madhaha

So basically none of you READ the article that addressed all of your counterarguments... I'll make this short. The oil crash is inevitable, everyone acknowledges that oil is both finite and running out. The article and most textbooks, scientists, geologists etc. agree that this will happen between now and 2030 at the latest. This isn't the end of oil production but the end of cheap oil. Our main reliance on oil is AGRICULTURE. No oil. No Haber Process. No fertiliser. No more intensive farming. I suppose China might make it because the traditional rice farming methods uses ox dung as a fertiliser and is in fact equally productive as western methods but much of that has been replaced by tractors now. We CERTAINLY won't be able to afford m!@#$%^&* importing fruit and vegetables from far distant places in order to sait our desire for oranges in the winter and other stupidities. Next we've got transport. No more oil means no more flying for most people as aviation fuel is derived from crude oil. Enjoy the recent budget flights while they last. We have no m!@#$%^&* produced alternatively fueled cars. Don't say "gas power" because that only has a decade or two at most over oil and besides our usage will increase dramatically as more people use it as an alternative. No ambulances. No police cars. Not outside MAJOR areas at least. I think we can safely kiss lorries goodbye and perhaps we'll have to go back to our much neglected canal system. Not sure how the US will do with such a vast amount of land to cover. Shipping is going to be very expensive. No oil, no power. This is going to hit almost every industry in a big way since most use oil powered equipment for example most steelworks use oil furnaces. Oil powerstations are already in lots of trouble in the uk and with cheap oil gone they're as good as closed. No plastics. -*BAD WORD*- I'm just going to end the list there. Basically the world is screwed unless we actually switch sometime this decade and fast. That isn't happening.

I thougth continuum already used a different protocol to subspace, as in different enough to stop snrrrubspace from working properly...

The pictures of your gothy friends were much more interesting. Do you really think you should keep your porn on show to the public though?

Shipset = ships.bm2 Ship SETTINGS. There's a difference Mister Jones: Bricks can not be bought in any ship. You would know this if you typed ?buy. Yet another unannounced change... On a similar note, weasel no longer requires energy to cloak. I disagree with your view on base battles. They weren't intense, they were simply a deadlock with people hammering F7 and unloading all their weapons in the shortest time possible before dying. Now the base battles are tense because you don't know when re-inforcements will arrive and that each death is going to cost you. In my opinion this means more skill is involved and more thought goes into how you kill your opposition. It also makes spider/terrier/shark rushing less feasible. Is it really that fun playing who can brick furthest? This style of gameplay can be found in many other zones such as EG. I don't see why any player would enter 17th for pure action given the choices availible.

Ignore DM... Apparently LOTS of people have been having trouble with the same error message. All of them use ASUS boards but the solutions appear to vary depending on the other components in the system or luck. I suggest voodoo.

Key finding door puzzles should have died out with quake. Especially stupid colour key puzzles. Unfortunately some "modern" game developers still haven't worked that out *cough*firewarriorsucks*cough*.

We could do with a proper editor for that too. I think there's one kicking about but I don't remember it being any good.

Obviously you haven't been down to the fairground recently. And I guess no-one saw the centrifuge bit in James Bond either... Power arrangements would be tricky. One simple way would be to use ion drives (already developed) to set the entire ship spinning and shut them off when you've reached the desired speed. It has also been shown that excercise helps to offset some of the low/zero G problems for the short term.

Mike is the owner of the zone. Mike can do what he -*BAD WORD*- likes. As mods AREN'T using precedant as I suggested, this ban is insignificant and it also got rid of a player that has nothing better to do than har!@#$%^&* the staff. Someone point out why this is bad. Foof will never learn, maybe because he's an attention seeker or maybe because he's stupid. Or a combination of the two, it doesn't matter. There is no reason why he should stay in the zone.

Jim don't be silly. Any change in either direction of the power balance will piss people off. What you're suggesting is 17th should progress to become a supership zone as we up the settings until they're balanced. BAD idea. http://www.ssforum.net/index.php?showtopic=2286 Oh look who's idea got used (scroll down till you see my name) Yes it was my fault and I'll justify it: teams now have to GREEN again. You can't just hammer the attach button anymore. Enemies stay dead for a certain amount of down time. Skilled special users like spiders and sharks that stay alive get a constant supply due to increased greening. Its not a penaulty, its just a shift back to the old gameplay style and I like it. You may continue whining

Ok, it is time... As a long time critic of other people's webcrap I've decided to add my own online detritus to the web. http://www.untypeable.com/ Let loose the dogs of war! Rip it to shreds I've only been working on it for a short time and there is LOTS to do but the basic design and colours that hurt the eyes are in place. The server also hosts my sister's coursework (hidden from prying eyes atm). If people want to contribute then get in touch.

Wrong, the original settings encouraged greening. You even had to green your gun and bomb power up...

We should make a list of tags that should be supported. obviously <!@#$%^&*le> (and all the !@#$%^&*ociated tags), all the list tags like etc. I'd rather people used stylesheets instead of ... Note that stylesheet support would mean that we'd be able to do a lot more than bland looking rtf style do-*BAD WORD*-ents. On the other hand, the size of the rendering engine would be quite big and quite complicated (none of the current browsers offer full, unbugged CSS1 support, let alone CSS2). I think that using an external browser is justified. Alternatively we Could just use rtf files instead.

So its ok to attack people who are not an imminent threat and the hope that you're killing the ones you're after and call it a defensive war? Me confused.

You think putting a couple of people in something the size of a small dormroom for a 3 month journey (at the shortest) without them killing each other is going to be simple? And then convincing them that they aren't going to die, that the radiation shielding will work, that there is enough food and water to go round, that it doesn't matter that most probes going to mars have been destroyed or mysteriously dissapeared and it will all be worthwhile for the experiments they could conduct in the few days they're staying there and that the RETURN JOURNEY is going to be just as fun? And do that on a tiny budget? Good luck. There is no point in going to mars until we've discovered something useful to do there other than gather scientific data.

Dav: Point missed again. You've gone straight for the soundbite and missed the entire topic of the article. Not only that, you've misunderstood the metaphor. "A blind man in a room of dead people". The blind man would not see the deaf people and the deaf people would not hear the blind man. The point being made is that what Bush says and does is totally independant of what his party is doing behind his back. This has NOTHING to do with the public. I don't know what to make of the "revelations" but I'm sure they'll sell lots of wood pulp. Aileron: Very disturbing. You condone the use of banned weapons in warfare because, you reason, if you go to war then the war is a significantly just cause to justify their use. It is particularly disturbing because the reason we were at war with Iraq was because Iraq was thought to be developing banned weapons and we feared they would be used against us by terrorists believing they're fighting for a just cause. I state again: this is not an issue about you or me "winning" an argument. Its about basic humanitrian welfare. In one sentence you say that the cause for war is strong enough to justify the means yet in another you say that the war does not need justification because it is defensive. How do you defend yourself from an enemy you cannot defeat with firepower? Not by invading other countries. The official line of reasoning is that the enemy government is supporting terrorism and as soon as we remove the government, terrorism will be substantially reduced. This has not turned out to be the case. Does this justify the deaths of innocent people killed both directly (blown to bits) and indirectly (starved to death, killed by mobs, innocently killed in terrorist attacks aimed at us)? No it does not. Does this call for the use of bigger weapons? No it does not. Can we consider attacking another country to root out a minority group defensive? No. I really do not know know how you can disagree with that or why.

In other words: the media has become rather silent about Saddam. Thus people of the forum are slowly forgetting about the issue, kind of like afghanistan.

Space exploration is unviable until we start exploiting the resources out there. Its no good sending out little explorers every few years, gathering a few crumbs of data if they survive the journey. Real exploration stems from need and people who are willing to fund the exploration. This can only come from either a state or a commercial interest. Space travel is not as simple as Akai claims (VERY complicated in the case of interplanetary manned space travel). Whats more we've lost the tools and design work that went into the saturn rockets. In short we've made no real progress in space travel despite technological advance and it will continue to be a non-priority until space outside earth's orbit becomes commercially compe!@#$%^&*ive with resources on earth.

A symbol not a euphemism... Why not just go dual boot so we don't have to have these tired conversations over and over again. That way you can use both windows AND your favourite flavour of *nix. See? They can co-exist happily! Its not like we don't have the diskspace nowadays.

QUOTE(SD>Big @ Jan 12 2004, 06:02 PM)after quickly browsing through some of the topics in this forum, i've come to the conclusion that god and/or religion has no place on the internet.OMG, people make philisophical life altering judgements from reading these forums! *scrolls up* The end is nigh!

The third post, the one from maka. You should fire him

Since all ships can potentially spawn with 2 bricks it evens out. wb isn't a shrap dependant ship anyway. Of course since the score system is changed, having a hightened start bounty is a little unfair. So I guess its either make cheap shrapnel availible for purchase or quit whining.

I repeat, why not use the local MachineID?

*sigh*? That's -*BAD WORD*-ing gra!@#$%^&*ude for you... Other people code bots for you. Other people put up with your stupid irrelevant babble on your latest "hack". Other people go to the trouble of checking deadlinks late into the night and running websites at their own expense for you and all you have to say is "*sigh*". Please tell me wtf you're sighing about you useless spam farm.

If I send you a bullet in the mail, it wouldn't make me a gun. Your initial objection was that subgame would become a WEBSERVER thus becomming too complicated and bloated. We're pointing out its just doing the same file serving job its always done. You have completed failed to prove your point. You have in fact, been "owned". Would it be worth rendering the html internally? It would Probably be more secure but it would increase the size of the distribution.