Well, there are always people who are going to pay to have someone tortured, so why don't you get right down to it?
It's not my sort of job. Besides, there isn't a strong economy for contract torturing where I live.
If it is unethical to torture somebody who will be tortured no matter what, then it apparantly doesn't mean much. So I'll change it: it is unethical to cause somebody to be tortured. The torturer is absolved.
Isn't the brain pretty much entirely in the domain of imprecise pattern recognition? Maybe massive parellelism isn't useful for many types of tasks. I don't have the imagination to think about it right now.
Well, one thing that I can think of is having extra threads gamble on what problems might need solving in the future, and doing them ahead of time. Diminishing returns still feels very relevant...
Isn't that about the Romans? Also, other translations of the bible say "to be given a mark on the right hand", which is significant in that it can't be weaseled as easily to represent an ID card.
If a job is absolutely going to be done whether you do it or not, then why not take advantage of it and make some money? Pragmatism at its finest! Responsibility then would fundamentally rest on the society that created such an atmosphere, and not on the individual.
There are possible confounding factors but they can be contrived away to keep possible the evaluation of this idea.
There doesn't seem to be any evidence that Gates really did say that. There is no attribution, and Gates denies it. That was the case the last time I explored it anyway. He may rue the day the quote appeared anyway!
What happens when BoB has all the map? I'm curious how things might change at that point. (And I don't mean change on account of the admins, although I suppose that is likely.)
Personally, I hate the idea of bind-on-equip and bind-on-pickup. I like how economic Eve is.
It seems like having a complex economy would result in funner play. In WoW nothing had any consequence, unless you liked fighting for the sake of fighting. There was always the "carrot" of getting good gear to have an advantage...at more fighting.
I wouldn't play EVE though because I prefer finding a way to write code and study things, more than actually carrying them out. And in mmorpgs people aren't fond of enriching ones experience with scripting. There seem to be no interesting goals in Second Life so that's out. A man can dream...
The fact is, more people have died from lightning strikes in the past fifty years than from terrorist acts on American soil.
The difference is that nobody is responsible for lightning strikes unlike terrorist groups full of culprits. Of course, even given that you'd expect a government would evaluate courses of action carefully and put their resources to the most good... benevolent governments I mean (where's that dictator?).
People are probably simplifying it too much. That is, it's a compound of reasons. It would be difficult to posit the actually balance. However, the quality of the implementation is at least possible to evaluate.
Yes, having the option of multiple approaches to the main goal is the best. However, those multiple approaches have to be interesting (cue Sid Meier).
In Far Cry I'd redo the same encounters just to see what result I'd get compared to the others. Can I use cover and manage with only a handgun? Can I take the boat and assault the beach from afar? Grand Theft Auto didn't have so much of this for me. Taking a different road generally doesn't matter, and handi-capping with worse cars is still via the same approach. There were sometimes opportunities for interesting alternatives, eg. driving into a group of mobsters with a huge truck and bumping their cars over them, or driving past them with a fast car, or, taking a route where the cops will have a tougher time crashing into you.
I've always thought a game would look fine if the models were blocky and untextured, as long as their animations were decent (eg. minimal, but reflect the action such that it's identifiable) and the game ran smoothly as a result. Special, accurate lighting doesn't necessarily add anything to the gameplay either. I vaguely remember playing a game like this years ago, which was very fun; it was a 3rd person view assault-the-base with a diverse-choice-of-weapons sort of game.
A possible conclusion then is that indy game developers might be the ones to introduce better sand-box games.
If flight paths resolved instantly you could leave your character standing idle and go make a sandwich. You accomplish the same thing but you aren't stuck waiting for the end of the flight. The only difference is that players who take fewer breaks are more competitive, but I have a hard time believing eg twenty minutes per day is going to put you behind.
The difference is that in real life you can't go assassinate the mayor, butcher John Doe, or misappropriate millions of dollars to fund a small army, and then reroll once the Americans invade and hang you. I'll take the sandbox, thanks.
I don't know about the Google pay services, but no free email service guarantees accessibility or data integrity, and neither do some other pay services. I worked for one of the five or six MSN dial-up contractors*. Their customers pay per month, some a premium price, and none has a guarantee. The worst case of a guy who lost important email, ironically, was the easiest to resolve as he was very polite. Phone support people were supposed to point out that customers aren't using a business service, iirc.
* The service was provided to Americans, but we were in Canada. The other contractors were in the USA and in India. (Provided as a matter of interest)
I should point out that I haven't worked there for a while, didn't work there long, and can't offer a guarantee of accurate information.
By coincidence I have the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis website up on their Consumer Price Index page. If the 1996 price of CDs was $33.86 then the inflation adjusted price of 1983 would have been $21.49. If CDs were, as you remember, $13-$18 in 1983 then the inflation adjusted price for 1996 would be $20.48 - $28.36.
I'm not going to try and reconcile those numbers or read the article because I'm tired.
Technical language doesn't evolve too much. And, imo, people should be encouraged to use the terms precisely. Besides, the codec is renamed? People don't even know what a codec is.
To clarify, if I was to release version 1.0 of Foo under GPL, then all the people who downloaded it as GPL would always have it under that license. They could distribute it under GPL as well. But if I change my mind about the GPL, I ought to be able to change the license of Foo 1.0 to MIT, because it's my copyright. Licensing to users shouldn't take away my right to do with my copyright as I please (barring the licensed code already out there). I guess the exception would be if you gave your copyright away to the FSF, as per their suggestion.
Can't they release old software under GPL3 instead of GPL2? They can't change the license on software already in the hands of users, but I would expect they can change it on what they distribute.
But the insurance companies only fork out money after they've already made more from clients who can't handle the risk. (At least, that's what I imagine. No training in econ...)
This issue is much too complicated to evaluate on such simple measures. While America is 46th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook (2006), they are about three years lower than the mean average of the top 46. And, from what I've heard there is a lot of variance in the United States: some states have universal healthcare, and many have public hospitals. Then, there is just the variance between wait times within the same hospital over the course of the year, and then compared to all the other hospitals. One anecdote is meaningless. Lastly, according to some websites (hopefully somewhat credible as that always bugs me) socialized health care is often a few times cheaper than private systems per person. And while you would end up paying more given your regular expenses, you would have to factor in risk.
Do you really mean approx. $35,000 after adjustment for inflation? Not to rag on you like the others but without adjusting for inflation that number is misleading.
Slashdot Mirror
What does this really have to do with schools? They're used in one example but the general idea seems to be only indirectly related to them.
If it is unethical to torture somebody who will be tortured no matter what, then it apparantly doesn't mean much. So I'll change it: it is unethical to cause somebody to be tortured. The torturer is absolved.
Isn't the brain pretty much entirely in the domain of imprecise pattern recognition? Maybe massive parellelism isn't useful for many types of tasks. I don't have the imagination to think about it right now.
Well, one thing that I can think of is having extra threads gamble on what problems might need solving in the future, and doing them ahead of time. Diminishing returns still feels very relevant...
Isn't that about the Romans? Also, other translations of the bible say "to be given a mark on the right hand", which is significant in that it can't be weaseled as easily to represent an ID card.
Alternatives welcome.
If a job is absolutely going to be done whether you do it or not, then why not take advantage of it and make some money? Pragmatism at its finest! Responsibility then would fundamentally rest on the society that created such an atmosphere, and not on the individual.
There are possible confounding factors but they can be contrived away to keep possible the evaluation of this idea.
Thinking out loud here.
There doesn't seem to be any evidence that Gates really did say that. There is no attribution, and Gates denies it. That was the case the last time I explored it anyway. He may rue the day the quote appeared anyway!
What happens when BoB has all the map? I'm curious how things might change at that point. (And I don't mean change on account of the admins, although I suppose that is likely.)
I wouldn't play EVE though because I prefer finding a way to write code and study things, more than actually carrying them out. And in mmorpgs people aren't fond of enriching ones experience with scripting. There seem to be no interesting goals in Second Life so that's out. A man can dream...
Or maybe I will just cheat.
Can one really envision the infinite?
(Yeah, this post is an aside.)
Re: 2
Well, even if you can reroll you have to play through the first 18 years again before you can do anything cool.
People are probably simplifying it too much. That is, it's a compound of reasons. It would be difficult to posit the actually balance. However, the quality of the implementation is at least possible to evaluate.
Spore will have a progression similar to that, although it's the same kind of game--not RPG-like.
Yes, having the option of multiple approaches to the main goal is the best. However, those multiple approaches have to be interesting (cue Sid Meier).
In Far Cry I'd redo the same encounters just to see what result I'd get compared to the others. Can I use cover and manage with only a handgun? Can I take the boat and assault the beach from afar? Grand Theft Auto didn't have so much of this for me. Taking a different road generally doesn't matter, and handi-capping with worse cars is still via the same approach. There were sometimes opportunities for interesting alternatives, eg. driving into a group of mobsters with a huge truck and bumping their cars over them, or driving past them with a fast car, or, taking a route where the cops will have a tougher time crashing into you.
I've always thought a game would look fine if the models were blocky and untextured, as long as their animations were decent (eg. minimal, but reflect the action such that it's identifiable) and the game ran smoothly as a result. Special, accurate lighting doesn't necessarily add anything to the gameplay either. I vaguely remember playing a game like this years ago, which was very fun; it was a 3rd person view assault-the-base with a diverse-choice-of-weapons sort of game.
A possible conclusion then is that indy game developers might be the ones to introduce better sand-box games.
If flight paths resolved instantly you could leave your character standing idle and go make a sandwich. You accomplish the same thing but you aren't stuck waiting for the end of the flight. The only difference is that players who take fewer breaks are more competitive, but I have a hard time believing eg twenty minutes per day is going to put you behind.
The difference is that in real life you can't go assassinate the mayor, butcher John Doe, or misappropriate millions of dollars to fund a small army, and then reroll once the Americans invade and hang you. I'll take the sandbox, thanks.
I don't know about the Google pay services, but no free email service guarantees accessibility or data integrity, and neither do some other pay services. I worked for one of the five or six MSN dial-up contractors*. Their customers pay per month, some a premium price, and none has a guarantee. The worst case of a guy who lost important email, ironically, was the easiest to resolve as he was very polite. Phone support people were supposed to point out that customers aren't using a business service, iirc.
* The service was provided to Americans, but we were in Canada. The other contractors were in the USA and in India. (Provided as a matter of interest)
I should point out that I haven't worked there for a while, didn't work there long, and can't offer a guarantee of accurate information.
By coincidence I have the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis website up on their Consumer Price Index page. If the 1996 price of CDs was $33.86 then the inflation adjusted price of 1983 would have been $21.49. If CDs were, as you remember, $13-$18 in 1983 then the inflation adjusted price for 1996 would be $20.48 - $28.36.
I'm not going to try and reconcile those numbers or read the article because I'm tired.
Technical language doesn't evolve too much. And, imo, people should be encouraged to use the terms precisely. Besides, the codec is renamed? People don't even know what a codec is.
To clarify, if I was to release version 1.0 of Foo under GPL, then all the people who downloaded it as GPL would always have it under that license. They could distribute it under GPL as well. But if I change my mind about the GPL, I ought to be able to change the license of Foo 1.0 to MIT, because it's my copyright. Licensing to users shouldn't take away my right to do with my copyright as I please (barring the licensed code already out there). I guess the exception would be if you gave your copyright away to the FSF, as per their suggestion.
Can't they release old software under GPL3 instead of GPL2? They can't change the license on software already in the hands of users, but I would expect they can change it on what they distribute.
But the insurance companies only fork out money after they've already made more from clients who can't handle the risk. (At least, that's what I imagine. No training in econ...)
When Bayer brought out Aspirin they had a patent. Nowadays testing costs a fortune.
This issue is much too complicated to evaluate on such simple measures. While America is 46th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook (2006), they are about three years lower than the mean average of the top 46. And, from what I've heard there is a lot of variance in the United States: some states have universal healthcare, and many have public hospitals. Then, there is just the variance between wait times within the same hospital over the course of the year, and then compared to all the other hospitals. One anecdote is meaningless. Lastly, according to some websites (hopefully somewhat credible as that always bugs me) socialized health care is often a few times cheaper than private systems per person. And while you would end up paying more given your regular expenses, you would have to factor in risk.
Do you really mean approx. $35,000 after adjustment for inflation? Not to rag on you like the others but without adjusting for inflation that number is misleading.