The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
If you keep to standard C++ and OpenGL, it is easy porting everything to Linux. Try OpenCL and/or CUDA while you're at it. Just so much fun playing with graphics cards. Just make sure you don't drive it at max all the time: that is a sure way to blow up the graphics cards.
Sounds like a plan. Going by what the bosses charge for an hour of my work, Microsoft owes me a brand new Lamborghini and can goto (!) hell until I find it in front of my door. That's not going to happen, but I can already see what's going to happen in a year or two when they have their next great idea. Why would anybody want to invest time and money in their junk as long as they stay predictably unpredictable?
The book seems to be good, just by looking at the summary. It covers some interesting and useful things. DirectX 10 and 11 were things I was looking forward to if they finally would have used them in XNA. But why do something useful when you can do something crazy?
Also that the machines in the on-site gym be hooked up to give positive feedback
to the electricity supply
The fitness center at my daughter's school does that with their aerobic machines (steppers and elliptical machines). IIRC the generated power is used for lighting in that area of the building. They've even had contests between campus groups for 'most power generated' over a given period, partially as a means of encouraging students to stay fit.
Since we operate a sewer company, I've suggested turbines in the mainlines. My thinking is that, our cost - overall - would go down because of the electricity put back into the system by the turbines, and our revenue would go up because the energy extracted from the sewer flow would have to be made up by electric pumps at lift stations, and we can bill our sewer customers for that. Now that's a win-win for us!
Of course, the customers kinda get it in the hiney, but "oh, well!"
I'm a little pissed that he dodged this question: "What if you strapped C4 to a boomerang? Could this be an effective weapon, or would it be as stupid as it sounds?"
Let's say it had a remote detonator, or some sort of fail-safe that it would automatically detonate before returning within X meters (Fellow Americans, I'm using meters here because we are talking science). Wouldn't it be an effective weapon to clear out enemies that are hiding behind a building, tank, or other barrier. It could possibly be more effective than a grenade, since it turns and is not a line of site weapon.
I know, this would be handheld, much more portable than a grenade launcher (m32 or xm307) or similar artillery, and single person operational. The military still uses grenades right? The boomerang could serve the purpose of clearing a small space, too, by throwing lightly underhand.