As far as my limited knowledge of the situation allows, I feel that this is just going to lead to chaos.
One one hand, everyone hates MS. They're big, ominous, and imposing. They are known, however, for making at least a few quality products.
On the other, we have AOL. Everyone also hates them. They're big, ominous, and imposing. They are known, also, for lack of quality in their products. Their demographic is much more focused and thus more easily reigned however, that being less than knowledgable net users (I use AOL by the way, so -don't- start flaming:P).
This reminds very much, in a scary way, of shadowrun. Only we don't have a corporate court to settle this.
Let's pray Gates and Case don't really have armies like we joke they do, or else I think a whole lotta/.ers are gonna have to turn street samurai...
Granted, I'd prefer that talented programmers stay with free software causes. Yay open-source and all that. But I can already smell the "Traitor!" remarks, so I guess I'm gonna play devil's advocate.
How long can you go on being noble before you realize you have to eat too? And hell, as I understand it MacOS X has a unix base. Mayhaps this will end up being a good thing, revival of Apple and all that snazzy stuff. I for one would love to see some really slick running Unices that can make full use of that wonderful apple hardware.
Oh well. Flame on.
In very few words: Should Computer Graphics Be Considered a Fine Art?
Yes.
In more words:
This is the same argument people have about online journalism being a valid form of media. "You can't trust everything you read on the net" we hear. No. But you can't trust everything you read in the paper-media either.
The same goes for computer graphics. Sure, you don't spend years mastering the fine art of blending lighting using different paints and all that. Instead you may have to go to school for a few years to learn how to get that same effect by mastering how pixels work together. You're simply using a different canvas, but you may put as much time and effort (or more) into any computerized art than you will with sculpting or painting or whatever other things may be considered fine arts.
As a society we're migrating to technology, as readers of slashdot will easily vouch for. Why should we be stuck in a different age of art then? As pictoral art and poetry start to mesh, are we going to deny the genius there because it's not the same as something Van Gogh would have done? It makes no sense to deny that computerized art is a fine art simply because it's new and not established.
The medium has so much value to artists, if only those who are stuck in previous centuries would give it a chance. An artist will still work endlessly to get the desired look from something s/he creates. They'll still labor to make it perfect.
Frag the critics. That's Beautiful. -Eric Dizkord
In a perfect world you'd know what port it was on. However, if you're late, you may only hear from friends on other servers that your clan left for a clan game on so-and-so's box, these guys obviously wouldn't be able to tell you what port it was on. Alternately, if you're new to a unit, they may simply post on the mailing list that the game is on the "usual setup" on "groupie's system" or whatever, at which point scanning your clanmates becomes easier than sending out another email which probably won't be answered until the game is over.
-Eric Dizkord
Those people aren't trying to connect to ports 111, 161, etc to do me a favour by testing my security. They're trying to break in!
Aaaaand Obviously someone here isn't a gamer, nor has one ever set up nonstandard ports. If I know a private game is being held and scan a clanmate's box for open ports, that's illegal, but he doesn't press charges. However, if I put say, 196 instead of 197 in the IP, I can be brought up for criminal charges? What?
Also, the entire concept of trying to apply many real-world situations to the digital world is a bit iffy. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't, however too many analogies can be used to describe one thing. The "drive by and check" and "crawling the vents" are both somewhat valid, but keep in mind that when driving by, people could in theory, not notice you at all. While crawling through vents you make obvious noise and such.
Logs result in people always being able to see who was doing what if people want to check, invalidating both arguments.
However, its more like checking to see if the paint is dry on a series of benches. You didn't damage anything (paint notwithstanding), but you left a noticable trace that you'd been there, if people care to notice.
-Eric Dizkord
Slashdot Mirror
As far as my limited knowledge of the situation allows, I feel that this is just going to lead to chaos.
:P).
/.ers are gonna have to turn street samurai...
One one hand, everyone hates MS. They're big, ominous, and imposing. They are known, however, for making at least a few quality products.
On the other, we have AOL. Everyone also hates them. They're big, ominous, and imposing. They are known, also, for lack of quality in their products. Their demographic is much more focused and thus more easily reigned however, that being less than knowledgable net users (I use AOL by the way, so -don't- start flaming
This reminds very much, in a scary way, of shadowrun. Only we don't have a corporate court to settle this.
Let's pray Gates and Case don't really have armies like we joke they do, or else I think a whole lotta
Kinda makes you wonder the effects this'll have when people accidently hit Whitehouse.com...
"cleanup, Isle 3. We have a -brainbrowser-."
How long can you go on being noble before you realize you have to eat too? And hell, as I understand it MacOS X has a unix base. Mayhaps this will end up being a good thing, revival of Apple and all that snazzy stuff. I for one would love to see some really slick running Unices that can make full use of that wonderful apple hardware.
Oh well. Flame on.
-Eric Dizkord
Yes.
In more words:
This is the same argument people have about online journalism being a valid form of media. "You can't trust everything you read on the net" we hear. No. But you can't trust everything you read in the paper-media either.
The same goes for computer graphics. Sure, you don't spend years mastering the fine art of blending lighting using different paints and all that. Instead you may have to go to school for a few years to learn how to get that same effect by mastering how pixels work together. You're simply using a different canvas, but you may put as much time and effort (or more) into any computerized art than you will with sculpting or painting or whatever other things may be considered fine arts.
As a society we're migrating to technology, as readers of slashdot will easily vouch for. Why should we be stuck in a different age of art then? As pictoral art and poetry start to mesh, are we going to deny the genius there because it's not the same as something Van Gogh would have done? It makes no sense to deny that computerized art is a fine art simply because it's new and not established.
The medium has so much value to artists, if only those who are stuck in previous centuries would give it a chance. An artist will still work endlessly to get the desired look from something s/he creates. They'll still labor to make it perfect.
Frag the critics.
That's Beautiful.
-Eric Dizkord
In a perfect world you'd know what port it was on. However, if you're late, you may only hear from friends on other servers that your clan left for a clan game on so-and-so's box, these guys obviously wouldn't be able to tell you what port it was on. Alternately, if you're new to a unit, they may simply post on the mailing list that the game is on the "usual setup" on "groupie's system" or whatever, at which point scanning your clanmates becomes easier than sending out another email which probably won't be answered until the game is over.
-Eric Dizkord
Aaaaand Obviously someone here isn't a gamer, nor has one ever set up nonstandard ports. If I know a private game is being held and scan a clanmate's box for open ports, that's illegal, but he doesn't press charges. However, if I put say, 196 instead of 197 in the IP, I can be brought up for criminal charges? What?
Also, the entire concept of trying to apply many real-world situations to the digital world is a bit iffy. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't, however too many analogies can be used to describe one thing. The "drive by and check" and "crawling the vents" are both somewhat valid, but keep in mind that when driving by, people could in theory, not notice you at all. While crawling through vents you make obvious noise and such.
Logs result in people always being able to see who was doing what if people want to check, invalidating both arguments.
However, its more like checking to see if the paint is dry on a series of benches. You didn't damage anything (paint notwithstanding), but you left a noticable trace that you'd been there, if people care to notice.
-Eric Dizkord