I agree with all but democracy. It isn't the end all be all of political models, as is often seen in the US election cycle. Perhaps democracy at its best is a good concept, but then, so is Communism.
I can't say I know what democracy needs to be replaced with, but the rule of the majority is causing a big mess when the majority doesn't know what it actually wants nor what it has actually voted for.
I'm definitely more impressed by the costik list than the Ludologist list. While you're obviously going to open yourself to a great deal of attack, the level to which they've broken games down by type and genre gives more room for exploration of truly 'canonical' titles that don't have to be compared in direct terms when it comes to their inclusion/exclusion.
The look at non-video games is important here too. Who could possibly call themselves a true gamer if they haven't gamed off-screen? Particularly relevant for game designers when it comes to understanding what makes video gaming different to other forms of gaming.
All in all the more people argue about such lists the better! Surely it will all take us closer to a true canon that can be held up in future as a respected list?
This is a very important point. MMOGs aren't like other games in that they need to get the details right before it ever goes out the door - patching is a big problem, but perhaps an even bigger problem is developers launching games that have been poorly playtested.
These games live and die by their meta- scale systems. The economics, the social structures, item commonality, and so on. When any of these factors fail so to will the game in the long term. And isn't what we're after is the kind of experience that is not only enjoyable today but is going to continue to be enjoyable after months of play?
Only through serious, extended playtesting can problems in these 'higher arts' of MMOGs become apparent. But right now it seems like we're going to have to endure a few more generations of ultimately doomed games... a few more live trial and error experiences that developers will (hopefully) learn from one day.
One piece of legislation doesn't forgive Alston for all the rest of his stupidity. The guy is still causing major troubles across the rest of his Communications portfolio.
Chalk this up to a staffer who knows what they're talking about in this specific context. The man himself is clearly still living in a dream world...
Or to maintain your 'unsolicited mail' status, just follow all the 'click here to unsubscribe' links. I get the feeling spammers would rather confirm your address this way than have you give it to them freely.
I have a lot of friends who still think that following an unsubscribe link is going to stop the spam... and then wonder why they're getting more than ever!
Another good option is using discussion boards, guestbooks and the like on websites. These seem to be a great way of spreading the joy of your e-mail address to all and sundry.
The definition of "news" is something that's out of the ordinary
WTF? Perhaps the definition of "News" is such (capital 'N', as in sensationalist reporting), but the definition of "news" is 'new information' and 'fresh events reported'. I agree that a great deal of protest is frivilous. Many activist type organisations have lost sight of what a protest used to achieve when used sparingly. Perhaps this is part of the problem? So many protests mean that they are rarely displayed as positive. BUT...
To suggest that protest activities surrounding events like the WTO meetings and G8 summits are NOT news? Take your head out of the sand and realise WHY major media agencies refuse to pass on the facts of such demonstrations! It is, in the end, all about their companies, their interests, their feedbag... They choose what to deem as 'Newsworthy' based on desired demographics, sensationalism, sales, ratings, advertiser interests, etc. Media and Communication are what it is all about - who has it, who controls it, who controls the opinions and attitudes of society...
History is what grants more perspective on the fallacies and propaganda of particular moments in time. Until then, we only get to see small parts of any story.
When news, history and other public information gets disseminated from fewer and fewer sources, it's going to be more and more tempting for those sources to use that information power to their own ends.
I'm surprised this has not been mentioned yet, but this is where I see us having already arrived at a period in history rather more like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World where we are controlled through entertainment media and pleasure rather than through the control technologies of '1984'.
While we have the interested few (such as many Slashdotters, I would assume) the reality is that the general public act as the 'silent majority' in that they don't particularly pay attention to what is going on because they are quite happy with their little house, big car, and the big TV in the corner of the room. What else do you need to worry about when you can sit back, relax and be passively entertained?
There is certainly an element of what Orwell was examining in this future. But it is more through this collusion between government and info-tainment producers that news, events and wars are reported within specific frameworks in their 30-60 second spots on the nightly news - the source of most people's understanding of what is going on in the world!
This is all well explored through the work of Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death among his best), Noam Chomsky and many other authors and academics in this field.
So yes, the key in this argument isn't how are we being observed, but rather how we are given opportunity to truly observe the activities of our government, our leaders, our 'owners'...
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with all but democracy. It isn't the end all be all of political models, as is often seen in the US election cycle. Perhaps democracy at its best is a good concept, but then, so is Communism.
I can't say I know what democracy needs to be replaced with, but the rule of the majority is causing a big mess when the majority doesn't know what it actually wants nor what it has actually voted for.
I'm definitely more impressed by the costik list than the Ludologist list. While you're obviously going to open yourself to a great deal of attack, the level to which they've broken games down by type and genre gives more room for exploration of truly 'canonical' titles that don't have to be compared in direct terms when it comes to their inclusion/exclusion.
The look at non-video games is important here too. Who could possibly call themselves a true gamer if they haven't gamed off-screen? Particularly relevant for game designers when it comes to understanding what makes video gaming different to other forms of gaming.
All in all the more people argue about such lists the better! Surely it will all take us closer to a true canon that can be held up in future as a respected list?
This is a very important point. MMOGs aren't like other games in that they need to get the details right before it ever goes out the door - patching is a big problem, but perhaps an even bigger problem is developers launching games that have been poorly playtested.
These games live and die by their meta- scale systems. The economics, the social structures, item commonality, and so on. When any of these factors fail so to will the game in the long term. And isn't what we're after is the kind of experience that is not only enjoyable today but is going to continue to be enjoyable after months of play?
Only through serious, extended playtesting can problems in these 'higher arts' of MMOGs become apparent. But right now it seems like we're going to have to endure a few more generations of ultimately doomed games... a few more live trial and error experiences that developers will (hopefully) learn from one day.
Probably around 2010 or so... I hope...
One piece of legislation doesn't forgive Alston for all the rest of his stupidity. The guy is still causing major troubles across the rest of his Communications portfolio.
Chalk this up to a staffer who knows what they're talking about in this specific context. The man himself is clearly still living in a dream world...
Or to maintain your 'unsolicited mail' status, just follow all the 'click here to unsubscribe' links. I get the feeling spammers would rather confirm your address this way than have you give it to them freely.
I have a lot of friends who still think that following an unsubscribe link is going to stop the spam... and then wonder why they're getting more than ever!
Another good option is using discussion boards, guestbooks and the like on websites. These seem to be a great way of spreading the joy of your e-mail address to all and sundry.
as I never leave home without my trusty keyring bottle-opener.
I will never be caught flat-footed by a non-twist top beer again!
WTF? Perhaps the definition of "News" is such (capital 'N', as in sensationalist reporting), but the definition of "news" is 'new information' and 'fresh events reported'. I agree that a great deal of protest is frivilous. Many activist type organisations have lost sight of what a protest used to achieve when used sparingly. Perhaps this is part of the problem? So many protests mean that they are rarely displayed as positive. BUT...
To suggest that protest activities surrounding events like the WTO meetings and G8 summits are NOT news? Take your head out of the sand and realise WHY major media agencies refuse to pass on the facts of such demonstrations! It is, in the end, all about their companies, their interests, their feedbag... They choose what to deem as 'Newsworthy' based on desired demographics, sensationalism, sales, ratings, advertiser interests, etc. Media and Communication are what it is all about - who has it, who controls it, who controls the opinions and attitudes of society...
History is what grants more perspective on the fallacies and propaganda of particular moments in time. Until then, we only get to see small parts of any story.
I'm surprised this has not been mentioned yet, but this is where I see us having already arrived at a period in history rather more like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World where we are controlled through entertainment media and pleasure rather than through the control technologies of '1984'.
While we have the interested few (such as many Slashdotters, I would assume) the reality is that the general public act as the 'silent majority' in that they don't particularly pay attention to what is going on because they are quite happy with their little house, big car, and the big TV in the corner of the room. What else do you need to worry about when you can sit back, relax and be passively entertained?
There is certainly an element of what Orwell was examining in this future. But it is more through this collusion between government and info-tainment producers that news, events and wars are reported within specific frameworks in their 30-60 second spots on the nightly news - the source of most people's understanding of what is going on in the world!
This is all well explored through the work of Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death among his best), Noam Chomsky and many other authors and academics in this field.
So yes, the key in this argument isn't how are we being observed, but rather how we are given opportunity to truly observe the activities of our government, our leaders, our 'owners'...