Cars are not limited-edition. They are not experimental. They are very, very, very heavily regulated, with vast amounts of unmanned testing before they hit the market -- none of which is happening with commercial space flight.
... is not really what I want people thinking about when I ride a limited-edition experimental craft into the most dangerous place there is. I want them thinking about keeping my ass alive and nothing else.
First the CIA jails and interrogates people when it is no part of their charter to do so and they have no training at it, producing an unmitigated diplomatic disaster for the USA and no valuable information. Now the FBI assembles "wanted" photos using Google images.
Where does the incompetence in the American security apparatus end?
Children are not supposed to be seducing anyone or looking hot. They are supposed to be playing outside. Jewelry would get snagged on tree branches and so forth.
Correction: it earns considerably MORE...
on
Sir Patrick Stewart
·
· Score: 1
... than it costs. The monarchy is cheap when you think of the vast sums that are paid for such things as preparing for the Olympics.
The world needs one last country that still does the pomp and ceremony of imperialism, and the UK is the one.
I think the legislation that the Queen should have the right to veto is anything that affects the British constitution itself, such as modifications to the role of the Lords without their consent, or modifications to her own role. Like the US President, her job should be to preserve, protect, and defend the British constitution.
If the Department of Vaterland Zecurity thinks for one second that people won't find a way of monkeywrenching this, they're even more deluded than they seem.
Shaped-charge high explosives filled with shrapnel designed to turn anyone climbing over their fence into a colander.
Mind you, the East German security people were total douchebags. Presumably that is what you want the US Border Patrol to become also. Or perhaps you think they already are.
The East Germans took them down after a while (well before the Wall came down). Even they realized how scummy it was.
I've been in the game industry for 20 years, 8 of them at Electronic Arts, so I know what I'm talking about. In time, game company HR departments will start looking for game degrees. In 1960, software companies didn't look for CS degrees, but in 1990, they did. It's a fact.
In the 1960s people had the same cavalier attitude about film schools when they were first getting set up. Today serious directors are expected to have been to one. Too much money is at stake.
I didn't say people don't still learn when they get on the job, but be serious -- would you really hire a 17-year-old self-taught coder with no experience but what he got in his mother's basement over a 22-year-old university-educated one? Why should anybody do so for a game designer?
Outsourcing has zero to do with it. The game service companies in India have university-educated programmers -- good ones -- on staff.
Right now studios don't care much about game degrees, for two reasons. First, there are a lot of bad game degrees out there. In time, the good ones will push out the bad. Second, studios are full of old-timers who went to school before there were any game degrees, so they don't see the need. When they die off, that attitude will die with them.
At the moment, young employees are learning on the job. That's inefficient and dangerous -- it means they make their mistakes on the job. If they came in with a game degree, it means they will have made their mistakes in school, not on the job. That is what schools are FOR: to train people before they get to the job.
Finally, HR departments have to filter the foot-high stack of resumes they get SOMEhow. They're going to start by throwing out any resume that doesn't have a game degree. This will be sad, as it will eliminate a lot of good people, but it is inevitable.
Writing for the interactive medium is very different, depending on the level of agency the game offers. If a game provides a fixed linear story, then a conventional writer can learn to do it; but many games offer the player the opportunity to affect the plot, and that severely wrings the withers of a lot of writers.
Writers are under the impression that it's "their" story. In a video game, it ain't.
You don't necessarily want to be making more of it in large quantities, although presumably as 7/10ths of the planet is covered by water, the amount generated by some flowers won't be terribly significant.
On the other hand, the forthcoming fuel cell cars should really include condensers so the water coming out the tailpipe is liquid rather than gaseous. One downside: the roads will ALWAYS be wet. We can presumably expect a certain increase in accident deaths from that cause, although it will be offset by the reduction in lung diseases.
If skepticism and altruism are leftist notions, it doesn't speak very well for the right. No logic and clear-headed thinking on the right? No charity? I doubt they would agree with you.
The BBC does not support Labour or the Conservatives or the LibDems, and not one of them would say that it does. It is politically neutral. It let a howling Fascist on the other night, despite many protests from left and right. (He got trashed by the other guests -- dumbass.)
If you think the BBC is slanted, that's just because it doesn't kiss your ass.
It matters not a whit to CNN that a few hundreds of thousands of people more or less in America watch Fox News. Nobody outside America would be seen dead watching it. CNN is a global news network; it is watched by tens of millions around the world. (It's still not up to the BBC, however.)
Turn on the TV in a hotel in ANY world capital that has satellite or cable, and you'll find CNN. You'll never find Fox.
The BBC is the single best news organization in the world, full stop. Nobody else comes close for global reach and insight. It receives "government" money, i.e. the TV license fee. As a result, it is required by law to be politically neutral, which is one of the best things about it. (So too, is NPR, and if you think NPR is biased, as many conservatives do, it just shows where YOU stand.)
Because the BBC is government funded it is watched like a hawk by everybody -- the party in power, the party in opposition, the taxpayers' lobby, and so on. It just cut out 20% of its own management thanks to public pressure.
It's not perfect; there is waste and abuse at times. But it beats the hell out of any American news organization whatsoever.
Mines come in when it's profitable, screw up the environment because nobody can stop them (that would be government regulation, which would be socialistical), and leave having raped the land of the only thing that was worth anything. The people left behind have no money to clean up the mess the mines made, and the mine companies are under no obligation to do so themselves.
Yet another example of why libertarianism is a pipe-dream utopia second only to Communism in its impracticality.
So, the number of pixels on your screen and the precision in which the colors are calculated determines if a game is ok or not ok?
That is correct. It's OK to kill aliens and robots realistically. It's also OK to kill people UNrealistically. The art style and the quality of the verisimilitude, including pixel count, matter quite a bit. That's just the way people feel about it. Put Call of Duty: Modern Warfare on a Game Boy, and no one will complain.
In old Western movies, when the bad guys got shot, they did not roll around in the dirt screaming and bleeding profusely. They died instantly and quietly, i.e. unrealistically.
Americans, particularly the poor and exploited, have been carefully taught by their exploiters to fear the word socialism without realizing that it actually would be in their best interests to support it. The Europeans are not so badly duped, probably because their enforced class structure of centuries meant they didn't trust anything the upper classes said. You can still sucker a poor American into voting against his own interests and in the interests of the ruling classes by persuading him that he can belong to the ruling classes someday if he'll just suffer a little longer. It's a lie, of course. Kinda like Christianity, really. You'll get to Heaven later as long as you do what we say now.
Libertarians are the only people more deluded than the Communists. At least the Communists could make their system work by force of arms; libertarians don't have that option.
You want to keep your opinion secret? Then express it inside the voting booth. When you make it public, you have to answer for the consequences, which may include other people pointing out that you're a complete idiot.
Petitions are public actions, voting is a secret action. Simple as that. If you aren't prepared to stand up for your opinion, keep your mouth shut -- or write an anonymous flame on the Internet that nobody will care about.
My dad's got a 1946 Dodge pickup. Pickups are notoriously unsafe, but the bumpers on this thing are attached directly to the frame. Both the frame and the bumpers are made of steel about half an inch thick, and the bumpers stick out a good foot ahead of and behind the body.
It would be a lousy thing to crash in -- no seat belts, metal dashboard. But for your ordinary low-speed fender bender it would total any modern car on the road.
Slashdot Mirror
Cars are not limited-edition. They are not experimental. They are very, very, very heavily regulated, with vast amounts of unmanned testing before they hit the market -- none of which is happening with commercial space flight.
First the CIA jails and interrogates people when it is no part of their charter to do so and they have no training at it, producing an unmitigated diplomatic disaster for the USA and no valuable information. Now the FBI assembles "wanted" photos using Google images.
Where does the incompetence in the American security apparatus end?
Children are not supposed to be seducing anyone or looking hot. They are supposed to be playing outside. Jewelry would get snagged on tree branches and so forth.
The world needs one last country that still does the pomp and ceremony of imperialism, and the UK is the one.
I think the legislation that the Queen should have the right to veto is anything that affects the British constitution itself, such as modifications to the role of the Lords without their consent, or modifications to her own role. Like the US President, her job should be to preserve, protect, and defend the British constitution.
If the Department of Vaterland Zecurity thinks for one second that people won't find a way of monkeywrenching this, they're even more deluded than they seem.
Border security? Nada. Why bother? They don't behave in such a way as to piss anybody off.
Shaped-charge high explosives filled with shrapnel designed to turn anyone climbing over their fence into a colander.
Mind you, the East German security people were total douchebags. Presumably that is what you want the US Border Patrol to become also. Or perhaps you think they already are.
The East Germans took them down after a while (well before the Wall came down). Even they realized how scummy it was.
Some states are so well-endowed that they don't need to take any money from anyone, forcibly or otherwise.
If you don't like the taxes your democratically-elected representatives have elected to collect, you should move to one of them.
No excuse. None.
I've been in the game industry for 20 years, 8 of them at Electronic Arts, so I know what I'm talking about. In time, game company HR departments will start looking for game degrees. In 1960, software companies didn't look for CS degrees, but in 1990, they did. It's a fact.
In the 1960s people had the same cavalier attitude about film schools when they were first getting set up. Today serious directors are expected to have been to one. Too much money is at stake.
I didn't say people don't still learn when they get on the job, but be serious -- would you really hire a 17-year-old self-taught coder with no experience but what he got in his mother's basement over a 22-year-old university-educated one? Why should anybody do so for a game designer?
Outsourcing has zero to do with it. The game service companies in India have university-educated programmers -- good ones -- on staff.
Right now studios don't care much about game degrees, for two reasons. First, there are a lot of bad game degrees out there. In time, the good ones will push out the bad. Second, studios are full of old-timers who went to school before there were any game degrees, so they don't see the need. When they die off, that attitude will die with them.
At the moment, young employees are learning on the job. That's inefficient and dangerous -- it means they make their mistakes on the job. If they came in with a game degree, it means they will have made their mistakes in school, not on the job. That is what schools are FOR: to train people before they get to the job.
Finally, HR departments have to filter the foot-high stack of resumes they get SOMEhow. They're going to start by throwing out any resume that doesn't have a game degree. This will be sad, as it will eliminate a lot of good people, but it is inevitable.
Writing for the interactive medium is very different, depending on the level of agency the game offers. If a game provides a fixed linear story, then a conventional writer can learn to do it; but many games offer the player the opportunity to affect the plot, and that severely wrings the withers of a lot of writers.
Writers are under the impression that it's "their" story. In a video game, it ain't.
Reading random chunks of leaked data and E-mail is not the way science is done, nor policy made.
Let's see ALL the data, and let's not see the E-mail at all -- E-mail isn't data.
Otherwise, STFU, this isn't helping anything.
You don't necessarily want to be making more of it in large quantities, although presumably as 7/10ths of the planet is covered by water, the amount generated by some flowers won't be terribly significant.
On the other hand, the forthcoming fuel cell cars should really include condensers so the water coming out the tailpipe is liquid rather than gaseous. One downside: the roads will ALWAYS be wet. We can presumably expect a certain increase in accident deaths from that cause, although it will be offset by the reduction in lung diseases.
If skepticism and altruism are leftist notions, it doesn't speak very well for the right. No logic and clear-headed thinking on the right? No charity? I doubt they would agree with you.
The BBC does not support Labour or the Conservatives or the LibDems, and not one of them would say that it does. It is politically neutral. It let a howling Fascist on the other night, despite many protests from left and right. (He got trashed by the other guests -- dumbass.)
If you think the BBC is slanted, that's just because it doesn't kiss your ass.
It matters not a whit to CNN that a few hundreds of thousands of people more or less in America watch Fox News. Nobody outside America would be seen dead watching it. CNN is a global news network; it is watched by tens of millions around the world. (It's still not up to the BBC, however.)
Turn on the TV in a hotel in ANY world capital that has satellite or cable, and you'll find CNN. You'll never find Fox.
The BBC is the single best news organization in the world, full stop. Nobody else comes close for global reach and insight. It receives "government" money, i.e. the TV license fee. As a result, it is required by law to be politically neutral, which is one of the best things about it. (So too, is NPR, and if you think NPR is biased, as many conservatives do, it just shows where YOU stand.)
Because the BBC is government funded it is watched like a hawk by everybody -- the party in power, the party in opposition, the taxpayers' lobby, and so on. It just cut out 20% of its own management thanks to public pressure.
It's not perfect; there is waste and abuse at times. But it beats the hell out of any American news organization whatsoever.
Mines come in when it's profitable, screw up the environment because nobody can stop them (that would be government regulation, which would be socialistical), and leave having raped the land of the only thing that was worth anything. The people left behind have no money to clean up the mess the mines made, and the mine companies are under no obligation to do so themselves. Yet another example of why libertarianism is a pipe-dream utopia second only to Communism in its impracticality.
So, the number of pixels on your screen and the precision in which the colors are calculated determines if a game is ok or not ok?
That is correct. It's OK to kill aliens and robots realistically. It's also OK to kill people UNrealistically. The art style and the quality of the verisimilitude, including pixel count, matter quite a bit. That's just the way people feel about it. Put Call of Duty: Modern Warfare on a Game Boy, and no one will complain.
In old Western movies, when the bad guys got shot, they did not roll around in the dirt screaming and bleeding profusely. They died instantly and quietly, i.e. unrealistically.
Americans, particularly the poor and exploited, have been carefully taught by their exploiters to fear the word socialism without realizing that it actually would be in their best interests to support it. The Europeans are not so badly duped, probably because their enforced class structure of centuries meant they didn't trust anything the upper classes said. You can still sucker a poor American into voting against his own interests and in the interests of the ruling classes by persuading him that he can belong to the ruling classes someday if he'll just suffer a little longer. It's a lie, of course. Kinda like Christianity, really. You'll get to Heaven later as long as you do what we say now.
Libertarians are the only people more deluded than the Communists. At least the Communists could make their system work by force of arms; libertarians don't have that option.
You want to keep your opinion secret? Then express it inside the voting booth. When you make it public, you have to answer for the consequences, which may include other people pointing out that you're a complete idiot.
Petitions are public actions, voting is a secret action. Simple as that. If you aren't prepared to stand up for your opinion, keep your mouth shut -- or write an anonymous flame on the Internet that nobody will care about.
My dad's got a 1946 Dodge pickup. Pickups are notoriously unsafe, but the bumpers on this thing are attached directly to the frame. Both the frame and the bumpers are made of steel about half an inch thick, and the bumpers stick out a good foot ahead of and behind the body.
It would be a lousy thing to crash in -- no seat belts, metal dashboard. But for your ordinary low-speed fender bender it would total any modern car on the road.
Why don't they make cars with REAL bumpers?