Bittorrent clients keep trying to talk to you for a long time after you shut down the program. Eventually you drop out of their attempts when they realize you're not answering anymore.
Which is funny considering that he began his post by making a snarky comment about the other poster's crappy hardware, implying that the whole process really does take only 6 seconds on his uber box of DRM doom.
If that is true, then why is it used as a noun and not just a verb? As in: "do not feed the trolls". I wonder if mythological trolls used a similar method for catching fish, walking slowly through the water dragging many lines, or perhaps a net? This would make it all the same thing then wouldn't it?
I guess you could grind if you were the sort of player that does that. But nobody is forcing you to stay in the same easier area for a whole day killing the same things over and over. But you're allowed to play it that way if you really want to, I'm not going to stop you.
What I'm saying about level scaling does not have to force you to "grind". You can keep moving around the world doing things that are more appropriate to the abilities of your character, and part of the fun there is in finding out what those things are.
What I don't like about the auto-scaling in Oblivion is that the game tends to remain at the same relative difficulty at all times. For an open-ended game where you can access just about anywhere in the world from the beginning of the game, this is no fun. There should be all sorts of places that will get you destroyed until you've been around the block a few times, then you can come back to those areas later and *this time* clear them. That's an accomplishment for you as a player, winning against something that previously kicked your ass. With auto-scaling, this doesn't really happen, you just pick somewhere to go, clear it, go somewhere else, clear that, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved Oblivion, but various bits of it needed work, and the level scaling thing was one of them.
You apparently don't know many rich people. Greed is blinding, and money calls more money to itself. The 419ers try to target people with access to money, such as business people. They don't target average joes who may be hungry, because there is nothing to take.
I may not have an expectation of privacy in a public place, but I would like to have an expectation of NOT having my public actions recorded for all time, for anyone to access at their whim and look at again and again. If you do something embarassing in public, as may sometimes happen, it generall goes away and drops out of memory, or maybe nobody happened to notice anyway. If it's filmed though, the incident is locked to your identity for anybody who wasn't there to see it themselves when it was happening. I don't see any reason to be comfortable with that.
there are two possibilities why he doesn't intervene more often
I think that if there is a supreme being (undecided, but I'm pretty sure he's not described in anybody's bible), there's a third possibility that I find to be the most likely: If we are to grow and learn and be strong for ourselves, he needs to keep out of our business and let us solve all problems ourselves. I think that a benign supreme being would want this for us.
You didn't happen to be dealing with a personal issue of some kind on the front lawn or sidewalk when their camera truck went by. If you had been, perhaps you would think differently. I saw a street view image where it was quite clear that someone was buying drugs from a man in a car at the side of the street. Assuming that you like a bit of pot now and then, and not harming anybody, would you still feel comfortable knowing that you're on Street View for all to see, getting your supply? Or, maybe your wife gets curious to see what the house is like on Street View, and there you are chatting up some hottie in jogging shorts.
Not that I'm against Street View, I think it rocks, but it could be better if there were an automated way of removing the non-permanent features such as people and cars since they are not necessary for mapping anyhow.
Are you certain that it was recording *only* the streaming audio? With both of my soundblasters, Live and Audigy, if I use "What You Hear" as a recording source, I have to make sure that CD output as well as mic, line-in, mic2/line-in2 are all muted. Each of them gives a faint noise that will add to the recording. Using "wave" as a recording source instead, there is no noise beyond what is actually being processed in the wave driver. Recording silence this way results in true silence, the whole wave is completely flat at 0. You get the same thing recording from "What You Hear" as long as every output but "wave" is set on mute.
Life as we know it is based around these naturally formed structures. They fit each other in the ways that they do, because if they didn't, life as we know it would be something else. If we create things that fit to cells in the body in unexpected ways, we get life as we do NOT know it.
It's easy to hypothesize how nanomaterials can be unsafe. All of biology works off of very tiny objects of specific shapes. These shapes allow different things to happen depending on how they fit each other, and where they fit, sort of like keys in locks. When making things of very small size we have to be careful about the shapes of these things, because we don't know what keyhole in a cell somewhere it might accidentally fit into, triggering some change in the cell that we don't know about due to not enough research.
My theory is similar: If you're a closeted gay man (or a pedo), your family doesn't know about it and keeps asking when you're going to find a nice woman to marry and settle down with. Join the priesthood and they have to get off your back about it, problem solved.
Way to make assumptions... I don't require any kind of personal agenda to realize when somebody is lying to people, and trying to whitewash it as some necessity due to a flawed business model.
You're creating a false image of what your membership base looks like, in order to lure other people into thinking they will have lots of real people to choose from. So they sign up and give you money based on this intentionally misleading image. That's fraud.
The customer has rarely ever been right. That little catchphrase was the ploy of a desperate business during the Great Depression, to get people to come in. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.
Actually, I had a situation where a dating website suddenly billed me almost a year after I had cancelled my subscription. It was probably the yearly premium for highlighting the profile or somesuch (the actual subscription fee was monthly, which had stopped when I cancelled), and since I did not actually have an active account at the time, there was no profile for them to highlight for this premium charge. I told VISA the situation, and they did a chargeback to the company that billed me. I was not required to show them any proof, in fact I barely even described it to the level of meagre detail above. I simply told them that I had cancelled awhile back and that I did not authorize this new charge. I didn't even try to contact the company first to get them to correct it, just VISA, who gave me my money back and then presumably sent the dating site a bill. Nice and tidy.
Uh, you too. To most people, "The Internet" is that blue "E" on the desktop (hey, shouldn't it be an "I"?). Even if they have broadband, they don't consider themselves connected to the Internet until they click that "E". When they are logged into a webmail account, to them it is their email, not a website through which they are able to interact with their email. YouTube is a website. Google is not a website, it's a search. Email is email. But these are all web-based. The average person doesn't care about the mechanism through which these services are delivered, only that they get delivered to them somehow.
Guess I should have known better than to leave anything to the imagination, heh.. Actually, no, on the jugs. Bearing, height, and face made her look very early 20's.
So I don't know why any trust is given to a machine to guess someone's age based on the appearance of their face. A lot of retailers I've seen have a sign posted at the till that says they will ask for ID if you look under 35. 35! This enormous margin of error is due to the fact that you really can't tell if someone is over or under 18 without some seriously obvious clue. I was 30 before people stopped guessing my age to be 20. My neice was able to get service in a bar once at age 14, and it could easily be seen why.
Yeah, it was quite astonishing the first time I saw an SMB password cracking tool in action. It looked just like how cracking tends to be portrayed in hollywood movies, a flurry of letters scrolling by, freezing one place at a time as the correct letters built the whole password, the whole operation finished in mere seconds. I had always sneered at that portrayal because it should be impossible to crack something that way, since who would be retarded enough to design a system where it would be possible? I got my answer.:)
You didn't get it... Normal cells die all the time, yes, they die in kids too. And new ones get made to replace them. But as you get older, new ones are made less frequently, and with less plasticity. That's all programmed, yes. But isn't that what we're talking about, changing that programming? If you can change the code, there's no biological reason that you would be *required* to have a decline in healthy cell replacement. That's all I was trying to say. Do you have a religious objection to extending quality of life to what would otherwise be your (perhaps very badly) declining years? You still get to die eventually you know, I don't think the mind itself could take immortality. But if you could be hale and strong at 90, why would you not want that, and why would your God judge you poorly for it unless he's just some kind of dick?
Slashdot Mirror
Bittorrent clients keep trying to talk to you for a long time after you shut down the program. Eventually you drop out of their attempts when they realize you're not answering anymore.
Which is funny considering that he began his post by making a snarky comment about the other poster's crappy hardware, implying that the whole process really does take only 6 seconds on his uber box of DRM doom.
Awesome, I finally have an easy way to get some action!
If that is true, then why is it used as a noun and not just a verb? As in: "do not feed the trolls". I wonder if mythological trolls used a similar method for catching fish, walking slowly through the water dragging many lines, or perhaps a net? This would make it all the same thing then wouldn't it?
I guess you could grind if you were the sort of player that does that. But nobody is forcing you to stay in the same easier area for a whole day killing the same things over and over. But you're allowed to play it that way if you really want to, I'm not going to stop you. What I'm saying about level scaling does not have to force you to "grind". You can keep moving around the world doing things that are more appropriate to the abilities of your character, and part of the fun there is in finding out what those things are.
What I don't like about the auto-scaling in Oblivion is that the game tends to remain at the same relative difficulty at all times. For an open-ended game where you can access just about anywhere in the world from the beginning of the game, this is no fun. There should be all sorts of places that will get you destroyed until you've been around the block a few times, then you can come back to those areas later and *this time* clear them. That's an accomplishment for you as a player, winning against something that previously kicked your ass. With auto-scaling, this doesn't really happen, you just pick somewhere to go, clear it, go somewhere else, clear that, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved Oblivion, but various bits of it needed work, and the level scaling thing was one of them.
You apparently don't know many rich people. Greed is blinding, and money calls more money to itself. The 419ers try to target people with access to money, such as business people. They don't target average joes who may be hungry, because there is nothing to take.
Maybe it's because web surfing on a cellphone sucks rather large donkey testicles?
I may not have an expectation of privacy in a public place, but I would like to have an expectation of NOT having my public actions recorded for all time, for anyone to access at their whim and look at again and again. If you do something embarassing in public, as may sometimes happen, it generall goes away and drops out of memory, or maybe nobody happened to notice anyway. If it's filmed though, the incident is locked to your identity for anybody who wasn't there to see it themselves when it was happening. I don't see any reason to be comfortable with that.
there are two possibilities why he doesn't intervene more often I think that if there is a supreme being (undecided, but I'm pretty sure he's not described in anybody's bible), there's a third possibility that I find to be the most likely: If we are to grow and learn and be strong for ourselves, he needs to keep out of our business and let us solve all problems ourselves. I think that a benign supreme being would want this for us.
You didn't happen to be dealing with a personal issue of some kind on the front lawn or sidewalk when their camera truck went by. If you had been, perhaps you would think differently. I saw a street view image where it was quite clear that someone was buying drugs from a man in a car at the side of the street. Assuming that you like a bit of pot now and then, and not harming anybody, would you still feel comfortable knowing that you're on Street View for all to see, getting your supply? Or, maybe your wife gets curious to see what the house is like on Street View, and there you are chatting up some hottie in jogging shorts. Not that I'm against Street View, I think it rocks, but it could be better if there were an automated way of removing the non-permanent features such as people and cars since they are not necessary for mapping anyhow.
And yet it still leaves me feeling all bloated and gassy.
Are you certain that it was recording *only* the streaming audio? With both of my soundblasters, Live and Audigy, if I use "What You Hear" as a recording source, I have to make sure that CD output as well as mic, line-in, mic2/line-in2 are all muted. Each of them gives a faint noise that will add to the recording. Using "wave" as a recording source instead, there is no noise beyond what is actually being processed in the wave driver. Recording silence this way results in true silence, the whole wave is completely flat at 0. You get the same thing recording from "What You Hear" as long as every output but "wave" is set on mute.
Life as we know it is based around these naturally formed structures. They fit each other in the ways that they do, because if they didn't, life as we know it would be something else. If we create things that fit to cells in the body in unexpected ways, we get life as we do NOT know it.
It's easy to hypothesize how nanomaterials can be unsafe. All of biology works off of very tiny objects of specific shapes. These shapes allow different things to happen depending on how they fit each other, and where they fit, sort of like keys in locks. When making things of very small size we have to be careful about the shapes of these things, because we don't know what keyhole in a cell somewhere it might accidentally fit into, triggering some change in the cell that we don't know about due to not enough research.
My theory is similar: If you're a closeted gay man (or a pedo), your family doesn't know about it and keeps asking when you're going to find a nice woman to marry and settle down with. Join the priesthood and they have to get off your back about it, problem solved.
Way to make assumptions... I don't require any kind of personal agenda to realize when somebody is lying to people, and trying to whitewash it as some necessity due to a flawed business model.
You're creating a false image of what your membership base looks like, in order to lure other people into thinking they will have lots of real people to choose from. So they sign up and give you money based on this intentionally misleading image. That's fraud.
The customer has rarely ever been right. That little catchphrase was the ploy of a desperate business during the Great Depression, to get people to come in. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.
Actually, I had a situation where a dating website suddenly billed me almost a year after I had cancelled my subscription. It was probably the yearly premium for highlighting the profile or somesuch (the actual subscription fee was monthly, which had stopped when I cancelled), and since I did not actually have an active account at the time, there was no profile for them to highlight for this premium charge. I told VISA the situation, and they did a chargeback to the company that billed me. I was not required to show them any proof, in fact I barely even described it to the level of meagre detail above. I simply told them that I had cancelled awhile back and that I did not authorize this new charge. I didn't even try to contact the company first to get them to correct it, just VISA, who gave me my money back and then presumably sent the dating site a bill. Nice and tidy.
Uh, you too. To most people, "The Internet" is that blue "E" on the desktop (hey, shouldn't it be an "I"?). Even if they have broadband, they don't consider themselves connected to the Internet until they click that "E". When they are logged into a webmail account, to them it is their email, not a website through which they are able to interact with their email. YouTube is a website. Google is not a website, it's a search. Email is email. But these are all web-based. The average person doesn't care about the mechanism through which these services are delivered, only that they get delivered to them somehow.
Guess I should have known better than to leave anything to the imagination, heh.. Actually, no, on the jugs. Bearing, height, and face made her look very early 20's.
So I don't know why any trust is given to a machine to guess someone's age based on the appearance of their face. A lot of retailers I've seen have a sign posted at the till that says they will ask for ID if you look under 35. 35! This enormous margin of error is due to the fact that you really can't tell if someone is over or under 18 without some seriously obvious clue. I was 30 before people stopped guessing my age to be 20. My neice was able to get service in a bar once at age 14, and it could easily be seen why.
Yeah, it was quite astonishing the first time I saw an SMB password cracking tool in action. It looked just like how cracking tends to be portrayed in hollywood movies, a flurry of letters scrolling by, freezing one place at a time as the correct letters built the whole password, the whole operation finished in mere seconds. I had always sneered at that portrayal because it should be impossible to crack something that way, since who would be retarded enough to design a system where it would be possible? I got my answer. :)
You didn't get it... Normal cells die all the time, yes, they die in kids too. And new ones get made to replace them. But as you get older, new ones are made less frequently, and with less plasticity. That's all programmed, yes. But isn't that what we're talking about, changing that programming? If you can change the code, there's no biological reason that you would be *required* to have a decline in healthy cell replacement. That's all I was trying to say. Do you have a religious objection to extending quality of life to what would otherwise be your (perhaps very badly) declining years? You still get to die eventually you know, I don't think the mind itself could take immortality. But if you could be hale and strong at 90, why would you not want that, and why would your God judge you poorly for it unless he's just some kind of dick?