In talking about cancer - however cancer works in spreading it's bad planning to neighbouring cells (I read about it, but I cannot be bothered to look up again) that is the process I was describing.
So just leave that bit ok, the point stands.
Also the swearing is int he tone of incredulity, that you can actually make those statements you made, and not meant to offend. Plus I typed at about 150+ wpm (yes exaggeration probably!) so typos and (thanksfully none!) unclosed html is all my fingers fault.
If only I had been born X*a really long time, later, then I would have qwerty fingers.
This is actually what my examples would seem to do for someone who have not studied for example comparative physiology or comparative genomics or at least know how DNA works together with genes and proteins.
Stop being arrogant and hiding behind your very blinkered view on the world.
Your 'unique' view also lends you to other ways of thinking that could impair your objective thought.
Stop being fucking arrogant. I do not need more specialisation on what I have read. I know the story of genetics, and I know complixities, not knowing exactly by the book certain facts of a certain species, or having not studied or work in this field doesn't make me less qualified than you to make completely unsubstantiated claims and argue that my own perspective would make you claims less valid.
Don't think you can just quote the good ideals of science in an effort to push your baseless (not baseless, but the word I am seeking... is a bit out of reach for me right now...) claims.
Yes, you believe one thing, but you cannot say that because of your own views, you can claim my view is invalid. By proving one thing, even sherlock holmes can disprove any other thing.
You haven't proven anything, except you are vary arrogant, which detracts from your 'holier than thou' I am such a model scientist who touches everything he believes.
Quoting all those gay-like questions you did ammounted to nothing more than a pissing contest. 'What about the XYZ of the FoooBar thingy - exlain that'. pssteesh.
The heart of a frog is so inefficient compared to other designs, where is the intelligence in that (no there ARE no other obstacles against a more efficient design, just compare with a reptile heart).
Right, dumbass, life, existence and chewing gum magically come into existence.
Little 'less than single celled, perhaps unalive things' evolve into man, yet the poor old frog still has this horrible pain in its diodes, down the left side?
Surely the evolved frog, with its curiosities woudl have evolved with a superior heart?
Where there fuck is the point? You say something, and then just leave it there in the air like it makes a fucking point, and I have to painstakingly (and talking with you is painful, you do put up so much flak) knock down each one of your points and say 'why make that point if it doesn't make a point?'
tsk.
Look at the similarities/differences between those two.
Fucking hell, you are talking again about the similarities and differences again, didn't we hammer out this point? Either way you are going to get similarities and differences. Check out my weak metaphor of a widget factory.
Oh, yes, the taste of simple victory:
You mean the same way that a cancer tumor is self aware (since it is able to hook up to the blood flow and "create" new vessels where there was none before)?
Well done fuckwad! please,/. (not that anyone else is reading) give this pseudo scientist a pat on the back.
Cancer (and I am not someone who studies it, I don't even know that many people who have died from it) is caused by localised i.e. the cells that are there... sharing bad protein/DNA working shit... and the cells loose their idea of when to stop, and therefore these 'super healthy' cells start ripping apart our bodies by multiplying.
Therefore, a cell that exists at the point where a vein is created to move blood in the complex dance of our cardiovascular system, is already designated to know about this vein, and when caner strikes it repeates this blueprint behaviour.
If cancer struk a road map, where it strikes it would be like using a photoshop cloning tool on that area. If there was a river, then tributaries and shit would form, if there was a highway.. guess what!
How can you put up such a weak argument? You think by you saying something as stupid as 'self aware cancer' you coudl imply I would think of such a thing? I was talking about the
Check out 'N' a great flash game. The proble with flash is reusability of the modules, and the hackability of it.
Looking at teagames.com and http://www.rit.edu/~jhb4598/jblog Java quake 3 map renderer (with rail gun) that runs at ~89fps on my stock dell POShit.
Despite diverging proprietary systems, the dominance of flash and java in web and mobile gaming will ultimately (as technology grows) give us cross platform gaming. If Java can do cross platform quake 3 now, in 3 years will Java do cross platform Doom3 or Offset engine?
Cross platform - its what you want!
Play N today, it is supeerrrr333t, and they are putting out tutorials as their prime objective.
Teagames hasn't tutorials yet, if you want, nag them to put some tutorials out!
Thats all!
Tod the guy playing slashdot and reading flash games... switch that... while getting paid!
I might as well ask a question. I googled up a simple one click mp3/ogg converter that would keep the bit rates that were in the mp3's and not perform any further loss (in conversion, if any, since they compress different).
I couldn't find one. The brilliance of google brought up hundreds of:
Can I simply run a quick app to mass convert, but tell it to skip certain trees that contain mp3 program files (like games mp3's, although increasingly I see ogg used in games).
So why can't people just make a groupware server that does X standard, make thunderbird and firefox support them (natively and web based) and be done with it.
Write some migration tools. Viola.
Or?
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: rested
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Cost of renting shuttle: $$$$$$$$$$$ Cost of fuel: $$$$$$ Cost of mission control: $$$$$$$$ Cost of training everyone: $$$$$$$$$$$ Cost of hiring everyone: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Cost of 100million things I cannot think of: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Cost of short stay parking on mars: ASTRONOMICAL (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ba-dum-pssssh)
Selling the right to the launch could net you about 1% if you are lucky, and have a team of lesbians covered in BRANDNAMEX chocolate sauce as the pilots, who are going to be doing 0 G lesbian experiments in space...streaming live over the intarspacewebnet.
haha.
Lameness filter encountered. Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted.
(and if it is, why are you even asking on/. but hey)
But if you have lots of database updates going ahead, locking and huge index searching, you might want to look at your slowest most costly queries (sometimes they can be stupid little footer fillers) and reduce those queries. Check what is slow, and see how you can work around it, add a new index, or cut the fat.
But seriously, if your 'performance hit' is pulling static stories out of a database, then how come you haven't looked at cacheing?
I quoted their goals, and acknowledges that they would market the game engine, but it was in response to someone flaming their efforts, saying 'it cannot complete' with UT* engines etc, because it is immature.
Which was not a bad call. Look at my post in context +3 insightful, patish.
Look, all these examples I've given isn't even a scratch on the surface and they are all support evolution.
No, you listed some interesting quirks, or features of nature. Wow, some animals have tails some don't some use this chemical, some don't. I don't see how you can argue that the similarity of the makeup of animals, and the diversity of the makeup can both argue evolution... I don't even think they are relevant, lets imagine 3 possible 'ways life came about as it is, but not necessarily explaining how life came into existence' theories, random ones. We have no clue about them, any of them.
The chance that animals could be equally diverse or similar would be the same, because of conjecture. There is no pretense that would suggest any method of life being 'evolved' (lets not go into creationism, lets just say design) would have great hetrogeneity ammongst the makeup of species.
Its like me quoting 20 past slashdot stories, at random, then saying how they argue for or against the case for Apples move to intel. I dunno.
Yeah, I agree, that'd sound implausible but even the extremely simplified version did not pan out that way. It was more like: one multicellular entity, that already had the ability to breath air (lungfishes, bichirs, mudcrawlers are all fishes that do that besides having the ability to use gills), "decided" to live a bit more connected to the dry land and then became amphibs.
I think your own story is more far fetched, I can argue a better pretense for this. But still. (lets not talk about the problems of mating when that one walked to land, so, it was able to breath with less and less water, now we talked about the macro setup of a body, being EVEN MORE (according to you) complex than the micro (you talked about digestion etc) so, evolution, that happens at a DNA level, would have to decide to change, at one point at least, the makeup of the gills to suddenly also work without dissolved oxygen in a solution. You see, that small DNA changes, while programmable, could not step to a lung system where intelligently (ok read as viable) blood systems and then, of course, 'work out' it shoudl be connected to the heart is a macro level problem, that requires a self awareness.
You know, a 'bigger picture' look. Of course, put in enough monkeys and typewriters, and you get evolution, and the magically existing, already breathing gilled animal, is here write now, talking about infinite monkeys. They should call evolution 'infinite monkeys' theory.
I am an alien, I mistake small plastic sprog/grommits/widgets as the fossilised remains of the intelligent lifeform on earth.
I walk into a factory that produce widgets. Widgets have various shapes, sizes, wheels, cogs, spindles etc.
I bet in any widget factory of this type, you can order them by there attributes, place the simpler ones first, and just say 'hey this simpler widget must be the direct ancestor of this more complex widget'
Yet, they were all designed, for different purposes, and are made of plastic.
You see what I am saying? We assume, because there are simpler living entities (or smaller), and there are similarities and diversities, it looks so obvious to put them one a chart and say, there simpler ones came first, and we came from them.
Wouldn't intelligent design produce as much variety?
If evolution is true, where did gravity, the colour green, the very nature of mass/energy (energy itself even) and the nature of atoms.
As we go smaller or bigger, so much becomes apparent. Where did 'existence' come from. Imagine a black void. Nothingness.
Now imagine there was nothing to contain that huge black nothing ness.
A complete absence of existence, not even defined by its absence.
Yes, hysterical/. reporting, I think this is legit. Thanks!
I am wondering if Linux is trademarked effectively in all necessary countries... right now I would say India and China are necessary countries, but how reliable are the trademarks over there?
Maybe this will bring more eyes to the issue of people trying to extort linux.
I played installing ubuntu on my laptop last night. I almost cried when it went on without a hitch!! Hurrah!
It is like windows 2000, but better, and it just works.
I use OpenOffice in windows... and firefox... and emacs... and eclipse.. pretty much nothing else. So how would I know the difference (I also use cygwin in windows world).
JamesO writes "Microsoft's J Allard has said that the Xbox 360 will be released in differing versions over the next five years.
If you don't like the first one, stick around, give us a chance to make a better one, but lets do the traditional announcement to lock the market into 'wait-and-see' for the next 5 years. Problem is, does this work on gamers?
"It's something we're not ready to announce yet," he said. "I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all [approach] over the next five-year horizon."
I am not actually ready to make this comment, but since I already have, isn't this proclaimation redundant? Or are they pointing at more details?
Relatedly JamesO writes "Microsoft is saying that anywhere up to 40 games could be released for the Xbox 360 during its launch period, but which of those will make or break the console's launch?
Between 0 and 40 games will be released!
Anyway, Sony are locking up their consoles, everyone is. I would rather not sponsor these types of locked down computer systems blindly, under the guise of games, and people should start realising that.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: eights
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Many of the previous commercial games that intrude onto the open source space are documented on the liberated games website. Some are just free, not Free, but a good resource.
New game: Use your script word in your comment, as a kinda protest against its redundancy.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: intrude
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
You try and 'read' the letters, and 'look at' the word. Which means many times the people see the words as shapes, not information.
When writing, we always look back on what we type, even visually (when assembling words).
The only pertinent parallel I can think of is when a hot chick in a shirt shirt skirt walks into the room, but is showing all her cleavage, and you mind fights itself, as your fovea centralis tries to split and focus all its cones on both her assets.
Dyslexia is like that, and then having a pop quiz if you noted her name on her id badge.
Nice comment, no time to write a whole chapter on this:
Why do they look alike if they do not share a common ancestor?
Because that is the blueprint of life. Life works that way in this universe, does that make sense?
If two people, in two different countries, without collaborating, design a car, guess what?
Yes, 4 wheels, + 1 for steering. Doors, you know, for getting in and out of... gearing... lights (night affects quite a large portion of the world you know;-) and even windscreen wipers becuase of rain.
Now, I have just given you ammunition to say that DNA is the blueprint that evolved to work on our planet, but also it says that the general plan for living breathing life, in this universe with fundemental characteristics, and this planet with its own quirks and flaws, can be the same for all living things, because they are all living, but it can be for those reasons, not common ancestry.
To say 4 single celled entities met up one day... one wobbled north, the others the other compass points, and one became a chicken, the other a lizard, the other a pig and the last a fish, is a little too cute.
Thei goals are stated clearly - to produce the game (the engine of course will probably become productized). Saying something isn't something when a) it is early days and b) they are not stating that intent is just trollish.
I for one think this looks awesome, and hope this makes EA realise what arsebandits they are!
I wonder what PA think of this... they like fantasy stuff, and WoW... they are worse than/. geeks.
A camera, that can take pictures, that can easily send the pcitures, I don't know, across some kind of net... net work... inter..network...internet, with computers, and could show an image from 3 years ago of frozen landscape, and an image today of the kilometer sized lakes.
Wow... Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words.
Anyone have photos of this? any aerial ones I can overlay on google earth?
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: staggers
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
If you want to make claims about how that first replicating organism came about, don't ask an evolutionist, ask a biochemist because it's not what we study nor are particularly interrested in.
Where are you getting this? I am saying that Darwin leaves a space that is conveniently ignored, its like X + 5 = 2, and everyone assumes that X = -3, but noone is sure what values 5 has, or indeed if 2 is the right answer.
I am talking about the disputes 'creationism' and 'evolution' and I stated that evolution did not cover this, YET it is taken that it is.
My goodness, whith a statement like that you just proved that you don't know much about what we're talking about. Please, if a biologist are talking about survival of the fittest then that does not mean survival of the strongest. Please learn the concept of biological "fitness". Look, it's is not meant as an insult, but if you're to talk about fitness in the context of evolution it sure helps to know what that concept is about for another time. Fitness is a key concept in evolutionary theory as it applies to the mechanism of natural selection.
What the hell are you saying - really this paragraph is like you are listening to me here on earth, and replying on some parallel dimension.
My point was to illustrate that although HBombs can cause burns, they are not instrinsically related subject or fields of study.
And then you write, probably the most stuped fucking 'I hope if I say this I will win the point' sentence:
Please, if a biologist are talking about survival of the fittest then that does not mean survival of the strongest
Where the fuck did you pull the rabbit from? Try and stay focussed man, you are wandering all over grasping at straws, or maybe I need to be more clear with my point, because debating with someone who ebbs and flows is not much fun.
We hadn't even disagreed on the concept of fitness, and you start explaining it as if I had SOMEHOW shown that I was ignorant of the concept of fitness. If you must know, this occurs int he plant kingdom, with certain plant varieties are more suited to the conditions, and the animal kingdom where certain strains of butterfly avoid predation because of colour, or now the tuskless Elephant who avoids the hunter.
This is not a sign of evolution, as I stated, a mutation (or use the loaded word 'evolution') in a species, or a conditioning / training, can lead (oh don't fucking pick up the word training and harp on about fittness is not a literal term for athletic fitness, I know you fucking idiot, stay the course of the river (and don't start talking abotu rivers)) to a 'race' between two 'competing' (not actually competing) strains. Anyway, I am sure you are going to start talking about a completely different point, so this feels completely wasted.
This next bit is really telling:
If this was not true then we'd all be standing in a layer of flyshit or dinofecies. What you just said was that since these two facts (variation and fitness) affects "life" then we cannot say they together bring about higher adaptation?! That is like saying that multiplication and addition cannot be used upon numbers at the same time or that gravity and magnetism are mutually exclusive in their effect on objects.
First - you cannot win an argument on evolution, because there is no proof, that is one, stop trying to look at this like a victory - now:
You say 'if that was not true we would all be in fly shit and blah'. So, I can see you must be correct now you have said that.
It is this 'jumping to conclusion' and 'it must be right' that shows you are not keeping an open mind.
The fact that mutations happen, or introduction of a new strain of life to a region, or a change in that regions eco system or climate can bring about symptoms of change in the population (because a new strain is more apt, and this fit, for the conditions) != evolution as the complete theory.
Slashdot Mirror
In talking about cancer - however cancer works in spreading it's bad planning to neighbouring cells (I read about it, but I cannot be bothered to look up again) that is the process I was describing.
So just leave that bit ok, the point stands.
Also the swearing is int he tone of incredulity, that you can actually make those statements you made, and not meant to offend. Plus I typed at about 150+ wpm (yes exaggeration probably!) so typos and (thanksfully none!) unclosed html is all my fingers fault.
If only I had been born X*a really long time, later, then I would have qwerty fingers.
This is actually what my examples would seem to do for someone who have not studied for example comparative physiology or comparative genomics or at least know how DNA works together with genes and proteins.
/. (not that anyone else is reading) give this pseudo scientist a pat on the back.
Stop being arrogant and hiding behind your very blinkered view on the world.
Your 'unique' view also lends you to other ways of thinking that could impair your objective thought.
Stop being fucking arrogant. I do not need more specialisation on what I have read. I know the story of genetics, and I know complixities, not knowing exactly by the book certain facts of a certain species, or having not studied or work in this field doesn't make me less qualified than you to make completely unsubstantiated claims and argue that my own perspective would make you claims less valid.
Don't think you can just quote the good ideals of science in an effort to push your baseless (not baseless, but the word I am seeking... is a bit out of reach for me right now...) claims.
Yes, you believe one thing, but you cannot say that because of your own views, you can claim my view is invalid. By proving one thing, even sherlock holmes can disprove any other thing.
You haven't proven anything, except you are vary arrogant, which detracts from your 'holier than thou' I am such a model scientist who touches everything he believes.
Quoting all those gay-like questions you did ammounted to nothing more than a pissing contest. 'What about the XYZ of the FoooBar thingy - exlain that'. pssteesh.
The heart of a frog is so inefficient compared to other designs, where is the intelligence in that (no there ARE no other obstacles against a more efficient design, just compare with a reptile heart).
Right, dumbass, life, existence and chewing gum magically come into existence.
Little 'less than single celled, perhaps unalive things' evolve into man, yet the poor old frog still has this horrible pain in its diodes, down the left side?
Surely the evolved frog, with its curiosities woudl have evolved with a superior heart?
Where there fuck is the point? You say something, and then just leave it there in the air like it makes a fucking point, and I have to painstakingly (and talking with you is painful, you do put up so much flak) knock down each one of your points and say 'why make that point if it doesn't make a point?'
tsk.
Look at the similarities/differences between those two.
Fucking hell, you are talking again about the similarities and differences again, didn't we hammer out this point? Either way you are going to get similarities and differences. Check out my weak metaphor of a widget factory.
Oh, yes, the taste of simple victory:
You mean the same way that a cancer tumor is self aware (since it is able to hook up to the blood flow and "create" new vessels where there was none before)?
Well done fuckwad! please,
Cancer (and I am not someone who studies it, I don't even know that many people who have died from it) is caused by localised i.e. the cells that are there... sharing bad protein/DNA working shit... and the cells loose their idea of when to stop, and therefore these 'super healthy' cells start ripping apart our bodies by multiplying.
Therefore, a cell that exists at the point where a vein is created to move blood in the complex dance of our cardiovascular system, is already designated to know about this vein, and when caner strikes it repeates this blueprint behaviour.
If cancer struk a road map, where it strikes it would be like using a photoshop cloning tool on that area. If there was a river, then tributaries and shit would form, if there was a highway.. guess what!
How can you put up such a weak argument? You think by you saying something as stupid as 'self aware cancer' you coudl imply I would think of such a thing? I was talking about the
And not Marathon as I still miss.
Damn you Mars!
I hope Heineken make an 'illegal' NOT THE OLYMPICS can of lager.
Like they did with the Pint can of Lager 'contravenes some daft euro law!!'
Great, more British than British!
Check out 'N' a great flash game. The proble with flash is reusability of the modules, and the hackability of it.
Looking at teagames.com and http://www.rit.edu/~jhb4598/jblog Java quake 3 map renderer (with rail gun) that runs at ~89fps on my stock dell POShit.
Despite diverging proprietary systems, the dominance of flash and java in web and mobile gaming will ultimately (as technology grows) give us cross platform gaming. If Java can do cross platform quake 3 now, in 3 years will Java do cross platform Doom3 or Offset engine?
Cross platform - its what you want!
Play N today, it is supeerrrr333t, and they are putting out tutorials as their prime objective.
Teagames hasn't tutorials yet, if you want, nag them to put some tutorials out!
Thats all!
Tod the guy playing slashdot and reading flash games... switch that... while getting paid!
I might as well ask a question. I googled up a simple one click mp3/ogg converter that would keep the bit rates that were in the mp3's and not perform any further loss (in conversion, if any, since they compress different).
I couldn't find one. The brilliance of google brought up hundreds of:
"convert-mp3-download-free-tunes-imusic-
itunes-ogg-divx-free.castadnetwork.com"
websites, but nothing of note.
Can I simply run a quick app to mass convert, but tell it to skip certain trees that contain mp3 program files (like games mp3's, although increasingly I see ogg used in games).
That'd be 1337.
It isn't a law, but a prediction made by viewing previous data, that hasn't even held, and gets modified to fit the results.
Now, check my journal on this, because I really wish people would shut up about moores law.
It takes credit from the chaps who did the hard thinking to get us to this point, and says, oh well, it was expected anyway.
Just, aaagh.
So why can't people just make a groupware server that does X standard, make thunderbird and firefox support them (natively and web based) and be done with it.
Write some migration tools. Viola.
Or?
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: rested
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Cost of renting shuttle: $$$$$$$$$$$
Cost of fuel: $$$$$$
Cost of mission control: $$$$$$$$
Cost of training everyone: $$$$$$$$$$$
Cost of hiring everyone: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Cost of 100million things I cannot think of: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Cost of short stay parking on mars: ASTRONOMICAL (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ba-dum-pssssh)
Selling the right to the launch could net you about 1% if you are lucky, and have a team of lesbians covered in BRANDNAMEX chocolate sauce as the pilots, who are going to be doing 0 G lesbian experiments in space...streaming live over the intarspacewebnet.
haha.
Lameness filter encountered.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted.
(and if it is, why are you even asking on /. but hey)
But if you have lots of database updates going ahead, locking and huge index searching, you might want to look at your slowest most costly queries (sometimes they can be stupid little footer fillers) and reduce those queries. Check what is slow, and see how you can work around it, add a new index, or cut the fat.
But seriously, if your 'performance hit' is pulling static stories out of a database, then how come you haven't looked at cacheing?
I quoted their goals, and acknowledges that they would market the game engine, but it was in response to someone flaming their efforts, saying 'it cannot complete' with UT* engines etc, because it is immature.
Which was not a bad call. Look at my post in context +3 insightful, patish.
Look, all these examples I've given isn't even a scratch on the surface and they are all support evolution.
No, you listed some interesting quirks, or features of nature. Wow, some animals have tails some don't some use this chemical, some don't. I don't see how you can argue that the similarity of the makeup of animals, and the diversity of the makeup can both argue evolution... I don't even think they are relevant, lets imagine 3 possible 'ways life came about as it is, but not necessarily explaining how life came into existence' theories, random ones. We have no clue about them, any of them.
The chance that animals could be equally diverse or similar would be the same, because of conjecture. There is no pretense that would suggest any method of life being 'evolved' (lets not go into creationism, lets just say design) would have great hetrogeneity ammongst the makeup of species.
Its like me quoting 20 past slashdot stories, at random, then saying how they argue for or against the case for Apples move to intel. I dunno.
Yeah, I agree, that'd sound implausible but even the extremely simplified version did not pan out that way. It was more like: one multicellular entity, that already had the ability to breath air (lungfishes, bichirs, mudcrawlers are all fishes that do that besides having the ability to use gills), "decided" to live a bit more connected to the dry land and then became amphibs.
I think your own story is more far fetched, I can argue a better pretense for this. But still. (lets not talk about the problems of mating when that one walked to land, so, it was able to breath with less and less water, now we talked about the macro setup of a body, being EVEN MORE (according to you) complex than the micro (you talked about digestion etc) so, evolution, that happens at a DNA level, would have to decide to change, at one point at least, the makeup of the gills to suddenly also work without dissolved oxygen in a solution. You see, that small DNA changes, while programmable, could not step to a lung system where intelligently (ok read as viable) blood systems and then, of course, 'work out' it shoudl be connected to the heart is a macro level problem, that requires a self awareness.
You know, a 'bigger picture' look. Of course, put in enough monkeys and typewriters, and you get evolution, and the magically existing, already breathing gilled animal, is here write now, talking about infinite monkeys. They should call evolution 'infinite monkeys' theory.
I am an alien, I mistake small plastic sprog/grommits/widgets as the fossilised remains of the intelligent lifeform on earth.
I walk into a factory that produce widgets. Widgets have various shapes, sizes, wheels, cogs, spindles etc.
I bet in any widget factory of this type, you can order them by there attributes, place the simpler ones first, and just say 'hey this simpler widget must be the direct ancestor of this more complex widget'
Yet, they were all designed, for different purposes, and are made of plastic.
You see what I am saying? We assume, because there are simpler living entities (or smaller), and there are similarities and diversities, it looks so obvious to put them one a chart and say, there simpler ones came first, and we came from them.
Wouldn't intelligent design produce as much variety?
If evolution is true, where did gravity, the colour green, the very nature of mass/energy (energy itself even) and the nature of atoms.
As we go smaller or bigger, so much becomes apparent. Where did 'existence' come from. Imagine a black void. Nothingness.
Now imagine there was nothing to contain that huge black nothing ness.
A complete absence of existence, not even defined by its absence.
Yes, hysterical /. reporting, I think this is legit. Thanks!
I am wondering if Linux is trademarked effectively in all necessary countries... right now I would say India and China are necessary countries, but how reliable are the trademarks over there?
Maybe this will bring more eyes to the issue of people trying to extort linux.
I played installing ubuntu on my laptop last night. I almost cried when it went on without a hitch!! Hurrah!
It is like windows 2000, but better, and it just works.
I use OpenOffice in windows... and firefox... and emacs... and eclipse.. pretty much nothing else. So how would I know the difference (I also use cygwin in windows world).
Just chuffed.
Jeremy Malcom's Website
Look how FUGLY he is! Someone pay him some tradmark fees, heck, lets get him reselling SCO licenses to pay for some surgery/sex!
Poor guy.
JamesO writes "Microsoft's J Allard has said that the Xbox 360 will be released in differing versions over the next five years.
If you don't like the first one, stick around, give us a chance to make a better one, but lets do the traditional announcement to lock the market into 'wait-and-see' for the next 5 years. Problem is, does this work on gamers?
"It's something we're not ready to announce yet," he said. "I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all [approach] over the next five-year horizon."
I am not actually ready to make this comment, but since I already have, isn't this proclaimation redundant? Or are they pointing at more details?
Relatedly JamesO writes "Microsoft is saying that anywhere up to 40 games could be released for the Xbox 360 during its launch period, but which of those will make or break the console's launch?
Between 0 and 40 games will be released!
Anyway, Sony are locking up their consoles, everyone is. I would rather not sponsor these types of locked down computer systems blindly, under the guise of games, and people should start realising that.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: eights
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Many of the previous commercial games that intrude onto the open source space are documented on the liberated games website. Some are just free, not Free, but a good resource.
New game: Use your script word in your comment, as a kinda protest against its redundancy.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: intrude
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Layman terms:
Both sides of the brain compete to read a word:
You try and 'read' the letters, and 'look at' the word. Which means many times the people see the words as shapes, not information.
When writing, we always look back on what we type, even visually (when assembling words).
The only pertinent parallel I can think of is when a hot chick in a shirt shirt skirt walks into the room, but is showing all her cleavage, and you mind fights itself, as your fovea centralis tries to split and focus all its cones on both her assets.
Dyslexia is like that, and then having a pop quiz if you noted her name on her id badge.
Nice comment, no time to write a whole chapter on this:
;-) and even windscreen wipers becuase of rain.
Why do they look alike if they do not share a common ancestor?
Because that is the blueprint of life. Life works that way in this universe, does that make sense?
If two people, in two different countries, without collaborating, design a car, guess what?
Yes, 4 wheels, + 1 for steering. Doors, you know, for getting in and out of... gearing... lights (night affects quite a large portion of the world you know
Now, I have just given you ammunition to say that DNA is the blueprint that evolved to work on our planet, but also it says that the general plan for living breathing life, in this universe with fundemental characteristics, and this planet with its own quirks and flaws, can be the same for all living things, because they are all living, but it can be for those reasons, not common ancestry.
To say 4 single celled entities met up one day... one wobbled north, the others the other compass points, and one became a chicken, the other a lizard, the other a pig and the last a fish, is a little too cute.
Thei goals are stated clearly - to produce the game (the engine of course will probably become productized). Saying something isn't something when a) it is early days and b) they are not stating that intent is just trollish.
/. geeks.
I for one think this looks awesome, and hope this makes EA realise what arsebandits they are!
I wonder what PA think of this... they like fantasy stuff, and WoW... they are worse than
It is not a game development platform / engine.
/.ians.
It is not designed to be sold (yet) they are developing a game with it, that is the difference.
Doom 3 engine can command millions in licensing and royalities (from the site they are very open).
But, their intent is to use their game engine as a game engine, not to sell it 'competively'.
One more day turning up the contrast on the subtle flaws in the logic of fellow
I think these guys have watched the LOTR films too much:
:-)
http://projectoffset.com/game.html
Humans, Elves and Dwarves.... and a Wizar in white... even One of those flying scarey things
Oh well, looks good I guess
A camera, that can take pictures, that can easily send the pcitures, I don't know, across some kind of net... net work... inter..network...internet, with computers, and could show an image from 3 years ago of frozen landscape, and an image today of the kilometer sized lakes.
Wow... Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words.
Anyone have photos of this? any aerial ones I can overlay on google earth?
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: staggers
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
frsit psot!!!!!!11
:-) I don't think I have ever speed played except in actual racing games... hrm :-)
Now I have to post the demo!!
That isn't to say they should publish them!
If you want to make claims about how that first replicating organism came about, don't ask an evolutionist, ask a biochemist because it's not what we study nor are particularly interrested in.
Where are you getting this? I am saying that Darwin leaves a space that is conveniently ignored, its like X + 5 = 2, and everyone assumes that X = -3, but noone is sure what values 5 has, or indeed if 2 is the right answer.
I am talking about the disputes 'creationism' and 'evolution' and I stated that evolution did not cover this, YET it is taken that it is.
My goodness, whith a statement like that you just proved that you don't know much about what we're talking about. Please, if a biologist are talking about survival of the fittest then that does not mean survival of the strongest. Please learn the concept of biological "fitness". Look, it's is not meant as an insult, but if you're to talk about fitness in the context of evolution it sure helps to know what that concept is about for another time. Fitness is a key concept in evolutionary theory as it applies to the mechanism of natural selection.
What the hell are you saying - really this paragraph is like you are listening to me here on earth, and replying on some parallel dimension.
My point was to illustrate that although HBombs can cause burns, they are not instrinsically related subject or fields of study.
And then you write, probably the most stuped fucking 'I hope if I say this I will win the point' sentence:
Please, if a biologist are talking about survival of the fittest then that does not mean survival of the strongest
Where the fuck did you pull the rabbit from? Try and stay focussed man, you are wandering all over grasping at straws, or maybe I need to be more clear with my point, because debating with someone who ebbs and flows is not much fun.
We hadn't even disagreed on the concept of fitness, and you start explaining it as if I had SOMEHOW shown that I was ignorant of the concept of fitness. If you must know, this occurs int he plant kingdom, with certain plant varieties are more suited to the conditions, and the animal kingdom where certain strains of butterfly avoid predation because of colour, or now the tuskless Elephant who avoids the hunter.
This is not a sign of evolution, as I stated, a mutation (or use the loaded word 'evolution') in a species, or a conditioning / training, can lead (oh don't fucking pick up the word training and harp on about fittness is not a literal term for athletic fitness, I know you fucking idiot, stay the course of the river (and don't start talking abotu rivers)) to a 'race' between two 'competing' (not actually competing) strains. Anyway, I am sure you are going to start talking about a completely different point, so this feels completely wasted.
This next bit is really telling:
If this was not true then we'd all be standing in a layer of flyshit or dinofecies. What you just said was that since these two facts (variation and fitness) affects "life" then we cannot say they together bring about higher adaptation?! That is like saying that multiplication and addition cannot be used upon numbers at the same time or that gravity and magnetism are mutually exclusive in their effect on objects.
First - you cannot win an argument on evolution, because there is no proof, that is one, stop trying to look at this like a victory - now:
You say 'if that was not true we would all be in fly shit and blah'. So, I can see you must be correct now you have said that.
It is this 'jumping to conclusion' and 'it must be right' that shows you are not keeping an open mind.
The fact that mutations happen, or introduction of a new strain of life to a region, or a change in that regions eco system or climate can bring about symptoms of change in the population (because a new strain is more apt, and this fit, for the conditions) != evolution as the complete theory.
You cannot jump from single celled life to dino
Paying $5mil to get people to enforce your whim, suddenly computerized crime targets OSS DVD players and MythTV media center software.
Hurrah.