I have heard it suggested a few times that this is true of all game designers, that when a real designer plays a game, all he sees are the design decisions; the game itself can't be seen behind the mechanics, and that a good game for a designer is a well-designed game, which is not necessarily related to having fun with the gameplay. Richard Bartle once wrote an interesting blog entry about a zone's design in World of Warcraft; he definitely doesn't see and play the game like most people.
I am glad people like you exist, because that's why I have games. I think you're really missing out sometimes, though.
I see your reasoning but I think it's flawed. Your brain goes through the same process for the color red and the color blue, but you get obviously different results. There is no reason to assume that simply because two stimuli are experienced differently that they must be entirely separate processes.
You do realize that memorizing and regurgitating known information is the perfect skill for 99.9% of medical diagnosis? As long as Watson knows how to say, "I don't know" it will be as good or better than the vast majority of humans at this particular task.
Not to mention that you want doctors to actually use the system, which is less likely if you're giving them a bunch of extra stuff to type. That makes it feel administrative; many doctors feel burdened by paperwork as it is.
To be fair though, the waiter faces the loss of his job, fines, and perhaps even jail time for misusing your card. His pay is low but you do have the force of law firmly on your side and so the trust seems approximately as reasonable as allowing a dentist you don't really know to poke around in your mouth with sharp metal objects. I'm not saying that Sony is culpable here - maybe they are and maybe they are not - but even if they are found culpable, what is likely to happen to them?
99.999% of the attackers involved do not have physical access to your computer or safe.
99.999% of attackers haven't had access to the passwords on Sony's servers, either. Physical access is likely not required; if you think the average home machine, connected to the Internet, is in any way more secure than these servers, then you're setting yourself up for quite a shock. It's not even a lot more work to farm information from individual machines; in fact, I would not bet against this having already been accomplished on some scale.
A completely secure network is not possible. If a machine is accessible, then it is hackable. That's a fact of life. Claiming that intrusions are moral because they are possible is an argument for the end of privacy altogether; if that's your agenda then okay, but be aware that this is the position you're taking.
I wonder whether you realize that every company with an online presence is open to this sort of attack. No online system is completely secure. Since the hackers aren't being ethical with their information, I see no reason to assume that any malfeasance on Sony's part was particularly responsible; I think it's just as likely that they knew this would be a popular target and that the backlash of their peers would be low to nonexistent. A lot of people seem anxious to brand LulzSec as heroes, and maybe they are, but they are acting suspiciously like common vandals.
I find this argument specious. I don't think that stockholders, being owners of the company, and employees, who actually carry out whatever policies are being protested, could be said to be innocents, since they are directly profiting from whatever malfeasance is being opposed. Customers are, presumably, the very people who are doing the protesting, though; it seems to me that the hackers are punishing people who are/should be on their side.
Windows, Office, Xbox, those are all bread winners and they are not going away. So what if they are a bit late to the Tablet and Phone business? It's funny how "mobile" technology enthusiasts are so edgy and angry all the time.
Indeed, sometimes it is good to be late. They were pretty late to the console market, and it seems to have worked out just fine for them. Ask Sega whether it's always good to be early.
The assertion that a human mind is fully formed and unable to learn completely new things and discover completely new interests at the ripe old age of eighteen seems a pretty specious one to me.
So... in other words, the locals do all the hard work and set up the infrastructure and establish a customer base, then the businesses can come in and operate at low margins (since they can take the loss) and don't have the cost of loans to set all that up? That doesn't sound fair to me. Seems to me that businesses should be willing to compete with a local government based on the business' (presumed) superior levels of service and resources. If the argument is that a megacorporation isn't a better ISP than a city government, then perhaps the megacorporation does not deserve to survive in that sector.
Schools have a lot of problems, but I honestly think that motivating the kids is one of the smallest; any teacher worth the title can solve that one on their own, given minimal levels of funding. American society as a whole is very hostile to schools right now. Teachers are paid relatively low salaries in most places. Schools as a whole are grossly underfunded. We have had a strong anti-intellectual streak in pop culture for the last few decades. We tie funding to superficial metrics like standardized testing that turn what should be a byproduct into the main objective. I think all of those are much more fundamental issues, and none of them have anything to do with the kids. If gamification can lead to better metrics then I'm all for that, but I suspect this line of inquiry won't do much to improve the sorry state of public education in the U.S.; what we need is to decide, as a nation, that real education actually matters - not merely as a means to an end, but as an end itself.
Since each class supposedly has its very own storyline, if they're all well done it might have considerably more replay value than one playthrough. I do agree that it doesn't seem to be built for very long-term sustainability, but if they can hold on to subscribers for even six months that might be enough time to construct a compelling end game.
I don't understand this attitude. The entire raison d'etre of a patent troll is to get that settlement; if they have a legitimate patent claim that would win in court, then they're not a troll, right? So trolls are hardly going to go after Red Hat more often because of this; they were already coming with everything they had.
Okay so that's an improvement on credit card issuance, but how does any of that relate to the use of a stolen number or security of a given transaction? Isn't that what this conversation is about? I don't think you made your point.
On stereotyping: of course he's oversimplifying, but it's lazy and inaccurate when you do it, too.
It would be unreasonable to expect Grandma & grandpa who barely know how to turn on a computer to learn Linux...
Why, because they are "too old" to learn?
I would cite an apparent lack of interest. Easy access to computers stopped being news years ago. If someone is still computer illiterate at this point, then they've most likely made a decision to be so, and it isn't reasonable to expect them to change their minds now.
I have yet to see any evidence that child molestation is caused by child pornography, and you do need compelling evidence because on the face of it, the claim is nonsense. I like grown women. If you outlaw all porn featuring adult women tomorrow, and let's even say you are successful, this will have zero impact on my predilections. I wanted to have sex with girls my age before I had ever seen pornography, and I will want to have sex with women, and seek out ways to make this happen, regardless of porn availability. I see no reason a pedophile's mind should work any differently - they like what they like, and you can stamp and scream all you want, but it won't change that. I imagine many of them would change it themselves if all it took was to stop looking at pictures.
Censorship won't make people celibate. You're wasting your time.
HA! That's a pretty good argument; I no longer have Linux installed so I took Mono's word for this, but if it doesn't really work then I stand corrected.
Okay... but how is this different from Flash? Is it worse simply because it's newer?
I do agree that a downloadable video file would have been better, but it really seems to me that the word "Microsoft" is all some people need to see to fly into a paranoid rant. If they had linked to a file I have no doubt that someone would have posted about how the format they used was suboptimal and MS is trying to keep us from experiencing the video in some other format that is better.
Wow, not kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit is being a luddite now? It amazes me that people have worked so hard to free the web from the clutches of the likes of MS (active-X) and Adobe (flash) through the efforts put into html5 and now we get the pleasure of being called a luddite. If anything, I'd say not embracing the <img> tag is being a luddite.
Wow, using a free browser addon that has versions for Windows, Mac, and Linux is kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit now? Everything more advanced than the <img> tag is somehow shameful? How fearful you must be every time you click a link. I don't think I'd enjoy your Internet very much.
Obviously, but the fact that you are alive and not a dead infant is still relevant. Modern medical science does in fact increase your chances of survival to age 80 from the time you are born; the fact that we've made no appreciable progress on immortality since World War I is hardly worth mentioning.
Slashdot Mirror
I would imagine that chasing younger viewers has something to do with the fact that they are potentially customers for a longer span of time.
I have heard it suggested a few times that this is true of all game designers, that when a real designer plays a game, all he sees are the design decisions; the game itself can't be seen behind the mechanics, and that a good game for a designer is a well-designed game, which is not necessarily related to having fun with the gameplay. Richard Bartle once wrote an interesting blog entry about a zone's design in World of Warcraft; he definitely doesn't see and play the game like most people.
I am glad people like you exist, because that's why I have games. I think you're really missing out sometimes, though.
I see your reasoning but I think it's flawed. Your brain goes through the same process for the color red and the color blue, but you get obviously different results. There is no reason to assume that simply because two stimuli are experienced differently that they must be entirely separate processes.
You do realize that memorizing and regurgitating known information is the perfect skill for 99.9% of medical diagnosis? As long as Watson knows how to say, "I don't know" it will be as good or better than the vast majority of humans at this particular task.
Not to mention that you want doctors to actually use the system, which is less likely if you're giving them a bunch of extra stuff to type. That makes it feel administrative; many doctors feel burdened by paperwork as it is.
To be fair though, the waiter faces the loss of his job, fines, and perhaps even jail time for misusing your card. His pay is low but you do have the force of law firmly on your side and so the trust seems approximately as reasonable as allowing a dentist you don't really know to poke around in your mouth with sharp metal objects. I'm not saying that Sony is culpable here - maybe they are and maybe they are not - but even if they are found culpable, what is likely to happen to them?
99.999% of the attackers involved do not have physical access to your computer or safe.
99.999% of attackers haven't had access to the passwords on Sony's servers, either. Physical access is likely not required; if you think the average home machine, connected to the Internet, is in any way more secure than these servers, then you're setting yourself up for quite a shock. It's not even a lot more work to farm information from individual machines; in fact, I would not bet against this having already been accomplished on some scale.
A completely secure network is not possible. If a machine is accessible, then it is hackable. That's a fact of life. Claiming that intrusions are moral because they are possible is an argument for the end of privacy altogether; if that's your agenda then okay, but be aware that this is the position you're taking.
I wonder whether you realize that every company with an online presence is open to this sort of attack. No online system is completely secure. Since the hackers aren't being ethical with their information, I see no reason to assume that any malfeasance on Sony's part was particularly responsible; I think it's just as likely that they knew this would be a popular target and that the backlash of their peers would be low to nonexistent. A lot of people seem anxious to brand LulzSec as heroes, and maybe they are, but they are acting suspiciously like common vandals.
If you're on the board of directors then "sacking people from the top" would include you, wouldn't it? Isn't that precisely why this doesn't happen?
I find this argument specious. I don't think that stockholders, being owners of the company, and employees, who actually carry out whatever policies are being protested, could be said to be innocents, since they are directly profiting from whatever malfeasance is being opposed. Customers are, presumably, the very people who are doing the protesting, though; it seems to me that the hackers are punishing people who are/should be on their side.
Windows, Office, Xbox, those are all bread winners and they are not going away. So what if they are a bit late to the Tablet and Phone business? It's funny how "mobile" technology enthusiasts are so edgy and angry all the time.
Indeed, sometimes it is good to be late. They were pretty late to the console market, and it seems to have worked out just fine for them. Ask Sega whether it's always good to be early.
The assertion that a human mind is fully formed and unable to learn completely new things and discover completely new interests at the ripe old age of eighteen seems a pretty specious one to me.
So... in other words, the locals do all the hard work and set up the infrastructure and establish a customer base, then the businesses can come in and operate at low margins (since they can take the loss) and don't have the cost of loans to set all that up? That doesn't sound fair to me. Seems to me that businesses should be willing to compete with a local government based on the business' (presumed) superior levels of service and resources. If the argument is that a megacorporation isn't a better ISP than a city government, then perhaps the megacorporation does not deserve to survive in that sector.
Schools have a lot of problems, but I honestly think that motivating the kids is one of the smallest; any teacher worth the title can solve that one on their own, given minimal levels of funding. American society as a whole is very hostile to schools right now. Teachers are paid relatively low salaries in most places. Schools as a whole are grossly underfunded. We have had a strong anti-intellectual streak in pop culture for the last few decades. We tie funding to superficial metrics like standardized testing that turn what should be a byproduct into the main objective. I think all of those are much more fundamental issues, and none of them have anything to do with the kids. If gamification can lead to better metrics then I'm all for that, but I suspect this line of inquiry won't do much to improve the sorry state of public education in the U.S.; what we need is to decide, as a nation, that real education actually matters - not merely as a means to an end, but as an end itself.
Since each class supposedly has its very own storyline, if they're all well done it might have considerably more replay value than one playthrough. I do agree that it doesn't seem to be built for very long-term sustainability, but if they can hold on to subscribers for even six months that might be enough time to construct a compelling end game.
I don't understand this attitude. The entire raison d'etre of a patent troll is to get that settlement; if they have a legitimate patent claim that would win in court, then they're not a troll, right? So trolls are hardly going to go after Red Hat more often because of this; they were already coming with everything they had.
Okay so that's an improvement on credit card issuance, but how does any of that relate to the use of a stolen number or security of a given transaction? Isn't that what this conversation is about? I don't think you made your point.
On stereotyping: of course he's oversimplifying, but it's lazy and inaccurate when you do it, too.
I'm all for taking his ass out, but damn, you know they are about to fuck up some city, somewhere...
Understand that this is exactly what terrorism is designed to make you think.
Maybe announce each time that they are being buried in an unmarked grave wrapped in bacon? That might cut down on the religious fanatics.
Yes, disrespecting a religion by insulting their dead is a time-tested way of reducing fanaticism.
It would be unreasonable to expect Grandma & grandpa who barely know how to turn on a computer to learn Linux...
Why, because they are "too old" to learn?
I would cite an apparent lack of interest. Easy access to computers stopped being news years ago. If someone is still computer illiterate at this point, then they've most likely made a decision to be so, and it isn't reasonable to expect them to change their minds now.
I have yet to see any evidence that child molestation is caused by child pornography, and you do need compelling evidence because on the face of it, the claim is nonsense. I like grown women. If you outlaw all porn featuring adult women tomorrow, and let's even say you are successful, this will have zero impact on my predilections. I wanted to have sex with girls my age before I had ever seen pornography, and I will want to have sex with women, and seek out ways to make this happen, regardless of porn availability. I see no reason a pedophile's mind should work any differently - they like what they like, and you can stamp and scream all you want, but it won't change that. I imagine many of them would change it themselves if all it took was to stop looking at pictures.
Censorship won't make people celibate. You're wasting your time.
HA! That's a pretty good argument; I no longer have Linux installed so I took Mono's word for this, but if it doesn't really work then I stand corrected.
Thanks.
Okay... but how is this different from Flash? Is it worse simply because it's newer?
I do agree that a downloadable video file would have been better, but it really seems to me that the word "Microsoft" is all some people need to see to fly into a paranoid rant. If they had linked to a file I have no doubt that someone would have posted about how the format they used was suboptimal and MS is trying to keep us from experiencing the video in some other format that is better.
Wow, not kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit is being a luddite now? It amazes me that people have worked so hard to free the web from the clutches of the likes of MS (active-X) and Adobe (flash) through the efforts put into html5 and now we get the pleasure of being called a luddite. If anything, I'd say not embracing the <img> tag is being a luddite.
Wow, using a free browser addon that has versions for Windows, Mac, and Linux is kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit now? Everything more advanced than the <img> tag is somehow shameful? How fearful you must be every time you click a link. I don't think I'd enjoy your Internet very much.
Obviously, but the fact that you are alive and not a dead infant is still relevant. Modern medical science does in fact increase your chances of survival to age 80 from the time you are born; the fact that we've made no appreciable progress on immortality since World War I is hardly worth mentioning.