That's very true. Though I was approaching it more from spoken English and phonetics, you're right. The word "applaud" actually comes from "ad-" and "plaudere," but nobody says "adplaud" because "applaud" is easier to say, just as "ur" is easier to type. As much as I dislike typing shortcuts like "ur," it's basically spawned from the same principles as "applaud."
So I guess the academic question is... is that wrong?
Boy, did I ever get exposure to homophones when I learned Chinese. Chinese has loads of homophones, and somehow they get by. Somewhere along the way, tones were invented to help out (or perhaps they were always an integral part of the language), but even then, there are words such as "hao" (good) have three different tones, yet mean the same thing. Depending upon the context, it can sound like a first, second, or third tone (there are only 4!).
As a result of homophones, Chinese has very few one-character words. The word "pengyou" means friend, yet if you were to break it down, "peng" and "you" can both mean friend. To avoid ambiguity, the two are stuck together to make the word more distinct. (admittedly, I think the words were also stuck together because of an innate sense of rhythm in Chinese, who like words/phrases to be 1, 2, 4, and 8 characters long).
I guess that was a bit of rambling -- I agree with you that people do leave terms more ambiguous on purpose, but again, they seem to do it because there's no need to be more granular. Some cultures/languages only have a small handful of color words, while others have a plethora. They often have a "grue" color, which is both green and blue, because in their daily lives, it's not as important to differentiate between the two. I'd bet, though, if they discovered that green berries were poisonous while blue ones weren't, they would quickly devise a new color term or some other language invention to describe the poisonous ones!
Having studied Latin a fair deal, I have a great appreciation for solid grammar, well-formed sentences, and intricate structures. I loathe the apparent devolution of language and despise the rampant misspellings, poor grammar, and horrific stream of consciousness run-ons I've witnessed on the boards and in gameplay.
However, language really is a self-correcting form of communication. I hate the use of "ur" as a bastardized "your," but linguistically speaking, it's pretty efficient. People who spell horribly usually spell with a more consistent logic than centuries of archaisms -- why not spell "dependent" as "dependant" when we have words such as "rampant, occupant," and attendant?" Other than the baggage caused by inherited languages, why do we persist in using "right" instead of "rite?"
In my lifetime, I've seen "donut" become the de facto spelling rather than "doughnut," and I haven't even lived that long.
People can say poor spelling creates ambiguities, but our language is already rife with 'em. If a term becomes too ambiguous, the term will die in its collective usage, or split. We know from context what "your" means, otherwise we wouldn't step in to correct people when it's used in place of "you're." I think it's lazy, but from another perspective, it's could be considered an ever-changing process of optimization.
I try to remind myself of this. Doesn't mean I have to like it.
I think one very important (yet passing) remark made by one of the interviewees was that all of the prawns seemed to have been part of a drone class. Perhaps the warrior/queen/etc classes were dead or unnecessary for a "routine" mission. The drones were difficult to like, difficult to communicate with, and didn't seem to have much interest in their technology over a can or two of cat food. It's easy to watch the movie and identify with the aliens' plight, but they really were... alien. While I too would have thought humans would have been in the camps working with the aliens as well, the lack of interest you mention can be explained by the fact that, as drones, they simply seemed to lack a lot of higher brain functions and were uninteresting (or immensely difficult) to deal with.
I agree that fuel doubling as a biological agent turning humans into bugs was an odd (and later, very convenient) tack to take. I complained about this to my friends when the movie ended, but they did point out that the alien technology was highly integrated with their genetic code. While it's pretty unlikely that some substance can be a highly efficient form of fuel and an immensely effective biological agent, it's sort of plausible within the framework they defined.
If the well-oiled Blizzard marketing machine has its way, it should be a story leading up to the next major expansion. If it were actually well-done, I think it'd be pretty cool. For once it would make me care for the lore and backstory as I scramble my way up to the next level cap!
While I'm quite skeptical about video game movie adaptations, I'm willing to give Sam Raimi the benefit of the doubt. Blizzard could have done much worse.:^)
I am puzzled that he was so surprised at the outcomes of his actions. Feel free to pass it off as some sort of experiment if you like, but it seemed like he was using almost exploitative techniques to kill people. Couple that with the fact that he just stormed into a room and started killing people -- most folks, being the social creatures they are, do a little bit of social reconnaissance before they start to act. It seems he had already observed the social conventions in the room and made a butthead character to antagonize them -- why did he find it so shocking that people reacted negatively?
I'd also add that if you're a parent, the Wii is a much more sparkly console than its competitors. While some lament that there aren't a lot of violent games for the Wii, it's a bonus for parents. For young children, photorealistic decapitations aren't as cool as seeing a flying turtle shell knock out a princess driving a go-kart, and for that, you don't need a macho graphics processor. Parents also see the value in actually having their kids exercise while gaming. Whether or not they end up buying games that use this feature is another thing, but the Wii is currently viewed as the system most likely to get you up and moving.
This compounded with your other two reasons (cheapness, intuitive games) makes it a great family game console. Others could argue that the Xbox and Playstation also do, but their marketing certainly isn't aimed at that target audience, while Nintendo is.
You're addicted to separately scrolling backgrounds?
I don't think that quoting overexcited electronic gaming magazines is necessarily the best indicator for what people want in a game, either.
Graphics are certainly important to a game, but the novelty wears quickly if the gameplay is poor. I find it hard to believe you and your buddy bought "Separately Scrolling Background Wars" just to ooh and aah over parallax for HOURS.
Interestingly, WoW achievements have now become a method for evaluating and excluding other players -- something I hadn't anticipated in my naivete. I had always thought these achievements were there to motivate players to play more, but now they're actually resulting in some players not getting to play in various raid groups who demand that they have an achievement demonstrating their "competency" in whatever instance they're planning to raid. I'm sure that some guilds also check certain achievements as a prerequisite to join!
I don't know if this even constitutes 'work.' It reminds me of spending a year at a community college so you can get a certification that then allows you to work. : )
I normally play cloth classes, so I have a bit of a grumpy bias against Rogues and Hunters, but the damage really does seem to be out of control. I know cloth casters are supposed to be fragile, but when battles end in a matter of seconds via stunlock, it's a disappointment. I wish Blizzard would simply ratchet down the damage and healing while still keeping roughly the same amount of hit points. It would draw out the battles and give you a little bit of time to think and develop a strategy instead of asking yourself "what happened?" when your body crumples to the ground.
Having said that, I think such a revision represents an enormous obstacle for Blizzard. As the AC put it, PvE does seem quite balanced on the whole. If you start tweaking damage output to accommodate PvP, you've got to be meticulously careful about its implications in PvE.
We did the same thing, but starting later with 3 death knights and 2 warlocks, killing our way through instances with no one to heal us. I found it immensely fun with greater rewards, but what both you and I have in common is that we had a reliable group of friends with whom it was fun to raid.
The poster complained that instances were boring, and that could certainly be personal preference, but if he also had to go through the tedium of forming PUGs and cutting through the drama and poor communication skills of other players, I can certainly see how it would be an irksome way to level!
I find myself going to movie theaters less and less because of the slow changes, all to negative effect:
Price: higher
Volume: louder (read: deafening)
Advertisements: far too many
Screens: older
I could probably live with most of these changes but for the screens. I've been to several different theaters here in San Diego, and I constantly marvel at how poor the picture is. The screens are often too bright with no contrast, or blurry. While sound systems seem to get upgraded every few years on a relentless campaign to deafen moviegoers, the screens and projectors seem oddly neglected. I've seen better film quality in the $1.50 theater in Eugene. There's no quicker way to make me feel swindled than to have to squint at a movie I paid close to $10 to view.
I generally agree, but I'd think MMORPGs (and other networked games like another poster mentioned) are more time-sensitive in that you're competing against skill sets and progressions that change with the age of the game. If you jump into a game at level 1 when most players are at level 50, you lose a bit of the discovery and, well, superiority you'd have otherwise. Plus, with patches coming out like WoW's Wrath of the Lich King, you're almost obliged to keep current as the level caps go up.
Granted, most MMORPGs are a bit frustrating on launch, with some infuriating bugs and dramatic changes in gameplay as patches come out, but for most gamers it seems to be something of a badge of honor to talk about the "old days" in an MMORPG's infancy.
A Korean friend of mine told me about how very once and a while her family would take a trip out to the country, and one of their haunts was a place quite near a "dog farm." Apparently, the meat is tastier when engorged with blood, but that doesn't happen well unless the animal is tenderized while alive. So occasionally their peaceful trips to the country would be punctuated by the yelping and keening of dogs being beaten to death, simply to enhance flavor.
The Korean taste for dog is probably over-exaggerated over here, but there's apparently a (quite brutal) market for it over there. Thankfully my friend was not a consumer, but honestly, I'd think a trip to the country like that would put off quite a few potential dog-eaters!
The grue is a sinister, lurking presence in the dark places of the earth. Its favorite diet is adventurers, but its insatiable appetite is tempered by its fear of light. No grue has ever been seen by the light of day, and few have survived its fearsome jaws to tell the tale.
Perhaps the original poster didn't explicitly mention Macs, but the point was that WoW isn't on consoles, unless you count the Molten Core for the Atari 2600!
And how -- I've been disemboweled by them on the beach a few times, but I still can't help but wander close to their shanty villages for a glimpse of them from time to time. Their loathesomeness is somehow magnetic. People may hate them, but I've seen all kinds of Murloc merchandise in the real world. You can't say that for leper gnomes.
I'm still waiting for a 25-man heroic murloc instance!
I also have a hard time truly liking the guy, but my first exposure to him was in the movie What's Eating Gilbert Grape. Having never seen him before, and watching with a pre-teen sort of naivete, I actually thought he was mentally retarded. Since then, I've never questioned his acting ability.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
Yes, to me it's as much the browser as the add-ons that keep me loyal to my browser. I'm sure modifications are on the way for Chrome, but it always startles me when I use another browser and stumble into the garish lights of a non-Adblocked world. When Chrome has spiffy mouse gestures and a decent ad blocker, I'll definitely revisit it!
I don't know all the legal ins and outs, but one of the biggest threats isn't even legal -- aintitcool said
Yes we could break the embargo, but then we'd never be allowed to see another Warner Brothers movie again, and instead of simply being barred from reviewing this one movie early we'd be barred from reviewing every movie early.
If you're a movie review site or even one that reports on new & cool things in popular culture, being blacklisted by WB has painful repercussions. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if WB even passed along their blacklist to other major studios.
I second your endorsement of Last.fm. I've found a lot of obscure and nascent artists through them. It generates playlists based on what a user listens to, and it finds matching artists fairly dependably. Users can also listen to radio stations based on tags such as "trance" or "reggae," meaning that if you, as an artist, post your tracks to Last.fm and tag them appropriately, your music will show up on searches and pop up in the appropriate radio stations. And unlike torrents, where people already have in mind what they want to download, Last.fm users are considerably more receptive, actively searching for new artists to listen to.
Whether or not people will pay for your music is another thing, but if you're looking for exposure as well as some control of how your music is distributed, Last.fm seems like a good place to start!
Xi'an was gorgeous when I was there. We were only there for a week in the summer, but we had blue skies all week. I commented above that Beijing was beautiful as well (well, for a time), and reading Hengdi's comments on Haerbin, I am often struck by how much variation in pollution a city can have. I'll see a photograph of a city enshrouded in smog and assume that it's like that for most of the year. Perhaps for some of the cities on the top 10 list here (like Linfen) this is true. It's sad to know how beautiful a place can be without air pollution. Seeing the blue skies in Linfen picture made me think "gee, it's not that bad..." but that was most likely one of their good days.
Sometimes these cities seem even "dirtier" even though it's not directly caused by pollutants: Xi'an and Beijing (sometimes even Korea) get hit by major dust storms blowing loess soil out from the west. Not that I'm ardently defending Xi'an's pollution record or anything... I just found it one of the nicer major cities in China I visited.
Slashdot Mirror
That's very true. Though I was approaching it more from spoken English and phonetics, you're right. The word "applaud" actually comes from "ad-" and "plaudere," but nobody says "adplaud" because "applaud" is easier to say, just as "ur" is easier to type. As much as I dislike typing shortcuts like "ur," it's basically spawned from the same principles as "applaud."
So I guess the academic question is... is that wrong?
Boy, did I ever get exposure to homophones when I learned Chinese. Chinese has loads of homophones, and somehow they get by. Somewhere along the way, tones were invented to help out (or perhaps they were always an integral part of the language), but even then, there are words such as "hao" (good) have three different tones, yet mean the same thing. Depending upon the context, it can sound like a first, second, or third tone (there are only 4!).
As a result of homophones, Chinese has very few one-character words. The word "pengyou" means friend, yet if you were to break it down, "peng" and "you" can both mean friend. To avoid ambiguity, the two are stuck together to make the word more distinct. (admittedly, I think the words were also stuck together because of an innate sense of rhythm in Chinese, who like words/phrases to be 1, 2, 4, and 8 characters long).
I guess that was a bit of rambling -- I agree with you that people do leave terms more ambiguous on purpose, but again, they seem to do it because there's no need to be more granular. Some cultures/languages only have a small handful of color words, while others have a plethora. They often have a "grue" color, which is both green and blue, because in their daily lives, it's not as important to differentiate between the two. I'd bet, though, if they discovered that green berries were poisonous while blue ones weren't, they would quickly devise a new color term or some other language invention to describe the poisonous ones!
Having studied Latin a fair deal, I have a great appreciation for solid grammar, well-formed sentences, and intricate structures. I loathe the apparent devolution of language and despise the rampant misspellings, poor grammar, and horrific stream of consciousness run-ons I've witnessed on the boards and in gameplay.
However, language really is a self-correcting form of communication. I hate the use of "ur" as a bastardized "your," but linguistically speaking, it's pretty efficient. People who spell horribly usually spell with a more consistent logic than centuries of archaisms -- why not spell "dependent" as "dependant" when we have words such as "rampant, occupant," and attendant?" Other than the baggage caused by inherited languages, why do we persist in using "right" instead of "rite?"
In my lifetime, I've seen "donut" become the de facto spelling rather than "doughnut," and I haven't even lived that long. People can say poor spelling creates ambiguities, but our language is already rife with 'em. If a term becomes too ambiguous, the term will die in its collective usage, or split. We know from context what "your" means, otherwise we wouldn't step in to correct people when it's used in place of "you're." I think it's lazy, but from another perspective, it's could be considered an ever-changing process of optimization.
I try to remind myself of this. Doesn't mean I have to like it.
I think one very important (yet passing) remark made by one of the interviewees was that all of the prawns seemed to have been part of a drone class. Perhaps the warrior/queen/etc classes were dead or unnecessary for a "routine" mission. The drones were difficult to like, difficult to communicate with, and didn't seem to have much interest in their technology over a can or two of cat food. It's easy to watch the movie and identify with the aliens' plight, but they really were... alien. While I too would have thought humans would have been in the camps working with the aliens as well, the lack of interest you mention can be explained by the fact that, as drones, they simply seemed to lack a lot of higher brain functions and were uninteresting (or immensely difficult) to deal with.
In reference to your spoiler,
I agree that fuel doubling as a biological agent turning humans into bugs was an odd (and later, very convenient) tack to take. I complained about this to my friends when the movie ended, but they did point out that the alien technology was highly integrated with their genetic code. While it's pretty unlikely that some substance can be a highly efficient form of fuel and an immensely effective biological agent, it's sort of plausible within the framework they defined.
If the well-oiled Blizzard marketing machine has its way, it should be a story leading up to the next major expansion. If it were actually well-done, I think it'd be pretty cool. For once it would make me care for the lore and backstory as I scramble my way up to the next level cap!
:^)
While I'm quite skeptical about video game movie adaptations, I'm willing to give Sam Raimi the benefit of the doubt. Blizzard could have done much worse.
I am puzzled that he was so surprised at the outcomes of his actions. Feel free to pass it off as some sort of experiment if you like, but it seemed like he was using almost exploitative techniques to kill people. Couple that with the fact that he just stormed into a room and started killing people -- most folks, being the social creatures they are, do a little bit of social reconnaissance before they start to act. It seems he had already observed the social conventions in the room and made a butthead character to antagonize them -- why did he find it so shocking that people reacted negatively?
I'd also add that if you're a parent, the Wii is a much more sparkly console than its competitors. While some lament that there aren't a lot of violent games for the Wii, it's a bonus for parents. For young children, photorealistic decapitations aren't as cool as seeing a flying turtle shell knock out a princess driving a go-kart, and for that, you don't need a macho graphics processor. Parents also see the value in actually having their kids exercise while gaming. Whether or not they end up buying games that use this feature is another thing, but the Wii is currently viewed as the system most likely to get you up and moving.
This compounded with your other two reasons (cheapness, intuitive games) makes it a great family game console. Others could argue that the Xbox and Playstation also do, but their marketing certainly isn't aimed at that target audience, while Nintendo is.
You're addicted to separately scrolling backgrounds?
I don't think that quoting overexcited electronic gaming magazines is necessarily the best indicator for what people want in a game, either.
Graphics are certainly important to a game, but the novelty wears quickly if the gameplay is poor. I find it hard to believe you and your buddy bought "Separately Scrolling Background Wars" just to ooh and aah over parallax for HOURS.
Interestingly, WoW achievements have now become a method for evaluating and excluding other players -- something I hadn't anticipated in my naivete. I had always thought these achievements were there to motivate players to play more, but now they're actually resulting in some players not getting to play in various raid groups who demand that they have an achievement demonstrating their "competency" in whatever instance they're planning to raid. I'm sure that some guilds also check certain achievements as a prerequisite to join!
I don't know if this even constitutes 'work.' It reminds me of spending a year at a community college so you can get a certification that then allows you to work. : )
Wait, you're saying 2D films are 3D and 3D films are 4D? Or 2D films are 4D and 3D is 5D? Or is that only for theaters with Smell-O-Vision?
You may get it earlier than you had imagined! Behold the Watchmen Saturday morning cartoon!
I normally play cloth classes, so I have a bit of a grumpy bias against Rogues and Hunters, but the damage really does seem to be out of control. I know cloth casters are supposed to be fragile, but when battles end in a matter of seconds via stunlock, it's a disappointment. I wish Blizzard would simply ratchet down the damage and healing while still keeping roughly the same amount of hit points. It would draw out the battles and give you a little bit of time to think and develop a strategy instead of asking yourself "what happened?" when your body crumples to the ground.
Having said that, I think such a revision represents an enormous obstacle for Blizzard. As the AC put it, PvE does seem quite balanced on the whole. If you start tweaking damage output to accommodate PvP, you've got to be meticulously careful about its implications in PvE.
We did the same thing, but starting later with 3 death knights and 2 warlocks, killing our way through instances with no one to heal us. I found it immensely fun with greater rewards, but what both you and I have in common is that we had a reliable group of friends with whom it was fun to raid.
The poster complained that instances were boring, and that could certainly be personal preference, but if he also had to go through the tedium of forming PUGs and cutting through the drama and poor communication skills of other players, I can certainly see how it would be an irksome way to level!
I could probably live with most of these changes but for the screens. I've been to several different theaters here in San Diego, and I constantly marvel at how poor the picture is. The screens are often too bright with no contrast, or blurry. While sound systems seem to get upgraded every few years on a relentless campaign to deafen moviegoers, the screens and projectors seem oddly neglected. I've seen better film quality in the $1.50 theater in Eugene. There's no quicker way to make me feel swindled than to have to squint at a movie I paid close to $10 to view.
I generally agree, but I'd think MMORPGs (and other networked games like another poster mentioned) are more time-sensitive in that you're competing against skill sets and progressions that change with the age of the game. If you jump into a game at level 1 when most players are at level 50, you lose a bit of the discovery and, well, superiority you'd have otherwise. Plus, with patches coming out like WoW's Wrath of the Lich King, you're almost obliged to keep current as the level caps go up.
Granted, most MMORPGs are a bit frustrating on launch, with some infuriating bugs and dramatic changes in gameplay as patches come out, but for most gamers it seems to be something of a badge of honor to talk about the "old days" in an MMORPG's infancy.
A Korean friend of mine told me about how very once and a while her family would take a trip out to the country, and one of their haunts was a place quite near a "dog farm." Apparently, the meat is tastier when engorged with blood, but that doesn't happen well unless the animal is tenderized while alive. So occasionally their peaceful trips to the country would be punctuated by the yelping and keening of dogs being beaten to death, simply to enhance flavor.
The Korean taste for dog is probably over-exaggerated over here, but there's apparently a (quite brutal) market for it over there. Thankfully my friend was not a consumer, but honestly, I'd think a trip to the country like that would put off quite a few potential dog-eaters!
From Wikipedia:
> what is a grue?
The grue is a sinister, lurking presence in the dark places of the earth. Its favorite diet is adventurers, but its insatiable appetite is tempered by its fear of light. No grue has ever been seen by the light of day, and few have survived its fearsome jaws to tell the tale.
Perhaps the original poster didn't explicitly mention Macs, but the point was that WoW isn't on consoles, unless you count the Molten Core for the Atari 2600!
And how -- I've been disemboweled by them on the beach a few times, but I still can't help but wander close to their shanty villages for a glimpse of them from time to time. Their loathesomeness is somehow magnetic. People may hate them, but I've seen all kinds of Murloc merchandise in the real world. You can't say that for leper gnomes.
I'm still waiting for a 25-man heroic murloc instance!
I also have a hard time truly liking the guy, but my first exposure to him was in the movie What's Eating Gilbert Grape. Having never seen him before, and watching with a pre-teen sort of naivete, I actually thought he was mentally retarded. Since then, I've never questioned his acting ability.
Yes, to me it's as much the browser as the add-ons that keep me loyal to my browser. I'm sure modifications are on the way for Chrome, but it always startles me when I use another browser and stumble into the garish lights of a non-Adblocked world. When Chrome has spiffy mouse gestures and a decent ad blocker, I'll definitely revisit it!
Yes we could break the embargo, but then we'd never be allowed to see another Warner Brothers movie again, and instead of simply being barred from reviewing this one movie early we'd be barred from reviewing every movie early.
If you're a movie review site or even one that reports on new & cool things in popular culture, being blacklisted by WB has painful repercussions. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if WB even passed along their blacklist to other major studios.
I second your endorsement of Last.fm. I've found a lot of obscure and nascent artists through them. It generates playlists based on what a user listens to, and it finds matching artists fairly dependably. Users can also listen to radio stations based on tags such as "trance" or "reggae," meaning that if you, as an artist, post your tracks to Last.fm and tag them appropriately, your music will show up on searches and pop up in the appropriate radio stations. And unlike torrents, where people already have in mind what they want to download, Last.fm users are considerably more receptive, actively searching for new artists to listen to.
Whether or not people will pay for your music is another thing, but if you're looking for exposure as well as some control of how your music is distributed, Last.fm seems like a good place to start!
Xi'an was gorgeous when I was there. We were only there for a week in the summer, but we had blue skies all week. I commented above that Beijing was beautiful as well (well, for a time), and reading Hengdi's comments on Haerbin, I am often struck by how much variation in pollution a city can have. I'll see a photograph of a city enshrouded in smog and assume that it's like that for most of the year. Perhaps for some of the cities on the top 10 list here (like Linfen) this is true. It's sad to know how beautiful a place can be without air pollution. Seeing the blue skies in Linfen picture made me think "gee, it's not that bad..." but that was most likely one of their good days.
Sometimes these cities seem even "dirtier" even though it's not directly caused by pollutants: Xi'an and Beijing (sometimes even Korea) get hit by major dust storms blowing loess soil out from the west. Not that I'm ardently defending Xi'an's pollution record or anything... I just found it one of the nicer major cities in China I visited.