You are mostly hitting the nail on the head. You're missing the part where the search for meaning is clouded by hopelessness. In other words, if these people might find motivation through the attempt to discover meaning, i.e. scientific research, or the arts, or religion, etc, they become even more depressed when they fail and think they will never be able to achieve it... i.e. hopelessness destroys their search for meaning.
The key solution to the existential crisis is... surprise: existentialism.
Life is amazing, with or without meaning. Existence is a miracle that cannot be explained, but can be experienced. So why not experience it to the fullest? Live your life knowing that none of it matters and that it's OK that none of it matters, because the only thing important is that you enjoy the experience, which you may never have again.
Some highly intellectual people get so tied up on finding 'meaning' that they forget to stop and smell the roses. It's like some kind of loop in our brains, and for many people it is only 'closed' when they find religion. For others, only something as powerful as prescription drugs can close it.
But for those of us 'intellectuals' who are merely 'bummed' about it, we can often self-medicate using various methods -- existentialism being one of them.
To me this 'exploding transformer' seems strange. I mean, the transformers we use where I work are filled with non-explosive mineral oil. Something seriously bad must have happened to this transformer. I mean, so bad I can't even imagine. Looking at the amount of destruction I just don't understand how it's possible. Any electrical engineers out there who can offer some insight?
Though your case study of two units is hardly statistically meaningful, I do share your sentiment. I wonder what the percentage of failure is for these units within one year?
And compare that to the 360.
And compare that to the PC.
I doubt the PS3 is much worse, but it seems like it sometimes.
It's pretty simple really. You DON'T. What you do is you create a mechanic that is closely tied to the story which will lead to certain classes or even entire factions being stronger in certain situations. Then you balance to the number of situations. And then you develop a method that rotates those different situations through the various content of the game. This way everyone gets their piece of the pie and the rotation ensures the pieces are equal. At this point the player can enjoy their class because they are playing the style of character they want to play, not just playing the character that the Developers seem to love the most at the time.
An example might be if you had a "Vampire" class in a game. Obviously the Vampires are stronger at night, so during a battle situation when nightfall comes the Vampires would reign.. Or the Werewolves.
Then when daylight comes, they would fall behind the classes based on the power of the sun, say like some kind of Mayan Shaman.
In the above example, the trick would be the length of the day/night cycle so that when a casual players jumps in the game they don't have to wait too long for their cycle and their time "in the sun" (or out of it!).
It is inherent game mechanics like these that can keep a game interesting.
But look at WAR for example for a BAD way to balance. Every single class in that game feels like it has the same skills just with different artwork. It's incredibly annoying if you like PvP, because it's just the same old thing over and over again.
If every single PC user of Team Fortress 2 was already part of an online 'e-tail' content delivery system with their credit cards hooked up to it, etc, then it would be much, much more likely that they try to release it only on that delivery method. As it is, that is really only found on consoles.
I suspect that the real case here is that some of today's scientists are holding their heads rather higher than they need to be in this 'race' to publication.
Guess this means there was no Stuckupasaurus? You know, the snooty dinosaur who thought it was better than all the others and walked around holding its head high and looking down its nose at the others?...ok, wow, THAT was lame.
This would probably be fairly tricky to do, but I would wire the drives so that they "burn up" when they are plugged in -- so that they emit red and green smoke. Bonus points if they still work after they emit the smoke.
I consider myself happily centered -- I don't get all googly-eyed over Linux releases, OR over Windows or OSX releases for that matter.
As a person who regularly uses two computers (work and home), one with XP32 and one with Vista64, I can honestly say that there's not really that big of a difference. My Vista machine is 64bit Ultimate with 8gb of RAM. And, not surprisingly, it runs everything like a dream. Also, that level of hardware is NOT that expensive anymore. For under a thousand bucks you can throw together a machine that will run Vista 64 so fast that you'll never notice a difference between it and XP. Except you still get some of the nice interface upgrades that Vista brings to the table. For me that's a win-win.
The only problems I have with it aren't because of Vista but because of applications I run which are poorly written for 64bit support.
I saw some nerd up above talking about how to implement some half-assed SSD support in Linux. It involved knowledge of Linux commands and structures that no typical computer user in the world is going to want to know. And this guy was acting like it was a viable alternative for people. The funny piece is that in a decade or two all of that specialized knowledge about Linux will be completely useless and obsolete, so the Linux user has to constantly keep up or they fall behind quickly. And meanwhile all of the 'typical' computer consumers will have focused their attention on other things, potentially more useful things, while their OS does what they want it to do automatically (i.e. TRIM in W7). Or hell, maybe they'll just get some good quality family time in. Who knows? The point is that they won't be having to constantly update their knowledge of some obscure Linux command structure in order to get that 1-5% of extra performance out of their computers over those 'poor windoze users'.
So who really wins here? It sure as hell isn't the guy sitting at his *nix box all day making sure his knowledge of the commands and distros is up to date!
The machine will probably be able to come up with an answer (maybe not the right one) much faster than all of the human opponents. But, what confidence will it have in that answer, and will it realize that a wrong answer will cost it?
Obviously if the machine just answers immediately (and no 'confidence' factor is involved) then it could provide wrong answers very quickly, and thus just lose money on every question as it "presses the button" to answer the question before the opponents, but answers incorrectly.
So, IBM, how are you giving Watson a confidence factor? Will Watson's confidence change based on the number of incorrect/correct answers it has given in a row, based on how much time it waited to find the best, most 'confident' answer? In short, will Watson learn?
This is just a single example, but there are many others. NASA is about a lot more than space these days, and our funding of NASA is a lot more important than you apparently realize.
You said you want to see the next generation clean up the financial and environmental mess our generation and previous generations created. Well, assuming that's even true, then I think this tidal power project represents precisely the kind of project that you think we should pursue.
I've had the distinct pleasure of working with Jim Wetherbee, the man who has commanded more NASA shuttle flights than any other.
During that time I asked him why he left NASA. And I don't want to put words into his mouth, but suffice it to say I think he felt like the country's support of NASA is terrible and he decided he wanted to go somewhere that he could make a difference (because he no longer felt that way in NASA).
It's sad really. The space program, while expensive, has resulted in many great technological discoveries and inventions. And yet do you even know how small of a percent of our GDP goes towards it? It's pathetic.
I only hope this Bolden is something like Jim Wetherbee. If so, there may be some hope yet.
There is probably a time and a place for this. If the friendship is doomed anyway, then you could use this as a last resort. But look at it like Fight Club: you have to lose.
That's right, you are going to start the fight, and get him very angry, and you are going to lose.
I disagree with people who say there is nothing anyone can do to help this guy. Giving up like that without even trying is pure stupidity.
That said, there are definitely bad ways to go about trying to help this guy.
Without talking about the bad ways though...
The main thing is to just appeal to the guy as a friend. You start by having a genuine conversation. You find one of those rare moments he isn't playing, like say when he's microwaving some food, and you stop him and ask him if he's got a second. Don't appear agitated -- just be casual and genuine.
You get the conversation going by saying you have something coming up, like a BBQ or sporting event, etc, and offer him to come along. At this point he'll probably say no, because he 'has a lot of stuff to do' which really just means he wants to play the game. You're expecting this, and you've prepared for it.
So you mention that there's another event coming up a few days or a week after, and you offer him to go along with that. Again, he'll probably say no, though he might say yes. If he says no, you continue on with events in the future (you may need to have prepared several, so come with at least 5-10 in mind).
At some point he'll get tired of saying no. His attention span is focused on the game and he'll want to appease you just to get back to the game as soon as possible. He's not going to just say "I'm never going to do anything with you ever again" because despite his addiction he would realize just how bad that sounds.
So he'll agree to go do something outside of the game. You have no secured the first step.
The second step is to bring him along, and take his mind off the game by interacting with him. Again, be genuine and do not make it obvious you have a hidden agenda.
The second step may be hard to pull off-- he may cancel at the last minute on the event. You'll have various ways to make it harder to cancel, but if ultimately he does cancel, then just go along with it and return to step one. After several attempts at step 2 he will finally go with you to an event outside of the game.
You then repeat this process indefinitely. If you have trouble, use a line like this:
"I want you to know that I understand how much you like that game and I don't think anything bad of it. I bet it's a pretty bad-ass game. If you want to keep playing it and not go to the BBQ that's fine, but just know that I'm not going to stop asking you to come along, because I enjoy your company just as much as you enjoy that game, hell, maybe more. Just wanted you to to know. Good luck kickin ass today man, talk to you in a few."
You have to ultimately downplay the effect so that he thinks your opinion of the game's effects on his life is less than he even thinks. Then he'll no longer be on the defensive at all. You also need to combine it with these events outside of the game, and you need to be persistent.
Otherwise, if you don't really value his friendship, the last effort you should make is to inform people who do that he is in this condition and then move on and enjoy your life knowing you've done what you could do.
But never, ever, just give up without even trying.
Because console controls are hugely inadequate for MMOs. In my MMO experience I would say on average that I have to access at LEAST 10 different skills/abilities/buttons in the blink of an eye.
On my WoW characters I have the following buttons mapped just for actions like skills, etc (this doesn't include movement keys!):
That's _19_ buttons that I can press at any given moment within the blink of an eye. And, yes, I have enough skills, abilities and actions to fill them all up.
How exactly am I going to accomplish this with a console controller while at the same time being able to move around and change my view a la' mouse look??
So, give me a console MMORPG and if you give me 1) a keyboard and 2) a mouse to control it, then I'm totally all for it and would try it.
Furthermore, Jedis would have to blow the socks off anyone else because, well, they are quite a bit overpowered in the SW universe.
Jedi Masters, yes. Jedi, no.
I played SWG for quite some time. I was basically a Bounty Hunter who made a living by utilizing my faction standings with certain NPC groups to cause them to fight each other (I had a repeatable quest in which I could assist a Nightsister Witch in fighting a Dark Jedi Master... leading to me being able to *loot* the Dark Jedi Master if I was able to assist the Witch enough to take out the DJM, which I was).
End result: I got "epic loot" from the Dark Jedi Master, sometimes of which the quality was so astoundingly high that I would simply show it to people, or put it on display in my main showroom, and their jaws would hit the floor.
I was a weapons and armor dealer of sorts, and I stocked some of the most exotic shit you'd ever seen.
Did I care about becoming a Jedi? Not in the least. I had my own AT/ST walker and was capable of driving off most solo Jedi pretty effectively. (Again, Jedi Master was a different story, but I never actually ran into any, thankfully.)
And it wasn't because it was too hard to do. At the time, you needed to master certain specific professions to unlock the Jedi slot, and I knew which ones I had to master, but it just wasn't interesting to me to have to watch my ass 24/7 as a Jedi.
But to your point: In SWG, before they made so many stupid changes, the Jedi class didn't appeal to everyone. And yet it was still very powerful. But some people would rather have treated SWG like a The Sims, staying in the cantinas and dancing (entertainer profession -- watching them gave you buffs).
While yet others were more of the resource empire building type and would spend their time trying to track down the highest quality crafting resources. I would trade with these people (my superb quality weapons from the Dark Jedi Masters) and they would craft me armor that was of the highest class available anywhere.
Anyway, if you won't play an MMO just because you can't be the most powerful player in the game, then you are taking it WAY too seriously.
As usual, things are not black and white. The new Digg "bar" frame deal is just like having another menu bar in the top of your browser window, so at least in that respect it isn't all that intrusive... and personally, I got a kick out of using the "random" link feature on it.
I'm a 'new wave' web user who doesn't care if there's content from several different sites on one screen. Hell, a mashup like that is something I PREFER instead of having to load up multiple URLs just to see tidbits of information I want.
This is the future of the web. People will have customized content. They won't be forced to go look at the whole webpage if they don't want to -- they'll get the content they want, from multiple web pages, all in one screen... if they want. That's the ticket, the "if they want" part.
If that means bad things for advertising revenue, well... tough shit, eh?
Parts of your post are true, parts aren't. You say MMOs are designed for 5yr old hardware... That's a half truth. WoW just released patch 3.1 which has "Ultra" video mode, but beyond that even, the latest content called Ulduar involved more graphics effects than any previous instance and, well, if you don't have a pretty stellar machine, you aren't going to be raiding on "Ultra" at 1900 in that place, or your FPS will just be horrible.
It's fine with me if you want to wave your experience around like some kind of banner. You can claim that matters, if you want. Myself, I prefer to stand on the merits of my statements. If my statements are without merit, then so be it. That said, let me examine your reply...
You completely missed the point that Microsoft wants people to run both in a desperate bid to start getting enterprises to actually roll out Windows 7. My point is that you don't want to run both, that it wont solve the problems that Microsoft thinks it will.
You are indeed correct. And the consequences of Microsoft failing to make this realization, and failing to deliver Windows 7 as a viable, and reasonably practical, upgrade, would be what?
It would be that Microsoft no longer has quite the stranglehold in the enterprise market that it has now. I don't know about you, but I think this is a good thing. And you've already stated that you are making official recommendations not to migrate to Vista or W7.
So... why exactly do you want to warn them? You aren't ethically bound to do so, are you?
"Architect" level my ass. You probably get someone coffee. Sorry but your whole post is just ridiculous.
There's no reason for any of your 'points' to stand if you migrate the system to Windows 7.
Why have both? If Windows 7 is a better alternative, then for god's sake, run it. And don't tell me you need it just to have support for legacy apps that only run in Windows XP and not Windows 7.
Because if you DO have those apps, you either need to upgrade them to Windows 7 functionality, find something that does the job better, or just FORGET ABOUT WINDOWS 7 and stay with XP.
Damnit man, this is not that difficult to comprehend.
Why do IT guys always have to blow things way out of proportion?
Did someone hire Jack Thompson's nemesis to write this title or something? The point of the research was not to look at violence or violent games. It's about games that require players to quickly discern changing contrasts in visual elements.
Last I checked, that wasn't the definition of violence.
Sure, violent games happen to be a large subset of "games that require players to quickly discern changing contrasts in visual elements". But is that all there is in the set? Fuck no. I have a couple games on my computer right now that qualify for this and aren't violent at all./rant
Slashdot Mirror
You are mostly hitting the nail on the head. You're missing the part where the search for meaning is clouded by hopelessness. In other words, if these people might find motivation through the attempt to discover meaning, i.e. scientific research, or the arts, or religion, etc, they become even more depressed when they fail and think they will never be able to achieve it... i.e. hopelessness destroys their search for meaning.
The key solution to the existential crisis is ... surprise: existentialism.
Life is amazing, with or without meaning. Existence is a miracle that cannot be explained, but can be experienced. So why not experience it to the fullest? Live your life knowing that none of it matters and that it's OK that none of it matters, because the only thing important is that you enjoy the experience, which you may never have again.
Some highly intellectual people get so tied up on finding 'meaning' that they forget to stop and smell the roses. It's like some kind of loop in our brains, and for many people it is only 'closed' when they find religion. For others, only something as powerful as prescription drugs can close it.
But for those of us 'intellectuals' who are merely 'bummed' about it, we can often self-medicate using various methods -- existentialism being one of them.
To me this 'exploding transformer' seems strange. I mean, the transformers we use where I work are filled with non-explosive mineral oil. Something seriously bad must have happened to this transformer. I mean, so bad I can't even imagine. Looking at the amount of destruction I just don't understand how it's possible. Any electrical engineers out there who can offer some insight?
Though your case study of two units is hardly statistically meaningful, I do share your sentiment. I wonder what the percentage of failure is for these units within one year?
And compare that to the 360.
And compare that to the PC.
I doubt the PS3 is much worse, but it seems like it sometimes.
It's pretty simple really. You DON'T. What you do is you create a mechanic that is closely tied to the story which will lead to certain classes or even entire factions being stronger in certain situations. Then you balance to the number of situations. And then you develop a method that rotates those different situations through the various content of the game. This way everyone gets their piece of the pie and the rotation ensures the pieces are equal. At this point the player can enjoy their class because they are playing the style of character they want to play, not just playing the character that the Developers seem to love the most at the time.
An example might be if you had a "Vampire" class in a game. Obviously the Vampires are stronger at night, so during a battle situation when nightfall comes the Vampires would reign.. Or the Werewolves.
Then when daylight comes, they would fall behind the classes based on the power of the sun, say like some kind of Mayan Shaman.
In the above example, the trick would be the length of the day/night cycle so that when a casual players jumps in the game they don't have to wait too long for their cycle and their time "in the sun" (or out of it!).
It is inherent game mechanics like these that can keep a game interesting.
But look at WAR for example for a BAD way to balance. Every single class in that game feels like it has the same skills just with different artwork. It's incredibly annoying if you like PvP, because it's just the same old thing over and over again.
Think of it this way:
If every single PC user of Team Fortress 2 was already part of an online 'e-tail' content delivery system with their credit cards hooked up to it, etc, then it would be much, much more likely that they try to release it only on that delivery method. As it is, that is really only found on consoles.
So, there you have it?
That may have been the only time I've seen Nascar related to anything remotely intelligent. I applaud you sir.
I suspect that the real case here is that some of today's scientists are holding their heads rather higher than they need to be in this 'race' to publication.
See the reply to my thread by the AC, and you might have an idea of where the phones were at the time... Ouch.
...brings a whole new meaning to "multi-touch"... and, no.
Guess this means there was no Stuckupasaurus? You know, the snooty dinosaur who thought it was better than all the others and walked around holding its head high and looking down its nose at the others? ...ok, wow, THAT was lame.
I apologize.
This would probably be fairly tricky to do, but I would wire the drives so that they "burn up" when they are plugged in -- so that they emit red and green smoke. Bonus points if they still work after they emit the smoke.
LMAO!!
I consider myself happily centered -- I don't get all googly-eyed over Linux releases, OR over Windows or OSX releases for that matter.
As a person who regularly uses two computers (work and home), one with XP32 and one with Vista64, I can honestly say that there's not really that big of a difference. My Vista machine is 64bit Ultimate with 8gb of RAM. And, not surprisingly, it runs everything like a dream. Also, that level of hardware is NOT that expensive anymore. For under a thousand bucks you can throw together a machine that will run Vista 64 so fast that you'll never notice a difference between it and XP. Except you still get some of the nice interface upgrades that Vista brings to the table. For me that's a win-win.
The only problems I have with it aren't because of Vista but because of applications I run which are poorly written for 64bit support.
I saw some nerd up above talking about how to implement some half-assed SSD support in Linux. It involved knowledge of Linux commands and structures that no typical computer user in the world is going to want to know. And this guy was acting like it was a viable alternative for people. The funny piece is that in a decade or two all of that specialized knowledge about Linux will be completely useless and obsolete, so the Linux user has to constantly keep up or they fall behind quickly. And meanwhile all of the 'typical' computer consumers will have focused their attention on other things, potentially more useful things, while their OS does what they want it to do automatically (i.e. TRIM in W7). Or hell, maybe they'll just get some good quality family time in. Who knows? The point is that they won't be having to constantly update their knowledge of some obscure Linux command structure in order to get that 1-5% of extra performance out of their computers over those 'poor windoze users'.
So who really wins here? It sure as hell isn't the guy sitting at his *nix box all day making sure his knowledge of the commands and distros is up to date!
What I want to know is this:
The machine will probably be able to come up with an answer (maybe not the right one) much faster than all of the human opponents. But, what confidence will it have in that answer, and will it realize that a wrong answer will cost it?
Obviously if the machine just answers immediately (and no 'confidence' factor is involved) then it could provide wrong answers very quickly, and thus just lose money on every question as it "presses the button" to answer the question before the opponents, but answers incorrectly.
So, IBM, how are you giving Watson a confidence factor? Will Watson's confidence change based on the number of incorrect/correct answers it has given in a row, based on how much time it waited to find the best, most 'confident' answer? In short, will Watson learn?
You're right, we aren't in the space race with Russia anymore. Astronauts aren't rockstars.
And one other thing: NASA doesn't just do space.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/tideenergy.html
This is just a single example, but there are many others. NASA is about a lot more than space these days, and our funding of NASA is a lot more important than you apparently realize.
You said you want to see the next generation clean up the financial and environmental mess our generation and previous generations created. Well, assuming that's even true, then I think this tidal power project represents precisely the kind of project that you think we should pursue.
Still think we should stop funding NASA?
Such as finding space-sharks on which to mount said lasers!
I've had the distinct pleasure of working with Jim Wetherbee, the man who has commanded more NASA shuttle flights than any other.
During that time I asked him why he left NASA. And I don't want to put words into his mouth, but suffice it to say I think he felt like the country's support of NASA is terrible and he decided he wanted to go somewhere that he could make a difference (because he no longer felt that way in NASA).
It's sad really. The space program, while expensive, has resulted in many great technological discoveries and inventions. And yet do you even know how small of a percent of our GDP goes towards it? It's pathetic.
I only hope this Bolden is something like Jim Wetherbee. If so, there may be some hope yet.
There is probably a time and a place for this. If the friendship is doomed anyway, then you could use this as a last resort. But look at it like Fight Club: you have to lose.
That's right, you are going to start the fight, and get him very angry, and you are going to lose.
Otherwise, it probably won't work.
I disagree with people who say there is nothing anyone can do to help this guy. Giving up like that without even trying is pure stupidity.
That said, there are definitely bad ways to go about trying to help this guy.
Without talking about the bad ways though...
The main thing is to just appeal to the guy as a friend. You start by having a genuine conversation. You find one of those rare moments he isn't playing, like say when he's microwaving some food, and you stop him and ask him if he's got a second. Don't appear agitated -- just be casual and genuine.
You get the conversation going by saying you have something coming up, like a BBQ or sporting event, etc, and offer him to come along. At this point he'll probably say no, because he 'has a lot of stuff to do' which really just means he wants to play the game. You're expecting this, and you've prepared for it.
So you mention that there's another event coming up a few days or a week after, and you offer him to go along with that. Again, he'll probably say no, though he might say yes. If he says no, you continue on with events in the future (you may need to have prepared several, so come with at least 5-10 in mind).
At some point he'll get tired of saying no. His attention span is focused on the game and he'll want to appease you just to get back to the game as soon as possible. He's not going to just say "I'm never going to do anything with you ever again" because despite his addiction he would realize just how bad that sounds.
So he'll agree to go do something outside of the game. You have no secured the first step.
The second step is to bring him along, and take his mind off the game by interacting with him. Again, be genuine and do not make it obvious you have a hidden agenda.
The second step may be hard to pull off-- he may cancel at the last minute on the event. You'll have various ways to make it harder to cancel, but if ultimately he does cancel, then just go along with it and return to step one. After several attempts at step 2 he will finally go with you to an event outside of the game.
You then repeat this process indefinitely. If you have trouble, use a line like this:
"I want you to know that I understand how much you like that game and I don't think anything bad of it. I bet it's a pretty bad-ass game. If you want to keep playing it and not go to the BBQ that's fine, but just know that I'm not going to stop asking you to come along, because I enjoy your company just as much as you enjoy that game, hell, maybe more. Just wanted you to to know. Good luck kickin ass today man, talk to you in a few."
You have to ultimately downplay the effect so that he thinks your opinion of the game's effects on his life is less than he even thinks. Then he'll no longer be on the defensive at all. You also need to combine it with these events outside of the game, and you need to be persistent.
Otherwise, if you don't really value his friendship, the last effort you should make is to inform people who do that he is in this condition and then move on and enjoy your life knowing you've done what you could do.
But never, ever, just give up without even trying.
Never.
Because console controls are hugely inadequate for MMOs. In my MMO experience I would say on average that I have to access at LEAST 10 different skills/abilities/buttons in the blink of an eye.
On my WoW characters I have the following buttons mapped just for actions like skills, etc (this doesn't include movement keys!):
Keyboard 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Q, E, F, Shift-Q, Shift-E, Shift-F, Z, C, Middle Mouse, Shift-Middle Mouse, Mouse 3, Mouse 4
That's _19_ buttons that I can press at any given moment within the blink of an eye. And, yes, I have enough skills, abilities and actions to fill them all up.
How exactly am I going to accomplish this with a console controller while at the same time being able to move around and change my view a la' mouse look??
So, give me a console MMORPG and if you give me 1) a keyboard and 2) a mouse to control it, then I'm totally all for it and would try it.
Jedi Masters, yes. Jedi, no.
I played SWG for quite some time. I was basically a Bounty Hunter who made a living by utilizing my faction standings with certain NPC groups to cause them to fight each other (I had a repeatable quest in which I could assist a Nightsister Witch in fighting a Dark Jedi Master... leading to me being able to *loot* the Dark Jedi Master if I was able to assist the Witch enough to take out the DJM, which I was).
End result: I got "epic loot" from the Dark Jedi Master, sometimes of which the quality was so astoundingly high that I would simply show it to people, or put it on display in my main showroom, and their jaws would hit the floor.
I was a weapons and armor dealer of sorts, and I stocked some of the most exotic shit you'd ever seen.
Did I care about becoming a Jedi? Not in the least. I had my own AT/ST walker and was capable of driving off most solo Jedi pretty effectively. (Again, Jedi Master was a different story, but I never actually ran into any, thankfully.)
And it wasn't because it was too hard to do. At the time, you needed to master certain specific professions to unlock the Jedi slot, and I knew which ones I had to master, but it just wasn't interesting to me to have to watch my ass 24/7 as a Jedi.
But to your point: In SWG, before they made so many stupid changes, the Jedi class didn't appeal to everyone. And yet it was still very powerful. But some people would rather have treated SWG like a The Sims, staying in the cantinas and dancing (entertainer profession -- watching them gave you buffs).
While yet others were more of the resource empire building type and would spend their time trying to track down the highest quality crafting resources. I would trade with these people (my superb quality weapons from the Dark Jedi Masters) and they would craft me armor that was of the highest class available anywhere.
Anyway, if you won't play an MMO just because you can't be the most powerful player in the game, then you are taking it WAY too seriously.
As usual, things are not black and white. The new Digg "bar" frame deal is just like having another menu bar in the top of your browser window, so at least in that respect it isn't all that intrusive... and personally, I got a kick out of using the "random" link feature on it.
I'm a 'new wave' web user who doesn't care if there's content from several different sites on one screen. Hell, a mashup like that is something I PREFER instead of having to load up multiple URLs just to see tidbits of information I want.
This is the future of the web. People will have customized content. They won't be forced to go look at the whole webpage if they don't want to -- they'll get the content they want, from multiple web pages, all in one screen... if they want. That's the ticket, the "if they want" part.
If that means bad things for advertising revenue, well... tough shit, eh?
Parts of your post are true, parts aren't. You say MMOs are designed for 5yr old hardware... That's a half truth. WoW just released patch 3.1 which has "Ultra" video mode, but beyond that even, the latest content called Ulduar involved more graphics effects than any previous instance and, well, if you don't have a pretty stellar machine, you aren't going to be raiding on "Ultra" at 1900 in that place, or your FPS will just be horrible.
It's fine with me if you want to wave your experience around like some kind of banner. You can claim that matters, if you want. Myself, I prefer to stand on the merits of my statements. If my statements are without merit, then so be it. That said, let me examine your reply...
You are indeed correct. And the consequences of Microsoft failing to make this realization, and failing to deliver Windows 7 as a viable, and reasonably practical, upgrade, would be what?
It would be that Microsoft no longer has quite the stranglehold in the enterprise market that it has now. I don't know about you, but I think this is a good thing. And you've already stated that you are making official recommendations not to migrate to Vista or W7.
So... why exactly do you want to warn them? You aren't ethically bound to do so, are you?
"Architect" level my ass. You probably get someone coffee. Sorry but your whole post is just ridiculous.
There's no reason for any of your 'points' to stand if you migrate the system to Windows 7.
Why have both? If Windows 7 is a better alternative, then for god's sake, run it. And don't tell me you need it just to have support for legacy apps that only run in Windows XP and not Windows 7.
Because if you DO have those apps, you either need to upgrade them to Windows 7 functionality, find something that does the job better, or just FORGET ABOUT WINDOWS 7 and stay with XP.
Damnit man, this is not that difficult to comprehend.
Why do IT guys always have to blow things way out of proportion?
Did someone hire Jack Thompson's nemesis to write this title or something? The point of the research was not to look at violence or violent games. It's about games that require players to quickly discern changing contrasts in visual elements.
Last I checked, that wasn't the definition of violence.
Sure, violent games happen to be a large subset of "games that require players to quickly discern changing contrasts in visual elements". But is that all there is in the set? Fuck no. I have a couple games on my computer right now that qualify for this and aren't violent at all. /rant