When the 'end-of-the-world' disaster comes, it won't be the one you were expecting.
That's a felony. You mean the people preventing it are breaking the law? I don't know exactly what your point was..since 'those in power' have already taken steps to protect your rights. I don't see the conspiracy.
Some of those pictures are just noise, but some of them are brilliant.
Also, I'll go so far as to say it's not something human could do. Sure a human can do 'similar' things, but I'm betting some of the patterns are more precise than that. (For a 'barely related' but spiritually equivalent example....a human couldn't draw an actual Mandlebrot set.)
The current client is 25GB. That includes 5 'maps' or 'instance zones' and about 30 of the smallest ships in the game. Making a guess based on the number of announced ships and locations, that's less than 1/10th of the planned 'content' for the game.
Currently when the game patches it downloads EVERYTHING again, and overwrites the directory. The compressed 'patch' file is typically 20GB. This is still very early in the game development. I'm sure they'll start optimizing their patching at some point.
The did make a casual forum statement about the size of the client and 'optimizations of that' Basically, "don't hold your breath." While they will reduce the size of the content as much as they can, they will be adding much much more content, so any optimizations will be overcome by the sheer bulk of what's coming.
Star Citizen is not skimping on the detail of their game. They've probably pushed that so far that their strength has become a weakness...but it's sure pretty.
An understanding of 'similar' is required though...and without knowledge of the programming there's no way you'll know that. When the programming is all 'magic,' everything is similar.
...it does cause cancer. But then, so does everything else, so who's counting?
I'd be willing to vote for this answer.
The World(tm) is not 'ready' for a generic wearable computer. However, wearable computers are 'ready' to be a thing. Part of your 'start the workday' routine will be to put on your enhanced reality glasses/goggles. These become the telephone headset for the call-center employee, the manual/blueprints for the maintenance or construction worker, the map for the delivery driver, and even the playbook for the football player.
Design/market Glass as a work tool that everyone uses every day because of its incredibly focused usefulness. Then, they won't be a weird thing for weird people, it'll be a familiar thing, and they'll want to use it all the time.
If they do send only women, they'd better make sure it's only a 2-person crew. It's widely known that 3 women can not get along for any period of time. Two of them will team up against the 3rd. (They'll switch groupings many times over, but it will always be 2 versus 1.)
I actually don't have any data on what happens in groups of 4+. But 3 is definitely a bad idea.
Nobody liked Steam when it came out either. There were a lot of things that kept most people away from it:
1. Always on. This was a problem both in internet connections (which were much more flaky back then) but also PC memory usage. Background processes were a gamer's worst nightmare before RAM sizes gained a few extra digits.
2. "Vaulted Access." People still wanted physical copies. They didn't trust Steam to be around in 5 years and figured they wouldn't have access to their games anymore.
3. Other things.
So, Steam was ignored by a lot of people, except for the games that 'forced' them to use it (Valve games:...CounterStrike and HL2 mostly.) However, (and this is the magic Microsoft needs to find) Valve made steam not suck. People learned to trust it. "Yes" it will be available. "Yes" it will be convenient. "No" it won't hose your experience. And most of all..."Yes" it will be economical.
Steam was considered draconian, until it proved not to be. And...importantly...it was 'optional' during that testing phase.
You should stick to not answering posts. There was no content in your sentences. You talked about how smart you are without being willing to show evidence. Instead you resorted to a personal attack. As of this time, I would 'not' like to subscribe to your newsletter.
You keep answering 'why' questions with 'how' answers. "Why are we here?" is a completely different question from 'How did we come to be here?"
Now, from the context of your post you do give an answer the 'why' question. "There is no reason other than random happenstance." I'm not sure that disagrees with the parents statement that 'why' is a philosophical question.
Yes, (replying to GrandParent, but agreeing with Parent.)
Can you explain why it would be better on the server side? I naturally assumed client side. "Get SmallScreen version of Picture." It would then be scaled by the Browser to fit the size determined by the layout.
I don't think that you'd change the layout based on which images were selected. Everything would look exactly the same, just the byte-size/quality of the image file would be different.
You're not supposed to close the windows. They just stay open all the time. (You don't even have to save them, it just keeps them up 'unsaved' the next time you come back.
That's why I use Sublime Text. It has a 'vi' mode that works very well. (Well, it does the most common functions, but if you're a grand-master vi wizard you'll easily find things it doesn't do.)
That was the primary reason I allowed myself to try it. 'come for the 'vi' stay for everything else.' The good news is that it's a top-notch editor even without vi. The 'overview' slider on the right side is brilliant. There's a vibrant 'plugin community', and it's very customizable. Also it's multi-platform so I'm using exactly the same Editor on my Windows box at work as well as my Gnome sessions at home.
(I still use vi in my terminals.)
We purchased a large ERP to 'centralize' and 'homogenize' our data. Instead if disparate systems trying to interface, we wanted all our divisions to use the same system. We had IT research the different options with occasional feedback, and they picked one, and we started implement it.
It turns out that we had disparate systems for a reason, and the new ERP system didn't fit into any of them. We adjusted models to fit the best practices of the ERP as best we could, but that only got us so far. At the end of the day the ERP was nothing but a database (SQL Server) and all the day to day operations were done with custom built applications interface through API's and ODBC. Occasionally, (but rarely) there will be a business need that happens to be implemented natively by the ERP, but it's not something we count on.
One of the original suggestions was that we just 'roll our own' solution. In the end, we did, but we first saddled ourselves with a large pricetag and mostly useless support contract.