Durakken
-
Posts
2381 -
Joined
-
Maybe Adrianne Palicki was poorly cast because...even though this is a bit unfair... Durance just looks far better in that costume.
Also the Smallville amazon costume has always looked bad to me -
Giggity
-
That looks better to me... though i'd remove the "*"... the code does it itself for at least 2 of the 3, but that's just me
Anything used throughout the program that could possibly change in the future should be a global variable, set at the top. For example if for an ad I were to write...
Mcdonalds is delicious
I'd want McDonalds and Delicious as global variables... that way if for some reason they change their name or want to say is awesome instead of delicious you don't have to search through possibly millions of lines of code... though there is a limit ^.^
Anything that is never going to change no matter what should be hardcoded and not variables.
Anything that is used in a particular area but not somewhere else and could change either from in the code or later on should be a variable either at the top of that section of code or set as you go... i prefer the former as it is neater.
if i understand what you are saying then i would make both 500s variables.
I don't see why making 640 be y is a problem...don't you want that coordinate to always be on the ground thus why you are making it 640 to begin with? -
Quote:Actually I think what should be legal is what is moral... the problem is that too many people are dumb and think that morality is some indefinite grey thing that is too hard to pin down or get it from <censored> or abuse the dumbness of people and their inability to understand that what they like and don't like or what is fair or not fair isn't what is moral or immoral. Anything that I can argue for as amoral or moral should be legal. Anything I can say is immoral using sound and valid logic should be illegal. The problem with that is very simple... We simply do not have the range and depth of knowledge for some things.Originally Posted by White Hot Flash
If you find yourself splitting hairs between morality and legality, you're probably the kind of person I was talking about. One who is trying to find that line of what's wrong and right so they can live right on top of it. That's a dangerous and confusing way to live.
For example, Is it immoral to distribute content... well the truth is, what i call the moral method (like the scientific method) would ask as simple question... is it harmful? and the answer to that is... I don't know. And that's where all the fuss is... to figure it out we have to look at what morality is (which is the method by which we derive whether social interactions are for the betterment of all involved or not) and when we look at that we have to look at If we can claim there is harm being done (which is a fundamental principal within any morality system) then is that harm to or for some reason that is ultimately good or in some way preventing other from doing harm... so we look at, say, almost all media industry and go is the media industry harmful or helpful? And we would have to say it, at one time, was helpful, but keeping it around is stifling and harming society and thus it's not be immoral that something is destroying that paradigm, but is it? It's not in reality... distributing has been found to raise sales (for the most part) of those who do right by society and produce good work and/or embrace progress...for the most part (some fall through the cracks and some people are just bad so meh) So I have to ask is this moral or immoral and the answer i come up with is that it is moral and to not do it is immoral to a degree as it promotes a system that is damaging society... and as such it should be legal.
For a simpler example... I can't think of a simpler example because i had one, but it quickly turned into political philosophy which is not politics, but people would claim it as such so oh well...
I, like many great people, though most succinctly put by and quoted famously from Aquinas, believe, "An Unjust law is no law at all." In other words. If it is not a law that is moral then it is not a proper law and should not be treated as if it were. -
Quote:...Originally Posted by Innovator
I suppose I could change it to look like this to make my intent clearer, but it doesn't really make a difference.
z = touch.y + (window.y - 500); z = ((500 * (640.0 - window.y)) / (z - window.y)) - 500;
x = touch.x - window.x; x = ((x - window.x) * ((z + 500) / 500)) + window.x;
y = 640.0;
... ...
You know... you might not like this but I'm going to tell you that that is atrocious.
I may be wrong... I don't like math and hardly ever work that part of my brain out any more, but I'm fairly certain that is very very over complicated... and since i have nothing to do right now since the servers for the game I was playing went down I decided to try to streamline it down...
Ok first off... Just because it is easier to work with i changed the names of your variables to single letters and made all the numbers the smallest decimal i could so 50 instead of 500 and 64 instead of 640.0... I know why they are like that in the programming but not needed for this...
Here's the translation
a = touch.y
b = window.y
c = touch.x
d = window.x
Secondly, don't break set something and then reset it unless you have to... for example...when you are going to use the number somewhere else in the program... like z is used in x... So i fixed that and with the translation above, here's the result
z = (50*(64-b)/((a+(b-50))-(a -b)) -50;
x = ((c-d) -d) * ((z+50)/50)) + d;
Now, you know math better than I do so I'm sure you can see where I simplified and all like that and why I changed what I changed in the below...
z = (64-b)/(a2-50);
x = (c-d2) * z + d;
You should come out with correct x... but I just realized not the same z...
Modifying for that... you could do it a few ways
n = (64-b)/(a2-50);
z = (n*50)-50
x = (c-d2) * n + d;
or
z = (50(64-b)/(a2-50))-50;
x = (c-d2) * (z+50)/50) + d;
I think the second choice is better. simply because you don't have another variable in memory, but n could be helpful elsewhere in the program so yeah.
I'm pretty sure the math works, but if it's not i'm sure someone will tell me... and miss the point that the math can and should be cleaned up
Also because this is all cleaned up you never touch y and it can be used in place of "(64-b)" it could "(y-b)" and that y=640 at the bottom can be removed.
edit: actually haha i messed up...a little
z = (50*(64-b)/(a +b -50-a -b) -50;
that's the number without all the apprentices which do nothing... the bold is the important part... Now if I remember my math right you always use the symbol to the left to define the number on the right so that the first number unless otherwise stated is positive so...
+a
+b
-50
-a
-b
Notice something? The a's and b's cancel so you are left with -50... so the lines after that should read
n = (64-b)/-50;
z = (50(64-b)/(-50)-50;
That second one you might end up with divide by -100... not sure. I forget the rules in programming and if that is what you end up with and want it that way you should change it to /-100 rather than how it would be.
edit 2: another side note... on that... i forgot so much but something tells me i should at least ask this...
what you end up doing is multiplying and then dividing... all you are doing is causing the number to turn negative so you could just save yourself the trouble of that by going...
and here's what those fixes would look like...
n = (64-b)/-50;
z = (n*50)-50
x = (c-d2) * n + d;
z = -(64-b)-50;
x = (c-d2) * (z+50)/50) + d;
so yeah... umm...i think i'm done >.> -
Quote:>.> I know he said you solved this but I'm still having trouble understanding because that is just calculating a triangle where the triangle can be at a different angle from the ground and that's pretty easy and i'm sure the math you're using is overly complex...Originally Posted by Tenjoy
It was more like kicking a puck over the floor while firing a laser beam (the touchpoint) pointing at a place further away on the floor where the puck is supposed to end up.
10joy
also just have to point this out as i just realized it
"y = touch.y + (window.y - 500); z = ((500 * (640.0 - window.y)) / (y - window.y)) - 500;
x = touch.x - window.x; x = ((x - window.x) * ((z + 500) / 500)) + window.x;
y = 640.0;"
if this is your programming it's messed up because you are a setting y to touch.y plus the math and then setting it again to 640.0 making the original statement pointless... unless you're only doing it for setting z, but then y and z would be broken so >.> -
I still don't understand what you're trying to do, but I think it's cuz I'm over thinking what you're trying to do >.> largely because if it's what i think you're trying to do is look up the calculation for orbiting...
What i think you're doing is you have a window and a ground... and you want to touch the screen and have a "puck" shot out and then arc down to the ground.
in which case... shouldn't this be the answer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajectory_of_a_projectile
But you apparently have your answer and i still got no clue lol ^.^ -
I don't understand what you're asking for what you intend to do...
You know where the puck stops because according to your explanation it's where the puck ends but also where it launches... -
Redbone, with all that being said do you think that commercials, in the traditional sense, will be removed and the shows, the content, will be extended to be hour long rather than 42 minutes with commercials?
-
It's not an obligation...
Commercials pay for the making of a tv show. TV shows earn money from commercials based on how many people watch the show. The reason that is is because the show is giving the commercial a forum to convince that audience. If that audience is not watching those commercials then the commercials will not advertise during that show... if the show doesn't get the advertising money it can't be made thus no show.
The viewer is a small but integral part where in if they are doing x then y isn't happening thus z can't happen. You watching commercials is equivalent, in the process, to you paying for the show, because if you don't watch the commercials the show doesn't get made.
You are not obligated to watch the commercials, but when you don't the show loses it's ability to get money from advertisers. This is why a lot of the rating systems don't take into account DVRs and such, because people who are watching via DVRs are skipping the commercials and because they are those people have no value to the advertisers and as such shouldn't be counted or paid for by the advertisers.
I forget how the cable model works but you aren't paying for the shows. you are paying for access to the distribution if i remember right. the only time you pay for the shows yourself are like HBO and Showtime which has no commercials... -
Quote:DVRing is legal, as far as I know. I'm asking why? in comparison to things that are illegal which seem to be the same thing.Originally Posted by Coin
Forum Rules and Regulations
16. Zero Tolerance Policy
Immediate suspension or bans from the forum can result from any of the following: the posting of pornography; discriminatory remarks, remarks which are sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive; offensive on the basis of sexual identity, gender, or sexual orientation; excessive obscene or vulgar language; posts which discuss or illustrate illegal activity; providing links to sites that contain any of the aforementioned.
Bolded for emphasis.
The very subject matter you brought is about piracy, something that has been stomped down on here numerous times before. As someone who posts here regulary, in this section, I find it hard to believe you've never noticed it, I know I have
Zero Tolerance, they'll delete it in seconds.
I don't think that breaks the rules, but I guess you could interpret it that way. -
Quote:By the nature of what politics is everything can turn into a political flame war.Originally Posted by Hopeling
And as soon as one of those threads hits upon a topic likely to devolve into a political flame war, it will be mod bait as well.
I'm asking why there is this distinction between this and that when they are the same thing. Commercials pay for tv shows via the premise you'e going to watch the commercials. If you aren't watching the commercials you aren't paying for the show thus you shouldn't be watching the show. Cut out the commercial part and say you just download the show that is ripped from a blu-ray. You aren't paying for it thus shouldn't be watching it. What's the difference and why is it that people view it as a difference. I never even thought about it till maybe yesterday and it just hit me that it is roughly the same thing. I just am wondering and it has nothing to do with changing things legally. I am just curious as to the thoughts of others and if we can come to some agreement on this odd thought. -
Quote:I asked how. Please explain. I looked at the rules and there is no rules against anything about this.Originally Posted by Coin
LOL, love that you picked my thread
Lets just ignore that thread has a stack of pics of comic book and hero related stuff in it, shall we :P
This thread is against the rules, dude. You know that and yet still posted it. My thread was very on-topic, hence the mods allowed it without any modding
The other thread you mentioned? Also on topic as it's discussing classic movie concepts that are very relevant to this forum.
Also I didn't look at who started the threads... just that they have nothing to do with comics. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Hopeling
Wait, really? [Citation Needed] please.yes, that is massively dumbed down from what the various laws say. I haven't done research on it. It's a factoid in the back of my brain from several things in the past that I asked about it was explained and then it just got shoved in with all the other copyright mumbojumbo that ultimately doesn't matter because it's all a broken system to begin with.Quote:Originally Posted by Mr. DJ
Not necessarily true *editing*
There is a lawyer around here that should be chiming in by next page so he should be able to tell you how it actually works and how it's wrong ^.^ -
Quote:The same thing that say, the xmas swag thread has, or Why is it during doomsday scenerio's people always make stupid decisions?, or Human potential, or There is a glitch in the matrix when....Originally Posted by Gobbledygook
So, like quite a few of Dur's threads, I have to wonder what this has to do with comic hero and vilain culture? This entire thread is off topic.
It's a nerd culture forum.
No, it's not. If it does I don't know how. Would you care to enlighten me?Quote:Originally Posted by Coin
You know it's against the forum rules, yet you posted it. -
Quote:I didn't stop posting there because others bothered me. I stopped posting there because Westley started modifying posts and such of mine. Banging your head against a brick wall when you know the parameters of your head and the wall is one thing...when your head and the wall starts morphing on you is another.Originally Posted by Mr. DJ
Well Durr, you and PK/Westley can be equally insane, just you decided to take your ball and go home. It's nice to be able to have a conversation that doesn't inevitably takes a nose dive into a empty well at the bottom of a ravine in the Grand Canyon sometimes.
I'm talking about watching it, not posting it up.Quote:Well if you're posting it online after taking it from tv
The problem with this is that copyright laws aren't just about making money, it's also about curtailing the ability of others to make money. For example, scanlations. Fans scan and translate manga and they are popular, but the original publisher now can't make money in america with that product, or as much, because it is already widely available...Quote:Originally Posted by Coin
Going back to your original topic, anyway....no, it's not piracy as you're not making a profit from it.
This is not so much a counter argument, but rather how it is seen by the system.
Also the system favors the person who can make the most off a product. So even if I can prove I created something and Disney stole it the courts would rule that because it would be impossible for me to make as much money off of the product as disney that my claim of copyright is invalid... or some such. -
Quote:I'm not. I'm just saying there is a contingent of people that are clearly motivated to attack some people over and over again. I think it's funny that they care to waste so much time on it. I also have seen the mods take actions that indicate a bias and I have been told by some of these people that they've done what I'm talking about.Originally Posted by Coin
You might want to be a little more specific then.
Anyway, regardless of what site it is, if it's a private site, then people can damn well say whatever they like, within the relevant laws of of their countries, etc etc. You don't like it? Don't read it then.
Next you'll be going in to peoples houses and telling them what they can and can't talk about
Those people take it as me mentioning it that they are getting under my skin. Not the case. What does get under my skin is the moderators, but at the same time I understand where they are coming from so meh.
Anyways, again I apologize, if you took it to mean the website in your sig... the comment was more towards you and Mr DJ's side discussion, not you or the site in your signature... -
Quote:TeamFourStar's content is actually legal, but whatever...Originally Posted by Mr. DJ
YouTube has it's own rules and tries to enforce them, accounts are banned daily there, but there's only so many people and their preemptive system only catches so many. Though there are unfair rulings that have been made (TeamFourStar's account has been banned before, and many Botchamania accounts have been banned as well)
I'm talking about posting content from tv on places where it's "illegal" to post them. MMPR on Youtube is copyrighted material and watching it via stream from youtube is considered pirating, but the argument was that if it's not a permanent thing for the viewer then it's not pirating because it is completely different. -
Quote:Not your website, sorry if you took it to mean the one you have linked. I'm pretty sure you do go to the site I am referring to, but I'm not sure who does or does not any more as a lot of them are no longer subscribed to CoH any more and I don't keep a tally of who is and isn't. I'm pretty sure you are, Mr DJ is, but I don't think Rylas does...Originally Posted by Coin
Sorry, what???
I'm pretty damn certain my site has NO ragging of ANYONE going on there and I challenge you to find one single post on the forums that does, other than the banter that goes on between the DJ's as normal!
See, posts like this, make you look bad, Durakken. Think before you type, dude. -
Quote:I'm not talking about Netflix or Hulu... I'm talking more along the lines of watching MMPR on Youtube.Originally Posted by Mr. DJ
Hulu, Netflix and the like are legal for obvious reasons.
-
Quote:Would you then argue that as long as you don't have a "permanent" copy then it's not the same thing?Originally Posted by Coin
I don't think it's remotely the same.
DVR, unless you have more money than sense and own about a dozen of them, you eventually run out of space, so the TV stuff you're getting isn't permanent.
For example, If I stream a movie off of some website. It's not a permanent thing so according to that logic it wouldn't be pirating right?
As far as that side discussion: It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you all have a website where you rag on people you don't like and you've likely already posted this post there and the way that the moderators have been, and the admittance by some that would make one think that's what is going on. -
I'm curious how those of you that are against pirating feel about DVRs... What do I mean?
Well, the basic argument is that the reason "pirating" is bad is because you are stealing, not paying for, whatever it is you are pirating.
What does that have to do with DVRs? TV, cable and network, the programming you get to see is paid for via commercials. The commercials are based on the idea that they are exchanging paying for the show for time to convince you to buy their product...
By you not watching the commercials you are not upholding your end of the sales thing going and because of that, in essence, not paying for the show you are watching and thus stealing that show...
DVRs are a big part of our culture now, but I've never heard anything against them, but they pretty much do the same thing as pirating. So...
It seems to me that people who are against pirating should be against DVRs... so are you or not? Why or why not? -
Quote:Oh yeah, now that you mention it, yeah... I don't think i was to that part yet when I said that...and I forgot about it later...Originally Posted by Father Xmas
Durakken, it's obvious he could turn things as well since he turned on a hose and started a number of cars. Also we didn't need to see the battery of tests they would put him through or did you want to have a montage sequence? He "joined" them only days before the mission. I'm sure that if the series happened that we would see him being tested more extensively but for this mission they only needed him to manipulate locks.
Compare this and Alpha's characters...
They are pretty close to each other with the same archtypes and pretty similar powers
emotion controlling girl = mind controlling girl
Insect guy + precog = synesthetic girl
Marster = Psychology guy
Smell guy = The autistic guy
Normal guy = The new guy to the team
The insect guy, and voice synth woman are unique and the super strength guy is unique. -
Quote:save for the whole space isn't actually a vacuum thing...Originally Posted by Mandu
But the lack of loss of temperature has nothing to do with heat radiating out from your body and then just forming a room temperature pocket around you. Nothing even remotely like that occurs. It's just that a vacuum is the worse possible conductor of heat because there is no substance touching your body that can absorb the heat energy. So the only loss is direct thermal radiation.
-
finished and i agree with their decision, though not because the show was bad, but because the show doesn't vibe well for the station. It'd be great for another station... perhaps they could sell it somewhere else or perhaps make it a web series.