Colrom

Some of my memories which I could not bring forward on demand later remembered themselves on their own in their own time.

What Bush should have done is give a speach about how we miss the people who were killed on 9/11 and how we appreciate the efforts of those who responded to our needs on that day and the days following. End of speach. Instead he sought to use the occasion to rationalize the wars and other controlling actions he has pursued since then. He reminds me of MacBeth. Has anyone looked at his hands closely lately? Is there an open sore there or is it just my imagination?

I agree with these statements. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Tell that to God when you see him.

Finally, regarding division by zero please read the following: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/DivisionbyZero.html . Some aspects of the issue involve complex numbers and are a bit ..... well ...... complex. :D

Finally, from http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Continuum.html comes: "The term "continuum" has (at least) two distinct technical meanings in mathematics. The first is a compact connected metric space (Kuratowski 1968; Lewis 1983, pp. 361-394; Nadler 1992; Prajs and Charatonik). The second is the nondenumerable set of real numbers, denoted c. The continuum c satisfies (1) N0 + c = c and (2) c^n = c where N0 is aleph0 (Aleph-0) and n is a positive integer. It is also true that (3) x^N0 = c for x>or=2. However, (4) c^c = G is a set larger than the continuum. Paradoxically, there are exactly as many points, c, on a line (or line segment) as in a plane, a three-dimensional space, or finite hyperspace, since all these sets can be put into a one-to-one correspondence with each other. The continuum hypothesis, first proposed by Georg Cantor , holds that the cardinal number of the continuum is the same as that of aleph1. The surprising truth is that this proposition is undecidable, since neither it nor its converse contradicts the tenets of set theory. "

From http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Aleph-1.html comes "N1 Aleph-1 is the set theory symbol for the smallest infinite set larger than N0 (Aleph-0), which in turn is equal to the cardinality of the set of countable ordinal numbers. The continuum hypothesis asserts that N1=c , where c is the cardinality of the "large" infinite set of real numbers (called the continuum in set theory). However, the truth of the continuum hypothesis depends on the version of set theory you are using and so is undecidable. Curiously enough, n-dimensional space has the same number of points © as one-dimensional space, or any finite interval of one-dimensional space (a line segment), as was first recognized by Georg Cantor . "

From http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Aleph-0.html comes: "The set theory symbol N0 refers to a set having the same cardinal number as the "small" infinite set of integers. The symbol N0 is often pronounced "aleph-null" rather than "aleph-zero," probably because Null is the word for "zero" in Georg Cantor's native language of German. It is sometimes also pronounced "aleph-zero" or "aleph-naught," the latter of which is also spelled "aleph-nought." The algebraic numbers also belong to N0. Rather surprising properties satisfied by N0 include (1) N0^r = N0 for r>0 (2) r*N0 = N0 for r not 0 (3) N0 + F = N0 where F is any finite set. However, (4) N0^N0 = c where c is the continuum. Renteln and Dundes (2005) give the following humorous mathematical analog of the "99 bottles of beer on the wall" drinking song, which refers to its property that : "Aleph-null bottles of beer on the wall, Aleph-null bottles of beer, Take one down, and pass it around, Aleph-null bottles of beer on the wall" (repeat). "

Which infinity do you have in mind? N0 or N1 or some other? :D

A "wicked" book.

We don't have those kinds of problems here in the United States. All information is readily available. Expression is completely free. :D

Very Bad!

Meta's solution is elegant. I liked Meta's approach. He starts with the important stuff and makes a minor adjustment. He makes it easy to see that the adjustment is minor. Nice!

I liked the setting. It needed alot more dialog and less combat. Better combat AI would have been good too. The business of doing altered history was fun. In Lionheart's case it was alot alot of history! I never finished the story. Maybe I should try again. That's the kind of game that Obsidian could really make into a masterpiece.

Sometimes it takes a few years before you can feel what you feel. " That happened when my Dad died. " I got smacked hard by it about 2 years later. Big down trip. Strange how things work. It's OK now.

It's different for each person. I guess I sort of imagine they are around somewhere else - just not here right now. Sometimes I am suprised that they are not around where I am right now and that hurts. But eventually I can remember nice things about them or nice times I had with them and not be sad. I tell certain people about the wonderful things about them - or about the things about them that were not so wonderful. One person who died a few years ago was very important in my life but was also very abusive on a regular basis. In time I got to see a complete person with both good and bad qualities. Fortunately for me that realization was well along before they died. That makes it easier. Good luck. It takes about 2 years to accept major loss. So I hear.

They why aren't you wearing any pants? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yikes! :">

This is just to get sort of acquainted. I don't want a date. I am one of the seven happily married people in the world. Besides I am very old and very ugly. Also it's hard to imagine anyone loving me - although my wife claims she does. :D Go figure. (w00t)

But do you want to listen to your character say stuff in a completely wierd voice you could never imagine for yourself? Especially if the delivery is completely different too!

Is this thread a code communication ------ or a for real communication? Just a cynical thought.

Has anyone played the adventure game Bladerunner which is based on the movie? The game allowed you to choose the tone which would be used by your character. The choice was made at the start. I think you could change it mid course if you wanted to. This choice didn't effect what your character intended so much as how that intention was expressed. I mean you can say: *Hey sweetie get me a cup of jo would ya. :D *Yo, bitch, coffee, here, now! *Cup of coffee, please. Big difference in delivery. Same explicit intention. " You would only see options appropriate to your selection of tone. Providing different dialog options for different character types could really provide alot more entertainment. Especially when tone effects the gameplay. That's a selection I can make up front. I don't need to see the separate options for tone each time. But I do need to see the exact wording of the options for intent. I don't think I like the option to select from paraphrase descriptions each time and be suprised by actual delivery each time that much. Perhaps they are trying to save money more than they are trying to make good games. Sort of a good enough solution for them to the complexity of dialog. Only I don't think their solution is good enough for me.

1. Very Very Old - I remember when the Dodgers played in Brooklyn 2. Blue 3. People, History, Religion, Science, Railroads, Games 4. Rock and Folk, Classical Piano 5. SciFi 6. RPG, Wargames 7. Kindness 8. Cruelty 9. Positive

It is generally accepted that we are about at the half way point for oil consumption. Here's some info from wiki on oil reserves: "It has been estimated that there was initially a total of 2,050 (Colin Campbell, 2005) to 2,390 gigabarrels (380 km

The Illusionist. Good flick.

I think he understood animals pretty well. So far as I can tell it was just a freak accident that could have happened to any scuba diver. Very sad.

Torment Grim Fandango Bladerunner Fallout I :D