To Americans arrogance is something they only recognize in others.
You call that insightful? I call that sad and ignorant. IMO any statement that uses generalization to achieve validity or justification is either uninformed - and therefore ignorant - or malicious and barbed - and therefore both ignorant and terminally invalid.
I'm quite surprised such an obvious troll was modded as insightful. I guess it's hip to bash on nationality now, right? Or were you just karma whoring?
You do understand that your statement embodies the exact behavior you berate, don't you? I don't think it matters where you come from to recognize that one.
I'd hate to be the poor schlep sitting behind the viewer for this contraption. With every passenger I'd be afraid that them walking through the machine would end up playing out like a Tool video!
Yeah, but wouldn't it look a little suspicious to see a couple wires sticking out of someone's ass? I think the chic terrorist this year will opt for the surgery.
I also appreciate your argument. I'm rather enjoying this exchange.
I will have to concede the point when it comes down to web development. You are absolutely correct in regards to applet dev. My school of thought comes from elsewhere, as I am primarily a backend coder. My forte is server side code, generally C++, with past life experience working on shrink-wrapped products. I've never been much on the applet side of things (and balked outright when I first heard the term 'servlet' - and every time since).
My argument does originate (and adhere to, mostly) my own experiences. I didn't consider some of your points and am glad to hear your argument unfold even more. You make a fantastic point. I suppose some of my ignorance comes from the fact that I strongly believe that at this time, the web is a terrible means to serve applications. Now I don't think that will always be the case, but I feel that we just aren't quite there yet to make the web a viable means to host apps.
Anyway, thanks again for the discussion. It is refreshing to exchange thoughts with a slashdotter that isn't part of the lunatic fringe.:)
I understand the logic, but my point is that it is ultimately the developer's responsibility to make sure they can deliver their product to a consumer. If that means they must develop parallel codebases then so be it. If that means they must use a language other than Java due to whatever Microsoft is doing to their OS, then you make that call. It's a huge pain in the ass, I agree, but that's just the reality that you face.
There was a time when writing a piece of code once and running it on multiple platforms was just a pipe dream. It was commonplace to find many code trees in order to spread your product across many platforms. Duh, right? I'm not saying anything new, I know.:) Now that we have languages like Java, Perl, et al, developers have suddenly decided that they don't want to do that work any more. They want to do it one time and have it magically work everywhere. In a way, I think that's cool. I'd love that luxury. Of course, we are still a long ways off from that every really happening, even in the face of Java. I think we are lucky that enough people came to the table to adopt XML as a semi-standard method of storing data. Even that is fragmented, when you think about it.
I don't agree with Microsoft. I think if they purposely made such a move with the intention of smothering Java in favor of.NET that they should suffer appropriately. I don't mean to sound naive, but I also don't want to point fingers and spread blame when I personally don't know their reasoning or their tactics. However, I just as strongly believe that developers whine like stuck pigs every time something happens that requires additional work. We've been downright spoiled over the past few years with easier languages, drop-in-and-go libraries that take much of the work off of our shoulders, etc. The moment someone makes a move that causes a ripple in our otherwise still pond... we collectively freak out. If we were cats we'd all drive to Redmond and piss all over Bill's office carpet. Okay maybe we wouldn't drive.
Personally, I'm a C++ guy. I never got on the Java bandwagon because, to be honest, I never saw anything that convinced me that it would solve the problems I was faced with as a programmer. At this point I'm used to taking great care to ensure that my code, if it is so desired, will run on every intended platform with minimal dependencies on the OS. Obviously you can only go so far with that, but that's the challenge. If I can't handle that I should probably look for another line of work, wouldn't you agree?
In the end, if you do not find a way to work around the problem, your competitors will. That, my friend, is why the developer suffers, not the consumer. The product will still be put out there. The question, ultimately, is whose name will be on the box.
Thanks for reading my bloated response. I don't mean to flame or to argue, I'm just making the point that either way, reality wins out. We need to satisfy the consumer if we expect to continue what we do, regardless of what the vendors are up to. Some days that's not so easy - I guess this is one of them.
Actually, not to flame you, but by doing this, Microsoft is not screwing the consumer; they are screwing the developer. Consumers couldn't care less about what language is used to develop software. We are the ones with the religious zealotry for a language, not the users.
And what, you think musicians live lavish lifestyles with women and booze and drugs? Think again, man. You might want to play the role of poor starving artist, but you need to know that 99% of the musicians you speak of are dirt poor. Only a very, VERY small percentage are able to avoid day jobs. Most of them are so damn poor that they work in photomats and coffee shops to make rent. I have yet to meet a real musician that didn't have to sacrifice nearly everything to pursue that dream.
And you know, even some of your favorite radio bands are dead broke. I would argue that *most* of the artists that move you are, in fact, pretty damn broke.
I'm not giving you a hard time here... but to imply that musicians have it better than any other struggling artist is both narrow minded and ludicrous.
And yeah, I know the life of a writer is difficult. I also know a little bit about the life of a musician. The only difference I can find between that and living as a musician? Well, let's see. Musician's have more shit to haul around and it's generally a lot heavier. That's about it.
Anyway, I think you guys are missing the point. This isn't necessarily a financial issue. Taking a single song out of an album will remove a piece of the story from its context. At least that could be said for some artists. Would you be so keen to chop your books into chapters to be sold invididually? Of course not! That idea is just plain silly. Why should it be okay for music? Just because you may not see the story in the song list doesn't mean it isn't there.
On a side note: it's a strange day indeed when you meet a writer that doesn't have much to say.
Browsing this topic I see quite a few inflated +5 posts... yet the parent to my ramble is stuck at, oh, 1. Shawn, albeit grumpy and bitter, has made the most insightful point of all thus far. I'll add my own $.02 in and state that even beyond what Shawn is saying that *everything* is art, just as art is nothing, even if you don't see it as such through your eyes. If you ask me, the moment you try to define art is the same moment your objects of definition lose the very thing that made them art in the first place.
For the purposes of this topic you may as well just substitute all instances of the word 'art' with the word 'novelty'.
Moderators: wake up and give this guy some credit, willya?;)
No I am not trolling! I really think the parent deserves some sort of recognition for well made points.
I tend to agree with you that the virtual worlds offered by technology are, indeed, wonderful. However, without any sense of balance, that virtual savior will quickly turn into a very destructive force in your very real life.
Sympathy aside, how would you view a scenario in which an individual becomes so immersed in a virtual world that they completely lose interest in the physical world around them? And yes, this does apply to everyone, even the unhappy, friendless geek or physically handicapped person trapped in a wheelchair for life. Everyone, and I do mean everyone, truly needs regular doses of the outside world in order to function properly on their own. Face it, we are pack animals. It is part of our heritage as human beings. Even our greatly expanded intellect can neither erase nor overcome that fact. And no, I'm not talking group-think here, so please don't take it as such. Ponder the notion of a day gone by with no face-to-face interations versus a day spent socializing with your neighbors, your family, etc. At the end of the day, I'll be that nearly all of us would feel that while we may have had a horrible time with that annoying aunt that never shuts up... it was damn good to see her. Obscure point, I know, but I hope someone gets it. =)
See, it is my belief that as the 'addiction' grows for the virtual world the individual's perceived need for the real world diminishes. Of course, the actual need does not. Just like with any addiction, perceptions become warped over time, intitially causing feelings of alienation to those around them that do not partake in the same virtual activities. Eventually those feelings will turn inward, causing the person to dive even further into the addiction - not so much to escape from reality, as people love to believe, but more to simply be in a safe, familiar environment. This creates the well known cycle that addicts find extremely difficult to break, whether the addiction is a chemical agent or simply a habitual routine. You simply desire to be with those that share your habit, even at the expense of social satisfaction in your relationships with those individuals. Such is the birth of group-think, incidentally. We all know of this, especially those of us whose lives are very dependent on technology (as for myself, I am a career software engineer). It's so easy to relate to technology sometimes that we forget how to relate, not just with each other, but with our own selves. (Sorry to get all zen and shit.) If you were to apply this on a grand scheme, you would see pockets of society, especially those within that certain subset more apt to explore such technologies, grow apathetic and distant towards one another. After all, the more deeply you dive into your virtual world, the less need for real interaction you will 'need'.
So while you say that virtual worlds are a wonderful thing (and remember, I do tend to agree), you must realize that such a statement is selfish at best. After all, to the single person living alone (or at home, or with roommates, etc), such reclusive behavior can be perceived as just fine (mostly because the rest of us are just as apathetic and detached). However, to the person with a family, such behavior is incredibly destructive. Not only to themselves, mind you, but to the people whose quality of life depends, at least somewhat, on the quality of interactions with that person. As a person who is recently engaged to be married and considering starting my own family, the thought of such detachment to those that are physically around me is terrifying.
So, having spewed all of that, I believe the poster to whom you are replying may have been touching on this very subject. Of course, I may be talking straight out of my EverCrack.
By the way, I have the solution: LAN PARTY!!! How else can you get your fix and satisfy that pesky need for social interaction with other frag bait, er, people. Plus you can use 1337 5p34| without getting modded down. Seriously, though, I would love to see a gaming paradigm that takes full advantage of LAN parties. And no, teamspeak and planetside don't count. =P
Well, that's my windbag rant. Blame a boring day at the office. =)
When I was 17 I worked construction back up in the NW. In union terms, 'about two' translates roughly, in human terms, to 15 laborers, 4 foremen, 7 union representatives, and 3 strippers (to be brought on site for birthdays, mondays, tuesdays, etc.)
To give you context, compare that to the software world, where 'about two' translates to just you, 4 weeks out of the 20 week projection, a pissed off laptop, and a boss that lives and dies by metrics.
Perhaps if you made the occasional post regarding Microsoft's terrible plague on society or how your children couldn't eat solid foods until you discovered Linux your posts would carry more influence and credibility. Or you could put up a website detailing how you case-modded your Seqway to include transparent panels and flashing neon lights. Your choice.
That's just it. It's so, so, nothing. I mean it looks like... Well, it looks like a small, less-rectangular-and-not-black-yet-still-eerie monolith. If you look real close, you might see... My god. It's full of stars!
That is a pretty amazing observation. Your attention to detail has no equal. However, next time I suggest you post your findings to the correct discussion.:)
Slashdot Mirror
To Americans arrogance is something they only recognize in others.
You call that insightful? I call that sad and ignorant. IMO any statement that uses generalization to achieve validity or justification is either uninformed - and therefore ignorant - or malicious and barbed - and therefore both ignorant and terminally invalid.
I'm quite surprised such an obvious troll was modded as insightful. I guess it's hip to bash on nationality now, right? Or were you just karma whoring?
You do understand that your statement embodies the exact behavior you berate, don't you? I don't think it matters where you come from to recognize that one.
Best Buy is slashdotted... here's a mirror.
Didn't appear in anything noticeable, eh?
I'm guessing that after such a box office smash as that, she hasn't had the need to find more acting jobs.
I'd hate to be the poor schlep sitting behind the viewer for this contraption. With every passenger I'd be afraid that them walking through the machine would end up playing out like a Tool video!
I can hear the opening riff for Sober now...
Doesn't even have to be surgery... ;)
Yeah, but wouldn't it look a little suspicious to see a couple wires sticking out of someone's ass? I think the chic terrorist this year will opt for the surgery.
I find it amusingly ironic that your simile of applying makeup to an ugly mug appears just above your signature for geek dating. :)
--
I also appreciate your argument. I'm rather enjoying this exchange.
:)
I will have to concede the point when it comes down to web development. You are absolutely correct in regards to applet dev. My school of thought comes from elsewhere, as I am primarily a backend coder. My forte is server side code, generally C++, with past life experience working on shrink-wrapped products. I've never been much on the applet side of things (and balked outright when I first heard the term 'servlet' - and every time since).
My argument does originate (and adhere to, mostly) my own experiences. I didn't consider some of your points and am glad to hear your argument unfold even more. You make a fantastic point. I suppose some of my ignorance comes from the fact that I strongly believe that at this time, the web is a terrible means to serve applications. Now I don't think that will always be the case, but I feel that we just aren't quite there yet to make the web a viable means to host apps.
Anyway, thanks again for the discussion. It is refreshing to exchange thoughts with a slashdotter that isn't part of the lunatic fringe.
I understand the logic, but my point is that it is ultimately the developer's responsibility to make sure they can deliver their product to a consumer. If that means they must develop parallel codebases then so be it. If that means they must use a language other than Java due to whatever Microsoft is doing to their OS, then you make that call. It's a huge pain in the ass, I agree, but that's just the reality that you face.
:) Now that we have languages like Java, Perl, et al, developers have suddenly decided that they don't want to do that work any more. They want to do it one time and have it magically work everywhere. In a way, I think that's cool. I'd love that luxury. Of course, we are still a long ways off from that every really happening, even in the face of Java. I think we are lucky that enough people came to the table to adopt XML as a semi-standard method of storing data. Even that is fragmented, when you think about it.
.NET that they should suffer appropriately. I don't mean to sound naive, but I also don't want to point fingers and spread blame when I personally don't know their reasoning or their tactics. However, I just as strongly believe that developers whine like stuck pigs every time something happens that requires additional work. We've been downright spoiled over the past few years with easier languages, drop-in-and-go libraries that take much of the work off of our shoulders, etc. The moment someone makes a move that causes a ripple in our otherwise still pond... we collectively freak out. If we were cats we'd all drive to Redmond and piss all over Bill's office carpet. Okay maybe we wouldn't drive.
There was a time when writing a piece of code once and running it on multiple platforms was just a pipe dream. It was commonplace to find many code trees in order to spread your product across many platforms. Duh, right? I'm not saying anything new, I know.
I don't agree with Microsoft. I think if they purposely made such a move with the intention of smothering Java in favor of
Personally, I'm a C++ guy. I never got on the Java bandwagon because, to be honest, I never saw anything that convinced me that it would solve the problems I was faced with as a programmer. At this point I'm used to taking great care to ensure that my code, if it is so desired, will run on every intended platform with minimal dependencies on the OS. Obviously you can only go so far with that, but that's the challenge. If I can't handle that I should probably look for another line of work, wouldn't you agree?
In the end, if you do not find a way to work around the problem, your competitors will. That, my friend, is why the developer suffers, not the consumer. The product will still be put out there. The question, ultimately, is whose name will be on the box.
Thanks for reading my bloated response. I don't mean to flame or to argue, I'm just making the point that either way, reality wins out. We need to satisfy the consumer if we expect to continue what we do, regardless of what the vendors are up to. Some days that's not so easy - I guess this is one of them.
--
mcpkaaos
Actually, not to flame you, but by doing this, Microsoft is not screwing the consumer; they are screwing the developer. Consumers couldn't care less about what language is used to develop software. We are the ones with the religious zealotry for a language, not the users.
--
mcp->kaaos;
I think most of us who play Shadowbane might disagree with that statement.
--
mcp.kaaos
Well you could start with www.bullshit.com.
--
mcp.kaaos
I'd suggest we send Sally Struthers to China to launch a massive "Save the IPs" campaign, but I'm too afraid she'd end up eating half the population.
Of course, that would solve the problem..
--
mcp.kaaos
Well, most of us here eat with our hands...
--
mcp.kaaos
...nice try, Bill.
--
And what, you think musicians live lavish lifestyles with women and booze and drugs? Think again, man. You might want to play the role of poor starving artist, but you need to know that 99% of the musicians you speak of are dirt poor. Only a very, VERY small percentage are able to avoid day jobs. Most of them are so damn poor that they work in photomats and coffee shops to make rent. I have yet to meet a real musician that didn't have to sacrifice nearly everything to pursue that dream.
And you know, even some of your favorite radio bands are dead broke. I would argue that *most* of the artists that move you are, in fact, pretty damn broke.
I'm not giving you a hard time here... but to imply that musicians have it better than any other struggling artist is both narrow minded and ludicrous.
And yeah, I know the life of a writer is difficult. I also know a little bit about the life of a musician. The only difference I can find between that and living as a musician? Well, let's see. Musician's have more shit to haul around and it's generally a lot heavier. That's about it.
Anyway, I think you guys are missing the point. This isn't necessarily a financial issue. Taking a single song out of an album will remove a piece of the story from its context. At least that could be said for some artists. Would you be so keen to chop your books into chapters to be sold invididually? Of course not! That idea is just plain silly. Why should it be okay for music? Just because you may not see the story in the song list doesn't mean it isn't there.
On a side note: it's a strange day indeed when you meet a writer that doesn't have much to say.
Anyway, that's my Sunday ramble..
--
mcp.kaaos
Damnit, save your mod points for Shawn's post, not mine! hehe :)
--
mcp.kaaos
Browsing this topic I see quite a few inflated +5 posts... yet the parent to my ramble is stuck at, oh, 1. Shawn, albeit grumpy and bitter, has made the most insightful point of all thus far. I'll add my own $.02 in and state that even beyond what Shawn is saying that *everything* is art, just as art is nothing, even if you don't see it as such through your eyes. If you ask me, the moment you try to define art is the same moment your objects of definition lose the very thing that made them art in the first place.
;)
For the purposes of this topic you may as well just substitute all instances of the word 'art' with the word 'novelty'.
Moderators: wake up and give this guy some credit, willya?
No I am not trolling! I really think the parent deserves some sort of recognition for well made points.
--
mcp.kaaos
I tend to agree with you that the virtual worlds offered by technology are, indeed, wonderful. However, without any sense of balance, that virtual savior will quickly turn into a very destructive force in your very real life.
Sympathy aside, how would you view a scenario in which an individual becomes so immersed in a virtual world that they completely lose interest in the physical world around them? And yes, this does apply to everyone, even the unhappy, friendless geek or physically handicapped person trapped in a wheelchair for life. Everyone, and I do mean everyone, truly needs regular doses of the outside world in order to function properly on their own. Face it, we are pack animals. It is part of our heritage as human beings. Even our greatly expanded intellect can neither erase nor overcome that fact. And no, I'm not talking group-think here, so please don't take it as such. Ponder the notion of a day gone by with no face-to-face interations versus a day spent socializing with your neighbors, your family, etc. At the end of the day, I'll be that nearly all of us would feel that while we may have had a horrible time with that annoying aunt that never shuts up... it was damn good to see her. Obscure point, I know, but I hope someone gets it. =)
See, it is my belief that as the 'addiction' grows for the virtual world the individual's perceived need for the real world diminishes. Of course, the actual need does not. Just like with any addiction, perceptions become warped over time, intitially causing feelings of alienation to those around them that do not partake in the same virtual activities. Eventually those feelings will turn inward, causing the person to dive even further into the addiction - not so much to escape from reality, as people love to believe, but more to simply be in a safe, familiar environment. This creates the well known cycle that addicts find extremely difficult to break, whether the addiction is a chemical agent or simply a habitual routine. You simply desire to be with those that share your habit, even at the expense of social satisfaction in your relationships with those individuals. Such is the birth of group-think, incidentally. We all know of this, especially those of us whose lives are very dependent on technology (as for myself, I am a career software engineer). It's so easy to relate to technology sometimes that we forget how to relate, not just with each other, but with our own selves. (Sorry to get all zen and shit.) If you were to apply this on a grand scheme, you would see pockets of society, especially those within that certain subset more apt to explore such technologies, grow apathetic and distant towards one another. After all, the more deeply you dive into your virtual world, the less need for real interaction you will 'need'.
So while you say that virtual worlds are a wonderful thing (and remember, I do tend to agree), you must realize that such a statement is selfish at best. After all, to the single person living alone (or at home, or with roommates, etc), such reclusive behavior can be perceived as just fine (mostly because the rest of us are just as apathetic and detached). However, to the person with a family, such behavior is incredibly destructive. Not only to themselves, mind you, but to the people whose quality of life depends, at least somewhat, on the quality of interactions with that person. As a person who is recently engaged to be married and considering starting my own family, the thought of such detachment to those that are physically around me is terrifying.
So, having spewed all of that, I believe the poster to whom you are replying may have been touching on this very subject. Of course, I may be talking straight out of my EverCrack.
By the way, I have the solution: LAN PARTY!!! How else can you get your fix and satisfy that pesky need for social interaction with other frag bait, er, people. Plus you can use 1337 5p34| without getting modded down. Seriously, though, I would love to see a gaming paradigm that takes full advantage of LAN parties. And no, teamspeak and planetside don't count. =P
Well, that's my windbag rant. Blame a boring day at the office. =)
--
mcp.kaaos
When I was 17 I worked construction back up in the NW. In union terms, 'about two' translates roughly, in human terms, to 15 laborers, 4 foremen, 7 union representatives, and 3 strippers (to be brought on site for birthdays, mondays, tuesdays, etc.)
To give you context, compare that to the software world, where 'about two' translates to just you, 4 weeks out of the 20 week projection, a pissed off laptop, and a boss that lives and dies by metrics.
--
mcp.kaaos
Perhaps if you made the occasional post regarding Microsoft's terrible plague on society or how your children couldn't eat solid foods until you discovered Linux your posts would carry more influence and credibility. Or you could put up a website detailing how you case-modded your Seqway to include transparent panels and flashing neon lights. Your choice.
--
mcp.kaaos
You must not live in southern California. That's pretty typical around here.
--
mcp.kaaos
That's just it. It's so, so, nothing. I mean it looks like... Well, it looks like a small, less-rectangular-and-not-black-yet-still-eerie monolith. If you look real close, you might see... My god. It's full of stars!
--
mcp.kaaos*
*ashamed of himself
Something tells me that as the shrinking units of measurement mask the size of your ass, so should your tendency to dance in public.
:)
And yes, we noticed the ho hos.
--
mcp.kaaos
That is a pretty amazing observation. Your attention to detail has no equal. However, next time I suggest you post your findings to the correct discussion. :)
--
mcp.kaaos
SUVs are still sucking it down like -- well you know like what --
/.
;)
Like Pamela Anderson sucks the paint off a trailer hitch. It's okay, you can say that on
--
mcp.kaaos
ex-SUV owner, proud Pamela Anderson fan.