Huh? What are you worried about? How would you get in trouble for running a piracy site that allows downloading from a server you own? If anything, people actually downloading warez and accessing the latest child-Pr0n on your server might get in trouble, but I don't see how you would.
Although a hot flamebait, it's a nice reminder. Of course geeks should be more political active. It's never too late in finding life paradoxal and humorous. However, I think most geeks already knows this.
Except that the Java-"solution" is an arcane ugly hack. It compares the object-numbers (pointers), as all Java-objects do, not the internal strings. You'll have to use this in order to always achieve what you want:
s1.intern() == s2.intern()
or:
s1.equals(s2).
Admittedly, I don't program Java because of issues like this. Currently, I fancy C++ with STL (for creating new systems/languages). So, here's a shameless plug from the 1.2-specification to explain things further:
public class Other { static String hello = "Hello"; }
produces the output:
true true true true false true
This example illustrates six points:
* Literal strings within the same class (8) in the same package (7) represent references to the same String object (4.3.1).
* Literal strings within different classes in the same package represent references to the same String object.
* Literal strings within different classes in different packages likewise represent references to the same String object.
* Strings computed by constant expressions (15.27) are computed at compile time and then treated as if they were literals.
* Strings computed at run time are newly created and therefore distinct.
* The result of explicitly interning a computed string is the same string as any pre-existing literal string with the same contents.
The fifth point is what breaks Java-platform/VM independence IMHO. What if an optimizer optimizes something like that out of run-time? You'll get different results Note though, I'm not sure what restrictions lies in the specifications of a Java-VM. This MAY not be an issue, but it sure is UGLY. It inhibits features you cannot express in the language itself.
So you can't escape pointer issues with Java either it seems. They've implemented a castrated pointertype retaining many of the old problems, for the sake of optimization. This is of course no surprise, it's an easy language to make something quick in, but it's far off from being a good language for what it's supposed to fix.
You think for yourself, and thats a good thing. However, you obviously fail to acknowledge other people as thinking concious beings equal to yourself.
The phrase "Information wants to be free" was taken out of context, and given a broader meaning out of that context you phrase. Now, this means that wherever the phrase came from is of no importance anymore. Its origin DOES NOT LIMIT its expressiveness now.
Personally, I hate people saying "Information wants to be free", and not backing it up with concrete arguments. It's too loose, and I bet it has many different meanings to people. However, that has nothing to do with the phrase itself, or the old context it was snatched from.
The only reason people hack on this phrase is that they either don't understand what it really means, or they're just envious they didn't think of such a catchy phrase. Disclaimer: I'm JUST as tired of hearing people advocate using this phrase as everyone else. Especially when it's their ONLY argument...
But what's wrong with it? Is it because it implies that information has a will of its own? Surely, you cannot prove either way. To say something has a "will", is like saying it is conscious, something that is not provable or deprovable. It's just two different views on the universe. Neither you or me can or should force our views down on other people's throats.
However, "will" is totally besides the point of this phrase. It refers more to a PROPERTY of information. Think of the entire universe as a system. Now, is it possible to deprive one part (subsystem) of the system of information from another part entirely for all eternity?
No, the natural state of information is such that it will merge with other information to create new patterns (thermodynamics). THAT is creativity. In essence, the universe is information always in transformation, or can be looked upon as such. Therefore the phrase "Information wants to be free" really means "The universe wants to be free". It's a statement of the "will of God" or "nature of God" (no this is not a troll;), in which "God" wants to be a system free of barricades blocking the free flow of energy (life). What is a blockade? (Answer: Depression)
"What's all this got to do with us?", you may ask. Everything! When we deprive each other for information we create a block in the structure of the universe. We deprive understanding and learning of the human race, and ultimately we deprive ourselves, since every action has a reaction (or rather we psychologically seek situations that are the opposite, e.g in bed etc).
Now, you want to limit this to "Information CAN be free". That's like saying WE decide the rules of our universe. Or, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" (different context I know, but it's still hypocritical). When people starts believing things like this in their "rational" ways, it usually gets out of hand fairly quickly.
Ultimately we're witnessing "free flow of information" here on Slashdot, or a near counterpart that we can bear (moderation). Where will YOU BE when huge corporations want to shut it down for the sake of protecting their "Intellectual Property" (created by their employees)? Isn't this all like giving up all your freedom (not rights, they don't exist) as a human being?
And no, I don't believe in any revolution to fix all this. I think things are going quite well as it is, as long as people don't give up to learn their lessons.
You may disagree with my interpretation of this, but that's perfectly okay. Maybe we're both right;-)
Communism (aka sharing) doesn't work with a rotten (greedy) core, as capitalism do. However, when people themselves change. They want to have more enlightened leaders and free flow of information, not dark rooms with old men patting their pipes behind closed doors. But non-corrupt leaders who don't screw them around for personal benefit. Then socialism is more appropriate.
However, it's very hard to accomplish pure socialism in a large and complex system with scarcity. The less scarcity, the more easier such a transition would be.
Btw, USSR was hardly communistic. It was a dictatorship. Look up the difference between communism and Communism in Webster's.
Depends what you define as dimension and as your viewpoint/perspective. Just like you disregarded all other dimensions but one, since the heat only moved in one direction, you can also select how to view the world in infinite ways. Including adding one dimension for time. You may even add it to the beginning of the list;-P
But the FSF is fighting fire with fire. Read RMS' editorial for christs sake. The KDE-response is clearly exhaggerated. Here's perhaps the most inflamatory part of the RMS' editorial (and in no way inflamatory if you just THINK..):
"Also, where code was copied from other GPL-covered programs, their copyright holders need to be asked for forgiveness. To lead the way, the FSF hereby grants this forgiveness for all code that is copyright FSF. More precisely, those who as of September 4, 2000 have used some FSF code in violation of the GPL solely by linking it with Qt, and thus have forfeited the right to use that code under the GPL, will once again have full GPL permissions to use that code upon switching to a GPL-covered version of Qt. I appeal to all the other copyright holders of affected code to grant similar forgiveness and thus help resolve the situation quickly."
Yes, the *copyright* holders needs to be asken for forgiveness, because the KDE-developers have linked their code to other code under an incompatible license *without* their consent (and distributed this effort). What's unreasonable about this? It's a breach of the GPL. Of course, there's always some people who refuse to ask for forgiveness. Now THAT's childish and petty IMHO. Of course the KDE-people are in the clear *now*, but they're being asked to ask for forgiveness so all the bad feelings can end.
I think RMS was pretty calm about this. In no way as zealotly as some of the posts here on Slashdot. Next time, try to read the stories Slashbots (yes I am one too, I don't see "Slashbot" as being a negative thing;), instead of going into war against something you clearly don't understand. I don't believe he meant this as a demanding letter, just a hint that it's time to reconcile and forgive the past.
"Think about it this way; I download an emulator, fill its content with unpleasant sexual material and advertise "RapeQuest" or "Ultima Paedo Edition". Ought not the creators of the original server application to have some protection against this?"
Protection from what? That people do what they do in their own free time? Taking apart things and making new creations out of products they've legally bought? What? What?
Wether customers are phaedophile, rapist or viewing "unpleasant sexual material" is not something a corporation should be concerned with. Neither are they responsible of others' misuse/creative use of their products. In fact, corporations shouldn't be ALLOWED to rule over people, that's for the governmental bodies to do.
As far as I know, the login servers are not hardcoded into the.exe file. That would be most stupid. You can probably start the game with a parameter that makes you able to type-in your login server. I've seen such a page when a friend of mine had problems with a dll-patch.
"Yeah I realize that its not just a simple hack.:)"
Heh, REALLY? I thought it was just a simple matter of importing old.c files into a Text-MUD OLE Object in Visual Studio. After that it's just a simple matter of drag'n drop the Text-MUD Icon over the neat DirectX7 Icon and voila... Graphical MUD with sound and music! Ta-da!
Seriously. You could reuse many objects from a Text MUD into a graphical MUD, even using the same driver. However, I would still rewrite things and add more realism simply because a 3D-world is more realistic and complex than Room-based Text MUD. I would be surprised though if Verant actually stole public code to do this, instead of making things up from scratch emulating the older systems. A commercial game like this should be designed from the ground up, not hacked upon old code for "legacy systems".
"This is a persistent world, not a short one. It's not the same as Doom/Unreal, etc. Look at MUD/MUSH/MUCKs, and how many come and go."
It's NOT a persistent world, except for the saving of player-data. There are few dynamics of the game, except spawning of NPCs and their deaths. The quests are boring, too unintuitive, hard and buggy. Give the wrong item to the wrong NPC, or combine stuff in the wrong order, and you have to redo it all. Getting good gear mounts down to camping the same NPC for hours, sometimes for weeks. I say Everquest is good at what it is (3D-Hack'n Slash MUD), but it's NOT a persistent RPG world. Far from it. It gets boring and repetitive after level 20-25ish.
Yes, I do know it's harder to make a 3D-MUD. I've been involved in MUD-programming myself (both on driver-side and game logics), so I know it all pretty well. I've just lost faith that a company can deliver what I, and many others, would want. I have greater hopes for WorldForge or something similar.
My grudges against Verant, Sony and Everquest have nothing to do with Everquest being popular. If people like their game, more power to them. However, they should call and review their game for what it is. Enough with the glamorous white-papers.
When Anarchy Online comes out, Everquest will get some serious competition on this field.. I wouldn't hold my breath though, no point in waiting for a prospective future when you only live in the Now.
You pay for the box more than you have to pay for other games. It buys you one month of play. I'd say ripping graphics and sounds for PERSONAL USE would fall under the category FAIR USE. Just as with music CDs and videos. I think that's why Verant charges so much for the boxes in the first place.
The EULA shouldn't be legally binding. They have changed it over and over again, and if you disagree, suddenly you have paid for nothing? That's blackmailing, not agreement.
What is "wrong", is distributing the game CD to people not owning the game. However, I said "wrong", because nothing is absolute in this world.
It depends what those parameters are. A computer program *cannot* exceed any parameters given to it, but the parameters may be infinite. Ie, a never ending loop will yield a program that never ends. Randomity may yield unexpected results as every possible solution is tried (in a non-ordered way). A program may be allowed to alter its own parameters and program. These combined, is what leads to a never-ending darwinian evolution in computer programs. The result may converge into death or stagnation though.
With a game-engine, a quite different approach used for chess-programs, the computer is given options and the ability to simulate the effects of each choice. What this program probably found within its search-tree, was a distinct advantage in blowing up its own ships (which the game-world MUST allow, or it wouldn't/shouldn't be searched). It would be most natural for the computer to search this, since it shouldn't have any prejudice against this sort of action (except when it leads to a *guaranteed* lower state, in which that branch should be pruned from the search-tree).
One argument against leaving ships in port could be that they require space, maintenance, crew and resources. This may go against the way reality works, but this is a different game-world. Made by humans, it usually contains strategic loop-holes or flaws.
If this is true, then humans are just like they said in Matrix: A virus, up to no good other than abusing its environment for its own selfish goals.
Compare this to a computer program: What good is it to produce huge quantities of programs with the same quality and complexity? Sheer quantity is not a human solution. Do you feel happy in huge cities?
Prior art, what's the use? Firstly, it needs to have been *publically published*, not just used. So there aren't very many applications to pick from. Graphical apps were all pretty much closed before the 90's. Without the details of the implementation disclosed *publically* (which is the whole meaning of the patent system), "prior art" is useless against this system.
What I would place my bet on here, are magazines and scientific papers prior to '91, maybe newsgroups but I doubt that would stick in court. Search for elaborate articles that explain in detail what you're looking for. If you do, that should invalidate the patent, but I recommend asking your lawyers about it.
But let's not forget the REAL issue here. These software patents shouldn't be accepted in the first place! It's like being forced to accept that Sun created Java, and live by their rules because it's suddenly ILLEGAL to develop something similar. Never mind that people have created Smalltalk, C++ and whatnot Java was based on. Accepting a patent is just like accepting being stolen of your lunch-money by big bullies.
"Artists: You can use it to stop people from putting their name on your band's mp3's and distributing them as their own, or you can use it to embed lyrics, links to your homepage, and stupid banner ads in mp3's."
There's something REALY innovative going on here. For how do they fit a banner inside MP3 files? And once inside, how do they output those banners to the speakers? To top it all, these banner ads are STUPID! Wow! What guys can come up with these days to get counter-hits! In the old days, we just made a Perl-script or something, but this is REALY innovative!
However, how about adding *Ads* in MP3's that you can't hear with your conscious ear, but is dictating your life *UNCONSCIOUSLY*. Just think about it: One day you wake up from listening to music all night, and you go to the nearest MPAA/RIAA Borg-HQ to seek employment.
There's just endless possibilities, isn't there?:-)
Isn't this standard in C / C++? The lower mathematical operand's type is casted to the highest one to ensure bits are not lost.
If you want asm-specific solutions you should use inline assembler IMHO. And this is one of the huge strengths of Watcom C++. The compiler allows you to make completely inline asm-functions! (Beware though that registers are locked, so you ought to know what you're doing)
I still can't believe any MS-compiler beats Watcom C++ on optimized output though. I've read the output myself, and it totally rocks (made me quit programming in assembler).
"..or that song about the kid who entered a race trying to win enough money to buy his gal a ring but got killed instead."
And this has nothing to do with love/lost love, as the previous poster argued about?
I on the other hand thought the comment was well put forth. We shouldn't be fighting to get what the music/movie industry makes "for us". We act pretty much like small cubs fighting among themselves to get milk from their mother. Instead, we should live our own lives and ignore people trying to control us into living in Barbie world.
1) Your point of installing Linux is now mostly false, since the latest distros are quite easily installed. You just have to pick the easiest one (Corel or Caldera I believe). Of course you may run into problems, especially with hardware. In my experience, incompability is worse with Windows. Either it works, or it don't. Plug'n Pray. Who installs their OSes themselves in Windows-world anyways?
2) Device support is a very good argument against Linux, on a short term scale. However, in a production environment webcams and 4 speakers w/subwoofer are not likely to be needed. Just look at WinNT, it managed fine without all that extra junk. Also, Microsoft has such a good range of available devices supported by their _monopoly_. You're saying the one-track monopoly situation is a good thing? It is the very reason for lack of support from device-manufacturers to alternate systems (think generic device files). Think what is possible if only people opens their eyes a bit.
3) What you get from using Linux, or other free operating systems is freedom. Freedom from corporate decisions. Decisions that are made from a view that people are consumers and should be tricked and lured into giving up their money for as little as possible. Freedom to fix the code yourself. Freedom to share the code and binaries with your friends. Freedom to get it for free. A platform you know won't change in the future on the whims of corporate greed and hype.
1) Here's what you can do: Hit Reply. Open notepad. Scribble down what you like. Copy'n Paste what you've written in notepad into your browser. Hit submit or preview. Save your notepad text-file for archival purposes if you like.
2) The HTML-standard was never designed from ground-up to deliver applications, and whoever think it's suitable for such tasks is plainly wrong. It's good enough for simple forms though. The future of "thin clients" is probably Java w/Swing, but we're probably going to face the same ridiculous lock-in with Sun as we have had with Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? What are you worried about? How would you get in trouble for running a piracy site that allows downloading from a server you own? If anything, people actually downloading warez and accessing the latest child-Pr0n on your server might get in trouble, but I don't see how you would.
- Steeltoe
Although a hot flamebait, it's a nice reminder. Of course geeks should be more political active. It's never too late in finding life paradoxal and humorous. However, I think most geeks already knows this.
- Steeltoe
s1.intern() == s2.intern()
or:
s1.equals(s2).
Admittedly, I don't program Java because of issues like this. Currently, I fancy C++ with STL (for creating new systems/languages). So, here's a shameless plug from the 1.2-specification to explain things further:
The fifth point is what breaks Java-platform/VM independence IMHO. What if an optimizer optimizes something like that out of run-time? You'll get different results Note though, I'm not sure what restrictions lies in the specifications of a Java-VM. This MAY not be an issue, but it sure is UGLY. It inhibits features you cannot express in the language itself.
So you can't escape pointer issues with Java either it seems. They've implemented a castrated pointertype retaining many of the old problems, for the sake of optimization. This is of course no surprise, it's an easy language to make something quick in, but it's far off from being a good language for what it's supposed to fix.
You can find more on: http://java.sun.com/docs/ books/jls/html/3.doc.html
Regards,
- Steeltoe
You think for yourself, and thats a good thing. However, you obviously fail to acknowledge other people as thinking concious beings equal to yourself.
The phrase "Information wants to be free" was taken out of context, and given a broader meaning out of that context you phrase. Now, this means that wherever the phrase came from is of no importance anymore. Its origin DOES NOT LIMIT its expressiveness now.
Personally, I hate people saying "Information wants to be free", and not backing it up with concrete arguments. It's too loose, and I bet it has many different meanings to people. However, that has nothing to do with the phrase itself, or the old context it was snatched from.
- Steeltoe
The only reason people hack on this phrase is that they either don't understand what it really means, or they're just envious they didn't think of such a catchy phrase. Disclaimer: I'm JUST as tired of hearing people advocate using this phrase as everyone else. Especially when it's their ONLY argument...
;), in which "God" wants to be a system free of barricades blocking the free flow of energy (life). What is a blockade? (Answer: Depression)
;-)
But what's wrong with it? Is it because it implies that information has a will of its own? Surely, you cannot prove either way. To say something has a "will", is like saying it is conscious, something that is not provable or deprovable. It's just two different views on the universe. Neither you or me can or should force our views down on other people's throats.
However, "will" is totally besides the point of this phrase. It refers more to a PROPERTY of information. Think of the entire universe as a system. Now, is it possible to deprive one part (subsystem) of the system of information from another part entirely for all eternity?
No, the natural state of information is such that it will merge with other information to create new patterns (thermodynamics). THAT is creativity. In essence, the universe is information always in transformation, or can be looked upon as such. Therefore the phrase "Information wants to be free" really means "The universe wants to be free". It's a statement of the "will of God" or "nature of God" (no this is not a troll
"What's all this got to do with us?", you may ask. Everything! When we deprive each other for information we create a block in the structure of the universe. We deprive understanding and learning of the human race, and ultimately we deprive ourselves, since every action has a reaction (or rather we psychologically seek situations that are the opposite, e.g in bed etc).
Now, you want to limit this to "Information CAN be free". That's like saying WE decide the rules of our universe. Or, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" (different context I know, but it's still hypocritical). When people starts believing things like this in their "rational" ways, it usually gets out of hand fairly quickly.
Ultimately we're witnessing "free flow of information" here on Slashdot, or a near counterpart that we can bear (moderation). Where will YOU BE when huge corporations want to shut it down for the sake of protecting their "Intellectual Property" (created by their employees)? Isn't this all like giving up all your freedom (not rights, they don't exist) as a human being?
And no, I don't believe in any revolution to fix all this. I think things are going quite well as it is, as long as people don't give up to learn their lessons.
You may disagree with my interpretation of this, but that's perfectly okay. Maybe we're both right
- Steeltoe
Communism (aka sharing) doesn't work with a rotten (greedy) core, as capitalism do. However, when people themselves change. They want to have more enlightened leaders and free flow of information, not dark rooms with old men patting their pipes behind closed doors. But non-corrupt leaders who don't screw them around for personal benefit. Then socialism is more appropriate.
However, it's very hard to accomplish pure socialism in a large and complex system with scarcity. The less scarcity, the more easier such a transition would be.
Btw, USSR was hardly communistic. It was a dictatorship. Look up the difference between communism and Communism in Webster's.
- Steeltoe
"Time isent a dimension ...."
;-P
Depends what you define as dimension and as your viewpoint/perspective. Just like you disregarded all other dimensions but one, since the heat only moved in one direction, you can also select how to view the world in infinite ways. Including adding one dimension for time. You may even add it to the beginning of the list
- Steeltoe
But the FSF is fighting fire with fire. Read RMS' editorial for christs sake. The KDE-response is clearly exhaggerated. Here's perhaps the most inflamatory part of the RMS' editorial (and in no way inflamatory if you just THINK..):
;), instead of going into war against something you clearly don't understand. I don't believe he meant this as a demanding letter, just a hint that it's time to reconcile and forgive the past.
"Also, where code was copied from other GPL-covered programs, their copyright holders need to be asked for forgiveness. To lead the way, the FSF hereby grants this forgiveness for all code that is copyright FSF. More precisely, those who as of September 4, 2000 have used some FSF code in violation of the GPL solely by linking it with Qt, and thus have forfeited the right to use that code under the GPL, will once again have full GPL permissions to use that code upon switching to a GPL-covered version of Qt. I appeal to all the other copyright holders of affected code to grant similar forgiveness and thus help resolve the situation quickly."
Yes, the *copyright* holders needs to be asken for forgiveness, because the KDE-developers have linked their code to other code under an incompatible license *without* their consent (and distributed this effort). What's unreasonable about this? It's a breach of the GPL. Of course, there's always some people who refuse to ask for forgiveness. Now THAT's childish and petty IMHO. Of course the KDE-people are in the clear *now*, but they're being asked to ask for forgiveness so all the bad feelings can end.
I think RMS was pretty calm about this. In no way as zealotly as some of the posts here on Slashdot. Next time, try to read the stories Slashbots (yes I am one too, I don't see "Slashbot" as being a negative thing
- Steeltoe
"Think about it this way; I download an emulator, fill its content with unpleasant sexual material and advertise "RapeQuest" or "Ultima Paedo Edition". Ought not the creators of the original server application to have some protection against this?"
Protection from what? That people do what they do in their own free time? Taking apart things and making new creations out of products they've legally bought? What? What?
Wether customers are phaedophile, rapist or viewing "unpleasant sexual material" is not something a corporation should be concerned with. Neither are they responsible of others' misuse/creative use of their products. In fact, corporations shouldn't be ALLOWED to rule over people, that's for the governmental bodies to do.
- Steeltoe
As far as I know, the login servers are not hardcoded into the .exe file. That would be most stupid. You can probably start the game with a parameter that makes you able to type-in your login server. I've seen such a page when a friend of mine had problems with a dll-patch.
- Steeltoe
"Yeah I realize that its not just a simple hack. :)"
.c files into a Text-MUD OLE Object in Visual Studio. After that it's just a simple matter of drag'n drop the Text-MUD Icon over the neat DirectX7 Icon and voila... Graphical MUD with sound and music! Ta-da!
Heh, REALLY? I thought it was just a simple matter of importing old
Seriously. You could reuse many objects from a Text MUD into a graphical MUD, even using the same driver. However, I would still rewrite things and add more realism simply because a 3D-world is more realistic and complex than Room-based Text MUD. I would be surprised though if Verant actually stole public code to do this, instead of making things up from scratch emulating the older systems. A commercial game like this should be designed from the ground up, not hacked upon old code for "legacy systems".
- Steeltoe
"This is a persistent world, not a short one. It's not the same as Doom/Unreal, etc. Look at MUD/MUSH/MUCKs, and how many come and go."
It's NOT a persistent world, except for the saving of player-data. There are few dynamics of the game, except spawning of NPCs and their deaths. The quests are boring, too unintuitive, hard and buggy. Give the wrong item to the wrong NPC, or combine stuff in the wrong order, and you have to redo it all. Getting good gear mounts down to camping the same NPC for hours, sometimes for weeks. I say Everquest is good at what it is (3D-Hack'n Slash MUD), but it's NOT a persistent RPG world. Far from it. It gets boring and repetitive after level 20-25ish.
Yes, I do know it's harder to make a 3D-MUD. I've been involved in MUD-programming myself (both on driver-side and game logics), so I know it all pretty well. I've just lost faith that a company can deliver what I, and many others, would want. I have greater hopes for WorldForge or something similar.
My grudges against Verant, Sony and Everquest have nothing to do with Everquest being popular. If people like their game, more power to them. However, they should call and review their game for what it is. Enough with the glamorous white-papers.
When Anarchy Online comes out, Everquest will get some serious competition on this field.. I wouldn't hold my breath though, no point in waiting for a prospective future when you only live in the Now.
- Steeltoe
You pay for the box more than you have to pay for other games. It buys you one month of play. I'd say ripping graphics and sounds for PERSONAL USE would fall under the category FAIR USE. Just as with music CDs and videos. I think that's why Verant charges so much for the boxes in the first place.
The EULA shouldn't be legally binding. They have changed it over and over again, and if you disagree, suddenly you have paid for nothing? That's blackmailing, not agreement.
What is "wrong", is distributing the game CD to people not owning the game. However, I said "wrong", because nothing is absolute in this world.
- Steeltoe
"Actually, this could just be PART of our evolution."
:)
Most probably, or maybe part of our destruction
- Steeltoe
It depends what those parameters are. A computer program *cannot* exceed any parameters given to it, but the parameters may be infinite. Ie, a never ending loop will yield a program that never ends. Randomity may yield unexpected results as every possible solution is tried (in a non-ordered way). A program may be allowed to alter its own parameters and program. These combined, is what leads to a never-ending darwinian evolution in computer programs. The result may converge into death or stagnation though.
With a game-engine, a quite different approach used for chess-programs, the computer is given options and the ability to simulate the effects of each choice. What this program probably found within its search-tree, was a distinct advantage in blowing up its own ships (which the game-world MUST allow, or it wouldn't/shouldn't be searched). It would be most natural for the computer to search this, since it shouldn't have any prejudice against this sort of action (except when it leads to a *guaranteed* lower state, in which that branch should be pruned from the search-tree).
One argument against leaving ships in port could be that they require space, maintenance, crew and resources. This may go against the way reality works, but this is a different game-world. Made by humans, it usually contains strategic loop-holes or flaws.
- Steeltoe
Nice troll.
- Steeltoe
You people got it all wrong.. The problem of humanity isn't about wether or not we can colonize every part of the universe or not. See: http://www.sciam.com/2000/ 0700issue/0700crawfordbox3.html
If this is true, then humans are just like they said in Matrix: A virus, up to no good other than abusing its environment for its own selfish goals.
Compare this to a computer program: What good is it to produce huge quantities of programs with the same quality and complexity? Sheer quantity is not a human solution. Do you feel happy in huge cities?
- Steeltoe
..you gotta be kidding me.
The very fact that we have never encountered so-called "alien lifeforms", must be a sure PROOF of intelligent life out there!
- Steeltoe
Trolls may be the first sign of alien lifeforms though... So there goes that theory about alien intelligence down the drain.
I have a sneaky suspicion that number is closer to 65535... They just overflowed =)
- Steeltoe
Ha! 'Betcha didn't expect ME here!
Prior art, what's the use? Firstly, it needs to have been *publically published*, not just used. So there aren't very many applications to pick from. Graphical apps were all pretty much closed before the 90's. Without the details of the implementation disclosed *publically* (which is the whole meaning of the patent system), "prior art" is useless against this system.
What I would place my bet on here, are magazines and scientific papers prior to '91, maybe newsgroups but I doubt that would stick in court. Search for elaborate articles that explain in detail what you're looking for. If you do, that should invalidate the patent, but I recommend asking your lawyers about it.
But let's not forget the REAL issue here. These software patents shouldn't be accepted in the first place! It's like being forced to accept that Sun created Java, and live by their rules because it's suddenly ILLEGAL to develop something similar. Never mind that people have created Smalltalk, C++ and whatnot Java was based on. Accepting a patent is just like accepting being stolen of your lunch-money by big bullies.
- Steeltoe
A violent society breeds violence.
"Artists: You can use it to stop people from putting their name on your band's mp3's and distributing them as their own, or you can use it to embed lyrics, links to your homepage, and stupid banner ads in mp3's."
:-)
There's something REALY innovative going on here. For how do they fit a banner inside MP3 files? And once inside, how do they output those banners to the speakers? To top it all, these banner ads are STUPID! Wow! What guys can come up with these days to get counter-hits! In the old days, we just made a Perl-script or something, but this is REALY innovative!
However, how about adding *Ads* in MP3's that you can't hear with your conscious ear, but is dictating your life *UNCONSCIOUSLY*. Just think about it: One day you wake up from listening to music all night, and you go to the nearest MPAA/RIAA Borg-HQ to seek employment.
There's just endless possibilities, isn't there?
- Steeltoe
Isn't this standard in C / C++? The lower mathematical operand's type is casted to the highest one to ensure bits are not lost.
If you want asm-specific solutions you should use inline assembler IMHO. And this is one of the huge strengths of Watcom C++. The compiler allows you to make completely inline asm-functions! (Beware though that registers are locked, so you ought to know what you're doing)
I still can't believe any MS-compiler beats Watcom C++ on optimized output though. I've read the output myself, and it totally rocks (made me quit programming in assembler).
- Steeltoe
"..or that song about the kid who entered a race trying to win enough money to buy his gal a ring but got killed instead."
And this has nothing to do with love/lost love, as the previous poster argued about?
I on the other hand thought the comment was well put forth. We shouldn't be fighting to get what the music/movie industry makes "for us". We act pretty much like small cubs fighting among themselves to get milk from their mother. Instead, we should live our own lives and ignore people trying to control us into living in Barbie world.
- Steeltoe
I have three points to make:
;-)
1) Your point of installing Linux is now mostly false, since the latest distros are quite easily installed. You just have to pick the easiest one (Corel or Caldera I believe). Of course you may run into problems, especially with hardware. In my experience, incompability is worse with Windows. Either it works, or it don't. Plug'n Pray. Who installs their OSes themselves in Windows-world anyways?
2) Device support is a very good argument against Linux, on a short term scale. However, in a production environment webcams and 4 speakers w/subwoofer are not likely to be needed. Just look at WinNT, it managed fine without all that extra junk. Also, Microsoft has such a good range of available devices supported by their _monopoly_. You're saying the one-track monopoly situation is a good thing? It is the very reason for lack of support from device-manufacturers to alternate systems (think generic device files). Think what is possible if only people opens their eyes a bit.
3) What you get from using Linux, or other free operating systems is freedom. Freedom from corporate decisions. Decisions that are made from a view that people are consumers and should be tricked and lured into giving up their money for as little as possible. Freedom to fix the code yourself. Freedom to share the code and binaries with your friends. Freedom to get it for free. A platform you know won't change in the future on the whims of corporate greed and hype.
Well you get the idea... Blablablablabla
- Steeltoe
1) Here's what you can do: Hit Reply. Open notepad. Scribble down what you like. Copy'n Paste what you've written in notepad into your browser. Hit submit or preview. Save your notepad text-file for archival purposes if you like.
2) The HTML-standard was never designed from ground-up to deliver applications, and whoever think it's suitable for such tasks is plainly wrong. It's good enough for simple forms though. The future of "thin clients" is probably Java w/Swing, but we're probably going to face the same ridiculous lock-in with Sun as we have had with Microsoft.
- Steeltoe