I got other escrow sites we can use if you like. Don't you want to be rich and celebrate trump's victory?

https://blog.zensports.com/zensports-launches-peer-to-peer-sports-betting-c4e82c4d64c5

Or we can do escrow through an attorney. The school secretary is a notary. I'll mail the contract first class and I'll be sure to sign it in a ceremonial fashion with a quill. Ok i won't do that but i WILL really make that bet. Put up man. Lets do this thing. Donald trump's says he won the election AND HE IS AN HONEST MAN so you don't have anything to worry about. One thing is for sure you can use that extra money to donate to whatever campaign you want cuz it'll be yours when you win it because Donald Trump will be here for four more years right?

The beta featured only a selection of weapons, titans and maps. Those weren't actually three different titans, that was just the three default loadouts for one titan, the Atlas. And, there were custom loadouts even in the beta, with 5 customization slots and 3 mods for all of the primary weapons, you just had to reach a certain rank to unlock customization.

http://www.ign.com/wikis/titanfall/Atlas
http://www.ign.com/wikis/titanfall/Ogre
http://www.ign.com/wikis/titanfall/Stryder

But, I was disappointed too, but mainly because it was a maximum of 12-player games, small maps, no server browser, no keyboard chat and no single-player. Honestly it gives the impression they designed it to be peer-to-peer multiplayer, then late in development switched it to dedicated servers, without actually leveraging any of the advantages of having dedicated servers.

Easily described

Band made funny video to try and stop p2p users of Winny filesharing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winny

Quote:
Winny (also known as WinNY) is a Japanese peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing program which claims to be loosely inspired by the design principles behind the Freenet network, which makes user identities untraceable. While Freenet was implemented in Java, Winny was implemented as a Windows C++ application

Because the Xbox 360 deal was pretty tolerable for it's time. Except for their ridiculous $50 annual fee to play peer-to-peer games online. . . Oh wait, Sony's doing that too now. Sony's just lucky that their dick move was completely overshadowed by Microsoft's incomparable dickery.

Well, at least that's settled.>> ^blankfist:

The way juris doctor blankfist sees it, the video content isn't being hosted on nor ever touches the VideoSift servers. The key difference between BT trackers and VS, according to the honorable judge blankfist, is the intent of the service. Whereas trackers are used to assist in peer-to-peer file sharing typically of copyrighted material, VideoSift is meant as an aggregator of material accessible via public and widely accessible video sharing sites.
It's thereby the verdict of the superior court of blankfist that this DCMA claim is bull fucking shit. Case dismissed.

The way juris doctor blankfist sees it, the video content isn't being hosted on nor ever touches the VideoSift servers. The key difference between BT trackers and VS, according to the honorable judge blankfist, is the intent of the service. Whereas trackers are used to assist in peer-to-peer file sharing typically of copyrighted material, VideoSift is meant as an aggregator of material accessible via public and widely accessible video sharing sites.

It's thereby the verdict of the superior court of blankfist that this DCMA claim is bull fucking shit. Case dismissed.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'robotics, cooperation' to 'robotics, cooperation, peer to peer, network, swarm, distributed' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^direpickle:
Can you explain what makes bitcoins worth anything? Why can I trust that I will be able to trade a bitcoin for goods and/or services tomorrow, much less in five or ten or forty years? I really don't get it.
Also, what's peer-to-peer money? Money that one person give to another person? Like... any money that's not credit card debt?

It's a competing currency. What makes it worth something are the people willing to use it. You can't be sure it'll be around, so you could lose everything you invest into it. That's how currency works. You can't be sure the US dollar will be around in another ten years either.
You can read up on how it works in greater detail, but p2p means that your coins are stored anonymously across multiple user's machines. It's kind of like bittorrent. Here's their wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin


I concede that it is possible for the USD to stop being worth anything, too, but I think it's likely to be a smidge more stable. Even if the world goes nuts, *probably* the store down the street will still give me a loaf of bread for a dollar or two, at least for a little bit. I think that any event that makes the USD so worthless so quickly that it's worth drastically betting against it as a citizen (not a rich person) is also going to make bitcoins (and any currency, really) useless. Better off stockpiling whiskey and ammunition.

I don't know. I just don't buy it. I imagine a large portion of the current bitcoin users are just the equivalent of oil or real estate speculators, trying to make a buck on the run-up. How many have you bought?

>> ^direpickle:

Can you explain what makes bitcoins worth anything? Why can I trust that I will be able to trade a bitcoin for goods and/or services tomorrow, much less in five or ten or forty years? I really don't get it.
Also, what's peer-to-peer money? Money that one person give to another person? Like... any money that's not credit card debt?


It's a competing currency. What makes it worth something are the people willing to use it. You can't be sure it'll be around, so you could lose everything you invest into it. That's how currency works. You can't be sure the US dollar will be around in another ten years either.

You can read up on how it works in greater detail, but p2p means that your coins are stored anonymously across multiple user's machines. It's kind of like bittorrent. Here's their wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

@blankfist said, "A bunch of stuff about bitcoins."

Can you explain what makes bitcoins worth anything? Why can I trust that I will be able to trade a bitcoin for goods and/or services tomorrow, much less in five or ten or forty years? I really don't get it.

Also, what's peer-to-peer money? Money that one person give to another person? Like... any money that's not credit card debt?

>> ^BansheeX:

I see little difference between this and dollars. Who is behind its issuance? Who will be behind it 100 years from now? What ensures that a company or a government doesn't take it over and issue bitcoins for themselves without labor while everyone else has to labor?<


The system actually does not allow this. The "mint" as well as the "bank" are a massively peer to peer system. The coins are scarce, because the system only generates coins at a fixed rate. Because the system auto adjusts, each coin is cryptographically more difficult to generate then the one before. these coins are awarded to miners based on real cryptographic, unfakable, work that they do to generate the coins. The history of each coin is tracked collectively by the p2p system, and any coin that has broken its rules is considered invalid.

The only significant hacks on the system require having more processing power than the entire existing BitCoin network, and only allows you to either:

1) reverse your own transactions, thereby double spending, and committing easily traceable fraud.
2) deviate from the systems rules, making all your coins invalid, getting barred from interacting with peers using the official client, and end up with a fork of the network, which generates and processes coins that nobody on the official network will accept. (Note: official in this context refers to adhering to the standard, not the approval of any central body)

>> ^sixshot:

<em>>> <a rel="nofollow" href='http://videosift.com/video/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-Multiplayer-Overview#comment-1064098'>^Matthu</a>:<br />
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/sixshot" title="member since October 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">sixshot</a><br> <br> Can you enlighten me as to what is the big deal regarding dedicated servers? Is it just so you can set your own server rules/ban people and play with some of the same people?<br> <br> Also, are you saying VAC sucks and can't keep out the cheaters? Are you rly sure you're not one of those people who think every guy who goes 20-2 is a hacker? <br> <br> Also, I accuse you of not having watched the video, as if you did, you'd acknowledge that they're doing something huge to differentiate their CoD from the rest: Theater Mode. IMO it was one of the coolest Halo 3 features and seeing it with IWs engine will be a blast.<br> <br> Lastly, I tend to agree with you regarding the DLC B.S.<br></em>
For dedicated server, it's been explained by RedSky. But adding to that, it levels out the playing field when it comes to playing against people. In MW2, as the only way to play against others is to either play on other people's machine or become the host, the person who is the host would inevitably be the one with the advantage. However, a dedicated server removes that advantage and it all boils down to whoever has the best connection to the server. From there, it then comes down to a player's reflex and skill. In MW2, what the connecting players see isn't always representative to what's happening. It creates unbalance that favors the hoster more often than the ones who have actual playing skill.
Having a peer-to-peer setup on PC for FPS games is, more often than not, a bad idea. The added delay and the possibility that the networking isn't set up correctly does nothing more than to pile on more problem to the player's experience.
I may have implied that VAC sucks but I didn't explicitly say that it sucks. I am merely saying that VAC as it stands now is inadequate for something a game like this which previously used PunkBuster as its anti-cheating system for years. I know that neither are perfect and that both have their own fair share of deficiencies. But VAC doesn't have a lot of flexibility as far as being proactive in catching cheaters or preventing the lot of them from playing when compared to PunkBuster. PunkBuster has the ability to stream its logs to a variety of places, such as PunksBusted, PBBans, and GGC, just to name a few. And it can also do MD5 checks to make sure that certain files are correct or to check if a certain cheat file is sitting on the player's computer. Yet I cannot think of anything that VAC can do to be more proactive in deterring cheaters.
And no, I do not always view those with high KDR as possible cheaters. I usually give them the benefit of the doubt because we all have that moment where we are simply on fire and everything clicks.
Also, I did view the video. I saw the theater mode, the in-game currency, and the modes to help support it. All of those things never really caught my attention. Like I said, Treyarch is using the same engine from MW2 for Black Ops. They're not doing anything else other than taking the engine and doing visual changes with it. It's a MW2-like rehash but w/ servers now. Same gameplay, same run-n-gun style of play, same stupid kill-cam nonsense, same everything. There's nothing to uniquely differentiate themselves from the norm. It's just another CoD game that will inherit all the features that MW2 had as well as the flaws it contains.


I quite like the money modes they put in its like a more sophisticated CS , although saying that from a console gamer point of view I like to have a regimented progression.

I hate all this sort of stuff on pc though because u never know if sumone beat you due to having better kit or of they played better, on console its fine though cos the game in general is pritty casual and less about been competative , i mean the whole sitting back with a controller and 20% of people playin been stoned makes it pritty hard to take console games very serously. still gr8 fun though.

>> ^Matthu:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/sixshot" title="member since October 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">sixshot
Can you enlighten me as to what is the big deal regarding dedicated servers? Is it just so you can set your own server rules/ban people and play with some of the same people?
Also, are you saying VAC sucks and can't keep out the cheaters? Are you rly sure you're not one of those people who think every guy who goes 20-2 is a hacker?
Also, I accuse you of not having watched the video, as if you did, you'd acknowledge that they're doing something huge to differentiate their CoD from the rest: Theater Mode. IMO it was one of the coolest Halo 3 features and seeing it with IWs engine will be a blast.
Lastly, I tend to agree with you regarding the DLC B.S.

For dedicated server, it's been explained by RedSky. But adding to that, it levels out the playing field when it comes to playing against people. In MW2, as the only way to play against others is to either play on other people's machine or become the host, the person who is the host would inevitably be the one with the advantage. However, a dedicated server removes that advantage and it all boils down to whoever has the best connection to the server. From there, it then comes down to a player's reflex and skill. In MW2, what the connecting players see isn't always representative to what's happening. It creates unbalance that favors the hoster more often than the ones who have actual playing skill.

Having a peer-to-peer setup on PC for FPS games is, more often than not, a bad idea. The added delay and the possibility that the networking isn't set up correctly does nothing more than to pile on more problem to the player's experience.

I may have implied that VAC sucks but I didn't explicitly say that it sucks. I am merely saying that VAC as it stands now is inadequate for something a game like this which previously used PunkBuster as its anti-cheating system for years. I know that neither are perfect and that both have their own fair share of deficiencies. But VAC doesn't have a lot of flexibility as far as being proactive in catching cheaters or preventing the lot of them from playing when compared to PunkBuster. PunkBuster has the ability to stream its logs to a variety of places, such as PunksBusted, PBBans, and GGC, just to name a few. And it can also do MD5 checks to make sure that certain files are correct or to check if a certain cheat file is sitting on the player's computer. Yet I cannot think of anything that VAC can do to be more proactive in deterring cheaters.

And no, I do not always view those with high KDR as possible cheaters. I usually give them the benefit of the doubt because we all have that moment where we are simply on fire and everything clicks.

Also, I did view the video. I saw the theater mode, the in-game currency, and the modes to help support it. All of those things never really caught my attention. Like I said, Treyarch is using the same engine from MW2 for Black Ops. They're not doing anything else other than taking the engine and doing visual changes with it. It's a MW2-like rehash but w/ servers now. Same gameplay, same run-n-gun style of play, same stupid kill-cam nonsense, same everything. There's nothing to uniquely differentiate themselves from the norm. It's just another CoD game that will inherit all the features that MW2 had as well as the flaws it contains.

Also, if you are using limewire or some other peer to peer file sharing application, you better be sure you've never downloaded copyrighted content before reporting to the authorities that you found child porn.

"Yeah, I was downloading a hacked copy of Halo and some movies and some music, and one of them was child porn! I was so shocked, I just had to report it!"

Commercial base, influence, peer-to-peer. That's worth a lot (well, a billion apparently).