Not even trying to be WoW, I think you mean. All of the SOE games have been resting on the laurels of Everquest's engine for years, with the exception, perhaps, of space combat added eventually in Star Wars Online. The game worlds show little in the way of ongoing development that would justify even a portion of the subscription fees. If they phased out characters from TMO, it's probably because they paid royalties initially to make the game sound good, but as usual, were counting on the community of players to keep other people playing. Screw that.
This was exactly my thought watching the video. I'd love to make this my default search engine. However, it doesn't seem to be QUITE there yet. For example, if I search for my name, it throws in people with the same forename, but different surnames. The semantic stuff they've done beyond normal search is GREAT, but they seem to have slacked off a bit on making the plain old search stuff work well enough. Shame, as it would have easily been the successor to google for me otherwise.
Still, I'm definitely going to play with this more, and see if I can get enough mileage out of it. It's not like google doesn't mix in things you didn't ask for I suppose, and part of the fun of the web is finding things you never expected.
I don't know why but their presentation pisses me off beyond reason.
Because you're unreasonable?;)
Personally, I think it's pretty great. There have been lots of attempts at a semantic search engine, but this one looks usable. Unless it does very unpleasant things, it's going to be my default search engine from now on. The semantic web has been a long time coming, but for me, it's finally arrived.
This shouldn't come as a surprise, since most people still don't understand how viewing a website can affect their computer.
Exactly. All of this is pro-level (or at least prosumer-level) stuff. We need to stop expecting users to know or care about technical issues. But more importantly, we need users to stop expecting to be able to do it themselves. The average user doesn't try to fix their own car; instead, they call a mechanic when they need help. They should be just as willing to call a pro when they have viruses, and to listen to a pro about browser choices etc., just like when a mechanic tells them to stop driving over broken glass.
The point is that, with hard AI, a new generation of programming language (and/or user interface) becomes available: the generation usually referred to as DWIM -- Do What I Mean. In other words, when a computer fully understands you, programming a computer would be as simple as saying "I'm going to dictate a letter before I fall asleep. It's a work letter, so lay it out and print it whatever way is appropriate. And make sure it sounds professional for me. You know how I am with letters. OK, let's see..."
should commercial distributors of free software, such as CheapBytes, be required to complete all 23 localizations before selling one copy to an EU resident? Second, should struggling independent developers of casual video games be required to wait six months for translations to be completed before they can release their product as shareware?
CheapBytes and similar organisations are a tough one, yes. They're not so relevant now for most, but at one time, CheapBytes was an important service for me. Nonetheless, they are commercial, and I believe that gives them a bit more responsibility to (re-)invest in the society that provides their provides.
Second, should struggling independent developers of casual video games be required to wait six months for translations to be completed before they can release their product as shareware?
Well, what is the real issue here? Is it that the small independent developers are struggling, or that they're competing against large almost-monopolies? This is where I feel subsidies, anti-trust law, and similar support should for small producers should come in. I'm a big believer in fixing the underlying bug, rather than applying bandaids to the obvious service issue. It does tend to raise big questions that aren't often popular to discuss, it's true.
And yes, I'm not always with the libertarians here:)
Whenever they solve a problem, the answer is declared by the world at large to be "obvious" and the solution mechanism "obviously not real intelligence because I'm sure I don't do that when solving that problem", or "just brute forcing it" or "just a load of mathematics".
Yep, and it says nothing about AI, but much about human fears. The exact same arguments are made against animals being truly intelligent or having emotions, despite many animals displaying intelligent, playful, fun behaviour, crying when they're left alone, etc. Likewise, the same arguments were made in the past against black slaves being equal to "civilised white people". People just don't want to admit that there's a new reality coming, and they have big questions to face.
If we had true AI today, it would only be able to exist in software form...toys like Asimo can barely walk,
Err.. it's precisely because we don't have true AI yet that such robots aren't perfectly able to walk. However, that's rapidly changing, with things like BigDog, ASIMO II, military grade exoskeletons, and planes/drones that fly with AI. Then there are projects like the semantic web putting all the knowledge bases in place.
If you aren't seeing any progress towards real AI, you're not paying attention.
If you were developing free software in Europe, would you want the law to require all software published by a European entity to come with translations into all 23 languages of the European Union, even at version 0.01?
Free Software is different, imho. The software is offered to all. Freedom is given to create ANY translation, even for the most obscure languages. Also, clearly, it's a community effort to build the software, so asking the community to contribute to the translations as and when they can is no different. But for commercial software, which creates a have/have not scenario simply by charging for the software, often creates lock-in from its file formats, and is publicised as a service to all in a market... yes, at least at version 1.0, I'd expect the vast majority of languages to be covered, even if it required social subsidies to do it.
EFIGS (English, French, Italian, German, Spanish) version has never been more than about 1 month after the English release.
Technically, those languages are all easy enough. When you get into Arabic and Chinese, things may be a bit harder. But yes, if it's all developed properly with awareness and experience of the issues, there's no reason the translation process should take longer than (initial_play_through + translate + test) time.
However, your point about other languages being able to ship on "almost" the same date... why discriminate? Why isn't localisation considered part of the actual development process, just like user interface design, graphics, music, etc.? There'll probably be a lawsuit for this sort of discrimination one day, so you'd be better taking the lead by changing your ways voluntarily, as soon as possible.
This could be the most obvious article I've ever seen posted on/.
There are interesting things about localization, such as not being able to write the message like:
print greeting + " " + greetee
because in other languages, the greetee might come before the greeting. Instead, you have to make sure your app is coded to work with full sentences, using something like:
Likewise, issues like presenting dates, times, and currencies in local formats are interesting. But this article superficially ignores that stuff. Instead, it seems to be an advert along the lines of "we do good localised ports. Let us do your next game."
Which is great for a young programmer, in that they can get into the code, find something they want to change or improve, type a couple of lines and hit "Refresh". They've just done something, in seconds.
True enough, yes. Webpages are one of the few modern parts of computing that can still be easily done by a kid writing his/her first "Hello World" app. Combined with a quick lesson in the power of CSS for changing background colors etc., it's probably your best bet as a starting point that kids actually recognise as a viable project.
This kind of immediate gratification can't be overstated for young kids, no matter what skill they're trying to acquire.
Actually, I suspect that raising our kids to expect instant gratification is what turns then on to drugs etc., and turns them off working hard for rewards, sticking with a healthy eating/exercise program, etc. As Linus would say, "Immediate gratification is a disease."
nothing wrong with PHP. Actually it has an advantage, in that so many open source Web toolkits are written in PHP.
PHP runs per-page, like old-fashioned CGI, rather than as an application. Running a new web app for every page is insane, even if you're keeping the PHP instance itself around. Check out some of the independent benchmarks comparing PHP web frameworks with just about any other web framework.
Three words that destroy any possibility of intelligent design: Recurrent laryngeal nerve
I think, if you try to argue this with creationists, you'll probably hear that it's very intelligent to design it that way, because it gives us some imperfections to make us more humble.
Slashdot Mirror
Not even trying to be WoW, I think you mean. All of the SOE games have been resting on the laurels of Everquest's engine for years, with the exception, perhaps, of space combat added eventually in Star Wars Online. The game worlds show little in the way of ongoing development that would justify even a portion of the subscription fees. If they phased out characters from TMO, it's probably because they paid royalties initially to make the game sound good, but as usual, were counting on the community of players to keep other people playing. Screw that.
This was exactly my thought watching the video. I'd love to make this my default search engine. However, it doesn't seem to be QUITE there yet. For example, if I search for my name, it throws in people with the same forename, but different surnames. The semantic stuff they've done beyond normal search is GREAT, but they seem to have slacked off a bit on making the plain old search stuff work well enough. Shame, as it would have easily been the successor to google for me otherwise.
Still, I'm definitely going to play with this more, and see if I can get enough mileage out of it. It's not like google doesn't mix in things you didn't ask for I suppose, and part of the fun of the web is finding things you never expected.
Because you're unreasonable? ;)
Personally, I think it's pretty great. There have been lots of attempts at a semantic search engine, but this one looks usable. Unless it does very unpleasant things, it's going to be my default search engine from now on. The semantic web has been a long time coming, but for me, it's finally arrived.
I wonder how you could ever tell a semantic search engine that you wanted the history of the idiom itself.
Probably much more easily than with Google. If you want to look up the etymology of "used to", a query like:
And it would complete your "sentence" by finding the value of "?".
If they think September was bad due to Uni's, they'll really hate it when we have neural interfaces, and a baby boom kicks off.
Exactly. All of this is pro-level (or at least prosumer-level) stuff. We need to stop expecting users to know or care about technical issues. But more importantly, we need users to stop expecting to be able to do it themselves. The average user doesn't try to fix their own car; instead, they call a mechanic when they need help. They should be just as willing to call a pro when they have viruses, and to listen to a pro about browser choices etc., just like when a mechanic tells them to stop driving over broken glass.
The point is that, with hard AI, a new generation of programming language (and/or user interface) becomes available: the generation usually referred to as DWIM -- Do What I Mean. In other words, when a computer fully understands you, programming a computer would be as simple as saying "I'm going to dictate a letter before I fall asleep. It's a work letter, so lay it out and print it whatever way is appropriate. And make sure it sounds professional for me. You know how I am with letters. OK, let's see..."
Actually, I believe they were referring to this incident:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQL_4acR6hM
Yeah, I never liked ASP either. And that was BEFORE dot-net.
CheapBytes and similar organisations are a tough one, yes. They're not so relevant now for most, but at one time, CheapBytes was an important service for me. Nonetheless, they are commercial, and I believe that gives them a bit more responsibility to (re-)invest in the society that provides their provides.
Well, what is the real issue here? Is it that the small independent developers are struggling, or that they're competing against large almost-monopolies? This is where I feel subsidies, anti-trust law, and similar support should for small producers should come in. I'm a big believer in fixing the underlying bug, rather than applying bandaids to the obvious service issue. It does tend to raise big questions that aren't often popular to discuss, it's true.
And yes, I'm not always with the libertarians here :)
Really? You mean... Europe ISN'T just a small fishing village on some remote island after all? ;)
Good points, well made. ...in theory ;)
Yep, and it says nothing about AI, but much about human fears. The exact same arguments are made against animals being truly intelligent or having emotions, despite many animals displaying intelligent, playful, fun behaviour, crying when they're left alone, etc. Likewise, the same arguments were made in the past against black slaves being equal to "civilised white people". People just don't want to admit that there's a new reality coming, and they have big questions to face.
Err.. it's precisely because we don't have true AI yet that such robots aren't perfectly able to walk. However, that's rapidly changing, with things like BigDog, ASIMO II, military grade exoskeletons, and planes/drones that fly with AI. Then there are projects like the semantic web putting all the knowledge bases in place.
If you aren't seeing any progress towards real AI, you're not paying attention.
I think you'll find that "pipe dream" refers to the process of dreaming of lofty notions whilst giving yourself cancer ;)
Free Software is different, imho. The software is offered to all. Freedom is given to create ANY translation, even for the most obscure languages. Also, clearly, it's a community effort to build the software, so asking the community to contribute to the translations as and when they can is no different. But for commercial software, which creates a have/have not scenario simply by charging for the software, often creates lock-in from its file formats, and is publicised as a service to all in a market... yes, at least at version 1.0, I'd expect the vast majority of languages to be covered, even if it required social subsidies to do it.
But then, I'm not much of a capitalist ;)
Technically, those languages are all easy enough. When you get into Arabic and Chinese, things may be a bit harder. But yes, if it's all developed properly with awareness and experience of the issues, there's no reason the translation process should take longer than (initial_play_through + translate + test) time.
However, your point about other languages being able to ship on "almost" the same date... why discriminate? Why isn't localisation considered part of the actual development process, just like user interface design, graphics, music, etc.? There'll probably be a lawsuit for this sort of discrimination one day, so you'd be better taking the lead by changing your ways voluntarily, as soon as possible.
This could be the most obvious article I've ever seen posted on /.
There are interesting things about localization, such as not being able to write the message like:
because in other languages, the greetee might come before the greeting. Instead, you have to make sure your app is coded to work with full sentences, using something like:
Likewise, issues like presenting dates, times, and currencies in local formats are interesting. But this article superficially ignores that stuff. Instead, it seems to be an advert along the lines of "we do good localised ports. Let us do your next game."
I know. In this day and age, you'd expect a ZX Spectrum, at least.
True enough, yes. Webpages are one of the few modern parts of computing that can still be easily done by a kid writing his/her first "Hello World" app. Combined with a quick lesson in the power of CSS for changing background colors etc., it's probably your best bet as a starting point that kids actually recognise as a viable project.
Actually, I suspect that raising our kids to expect instant gratification is what turns then on to drugs etc., and turns them off working hard for rewards, sticking with a healthy eating/exercise program, etc. As Linus would say, "Immediate gratification is a disease."
PHP runs per-page, like old-fashioned CGI, rather than as an application. Running a new web app for every page is insane, even if you're keeping the PHP instance itself around. Check out some of the independent benchmarks comparing PHP web frameworks with just about any other web framework.
Perhaps because it's only an asshole ;)
I was with you right up until:
I think, if you try to argue this with creationists, you'll probably hear that it's very intelligent to design it that way, because it gives us some imperfections to make us more humble.
You're a scientologist, aren't you? ;)
Is it? Or is it just designed to make you think it's a joke? Perhaps the real joke is that people take it as a joke.