Yeah I must say I have always been SORELY disappointed with the RPG selection on the XBox, Fable is the only remotely decent one in my mind [I just couldn't get in to elder scrolls for some reason] and Fable only held my interest for the first twenty hours...at which point I quit playing it.
On more than one occasion, I've almost bought another PS2 just to play some decent RPG's...
Yeah, almost every single RPG I play I end up being a paladin. I can't help it...the idea of being an evil character just doesn't sit well with me; I suppose it's that whole living vicariously through the game, which is why we play RPG's in the first place.
That being said, I don't really view "The World of Warcraft" [ie the game universe] as place where the horde are "evil" and the alliance are "good". The orcs, at least in the beginning levels, seem to be very tribalistic but that is not to be confused with evil. And just because the humans have high castles and pretty armored knights doesn't mean that their the good guys.
For me it was GI Joes v. Transformers, but then I Was about five years too early to really remember those early Star Wars movies [I have a very vague recollection of being absolutely terrified of that big nasty thing in "Return of the Jedi" and yes I realized my geek badge should be revoked because I can't think of the damn things name...in fact I think it got revoked a few weeks back when I referred to the voice over on Civ IV as some dude and not Mr. Spock].
As a non-believing Catholic [baptized etc, haven't been to church in years] I'm very pleased to see when people of the book [Christian-Muslim-Jewish] are willing to seperate science and faith; so often the vocal minority make it difficult to discern the real intention and desire of the majority.
Faith is designed to operate outside of the realm of science. Let ID be taught, but let it be taught in a philosophy class and without the "Darwin is wrong". As an intellectual exercise and as an idea of faith ID has a place in our society; as a scientific theory it needs to be relegated to the trash heap (And this is why I was a philosophy major in college, we're allowed to make exceptions like this!).
I would hardly call the original XBox a failure. Just because microsoft isn't making money off it yet doesn't mean it has failed in any way. Moreover, whatever you might think about Microsoft, I can not think of many instances where Microsoft has entered a business arena and lost (I can't think of any in fact but I'm sure they exist).
You may never buy a Microsoft gaming system but I assure you sir, Microsoft is going to win this battle. To use the parlance of our time "It's just how they roll".
Also this is more a brand war than a console war; the individual abilities of the consoles are irrelevant it's really about who can sell their product better and Microsoft excels at selling their products. They wouldn't have 90% market share [might be less now, I know it's still absurd] if they didn't excel at selling because their OS's would NEVER be mistaken for a superior product.
First Invalid Argument Form Invoked by Logical Progression of Statement: Bill gates was wrong about the amount of memory needed in a computer therefore Microsoft is wrong about number of controllers needed in the Xbox. For the sake of my own sanity let me break this down symbolically. A->B Therefore C->D I missed that theorem of proof and I think actually falls under something known as a "non-sequitor" but maybe we should check with some people who took the LSAT.
Second Invalid Argument Form Invoked by Logical Progression of Statement: The entire statement is simply a straw man argument. The following info is from the wiki link but they explore in in greater depth than I will here.
One can set up a straw man as follows:
1. Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
2. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group that the speaker is critical of.
I've been debating which one fits what you just did most aptly but I think I'll go with number #2.
Anyhow, I'm not some Xbox 360 Fanboy. I don't even own one nor do I plan on doing so, just sick and tired of nonsensical arguments.
Yeah you got reamed by a few AC's and I almost posted in response to them but I decided to reiterate your point; there is actually an instance of Sony Music nameing a division of Sony Electronics in a lawsuit over "intellectual properpty". Smashing entertainment if you ask me...
Yeah I know I should find a source, I'm fucking lazy.
The warranty is a con-job but it has no business in this discussion. Best Buy wasn't apologizing for their warranty they're just doing a corporate "mea culpa"...see in America we can have our Cake and eat it too;)
Whenever you research the corporation "technology" in Civ IV, when you get it there is a quote from some guy describing corporations: "Entities designed to generate the greatest personal profit with the least personal responibility". Just remined me of this...
I don't know where you live nor the circumstances surrounding the advertisments you saw regarding the Xbox 360 but in Los Angeles, it was very clear that they were only selling bundles. If you didn't want a bundle, you have to wait until after Christmas...that sounds like economics to me, not some vast corporate conspiracy.
If you look at the dispersion of human intelligence across a bell curve it becomes apparent that there exists six men to every one woman in the outer regions of the spectrum. In other words, there are more men geniuses but there are also more men who have intelligences that fall in to the retarded range. Strange how evolution works...
The Great L. Ron Hubbard has returned to us in the form of a small boy from South Park! Millions! There are millions to be had! Muhahahahhahahahahahhhhhhhahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahah!
I have an addicitive personality; I've been addicted to the internet; I've been addicted to alcohol. You may think that the consequences are different but they are not. You may not get a DUI/DWI or kill someone [other than yourself] while on the internet but it has the ability to consume a person and when that happens the social connections that are severed come with the same consequences as those severed by people who drink to excess.
On slashdot we resort to calling psychology a "pseudo-science" because they're saying something that makes us uncomfortable. When I was addicted to the internet, I would rationalize my behavior by saying that many kids my age were out "drinking, smoking and using illicit drugs" whilst I was at home using my own "drugs" that just happened to be legal [dopamine is dopamine and last I checked it's the major thing stimulated by most things we enjoy]. So maybe instead of name calling we need to look in the mirror a little harder and maybe I'm generalizing my own shortcoming across the slashdot community.
"I don't look at it as an addiction really. There are those of who have an honest drive for a stiff drink to unwind after work. My life, my job and my hobbies revovle around drinking I always think about "it". How does it work, where does it come from, why is it better, who else likes it?"
So I just replaced a few words, how does that sound? Absurd? Well I've heard drunks say very similar things. I'm not saying an addict, I'm not saying you have a problem; I'm saying that your pattern of behavior and rationalization is consistent with that of someone with an addiction. Two completely different things but don't blow it off so quickly just because you may not like the implications.
I'm also not trying to take some moral high ground here; I'm a borderline problem-drinker who still chooses to drink.
Every phsycological profile that I've ever taken has labeled me as an introvert of some sort or another; I look people in the eye when I talk, I am able to pick women up at bars to bring them home and have sex with me, I've played competative sports my entire life and I too once thought I was completely incapable of learning how to read other people. I had myself believe that I was just not a "people person"; in reality I lacked the confidence to be a people person. When I stopped making excuses for why I didn't function like other people, I started functioning in normal social settings properly (I'm not trying to call anyone out or to say that my way is the only way, merely saying this is what I experienced).
Exactly, that's why I felt it was over the top; not that Kanye's statement didn't contain a very real element of truth it was just an oversimplification of the issue at hand. Bush loves rich black people, just not poor people...white, black or otherwise.
I would argue that Mr Levitt's claim is a bit larger than the pool of evidence he has to back it up. In statistics they say that "Correlation does not imply causation" and I think Levitt fell victim to this with his book; moreover I think he needed an absurd claim to help sell the book. It was kind of like when Kanye West said "Bush doesn't care about black people", the only way someone will pay attention now a days is if you say something completely over the top.
It's actually quite simple, teens arn't allowed to vote thus they have no say. Why are issues like Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare always talked about during election years? Because it is proven that older people, particularly retirees, take an aggressive interest in politics and make sure their voice is heard. It's a sticky situation because some might argue that giving teens a vote simply enables the parents to have another chance to vote along their politcal lines plus I hardly care about politcs now and I'm 24 I can't imagine a situation where at 15 I would have been the least bit interested in politics. They have no votes so they have no champions, welcome to a democracy.
I have a friend who used to work for one of the major plane building manufacturers in the United States. He started working there as a senior in college and after a year out was supervising the same position he started in; he was getting paid about 60% of the money to do the exact same job as some guy in his 30's. Needless to say, he left the company.
Yeah that might be the case but as a white male I can assure you that the immediate status afforded me far out weighs any discrimination. Society isn't perfect and some things are not strictly "fair" but the idea is to move towards a level playing field so if I get discriminated against a bit in order for the playing field to be tilted slightly less in my favor that's not such a bad thing.
Actually learning to read body language and human beings is something that one can learn, some exceptionals may be born with the innate ability to do so but it's a skill, that much I garentee. Recently I decided to take an acting class for my own edification (besides I live in Los Angeles so I might as well take advantage of the things that my area has to offer). The class focuses on a technique known as Meisner. The drills and exercises force you to establish an intimiate connection with another living-breathing human being and slowly begin to learn reading what bubbles to the surface "in the moment". It sounds like nonsensical bullshit but I assure you it is not; if you've played team sports at some point in your life you've probably been "in the moment" with people without even knowing. I am finding it manifests particularly well in soccer/basketball but that's besides the point.
I don't know much about the South Beach diet so I'll refrain from critiqueing it but the Atkins diet is not healthy at all. It tricks your body in to thinking it is in a state of starvation and you do quickly burn large quantities of fat; problem is as soon as you begin eating Carbohydrates again you put the weight right back on. It's great for Body Builders who need to get lean right before a contest but for normal people who are interested in becoming healthier you might as well switch to the beer diet. It'll at least allow you to lose some weight and you can be drunk the whole time [And yes, I've been on the beer diet in before, although it wasn't to lose weight it was just my drinking peak in college...my brain and liver still hate me].
Now the simple mechanics of weight lose you are correct on; some people seem to like to think that there is some mystical other factor that causes people to gain weight despite a net energy loss. Well, unless there is an underlying medical condition, that's bullshit. Thermodynamics doesn't fall apart just because we have "genetic predispositions" afterall categorized as "laws of physics" for a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah I must say I have always been SORELY disappointed with the RPG selection on the XBox, Fable is the only remotely decent one in my mind [I just couldn't get in to elder scrolls for some reason] and Fable only held my interest for the first twenty hours...at which point I quit playing it.
On more than one occasion, I've almost bought another PS2 just to play some decent RPG's...
That would have been fun to see with all the formating ;)
Shhh! Don't Tell Anyone!
Yeah, almost every single RPG I play I end up being a paladin. I can't help it...the idea of being an evil character just doesn't sit well with me; I suppose it's that whole living vicariously through the game, which is why we play RPG's in the first place.
That being said, I don't really view "The World of Warcraft" [ie the game universe] as place where the horde are "evil" and the alliance are "good". The orcs, at least in the beginning levels, seem to be very tribalistic but that is not to be confused with evil. And just because the humans have high castles and pretty armored knights doesn't mean that their the good guys.
For me it was GI Joes v. Transformers, but then I Was about five years too early to really remember those early Star Wars movies [I have a very vague recollection of being absolutely terrified of that big nasty thing in "Return of the Jedi" and yes I realized my geek badge should be revoked because I can't think of the damn things name...in fact I think it got revoked a few weeks back when I referred to the voice over on Civ IV as some dude and not Mr. Spock].
As a non-believing Catholic [baptized etc, haven't been to church in years] I'm very pleased to see when people of the book [Christian-Muslim-Jewish] are willing to seperate science and faith; so often the vocal minority make it difficult to discern the real intention and desire of the majority.
Faith is designed to operate outside of the realm of science. Let ID be taught, but let it be taught in a philosophy class and without the "Darwin is wrong". As an intellectual exercise and as an idea of faith ID has a place in our society; as a scientific theory it needs to be relegated to the trash heap (And this is why I was a philosophy major in college, we're allowed to make exceptions like this!).
I would hardly call the original XBox a failure. Just because microsoft isn't making money off it yet doesn't mean it has failed in any way. Moreover, whatever you might think about Microsoft, I can not think of many instances where Microsoft has entered a business arena and lost (I can't think of any in fact but I'm sure they exist).
You may never buy a Microsoft gaming system but I assure you sir, Microsoft is going to win this battle. To use the parlance of our time "It's just how they roll".
Also this is more a brand war than a console war; the individual abilities of the consoles are irrelevant it's really about who can sell their product better and Microsoft excels at selling their products. They wouldn't have 90% market share [might be less now, I know it's still absurd] if they didn't excel at selling because their OS's would NEVER be mistaken for a superior product.
Yeah I've always kinda been a jock hiding in Geeks clothing...sorry :-/
Who needs more than 640k of RAM? My point exactly
False Premise Used: Bill Gates == Microsoft
First Invalid Argument Form Invoked by Logical Progression of Statement: Bill gates was wrong about the amount of memory needed in a computer therefore Microsoft is wrong about number of controllers needed in the Xbox. For the sake of my own sanity let me break this down symbolically. A->B Therefore C->D I missed that theorem of proof and I think actually falls under something known as a "non-sequitor" but maybe we should check with some people who took the LSAT.
Second Invalid Argument Form Invoked by Logical Progression of Statement: The entire statement is simply a straw man argument. The following info is from the wiki link but they explore in in greater depth than I will here.
One can set up a straw man as follows:
1. Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
2. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group that the speaker is critical of.
I've been debating which one fits what you just did most aptly but I think I'll go with number #2.
Anyhow, I'm not some Xbox 360 Fanboy. I don't even own one nor do I plan on doing so, just sick and tired of nonsensical arguments.
Yeah you got reamed by a few AC's and I almost posted in response to them but I decided to reiterate your point; there is actually an instance of Sony Music nameing a division of Sony Electronics in a lawsuit over "intellectual properpty". Smashing entertainment if you ask me...
Yeah I know I should find a source, I'm fucking lazy.
The warranty is a con-job but it has no business in this discussion. Best Buy wasn't apologizing for their warranty they're just doing a corporate "mea culpa"...see in America we can have our Cake and eat it too ;)
Whenever you research the corporation "technology" in Civ IV, when you get it there is a quote from some guy describing corporations: "Entities designed to generate the greatest personal profit with the least personal responibility". Just remined me of this...
I don't know where you live nor the circumstances surrounding the advertisments you saw regarding the Xbox 360 but in Los Angeles, it was very clear that they were only selling bundles. If you didn't want a bundle, you have to wait until after Christmas...that sounds like economics to me, not some vast corporate conspiracy.
If you look at the dispersion of human intelligence across a bell curve it becomes apparent that there exists six men to every one woman in the outer regions of the spectrum. In other words, there are more men geniuses but there are also more men who have intelligences that fall in to the retarded range. Strange how evolution works...
And you know who the biggest loser was in this whole OJ thing?
BILLY DEE WILLIAMS! No longer kind of the wife-beaters.
Wow your high level math blows me away....what class did you learn to decphier the hierarchical ordering of numbers?
;)
Sorry I had to get the morning smartass out before I went in to a meeting
The Great L. Ron Hubbard has returned to us in the form of a small boy from South Park! Millions! There are millions to be had! Muhahahahhahahahahahhhhhhhahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahah!
I have an addicitive personality; I've been addicted to the internet; I've been addicted to alcohol. You may think that the consequences are different but they are not. You may not get a DUI/DWI or kill someone [other than yourself] while on the internet but it has the ability to consume a person and when that happens the social connections that are severed come with the same consequences as those severed by people who drink to excess.
On slashdot we resort to calling psychology a "pseudo-science" because they're saying something that makes us uncomfortable. When I was addicted to the internet, I would rationalize my behavior by saying that many kids my age were out "drinking, smoking and using illicit drugs" whilst I was at home using my own "drugs" that just happened to be legal [dopamine is dopamine and last I checked it's the major thing stimulated by most things we enjoy]. So maybe instead of name calling we need to look in the mirror a little harder and maybe I'm generalizing my own shortcoming across the slashdot community.
"I don't look at it as an addiction really. There are those of who have an honest drive for a stiff drink to unwind after work. My life, my job and my hobbies revovle around drinking I always think about "it". How does it work, where does it come from, why is it better, who else likes it?"
So I just replaced a few words, how does that sound? Absurd? Well I've heard drunks say very similar things. I'm not saying an addict, I'm not saying you have a problem; I'm saying that your pattern of behavior and rationalization is consistent with that of someone with an addiction. Two completely different things but don't blow it off so quickly just because you may not like the implications.
I'm also not trying to take some moral high ground here; I'm a borderline problem-drinker who still chooses to drink.
Every phsycological profile that I've ever taken has labeled me as an introvert of some sort or another; I look people in the eye when I talk, I am able to pick women up at bars to bring them home and have sex with me, I've played competative sports my entire life and I too once thought I was completely incapable of learning how to read other people. I had myself believe that I was just not a "people person"; in reality I lacked the confidence to be a people person. When I stopped making excuses for why I didn't function like other people, I started functioning in normal social settings properly (I'm not trying to call anyone out or to say that my way is the only way, merely saying this is what I experienced).
Exactly, that's why I felt it was over the top; not that Kanye's statement didn't contain a very real element of truth it was just an oversimplification of the issue at hand. Bush loves rich black people, just not poor people...white, black or otherwise.
I would argue that Mr Levitt's claim is a bit larger than the pool of evidence he has to back it up. In statistics they say that "Correlation does not imply causation" and I think Levitt fell victim to this with his book; moreover I think he needed an absurd claim to help sell the book. It was kind of like when Kanye West said "Bush doesn't care about black people", the only way someone will pay attention now a days is if you say something completely over the top.
It's actually quite simple, teens arn't allowed to vote thus they have no say. Why are issues like Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare always talked about during election years? Because it is proven that older people, particularly retirees, take an aggressive interest in politics and make sure their voice is heard. It's a sticky situation because some might argue that giving teens a vote simply enables the parents to have another chance to vote along their politcal lines plus I hardly care about politcs now and I'm 24 I can't imagine a situation where at 15 I would have been the least bit interested in politics. They have no votes so they have no champions, welcome to a democracy.
I have a friend who used to work for one of the major plane building manufacturers in the United States. He started working there as a senior in college and after a year out was supervising the same position he started in; he was getting paid about 60% of the money to do the exact same job as some guy in his 30's. Needless to say, he left the company.
Yeah that might be the case but as a white male I can assure you that the immediate status afforded me far out weighs any discrimination. Society isn't perfect and some things are not strictly "fair" but the idea is to move towards a level playing field so if I get discriminated against a bit in order for the playing field to be tilted slightly less in my favor that's not such a bad thing.
Actually learning to read body language and human beings is something that one can learn, some exceptionals may be born with the innate ability to do so but it's a skill, that much I garentee. Recently I decided to take an acting class for my own edification (besides I live in Los Angeles so I might as well take advantage of the things that my area has to offer). The class focuses on a technique known as Meisner. The drills and exercises force you to establish an intimiate connection with another living-breathing human being and slowly begin to learn reading what bubbles to the surface "in the moment". It sounds like nonsensical bullshit but I assure you it is not; if you've played team sports at some point in your life you've probably been "in the moment" with people without even knowing. I am finding it manifests particularly well in soccer/basketball but that's besides the point.
Very very interesting stuff....
I don't know much about the South Beach diet so I'll refrain from critiqueing it but the Atkins diet is not healthy at all. It tricks your body in to thinking it is in a state of starvation and you do quickly burn large quantities of fat; problem is as soon as you begin eating Carbohydrates again you put the weight right back on. It's great for Body Builders who need to get lean right before a contest but for normal people who are interested in becoming healthier you might as well switch to the beer diet. It'll at least allow you to lose some weight and you can be drunk the whole time [And yes, I've been on the beer diet in before, although it wasn't to lose weight it was just my drinking peak in college...my brain and liver still hate me].
Now the simple mechanics of weight lose you are correct on; some people seem to like to think that there is some mystical other factor that causes people to gain weight despite a net energy loss. Well, unless there is an underlying medical condition, that's bullshit. Thermodynamics doesn't fall apart just because we have "genetic predispositions" afterall categorized as "laws of physics" for a reason.