I understand the confusion. I believe context and choice of assumption is important in this situation.
The source article opens by indicating design/development is the area where advance has been made... "shows a new approach to designing video game characters that can respond to our body movements and body language." While they speak to "having to think about mathematical rules," there is no indication that such rule would be or are precluded from a mature model.
The innovation implies the challenge, "how to capture and incorporate subtlety and natural movement" -- we are expected to assume not that mathematical rules are bad...merely, in and of themselves, inadaquate to the challenge.
I really don't give a damn about Facebook (the firm). The survivors of event triggered churn (following milestone events) can be painful for the remaining staff.
Additionally this business phenomenon presents a new challenge for both inexperienced managers and leaders that have become intoxicated by constant build-grow success. Add in the additional inconvenience, ramp time, and dollar cost of finding and onboarding replacement staff, event related staff churn can have a damaging effect on the morale and productivity of the existing workforce (and impact their resumes).
The walking wounded; however, can choose to affect the situation or be affected by it. The survivors and thrivers will confront this challenge and exploit the opportunity for what it is... a chance to learn and grow.
Some think this harassing behavior is simply inappropriate; however, some of what has been described in the connected articles implies potential illegal, tortious behavior. In some cases, unwanted touching was involved.
Knowledge and appreciation of a risk, short of substantial certainty, is not necessary for requisite intent to cause harm. Further, intent to cause harm or offense is not vitiated by good faith mistake. Insane individuals and children as young as infants are capable of forming intent and are thus liable for damages. Intent also is transferable... one can act towards one individual and another can suffer the consequences.
While there are exceptions to circumstance (mingling crowds, emergency egress, etc), unreasonable and offensive behavior can be and often is put to a "reasonable person" test concerning rudeness, insolence, or anger. One does not need to act directly against the person of another, one's behavior can connect through objects closely associate with the person of another. IANAL.
The fact that this question is being raised...is...disturbing. I'm talking early Bobcat Goldthwait, maniacal screaming, dark-acerbic comedy disturbing.
Math is about much more than "solution." Math is also about how one arrives at solution. Math is about how one communicates the most fundimental ideas. Math is about proof, certainty, and understanding (individually and communally).
Certain themes occur in our daily lives; themes that today, we "know" and "understand" (with certainty) because they are reduced to a mathematics. If there is no mathematics, one is left with faith-based, opinion -- hypothesis...speculation.
One builds upon a foundation. If one's foundation is toolsets -- created by others -- then one's capability will forever be limited by said toolsets. However, if one's foundation is the underlying reasoning of toolsets, then one can transcend the toolsets and achieve excellence far beyond the imagineering of others. It was gaming, game theory, relativistic models, fluid flows, collision dynamics, vector mechanics... that grabbed me by my entrails and kicked my youthful ignorance, arrogance, and laziness into a new dimension of sympathy and love for the elegance (and necessity) of higher-order mathematics.
The fact that the argument is evidenced by "Ogre" and "Unity3D" evokes an almost sympathetic, puppy-like pat on the head. Ugh... I see these kinds all the time at conventions. All gooey-eyed and heads filled with mush! I see their resumes and portfolios... and they go directly into the trash. I get their babbling phone messages and I route them to the bit bucket.
Answer: If one is content with limitation; chained to the capability of others, unable to even communicate intelligently with pioneers in one's field... no, math is not important. But...trancendent excellence is forever denied to the willfully ignorant.
[...] the whole FOSS movement is fractured all to hell anyway, that is why you have 50 text editors, a bazillion distros, everybody reinvents the wheel rather than learn to get along. Kinda sad really, if all that energy would have been put into say 3 distros, one for home, one for enterprise, and one for mobile? [...]
It is absurd to presume such a reduction. Your argument expects the reader to assume that being fractured is the result of not learning...or not getting along... or that the destination (and not the journey) is the objective. Further, the reader must assume that the level of effort ("energy") of a reasonable person would be preserved. Then there is the whole "lack of diversity is better" implication. Your argument discounts the potential cumulative benefit that can be leveraged from of diversity. Finally, the reader must accept that the commercial world would not or does not respond.
Nosiree, Bob...
...and then some innovative spin takes the technology to previously unthunk depths. Digital determination of:
Terrorist Potential Religiosity, OMG! Sexual Orientation or Proclivity Educational Capacity
The Sex Industry, Homeland Security, Legal Education, and Shepherded Belief have one thing in common, abject disregard for pragmatism. Facial recognition will eventually follow the yellow-brick garden path to televangelizing-waterboarded-case-method-gone-wild!
My first impression when I read the subject line was, "Wow, what an odd couple selection." Who would have thunked that in the aftermath, my childhood hero (Shatner) would have such a devistating fall from grace; while, at the same time, as an adult...my contempt for the young brat (Wheaton) would turn into admiration (if not respect). What they have done with their fame/notoriety... what they model in real life, as role constructs for the impressionable, could not be more diametrically opposed.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand the confusion. I believe context and choice of assumption is important in this situation.
The source article opens by indicating design/development is the area where advance has been made... "shows a new approach to designing video game characters that can respond to our body movements and body language." While they speak to "having to think about mathematical rules," there is no indication that such rule would be or are precluded from a mature model.
The innovation implies the challenge, "how to capture and incorporate subtlety and natural movement" -- we are expected to assume not that mathematical rules are bad...merely, in and of themselves, inadaquate to the challenge.
I really don't give a damn about Facebook (the firm). The survivors of event triggered churn (following milestone events) can be painful for the remaining staff.
Additionally this business phenomenon presents a new challenge for both inexperienced managers and leaders that have become intoxicated by constant build-grow success. Add in the additional inconvenience, ramp time, and dollar cost of finding and onboarding replacement staff, event related staff churn can have a damaging effect on the morale and productivity of the existing workforce (and impact their resumes).
The walking wounded; however, can choose to affect the situation or be affected by it. The survivors and thrivers will confront this challenge and exploit the opportunity for what it is... a chance to learn and grow.
Some think this harassing behavior is simply inappropriate; however, some of what has been described in the connected articles implies potential illegal, tortious behavior. In some cases, unwanted touching was involved.
Knowledge and appreciation of a risk, short of substantial certainty, is not necessary for requisite intent to cause harm. Further, intent to cause harm or offense is not vitiated by good faith mistake. Insane individuals and children as young as infants are capable of forming intent and are thus liable for damages. Intent also is transferable... one can act towards one individual and another can suffer the consequences.
While there are exceptions to circumstance (mingling crowds, emergency egress, etc), unreasonable and offensive behavior can be and often is put to a "reasonable person" test concerning rudeness, insolence, or anger. One does not need to act directly against the person of another, one's behavior can connect through objects closely associate with the person of another. IANAL.
The fact that this question is being raised...is...disturbing. I'm talking early Bobcat Goldthwait, maniacal screaming, dark-acerbic comedy disturbing.
Math is about much more than "solution." Math is also about how one arrives at solution. Math is about how one communicates the most fundimental ideas. Math is about proof, certainty, and understanding (individually and communally).
Certain themes occur in our daily lives; themes that today, we "know" and "understand" (with certainty) because they are reduced to a mathematics. If there is no mathematics, one is left with faith-based, opinion -- hypothesis...speculation.
One builds upon a foundation. If one's foundation is toolsets -- created by others -- then one's capability will forever be limited by said toolsets. However, if one's foundation is the underlying reasoning of toolsets, then one can transcend the toolsets and achieve excellence far beyond the imagineering of others. It was gaming, game theory, relativistic models, fluid flows, collision dynamics, vector mechanics... that grabbed me by my entrails and kicked my youthful ignorance, arrogance, and laziness into a new dimension of sympathy and love for the elegance (and necessity) of higher-order mathematics.
The fact that the argument is evidenced by "Ogre" and "Unity3D" evokes an almost sympathetic, puppy-like pat on the head. Ugh... I see these kinds all the time at conventions. All gooey-eyed and heads filled with mush! I see their resumes and portfolios... and they go directly into the trash. I get their babbling phone messages and I route them to the bit bucket.
Answer: If one is content with limitation; chained to the capability of others, unable to even communicate intelligently with pioneers in one's field... no, math is not important. But...trancendent excellence is forever denied to the willfully ignorant.
[...] the whole FOSS movement is fractured all to hell anyway, that is why you have 50 text editors, a bazillion distros, everybody reinvents the wheel rather than learn to get along. Kinda sad really, if all that energy would have been put into say 3 distros, one for home, one for enterprise, and one for mobile? [...]
It is absurd to presume such a reduction. Your argument expects the reader to assume that being fractured is the result of not learning...or not getting along... or that the destination (and not the journey) is the objective. Further, the reader must assume that the level of effort ("energy") of a reasonable person would be preserved. Then there is the whole "lack of diversity is better" implication. Your argument discounts the potential cumulative benefit that can be leveraged from of diversity. Finally, the reader must accept that the commercial world would not or does not respond. Nosiree, Bob...
Ok, forget the spoon.
We cannot forget what does not exist...
...and then some innovative spin takes the technology to previously unthunk depths. Digital determination of:
Terrorist Potential
Religiosity, OMG!
Sexual Orientation or Proclivity
Educational Capacity
The Sex Industry, Homeland Security, Legal Education, and Shepherded Belief have one thing in common, abject disregard for pragmatism. Facial recognition will eventually follow the yellow-brick garden path to televangelizing-waterboarded-case-method-gone-wild !
My first impression when I read the subject line was, "Wow, what an odd couple selection." Who would have thunked that in the aftermath, my childhood hero (Shatner) would have such a devistating fall from grace; while, at the same time, as an adult...my contempt for the young brat (Wheaton) would turn into admiration (if not respect). What they have done with their fame/notoriety... what they model in real life, as role constructs for the impressionable, could not be more diametrically opposed.
Wheaton... models, Be honest. Be kind. Be honorable. Work hard..."
While Shatner, well... I don't have much to say that stays within the framework of, "Be kind."