What huge problems? Take Good for example. Email on the main system (blue screen) doesn't run, email on the container (red screen) works fine. I'm not sure how this presents a problem for anyone.
Apple has pretty good integration for MDM. It is possible to have hardware support and Good, MobileIron, MaaS360... make use of it. I think BES does as well. I'd agree that Samsung Knox is better but of course that's not across all Android but only some of Samsung's phones.
You are trying to argue how you are reasonable people setting an appropriate tone and during that argument after I gave you a clear response that's how you come back. I think I've proven my point about tone. As for the math. Think about what I said.
t, but you're assuming she has a high degree of knowledge of gaming.
No she's demonstrated a high degree of knowledge about gaming by being able to pull in multiple examples.
What does matter is she is abusive, manipulative and a liar.
Why does her being abusive to her boyfriend, matter in a discussion of ethics in journalism? Also why the tone? That's the problem. That's why people don't believe you that you have nothing to do with anti-woman terrorism.
being used to prevent discussion of a series of events around a horrible human.
There was no serious event. She got an article that mentioned her game a few extra times. That was the event.
You're conflating what she's received in the past and her getting harassment anyway to her getting harassed and saying it's coming from a group without proving that group is doing anything of the kind to her.
No I'm not. Again the correlation. Which BTW Nightline agreed with.
Why is she getting attention for her involvement in GamerGate from the media?
Because her argument is that GamerGate is a social movement that attacks women and not about ethics in journalism. An argument that others accept because the people who are arguing about ethics in journalism don't seem interested in say ethics in political journalism or computer journalism while they do have interests in anti-feminism with regard to gaming.
Have you watched ABC Nightline that was just last week?
Just did. And well there is another highly credible news organization asserting that she is under serious threat.
Have you read ANY article in the last 5 months on GamerGate?
Yes.
Because just about everything is saying GamerGate is harassment campaign and has her face slapped on it, but nothing's actually providing proof there's ANY harassment coming from GamerGate.
I just did. You dismissed it while being insulting.
Um... We're not harassing anyone... We just write e-mails to advertisers for shitty click bait gaming websites and chat with other gamers on twitter about shitty click bait journalist and gaming related stuff... person unrelated to the controversy is entitled to their opinion, but they're not an expert on gaming, they're full of shit and I don't personally like them."
Stop using the word "shitty". People unrelated to this controversy don't need to be experts on gaming they may very well be knowledgeable about how trade presses work in other industries and if this is about ethics in journalism gaming knowledge isn't that important.
Not so much argue as discuss. Obviously if you are totally opposed to the entire program, and impossible to persuade, there isn't much to discuss. But in real politics there are often people who somewhat support parts of a goal, but object to some of the risks and costs. Those people are where the point of discussion happens. Once it stops being about agitating the base and instead becomes a discussion of persuading moderates you often get a lot of practical agreement emerging because moderates frequently side with the side that seems to be more reasonable and less heated (as the mainstream media's endorsement of anti-GamerGate I think shows).
So for example I that the video games she's pointing to most have misogynistic themes that sexual exploitation of women is used to make games gritty. I'm not sure however that's avoidable in gritty games and I don't think she's fully taking into account how important sex is for setting a mood. Characters in a distopia can't be having healthy happy sexual relationships without it breaking the mood. I also think playful sexuality is fine while she often doesn't. OTOH where I think she makes far more sense is when it is counter productive. For example the Lego advertising she talks about. That's an area where I see no reason that either sexism or violence needs to be part of the product and I'd fully support what's doing.
That's the kind of discussion I think SJWs would welcome. And I think that's the kind of discussion the anti-SJW side should be more open to. People who think sexism is a problem and think game worlds need to use sex to build the mood.
I just don't believe that. Lots of people believe their cause is moral and righteous. They also frequently once they start focusing on pragmatic accomplishments can see how they have to take other views into account. Politics is about building coalitions and that means coalitions with people who don't share all your views.
Feminism in particular has lost enough battles over the years that it has matured.
It is even worse than that in terms of this post. Their messaging service for many years was far and away the leader. It was so good in fact that the carriers were offering to give them institutional support by making BBM into SMS 2.0 providing they would go cross platform (i.e. a percentage of all SMS fees for many years). RIM/ BlackBerry turned them down.
I've tried following Phil Fish... and the story was too complex. Mostly though Phil Fish seems to be someone who uses negative media attention to promote his work. A Larry Flint of your generation.
. Where things are going now is more just a pissing contest then anything else between SJW and a bunch of guys that want things to be back the way they were.
Exactly. And a slightly less heated version of that contest is what I believe Anita was originally aiming for. A discussion about sexism in games.
What you are describing above is what you would see in any trade press. I don't have a huge problem with the gaming press customers driving the gaming press to be a model of ethics that's terrific if it is accomplished. But I think the people in the gaming press to have a legitimate complaint that you are demanding more of them than what's normally needed for a trade press and aren't really thinking through the implications of the how. How are gaming magazines going to get exclusives without cultivating relationships of trust with sources.
Obviously I don't follow 4chan and so forth. I'm not involved in these social networks. Taking over small groups that are tightly affiliated is very different than taking over large diverse groups in terms of skill.
Obviously if there was a campaign against GamerGate proponents for ethics in journalism using the very sort of tactics Anita and Zoe were talking about that is wrong, and likely criminal. If there are really two gangs involved that's different than there being one gang. I'd want to hear specific names and sources of harassment verified by good quality authorities like police departments or mainstream media. If someone on the pro-GamerGate side gets hurt or killed by the anti-GamerGate side that would prompt such an investigation.
So right now having 0 evidence for game warfare what I do have evidence for is the rhetoric. Anita's rhetoric strikes me as mainstream feminism. The anti-Antia rhetoric strikes me as juvenile and overblown. I've seen the pro-GamerGate videos and they seem like sort of broad based rants.
But I will agree that believing that one side is less emotional doesn't mean anything about the gang warfare aspect. The only evidence I have is lack of mainstream coverage or even gaming press coverage. I fundamentally believe our media while imperfect has become so diverse it works.
Hand in your nerd badge and GTFO, you've failed all logic and lose the internet -_-
Correlation is a probabilistic assertion of equality, "with X probability we can act as if A = B". So no.
If the genders had been reversed concerning the Zoe post, we'd be praising Zoe for being a strong independent women that called out an abusive ex.
I'm not going to get into grading their relationship but I don't see abuse. If the boyfriend wanted an exclusive claim on her sexuality then put a ring on her finger. Otherwise she decided to trade in her fuck buddy for a better model. They weren't married, so let's not raise cheating a boyfriend to "abusive". But even if they were married he should have been secure enough in his own relationship to have dealt with her flirting for advantage if it was working.
Now let's look at the sort of unhinged rhetoric that I was talking about from this post above:
but inserted herself and claimed, without proof, people looking for ethics in journalism were attacking her.
As mentioned the attacks on her started before the discussion of ethics in journalism. And we've discussed the proof above.
Go read the comments on ABC Nightline's Youtube video with her, or their Facebook page, the VAST majority of commenters, including women, see right through it,
She's gotten pretty favorable coverage from the mainstream press once the story went mainstream. To the extent people know about her she's held in high regard.
but she's STILL held up by people like you as an example of how bad "gamers" are because they don't like being talked down to and told they're misogynistic shitlords
No they don't like the medium getting the same kind of feminist cultural critique that other media gets. The fact that you identify with the media so personally as to see an attack on a game as an attack on your person is part of what you people like me don't like.
for playing Mario because Peach is a "damsel in distress",
I actually saw that episode and she said nothing of the kind.
and HATES GAMES.
First of all who cares if she hates games? I don't game. BFD. But more importantly she seems to show a fairly high degree of knowledge of gaming. Where did she get that? What drew her to critiquing gaming? The whole "hates games" thing is another example of the sort of overblown rhetoric I was talking about.
Her behavior is fully consistent with an avid gamer who is conflicted because she believes the medium is inconsistent with her developing politics. I find her story quite credible.
Then when anyone so much as scratches their head in her direction, MISOGYNY!!!!
Nonsense overblown hysterical defensiveness like the above is also a perfectly reasonable explanation. Over identification is another perfectly reasonable explanation. What isn't a perfectly reasonable explanation is a well reasoned disagreement with fairly mainstream views.
Other than the fact that BOTH these women are using GamerGate as a spring board for attention they are completely unrelated.
Again impossible. Anita's attention comes before GamerGate.
I don't hate them all for the same reason,
If they correlate strongly then it almost invariable is the same underlying reason. You may not be aware of what that reason is, but beliefs that correlate are driven by the same factors though the rationalizations can differ. I don't think misogyny is that reason, because misogyny would likely imply hatred for more prominent women: Nancy Pelosi, Condoleezza Rice or Opera are more likely targets for misogyny than say Anita Sarkisian. But the underlying cause being the same... yes.
I agree. But a patron's interests and a customer's interests can often be quite different. We'd need to know more about what the patron was trying to achieve.
I agree which is why multisite makes sense. Mainframes can be multisite as well but they aren't designed as well for multisite operations. Too many things assume low latency and more reliable networks than WANs can provide.
1) People who dislike person X dislike person Y 2) This correlation grows stronger as the amount of dislike grows stronger 3) Person X and person Y are both being attacked more strongly (death threats..) by anonymous attackers
C) By (2) is is unlikely (though not impossible) that there is a point of disconnection. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that X and Y are being attacked by the same people in the absence of other information.
You aren't buying Microsoft for over a decade. You aren't buying additional services obviously. If customers like you go to Linux or BSD it doesn't matter much for Microsoft. If they can get 1/2 of you to buy more frequently in exchange for losing the other 1/2 that's a good trade.
You know this latter HOW? As far as I know, only one person hassling Sarkeesian has been identified (by GamerGate, in fact). A Brazilian journalist, as it happens. And when Anita was informed, she said they already knew about that guy.
I've seen people saying mean things about both of them. Generally bringing them both up together. This thread shows the connection. The two were at least by the time of the blow up grouped.
Being dramatic and insulting doesn't mean their objections were wrong.
The issue what whether they supported the harassment. The dramatic insulting critiques mostly were stupid. I suspect they were right on some of the facts they kept hammering on though.
I suspect Microsoft is going to move towards a subscription model. So something like:
$3 / mo just windows +$3 / mo for office +$3 / mo for sharepoint and storage +$4 / mo for dynamics CRM +$2 / mo for Azure management of your cloud services +$5 / mo to back all those services up
She got friggin' 20 times the budget she planned. So don't make up any excuses for failure to deliver. People paid for what she promised to deliver, not for any allegedly superior product she'd fail to deliver.
What she already delivered is well beyond what she promised. The quantity isn't there but the length and quality is. Besides the people who paid aren't unhappy it is people who didn't pay who are objecting.
As for 20 times the budget that is the excuse. It totally changed the nature of the program.
If I request 50 cheapest McDonalds' hamburgers, and give you $1000 for it, don't make excuses about delivering two gourmet steak burgers instead, claiming that steaks are more expensive and more difficult to cook, and take more time. And especially I don't want to hear $1000 is not enough for 50 steak burgers. It's not what I paid for and what I paid is far more than enough to deliver what I paid for.
That's actually a fairly good analogy. If you give $1000 for 50 hamburgers the McDonalds has to go the steak shop across the street. While McDonalds can do 50 burgers in 5 minutes the steak place can't. So 30 minutes into it, the steak place is still cooking burgers while McDonalds would have been done 20 minutes ago.
I'm not going to assume they were lying. There were members of the gamer press that came forward about seeing their friends and themselves attacked (i.e. threatened) by name. So the threat part we do have multiple independent names for.
I do know of some devs that agreed with Anita who used their real names.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry I was getting Jeff Sessions and Jeff Flake confused. Oh well.
We don't have to stop having inflation. We need a lower exchange rate.
Score one for the Republicans! I'm a pretty solid democrat, don't live in Arizona but I'm starting to like Jeff Sessions.
What huge problems? Take Good for example. Email on the main system (blue screen) doesn't run, email on the container (red screen) works fine. I'm not sure how this presents a problem for anyone.
Apple has pretty good integration for MDM. It is possible to have hardware support and Good, MobileIron, MaaS360... make use of it. I think BES does as well. I'd agree that Samsung Knox is better but of course that's not across all Android but only some of Samsung's phones.
iPhone and Android do have BBM. I have it. Though it is relatively recent (I think about 2 years).
I agree with you the argument is stupid however.
You are trying to argue how you are reasonable people setting an appropriate tone and during that argument after I gave you a clear response that's how you come back. I think I've proven my point about tone. As for the math. Think about what I said.
No she's demonstrated a high degree of knowledge about gaming by being able to pull in multiple examples.
Why does her being abusive to her boyfriend, matter in a discussion of ethics in journalism? Also why the tone? That's the problem. That's why people don't believe you that you have nothing to do with anti-woman terrorism.
There was no serious event. She got an article that mentioned her game a few extra times. That was the event.
No I'm not. Again the correlation. Which BTW Nightline agreed with.
Because her argument is that GamerGate is a social movement that attacks women and not about ethics in journalism. An argument that others accept because the people who are arguing about ethics in journalism don't seem interested in say ethics in political journalism or computer journalism while they do have interests in anti-feminism with regard to gaming.
Just did. And well there is another highly credible news organization asserting that she is under serious threat.
Yes.
I just did. You dismissed it while being insulting.
Stop using the word "shitty". People unrelated to this controversy don't need to be experts on gaming they may very well be knowledgeable about how trade presses work in other industries and if this is about ethics in journalism gaming knowledge isn't that important.
Not so much argue as discuss. Obviously if you are totally opposed to the entire program, and impossible to persuade, there isn't much to discuss. But in real politics there are often people who somewhat support parts of a goal, but object to some of the risks and costs. Those people are where the point of discussion happens. Once it stops being about agitating the base and instead becomes a discussion of persuading moderates you often get a lot of practical agreement emerging because moderates frequently side with the side that seems to be more reasonable and less heated (as the mainstream media's endorsement of anti-GamerGate I think shows).
So for example I that the video games she's pointing to most have misogynistic themes that sexual exploitation of women is used to make games gritty. I'm not sure however that's avoidable in gritty games and I don't think she's fully taking into account how important sex is for setting a mood. Characters in a distopia can't be having healthy happy sexual relationships without it breaking the mood. I also think playful sexuality is fine while she often doesn't. OTOH where I think she makes far more sense is when it is counter productive. For example the Lego advertising she talks about. That's an area where I see no reason that either sexism or violence needs to be part of the product and I'd fully support what's doing.
That's the kind of discussion I think SJWs would welcome. And I think that's the kind of discussion the anti-SJW side should be more open to. People who think sexism is a problem and think game worlds need to use sex to build the mood.
I just don't believe that. Lots of people believe their cause is moral and righteous. They also frequently once they start focusing on pragmatic accomplishments can see how they have to take other views into account. Politics is about building coalitions and that means coalitions with people who don't share all your views.
Feminism in particular has lost enough battles over the years that it has matured.
It is even worse than that in terms of this post. Their messaging service for many years was far and away the leader. It was so good in fact that the carriers were offering to give them institutional support by making BBM into SMS 2.0 providing they would go cross platform (i.e. a percentage of all SMS fees for many years). RIM/ BlackBerry turned them down.
I've tried following Phil Fish... and the story was too complex. Mostly though Phil Fish seems to be someone who uses negative media attention to promote his work. A Larry Flint of your generation.
Exactly. And a slightly less heated version of that contest is what I believe Anita was originally aiming for. A discussion about sexism in games.
What you are describing above is what you would see in any trade press. I don't have a huge problem with the gaming press customers driving the gaming press to be a model of ethics that's terrific if it is accomplished. But I think the people in the gaming press to have a legitimate complaint that you are demanding more of them than what's normally needed for a trade press and aren't really thinking through the implications of the how. How are gaming magazines going to get exclusives without cultivating relationships of trust with sources.
Obviously I don't follow 4chan and so forth. I'm not involved in these social networks. Taking over small groups that are tightly affiliated is very different than taking over large diverse groups in terms of skill.
Obviously if there was a campaign against GamerGate proponents for ethics in journalism using the very sort of tactics Anita and Zoe were talking about that is wrong, and likely criminal. If there are really two gangs involved that's different than there being one gang. I'd want to hear specific names and sources of harassment verified by good quality authorities like police departments or mainstream media. If someone on the pro-GamerGate side gets hurt or killed by the anti-GamerGate side that would prompt such an investigation.
So right now having 0 evidence for game warfare what I do have evidence for is the rhetoric. Anita's rhetoric strikes me as mainstream feminism. The anti-Antia rhetoric strikes me as juvenile and overblown. I've seen the pro-GamerGate videos and they seem like sort of broad based rants.
But I will agree that believing that one side is less emotional doesn't mean anything about the gang warfare aspect. The only evidence I have is lack of mainstream coverage or even gaming press coverage. I fundamentally believe our media while imperfect has become so diverse it works.
Correlation is a probabilistic assertion of equality, "with X probability we can act as if A = B". So no.
I'm not going to get into grading their relationship but I don't see abuse. If the boyfriend wanted an exclusive claim on her sexuality then put a ring on her finger. Otherwise she decided to trade in her fuck buddy for a better model. They weren't married, so let's not raise cheating a boyfriend to "abusive". But even if they were married he should have been secure enough in his own relationship to have dealt with her flirting for advantage if it was working.
Now let's look at the sort of unhinged rhetoric that I was talking about from this post above:
As mentioned the attacks on her started before the discussion of ethics in journalism. And we've discussed the proof above.
She's gotten pretty favorable coverage from the mainstream press once the story went mainstream. To the extent people know about her she's held in high regard.
No they don't like the medium getting the same kind of feminist cultural critique that other media gets. The fact that you identify with the media so personally as to see an attack on a game as an attack on your person is part of what you people like me don't like.
I actually saw that episode and she said nothing of the kind.
First of all who cares if she hates games? I don't game. BFD. But more importantly she seems to show a fairly high degree of knowledge of gaming. Where did she get that? What drew her to critiquing gaming? The whole "hates games" thing is another example of the sort of overblown rhetoric I was talking about.
Her behavior is fully consistent with an avid gamer who is conflicted because she believes the medium is inconsistent with her developing politics. I find her story quite credible.
Nonsense overblown hysterical defensiveness like the above is also a perfectly reasonable explanation. Over identification is another perfectly reasonable explanation. What isn't a perfectly reasonable explanation is a well reasoned disagreement with fairly mainstream views.
Again impossible. Anita's attention comes before GamerGate.
If they correlate strongly then it almost invariable is the same underlying reason. You may not be aware of what that reason is, but beliefs that correlate are driven by the same factors though the rationalizations can differ. I don't think misogyny is that reason, because misogyny would likely imply hatred for more prominent women: Nancy Pelosi, Condoleezza Rice or Opera are more likely targets for misogyny than say Anita Sarkisian. But the underlying cause being the same... yes.
I agree. But a patron's interests and a customer's interests can often be quite different. We'd need to know more about what the patron was trying to achieve.
I agree which is why multisite makes sense. Mainframes can be multisite as well but they aren't designed as well for multisite operations. Too many things assume low latency and more reliable networks than WANs can provide.
There will be bundles. Though why make Windows (one of their best selling components) $0 in your view?
No I'm not saying that.
1) People who dislike person X dislike person Y
2) This correlation grows stronger as the amount of dislike grows stronger
3) Person X and person Y are both being attacked more strongly (death threats..) by anonymous attackers
C) By (2) is is unlikely (though not impossible) that there is a point of disconnection. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that X and Y are being attacked by the same people in the absence of other information.
I'm not certain but it seems reasonable.
You aren't buying Microsoft for over a decade. You aren't buying additional services obviously. If customers like you go to Linux or BSD it doesn't matter much for Microsoft. If they can get 1/2 of you to buy more frequently in exchange for losing the other 1/2 that's a good trade.
I've seen people saying mean things about both of them. Generally bringing them both up together. This thread shows the connection. The two were at least by the time of the blow up grouped.
The issue what whether they supported the harassment. The dramatic insulting critiques mostly were stupid. I suspect they were right on some of the facts they kept hammering on though.
I suspect Microsoft is going to move towards a subscription model. So something like:
$3 / mo just windows
+$3 / mo for office
+$3 / mo for sharepoint and storage
+$4 / mo for dynamics CRM
+$2 / mo for Azure management of your cloud services
+$5 / mo to back all those services up
etc..
What she already delivered is well beyond what she promised. The quantity isn't there but the length and quality is. Besides the people who paid aren't unhappy it is people who didn't pay who are objecting.
As for 20 times the budget that is the excuse. It totally changed the nature of the program.
That's actually a fairly good analogy. If you give $1000 for 50 hamburgers the McDonalds has to go the steak shop across the street. While McDonalds can do 50 burgers in 5 minutes the steak place can't. So 30 minutes into it, the steak place is still cooking burgers while McDonalds would have been done 20 minutes ago.
I'm having too much trouble reading between the editorials to figure out what specific acts you are unhappy about.
I'm not going to assume they were lying. There were members of the gamer press that came forward about seeing their friends and themselves attacked (i.e. threatened) by name. So the threat part we do have multiple independent names for.
I do know of some devs that agreed with Anita who used their real names.
I think you might want to reread what I wrote. No idea what you are responding to.
Why do you think they would want to enable that sort of behavior?