Re:480p Wii Sucks
on
HD Wii By 2011?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That resolution is really only necessary if you're going for realistic. And this is exactly where Nintendo isn't. The XBox's and PS's are, but not the Wii. High resolution just isn't necessary for cartoon-y stuff. So, don't criticise them for choosing technology that suits there needs, but doesn't live up to what/you/ *think* they should be doing.
Btw, I have a 32" LCD HDTV and Metroid looks amazing and Zelda looks good as well (though Zelda is _not_ supposed to look as good as Metroid).
Fair enough about prior art. But, it does limit people. See an example below regarding metals. Also, note that limiting usage of the national anthem is retarded no matter how limited that limitation is. I'll also point out that with blogging so damn popular, this could mean a hell of a lot of lawsuits (if even if people aren't careful on there wording when writing about this story). This also sets a precedent that I would rather not have on the books. That could turn ugly in the future when the IOC and others wish to do other things. So yah, government could have a lot to lose.
1) WERE in a minority, government was dissolved a little while ago.
2) The Liberal leadership (and others) was (is probably still) too weak to vote down something for fear that it would bring down government and invoke an election when they didn't have favourable polling numbers. So, much for that, eh. Harper went against his own bill and did it anyway. Another example of this behaviour was the immigration bill that significantly weakened the point system in favour of the person reviewing the application. The Liberals were venomously opposed to it, yet they let it pass because of the same fear.
3) Limiting use of something so very general is against reason no matter how long/short the time limit on it is.
4) Your example of metals works against your point.
Rather someone who doesn't know the limitations of a computer (they do have limitations you know) and doesn't have anything of substance to say.
I'll never understand why some people think that because its done on a computer, it makes it better. There are always bugs and because of that, it's no more infallible than humans. It'll just make the mistakes faster and *much* harder to detect.
... is that this Canadian and a lot of people that I know will, with glowing hearts, ignore this piece of nonsense on the basis of prior art.
p.s. With the Conservatives in power when this was done, and the fact that they are more than likely to get back in, does anyone think that this will change?
This is totally nuts. Machines CAN NEVER BE AS GOOD AS THE ONES THAT PROGRAM THEM. For that to be so, it'll require creativity, etc. Computers, at least now, have no such capacity. After all, how are new proof techniques supposed to be checked when they are an unknown quantity? This is total BS.
If one wants an example of such things gone awry, you need to look no further than James Anderson's Transreals. There exists proofs that they are inconsistent at the axiomatic level, but James just states that he has a machine proof that states they are consistent and ignores the proofs completely. In fact, his response to the criticism has been the typical political speak of not actually addressing anything.
Given the above, you'll have to excuse me while the Mathematical community at large and myself completely ignore and shun this.
You still wouldn't have a leg to stand on comparing ID to any Big Bang nor String "Theory."
You see, the Big Bang theories are being tested against every year as we get more powerful Colliders, and the theories are developed further (i.e. more testable predictions produced). So, with each passing year, any given Big Bang is either thrown out or more evidence is found in its favour. They cycle holds.
When it comes to String "Theory," it's in *really* big trouble. The only reason why anyone outside the labs know anything about it is the *massive* PR campaigns put on by its participants. When it comes to the scientific community thoughts on it... well, it's a *very* different story than what's coming from the Proles. In fact, the only things that String "Theory" has been good for, is developing some interesting techniques (Mathematical) and ideas that have benefited *real* Physics research.
In other words, String "Theory" is fine as a toy. But, the whole String Theory notion spun wildly out of control. Thankfully, and this is where your argument falls on its face:
It is currently being corrected.
If you don't believe me, just check out the distribution of funding in the last couple years. String "Theory's" piece of the pie is getting smaller and smaller and smaller.
I'll also point out that many a Theory has started like "String Theory." So, entertaining such notions ARE part of the scientific process. It looked interesting in the beginning, like it might lead somewhere. Now that the likeliness of that is waning, Administration's perception has caught up with reality and its funding is being dramatically cut. The cycle holds.
To give you another example, I just need to point to the variable speed of light guys. It most certainly solves a number of problems, but they've yet to produce a cohesive theory. They're working on it, and I for one and quite interested in what is produced. But, it'll take a while. Patience. Sometimes these things need a few decades (or more actually) to see that it's not going to work out.
ID is creationism and creationism being taught in schools is a clear violation of the separation of church and state. That, so called, broad statement is law in many a county including the US.
And those foreign students coming to the US to study (typically Masters or higher) will be taught by instructors that are foreigners as well. Don't let the fact that many students come to the US to study delude you into thinking that US citizens are teaching them. There are many running jokes regarding this. One of them being, it's the Russian Math Profs teaching the Chinese students at the American Universities. That actually isn't far from the truth. Point of fact, when I lived in the US my wife worked in a group of about a dozen people in which 2 were US born and one of those was the crackpot retired guy that wouldn't go away (every group has one). This isn't uncommon.
Also, let's not to mention that since the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent changes to VISA regulations, the number of those students have plummeted.
I'll also point out that there will always be people left to study at the US Universities. They'll just lower the bar to get in. If you don't think that'll happen, just look at what's going on right now.
Honestly, I think that your thinking on this is that, "public perception will always be *at least* a decade or two *behind* reality" thing.
Yah, totally. What this article was saying is totally stupid. Let's just do some administrative renaming and call that renaming thing smart and better.
Aside: I'm not from the US. Perhaps the world beyond your borders is a little bit better than you think it is.
I find it shocking that a school teacher has no clue as to why grades are assigned. I'll let you in on the secret:
Grades are there to give the student an as accurate as possible idea of how well they know/understand the material. That's it.
So, I'll ask you a question. You know, now that you know what grades are supposed to represent.
Why do you think it is fair to delude a kid into thinking that they did (far) better (or worse for that matter - curves) than they actually did? Or do you believe that there should be no repercussions for ones actions (or lack thereof)?
Yah, leave it to the corporations. You know, the ones that have nothing else but the best interests of the students education in mind... wait a minute...
I'd say that this has more to do with programming errors and cryptic error messages in those popups than anything else. I mean, how often do we see something in a popup that 1) Average Joe user doesn't have a hope of understanding, or 2) something completely unnecessary.
We, as programmers, should be ashamed for creating a "never cry wolf" scenario that has created this mentality among users. Similarly, for all those "next" button clicks with the nonsense involved. How many of us just click next, eh?
You need to get out more. DRM is NOT something that the typical person care about much less even knows about. Most of the people who have HDTV sets don't care so much as they get to take full advantage of there cool new toy(s).
1) The Wii does NOT have exclusivity over casual games
2) You have no clue as to whether a reduction to SD would allow for it to fit on a DVD
3) Downloading levels, etc requires space on the console which the Wii is tragically low on
4) You've never played it, so don't comment on the controls
5) Don't bitch about it because YOU are part of the Wii community and feel like you got cheated because you don't own a PS3 as well
Sure, the game MIGHT (probably?) fit the Wii as well depending on controls. But, just because that MAY be so, doesn't mean that another type of control won't fit just as good. I mean, how many games have been on both the PS3 AND the Wii again? Get your head out of your ass. The Wii is NOT the end all be all of the consoles (even with regard to casual games).
""" an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be appreciated but is not required. """
And replace it with:
""" an acknowledgment in the product documentation is required. """
Or some other wording that you like better.
You could do similar things with licenses such as the MIT or BSD. But, for the love of god, do NOT use the [L]GPL. If you respect the academic freedom of others, you'll stay *very* far away from that license.
... a study will find that Video Games *Are* Bad for Kids.
And you were expecting what?
on
Tech Vs. Business?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Seriously, tech and business really are two different worlds.
The techies want to learn, deploy, do "cool things", etc. Whereas the business people want to make assloads of money. The problem comes in when these two worlds collide. The business people don't understand that when they change there mind with a complex (software) project, that it really isn't as simple as altering a pie chart on a presentation and takes some (if not a lot) of time. This makes them mad and then they come down on the IT people like they're just being lazy.
The IT people know why things are the way they are, but the typical business person doesn't listen to explanations because in the business world explanations tend to be excuses and CYA. They don't understand that things are different in the IT field nor do they care. Nor do they realise that throwing money at a problem doesn't make it go away. As in, a bug doesn't care how much you're paid, it'll hide as long as it wants to.
But, most of these problems occur because of poor project management. Back in the day, project managers were there to protect the people that they were managing. They were there so the IT people didn't get screwed. But, more and more over time, the project manager has become an extension of the client.
No-one really seems to care that changing there minds constantly (sometimes back and forth) costs a profound amount of time and money. After all, why plan something out when it will waste someone (or someone else's company's) money and not yours.
""" science is simply a dogmatic form of superstition """
This is a laughable statement that implies that this guy has no clue what science really is. Science is about creating a theory that produces predictions that are experimentally verifiable across time/space. So, no matter where you are, no matter when it is done, the experiment produces the same result which will either prove or disprove the prediction which will prove or disprove (at least part of) the theory.
Science, is thus something that can disprove something is is thought to be true. An example would be horoscopes. Science killed them long ago, yet some people (quite irrationally) still swear by them. Quantum Mechanics is strange and counter-intuitive, but none-the-less has mountains of experimental evidence to show its veracity.
Other than that, all I have to say is this: This so called "research" sounds more like that paper that that Mathematician put out a while ago to "prove" intelligent design than actual science. So, my review gives this paper two opposable thumbs down. For shame non-researcher. For shame.
Slashdot Mirror
That resolution is really only necessary if you're going for realistic. And this is exactly where Nintendo isn't. The XBox's and PS's are, but not the Wii. High resolution just isn't necessary for cartoon-y stuff. So, don't criticise them for choosing technology that suits there needs, but doesn't live up to what /you/ *think* they should be doing.
Btw, I have a 32" LCD HDTV and Metroid looks amazing and Zelda looks good as well (though Zelda is _not_ supposed to look as good as Metroid).
Fair enough about prior art. But, it does limit people. See an example below regarding metals. Also, note that limiting usage of the national anthem is retarded no matter how limited that limitation is. I'll also point out that with blogging so damn popular, this could mean a hell of a lot of lawsuits (if even if people aren't careful on there wording when writing about this story). This also sets a precedent that I would rather not have on the books. That could turn ugly in the future when the IOC and others wish to do other things. So yah, government could have a lot to lose.
1) WERE in a minority, government was dissolved a little while ago.
2) The Liberal leadership (and others) was (is probably still) too weak to vote down something for fear that it would bring down government and invoke an election when they didn't have favourable polling numbers. So, much for that, eh. Harper went against his own bill and did it anyway. Another example of this behaviour was the immigration bill that significantly weakened the point system in favour of the person reviewing the application. The Liberals were venomously opposed to it, yet they let it pass because of the same fear.
3) Limiting use of something so very general is against reason no matter how long/short the time limit on it is.
4) Your example of metals works against your point.
Wholly out of context Batman!
Rather someone who doesn't know the limitations of a computer (they do have limitations you know) and doesn't have anything of substance to say.
I'll never understand why some people think that because its done on a computer, it makes it better. There are always bugs and because of that, it's no more infallible than humans. It'll just make the mistakes faster and *much* harder to detect.
Overconfidence never leads to good places.
And for not saying why, that makes you what again?
... is that this Canadian and a lot of people that I know will, with glowing hearts, ignore this piece of nonsense on the basis of prior art.
p.s. With the Conservatives in power when this was done, and the fact that they are more than likely to get back in, does anyone think that this will change?
This is totally nuts. Machines CAN NEVER BE AS GOOD AS THE ONES THAT PROGRAM THEM. For that to be so, it'll require creativity, etc. Computers, at least now, have no such capacity. After all, how are new proof techniques supposed to be checked when they are an unknown quantity? This is total BS.
If one wants an example of such things gone awry, you need to look no further than James Anderson's Transreals. There exists proofs that they are inconsistent at the axiomatic level, but James just states that he has a machine proof that states they are consistent and ignores the proofs completely. In fact, his response to the criticism has been the typical political speak of not actually addressing anything.
Given the above, you'll have to excuse me while the Mathematical community at large and myself completely ignore and shun this.
You still wouldn't have a leg to stand on comparing ID to any Big Bang nor String "Theory."
You see, the Big Bang theories are being tested against every year as we get more powerful Colliders, and the theories are developed further (i.e. more testable predictions produced). So, with each passing year, any given Big Bang is either thrown out or more evidence is found in its favour. They cycle holds.
When it comes to String "Theory," it's in *really* big trouble. The only reason why anyone outside the labs know anything about it is the *massive* PR campaigns put on by its participants. When it comes to the scientific community thoughts on it... well, it's a *very* different story than what's coming from the Proles. In fact, the only things that String "Theory" has been good for, is developing some interesting techniques (Mathematical) and ideas that have benefited *real* Physics research.
In other words, String "Theory" is fine as a toy. But, the whole String Theory notion spun wildly out of control. Thankfully, and this is where your argument falls on its face:
It is currently being corrected.
If you don't believe me, just check out the distribution of funding in the last couple years. String "Theory's" piece of the pie is getting smaller and smaller and smaller.
I'll also point out that many a Theory has started like "String Theory." So, entertaining such notions ARE part of the scientific process. It looked interesting in the beginning, like it might lead somewhere. Now that the likeliness of that is waning, Administration's perception has caught up with reality and its funding is being dramatically cut. The cycle holds.
To give you another example, I just need to point to the variable speed of light guys. It most certainly solves a number of problems, but they've yet to produce a cohesive theory. They're working on it, and I for one and quite interested in what is produced. But, it'll take a while. Patience. Sometimes these things need a few decades (or more actually) to see that it's not going to work out.
There's also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
ID is creationism and creationism being taught in schools is a clear violation of the separation of church and state. That, so called, broad statement is law in many a county including the US.
And those foreign students coming to the US to study (typically Masters or higher) will be taught by instructors that are foreigners as well. Don't let the fact that many students come to the US to study delude you into thinking that US citizens are teaching them. There are many running jokes regarding this. One of them being, it's the Russian Math Profs teaching the Chinese students at the American Universities. That actually isn't far from the truth. Point of fact, when I lived in the US my wife worked in a group of about a dozen people in which 2 were US born and one of those was the crackpot retired guy that wouldn't go away (every group has one). This isn't uncommon.
Also, let's not to mention that since the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent changes to VISA regulations, the number of those students have plummeted.
I'll also point out that there will always be people left to study at the US Universities. They'll just lower the bar to get in. If you don't think that'll happen, just look at what's going on right now.
Honestly, I think that your thinking on this is that, "public perception will always be *at least* a decade or two *behind* reality" thing.
Yah, totally. What this article was saying is totally stupid. Let's just do some administrative renaming and call that renaming thing smart and better.
Aside: I'm not from the US. Perhaps the world beyond your borders is a little bit better than you think it is.
I find it shocking that a school teacher has no clue as to why grades are assigned. I'll let you in on the secret:
Grades are there to give the student an as accurate as possible idea of how well they know/understand the material. That's it.
So, I'll ask you a question. You know, now that you know what grades are supposed to represent.
Why do you think it is fair to delude a kid into thinking that they did (far) better (or worse for that matter - curves) than they actually did? Or do you believe that there should be no repercussions for ones actions (or lack thereof)?
Yah, leave it to the corporations. You know, the ones that have nothing else but the best interests of the students education in mind... wait a minute...
I'd say that this has more to do with programming errors and cryptic error messages in those popups than anything else. I mean, how often do we see something in a popup that 1) Average Joe user doesn't have a hope of understanding, or 2) something completely unnecessary.
We, as programmers, should be ashamed for creating a "never cry wolf" scenario that has created this mentality among users. Similarly, for all those "next" button clicks with the nonsense involved. How many of us just click next, eh?
You are NOT regular Joe consumer because:
1) You consider DRM
2) See (1)
3) $99 is still too much, more like $50
4) The only thing you're right on
5) With the prices I've seen, this is already the case for the most part.
You need to get out more. DRM is NOT something that the typical person care about much less even knows about. Most of the people who have HDTV sets don't care so much as they get to take full advantage of there cool new toy(s).
I find it REALLY hard to believe that you don't know anyone that doesn't own a PS3.
It'd hate to burst your bubble there buddy, but:
1) The Wii does NOT have exclusivity over casual games
2) You have no clue as to whether a reduction to SD would allow for it to fit on a DVD
3) Downloading levels, etc requires space on the console which the Wii is tragically low on
4) You've never played it, so don't comment on the controls
5) Don't bitch about it because YOU are part of the Wii community and feel like you got cheated because you don't own a PS3 as well
Sure, the game MIGHT (probably?) fit the Wii as well depending on controls. But, just because that MAY be so, doesn't mean that another type of control won't fit just as good. I mean, how many games have been on both the PS3 AND the Wii again? Get your head out of your ass. The Wii is NOT the end all be all of the consoles (even with regard to casual games).
DISCLAIMER: I own both a PS3 and a Wii.
Zlib license
http://opensource.org/licenses/zlib-license.php
Just take out the:
"""
an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be
appreciated but is not required.
"""
And replace it with:
"""
an acknowledgment in the product documentation is required.
"""
Or some other wording that you like better.
You could do similar things with licenses such as the MIT or BSD. But, for the love of god, do NOT use the [L]GPL. If you respect the academic freedom of others, you'll stay *very* far away from that license.
Wholly missing the point Batman!
... a study will find that Video Games *Are* Bad for Kids.
Seriously, tech and business really are two different worlds.
The techies want to learn, deploy, do "cool things", etc. Whereas the business people want to make assloads of money. The problem comes in when these two worlds collide. The business people don't understand that when they change there mind with a complex (software) project, that it really isn't as simple as altering a pie chart on a presentation and takes some (if not a lot) of time. This makes them mad and then they come down on the IT people like they're just being lazy.
The IT people know why things are the way they are, but the typical business person doesn't listen to explanations because in the business world explanations tend to be excuses and CYA. They don't understand that things are different in the IT field nor do they care. Nor do they realise that throwing money at a problem doesn't make it go away. As in, a bug doesn't care how much you're paid, it'll hide as long as it wants to.
But, most of these problems occur because of poor project management. Back in the day, project managers were there to protect the people that they were managing. They were there so the IT people didn't get screwed. But, more and more over time, the project manager has become an extension of the client.
No-one really seems to care that changing there minds constantly (sometimes back and forth) costs a profound amount of time and money. After all, why plan something out when it will waste someone (or someone else's company's) money and not yours.
"""
science is simply a dogmatic form of superstition
"""
This is a laughable statement that implies that this guy has no clue what science really is. Science is about creating a theory that produces predictions that are experimentally verifiable across time/space. So, no matter where you are, no matter when it is done, the experiment produces the same result which will either prove or disprove the prediction which will prove or disprove (at least part of) the theory.
Science, is thus something that can disprove something is is thought to be true. An example would be horoscopes. Science killed them long ago, yet some people (quite irrationally) still swear by them. Quantum Mechanics is strange and counter-intuitive, but none-the-less has mountains of experimental evidence to show its veracity.
Other than that, all I have to say is this: This so called "research" sounds more like that paper that that Mathematician put out a while ago to "prove" intelligent design than actual science. So, my review gives this paper two opposable thumbs down. For shame non-researcher. For shame.
Let me point out that you have completely missed the point of my post. I'll leave it as an exercise for you to re-read it and get a clue.