Slashdot Mirror

Given that the target audience would consit of lonely, sexually frustrated men who have little experience of how a real woman behaves, that's probably not a problem. It could be grotesquely caricatured and still bring in a good harvest of suckers; and perhaps even leaving them thinking that they just got lucky.

A dog can find a dog in a two-dimensional landscape photograph.

In an experiment far removed from the ordinary way in which he experiences his world - and do it with no other sensory or behavioral cues.

That does not strike me as an insignificant achievement.

It would be interesting to know if a dog could recognize a painting of a dog, a sculpture, a cartoon or caricature.

Even more interesting, perhaps, if he could sort the results. Recognize different breeds of dogs. Recognize that one dog appears in several pictures.

Recognizing that people make mistakes and that we also make mistakes, that perhaps we should forgive, or even trying to understand what led to the act...all of these have been caricatured and stigmatized as "liberal" soft-headedness. Even pointing out that someone's childhood may have an effect on their actions as an adult elicits scorn and contempt. No doubt there are some "liberals" out there who wouldn't even punish a serial child rapist/axe murderer, but instead of arguing against specific bad arguments, our entire capacity to understand, forgive, and move on has been thrown out like a baby with the bathwater. To understand and forgive wrongdoing you have to have humility, which is not only lacking in our culture but which is actively discouraged.

Recognizing that people make mistakes and that we also make mistakes, that perhaps we should forgive, or even trying to understand what led to the act...all of these have been caricatured and stigmatized as "liberal" soft-headedness. Even pointing out that someone's childhood may have an effect on their actions as an adult elicits scorn and contempt. No doubt there are some "liberals" out there who wouldn't even punish a serial child rapist/axe murderer, but instead of arguing against specific bad arguments, our entire capacity to understand, forgive, and move on has been thrown out like a baby with the bathwater. To understand and forgive wrongdoing you have to have humility, which is not only lacking in our culture but which is actively discouraged.

I've been faulted multiple times for trying to have humility. You aren't supposed to admit that you could be wrong, or that that person in the dock could, by the grace of God and bit of luck, be you as well. Everything is black and white, all the time. Well, unless we're talking about Rush Limbaugh's drug conviction or something like that--people seem to have no trouble handling nuanced arguments about blame and addiction when it comes to Rush. Anyway, I can't tell you how surreal it is for me, an atheist, to be lectured by an evangelical Christian I work with that I shouldn't be so humble, that I should be more proud of what I've done, and so on. Humility and forgiveness go hand in hand, and right now forgiveness, and that whole "don't judge a person till you've walked a mile in their shoes" thing, has been caricatured and shunned almost out of existence, or at least out of influence, in the USA.

"On a side note, is there some natural law that dictates that every well-intentioned non-profit group must eventually degenerate into a caricature of their former selves? ie Greenpeace, PETA, MAD, etc"

2 cents incoming:

non-profit groups are just like any other corporations. The company doesn't make profit, but people are still earning their rent\mortgage running them. Company growth = less chance of getting canned + likelihood of increased salary(?). Not sure exactly how salary increases work in a non-profit, but I'd be surprised and elated if they didn't exist.

Does anyone have actual info on paid positions in non-profits? I'd be interested to know just how similar (or not) they are to regular corporations.

But my point is, these people with paid positions in the company have something to gain from org growth (even if it is just job security), so at least a little (if not a lot) of corporate greed bleeds into the bigger non-profits out there.

This is the type of logic that reduces the utility of a user rating system. Troll != discord.

Since when did a "troll" mod apply to any cynical (but commonplace) opinion directed at a popular company? I don't believe he is entirely correct in the case of Nintendo, but he had a very valid point in that it is common for corporations to skim over details they aren't as proud of. He never said they were guilty, he merely presented the same cynical view common on Slashdot - only he directed it at a company that has managed to maintain excellent PR and a loyal following (myself included) for decades.

Replace the company name and the subject being discussed, and his argument would be accepted much more readily. Using "Microsoft" would be far too easy, so try it with a company you have a neutral opinion of - perhaps a waste management company. If they go into detail on all the areas of ecology that they are doing well at, and another organization points out major (to them) factors not covered by the company's statement, you're going to naturally assume that it's for the usual reasons - specifically, that PR departments tend to ignore or downplay shortcomings. That's not always the case, and probably is not in the case of Nintendo, but the logic is defensible, at least as a reasonable opinion to express.

Also, he implied it as one reasonable possibility, not as a proclamation of guilt. Even if he did, would that make him a Troll, or just someone you disagree with?

On a side note, is there some natural law that dictates that every well-intentioned non-profit group must eventually degenerate into a caricature of their former selves? ie Greenpeace, PETA, MAD, etc. I fearfully await the day when the Red Cross begins to refuse assistance in non-allied countries, or when the Audubon Society is found guilty of sponsoring EcoTerrorism. Then again, I'm not certain PETA ever had credibility...

I can't tell if you're joking or not (you seem to be almost a Republican caricature, but I know real Republicans who appear as such), but you do know there are other religions in this world other than yours, and all of them have the same amount of proof backing them up and legions of followers just as devoted and convinced they're right as you are. No, I don't expect this to change anyone's opinion, but have you actually ever considered that before--and NOT just wrote them off as sinners, heretics, or charlatans who shouldn't be listened to? I know a very kind hearted Buddhist who's a loving father and an overall caring and decent human being, is he going to hell too?

Notice how I treated you, a complete stranger, with respect and I used no profanities or insults to make my point.

I can't remember if the Harvard copyright notice was in there or not. Not much reason to edit it out, since the short video doesn't say anything one way or the other about evolution, and Harvard was found as a religious school. There was some guy who gave the introduction to the video, who talked about how wonderfully complex cells were. But obviously looking at this video, most of the things that we see are extremely simplistic caricatures of stuff that actually happens in a cell. I mean come on, some stick figure with big old goofy shoes hauling a big bag up a pipe? That doesn't scream evolution at me.

Were the Starwars movies really that bad? I think they were bad in so many respects, from the very beginning: the dubious understanding of science, the strange coincidence that all these aliens in a galaxy far, far away looked exactly like humans with the occasional funny hairdress, the utterly uncool wookies, the jedis with their supposedly deep wisdom who still educated their apprentice jedis like a caricature of the archetypical 'Zen master/student' relationship; isn't it likely that if a hugely gifted boy like Anakin had been treated with care and understanding, he might have had the strength to resist the rather naff temptations of Mr. Palpatine, Esq.? In this context things like midichlorians and Ewoks are simply natural and quite cute.

I think it is simply being seen from the wrong perspective - Starwars was never more than an entertaining, exciting story, and as such brilliant. I remember when I saw them in the beginning I felt hugely disappointed, but now I really enjoy them for what they are. They are just not 'deep' or insightful, that's all.

I supposed some games lend themselves to the level-less experience, some don't. Some of it is probably just organizational on the part of the creators. Nevertheless, it is probably true that levels in many modern games are a legacy effect from bygone eras and could be done away with. However, even back in The Day, games like Zork didn't have levels as such, you just played. Ironically, a level-based game may actually be somewhat more realistic. Although we think of life itself as a continuum of moments, our real circumstances actually do break naturally into something approximating "levels": that is, well defined cycles and milestones based on shifting local goals. These milestones are often separate by periods of routine. Perhaps levels in games (like chapters in books or acts in a play) are just a caricature of that real-life organizational effect with the routine periods removed to expedite the entertainment value.

I'm just tired of it being presented as a snake oil cure for everything when it isn't.

Cue the tin foil hats about how this is a conspiracy from the government/Big Pharms.

Welcome to the USA my dear friend. They keep you terrorized with the fear that the (FAKE!!!!!!!!LIE!!!!!BS!!!!!!OUR VERY OWN CIA BLEW THE AIRPLANES!!!!!) 9/11 is going to happen again, so you cooperate being meek and not complaining when they torture immigrants, force you to carry and show an ID, or when the NSA invades your privacy by chasing the logs of your ISP and knowing each and every site you visited on the last two months. Kinda like the USA became a caricature of the Soviet Union they so proudly destroyed...
The constitution and the forefathers' ideals got all killed by the GOP-NAZI Fox News tyranny.

What?!

Gene Simmons is not a musician. He may play an instrument, but he is no musician. Hopefully you understand the distinction. Prince is actually a very good musician and a damn good guitar player. You may not like his music due to your prejudices, but you cannot discount him as a musician.

Another contrast: Gene Simmons is a tool who just wants to make money. He has no morals or principles, he is just a self-absorbed jerk who wants to fill his pockets. Gene Simmons is the essence of a sellout -- one who uses every possible means to make money, integrity be damned. Practicality over idealism every time. Prince actually speaks out against the record industry and their draconian practices. I attended one of his shows and was given his latest CD. So was everyone else who attended. Prince embodies what people here talk about: using CDs to advertise his shows.

You can always tell a good musician by how he plays live, not how he plays on record. Why else do you think all the posers are so pro-RIAA? Because if they had to make a living performing they wouldn't be able to cut it. Real musicians, ones who can play their instruments, write songs, and express themselves, sound GREAT in concert and the CD is just a substitute for the live performance. Posers are the ones where after you have the misfortune of attending one of their shows, you feel ripped off. Real musicians stay relevant for decades, and posers fade out after a few years. If it weren't for his outspoken idiocy, Simmons and the horse he rode in on (KISS) would have faded away a LONG time ago. Even if people still know who Gene Simmons is, who gives a CRAP about the music? Even if you like the 70's thing, there are WAY better bands from the era who were doing things that were actually groundbreaking. KISS appealed to kids because it made their parents and teachers gasp. KISS is the musical equivalent of pro wrestling; a caricature of itself, just a bunch of kitsch.

I'm not surprised that the gentleman is finding his audience resistant to buying his 'music'. Technically the product he sells is not music. Its a stage show backed up by a caricature of heavy rock music with a very limited range of variation. The music is entirely a secondary matter in his product so we can hardly be surprised that it is treated as the valueless disposable rubbish that it truly is. I look forward to hearing a proper rock band when the reformed Led Zeppelin perform in London on Dec 10. The whole pop mainstream heavy rock genre is excruciatingly embarrassing these days. The whole thing went off the rails in the UK when the hard working but talentless Motorhead took the genre away from its melodic roots. Bugger, Spouting all this trial rubbish means I must be over 40 too. Drat.

I wonder how they would make a caricature of Freddie Mercury embedded in the Google logo?

I mean, was it just that NCSoft offered unrefuseably large piles of cash?

I met & interviewed Jack Emmert at E3 the year before CoH released - if there's anyone who was developing a game as a labor of love, it was him. He was almost a caricature of the Simpsons' comic book guy, but it was in a charming way because he was so genuine. I agree with his characterization of comic books as 'modern day mythology' and while I can't quite yet personally consider them quite 'literature', there are some fantastic stories being told.

It was such a product of his particular personality and desire, I'm curious what it would have taken to get him to relinquish creative control.

I guess I should have clarified that the pictures are largely tongue in cheek and featuring their staff and caricatures of actions being taken . . . sorry about that!

The point is that this is a "toy" and not the "real thing" and, by definition, that's pretty much what a toy is. Try remembering what it was like to be a kid with an imagination, and from that perspective it doesn't seem like such a horrible concept.

No, there is a vast difference between caricature and stereotype.