To access shortcuts, yes. To navigate the UI, everything can be accessed with a single button. Therefore, the secondary button is not required, but useful.
>> it leads to "so the engine should try to do motion blurring accurately.
But it can't, at least not in any reasonably realistic way. Your eyes blur images that are moving relative to your eye movement. This means that if an object moves and you follow it with your eyes, the image will not be blurred, as long as you approximate its speed while tracking it.
On the other hand, a video game would blur the images unconditionally, regardless of your focus point or eye tracking movements.
This ultimately does not solve the problem, and may even seem more wierd than the alternative flickering.
The blurring illusion would only work if you keep your eyes centered on the screen and resist any natural urge to focus on or track individual moving objects. Otherwise, it's just annoying.
There's also a matter of scale. Take, for example, a car racing game: The monitor cannot represent the actual full view of a driver sitting at the cockpit in its true size, so it scales it down so as to include all the necessary information in a smaller viewport. However, portraying this accurately, e.g. scaling down the effect of physics, such as parallax displacement and speed, would make the game "feel" as if you were farther away, and not really sitting in the cockpit; thus breaking the illusion or at least making it seem wierd by entering the "uncanny valley".
If you get a chance, check out the "Criterion Collection" edition (it's available in Netflix). It contains much biographical material, as well as a very interesting audio commentary track with various film scholars and critics.
I watched Solyaris three times over the course of one weekened: first, normally; then with the audio commentary; and finally, normally once again to further appreciate what I had gleaned from the commentary. My enjoyment increased with each viewing.
There's also a comment made by Obi Wan when they were talking about how good a pilot his father was, something like "I hear you've become a great pilot yourself."
Beware of those! I found a girl with a giant exclamation point over her head once, and she sent me off to get her some fancy jewlery for which I had to pay in blood and treasure. Mostly blood.
The payoff when I returned wasn't worth half the trouble.
What you are missing is that their C.V. would not say "Worked on a game for 12 years that never came out", but instead it'll say something like "Lead A.I. developer for Duke Nukem Forever", and then show them a link to the YouTube video of a demo.
Sure, the game never came out for various reasons, but everybody in the industry is familiar with it, and is aware that real work went into it.
Interesting idea. Except that it is not necessarily true.
As a child, I remember watching the first Star Wars movie over and over and over and over again. I think at one time during my teens I counted 40 times, between multiple visits to the theater (since it kept being re-released every other year or so) and later owning it in VHS. I remember liking a bit the other two but nothing like the first one, yet I also saw them many times over.
Now, over 30 years later, I still watch Star Wars once in a while, and I enjoy it very much. To me it is an action-packed, fast-paced movie with a good story, like so many others I also enjoy. During the years, my taste in films and appreciation of the art has expanded greatly, yet I still enjoy action movies, both old and new, once in a while--including, but not limited exclusively, to those from my childhood.
To me, the original Star Wars may not be a great and perfect film, but it is entertaining. Plus the special and visual effects have stood rather well against the test of time (not to mention the sound effects!). In contrast, there are many movies which I remember fondly from my childhood, in diverse genres, which I have tried to watch as an adult only to regret with utter agony.
Although I do admit that nostalgia takes a part in my appreciation of some things, it is mosts definitely not the only criteria that colors my view.
Strange that you mentioned 10 years, because as the article claims,.Net was announced in 2001, and introduced in 2002. So even if you started using it the day it came out, the framework is still only 7 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework#Versions
Do you by chance have one of those jobs posted circa 2004 asking for "10 years experience in.NET"?
"C and C++ are the root of all EVIL! Bad programmers are not stupid or incompetent, it's just impossible to write good software, especially when using (EVIL!) languages like C and C++. Software companies have never hired incompentent programmers because they are cheap; all programmers everywhere are as good as they can ever be. There has never, ever, (EVAH!) been a piece of software which is bug free, or at least close to it. Bug free software is impossible. And finally, the spectrum of competence of software developers is binary: there is braindead stupid vs. god-like omnipotence; just as the spectrum of software quality: there is crappy buggy software vs. impossibly unatainable perfection."
No, he actually meant a DNS server that, when asked about a non-existant domain, instead of returning an error, returns an IP address to a host running a web server hosting ads.
Read it again. It says that the will not mine the log files of their DNS service and correlate that with their other data. That's all it says they won't do. It says nothing about sampling traffic en route, or grabbing it outright with an intermediate proxy, or any of a hundred other ways they could access this (pressumably valuable) information.
Or, you know, subscribe for free as an "expert" in any of the myriad topics, and not only get access to read answers, but also have a chance at giving back something to the community. Depending on your participation, you can be rewarded with more free access. And you also get some cool t-shirts.
I think Experts-Exchange is a wonderful site. The quality and breadth of the knowlege base is impressive, and the community is extensive. I've been using it since the 1990s, and have never paid a single cent. All I do is roam through the topics of my interest and expertise, help some people with good answers to the best of my abilities, and earn enough points that grant me full access to the entire site. Then, whenever I have a question, I can either view the answer to a previously posted question, or spend some of my (freely) earned points and post a new one.
Of course, if all you want is to get answers without participating in enriching the knowledge base, then you must pay for the points that you aren't earning.
Slashdot Mirror
To access shortcuts, yes. To navigate the UI, everything can be accessed with a single button. Therefore, the secondary button is not required, but useful.
-dZ.
>> it leads to "so the engine should try to do motion blurring accurately.
But it can't, at least not in any reasonably realistic way. Your eyes blur images that are moving relative to your eye movement. This means that if an object moves and you follow it with your eyes, the image will not be blurred, as long as you approximate its speed while tracking it.
On the other hand, a video game would blur the images unconditionally, regardless of your focus point or eye tracking movements.
This ultimately does not solve the problem, and may even seem more wierd than the alternative flickering.
The blurring illusion would only work if you keep your eyes centered on the screen and resist any natural urge to focus on or track individual moving objects. Otherwise, it's just annoying.
-dZ.
There's also a matter of scale. Take, for example, a car racing game: The monitor cannot represent the actual full view of a driver sitting at the cockpit in its true size, so it scales it down so as to include all the necessary information in a smaller viewport. However, portraying this accurately, e.g. scaling down the effect of physics, such as parallax displacement and speed, would make the game "feel" as if you were farther away, and not really sitting in the cockpit; thus breaking the illusion or at least making it seem wierd by entering the "uncanny valley".
-dZ.
You mean, like we've tried to do so far? Much good it has done us, I see.
Good luck with that!
-dZ.
If you get a chance, check out the "Criterion Collection" edition (it's available in Netflix). It contains much biographical material, as well as a very interesting audio commentary track with various film scholars and critics.
I watched Solyaris three times over the course of one weekened: first, normally; then with the audio commentary; and finally, normally once again to further appreciate what I had gleaned from the commentary. My enjoyment increased with each viewing.
I hope you enjoy it!
-dZ.
I'd say, skip 2001; if you want to see what sci-fi really can be, watch Solyaris, the 1972 film by Russian director Andrei Tarkosvky.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(1972_film)
-dZ.
True, but he was waaaaaaaaaaaaaay off from that sort honed skill back in the early Star Wars days.
-dZ.
>> The last hour of Sith was the only decently written part of the prequels
Please tell me you are not including the line "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" within that last hour.
-dZ.
There's also a comment made by Obi Wan when they were talking about how good a pilot his father was, something like "I hear you've become a great pilot yourself."
-dZ.
Vader? Is that you?
-dZ.
Here, Merry Christmas:
http://www.dosbox.com/
(I apologize to your wife/gf/s.o. in advance)
-dZ.
Dude, check out DosBox, and for full immersion, set it to full screen. No re-boot needed! And for old Windows games, you can install Win3.11 easily!
-dZ.
The strippers were out on PTO leave that day.
-dZ.
Beware of those! I found a girl with a giant exclamation point over her head once, and she sent me off to get her some fancy jewlery for which I had to pay in blood and treasure. Mostly blood.
The payoff when I returned wasn't worth half the trouble.
-dZ.
Dude, what do you use your motion capture room for?
-dZ.
What you are missing is that their C.V. would not say "Worked on a game for 12 years that never came out", but instead it'll say something like "Lead A.I. developer for Duke Nukem Forever", and then show them a link to the YouTube video of a demo.
Sure, the game never came out for various reasons, but everybody in the industry is familiar with it, and is aware that real work went into it.
-dZ.
Interesting idea. Except that it is not necessarily true.
As a child, I remember watching the first Star Wars movie over and over and over and over again. I think at one time during my teens I counted 40 times, between multiple visits to the theater (since it kept being re-released every other year or so) and later owning it in VHS. I remember liking a bit the other two but nothing like the first one, yet I also saw them many times over.
Now, over 30 years later, I still watch Star Wars once in a while, and I enjoy it very much. To me it is an action-packed, fast-paced movie with a good story, like so many others I also enjoy. During the years, my taste in films and appreciation of the art has expanded greatly, yet I still enjoy action movies, both old and new, once in a while--including, but not limited exclusively, to those from my childhood.
To me, the original Star Wars may not be a great and perfect film, but it is entertaining. Plus the special and visual effects have stood rather well against the test of time (not to mention the sound effects!). In contrast, there are many movies which I remember fondly from my childhood, in diverse genres, which I have tried to watch as an adult only to regret with utter agony.
Although I do admit that nostalgia takes a part in my appreciation of some things, it is mosts definitely not the only criteria that colors my view.
-dZ.
Strange that you mentioned 10 years, because as the article claims, .Net was announced in 2001, and introduced in 2002. So even if you started using it the day it came out, the framework is still only 7 years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework#Versions
Do you by chance have one of those jobs posted circa 2004 asking for "10 years experience in .NET"?
-dZ.
Let me see if I can translate your post:
"C and C++ are the root of all EVIL! Bad programmers are not stupid or incompetent, it's just impossible to write good software, especially when using (EVIL!) languages like C and C++. Software companies have never hired incompentent programmers because they are cheap; all programmers everywhere are as good as they can ever be. There has never, ever, (EVAH!) been a piece of software which is bug free, or at least close to it. Bug free software is impossible. And finally, the spectrum of competence of software developers is binary: there is braindead stupid vs. god-like omnipotence; just as the spectrum of software quality: there is crappy buggy software vs. impossibly unatainable perfection."
Sounds about right?
-dZ.
Wouldn't the browser be able to block it when the 302 redirect response comes back? Or does it only block URLs entered by the user?
-dZ.
You can also shorten it to, say, "e-mail". The hyphen makes all the difference in uniqueness.
-dZ.
Hum... If people didn't have any expectation of privacy in the mall, why are they suddenly complaining that their privacy is being violated?
-d.
No, he actually meant a DNS server that, when asked about a non-existant domain, instead of returning an error, returns an IP address to a host running a web server hosting ads.
-dZ.
>> They aren't now. Their policy says they won't,
Read it again. It says that the will not mine the log files of their DNS service and correlate that with their other data. That's all it says they won't do. It says nothing about sampling traffic en route, or grabbing it outright with an intermediate proxy, or any of a hundred other ways they could access this (pressumably valuable) information.
-dZ.
Or, you know, subscribe for free as an "expert" in any of the myriad topics, and not only get access to read answers, but also have a chance at giving back something to the community. Depending on your participation, you can be rewarded with more free access. And you also get some cool t-shirts.
I think Experts-Exchange is a wonderful site. The quality and breadth of the knowlege base is impressive, and the community is extensive. I've been using it since the 1990s, and have never paid a single cent. All I do is roam through the topics of my interest and expertise, help some people with good answers to the best of my abilities, and earn enough points that grant me full access to the entire site. Then, whenever I have a question, I can either view the answer to a previously posted question, or spend some of my (freely) earned points and post a new one.
Of course, if all you want is to get answers without participating in enriching the knowledge base, then you must pay for the points that you aren't earning.
-dZ.