I wouldn't bother if I lived in the USA since watching their TV programs is a waste of time, but I happen to be quite fond of Japanese TV.
You can just turn on the TV and there's almost always something interesting, funny or nice. But life in Japan is very busy and time is very limited. It's a tough tradeoff.
Our current scientific understanding tell us nothing about how we could possibly establish self-sufficient, Earth-like colonies in other planets, nor about how to travel beyond the Solar System.
Therefore, stating that humanity will eventually do so is a statement of faith, not of science.
I find strange this story has been tagged as "idiot". Perhaps our belief that science and engineering will always save us has become our tacit religion?
I think our focus should be on preserving our planet and finding balance, instead of believing in sci-fi savior technologies. By which I don't mean research should be decreased, but that we should not believe that there will be technological "magic" solutions to the messes we are causing here, such as global warning and species extinction.
all the patches released by Blizzard are just to correct random bugs and adding some new Korean-related support/feature.
Though the game is well balanced, I think Zerg late game is perhaps too strong against Terran (dark swarm + lurkers/ultralisks) while Terran heavy-metal (mass tanks/vultures) may also be too strong against Protoss mid-game.
For the Protoss, I would make hallucination cost cheaper so they could clear the massive mine fields and initial tank blasts by sending an initial charge of hallucinated units. Hallucination is too expensive anyways.
About the Terrans, I would make it so that burrowed lurkers can still receive splash damage. As it's now, you can't attack a burrowed lurker under dark swarm with anything but special abilities and firebats (who would die by the dozen if you used them in such a situation anyways)
the thing is, it has been about 10 years of wait. A continuation of the great story of SC with some improvements here and there would have been always welcome, since the base SC is so great. But then again 10 years (plus what's left to wait)? for this?
It's also untrue that there are not revolutionary new things to be explored in real-time strategy games. One would be to have artificial-intelligence assistance for various tasks so you don't have to everything yourself (as you have to in SC). For example have generals who would execute plans on your command, respond in certain ways to emergencies/surpise attacks etc. Also, check Supreme Commander for some interesting new features.
Again, more SC is great, but what Blizzard is showing us should have arrived 5 years or so ago.
I was amazed at this announcement but upon closer examination of the screenshots, it looks like it doesn't have anything new over its predecessor. Buildings and units have the same size relation as before, it doesn't seem like you can zoom in/out, very similar units.
It would be disappointing it it didn't have some revolutionary features and a great story.
Zelda II was not as legendary as its predecessor but it was a great game and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I don't understand why so many people dislike it. There were some glaring flaws though, such as the super slow scrolling text in the dialogs. And it wasn't as deep as Zelda I, but it wasn't shallow either.
Anyways, can some enlighten me on why Zelda II is considered so much inferior to Zelda I?
I notice that there is a lot of animosity towards the greens in Slashdot. Yes, they maybe just agitators, but I would like you to consider if the reason they are ostracized here is simply a conflict of interests.
Simply put, what do us geeks/nerds want? we want abundant, cheap energy to power the technology we "live and breathe" and in which our jobs and means of subsistence depend. We secretly fear peak-oil and rationing our energy use is almost unconceivable to us.
Could it be that we want energy so bad that we dismiss any criticism before even thinking about it?
You have no expectation of privacy in public places.
Logical fallacy: that one is in public (place owned by no one, privacy not actively being enforced) does not imply that one should be actively surveilled.
Actually, those are the 2 things (especially lawyers) that contribute the most to them being "dead", in PG's definition.
Lawyers do not mix with engineering, just look at Sony. For example, the PSP could have been a superb machine (homebrew apps, full rez video, hard-drive instead of stick) but Sony's legal dept. would not let that happen. As someone else said "you can almost feel the tears of the engineers who made it".
As for money, it mostly means they don't have any "hunger", any desire to actually make something other than look enterprisey. And with money comes bloat, in the form of bureaucracy and people who are there only for the money, not the craft.
Unfortunately, money and lawyers seem to be quite enough to stay in business, so they won't go away until they run out of both. How much damage will they cause until they run out of it? I hope not much.
Mr. Graham's definition of "dead" in this essay only encompasses the activity in his field of work (startups). What I would like to know is how much longer will we *normal people* have to put up with microsoft's influence and products?
How much longer will we be forced to use their software at work, such as Windows and.NET?
How much more time of our life will be wasted having to fix some Visual Basic monstrosity and the like?
How much longer until they can no longer damage others through their inmoral and sometimes illegal business practices (SCO anyone?)
yeah right, just like when 9/11 happened every slashdot post making jokes about it got something else besides -1 troll.
The truth is that nearly all instances when one makes a joke about a sad event is when one does not really care about it nor feel its significance.
Not to say that humor is wrong or the joke post should be modded down as a troll, since it's a joke after all. It's the fact that it reflects the sentiments of so many people here that indicates something seriously wrong with our ethics.
From my experience reading and posting in Slashdot, I have to agree with the GeckoX in that the IQ here is higher, but morality may be not. In some cases such as "your rights online" articles it seems the morality is higher since everyone is quick to post in favor of civil freedoms, etc. but it maybe that we are just smart enough to see that it's something in our interests (the much needed privacy, for example).
I would like everyone in Slashdot to think hard about it (or more like "search your feelings", actually).
I find particularly disturbing that whenever a story like this is posted no one seems to care about the horrible experiments made on animals or ridicule those who do.
I don't think any scientific finding is worth it if we have to pay with such horror and cruelty for it. Can't we advance science another way? Even if we couldn't I'd rather live in an inconvenient world.
Every other "scary" game relied on shock/BOO! like scares or at most a layer of suspense.
Only the Silent Hill series have been able to make me feel actual fear and dread by playing them. I actually had trouble sleeping after playing them alone at night (I was 15-17 at the time).
You ought to try them (start with 1, maybe 2), but play in the dark, alone and with a good pair of headphones. Preferrably with more than an hour to spare.
Avoid Silent Hill 4 though, it's not scary at all and pretty mediocre.
If you have a boring programming job such as coding Java web apps (as I do) it is particularly important you turn away your attention from the mainstream (e.g. the framework of the week) or else you too may become yet another boring corporate drone.
It is also very important to avoid fads (such as PHP) as well as stuff that gets a lot of attention but only because of the huge publicity behind it and the swarm of clueless people who fall for it (.NET, Windows whatever)
Finally, it is essential that what you work on is interesting in itself (to you, of course), otherwise no matter how effective a way you find to make it, it will fail to inspire you and without inspiration your mind will deteriorate.
About them getting impatient at you when you try speaking Japanese, my guess is that you are not fluent and thus speak slowly and with a really bad pronunciation.
English speakers tend to pronounce Japanese very poorly, as they are extremely different.
Has this changed? I tried it on a Dell Inspiron 5150 laptop. It has a i686 architecture/chipset and nvidia card.
However, while things such as yum are excellent and it had all necessary drivers (except nvidia but that's propietary, have to download, same for all distros) the system is slow and heavy.
I read that that's because the distro is optimized for i386, not i686. Anyone can tell me if this has changed in FC5?
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't bother if I lived in the USA since watching their TV programs is a waste of time, but I happen to be quite fond of Japanese TV.
You can just turn on the TV and there's almost always something interesting, funny or nice. But life in Japan is very busy and time is very limited. It's a tough tradeoff.
I'm just starting to develop a java app for websphere so your remark got my attention. Could you explain it a little bit please?
and people are the livestock.
Keep doing your job, watching your entertainment and paying your taxes.
at least he didn't say "blogosphere"
"Gave up my civil liberties and all I got was this lousy checkpoint"
Our current scientific understanding tell us nothing about how we could possibly establish self-sufficient, Earth-like colonies in other planets, nor about how to travel beyond the Solar System.
Therefore, stating that humanity will eventually do so is a statement of faith, not of science.
I find strange this story has been tagged as "idiot". Perhaps our belief that science and engineering will always save us has become our tacit religion?
I think our focus should be on preserving our planet and finding balance, instead of believing in sci-fi savior technologies. By which I don't mean research should be decreased, but that we should not believe that there will be technological "magic" solutions to the messes we are causing here, such as global warning and species extinction.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!
all the patches released by Blizzard are just to correct random bugs and adding some new Korean-related support/feature.
Though the game is well balanced, I think Zerg late game is perhaps too strong against Terran (dark swarm + lurkers/ultralisks) while Terran heavy-metal (mass tanks/vultures) may also be too strong against Protoss mid-game.
For the Protoss, I would make hallucination cost cheaper so they could clear the massive mine fields and initial tank blasts by sending an initial charge of hallucinated units. Hallucination is too expensive anyways.
About the Terrans, I would make it so that burrowed lurkers can still receive splash damage. As it's now, you can't attack a burrowed lurker under dark swarm with anything but special abilities and firebats (who would die by the dozen if you used them in such a situation anyways)
the thing is, it has been about 10 years of wait. A continuation of the great story of SC with some improvements here and there would have been always welcome, since the base SC is so great. But then again 10 years (plus what's left to wait)? for this?
It's also untrue that there are not revolutionary new things to be explored in real-time strategy games. One would be to have artificial-intelligence assistance for various tasks so you don't have to everything yourself (as you have to in SC). For example have generals who would execute plans on your command, respond in certain ways to emergencies/surpise attacks etc. Also, check Supreme Commander for some interesting new features.
Again, more SC is great, but what Blizzard is showing us should have arrived 5 years or so ago.
I was amazed at this announcement but upon closer examination of the screenshots, it looks like it doesn't have anything new over its predecessor. Buildings and units have the same size relation as before, it doesn't seem like you can zoom in/out, very similar units.
It would be disappointing it it didn't have some revolutionary features and a great story.
Zelda II was not as legendary as its predecessor but it was a great game and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I don't understand why so many people dislike it. There were some glaring flaws though, such as the super slow scrolling text in the dialogs. And it wasn't as deep as Zelda I, but it wasn't shallow either.
Anyways, can some enlighten me on why Zelda II is considered so much inferior to Zelda I?
of course a more relevant issue in such a situation would be: why would one want/have to kill a 14 year old girl?
if one is lead to such a situation, isnt it much more plausible that the path one has followed is severely wrong?
nuff said
I notice that there is a lot of animosity towards the greens in Slashdot. Yes, they maybe just agitators, but I would like you to consider if the reason they are ostracized here is simply a conflict of interests.
Simply put, what do us geeks/nerds want? we want abundant, cheap energy to power the technology we "live and breathe" and in which our jobs and means of subsistence depend. We secretly fear peak-oil and rationing our energy use is almost unconceivable to us.
Could it be that we want energy so bad that we dismiss any criticism before even thinking about it?
Logical fallacy: that one is in public (place owned by no one, privacy not actively being enforced) does not imply that one should be actively surveilled.
it's "graphic novel" you insensitive clod!
Actually, those are the 2 things (especially lawyers) that contribute the most to them being "dead", in PG's definition.
Lawyers do not mix with engineering, just look at Sony. For example, the PSP could have been a superb machine (homebrew apps, full rez video, hard-drive instead of stick) but Sony's legal dept. would not let that happen. As someone else said "you can almost feel the tears of the engineers who made it".
As for money, it mostly means they don't have any "hunger", any desire to actually make something other than look enterprisey. And with money comes bloat, in the form of bureaucracy and people who are there only for the money, not the craft.
Unfortunately, money and lawyers seem to be quite enough to stay in business, so they won't go away until they run out of both. How much damage will they cause until they run out of it? I hope not much.
Mr. Graham's definition of "dead" in this essay only encompasses the activity in his field of work (startups). What I would like to know is how much longer will we *normal people* have to put up with microsoft's influence and products?
.NET?
How much longer will we be forced to use their software at work, such as Windows and
How much more time of our life will be wasted having to fix some Visual Basic monstrosity and the like?
How much longer until they can no longer damage others through their inmoral and sometimes illegal business practices (SCO anyone?)
yeah right, just like when 9/11 happened every slashdot post making jokes about it got something else besides -1 troll.
The truth is that nearly all instances when one makes a joke about a sad event is when one does not really care about it nor feel its significance.
Not to say that humor is wrong or the joke post should be modded down as a troll, since it's a joke after all. It's the fact that it reflects the sentiments of so many people here that indicates something seriously wrong with our ethics.
From my experience reading and posting in Slashdot, I have to agree with the GeckoX in that the IQ here is higher, but morality may be not. In some cases such as "your rights online" articles it seems the morality is higher since everyone is quick to post in favor of civil freedoms, etc. but it maybe that we are just smart enough to see that it's something in our interests (the much needed privacy, for example).
I would like everyone in Slashdot to think hard about it (or more like "search your feelings", actually).
Final Fantasy VI (best RPG)
Einhander (best space-shooter action game)
Silent Hill 1 and 2 (best horror games)
I find particularly disturbing that whenever a story like this is posted no one seems to care about the horrible experiments made on animals or ridicule those who do.
I don't think any scientific finding is worth it if we have to pay with such horror and cruelty for it. Can't we advance science another way? Even if we couldn't I'd rather live in an inconvenient world.
Every other "scary" game relied on shock/BOO! like scares or at most a layer of suspense.
Only the Silent Hill series have been able to make me feel actual fear and dread by playing them. I actually had trouble sleeping after playing them alone at night (I was 15-17 at the time).
You ought to try them (start with 1, maybe 2), but play in the dark, alone and with a good pair of headphones. Preferrably with more than an hour to spare.
Avoid Silent Hill 4 though, it's not scary at all and pretty mediocre.
I recommend you the following essay (or any by Paul Graham for that matter):
http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
If you have a boring programming job such as coding Java web apps (as I do) it is particularly important you turn away your attention from the mainstream (e.g. the framework of the week) or else you too may become yet another boring corporate drone.
It is also very important to avoid fads (such as PHP) as well as stuff that gets a lot of attention but only because of the huge publicity behind it and the swarm of clueless people who fall for it (.NET, Windows whatever)
Finally, it is essential that what you work on is interesting in itself (to you, of course), otherwise no matter how effective a way you find to make it, it will fail to inspire you and without inspiration your mind will deteriorate.
About them getting impatient at you when you try speaking Japanese, my guess is that you are not fluent and thus speak slowly and with a really bad pronunciation.
English speakers tend to pronounce Japanese very poorly, as they are extremely different.
Has this changed? I tried it on a Dell Inspiron 5150 laptop. It has a i686 architecture/chipset and nvidia card.
However, while things such as yum are excellent and it had all necessary drivers (except nvidia but that's propietary, have to download, same for all distros) the system is slow and heavy.
I read that that's because the distro is optimized for i386, not i686. Anyone can tell me if this has changed in FC5?