Put cameras all over an uninhabited island. Dock a boat there. Send in all the "contestants", each with one backpack full of supplies of their own choosing. (full size camping backpack).
Rules:
1) You may leave at any time by getting on the docked boat.
2) Once you leave, you may not come back.
3) Last living person on the island wins.
Game continues until there is one person left. It would take longer, and possibly some may find
it less interesting... but would be much more "survivor"
No "challenges" or "councils". Just harsh survival.
I saw the original Dune movie before I ever read the books. I could follow the movie, I even thought it was good. I still think it is... as far as movies go. However, as far as being an adaptation of the Dune story, it sucked ass.
After reading the book, I was quite unhappy with the major changes made to the story in the movie. The whole throwing away of the kris knives and giving the frememn "voice weapons" wtf was that?
As for FF... ive played the games. I like the games. However, I know the games, so I expect the plot to be thin and corney as all hell. (though I have to hand i tto square, in FF7, the plot wasn't too corney until around the point where you actually meet laguna)
Hmmm all you really need in vi are (assuming you can use arrow keys):
a i J d x and either:q! or:wq
Which are "append" "insert" "join" "delete line" and "delete character" then "quit now" or "write and quit".
Anything else is extra (I regularly use o to get a new line and regular expressions stuff, and sometimes ~ to toggle capitalisation, or r to replace a letter without going into insert mode)
As for simple editors... before I learned to use vi, ee was a great little editor... and ae didn't suck too bad either.
Well speed alone isn't really the issue as much as reaction time. Sure, you can walk away from a 165+ MPH spill on a bike. However its often not just a spill on the highway - Like if you go down because you didn't see the car just over the top of the next hill.
Hitting stationaty objects, or flyin gover and then being run over by cars, that tends to lower the surviuvability of the crash.
Reaction ability at that speed is just so severely reduced. Not to mention the speeding ticket! Hell, shoulda heard the state trooper yelling at me when he caught me doin 90 in a 55 (didn't ticket me, just yelled and got all condesending)
DO me a favor. Get a motorcycle. Go to medford MA. From Boston Ave, go down Harvard Street at 3 am and come up to the corner of Main and Harvard alone.
Once you have done that THEN you may tell me that there is "no promise,ever, in running a red light" and I will consider your opinion to be at least potentially informed.
If this test is too hard for you geographically, then head to the local bike shop and ask them which traffic light sensors in the area are so out of whack that anything less than a mack truck will have trouble being noticed on them - try one of those.
Please...if thats your attitude, and you REALLY want to not kill people, then stay oin the fucking right lane.
There are few things more dangerous than people who sit around doing lsow speeds in the left lanes of a highway.
All the mor eagressive faster drivers slow down. They get pisse doff because you are going slow in the left lane - the lane that is generally considered the fast lane. Then they have to try to get around your self-rightous ass.
The manuver of trying to get around involves changing lanes and passing. This is easily more dangerous than speeding. People who drive with thsi smug "you shouldn't be going that fast anyway" attitude are the ones who kill people.
driving fast in straight clear lane is pretty damned safe in and of itself.
Lots of the lights around here are tripped just fine by my bike. There are a coupl ehowever that I have to run eevery single time (at night anyway).
Of course, I don't really think o fit as "running the light". Its more like treating it as a stop sign.
In any case the rules are silly. I don't need to come to a full stop at a stop sign, I just need to slow down enough that I can see if anything is comming and come to a full stop if needed.
The laws make a good general guide for safe driving, sure. However they arn't the be all and end all. Theres alot fo things that are perfectly safe and still break the law.
Some (like running the light at the corner of harvard and maine in medofrd MA) are impossible to not break
hmmm the system I was taught in my safe driving course was SIPDE (it was an MSF certified motorcycle course) Scan Identify Predict Decide Execute.
Note, stop i snot one of the steps.
A driver should be ready to take WHATEVER ACTION NEEDED to avoid an accident. Thats the decide step. Sometimes you avoid it by speeding up, sometimes by slowing down.
If the car to the right of me suddenly starts comming into my lane, I have a semiu behind me, and the next lane over has a car in it, but enough room for me to acelerate out and come in in front o fhim....
Guess what I am gonna do? It certainly isn't going to be "brake hard and hope the guy in the Mack truck is paying attention".
We are talking accident avoidance here, not what to do if an accident is eminent. These are two different things.
In fact, in both my MSF course, and my previous drivers ed, we learned that accident avoidance is alot more than just braking and there are many situations where you want to swerve and possibly accelerate to get out of bad situations.
I have heard that they do indeed watch for speeding. You miss the other benefit of this. While overall efficiency is reduced by not speeding, it is only by a tiny amount.
The trade off then? Lower insurance rates. I have heard (can anyone verify) that they get a break on their insurance if they install GPS for this reason.
hmmmm 115 is the fastest ive had a bike up to, and that was just once to see how fast she would go (it was a cruiser), going that fast on a regular basis is just crazy man.
But yea, ive found I can do 85-90 and not have too much trouble. Hell, I did 80-90 from Boston to D.C. last month, all the way except for NYC area (where it was more like 5 ugh) - actually my speedometer broke outside of Providence - but I rode with the tach pegged at 5 (on an 1100 virago) which translates to about 85 on that bike
So far ive been pulled over once in my life for speeding. 90 in a 55 on my bike. State trooper yelled at me and took off with no ticket.
Personally, I see no problem with speed, specially on a bike where you can manuver easily and stop qucikly. As long as the road is clear and your not weavin gin and out of traffic, speed isn't too bad.
The real danger is the peopl ewho go fast in heavy traffic and weave in and out trying to pass.
Of course, if slow drivers would stay out of the left lane, perhaps these agressive drivers would do a little less weaving? Might be safer for everyone.
Generally speaking, here is my philosophy. If you rbeing tailgated - slowing down and flashing lights is fine, unless your in the left lane. Then it means your too slow and need to either speed up or get out of the way. I fyour in the left (or on larger roads, left couple of lanes) then you should be looking for faster drivers who want to pass you and get out of their way.
hmmm please define worst... then tell me if you have been to Boston.
Its often been said that we have some of the "worst" drivers in the country, if not the world. A driver who has been battle hardend on the streets of boston is nothing to sneeze at.
Well happens of course. However most accidents are entirely avoidable if you keep your skills up to date.
Most accidents arn't that bad either. Most damage comes either from wearing improper gear (just don't do that, the goo dstuff only costs a few hundred $$, will still be good after a crash (not counting helmets) and is comfortable at speed even on hot days), hitting objects (avoid them), or being run over by cars (hard to avoid yourself but...most cars hit the breaks when you go down)
I went down at about 50 MPH about 2 weeks ago... came out of it with a sprained wrist and some chewed up pants (I wasn't wearing cordura pants - so I bought some since then).
or do what I do, ride a motorcycle. Save less power (but still quite a bit), have fun doing, and get there faster. (especially if your commute involves the highway) - not to mention the time you can save by advancing slowly ( I said slowly damnit - some people are just crazy) between the cars in a traffic jam. (course bicycles can do that too - but still not on the highway)
-Steve
Re:/. crew's pro-democrat/left wing bias
on
Carnivore To Die?
·
· Score: 1
> Actually, I'm kind of surprised you invoked
> Hitler - according to Usenet rules this
> conversation is now at an end and you lost.
Hmmm well this isn't usenet. Besides the "loss" idea is not actually part of Godwins law, it simply states that the chances of a comparison to hitler or the nazis aproaches 1 as a conversation goes on. You will not that my point in doing so was opposite to that where most such comparisons are made. In fact, I made it specifically to show that such comparisons are meaningless.
I don't see how your post has anything to do with mine. The entire point to my post was, afterall, 'Just because a person believes one thing, doesn't mean they believe another'
I somehow doubt that anything blackmail worthy goes out in congressional email, and if it does, I bet it goes out encrypted.
In fact, I think you will find that back room deals still happen in back rooms, not chat rooms. Remember, these are people who are used to being under the eye of newspapers and TV cameras.
-Steve
Re:/. crew's pro-democrat/left wing bias
on
Carnivore To Die?
·
· Score: 1
> So it is with some surprise that I find myself
> actually agreeing with Armey for once
And if you think only the armed forces (police, army, etc) should have guns, then you agree with Hitler. Surprized?
SO what? What Dick Armey believes about religions or about homosexuality has nothing to do with other issues. Its impossible to take one or two issues and say "I wont agree with this person on anything" or "This person can't have any good ideas".
It is annoying though. There are so many people (like my High School Senior year religon teacher, who prayed in class that Roe Vs Wade would be overturned) that I would love to consider complete wastes of flesh but... sometimes they do end up holding a few ideas that arn't too far off.
-Steve
Re:/. crew's pro-democrat/left wing bias
on
Carnivore To Die?
·
· Score: 1
Since when are the democrats "Left wing?
Sheesh, you run a country with two right wing parties and all of a sudden people start calling the more centrist one "left wing".
Quite amazing. I will agree though - we could use more parties. Actually, I like an idea I heard recently from a friend.
Change the senate such that parties are elected, who then apoint members. Ie a party is elected to each seat and the party determines who fills it.
Then change the house such that members are not allowed to be members of political parties. NO parties in the house. No Majority leaders or whips. Just representatives of the people, pure and simple.
ANd how do we know whether they have the "responsibility or authority to spy on citizens"? afterall, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the NSA charter classified?
Even if they "don't have the authority", should we honestly believe it would stop them?
Also, would you like to show som eevidence to back up your statements? How are we suposed to know that the NSA "has a hard enough time tracking foreign terrorists"?
And lastly... had they ever thought that maybe the world might be a better place if the terrorists going after the white house got through? Just a thought. "Just planting seeds".
Actually... I don't see that in dilbert at all. Except for the marketing stuff... thats pretty true. As Bill Hicks implored, "If anyone here works in advertising or marketing, please kill yourself".
Resource Allocation, priority setting, "management" are all good things. However, when they are done poorly, then it is often worst than having none at all being done. Dilbert shows quite well a company where management is stupid.
In fact, scott adams books pose some interesting ideas on why this is the case, and why much management is bad management. He never says that management can't be good, or isn't needed - but rather that the people thrust into the position of doing it are usually incompetent.
> However, based on many years of observing
? technical people and managers, I think there
> are very few techies who are really interested
> in, or would really like, jobs in management.
I think this is the real problem. Hell, I don't want to be a manager. Hell no, the very idea of it bores me to death.
Of course, you really have to be a techie to manage techies effectivly. That has been my, albeit limited, experience. Those who are real geeks and can manage tend to be excellent managers. Those who are not reral geeks and try to manage them...well... are just PHBs.
Slashdot Mirror
Its generally been my experience that people who buy stolen goods know that they have bought stolen goods.
Sure, they don't know how it was stolen, or who it was stolen from. However, there is never any doubt that this "great deal" is a "hot deal".
-Steve
I had a better one I think.
Put cameras all over an uninhabited island. Dock a boat there. Send in all the "contestants", each with one backpack full of supplies of their own choosing. (full size camping backpack).
Rules:
1) You may leave at any time by getting on the docked boat.
2) Once you leave, you may not come back.
3) Last living person on the island wins.
Game continues until there is one person left. It would take longer, and possibly some may find
it less interesting... but would be much more "survivor"
No "challenges" or "councils". Just harsh survival.
-Steve
What the fuck?
I saw the original Dune movie before I ever read the books. I could follow the movie, I even thought it was good. I still think it is... as far as movies go. However, as far as being an adaptation of the Dune story, it sucked ass.
After reading the book, I was quite unhappy with the major changes made to the story in the movie. The whole throwing away of the kris knives and giving the frememn "voice weapons" wtf was that?
As for FF... ive played the games. I like the games. However, I know the games, so I expect the plot to be thin and corney as all hell. (though I have to hand i tto square, in FF7, the plot wasn't too corney until around the point where you actually meet laguna)
-Steve
Well in bash I use this:
;)
[sjc@brake sjc]$ echo $PS1
[\u@\h \W]\$ \[\033]0;\u@\h \w\007\]
Pretty simple... takes who and where I am, and sends the info to my terminal windo so it can set the title bar apropriatly.
Of course, my terminal windows don't have title bars (or even boarders), but it does make the window list work a bit better
-Steve
Hmmm all you really need in vi are (assuming you can use arrow keys):
:q! or :wq
a i J d x and either
Which are "append" "insert" "join" "delete line" and "delete character" then "quit now" or "write and quit".
Anything else is extra (I regularly use o to get a new line and regular expressions stuff, and sometimes ~ to toggle capitalisation, or r to replace a letter without going into insert mode)
As for simple editors... before I learned to use vi, ee was a great little editor... and ae didn't suck too bad either.
-Steve
Well speed alone isn't really the issue as much as reaction time. Sure, you can walk away from a 165+ MPH spill on a bike. However its often not just a spill on the highway - Like if you go down because you didn't see the car just over the top of the next hill.
Hitting stationaty objects, or flyin gover and then being run over by cars, that tends to lower the surviuvability of the crash.
Reaction ability at that speed is just so severely reduced. Not to mention the speeding ticket! Hell, shoulda heard the state trooper yelling at me when he caught me doin 90 in a 55 (didn't ticket me, just yelled and got all condesending)
-Steve
Hmmm your notion of death must be quite odd if you think it is possible for one to enter the loop after death.
-Steve
DO me a favor. Get a motorcycle. Go to medford MA. From Boston Ave, go down Harvard Street at 3 am and come up to the corner of Main and Harvard alone.
Once you have done that THEN you may tell me that there is "no promise,ever, in running a red light" and I will consider your opinion to be at least potentially informed.
If this test is too hard for you geographically, then head to the local bike shop and ask them which traffic light sensors in the area are so out of whack that anything less than a mack truck will have trouble being noticed on them - try one of those.
-Steve
Please...if thats your attitude, and you REALLY want to not kill people, then stay oin the fucking right lane.
There are few things more dangerous than people who sit around doing lsow speeds in the left lanes of a highway.
All the mor eagressive faster drivers slow down. They get pisse doff because you are going slow in the left lane - the lane that is generally considered the fast lane. Then they have to try to get around your self-rightous ass.
The manuver of trying to get around involves changing lanes and passing. This is easily more dangerous than speeding. People who drive with thsi smug "you shouldn't be going that fast anyway" attitude are the ones who kill people.
driving fast in straight clear lane is pretty damned safe in and of itself.
-Steve
Course thne there are some lights that don't EVER change unless their sensor detects a car, and the damned sensor wont detect a motorcycle.
COme one up to boston and id be happy to show you 2 or 3 like that.
-Steve
Eh some do, some don't.
Lots of the lights around here are tripped just fine by my bike. There are a coupl ehowever that I have to run eevery single time (at night anyway).
Of course, I don't really think o fit as "running the light". Its more like treating it as a stop sign.
In any case the rules are silly. I don't need to come to a full stop at a stop sign, I just need to slow down enough that I can see if anything is comming and come to a full stop if needed.
The laws make a good general guide for safe driving, sure. However they arn't the be all and end all. Theres alot fo things that are perfectly safe and still break the law.
Some (like running the light at the corner of harvard and maine in medofrd MA) are impossible to not break
-Steve
hmmm the system I was taught in my safe driving course was SIPDE (it was an MSF certified motorcycle course) Scan Identify Predict Decide Execute.
Note, stop i snot one of the steps.
A driver should be ready to take WHATEVER ACTION NEEDED to avoid an accident. Thats the decide step. Sometimes you avoid it by speeding up, sometimes by slowing down.
If the car to the right of me suddenly starts comming into my lane, I have a semiu behind me, and the next lane over has a car in it, but enough room for me to acelerate out and come in in front o fhim....
Guess what I am gonna do? It certainly isn't going to be "brake hard and hope the guy in the Mack truck is paying attention".
We are talking accident avoidance here, not what to do if an accident is eminent. These are two different things.
In fact, in both my MSF course, and my previous drivers ed, we learned that accident avoidance is alot more than just braking and there are many situations where you want to swerve and possibly accelerate to get out of bad situations.
-Steve
He didn't say "head on" he said "oncomming" which just means "comming towards me".
A truck that has lost its breaks and is comming quickly down towards you at 60 MPH, from behind, is just as "oncomming" as one comming head on.
Either way, you had better do some sort of accelerating in some direction or other pretty quickly
-Steve
Actually...
I have heard that they do indeed watch for speeding. You miss the other benefit of this. While overall efficiency is reduced by not speeding, it is only by a tiny amount.
The trade off then? Lower insurance rates. I have heard (can anyone verify) that they get a break on their insurance if they install GPS for this reason.
-Steve
hmmmm 115 is the fastest ive had a bike up to, and that was just once to see how fast she would go (it was a cruiser), going that fast on a regular basis is just crazy man.
But yea, ive found I can do 85-90 and not have too much trouble. Hell, I did 80-90 from Boston to D.C. last month, all the way except for NYC area (where it was more like 5 ugh) - actually my speedometer broke outside of Providence - but I rode with the tach pegged at 5 (on an 1100 virago) which translates to about 85 on that bike
So far ive been pulled over once in my life for speeding. 90 in a 55 on my bike. State trooper yelled at me and took off with no ticket.
Personally, I see no problem with speed, specially on a bike where you can manuver easily and stop qucikly. As long as the road is clear and your not weavin gin and out of traffic, speed isn't too bad.
The real danger is the peopl ewho go fast in heavy traffic and weave in and out trying to pass.
Of course, if slow drivers would stay out of the left lane, perhaps these agressive drivers would do a little less weaving? Might be safer for everyone.
Generally speaking, here is my philosophy. If you rbeing tailgated - slowing down and flashing lights is fine, unless your in the left lane. Then it means your too slow and need to either speed up or get out of the way. I fyour in the left (or on larger roads, left couple of lanes) then you should be looking for faster drivers who want to pass you and get out of their way.
Its not just courtesy, its safety.
-Steve
hmmm please define worst... then tell me if you have been to Boston.
Its often been said that we have some of the "worst" drivers in the country, if not the world. A driver who has been battle hardend on the streets of boston is nothing to sneeze at.
-Steve
Well happens of course. However most accidents are entirely avoidable if you keep your skills up to date.
Most accidents arn't that bad either. Most damage comes either from wearing improper gear (just don't do that, the goo dstuff only costs a few hundred $$, will still be good after a crash (not counting helmets) and is comfortable at speed even on hot days), hitting objects (avoid them), or being run over by cars (hard to avoid yourself but...most cars hit the breaks when you go down)
I went down at about 50 MPH about 2 weeks ago... came out of it with a sprained wrist and some chewed up pants (I wasn't wearing cordura pants - so I bought some since then).
-Steve
or do what I do, ride a motorcycle. Save less power (but still quite a bit), have fun doing, and get there faster. (especially if your commute involves the highway) - not to mention the time you can save by advancing slowly ( I said slowly damnit - some people are just crazy) between the cars in a traffic jam. (course bicycles can do that too - but still not on the highway)
-Steve
> Actually, I'm kind of surprised you invoked
> Hitler - according to Usenet rules this
> conversation is now at an end and you lost.
Hmmm well this isn't usenet. Besides the "loss" idea is not actually part of Godwins law, it simply states that the chances of a comparison to hitler or the nazis aproaches 1 as a conversation goes on. You will not that my point in doing so was opposite to that where most such comparisons are made. In fact, I made it specifically to show that such comparisons are meaningless.
I don't see how your post has anything to do with mine. The entire point to my post was, afterall, 'Just because a person believes one thing, doesn't mean they believe another'
-Steve
I somehow doubt that anything blackmail worthy goes out in congressional email, and if it does, I bet it goes out encrypted.
In fact, I think you will find that back room deals still happen in back rooms, not chat rooms. Remember, these are people who are used to being under the eye of newspapers and TV cameras.
-Steve
> So it is with some surprise that I find myself
> actually agreeing with Armey for once
And if you think only the armed forces (police, army, etc) should have guns, then you agree with Hitler. Surprized?
SO what? What Dick Armey believes about religions or about homosexuality has nothing to do with other issues. Its impossible to take one or two issues and say "I wont agree with this person on anything" or "This person can't have any good ideas".
It is annoying though. There are so many people (like my High School Senior year religon teacher, who prayed in class that Roe Vs Wade would be overturned) that I would love to consider complete wastes of flesh but... sometimes they do end up holding a few ideas that arn't too far off.
-Steve
Since when are the democrats "Left wing?
Sheesh, you run a country with two right wing parties and all of a sudden people start calling the more centrist one "left wing".
Quite amazing. I will agree though - we could use more parties. Actually, I like an idea I heard recently from a friend.
Change the senate such that parties are elected, who then apoint members. Ie a party is elected to each seat and the party determines who fills it.
Then change the house such that members are not allowed to be members of political parties. NO parties in the house. No Majority leaders or whips. Just representatives of the people, pure and simple.
-Steve
ANd how do we know whether they have the "responsibility or authority to spy on citizens"? afterall, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the NSA charter classified?
Even if they "don't have the authority", should we honestly believe it would stop them?
Also, would you like to show som eevidence to back up your statements? How are we suposed to know that the NSA "has a hard enough time tracking foreign terrorists"?
And lastly... had they ever thought that maybe the world might be a better place if the terrorists going after the white house got through? Just a thought. "Just planting seeds".
-Steve
yes I know that. Whats your point?
That doesn't elevate the status of marketers above scum of the earth and "ruiners of all things good". It certainly doesn't justify the means.
don't you think its sad that often marketning, and not quality, is what sets apart a successful moneymaking product from a flop?
Unsafe? Peice of shit? No problem...bring in the marketers!
Again, "if anyone here is in advertising or marketing, kill yourself".
-Steve
Actually... I don't see that in dilbert at all. Except for the marketing stuff... thats pretty true. As Bill Hicks implored, "If anyone here works in advertising or marketing, please kill yourself".
Resource Allocation, priority setting, "management" are all good things. However, when they are done poorly, then it is often worst than having none at all being done. Dilbert shows quite well a company where management is stupid.
In fact, scott adams books pose some interesting ideas on why this is the case, and why much management is bad management. He never says that management can't be good, or isn't needed - but rather that the people thrust into the position of doing it are usually incompetent.
> However, based on many years of observing
? technical people and managers, I think there
> are very few techies who are really interested
> in, or would really like, jobs in management.
I think this is the real problem. Hell, I don't want to be a manager. Hell no, the very idea of it bores me to death.
Of course, you really have to be a techie to manage techies effectivly. That has been my, albeit limited, experience. Those who are real geeks and can manage tend to be excellent managers. Those who are not reral geeks and try to manage them...well... are just PHBs.
-Steve