Indeed - OnLive would be foolish to destroy their chances of a presence in the UK market by forcing potential customers to go with BT.
Gamers are one of the last audiences likely to agree to that one. Then again, gamers are probably sceptical about the responsiveness of the proposed OnLive service, so maybe it wont matter:)
Rather than undo the 'troll' mod someone's given you, I'll post instead.
Gamers have been gaming in 1200x1024 for well over 10 years. I've personally been gaming in 1600x1200 for over 10 years, in 1920x1200 for over 5 years and I shudder to think I might get restricted to a mere 1080. To call 720p 'standard' is frankly laughable and does indeed underwhelm many gamers.
So the original post is not stupid, and you suggesting that he is does indeed sound like flamebait and/or trolling. Sure, ten years ago very few people could do a widescreen HD but people were happily gaming in rather more than 1080 pixels of height on standard monitors.
Adding widescreen does not justify reducing screen height, or proclaiming it to be an awesome improvement. 1920x1080 is frankly crap for a computer screen and adopting it for TVs is sadly already negatively influencing 17" laptop design.
That depends very strongly on what you're developing.
Take World of Warcraft. There's a massive game development community building game features and UI capabilities using a scripting language. The game UI itself is built using the same language.
Sure, the underlying game engine, the pretty graphics and probably the network code are written in optimised compiled code, but a lot of games use higher level languages for a lot of the game. AI, UI.. pretty much anything that isn't graphics and network really.
Game development suffers the same skillset and productivity issues everybody else suffers. So it adopts the same solutions: high level high productivity low maintenance cost languages.
Of course, real games programmers still program using a solder iron.
So your solution to the complexity of determining how to vote is to disenfranchise myself? Interesting.
As for STV working, surely the results in Scotland demonstrate that it's rather flawed. Both the SNP and Labour got 50% more seats for each percentage of the vote than the Conversatives and Lib Dems. Hardly proportional.
Citing Scotland as a democratic example is inherently flawed anyway, given the Scottish MP influence on Westminster and their demonstrated willingness to fuck over England with laws that wont apply to their own constituencies. But I digress..
Lets say I want to vote for a minority candidate. They have only one candidate, so my other votes must be split between other parties.
If there are five seats, I'll have ranked my minority favourite first. Who do I rank 2-5? If all four are from the same party, which four from that party do I rank 2-5, and which comes in sixth (if at all).
This matters; if someone voting for another party ranks five people 1-5 from the same party, their relative rankings will be different to the rankings of the people I vote 2-5.
This is a massive game theory complexity, with unfeasibly difficult optimal outcomes made harder by the likelihood of collusion by party affiliations.
Sure, filling in 1-5 on a ballot paper is a piece of piss. Knowing the right order and which candidates to give 1-5 to is not.
STV is, frankly, fucking complicated. It does allow named individuals to be elected, but if you're electing multiple individuals for a given constituency I'd rather have a straight vote.
AV on the other hand, despite being non-trivial in itself, retains the one representative per constituency link, and helps encourage people to vote for minority candidates.
AV+ sadly seems the more likely proposal, and may prove the best compromise. I just still don't like it.
I write to my MP. I read his literature that tells me his position, his speeches in parliament and I check whether his voting record matches what he's telling me.
Candidates other than him, no, it's not as easy to assess their honesty. The local press certainly helps, it's possible I'll know them (maybe once removed) and they may hold a local council position.
I appreciate that I don't have a perfect set of information on which to base a position, but it's a hell of a lot more than "if I vote A then candidate 2 from that party gets in, but if I vote B then candidate 4 from this party gets in. Or maybe candidate 3 or 5. Or maybe by denying a vote to party A I make it possible for party C to get an extra candidate, even though I didn't vote for them, and I don't know which of their candidates that would be"
Voting specifically for an individual is a far closer tie, even if it isn't entirely reliable, and I don't have all the information available.
Hmm, most women hitting their mid twenties already knows what average is - even if she hasn't had many partners herself, there's an awful lot of gossipping going on..
Most women are scared (in a bad way) by oversized organs anyway. Even if something stretches far enough for a child to pop out, that doesn't mean it's comfortable fitting something cucumber sized in.
(of course, after childbirth some stretching may be retained, in which case cucumbers remain an option. We may have digressed somewhat..)
they would be exposed for the opportunistic bastards they are
Exposed? It was a key election campaigning message for them! "Vote SNP, we can use a hung parliament to fuck over the English even more than we do already"
However, PR means you vote for parties and not for individuals.
I want to vote for individuals. I hate party politics. I have a diverse range of views and none of the parties represent me accurately. I thus want to select the individual that has a good level of agreement with my views, and that will act with integrity and represent my fellow constituents on the rest.
Any representative of a major party will on balance not do that. They will in many cases vote the party line.
I'm happy to have an alternative vote system, but PR merely perpetuates the flawed party based system and that's broken whether it's two or three parties involved.
If you're so goddamn fucking elloquent why the fuck do you have to resort to fucking swearing like the rest of us?
Sadly my eloquence doesn't entirely compensate for my poor memory, so instead of quoting fiction at you I took the easier option of calling you a fuckwit.
Bullshit. Quoting Shakespeare in context can be unfeasibly intelligent. There's a skill in using a quote (fictional or otherwise) to comment on something.
By using a quote, you can infer the entire context of that quote, and apply it to the current situation. Thus an eight word quote can replace a twenty minute explanation of why something is so utterly fucked up.
Meanwhile you haven't had to explicitly say something's fucked up, so you haven't pissed anybody off, the person that's fucking it up will be too stupid to understand the quotation, where it came from and its implications so you wont piss them off, and if they do understand it then they'll be intelligent enough to appreciate the position and deal with it.
Learn how to use quotes well. It's a Nineteenth century skill that's sadly passed into disuse, probably because of fuckwits thinking it's emotionally immature.
On the sideline there are guards yelling at you; demanding obedience.
That surprises me. Where is that happening?
Airport security in the UK is invasive and ever-present, and lacks a sense of humour at the macro level. The individuals involved however are pretty much all personable, patient, polite and happy to joke.
Hell, I flirt with the ladies. It's the uniforms, I blame my upbringing..
Why else would the manufacturers build them, other than to make money?
Altruism? A genuine desire to improve public security? Accidental outcomes from an attempt to build something else?
Not everybody is a slave to the dollar.
Anyway, the issue being highlighted wasn't that someone makes money from selling them. The issue is that they've been sold as a great panacea to terrorism, while providing minimal to no real benefits. The whole affair is dishonest, disingenuous and to an extent fraudulent.
Where the fuck did your 8 inch bar come from? For white men that's way above average, for Indian men that's way way above average and even for black men I recall it's above average.
Shit, if people are feeling insecure about having a less than 8 inch dick no wonder there's so much fucking spam.
I'm a man. I hate sewing. So I don't do stupid fucking things like putting a big bundle of keys in my pocket so they rip holes and force me to sew the tear up.
I could just buy more trousers, but it's easier to stop carrying so many keys.
I had WoW playable on my T-Mobile G1 (an Android phone) via VNC over a year ago. With the added bonus of a hardware keyboard for text input..
That a more modern device with a better processor and bigger screen can also do something like this isn't a surprise at all.
For me the form factor of the iPad precludes its use for serious online interactive gaming. It's a sleek elegant device with diabolical gaming inputs. Why bother?
Now, getting WoW to run natively on my n900.. that's a fun and worthy achievement. It still wont be a viable replacement for a 1920x1200 screen with full sized keyboard attached.
Oh please, you act like we have a choice in whether or not plastic is in our lives. There is simply no choice with the way our economy is set up. Frankly, I do not demand petroleum products, but companies choose to wrap wrap their food or other products in it. I would be perfectly happy if it were covered in something else.
So go Amish. Grow your own food. Build your own shelter out of wood. Entertain yourself by fucking your neighbour's daughter.
You have a choice. Clearly you've chosen to fuck the planet. Stop bitching about it and deal with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed - OnLive would be foolish to destroy their chances of a presence in the UK market by forcing potential customers to go with BT.
Gamers are one of the last audiences likely to agree to that one. Then again, gamers are probably sceptical about the responsiveness of the proposed OnLive service, so maybe it wont matter :)
Rather than undo the 'troll' mod someone's given you, I'll post instead.
Gamers have been gaming in 1200x1024 for well over 10 years. I've personally been gaming in 1600x1200 for over 10 years, in 1920x1200 for over 5 years and I shudder to think I might get restricted to a mere 1080. To call 720p 'standard' is frankly laughable and does indeed underwhelm many gamers.
So the original post is not stupid, and you suggesting that he is does indeed sound like flamebait and/or trolling. Sure, ten years ago very few people could do a widescreen HD but people were happily gaming in rather more than 1080 pixels of height on standard monitors.
Adding widescreen does not justify reducing screen height, or proclaiming it to be an awesome improvement. 1920x1080 is frankly crap for a computer screen and adopting it for TVs is sadly already negatively influencing 17" laptop design.
That depends very strongly on what you're developing.
Take World of Warcraft. There's a massive game development community building game features and UI capabilities using a scripting language. The game UI itself is built using the same language.
Sure, the underlying game engine, the pretty graphics and probably the network code are written in optimised compiled code, but a lot of games use higher level languages for a lot of the game. AI, UI.. pretty much anything that isn't graphics and network really.
Game development suffers the same skillset and productivity issues everybody else suffers. So it adopts the same solutions: high level high productivity low maintenance cost languages.
Of course, real games programmers still program using a solder iron.
Ruby rocks. It's fantastic. I really really like it as a language.
I wouldn't recommend it for business use though. But then, I'm a "constrain those cowboys" Java fan..
Yes, you are right that there is probably no Pascal/Delphi job post.
Scarily there are. I got an email from an agent a couple of weeks back suggesting I step back 11 years in my career and apply for one in Leicester.
I chose against that option...
So your solution to the complexity of determining how to vote is to disenfranchise myself? Interesting.
As for STV working, surely the results in Scotland demonstrate that it's rather flawed. Both the SNP and Labour got 50% more seats for each percentage of the vote than the Conversatives and Lib Dems. Hardly proportional.
Citing Scotland as a democratic example is inherently flawed anyway, given the Scottish MP influence on Westminster and their demonstrated willingness to fuck over England with laws that wont apply to their own constituencies. But I digress..
Lets say I want to vote for a minority candidate. They have only one candidate, so my other votes must be split between other parties.
If there are five seats, I'll have ranked my minority favourite first. Who do I rank 2-5? If all four are from the same party, which four from that party do I rank 2-5, and which comes in sixth (if at all).
This matters; if someone voting for another party ranks five people 1-5 from the same party, their relative rankings will be different to the rankings of the people I vote 2-5.
This is a massive game theory complexity, with unfeasibly difficult optimal outcomes made harder by the likelihood of collusion by party affiliations.
Sure, filling in 1-5 on a ballot paper is a piece of piss. Knowing the right order and which candidates to give 1-5 to is not.
STV is, frankly, fucking complicated. It does allow named individuals to be elected, but if you're electing multiple individuals for a given constituency I'd rather have a straight vote.
AV on the other hand, despite being non-trivial in itself, retains the one representative per constituency link, and helps encourage people to vote for minority candidates.
AV+ sadly seems the more likely proposal, and may prove the best compromise. I just still don't like it.
I write to my MP. I read his literature that tells me his position, his speeches in parliament and I check whether his voting record matches what he's telling me.
Candidates other than him, no, it's not as easy to assess their honesty. The local press certainly helps, it's possible I'll know them (maybe once removed) and they may hold a local council position.
I appreciate that I don't have a perfect set of information on which to base a position, but it's a hell of a lot more than "if I vote A then candidate 2 from that party gets in, but if I vote B then candidate 4 from this party gets in. Or maybe candidate 3 or 5. Or maybe by denying a vote to party A I make it possible for party C to get an extra candidate, even though I didn't vote for them, and I don't know which of their candidates that would be"
Voting specifically for an individual is a far closer tie, even if it isn't entirely reliable, and I don't have all the information available.
Hmm, most women hitting their mid twenties already knows what average is - even if she hasn't had many partners herself, there's an awful lot of gossipping going on..
Most women are scared (in a bad way) by oversized organs anyway. Even if something stretches far enough for a child to pop out, that doesn't mean it's comfortable fitting something cucumber sized in.
(of course, after childbirth some stretching may be retained, in which case cucumbers remain an option. We may have digressed somewhat..)
they would be exposed for the opportunistic bastards they are
Exposed? It was a key election campaigning message for them! "Vote SNP, we can use a hung parliament to fuck over the English even more than we do already"
However, PR means you vote for parties and not for individuals.
I want to vote for individuals. I hate party politics. I have a diverse range of views and none of the parties represent me accurately. I thus want to select the individual that has a good level of agreement with my views, and that will act with integrity and represent my fellow constituents on the rest.
Any representative of a major party will on balance not do that. They will in many cases vote the party line.
I'm happy to have an alternative vote system, but PR merely perpetuates the flawed party based system and that's broken whether it's two or three parties involved.
If you're so goddamn fucking elloquent why the fuck do you have to resort to fucking swearing like the rest of us?
Sadly my eloquence doesn't entirely compensate for my poor memory, so instead of quoting fiction at you I took the easier option of calling you a fuckwit.
I stand by that assessment.
Bullshit. Quoting Shakespeare in context can be unfeasibly intelligent. There's a skill in using a quote (fictional or otherwise) to comment on something.
By using a quote, you can infer the entire context of that quote, and apply it to the current situation. Thus an eight word quote can replace a twenty minute explanation of why something is so utterly fucked up.
Meanwhile you haven't had to explicitly say something's fucked up, so you haven't pissed anybody off, the person that's fucking it up will be too stupid to understand the quotation, where it came from and its implications so you wont piss them off, and if they do understand it then they'll be intelligent enough to appreciate the position and deal with it.
Learn how to use quotes well. It's a Nineteenth century skill that's sadly passed into disuse, probably because of fuckwits thinking it's emotionally immature.
On the sideline there are guards yelling at you; demanding obedience.
That surprises me. Where is that happening?
Airport security in the UK is invasive and ever-present, and lacks a sense of humour at the macro level. The individuals involved however are pretty much all personable, patient, polite and happy to joke.
Hell, I flirt with the ladies. It's the uniforms, I blame my upbringing..
Why else would the manufacturers build them, other than to make money?
Altruism? A genuine desire to improve public security? Accidental outcomes from an attempt to build something else?
Not everybody is a slave to the dollar.
Anyway, the issue being highlighted wasn't that someone makes money from selling them. The issue is that they've been sold as a great panacea to terrorism, while providing minimal to no real benefits. The whole affair is dishonest, disingenuous and to an extent fraudulent.
Or maybe you think that's ok too?
Where the fuck did your 8 inch bar come from? For white men that's way above average, for Indian men that's way way above average and even for black men I recall it's above average.
Shit, if people are feeling insecure about having a less than 8 inch dick no wonder there's so much fucking spam.
I'm a man. I hate sewing. So I don't do stupid fucking things like putting a big bundle of keys in my pocket so they rip holes and force me to sew the tear up.
I could just buy more trousers, but it's easier to stop carrying so many keys.
I'm a man. I also have a brain.
I had WoW playable on my T-Mobile G1 (an Android phone) via VNC over a year ago. With the added bonus of a hardware keyboard for text input..
That a more modern device with a better processor and bigger screen can also do something like this isn't a surprise at all.
For me the form factor of the iPad precludes its use for serious online interactive gaming. It's a sleek elegant device with diabolical gaming inputs. Why bother?
Now, getting WoW to run natively on my n900.. that's a fun and worthy achievement. It still wont be a viable replacement for a 1920x1200 screen with full sized keyboard attached.
Yep. Give me cheaper fuel, cheaper energy and a faster Internet, and frankly, I don't care if you kill all the baby seals to achieve it.
This planet will survive the human race, as will other life on it. So stop trying to make the rest of us feel guilty about it.
BP messed up, and they need to own up to it, plain and simple.
Explain how BP messed up?
As far as I can tell, their subcontractor cocked up. BP just happen to be liable for the resultant mess.
Oh please, you act like we have a choice in whether or not plastic is in our lives. There is simply no choice with the way our economy is set up. Frankly, I do not demand petroleum products, but companies choose to wrap wrap their food or other products in it. I would be perfectly happy if it were covered in something else.
So go Amish. Grow your own food. Build your own shelter out of wood. Entertain yourself by fucking your neighbour's daughter.
You have a choice. Clearly you've chosen to fuck the planet. Stop bitching about it and deal with it.
None of which require someone to provide their own hardware to enable that contact.
If it's that important, give him the tools.
However, being an arrogant cunt is merely a personal failing. It shouldn't in itself be a crime.
I'm curious. If you think he's guilty of a crime, can you explain what that crime was and why he was guilty?
Everything I've seen implies that he was following his employer's guidelines on password secrecy.
Further to that, once sacked how can he possibly be obliged to divulge passwords?
This feels like a stitchup, and yeah, I'm holding you partially responsible. So please, help me understand why I'm wrong.