IE can be used to spy on a computer too (cookies, installing software, etc). A fileshare could be used. And, assuming you have the right version of Windows, so could Remote Desktop. Are these being flagged too?
I doubt it. Not because of a nefarious Microsoft plot - but simply because it's NOT spyware. Neither is FTP nor VNC.
I understand the concept of why one would choose to flag VNC, an FTP daemon, etc. But when it comes down to it, that's a rather agressive and more than likely incorrect interpretation. This isn't a vulnerability scanner. It's an anti-spyware app.
On a somewhat related note, I still don't understand why "spyware" isn't included within the normal run of malware definitions for common antivirus while "elf bowling" is.
Care to point to the wide range of gaming tittles with main characters who are female and don't fit the buxom babe stereotype?
You might want to pay more attention to this post, which points out that just because women don't necessarily go for ripped guys doesn't mean they objectify any less. For that matter, saying that girls go for super-muscled guys is a complete red herring, because no one was saying that in the first place.
Yet the game industry isn't full of objectified male stereotypes with "'Im oh so sensitive and affected' eyebrows" as mentioned in your linked post. The image is the ripped, super-muscle charater which panders to a male-oriented characterization. Odd that even prime-time TV is capable of showing a wider range than the gaming industry.
I may have miscommunicated my message with over-use of the word "objectification". So let me restate it. It's not an issue that people are objectified. It's that a particular form of objectification is so common. That form is from a male-oriented perspective. What do I base this on? Conversations with female posters, which happen to fall in line with one of the posts I linked to.
Yeah, if you have to pick one, its no contest: it's wired for women. The next time you're buying groceries, check out the romance novels. Check out the beefcakes that are invariably drawn on the covers. Check out which gender buys said romance novels. Then check out all the fantasy novels written for women by women.
Wait - your counter-example is trashy romance novels? There are slews of pop novels out there that cover a wide range of characterizations. The romance novel is a rather small example. And even at that point - the draw of the romance novel is the text within, not the cover art.
Then come to the realization that you are a wuppie pussy, and haven't yet caught on to the fact that women are every bit as capable of sexism, arrogance, chauvinism and violence as men.
You might want to relize that name-calling is a good indication that you're lacking the maturity to have this kind of conversation. Grow up a bit.
Note that nowhere do I claim that women are not capable of sexism, arrogance, chauvinism, or violence. And, on that note, nowhere do I claim that any of this objectification is bad per se (hey - I like buxom babes). The point is that this objectification is a lot more one-sided than many seem to realize.
Maybe if your game library consists of Rumble Roses and DOA Vollyball. Ludicrously broad generalization.
Care to point to the wide range of gaming tittles with main characters who are female and don't fit the buxom babe stereotype? Sure. There are a few - the article named one. But the point is that they're very few and far between.
This is just like the poeple who bitch about how women are drawn in comics, ignoring the fact that even guys who are supposed to look like the definitions of 98 lbs weaklings, like Bruce Banner and pre-spider bite Peter Parker, are ripped like Brad Pitt in fight club.
The ironic thing is that this objectification of the male form is a MALE-oriented view. Read my earlier post to which a (at least self-proclaimed) girl gamer had an interesting response. You might also want to pay attention to the female response in this thread.
We might think that we're playing fair. But the truth is that the fantasy is wired for a single gender.
I wonder if Ms. Flower has read any romance novels or seen any romatic movies and if she's offended by the objectification of the sexes there - especially the "handsome, tall, muscular" man.
It would be interesting to hear her responce to this question. Having said that, I don't believe that's the point. It's not that there is objectification within the gaming industry. It's that it is nothing BUT objectification; the same cartoonish sexuality again and again.
During any given month, the covers of Vogue and Cosmopolitan may be more erotic than Playboy.
You should open the cover of Playboy.:P
The "Lara Croft" syndrome isn't limited to people trying to "pander to adolescent boys". Allegedly feminist publications are actually holding women to a tougher and more unrealistic standard of beauty.
Vogue and Cosmo are "skimp and buxom bounce" with pretense.
Is Vogue and Cosmo feminist? Or do they pander to a cultural mindset set by aforementioned male perspective? Guys tend to be wired to like certain things (buxom babe included), and Cosmo promises to give their readers the tips needed to tap in to that psyche.
Keep in mind my notes on Barbie. Matel's staff involved with the Barbie product includes quite a few females in various positions of seniority. I've seen quotes from these individuals expressing a belief in the positive image and role model of the Barbie characterization. Yet there is a reson Barbie is the butt of social commentary - not everyone believes the image is possitive.
I'm not saying all this imagery is wrong or should be entirely wiped from our society. But we're fooling ourselves if we think the imagery being described has any semblance of an even treatment for both sexes.
On a side note - I wonder how many posters claiming equal treatment or this being a non-issue have really talked to (or are) female gamers.
Re:Why should it evolve?
on
Getting the Girl
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Ms. Flower is trying to manufacture a double standard where none exists - male and female characters are treated the same; they're made to look perfect.
You've missed a very interesting point - perfect to who? It's not that there is an impossible image. It's that this image is a distorted view from a male standpoint. Or is it? There are a couple interesting, if somewhat subtle, points to consider.
First is that the author feels that there is a certain degree of misrepresentation to begin with. I'm not saying she's "right" per se - but it's not an unheardof view among female gamers.
Second, females involved in producing some of these images defend these images and feel that they are actually positive or even well recieved That seems to be the author's point; suprise. Again - no right or wrong... just interesting. Of course, executives involved with Barbie see the product as a role model and there is certainly some disenting opinion on that.
Finally, you'll note that among the featured female character models was one who wasn't all skimpy outfits and buxom bounce. Yet the model still represented a physical ideal (even as a toned-down example, the character still had physical atributes of a model or actress). It just wasn't the same ideal as all the others.
I like roleplaying environments and imersive characters where players add to the depth of the environment around them. A big part of creating such a character is their speech (since most games lack control over body language). So I tend to alter my normal speech patterns when playing my favorite character.
One of my favorite speech alternations is inspired by the Wheel of Time novels. It makes quite an impact, but it requires a bit of thought to alter the sentence structure properly. But with practice, it gets easy. Then I found myself "speaking" in that mode during my dreams. I realized something interesting was going on.
This isn't without precedent. When I got my PilotPro years ago, I learned grafitti with gusto. I even found myself scribbling out sticky notes using occasional grafitti glyphs.
It seems that a combination of focus, interest, and repetition leads to a rewiring our wetware, as it were. Which shouldn't be surprising. It's a common learning principle. But I suppose what is surprising is when we find what we learned within a limited context, jumping boundaries in to the mundane.
Wasn't the late Apollo hardware actually used for Skylab 1, 2 and ASTP missions?
Yes - Apollo hardware went to those missions. However, there was still hardware remaining. Some historical displays are even made of repurposed / modified Apollo hardware created as backup flight hardware for Skylab (for example). Some displays are actually testing hardware. And some displays are origional Apollo mission fight hardware. JSC's display consists of mismatched hardware intended for the last 3 Apollo missions.
2. Mac/PC compatible. I know, I know - Mac's only include 4% of the "new computers sold" base or some such. But I know several Unix geeks who got Macs just so they could play some games on them (as opposed to Linux, which is even less native ports than for the Mac). So after the kids are in bed, I can sit in the living room with my Powerbook and play the same game my friends are playing in my living room.
3. Performance: you don't need a brand spanking new computer to play. It helps, of course, but I know a guy with a 867 Mhz Powerbook who plays without missing anything.
WoW works rather nicely under Cedega (formerly WineX). It's not flawless as a native client (for example, my copies of NWN, UT2k4, AA, ET). But with a few minor clitches aside, it is very playable. I seem to remember a message somewhere noting that it also works well with the WineX release of Cedega.
Where I once came to work next to a giant reminder of NASA's past accomplishments (or rather, left for lunch by it, as I usually come in via the back gate), now I only see a big, white, ugly building. Where once tourists could stand back in awe as they took in the rocket's size, now they have to peer through windows at it.
I agree - and so have all my coworkers who have commented on Rocket Park. The only savings grace is that I've heard the building being referred to as "temporary". So one can only hope the current structure is only intended for the restoration phase.
It would be nice if a final structure that shows off the rocket was planned. Perhapse involving a good deal of glass... assuming such a structure would be compatible with Houston weather.
On a side note - the Saturn V makes a rather fitting, if bitter monument. On one hand, it is a reminder of the amazing achievements of NASA. On the other hand, it is a sad note on past days of glory. The Saturn V display consists of flight hardware intended to fly on Apollo missions 18, 19, and 20; all cancelled due to budget cuts.
Oh yeah I guess Polly boy has something to put on his resume now as if someone else was going to steal his glory and get away with it.
What's interesting is the preface that shows up on several lists:
Hi all,
first of all I must comply about the handling of this vulnerability that I reported to vendorsec. Obviously my code posted there has been stolen and plagiated by Stefan Esser from Ematters. The posting containing the plagiate will follow. Now I have been forced to release the full advisory however another disclosure timeline have been agreed on vendorsec. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Followed by:
Hi all,
first of all I must comply about the handling of this vulnerability that I reported to vendorsec. Obviously my code posted there has been stolen and plagiarized in order to put the blame on Stefan Esser from Ematters and disturb the security community.
I really apologize to Stefan Esser for the inconvenience and thank him for his cool reaction - the plagiarism did work.
Further steps must be taken to investigate the security leak on vendorsec.
The problem with open source is that the code is out there, so its easier to find the bugs. The saving grace is that the code is generally better, and there are usually more white hats looking for the problem than black hats.
Of course, you don't have to have source code to find exploitable bugs. So closed or secret source doesn't entirely solve the 0-day issue.
The double-edge sword to open source is that it lowers the boundaries to looking for bugs. The hope is that this lower boundary will mean that more people interested in fixing bugs will join the effort than those motivated by malicious intent.
Slashdot's editorial ability (not that it was ever good) is just getting worse.
Since when do Slashdot editors routinely provide an entire background on a subject? It's nice when the submitter adds some links to background. But otherwise, I suppose you'll have to beat that inert laziness and type "hardocp infinitum" in to google yourself.
In what way is any of that MS's fault? Even with a 100% bug-free OS (which is all-but impossible), there is *nothing* MS could do to prevent users from installing software. I'll give you that IE bugs, etc, are responsible for a lot of malware infections, but by no means all of them.
Fair enough. Microsoft can't stop people intent on installing software that may damage their system. But what (at least somewhat) credible criticism is claiming that this IS Microsoft's problem?
They don't do anything, they get blamed, try to do something, they get blamed. Come out of the MS bashing mentality to see that they are trying to resolve the issue. The only reason spyware is so prevalent in IE is because of monoculture, nothing to do with engineering
Keep in mind that a good amount of Microsoft criticism (call it "bashing" if you want) is due to their engineering choices. Those choices lead to the outcomes critics predicted. Which in turn leads to a wasteland of broadband zombies.
When Microsoft attempts bandaid solutions, there is more criticism. That isn't bashing. It's pointing out that Microsoft has issues - much of their own doing.
Sure - they're doing something. But is "doing something" really solving the problem?
Keynote and Powerpoint make people dumber. I'm too lazy to look up the coresponding Slashdot article.
It can be worse than just flash. Powerpoint is often used in inappropriate situations that lead to a lack of clear communication. From the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) Report:
As information gets passed up an organization hierarchy, from people who do analysis to mid-level managers to high-level leadership, key explanations and supporting information is filtered out. In this context, it is easy to understand how a senior manager might read this PowerPoint slide and not realize that it addresses a life-threatening situation.
And...
At many points during its investigation, the Board was surprised to receive similar presentation slides from NASA officials in place of technical reports. The Board views the endemic use of PowerPoint briefing slides instead of technical papers as an illustration of the problematic methods of technical communication at NASA.
These are just two interesting tidbits from the Report.
Don't even go there. That's comparing grapefruits to grapes. Skylab was a disaster by nearly everyone's estimate, and a colossal waste of money. By six years I think you mean "Yes, it was up in orbit in varying degrees of usefulness for six years, but people actually only lived in it for a few months, and for the last 4 1/2 years of its 'life' it was classified as a navigational hazard."
You're being far too harsh. Skylab was no Mir in terms of overall success. But it was unique for its time and flew a full decade before Mir was launched. Furthermore, Skylab did produce solar observation data as well as proving the ability and importance of long-term manned flight (and setting records in the process). Skylab was far from a complete failure.
Sounds a bit different from a space station that was continuously staffed for well over a decade, conducted good research, and was de-orbited safely and according to plan at the end of its mission. True it had that collision that caused it some damage, but that was toward the very end of its lifespan.
Again, Mir was indeed much more successful than Skylab - albiet a decade later. And experience gained from Mir certainly makes the Russians an asset to the ISS partnership. But using Mir as a point of NASA's dependance on Russian technology is a stretch (although its probably a fair point that due to funding issues, neither the US nor Russians would currently have a space station without their mutual involvement).
NASA's missions tend to have their boner moments right at the start (Challenger, Columbia, Skylab, Apollo 13, etc)
Space exploration has a price. You can track that price with the history of NASA's failures (while completely ignoring it's successes). But you might also want to look at Russian failures (Soyuz 1, Salyut 1/Soyuz 11, Nedelin, etc.) less you get an incomplete tally.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like it's almost a guarentee that G4 will air it.
IE can be used to spy on a computer too (cookies, installing software, etc). A fileshare could be used. And, assuming you have the right version of Windows, so could Remote Desktop. Are these being flagged too?
I doubt it. Not because of a nefarious Microsoft plot - but simply because it's NOT spyware. Neither is FTP nor VNC.
I understand the concept of why one would choose to flag VNC, an FTP daemon, etc. But when it comes down to it, that's a rather agressive and more than likely incorrect interpretation. This isn't a vulnerability scanner. It's an anti-spyware app.
On a somewhat related note, I still don't understand why "spyware" isn't included within the normal run of malware definitions for common antivirus while "elf bowling" is.
Not the mama!
This would be where I asked:
Yet the game industry isn't full of objectified male stereotypes with "'Im oh so sensitive and affected' eyebrows" as mentioned in your linked post. The image is the ripped, super-muscle charater which panders to a male-oriented characterization. Odd that even prime-time TV is capable of showing a wider range than the gaming industry.
I may have miscommunicated my message with over-use of the word "objectification". So let me restate it. It's not an issue that people are objectified. It's that a particular form of objectification is so common. That form is from a male-oriented perspective. What do I base this on? Conversations with female posters, which happen to fall in line with one of the posts I linked to.
Wait - your counter-example is trashy romance novels? There are slews of pop novels out there that cover a wide range of characterizations. The romance novel is a rather small example. And even at that point - the draw of the romance novel is the text within, not the cover art.
You might want to relize that name-calling is a good indication that you're lacking the maturity to have this kind of conversation. Grow up a bit.
Note that nowhere do I claim that women are not capable of sexism, arrogance, chauvinism, or violence. And, on that note, nowhere do I claim that any of this objectification is bad per se (hey - I like buxom babes). The point is that this objectification is a lot more one-sided than many seem to realize.
Care to point to the wide range of gaming tittles with main characters who are female and don't fit the buxom babe stereotype? Sure. There are a few - the article named one. But the point is that they're very few and far between.
The ironic thing is that this objectification of the male form is a MALE-oriented view. Read my earlier post to which a (at least self-proclaimed) girl gamer had an interesting response. You might also want to pay attention to the female response in this thread.
We might think that we're playing fair. But the truth is that the fantasy is wired for a single gender.
What this coffin needs is more nails.
It would be interesting to hear her responce to this question. Having said that, I don't believe that's the point. It's not that there is objectification within the gaming industry. It's that it is nothing BUT objectification; the same cartoonish sexuality again and again.
I've talked to people who have chosen female avatars for alterior reasons.
You should open the cover of Playboy.
Is Vogue and Cosmo feminist? Or do they pander to a cultural mindset set by aforementioned male perspective? Guys tend to be wired to like certain things (buxom babe included), and Cosmo promises to give their readers the tips needed to tap in to that psyche.
Keep in mind my notes on Barbie. Matel's staff involved with the Barbie product includes quite a few females in various positions of seniority. I've seen quotes from these individuals expressing a belief in the positive image and role model of the Barbie characterization. Yet there is a reson Barbie is the butt of social commentary - not everyone believes the image is possitive.
I'm not saying all this imagery is wrong or should be entirely wiped from our society. But we're fooling ourselves if we think the imagery being described has any semblance of an even treatment for both sexes.
On a side note - I wonder how many posters claiming equal treatment or this being a non-issue have really talked to (or are) female gamers.
You've missed a very interesting point - perfect to who? It's not that there is an impossible image. It's that this image is a distorted view from a male standpoint. Or is it? There are a couple interesting, if somewhat subtle, points to consider.
First is that the author feels that there is a certain degree of misrepresentation to begin with. I'm not saying she's "right" per se - but it's not an unheardof view among female gamers.
Second, females involved in producing some of these images defend these images and feel that they are actually positive or even well recieved That seems to be the author's point; suprise. Again - no right or wrong... just interesting. Of course, executives involved with Barbie see the product as a role model and there is certainly some disenting opinion on that.
Finally, you'll note that among the featured female character models was one who wasn't all skimpy outfits and buxom bounce. Yet the model still represented a physical ideal (even as a toned-down example, the character still had physical atributes of a model or actress). It just wasn't the same ideal as all the others.
Yep. Because all the female players I've known who play Quake, etc. all talk about playing to watch their character's pecs flex while they play.
I like roleplaying environments and imersive characters where players add to the depth of the environment around them. A big part of creating such a character is their speech (since most games lack control over body language). So I tend to alter my normal speech patterns when playing my favorite character.
One of my favorite speech alternations is inspired by the Wheel of Time novels. It makes quite an impact, but it requires a bit of thought to alter the sentence structure properly. But with practice, it gets easy. Then I found myself "speaking" in that mode during my dreams. I realized something interesting was going on.
This isn't without precedent. When I got my PilotPro years ago, I learned grafitti with gusto. I even found myself scribbling out sticky notes using occasional grafitti glyphs.
It seems that a combination of focus, interest, and repetition leads to a rewiring our wetware, as it were. Which shouldn't be surprising. It's a common learning principle. But I suppose what is surprising is when we find what we learned within a limited context, jumping boundaries in to the mundane.
Yes - Apollo hardware went to those missions. However, there was still hardware remaining. Some historical displays are even made of repurposed / modified Apollo hardware created as backup flight hardware for Skylab (for example). Some displays are actually testing hardware. And some displays are origional Apollo mission fight hardware. JSC's display consists of mismatched hardware intended for the last 3 Apollo missions.
WoW works rather nicely under Cedega (formerly WineX). It's not flawless as a native client (for example, my copies of NWN, UT2k4, AA, ET). But with a few minor clitches aside, it is very playable. I seem to remember a message somewhere noting that it also works well with the WineX release of Cedega.
I agree - and so have all my coworkers who have commented on Rocket Park. The only savings grace is that I've heard the building being referred to as "temporary". So one can only hope the current structure is only intended for the restoration phase.
It would be nice if a final structure that shows off the rocket was planned. Perhapse involving a good deal of glass... assuming such a structure would be compatible with Houston weather.
On a side note - the Saturn V makes a rather fitting, if bitter monument. On one hand, it is a reminder of the amazing achievements of NASA. On the other hand, it is a sad note on past days of glory. The Saturn V display consists of flight hardware intended to fly on Apollo missions 18, 19, and 20; all cancelled due to budget cuts.
Check out my earlier post. Looks like someone leaked the exploit ahead of the "responsible disclosure" schedule.
What's interesting is the preface that shows up on several lists:
Followed by:
There are things that you know.
;)
There are things that you don't know.
Then there are things that you know you don't know. And there are things that you don't know you don't know.
Of course, you don't have to have source code to find exploitable bugs. So closed or secret source doesn't entirely solve the 0-day issue.
The double-edge sword to open source is that it lowers the boundaries to looking for bugs. The hope is that this lower boundary will mean that more people interested in fixing bugs will join the effort than those motivated by malicious intent.
Since when do Slashdot editors routinely provide an entire background on a subject? It's nice when the submitter adds some links to background. But otherwise, I suppose you'll have to beat that inert laziness and type "hardocp infinitum" in to google yourself.
Fair enough. Microsoft can't stop people intent on installing software that may damage their system. But what (at least somewhat) credible criticism is claiming that this IS Microsoft's problem?
Keep in mind that a good amount of Microsoft criticism (call it "bashing" if you want) is due to their engineering choices. Those choices lead to the outcomes critics predicted. Which in turn leads to a wasteland of broadband zombies.
When Microsoft attempts bandaid solutions, there is more criticism. That isn't bashing. It's pointing out that Microsoft has issues - much of their own doing.
Sure - they're doing something. But is "doing something" really solving the problem?
It can be worse than just flash. Powerpoint is often used in inappropriate situations that lead to a lack of clear communication. From the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) Report:
And...
These are just two interesting tidbits from the Report.
'Cause... after all... as an example, Gator (or whatever they call themselves now is not spyware. Or is it?
You're being far too harsh. Skylab was no Mir in terms of overall success. But it was unique for its time and flew a full decade before Mir was launched. Furthermore, Skylab did produce solar observation data as well as proving the ability and importance of long-term manned flight (and setting records in the process). Skylab was far from a complete failure.
Again, Mir was indeed much more successful than Skylab - albiet a decade later. And experience gained from Mir certainly makes the Russians an asset to the ISS partnership. But using Mir as a point of NASA's dependance on Russian technology is a stretch (although its probably a fair point that due to funding issues, neither the US nor Russians would currently have a space station without their mutual involvement).
Space exploration has a price. You can track that price with the history of NASA's failures (while completely ignoring it's successes). But you might also want to look at Russian failures (Soyuz 1, Salyut 1/Soyuz 11, Nedelin, etc.) less you get an incomplete tally.