To the best of my knowledge storing data as spin, therefore creating transistors the size of atoms* will, at the very least, bypass the limitations of the current transistors measured in nanometers. A Nanometer is 10 to the -9th power of a meter**. An atom is approximately 10 to the -11th power of a meter***. Therefore this technology, when fully functional would theoretically allow two orders of magnitude greater number of transistors per area of measurement. So if a Pentium IV has approximately 42million transistors**** it could (in theory) contain 42,000,000 to the 2nd power more transistors. Accept the increase is far greater than this because the P IV die process is 0.18 microns which is 180 nanometers (if I'm correct). So the actual increase in available transistors per area of measurement would be more on the order of 42,000,000 to the 5th power: 5,489,031,744,000,000 transistors (well atoms).
Now add to that the current problems with heat. I would expect (although I most definitely do not remember/know the laws of thermodynamics well enough to do more than vague speculation) that the amount of heat created by such a quantum system would be impressively small compared to the current system... although I would conjecture there are limitations to speed when measuring and changing spin... this would hugely increase the ability to clock the processor higher (an over abundance of heat is the primary limiting factor in clocking the processor system higher).
Wow, so now I am looking forward to having my conjecture ripped to pieces by those who actually know:D.
I hope that's at least a little helpful
*(although I think of spin being associated with quarks, a much smaller, sub-atomic particle... obviously a hole in my knowledge)
I agree in general but with one part in particular: no DRM.
Here's what would get me buying more music: 1. Cheaper Prices 2. No DRM or other idiotic shcemes 3. No racketeering and intimidation tactics from the RIAA and MPAA (and similar organizations in other countries/regions).
Currently I buy very little music. I used to buy a lot more music. #1 put a stop to that (for CDs) #2 prevented on-line sources from replacing CDs, #3 creates a desire for the death of the recording industry as it has existed for the last 30+ years through today (and decreases my desire to even care about music)
I suspect we won't get much of either until the RIAA is defeated in court a number of times more.
I don't disagree that a degree is a good idea. I do disagree with some of the reasons mentioned excluding:
"In some jobs, especially in larger companies, there's a ceiling, you can't be promoted above a certainl level without a degree.
And yes, if you want to be a consultant, the contacts and the prestige of being associated with a well-known university are worth an awful lot, like it or not." I definitely agree that these points are valid.
All of the other reasons, such as helping you reason, needing a degree to understand research and citations, etc... are all necessary for only those unmotivated enough to avoid a few nights research.
Learning, however, is a process. The process includes (among other things): observation, ability to generate a personal interest in the topic, and correctly categorize the ramifications of what is discerned from the process. This does NOT require a college degree and there are many with college degrees who still do not do this well. This process DOES require a determined effort, sharp reasoning skills, and constant practice to do well.
Statistics are a fickle ally or friend. I see in them a useful tool to trend situations and without very complete thought or thorough analysis I'm sure I've misconstrued the trend here. In fact I was entirely mistaken that in both elections the victor lost the popular vote. Now I can't remember why I was thinking that was correct.
Also, excellent article.
My main motivation here was to lend strength to an argument that Democrats could be as likely to be cheating as Republicans.
My opinion is: depending on the ethical standards of any given region, it is likely that there is occasionally cheating that occurs during national elections. It is also my opinion that the cheating is probably not very effective in creating a win, (at least in the current ethical atmosphere of the United States).
Thank you, intelligent arguments from intelligent people are one of the primary reasons I frequent/.
From my perspective the Al Gore 're-count' stunk to high heaven of 'Well it didn't come out right yet so lets "recount"*' (*read: Lets count out the votes for the Republican and vote in any thing we can misconstrue as a vote for the Democrat).
I am also suspect of the last elections results. I suspect the race was not really as close as it was called/made to be.
Let me ask this statistically logical question: How often have their been two consecutive presidential elections were the 'popular' vote was greate for the losing party. Here's a follow up question based on the frequency of that event occuring in the past does it not suggest a statistical likelyhood that the results in one of those two elections were baked? Last statisticaly logical question: Is it more or less likely that the victor in an election wins by a margin of thousands or hundreds when they win?
My main point here is it is very likely there was cheating going on and likely rampant cheating at that. Either the Republicans REALLY cheated (as in 10s of thousands) or the Democrats cheated a fair amount (thousands). Statistically speaking it is more likely you will get caught the more you cheat. Therefore, again based on statisticaly accurate likelyhoods the democrats cheated.
Anyone familar with the book The Fermi Solution? I highly recommend it.
Well, it's unlikely anyone will see this but I think it needs to be said. Microsoft is manufacturing what they call piracy by constantly changing what is 'legit'.
Anyone else but me remember the way software used to be sold?!? Back in the day, when you purchased software you purchased a license to use ONE COPY of that software indefinitely. Let me repeat that last word INDEFINITELY. Including any computers you may purchase in the future.
Eventually some software companies very strong in marketing (read: Microsoft), became tired of not being able to milk money out of people for each new computer they purchased. So they thought 'lets change the rules on our users, now the licenses provides use of ONE COPY of that software on ONE COMPUTER'. Now the massive marketing engine then kicked in to convince everyone that the new rules were the standard way of doing business and that pirating was still just pirating ('Are you ligit', Genuine licenseing ADVANTAGE, 'Ask for genuine software'). So here's the part that irksome. Selling a copy of Windows98 that you don't need anymore is legal, selling a copy of XP that you don't need anymore is pirating.
VOLUME LICENSING COMPUTER MAKERS AND COPORATE IT Here's where it gets VERY interesting (IMOP). Anyone else out there worked in corporate IT for the last 8 years? Anyone every notice that the computers you get from HP (IBM/lenovo, Dell, Gateway, Micron, etc...) all have stickers with XP license keys on them? Anyone else out there notice that these license keys NEVER GET USED?? I mean do you enter those keys when you are imaging the computers?? Of course not, your company has a volume license for XP, as most do. Do you think that the computer manufacturer didn't pay for that license key? Sure they did. AND I'm sure your company paid for the volume license as well.
MICROSOFT Poor microsoft loosing lots of money to dastardly evil pirates who sell licenses that have been paid for but will never be used.
ME Aside from my feelings about the dishonest nature of the licensing model I am 'ligit' (as much as it pains me to use that term).
As a system administrator for a small (200employee) company where I was previously employed I can safely state that THE LARGEST PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS were not viruses but malware made possible by the wonderful insecurities of Internet Exploder!!!!
In general it was not even the quality of the security features of the application itself, it was the following problems: 1. that activeX/active scripting is enabled by default 2. that the browser is so closely integrated with the rest of the operating system 3. that IE is so commonly used and so commonly trusted (it is in the required list for most IT departments of most companies etc...)
...ummm their house? Does he mean LDAP using Active Directory? Light Direct Access Protocol brought to the fore front by Novell?? And they think it provides Enterprise level search capabilities when connected to Active Directory?? If all you want is an employees account and contact information I suppose...
I was hoping to get away with just reading.
Your post is too valuable to let it go without comment IMO.
This is exactly it, at the very least everyone complaining, commenting, or irrate can write their representatives.
Recently I wrote to a senator and a house representitave regarding my concerns about the direction copywrite law is going.
At risk of exposing myself here's the response I received from the senator:
"
Thank you for contacting me concerning the needs of consumers to duplicate certain copyrighted materials. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 1998, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that updated copyright laws to account for recent technological developments related to digital media and the internet. The main points of the legislation were designed to control on-line file sharing that allows consumers to enjoy digital forms of entertainment without paying for such services. The bill also increased penalties for other copyright infringements. Some people have criticized this piece of legislation for having gone too far in limiting the rights of consumers to duplicate copyrighted materials for ethical purposes.
As you may know, Representative Rick Boucher (D-Virginia) introduced H.R. 1201 on March 9, 2005 to address some of the concerns about DMCA. This bill would amend DMCA to allow the performance of scientific research, and the legal production and use of technology that circumvents copyright protections.
Under current copyright laws, authors and inventors are guaranteed an exclusive right, for limited times, to their respective writings and discoveries, as set forth in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Fair use is an affirmative defense to a claim of copyright infringement. However, fair use is generally understood by legal scholars to be a privilege, not a right.
In assessing whether a use of a copyrighted work is a fair use, courts weigh four statutory factors: the purpose and character of the use; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work.
As the uses of the Internet and other multimedia technologies continue to develop, it is essential Congress works to promote a vibrant, open system that balances the interests of consumers with those of intellectual property holders. In the meantime, please rest assured I will continue to support efforts by these parties to develop mutually-agreeable settlements that achieve a proper level of compensation and non-commercial use.
Again, thank you for contacting me. For information concerning issues being considered in the United States Senate, please visit my website at www.crapo.senate.gov. Please feel free to contact me in the future on this or any other matter of importance to you.
Sincerely,
Mike Crapo
United States Senator
MDC:JH
Learn about the Stop Over-Spending Act of 2006 (the SOS Act) at http://crapo.senate.gov./ The bill is a comprehensive reform plan that will curb out-of-control federal spending and restore discipline to the federal budget process.
"
Therefore, from the character of what this Senator is saying (and btw he's the only one I really have some level of trust in, even from my own state...), there COULD be room for an actual innovative legal solution to the problem of copy write and patents in software.
WE JUST HAVE TO TELL THEM THAT WE WANT IT SOLVED!!!!! damn it. (ok, and tell them all and tell them often enough that they don't forget/get distracted)
I liked thief and thief 2, didn't play thief 3. And actually LIKED Invisible War (reminded me of a good System Shock 2 which generally sucked).
I also particularly liked the Thief mod for UT (the first UT the one that was the tournament mode only... came out about the same time as Quake3 tournament...).
The fact that I liked the Thief mod for UT a bit better than thief tells me the technology side is pretty important to me (it was much better technically than the thief engine tended to be).
And I am a stickler for good game play I just don't see how Invisible War was not good gameplay.
Potential Compromise (which, since it is 150th something comment will probably never be seen):
Allow liability only to the amount of profit made from the product... or at most punitive to the amount the customer paid to the software creation company.
Additionally I think there should be a limit on the types of bugs... standard bugs should NOT be considered neglegence but SECURITY related bugs should.
Everyone worries far too much about 'balance'. The 'balance' in most games is artifical. Not actual balance, but perceived balance. We tend to think of things as being fair or unfair in our lives and this reflects the balanced or unbalanced thinking in our games. To make actually balanced games (which challenge our intellect and skills instead of our sense of fairness) a new approach must be made. Unfortunately it will offend many peoples sense of 'fairness'. With the millions of people playing I think actual balance would engender an impressive following fairly quickly of those of us who despise synthetic balance.
This post is likely to never be read by the poster or others. However I think its an interesting note (and again I obviously haven't read all the other 220 posts at this point).
IDEAL AI: AI that learns from every player encountered in the same way flickr photo categories are selected. This should be possible to be accomplished by using a basic dynamic structure for the AI which would know about the abilities of each NPC it runs by spawning off a version of its self for each NPC with those capability attributes. The next step could be made by utilizing a genetic algorithm (point based system that allows effective AI routines[usually specific choices made] to continue and become increasingly more likely to reproduce and less effective AI routines to be less likely to be reproduced ). Finally the addition of random reaction elements to seed the genetic algorithm and to be produced by the genetic algorithm along with cross breeding of more affective routines.
JUSTIFICATION: Second Life, Flickr, and Myspace are all user driven and therefore very effective at what they do. When thousands (or millions) of users determine the direction a program can take the effectiveness of that program increases. MMO games would be wise to take advantage of that model.
DRAWBACKS (potential): Some interface that allows users to provide feedback regarding the AI they are fighting that makes preferences clear. It would be a little lame to have the program say [in a pleasent female voice] "How did you like your combat experience, please rate it on a scale from 1 to 10". If there was some clear way to rate the user experience without having to bug the user this method would become extremely effective. Could be as simple as how frequently the user comes back to that spot... pro-rated on how easy it was for the user to defeat it's oponents. Might need to instance combat for each player in order to make it work...
-ME®
SUCH GOOD CODE NAMES SUCH TERRIBLE PRODUCT NAMES
on
Both Sides of Wii
·
· Score: 1
OK now for a very likely to be redundant comment:
WHY IS IT COMMON FOR COMPANIES COME UP WITH SUCH EXCELLENT CODE NAMES AND SUCH STUPID PRODUCT NAMES?!!?!
OK, I can only think of two right now. Nintendo Revolution is an excellent name. Wii is quite stupid.
Opteron is just passable while Athlon 64 is fairly lame. The origional code names were Sledgehammer and Clawhammer. Very cool names.
I think there would be a number of people who would argue that Revolution, Sledgehammer and Clawhammer are not as marketable as the final product names. To this I say Saturn, Xbox, DirectX, Cingular, Weta, Matrix, Segway, Alien Ware, Area 51 (computer name from Alienware), Ipod, Ipod Nano, etc...
All kinds of product names and company names can be interesting and sellable.
In fact the truth tends to be that the more interesting the name the more effective from a marketing perspective.
Unfortunately companies get much too conservative with names when the truth is anything can be used and still be effective (even Wii). However the more memorable and easy to tie into an add campaign the better the name.
Who here can, with a clear concience, say that Wii is easier to market than Revolution???
I can think of a number of decent add campaigns surrounding Revolution (and its other language translations) where as Wii I can think of none. Additionally Revolution is fitting because of the new controller interface is, well revelotionary.
Thoughts?
There are enough poorly structured research cases. We don't need more useless data. Not only is the 'study' putting an illogical spin on the affects of gaming as relating to alcohol and drugs it is adding to the enormous pile of research that reeks of bad journalism, while obviously being bad science.
And in that way this is a story of supply and demand. I used to buy CD's fairly frequently. Until I decided the prices became too high. Instead of lowering them as the value of economies of scale would dictate... (ever wonder why the hell casettes are still around??) prices have risen to a degree that the market is not willing to bear. The same may happen with concerts or there may simply become fewer concerts as the smaller portion of the market willing to bear the higher prices will be the core attendees.
Seems to me the best solution is for recording artists to get out from under the bloat that is the RAA. They are dragging music down a pit created by their limitless hunger for extortion (blank 'music CDs', blank cassettes, lawsuits against defenseless single mothers and college students etc...).
In too many companies actual skill, experience, and ability has little to do with who is hired. I think the real problem is decently complex but has a lot to do with ignorant/incompetent hiring managers. Additionally I think there is, to some degree, some resentment from non-technical corporate types that they must depend on these non-degree holding or non-business degree holding technology people to keep their business going.
Which brings up one more thought, a degree does not make a good IT person. I'm positive it helps but it is not the most important part of the equation. Experience and skill are much more important when the IT person is expected to perform a particular duty. I feel confident that this statement is correct. I have seen people with CS degrees who couldn't make it in the industry and people who have no degree who excel in the field.
I play with my 4 year old. She's actually quite good at it and enjoys it a lot.
In fact occassionally my wife, my 4 yr old and I will get together and play, (1-GameCube=4 controllers).
For computer games... There's a Tron based game called.... arrgg can't quite think of the name... Armegatron thats pretty good (you can be on the same team).... there are a number of older games or freeware or fanware games that are good... look for open source or fanware games...
First Person Shooters are good as long as you can be on the same team. Getting constantly gibbed is NOT fun .
I think your best bet is GameCube.
Hmmm. If you watch specific areas of technology and view only earth shaking brand spanking new solutions to old problems as "The next big thing..." then I suppose you could view the incremental improvements as being ignorable.
However, technological inovation is not dropping off. Watch/. read science magazines, watch the general news. You will see new inovations occuring very regularly. A german company is about to start production of transparent LCDs, the human genome has been mapped, cameras can be put as a feature on a phone, the ability to produce nano tubes has been discovered and used in products, HDD memory densities continue to increase despite claims that they can not be increased further, a filter to clean blood of viruses is available on the market, a new mathematical theory to describe gravity has been found and verified etc... etc... etc....
I realize some of the above may not sound tech related. Really thats my point. If your point of view says that the only things to watch are higher DRAM densities then you may not see DDR2 as a next big thing. However if you watch advances in science, such as the ability to slow light down using specific materials, you will realize that there will likely, eventually be a next big thing for memory (although it may feel a bit like waiting for Duke Nukem Forever to come out).
My POV is that there is absolutely not chance that important innovations will stop, unless research using scientific reasoning stops....
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmmmm
:D.
c i514407,00.html
d e7.html
w ww.soc.staffs.ac.uk/mss1/hsn/hsn-lect9.ppt+transis tors+in+a+Pentium+IV&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&clie nt=firefox-a
To the best of my knowledge storing data as spin, therefore creating transistors the size of atoms* will, at the very least, bypass the limitations of the current transistors measured in nanometers. A Nanometer is 10 to the -9th power of a meter**. An atom is approximately 10 to the -11th power of a meter***. Therefore this technology, when fully functional would theoretically allow two orders of magnitude greater number of transistors per area of measurement.
So if a Pentium IV has approximately 42million transistors**** it could (in theory) contain 42,000,000 to the 2nd power more transistors.
Accept the increase is far greater than this because the P IV die process is 0.18 microns which is 180 nanometers (if I'm correct). So the actual increase in available transistors per area of measurement would be more on the order of 42,000,000 to the 5th power: 5,489,031,744,000,000 transistors (well atoms).
Now add to that the current problems with heat. I would expect (although I most definitely do not remember/know the laws of thermodynamics well enough to do more than vague speculation) that the amount of heat created by such a quantum system would be impressively small compared to the current system... although I would conjecture there are limitations to speed when measuring and changing spin... this would hugely increase the ability to clock the processor higher (an over abundance of heat is the primary limiting factor in clocking the processor system higher).
Wow, so now I am looking forward to having my conjecture ripped to pieces by those who actually know
I hope that's at least a little helpful
*(although I think of spin being associated with quarks, a much smaller, sub-atomic particle... obviously a hole in my knowledge)
**Nanometer: http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_g
***Atom, Size of: http://trshare.triumf.ca/~safety/EHS/rpt/rpt_1/no
**** http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:foWPHOKFqoMJ:
Excellently stated.
I agree. Social problems may be influenced by media but they are created or resolved by parents/families.
I agree in general but with one part in particular: no DRM.
Here's what would get me buying more music:
1. Cheaper Prices
2. No DRM or other idiotic shcemes
3. No racketeering and intimidation tactics from the RIAA and MPAA (and similar organizations in other countries/regions).
Currently I buy very little music. I used to buy a lot more music. #1 put a stop to that (for CDs) #2 prevented on-line sources from replacing CDs, #3 creates a desire for the death of the recording industry as it has existed for the last 30+ years through today (and decreases my desire to even care about music)
I suspect we won't get much of either until the RIAA is defeated in court a number of times more.
Hmmm...
I don't disagree that a degree is a good idea. I do disagree with some of the reasons mentioned excluding:
"In some jobs, especially in larger companies, there's a ceiling, you can't be promoted above a certainl level without a degree.
And yes, if you want to be a consultant, the contacts and the prestige of being associated with a well-known university are worth an awful lot, like it or not."
I definitely agree that these points are valid.
All of the other reasons, such as helping you reason, needing a degree to understand research and citations, etc... are all necessary for only those unmotivated enough to avoid a few nights research.
Learning, however, is a process. The process includes (among other things): observation, ability to generate a personal interest in the topic, and correctly categorize the ramifications of what is discerned from the process. This does NOT require a college degree and there are many with college degrees who still do not do this well. This process DOES require a determined effort, sharp reasoning skills, and constant practice to do well.
IMHO
-ME®
Hey Pudge
/.
Excellent points.
I generally agree.
Statistics are a fickle ally or friend. I see in them a useful tool to trend situations and without very complete thought or thorough analysis I'm sure I've misconstrued the trend here.
In fact I was entirely mistaken that in both elections the victor lost the popular vote. Now I can't remember why I was thinking that was correct.
Also, excellent article.
My main motivation here was to lend strength to an argument that Democrats could be as likely to be cheating as Republicans.
My opinion is: depending on the ethical standards of any given region, it is likely that there is occasionally cheating that occurs during national elections. It is also my opinion that the cheating is probably not very effective in creating a win, (at least in the current ethical atmosphere of the United States).
Thank you, intelligent arguments from intelligent people are one of the primary reasons I frequent
I'll have to agree.
From my perspective the Al Gore 're-count' stunk to high heaven of 'Well it didn't come out right yet so lets "recount"*' (*read: Lets count out the votes for the Republican and vote in any thing we can misconstrue as a vote for the Democrat).
I am also suspect of the last elections results. I suspect the race was not really as close as it was called/made to be.
Let me ask this statistically logical question: How often have their been two consecutive presidential elections were the 'popular' vote was greate for the losing party.
Here's a follow up question based on the frequency of that event occuring in the past does it not suggest a statistical likelyhood that the results in one of those two elections were baked?
Last statisticaly logical question: Is it more or less likely that the victor in an election wins by a margin of thousands or hundreds when they win?
My main point here is it is very likely there was cheating going on and likely rampant cheating at that. Either the Republicans REALLY cheated (as in 10s of thousands) or the Democrats cheated a fair amount (thousands). Statistically speaking it is more likely you will get caught the more you cheat. Therefore, again based on statisticaly accurate likelyhoods the democrats cheated.
Anyone familar with the book The Fermi Solution? I highly recommend it.
Well, it's unlikely anyone will see this but I think it needs to be said.
Microsoft is manufacturing what they call piracy by constantly changing what is 'legit'.
Anyone else but me remember the way software used to be sold?!?
Back in the day, when you purchased software you purchased a license to use ONE COPY of that software indefinitely. Let me repeat that last word INDEFINITELY.
Including any computers you may purchase in the future.
Eventually some software companies very strong in marketing (read: Microsoft), became tired of not being able to milk money out of people for each new computer they purchased. So they thought 'lets change the rules on our users, now the licenses provides use of ONE COPY of that software on ONE COMPUTER'.
Now the massive marketing engine then kicked in to convince everyone that the new rules were the standard way of doing business and that pirating was still just pirating ('Are you ligit', Genuine licenseing ADVANTAGE, 'Ask for genuine software').
So here's the part that irksome. Selling a copy of Windows98 that you don't need anymore is legal, selling a copy of XP that you don't need anymore is pirating.
VOLUME LICENSING COMPUTER MAKERS AND COPORATE IT
Here's where it gets VERY interesting (IMOP).
Anyone else out there worked in corporate IT for the last 8 years? Anyone every notice that the computers you get from HP (IBM/lenovo, Dell, Gateway, Micron, etc...) all have stickers with XP license keys on them?
Anyone else out there notice that these license keys NEVER GET USED?? I mean do you enter those keys when you are imaging the computers?? Of course not, your company has a volume license for XP, as most do.
Do you think that the computer manufacturer didn't pay for that license key?
Sure they did. AND I'm sure your company paid for the volume license as well.
MICROSOFT
Poor microsoft loosing lots of money to dastardly evil pirates who sell licenses that have been paid for but will never be used.
ME
Aside from my feelings about the dishonest nature of the licensing model I am 'ligit' (as much as it pains me to use that term).
As a system administrator for a small (200employee) company where I was previously employed I can safely state that THE LARGEST PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS were not viruses but malware made possible by the wonderful insecurities of Internet Exploder!!!!
In general it was not even the quality of the security features of the application itself, it was the following problems:
1. that activeX/active scripting is enabled by default
2. that the browser is so closely integrated with the rest of the operating system
3. that IE is so commonly used and so commonly trusted (it is in the required list for most IT departments of most companies etc...)
:D
And um IBM better not threaten Alienwares strangle hold on the super computer market either!!!
...ummm their house?
Does he mean LDAP using Active Directory?
Light Direct Access Protocol brought to the fore front by Novell??
And they think it provides Enterprise level search capabilities when connected to Active Directory??
If all you want is an employees account and contact information I suppose...
Uh... yeah...
I was hoping to get away with just reading.
Your post is too valuable to let it go without comment IMO.
This is exactly it, at the very least everyone complaining, commenting, or irrate can write their representatives.
Recently I wrote to a senator and a house representitave regarding my concerns about the direction copywrite law is going.
At risk of exposing myself here's the response I received from the senator:
" Thank you for contacting me concerning the needs of consumers to duplicate certain copyrighted materials. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 1998, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that updated copyright laws to account for recent technological developments related to digital media and the internet. The main points of the legislation were designed to control on-line file sharing that allows consumers to enjoy digital forms of entertainment without paying for such services. The bill also increased penalties for other copyright infringements. Some people have criticized this piece of legislation for having gone too far in limiting the rights of consumers to duplicate copyrighted materials for ethical purposes.
As you may know, Representative Rick Boucher (D-Virginia) introduced H.R. 1201 on March 9, 2005 to address some of the concerns about DMCA. This bill would amend DMCA to allow the performance of scientific research, and the legal production and use of technology that circumvents copyright protections.
Under current copyright laws, authors and inventors are guaranteed an exclusive right, for limited times, to their respective writings and discoveries, as set forth in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Fair use is an affirmative defense to a claim of copyright infringement. However, fair use is generally understood by legal scholars to be a privilege, not a right.
In assessing whether a use of a copyrighted work is a fair use, courts weigh four statutory factors: the purpose and character of the use; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work.
As the uses of the Internet and other multimedia technologies continue to develop, it is essential Congress works to promote a vibrant, open system that balances the interests of consumers with those of intellectual property holders. In the meantime, please rest assured I will continue to support efforts by these parties to develop mutually-agreeable settlements that achieve a proper level of compensation and non-commercial use.
Again, thank you for contacting me. For information concerning issues being considered in the United States Senate, please visit my website at www.crapo.senate.gov. Please feel free to contact me in the future on this or any other matter of importance to you.
Sincerely,
Mike Crapo
United States Senator
MDC:JH
Learn about the Stop Over-Spending Act of 2006 (the SOS Act) at http://crapo.senate.gov./ The bill is a comprehensive reform plan that will curb out-of-control federal spending and restore discipline to the federal budget process. "
Therefore, from the character of what this Senator is saying (and btw he's the only one I really have some level of trust in, even from my own state...), there COULD be room for an actual innovative legal solution to the problem of copy write and patents in software.
WE JUST HAVE TO TELL THEM THAT WE WANT IT SOLVED!!!!! damn it.
(ok, and tell them all and tell them often enough that they don't forget/get distracted)
-ME®
This is an interesting discussion.
I liked thief and thief 2, didn't play thief 3.
And actually LIKED Invisible War (reminded me of a good System Shock 2 which generally sucked).
I also particularly liked the Thief mod for UT (the first UT the one that was the tournament mode only... came out about the same time as Quake3 tournament...).
The fact that I liked the Thief mod for UT a bit better than thief tells me the technology side is pretty important to me (it was much better technically than the thief engine tended to be).
And I am a stickler for good game play I just don't see how Invisible War was not good gameplay.
Intersting...
Potential Compromise (which, since it is 150th something comment will probably never be seen):
Allow liability only to the amount of profit made from the product... or at most punitive to the amount the customer paid to the software creation company.
Additionally I think there should be a limit on the types of bugs... standard bugs should NOT be considered neglegence but SECURITY related bugs should.
Everyone worries far too much about 'balance'.
The 'balance' in most games is artifical. Not actual balance, but perceived balance.
We tend to think of things as being fair or unfair in our lives and this reflects the balanced or unbalanced thinking in our games.
To make actually balanced games (which challenge our intellect and skills instead of our sense of fairness) a new approach must be made.
Unfortunately it will offend many peoples sense of 'fairness'.
With the millions of people playing I think actual balance would engender an impressive following fairly quickly of those of us who despise synthetic balance.
-ME®
This post is likely to never be read by the poster or others.
However I think its an interesting note (and again I obviously haven't read all the other 220 posts at this point).
IDEAL AI:
AI that learns from every player encountered in the same way flickr photo categories are selected.
This should be possible to be accomplished by using a basic dynamic structure for the AI which would know about the abilities of each NPC it runs by spawning off a version of its self for each NPC with those capability attributes. The next step could be made by utilizing a genetic algorithm (point based system that allows effective AI routines[usually specific choices made] to continue and become increasingly more likely to reproduce and less effective AI routines to be less likely to be reproduced ). Finally the addition of random reaction elements to seed the genetic algorithm and to be produced by the genetic algorithm along with cross breeding of more affective routines.
JUSTIFICATION:
Second Life, Flickr, and Myspace are all user driven and therefore very effective at what they do. When thousands (or millions) of users determine the direction a program can take the effectiveness of that program increases. MMO games would be wise to take advantage of that model.
DRAWBACKS (potential):
Some interface that allows users to provide feedback regarding the AI they are fighting that makes preferences clear. It would be a little lame to have the program say [in a pleasent female voice] "How did you like your combat experience, please rate it on a scale from 1 to 10".
If there was some clear way to rate the user experience without having to bug the user this method would become extremely effective. Could be as simple as how frequently the user comes back to that spot... pro-rated on how easy it was for the user to defeat it's oponents. Might need to instance combat for each player in order to make it work...
-ME®
OK now for a very likely to be redundant comment: WHY IS IT COMMON FOR COMPANIES COME UP WITH SUCH EXCELLENT CODE NAMES AND SUCH STUPID PRODUCT NAMES?!!?! OK, I can only think of two right now. Nintendo Revolution is an excellent name. Wii is quite stupid. Opteron is just passable while Athlon 64 is fairly lame. The origional code names were Sledgehammer and Clawhammer. Very cool names. I think there would be a number of people who would argue that Revolution, Sledgehammer and Clawhammer are not as marketable as the final product names. To this I say Saturn, Xbox, DirectX, Cingular, Weta, Matrix, Segway, Alien Ware, Area 51 (computer name from Alienware), Ipod, Ipod Nano, etc... All kinds of product names and company names can be interesting and sellable. In fact the truth tends to be that the more interesting the name the more effective from a marketing perspective. Unfortunately companies get much too conservative with names when the truth is anything can be used and still be effective (even Wii). However the more memorable and easy to tie into an add campaign the better the name. Who here can, with a clear concience, say that Wii is easier to market than Revolution??? I can think of a number of decent add campaigns surrounding Revolution (and its other language translations) where as Wii I can think of none. Additionally Revolution is fitting because of the new controller interface is, well revelotionary. Thoughts?
Exactly.
There are enough poorly structured research cases. We don't need more useless data.
Not only is the 'study' putting an illogical spin on the affects of gaming as relating to alcohol and drugs it is adding to the enormous pile of research that reeks of bad journalism, while obviously being bad science.
-ME®
Exactly.
And in that way this is a story of supply and demand.
I used to buy CD's fairly frequently. Until I decided the prices became too high.
Instead of lowering them as the value of economies of scale would dictate... (ever wonder why the hell casettes are still around??) prices have risen to a degree that the market is not willing to bear. The same may happen with concerts or there may simply become fewer concerts as the smaller portion of the market willing to bear the higher prices will be the core attendees.
Seems to me the best solution is for recording artists to get out from under the bloat that is the RAA. They are dragging music down a pit created by their limitless hunger for extortion (blank 'music CDs', blank cassettes, lawsuits against defenseless single mothers and college students etc...).
-ME®
I completely agree.
In too many companies actual skill, experience, and ability has little to do with who is hired. I think the real problem is decently complex but has a lot to do with ignorant/incompetent hiring managers. Additionally I think there is, to some degree, some resentment from non-technical corporate types that they must depend on these non-degree holding or non-business degree holding technology people to keep their business going.
Which brings up one more thought, a degree does not make a good IT person. I'm positive it helps but it is not the most important part of the equation. Experience and skill are much more important when the IT person is expected to perform a particular duty. I feel confident that this statement is correct. I have seen people with CS degrees who couldn't make it in the industry and people who have no degree who excel in the field.
My wife beat Neverwinter Nights long before I did. Excellent point.
RPG's seem to have a wide appeal and Bioware makes great ones.
Good list
Smash brothers is great, if you like fighting games, my opinion.
Gauntlet!
Your right!
My wife and I and a few friends spent hours on Dark Legacy on GameCube.
Mario Kart
Is great.
(GameCube again)
Yep Monkey Ball is great.
.... arrgg can't quite think of the name... Armegatron thats pretty good (you can be on the same team).... there are a number of older games or freeware or fanware games that are good... look for open source or fanware games...
I play with my 4 year old. She's actually quite good at it and enjoys it a lot. In fact occassionally my wife, my 4 yr old and I will get together and play, (1-GameCube=4 controllers).
For computer games... There's a Tron based game called
First Person Shooters are good as long as you can be on the same team. Getting constantly gibbed is NOT fun . I think your best bet is GameCube.
Hmmm.
/. read science magazines, watch the general news. You will see new inovations occuring very regularly. A german company is about to start production of transparent LCDs, the human genome has been mapped, cameras can be put as a feature on a phone, the ability to produce nano tubes has been discovered and used in products, HDD memory densities continue to increase despite claims that they can not be increased further, a filter to clean blood of viruses is available on the market, a new mathematical theory to describe gravity has been found and verified etc... etc... etc....
...
If you watch specific areas of technology and view only earth shaking brand spanking new solutions to old problems as "The next big thing..." then I suppose you could view the incremental improvements as being ignorable.
However, technological inovation is not dropping off. Watch
I realize some of the above may not sound tech related. Really thats my point. If your point of view says that the only things to watch are higher DRAM densities then you may not see DDR2 as a next big thing. However if you watch advances in science, such as the ability to slow light down using specific materials, you will realize that there will likely, eventually be a next big thing for memory (although it may feel a bit like waiting for Duke Nukem Forever to come out).
My POV is that there is absolutely not chance that important innovations will stop, unless research using scientific reasoning stops.