitable.
But ignoring that, I think to hold the rights to a patent you should, heaven forbid, actually use the patented invention in your business or forfeit it.
It should be: I have a patent on this product which I still currently produce and company x is taking away from my market share by infringing on my patent without permission. Not: I have never produced/sold anything outlined in the patent ever, I just hold on to this to legally threaten companies who infringe on the patent and milk them for profit, which in turn is put towards stock-piling more patents.
Maybe in terms of usability (i don't know. never tried numbers) but it doesn't have a macro language.
Once I started using vba it opened up so many other ways of dealing with data. I'm surprised I'm defending a microsoft product but I think excel is one of their best.
There's one thing I've wondered about copyright expiring. First off, I totally agree that copyright is ridiculous at this point and keeps being extended to the point where nothing will be expire.
But let's say Floyd's albums expired today. And let's say some new format that exploded that was vastly superior to vinly and cd. I know with mp3 etc this probably wouldn't happen, but lets say a last physical media was selling like hotcakes and customers loved the format.
So what would motivate Floyd to re-master their past works in this new format? There might be no copyright on their past works but nothing compels them to release the masters, or even continue to preserve them.
If they did re-master, people could legally copy or other publishers could take the mastered work and sell it at rock bottom prices.
Or would a new copyright exist on the mastering itself?
You're kidding right? lot's of little annoying things in gmail. For ex, my voip provider has an email forwarding option for voicemail which I use with a gmail account. A friend called a while back and I was trying to find his number. I knew it was 310870 but that's all i could recall. So search for that and get nothing. Partial searches don't work in the subject.
I know, I'll sort by sender. Oh that's right, it's newest to oldest and that's it. Can't sort by attachments, name etc on the fly. Yeah you can do most/all with a filter, but what a pain. klunky in lots of ways.
I haven't tried portal in crossover & wine since it first came out, but even though hl2 worked fine, portal had issues when actually looking through your portal sometimes, depending on the surface it was on. I checked a couple of times, and the bug was long standing, maybe it's finally fixed.
This goes with what the other poster was saying, if humans try they fail miserably at picking random numbers, and in your example they are trying to craft a random sequence. Hell, in your example people are planning a random sequence; they are asked to fake it. What a stupid, tainted experiment. That was doomed to fail. And even if humans don't pass something approaching statistically random levels, it's still random. As in there isn't a definite reference guiding the random numbers. With a machine, it is its clock that dictates the next 'random' number chosen. Thus, it might appear random and might even pass some statistical analysis of how random it is, but in the end it's still pseudo-random.
Here's my million dollar idea. Why can't I have a search engine where I can click on a search result 'never show results from this domain again'. It might take awhile but you could build up nice filtered list after awhile. Hell, even being able to share your list with people and the community builds a good filtered list to get rid of the crap.
To me the key word is artificial, depending on your interpretation of the meaning it could be simply man made, or it's fake, simulated.
Does deep blue show any intelligence? To me, that's just good programming. I think the intelligence of computers is a misnomer. Their intelligence so far and has always has been nil. Maybe that'll change, but in so many areas of technology I'm an optimist but in this regard I'm a pessimist or at least very skeptical.
A computer can't even pick a (truly) random number without being hooked up to a device feeding it random noise.
How do you program that? How does the brain choose a random number? What's holding us back? CPU Speed? Quantum computing? A brilliant programmer?
Wake me up when a computer can even do something as simple as pick a truly random number and I'll be impressed.
This is only to a point. Just put your right right to your business to the extreme and see if you still have the right.
If there was something that was truly as common as the cold but was extremely deadly, say killing 1 in 5, but we have a vaccine that has adverse reactions in say 1 in 1000.
In an extreme case I believe vaccination should be mandatory. I know that sounds radical but think if the above scenario was actually happening and some people are refusing vaccination because it's against their beliefs or whatever. Not that safety concern aren't a valid issue, but when someone raises the religious flag that really bugs me.
Just saying that under extreme circumstances you should lose your right to a choice for the greater good.
Well maybe my eyes are shit but for me I can't tell anymore once I reach the early 70's. I did this test awhile back, so it would be useless with current lcds if your refresh maxes at 60.
I launched quake 1 on a system that could easily render anything in that game. I think it was something like 800x600 with the monitor at 85hz refresh, vsync on.
Launched a map and used the arrow keys to rotate around, with it capped at various limits. 30, choppy as hell, 45 a little better but still easily noticeable, 50 and so on.
At 60 I perceived that smooth as glass feeling but when I went to about 72, I noticed it being a little smoother still. Any higher than that and I couldn't tell a difference.
I know nothing about network programming but the benefits of the server/client model are obvious. P2P can only potentially beat server/client in one scenario: 1 on 1 play. Any more players than that, and it becomes inefficient.
If I'm playing a game and say 3 others are in visual range, I have to tell 3 others over the network where I am, what I'm doing etc. You might be able to get by with P2P with say 4 players, but it just does not scale period.
Maybe Carmack can work some magic, some type of optimization, but no matter what networking trick he pulls out of his hat, it's not going to beat server/client.
People might say his games are irrelevant and they don't care now, but he's the man who pretty much started this, and stayed behind technologies/methods he believed in not necessarily because it was profitable, but because 'it's a good thing'.
This does not bode well for pc gaming, when id drops the server/client model from their games.
T1 hammers home the point you can't change shit. Arnie comes back and a protector follows ensuring the birth of Cyberdine and of john connor. T2 is the exception implying they can change things but they don't. T3 continues with the original vein of not being able to change anything, it's going to happen. So I'm not sure what gave you that impression with the series...
It would be cool, if on the road, I could launch one of my games whereever I'm at (say a friends) and play my games. But instead of a service, I want to run the server myself.
There's streammygame.com for the pc (haven't tried it yet) but again it's a service and not standalone.
I'm excited as hell for this movie, but I wish they brought back David Warner as Sark. You might say he's too old, but I've seen him in something recently and he still looks good. He's truly an underrated actor and makes a great villain.
A little pointless trivia, he was also the voice of the MCP.
Slashdot Mirror
'Someone invented something which otherwise would not have existed,YET'
Fixed that for you. It's a bold claim that the world would have been forever deprived of such n such 'novel' invention. Most patents are trival, and someone else would have came up with it. I would say most of these unique inventions were practically inevitable.
But ignoring that, I think to hold the rights to a patent you should, heaven forbid, actually use the patented invention in your business or forfeit it.
It should be: I have a patent on this product which I still currently produce and company x is taking away from my market share by infringing on my patent without permission. Not: I have never produced/sold anything outlined in the patent ever, I just hold on to this to legally threaten companies who infringe on the patent and milk them for profit, which in turn is put towards stock-piling more patents.
Maybe in terms of usability (i don't know. never tried numbers) but it doesn't have a macro language.
Once I started using vba it opened up so many other ways of dealing with data. I'm surprised I'm defending a microsoft product but I think excel is one of their best.
There's one thing I've wondered about copyright expiring. First off, I totally agree that copyright is ridiculous at this point and keeps being extended to the point where nothing will be expire.
But let's say Floyd's albums expired today. And let's say some new format that exploded that was vastly superior to vinly and cd. I know with mp3 etc this probably wouldn't happen, but lets say a last physical media was selling like hotcakes and customers loved the format.
So what would motivate Floyd to re-master their past works in this new format? There might be no copyright on their past works but nothing compels them to release the masters, or even continue to preserve them.
If they did re-master, people could legally copy or other publishers could take the mastered work and sell it at rock bottom prices.
Or would a new copyright exist on the mastering itself?
You're kidding right? lot's of little annoying things in gmail. For ex, my voip provider has an email forwarding option for voicemail which I use with a gmail account. A friend called a while back and I was trying to find his number. I knew it was 310870 but that's all i could recall. So search for that and get nothing. Partial searches don't work in the subject.
I know, I'll sort by sender. Oh that's right, it's newest to oldest and that's it. Can't sort by attachments, name etc on the fly. Yeah you can do most/all with a filter, but what a pain. klunky in lots of ways.
Well I wouldn't praise valve too much. First off, this might of happened ages ago if they didn't port a q1 engine to d3d in the first place.
but what I wanted to post is, I now have l4d 1 & 2, I wanted to give my nephew the first version.
Believe it or not, I didn't actually know that I can't give away a steam game to another user.
If I can't give it away, I don't really own, I just have a license to play it.
I haven't tried portal in crossover & wine since it first came out, but even though hl2 worked fine, portal had issues when actually looking through your portal sometimes, depending on the surface it was on. I checked a couple of times, and the bug was long standing, maybe it's finally fixed.
I was skeptical about them ever d3d porting as well, but were these images released the other day a gag?
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/62617
Then I thought, if they have converted to opengl, could a linux port ever come down the pipeline?
A gamer can dream, right?
Yeah I can see the plan.
'Hmm... What colour could potentially be uglier than brown...'
'Purple!!! Of course!!!'
I saw that coming.
This goes with what the other poster was saying, if humans try they fail miserably at picking random numbers, and in your example they are trying to craft a random sequence. Hell, in your example people are planning a random sequence; they are asked to fake it. What a stupid, tainted experiment. That was doomed to fail. And even if humans don't pass something approaching statistically random levels, it's still random. As in there isn't a definite reference guiding the random numbers. With a machine, it is its clock that dictates the next 'random' number chosen. Thus, it might appear random and might even pass some statistical analysis of how random it is, but in the end it's still pseudo-random.
p.s. stick the 'insiteful' up your ass.
p.p.s. 64 785 2 1.876574685444782336 8.7867 90654654654 987342 5646787633541.2 1 54654 32335243 6578 35456541168 21 37 5897 2957.9843527652
Here's my million dollar idea. Why can't I have a search engine where I can click on a search result 'never show results from this domain again'. It might take awhile but you could build up nice filtered list after awhile. Hell, even being able to share your list with people and the community builds a good filtered list to get rid of the crap.
To me the key word is artificial, depending on your interpretation of the meaning it could be simply man made, or it's fake, simulated.
Does deep blue show any intelligence? To me, that's just good programming. I think the intelligence of computers is a misnomer. Their intelligence so far and has always has been nil. Maybe that'll change, but in so many areas of technology I'm an optimist but in this regard I'm a pessimist or at least very skeptical.
A computer can't even pick a (truly) random number without being hooked up to a device feeding it random noise.
How do you program that? How does the brain choose a random number? What's holding us back? CPU Speed? Quantum computing? A brilliant programmer?
Wake me up when a computer can even do something as simple as pick a truly random number and I'll be impressed.
meant to moderate funny. oops
This is only to a point. Just put your right right to your business to the extreme and see if you still have the right.
If there was something that was truly as common as the cold but was extremely deadly, say killing 1 in 5, but we have a vaccine that has adverse reactions in say 1 in 1000.
In an extreme case I believe vaccination should be mandatory. I know that sounds radical but think if the above scenario was actually happening and some people are refusing vaccination because it's against their beliefs or whatever. Not that safety concern aren't a valid issue, but when someone raises the religious flag that really bugs me.
Just saying that under extreme circumstances you should lose your right to a choice for the greater good.
It's because they read site like this:
http://www.westonaprice.org/Autism-and-Vaccinations.html
I have a couple of friends who are adamant about this stuff. Btw, any help knocking points on that website would be nice.
And don't forget Ubuntu Netbook Remix
http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/unr
Well maybe my eyes are shit but for me I can't tell anymore once I reach the early 70's. I did this test awhile back, so it would be useless with current lcds if your refresh maxes at 60.
I launched quake 1 on a system that could easily render anything in that game. I think it was something like 800x600 with the monitor at 85hz refresh, vsync on.
Launched a map and used the arrow keys to rotate around, with it capped at various limits. 30, choppy as hell, 45 a little better but still easily noticeable, 50 and so on.
At 60 I perceived that smooth as glass feeling but when I went to about 72, I noticed it being a little smoother still. Any higher than that and I couldn't tell a difference.
Just stumbled upon this today. Not sure how good the book is but found it linked today on http://pygame.org/
http://inventwithpython.com/
I know nothing about network programming but the benefits of the server/client model are obvious. P2P can only potentially beat server/client in one scenario: 1 on 1 play. Any more players than that, and it becomes inefficient.
If I'm playing a game and say 3 others are in visual range, I have to tell 3 others over the network where I am, what I'm doing etc. You might be able to get by with P2P with say 4 players, but it just does not scale period.
Maybe Carmack can work some magic, some type of optimization, but no matter what networking trick he pulls out of his hat, it's not going to beat server/client.
People might say his games are irrelevant and they don't care now, but he's the man who pretty much started this, and stayed behind technologies/methods he believed in not necessarily because it was profitable, but because 'it's a good thing'.
This does not bode well for pc gaming, when id drops the server/client model from their games.
T1 hammers home the point you can't change shit. Arnie comes back and a protector follows ensuring the birth of Cyberdine and of john connor. T2 is the exception implying they can change things but they don't. T3 continues with the original vein of not being able to change anything, it's going to happen. So I'm not sure what gave you that impression with the series...
I'm a big fan of ubuntu, but neither kde or gnome run comfortably with 256 megs of ram. Whereas xp is usually with that amnount of ram.
I'd like to see a pc survive this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoD6zzd35mc
It would be cool, if on the road, I could launch one of my games whereever I'm at (say a friends) and play my games. But instead of a service, I want to run the server myself.
There's streammygame.com for the pc (haven't tried it yet) but again it's a service and not standalone.
It'll say, "Don't bother me, I'm working on that entropy problem. But don't worry, I'm still collecting data."
I'm excited as hell for this movie, but I wish they brought back David Warner as Sark. You might say he's too old, but I've seen him in something recently and he still looks good. He's truly an underrated actor and makes a great villain.
A little pointless trivia, he was also the voice of the MCP.