Bullshit, eh? Do you remember MechAssault? One of the most popular games for the XBox. Online community, many-person gaming via the XBox live servers, worked very well without anything even remotely resembling this kind of hurry-up-and-wait nonsense. Even downloads of new terrain and/or game types (which you chose to do) weren't much of a challenge. The Live interface was much easier to use, too. It was mostly about gaming, not about trying to turn the machine into some kind of Rube Goldberg nightmare.
Next, why should I want to leave a multiplayer game disconnected from the network?
Your position is either that I shouldn't be able to multiplayer-game, or that it's justified that if I do, Microsoft puts a huge time and convenience penalty on the experience, or that there is no significant inconvenience. I don't buy any of those arguments.
Sorry, I've seen the many-hours of no-gaming downside. It's real. It sucks. Not interested.
And hey, did you know MechAssault and MechAssault II both still work offline? I mean, hell, if I have to stay offline in order to keep Microsoft from ruining my day, I might as well do it with one of the most awesome games they ever produced.
No. I've seen the XBox one in action. Hours for updates, insert game, hours more for updates... it's a terrible system.
Sticking with the older gear. Because you can actually play a game when you stick a disk in.
The console makers have completely lost sight of the customer.
...and then you find some genius who wants to jump out of a perfectly good aircraft for "fun" and see if the parachute works under real-world conditions.
No. Pavlov fell in the forest.
They're pretty late to the party. The fourth amendment has obviously been a "it's just a piece of paper" issue to legislators and the legislation they create since the patriot act was squeezed out of the ass of congress. The rest of the bill of rights hasn't fared much better (3rd amendment excepted.) Lots of other unconstitutional legislation currently in play as well — eminent domain, commerce clause, ex post facto laws, etc. Perhaps I'm just too cynical because of where we are today, but it seems extremely unlikely to me that congress, with or without this... caucus... will get anything done that slows or stops the ongoing government extra-constitutional behaviors.
Well, I am neither brain-damaged nor a native speaker, and it is pretty clear to me that, while he does call the unbalanced comment style "brain-damaged", nowhere did he call *anyone*, not even those who like that style, brain-damaged.
That interpretation requires that comments have brains. They don't. So this particular remark can reasonably be read to impugn the author of the comments. However, it's also extremely likely that this is a case of hyperbole; in which case smiles are called for, not outrage.
Yes, English is annoying. Linus can be, too.
One of their donuts is about the same price as a Twinkie, tastes like a kiss from a goddess, and it won't cause you to grow a third nipple, Fallout 4 -style.
Ugh. Editing error, and of course it can't be fixed because Slashcode...
"and seeing my then-lead programmer's eyes light up"
Should have been
"and I well remember seeing my then-lead programmer's eyes light up"
Not famliar with "rMorf"; Google can't seem to find anything prior to the 2000's about it, and the archives Google references that I looked at no longer have the files, other than one ZIP that appears to be defective. What's the history of rMorf?
As far as I know as of right now, first to market for desktop PCs is correct. The original code, which was a freeform point morphing engine, not a grid morpher, was written in early 1986 in 68000 assembler for the Amiga 1000, demonstrated in working form (though with a pretty basic UI) in a dedicated vertical package at the 1986 spring Comdex in Atlanta, in Commodore's Amiga booth (my company was one of Commodore's four featured developers, showing some PCB layout and schematic capture CAD in a showcase section of their Amiga booth... they generously put one of my CAD products in the Amiga software brochure, too, really gave me a terrific "kickstart") to some Commodore execs. In late 1991, in my next company, we began shipping a similar morphing engine for the Amiga within a more extensive image processing system aimed at, and priced for, consumers, written in c. I laid out the basis for the engine on a napkin at lunch in a Dairy Queen during the summer of 1991 and seeing my then-lead programmer's eyes light up), and we shipped a similar product for Windows shortly after that. After I retired, I made the EOL versions of both the Amiga and Windows image processing software (and some other things) freely available on the web. (Amiga / Windows)
Does rMorf predate my 1986 work, and if so, can you provide a reference for me? I'd be very interested to learn that was not first shipping package for an actual desktop PC. It's certainly possible, it's just news to me, and I'd need to rewrite some of my memoirs -- so I'd really like to know.
WRT to its name, you're obviously wrong that this should define your behavior without learning what the reality is (IOW, RTFM.) Also silly. Do you think Florida Sunkist oranges were actually kissed by the sun? Do you think that buying Photoshop puts a building on your property? Do you think that "everyone is created equal" means "everyone is actually created equal?" Do you think that Hostess Twinkies were made by or delivered by a "Hostess"? Do you think that because Chevy sells a truck as "the heartbeat of America" that somewhere in a Chevy truck's mechanical systems, you could apply a stethoscope and hear an actual heartbeat? Do you think that "Jet Blue" has completely blue jets? Do you think that Black and Decker tools are black, and are meant to deck people? Or meant to deck black people?
You're expected, quite reasonably, to use your head. You're expected, again quite reasonably, to RTFM in the case of anything that is new to you or otherwise not completely, blindingly obvious. If you go blundering into some undertaking without having done either or both, then the blame for adverse consequences of your chosen path is on you.
WRT to what this particular driver did, the driver let the autopilot system pilot the car into a truck. Fact. So either you're suggesting that the driver would have hit the truck anyway, or that they weren't monitoring the process adequately, which, again, Tesla specifically instructs usage as "don't do that."
As far as fixing stupid, and myself becoming lower tier: There are already a lot of people out there smarter than I am. I'm not crushed by this. I would gladly welcome more of them. Furthermore, I would consider not assuring a maximally intelligent outcome for human beings when the option was reasonably available to be... stupid.
Stagnate and die because "intelligence gets narrower" because everyone is smart? Hoo. Again, you're silly. Really, really silly. We're a lot more likely to suffer various and sundry serious adverse consequences because far too many people are not smart enough.
You can't fix stupid yet (genetic engineering will eventually, but not yet), and I don't think you should try. Yet. So I think the government's correct role (not that they would actually do this, of course) would be:
1) Person injured / dies doing X with Y
2) Check to see if X was explicitly ruled out as correct / safe by manufacturer of Y
3) Additionally check if X was blindingly obviously stupid (for example, shoot self in face with gun or follow GPS off cliff)
4) If 2 or 3 is true, issue closed, no investigation. If not, then okay, then open an investigation.
Here, we have 2 and 3, so there you go.
Do not meddle in the affairs of troff, for it is subtle and quick to anger.