HeXetic

Looks fine for me in Firefox (Iceweasel) 23.0 on Linux, even with NoScript having disabled everything on that page.

Probably this in reference to the steel towers and girders upon which the cameras are mounted.

Every time one of these things happens, I actively see (employed) game-dev buddies on Facebook publicly advertising jobs at their present companies to their newly laid-off friends.

Game developers are still a pretty tight-knit group. It's not like getting laid off from a Wal-Mart.

I consider "L.A. Noire" the modern equivalent of an adventure game. Much of your time is spent walking around crime scenes picking up everything that isn't nailed down. The rest of the time consists of solving the game's "puzzles", which are all in the form of conversations, and sometimes involve using objects (evidence) to solve, while otherwise requiring careful observation. The combat and chase sequences are actually very incidental, with the foot chases in particular having extremely simplified controls (just hold "up" to climb a whole set of fire escape ladders and stairs) and if you screw them up enough then the game will simply let you skip them. Unlike old adventure games, there are multiple ways to solve each case, and there are no instances of "Moon Logic Puzzles".

Isn't this sort of like turning an entire rack into just a big blade server enclosure?

Agreed, I would move a lot of these things to about:config so that power users can play with them while hiding them from average-Joes.

Among other things already mentioned, it makes it impossible to be "const pedantic" as Mr. Carmack professes to now be, i.e. declaring everything that is only initialized and then never changed as const.

I most certainly am const pedantic as well, and I was back when I worked on this project, too -- quite a few of the "inconsequential" lines I checked in were simply moving a variable declaration down to where it was initialized, and adding 'const'. I found the resulting code much easier to read.

Personally, I found some of the horizontal spacing excessive. There were several lines that even forced me to scroll horizontally within VisualStudio (with a few side-panes open, admittedly), despite having a widescreen monitor. I'm pretty sure I chunked those up. Maybe Mr. Carmack has a much bigger monitor than I did.

Besides that, I think the stylistic changes this author is commenting on are fairly minor. I think the conciseness of vertical space was a bit confusing sometimes; this article only shows the simple functions where it works. The almost complete absence of templated is more likely because no STL code was used.

Certainly, the code base is very thorough. When I realized I had to use quaternions to represent the player's orientation in the game space, there was already an idQuat class ready and waiting and fully functional, which was very nice. I think that idQuat class was never even used anywhere in the base code, so it was cool -- for someone with who never knew about quaternions before then -- to have a class fully implemented and ready for me to use.

As someone who has worked with the Doom 3 source code for a mod, I have the opposite opinion. The code very clearly shows a programming team (or programmer) in the process of transitioning from old-school C to C++.

Most functions have a huge blob of variable declarations right at the top, as was once necessary in C, even though these variables aren't used until later, or possibly even at all. Usage of const is minimal to non-existent. Global variables are everywhere.

It made some of the functions I had to modify so hard to read that I wound up completely editing them, particularly those variable-declaration blocks, even though I ultimately only needed to change a line or two to get my mod to work.

The disclaimer page makes it obvious:

http://www.arpanetdialogues.net/disclaimer/

The wording is intensely verbose but basically boils down to: "We made this all up as an art project".

I meant that even though you appeared to be confusing refresh rate with frame rate, and certainly higher refresh rates made things look a lot better on old CRTs, higher frame rates than the max 60 fps possible on today's average LCDs* actually make a difference as well.

*(only "3D-capable" LCDs run at 120 Hz or 240 Hz and are therefore capable of actually showing more than 60 frames per second).

No, not that kind of effect; there is genuine "motion" motion blur available in games in response to rapid movement (e.g., sprinting in Battlefield or Mass Effect - the scenery closest to the player [and therefore moving most rapidly relative to them] blurs in the appropriate direction) or rapid orientation change (Portal 2 does this; I think Mirror's Edge did so also).

As micampe said, you're mixing refresh rates with frame rates, but actually you aren't entirely wrong, because I remember the heady days of upgrading my graphics card and having Counter-Strike hit 100-120 frames per second on my 120 Hz CRT monitor, and the visual difference was very noticeable vs. when I was back in 60fps zone.

The main visual difference was when rapidly moving the mouse; turning quickly was much more visually appealing at a high frame rate.

> there's no blurring in video games at all.

Most video games since a few years ago render frames with a degree of artificial motion blur to simulate speed. This is particularly the case with racing games but also exists in first-person shooters (moreso on the PC than on consoles, since rapid mouse movements translate to rapid screen motion).

Kinda important to mention apps when talking about smartphones.

Sure, you can buy Angry Birds (or whatever) again for $0.99 if you switch platforms, but will you buy all of your apps again? And what if you really like an app that's only on one platform?

Highly successful Playstation titles tend to roll over into being re-released as "greatest hits" editions for about $20 in a year or so. The list is fairly extensive:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatest_Hits_%28budget_range%...

Wow the original title for this submission, "How to Recruit Women into Tech: A Madison Ruby case study", completely missed the mark and I am glad it was changed.

I can understand taking over an abandoned mall to make a "Zombie Theme Park" like was done in the UK

http://www.zedevents.co.uk/the-mall/

but 200 acres is pretty big, and outdoors makes everything more complicated.

Even better, the Atlantic's photo articles like this can be navigated with the arrow keys to go from one photo to the next.

The registers aren't shared here, but the main memory is. The example has each thread write '1' into a [shared, main] memory location and then read the other thread's memory location into a register. If both CPUs' registers are 0, that means that both reads occurred before both writes.

I looked it up: In Firefox 11 and newer, punch in about:config in the URL bar, then find network.http.spdy.enabled and turn it on.

Kinda crummy article to mention that SPDY is actually present in earlier Firefox versions, but just turned off. How about telling us how we can turn it on?

That's not a "nice rebuttal", that's some bullet points spat back. Whereas the original linked article in this discussion provides some context and explanation, the bullet points in your second link are meaningless to the layperson (e.g, me).

Gpyroc is drywall, and that is used for interior walls, not exterior walls.

Most (non-mobile) homes in the US & Canada are either brick veneer over wooden frame, or double-brick construction where the bricks bear the structural weight to the foundation.

Because the Economist's point is that so much of the potential tax revenue is getting excluded due to loopholes that eliminating those loopholes without reducing the marginal tax rate at the same time would amount to an enormous wallop. Maybe "the rich" can bear it, maybe not, but the point is effecting change of that sort would make them pay more, and that regardless of what actual tax rate we want to target, it would be better to start from a position where the actual tax paid by any individual is straightforward to calculate.

Only at that point does it become reasonable to figure out at exactly what number to set the tax rates, because until then you don't really know how much tax you're going to get from the person, since they may or may not have avenues of escape.

You are misquoting the article, which actually proposes to "boost the tax take from the wealthy by eliminating loopholes while simultaneously lowering marginal rates."

In other words, make the rich actually pay more by eliminating loopholes used to avoid taxes entirely. Compensate somewhat for the increase by lowering the actual tax rate.