1  ...  25  26  27  28  29  30  ...  101  |   Order by default

Apr 17, 2004, 4:16pm

[View Quote] Nah, the universe doesn't move -- our galaxy maybe.

Apr 17, 2004, 8:48pm

[View Quote] How would it expand if it's everything?

Apr 19, 2004, 5:29pm

[View Quote] Gravity pulls everything together. Which has more power, gravity or the
expanding universe theory? We can prove gravity... I'm not so sure
about an expanding universe, neither is Stephen Hawking.

Apr 20, 2004, 2:26am

[View Quote] How do you know the universe is expanding or has a perimeter?

Apr 21, 2004, 2:09am

[View Quote] Dopler shift is caused by the pull of planets. Red as it get closer,
blue as it gets further... I think.

You keep claiming theory for fact. How do you know time can be created?
How do you know space curves at it's edges? We _know_ there's some
sort of pull on molecules (gravity -- what it is exactly may still be
theory but we know it's there)... but as for the other stuff we have
absolutely no idea.

Apr 21, 2004, 4:58am

[View Quote] That's what it was, their position. It's a theory though, nonetheless.

Apr 21, 2004, 5:19pm

[View Quote] Nope. Unless you can prove time exists. I don't know why you're
trying, not even the most brilliant thinkers can prove it -- yet. In
order for existance to be true, everything that ever was or will be, has
to be now. Matter. Energy. Time. But, apparently you know more than
Einstein, Newton, and the rest. But again, these are all theories and
you're still trying to prove them as fact.

Apr 16, 2004, 2:00am

[View Quote] It's probably just grabbing it everytime there's an object addition.

Apr 18, 2004, 6:11am

[View Quote] They'd have to make some sort of proprietary binary format that only
they have the key for to decrypt it. This key would obviously be based
on something like the citizen number.. maybe mixed in with immigration
time in seconds from the epoch. Then if a parent wants to get the key
they could call up AWI and get the code using some information like
their CC number they used to register it or whatnot.

Apr 19, 2004, 2:37pm

[View Quote] > Just cipher the binary line by line going in with reversable encryption.

Kids with overprotective parents tend to stay quite a bit ahead of them
in computer knowledge to be able to hide their tracks. The more
protective, the further ahead they stay.

Apr 19, 2004, 2:58pm

[View Quote] > We aren't paying for such irrelevant features.
> Secure the browser, not the content or chat.

Nothing can be secure as long as it's publically available. Besides,
Shamus isn't a cryptography specialist, anything he can do will be
amatuer at best.

Aug 17, 2004, 4:48pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] From scratch or using someone elses? :)

Aug 15, 2004, 12:22am

How about a way to mute/stop media via the settings? Kinda annoying
when you have sound turned off, and not to download and you still have
background noise because of the media command.

Aug 15, 2004, 12:49am

[View Quote] > Look at the very bottom of the "Downloads" tab in the "Settings" dialog.

Well to be honest, if you're going to make a feature similar to other
features you should at least include a design in the settings to mimic
them. As to not have me think that I would need to explicitly click it
(as what I read that as when I first saw it).

Aug 15, 2004, 2:11pm

[View Quote] Yes that's what I mean. You might want to give users the ability to
limit the size of what they want to download. Also the formats as well.
Some people may not want movies, but want sounds.

Aug 15, 2004, 3:46pm

[View Quote] Well, you're looking at it from entirely the wrong contect then. You're
obviously looking at it like we know everything ahead of time, when we
don't. When you limit things, you can stop it at _any_ time. This
includes mid download. This isn't exactly the best thing, but some
people want such things (like me). As for differentiating between
movies and sounds, you need only determine if it's on an object that can
show it.

You have to be intuitive about things too. ;) Again, they're optional
data for people who want to conserve bandwidth and save their eyes...
without completely limiting what they can do with it.

Aug 24, 2004, 1:08am

[View Quote] > Eep instantly knew I was talking about LOD on his first reply. It sounds
> like I got my point across efficiently enough :P

I didn't though. I didn't know what the hell Truform was. Although it
sounded stupid, so I figured it must be something someone made up.

Aug 20, 2004, 1:17am

[View Quote] Why? Because you're one of the few people who would use it -- it's not
enough to implement a feature that you can do in about 4 seconds without.

Aug 20, 2004, 1:43am

[View Quote] > I agree absolutely, highflier! The yellow question mark was a terrible thing to put into the so-called "privacy" feature. The only thing the question mark does is offend people or hurt their feelings, because it means one of these things:
>
> A. You have not put that person on your contacts list at all.
>
> B. That person is on your contacts, but you've not turned on the option for that person to see when you are online.
>
> Either way, it makes you come across as rude when perhaps your only intention (mine, anyway) in not adding the name of everyone you know, was to keep your contacts list short. That leads to hurt feelings, of course, whether the others come right out and ask, "Why haven't you added me?" or whether they just silently feel slighted. The yellow question mark is a very ugly thing in more ways than one, imho.
>
> Having NO mark at all until I deliberately want to turn on the green online checkmark would be sooooooooooo much nicer.
>
> Lara

Stop being so antisocial then. :P

Aug 20, 2004, 3:25am

Go get some LEGO's.

Aug 24, 2004, 2:28pm

[View Quote] Who cares? If your sole excuse for using the "?" (which is not a check
by the way) is to "get away" or "have some alone time" then there is no
real reason to completely hide your status with an "offline" mark.
You'll get telegrammed with "why are you ignoring me" yes, but you can
block telegrams easily.

Stop being so antisocial, it's virtual reality; why pay $20 if you don't
want the reality part. Go get some LEGO's if you don't like people. Go
into the middle of AW if you want to be alone, being inside your house
doesn't stop people from calling you on your phone (telegrams), or for
coming to visit (join request) which you can ignore both easily from
everyone.

The tools are there to your disposal, you just have to change options
around if you want to be a hermit.

By the way, I think everyone who tries to be a hermit in an online
program with hundreds of users to be "DUMB!".

Aug 25, 2004, 3:27pm

[View Quote] Don't we all, but still, they'll get over it if you hurt their feelings.

Aug 26, 2004, 3:32pm

[View Quote]
http://www.activeworlds.com/sdk/AW_EVENT_OBJECT_CLICK.htm

Aug 26, 2004, 5:22pm

[View Quote] Be understandable. Create means to make, drawing an object into your
field of view is different. :P

All of these would cause ridiculous amounts of traffic, especially when
an object comes into sight.

Aug 27, 2004, 1:18am

[View Quote] Everytime you say something, I think you're a jackass more and more.

Maybe it's just me.

Aug 29, 2004, 3:34pm

[View Quote] > Maybe not a fully featured one... e.g. if it would be too hard to get
> the web window to work with another browser, just remove that feature.
>
> It's just annoying trying to emulate AW on Linux because some parts
> don't work properly, or emulate reeeeally slowly. Also since a TrueType
> font is used in AW, it doesn't show properly at all in Linux (especially
> on signs) because Linux TrueType rendering engines are crappy because
> they have to get round patents. Nasty patents. :(
>
> Until then, AW addicts like me are forced to use Windows. :(

Better to expand the userbase too, instead of half-assedly implementing
features and never fixing the bugs. I don't think the problem is they
don't want to, I think the problem is their programmers can't do it.

Oct 1, 2004, 4:05pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Is that contacts on his list, or people who have him on their contact list?

On that note, ouch.

Oct 2, 2004, 3:43am

[View Quote] So is every terrorist, every member of the CIA, every ex member of the
gestapo, and every member of the KGB. What's your point? :P

Oct 2, 2004, 5:45am

[View Quote] He's welcome to try and find them, although he may need a microscope, I
assume.

Oct 2, 2004, 5:51am

[View Quote] > that your ideas of relevancy are about the size of your genetals...that is
> to say, very small...

On that note, it's also completely relevant. You don't pay respect to
people who usually have alterior motives. Especially when they say
things towards the degree of "I only do things that benefit me."
Note, that's not an exact quote.

Your idea of a response is laughable, on the other hand, personal
attacks don't bother me. I'm confident in my 'genital' size. On the
other hand, I recommend a dictionary -- which would be more, shall we
say, punctual. Not only that, I can prove it! Yes I can play your
game. As I suspect, it doesn't bother you either.

1  ...  25  26  27  28  29  30  ...  101  |   Order by default