Re:Purple Moon, John Romero, and sexist games
on
Sims the New Dolls?
·
· Score: 1
That's one of the biggest problems with the game industry: they are so insulated from reality that they can't see the obvious problem of how fucking dominated the industry is by clueless straight white boys who think everybody else is just like them.
How very odd; I had always thought that was the biggest problems with/.
"...the city will be rebuilt as a white, condo-tall, high-rise republican bastion of neo-con values (looting), and the state of Louisiana will be a republican state henceforth. mission accomplished."
WTF?
Reading/. is making my head hurt. Now I'm gonna go surf YouTube until the world makes sense again.:-(
If netflix is having difficulty making profit due to a small percentage of heavy users, perhaps they should tweak their rental plans. Just as an example:
New Rates
$09.99 1-at-a-time Unlimited
$14.99 2-at-a-time Unlimited
$17.99 3-at-a-time Unlimited (with current throttling algorithm) $20.99 3-at-a-time Fast Unlimited (no delays for heavy usage)
Flat rates are easier to understand, but netflix is established now, and should give customers more options. If the plan don't fit the customer, change the plan!
Where does "knowledgeable about" end, and "vested interest" begin?
A vested interest usually indicates a financial or deeply personal interest. One can be knowledgeable about a subject, but indifferent to it, and vise-versa. The two terms are reasonably distinct.
That said, excluding Wikipedia contributors with vested interests would unfortunately exclude interested people who are also able to maintain a NPOV. Also, this would likely be a difficult solution to implement. How can Wikipedia discern those with vested interests from the masses?
For about 4 months, I regularly received mail from students of a German Professor at a state school. The gmail adress was *.*@gmail. I would have let them know about the glitch sooner, but it I'll admit it was much too entertaining watching several of the students do their best to kiss up to the Prof every week or so. For some weird reason, it would just sort of brighten my day:)
The mission statement's use of "cyberspace" is likely a bit misleading, as it is more often used in reference to the internet (by people who don't know the correct terms to use). Actually, however, the Air Force has been deeply involved in electronic warfare since before the cold war.
Today, aircraft like the AWACS and JSTARS are integral to controlling theater level communication and are often used for intel gathering.
Other dedicated surveillance aircraft like the Rivet Joint are packed full of sensory equipment to intercept, block, and manipulate wireless communication transmittions(cellular, 802.11, 900MHz).
After Vietnam, the Prowler was repurposed for radar jamming and surveillance in support of combat operations.
In the last few American wars, the EC-130E was used quite a bit to broadcast radio and TV content for PsycOps.
These days, it could be argued, the Air Force is used for electronic warfare more than it is as an "ordinance taxi service". Either way, this role certainly disserves mentioning in its mission statement.
As a past participant in the AUVSI/IARC, I've noticed that only a few teams have tried using a fixed-wing approach. This is likely because the "building entry" requirement is difficult to accomplish without navigating in close proximity to the buildings. Yet since Mars has such a thin atmosphere, one would think that a rotary-wing aircraft would be much less practical for NASA's purposes.
However, if the NASA competition allows for helicopters, there are several IARC teams that have developed vision-based (no GPS) navigation capability for their rotary-wing platforms.
In particular,
Carnegie Mellon University, Georgia Tech, and USC
all appear to have successfully developed this capability.
The only other requirement listed is "extending and retracting a probe to precisely hit multiple targets on the ground." This statement is pretty vague, and doesn't sound very trivial, but there is precedent.
So far anyway, there doesn't appear to be much any new technology needed to win this NASA competition. Contending institutions that have developed visual navigation techniques can probably just integrate an extra computer/camera to a cheap commercial UAV, optimize their algorithm for the competition terrain type, and interface their controller with the UAV's mission planner. Hopefully NASA will soon add some requirements that will level the playing field a bit and provide them with some usable R&D.
Meh,
In the 1950's we had the great DO-IT-YOURSELF revolution.
Simply put, people are inclined to tinker with technology after it matures.
Modding isn't new. It just has a new name.
Slashdot Mirror
How very odd; I had always thought that was the biggest problems with
"...the city will be rebuilt as a white, condo-tall, high-rise republican bastion of neo-con values (looting), and the state of Louisiana will be a republican state henceforth. mission accomplished."
/. is making my head hurt. Now I'm gonna go surf YouTube until the world makes sense again. :-(
WTF?
Reading
If netflix is having difficulty making profit due to a small percentage of heavy users, perhaps they should tweak their rental plans.
Just as an example:
Current Rates
New Rates
$09.99 1-at-a-time Unlimited
$14.99 2-at-a-time Unlimited
$17.99 3-at-a-time Unlimited (with current throttling algorithm)
$20.99 3-at-a-time Fast Unlimited (no delays for heavy usage)
Flat rates are easier to understand, but netflix is established now, and should give customers more options. If the plan don't fit the customer, change the plan!
Where does "knowledgeable about" end, and "vested interest" begin?
A vested interest usually indicates a financial or deeply personal interest. One can be knowledgeable about a subject, but indifferent to it, and vise-versa. The two terms are reasonably distinct.
That said, excluding Wikipedia contributors with vested interests would unfortunately exclude interested people who are also able to maintain a NPOV. Also, this would likely be a difficult solution to implement. How can Wikipedia discern those with vested interests from the masses?
For about 4 months, I regularly received mail from students of a German Professor at a state school. The gmail adress was *.*@gmail. I would have let them know about the glitch sooner, but it I'll admit it was much too entertaining watching several of the students do their best to kiss up to the Prof every week or so. For some weird reason, it would just sort of brighten my day :)
The mission statement's use of "cyberspace" is likely a bit misleading, as it is more often used in reference to the internet (by people who don't know the correct terms to use). Actually, however, the Air Force has been deeply involved in electronic warfare since before the cold war.
Today, aircraft like the AWACS and JSTARS are integral to controlling theater level communication and are often used for intel gathering.
Other dedicated surveillance aircraft like the Rivet Joint are packed full of sensory equipment to intercept, block, and manipulate wireless communication transmittions(cellular, 802.11, 900MHz).
After Vietnam, the Prowler was repurposed for radar jamming and surveillance in support of combat operations.
In the last few American wars, the EC-130E was used quite a bit to broadcast radio and TV content for PsycOps.
These days, it could be argued, the Air Force is used for electronic warfare more than it is as an "ordinance taxi service". Either way, this role certainly disserves mentioning in its mission statement.
As a past participant in the AUVSI/IARC, I've noticed that only a few teams have tried using a fixed-wing approach. This is likely because the "building entry" requirement is difficult to accomplish without navigating in close proximity to the buildings. Yet since Mars has such a thin atmosphere, one would think that a rotary-wing aircraft would be much less practical for NASA's purposes.
However, if the NASA competition allows for helicopters, there are several IARC teams that have developed vision-based (no GPS) navigation capability for their rotary-wing platforms. In particular, Carnegie Mellon University, Georgia Tech, and USC all appear to have successfully developed this capability.
The only other requirement listed is "extending and retracting a probe to precisely hit multiple targets on the ground." This statement is pretty vague, and doesn't sound very trivial, but there is precedent.
So far anyway, there doesn't appear to be much any new technology needed to win this NASA competition. Contending institutions that have developed visual navigation techniques can probably just integrate an extra computer/camera to a cheap commercial UAV, optimize their algorithm for the competition terrain type, and interface their controller with the UAV's mission planner. Hopefully NASA will soon add some requirements that will level the playing field a bit and provide them with some usable R&D.
Meh, In the 1950's we had the great DO-IT-YOURSELF revolution. Simply put, people are inclined to tinker with technology after it matures. Modding isn't new. It just has a new name.