Slashdot Mirror

and this is a non-associate link

Hotel Dusk is also getting good reviews at amazon.(that's an associates link-- if you feel like picking it up and want to throw a little something my way in the process, thanks in advance.)

Tycho has a few comments on the game that may be of use in deciding if you are interested in picking it up.

Unless you take a couple of rubber/elastic bands with you, I guess. But try to explain THAT to your superiors...

Bungee ties. Or, more formally, a Payload Equipment Restraint System. Astronauts are used to the idea of retasking mission equipment. Now, explaining the unusual recreational reading material in your personal effects for that mission... that might be hard to explain.

I've never played the Soul Reaver series (though I played the original Kain on PS1!); though the act of sacrificing oneself could likely be read pyschoanalytically... of course, one would want to ask, why sacrifice? Is the goal to save a glorified sense of self? Or is the only option to sacrifice the self, since to be "whole" would negate exisitence? Does the hero sacrifice himself as a return to the mother? In defiance of a father? Does his sacrifice castrate the father's power (thus making it an Oedipal act)?

What makes your example interesting, especially if you are a fan of Slavoj Zizek, is the reference to the vampire--an undead, but, unlike zombies, one that has consciousness. Thus, the vampire is a (non)-being outside of the symbolic order, yet still able to participate within it. Furthermore, the vampire does not have the big Other, death, to worry about. Must be nice. I don't know how much of this stuff you read, but a great introduction to Lacan is Zizek's thoroughly readable Looking Awry (its a must for any Hitchcock fan). Zizek does a particularly admirable job of explicating postmodern theorists' interest in the undead.

I haven't done any writing on other games--I was working on a paper on Socom and online gaming, but had to drop the project. That investigation wasn't psychoanalytic--it was ethnographic, I'm interested in the kinds of ethics that take place in virtual communities and am torn reflecting on my own experiences with Socom (a thoroughly addicted clan member who had to quit playing in order to get a degree!). Socom does encourage ethical interaction between players, but I also witnessed some seriously questionable behavior. Anywho, that's another paper for another day.

I wasn't aware of the mathematical reference--I'll have to look into that. Mark C. Taylor's recent book on Complexity Theory is an excellent book--a work that not only summarizes postmodern theory, but integrates it with recent developments in the sciences and with technological changes (in a sense, he puts technology, science, and philosophy in a feedback loop within which it is impossible to identify what leads to what). Taylor is an exceptional Derrida scholar (though I disagree with him on a few points), and his work not only highlights the keys to postmodern theory, but also suggests what might come next.

Francois Lyotard's The Postmodern Condition is a short, dense, and extremely important book--probably the book in terms of postmodernism. Lyotard compactly summarizes the central arguments of the pomo crew and articulates their impact on rational epistemology. Essentially, Lyotard maintains that rationality cannot be its own foundations, and once untethered from its historic "certain" status, no longer can operate at the center of Western metaphysics (or as the center of western Universities).

Bill Reading's University in Ruins further explores the impact of Lyotard and postmodernism on university education. Although some people find it slow, Reading's book is very readable, and the problems that it addresses (in terms of proving the "excellence" of education without a foundation for what "excellent" means) problems that are very present today (see No Child Left Behind).

What's important to recognize is that for Taylor, Lyotard, and Readings, leaving Platonic rationality in ruins is a postive thing--it opens the possibilty for plurality, since knowledge ceases to be singular, and learning the search for the one truth. This doesn't mean, of course, that there is no truth. Just no truth can be considered final. We still need rationality, but we must recognize its limitations, and learn to dwell in the ruins.

Anyways, thanks for the reference and the positive comments. It sounds like Taylor's book would probably be a good read.

I wasn't aware of the mathematical reference--I'll have to look into that. Mark C. Taylor's recent book on Complexity Theory is an excellent book--a work that not only summarizes postmodern theory, but integrates it with recent developments in the sciences and with technological changes (in a sense, he puts technology, science, and philosophy in a feedback loop within which it is impossible to identify what leads to what). Taylor is an exceptional Derrida scholar (though I disagree with him on a few points), and his work not only highlights the keys to postmodern theory, but also suggests what might come next.

Francois Lyotard's The Postmodern Condition is a short, dense, and extremely important book--probably the book in terms of postmodernism. Lyotard compactly summarizes the central arguments of the pomo crew and articulates their impact on rational epistemology. Essentially, Lyotard maintains that rationality cannot be its own foundations, and once untethered from its historic "certain" status, no longer can operate at the center of Western metaphysics (or as the center of western Universities).

Bill Reading's University in Ruins further explores the impact of Lyotard and postmodernism on university education. Although some people find it slow, Reading's book is very readable, and the problems that it addresses (in terms of proving the "excellence" of education without a foundation for what "excellent" means) problems that are very present today (see No Child Left Behind).

What's important to recognize is that for Taylor, Lyotard, and Readings, leaving Platonic rationality in ruins is a postive thing--it opens the possibilty for plurality, since knowledge ceases to be singular, and learning the search for the one truth. This doesn't mean, of course, that there is no truth. Just no truth can be considered final. We still need rationality, but we must recognize its limitations, and learn to dwell in the ruins.

Anyways, thanks for the reference and the positive comments. It sounds like Taylor's book would probably be a good read.

I wasn't aware of the mathematical reference--I'll have to look into that. Mark C. Taylor's recent book on Complexity Theory is an excellent book--a work that not only summarizes postmodern theory, but integrates it with recent developments in the sciences and with technological changes (in a sense, he puts technology, science, and philosophy in a feedback loop within which it is impossible to identify what leads to what). Taylor is an exceptional Derrida scholar (though I disagree with him on a few points), and his work not only highlights the keys to postmodern theory, but also suggests what might come next.

Francois Lyotard's The Postmodern Condition is a short, dense, and extremely important book--probably the book in terms of postmodernism. Lyotard compactly summarizes the central arguments of the pomo crew and articulates their impact on rational epistemology. Essentially, Lyotard maintains that rationality cannot be its own foundations, and once untethered from its historic "certain" status, no longer can operate at the center of Western metaphysics (or as the center of western Universities).

Bill Reading's University in Ruins further explores the impact of Lyotard and postmodernism on university education. Although some people find it slow, Reading's book is very readable, and the problems that it addresses (in terms of proving the "excellence" of education without a foundation for what "excellent" means) problems that are very present today (see No Child Left Behind).

What's important to recognize is that for Taylor, Lyotard, and Readings, leaving Platonic rationality in ruins is a postive thing--it opens the possibilty for plurality, since knowledge ceases to be singular, and learning the search for the one truth. This doesn't mean, of course, that there is no truth. Just no truth can be considered final. We still need rationality, but we must recognize its limitations, and learn to dwell in the ruins.

Anyways, thanks for the reference and the positive comments. It sounds like Taylor's book would probably be a good read.

Actually, Unbox's EULA was updated some back in November - maybe in response to that Boing Boing article.

See it here...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.htm l?nodeId=200026970

... if you use a Mac or a Linux box. Only Windows PCs are supported. See the Unbox FAQ. I'm constantly amazed that vendors turn their noses up at millions of potential customers that happen to use other OSs. Amazon, at least, should know better.

Adventure games are alive and well on the PC. I just finished Safecracker and found it to be fairly enjoyable. Granted, these aren't AAA games, but they're still out there if you look around a little. http://www.amazon.com/Dreamcatcher-Interactive-Saf ecracker/dp/B000GUNAOW/sr=1-1/qid=1170882598/ref=p d_bbs_sr_1/105-9363391-4843657?ie=UTF8&s=videogame s

the toughbook-30 looks fantastic in bright direct sunlight as it has a correct reflective LCD instead of a standard Laptop screen, IF ordered correctly.

Can you order it without the correct screen? The Panasonic site makes it seem like it's standard.

Most places do not buy the right gear when it comes to toughbooks because their accounting department craps their pants when they see the price.

If so, Amazon has it listed for $4,169.95 which doesn't seem unreasonable, considering it's not hard to order a Lenovo ThinkPad for that much. I'm sure the specs aren't as good (fast/big/bells/whistles) but they're both 'high-end' notebooks, just with different requirements docs.

Now, how are the Linux drivers? I understand the DoD uses them in this fashion, so I'm guessing 'good enough'.

Malcolm Gladwell's book "Blink" talks a lot about the differences between first impression and actual, thoughtful reaction to a situation, including some interesting studies on what happens when the two conflict and how measurement of the effects of those conflicts on reaction time can tell us a lot about how the brain is processing material. There's controversy around some of his conclusions but I strongly recommend the book and everything else Gladwell has written.

Richard Clarke just released a book about a similar situation,BreakPoint. Of course the book was fiction but it was written from a government type of perspective.

Here's the link to a plain-english read on it by the chicago tribune: http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ez orn/2006/09/scary_movie_dow.html

Here's an explitive laced though pretty good summary: http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/15/amazon_unbox_ to_cust.html

Here's the EULA: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.htm l/ref=atv_dp_cs_use/002-8388024-7705601?ie=UTF8&no deId=200026970

From the bottom of my heart, I thank all unbox consumers for abaondoning the decades of time and people's effort to create and guard the principal that I own my media.

The price point for movies is fairly reasonable.

Says who?

A random new release is $14.99, the same price I would pay to own the movie, not rent a copy

The service seems to be on par with the iTunes prices for TV shows an has the advantage of going right to your TiVo.

Amazon has the re-release under Inside Out U.S., which lists him as their artist here.

So, people freak out whenever the feds do something they don't like, but they haven't the slightest clue what anyone in their state government is up to, which rather makes the states the more dangerous beasts, since your state is not just your protection from the federal government--it is also the colluding executor of its will.

Actually most politics is local not national. People have more control, and exercise it, at the local level than they have at the national level. Don't believe it? Check with you local city and county governments. A group of people can have a more effective say in these than they can at the state or national level. When Alexis de Tocqueville travelled the USA in the 1820s he was amazed to see just how well democracy worked at the local level and wrote the book Democracy in America describing what he saw.

Read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins for a full treatment on the matter.

Amazon link
http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins /dp/0618680004/sr=8-1/qid=1170790431/ref=pd_bbs_sr _1/104-1874526-7061506?ie=UTF8&s=books

Reading through the book summary today gives me something of a deja-vu (on the heels of the UN report on the environment):

"The authors of the best seller ... depict in powerful detail a 21st-century Earth with devastated environment and rampant overpopulation. A rich and comfortable elite coexists with malnourished, pitiful billions, "the victim generation." The rich enjoy youth preservation treatments and other biomedical wonders while the rest just endure the toxicity and pollution."

The book was set in 2025. A deal today at $0.20!

The notion that all publicity is good publicity is adolescent nonsense.

Tell that to Take Two and Rockstar. Tell it to the Fox executives who bought into the O.J. Simpson deal. Tell that to the Nintendo exec the next time someone dies in a video game stunt.

And even more bad that the two poor schmucks working for the ad agency are still charged with crimes. They should be set free, and whatever moron phoned in a litebrite as a "bomb" (and the corresponding police moron who agreed with him) should be looking at potential liability

The caller sees something in passing, something that is not quite right: a parcel where there should be no parcels, movement where there should be no movement, lights where there should be no lights.

The classic booby trap isn't hidden, it's baited. Cartoons for Victory

Does anybody remember the post-9/11 homeland security debacle with Tom Ridge reccomending people use duct tape and plastic sheeting to protect themselves from terrorists.. and then several people dying by asphyxiating themselves in their own homes?

This has the feel of an urban legend, but something of the sort did happen in Israel:

In mid-March 2003 the Associated Press reported on the demise by suffocation of three Israeli Arabs (a woman and her two teenage sons) in the town of Kfar Kassem, all of whom had spent the night in a room of the family home which had been sealed with plastic sheeting and duct tape against a possible Iraqi chemical missile attack.

Police said the three lost their lives because a coal-fueled heater in an adjacent room sucked oxygen from the room they were sleeping in, which was designed to stop air from entering but allowed air to escape. Around 5 a.m., the husband awoke and realized his wife and their two teens (ages 13 and 14) were not breathing, police said. Their two younger children (ages 3 and 4) survived. Smother of Invention

I'll take the odds that the real or contributing cause of death was carbon monoxide poisoning.

How about saving $16.98 and not letting a shameless Anonymous Coward make some affiliate dollars off of it!

http://www.amazon.com/Enemy-Water-Cooler-Enterpris e-Countermeasures/dp/1597491292/sr=8-1/qid=1170717 461/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-4598005-5262205?ie=UTF8&s= books

Referral link in the parent post. Mod down jackass.

Non-referral link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1597491292/

Go and watch the corporation

That documentary explains it all far better than anybody here and you owe it to yourself to view it before using the "groupthink" argument.

Barnes and Noble is selling this book for $49.95, but Amazon.com is only selling it for $32.97!
 
Save yourself $16.98 by buying the book here: Enemy At The Water Cooler. That's a total savings of 33.99%!

Not available from any online store? I beg to differ.

http://amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/105-3241028-37140 34?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=Beatl es&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?_dyncharse t=ISO-8859-1&id=pcat17071&type=page&st=Beatles&sc= artistSP&cp=1&sp=&qp=ccat02001%23%23-1%23%23-1~~q4 26561746c6573~~nf47%7C%7C426561746c657320285468652 9&list=y&usc=%A0-Artist&nrp=15&iht=n

http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/artist/B eatles/a/Beatles.htm

Yes, yes, I know. You hate CDs. But the notion that Beatles music is not available at any online store is a misnomer. And I guess that we're just going to have to agree to disagree when it comes to our definitions of "a convenient, simple and cost effective solution". :)

I have no idea why Slashdot linked to B & N here, when Amazon has it considerably cheaper (see the "Used and new from..." listings).

This group is obviously a legitimate religion as much as any religion can be according to any objective definition that I can come up with*.

All of the "legitimate" religions started because the original "prophet" suffered a psychotic break from reality and found an audience for his deranged rantings. OTOH, L. Ron was lucid when concocting his cynical scheme to fleece losers of their meager funds.

The only thing on my iPod is the soothing sounds of Crispin Hellion Glover. What does that say about me?

As Bayoudegradeable pointed out, there is evidence of noodles in China 4000 years ago.

And as CRCulver mentioned that pasta is nowhere to be found in the texts at all. "We know more about Roman dining customs than about any other ancient people, with whole recipes reconstructed, see Patrick Fass' Around the Roman Table [amazon.com] (University of Chicago Press, 2005). "

So your out of your domain.

IT was UNIX its self that came with the concept of "Software Tools".

It's the goal of any good programer to make simple tools that one can reuse over and over. But few can actuly do it, and do it well.

I'm not so sure. You seem to be getting at the inference problem, which is still a bit of a Gordian knot with frequentist or alternative approaches. This is more about dumb luck, a bit like Godel's result.

Also, some folks still feel that a priori knowledge is possible when you seem to claim that is is not.

On the subject you raise, I've found "Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World" by Wesley C. Salmon http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-Explanation-Causa l-Structure-World/dp/0691101701/sr=1-9/qid=1170693 965/ref=sr_1_9/105-0836718-1902056?ie=UTF8&s=books to be helpful in laying out some of the stickier issues.
--
I'm not selling my copy but I do sell solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

It is only a problem because you make it so. If you define knowledge as "justified true belief", then you arrive to this contradiction because you have not specified how a belief is supposed to be justified. If Smith "justifies" his belief that Jones will get the job by counting the number of coins in Jones's pocket, he is just making an unrelated assertion. "A man with ten coins gets the job" is only a valid argument if the employer states this as a condition for employment. Otherwise, Smith might as well believe that a man with dark hair will get the job, or a man with a 63mm pinky will get the job, or whatever. He can believe whatever he wants, but he will still not know a thing. Knowledge consists of concepts that are logically rooted in reality, and thus can serve as valid representations of reality in cognition, which is the primary purpose of knowledge.

To verify that a concept is rooted in reality, you must be able to logically deduce it from real premises. Sometimes this is not possible due to insufficient information, in which case your concept's reality becomes uncertain. This uncertainty depends on the amount of information you have and can be computed by using Bayesian inference rules. For example, if the employer in question explicitly states that only men with ten coins in their pockets will get the job and Smith has knowledge of his previous statements and knows that he keeps his word, then Smith can compute his degree of certainty that Jones will get the job from the employer's statement and Jones' coin count. Because the employer's choice is involved, no matter how honest he may be, it is unlikely that this certainty value will be 1. Also, Smith is predicting a future event, and his certainty value must necessarily be less than 1 because he does not have complete information about every event that might happen between his calculation and the employer's decision and how such events may influence the outcome.

Absolute certainty is only possible when all information is available, and we may approach this in precisely defined fields such as mathematics. In most other disciplines some degree of uncertainty about our statements is inevitable, but by acquiring information, this uncertainty value can be made insignificant. It must be emphasized that this uncertainty is in our minds and does not in any way relate to the state of the universe. Smith and Jones may both have different certainty values for Jones' chance of employment, but neither number has any direct effect on who will really be employed. Both men have knowledge of the choice, but this knowledge is uncertain due to lack of informaiton. Knowledge is derived from reality, not the other way around. Because of this it is not proper to ask whether each man's conjecture is true, since the event has not occured (=been made real) yet. The proper questions to ask are whether each man had correct information on which to base his decision and whether he used proper rules of inference in manipulating them.

There is an entire book on this subject, called "Probability Theory, The Logic of Science", which you are invited to read.

So, they're not as good at: memorizing long strings of numbers, placing blocks to copy a pattern that they see in a picture, their vocabulary doesn't match what the test creator thinks an intelligent person should have, and find patterns in a string of symbols, numbers, picture, etc... as the rest of the country.

The IQ test was created to find deficiencies in children with the hopes of finding kids who are having problems in school and then help them to succeed in school. Then the US military got it and turned it into a measuring stick. An as a result, the US school systems started using it as a measuring stick also - which is completely moronic since IQ tests were not designed for that purpose. See this book.

No, I'm not from Kansas, but I agree with everything else said in the parent. I'm just a little touchy about the whole measuring stick bullshit...it's not just IQ, folks use income...never mind!

If you read the other referenced book A Taste of Ancient Rome- there is a mention of pasta in page 227 of the index.

Roman Cookery: Ancient Recipes for Modern Kitchens also has a reference.

Fascinating menu - dolphin meatballs, roasted parrot, squid patties, jellyfish omelettes. I think I'll stick with the tuna steaks.

If you read the other referenced book A Taste of Ancient Rome- there is a mention of pasta in page 227 of the index.

Roman Cookery: Ancient Recipes for Modern Kitchens also has a reference.

Fascinating menu - dolphin meatballs, roasted parrot, squid patties, jellyfish omelettes. I think I'll stick with the tuna steaks.

Off-topic, but I have to note what a great show Sports Night was.

Maybe I'll have to dig out my DVDs and watch it again. Is it just me, or does ABC do a great job of killing quality shows?

For a glimpse at this kind of disaster, I'd certainly recommend Xenophon's Anabasis , his chronicle of joining 10,000 Greek mercenaries hired by Cyrus to overthrow his brother for the Persian throne, and then helping lead them back home after Cyrus was slain in battle. When your commanding office is killed while you are deep in enemy territory, you don't have too many open routes to get away. Xenophon took his comrades back to Greece by a rather roundabout way. These Romans must have found themselves force to go in a direction further and further away from Italy.

If proven, then the theory that Marco Polo brought spaghetti to Italy will finally have some competition. Were noodles, in fact, a Roman invention introduced to the Chinese?

The problem of ascribing pasta to the Romans is that this particular food is not described in the texts at all. We know more about Roman dining customs than about any other ancient people, with whole recepies reconstructed, see Patrick Fass' Around the Roman Table (University of Chicago Press, 2005). And pasta is nowhere to be found.

Just so you know, China, for one, is not doing a hell of a lot better than South Africa right now.

Chinese cities are going gangbusters, and if you are lucky enough to live in one, your standard of living has gone up exponentially. The Chinese countryside, on the other hand, is still suffering in terrible poverty, comparable to anything in the third world. China essentially has an existing apartheid system, where peaseants do not have the right to move into the city, and often suffer under a tax burden many times greater than their city relatives. (And this is ignoring actual ethnic discrimination in China, which is rife against the "minorites")

Check out the book- http://www.amazon.com/Will-Boat-Sink-Water-Peasant s/dp/1586483587

In the countryside, AIDS and Hepatitis are rife in some areas, and basic healthcare is poor or nonexistant. China is still a largely rurual society, although the cities have been filling up with migrants who have few or no rights when they arrive. Their population, because of the 1-child policy, is aging rapidly, and there are serious concerns about the political instability caused by the rich/poor city/country divide.

China has serous 3rd world problems, hinding behind some glitzy first-world cities.

Bush's memo/article (published originally in The Atlantic Monthy) did have an effect in America. But the ideas in it as regards hypertext are far from original.

From 1937, HG Wells' essay/lecture "The World Brain: The Idea of a Permanent World Encyclopedia" reflects a more accurate version of what we now call the World Wide Web. Bush's hypertext was mostly personal and barely social. http://sherlock.berkeley.edu/wells/world_brain.htm l

And even more important was Emanuel Goldberg, who actually had the machine that Bush describes working and patented pre-WWII. Unfortunately, for Goldberg, who had been head of Zeiss Optical, the Nazis tried to surpress all of his work. He eventually ended up in Palestine (later Israel of course) where his further work was kept secret. See Michael Buckland's great biography for this story in creativity, leadership, technology, politics and history. http://www.amazon.com/Emanuel-Goldberg-His-Knowled ge-Machine/dp/0313313326/

"One thing I've noticed about companies is that they try to treat programmers like factory workers. "

Software Factories

Here's a book I recommend anyone contemplating "why is software hard" should read.

I thought the idea was to start a penal colony on the moon? Then they can develop into a libertarian society portal to the rest of the solar system...

......but the moon turned out to completely suck.
http://www.amazon.com/Feed-M-T-Anderson/dp/0763622 591/sr=1-1/qid=1170510399/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0097 095-3472904?ie=UTF8&s=books/

"Jobs is arrogant and defensive too, but at least you can understand why given what happened between Apple and Microsoft in the 80s."

Or I could simply read this and realize that Jobs was that way even before he formed Apple computers.

I've tried a CobaltFlux pad, and I wasn't impressed. The thing stopping me from getting this is the housing market in the SF bay area. (I probably wouldn't actually buy the machine direct from Amazon, just so you know.)

Heh, I was thinking the same thing. "What else could he have possibly said [here]?" (nothing else made any sense, other than swearing).

I haven't seen Bill Gates this scared of Apple/Mac since the ramp up to Windows 3.x. Perhaps not coincidentally, I saw this pointed out earlier today.

I can't imagine with his wealth and the importance of what the Gates Foundation can be doing why he bothers to show up to work at Microsoft anymore. You'd think he'd have graduated from that position a while ago.

Thanks for the straightforward answer. I was aware that death was a big part of the motivation. It's certainly something I've agonized over in the past as much as anyone. Maybe even more. But since then I've learned that death is, in fact, not something to fear. Here is one book which puts it better than I am able to, and it isn't sci-fi or fantasy. If, 10, 20, 50 years from now, we can continue to expand our lifespan, that would be neat and everything, but I don't think it's sensible to view life extension as some kind of victory in the battle against the evil spectre of death. And that appears to be a common viewpoint among nanotech-hopefuls.

Why wait for the book when you can have the book come to you: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0545010225/ref=am b_link_4077732_1/102-0255563-1302538

Barry Trotter is more fun to read, but the really best thing is that the books are about one tenth the size for the same entertainment.