FTFS : "If the speed of a car goes over the posted legal limit, a warning sounds. If the driver ignores the warning....."
It warns you first. It probably gives you a few seconds before "cutting power". During those few seconds, you can: either complete your manoeuvre, cancel your manoeuvre, push the override button and complete the manoeuvre.
Except that speeding (ie, violating the posted limit) isn't what is causing traffic accidents. If anything, it's limits purposefully set lower than engineering standards that cause accidents.
Right. Excuse my use of an anecdote, but I had this friend who would drive me to college every morning. He had a shitty old Peugeot 205, but that idiot thought it was a real thrill to push it to 90 mph on stretches limited to 55. It got us into a minor accident and a near miss. This type of accident would never happen if his car wouldn't allow him to go over the limit. No matter how hard you push the brakes it takes a while to avoid an accident when the car before you braked too hard and you're 30 mph over the limit.
People aren't so wise, or rather, we value more our immediate present than our distant future or eventualities. People start smoking and doing drugs for the instant effect, regardless of the eventual undesirable consequences, people push the gas pedal because they don't want to be two minutes late to work, or for a thrill, regardless of the increased risks. But even telling them anything about what they risk won't stop them, be it a picture of a human lung full of tar, or a gruesome traffic accident with a telephone pole though a driver's head. That's why those speed limiting things are good.
Why do you think raising speed limits makes accident rates drop? Because driving at 55 mph is more dangerous than driving at 70 mph? Nope, that's because even if you limit it to 55 mph you'll still have people driving way over the limit. How do you think accident rates would drop if you actually forced anyone to drive no faster than 55 mph?
Why do they assume that that Zeebo thing is just going to be so popular? I mean I wish them to be successful, but realistically when you're not an industry giant you can hardly hope to sell 100,000 units.
Don't use FTP anyways for anything sensitive like uploading to your website. I used to do that, then got infected by a virus of sorts. What it did was sniff the (non-encrypted) FTP packets to steal credentials, then log in and replace all the index files on the server with its malware infected version.
That got me to of my websites to be infected and being blocked by Firefox/Google for being reported as attack sites. Now I only use SFTP/SCP.
Agreed, the ultimate game would be : Google Earth (except with the resolution and detail you won't get before decades) + SimCity (so you could build your own city in the real world and connect it to others) + GTA, so you could do all the aforementioned criminal stuff + driving + flying around.
In the meantime I'd content myself with a Google Earth based DEFCON.
Yep, security-savvy users do that because they know that's just wrong, the problem is companies pushing that security measure when it actually undermines their security efforts. It's like they're really asking for accounts to be broken in.
Also, neither would you. Hence, disabling this whole huge security hole.
Fixed it for you. If you look at a security as a bunch of security components put together either in line or in parallel, you'll realise that when you put in parallel something somewhat secure like a password and something not very secure like asking a question, then the system is only as secure as the weaker of the two securities. You don't need to know much about someone to know or guess where they were born or what their favourite TV show it, I mean that's the kind of information people put on their Facebook profile for the whole world to see to begin with.
I'll venture to say that at that point people very much develop their own browsing habits, habits which to others may seem absurd, impractical, yet work.
Some people can't stand having more than 8 tabs in a window, some people need lots of windows, some people can't stand more than a window, some people need hierarchy in their tabs, some people need 200 tabs opened. I for example commonly have 100+ tabs opened in only one windows, and I love it. It replaces bookmarks for some of the sites I browse most often, for example the lolcats site is always on tab 4, the failblog site is always on tab 5, and my website statistics are always on tab 7.
It may seem crazy, stupid, absurd, brilliant, what matters is that at this point you cannot tell people what to do anymore, you can only offer them options. That's precisely what extensions are made for in Firefox.
As for Raskin and his group working for Mozilla, not to sound too inflammatory but they kind of belong to the kind of designers who surf on a wave of hype and buzz and who live off trying to reinvent things that aren't broken in ways that won't stick around, kind of like your ergonomic futuristic 1970s designer seats.
You want monsters in your GTA? Also, are you a gangster/crook in real life? I don't see how else selling drugs on a rival drug dealer's turf could be too familiar an experience otherwise;). If anything it's the Sims that should sound too much like real life, yet it sells just great.
Games of today look great, but a couple of aspects of some of the most popular games like GTA, Call of Duty and Resident Evil are outdated and I'll take the optimistic risk to say they'll soon start to disappear.
I'm talking about ultra linearity (yes, even GTA is very linear) and the annoying aspects that accompany it, most noticeably the "try this missing again and again and again until you succeed it", and to a lesser extent to put the player in a ultra scripted environment where you could pretty much dictate them what they have to do, and have to prevent them from doing such trivial things as jumping over a small fence. As games become ever increasingly realistic, those sorts of unrealistic limitations are becoming important threats to the player's suspension of disbelief, and game designers will I believe have to get more subtle and work their way around it.
But in my opinion both the problems of linearity and unrealistic limitations means that game designers and developers will enter an uphill battle to rethink the aforementioned ageing paradigms, but I think that in a way those new paradigms will be the new shiny graphics. To use the GTA series as an example, right now it's basically all centred around a long string of very scripted fixed missions cut with cinematics, with an "either succeed in all the required aspects or try again like nothing happened" system which is arguably incompatible with realism. In my opinion, the GTA of the future should be much more life-like, dynamic, one way to see how it would work would be like the Sims series, you are one person, you make encounters, create connections, obtain things from your connections such as jobs or whatever you may need, and everything you would do would have an influence of sorts. Fail a job and you have to deal with the consequences and impact on your reputation, start shooting people at random and you earn a reputation of psychopathic killer, by drugs, sell them on someone else's turf and watch things escalating with them, become a real estate agent, spend ten years in jail, join a gang, start a gang and delegate tasks, become a politician, etc, in other words, a free unscripted crime world/business world simulator.
I'm not saying it would be easy at all to create, but I think there is lots to be done and innovated in that domain, and I think and hope that within the next few years game designers will see themselves forced to explore such solutions, and if it becomes a crucial aspect of making a successful game then great resources, talent and work will be put into it and the results will be very much worth it. Since both the market and technology push us towards realism we'll have to make things realistic in more ways than just the reflections on cars or the physics of driving.
Yes, who would have thought that the Sun, the star around which would rotate, would be SOOOOO much bigger than a space vehicle and a space telescope. Next thing you know we'll have pictures showing how tiny people and cars look seen from space compared to the hugeness of Earth.
Me too, made it crash. That's the annoying thing about OGG being the defacto audio/video format, while it's a great compression, the integration utterly sucks.
That may be true now, but it used to be science, a long time ago, back in the 1990s, back when only journals and magazines such as Science or Nature would talk about it and that no one else cared or listened. I grew up in the 1990s in France reading Science & Vie, global warming was there all along, back then we called it 'climate warming', but then suddenly the American public started caring, and that's when the shit went down and it all became controversial and hysterical.
You damn kids and your newfangled climatological hysteria, get off my lawn!
Slashdot Mirror
That would work if it was a Google console. A console that uses some Google thingie no one cares about is very different.
That's conveniently forgetting about the PS2, isn't it?
They "might" be interchangable, but I'm not sure you "could" use them that way without confusion...
I see what you did there >_>
FTFS : "If the speed of a car goes over the posted legal limit, a warning sounds. If the driver ignores the warning....."
It warns you first. It probably gives you a few seconds before "cutting power". During those few seconds, you can: either complete your manoeuvre, cancel your manoeuvre, push the override button and complete the manoeuvre.
Except that speeding (ie, violating the posted limit) isn't what is causing traffic accidents. If anything, it's limits purposefully set lower than engineering standards that cause accidents.
Right. Excuse my use of an anecdote, but I had this friend who would drive me to college every morning. He had a shitty old Peugeot 205, but that idiot thought it was a real thrill to push it to 90 mph on stretches limited to 55. It got us into a minor accident and a near miss. This type of accident would never happen if his car wouldn't allow him to go over the limit. No matter how hard you push the brakes it takes a while to avoid an accident when the car before you braked too hard and you're 30 mph over the limit.
People aren't so wise, or rather, we value more our immediate present than our distant future or eventualities. People start smoking and doing drugs for the instant effect, regardless of the eventual undesirable consequences, people push the gas pedal because they don't want to be two minutes late to work, or for a thrill, regardless of the increased risks. But even telling them anything about what they risk won't stop them, be it a picture of a human lung full of tar, or a gruesome traffic accident with a telephone pole though a driver's head. That's why those speed limiting things are good.
Why do you think raising speed limits makes accident rates drop? Because driving at 55 mph is more dangerous than driving at 70 mph? Nope, that's because even if you limit it to 55 mph you'll still have people driving way over the limit. How do you think accident rates would drop if you actually forced anyone to drive no faster than 55 mph?
I don't get it... Are you saying your junk is so big people may want to kill you out of jealousy? I don't see what else it could mean...
Why do they assume that that Zeebo thing is just going to be so popular? I mean I wish them to be successful, but realistically when you're not an industry giant you can hardly hope to sell 100,000 units.
What? A cliche Libertarian "Dems and Reps all suck equally!" comment modded all the way up? In my Slashdot?!
Ah, the insightfulness of overly broad, generalist and ideology-based comments.. You can't go wrong with those now can you?
Don't use FTP anyways for anything sensitive like uploading to your website. I used to do that, then got infected by a virus of sorts. What it did was sniff the (non-encrypted) FTP packets to steal credentials, then log in and replace all the index files on the server with its malware infected version.
That got me to of my websites to be infected and being blocked by Firefox/Google for being reported as attack sites. Now I only use SFTP/SCP.
Agreed, the ultimate game would be : Google Earth (except with the resolution and detail you won't get before decades) + SimCity (so you could build your own city in the real world and connect it to others) + GTA, so you could do all the aforementioned criminal stuff + driving + flying around.
In the meantime I'd content myself with a Google Earth based DEFCON.
Yep, security-savvy users do that because they know that's just wrong, the problem is companies pushing that security measure when it actually undermines their security efforts. It's like they're really asking for accounts to be broken in.
Also, neither would you. Hence, disabling this whole huge security hole.
Fixed it for you. If you look at a security as a bunch of security components put together either in line or in parallel, you'll realise that when you put in parallel something somewhat secure like a password and something not very secure like asking a question, then the system is only as secure as the weaker of the two securities. You don't need to know much about someone to know or guess where they were born or what their favourite TV show it, I mean that's the kind of information people put on their Facebook profile for the whole world to see to begin with.
And you just broke rule #1 and #2 of the Semper Fi club : never talk about Semper Fi.
I'll venture to say that at that point people very much develop their own browsing habits, habits which to others may seem absurd, impractical, yet work.
Some people can't stand having more than 8 tabs in a window, some people need lots of windows, some people can't stand more than a window, some people need hierarchy in their tabs, some people need 200 tabs opened. I for example commonly have 100+ tabs opened in only one windows, and I love it. It replaces bookmarks for some of the sites I browse most often, for example the lolcats site is always on tab 4, the failblog site is always on tab 5, and my website statistics are always on tab 7.
It may seem crazy, stupid, absurd, brilliant, what matters is that at this point you cannot tell people what to do anymore, you can only offer them options. That's precisely what extensions are made for in Firefox.
As for Raskin and his group working for Mozilla, not to sound too inflammatory but they kind of belong to the kind of designers who surf on a wave of hype and buzz and who live off trying to reinvent things that aren't broken in ways that won't stick around, kind of like your ergonomic futuristic 1970s designer seats.
You want monsters in your GTA? Also, are you a gangster/crook in real life? I don't see how else selling drugs on a rival drug dealer's turf could be too familiar an experience otherwise ;). If anything it's the Sims that should sound too much like real life, yet it sells just great.
Games of today look great, but a couple of aspects of some of the most popular games like GTA, Call of Duty and Resident Evil are outdated and I'll take the optimistic risk to say they'll soon start to disappear.
I'm talking about ultra linearity (yes, even GTA is very linear) and the annoying aspects that accompany it, most noticeably the "try this missing again and again and again until you succeed it", and to a lesser extent to put the player in a ultra scripted environment where you could pretty much dictate them what they have to do, and have to prevent them from doing such trivial things as jumping over a small fence. As games become ever increasingly realistic, those sorts of unrealistic limitations are becoming important threats to the player's suspension of disbelief, and game designers will I believe have to get more subtle and work their way around it.
But in my opinion both the problems of linearity and unrealistic limitations means that game designers and developers will enter an uphill battle to rethink the aforementioned ageing paradigms, but I think that in a way those new paradigms will be the new shiny graphics. To use the GTA series as an example, right now it's basically all centred around a long string of very scripted fixed missions cut with cinematics, with an "either succeed in all the required aspects or try again like nothing happened" system which is arguably incompatible with realism. In my opinion, the GTA of the future should be much more life-like, dynamic, one way to see how it would work would be like the Sims series, you are one person, you make encounters, create connections, obtain things from your connections such as jobs or whatever you may need, and everything you would do would have an influence of sorts. Fail a job and you have to deal with the consequences and impact on your reputation, start shooting people at random and you earn a reputation of psychopathic killer, by drugs, sell them on someone else's turf and watch things escalating with them, become a real estate agent, spend ten years in jail, join a gang, start a gang and delegate tasks, become a politician, etc, in other words, a free unscripted crime world/business world simulator.
I'm not saying it would be easy at all to create, but I think there is lots to be done and innovated in that domain, and I think and hope that within the next few years game designers will see themselves forced to explore such solutions, and if it becomes a crucial aspect of making a successful game then great resources, talent and work will be put into it and the results will be very much worth it. Since both the market and technology push us towards realism we'll have to make things realistic in more ways than just the reflections on cars or the physics of driving.
Since when is Slashdot's front page USENET's macromedia.flash.actionscript?
What?! Stop the press, we have someone for whom OGG playback in a browser works flawlessly!!
I thought that Edison was more the type who had a shitload of people to delegate things to and take all the credit for it.
Aren't you basically describing consultancy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating#Modern_dating_methods
Yes, who would have thought that the Sun, the star around which would rotate, would be SOOOOO much bigger than a space vehicle and a space telescope. Next thing you know we'll have pictures showing how tiny people and cars look seen from space compared to the hugeness of Earth.
Me too, made it crash. That's the annoying thing about OGG being the defacto audio/video format, while it's a great compression, the integration utterly sucks.
I'll wait for City 17
Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen
That may be true now, but it used to be science, a long time ago, back in the 1990s, back when only journals and magazines such as Science or Nature would talk about it and that no one else cared or listened. I grew up in the 1990s in France reading Science & Vie, global warming was there all along, back then we called it 'climate warming', but then suddenly the American public started caring, and that's when the shit went down and it all became controversial and hysterical.
You damn kids and your newfangled climatological hysteria, get off my lawn!