I can't believe I just wasted a minute of my life trying to play that. It's really just another argument for why Flash should be fucking illegal. That was the worst thing I've played in a year.
The Internet and Jade Raymond. Yeah, it's obvious she's quite an attractive woman, and when I realized she would be attached at the hip to one of the most high-profile releases of the year, I assumed there would be the usual sexist comments on the Internet, but nothing could have prepared me for the ridiculous amount of cruelty, sexism and misogyny displayed during the launch of Assassin's Creed. I'd like to think the Internet isn't comprised almost entirely of 14-year-old misanthropes, but based on the unmentionable events surrounding that game, I could be wrong.
Linux has a database like filesystem (Reiserfs) No, it has no such thing. Reiserfs is not database-like in any way, and it is nothing like WinFS was supposed to be.
Texture size does not affect rendering speed on a low-cache architecture like the old Pentiums, or the mobile ARMs. Modern games still use pre-calculated visibility with BSP trees and the like, and pre-calculated lighting (which does not use the BSP tree). Those are totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand, too.
A phone is not going to be doing complex 3D for anything but games. At the most, it will use 2D scaling and rotation, and some alpha blends. Depending on display bit depths and resolutions, that may be entirely doable on a 200 MHz processor with properly optimized code, like they apparently claim to have.
Who is harmed if I speed?? The people you crash into when your useless, over-confident ass loses control over your car when you enter a situation you did not expect at too high speed.
"Most beautiful"? It's the most realistic portrayal of a video game ever, perhaps. It definitely isn't very beautiful, nor does it look all that much like the real world.
Uh, with Perl being one of the few scripting languages out there that even have something like use strict, I'd say it's one of the least likely ones to confuse variables in.
It is not specifically that the gears don't work. It's that the gears break the illusion of it being a Victorian piece of hardware. I can easily tell you how to improve it: Just remove the gears entirely. They only distract from the whole.
Thanks for supplying the big words. That is exactly what I meant, but I do indeed not have much a grounding in the theoretic discussion of aesthetics, so I lacked the vocabulary to express it properly.
If you actually went back and read what I said, you would have seen that I called it beautiful. It's simply that the crudity and tackiness of the cover is such a stark contrast to the beauty of the rest of it that causes me to react so hard to it. If he had just left the cover an empty plate of wood, it would have been a much better work overall, for instance.
Dude, that's the most childish argument on the internet. Please don't make it around grown-ups, OK?
You can judge a book without being able to write one. You can judge a building without being an architect. You can judge a meal without being able to cook it.
And "it's too hard" is not an excuse for doing a poor job. If it's too hard to do it right, don't bother doing it. Make something else that actually looks good.
Sorry, I do know art. I know it well enough that I also know that it goes deeper than simple looks. Which is all this is, disregarding all but the most shallow features of what it tries to replicate, ending up as mockery instead of an homage.
It really is a shame to put that much effort into making something, and then totally ruining it with that cover, that just screams that the creator knows nothing about how clockwork actually works. It really is kind of an eyesore on an otherwise beautiful piece of work.
Whether you set up the process with electronic voting or you use old fashioned paper slips, someone somewhere can either cause votes to disappear or have extra votes sent to a certain candidate. It doesn't matter what system is in place. Yes, it does matter what system is in place. Namely, the system where elections are handled by volunteers, and you never leave any part of the process in the hand of a single person, nor do you let people pick their own tasks. You just make sure that chances are that there is always one honest person in place at each step.
And you have routines in place for dealing with what happens if votes are lost in an accident, such as re-doing the election.
This isn't difficult stuff, it's been worked out centuries ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't believe I just wasted a minute of my life trying to play that. It's really just another argument for why Flash should be fucking illegal. That was the worst thing I've played in a year.
I'd like to think the Internet isn't comprised almost entirely of 14-year-old misanthropes, but based on the unmentionable events surrounding that game, I could be wrong.
Texture size does not affect rendering speed on a low-cache architecture like the old Pentiums, or the mobile ARMs. Modern games still use pre-calculated visibility with BSP trees and the like, and pre-calculated lighting (which does not use the BSP tree). Those are totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand, too.
A phone is not going to be doing complex 3D for anything but games. At the most, it will use 2D scaling and rotation, and some alpha blends. Depending on display bit depths and resolutions, that may be entirely doable on a 200 MHz processor with properly optimized code, like they apparently claim to have.
Unless of course you'd be OK with putting up cameras on all roads, everywhere.
So tell us then, Mr. Genius, how you will prove in a court of law that someone was speeding when they killed someone else in an accident?
And, you know, there's the minor matter of how increasing penalties doesn't really have much of an effect as a deterrent in the first place.
Any other dumbass questions?
It may have talked, but it sure couldn't tell a joke.
"Most beautiful"? It's the most realistic portrayal of a video game ever, perhaps. It definitely isn't very beautiful, nor does it look all that much like the real world.
Yes, burn the heretic!
Uh, with Perl being one of the few scripting languages out there that even have something like use strict, I'd say it's one of the least likely ones to confuse variables in.
Man, am I ever regretting posting this. Just look at the kind of utter idiocy this post spawned.
Funny how the word changes from "features" to "skills" when the machine becomes humanoid.
It is not specifically that the gears don't work. It's that the gears break the illusion of it being a Victorian piece of hardware. I can easily tell you how to improve it: Just remove the gears entirely. They only distract from the whole.
Plus, what this guy said: http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=390610&cid=21721994
And that was a big mistake. He should have scrapped the clockwork idea entirely, and the result would have been much more pleasing.
Thanks for supplying the big words. That is exactly what I meant, but I do indeed not have much a grounding in the theoretic discussion of aesthetics, so I lacked the vocabulary to express it properly.
So what is this now, a pissing contest? I'm pretty sure I've accomplished a fair bit more than you, if that's what you're wondering.
If you actually went back and read what I said, you would have seen that I called it beautiful. It's simply that the crudity and tackiness of the cover is such a stark contrast to the beauty of the rest of it that causes me to react so hard to it. If he had just left the cover an empty plate of wood, it would have been a much better work overall, for instance.
And the true sign of the incompetent: mocking others for having knowledge.
PS: Try re-reading that discussion. I am not the one who bought up art, nor the one who implied that knowledge of art make a person somehow superior.
Anybody who knows how a gear or ratchet works?
What is this, a defence of the lowest common denominator?
Dude, that's the most childish argument on the internet. Please don't make it around grown-ups, OK?
You can judge a book without being able to write one. You can judge a building without being an architect. You can judge a meal without being able to cook it.
And "it's too hard" is not an excuse for doing a poor job. If it's too hard to do it right, don't bother doing it. Make something else that actually looks good.
Sorry, I do know art. I know it well enough that I also know that it goes deeper than simple looks. Which is all this is, disregarding all but the most shallow features of what it tries to replicate, ending up as mockery instead of an homage.
It really is a shame to put that much effort into making something, and then totally ruining it with that cover, that just screams that the creator knows nothing about how clockwork actually works. It really is kind of an eyesore on an otherwise beautiful piece of work.
And you have routines in place for dealing with what happens if votes are lost in an accident, such as re-doing the election.
This isn't difficult stuff, it's been worked out centuries ago.
True, but that is a completely different effect, and the two can't be easily compared.