Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:AAA studio? (Score 5, Funny) 163

by O-Deka-K (#49487771) Attached to: 2K, Australia's Last AAA Studio, Closes Its Doors

Anytime an article acknowledges an "AAA title", this is all anyone asks. AAA ain't an acronym. Actually, it alludes to an academic grading arrangement (as adminstered in the U.S. of A.). For games, an "A" applies to advertising allotment, another "A" to amazing game play, as well as an "A" for fanancial succass. At farst, at was davalopers usang tha term, but than vidao jaurnalists, game raviewars and saftware campanaes startad ta call tham AAA gamas. Aftar a faw yaars, pablashars startad cansadaraaa gaaas ta ba AAA bafara ralaasa, whaah than jaatafaad larga aavalapaant and maraatang baaaaaa. Asaaaaaaaaaaa, an aaa aaaaa aaa aaaaaaa.

Comment: Re:Is there an extension that...? (Score 1) 353

by O-Deka-K (#49080883) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Most Useful Browser Extensions?

Sometimes "Element Hiding Helper for Adblock Plus" can help with that. It can block an HTML element based on its name, id, size, etc. When you use it, it selects the element under your mouse pointer and outlines it in red. Then you can use the hotkeys (there's a handy popup that displays them) to select the exact element you want and block it.

It's also useful for blocking certain ad boxes. As long as the element has some kind of identifying feature, you should be able to block it. Some sites get around it by randomizing the name/id or not having any identifying features.

Comment: Re:cross-site attacks (Score 1) 59

by O-Deka-K (#44547013) Attached to: New Attack Uses Attackers' Own Ad Network To Deliver Android Malware

No. It's the word "more", which is confusing when used with percentages.

A word with 6 typos would have "20% more typos" than a word with 5 typos. However, this is in itself disputable, because even if a word has more than one error in it, we often just say "it's a typo" instead of "it has 5 typos in it". For instance, if you transpose two letters by mistake (e.g. "flase"), do you say it has 2 typos in it? I know I don't.

Even if we accept the premise that each incorrect letter counts as one "typo", then you would say that "galse" has "20% typos", not "20% MORE typos".

The poster's logic is this:
"false" has 0 typos in it.
"galse" has 1 typo in it.
Since 1 is 100% more than 0, it has "100% more typos".

However, this is incorrect. 1 is NOT 100% more than 0. (1 - 0) divided by 0 is infinite. For it to be true, "false" would have to have 1 typo in it. Since "galse" differs by only 1 letter, this means that it has 2 typos in it, and therefore "100% more typos". Unfortunately, it makes no sense to say that.

Therefore, the poster's logic is galse.

Comment: Re:I agree with Lewis Black (Score 1) 383

Yeah, but... what's the difference between your avatar and a copy of your avatar? If you simulate multiple copies of the yourself, how do you know which one your "consciousness" is transferred to? Maybe it's one of them. Maybe it's none of them. Maybe it's ALL of them, simultaneously. Of course that seems like it's impossible, but YOU'D never know that (or even be able to know that).

What do you define as the "real" you? How do you know that you're not a copy of the real you? Put it another way: How do you know that you're you? Like the characters in a book, the characters don't know that they're not real (unless the author makes it so). You can try to argue, "But I'm conscious, and I feel that I'm real." However, you can't PROVE it to me. Your avatar's copy can say that exact same thing to me and I wouldn't be able to tell either way.

Given an infinite amount of processing power, you could simulate an unlimited number of copies of yourself and an unlimited number of copies of everyone else. Which ones are "real"?

Comment: Re:Commodore Vic 20. (Score 1) 623

by O-Deka-K (#43850731) Attached to: How Did You Learn How To Program?

Commodore BASIC was bloody horrible even by the standards of the 1980s, but it was my first programming language & I still have a soft spot for it somewhere. I was only a kid though, and my programs were simplistic and crap.

I did this with my C64 when I was around 8. I remember going through the BASIC tutorials in the manual (when home computers came with programming manuals). Later, I would go down to the library and take out books like "Write Your Own Adventure Programs for Your Microcomputer" and "Write Your Own Fantasy Games for Your Microcomputer".

I also had a subscription to Commodore magazine. Still have them in a box somewhere.

APL is a write-only language. I can write programs in APL, but I can't read any of them. -- Roy Keir

Working...