You're better off not seeing the last episode of DS9. That series didn't end well - I mean, the big arc was resolved (too abruptly for my tastes) but the rest of the conclusion was just not worth it. Then again, even knowing that, I'd still be pissed if I didn't even get a chance to watch it.:)
And yet Americans are always talking about how much better British TV is, forgetting that what we get here in the US from the UK is the cream skimmed off the top.
I was convinced that American TV is, as a whole, better than British TV when John Cleese said it a few years back. I figure he ought to know.
That kind of makes no sense since the North Americans who care about Square Enix already know that the main Final Fantasy line is a PS2-only deal, ergo they would have a PS2.
The issue described sounded like a pretty simple prototype bug instead of a technology issue. Specifically, they said that they had to depress the contrast button constantly to keep the display on. So, whatever that was doing could be replaced with a simple switch and it would be good to go.
Who said they had to be mindlessly obedient? Who said that a kid couldn't still skip class with the kind of RFID system in place that this discussion is, ostensibly, about? All children rebel to some degree before they turn 18 - that's natural. Even after they turn 18, they still tend to be immature and sometimes a bit tentative about moving forward into adulthood because they're not used to making decisions, but as life goes on they eventually do so fully - hopefully, with help from their parents.
Maybe 18 years old IS an arbitrary number. As it stands, that happens to be around the time that most kids graduate high school, the last schooling in the US which it is mandatory to offer. That seems a good enough reason to keep the age right where it is, so that children don't have extra incentive to quit on their education (if the age were 16, it would be all too easy for a sophomore to just say "Screw this, I'm an adult and I don't have to stick around."). Even if the money we spend doesn't prove it, our society DOES value education and when children don't complete high school it makes unnecessary problems for them.
The system in question isn't an implant; it isn't a chain to a desk. It's a simple ID badge that interfaces with a computer system to, hopefully, improve recordkeeping and keep better track of students for whom THE SCHOOL IS RESPONSIBLE. Making a bunch of noise about how it somehow violates a child's rights is just that: Noise.
We designate children under 18 (I think it should probably be 21, but whatever) as minors for a reason. They don't GET to exercise their own judgement in most things because it's been decided they don't have enough life experience to do so. They don't HAVE the same rights as adults and neither do they have the same responsibilities. Their responsibility is to what they're told, when they're told to do it.
If we want to teach children about their civil rights, that's what civics classes are for. Until they turn 18, they don't get to choose where they go or what they do unless adults in authority permit it.
The bottom line is that there aren't enough adults in schools to keep tabs on every kid (and there haven't been for a LONG time) and the parents can't be there to do it because they're hopefully out there doing their thing to support their family. If technology can help out, then go for it (I say add a little GPS to the mix and get some REAL tracking). They're children and we need to treat them that way.
Since the article mentions they're taking their idea "to the public" I think they'd get a better reaction by releasing a preview of some type. Kind of hard for an audience to approve and support a project without knowing what it is! (Because we all know counting on the Trek name alone doesn't always work)
Indeed. I suppose JMS and company are counting on the geek legions to just support any idea he has, even sight unseen. This was certainly the case when Rick Berman was given all-but-complete control over Star Trek - TNG was good, so why not let him do whatever he wants? That certainly turned out well.
If I were to support anyone along these lines, I'd support Manny Coto. Enterprise really IS better than it was previously, which is pretty impressive considering how weak the show was before (and Odyssey 5 was pretty good, too).
It's a pretty crowded bandwagon that I'm yelling from here, but the key is to drop Berman like a hot potato. Then, if Paramount feels that they have to get Star Trek back on screen (big or small), they should throw the doors open and take pitches from all kinds of people - JMS, Coto...anyone who wants to take the time and make the effort to construct something that will hopefully revitalize the A/V portion of the franchise (some of the books are actually pretty darned good - I've liked the DS9 followups, for example).
You hit on one difference and I'll hit on another. In the most popular MMORPGs PvP (player versus player - like Monopoly) is at most a secondary option to PvE (player versus environment). In the former, people buying fancy items (or gold to buy same) are directly cheating other players who "earned" their way through gameplay. In PvE, however, other players aren't losing out unless the item SELLERS are disrupting the game by monopolizing the places where the most gold and fanciest items can be obtained. The buyers, though, are only - forgive me - cheating themselves out of the experience of earning their way through the game...either that, or they're reducing a "grind" section in which they didn't want to participate so that they could so something else they consider more fun.
All PS2s have 5.1 output via optical. The difference between PS2 and Xbox in this respect (well, besides Xbox going outboard with all their AV outputs) is that the PS2 has to handle multi-channel gaming in software while Xbox has Dolby Digital sound available in hardware for their games.
PS2's multi-channel audio is NOT only available in cinematics and the like. DTS multi-channel sound is available to developers in all parts of games (I believe that ProLogic II is also available, but that isn't supported on my particular receiver). It certainly made a big difference with Vice City when I played it. Unfortunately, it's handled in software instead of dedicated hardware (the Xbox offloads 5.1 to separate hardware) so it's possible to take a performance hit by using the multi-channel sound in the PS2.
No, that's actually NOT the way it works. The way it has worked is that Square has chosen to go with a) the most popular console and b) the console with the better technology. Square ditched Nintendo at least partially because the Playstation was huge and partially because the PS technology was better suited to where they were going with their games.
Square doesn't determine a console's popularity. A console's popularity helps determine where Square goes.
Me, I always had a problem with shows like Trek, in which all human religions had apparently vanished overnight, and religion was presented only in terms of loony fanatics causing a problem for our atheist heroes.
"Amen." (Ouch) While I liked DS9, for example, which had a lot of religion in it, the only reason it seemed to be accepted at all by the characters is because the gods of the religion actually spoke to people, gave them visions detectable by changes in brain function and made fleets of enemy ships disappear. There was a lot of talk of "faith," but the truth is that if your god shows up on your doorstep and turns your bottled water into wine you don't really need to have faith at all.
Are racial issues really necessary? Are sexual issues really necessary? Are political issues really necessary?
Good science fiction has less to do with cool spaceships blowing stuff up, funny/scary robots, etc. and more to do with people (or at least sentient beings with familiar aspects) - they're people in an unusual setting but the stories still need to be about people in order to be compelling/entertaining. Religion, politics, sex...these are "people issues" and just as much at home in science fiction as they are in any "non-science" fiction.
PC games versus console games = apples versus something that's clearly not an apple in any way. It's worth noting, too, that PC gamers often have little choice in the matter. It's certainly not like Valve or ID have a history of releasing a lot of games.
Just because some companies don't mind having their code modified and then redistributed (or, at least, specific sections of their code) doesn't mean that other companies don't have a right to protect theirs. Whether you agree with it in terms of being a good business decision or not is in a different country from the point.
I'm not even sure why they care anyway - when I had more free time, hacking games was in some ways more fun for me than actually playing them. I extended the play time of Soul Reaver to something like 500 hours because of my extensive hacking of the PC version, for example.
Hello? This seems like exactly the reason software publishers/developers would want people to be prohibited from hacking their games - they'd much rather you buy the game and finish it in a month (or even less) so that you're jacked up and ready to buy the next one.
That doesn't make them [morally] right, of course, but from a business point of view it makes perfect sense.
As the person who replied above me said, just because a person is a lawyer doesn't mean they don't know what the hell they're talking about.
In this case, the lawyer in question works for a NETWORK SECURITY firm. In other words, it's in his company's financial interests to stoke concerns about the government (and others) potentially monitoring people's TCP/IP packets. After all, why secure your communications if you don't think anyone cares enough to monitor them?
I'm no proponent of the ridiculous length of current copyright terms (in fact, I'm an OPPonent), but going back to the "golden age" to show how movie studios didn't preserve their material is weak sauce. They probably never thought they would be able to make money after 60+ years - copyright didn't extend that long and the ideas of consumers purchasing movies or a multitude of television channels wanting to show them would have been considered ridiculous.
This is a good reason to go with MMOGs that allow you to buy time in stores with their game cards. Sometimes, you might end up paying an extra dollar or two a month for the privilege, but it a) doesn't expose your credit card to ongoing charges and b) gives you nice point every couple months where you have to consciously evaluate your game experience and decide whether or not its worth dropping more cash. It also ensures you'll hit the store every couple of months to see what's come out during the time you've been obsessed with your MMOG.:)
Clinton: Ridiculously overvalued Internet crap riding high.
Bush: Inherited the bursting bubble.
Clinton: Pre-9/11.
Bush: Post-9/11.
Trying to make the case that George W Bush and the republicans ruined the economy over the last four years is just flat-out ridiculous. Even ignoring the fundamental economic problems he inherited (again, the incredible loss of wealth after the dot coms went down in flames, for example), on 9/11/2001 billions of dollars were lost in addition to the people who were murdered.
I would suggest that the fact that the economy IS recovering (the unemployment rate in my state - Oregon - has gone down, for example) despite an active, ongoing war against terrorism is a testament that things are going quite well with our current leadership.
There are a lot of things I dislike about Bush and company (stem cell research, marriage discrimination, death penalty, etc.), but most of the economic problems we have are not their fault.
What "Moral TV Crusade"? For all the hand-wringing, the FCC has done virtually nothing to TV since the stupid JJ/JT Super Bowl escapade. Powell and company fined a few CBS-owned stations (spread around just to increase the fine - it was still pocket change) and THAT WAS IT. Example: Desperate Housewives and Boston Legal started right up on ABC's (Disney!) Sunday ("God's Day"!) lineup and they're both rife with the same sort of sexual content that's been going on for years (in other words, just about everything but the naked "private" areas and that small set of "dirty" words). Hell, the only media business the FCC has really gone at with the hammer is radio (??).
For all the yakking that goes on about how the FCC is really sticking it to TV with censorship, there's been virtually no measurable change. I suppose it's just because republicans are in charge that people THINK there's some sort of big change happening and that the bible belt is taking charge of the airwaves. The truth, of course, is that there's way too much money there for BOTH parties for the FCC to do anything really drastic. Again, except on radio where apparently saying the word "asshole" would cause children all over the country to turn to lives of sin.
a) There are people who don't hear about games until they're featured in magazines or actually appear on store shelves.
b) Packaging a game differently from other games can turn off those who only pay attention to the "big box" titles. I'm a game addict from way back who doesn't have to have the "latest, greatest" and I still only look at the cheap jewel cases when I'm either hunting for a specific older title or shopping for someone else (my mom likes casino and pinball and dad likes card games, so many selections can be found in the "bargain bin").
c) Finally, you will still be able to get the game via download. You won't get whatever special item they include with the boxed version, nor will you get the single-player material, but you can still play the "real" game.
What you're saying just isn't true. It's not at all unreasonable for a good company (note that I'm not necessarily saying EA is a "good" company) to lay people off during a good quarter. For example, let's say that I hire people to produce game A I want to release next June. They then finish that game by next May and it's "gone gold" but I don't have any other games where the people who designed game A can be put to use. Why would I keep them on the payroll if I didn't have anyplace I wanted to put them? Hell, what if the people I'm letting go just weren't that good (someone can be competent but not up to my standards)? It's not like I have an obligation (barring contractual obligations) to keep employees on the payroll in perpetuity.
In this particularly case with EA, combined with the reports of very harrowing work conditions (ridiculous amounts of forced overtime), the layoffs are probably a bad thing. By themselves, though, layoffs aren't unreasonable no matter what the recent profit results have been.
The thing is, the people who would be affected are already pissed. On thinking even more about the issue, it occurs to me that if they went through a plan like mine and gave every player who volunteers to move a free month of service, any hard feelings would quickly dissipate.
If you're talking about how Enterprise is RIGHT NOW, then, sure, it's pretty good. The recent transporter episode was weak, but the six prior and the one subsequent were solid (I geeked out intensely when I heard the word "Organian" last week). If, however, you're talking about the entirety of the thing, I must respectfully disagree. It's not that I'm overly picky about my scifi (at least no more so than I am with anything else). It's that the series was sold to Star Trek fans as a "prequel" about the first human deep space voyages, the forming of Starfleet and the eventual establishment of the Federation - yay! Of course, instead, within the first 10 episodes we were treated to the beginning of three (THREE!) seasons of time travel-related material - not yay. With all the grand story arcs available to them, with foundations already laid during the time periods of the first series and the subsequent TNG-spawned universe, they decided to go straight for one of the most tired gimmicks available in science fiction. I tried several times over the first three years of the show to get into it. I wanted to like it!
For me, the only reason I started watching again this year (AFTER the season premiere, by the way) was because I had read that they were closing off the "temporal cold war" (did they ever explain what the hell that meant, anyway, or did B&B just think it sounded cool?) and hiring Manny Coto (who, by the way, did Odyssey 5 which also used time travel but did it in a far more interesting way) to take the reins. I've been rewarded with three episodes about Khan-like, genetically enhanced humans (a nice, already well-established topic in Star Trek), three episodes fixing the Vulcans (providing a nice explanation as to why they were simply being A-holes instead of being aloof and detached - subtle difference, I admit), a good one-off featuring "first contact" with the Organians and a so-so transporter episode. THAT is the right direction. Supposedly, they're planning to take it to the next level with some Romulan action - I can hardly wait.
I've rambled, but here's my take in a nutshell: I hope that a) they don't get cancelled and b) Enterprise continues in the direction it's going. It's finally getting good.
Slashdot Mirror
You're better off not seeing the last episode of DS9. That series didn't end well - I mean, the big arc was resolved (too abruptly for my tastes) but the rest of the conclusion was just not worth it. Then again, even knowing that, I'd still be pissed if I didn't even get a chance to watch it. :)
I was convinced that American TV is, as a whole, better than British TV when John Cleese said it a few years back. I figure he ought to know.
That kind of makes no sense since the North Americans who care about Square Enix already know that the main Final Fantasy line is a PS2-only deal, ergo they would have a PS2.
The issue described sounded like a pretty simple prototype bug instead of a technology issue. Specifically, they said that they had to depress the contrast button constantly to keep the display on. So, whatever that was doing could be replaced with a simple switch and it would be good to go.
Maybe 18 years old IS an arbitrary number. As it stands, that happens to be around the time that most kids graduate high school, the last schooling in the US which it is mandatory to offer. That seems a good enough reason to keep the age right where it is, so that children don't have extra incentive to quit on their education (if the age were 16, it would be all too easy for a sophomore to just say "Screw this, I'm an adult and I don't have to stick around."). Even if the money we spend doesn't prove it, our society DOES value education and when children don't complete high school it makes unnecessary problems for them.
The system in question isn't an implant; it isn't a chain to a desk. It's a simple ID badge that interfaces with a computer system to, hopefully, improve recordkeeping and keep better track of students for whom THE SCHOOL IS RESPONSIBLE. Making a bunch of noise about how it somehow violates a child's rights is just that: Noise.
If we want to teach children about their civil rights, that's what civics classes are for. Until they turn 18, they don't get to choose where they go or what they do unless adults in authority permit it.
The bottom line is that there aren't enough adults in schools to keep tabs on every kid (and there haven't been for a LONG time) and the parents can't be there to do it because they're hopefully out there doing their thing to support their family. If technology can help out, then go for it (I say add a little GPS to the mix and get some REAL tracking). They're children and we need to treat them that way.
Indeed. I suppose JMS and company are counting on the geek legions to just support any idea he has, even sight unseen. This was certainly the case when Rick Berman was given all-but-complete control over Star Trek - TNG was good, so why not let him do whatever he wants? That certainly turned out well.
If I were to support anyone along these lines, I'd support Manny Coto. Enterprise really IS better than it was previously, which is pretty impressive considering how weak the show was before (and Odyssey 5 was pretty good, too).
It's a pretty crowded bandwagon that I'm yelling from here, but the key is to drop Berman like a hot potato. Then, if Paramount feels that they have to get Star Trek back on screen (big or small), they should throw the doors open and take pitches from all kinds of people - JMS, Coto...anyone who wants to take the time and make the effort to construct something that will hopefully revitalize the A/V portion of the franchise (some of the books are actually pretty darned good - I've liked the DS9 followups, for example).
You hit on one difference and I'll hit on another. In the most popular MMORPGs PvP (player versus player - like Monopoly) is at most a secondary option to PvE (player versus environment). In the former, people buying fancy items (or gold to buy same) are directly cheating other players who "earned" their way through gameplay. In PvE, however, other players aren't losing out unless the item SELLERS are disrupting the game by monopolizing the places where the most gold and fanciest items can be obtained. The buyers, though, are only - forgive me - cheating themselves out of the experience of earning their way through the game...either that, or they're reducing a "grind" section in which they didn't want to participate so that they could so something else they consider more fun.
All PS2s have 5.1 output via optical. The difference between PS2 and Xbox in this respect (well, besides Xbox going outboard with all their AV outputs) is that the PS2 has to handle multi-channel gaming in software while Xbox has Dolby Digital sound available in hardware for their games.
PS2's multi-channel audio is NOT only available in cinematics and the like. DTS multi-channel sound is available to developers in all parts of games (I believe that ProLogic II is also available, but that isn't supported on my particular receiver). It certainly made a big difference with Vice City when I played it. Unfortunately, it's handled in software instead of dedicated hardware (the Xbox offloads 5.1 to separate hardware) so it's possible to take a performance hit by using the multi-channel sound in the PS2.
Square doesn't determine a console's popularity. A console's popularity helps determine where Square goes.
"Amen." (Ouch) While I liked DS9, for example, which had a lot of religion in it, the only reason it seemed to be accepted at all by the characters is because the gods of the religion actually spoke to people, gave them visions detectable by changes in brain function and made fleets of enemy ships disappear. There was a lot of talk of "faith," but the truth is that if your god shows up on your doorstep and turns your bottled water into wine you don't really need to have faith at all.
Good science fiction has less to do with cool spaceships blowing stuff up, funny/scary robots, etc. and more to do with people (or at least sentient beings with familiar aspects) - they're people in an unusual setting but the stories still need to be about people in order to be compelling/entertaining. Religion, politics, sex...these are "people issues" and just as much at home in science fiction as they are in any "non-science" fiction.
Just because some companies don't mind having their code modified and then redistributed (or, at least, specific sections of their code) doesn't mean that other companies don't have a right to protect theirs. Whether you agree with it in terms of being a good business decision or not is in a different country from the point.
Hello? This seems like exactly the reason software publishers/developers would want people to be prohibited from hacking their games - they'd much rather you buy the game and finish it in a month (or even less) so that you're jacked up and ready to buy the next one.
That doesn't make them [morally] right, of course, but from a business point of view it makes perfect sense.
In this case, the lawyer in question works for a NETWORK SECURITY firm. In other words, it's in his company's financial interests to stoke concerns about the government (and others) potentially monitoring people's TCP/IP packets. After all, why secure your communications if you don't think anyone cares enough to monitor them?
I'm no proponent of the ridiculous length of current copyright terms (in fact, I'm an OPPonent), but going back to the "golden age" to show how movie studios didn't preserve their material is weak sauce. They probably never thought they would be able to make money after 60+ years - copyright didn't extend that long and the ideas of consumers purchasing movies or a multitude of television channels wanting to show them would have been considered ridiculous.
This is a good reason to go with MMOGs that allow you to buy time in stores with their game cards. Sometimes, you might end up paying an extra dollar or two a month for the privilege, but it a) doesn't expose your credit card to ongoing charges and b) gives you nice point every couple months where you have to consciously evaluate your game experience and decide whether or not its worth dropping more cash. It also ensures you'll hit the store every couple of months to see what's come out during the time you've been obsessed with your MMOG. :)
Clinton: Ridiculously overvalued Internet crap riding high.
Bush: Inherited the bursting bubble.
Clinton: Pre-9/11.
Bush: Post-9/11.
Trying to make the case that George W Bush and the republicans ruined the economy over the last four years is just flat-out ridiculous. Even ignoring the fundamental economic problems he inherited (again, the incredible loss of wealth after the dot coms went down in flames, for example), on 9/11/2001 billions of dollars were lost in addition to the people who were murdered.
I would suggest that the fact that the economy IS recovering (the unemployment rate in my state - Oregon - has gone down, for example) despite an active, ongoing war against terrorism is a testament that things are going quite well with our current leadership.
There are a lot of things I dislike about Bush and company (stem cell research, marriage discrimination, death penalty, etc.), but most of the economic problems we have are not their fault.
Give the actual copyright holders a $200 unit that does that and they'll buy several dozen of them and retain the things perfectly themselves.
For all the yakking that goes on about how the FCC is really sticking it to TV with censorship, there's been virtually no measurable change. I suppose it's just because republicans are in charge that people THINK there's some sort of big change happening and that the bible belt is taking charge of the airwaves. The truth, of course, is that there's way too much money there for BOTH parties for the FCC to do anything really drastic. Again, except on radio where apparently saying the word "asshole" would cause children all over the country to turn to lives of sin.
a) There are people who don't hear about games until they're featured in magazines or actually appear on store shelves.
b) Packaging a game differently from other games can turn off those who only pay attention to the "big box" titles. I'm a game addict from way back who doesn't have to have the "latest, greatest" and I still only look at the cheap jewel cases when I'm either hunting for a specific older title or shopping for someone else (my mom likes casino and pinball and dad likes card games, so many selections can be found in the "bargain bin").
c) Finally, you will still be able to get the game via download. You won't get whatever special item they include with the boxed version, nor will you get the single-player material, but you can still play the "real" game.
In this particularly case with EA, combined with the reports of very harrowing work conditions (ridiculous amounts of forced overtime), the layoffs are probably a bad thing. By themselves, though, layoffs aren't unreasonable no matter what the recent profit results have been.
The thing is, the people who would be affected are already pissed. On thinking even more about the issue, it occurs to me that if they went through a plan like mine and gave every player who volunteers to move a free month of service, any hard feelings would quickly dissipate.
For me, the only reason I started watching again this year (AFTER the season premiere, by the way) was because I had read that they were closing off the "temporal cold war" (did they ever explain what the hell that meant, anyway, or did B&B just think it sounded cool?) and hiring Manny Coto (who, by the way, did Odyssey 5 which also used time travel but did it in a far more interesting way) to take the reins. I've been rewarded with three episodes about Khan-like, genetically enhanced humans (a nice, already well-established topic in Star Trek), three episodes fixing the Vulcans (providing a nice explanation as to why they were simply being A-holes instead of being aloof and detached - subtle difference, I admit), a good one-off featuring "first contact" with the Organians and a so-so transporter episode. THAT is the right direction. Supposedly, they're planning to take it to the next level with some Romulan action - I can hardly wait.
I've rambled, but here's my take in a nutshell: I hope that a) they don't get cancelled and b) Enterprise continues in the direction it's going. It's finally getting good.