ENIGMA Forums

General fluff => Announcements => Topic started by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 07:02:10 AM

Title: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 07:02:10 AM
We'll be changing to a cheaper service. This may cause downtime lasting a span anywhere between now and this Sunday. Although this should not happen, it is a possibility, but don't worry, it'll be over soon.

Furthermore, progress.

String and Map both parse 100% correctly, but stack is another story. I will try to wrap it up, and if I fail, I'll simply move on.

EDIT: Okay, stack works. It was a simple missing check that I should have remembered to put there in the first place.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 10, 2010, 08:58:28 AM
Hmm, simple missing checks that should've been there in the first place... I thought you never made those mistakes? XD

Anyway, suggestion on the GM library- write it in EDL. It'd be easier and it's compiled anyway.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 09:11:29 AM
Which GM Library? If you mean the actual .LIB files, I at least want an EDL version so they can be copied as code.

It's an odd request, though... [debatably-] good EDL can't be distinguished from [less debatably-] good C++.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: TheExDeus on February 10, 2010, 10:55:58 AM
So is the next release coming? :)

Also, if you finish this parser then how long would be transferring all the functions? I guess its very easy for the basic stuff, but things like surfaces etc. could take longer. Its just that I think the parser is the hard part, and then the functions should be month's work no? :D
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 12:08:19 PM
That's about the size of it. The parser is what's really important as far as setting a foundation; the rest of the functions are trivial. Surfaces will present a problem since ENIGMA presently uses OpenGL. Since R3 (Forever ago) I added a system that will allow switching out of graphics systems so Windows can use the users' choice of DirectX or OpenGL. However... I don't know much DX. So surfaces are going to be rough until I learn some. It shouldn't be that hard, though. (Maybe a DX coder will come along in the meantime, hm?)

My biggest concern at the moment is with() {} and instance_destroy(). Though they seem unrelated, they're really not. With() changes the scope, and instance_destroy() is a member function of an integer. The system employed by the C parser should make this less difficult to organize and understand (by both me and the parsers), but it is still a bridge to cross.

Also I have two papers due Monday. *troll*
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 10, 2010, 03:13:34 PM
Surfaces can be done in GL. :/

Don't add DX for Windows; it'll completely remove cross-platform stuff when people add tons of DX crap.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: freezway on February 10, 2010, 06:26:44 PM
I agree with retroX, the only reason i found this was because i was looking for something cross platform.

EDIT: also, ever notice how DX looking like its crying?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: retep998 on February 10, 2010, 07:05:24 PM
http://www.opengl.org/wiki/Buffer_Objects
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 10, 2010, 08:36:24 PM
I agree with retroX, the only reason i found this was because i was looking for something cross platform.
Really, the nice thing about ENIGMA will be that people can just make it work in Linux without modification and/or running it in WINE.

Also, completely unrelated, but has anyone tried to compile a g++ that compiles bash executables from windows?  I have wineg++ for MinGW under Linux, but I've never seen anything that works the other way around.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: freezway on February 10, 2010, 08:45:57 PM
wait. are u running wine inside minGW on windows? why??
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 10, 2010, 08:48:08 PM
wait. are u running wine inside minGW on windows? why??
...no.  I downloaded the MinGW GCC on Arch Linux and it can be used to natively compile 32-bit windows applications.  I would also install mingw-w64, but Arch does not have a package, and I do not feel like making one.  Besides; I couldn't run it, anyways.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: freezway on February 10, 2010, 08:51:12 PM
ok, got it. running a windows emulator inside a linux emulator on windows would be pointless....... is it even possible...... hmmm...
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 10, 2010, 09:09:44 PM
ok, got it. running a windows emulator inside a linux emulator on windows would be pointless....... is it even possible...... hmmm...
WINE Is Not an Emulator (it's a recursive acronym, as GNU is famous for).  It's an actual runtime layer which converts Windows applications into a format that can be read by the shell.

MinGW is Minimalistic GNU for Windows, and it doesn't just include the GCC; it also includes MSYS (Minimal System) and CygWin, which are meant to provide native Windows versions of a bash shell and Linux kernel, essentially emulating a GNU OS.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 09:45:56 PM
Jesus people, give me a little credit. I know all about OpenGL's Framebuffer Objects. I know a lot of you are newer here (Retro, you should have remembered this:) and missed the wave of sarcastic bug reports (and just regular bug reports) resulting from half the user base receiving an error that their shitty Intel cards don't support a 1970 GL extension (Yes, the FrameBuffer objects are supported by approximately 40% of ENIGMA users [NOTE: That statistic is entirely made up, but there were greater than ten error reports on the matter]).

Let me clarify:

A. Surfaces are not difficult to implement in GL; they are difficult to maintain on shitty Intel chipsets using GL.
B. Implementing a DirectX port for windows will in no way remove cross platform capability. The call draw_line will work regardless of platform; that's the beauty of keeping GML and is my primary line of defense for doing so as far as C++ fans are concerned. There is no completely cross platform library; GL is crippled on Intel chips, and it's modified for Wii beyond cross-compatibility. It is inevitably best that draw_line should call glBegin on Linux, godknowswhatbutibetithasalongname_begin() on Windows, and GX_Begin() on Wii. Ideally, the systems will be entirely interchangeable (where applicable, I mean. Obviously there won't be a DiretctX option when your window system is set to "Whole-context" or "XLib").

However. Because ENIGMA can include a number of different drawing library, a wrapper would be a good idea for any system that does not have a perfect equivalent on every platform intended for use. Graphics libraries are one such system.  So long as you don't make GL or DirectX specific calls, your code will be platform independent.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 10, 2010, 10:16:17 PM
Yeah, and the only thing that I'm worried about is people making DirectX-only calls. >_>
But that makes sense.

GL is crippled on Intel chips, and to be honest, I'm actually surprised that it hasn't been brought-up in a lawsuit, yet. :/
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 10, 2010, 11:10:36 PM
By who? Someone has to pay for representation, and GL isn't exactly raking in cash with its open freeness, as far as I am aware. I can't imagine them having a true legal ground; they're simply not covered all the way... Would take a damn good lawyer.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: luiscubal on February 11, 2010, 01:11:29 PM
You're going to think I'm mad but...
What if...
You created a new invisible window(HWND or invisible X11 window), did everything there, read the contents of that window and used that as your surface. After you were done with the surface operations you could return to the common GL context and proceed as if nothing ever happened.
Another (far less evil) option is to use something like Cairo for surfaces... or even SDL gfx.

DX has a huge problem: DX9(XP) vs DX10(Vista).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 11, 2010, 04:16:50 PM
You created a new invisible window(HWND or invisible X11 window), did everything there, read the contents of that window and used that as your surface.
So, making a separate GL context that isn't drawn?  I'm assuming that Windows and X only allow one per process, afaik.

Quote
Another (far less evil) option is to use something like Cairo for surfaces... or even SDL gfx.
They had to get their surfaces from somewhere.  And afaik, SDL doesn't work very well on Intel chips.

Quote
DX has a huge problem: DX9(XP) vs DX10(Vista).
I have no clue what you're talking about.  DX9 is the standard, right now, despite the fact that DX11 is out (and, I have a DX11 card).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 11, 2010, 06:17:12 PM
I think he means to imply that there is a difference in coding from XP to Vista. It's no problem; if I need to make separate categories, so be it. It will be at the user's discretion which to use. My job is only to provide them.

That said, there shouldn't be a difference anyway, save MAYBE the difference there will be in GL code depending on available extensions, which is all added in to one release anyway.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: luiscubal on February 11, 2010, 06:33:56 PM
Windows does allow multiple GL contexts in the same process. I've used that in the past.

The GL would be drawed in an invisible window. That's what I'm suggesting. Unfortunately, some "optimizations" may render this code useless, so I guess you'd have to try to know if it works.

Also, Cairo is either software-based or deals with hardware way better than most of us would be able to. Since Firefox/Gecko and GTK+ Webkit use it, I'd guess it was rather stable. I've had no reason to complain. So Cairo "context from somewhere" should *just work*. I don't remember how is one supposed to deal with GL interoperability, but it is possible(I've seen it done somewhere). Not sure about Cairo/DX integration, but I'm guessing DX doesn't have this problem. (Vista and later also happen to have Direct2D)

DX9 is used in XP. DX10 is used in Vista. DX11 is used in 7. Although DX11 has been backported to Vista.
DX10 is supposed to be far superior to DX9, but it doesn't work on XP which most Windows users are still in.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 11, 2010, 07:32:41 PM
DX10 and DX11 are both major improvements.  However, DX9 is still used in everything.

Also, Windows 7 lags when I highlight a box on my desktop.  I have an RHD 5770 and a 3.4GHz processor. :/
In Arch, it doesn't lag.

It's either win7 or DX. :/
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Game_boy on February 12, 2010, 11:57:06 AM
@Retro

It's AMD's driver. They are working on a fix.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windows-gdi,2539.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windows-gdi,2539-8.html

AMD's response:

    * Tom’s Hardware has tripped over a workload area (2D lines, etc.) that we have not optimized yet.
    * Until this new benchmark, we have not seen any other applications that are bottlenecked by this path, and hence have not focused on it until now.
    * Our initial analysis has shown that we have no hardware limitations in this area.
    * We now have our driver team engaged to optimize this path and will release a new driver to address this workload as soon as possible.
    * We have already found an easy way of increasing our performance greatly, and are now going to try and schedule this in a future Catalyst (need to code in production, validate, ensure it doesn’t break anything else, etc.).

--

@Josh

Definitely use a DX9 backend first, if you plan to use DX at all. The percentage of PCs with both Vista or 7 and a DX10 card isn't that great. The percentage with a DX10.1/11 card and Vista or 7 is almost none, since Nvidia doesn't even have any DX11 cards and only did DX10.1 cards two years after AMD did.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 12, 2010, 02:46:08 PM
I was considering going with eight. If you recommend nine, I'll take the suggestion.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Game_boy on February 12, 2010, 03:04:53 PM
No. Eight is probably good, I was thinking you'd go too high. I'm not sure about relative features/performance, I'm only thinking about userbase considerations with that.

Since you're trying to support at least everything that GM does, DX8 may be preferable.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 12, 2010, 03:47:09 PM
Those were my thoughts. Eight's good for me; nine can be implemented after the basics are in (hopefully with as little recode as possible).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 12, 2010, 07:12:10 PM
Almost all of ATI's cards are DX11 and GL3.2, now. :/

Mine is DX11 and GL3.2, anyways.

It's AMD's driver. They are working on a fix.
Does that mean that they're going to make it stop sucking

AMD makes great hardware, but terrible drivers.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: retep998 on February 13, 2010, 01:18:37 AM
I say you should focus on OpenGL.
Only work on other graphics libraries if you have nothing else to do...
or people with shitty intel cards pay you to do so.
My opinion is that if they stick with a shitty intel card, they don't deserve Enigma.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: freezway on February 13, 2010, 02:01:10 AM
whatever you do, DONT lose the cross-platform
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: TheExDeus on February 13, 2010, 06:50:33 AM
I actually agree. I don't think supporting some built-in gpu in contrast to cross-compatibility is smart. I still think openGL is the way to go, but if you are using DX then you can use 9 as well. :D
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 13, 2010, 06:51:05 AM
Frankly, I'm of the same (if differently-worded) opinion, retep, but it's the large number of people who don't know what they're doing with the really shitty cards that power forums. And I mean this in a literal sense; they outnumber us, and are often susceptible to clicking ads. Eventually I'll try to put some unobtrusive Google ads about the forum, and they'll act like sort of a sail, if you will. That'll be when there is a high enough number of people to justify doing so.

Yoyo's estimated daily income is $170 dollars. I can't hope, right now, to catch up with that. However. As the community grows, I'll need better hosting to accommodate it, and better hosting needs paid for. Think about that figure. With $170 of income...Even with just $17! 17 * 30 = $510. Monthly. With that money, I could have a dedicated server *and* generate money to do what Yoyo did: CONTESTS. Hey, build <trivial item> in ENIGMA. Prize money: 25, 10, 5. Maybe even a $1750 (1000, 500, 250) contest after 1750/((17 * 30)-150) months = 4.9... I could wait three months and throw a two month contest JUST like Yoyo's. At 1/10 of what they make a day (It's really a wonder how they manage to lose money on this operation).

HaRRiKiRi--
It'll be as easy for the user as switching a radio button. Or more likely a combo box. The point is that we'll have support for a variety of them; for ENIGMA's ultimate purpose, there's no such thing as a truly cross-platform library. Cross platformability isn't only the result of this system, but the purpose.

Ultimately, EDL will be cross platform, but the C++ that runs it will not be. ENIGMA will choose (and the user can deliberate) which C++ to use to "run" the EDL.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Micah on February 13, 2010, 03:03:22 PM
(It's really a wonder how they manage to lose money on this operation)
...Employees?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 13, 2010, 03:17:44 PM
Ultimately, EDL will be cross platform, but the C++ that runs it will not be. ENIGMA will choose (and the user can deliberate) which C++ to use to "run" the EDL.
Like any cross-platform library.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: freezway on February 13, 2010, 03:38:40 PM
so basically, u compile for each platform seperatly?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: TheExDeus on February 13, 2010, 04:41:11 PM
Well doh.. Of course you will need to compile for each platform separately. Linux does not launch .exe's you know..
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 13, 2010, 05:22:13 PM
u compile..doh
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 13, 2010, 07:37:02 PM
Miky--
Have you calculated where all that 180K (in addition to the income from the new release amplified tenfold by the invalidation of previous keys, which I'm sure you'll stick up for as well) is going? Or do you just assume that more individuals than Mark, a Mac developer (who is paid so well as to bail the moment Sandy shows his true colors), and a web developer (how many do you need?) are being paid? I hate pointing the "overpaid" finger. I'd rightly say Mark deserves it after all the work he's put in over such a long time (having thousands of happy[...] users justifies the pay, and I do profess they are happy [yea, ignorance is bliss]), and I suppose not every good web developer can work in his/her spare time for a cause they support (unlike our a2h here; though not to reiterate that a clear lack of support has traversed the ranks of Yoyo's employees). I guess, also, that a--coordinator?--so talented as Sandy is an invaluable resource to GM's public relations and even to the staff and should definitely be queued up before the interest of the ever dwindling budget (No one I've seen has ever repelled so many individuals [and a Mac developer] as Sandy, leaving the forums in an uproar until concerned topics are deleted...).
Anyway, I suppose I can see where that money is going now, you're right. Try now to justify it.

Freezeway--
As HaRRiKiRi pointed out, since architectures vary anyway, a recompile is necessary on all platforms a-priori. However, cross compilation has proven to be not only an option (especially in the case of Windows and Linux) but often a necessity (good luck rigging a compiler to work ON the Wii).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 13, 2010, 10:45:07 PM
The only problem is that while MinGW does have Linux/Unix versions, Windows does not have a version of the GCC that can compile bash applications.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Micah on February 14, 2010, 06:34:00 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa, Josh. No need to throw a tantrum.

The Mac dev has actually agreed to stay, and they've hired another Mac dev.

They have to pay each employee, they have to pay for hosting, and I'd imagine they have to pay for a lot of other stuff.

Sure, Sandy's a moron, and they probably don't manage their money very well, but it's not completely pathetic.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 14, 2010, 07:39:29 PM
So they have three coders, a web team and a Sandy.
They could make do with three or four of the above at this point (Sandy could poke around the forum and make bizarre suggestions there, and/or one of the Mac developers could storm off about it).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 14, 2010, 09:14:49 PM
You realize how much bandwidth the site uses, right? Their hosting is a lot more expensive than yours is or probably ever will be. They probably also pay for hosting support. Anyway, you really have no basis for judgement- you have no idea what goes on internally.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 14, 2010, 10:24:46 PM
Special pleading. Argumentum ad ignorantiam. A cute ad hominem. I'll just add tu quoque and move on.

As stated, their server will run them for roughly $150 monthly. They're making more than that *daily*. And Bandwidth, assuming you actually meant "traffic," is whatever the server can put out; 1&1 doesn't limit it. (They may pay more for additional bandwidth in the literal sense, but if they do, it's not much).

And frankly, it's irrelevant what goes on internally if the budget has gone down more than 30%.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Fede-lasse on February 15, 2010, 04:12:44 AM
Miky--
Have you calculated where all that 180K (in addition to the income from the new release amplified tenfold by the invalidation of previous keys, which I'm sure you'll stick up for as well) is going? Or do you just assume that more individuals than Mark, a Mac developer (who is paid so well as to bail the moment Sandy shows his true colors), and a web developer (how many do you need?) are being paid? I hate pointing the "overpaid" finger. I'd rightly say Mark deserves it after all the work he's put in over such a long time (having thousands of happy[...] users justifies the pay, and I do profess they are happy [yea, ignorance is bliss]), and I suppose not every good web developer can work in his/her spare time for a cause they support (unlike our a2h here; though not to reiterate that a clear lack of support has traversed the ranks of Yoyo's employees). I guess, also, that a--coordinator?--so talented as Sandy is an invaluable resource to GM's public relations and even to the staff and should definitely be queued up before the interest of the ever dwindling budget (No one I've seen has ever repelled so many individuals [and a Mac developer] as Sandy, leaving the forums in an uproar until concerned topics are deleted...).
Anyway, I suppose I can see where that money is going now, you're right. Try now to justify it.
Well said. Sandy is very bad at what he is trying to do at YoYoGames, sadly...
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 15, 2010, 01:10:18 PM
Look, I dislike YoYo as much as you do, and I agree they're probably not managing money very well. But there were no fallacies in that last post, either. Their site uses a lot more bandwidth than yours. They're hosting tons of full games. It's also true that you don't work there. How do you know what they're paying for their hosting?

Bashing YoYo is just old.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Micah on February 15, 2010, 06:47:45 PM
As stated, their server will run them for roughly $150 monthly. They're making more than that *daily*. And Bandwidth, assuming you actually meant "traffic," is whatever the server can put out; 1&1 doesn't limit it. (They may pay more for additional bandwidth in the literal sense, but if they do, it's not much).
If you had actually looked at their latest glog post you would have seen that their monthly hosting bill, because of how much traffic they get, is much, much higher than $150. And that's just for the bandwidth.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: serprex on February 16, 2010, 09:46:54 PM
They could probably save space by using Josh's GMzip's technique. Integrate it into the browser plugin, and they'd lower bandwidth too. Perhaps that's how they already go about it? I'd hope

Also, Retro, why are you talking about compiling bash scripts?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 17, 2010, 10:03:20 AM
Miky- I assumed they'd invested in a cloud server to hold the plethora of games they host. Such a server, at their provider, has unmetered traffic. That would have been the first thing I did.
Rusky- The major fallacy was "you have no idea what goes on internally."

Serp and those concerned- I imagine they are using that technique. If you remember, that's what really set my hat on fire (Fred's outright anti-support for the idea until Sandy made clear they were going to make off with it).
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 17, 2010, 01:39:05 PM
Err, you don't. How is that a fallacy?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 17, 2010, 07:24:04 PM
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading
Special pleading is a form of spurious argumentation where a position in a dispute introduces favorable details or excludes unfavorable details by alleging a need to apply additional considerations without proper criticism of these considerations themselves. Essentially, this involves someone attempting to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exemption.

...

  • assertion that the opponent lacks the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view

Example: I know you think that I should be giving my money to the poor, but you've never been rich before. There are things about wealth that you don't understand.

In this case,
You don't work for Yoyo. You don't understand. :(
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Micah on February 17, 2010, 08:48:25 PM
Uh, no.

Yoyo is not the most competent of companies. We all agree on that.

But you can stop bashing them whenever you mention them now.

Besides, there is something to the "you don't understand" thing. You have never attempted to run a company, much less a startup. Hasn't everything on Enigma so far been free (labor, hosting, etc.)?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 17, 2010, 09:09:27 PM
I've never worked for YoYo before either, so I don't know any more than you. I fail to see how that is a fallacy, although I agree with the wikipedia example.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 17, 2010, 10:20:07 PM
They could probably save space by using Josh's GMzip's technique. Integrate it into the browser plugin, and they'd lower bandwidth too. Perhaps that's how they already go about it? I'd hope

Also, Retro, why are you talking about compiling bash scripts?
bash applications, meaning, applications that run under bash

probably the wrong term; they're really just unix applications
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 18, 2010, 07:07:08 AM
Miky--
Roughly $140 has gone in, $100 has come out. That puts me at as big a loss as Yoyo, percentage wise. XD

Rusky--
Take an upper-level philosophy course; you'd be hard-pressed to find one that won't teach you about fallacies.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 18, 2010, 11:40:04 AM
Oh, so I can't understand fallacies because I haven't taken a class?
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: retep998 on February 18, 2010, 02:52:00 PM
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailLogicForever (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailLogicForever)
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: RetroX on February 18, 2010, 04:36:12 PM
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailLogicForever (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailLogicForever)
All you need is ignorance and confidence and the success is sure.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: score_under on February 18, 2010, 07:05:48 PM
Oh, so I can't understand fallacies because I haven't taken a class?
Being likely to learn about fallacies when taking a class does not imply being unlikely to understand them already.

Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: HUMPHREY on February 18, 2010, 07:11:22 PM
You people are too off topic
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 18, 2010, 07:41:25 PM
So what's the point of telling me I should take a class? I'm sorry, but it's a fact that Josh does not work at YoYo, unless he's been lying. He does not know everything Sandy and Mark do. That is in no way a fallacy.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 18, 2010, 09:59:06 PM
Suggesting that I don't know everything Sandy and Mark do is not the fallacy; using that to suggest that my claims that they are inefficient are invalid is where the fallacy is.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Rusky on February 18, 2010, 11:07:55 PM
I said "you really have no basis for judgement." You don't really know what they're paying for, so you don't know if they can pay for it with just their advertising revenue.
Title: Re: Domain Name Provider Transfer
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on February 18, 2010, 11:13:37 PM
I know who their provider is and what their provider charges for a variety of servers. I also know their old provider, when Mark still made major decisions. I believe they were even better for this job... I don't care what they blindly wandered into.