Old prose which is still available is however likely to be amongst the best from it's time. Simply because anything from the same time which is poor is likely to be long forgotten. A similar thing applies to classical music.
A valid point - which only emphasizes that old literature - all of it - is not necessarily superior in merit to modern stuff.
The literacy factor: Adults are not reading as often as they used to, and the literacy level of adult fiction has lowered over the decades to keep up with the times. Compare a newspaper from a hundred years ago to one today. Compare a popular novel to one today. People like easier material. They get lazy. So when they pick up a HP book they find it's easy to read, contains a good story, and they feel as if they are accomplishing something.
Whoa, buddy. Couple of things here.
As for adults not reading as often as they used to - unless you can bring some kind of statistics to the table, I'd have to disagree. Adults this day and age are far more educated than adults at any other peroid in time. To say that they read less is to fall into a stereotype about this generation vs. "the great generation" of yesteryear.
As for the literary merit of adult fiction: again, not the case. More educated people = more educated things to read. As science and philosophy and even society advance and become more complicated, it is nessesarily reflected in the literature.
As for the comparison between old literature to modern literature: Of course old literature is harder to read! It was written in a vernacular that is no longer used. People write and speak differently now, and so modern literature looks easier simply because thats how you speak. Old prose being harder to read does not increase its literary merit.
So when they pick up a HP book they find it's easy to read, contains a good story, and they feel as if they are accomplishing something.
What an elitest thing to say. You're assuming that outside of your circle of friends and family, and "present company excluded," America is filled with trailer park trash. And it's absolutely not true. People arn't happy about reading Harry Potter because "Oh! I read a 900 page book! Whoa, I didn't know I had it in me!" No, people are happy they read Harry Potter because it sparks the imagination.
"Yeah. And by that measure the companies that made "Commander Keen", "Jazz Jackrabbit", "Grand Theft Auto", "Battlefield 1942" didn't amount to anything either"
I don't know what you're talking about. Those are all great games. I remember playing Commander Keen when I was a kid. In fact, all of those games stand out. I recognize Jazz Jackrabbit, even though I've never played it. A classic game. If I was a developer, I'd want a game like that in my portfolio. In contrast, Micro Forte has... what? The bastard Fallout game?
As for what I said about Microsoft and it's MMO tech, I didn't expect Microsoft trust Micro Forte with its stuff, because it looks like Micro Forte will screw it up.
"Their decisions on law are binary, and they cannot reword laws so that they adhere to the constitution. They merely stamp the law "UNCONSTITUTIONAL" and send it back to Congress. Once stamped, the law is null and void."
Thats not true at all. Ever hear of a court opinion? Court opinions are more important than the actual wording of the law - they set precedent, and precedent is what the legal world revolves around.
Most "laws" are are specific sections of large Congressional "acts." The Supreme Court can declare any specific part of the act unconstitutional, or the whole damn thing. Its much more than binary, though, because it can decide that when the law is used one way, its constitutional; when used another, it's not. Likewise, once "stamped," the law is not nescessarily null and void - the court may have decided that only one particular action was unconstitutional (for example, having not provided a lawyer to the defendant), and not the whole law.
"They do not write law." Thats a fictious statement. Supreme Court decisions wrote the law requiring Miranda warnings. They did it through the Court opinion. Consider Gideon v. Wainwright, in which the Court decided that all states must provide attorneys for felony and capital case defendants. In New York Times Co. v. United States, the Court decided how, and to what extent, the government may limit the freedom of the press. In Roe v. Wade, the Court created a system for state laws to regulate abortions.
The system of laws in the US is far more complicated than you are making it seem. The Court, as well as the Executive, have a large amount of lawmaking capabilities. They do write the law.
Micro Forte has developed or is developing the following games: America's Cup Bombs Away Demon Stalkers Fire King Nordice Enemy Infestation Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel HotWheels: Bash Arena Citizen Zero
Other than Fallout Tactics (the bastard child of the Fallout series) I've never heard of a single one of these. Which leads me to believe that they arn't exactly a AAA developer. I would not expect Microsoft to entrust its MMO technology to a small, almost unheard of developer.
Sounds to me more like Micro Forte is desparately trying to hype its product. Look at their track record, though, and it becomes obvious that the chances of them creating a "killer app" is pretty damn low.
I don't even know where to start. I guess I have to address that page you posted.
First of all, Alger Hiss was not a communist spy; he was a victim of the red scare. Second, the article ridicules the idea of global disarmament. Hell, I don't know what progress is if it isn't world peace and global disarmament.
I'm not going to continue to debunk the article; it's so painfully and obviously propaganda built for fanatics that arguing is futile. Here's a quote: "Along these lines, UNICEF, the UN Children's Fund, has recently been pushing child sex with homosexuals and with animals."
Okay, about your point concerning problems in various states, and the UN only interesting itself in "oil" states. The UN has peacekeeping/observational forces in Kosovo, Georgia, Cyprus, Sierra Leone, Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Ivory Coast, the western Sahara, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, East Timor, India, and Pakistan. How many of those are oil states?
Bottom Line: the UN doesn't make autonomous decisions. The Secretary General has little to no control over the agenda. The General Assembly has almost no power to begin with, but can't get anything important done because it's hopeless split by cross pressured members. The Security Council is geopolitcally split, with at least three of the members (US, China, Russia) vying for power and influence. The Trustee Council is steadily dissolving its protectorates, and is very close simply shuting down. The International Court of Justice is almost a joke. What I'm saying is, the UN has no power to do anything insidious. Conspiracy theorists need to find another target: the UN is to disorganized to be able "to subjugate nations and peoples,to make them sub servient to the UN."
There is no Stalinist model: the very basis of a Stalinist model is a dictator, and the UN has no powerful leader. Kofi Annan has no power. The Stalinist model relies on military might; the UN has no military. Its peace keeping forces are donations from dozens of nations. The Stalinist model requires strict control of the economy; the UN has no power over trade. The UN can't even afford to renovate its building to meet the New York fire code.
The UN is a pathetic target to shoot at. And to call it "communist," even while it promotes free trade and globalization, is a joke.
Look, if life migrated from Mars to Earth, or vice versa, or if life came here from somewhere else, it greatly increases the chance of finding life else where in the universe. It shows that life can jump planets. Hence, only one planet in the entire universe actually has to go through the process of creating life. The migration of life would follow its own statistical probabilities (meteor hits planet, debris shoots into space, debris carries life, life survives space, debris falls on other planet, life survives fall, life survives on new planet) which I bet are a lot more likely than original creation.
Plus, if life came from a planet other than Mars of Earth, then it very likely came from a nearby star system, like Alpha Centaruri, and so our chance of discovering life increases dramaticaly (because we only have to visit nearby systems to find it)
"...the UN was extremely based on the stalinist-brand "communist" model..."
I have to say, I have no idea what you're talking about. I've studied the UN, its charter, and international law, and I can't see what you're refering to. I'm not saying you're wrong, though at this point I think you are; I'm asking you to elaborate.
From what I know, the UN is based on American ideals from the end of World War II, and America was a positive player in the United Nations (compared to Reagan or the current Bush's practices and policies). Russia, on the other hand, was the main vetoer, and basically did what it could to prevent the UN from achieving it's objectives.
...the UN, the 'official' governing body of the world (whatever that means)...
The UN has no governing ability or responsibility - it's merely a body for nations to resolve conflicts peacefully. It has no power, and really no intention, of governing nations. The point is to get nations to agree to do things, not to force them to.
The UN is "official" because we've agreed to it. We've signed and ratified the UN Charter, and therefore recognize what authority it has. In theory, that means that we are required to submit to all the conditions listed in the Charter (especially article II), not only because we ratified it, but also because the Constitution specificaly states: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;" Therefore, it seems the UN charter, and all the other things we've ratified, are the "supreme law of the land."
As for your point about the UN not seeming to mind about nations slaughtering their own people, That's primarily because the UN charter specifically states that no internal affairs will be discussed or addressed by the UN. Article II states: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state..." It means that the UN can't do anything about oppressive governments, but it also means that it can't dick around with our internal affairs.
In other words, the UN can only deal with international actions - internal actions are the sovereign rights of states. If we want an official organization that can interfere with states slaughtering its people, we have to surrender our own sovereignty as well.
Well, I'd say there are a couple of quadzillion nucleotides.
Your article talks about complexity in terms of how many genes there are; however, I bet the complexity of the genes themselves (ie, how many nucleotides they contain) is far more important than the mere number.
I think the idea that Neo is a project to develop AI is interesting, but in that case, no one else can be a program, because then they would also require AI, and if Neo is the project to develop AI... then...? those ideas are mutually exclusive.
I don't think that Trinity and Neo are programs, simply because they fall in love. That's a stereotypical non-machine thing to do.
Morpheus, however, very well could be a program. Think about it - Morpheus's role must always be fulfilled in each iteration of the Matrix. He has a singular purpose - to find Neo, train him, make him believe in the prophecy, and then fulfill it. Everyone else - Trinity, Niobe, the council, Tank, Dozer, Cypher, etc. are all just peripheral roles that could be done by anyone. Neo, due to his nature as the One, may or may not be a program, though I think he isn't. Without Morpheus, no one would believe the prophecy, and consquently, the One (which I just now realize is an anagram of Neo. Feel kinda stupid about that) would never be found. Therefore, Morpheus is required for the cycle, just as are the Oracle and Keymaker.
The Matrix hasn't been running for 500-600 years. Its reloaded every 100. In other words, it's reset. So, it probably goes from 1950 to 2050 (when mankind discovered AI), then loops back to 1950. Remember that the Matrix can build false pasts for people - thats what Mr. Reagan (Cypher) wanted in the first movie, to be made a wealthy actor, and not remember about the Matrix. Excess people (That is, 1950 had less people than 2050 will have, by about 5 billion or so) could be liquified, then reserved to feed people when food stocks run low. That seems to fit what we've been told by the movie well.
"...Rob Dougan's and Juno Factor's music was killer..."
I'd have to disagree. Most of the time during the movie I painfully aware of the soundtrack. In other words, the music selection and place was, in my opinion, bad. What I remember (it's been about 24 hours since I saw the thing, and I wasn't actively trying to analyze the music, so forgive any errors) was a lot of rock/electronica music moving at a different tempo than the action in the scenes. Plus, during many of the dramatic parts the music was melodramatic or overbearing. I remember the music of the first Matrix was perfect, especially when Neo stops the bullets. This time around? Mostly hard beats (bum bum BUM) to try to emphasize something.
If there's any one thing that irritated me about this movie, it was the soundtrack.
"Agent Smith was able to transfer his consciousness into the 'real world'. I don't see how this is possible (I mean a computer program mapping itself to the human synapses?)"
Consider first that killing the body in the matrix kills the mind. Second, during fight scenes, sometimes the characters spit up blood in the "real world" (which is now in doubt as to whether it really is real, or just a looped matrix), which suggests that the body in the real world is taking what happens in the matrix so seriously, that it actually does damage to itself to replicate what is happening in the matrix.
With that in mind, it's not too much of a strech to say that when Smith injects himself into human constructs (which I think is overwriting their program with his), the real body overwrites the person's mind with Smith's.
You're forgetting that Zion is destroyed every time the matrix reloads. The 23 people are the only survivors; hence, the last time the matrix reloaded was a couple hundred years ago; long enough for 23 people to mate enough, and pull enough people out of the matrix, to produce 250,000 people. No one remembers the last time the matrix was reloaded. No one remembers the prophecy is really just a cycle.
In FFVIII, I drew furiously for about 5 hours, in the beginning. From then on... maybe three or four times (in battles, drawing while on the map was pretty painless). There's a trick that I think a lot of people who don't like the game don't quite understand. You can refine magic from everything: cards, items, other magic. If you liked the card game, all you had to do was play the card game, a lot, to get some good stuff. Or, fight a lot of (quick) battles, and refine the items.
The number one thing, though, is that you're wasting magic if you cast it. With the exception of perhaps curaga, berserk, and aura, there was no point in casting magic. The point of magic was junctioning. It was to improve your character, not for casting. And GF's? Don't _summon_ them! Use them for junctioning, and things like mug! Except in a few boss battles, its much quicker to have a character with triple junctioned to speed and ultima junctioned to strength, and just have him attack furiously. its 9999 damage every 5 seconds.
The point of magic and GF's was to improve the character - that they could be used independantly was a bonus. Draw is for beginners, before you have a large enough base of items and cards to refine from. In anycase, draw is just the same as fighting battles solely to gain exp, or get enough money to buy that new sword. Same thing, different appearance.
"IX actually broke the mold by being nostalgic and reaching all the way back to V... Square is done innovating here, move along."
I'm not quite sure repeating methods used before is breaking a mold (it rather seems to be reusing the mold, doesn't it?), and to say that Square isn't innovating by doing new things every iteration (in your words, "line of travel") is to misunderstand what innovation is. According to dictionary.com: "a change in customs; something new, and contrary to established customs, manners, or rites."
Bottom line here is that Square _is_ innovating, by constantly creating new gameplay and character development systems, and you don't like it. You don't like Square's innovations. Admit it: what you want are recasts of FFIV and VI (such as IX), not new things, like, well, VII, VIII, and X.
"VII, VIII and X all practically required you to take a college course before you could understand the mechanics they used for character development (whether they called it "materia," "guardian forces/draw" or "sphere grid")."
This is called a learning curve, and it's necessary for new, complex systems. anytime there is an innovation, people have to go through a learning curve. I suppose all future final fantasies could have systems based around tic-tac-toe, but I would rather spend a few hours learning how to use and master a game system, every time, than play the same game over and over again.
"In general, any RPG that requires you to take several hours of your time to learn how to play the game isn't worth my money, because spending so much focus on the game mechanics means that less focus is spent on the actual story."
For stories, good stories, you should really be buy books or videos. Games are about PLAYING, not about reading or watching. Square has never had an interactive story - they're always very linear, and the few choices you get, never effect the outcome, and hardly even effect the dialogue in any meaningful way.
"If I rent a machine from Blockbuster, should I get an X-Box or a Playstation 2?"
By all means, if you're renting, get both. But, if for some reason you only want one, get the PS2, mainly because then you can also play the excellent PSX games you missed.
Get Metal Gear Solid, the one for PSX. Its about as "spy/soldier" as you can get, and absolutely excellent.
Try Gran Turismo 3 for the racing game.
Finding a D&D game for consoles is tough. On PCs, of course, you can go with Planescape and Baldur's Gate, but consoles are more hack and slash. Perhaps Vagrant Story for the PSX is as D&D rpg-ish as you can get (and still be an quality game).
"America has gone from admireable to just downright disgusting"
America has always been disgusting (you can trace social injustices all the way back to the beginning of the nation. Just ask African Americans.) What's happened is that your innocence died...
"Please dont ruin the world and freedom for the rest of us."
I disagree that the United States is "not setup for 2 parties only." Constitutionally, you're right - there is nothing in the constitution that suggests a two-party system. However, consider this: in the *vast* majority of states, republican and democratic candidates are automatically placed on the ballot. All third party candidates must must run a petition to be placed on a ballot. And that's for candidates - not the party. Hence, a congressman and state senator for the green party must both run petitions to be placed on the ballot of a district. Compare to democratic and republican candidates who are automatically placed on ballots when sponsored by their party (ie, after the primaries). The Green party had to scramble to get Nader on all 50 state ballots for president.
Also consider the set up of Congress. Majority, Minority leader. If, for example, the green party had three members in the senate, they don't get a "leader" who can direct legislative agenda. In fact, without influence of either the majority or minority leaders, the bills proposed by them would never get out of committee... especially since they might not even be in the committee the bill is assigned to! Congress is definately a two-party system.
Thats why I would never vote for a third party in any important federal election - even if the candidate won, they wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful.
Slashdot Mirror
Old prose which is still available is however likely to be amongst the best from it's time. Simply because anything from the same time which is poor is likely to be long forgotten. A similar thing applies to classical music.
A valid point - which only emphasizes that old literature - all of it - is not necessarily superior in merit to modern stuff.
The literacy factor: Adults are not reading as often as they used to, and the literacy level of adult fiction has lowered over the decades to keep up with the times. Compare a newspaper from a hundred years ago to one today. Compare a popular novel to one today. People like easier material. They get lazy. So when they pick up a HP book they find it's easy to read, contains a good story, and they feel as if they are accomplishing something.
Whoa, buddy. Couple of things here.
As for adults not reading as often as they used to - unless you can bring some kind of statistics to the table, I'd have to disagree. Adults this day and age are far more educated than adults at any other peroid in time. To say that they read less is to fall into a stereotype about this generation vs. "the great generation" of yesteryear.
As for the literary merit of adult fiction: again, not the case. More educated people = more educated things to read. As science and philosophy and even society advance and become more complicated, it is nessesarily reflected in the literature.
As for the comparison between old literature to modern literature: Of course old literature is harder to read! It was written in a vernacular that is no longer used. People write and speak differently now, and so modern literature looks easier simply because thats how you speak. Old prose being harder to read does not increase its literary merit.
So when they pick up a HP book they find it's easy to read, contains a good story, and they feel as if they are accomplishing something.
What an elitest thing to say. You're assuming that outside of your circle of friends and family, and "present company excluded," America is filled with trailer park trash. And it's absolutely not true. People arn't happy about reading Harry Potter because "Oh! I read a 900 page book! Whoa, I didn't know I had it in me!" No, people are happy they read Harry Potter because it sparks the imagination.
"Yeah. And by that measure the companies that made "Commander Keen", "Jazz Jackrabbit", "Grand Theft Auto", "Battlefield 1942" didn't amount to anything either"
I don't know what you're talking about. Those are all great games. I remember playing Commander Keen when I was a kid. In fact, all of those games stand out. I recognize Jazz Jackrabbit, even though I've never played it. A classic game. If I was a developer, I'd want a game like that in my portfolio. In contrast, Micro Forte has... what? The bastard Fallout game?
As for what I said about Microsoft and it's MMO tech, I didn't expect Microsoft trust Micro Forte with its stuff, because it looks like Micro Forte will screw it up.
"Their decisions on law are binary, and they cannot reword laws so that they adhere to the constitution. They merely stamp the law "UNCONSTITUTIONAL" and send it back to Congress. Once stamped, the law is null and void."
Thats not true at all. Ever hear of a court opinion? Court opinions are more important than the actual wording of the law - they set precedent, and precedent is what the legal world revolves around.
Most "laws" are are specific sections of large Congressional "acts." The Supreme Court can declare any specific part of the act unconstitutional, or the whole damn thing. Its much more than binary, though, because it can decide that when the law is used one way, its constitutional; when used another, it's not. Likewise, once "stamped," the law is not nescessarily null and void - the court may have decided that only one particular action was unconstitutional (for example, having not provided a lawyer to the defendant), and not the whole law.
"They do not write law." Thats a fictious statement. Supreme Court decisions wrote the law requiring Miranda warnings. They did it through the Court opinion. Consider Gideon v. Wainwright, in which the Court decided that all states must provide attorneys for felony and capital case defendants. In New York Times Co. v. United States, the Court decided how, and to what extent, the government may limit the freedom of the press. In Roe v. Wade, the Court created a system for state laws to regulate abortions.
The system of laws in the US is far more complicated than you are making it seem. The Court, as well as the Executive, have a large amount of lawmaking capabilities. They do write the law.
Micro Forte has developed or is developing the following games:
America's Cup
Bombs Away
Demon Stalkers
Fire King
Nordice
Enemy Infestation
Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel
HotWheels: Bash Arena
Citizen Zero
Other than Fallout Tactics (the bastard child of the Fallout series) I've never heard of a single one of these. Which leads me to believe that they arn't exactly a AAA developer. I would not expect Microsoft to entrust its MMO technology to a small, almost unheard of developer.
Sounds to me more like Micro Forte is desparately trying to hype its product. Look at their track record, though, and it becomes obvious that the chances of them creating a "killer app" is pretty damn low.
I don't even know where to start. I guess I have to address that page you posted.
First of all, Alger Hiss was not a communist spy; he was a victim of the red scare. Second, the article ridicules the idea of global disarmament. Hell, I don't know what progress is if it isn't world peace and global disarmament.
I'm not going to continue to debunk the article; it's so painfully and obviously propaganda built for fanatics that arguing is futile. Here's a quote: "Along these lines, UNICEF, the UN Children's Fund, has recently been pushing child sex with homosexuals and with animals."
Okay, about your point concerning problems in various states, and the UN only interesting itself in "oil" states. The UN has peacekeeping/observational forces in Kosovo, Georgia, Cyprus, Sierra Leone, Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Ivory Coast, the western Sahara, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, East Timor, India, and Pakistan. How many of those are oil states?
Bottom Line: the UN doesn't make autonomous decisions. The Secretary General has little to no control over the agenda. The General Assembly has almost no power to begin with, but can't get anything important done because it's hopeless split by cross pressured members. The Security Council is geopolitcally split, with at least three of the members (US, China, Russia) vying for power and influence. The Trustee Council is steadily dissolving its protectorates, and is very close simply shuting down. The International Court of Justice is almost a joke. What I'm saying is, the UN has no power to do anything insidious. Conspiracy theorists need to find another target: the UN is to disorganized to be able "to subjugate nations and peoples,to make them sub servient to the UN."
There is no Stalinist model: the very basis of a Stalinist model is a dictator, and the UN has no powerful leader. Kofi Annan has no power. The Stalinist model relies on military might; the UN has no military. Its peace keeping forces are donations from dozens of nations. The Stalinist model requires strict control of the economy; the UN has no power over trade. The UN can't even afford to renovate its building to meet the New York fire code.
The UN is a pathetic target to shoot at. And to call it "communist," even while it promotes free trade and globalization, is a joke.
Look, if life migrated from Mars to Earth, or vice versa, or if life came here from somewhere else, it greatly increases the chance of finding life else where in the universe. It shows that life can jump planets. Hence, only one planet in the entire universe actually has to go through the process of creating life. The migration of life would follow its own statistical probabilities (meteor hits planet, debris shoots into space, debris carries life, life survives space, debris falls on other planet, life survives fall, life survives on new planet) which I bet are a lot more likely than original creation.
Plus, if life came from a planet other than Mars of Earth, then it very likely came from a nearby star system, like Alpha Centaruri, and so our chance of discovering life increases dramaticaly (because we only have to visit nearby systems to find it)
"...the UN was extremely based on the stalinist-brand "communist" model..."
I have to say, I have no idea what you're talking about. I've studied the UN, its charter, and international law, and I can't see what you're refering to. I'm not saying you're wrong, though at this point I think you are; I'm asking you to elaborate.
From what I know, the UN is based on American ideals from the end of World War II, and America was a positive player in the United Nations (compared to Reagan or the current Bush's practices and policies). Russia, on the other hand, was the main vetoer, and basically did what it could to prevent the UN from achieving it's objectives.
...the UN, the 'official' governing body of the world (whatever that means)...
The UN has no governing ability or responsibility - it's merely a body for nations to resolve conflicts peacefully. It has no power, and really no intention, of governing nations. The point is to get nations to agree to do things, not to force them to.
The UN is "official" because we've agreed to it. We've signed and ratified the UN Charter, and therefore recognize what authority it has. In theory, that means that we are required to submit to all the conditions listed in the Charter (especially article II), not only because we ratified it, but also because the Constitution specificaly states: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;" Therefore, it seems the UN charter, and all the other things we've ratified, are the "supreme law of the land."
As for your point about the UN not seeming to mind about nations slaughtering their own people, That's primarily because the UN charter specifically states that no internal affairs will be discussed or addressed by the UN. Article II states: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state..." It means that the UN can't do anything about oppressive governments, but it also means that it can't dick around with our internal affairs.
In other words, the UN can only deal with international actions - internal actions are the sovereign rights of states. If we want an official organization that can interfere with states slaughtering its people, we have to surrender our own sovereignty as well.
Well, I'd say there are a couple of quadzillion nucleotides.
Your article talks about complexity in terms of how many genes there are; however, I bet the complexity of the genes themselves (ie, how many nucleotides they contain) is far more important than the mere number.
"So it's very simple, even if you don't understand the reasoning at all: the most expensive product is the newest."
So, if brand spanking new games go for $50... that SNES cartridge for Chrono Trigger I bought for 80 bucks must have come out... two years from now!
I guess it's called "Chrono Trigger" for a reason!
I don't think Neo and Trinity are programs.
I think the idea that Neo is a project to develop AI is interesting, but in that case, no one else can be a program, because then they would also require AI, and if Neo is the project to develop AI... then...? those ideas are mutually exclusive.
I don't think that Trinity and Neo are programs, simply because they fall in love. That's a stereotypical non-machine thing to do.
Morpheus, however, very well could be a program. Think about it - Morpheus's role must always be fulfilled in each iteration of the Matrix. He has a singular purpose - to find Neo, train him, make him believe in the prophecy, and then fulfill it. Everyone else - Trinity, Niobe, the council, Tank, Dozer, Cypher, etc. are all just peripheral roles that could be done by anyone. Neo, due to his nature as the One, may or may not be a program, though I think he isn't. Without Morpheus, no one would believe the prophecy, and consquently, the One (which I just now realize is an anagram of Neo. Feel kinda stupid about that) would never be found. Therefore, Morpheus is required for the cycle, just as are the Oracle and Keymaker.
The Matrix hasn't been running for 500-600 years. Its reloaded every 100. In other words, it's reset. So, it probably goes from 1950 to 2050 (when mankind discovered AI), then loops back to 1950. Remember that the Matrix can build false pasts for people - thats what Mr. Reagan (Cypher) wanted in the first movie, to be made a wealthy actor, and not remember about the Matrix. Excess people (That is, 1950 had less people than 2050 will have, by about 5 billion or so) could be liquified, then reserved to feed people when food stocks run low. That seems to fit what we've been told by the movie well.
"...Rob Dougan's and Juno Factor's music was killer..."
I'd have to disagree. Most of the time during the movie I painfully aware of the soundtrack. In other words, the music selection and place was, in my opinion, bad. What I remember (it's been about 24 hours since I saw the thing, and I wasn't actively trying to analyze the music, so forgive any errors) was a lot of rock/electronica music moving at a different tempo than the action in the scenes. Plus, during many of the dramatic parts the music was melodramatic or overbearing. I remember the music of the first Matrix was perfect, especially when Neo stops the bullets. This time around? Mostly hard beats (bum bum BUM) to try to emphasize something.
If there's any one thing that irritated me about this movie, it was the soundtrack.
"Agent Smith was able to transfer his consciousness into the 'real world'. I don't see how this is possible (I mean a computer program mapping itself to the human synapses?)"
;)
Consider first that killing the body in the matrix kills the mind. Second, during fight scenes, sometimes the characters spit up blood in the "real world" (which is now in doubt as to whether it really is real, or just a looped matrix), which suggests that the body in the real world is taking what happens in the matrix so seriously, that it actually does damage to itself to replicate what is happening in the matrix.
With that in mind, it's not too much of a strech to say that when Smith injects himself into human constructs (which I think is overwriting their program with his), the real body overwrites the person's mind with Smith's.
All speculation, of course
You're forgetting that Zion is destroyed every time the matrix reloads. The 23 people are the only survivors; hence, the last time the matrix reloaded was a couple hundred years ago; long enough for 23 people to mate enough, and pull enough people out of the matrix, to produce 250,000 people. No one remembers the last time the matrix was reloaded. No one remembers the prophecy is really just a cycle.
In FFVIII, I drew furiously for about 5 hours, in the beginning. From then on... maybe three or four times (in battles, drawing while on the map was pretty painless). There's a trick that I think a lot of people who don't like the game don't quite understand. You can refine magic from everything: cards, items, other magic. If you liked the card game, all you had to do was play the card game, a lot, to get some good stuff. Or, fight a lot of (quick) battles, and refine the items.
The number one thing, though, is that you're wasting magic if you cast it. With the exception of perhaps curaga, berserk, and aura, there was no point in casting magic. The point of magic was junctioning. It was to improve your character, not for casting. And GF's? Don't _summon_ them! Use them for junctioning, and things like mug! Except in a few boss battles, its much quicker to have a character with triple junctioned to speed and ultima junctioned to strength, and just have him attack furiously. its 9999 damage every 5 seconds.
The point of magic and GF's was to improve the character - that they could be used independantly was a bonus. Draw is for beginners, before you have a large enough base of items and cards to refine from. In anycase, draw is just the same as fighting battles solely to gain exp, or get enough money to buy that new sword. Same thing, different appearance.
"IX actually broke the mold by being nostalgic and reaching all the way back to V ... Square is done innovating here, move along."
I'm not quite sure repeating methods used before is breaking a mold (it rather seems to be reusing the mold, doesn't it?), and to say that Square isn't innovating by doing new things every iteration (in your words, "line of travel") is to misunderstand what innovation is. According to dictionary.com: "a change in customs; something new, and contrary to established customs, manners, or rites."
Bottom line here is that Square _is_ innovating, by constantly creating new gameplay and character development systems, and you don't like it. You don't like Square's innovations. Admit it: what you want are recasts of FFIV and VI (such as IX), not new things, like, well, VII, VIII, and X.
"VII, VIII and X all practically required you to take a college course before you could understand the mechanics they used for character development (whether they called it "materia," "guardian forces/draw" or "sphere grid")."
This is called a learning curve, and it's necessary for new, complex systems. anytime there is an innovation, people have to go through a learning curve. I suppose all future final fantasies could have systems based around tic-tac-toe, but I would rather spend a few hours learning how to use and master a game system, every time, than play the same game over and over again.
"In general, any RPG that requires you to take several hours of your time to learn how to play the game isn't worth my money, because spending so much focus on the game mechanics means that less focus is spent on the actual story."
For stories, good stories, you should really be buy books or videos. Games are about PLAYING, not about reading or watching. Square has never had an interactive story - they're always very linear, and the few choices you get, never effect the outcome, and hardly even effect the dialogue in any meaningful way.
"If I rent a machine from Blockbuster, should I get an X-Box or a Playstation 2?"
By all means, if you're renting, get both. But, if for some reason you only want one, get the PS2, mainly because then you can also play the excellent PSX games you missed.
Get Metal Gear Solid, the one for PSX. Its about as "spy/soldier" as you can get, and absolutely excellent.
Try Gran Turismo 3 for the racing game.
Finding a D&D game for consoles is tough. On PCs, of course, you can go with Planescape and Baldur's Gate, but consoles are more hack and slash. Perhaps Vagrant Story for the PSX is as D&D rpg-ish as you can get (and still be an quality game).
Yes, I can name a more obscure game than you.
"America has gone from admireable to just downright disgusting"
America has always been disgusting (you can trace social injustices all the way back to the beginning of the nation. Just ask African Americans.) What's happened is that your innocence died...
"Please dont ruin the world and freedom for the rest of us."
but I guess your idealism hasn't.
"Usenet, unfortunately, has no ejection mechanism." PLONK!
"the RIAA isn't a monopoly... they are a whole bunch of companies all joined together for the 'common cause'."
Yeah, thats called a Trust. And the US has these things called "antitrust laws." To bad they arn't used, eh?
"I would be inclined to leave it the way it is, if for no other reason than as broke as it is, the alternative may be more broken."
I don't really see how equal franchise is broken. Bottom line is, if I voted for Al Gore in 2000, or, IIRC, Nixon in 1960, I was disenfranchised.
The alternative is that everbody's vote counts equally, whether you're in a big state or small state.
I disagree that the United States is "not setup for 2 parties only." Constitutionally, you're right - there is nothing in the constitution that suggests a two-party system. However, consider this: in the *vast* majority of states, republican and democratic candidates are automatically placed on the ballot. All third party candidates must must run a petition to be placed on a ballot. And that's for candidates - not the party. Hence, a congressman and state senator for the green party must both run petitions to be placed on the ballot of a district. Compare to democratic and republican candidates who are automatically placed on ballots when sponsored by their party (ie, after the primaries). The Green party had to scramble to get Nader on all 50 state ballots for president.
Also consider the set up of Congress. Majority, Minority leader. If, for example, the green party had three members in the senate, they don't get a "leader" who can direct legislative agenda. In fact, without influence of either the majority or minority leaders, the bills proposed by them would never get out of committee... especially since they might not even be in the committee the bill is assigned to! Congress is definately a two-party system.
Thats why I would never vote for a third party in any important federal election - even if the candidate won, they wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful.