I agree mostly but you really describe the consequence of a real problem. The basic problem with the battlebots is that they're just too damn err... strong. Who needs that manipulator you describe if just hacking and bludgeoning is more effective? I would suggest introducing some restrictions on the bots' armor strength so that using brute force would damage the aggressor itself (if you use force too excessively of course), thus promoting use of more sophisticated devices and algorithms in the bot construction.
As to our 'bot-of-the-day' it is just another hard thing bashing on its opponent. Also, I just don't see anything special in using some math software for designing it. After all most engineers calculate their inventions before building them.
I agree. Making it look a catastrophe just because it came inside of the orbit of our natural satellite. What next? "A near miss: an asteroid came into Voyager's orbit" ?
While you try to figure out the obvious, we here in Russia do it all the time, assembling our boxes ourselves. Even software company I work for have a couple of assembly men to do the job. That's just plain cheaper several times and you know what is inside and you have no stupid problems with warranty. I remember we had one 486 box from Acer (management mistake) It was as expensive as a Pentium box and we simply couldn't even add extra memory cause the SIMMs was bolted to the slots! To hell with the shops selling computers they are just plain ripping you off.
And still we have warranty for each single detail so we don't suffer from occasional accidents with hardware.
And yes, we assemble our production web and DB servers ourselves too. And no problems yet.
Oh, how I love those geeks who cheerfully pirate mp3s and warez, support p2p networks and such and then when somebody absolutely legally take their puclicly distributed content they raise that fuss all over Slashdot. Come to think of it "archives are like SPAM" !!! Even RIAA speaking heads haven't come to such a ridiculous formula.
The products are even less buggy than others, in terms of per capita usage, Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer has said.
So does that mean that because more people use Microsoft software they can have more bugs in it? This sort of statistic is like using "Revenue over number of employees named Frank" as an accounting measure for companies!
I suppose that they think that the more people write code the more bugs there should be because everyone introduces his own bugs, so 'per capita less buggy' may mean each programmer started to make less bugs.
Anyway this statistic is not really good news because there still a lotof bugs by number of programmers.
And by Goedel law every model is either incomplete or self-contadictory. Since such simulation is supposed to be a model, it would be incomplete anyway leave alone self-contradictory which we wouldn't allow.
Go ahead. You can even use Mozart and Britney Spears in your example. No matter what you say, it comes down to personal opinion. If I like superficial teenage pop better than complex heart-wrenching orchestrations, then pop is better. It's all relative.
Well, for starters I'd take originality. There is no, and never will be, a second Mozart. But there are lotsa "Bretney Spears'es" - Jessica Simpson, Jennifer Lopez etc. Without proper marketing they're NOTHING. No one of my friends and other people who I know can distinguish between our "pop stars" just by listening to their song.
Listen to weather forecasts and have your balloons ready to down for safety
Lightning? Sure, they don't hit a high enough balloon but they do hit the cables quite hard.
Well, that's just additional electricity. Make a good use of it!:-)
Also... doesn't that make things a little difficult for air traffic? How about shading if you've got that many balloons (or kites) up?
Yeah that's right. I think it could be resolved by making balloon-free air-corridors
Re:Doesn't the earth receive more?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 0
1. There is weather here, making a project like that demand huge ongoing costs. Rain/Snow/Wind/Erosion are all very powerful forces.
Balloons
2. People don't want 100 miles of solar panels...anywhere, it doesn't matter if we try to stick them in texas/Arizona, they will still be in somebodies backyard. And those people won't want them there.
Balloons
3. Power distribution will kill you, a massive project like this in Arizona will really (at the very most) just help North America. And that wouldn't be exactly great PR would it?
A balloon in your backyard
4. Building Phase. The building of something like this would require enormous amounts of materials to be shipped somewhere. And that somewhere wouldn't like the 20 semi's going by every 20 minutes.
Balloons
5. If we don't want the world to stay as it is, 1 Super-Power/100 Little Powers/1,000 Crappy Third world nations where people still die of the plague, something like this needs to be built. We need a worldwide energy distribution net so that third world countries don't feel that to succedde they need to cut down all their trees for power plants and strip mine themselves to death.
Why the hell do you need that 'power distribution'? Make a lot of efficient local power stations. And, of course balloons
6. We have a atmosphere so the efficiency of power per square foot generated would be much lower then it would be on the moon.
Balloons is answer to that one, too.
More seriously, what I propose is to make lotsa saucer shaped balloons filled with helium or hydrogen clad with solar cells on top side and a cable on the bottom side and launch 'em high above the clouds and ozone layer. The only drawback is a ~30 km long power cord:-)
Actually, no selectivity here. In both cases the government is guilty in working in favor of big corporations (read: money) against the public. It's the public who suffers from fat M$ and again it's the public who suffers from that media tax. So a good government must really do more in genereal public favor.
The truth is that the one, and the only problem here is in the player's head. And the second part is in the item farmer's head. Everything one should understand is that it is a GAME. It is not real. No swords of Ultimate Chaos. No Rings of Invisibility. And that all of it was made up by the game designers for fun (for the player's fun, I mean) So it is NOT RIGHT to profit from item farming. That's all. Like I am a programmer and I will never work as a salesperson because it is NOT RIGHT for me.
And yes, I think Mythic is right. Aside from ethical issues, the item trading disrupt game balance and makes it less fun. Also I think the game items belong to them (not players) and they may do whatever they want even block online auctions.
Your point may be right in an ideal market where there are a lot of firms and their competition is regulated only by their price politics. But in the real world we have such nasty things like monopolies, you know. Doesn't M$ use aggressive advertising politics, FUD, buying competitors and such? Wouldn't you be willing to pay a $1000000 for the very last piece of food in the world?
I think moderators don't have a clue.
The parent post is not just 'funny'.
Have you thought about consequences of this epic battle MS vs AOL for the consumer majority?
In my world business is for the body while art is for the soul, as simple as that. I won't die without my favourite music however I'll eventually get bored:-)
regarding the "ugly monsters" such as Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys, they exist only because consumers are willing to pay the prices
You're right but you missed my point.
Britney Spears was created for profit, aggressively advertised and sold to millions of kids. No different from M$ products when we have clueless listeners kids or teenagers. Compare to an average home wife using Windows.
Culture is no different from industry from the point of education. We may have different tastes but we should be able to divide good from bad.
Besides, britney's existence isn't denying you from other music
Right, just like no one denying me from using Linux while there are huge advertisement campaings around which promote M$ products:-\
Well, a real artist gets pleasure from making a piece of art itself and doesn't care about money. I'd say even more - money kills art. As I could observe quite alot of good artists succumb to profits and lose quality.
Yeah, here we can see the corruption of the whole system. The system itself is wrong. Cinema/music/etc is art, not business. When we see it as business we get such ugly monsters in music like Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys and Metallica (late Metallica that is) and even uglier monsters in cinema like Godzilla (american one), Pearl Harbor and such... Cool technology poor quality. Just to get a lot of money. No heart, no soul just BILLIONS of dollars:-(
Oh, I'd like the USA to pass this law. This will move software development to other countries which deserve to have better technology leaving the USA with monopolistic m$ and its bugs.
Slashdot Mirror
As to our 'bot-of-the-day' it is just another hard thing bashing on its opponent. Also, I just don't see anything special in using some math software for designing it. After all most engineers calculate their inventions before building them.
Technically, yes. But I don't think an object about 100 meters in size could be called a 'moon'. We don't call the ISS 'an artifical moon' :-)
I agree. Making it look a catastrophe just because it came inside of the orbit of our natural satellite. What next? "A near miss: an asteroid came into Voyager's orbit" ?
And still we have warranty for each single detail so we don't suffer from occasional accidents with hardware.
And yes, we assemble our production web and DB servers ourselves too. And no problems yet.
Oh, how I love those geeks who cheerfully pirate mp3s and warez, support p2p networks and such and then when somebody absolutely legally take their puclicly distributed content they raise that fuss all over Slashdot. Come to think of it "archives are like SPAM" !!! Even RIAA speaking heads haven't come to such a ridiculous formula.
Too bad for companies not that bad for Linux.
There are lotsa developers around the world, and anyway linux will remain on my hard drive.
BTW, Red Hat is a crappy distro and their RPM's are a pain in the @$$. Long live the TarBall!!!
So does that mean that because more people use Microsoft software they can have more bugs in it? This sort of statistic is like using "Revenue over number of employees named Frank" as an accounting measure for companies!
I suppose that they think that the more people write code the more bugs there should be because everyone introduces his own bugs, so 'per capita less buggy' may mean each programmer started to make less bugs.
Anyway this statistic is not really good news because there still a lotof bugs by number of programmers.
And by Goedel law every model is either incomplete or self-contadictory. Since such simulation is supposed to be a model, it would be incomplete anyway leave alone self-contradictory which we wouldn't allow.
Go ahead. You can even use Mozart and Britney Spears in your example. No matter what you say, it comes down to personal opinion. If I like superficial teenage pop better than complex heart-wrenching orchestrations, then pop is better. It's all relative.
Well, for starters I'd take originality. There is no, and never will be, a second Mozart. But there are lotsa "Bretney Spears'es" - Jessica Simpson, Jennifer Lopez etc. Without proper marketing they're NOTHING. No one of my friends and other people who I know can distinguish between our "pop stars" just by listening to their song.
Tornado? Cyclone? Hurricane? Hypercane? Willy-willy?
Listen to weather forecasts and have your balloons ready to down for safety
Lightning? Sure, they don't hit a high enough balloon but they do hit the cables quite hard.
Well, that's just additional electricity. Make a good use of it! :-)
Also... doesn't that make things a little difficult for air traffic? How about shading if you've got that many balloons (or kites) up?
Yeah that's right. I think it could be resolved by making balloon-free air-corridors
Balloons
2. People don't want 100 miles of solar panels...anywhere, it doesn't matter if we try to stick them in texas/Arizona, they will still be in somebodies backyard. And those people won't want them there.
Balloons
3. Power distribution will kill you, a massive project like this in Arizona will really (at the very most) just help North America. And that wouldn't be exactly great PR would it?
A balloon in your backyard
4. Building Phase. The building of something like this would require enormous amounts of materials to be shipped somewhere. And that somewhere wouldn't like the 20 semi's going by every 20 minutes.
Balloons
5. If we don't want the world to stay as it is, 1 Super-Power/100 Little Powers/1,000 Crappy Third world nations where people still die of the plague, something like this needs to be built. We need a worldwide energy distribution net so that third world countries don't feel that to succedde they need to cut down all their trees for power plants and strip mine themselves to death.
Why the hell do you need that 'power distribution'? Make a lot of efficient local power stations. And, of course balloons
6. We have a atmosphere so the efficiency of power per square foot generated would be much lower then it would be on the moon.
Balloons is answer to that one, too.
More seriously, what I propose is to make lotsa saucer shaped balloons filled with helium or hydrogen clad with solar cells on top side and a cable on the bottom side and launch 'em high above the clouds and ozone layer. The only drawback is a ~30 km long power cord :-)
Because it gets mp3's without having a storage itself :-)
Check out a recent story
I think 'brotherly love' and 'five centuries of peace' is more valuable than any Renaissance. I'd like them all combined, though.
By following this logic we will soon get the market without any ready to use products but with just made-it-yourself kits
Actually, no selectivity here. In both cases the government is guilty in working in favor of big corporations (read: money) against the public. It's the public who suffers from fat M$ and again it's the public who suffers from that media tax. So a good government must really do more in genereal public favor.
Hey, and what about our friendly Linux mascots living in Antarctic?!
That is why they use an infrared laser. The ray will just melt away the ice and evaporate any rain in the way! Infrared light carries heat, remember?
And yes, I think Mythic is right. Aside from ethical issues, the item trading disrupt game balance and makes it less fun. Also I think the game items belong to them (not players) and they may do whatever they want even block online auctions.
Your point may be right in an ideal market where there are a lot of firms and their competition is regulated only by their price politics. But in the real world we have such nasty things like monopolies, you know. Doesn't M$ use aggressive advertising politics, FUD, buying competitors and such? Wouldn't you be willing to pay a $1000000 for the very last piece of food in the world?
That's just your capitalistic thoughts. In the land of the capital everything is money.
I think moderators don't have a clue.
The parent post is not just 'funny'.
Have you thought about consequences of this epic battle MS vs AOL for the consumer majority?
In my world business is for the body while art is for the soul, as simple as that. I won't die without my favourite music however I'll eventually get bored :-)
regarding the "ugly monsters" such as Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys, they exist only because consumers are willing to pay the prices
You're right but you missed my point. Britney Spears was created for profit, aggressively advertised and sold to millions of kids. No different from M$ products when we have clueless listeners kids or teenagers. Compare to an average home wife using Windows.
Culture is no different from industry from the point of education. We may have different tastes but we should be able to divide good from bad.
Besides, britney's existence isn't denying you from other music
Right, just like no one denying me from using Linux while there are huge advertisement campaings around which promote M$ products :-\
Well, a real artist gets pleasure from making a piece of art itself and doesn't care about money. I'd say even more - money kills art. As I could observe quite alot of good artists succumb to profits and lose quality.
Yeah, here we can see the corruption of the whole system. The system itself is wrong. Cinema/music/etc is art, not business. When we see it as business we get such ugly monsters in music like Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys and Metallica (late Metallica that is) and even uglier monsters in cinema like Godzilla (american one), Pearl Harbor and such... Cool technology poor quality. Just to get a lot of money. No heart, no soul just BILLIONS of dollars :-(
Oh, I'd like the USA to pass this law. This will move software development to other countries which deserve to have better technology leaving the USA with monopolistic m$ and its bugs.