Your approach is "give it to us or we'll steal it." You know what my reply to that is? "Fuck you, I won't release it at all."
Well the sad thing is, nobody will mourn the death of an indie game. Ever. I suggest you take a leap of faith. The alternative is, nobody will ever care.
It's very difficult to own an idea, the tighter you squeeze, the more it slips through your fingers.
The sweetest fruit, before it has ripened, is the most bitter. As if to trick us, nature appears at its most opposite before emergence.
This principle is reflected not just on a microcosmic level, but as a fixed law within the Earth itself - everything must ripen. For this same reason, the climate will appear to separate into extremes - a desert (both sun and ice). And just before everything becomes climatically intolerable - we will emerge into a single, unchanging, abundant season.
It unfortunately does seem very weak. But, at least they're not playing ball with the plantiffs. By not even admitting that their users download illegal content, they've made it quite clear they won't be co-operating with the studios.
Can't say I blame them. I'm of the belief that the "internet is imaginary" - I don't think anyone should be prosecuted for anything on it. Unpopular school of thought I know, you needn't inform me.:)
I DO think it is a legitimate stand for consumer rights. iiNet has a decent track record of valuing their customers over the demands of corporate bullies.
I don't agree with "then we're fucked, and rightfully so". Many legal cases have hinged on the meaning or interpretation of a word or words. Not only that, but fighting against heavy handed execution of IP law is evolving every day due to the overwhelming body of what does/doesn't work in court. Fingers crossed the lawyers read Slashdot.:)
I'm willing to give iiNet a bit of credit for what they're doing, until I see what happens. Either way, the effect will be dramatic in Australia.
Very true. Adult pretension is the grease in the gears of society - without it, there would only be the truth - that we are all selfish, unrepentant egoists. Not a friendly truth, easy to see why it's left untouched.
I have a Das Keyboard, based on the original Model-M design. Definitely recommended if you're sick of typing into a soggy sponge.
There is something incredibly satisfying about solving a particularly complex problem, and hitting "enter" for a crunchy click. No other keyboard satisfies my lust for tactility the way this one does.
Brainwashing somewhat implies a non-rational response though.
Totally right. Perhaps "social conditioning" is a better euphemism? Or "rehabilitation" haha
Morality can be taught, you might say, but with a rational response.
I would define "rational response" as "most pleasure for least effort". Morality is taught with these requirements in mind. The child learns that it is easier to get what it wants if it goes about it in a nice way - please, thankyou, yes sir, no sir. This is no way changes the underlying motivation, just suppresses it - puts it to sleep.
Yes, I'm certainly familiar with the contept of original sin. Now, where I would differ from you is that I believe an actual change of our inherent "moral" nature, if you will, is possible. It's what "evangelical" Christianity's big deal about the Gospel is. True Christianity isn't [supposed to be] a morality/standard that is imposed on people from outside.
We're not so different. Although I don't believe a change is possible in our moral nature, I believe it is very possible to clothe it with a greater, purer intention. Bringing these powerful egoistic, moral concerns into alignment with the laws of nature is the ultimate goal of creation. Suppressing them is not, it is only a preparative stage.
Now, I'm curious. It sounds like you believe in evolutionary principles. Why is it you refer to the non-humans as animals and separate from us?
Evolution is a lie. From what I perceive, desire is the motivating force behind creation. There is a lack, it must be filled. A stone desires nothing more than to keep its shape. A plant has a greater vessel of desire than a stone. It now can grow, but must depend on its environment slightly more in return. A greater level of desire results in more abilities, such as movement, speech and so on. The desire of each level, from still, to vegetative, animate, and speaking, is an order of magnitude higher than the previous one. Animals are only as separate from us as a baby from its mother.
Humanity is the order of creation that is most dependent on their environment, a fact that will come to greater light in the future. The suffering caused by incorrectly asserting our independence from the overall Human organism is a cause of great suffering, which will pass as we integrate and unite.
Sorry to disappoint you, but this viewpoint originated in the dark ages when 50-70% of children were being left on the road for the wild animals and slavehunters, incest was the norm and severe physical torture and punishment were daily routine
Perhaps I should elaborate. I meant discipline according to its dictionary definition.
"Children are born bad and must be made good" comes from hearsay, religious writings, righteous parents and pure ignorance.
Most definitely correct. Therefore, I am at a loss as to why you entertain such superstition.
"Discipline" is conditioning through violence. Rewards are conditioning through manipulation. There are other ways to inspire the qualities you see in a healthy adult, and still respect the core dignity of the child as a human being.
Give me some examples.
Children are born with only 25% of their brain developed. They are helpless and depend on adults for survival and are wired to survive. When a baby is crying in the middle of the night that's because they need food or comforting or something else, and definitely not because they are "trying to manipulate their parents"
Refer above. I hope I made it clear enough that egoism - such as a baby crying at night - is an evolutionary characteristic. I am neither praising nor condemning necessity.
The desire to receive everything for oneself is inherent within our nature. No doubt you're familiar with the concept of original sin?
Morality must always be imposed by an environment. It is therefore not an absolute concept, but an abstract one. It is however a very necessary social construct. Without it, a society will fall apart, Sodom and Gomorrah style.
Any time an animate body rejects a form of pleasure, it must account for it. Things like "it's better for society" - in other words, considering the desires of the other - are a way to account for this rejection. Without this consideration of another's desires, the body will refuse to reject the pleasure, and instead partake in it - i.e take that $100 when no-one is around.
Because this concept of considering another's desires runs diametrically opposed to the concept of our personal, animate evolution, it requires the brainwashing of an environment in order to succeed. For this reason I would consider any form of morality or social abstraction a form of brainwashing. It's what separates us from the animals.
Children are pure egoism in action. It's necessary to discipline them in order to train this egoism into compromise. This the foundation of social law and the rules of social engagement.
Given half a chance, all of us would make the entire world submit to our will, as any child desires. However, with the help of discipline, we can put this egoism to sleep. The ego suppresses what it cannot attain, therefore punishing and rewarding a child for certain actions is an effective form of conditioning.
It is a false conditioning, however. Only the most constant brainwashing can condition a child not to take $100 when no one is around. Anything less will not allow us to deny an evolutionary characteristic important to our animate survival.
Until such a time when this human characteristic has been superseded by evolutionary altruism (as present within the rest of nature, which has already evolved), discipline will remain an important part of raising a child, and children will not have identical rights to an adult.
Slashdot Mirror
Your approach is "give it to us or we'll steal it." You know what my reply to that is? "Fuck you, I won't release it at all."
Well the sad thing is, nobody will mourn the death of an indie game. Ever. I suggest you take a leap of faith. The alternative is, nobody will ever care.
It's very difficult to own an idea, the tighter you squeeze, the more it slips through your fingers.
A win for the noble contributors of this article.
If anything is representative of the development method, it's the final product.
Welcome to slashdot, where unscience quashes dissenting views :( For the record, I did not find anything trollish about your statement at all.
Ineetnlgisrty eougnh the cmeutpor in yuor haed can raed a fiplped bit jsut fnie.
Fred has sent you a torrent. Download?
Send 20 more torrents to get a "FUCK THE RIAA" gift!
C'mon, gimme your best shot.
Nature has a funny way of surprising us.
The sweetest fruit, before it has ripened, is the most bitter. As if to trick us, nature appears at its most opposite before emergence.
This principle is reflected not just on a microcosmic level, but as a fixed law within the Earth itself - everything must ripen. For this same reason, the climate will appear to separate into extremes - a desert (both sun and ice). And just before everything becomes climatically intolerable - we will emerge into a single, unchanging, abundant season.
Further reading, Everything is evaluated not by its appearance at a given moment, but according to its measure of development.
It's evolution, baby.
Well said.
Becoming less wasteful and consuming only what you need may or may not benefit the Earth, but it will certainly benefit those who have to live on it.
Kohlberg's fourth stage of moral development.
It unfortunately does seem very weak. But, at least they're not playing ball with the plantiffs. By not even admitting that their users download illegal content, they've made it quite clear they won't be co-operating with the studios.
Can't say I blame them. I'm of the belief that the "internet is imaginary" - I don't think anyone should be prosecuted for anything on it. Unpopular school of thought I know, you needn't inform me. :)
I DO think it is a legitimate stand for consumer rights. iiNet has a decent track record of valuing their customers over the demands of corporate bullies.
I don't agree with "then we're fucked, and rightfully so". Many legal cases have hinged on the meaning or interpretation of a word or words. Not only that, but fighting against heavy handed execution of IP law is evolving every day due to the overwhelming body of what does/doesn't work in court. Fingers crossed the lawyers read Slashdot. :)
I'm willing to give iiNet a bit of credit for what they're doing, until I see what happens. Either way, the effect will be dramatic in Australia.
These are interesting times, indeed.
nice joke.
Very true. Adult pretension is the grease in the gears of society - without it, there would only be the truth - that we are all selfish, unrepentant egoists. Not a friendly truth, easy to see why it's left untouched.
If you picture him screaming this, naked at a bus stop, it's kind of amusing.
I have a Das Keyboard, based on the original Model-M design. Definitely recommended if you're sick of typing into a soggy sponge.
There is something incredibly satisfying about solving a particularly complex problem, and hitting "enter" for a crunchy click. No other keyboard satisfies my lust for tactility the way this one does.
Pornographic use of Occam's razor.
The idea of winning "one internets" is suddenly not quite so appealing.
I think an even better comparison would be a car analogy, with seventeen discrete car analogies attached below it.
Brainwashing somewhat implies a non-rational response though.
Totally right. Perhaps "social conditioning" is a better euphemism? Or "rehabilitation" haha
Morality can be taught, you might say, but with a rational response.
I would define "rational response" as "most pleasure for least effort". Morality is taught with these requirements in mind. The child learns that it is easier to get what it wants if it goes about it in a nice way - please, thankyou, yes sir, no sir. This is no way changes the underlying motivation, just suppresses it - puts it to sleep.
Yes, I'm certainly familiar with the contept of original sin. Now, where I would differ from you is that I believe an actual change of our inherent "moral" nature, if you will, is possible. It's what "evangelical" Christianity's big deal about the Gospel is. True Christianity isn't [supposed to be] a morality/standard that is imposed on people from outside.
We're not so different. Although I don't believe a change is possible in our moral nature, I believe it is very possible to clothe it with a greater, purer intention. Bringing these powerful egoistic, moral concerns into alignment with the laws of nature is the ultimate goal of creation. Suppressing them is not, it is only a preparative stage.
Now, I'm curious. It sounds like you believe in evolutionary principles. Why is it you refer to the non-humans as animals and separate from us?
Evolution is a lie. From what I perceive, desire is the motivating force behind creation. There is a lack, it must be filled. A stone desires nothing more than to keep its shape. A plant has a greater vessel of desire than a stone. It now can grow, but must depend on its environment slightly more in return. A greater level of desire results in more abilities, such as movement, speech and so on. The desire of each level, from still, to vegetative, animate, and speaking, is an order of magnitude higher than the previous one. Animals are only as separate from us as a baby from its mother.
Humanity is the order of creation that is most dependent on their environment, a fact that will come to greater light in the future. The suffering caused by incorrectly asserting our independence from the overall Human organism is a cause of great suffering, which will pass as we integrate and unite.
Sorry to disappoint you, but this viewpoint originated in the dark ages when 50-70% of children were being left on the road for the wild animals and slavehunters, incest was the norm and severe physical torture and punishment were daily routine
Perhaps I should elaborate. I meant discipline according to its dictionary definition.
"Children are born bad and must be made good" comes from hearsay, religious writings, righteous parents and pure ignorance.
Most definitely correct. Therefore, I am at a loss as to why you entertain such superstition.
"Discipline" is conditioning through violence. Rewards are conditioning through manipulation. There are other ways to inspire the qualities you see in a healthy adult, and still respect the core dignity of the child as a human being.
Give me some examples.
Children are born with only 25% of their brain developed. They are helpless and depend on adults for survival and are wired to survive. When a baby is crying in the middle of the night that's because they need food or comforting or something else, and definitely not because they are "trying to manipulate their parents"
Refer above. I hope I made it clear enough that egoism - such as a baby crying at night - is an evolutionary characteristic. I am neither praising nor condemning necessity.
The desire to receive everything for oneself is inherent within our nature. No doubt you're familiar with the concept of original sin?
Morality must always be imposed by an environment. It is therefore not an absolute concept, but an abstract one. It is however a very necessary social construct. Without it, a society will fall apart, Sodom and Gomorrah style.
Any time an animate body rejects a form of pleasure, it must account for it. Things like "it's better for society" - in other words, considering the desires of the other - are a way to account for this rejection. Without this consideration of another's desires, the body will refuse to reject the pleasure, and instead partake in it - i.e take that $100 when no-one is around.
Because this concept of considering another's desires runs diametrically opposed to the concept of our personal, animate evolution, it requires the brainwashing of an environment in order to succeed. For this reason I would consider any form of morality or social abstraction a form of brainwashing. It's what separates us from the animals.
Children are pure egoism in action. It's necessary to discipline them in order to train this egoism into compromise. This the foundation of social law and the rules of social engagement.
Given half a chance, all of us would make the entire world submit to our will, as any child desires. However, with the help of discipline, we can put this egoism to sleep. The ego suppresses what it cannot attain, therefore punishing and rewarding a child for certain actions is an effective form of conditioning.
It is a false conditioning, however. Only the most constant brainwashing can condition a child not to take $100 when no one is around. Anything less will not allow us to deny an evolutionary characteristic important to our animate survival.
Until such a time when this human characteristic has been superseded by evolutionary altruism (as present within the rest of nature, which has already evolved), discipline will remain an important part of raising a child, and children will not have identical rights to an adult.
If such a way to remove restrictions existed, I am surprised it has not been activated by an (ahem) third party.
Though I perhaps wouldn't phrase it to your manager like that. She might get the wrong impression.
Huh? How will that change anything?