Linux needs it's version of "Doom". A killer game that blows the competition away and makes people sit up and take notice.
I think for something like this to work the game would have to be SPECIFICALLY for Linux. Otherwise, most people will stay with the OS they have. If I was a Windows user and the next "big thing" was available for both Linux and Windows, I wouldn't likely switch to a new OS, I'd just buy the Windows version. Don't get me wrong, more games for Linux is great, but as long as they're all ports of Windows games, not many people are going to switch over ( at least not for the games ).
Tim Burton did this excellently with the first Batman movie, using Batman's long-time foe The Joker, but Spiderman really doesn't have an equivalent equal -- all his enemies like Green Goblin, Dr Oct, and Venom, are just foes, but not a constant one. I don't see how you can pick one foe and still have a good Spiderman movie.
The thing is, Hollywood wouldn't WANT to stick with just one villan. There's just too much money to be made by cramming in as many marketable characters as possible (just look where the Batman movies ended up).
Now, as for software patents, my thought is that since software engineering is such a new science, the "wheels" so to speak are still being invented. I say we should set an arbitrary date, say 2029, where we say "OK! All the obvious software algorithms have been invented. After that point, clearly it was not obvious and someone deserves to own it." Note that after that date any undiscovered algorithm is going to be extremely complicated (like the recipe for intelligence or something).
The problem with this is the fact that what is "obvious" changes every day. Every time someone learns a new piece of information, that information can make another (until then) unobvious fact obvious. That's how most of science is done. People build on previous knowledge one piece at a time. Only occasionally are great leaps made.
Some small areas at the poles recieve no light, but when the moon is "dark" as seen from earth (no sense wasting technical terms here) the other side is illuminated by the sun you retard!!!!
By no stretch of the imagination am I an authority on this, but I'm not sure this makes sense. If the moon is "dark" as seen from the earth, then in order for the other side to be illuminated by the sun wouldn't the sun have to be on the other side, making it a Solar Eclipse?? Otherwise it would still be light out and the sun would be illuminating both the moon and the place I'm viewing it from ( it DOES happen ). I always thought that when you see a "cresent" moon it's due to the earth's shadow on it and when you get a new moon the earth's shadow completely obsures the moon.
Katz seems to be assuming that some genetic tweaking can produce people who behave exactly as you want them to. While I don't disagree that a person's genetic structure will have _some_ effect on how they behave, I'm not totally convinced that it controls all behaviour ( or even most of it ). What about a person's upbringing and the society around them? What do other readers think?
They are challenging Bigness and asking whether or not increasingly powerful corporations shouldn't be held to a higher standard of moral behavior;
While I don't usually agree with Katz, I must agree that large corps should be held to a higher degree of morality. That said, the question is: WHICH morality will they be held to?
Large corps are mostly international in nature, and people in (and within) different countries all have different standards as to what is "moral". Is McDonalds immoral because the cow is a sacred animal to some? In fact, are ALL meat producing companies immoral because some people believe that eating meat is wrong? On the other hand, there are some people (I know a few) who have practically no morals. Do we want to use them as a basis for international morallity?
I gues what I'm saying is that having companies adhear to a certain moral standard is a good idea, you can't enforce it and make everyone happy.
"Who are you, to criticise me? Who are you, to despise me? If your slate is clean, than you can throw stones. If your slate is not, than leave me alone!"
DoomHaven's listening to Jesus Christ Superstar. Damn good musical.
Anyway, to the people who have problems with moderation: if you don't like it, ignore it! Nothing's forcing you to read all posts or even to filter the level of posts that you see!
That said, if it's really a problem for you then you should make a civialized attempt to get it changed.
Care to put a estimate on how long the sun has left? And before you say, "We'll be off-planet *long before* the sun goes nova", remember: people said the same thing about Y2K ("the computers with be updated *long before* the year 2000 is reached").
1. Current estimates figure that the sun will continue to burn just fine for another 5 billion years. I don't think that humans (as we know them) will be around when the sun starts to die.
2. Only VERY large stars "go nova". The sun isn't one of them.
Hmmmm. I just got paid today. I try to make it a point of setting aside a certain amount of each pay cheque for books be they technical or just for fun. (of course a good deal of technical books can be fun too, but I digress)
I must admit that I haven't read any of Stephenson's books, but I am interested. What do you guys/girls say? Is this a book worth ponying up the dough for or what?
If I had enough money that I didn't have to "work" anymore, I'd still be programming. It's just that instead of spending 8-12 hours a day programming for my company, I'd be spending 4-6 hours on my own pet projects, and doing other (non-computer related, I do have a life outside computers) stuff.
As scary as this is, this guy might be one smart cookie. If things in North America continue in the same direction they're currently going. Holding a patent like this could be a major financial windfall.
I'm not saying It's not a bad (read: scary, inhumane, degrading) thing, but with governments steadily eroding our freedoms, this could be a step they'd like to take. Think of it, by barcoding people, and making it a manditory requirement for transactions, the spooks could very easily keep track of you wherever you go. I would hope that the politicians, and the general populous would never go along with such a stupid idea, BUT they could always use a new tactic to "protect the children" right?
If you like a system, fine, use it, and tell us all about what it can offer, but don't try to deride others in the process.
I agree, that would be the ideal. Unfortunatly, there are some who feel the need to build themselves up by tearing everyone around them down. These tend to be the people who are the loudest with thier opinions, which gives a false impression as to thier numbers.
Moral: You'll get more out of a reasonable discussion, but only if you can hear each other.
All you Jar Jar bashers are forgetting one very important point (as annoying as he may be to most of us). Star Wars is made for K-I-D-S. Not old people like us bashing him. Kids like Jar Jar, and I think as a kid I would have been pretty dissappointed if I was always hearing my parents and practically all adults going about how much that fucking Chewbacca kept annoying them and how they hated him so. It's a kids movie, try to keep that in mind next you time you watch it, and watch it through childs eyes, thats the way it was meant to be watched.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux needs it's version of "Doom". A killer game that blows the competition away and makes people sit up and take notice.
I think for something like this to work the game would have to be SPECIFICALLY for Linux. Otherwise, most people will stay with the OS they have. If I was a Windows user and the next "big thing" was available for both Linux and Windows, I wouldn't likely switch to a new OS, I'd just buy the Windows version. Don't get me wrong, more games for Linux is great, but as long as they're all ports of Windows games, not many people are going to switch over ( at least not for the games ).
Colour IS the correct spelling. It's just that you Yanks can't spell :) Seriously, it's just the British spelling, no hints here.
True.
:)
We all know where the road the "Good Intentions Paving Company" builds leads to.
Tim Burton did this excellently with the first Batman movie, using Batman's long-time foe The Joker, but Spiderman really doesn't have an equivalent equal -- all his enemies like Green Goblin, Dr Oct, and Venom, are just foes, but not a constant one. I don't see how you can pick one foe and still have a good Spiderman movie.
The thing is, Hollywood wouldn't WANT to stick with just one villan. There's just too much money to be made by cramming in as many marketable characters as possible (just look where the Batman movies ended up).
Now, as for software patents, my thought is that since software engineering is such a new science, the "wheels" so to speak are still being invented. I say we should set an arbitrary date, say 2029, where we say "OK! All the obvious software algorithms have been invented. After that point, clearly it was not obvious and someone deserves to own it." Note that after that date any undiscovered algorithm is going to be extremely complicated (like the recipe for intelligence or something).
The problem with this is the fact that what is "obvious" changes every day. Every time someone learns a new piece of information, that information can make another (until then) unobvious fact obvious. That's how most of science is done. People build on previous knowledge one piece at a time. Only occasionally are great leaps made.
Some small areas at the poles recieve no light, but when the moon is "dark" as seen from earth (no sense wasting technical terms here) the other side is illuminated by the sun you retard!!!!
By no stretch of the imagination am I an authority on this, but I'm not sure this makes sense. If the moon is "dark" as seen from the earth, then in order for the other side to be illuminated by the sun wouldn't the sun have to be on the other side, making it a Solar Eclipse?? Otherwise it would still be light out and the sun would be illuminating both the moon and the place I'm viewing it from ( it DOES happen ). I always thought that when you see a "cresent" moon it's due to the earth's shadow on it and when you get a new moon the earth's shadow completely obsures the moon.
Can anybody POLIETLY confirm/deny this?
Katz seems to be assuming that some genetic tweaking can produce people who behave exactly as you want them to. While I don't disagree that a person's genetic structure will have _some_ effect on how they behave, I'm not totally convinced that it controls all behaviour ( or even most of it ). What about a person's upbringing and the society around them? What do other readers think?
They are challenging Bigness and asking whether or not increasingly powerful corporations shouldn't be held to a higher standard of moral behavior;
While I don't usually agree with Katz, I must agree that large corps should be held to a higher degree of morality. That said, the question is: WHICH morality will they be held to?
Large corps are mostly international in nature, and people in (and within) different countries all have different standards as to what is "moral". Is McDonalds immoral because the cow is a sacred animal to some? In fact, are ALL meat producing companies immoral because some people believe that eating meat is wrong? On the other hand, there are some people (I know a few) who have practically no morals. Do we want to use them as a basis for international morallity?
I gues what I'm saying is that having companies adhear to a certain moral standard is a good idea, you can't enforce it and make everyone happy.
I know this is off topic buttttt...
"Who are you, to criticise me? Who are you, to despise me? If your slate is clean, than you can throw stones. If your slate is not, than leave me alone!"
DoomHaven's listening to Jesus Christ Superstar. Damn good musical.
Anyway, to the people who have problems with moderation: if you don't like it, ignore it! Nothing's forcing you to read all posts or even to filter the level of posts that you see!
That said, if it's really a problem for you then you should make a civialized attempt to get it changed.
And why, why does satan have to do the dirty deed between 11pm and 12am on Dec 31, 1999?
:)
I haven't seen the movie but I wonder....
Is that EST?
Care to put a estimate on how long the sun has left? And before you say, "We'll be off-planet *long before* the sun goes nova", remember: people said the same thing about Y2K ("the computers with be updated *long before* the year 2000 is reached").
1. Current estimates figure that the sun will continue to burn just fine for another 5 billion years. I don't think that humans (as we know them) will be around when the sun starts to die.
2. Only VERY large stars "go nova". The sun isn't one of them.
Hmmmm. I just got paid today. I try to make it a point of setting aside a certain amount of each pay cheque for books be they technical or just for fun. (of course a good deal of technical books can be fun too, but I digress)
I must admit that I haven't read any of Stephenson's books, but I am interested. What do you guys/girls say? Is this a book worth ponying up the dough for or what?
Right On!!
If I had enough money that I didn't have to "work" anymore, I'd still be programming. It's just that instead of spending 8-12 hours a day programming for my company, I'd be spending 4-6 hours on my own pet projects, and doing other (non-computer related, I do have a life outside computers) stuff.
As scary as this is, this guy might be one smart cookie. If things in North America continue in the same direction they're currently going. Holding a patent like this could be a major financial windfall.
I'm not saying It's not a bad (read: scary, inhumane, degrading) thing, but with governments steadily eroding our freedoms, this could be a step they'd like to take. Think of it, by barcoding people, and making it a manditory requirement for transactions, the spooks could very easily keep track of you wherever you go. I would hope that the politicians, and the general populous would never go along with such a stupid idea, BUT they could always use a new tactic to "protect the children" right?
If you like a system, fine, use it, and tell us all about what it can offer, but don't try to deride others in the process.
I agree, that would be the ideal. Unfortunatly, there are some who feel the need to build themselves up by tearing everyone around them down. These tend to be the people who are the loudest with thier opinions, which gives a false impression as to thier numbers.
Moral: You'll get more out of a reasonable discussion, but only if you can hear each other.
All you Jar Jar bashers are forgetting one very important point (as annoying as he may be to most of us). Star Wars is made for K-I-D-S. Not old people like us bashing him. Kids like Jar Jar, and I think as a kid I would have been pretty dissappointed if I was always hearing my parents and practically all adults going about how much that fucking Chewbacca kept annoying them and how they hated him so. It's a kids movie, try to keep that in mind next you time you watch it, and watch it through childs eyes, thats the way it was meant to be watched.