Make that over-90's! And I'm not even talking about people who are exactly 99 on MySpace, I mean come on, has someone been pouring massive doses of testosterone in the water back in 1907 or what?
That's better odds than the people they're giving licenses to in this country.
Why isn't it modded troll already? What you mean by all these people not being safe to drive is that they can sometimes behave dangerously, forget their blinker, not give you your due priority, occasionally get involved in minor accidents, etc... Here, the 45% deemed unsafe are deemed so because they can't drive an hour without leaving the road and rolling over or systematically hitting obstacles. Not quite the same thing..
Besides the obvious "Why?" that this article must prompt in anyone with some common sense, could Apple even afford it? Now I didn't RTFA but I search for the word 'afford' in it and I didn't find anything..
More seriously I'm asking if they could afford it because Adobe is huge, it has swallowed Macromedia whole, and I think that if Microsoft could have bought them, they would have done it a long time ago, right? So could Apple even do that, besides the questionable interest of doing such a thing?
...is that the patterns of stars, planets, and constellations you see in the night sky is not random at all, but rather are arranged by a very intricate system of mathematical functions which describe all the interactions of all those objects and include their wildly varying velocity vectors, sizes, densities, masses, and distances from one another and they are not contained in a fixed size and shape container where frequent collisions will affect their positions as seen by a viewer here on this planet.
Stars in the sky are placed randomly, and while it should not be so easy to prove it by a statistical analysis of the night sky, I've made a night sky generator that places stars at random coordinates (with random intensities too, but with a particular distribution), and I'm telling you you can see new constellations everywhere.
And if you think about it, stars don't just look like they're at random places, they're actually pretty much placed randomly, following a certain distribution (in 3D space, on a galactic scale), although they obey rules.
It stands for Bisexual Satanic Daemon. That's a service for Linux that filters packets from the internet and replaces the text from web pages with random extracts from the Satanic Bible and random occurences of '666', and replaces images with obscene pornographic depictions.
lol, what a bunch of fucking idiots. I'll try to remember this in a few years when I'll see some guy on TV going "Americans suck at science, the only good scientists we have come from abroad", although you can already hear that.
If there is no such thing as a perfect game, when why the hell are you scoring out of 100? [...] Games are penalized through being divided by a sum that they can never possibly reach.
Here's what I think about scoring out of 100. Have you noticed how it's as easy to go from 0 to 80 as it is to go from 80 to 90? Here's the thing, scores are not linear, they are logarithmic, so if you want to report a score out of 100 into a linear score, f(90) might just be twice as much as f(80), and f(100) is infinity. That's why there's no such thing as a perfect game, a game can't rank to infinity on a linear scale, and thus not score 100 in the scale we use.
As for the rest, the metric is just a means of comparison, and is a speed trade-off to make yourself an idea of how good a game is without reading an entire review, which is itself a quicker way to make yourself an idea without trying the game.
You've got a point, but I think we can say the GTA series had its fair share of gameplay innovations with respect to these games (if not why would people consider GTA III as such a stepping stone?)
That's completely different. To a certain extent, the Simpsons game are directly concurrencing (in a way) the GTA series by ripping them off, as GTA is heavily inspired by relatively old *movies*. If you can't spot the major difference, please consider your intelligence insulted.
You should try tuning the in-game car radios to the talk-radio channel, especially the concerned mother that playing video games is teaching children to chase after money (parodying the post-Donkey-Kong Mario games).
You know what's funny? The utter ridiculousness of your point. Did Rockstar copy the Donkey Kong games anywhere in GTA? No. There's a big difference between making a reference to a game in your game's environment, and basing your game on another game and claiming it loud and clear.
Damn right! If anyone, EVER, dares to make a third-person shooter-em-up in which the protagonist is capable of interacting with his or her environment, they'll have to go through ME.
It's not like they're just happening to make a game a bit similar, otherwise they would already have sued for Saints Row or 25 To Life, the thing is that they repeatedly make their games off copying their games. As in, they're not even going "no, we're not copying your game, we're just doing an unrelated third person game in which the protagonist is capable of interacting with his or her environment", they go "yup, we're copying your game and making money off of it, and? Get some humour!"
That free speech and all is a bitch when its making fun of your product isn't it?
There's a difference between humour in free speech and making money off copying what you've invented and intend to keep making money on. Rockstar didn't base a major part of their games on some other games.
Senior producer Matt Warburton added, "They're supposed to be rock stars; that's not a big Rockstar move - to be afraid of The Simpsons making fun of their game."
Rockstar are not afraid, they're tired of you guys making money by ripping off their game. There's a difference between poking some fun at another game and making large parts of their games recurrently based on copying Rockstar's game franchise.
Actually this service has little to do with YouTube, and doesn't risk to kill it, since Hulu and YouTube are actually complementary. YouTube serves user-submitted content and no shows, and Hulu serves no user-submitted content and nothing but shows. So actually it has little to do with YouTube, it's just a free web-based VoD service, I guess. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but that's just no YouTube killer at all.
If you look at the timestamps, my reply to my own question came earlier than any other reply to it. I'm amazed you didn't check that. But you're right on one thing, I'm a true slashdotter.
In this case, instead of forking, couldn't you just put certain parts of your code under the GPL license, and put the parts of the code you want to let companies use and close under the BSD license?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, part of the internet still serves a purpose other than trying to score with teenage girls and watching the video at 2girls1cup.com, but not much.
Thanks for the link! ;-)
So now even Google is jumping into this whole web 2.0 thing?
Not now at all. Orkut is Google, and it's social networking, and social networking is by definition "Web 2.0". So no, not just now.
Besides, the only thing wrong about Web 2.0 is the term 'Web 2.0'.
Over-50s Invade the Social Networking Scene
Make that over-90's! And I'm not even talking about people who are exactly 99 on MySpace, I mean come on, has someone been pouring massive doses of testosterone in the water back in 1907 or what?
That's better odds than the people they're giving licenses to in this country.
Why isn't it modded troll already? What you mean by all these people not being safe to drive is that they can sometimes behave dangerously, forget their blinker, not give you your due priority, occasionally get involved in minor accidents, etc... Here, the 45% deemed unsafe are deemed so because they can't drive an hour without leaving the road and rolling over or systematically hitting obstacles. Not quite the same thing..
Besides the obvious "Why?" that this article must prompt in anyone with some common sense, could Apple even afford it? Now I didn't RTFA but I search for the word 'afford' in it and I didn't find anything..
More seriously I'm asking if they could afford it because Adobe is huge, it has swallowed Macromedia whole, and I think that if Microsoft could have bought them, they would have done it a long time ago, right? So could Apple even do that, besides the questionable interest of doing such a thing?
Stars in the sky are placed randomly, and while it should not be so easy to prove it by a statistical analysis of the night sky, I've made a night sky generator that places stars at random coordinates (with random intensities too, but with a particular distribution), and I'm telling you you can see new constellations everywhere.
And if you think about it, stars don't just look like they're at random places, they're actually pretty much placed randomly, following a certain distribution (in 3D space, on a galactic scale), although they obey rules.
What's BSD?
It stands for Bisexual Satanic Daemon. That's a service for Linux that filters packets from the internet and replaces the text from web pages with random extracts from the Satanic Bible and random occurences of '666', and replaces images with obscene pornographic depictions.
You can just ask Google if you don't believe me.
lol, what a bunch of fucking idiots. I'll try to remember this in a few years when I'll see some guy on TV going "Americans suck at science, the only good scientists we have come from abroad", although you can already hear that.
That new thing is *not* gonna help..
What were we talking about?
I don't remember, who cares! I'm off to watch some porn I guess.
If there is no such thing as a perfect game, when why the hell are you scoring out of 100? [...] Games are penalized through being divided by a sum that they can never possibly reach.
Here's what I think about scoring out of 100. Have you noticed how it's as easy to go from 0 to 80 as it is to go from 80 to 90? Here's the thing, scores are not linear, they are logarithmic, so if you want to report a score out of 100 into a linear score, f(90) might just be twice as much as f(80), and f(100) is infinity. That's why there's no such thing as a perfect game, a game can't rank to infinity on a linear scale, and thus not score 100 in the scale we use.
As for the rest, the metric is just a means of comparison, and is a speed trade-off to make yourself an idea of how good a game is without reading an entire review, which is itself a quicker way to make yourself an idea without trying the game.
Call in the next five minutes, and I'll throw in the correct spelling of "plagiarisming" at absolutely no additional cost.
Oh wait, you mean "parodying" is correct? Crap..
If you can't tell the difference between parody and plagiarism, then consider your intelligence insulted.
Err, are you plagiarisming me or parodying me here? *scratches head* ;-)
Wow, -1 Troll? Do people even think before moderating? For those who aren't subtle enough to get it on their own, the parent post is being sarcastic.
Edit : ha, nevermind, someone had the common sense to mod it Funny.
Edit #2 : Oh yeah, didn't you know? Now you can edit your posts on Slashdot.
You've got a point, but I think we can say the GTA series had its fair share of gameplay innovations with respect to these games (if not why would people consider GTA III as such a stepping stone?)
That's completely different. To a certain extent, the Simpsons game are directly concurrencing (in a way) the GTA series by ripping them off, as GTA is heavily inspired by relatively old *movies*. If you can't spot the major difference, please consider your intelligence insulted.
Rockstar's games (well, at least Bully and GTA, I don't know any of their other games) are extremely derivative.
OK then tell me please what games are they're based on?
You should try tuning the in-game car radios to the talk-radio channel, especially the concerned mother that playing video games is teaching children to chase after money (parodying the post-Donkey-Kong Mario games).
You know what's funny? The utter ridiculousness of your point. Did Rockstar copy the Donkey Kong games anywhere in GTA? No. There's a big difference between making a reference to a game in your game's environment, and basing your game on another game and claiming it loud and clear.
Surt is saying that your claim that Rockstar didn't base a major part of their games on some other games is so false that it is laughable.
OK, so educate me, which games did they rip off and base their own games on?
Mod parent +5 funny. That totally cracked me up.
Sorry but I fail to see what's funny about it.
Damn right! If anyone, EVER, dares to make a third-person shooter-em-up in which the protagonist is capable of interacting with his or her environment, they'll have to go through ME.
It's not like they're just happening to make a game a bit similar, otherwise they would already have sued for Saints Row or 25 To Life, the thing is that they repeatedly make their games off copying their games. As in, they're not even going "no, we're not copying your game, we're just doing an unrelated third person game in which the protagonist is capable of interacting with his or her environment", they go "yup, we're copying your game and making money off of it, and? Get some humour!"
That free speech and all is a bitch when its making fun of your product isn't it?
There's a difference between humour in free speech and making money off copying what you've invented and intend to keep making money on. Rockstar didn't base a major part of their games on some other games.
Senior producer Matt Warburton added, "They're supposed to be rock stars; that's not a big Rockstar move - to be afraid of The Simpsons making fun of their game."
Rockstar are not afraid, they're tired of you guys making money by ripping off their game. There's a difference between poking some fun at another game and making large parts of their games recurrently based on copying Rockstar's game franchise.
Actually this service has little to do with YouTube, and doesn't risk to kill it, since Hulu and YouTube are actually complementary. YouTube serves user-submitted content and no shows, and Hulu serves no user-submitted content and nothing but shows. So actually it has little to do with YouTube, it's just a free web-based VoD service, I guess. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but that's just no YouTube killer at all.
If you look at the timestamps, my reply to my own question came earlier than any other reply to it. I'm amazed you didn't check that. But you're right on one thing, I'm a true slashdotter.
In this case, instead of forking, couldn't you just put certain parts of your code under the GPL license, and put the parts of the code you want to let companies use and close under the BSD license?