What I find most interesting about this trend, is that "social" interaction carried out online is world-knowable. Anyone who wants to look at, use, or even track what you do online, can do so. It's not like going to a party for a drink and then leaving for the day- it's like going to a party and having everything you do etched in stone so that a nice little memento can haunt you forever.
It will be most interesting to see how much fallout those who participated in sites like MySpace will endure as a result.
Keep laughing...just the other day I spoke with someone employed by a reasonbly-sized city, that, like many, are cash-strapped. Don't think they aren't looking for ways to reduce their costs. She seemed intrigued by the fact that you could download, install, and use an entire OS, not to mention software with a reasonably good feature set - for free.
Based on feedback from a friend that bought the game, I'd say the scaling issue is in need of some serious work, and there are lots of other Oblivion players who feel the same way - check out the forums on ars technica. He has had to re-roll once already, because if you don't focus most of your effort on combat-related skills, you will not get far, or have a VERY hard time doing it. Even if you do, things aren't easy. He finally had to set the difficulty level down to get past this one area, and he was only at level 14. He is not a n00b gamer either- he has wiped the floor with me almost every time we've played together.
There are other rediculous aspects to the leveling - namely that if you relegate all your combat stuff to minor skills, you can advance on those without it affecting your overall level. This allows for absurd situations where you have a level 3 character that can take on (and easily defeat) what would otherwise be very formidable enemies.
It sounds like it's a bad enough problem that I've decided to hold off on buying the game until it's fixed.
This is simply a case where the ingenuity of American laziness has been justified (er, rationalized) in a Wikipedia article. When you get right down to it, using "could" instead of "couldn't," literally interpreted, means quite the opposite of what is intended. What's particularly unfortunate, is my suspicion that a fair number of people don't even understand this.
Given tbe Dubya administration's track record, the whole thing just seems rather hypocritical. Yes, we need to be sure that foreign governments aren't surreptitiously spying on us, but I dare say that we (the citizens) currently face a threat on this side of the ocean that's more pressing.
Further, I believe that the wiretaps are only part of what's actually visible to the public - I wouldn't be a bit surprised if all kinds of nastiness (unconstitutonal or otherwise) continue to be uncovered. Just yesterday there was an article about the potential use of small airborne drones equipped with cameras to spy on ANY location from a stationary point in the air. What is with the preoccupation this governnment has with spying on everyone for no rationally justifiable reason? ("fer the terrists" doesn't cut it anymore - that's been done to death, and has become little more than a logical fallacy).
It would include, as part of this re-engineering effort, a dialog that would appear, explaining to the user, why this is happening- pointing out the destructive nature of software patents. The effect is, that since someone else "owns" the ability to do things a certain way, you are required to do it differently, or fork out some cash. If enough people are made aware of just how sofware patents really do have an effect on what they can and cannot do, perhaps this could be the beginning of some grassroots support for much-needed change.
In Diebold's defense, any machine handed over to an investigator should not be trusted again, for the very same reasons.
The fact that it's Diebold should make the machine untrusted. Why states have even entertained the notion of purchasing Diebold equipment is beyond me.
Having already spent the money, I'd agree with the notion of making them untrusted once inspected. However, given that it's Diebold we're talking about, if I were the state I'd say, "We just spent $27 million on new voting machines, but in order to insure their integrity, we are going to select a random sample, subject them to a rigorous review and inspection, and then throw them out."
I agree with part of your reasoning- that it is about professionalism, but I wouldn't confuse that with "meeting the needs of a business". Much of what goes on in the deal-making arena is about gamesmanship, not about necessarily about quality or value. It's who can put on the best show, and walk away with the biggest wad of cash at the end of the game. The more your audience feels like it's getting something big and shiny, the more they are likely to buy in - even if they're actually getting a turd dipped in gold-colored glitter. Otherwise, how could you explain large companies that routinely create disasters(think software), but still manage to stay in business?
That said, I do agree that professionalism is important - if for no other reason than to be considered a contender, or a participant.
With FOSS, it may not do exactly what I need, but I always have the option to modify it. And again, I am not locked in to a stupid EULA, per-seat or site licensing, and the overall cost.
far exceeds the cost of lisencing a proprietary soltuion.
Is this really a factor if the proprietary solution isn't a solution, in that it doesn't do what you need, and that there is no way to modify it so that it does?
Not because OOo is better than MS Office (which should be why you choose any piece of software, right?) but simply because it's cheaper.
No...there are other reasons as well - namely that the code is not closed. We can see what's going on if there is a need. If we need a feature or a fix, we're not forced to wait until enough people ask for it, and the marketing department decides that the ROI would be enough to offset the cost. There is no EULA other than the GPL or one of its variants.
I agree that OOo has some issues to contend with. I have faith in the OS development community, that they WILL be dealt with. But to suggest that the absence of cost is the only reason that anyone should consider an open source alternative, is leaving out an important part of the overall picture.
That's quite the description. When I read that (or should I say, when I try to read it), it sounds like something that might appear on a 4-color glossy brochure from a large company. One thing they do particularly well is take up a lot of space without saying anything in particular. But the colors and the big and/or vague words should leave you with a warm fuzzy feeling, I guess.
I totally agree with your assessment. Garbage in, garbage out. Abstract in, abstract out.
I'm not sure it's a matter of waiting until it's "right" - perhaps the problems that Microsoft is experiencing are more systemic (no pun intended). In other words, I think it's a distinct possibility that the methodology is at fault, and nothing, short of a complete change in culture, will cure that. If they re-write portions of the code, it would not surprise me if the rewrites had problems of their own.
Yes, fond memories here as well - we use have a shopping center with a small arcade close by. We'd ride our bikes down and spend an hour or two (and the money of course), if not playing, watching others play. Great fun.
I hate to say this, but when I took notes in college classes, I expended significant energy trying to make sure that I got as many nuances as I could from the lecture. This required a lot of writing, and I can pretty well guarantee that eye contact with the professor was the LAST thing on my mind.
The problem as I see it is, that you can think, and reflect, and write down the byproduct of all that, but if you happen to miss the gist of what the professor is saying, you've not done yourself any favors. I figured that I could do any reflection and thinking after the fact, when I wasn't so worried about missing a key point.
It's a matter of "push" vs "pull" - if you happen upon some "obscene" content while actively pursuing content (not necessarily obscene), then you have nothing to say about it. If, on the other hand, I email you content that might be considered obscene, then I am soliciting you, and you might have a legitimate gripe. But merely encountering something you consider obscene isn't (or shouldn't be) actionable. Just acknowledge that we all share the same resources, and continue with what you were doing.
Slashdot Mirror
What I find most interesting about this trend, is that "social" interaction carried out online is world-knowable. Anyone who wants to look at, use, or even track what you do online, can do so. It's not like going to a party for a drink and then leaving for the day- it's like going to a party and having everything you do etched in stone so that a nice little memento can haunt you forever.
It will be most interesting to see how much fallout those who participated in sites like MySpace will endure as a result.
I wonder how many of those complaining could come up with something better....
I guess another deficit that some geeks share is a sense of humor!
Keep laughing...just the other day I spoke with someone employed by a reasonbly-sized city, that, like many, are cash-strapped. Don't think they aren't looking for ways to reduce their costs. She seemed intrigued by the fact that you could download, install, and use an entire OS, not to mention software with a reasonably good feature set - for free.
Don't be so quick to judge - one did manage to get into the whitehouse....
Haha...joke's on me (I hope). I forgot that it's very close to the 1st of April. If this is in fact the case, it worked! (at least in my case).
Wouldn't you also have to include *content* that those on the other side of the fence might find interesting?
Based on feedback from a friend that bought the game, I'd say the scaling issue is in need of some serious work, and there are lots of other Oblivion players who feel the same way - check out the forums on ars technica. He has had to re-roll once already, because if you don't focus most of your effort on combat-related skills, you will not get far, or have a VERY hard time doing it. Even if you do, things aren't easy. He finally had to set the difficulty level down to get past this one area, and he was only at level 14. He is not a n00b gamer either- he has wiped the floor with me almost every time we've played together.
There are other rediculous aspects to the leveling - namely that if you relegate all your combat stuff to minor skills, you can advance on those without it affecting your overall level. This allows for absurd situations where you have a level 3 character that can take on (and easily defeat) what would otherwise be very formidable enemies.
It sounds like it's a bad enough problem that I've decided to hold off on buying the game until it's fixed.
This is simply a case where the ingenuity of American laziness has been justified (er, rationalized) in a Wikipedia article. When you get right down to it, using "could" instead of "couldn't," literally interpreted, means quite the opposite of what is intended. What's particularly unfortunate, is my suspicion that a fair number of people don't even understand this.
Given tbe Dubya administration's track record, the whole thing just seems rather hypocritical. Yes, we need to be sure that foreign governments aren't surreptitiously spying on us, but I dare say that we (the citizens) currently face a threat on this side of the ocean that's more pressing.
Further, I believe that the wiretaps are only part of what's actually visible to the public - I wouldn't be a bit surprised if all kinds of nastiness (unconstitutonal or otherwise) continue to be uncovered. Just yesterday there was an article about the potential use of small airborne drones equipped with cameras to spy on ANY location from a stationary point in the air. What is with the preoccupation this governnment has with spying on everyone for no rationally justifiable reason? ("fer the terrists" doesn't cut it anymore - that's been done to death, and has become little more than a logical fallacy).
US Intelligence: "If there is any spying to do on Americans, WE'RE the ones that are going to do it!".
I'd mod this post up.
It would include, as part of this re-engineering effort, a dialog that would appear, explaining to the user, why this is happening- pointing out the destructive nature of software patents. The effect is, that since someone else "owns" the ability to do things a certain way, you are required to do it differently, or fork out some cash. If enough people are made aware of just how sofware patents really do have an effect on what they can and cannot do, perhaps this could be the beginning of some grassroots support for much-needed change.
In Diebold's defense, any machine handed over to an investigator should not be trusted again, for the very same reasons.
The fact that it's Diebold should make the machine untrusted. Why states have even entertained the notion of purchasing Diebold equipment is beyond me.
Having already spent the money, I'd agree with the notion of making them untrusted once inspected. However, given that it's Diebold we're talking about, if I were the state I'd say, "We just spent $27 million on new voting machines, but in order to insure their integrity, we are going to select a random sample, subject them to a rigorous review and inspection, and then throw them out."
I agree with part of your reasoning- that it is about professionalism, but I wouldn't confuse that with "meeting the needs of a business". Much of what goes on in the deal-making arena is about gamesmanship, not about necessarily about quality or value. It's who can put on the best show, and walk away with the biggest wad of cash at the end of the game. The more your audience feels like it's getting something big and shiny, the more they are likely to buy in - even if they're actually getting a turd dipped in gold-colored glitter. Otherwise, how could you explain large companies that routinely create disasters(think software), but still manage to stay in business?
That said, I do agree that professionalism is important - if for no other reason than to be considered a contender, or a participant.
With FOSS, it may not do exactly what I need, but I always have the option to modify it. And again, I am not locked in to a stupid EULA, per-seat or site licensing, and the overall cost.
far exceeds the cost of lisencing a proprietary soltuion.
Is this really a factor if the proprietary solution isn't a solution, in that it doesn't do what you need, and that there is no way to modify it so that it does?
Not because OOo is better than MS Office (which should be why you choose any piece of software, right?) but simply because it's cheaper.
No...there are other reasons as well - namely that the code is not closed. We can see what's going on if there is a need. If we need a feature or a fix, we're not forced to wait until enough people ask for it, and the marketing department decides that the ROI would be enough to offset the cost. There is no EULA other than the GPL or one of its variants.
I agree that OOo has some issues to contend with. I have faith in the OS development community, that they WILL be dealt with. But to suggest that the absence of cost is the only reason that anyone should consider an open source alternative, is leaving out an important part of the overall picture.
That's quite the description. When I read that (or should I say, when I try to read it), it sounds like something that might appear on a 4-color glossy brochure from a large company. One thing they do particularly well is take up a lot of space without saying anything in particular. But the colors and the big and/or vague words should leave you with a warm fuzzy feeling, I guess.
I totally agree with your assessment. Garbage in, garbage out. Abstract in, abstract out.
I'm not sure it's a matter of waiting until it's "right" - perhaps the problems that Microsoft is experiencing are more systemic (no pun intended). In other words, I think it's a distinct possibility that the methodology is at fault, and nothing, short of a complete change in culture, will cure that. If they re-write portions of the code, it would not surprise me if the rewrites had problems of their own.
Yes, fond memories here as well - we use have a shopping center with a small arcade close by. We'd ride our bikes down and spend an hour or two (and the money of course), if not playing, watching others play. Great fun.
Agreed...today's adult gamers represent the very START of the whole gaming industry. Some are old enough to remember back when pong was a BIG DEAL.
I hate to say this, but when I took notes in college classes, I expended significant energy trying to make sure that I got as many nuances as I could from the lecture. This required a lot of writing, and I can pretty well guarantee that eye contact with the professor was the LAST thing on my mind.
The problem as I see it is, that you can think, and reflect, and write down the byproduct of all that, but if you happen to miss the gist of what the professor is saying, you've not done yourself any favors. I figured that I could do any reflection and thinking after the fact, when I wasn't so worried about missing a key point.
It's a matter of "push" vs "pull" - if you happen upon some "obscene" content while actively pursuing content (not necessarily obscene), then you have nothing to say about it. If, on the other hand, I email you content that might be considered obscene, then I am soliciting you, and you might have a legitimate gripe. But merely encountering something you consider obscene isn't (or shouldn't be) actionable. Just acknowledge that we all share the same resources, and continue with what you were doing.
They couldn't afford the $2 million contract that would have had a contractor come in and do it for them.