Jump to content
  • Advertisement

WillC

Member
  • Content Count

    323
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

548 Good

About WillC

  • Rank
    GDNet+

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Quote:Original post by h4tt3n Now, let's see your algorithm Victor! No more bullshitting around. It's on his website. I posted a link earlier in the thread. http://www.geocities.com/ze_aks/myBooK/ThreeBugsWithOneStone.html
  2. Quote:Original post by Victor-Victor I suppose being arrogantly ignorant helps you perceive your statement as if it was an actual argument. Welcome back abaraba.
  3. Quote:Original post by Yodaman Jer Essentially what I meant is that it seems very likely that God put them there for our benefit, then granted us the ability to learn and to discover. And yes, I really believe that. I’m not sure I follow how you come to the conclusion that it’s ‘very likely’ that God put them there for our benefit? If we’re assuming God exists and we’re assuming that he created the life we see around us, then we have to be talking about a really evil nasty piece of work. One that has created a massive amount of suffering on a daily basis for the vast majority of life on earth which is struggling to just to survive. Surely it's just as likely that he put the poisonous plants on earth so he could watch our ancestors suffer as they tried to work out, by a process of trial and error, which plants are food and which ones killed them? It seems equally plausible to me that he’s actually pretty pissed off that we’ve got so smart, ‘cus we’re ruining his fun game of watching animals on earth suffer in the struggle for survival.
  4. Quote:Original post by Yodaman Jer I personally believe that God gave us knowledge to develop medicines so that we can cure ourselves. Why else would there be herbs and other medical ingredients? I may have misunderstood you, but it seems like you are saying that the only explanation as to why some plants have positive effects on the human body when ingested, while others have no effect, and others have negative effects, is that the positive effect ones (which humans have labelled as medical ingredients) have been put there specifically by God so that we may learn how to use them for our benefit? Do you really believe that? And can you really not think of other explanations?
  5. Hi Nick, You might find these free online OU courses useful to start you off... Using vectors to model: http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=2544 Modelling static problems: http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=2515 To answer one of your specific questions, the F12x F12y values represent the Cartesian components of the unknown joint reaction forces. The arrows always point in the same direct as they represent x and y components of the unknown joint force vector which could point in any direction depending on the system configuration, but can always be broken down into equivilent x and y components. See 'Using vectors to model' above for more info on this. I don't have any specific Statics and Dynamics books to recommend, but they generally all cover these topics in much the same way, so I wouldn't worry too much about which one you get.
  6. WillC

    Buying a Home in This Market.

    Quote:Original post by RealMarkP My original question was if Fixed mortgage is better then a Variable rate mortgage in this economy. Keep in mind that the maximum amount of time I can get Fixed is 10yrs. A fixed Term mortgage does not mean fixed payment because I can pay my loan off faster if I give them more money. There are burndown charts for this on bank websites. Bear in mind that if you get a fixed rate mortgage you are effectively 'buying' safety. You will know what your payments are going to be and can maybe push this up closer to your limit, but you will be paying a price for this stability in the form of a higher rate. The best deals are usually 2 or 3 year discounted variables, but they are of course more unstable. As things stand at the moment in the US and UK rates really have only one way to go - up, so you might think a fixed would be a better idea, but you have to balance a higher fixed rate against a lower variable rate that will probably go up... but how much will it go up over the next few years, and how fast? My advice, based on personal experience, is this... if you're going to buy, go and see a good independent financial/mortgage adviser. They cost money, but whenever I have done this in the past I have more than made it back in savings from the great deals they have found me (Some great advise for my last adviser has led to me currently having a mortgage rate of 0.14%!).
  7. WillC

    Buying a Home in This Market.

    Quote:Original post by zedz buying a house is slightly like having a kid, Unless u live in mumbai I can sell your kid into slavery, its usually finicially a bad deal. To claim that buying a house is 'usually' a bad idea is just insane. 'Sometimes' yes, but 'usually' it's a far better bet to buy. I would have to question the OP's $700 rent... Is that for the same property that you would be able to buy for $250K? If so then yes, certainly renting would be better in this instance, but you would then have to question the sustainability of such a low rent over a long period? How is the landlord able to afford to pay their own mortgage and expenses? In the area I live, rent on a $250K property would be at least $1000 (I live in the UK, where units are £(UK Pounds), but units are irrelevant here). With this figure fed into the NYT site buying leaves you $200K better off after 30 years. Using BeanDogs figure of $1600, buying would leave you $800K better off after 30 years. If we factor in the fact that property in many parts of the world are historically good value at the moment, then things look even better for a buyer. But there is one big problem with all of this. You are trying to use a simplistic mathematic model to predict a very complex real world situation. The NYT site compares someone buying a house and living in it for 30 years against someone renting the same property for 30 years. I don't think either of these two things is likely to occur in reality. When you buy a first property you are stepping on the first rung of a property ladder. Small Flat -> Bigger Flat -> Small House -> Bigger House -> Bigger Detached House -> Retire into smaller house in country + big chunk of cash to swim in. You can do this because your fixed mortgage payments decrease in real terms due to inflation, allowing you to constantly 'upgrade' your home while keeping the mortgage payments at the same relative proportion of your income. You can't do this while renting as the rent increases with inflation (i.e. stays fixed in real terms against the decreasing mortgage in real terms). Also, I can't stress enough the significance of owning a home by the time you retire. Unless you are very lucky, your retirement income is likely to be a fraction of your income before you retired. Having to find rent out of this income is likely to leave you struggling to survive in your later years.
  8. WillC

    Buying a Home in This Market.

    Quote:Original post by Sandman Which is great so long as house prices are growing. Something which they haven't been doing much of this past year. If you are confident that you are going to remain in the house for longer than the duration of the recession, and you can get a good deal, then it may be worth it. But if you're likely to move in say, a couple of year's time, and you aren't confident that house prices will have risen or worse, declined even further, then you'd be better off hiding that 70K under the sofa than investing it in a house. But once you've bought a house, it really doesn't matter what happens to prices in the short term. So long as you avoid negative equity (i.e. don't buy at a market peak with a small deposit) then who cares if prices go up or down over short periods... If prices go down a bit, when you move you sell your house for less, but the house you're buying is cheaper too. If prices go up, you sell your house for more, but the house you're buying is more expensive. So the important factor is to buy a house when prices are historically good value (as they are in the UK at the moment). Quote: Unless you end up with negative equity, in which case you may as well be throwing money into a black hole. Well, true to an extent, but only in the short term. Of course it could be a problem if you *had* to sell your house for some reason, but this only applies in a limited set of circumstances. For most people it simply means they have to wait for a few years before they can move. Historically, over a 25-30 year period, house prices have always gone up at least in line with inflation (in the UK at least, not sure about elsewhere), and this is the sort of time periods you need to be thinking in with houses.
  9. WillC

    Buying a Home in This Market.

    Quote:Original post by zedz u keep adding to that 70k from the money u save from renting compared to paying off the mortgage Quote: it all boils down to, the chief reason renting is better, u have much larger cash at the start, this compounds over the years But someone buying a house is doing the exact same thing. The 70k deposit is invested in the house as equity and the value will grow with house price growth. Each month they are partially paying interest to the bank but also some of the money is paying the principal, adding to the value of the investment each month. So when comparing renting and buying, you need to compare the value of the cash deposit invested in a bank plus the investment of any extra cash you have spare each month, minus your monthly rent; against the value of the deposit invested in the house as equity plus the monthly principal invested in the house, minus the monthly interest payments. Bear in mind when doing this, that the rental payments are an increasing function of time, while the mortgage interest payments are a decreasing function of time. It’s certainly true though that when interest rates are as high as 10-20% things do get quite close, as the renter will be getting a better return on their investment, while the buyer will (initially) be paying more interest; but this is an extreme case, and even then over 25 years they end up pretty close. In other words the ‘best case’ for a renter is about the same as the ‘worst case’ for a buyer over a 25 year period. In most realistic situations worldwide though, buying will unsually save you in the order of 100s of thousands of (US) dollars over a 25 year period, especially if you can buy at the bottom of the market as is the case thoughout much of the world today (US and UK for example).
  10. WillC

    Buying a Home in This Market.

    Quote:Original post by zedz mathematically unless u have a guarantted low interest rate + can pay it off very quick, renting is a better investment (at least here in nz) In the short term yes, but long term, buying a house is going to work out much better. Quote: A/350k + 20% downpayment interest 10.0% (+rates 0.5% a year(*)) == $2457 a month Taking this as an example, even with a 10% interest rate averaged over 25 years (which seems unlikely)... Monthly is ~$2500. Over 25 years total cost is ~$750,000. Taking a conservative house price growth rate of 3% (in line with average inflation), after 25 years the house would be worth ~$740,000. So your net cost over 25 years is ~$10,000. Renting at $1500, increasing in line with inflation at 3% per year, according to my rough calculations would be way over $500,000. So even with your $70,000 invested at 5% giving you $225,000 after 25 years. You're still over $200,000 worse off having rented all that time. And after 25 years, you will have paid off your mortgage, and so will be paying $0 per month in your twighlight years. Whereas you'll have to continue to find an ever increasing rent perhaps paid out of a meager pension if you didn't own a house.
  11. WillC

    university levels what do they mean

    I'm studying an OU degree in my spare time (along side a full time GameDev job). The OU levels can be mapped to the National Qualifications and Credit Framework (NQF) as follows... OU Level 1 --> NQF Level 4 OU Level 2 --> NQF Level 5 OU Level 3 --> NQF Level 6 and NQF levels are... Level 1 --> GCSE grades D-G, NVQ Level 1 Level 2 --> GCSE grades A*-C, NVQ Level 2 Level 3 --> A Levels, NVQ Level 3 Level 4 --> Certificates of higher education Level 5 --> Diplomas of higher education, BTEC HND Level 6 --> Bachelor Degrees, Graduate certificates and diplomas See here for details. So OU Level 1 starts just above A Level. Let me know if you have any further questions about OU courses, as I've been doing them for quite a few years now and I highly recommend them; although it is hard work to do it alongside a full time job.
  12. WillC

    Physics for a Game

    Quote:Original post by Satan666 I am making a game where... You know, your game sounds very familiar. I'm sure I've seen it before somewhere.
  13. WillC

    Cubic Bzier Curve Motion Problem

    Quote:Original post by rat4sale Is there a mathematical equation to average the data so that the entity flows around the curve at a constant velocity? Yes!
  14. Quote:Original post by abaraba1 >>"Both of your solutions above appear.." sorry, you lost me right there, we cant discuss this if all you have to offer is your guesses and assumptions.. basically, on all that what you said, im telling you - you're wrong It's a shame you're taking this attitude, as there are many experienced people on this site that could have given you constructive feedback on this issue. It's a well trodden path that anyone who has done any game physics has 'solved' many times before. Unfortunetly from your posts there seems little point in discussing this with you. Also I noticed this on the page you linked to... Quote: (R) All rights reserved, dont you dare use this code unless you can prove to me you're human being. Use of this algorithm in commercial products without my permission will be cheerfully taken to court. A few points about this. Firstly (R) is a registered trade mark sign. Do you have a registered trade mark? If so what is it? and what does that have to do with 'your' algorithm? Secondly, what ownership claims do you have for 'your' algorithm? You'd need a patent to prevent commercial use (in countries that allow software patents); do you have a patent for this? Obviously those are retorical questions, as clearly you don't, but my point is that you are way out of your depth here, making wild claims about things you seem to know little about. I would suggest you take a different, less agressive approach if you really want to find solutions to the problems you have presented. [Edited by - WillC on September 22, 2008 7:24:07 AM]
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!