I think it wasn't well thought out. This is a common problem regarding human interactions with nature. This is one of the main reason why we have so many environmental problems.
what do you mean? a thousand yards long for those endless running scenes, Or where a wife can lock her husband out but a raptor or sabre-tooth tiger can come in through any window?
It isn't actually long, it has torus-shaped corridors. That's why the background keeps repeating.
Flash is not very efficient resource-wise, but it is easy to deal with, making dealing with movement, transitions, collision detections and 2D visual effects very simple. Also, I have yet to see a tool as practical for animation as Flash.
Flash is not the scourge of the internet. It is just misused sometimes.
Great job, UBIsoft. Just as the software industry finally regained some footing in the battle against copying, you go and aim the bazooka at your (and the industry's) foot.
It's bad enough when Christians won't even think about everything outside the Bible, but when you cherry pick the things from the Bible that you choose to believe or disbelieve, you're unreachable.
Are you saying it is bad when christians won't think outside the Bible, but when they do it is worse? By unreachable, do you mean you can't make me see the "truth"?
Be aware the stance you take is not very different from that of some religious people, who push their religious views on others and vilify different views.
I say that the only purely rational religious position is agnosticism. It may be easy to disprove many writings on ancient texts, but it is impossible to deny the possibility of existence of the divinity altogether. Any different position requires some amount of (dis)belief.
If you don't like religions, try to see them as just cultural manifestations. If you feel the need to oppose, do so against the specific groups/people which are being actually harmful. Do not begin a personal war against other people just because they happen to have a different belief, no good would come from that.
What someone believes and why is something personal. There is no way I can give an universal answer, or an answer that works for you for that matter. Personally, believe in the divinity because it makes much more sense for me to think that the universe was created than to think that the universe just happens to exist and have such specific rules.
It is very natural that a relative doctrine would be used as a foundation for moral law, since a specific act should not be judged the same in different situations e.g. beating someone without reason or beating someone as self defense.
The problem in most of these discussions is that people believe to have the truth, including atheists. As far as I know, people just have their (dis)beliefs, including me.
Not if the offense was bestiality, from a conservative point of view, though it's difficult to argue that a male horse or dog was "harmed" by being fellated by a human.
But what if the animal was penetrated? The harm would not be so easy to dismiss in such a situation.
As I said before, ancient texts have particularities from their age and place. With this I meant that they are not purely laws of the divinity. Not only that, but they may contain misinterpretations and biases of their originators, which are human.
It seems you were taught to follow the teachings of the Bible as literally as possible. That would explain why you seem to think less of someone who doesn't. It also may be the reason why you seem to have an aversion towards religions.
Religions change as the world changes. To exactly "walk the talk" of an ancient text is hardly feasible, even more if the text comes from different sources and goes through several translations. Their orientations often have cultural particularities from the age and place they are from.
I doesn't mean the orientations can't be used though. With interpretation and contextualization, good messages are not difficult to find. Good priests should help common people to get those messages, and good followers should try to interpretate by themselves too.
Religions are very subjective. Usually that's the reason ill-inclined people derive bad and selfish things from them.
Being raised as a christian, I can say the Bible is filled with things I believe to be wrong. I do not consider myself less religious because of this. I can also say if you don't take everything literally, almost everything from the Gospels is good. I use christianity as an example, because it is the religion I am most familiar with.
Yeah, but what about me? I am an adult and I want to play video games.
Will they ban violent and pornographic graphic novels? What about movies and TV shows? What about books and songs?
It always infuriates me whan video game is treated like a lesser medium, like it is something for kids. Even if it was, those same kids can find examples of bad conduct in any other medium.
On a second thought, I think I might have failed to notice the sarcasm of parent post, but my opinion stays the same.
Key word there is ignorant. I know a lot about history and where religion fits into it, including Christianity. I judge religion on the facts, the purges of heretics, the slaughter of infidels, the suppression of dissent, the continuance of misogyny, the tacit acceptance of racism and slavery, etc. etc. What I said is you don't know anything about these people beyond this story. Until you do, your judgement is weaker than my judgement of religion
Did these things happen because of religion or religion just was used as mean of promoting this?
I'm not against religion, but I am against organizations that manipulate people for their own benefit. Those two are not the same and the second, which is the actual problem, doesn't happen exclusively because of religion.
This is very, very sad. I understand the youth aversion to classical music, except in that single school, is something prior to this measure, but to use it as some kind of repellent is insulting.
Britain seems to be consistently following the wrong books.
I'm surprised by the amount of slashdotters complaining about the previous color scheme of Ubuntu.
Putting aside that it is actually easy to change theme, orange and brown seemed to me a very consistent choice of colors. It never bothered me, I can't see why it is so unpleasant.
I don't see people complaining about how blue is Windows, or how grey is OSX...
The difference between an ARG and another game is that you have to take actions in the real world to advance in the fictional plot.
In this case, they didn't get the meaning of the messages by an automatic test of a virtual "intelligence" atribute or a dice roll, or by folowing a set of rules given by the game. These people actually had to figure out what the secret messages meant using the skills they have in real life.
Do people become environmentally friendly in a large scale only when they don't have any other choice left?
Living in a slum might be "green"*, but it is a horrible situation. People there often either depend on environmentally friendly actions (recycling) or can't do anything else (having/driving a car). Does it say something about us?
*except for the overpopulation and constant growth of the slums themselves, which often are invasions on protected lands.
No one will want to waste their time recycling plastic bottles if there are aluminum cans available. There's very little value in recycling plastic which will most probably end in a landfill, no matter how many people are gathering garbage.
Miserable people can't afford letting anything behind, since it's their only hope of getting some money.
I live in a suburb in Brazil. I see they taking away not only plastic bottles, but cardboard as well, which has even less value. This is actually very common here.
If someone clicks in a pop-up or a similarly intrusive ad, it is probably either an accident or they are not used to navigating the internet. It is very unlikely they will see the advertiser in a positive view and end up buying from them.
An ad doesn't have to be intrusive or distracting in any way. Some people may be amused game, quiz and other flashy ads for a while, but they will end up ignoring them and/or considering them a nuisance. Being informative is important for an ad, but it needs more than that. It needs to be relevant to what its target is browsing.
Eventually, the advertisers may notice that intrusive ads annoy people and stop doing it. They are a flawed and unreliable solution for the free proxies' problem. However, this problem is complicated because payment services may compromise the anonymity of the user of paid proxies.
I don't support intrusive ads (and I use Adblock Plus), but I support internet freedom and anonymity. I don't think more ads are the solution, and they can compromise the superior speed of those free proxies, which is their advantage over alternatives.
Kinda scary how easy it is to manipulate our emotions for commercial gain.
Isn't it awesome. Those companies amaze me with their abilities of amazing me.
But, seriously, the whole industry of entertainment is based on this. We often pay for having our emotions manipulated.
I should throw away my emotions on the nearest garbage bin, but I don't feel like doing it. Oh well, I would end up as a drone without motivation and unable to get satisfaction anyway...
When I started reading I thought it was a joke. Now I'm not sure.
I hope it is a joke, because either it is a joke or there are people spreading very stupid notions out there, if they aren't stupid themselves. And if they aren't stupid or joking they are being deceitful with their absurd brainwashing, which is even worse.
I can't get it. As a christian I can say I don't get it at all. What is the point of all the veneration if the people ignore the teachings. Where is the understanding, altruism and good sense? Why the feel the need to spread so much FUD?
Jesus walked amongst the sinners, treating them as equals and teaching the willing. Doesn't that give them a clue?
So many of them don't even care enough to help those who need or even to stop harassing others. Want to be rich and healthy without effort and think they will just because they can cite biblic passages passages out of context.
Ugh, it's hard to be even slightly religious when there is so much harmful ignorance and ill intentions standing behind the same flag. Official religions usually go bad, if people want to be religious they should be at least capable of making their own interpretations.
And of course, there's all those damn Homo Sapiens taking up valuable real estate...
I know it's a sad opinion to have, but the human overpopulation problem is the worst overpopulation problem of all animals.
Humans are large animals, take way more resources than needed for feeding, have no natural predator, reproduction control is not imposed by most countries and the excess population can't be simply euthanized.
Wars, criminality and epidemies end up being the only effective ways of population control. Which are not even (and shouldn't be) intended for this.
It's really a sad situation. What are we supposed to do?
Slashdot Mirror
I think it wasn't well thought out. This is a common problem regarding human interactions with nature. This is one of the main reason why we have so many environmental problems.
Who cares about the moon when we can has kittehs.
"King" is not the most adequate expression. The only ones who are actually getting to rule anything are the FarmMafia developers and managers.
what do you mean? a thousand yards long for those endless running scenes, Or where a wife can lock her husband out but a raptor or sabre-tooth tiger can come in through any window?
It isn't actually long, it has torus-shaped corridors. That's why the background keeps repeating.
Mod this up. Where are my mod points when I need them?
This cycle of resentment and intolerance from both sides will never result in anything good.
Flash is not very efficient resource-wise, but it is easy to deal with, making dealing with movement, transitions, collision detections and 2D visual effects very simple. Also, I have yet to see a tool as practical for animation as Flash.
Flash is not the scourge of the internet. It is just misused sometimes.
Great job, UBIsoft. Just as the software industry finally regained some footing in the battle against copying, you go and aim the bazooka at your (and the industry's) foot.
Do not rocket jump if you have low HP.
It's bad enough when Christians won't even think about everything outside the Bible, but when you cherry pick the things from the Bible that you choose to believe or disbelieve, you're unreachable.
Are you saying it is bad when christians won't think outside the Bible, but when they do it is worse? By unreachable, do you mean you can't make me see the "truth"?
Be aware the stance you take is not very different from that of some religious people, who push their religious views on others and vilify different views.
I say that the only purely rational religious position is agnosticism. It may be easy to disprove many writings on ancient texts, but it is impossible to deny the possibility of existence of the divinity altogether. Any different position requires some amount of (dis)belief.
If you don't like religions, try to see them as just cultural manifestations. If you feel the need to oppose, do so against the specific groups/people which are being actually harmful. Do not begin a personal war against other people just because they happen to have a different belief, no good would come from that.
It's Paul saying[...]
Yes, it is.
What someone believes and why is something personal. There is no way I can give an universal answer, or an answer that works for you for that matter. Personally, believe in the divinity because it makes much more sense for me to think that the universe was created than to think that the universe just happens to exist and have such specific rules.
It is very natural that a relative doctrine would be used as a foundation for moral law, since a specific act should not be judged the same in different situations e.g. beating someone without reason or beating someone as self defense.
The problem in most of these discussions is that people believe to have the truth, including atheists. As far as I know, people just have their (dis)beliefs, including me.
Not if the offense was bestiality, from a conservative point of view, though it's difficult to argue that a male horse or dog was "harmed" by being fellated by a human.
But what if the animal was penetrated? The harm would not be so easy to dismiss in such a situation.
As I said before, ancient texts have particularities from their age and place. With this I meant that they are not purely laws of the divinity. Not only that, but they may contain misinterpretations and biases of their originators, which are human.
It seems you were taught to follow the teachings of the Bible as literally as possible. That would explain why you seem to think less of someone who doesn't. It also may be the reason why you seem to have an aversion towards religions.
Religions change as the world changes. To exactly "walk the talk" of an ancient text is hardly feasible, even more if the text comes from different sources and goes through several translations. Their orientations often have cultural particularities from the age and place they are from.
I doesn't mean the orientations can't be used though. With interpretation and contextualization, good messages are not difficult to find. Good priests should help common people to get those messages, and good followers should try to interpretate by themselves too.
Religions are very subjective. Usually that's the reason ill-inclined people derive bad and selfish things from them.
Being raised as a christian, I can say the Bible is filled with things I believe to be wrong. I do not consider myself less religious because of this. I can also say if you don't take everything literally, almost everything from the Gospels is good. I use christianity as an example, because it is the religion I am most familiar with.
Yeah, but what about me? I am an adult and I want to play video games.
Will they ban violent and pornographic graphic novels? What about movies and TV shows? What about books and songs?
It always infuriates me whan video game is treated like a lesser medium, like it is something for kids. Even if it was, those same kids can find examples of bad conduct in any other medium.
On a second thought, I think I might have failed to notice the sarcasm of parent post, but my opinion stays the same.
Key word there is ignorant. I know a lot about history and where religion fits into it, including Christianity. I judge religion on the facts, the purges of heretics, the slaughter of infidels, the suppression of dissent, the continuance of misogyny, the tacit acceptance of racism and slavery, etc. etc. What I said is you don't know anything about these people beyond this story. Until you do, your judgement is weaker than my judgement of religion
Did these things happen because of religion or religion just was used as mean of promoting this?
I'm not against religion, but I am against organizations that manipulate people for their own benefit. Those two are not the same and the second, which is the actual problem, doesn't happen exclusively because of religion.
This is very, very sad. I understand the youth aversion to classical music, except in that single school, is something prior to this measure, but to use it as some kind of repellent is insulting.
Britain seems to be consistently following the wrong books.
I'm surprised by the amount of slashdotters complaining about the previous color scheme of Ubuntu.
Putting aside that it is actually easy to change theme, orange and brown seemed to me a very consistent choice of colors. It never bothered me, I can't see why it is so unpleasant.
I don't see people complaining about how blue is Windows, or how grey is OSX...
The difference between an ARG and another game is that you have to take actions in the real world to advance in the fictional plot.
In this case, they didn't get the meaning of the messages by an automatic test of a virtual "intelligence" atribute or a dice roll, or by folowing a set of rules given by the game. These people actually had to figure out what the secret messages meant using the skills they have in real life.
Do people become environmentally friendly in a large scale only when they don't have any other choice left?
Living in a slum might be "green"*, but it is a horrible situation. People there often either depend on environmentally friendly actions (recycling) or can't do anything else (having/driving a car). Does it say something about us?
*except for the overpopulation and constant growth of the slums themselves, which often are invasions on protected lands.
No one will want to waste their time recycling plastic bottles if there are aluminum cans available. There's very little value in recycling plastic which will most probably end in a landfill, no matter how many people are gathering garbage.
Miserable people can't afford letting anything behind, since it's their only hope of getting some money.
I live in a suburb in Brazil. I see they taking away not only plastic bottles, but cardboard as well, which has even less value. This is actually very common here.
Racism from a minority, fuels the aversion and can be used as a poor excuse by the racists from the majority group.
Just because racism from a minority is less common, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be considered. And by no means it is just an anecdote.
It is unlikely equality and fairness will be result of a system that doesn't consider the necessities of all groups equally.
If someone clicks in a pop-up or a similarly intrusive ad, it is probably either an accident or they are not used to navigating the internet. It is very unlikely they will see the advertiser in a positive view and end up buying from them.
An ad doesn't have to be intrusive or distracting in any way. Some people may be amused game, quiz and other flashy ads for a while, but they will end up ignoring them and/or considering them a nuisance. Being informative is important for an ad, but it needs more than that. It needs to be relevant to what its target is browsing.
Eventually, the advertisers may notice that intrusive ads annoy people and stop doing it. They are a flawed and unreliable solution for the free proxies' problem. However, this problem is complicated because payment services may compromise the anonymity of the user of paid proxies.
I don't support intrusive ads (and I use Adblock Plus), but I support internet freedom and anonymity. I don't think more ads are the solution, and they can compromise the superior speed of those free proxies, which is their advantage over alternatives.
Kinda scary how easy it is to manipulate our emotions for commercial gain.
Isn't it awesome. Those companies amaze me with their abilities of amazing me.
But, seriously, the whole industry of entertainment is based on this. We often pay for having our emotions manipulated.
I should throw away my emotions on the nearest garbage bin, but I don't feel like doing it. Oh well, I would end up as a drone without motivation and unable to get satisfaction anyway...
Some required reading
When I started reading I thought it was a joke. Now I'm not sure.
I hope it is a joke, because either it is a joke or there are people spreading very stupid notions out there, if they aren't stupid themselves. And if they aren't stupid or joking they are being deceitful with their absurd brainwashing, which is even worse.
I can't get it. As a christian I can say I don't get it at all. What is the point of all the veneration if the people ignore the teachings. Where is the understanding, altruism and good sense? Why the feel the need to spread so much FUD?
Jesus walked amongst the sinners, treating them as equals and teaching the willing. Doesn't that give them a clue?
So many of them don't even care enough to help those who need or even to stop harassing others. Want to be rich and healthy without effort and think they will just because they can cite biblic passages passages out of context.
Ugh, it's hard to be even slightly religious when there is so much harmful ignorance and ill intentions standing behind the same flag. Official religions usually go bad, if people want to be religious they should be at least capable of making their own interpretations.
...I think I got worked up.
And of course, there's all those damn Homo Sapiens taking up valuable real estate...
I know it's a sad opinion to have, but the human overpopulation problem is the worst overpopulation problem of all animals.
Humans are large animals, take way more resources than needed for feeding, have no natural predator, reproduction control is not imposed by most countries and the excess population can't be simply euthanized.
Wars, criminality and epidemies end up being the only effective ways of population control. Which are not even (and shouldn't be) intended for this.
It's really a sad situation. What are we supposed to do?