But the law states that children below the age of 17 cannot purchase or play video games of VIOLENT or SEXUALLY EXPLICT content without the permission of a parent.
What is VIOLENT? Is Bugs Bunny VIOLENT? What about Rambo? How about Streetcar Named Desire? What's more violent, scenes of abuse in the household (father beating children, mother), or John Travolta killing people in Swordfish?
Also, what is SEXUALLY EXPLICT? IF you ask the fox network, anything short of unfuzzed nipple or private area is sexually explict. If ask the puritans, then a little ankle showing was explict. This term means something different every time we ask it. It's a flavor of the month, whatever is popular at the time is 'sexually explict'.
So, who gets to make these distictions? The law? I guess, but what happens if you are working at EB and you get arrested for selling a bugs bunny game to a kid because it was decided that it is too violent? (a little extreme I agree, but anything goes in this world)
The only problem with the whole video game might == right dogma is that is all the games teach. Very rarely does a game show more then the most base of human experience to a player. Movies and books are very good at this. Maybe after a couple more decades of this will be more the norm instead of the exception.
Another reason this works is because since everyone runs the same platform, but doesn't update the software to the newest version. These exploits would not work (as well) if everybody went to microsoft.com and downloaded the newest version every day.
Sun sued Microsoft for extending the spec, not for a bad implementation!
If you look at that MS was doing to the Java APIs (not the language or VM), you will see that they tried to get people to write code to their APIs that tied people to their MS x86 Java Platform which was against the agreement they had with Sun.
Not playing a video game is like reading a book based on a movie. You only get the idea and it's not the same thing, sometimes radically different.
Video gamimg is the first automated warm medium, where the player (or audience) is part of the feedback that creates the show. Movies, TV, and playing music on a CD are cold mediums, where the audience has no/little effect on the entertainment. (though some would argue that the audience is the entertainment at plays/concerts) Story telling (esp. with small children), books, stand up comics ( esp. in small clubs) are warm, where the audience takes part in the performance.
Video gaming being as young as it is, and having such a high cost to entry for new games has created a culture where everyone goes for the largest market, throwing aside everything but the almighty dollar. Even the Salon article admints that the Sims almost didn't get made, which goes to show how single minded these game publishers are. $$$$$
So far, I've seem many comments about people comparing these games to RPGs, but what about the true classics, like Pac-Man, Tetris, Galaga, Bust-a-Move, etc. These games are like poetry compared to the monstrous volumes that are required to encompass most RPGs. Games like Golden Axe where the whole point is to destroy the tyrant who has usurped the power from the king in the region.
Some of the best examples of games and conveyance of ideas come from old Sierra games, especially the Lesiure Suit Larry series. That series was nothing but satire, pure and simple. The game was solving the most insane puzzles to advance the almost non-existant plot, but the items you got and the way they were described picked on a multitude of facets of american culture.
Unfortunatly, most games teach that might = right and you must be the strongest most powerful (Insert stereotype here) in the world. And that concludes their message. It's the games like Ultima, B&W, every Sim game ever that show us new ways of thinking, since in many cases we must change the way we think about a problem in order to solve it in the world of the game.
The bad thing in my opinion is not that a COP can swipe your id and get your information. This is valuable in that it reduces both work for the cop and errors in validating your identity. What a larger problem in my opinion is that businesses can buy id readers and check your ids. Getting valuable information about you for next to nothing in cost. an example is the story on/. a couple of weeks ago about the bar in Boston (I think) that tracked all of it's customers.
It's bad enough that Vons, Ralphs, Price Chopper, etc all track our shopping habits, but if they made us swipe our ids then they could track us forever.
Also I don't think that forging a retinal scan would be difficult at all. Think about it, unless the data on the card is encrypted via some sort of public key system where the private key is in a central DB, anyone who knows how to read/write the data on a card can replace it with bogus information.
This would be faster because work would have to be done at compile time to figure out if the object should be created on the stack or the heap by the VM. Basically trading ease of compile for runtime performance, which in my opinion is always a win.
I don't care how fast you say this 'eden GC' is, there is no way it's faster then this solution, cleaning the stack is so fast. The live section of the stack has a MUCH higher chance to be in the cache, while eden starts out being megabytes large. So no matter what you are going to have page faults with eden. With the stack approach, objects simply go out of scope, no thinking on the vm is required to determine if an object is no longer live. Just like with a primitive.
The only problem with this solution is that you have to have a way for objects to be promoted from the stack to the heap in the case of classes that change after you compile a class that depends in it.
The whole reason for this argument is that time and time again, people want speed, and if speed can be added through VM changes only, and maybe a recompile, then why not do it?
The BSD license also gives the rights of the developer to the user. The only difference between a BSD license and a public domain is that the BSD license requires the redistributor of code to acklowledge that the code came from a certain source. (AFAIK)
Most licenses do take away almost all priviledges of a user, and they are only getting worse by the day.
It doesn't take away that right, you never had it in the first place!
Does there exist EULA that gives you, the user the right to distribute binary-only copies of a program?
Not resell your copy, actually distribute more copies? There is no such EULA.
Stop propagaging the myth that the GPL takes away your rights as a user. Most companies want to be a monopoly and to control what you do with their products. (Meaning that if you do something with their product that they didn't sell to you then you have to pay for it)
For developers, the GPL is not a nice as say a public domain license. There you can do whatever you want with the code. There's a reason that most people don't release code in the public domain. And that's because anyone can take it, compile it and claim that the compiled binary is unique in some way and sell it for $$$$. At least with GPLed code, the person that compiles it has to make his changes public so that you can create the same binary.
One more afternote, the whole idea here is to NOT do a GC. The eden area is a great idea and should not go away, actually I really like it. I'm trying to attack the problem from the other side, instead of making the GC smarter. Make it so that the GC never even sees these temporary objects.
Not really, this is not the same thing as what I'm talking about. Well, it could be depending on how they implement it. They still have to do some sort of mark and sweep algorithim, which is not fast.
I'm saying that they change the class file format. Such that all methods have their parameters marked. So you have a method myMethod ( Rectangle r ); now the coder does nothing, but during compile time , the rectangle r is tracked, and determined if r is only used locally, if the code keeps a reference to it, or passes the reference to a function that then keeps a reference to it.
If the reference is never actually stored ( the reference is only used locally) then the object is marked as possiable for stack creation.
In your code, if you create an object, it is by default created on the stack, unless it is determined by the compiler that the reference to the object is stored somewhere in your code.
The object would be destroyed when it goes out of scope.
This would speed up and reduce memory consumption of the VM IMO. Firstly , it would get rid of the huge penality for temporary object creation in loops. Usually this can be avoided by clever programming, but not always. Secondly, you can get rid of the static 'rendering objects' that many Swing components use. Rectangles being probably the biggest offender of this policy. Many times you just need a simple data structure in a loop ( for rendering to the screen) and you don't want to call a function to create it everytime. Or what about in a http server, you end up creating the same object over and over, the penality for this could be reduced.
AFAIK, lisp does this already so this is not voodoo science we are talking about. What sucks about this approach is that changes to the JVM bytecode are required. Since object cannot be create on the stack.
Sure, especially if they need to raise the stock of the new company, they can just lay off 1/2 the workforce as being 'duplicate'. Since they do many of the same things, they will be firing a lot of engineers. I would hate to be a graduating engineer right now, as there will be many, many engineers on the market place with lots of experience.
Which means of course that they wasted their time yet again!
Why do the game companies think that we really care about how cool neato wow the water looks? If it looks vagely like water then yeah, I'll think that's it water and keep on playing the game. You don't have to wow me with water effects, modeling every drop of water as it is absorbed by my characters clothes in the game.
BethSoft had better make this game work unlike Daggerfall. Daggerfall sucked unless you were some insane fanboy willing to put up with the constant crashes and headaches caused by this buggy piece of crap. You had to be in love with the concept of the game to truely like it. I'm tempted to actually buy a X-box for it because I don't trust them with my PC to play it.
I think that these new GPUs are too powerful. As nobody can possiably generate the artwork that will use them quickly enough. It takes much longer to generate a 100,000 poly model then a 5000 poly model in a program like 3d studio max. (assuming that they are of equal quality) It's going to be a couple more years until we see any games really taking advantage of these new features.
But that's exactly what debugging is. Implmenting a spec is one thing, but also being able to handle data that isn't exactly what you expect is what happens after you debug an application.
As a programmer, you parse through input from a user, if the user does something that they are not supposed to, the program should either ignore the input or prompt the user, possiable an error message.
You have to throw data at a program that it shouldn't get and the program should only do what it was designed to do, not more or less. Buffer overflows are bugs in software that can be exploited to make to program do something it wasn't designed to do.
Not really, because you have problems like what gosling said with identity, so you say int i = 1; Integer I = 1; does i == I?
casting a float to an int ( and back ) is completly different as when you cast a float to an int, the number will probably change. 3.999999 -> int -> 3 should it goto 4? probably, it should be rounded. but autoboxing is supposed to keep the value of the original type.
Regardless I'm not too sure how this will help performance much. The feature that I want to see added to java is that I want to be able for the java vm to create objects on the stack. Then if they get assigned to a member pointer, get promoted to the heap. This way you could keep objects on the stack where they could be easily collected when the function that created them ends scope.
Sorry, I misquoted the java language, I've never used the BigDecimal class before, so that's why I don't know as much as I should before making claims about it.
From the Java API... Immutable, arbitrary-precision signed decimal numbers. A BigDecimal consists of an arbitrary precision integer unscaled value and a non-negative 32-bit integer scale, which represents the number of digits to the right of the decimal point. The number represented by the BigDecimal is (unscaledValue/10scale). End API... The rounding modes, you have to select one of them, are: ROUND_CEILING, ROUND_DOWN,ROUND_FLOOR,ROUND_HALF_DOWN,ROUND_HAL F_EVEN,ROUND_HALF_UP,ROUND_UNNECESSARY,ROUND_UP Thus, it is a fixed point math type. That can have as much as 2^16 digits to the right of your decimal point.
Autoboxing is a process where primitives are automagically converted to Objects (and back). It's a language change so that you would have to write new code to use it. Basically you could say.... int i = 2,j=1; Integer result = Math.max( i,j); and it would magically convert the result of the Math.max to an integer. Or if the Math.max took Integers instead of ints, it would create Integers for you. The details need to be worked out because as of right now, an Integer is unmodifiable and things like i == result would be problematic. Since == tests equality, but it only works with objects if they are actually the same reference. You can't do i.equals( result ) Also, what if you do int i= 2; Integer j=i, k=j; ++j; If you are using object semantics, then k should probably be changed to reflect the new value of j, since j and k both point to the same object. It comes down to, should the value of j change? or the value of the object that it represents?
Use the BigDecimal class. It's standard and handles any size floating point numbers. Not quite as good as the Cobol version, but you can always write your own class if you are that picky.
-- begin belo's position "ultimately that this is our content and we should have some control about where and in what way it is used. We'll see what happens in the law and in the courts to decide how to proceed." --end This is such crap. If you want to control your content then fine, do it. Placing a web page on a public web server is like placing a stack of flyers in a student union. Sure, it's your content, but you've given up direct control of who get's their hands on it. If you want to make sure that people only see content the way you want to then you'll have to try something else. Like making people login (aka NYT).
Seems to me like all these problems arise from the fact that people don't understand that a web server is by default public. Same with the internet in general, being the 'open' standard that it is.
But they should not be seeking a legal resolution to this conflict. They are dealing with a technical issue, not a legal one. If they don't want people to use their content without having come from their site, then they should design their site in that way.
Laziness is not a reason to make a law. They are just being lazy about the technical solution to their problem. Just look at tomshardware.com. You can't link to any of their pictures directly from your site. Only when actually browsing their site does it work.
Only the atari 2600 was popular. Not many people had Sega Master Systems ( I was one and boy are you missing out if you didn't have one!)
The PSX however, still has games coming out for it. Over seven years after it was released! The only home game system that is older and still has games being released is the game boy.
I think that it will be almost impossiable to maintain backwards compatability with the PSX2, they should be able to give us PSX1 compatability but the PSX2 just seems like too complex of a machine to emulate.
Of course, if they make the PSX3 architechiure the same as the psx2, then it's possiable.
You won't see any real time emulators for the PC of the PSX2 for a long time, until the speed of processors increase 10 times. Maybe sooner on a PPC chip ( with altivec), but the vector units of the main cpu in the PSX2 are extremly fast and will require a ton of CPU to emulate. Not to forget that the Graphics chip is very, very strange compared to PC graphics cards.
I can't wait to get the linux kit for the PSX2, I want to see how the graphics really work in that thing.
Slashdot Mirror
But the law states that children below the age of 17 cannot purchase or play video games of VIOLENT or SEXUALLY EXPLICT content without the permission of a parent.
What is VIOLENT? Is Bugs Bunny VIOLENT? What about Rambo? How about Streetcar Named Desire? What's more violent, scenes of abuse in the household (father beating children, mother), or John Travolta killing people in Swordfish?
Also, what is SEXUALLY EXPLICT? IF you ask the fox network, anything short of unfuzzed nipple or private area is sexually explict. If ask the puritans, then a little ankle showing was explict. This term means something different every time we ask it. It's a flavor of the month, whatever is popular at the time is 'sexually explict'.
So, who gets to make these distictions? The law? I guess, but what happens if you are working at EB and you get arrested for selling a bugs bunny game to a kid because it was decided that it is too violent? (a little extreme I agree, but anything goes in this world)
The only problem with the whole video game might == right dogma is that is all the games teach. Very rarely does a game show more then the most base of human experience to a player. Movies and books are very good at this. Maybe after a couple more decades of this will be more the norm instead of the exception.
Another reason this works is because since everyone runs the same platform, but doesn't update the software to the newest version. These exploits would not work (as well) if everybody went to microsoft.com and downloaded the newest version every day.
It used to be that you had to have an IQ of greater then 100 to actually even USE the internet.
Maybe that's why the internet was so much better before the Homer Simpsons of the world decided to get on the internet.
Sun sued Microsoft for extending the spec, not for a bad implementation!
If you look at that MS was doing to the Java APIs (not the language or VM), you will see that they tried to get people to write code to their APIs that tied people to their MS x86 Java Platform which was against the agreement they had with Sun.
Netscape just had a bad implementation of Java.
Not playing a video game is like reading a book based on a movie. You only get the idea and it's not the same thing, sometimes radically different.
Video gamimg is the first automated warm medium, where the player (or audience) is part of the feedback that creates the show. Movies, TV, and playing music on a CD are cold mediums, where the audience has no/little effect on the entertainment. (though some would argue that the audience is the entertainment at plays/concerts) Story telling (esp. with small children), books, stand up comics ( esp. in small clubs) are warm, where the audience takes part in the performance.
Video gaming being as young as it is, and having such a high cost to entry for new games has created a culture where everyone goes for the largest market, throwing aside everything but the almighty dollar. Even the Salon article admints that the Sims almost didn't get made, which goes to show how single minded these game publishers are. $$$$$
So far, I've seem many comments about people comparing these games to RPGs, but what about the true classics, like Pac-Man, Tetris, Galaga, Bust-a-Move, etc. These games are like poetry compared to the monstrous volumes that are required to encompass most RPGs. Games like Golden Axe where the whole point is to destroy the tyrant who has usurped the power from the king in the region.
Some of the best examples of games and conveyance of ideas come from old Sierra games, especially the Lesiure Suit Larry series. That series was nothing but satire, pure and simple. The game was solving the most insane puzzles to advance the almost non-existant plot, but the items you got and the way they were described picked on a multitude of facets of american culture.
Unfortunatly, most games teach that might = right and you must be the strongest most powerful (Insert stereotype here) in the world. And that concludes their message. It's the games like Ultima, B&W, every Sim game ever that show us new ways of thinking, since in many cases we must change the way we think about a problem in order to solve it in the world of the game.
humor maybe? I could be grasping at straws but sometimes funny = good.
The bad thing in my opinion is not that a COP can swipe your id and get your information. This is valuable in that it reduces both work for the cop and errors in validating your identity. What a larger problem in my opinion is that businesses can buy id readers and check your ids. Getting valuable information about you for next to nothing in cost. an example is the story on /. a couple of weeks ago about the bar in Boston (I think) that tracked all of it's customers.
It's bad enough that Vons, Ralphs, Price Chopper, etc all track our shopping habits, but if they made us swipe our ids then they could track us forever.
Also I don't think that forging a retinal scan would be difficult at all. Think about it, unless the data on the card is encrypted via some sort of public key system where the private key is in a central DB, anyone who knows how to read/write the data on a card can replace it with bogus information.
This would be faster because work would have to be done at compile time to figure out if the object should be created on the stack or the heap by the VM. Basically trading ease of compile for runtime performance, which in my opinion is always a win.
I don't care how fast you say this 'eden GC' is, there is no way it's faster then this solution, cleaning the stack is so fast. The live section of the stack has a MUCH higher chance to be in the cache, while eden starts out being megabytes large. So no matter what you are going to have page faults with eden. With the stack approach, objects simply go out of scope, no thinking on the vm is required to determine if an object is no longer live. Just like with a primitive.
The only problem with this solution is that you have to have a way for objects to be promoted from the stack to the heap in the case of classes that change after you compile a class that depends in it.
The whole reason for this argument is that time and time again, people want speed, and if speed can be added through VM changes only, and maybe a recompile, then why not do it?
Damn, I always forget about that BSD license.
The BSD license also gives the rights of the developer to the user. The only difference between a BSD license and a public domain is that the BSD license requires the redistributor of code to acklowledge that the code came from a certain source. (AFAIK)
Most licenses do take away almost all priviledges of a user, and they are only getting worse by the day.
It doesn't take away that right, you never had it in the first place!
Does there exist EULA that gives you, the user the right to distribute binary-only copies of a program?
Not resell your copy, actually distribute more copies? There is no such EULA.
Stop propagaging the myth that the GPL takes away your rights as a user. Most companies want to be a monopoly and to control what you do with their products. (Meaning that if you do something with their product that they didn't sell to you then you have to pay for it)
For developers, the GPL is not a nice as say a public domain license. There you can do whatever you want with the code. There's a reason that most people don't release code in the public domain. And that's because anyone can take it, compile it and claim that the compiled binary is unique in some way and sell it for $$$$. At least with GPLed code, the person that compiles it has to make his changes public so that you can create the same binary.
Yeah, what's up with those girls that look like they belong in wrestling in action films?
One more afternote, the whole idea here is to NOT do a GC. The eden area is a great idea and should not go away, actually I really like it. I'm trying to attack the problem from the other side, instead of making the GC smarter. Make it so that the GC never even sees these temporary objects.
Not really, this is not the same thing as what I'm talking about. Well, it could be depending on how they implement it. They still have to do some sort of mark and sweep algorithim, which is not fast.
I'm saying that they change the class file format. Such that all methods have their parameters marked. So you have a method
myMethod ( Rectangle r );
now the coder does nothing, but during compile time , the rectangle r is tracked, and determined if r is only used locally, if the code keeps a reference to it, or passes the reference to a function that then keeps a reference to it.
If the reference is never actually stored ( the reference is only used locally) then the object is marked as possiable for stack creation.
In your code, if you create an object, it is by default created on the stack, unless it is determined by the compiler that the reference to the object is stored somewhere in your code.
The object would be destroyed when it goes out of scope.
This would speed up and reduce memory consumption of the VM IMO. Firstly , it would get rid of the huge penality for temporary object creation in loops. Usually this can be avoided by clever programming, but not always. Secondly, you can get rid of the static 'rendering objects' that many Swing components use. Rectangles being probably the biggest offender of this policy. Many times you just need a simple data structure in a loop ( for rendering to the screen) and you don't want to call a function to create it everytime. Or what about in a http server, you end up creating the same object over and over, the penality for this could be reduced.
AFAIK, lisp does this already so this is not voodoo science we are talking about. What sucks about this approach is that changes to the JVM bytecode are required. Since object cannot be create on the stack.
Sure, especially if they need to raise the stock of the new company, they can just lay off 1/2 the workforce as being 'duplicate'. Since they do many of the same things, they will be firing a lot of engineers. I would hate to be a graduating engineer right now, as there will be many, many engineers on the market place with lots of experience.
Which means of course that they wasted their time yet again!
Why do the game companies think that we really care about how cool neato wow the water looks? If it looks vagely like water then yeah, I'll think that's it water and keep on playing the game. You don't have to wow me with water effects, modeling every drop of water as it is absorbed by my characters clothes in the game.
BethSoft had better make this game work unlike Daggerfall. Daggerfall sucked unless you were some insane fanboy willing to put up with the constant crashes and headaches caused by this buggy piece of crap. You had to be in love with the concept of the game to truely like it. I'm tempted to actually buy a X-box for it because I don't trust them with my PC to play it.
I think that these new GPUs are too powerful. As nobody can possiably generate the artwork that will use them quickly enough. It takes much longer to generate a 100,000 poly model then a 5000 poly model in a program like 3d studio max. (assuming that they are of equal quality) It's going to be a couple more years until we see any games really taking advantage of these new features.
But that's exactly what debugging is. Implmenting a spec is one thing, but also being able to handle data that isn't exactly what you expect is what happens after you debug an application.
As a programmer, you parse through input from a user, if the user does something that they are not supposed to, the program should either ignore the input or prompt the user, possiable an error message.
You have to throw data at a program that it shouldn't get and the program should only do what it was designed to do, not more or less. Buffer overflows are bugs in software that can be exploited to make to program do something it wasn't designed to do.
Not really, because you have problems like what gosling said with identity, so you say
int i = 1;
Integer I = 1;
does i == I?
casting a float to an int ( and back ) is completly different as when you cast a float to an int, the number will probably change.
3.999999 -> int -> 3
should it goto 4? probably, it should be rounded.
but autoboxing is supposed to keep the value of the original type.
Regardless I'm not too sure how this will help performance much.
The feature that I want to see added to java is that I want to be able for the java vm to create objects on the stack. Then if they get assigned to a member pointer, get promoted to the heap. This way you could keep objects on the stack where they could be easily collected when the function that created them ends scope.
Sorry, I misquoted the java language, I've never used the BigDecimal class before, so that's why I don't know as much as I should before making claims about it.
,ROUND_HALF_DOWN ,ROUND_HAL F_EVEN ,ROUND_HALF_UP ,ROUND_UNNECESSARY ,ROUND_UP
From the Java API...
Immutable, arbitrary-precision signed decimal numbers. A BigDecimal consists of an arbitrary precision integer unscaled value and a non-negative 32-bit integer scale, which represents the number of digits to the right of the decimal point. The number represented by the BigDecimal is (unscaledValue/10scale).
End API...
The rounding modes, you have to select one of them, are:
ROUND_CEILING, ROUND_DOWN,ROUND_FLOOR
Thus, it is a fixed point math type. That can have as much as 2^16 digits to the right of your decimal point.
Autoboxing is a process where primitives are automagically converted to Objects (and back). It's a language change so that you would have to write new code to use it. Basically you could say....
int i = 2,j=1;
Integer result = Math.max( i,j);
and it would magically convert the result of the Math.max to an integer. Or if the Math.max took Integers instead of ints, it would create Integers for you.
The details need to be worked out because as of right now, an Integer is unmodifiable and things like
i == result
would be problematic. Since == tests equality, but it only works with objects if they are actually the same reference. You can't do
i.equals( result )
Also, what if you do
int i= 2;
Integer j=i, k=j;
++j;
If you are using object semantics, then k should probably be changed to reflect the new value of j, since j and k both point to the same object. It comes down to, should the value of j change? or the value of the object that it represents?
Use the BigDecimal class. It's standard and handles any size floating point numbers. Not quite as good as the Cobol version, but you can always write your own class if you are that picky.
Sorry, Java is more based on C then on Cobol.
-- begin belo's position
"ultimately that this is our content and we should have some control about where and in what way it is used. We'll see what happens in the law and in the courts to decide how to proceed."
--end
This is such crap. If you want to control your content then fine, do it. Placing a web page on a public web server is like placing a stack of flyers in a student union. Sure, it's your content, but you've given up direct control of who get's their hands on it. If you want to make sure that people only see content the way you want to then you'll have to try something else. Like making people login (aka NYT).
Seems to me like all these problems arise from the fact that people don't understand that a web server is by default public. Same with the internet in general, being the 'open' standard that it is.
But they should not be seeking a legal resolution to this conflict. They are dealing with a technical issue, not a legal one. If they don't want people to use their content without having come from their site, then they should design their site in that way.
Laziness is not a reason to make a law. They are just being lazy about the technical solution to their problem. Just look at tomshardware.com. You can't link to any of their pictures directly from your site. Only when actually browsing their site does it work.
Not today, but just give him awhile. Nobody can please all the people all of the time.
Only the atari 2600 was popular. Not many people had Sega Master Systems ( I was one and boy are you missing out if you didn't have one!)
The PSX however, still has games coming out for it. Over seven years after it was released! The only home game system that is older and still has games being released is the game boy.
I think that it will be almost impossiable to maintain backwards compatability with the PSX2, they should be able to give us PSX1 compatability but the PSX2 just seems like too complex of a machine to emulate.
Of course, if they make the PSX3 architechiure the same as the psx2, then it's possiable.
You won't see any real time emulators for the PC of the PSX2 for a long time, until the speed of processors increase 10 times. Maybe sooner on a PPC chip ( with altivec), but the vector units of the main cpu in the PSX2 are extremly fast and will require a ton of CPU to emulate. Not to forget that the Graphics chip is very, very strange compared to PC graphics cards.
I can't wait to get the linux kit for the PSX2, I want to see how the graphics really work in that thing.