The "obvious" thing is that OKCupid is just doing this for publicity anyhow. They're owned by IAC, which has about 50 different brands, including the "competitor" Match.com. Where are the stories about the other IAC brands protesting Eich's views? And wouldn't it be more appropriate for them to advocate not using the language he designed (Javascript), instead of taking the easier road of asking people to get rid of a browser made by a company that he only recently became CEO if?
I think they were probably referring to the 52.24% of the voting population in California that voted "yes" on Prop 8 (with a 79.42% voter turnout). The percentage has changed in the last 5 1/2 years; I doubt that the same law would be able to get a majority in favor of it today.
On the other hand, the US doesn't have any kind of TV licence fee for receiving broadcasts. Terrestrial OTA broadcasts are free but relatively limited in channel selection. I receive broadcasts from LA and can receive perhaps 20 stations. Satellites are more expensive than terrestrial towers though (and provide a much, much larger range of programming), so it makes sense to me that they would have associated subscription costs.
You sound bitter and overly cynical. Companies will certainly pay you less than the profit that you generate for the company, and they'll pay you the minimum that they can to retain you as an employee. Those are givens. That doesn't mean that you're getting fucked. In my case, I expect that I could make more money out on my own, true. But that's with more work, fewer benefits, and taking the risk of failure on myself. I "took what they gave me", have a steady job where I'm doing work that I enjoy, and have more money than I expected to be paid before starting to work. As far as I can see, getting a degree from a public university has helped more than it hurt.
Give virtualization a try, if you don't have spare hardware and don't have a way to get more (we've ordered out-of-production hardware from Ebay before). There are PCIe cards that supply serial ports, and VMWare lets you add things like serial/parallel controllers, mapped to your real hardware. Assuming they've got a disk image of their super-important computer, things shouldn't be too hard to work out.
At most, the school's administration should contact the girl's parents and tell them what they were told. Behavior of children outside of school isn't something that is the school's responsibility to take care of.
The simplest explanation is that your claim isn't a "lie" per se, but that it's also not 100% accurate, and you just got told by someone better-informed and/or more experienced than yourself. It's less likely that you were responded to by a butthurt industry shill still bent out of shape by the idea of you copying tapes in the 90s.
The online etymology dictionary states that using "mall" in the sense of "an enclosed shopping gallery" dates from 1963. Calling that part of DC "The Mall" dates from a map made in 1802.
Well, if you insist on accuracy, you can take it that I mean that the rest of Earth should be wiped out, with the ark builders and phone cleaners as the only survivors. It'd be a bit of irony, if the people with an irrational worldview end up as the ones rebuilding the world.
Graphics are what makes them money; they're what most of the companies compete on. That's the whole point that I've been trying to make. Secondarily, there isn't anything about graphics that *inherently* limit the design of the gameplay elements. Companies take short-cuts to lower costs, not because of some kind of inherent problem of graphical games.
Having more regular geometry allows the program generate more geometry itself and level designer to specify less.
Wait, are you talking about the level designer or the gameplay designer? The person who designs the gameplay mechanics isn't necessarily the one who designs the levels that use the mechanics, and the artist that designs the actual assets that get placed in the level can be a third person (or more likely, a team of people). The actual behavior of a level is implemented as part of the "Model" part of "Model-View-Controller". The appearance is implemented as part of the "View". They're developed separately.
No reason except the requirement to maintain a reasonable framerate.
That isn't what I asked, so I'll rephrase. Dwarf Fortress is a single-threaded application; its world simulation occurs on a single core. In what way am I limiting the gameplay possibilities by using the unused CPU cores to push graphics to a GPU?
There exist some graphics frontends to DF but they definitely don't use photorealistic graphics. And probably they wouldn't be able to get enough art assets for more detailed graphics anyway.
Current graphics frontends for the game wouldn't use photorealistic graphics because they are time-consuming to produce. That's also not what I was asking, but the existence of frontends reinforces the point I was trying to make: The world simulation is completely separate from how that world is displayed. There's no theoretical reason that some AAA game company couldn't make a complex game with deep gameplay and gorgeous graphics to go along with it. The problem is that large companies aren't going to reach in that direction because it's a much riskier business proposition.
It's quite obvious that a level based on tiles is easier to design than a level based on arbitrary geometry.
What does arbitrary geometry have to do with level complexity? My Nintendo 64 featured games with arbitrary geometry, and games with complex level geometry usually feature invisible, lower-resolution collision boxes; from a design perspective, those "are" the level.
How about the entirety of, say, Dwarf Fortress?
Wrong. There's absolutely no reason that the developers couldn't tack on a graphics-based display of the content in the game world, with nearly arbitrary-detail tiles, and there's no way that doing so would limit the underlying game logic. "More triangles per frame" is primarily a function of GPU power, and DF's world runs exclusively on the CPU. The world's CPU-heavy; the graphics are CPU-light and GPU-heavy.
Interesting. It didn't seem odd enough to me to really stand out, but it's also not a construction that I'm particularly likely to use myself. My claim of "North America" was based on an entry in the OED; I reasoned that it would be more likely to point out Americanisms than some other dictionaries would.
Pushing the limits of platform like that will not give you that much of a competitive advantage. But it definitely will require more work that would be better spent focusing on game mechanics proper.
I absolutely disagree with those statements, especially in the context of a PS2-era game. Games absolutely compete on graphics, and as stupid as it is, there flashier games tend to make better sales numbers. Also, graphics programming is a highly-specialized skill; you aren't going to have your graphics whiz handling the design of your game mechanics unless you're a tiny studio.
Due to nature of those worlds built of millions of triangles it becomes harder to design levels which results in shorter games.
Level design doesn't become more difficult, but you have to pay for more artists to design and build the higher-detail game resources (or spend more time with the same number of artists). Difficulty of using the models doesn't necessarily scale up with the complexity of the model geometry.
And game design is an afterthought too. There weren't much progress with it.
Game design on the whole is more complex, but easier to use, than it ever has been.
Power of modern PC could allow huge virtual worlds with complicated,interesting mechanics, but in practice all that power is spent on making world models less efficient for sake of more triangles per frame.
Name a game mechanic that you'd like to see that can't be made purely because the code running the GPU has been optimized. I'll wait.
That's a sloppy, brawn-instead-of-brains way of working, and you're ignoring certain realities of the gaming market. If game developers develop only for the flashiest hardware (high-powered PCs, for instance), then they're abandoning a large demographic of potential customers (the ones that bought lower-level PCs or that are console-only gamers). On the other hand, if they develop a great game for a console but neglect the flashy, performance-requiring parts of the development, they'll be driven out of business by all the other developers that are also putting out great games (but optimized with "hacks" and taking advantage of quirks of the hardware).
As someone who self-taught himself Linux, a competent introductory course would've been great about 13 years ago. Unless you have a lot of time to dedicate to experimentation and a lot of forum-surfing, an organized course of study is the way to go.
Only if the emulator functions as an interpreter. Another faster emulation method is to treat the input data kind of like the source code of another language, and recompile it to native code. That way, long stretches of code can be executed directly, instead of suffering the overhead imposed by interpretation.
Similarly, complex audio processing (like chains of operations being performed on a chunk of audio data) might be more efficient if the library re-compiles chains of functions into a single function. That's probably what the library does.
JIT-compiled audio filters would make sense; Miles does a lot more than audio file decoding, and there would be a performance benefit to allowing games to specify a custom special effects chain that gets compiled on the fly (and maybe frequently modified as the environment in the game changes).
A program without bugs is either trivial or expensive to produce. In most cases, it's not worth the time and money necessary to prove the correctness of a program.
When I think "suburbs", I think single-family homes and a lower population density than the city core. In comparison to cities, suburbs aren't crowded.
Exactly, but only because you had the drive to study and complete your assignments based on understanding, rather than rote memorization. It's easy enough to recognize a pattern in the answers that a professor is looking for and answer as expected without really understanding *why* you're expected to answer that way. Getting through a university with something more valuable than a piece of paper is work.
On the other hand, if you haven't learned hard work and writing before university, then you're less likely to succeed during it. Or, you could be a self-driven student that would learn the material even if they weren't directed by a university curriculum.
Slashdot Mirror
The "obvious" thing is that OKCupid is just doing this for publicity anyhow. They're owned by IAC, which has about 50 different brands, including the "competitor" Match.com. Where are the stories about the other IAC brands protesting Eich's views? And wouldn't it be more appropriate for them to advocate not using the language he designed (Javascript), instead of taking the easier road of asking people to get rid of a browser made by a company that he only recently became CEO if?
I think they were probably referring to the 52.24% of the voting population in California that voted "yes" on Prop 8 (with a 79.42% voter turnout). The percentage has changed in the last 5 1/2 years; I doubt that the same law would be able to get a majority in favor of it today.
On the other hand, the US doesn't have any kind of TV licence fee for receiving broadcasts. Terrestrial OTA broadcasts are free but relatively limited in channel selection. I receive broadcasts from LA and can receive perhaps 20 stations. Satellites are more expensive than terrestrial towers though (and provide a much, much larger range of programming), so it makes sense to me that they would have associated subscription costs.
You sound bitter and overly cynical. Companies will certainly pay you less than the profit that you generate for the company, and they'll pay you the minimum that they can to retain you as an employee. Those are givens. That doesn't mean that you're getting fucked. In my case, I expect that I could make more money out on my own, true. But that's with more work, fewer benefits, and taking the risk of failure on myself. I "took what they gave me", have a steady job where I'm doing work that I enjoy, and have more money than I expected to be paid before starting to work. As far as I can see, getting a degree from a public university has helped more than it hurt.
Give virtualization a try, if you don't have spare hardware and don't have a way to get more (we've ordered out-of-production hardware from Ebay before). There are PCIe cards that supply serial ports, and VMWare lets you add things like serial/parallel controllers, mapped to your real hardware. Assuming they've got a disk image of their super-important computer, things shouldn't be too hard to work out.
At most, the school's administration should contact the girl's parents and tell them what they were told. Behavior of children outside of school isn't something that is the school's responsibility to take care of.
The simplest explanation is that your claim isn't a "lie" per se, but that it's also not 100% accurate, and you just got told by someone better-informed and/or more experienced than yourself. It's less likely that you were responded to by a butthurt industry shill still bent out of shape by the idea of you copying tapes in the 90s.
The online etymology dictionary states that using "mall" in the sense of "an enclosed shopping gallery" dates from 1963. Calling that part of DC "The Mall" dates from a map made in 1802.
Well, if you insist on accuracy, you can take it that I mean that the rest of Earth should be wiped out, with the ark builders and phone cleaners as the only survivors. It'd be a bit of irony, if the people with an irrational worldview end up as the ones rebuilding the world.
Do you know any telephone sanitisers to send on it?
Graphics are what makes them money; they're what most of the companies compete on. That's the whole point that I've been trying to make. Secondarily, there isn't anything about graphics that *inherently* limit the design of the gameplay elements. Companies take short-cuts to lower costs, not because of some kind of inherent problem of graphical games.
Having more regular geometry allows the program generate more geometry itself and level designer to specify less.
Wait, are you talking about the level designer or the gameplay designer? The person who designs the gameplay mechanics isn't necessarily the one who designs the levels that use the mechanics, and the artist that designs the actual assets that get placed in the level can be a third person (or more likely, a team of people). The actual behavior of a level is implemented as part of the "Model" part of "Model-View-Controller". The appearance is implemented as part of the "View". They're developed separately.
No reason except the requirement to maintain a reasonable framerate.
That isn't what I asked, so I'll rephrase. Dwarf Fortress is a single-threaded application; its world simulation occurs on a single core. In what way am I limiting the gameplay possibilities by using the unused CPU cores to push graphics to a GPU?
There exist some graphics frontends to DF but they definitely don't use photorealistic graphics. And probably they wouldn't be able to get enough art assets for more detailed graphics anyway.
Current graphics frontends for the game wouldn't use photorealistic graphics because they are time-consuming to produce. That's also not what I was asking, but the existence of frontends reinforces the point I was trying to make: The world simulation is completely separate from how that world is displayed. There's no theoretical reason that some AAA game company couldn't make a complex game with deep gameplay and gorgeous graphics to go along with it. The problem is that large companies aren't going to reach in that direction because it's a much riskier business proposition.
About all that could be really said is that any damage from sleep deprivation didn't tend to kill our ancestors before they bred.
It's quite obvious that a level based on tiles is easier to design than a level based on arbitrary geometry.
What does arbitrary geometry have to do with level complexity? My Nintendo 64 featured games with arbitrary geometry, and games with complex level geometry usually feature invisible, lower-resolution collision boxes; from a design perspective, those "are" the level.
How about the entirety of, say, Dwarf Fortress?
Wrong. There's absolutely no reason that the developers couldn't tack on a graphics-based display of the content in the game world, with nearly arbitrary-detail tiles, and there's no way that doing so would limit the underlying game logic. "More triangles per frame" is primarily a function of GPU power, and DF's world runs exclusively on the CPU. The world's CPU-heavy; the graphics are CPU-light and GPU-heavy.
Interesting. It didn't seem odd enough to me to really stand out, but it's also not a construction that I'm particularly likely to use myself. My claim of "North America" was based on an entry in the OED; I reasoned that it would be more likely to point out Americanisms than some other dictionaries would.
It's only "bizarre non-standard" outside of North America. Does it surprise you that American English has differences from the other English dialects?
Pushing the limits of platform like that will not give you that much of a competitive advantage. But it definitely will require more work that would be better spent focusing on game mechanics proper.
I absolutely disagree with those statements, especially in the context of a PS2-era game. Games absolutely compete on graphics, and as stupid as it is, there flashier games tend to make better sales numbers. Also, graphics programming is a highly-specialized skill; you aren't going to have your graphics whiz handling the design of your game mechanics unless you're a tiny studio.
Due to nature of those worlds built of millions of triangles it becomes harder to design levels which results in shorter games.
Level design doesn't become more difficult, but you have to pay for more artists to design and build the higher-detail game resources (or spend more time with the same number of artists). Difficulty of using the models doesn't necessarily scale up with the complexity of the model geometry.
And game design is an afterthought too. There weren't much progress with it.
Game design on the whole is more complex, but easier to use, than it ever has been.
Power of modern PC could allow huge virtual worlds with complicated,interesting mechanics, but in practice all that power is spent on making world models less efficient for sake of more triangles per frame.
Name a game mechanic that you'd like to see that can't be made purely because the code running the GPU has been optimized. I'll wait.
That's a sloppy, brawn-instead-of-brains way of working, and you're ignoring certain realities of the gaming market. If game developers develop only for the flashiest hardware (high-powered PCs, for instance), then they're abandoning a large demographic of potential customers (the ones that bought lower-level PCs or that are console-only gamers). On the other hand, if they develop a great game for a console but neglect the flashy, performance-requiring parts of the development, they'll be driven out of business by all the other developers that are also putting out great games (but optimized with "hacks" and taking advantage of quirks of the hardware).
Also, steam runs on iOS, and can't install any games at all.
The mobile Steam app (it's on Android too) clearly isn't "Steam" in the same sense that the Windows/OSX/Linux versions are.
As someone who self-taught himself Linux, a competent introductory course would've been great about 13 years ago. Unless you have a lot of time to dedicate to experimentation and a lot of forum-surfing, an organized course of study is the way to go.
What they run is considered data by the OS.
Only if the emulator functions as an interpreter. Another faster emulation method is to treat the input data kind of like the source code of another language, and recompile it to native code. That way, long stretches of code can be executed directly, instead of suffering the overhead imposed by interpretation.
Similarly, complex audio processing (like chains of operations being performed on a chunk of audio data) might be more efficient if the library re-compiles chains of functions into a single function. That's probably what the library does.
JIT-compiled audio filters would make sense; Miles does a lot more than audio file decoding, and there would be a performance benefit to allowing games to specify a custom special effects chain that gets compiled on the fly (and maybe frequently modified as the environment in the game changes).
A program without bugs is either trivial or expensive to produce. In most cases, it's not worth the time and money necessary to prove the correctness of a program.
When I think "suburbs", I think single-family homes and a lower population density than the city core. In comparison to cities, suburbs aren't crowded.
Exactly, but only because you had the drive to study and complete your assignments based on understanding, rather than rote memorization. It's easy enough to recognize a pattern in the answers that a professor is looking for and answer as expected without really understanding *why* you're expected to answer that way. Getting through a university with something more valuable than a piece of paper is work.
On the other hand, if you haven't learned hard work and writing before university, then you're less likely to succeed during it. Or, you could be a self-driven student that would learn the material even if they weren't directed by a university curriculum.