The name of the game is "Tabula Rasa" i.e., "blank slate".
"Tabula Rosa" would mean "pink slate." I'm not sure what kind of game that would imply.
m-
Re:I guess I don't understand...
on
Out Of The XBox
·
· Score: 1
Fine. Better the intellectual honesty that comes from saying "I just don't like the company" (for whatever reason) than slamming a machine (and the people who use it) for some bizarre, made up reason.
People who compare the rumored specs of one unreleased product to the rumored specs of another unreleased product, and then proclaim a winner.... well, they have too much time on their hands.
The thing is, science--properly done-- doesn't require proponents. The theory stand on its own, or it's disproved and replaced with something better.
This happens all the time.
Ok, so you spent 5 years writing code. This doesn't give you some magical insight into anything other than writing code, as far as I see. As for being a rocket scientist, so? I'm glad for you that you've done something interesting with your life, but it's hardly germane: being well-versed in maths and physics does not qualify you as a biologist. (or would you prefer that all aerospace engineers come from a background in marine biology?)
Science is a process. Nothing more, nothing less. Following the process won't eliminate miss-steps, but it will correct them eventually.
Um, pardon me, but YOU are the one with the "Invisible Bubble of Faith".
Would you care to explain this statement, or is this just a troll? "Faith" is defined as "belief without the need evidence". Precisely what is it that I have belief in for which there is no evidence?
See, that's the lovely thing about science, you don't have to believe in it to make it work. If observation and theory don't jibe, throw out the theory, or replace it with something better. End of story. What's your "version of science," and how does it contradict this?
Exactly what "conclusion" have I jumped to? That there's no invisible man in the sky? Hey, feel free to prove me wrong.
--sigh--
I'm teaching the pig to sing, again.
m-
I guess I don't understand...
on
Out Of The XBox
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I just don't get all the hate and vitriol that console fanboys spew on boards like this.
Is being anti-ms or pro-ms so important to people? Is this like a large core of your existence?
It seems pretty simple to me...
1. If you like a console, and the games available for it, buy it. 2. If you don't like a console, or its games, don't buy it. 3. If you like all the consoles, buy them all.
So much is subjective... from gameplay styles to graphics. Some people prefer the more cartoony (imo) Nintendo stuff, some like the range of Sony games, some like the Xbox for its superior graphics or whatever. Great! That means that whatever you like, there will be something for you. Does it really hurt you as a person when someone else buys something you wouldn't have?
"M$ is evil blah blah blah"
Um, so? Blind hate is as misguided as blind adulation. You do realize that the developers working inside that huge company are just as committed to creating great things as the developers at ANY large company. They wouldn't be in the business if they didn't love it.
Hate Gates for being a tool if you want, and Balmer for being a twit, but the devs are like devs anywhere (though they seem to fall more on the brilliant/antisocial end of the scale, perhaps because of hiring practices.)
For the record, I own all 3 consoles, but I haven't plugged in the GC in months, and the PS2 only really gets use for Katamari Damaci. I'm addicted to PGR2 on the Xbox, though.
Of course, maybe if I owned a PC I would understand the hatred better... (I like my G5 too much.)
Yeah, I carefully examined this tripe years ago, and every time some new version comes up. I've spent entirely too much time chasing down every misunderstanding and misconception.
It's not science, it merely co-opts the language of science.
I'll refer you to the old Sagan chestnut: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The ID/creationist folk are the ones proposing an invisible man in the sky or ancient aliens. So prove it. Provide ACTUAL, physical evidence. Don't waste my time with ignorant, mystical bullshit. I'm not holding my breath
But, you won't hear this: there's an Invisible Bubble of Faith(TM) around you that will prevent any of this getting through. It's pointless. Like the old saying about trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
There's another possible explanation... i.e. they incorporated some fancy switching system like the Powerbooks have in order to reduce power consumption and keep heat down: as CPU demands drop, parts of the chip are shut off, and as demand increases, they're seamlessly brought back on line.
If this were the case, I imagine that the metal case would act as enough of an extended heat sink that it could run at max CPU for a few minutes at a time before starting to get really hot.
Either that, or they've gotten as smart as Apple about heat management. (i think you can almost count on the next iMac G5 or Mac Mini being in a metal case: plastic is one heck of an insulator.)
Great, so for you and the other 5 sports nuts/technophiles out there, it would be great: for the rest of us, those features would be wasted, and may even get in the way of what we bought the iPod for: playing music.
The LCD thing isn't just my opinion. They just can't reproduce subtle dark shades. I suspect it's an inherent problem at this point. (I would go out and buy a 30" cinema display today if this wasn't there.) It doesn't bother some people, but I do color correction as part of my work, and I'm very aware of it.
Some DLP's are pretty sharp, it's very true. These are also the mid-to-high end ones, from what I've seen. ($3500+) Also, the whole rear projection "hotspot" thing bugs me. You've got to get your viewing angle just right, or you've got one part of the screen well-lit, with a dark halo around it.
The thing is, I would be happy with *any* of these technologies, except for one little problem with each one.
I have high hopes that the quality DLP's will get cheaper with better illumination, but who knows. Or maybe plasmas will get so cheap I can afford to replace them every couple of years.
Every new display technology in the last 10 years either: 1. Is so astonishingly far from making it to market that I'll likely be blind before it gets there. (OLED, except for cell phones and the like) 2. Is touted as a quality, affordable solution, then is introduced only at the mid-high end (DLP, I'm looking at you) 3. Is never heard from again. (too many examples to list.)
I want something that's thinner and lighter than a CRT, without plasma burn-in, doesn't suffer from LCD's horrible color gamut, is sharper and cheaper than DLP, and lasts longer than OLED.
Yeah, she's lesbian. She's been pretty public about this for years, so it's not exactly news.
What's more, it doesn't have anything to do with anything: slam her for lying to Congress, lying about what dire straits the music industry is in, and wanting to throw kids in jail. There are plenty of things to complain about, but insulting her sexuality (which I see people do pretty often) is uncalled for, and casts all opponents of the RIAA gestapo in a bad light.
Many of the ID group do not believe in any sort of "supernatural" beings.
Um... right. Any back-up for this statement? So who do they think it was, aliens?
Proponents of evolution science are hurting their own cause
Ah, minor mistake here. It's not "evolution science", it's just "science." Bring up a testable hypothesis that better fits the available evidence, and we'll talk.
(Although I'm not sure why I'm even bothering to post: at this point in the "debate" (read screaming match), there isn't anyone left on the other side who even could be convinced by logic. It's a matter of faith for them. Perhaps it's the principle of "silence implies consent": I can't hear drivel like this without responding.) m-
And somehow trying to protect them from everything is going to make them gain life experience?
No, not at all. Falling down and getting boo-boos is part of life. Being overprotective can be pretty damaging.
However, this isn't to say that you shouldn't be protective at all, until they are old enough to handle whatever it is and make responsible decisions. You don't give a gun to a 10-year old boy and tell him to go play in the yard: he has to be taught that it isn't a toy. You don't let a 14 year-old girl go to boy-girl parties and stay out all night: she doesn't understand what can happen in those situations. You don't want your "life experience" to come in the form of an HIV-positive test....and you don't give an 8-year old a game where he's put in the position of playing a character who's raping, killing and doing drug deals. (yes, other media have these things in them, but it's not as visceral an experience to read in a book about someone else doing something, as doing it yourself in a game. it's just not the same.)
Of course, if you want to fuck up your own kids, go right ahead. That's your prerogative.
How about you accept that just being older than somebody doesn't automatically make you their superior.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it does. To a degree. In some sense.
Well, it's actually a side effect of being older: it's called life experience. Everyone needs to do some things wrong, do some things right, and have a whole lot of living to do before they really grow up and can make responsible decisions. It's not that younger people are dumb, it's just that usually they haven't lived with the consequences of their actions for long enough to consistantly Do The Right Thing.
Of couse, this varies widely person-person. Some people are smarter/wiser at 20 than their parents will ever be. However, I've never met someone who was smarter/wiser at 20 than they were at 30.
Honestly, if I ran into myself from when I was 17-18, I would just want to beat the living shit out of myself for treating people the way that I did back then.
Yeah, I hate teenage smartasses because they vividly remind me of what a jerk I once was.
That and he (or she) won't really fit in, because there are plenty of decent people who swap movies and music.
There are also plenty of decent people who:... have a bit of a pot habit.... occasionally drive a little too fast.... didn't pay their taxes on time.... got into a fight in a bar.... took advantage of their employer.... took advantage of their babysitter.... had a little too much to drink, and decided to drive home afterwards.... etc.
Not that I disagree with you that this is excessive, but there are lots of people in jail who are "nice people" by almost any metric. Of course, there are lots of people in there who aren't very nice, as well.
To get back on topic, wasn't the original discussion about end users, and end user usability?
For end users, isn't all the usability in the GUI? (with the exception of the superior security) OSX seems to be more usable (for end users) despite parts of it being open source, not because of it.
Maybe I just don't understand the point you are making.
Just because some people have an imperfect understanding of the word (imagine, on slashdot of all places), does not mean that the rest of us should be limited by their ignorance or misapprehension.
In other words, "numerous people" are wrong. What else is new? ("Numerous people" also believe in an invisible man in the sky who will punish us if we do the wrong thing. That doesn't mean it's true.)
Somehow, I think if that were the real (or only) reason, you would be promoting OSX, which has the same positives you mention, with a much, much better (arguably) end-user usability profile than Linux.
I suppose you could drag out the old chestnuts (1 Mouse Button! "Pretty" sucks! Too expensive! Too slow! No games!), but those are just old cliches (again, arguably).
Slashdot Mirror
Judging based on processing power, thats a bargain. It would cost in excess of $2,000 to get a comperable PC system. (Which don't even exist yet)
Of course, a finished, working PS3 doesn't exist now either. In a year and a half, who knows?
m-
The name of the game is "Tabula Rasa" i.e., "blank slate".
"Tabula Rosa" would mean "pink slate." I'm not sure what kind of game that would imply.
m-
Fine. Better the intellectual honesty that comes from saying "I just don't like the company" (for whatever reason) than slamming a machine (and the people who use it) for some bizarre, made up reason.
People who compare the rumored specs of one unreleased product to the rumored specs of another unreleased product, and then proclaim a winner.... well, they have too much time on their hands.
IMO, competition is a good thing.
m-
The thing is, science--properly done-- doesn't require proponents. The theory stand on its own, or it's disproved and replaced with something better.
This happens all the time.
Ok, so you spent 5 years writing code. This doesn't give you some magical insight into anything other than writing code, as far as I see. As for being a rocket scientist, so? I'm glad for you that you've done something interesting with your life, but it's hardly germane: being well-versed in maths and physics does not qualify you as a biologist. (or would you prefer that all aerospace engineers come from a background in marine biology?)
Science is a process. Nothing more, nothing less. Following the process won't eliminate miss-steps, but it will correct them eventually.
Um, pardon me, but YOU are the one with the "Invisible Bubble of Faith".
Would you care to explain this statement, or is this just a troll? "Faith" is defined as "belief without the need evidence". Precisely what is it that I have belief in for which there is no evidence?
See, that's the lovely thing about science, you don't have to believe in it to make it work. If observation and theory don't jibe, throw out the theory, or replace it with something better. End of story. What's your "version of science," and how does it contradict this?
Exactly what "conclusion" have I jumped to? That there's no invisible man in the sky? Hey, feel free to prove me wrong.
--sigh--
I'm teaching the pig to sing, again.
m-
I just don't get all the hate and vitriol that console fanboys spew on boards like this.
Is being anti-ms or pro-ms so important to people? Is this like a large core of your existence?
It seems pretty simple to me...
1. If you like a console, and the games available for it, buy it.
2. If you don't like a console, or its games, don't buy it.
3. If you like all the consoles, buy them all.
So much is subjective... from gameplay styles to graphics. Some people prefer the more cartoony (imo) Nintendo stuff, some like the range of Sony games, some like the Xbox for its superior graphics or whatever. Great! That means that whatever you like, there will be something for you. Does it really hurt you as a person when someone else buys something you wouldn't have?
"M$ is evil blah blah blah"
Um, so? Blind hate is as misguided as blind adulation. You do realize that the developers working inside that huge company are just as committed to creating great things as the developers at ANY large company. They wouldn't be in the business if they didn't love it.
Hate Gates for being a tool if you want, and Balmer for being a twit, but the devs are like devs anywhere (though they seem to fall more on the brilliant/antisocial end of the scale, perhaps because of hiring practices.)
For the record, I own all 3 consoles, but I haven't plugged in the GC in months, and the PS2 only really gets use for Katamari Damaci. I'm addicted to PGR2 on the Xbox, though.
Of course, maybe if I owned a PC I would understand the hatred better... (I like my G5 too much.)
m-
Yeah, I carefully examined this tripe years ago, and every time some new version comes up. I've spent entirely too much time chasing down every misunderstanding and misconception.
It's not science, it merely co-opts the language of science.
I'll refer you to the old Sagan chestnut: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The ID/creationist folk are the ones proposing an invisible man in the sky or ancient aliens. So prove it. Provide ACTUAL, physical evidence. Don't waste my time with ignorant, mystical bullshit. I'm not holding my breath
But, you won't hear this: there's an Invisible Bubble of Faith(TM) around you that will prevent any of this getting through. It's pointless. Like the old saying about trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
m-
There's another possible explanation... i.e. they incorporated some fancy switching system like the Powerbooks have in order to reduce power consumption and keep heat down: as CPU demands drop, parts of the chip are shut off, and as demand increases, they're seamlessly brought back on line.
If this were the case, I imagine that the metal case would act as enough of an extended heat sink that it could run at max CPU for a few minutes at a time before starting to get really hot.
Either that, or they've gotten as smart as Apple about heat management. (i think you can almost count on the next iMac G5 or Mac Mini being in a metal case: plastic is one heck of an insulator.)
of course, this is all idle speculation.
m-
Great, so for you and the other 5 sports nuts/technophiles out there, it would be great: for the rest of us, those features would be wasted, and may even get in the way of what we bought the iPod for: playing music.
That's what the OP mean by "more complex".
m-
I like Apple, but their products are too expensive. There are plenty of alternatives to Apple, which is what Apple marketshare confirms.
Correction, their products are too expensive for you, which is very different.
Considering the marketshare of the iPod, it seems a lot of people agree with me.
m-
Yeah, I know. It's a wishlist, what can I say.
The LCD thing isn't just my opinion. They just can't reproduce subtle dark shades. I suspect it's an inherent problem at this point. (I would go out and buy a 30" cinema display today if this wasn't there.) It doesn't bother some people, but I do color correction as part of my work, and I'm very aware of it.
Some DLP's are pretty sharp, it's very true. These are also the mid-to-high end ones, from what I've seen. ($3500+) Also, the whole rear projection "hotspot" thing bugs me. You've got to get your viewing angle just right, or you've got one part of the screen well-lit, with a dark halo around it.
The thing is, I would be happy with *any* of these technologies, except for one little problem with each one.
I have high hopes that the quality DLP's will get cheaper with better illumination, but who knows. Or maybe plasmas will get so cheap I can afford to replace them every couple of years.
m-
But I'm not.
Every new display technology in the last 10 years either:
1. Is so astonishingly far from making it to market that I'll likely be blind before it gets there. (OLED, except for cell phones and the like)
2. Is touted as a quality, affordable solution, then is introduced only at the mid-high end (DLP, I'm looking at you)
3. Is never heard from again. (too many examples to list.)
I want something that's thinner and lighter than a CRT, without plasma burn-in, doesn't suffer from LCD's horrible color gamut, is sharper and cheaper than DLP, and lasts longer than OLED.
Bleh, maybe when I'm dead.
m-
Yeah, she's lesbian. She's been pretty public about this for years, so it's not exactly news.
What's more, it doesn't have anything to do with anything: slam her for lying to Congress, lying about what dire straits the music industry is in, and wanting to throw kids in jail. There are plenty of things to complain about, but insulting her sexuality (which I see people do pretty often) is uncalled for, and casts all opponents of the RIAA gestapo in a bad light.
m-
a study called "apologetics."
I'm sorry? I didn't get that...
m-
Many of the ID group do not believe in any sort of "supernatural" beings.
Um... right. Any back-up for this statement? So who do they think it was, aliens?
Proponents of evolution science are hurting their own cause
Ah, minor mistake here. It's not "evolution science", it's just "science." Bring up a testable hypothesis that better fits the available evidence, and we'll talk.
(Although I'm not sure why I'm even bothering to post: at this point in the "debate" (read screaming match), there isn't anyone left on the other side who even could be convinced by logic. It's a matter of faith for them. Perhaps it's the principle of "silence implies consent": I can't hear drivel like this without responding.)
m-
And somehow trying to protect them from everything is going to make them gain life experience?
...and you don't give an 8-year old a game where he's put in the position of playing a character who's raping, killing and doing drug deals. (yes, other media have these things in them, but it's not as visceral an experience to read in a book about someone else doing something, as doing it yourself in a game. it's just not the same.)
No, not at all. Falling down and getting boo-boos is part of life. Being overprotective can be pretty damaging.
However, this isn't to say that you shouldn't be protective at all, until they are old enough to handle whatever it is and make responsible decisions. You don't give a gun to a 10-year old boy and tell him to go play in the yard: he has to be taught that it isn't a toy. You don't let a 14 year-old girl go to boy-girl parties and stay out all night: she doesn't understand what can happen in those situations. You don't want your "life experience" to come in the form of an HIV-positive test.
Of course, if you want to fuck up your own kids, go right ahead. That's your prerogative.
m-
How about you accept that just being older than somebody doesn't automatically make you their superior.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it does. To a degree. In some sense.
Well, it's actually a side effect of being older: it's called life experience. Everyone needs to do some things wrong, do some things right, and have a whole lot of living to do before they really grow up and can make responsible decisions. It's not that younger people are dumb, it's just that usually they haven't lived with the consequences of their actions for long enough to consistantly Do The Right Thing.
Of couse, this varies widely person-person. Some people are smarter/wiser at 20 than their parents will ever be. However, I've never met someone who was smarter/wiser at 20 than they were at 30.
Honestly, if I ran into myself from when I was 17-18, I would just want to beat the living shit out of myself for treating people the way that I did back then.
Yeah, I hate teenage smartasses because they vividly remind me of what a jerk I once was.
-sigh-
m-
Not really. Remember, you're not selling to the kids, you're selling it to the parents: it doesn't matter if it sucks. They don't have to play it.
Remember: christian pop/rock is driven by parents who won't let their kids listen to anything else. Seriously.
Bribe a couple of televangelists to pitch it, and you're set. Hell, grandmas will buy it for christmas gifts.
Poor kids.
Merge my ass, Namco just rolled them up.
m-
That and he (or she) won't really fit in, because there are plenty of decent people who swap movies and music.
... have a bit of a pot habit. ... occasionally drive a little too fast. ... didn't pay their taxes on time. ... got into a fight in a bar. ... took advantage of their employer. ... took advantage of their babysitter. ... had a little too much to drink, and decided to drive home afterwards. ... etc.
There are also plenty of decent people who:
Not that I disagree with you that this is excessive, but there are lots of people in jail who are "nice people" by almost any metric. Of course, there are lots of people in there who aren't very nice, as well.
Just a thought.
m-
This could be the first gauntlet into the ring a major media company.
Main screen turn on.
m-
Well, I'll certainly concede that point.
To get back on topic, wasn't the original discussion about end users, and end user usability?
For end users, isn't all the usability in the GUI? (with the exception of the superior security) OSX seems to be more usable (for end users) despite parts of it being open source, not because of it.
Maybe I just don't understand the point you are making.
m-
I fundamentally disagree with you here.
Just because some people have an imperfect understanding of the word (imagine, on slashdot of all places), does not mean that the rest of us should be limited by their ignorance or misapprehension.
In other words, "numerous people" are wrong. What else is new? ("Numerous people" also believe in an invisible man in the sky who will punish us if we do the wrong thing. That doesn't mean it's true.)
m-
Except that OSX is a pretty non-open source platform. Isn't it? (not saying this is a bad thing)
(yes, I know about the exceptions, which are, IMO, token.)
m-
Somehow, I think if that were the real (or only) reason, you would be promoting OSX, which has the same positives you mention, with a much, much better (arguably) end-user usability profile than Linux.
I suppose you could drag out the old chestnuts (1 Mouse Button! "Pretty" sucks! Too expensive! Too slow! No games!), but those are just old cliches (again, arguably).
m-
Not to belabor a point, but a high incidence of lingual ignorance on this site is hardly surprising to anyone who has been paying attention.
In other words, a lot of the geeks here have no English skills, whatsoever. It's not surprising they agree with you. (No offense intended.)
m-