The reasons all come down to the fact that games jobs are regarded as high status among young males and thus there are thousands of applicants for every job. This leads to giving the employer more power over employees and a paranoid workplace. Thus:
1. Management push. Almost everyone is young in games development, and many managers have come from the trenches with little or no management experience. When someone inevitably yells SHIP and the game goes to Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft for testing, there is a chance that something may go wrong and someone is going to get blamed and/or fired. The manager can then save their ass by saying everyone had been working for 60+ hours, so they did all they can. If they didn't do that, maybe some other teams manager would say "If the lazy QA team had been pulling 80 hour weeks like the rest of us, maybe they would have found those bugs!"
2. No employee resistance. They are terrified of being thrown out of the "games industry".
I think part of the solution is to expose what it really is like in the industry and thus maybe the jobs won't seem so cool, demand for getting a job will fall and so employers will have to treat their employees better as they are not replaceable.
Right on - when eliminating these politicians in other countries, do you think we should use the achingly expensive socialist big government army, or instead outsource to guerillas bought with a few cheap crates of guns? As Iraq has shown, the conventional army is expensive, taking tax dollars away from hard working citizens. It's mostly deficit, so I can still have my war and not pay for it, but Iraq is starting to feel like a scam - I mean if it had brought down the price of oil it would have been worth it. Oil that nourishes the glorious free market like smooth massage oil nourished the milky warm skin of Ayn Rand.
Nevertheless, it sounds like a pretty good reason to me, and invading other countries is something too important to worry about reasons for. We must move against these enemies of freedom. Enemies of the freedom to make as much fucking money as we can, God bless America!
I totally agree with you about the case-footrest thing. I have it that way at work and home - the only trouble is my Athalon makes my feet hot in summer.
On ergonimics: I have appalling posture and used to get a bit sore, then I started doing lots of chinups. My posture is still terrible, but I guess my back can take it now.
>> Later I saw the U.N. trick them out of their guns.
WTF? The Australian government (not the UN) banned auto and semi-auto assault rifles (outside of gun clubs) after a mass slaying in Tasmania where someone killed 13 people in 17 seconds.
Since then, gun deaths have gone down.
Australia uses votes not guns to change our government. We separated from the UK peacefully in 1901 with votes, not a war. The trouble down here is everyone knows the current govt sucks, it's just we have a pretty comfortable life and the other lot are bad for different reasons, so nobody is concerned enough to vote for change, let alone violent revolution.
I don't know about that - just because a thing causes your body harm, doesn't mean doing the opposite will do it good. Extremely cold temperatures cause you to become weak, but this doesn't mean that extremely high temperatures will make you strong.
Australia under the new sedition laws is even worse.
In sport, it has been traditional for Australians to if not support, then at least show some sympathy for the underdogs, especially if they were the home team. In war, that can get you locked up.
Yeah, in some ways the phenomenal success of the American experiment has put us in an interesting conundrum... Our standard of living IS higher than everybody elses, but to me that is an argument for others to emulate us. Instead of demanding that we work for 80% less and lower our standard of living to be as shitty as yours, why not innovate, create some REAL value (by giving more rather than just charging less) and raise up your own standards, rather than kvetching about ours.
GDP/population is a really crappy measurement when wealth is so unequal.
I've travelled for ~3-4 months in America, 2 months in Europe and lived/studied/worked for 2 years in Canada and 24 years in Australia. From what I've seen, the US has the highest standard of living for SOME people, and a FAR FAR lower standard of living for a very large percentage of the population than most other western countries. Never in a rich western country have I seen so many people with SIMPLE medical problems that would be easily fixed in a country with decent healthcare, for example.
Utility theory also says that there are diminishing returns for money, eg as an impact on human life not having enough money for food for dinner tonight ($5) is more than an extra million to a multi-billionaire. So high GDP + unequal distribution can lead to a worse society than mid GDP vs more even distribution. It depends, of course, and there are minimums. I just think that every english speaking country I've seen strikes a better balance than the US.
And as for everyone becoming like Americans.... Americans make up 5% of the population but use 26% of the worlds energy. If the rest of the world "caught up", presumably all getting hummers to drive through McDonalds, the earth would consume 500% the current level of natural resources - and the poor old dear is starting to creak under the strain of current levels already.
>> Hell... Wouldn't it be better if those people were around today? I'm still sure Newton would have loved to have all the tools our scientists have today.
Newton probably would have used his clout to condemn Einsteins theory that exposed flaws in his own. That is, if he dragged himself away from searching for bible codes, which is what he spent the last part of his life on.
There is a difference between not learning (ie not keeping up with new, updated theories) and continuing with your belief and values.
Most people do not question their values because they have invested too much into them, not because they figure they won't get much out of it as they're due to die soon. Lets think of an example:
An old preacher retires from the ministry and one day is offered a religious text from a different faith. He declines to read it, saying he is happy believing what he believes. Why?
a) He knew he'd be dead soon, so even if the book contains the true path, he'd only have a few years to walk it.
b) He had dedicated his entire life to his religion, and was not receptive to something that tells him he had been wrong all that time.
Most people who lived believing that demonic posession rather than germs were responsible for sickness died still believing it. They were just eventually replaced by people whose minds were open to new theories.
If people don't die die, old (wrong) ideas will never die, and humans will never improve.
What if Australia dismantled their military, and few years from now they noticed that "Shit, China/Indonesia is about to invade us in just few months time!". They couldn't build an effective defence against it.
If China invaded, I think we'd all have to learn to say "Ni Hao".
>> Instead of screwing your allies on their arms purchases, why don't you actually help us and stop selling stuff to our enemy.
Because it's more profitable that way? There are heaps of historical conflicts where the US has sold weapons to both sides (not going to mention one group because it would invoke Goodwins law)
Look at the recent history of the middle east:
-Reagan sells weapons to Iran -Bush Sr sells weapons to Iraq -Iran & Iraq blow each others weapons up (damn, we need more!) -Bush Sr blows up old US weapons in Gulf 1 (obsolete losers, should have keep buying the latest shit!) -Bush Jr invades Iraq, soon they'll need some cool new toys. I think Cheney might be able to hook them up with some dealers....
It's all about the money, what, do you think it is about "freedom"? China is as totalitarian as the Russians ever were, but the US love them because they sell cheap crap & loan cheap money. They don't see opressed masses, they see 1 billion extra consumers to sell coke to.
My way of thinking is the higher level the language, the less code you need to write and I've found Java to be more verbose than C++. Java is also missing paradigms that C++ has, like operator overloading and (proper) generic programming.
>> both Hitler and Churchil believed in the rightness of their causes.
They were opposed, but their goals and beliefs were different: Hitler wanted the German people to dominate and Churchill wanted to stop Hitler.
Neocons and Islamic extremists both want to force their way of life on the rest of the world because they believe theirs is the best, and only way to live.
Slashdot Mirror
C++ finally block:
// stuff goes here.
{
class Finally {
~Finally() {
}
} foo;
try {
} catch {
}
}
The reasons all come down to the fact that games jobs are regarded as high status among young males and thus there are thousands of applicants for every job. This leads to giving the employer more power over employees and a paranoid workplace. Thus:
1. Management push. Almost everyone is young in games development, and many managers have come from the trenches with little or no management experience. When someone inevitably yells SHIP and the game goes to Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft for testing, there is a chance that something may go wrong and someone is going to get blamed and/or fired. The manager can then save their ass by saying everyone had been working for 60+ hours, so they did all they can. If they didn't do that, maybe some other teams manager would say "If the lazy QA team had been pulling 80 hour weeks like the rest of us, maybe they would have found those bugs!"
2. No employee resistance. They are terrified of being thrown out of the "games industry".
I think part of the solution is to expose what it really is like in the industry and thus maybe the jobs won't seem so cool, demand for getting a job will fall and so employers will have to treat their employees better as they are not replaceable.
Right on - when eliminating these politicians in other countries, do you think we should use the achingly expensive socialist big government army, or instead outsource to guerillas bought with a few cheap crates of guns? As Iraq has shown, the conventional army is expensive, taking tax dollars away from hard working citizens. It's mostly deficit, so I can still have my war and not pay for it, but Iraq is starting to feel like a scam - I mean if it had brought down the price of oil it would have been worth it. Oil that nourishes the glorious free market like smooth massage oil nourished the milky warm skin of Ayn Rand.
Nevertheless, it sounds like a pretty good reason to me, and invading other countries is something too important to worry about reasons for. We must move against these enemies of freedom. Enemies of the freedom to make as much fucking money as we can, God bless America!
I totally agree with you about the case-footrest thing. I have it that way at work and home - the only trouble is my Athalon makes my feet hot in summer.
On ergonimics: I have appalling posture and used to get a bit sore, then I started doing lots of chinups. My posture is still terrible, but I guess my back can take it now.
>> 1. Fluoridation of Water [cdc.gov] ...
>>
>> In Soviet Russia, all our base are belong to you!
In Soviet Russia, your precious bodily fluids corrupt the water supply.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/26/175722/727
>> Later I saw the U.N. trick them out of their guns.
WTF? The Australian government (not the UN) banned auto and semi-auto assault rifles (outside of gun clubs) after a mass slaying in Tasmania where someone killed 13 people in 17 seconds.
Since then, gun deaths have gone down.
Australia uses votes not guns to change our government. We separated from the UK peacefully in 1901 with votes, not a war. The trouble down here is everyone knows the current govt sucks, it's just we have a pretty comfortable life and the other lot are bad for different reasons, so nobody is concerned enough to vote for change, let alone violent revolution.
Without selling at the end he would have been left with a 9 month old laptop, which would have depreciated (though probably not by $900)
I don't know about that - just because a thing causes your body harm, doesn't mean doing the opposite will do it good. Extremely cold temperatures cause you to become weak, but this doesn't mean that extremely high temperatures will make you strong.
Australia under the new sedition laws is even worse.
In sport, it has been traditional for Australians to if not support, then at least show some sympathy for the underdogs, especially if they were the home team. In war, that can get you locked up.
If it was about saving lives then where is the war on cars, or the war on junk food?
>> American... ingenuity... Simply undercutting on price is a dangerous game
Don't forget that Walmart is the #1 US corporation.
And who sells more computers, Apple or Dell?
Yeah, in some ways the phenomenal success of the American experiment has put us in an interesting conundrum... Our standard of living IS higher than everybody elses, but to me that is an argument for others to emulate us. Instead of demanding that we work for 80% less and lower our standard of living to be as shitty as yours, why not innovate, create some REAL value (by giving more rather than just charging less) and raise up your own standards, rather than kvetching about ours.
GDP/population is a really crappy measurement when wealth is so unequal.
I've travelled for ~3-4 months in America, 2 months in Europe and lived/studied/worked for 2 years in Canada and 24 years in Australia. From what I've seen, the US has the highest standard of living for SOME people, and a FAR FAR lower standard of living for a very large percentage of the population than most other western countries. Never in a rich western country have I seen so many people with SIMPLE medical problems that would be easily fixed in a country with decent healthcare, for example.
Utility theory also says that there are diminishing returns for money, eg as an impact on human life not having enough money for food for dinner tonight ($5) is more than an extra million to a multi-billionaire. So high GDP + unequal distribution can lead to a worse society than mid GDP vs more even distribution. It depends, of course, and there are minimums. I just think that every english speaking country I've seen strikes a better balance than the US.
And as for everyone becoming like Americans.... Americans make up 5% of the population but use 26% of the worlds energy. If the rest of the world "caught up", presumably all getting hummers to drive through McDonalds, the earth would consume 500% the current level of natural resources - and the poor old dear is starting to creak under the strain of current levels already.
>> Hell... Wouldn't it be better if those people were around today? I'm still sure Newton would have loved to have all the tools our scientists have today.
Newton probably would have used his clout to condemn Einsteins theory that exposed flaws in his own. That is, if he dragged himself away from searching for bible codes, which is what he spent the last part of his life on.
There is a difference between not learning (ie not keeping up with new, updated theories) and continuing with your belief and values.
Most people do not question their values because they have invested too much into them, not because they figure they won't get much out of it as they're due to die soon. Lets think of an example:
An old preacher retires from the ministry and one day is offered a religious text from a different faith. He declines to read it, saying he is happy believing what he believes. Why?
a) He knew he'd be dead soon, so even if the book contains the true path, he'd only have a few years to walk it.
b) He had dedicated his entire life to his religion, and was not receptive to something that tells him he had been wrong all that time.
You need people to get old and die.
Most people who lived believing that demonic posession rather than germs were responsible for sickness died still believing it. They were just eventually replaced by people whose minds were open to new theories.
If people don't die die, old (wrong) ideas will never die, and humans will never improve.
>> Mao believed that deflowering virgins would help him live longer
He lived to be 84!
What if Australia dismantled their military, and few years from now they noticed that "Shit, China/Indonesia is about to invade us in just few months time!". They couldn't build an effective defence against it.
If China invaded, I think we'd all have to learn to say "Ni Hao".
The CIA World Fact Book
Manpower available for military service:
Australia: 4,943,676 (2005 est.)
China: 342,956,265 (2005 est.)
>> Instead of screwing your allies on their arms purchases, why don't you actually help us and stop selling stuff to our enemy.
Because it's more profitable that way? There are heaps of historical conflicts where the US has sold weapons to both sides (not going to mention one group because it would invoke Goodwins law)
Look at the recent history of the middle east:
-Reagan sells weapons to Iran
-Bush Sr sells weapons to Iraq
-Iran & Iraq blow each others weapons up (damn, we need more!)
-Bush Sr blows up old US weapons in Gulf 1 (obsolete losers, should have keep buying the latest shit!)
-Bush Jr invades Iraq, soon they'll need some cool new toys. I think Cheney might be able to hook them up with some dealers....
It's all about the money, what, do you think it is about "freedom"? China is as totalitarian as the Russians ever were, but the US love them because they sell cheap crap & loan cheap money. They don't see opressed masses, they see 1 billion extra consumers to sell coke to.
Why is Java a higher level language than C++?
My way of thinking is the higher level the language, the less code you need to write and I've found Java to be more verbose than C++. Java is also missing paradigms that C++ has, like operator overloading and (proper) generic programming.
Thank God they don't write userland apps in Java. Just imagine:
>ls -l | grep foo | sort | more
would cause 4 JVMs to load (at 2-3 seconds startup time each) each gobbling up insane amounts of ram.
"Die Murdoch Media"
I couldn't agree more!
>> I'm also anti-voting as I feel voting is what causes the minority decision to be criminalized. The best voting is voting done with your dollars --
So Bill Gates gets 100,000 times more votes than me?
>> The Best Programming Books [canonicalbooks.com]
Given the existance of Canonical Tomes why make that site?
>> both Hitler and Churchil believed in the rightness of their causes.
They were opposed, but their goals and beliefs were different: Hitler wanted the German people to dominate and Churchill wanted to stop Hitler.
Neocons and Islamic extremists both want to force their way of life on the rest of the world because they believe theirs is the best, and only way to live.