It seems like this is an excellent case in point to show that the 4th wall does exist in games. People do get lost in games and anything that ruins a carefully crafted mood is a bad idea. There's no excuse for it.
But that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. The example in the summary isn't a good one, IMHO, but think I do see what he means, and I'm not sure how interruptions to this experience are supposed to refute it, anyway.
Now you know why I used the word "often", because many people wouldn't consider that to be a comparable situation even if it did meet their strict definition of racism. But thanks for playing.
There are notable exceptions, though. Otherwise you would not see Nobel prize laureates in Physics and Medicine accused of being racists, or, more appropriately, of having said something which is widely considered unacceptably racist.
Just because someone can be very good at something, doesn't mean they apply the same strict, questioning rational to everything in life. The other part of this are those that are simply making an observation and people misinterpret their intentions of why they said it (this seems to happen a lot with eugenics, in large part thanks to Hitler).
Well, take a racist sexist X guy and put him around some X people and Y people and he'll congregate with the X people. Then, put him with X males and X females, and he'll congregate with the X males.
It stands to reason that this would work in the reverse. Put him around elephants and X, Y, and Z people and see him flock to the people regardless of their race.
Why? When he's back with X and Y again, he's going to do what he did before. Just because he dislikes the elephants more, doesn't mean he now has no problem with Y and Z, does it? You don't overcome racism by finding something even more different to discriminate against. And saying that the differences of the elephant makes the other peoples' difference seem less important requires the use of logic, and more importantly, a mindset of seeing the similarities in people, rather than just the differences.
Agree. It would be a usability disaster. An OS designed to be be used with a small, portrait touchscreen with no keyboard on a device with a large, landscape non-touch screen, a keyboard, and a touchpad? They'd have to rework the iPhone interface so much that it would be a complete compromise for both devices. I can't believe this even made it to the front page.
..."go slow because there is an accident on the other side of the freeway, etc?"
Because it's dangerous to drive fast when you're gawking out the side window to get a good view of the carnage you're passing. Actually, that's too optimistic -- it's probably because they can't get a good look if they're going fast.
You might have a point if what you suggested was in anyway popular, but it's not. Most people don't want to have a USB drive so that they can take their music to any computer and play it. They have it on their own computer and listen to it there, or they have a laptop, or they have a portable music player as well, that they can listen to anywhere, no computer required. I've seen a lot of complaints about the iPod, such as the lack or radio, but I've never before heard of someone who keeps there music on an external drive and takes it to a computer other than their own to listen to music. Now, if that's the perfect system for you, good for you, but why should Apple cater for every possible niche market?
As for importing music, why is that such a big deal? If I was ripping CDs and using the file/folder way, then that's an extra step, or at least no different, just like adding files to the DB is no different to copying them to a folder. Is dragging some new files into the folder in iTunes really that different to dragging them into a folder in the file system in terms of the number of steps required? One could even argue it was less clicks since you don't have to drill down to you're music folder, just fire up iTunes.
So a robot that is able to understand what people are saying more accuratly because it can also read there emotions is garbage? I mean, sure, perhaps this particular one (haven't read article) might be, as demonstrating emotions might just be silly or creepy to many people, but you aren't going to get far in human interacting with robots if they can't even detect sarcasm etc.
It's not just societies, though, but individuals. I hardly ever remember any oral conversation. If I need to learn it, I'm better off seeing it, and writing it down or some other action also helps. I am, however, a graphic designer, as well as a web developer, and I also have an interest in photography and architecture -- all very visual-spatial things, unlike theater or anthropology.
I don't buy anything from the iTunes store, so how does this affect people like me? And there are many technical users who know exactly what DRM is but accept it when weighed up against other things -- they may not like it but might not go to the extent of boycotting them, either.
But a competent technical user might not have the same criteria for what a "well designed interface" is.
But that is my point. Often they can be the same.
I, for instance, think a well designed media-player interface is one that simply shows me the file system in a directory browser and either let me choose a file to play, a directory structure to play or a playlist to play.
I've said this many times before. I've installed many different type of Linux, even on a Jornada 680. I know my way around an Apache httpd.conf file. But when it comes to managing my music collection, I can't see why I'd want to bother with files and folders as browsing them by DB using the metadata in the file makes so much more sense. I never have to create new folders for new artists or albums, I can use characters that aren't allowed in the file system, etc.
Why do you find browsing the file system so much better?
Put up with what crap? I still find iTunes and the iPod to be the best on the market, and all my music is in MP3 or MP4 format, with no DRM anywhere. How am I locked-in, exactly?
Flak from having major issues with 3rd party devices when they add new features to iTunes? Because to ensure a smooth experience for every device would cost them a lot. Just easier to not bother letting them in to begin with.
Why are you comparing this to IE? Why not to Microsoft's music stores, some were they've shut down the servers leaving the customers with non-functioning music files that they paid for. Apple has yet to do anything like that.
For god's sake, please stop associating good interface design with nontechnical users. There are plenty of very competent technical users out there that prefer a well designed interface because it makes things easier.
Which is why I think that would be the religious standpoint. Science would only make that statement after a law was already defined.
But for science to define a law based on no evidence isn't scientific at all. It's not necessarily either standpoint, because to say either way makes assumptions.
People can see patterns everywhere, but that doesn't mean it's easy to recreate the same effect just with a few basic maths equations. What you'd probably end up with is something that looks far too much like a fractal pattern, unless you added back in all the stuff that takes a lot of effort and looks real.
When I'm talking about "it just is", with regards to the universe, I don't mean accepting something as it is with no desire to find out more about it, but in the sense that it's a possibility of what it is -- that perhaps there can never be a complete explanation for it, and leaving it at that until you have good reason to question it again.
Yeah, but people value different things. I know that some people use their laptop as their main computer, so the ability to drive a good screen is often more important that the screen on the laptop itself. I also know that some people prefer the lower DPI screen because it's easier to see (it's still higher than Apple's desktops). Personally, I don't have a problem with the resolution of their laptops, as any laptop in the size I want is always going to have a screen that is too small to be comfortable. So perhaps their laptops aren't for you, but that's different to being underspeced or mediocre.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems like this is an excellent case in point to show that the 4th wall does exist in games. People do get lost in games and anything that ruins a carefully crafted mood is a bad idea. There's no excuse for it.
But that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. The example in the summary isn't a good one, IMHO, but think I do see what he means, and I'm not sure how interruptions to this experience are supposed to refute it, anyway.
Now you know why I used the word "often", because many people wouldn't consider that to be a comparable situation even if it did meet their strict definition of racism. But thanks for playing.
There are notable exceptions, though. Otherwise you would not see Nobel prize laureates in Physics and Medicine accused of being racists, or, more appropriately, of having said something which is widely considered unacceptably racist.
Just because someone can be very good at something, doesn't mean they apply the same strict, questioning rational to everything in life. The other part of this are those that are simply making an observation and people misinterpret their intentions of why they said it (this seems to happen a lot with eugenics, in large part thanks to Hitler).
Why? When he's back with X and Y again, he's going to do what he did before. Just because he dislikes the elephants more, doesn't mean he now has no problem with Y and Z, does it? You don't overcome racism by finding something even more different to discriminate against. And saying that the differences of the elephant makes the other peoples' difference seem less important requires the use of logic, and more importantly, a mindset of seeing the similarities in people, rather than just the differences.
But when the inevitable species war erupts, we can end racism.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Racism is often based on poor logic, so how would this change anything?
And you can't see how that is misleading?
Agree. It would be a usability disaster. An OS designed to be be used with a small, portrait touchscreen with no keyboard on a device with a large, landscape non-touch screen, a keyboard, and a touchpad? They'd have to rework the iPhone interface so much that it would be a complete compromise for both devices. I can't believe this even made it to the front page.
..."go slow because there is an accident on the other side of the freeway, etc?"
Because it's dangerous to drive fast when you're gawking out the side window to get a good view of the carnage you're passing. Actually, that's too optimistic -- it's probably because they can't get a good look if they're going fast.
You might have a point if what you suggested was in anyway popular, but it's not. Most people don't want to have a USB drive so that they can take their music to any computer and play it. They have it on their own computer and listen to it there, or they have a laptop, or they have a portable music player as well, that they can listen to anywhere, no computer required. I've seen a lot of complaints about the iPod, such as the lack or radio, but I've never before heard of someone who keeps there music on an external drive and takes it to a computer other than their own to listen to music. Now, if that's the perfect system for you, good for you, but why should Apple cater for every possible niche market?
As for importing music, why is that such a big deal? If I was ripping CDs and using the file/folder way, then that's an extra step, or at least no different, just like adding files to the DB is no different to copying them to a folder. Is dragging some new files into the folder in iTunes really that different to dragging them into a folder in the file system in terms of the number of steps required? One could even argue it was less clicks since you don't have to drill down to you're music folder, just fire up iTunes.
I'm just surprised that no one has written a script to convert an image into one of these documents yet, even if it was considered cheating.
So a robot that is able to understand what people are saying more accuratly because it can also read there emotions is garbage? I mean, sure, perhaps this particular one (haven't read article) might be, as demonstrating emotions might just be silly or creepy to many people, but you aren't going to get far in human interacting with robots if they can't even detect sarcasm etc.
It's not just societies, though, but individuals. I hardly ever remember any oral conversation. If I need to learn it, I'm better off seeing it, and writing it down or some other action also helps. I am, however, a graphic designer, as well as a web developer, and I also have an interest in photography and architecture -- all very visual-spatial things, unlike theater or anthropology.
No. I think you're missing my point.
I don't buy anything from the iTunes store, so how does this affect people like me? And there are many technical users who know exactly what DRM is but accept it when weighed up against other things -- they may not like it but might not go to the extent of boycotting them, either.
But a competent technical user might not have the same criteria for what a "well designed interface" is.
But that is my point. Often they can be the same.
I, for instance, think a well designed media-player interface is one that simply shows me the file system in a directory browser and either let me choose a file to play, a directory structure to play or a playlist to play.
I've said this many times before. I've installed many different type of Linux, even on a Jornada 680. I know my way around an Apache httpd.conf file. But when it comes to managing my music collection, I can't see why I'd want to bother with files and folders as browsing them by DB using the metadata in the file makes so much more sense. I never have to create new folders for new artists or albums, I can use characters that aren't allowed in the file system, etc.
Why do you find browsing the file system so much better?
Put up with what crap? I still find iTunes and the iPod to be the best on the market, and all my music is in MP3 or MP4 format, with no DRM anywhere. How am I locked-in, exactly?
Flak from having major issues with 3rd party devices when they add new features to iTunes? Because to ensure a smooth experience for every device would cost them a lot. Just easier to not bother letting them in to begin with.
Why are you comparing this to IE? Why not to Microsoft's music stores, some were they've shut down the servers leaving the customers with non-functioning music files that they paid for. Apple has yet to do anything like that.
What are you using your Mac for that makes it so superior to a windows machine?
What are you using your windows machine for that makes it so superior to a Mac?
You know, while we're all just refuting points with more subjective opinions and such.
aimed at nontechnical consumers
For god's sake, please stop associating good interface design with nontechnical users. There are plenty of very competent technical users out there that prefer a well designed interface because it makes things easier.
Which is why I think that would be the religious standpoint. Science would only make that statement after a law was already defined.
But for science to define a law based on no evidence isn't scientific at all. It's not necessarily either standpoint, because to say either way makes assumptions.
I still plan on getting a new MacBook, but I certainly won't be getting anything with DRM from the iTunes store.
People can see patterns everywhere, but that doesn't mean it's easy to recreate the same effect just with a few basic maths equations. What you'd probably end up with is something that looks far too much like a fractal pattern, unless you added back in all the stuff that takes a lot of effort and looks real.
When I'm talking about "it just is", with regards to the universe, I don't mean accepting something as it is with no desire to find out more about it, but in the sense that it's a possibility of what it is -- that perhaps there can never be a complete explanation for it, and leaving it at that until you have good reason to question it again.
Yeah, but people value different things. I know that some people use their laptop as their main computer, so the ability to drive a good screen is often more important that the screen on the laptop itself. I also know that some people prefer the lower DPI screen because it's easier to see (it's still higher than Apple's desktops). Personally, I don't have a problem with the resolution of their laptops, as any laptop in the size I want is always going to have a screen that is too small to be comfortable. So perhaps their laptops aren't for you, but that's different to being underspeced or mediocre.