Ok, it's possible that I'm being trolled here but real world Japan is not the idyllic world it is portrayed as in anime. Here is just one article on it:
Corporal punishment is officially outlawed in Japanese schools. But reasearch does seem to indicate that it goes on quite a lot, and not just by the teachers. Far more deaths (many of them suicides) have come about as a result of student-to-student bullying, called iijime. Iijime is a serious problem in Japan. Just how serious depends alot on who you talk to, but the raw statistics on the number of iijime-related deaths do seem to indicate that it is worthy of attention. of course, iijime is not exactly sanctioned by school authorities, but they do very little to stop it, and arguably a lot to encourage it.
There have been articles on this in Japanese newspapers, the prime minister even hamfistedly addressed the issue. Everything I've ever read about Japanese schools makes me tend to believe they are real hellholes, worse than American schools. (Well, not the worst of American schools.) There is even a dystopian movie about them called Battle Royale
My DInner with Origin
on
Sim-Dud?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
One of the funniest articles I ever read on the Internet was "My Dinner with Origin" by Tom Chick, published on the old Next Generation website. The article is no longer available, maybe it scorched to much hair of at Electronic Arts, but the gist of it was that Origin was being transformed from a great game company into a company that produced "mainstream online" games. The fake Origin exec interviewed for the article had no respect for games or gaming but loved money. This fake exec hated companies like Blizzard which let people play Diablo online for free.
This article gave me the same feeling as that article, as I see two reasons to create an online game:
1. The game will be fun and engaging, people will want to try their skill at playing against/with other people.
2. Why sell a game once when you can sell it over and over again? (The same philosophy behind the original Divx, "Why sell a DVD once when you can sell it over and over again to the same person?")
Well, I think Sims Online falls into the latter category. I also have to wonder who they think plays online game? When I was heavily into MUCKing, I had no social life at all outside of the MUCKs I was on. (My life basically sucked.) If I had had to pay to MUCK, I might have (though I was making pitiful money at my K-Mart and Winn Dixie jobs.) My life was not even close to "mainstream" though, and I think if the majority of people had lives like that then suicide/killing spree statistics would reflect it.
"The breed of government employee is different nowadays," says Norma Pratt, owner of Rodgers Travel in Philadelphia, which handles government business. "They don't see any reason why they can't travel first class."
If the quote is accurate (and knowing as much as I do about Lyndon Baines Johnson, I actually think it is far from accurate, there was a man who loved to live well on the public's dime) it just goes to show how much more arrogant people in goevernment are now. Actually, I think the difference is that Johnson liked to pretend that he loved the simple, lower-middle class life while craving luxury and power. Nowadays, the government types don't understand why they have to pretend. To paraphrase the Bard, "What need they fear when none can call their power to account."
Umm.... sort of like.. Mick and Mack Global Gladiators(McDonalds) the game where Ronald McDonald uses his evil, clown powers to sent two kids into a hellish comic book universe where they must collect McDonald's logos and avoid being covered in slime?
Or how about Cool Spot where you play the spot on the front of the 7-Up can?
Oh, and if you are Japanese, you might enjoy the "Pepsi-man Game."
This of course ignores games that have advertising placed in them, like Nike or Red Bull ads.
Re:Unbelievably depressing?
on
Immortal Code
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I find these types of stories amusing in an ironic sense, much the way gallows humor is amusing (I mean amusing to the person who is about to die). Dragon (which was devoured by the company that later imploded due to massive fraud) gets added to the list of companies that were destroyed when they were transfered from people who had pride and love for what they do into the hands of people who saw them as revenue streams, like Atari, Infocom, TSR Hobbies, and so on.
You can always understand why the people did it. Warner Brothers assured Nolan Bushnell he would still be in charge of Atari before they forced him out. Many of TSR's problems were caused by Gary Gygax's sneaky venture capital guys (not to mention his vindictive ex-wife and the widow of a former partner). Some of the people at the top of Infocom from the very start were only interested in big bucks and wanted to enter the lucrative business software field and leave games behind. The founders of Dragon thought they would have time and money to pursue other projects related to their interests.
Another thing, any company with a successful software product needs to be worried about embrace, extend and extinguish, not just from Microsoft, but from other big software companies. Look at Bleem! versus Sony. You'll always have to look over your shoulder for big, politically connected competitors with an unfair advantage in our mercantilist legal system. Money can help here, money can get you through frivolous lawsuits designed not to be won but to drain the life out of you. Money can even help you when your well-heeled competitors use pressure tactics at retail locations if they stock your product instead of theirs. Face it, in software or videogames and in most other businesses small only remains an option if you manage to remain under the big comglomorates and monopolists radar.
Even a small company can face a hostile take over if any of its operating or startup expenses come from outside sources.
Our government is currently almost purely mercantilistic. That's why if you manufacture things out of steel in the US, the government is out to get you, but if you manufacture steel itself, the government is giving you a helping hand. For an article on what I'm talking about, see this one:
We can see the same thing elsewhere, with copyright, the DMCA, softwood tarrifs(designed to increase logging profits in the US which is faced with Canadian competition) and the like.
The essence of mercantilism is to reward your cronies with government favors (corporate welfare, monopolies, tax breaks) while harming their competitors, and anyone else who happens to get in their way.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that Microsoft has secured its position as a beneficiary of "honest graft"
I mean, I hope no one thinks it was in the interests of justice that they got a slap on the wrist in the anti-trust case.
Re:Not to be a troll here but...
on
Superbowl XXXVII
·
· Score: 1
The trouble is that many American people don't seem to understand that the US is planning to liberate the Iraqi's (some of them) from their mortal coils. The rest will be placed under a US friendly dictator, who will crush and suppress them for the US government, much as Saddam Hussein did before he went "off the reservation."
Of course, some people are both bloodthirsty enough and feel safe enough that they don't care about the people the US State is planning to kill for the greater glory of mercantilism. I like to think that most people have just been anesthetized by propaganda, though.
Hmm... It seems to that if they want a Mac because they need "one mouse click" they'll be disappointed if they use Windows ports. In those cases you really need a regular mouse, unless you enjoy holding down the control button and clicking to emulate a right click. (This is no fun in an FPS where you need to right-click quickly.)
Most ordinary people object to DRM because in some way the companies using DRM are deliberately screwing them. Usually, it's someone who ran into some wall somehwere, for example, "If you own a (IBM-clone) PC, and you want to watch movies on it, you will have to have Windows on it. Sorry if you think Windows is a waste of space, and technologically there is no real difficulting in playing DVDs on Linux. We've decided that you aren't going to be allowed to play movies on Linux. Sorry if you were looking forward to watching movies on a long plane trip on your Linux Laptop, but that's just the way it is." or "So you are American and you want to play Rockman 3 on your Sony Playstation(tm)? Sorry, but that's not allowed. Too bad you aren't a Japanese citizen." or "Oh, you want to watch the pilot for Twin Peaks? Sorry, but you're American, the rights are all screwed up there. Now if you lived in Europe, maybe..." or "Oh, you bought an MP3 player? Sorry, that's a more or less useless piece of technology. We certainly aren't going to allow you to copy tracks from your own CDs to play on it, and we also aren't going to let you legally download those tracks. You may as well toss it in the trash, since even if we come out with something like it, someday in the far future, it will be a nice DRM enabled product."
Now, if the companies that loved DRM would stop deliberately screwing people, they'd probably let most ordinary people come to accept DRM. Then in the future, when they clamped down, people would be more used to DRM. Sure, people like me would still worry about how DRM could be used, but if it were not being used in objectionable ways, we'd be stuck with theoretical arguments. A lot of these people will look at me like I'm a wild eyed fanatic if I start up with doomsday scenarios based on theoretical abuses of DRM. However, if I can tell my sister that her favorite old TV series won't play on her DVD player because of it, she immediately starts to care.
Personally, it makes me happy when DRM loving companies turn the screws in a way that ordinary consumers get screwed. It is music to my ears when a large number of CD players can't play DRM "enabled" (i.e. disabled) CDs. Because it irritates people, and if enough people are irritated, you might get enough public support to take on the plutocrats (who still depend on consumer good will at the end of the day, no matter how much they may hate them.) and get rid of DRM. It won't happen if they manage to keep the vast majority happy, though.
1. Fails to stop Microsoft from committing illegal acts. Not just violating anti-trust laws, but breaking contract laws and the like.
2. Extends copyright in perpetuity for all practical purposes, effectively legislating away the public domain.
3. In the interest of two big media cartels (RIAA and MPAA), passes laws like the DMCA.
I'm supposed to believe that they are going to pass a law that seriously harms Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Walmart, Target and most of the members of MPAA/RIAA who sell licenses to their copyrighted content to video game studios or own interests in video game studios?
No, I'll tell you what this is. This is a shakedown. It's very simple, the State is looking for money. It will probably come in the form of campaign contributions or quid-pro-quo ("Representative Smith, while we don't agree with your law, we do find your ideas on protecting our children insightful. Ah! If only we had someone like you working for our company as a media consultant. Well, maybe someday...")
Of course, you should write your Congresspersons and Senators, but remember, people who actually matter in Washington will also be fighting this idiotic law. Washington isn't St. Louis.
Also, you exclude fantasy/sci-fi from your so-called "great literature." Why?
This is a form of literary snobbery, I was just reading an article about it. Basically, they can't successfully touch fantasy that is in the canon (such as good old fantasist Bill Shakespeare or his predecessors like Homer. They try though, oh how they try...), but they can savage any fantasy that isn't in the canon. (Forget about science fiction, it's too new to be in the canon.) Actually, if you are going for being a conformist in the area where I live, talking about Shakespeare will run you the risk of running into reverse snobbery. You would be far better off having an opinion on how well John Gruden is coaching the Bucs.
What he is really talking about is conformism. Companies, or their HR departments, are often not looking for geniuses but for good organization men. You know people who won't "rock the boat."
Of course, for a person who is intellectually inclined, such a corporation might resemble a particularly horrible part of Hell, so I think it is better to be yourself, and not try to mold yourself into an acceptable stooge.... unless it is between that job and sleeping in a box on the street.
In my opinion, the problem is that people still look at working for someone else as opposed to owning their own business. We are a nation of managers. While my manager may be my boss, he is not the boss. The boss is a distant figure who I have never seen, nor do I know anything about him/her (we were recently aquired by a larger company). Because of this, I am a human resource. I'm not that much different than my desk in the eyes of the company, and I know it. (The company tries to disguise this fact with things like team building activities and the like.)
Unfortunately, the barriers for small business are quite high in this country. People don't realize it. Big, giant behemoths are able to fend off the attacks of the State and other predators (such as other behemoth-sized businesses).
Despite this, I still plan to take the plunge. I'm scrimping and saving and developing business contacts. I'm hoping that in 24 months, I'll be able to open a business. I have some ideas, we'll see.
Of course, I could get laid off tommorrow, you never know, no matter what they tell you.
Incidentally, one of my in-laws was recently laid off from an electrical engineering job, and she's now looking to go into computer science, maybe because she saw that I bounced back into a pretty good job after being laid off during the crash while she hasn't had any offers.
And if the burglar decides he also wants your girlfriend?
Re:Lotsa stuff happens at these places.
on
Starcraft
·
· Score: 2
My Dad experienced this first hand when he was in the airforce. He saw something on radar (he was working in radar at the time) that was moving too fast. Later he surmised that it was a Blackbird (although it was long enough ago it could have been an Archangel or other classified high speed military plane). None of this was explained to him at the time and it was literally a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object). The Blackbird wasn't declassified until many years later. That was when he put two and two together.
He snorted, and took a gulp. "It was just about that easy. The fighting part, I mean - after we'd bombed the daylights out of them for months, then shelled them for more than 24 hours. We barely had to show up for those guys to throw down their guns and beg us to take them captive." My friend shook his head and looked away. "I wish we could have."
He took a deep breath, and waved for another beer. "After so many thousands of prisoners, the order came down that it was endangering our men to capture any more. There were so many at once - it seemed like a trick. So we called in the bulldozers." No one knows how many of those soldiers were trying to surrender, since U.S. forces stopped offering them the opportunity, as the Pentagon has admitted.
My friend, the veteran, shoved his empty glass away. "I had to give the order, order men who drove the earth-movers to just cover up the trenches. To bury those poor bastards alive."
"Try telling that in confession," he continued. Before he enlisted, he'd himself been a seminarian. "I had to. I said to the priest 'I buried hundreds of men alive.' And I told him why - how if I'd disobeyed orders I should have been shot for insubordination on the battlefield.
He didn't know what to say." The priest asked if he was sorry, and my friend
said he sure was. He gave the soldier absolution.
I asked him if he would do anything like that again. He said, "Not unless they order me to." Then he waved for another drink. "That's war."
Right, to me this is the key issue. I don't understand some people in the Free Software movement. The Gnu/Darwin project was, I thought, for Apple users who wanted to be able to use a Free OS on their boxes. I also believed that they were choosing to do GNU/Darwin because Darwin was under a Free license (BSD), and it would be more compatible with a Mac due to Apple's support than PPC_Linux.
If that's not the case, then what is the purpose of the project? Why continue Darwin on x86? Why not just abandon it and turn to other pursuits?
I believe in Free Software. I'm not a purist, whatever that means, but I'm willing to be inconvienienced and put in extra time and effort in order to run a mostly Free system as opposed to a mostly proprietary one. (What I mean is Free software that actually works, even if it is clunky. Not Free software that doesn't actually work right now but might someday.) Even though I don't really use it, except for a few packages which I could download, I bought the GNU/Darwin set when it came out and intended to buy the next upgrade. But I don't need to add to the pile of FreeOS's disk sets I have bought for my x86 unless there is a really compelling reason, since I only really need Mandrake, and I already have umpteen versions of that. (Plus Slackware, FreeBSD, RedHat and many others. Not to mention Yellow Dog Linux, which I bought for my Apple but don't use. I couldn't get it to work the way I wanted it to.)
I bought a Mac for one reason, and that was the fact that Apple was willing to stake their future on a partially Free OS. I also don't see any of the major x86 players (unless Walmart should be considered a major player) staking their futures on Free OSs. They mostly grovel before Microsoft.
So, in my opinion, Apple has raised the bar. Not perfect? No. Find me a PC solution that is perfect and works, and I'll consider it. Until then, I'll happily use my TiBook and sleep the sleep of the just.
Remind me of the old idea of "socialist realism." In SOVIET RUSSIA, socialist realist art was the only kind of art that was allowed. Art had to support the political ideas of the ruling elites, or else it would be censored. Some fantasy of note was censored, including Mikhail Bulgakov's
The Master and Marguerite. (Bulgakov ended up in a madhouse, I imagine Tolkien would have ended up in a gulag or shot.) The reality is that Tolkien created his story for purely selfish reasons, because it was of interest to him. He had no desire to use The Lord of the Rings to influence politics, and indeed rejected specifically political interpretations of his works. Why? Because not everyone sees politics as the be-all and end-all of human existence. Religion was far more important to Tolkien, and LOTR is a story of an ordinary person (Frodo Baggins), who becomes greater than any king, and goes through temptation, sin and redemption in the course of the story.
Of course, the idea that anything can be greater than politics or exist outside of politics is offensive to those who worship the State. Worship of progress could be the worship of science, but it usually refers to an agenda that seeks to "scientifically" plan out a perfect human future. Of course, the "science" that these planners usually adopt is the most pernicious quackery, and reflects there own bigotries and hatreds. (This is why "scientifically" planned societies, like the Third Reich or Soviet Russia end up as charnel houses.)
So, while the rest of us enjoy a good fantasy story, let us all be thankful that those who gibber and rave against them are mere media critics and not our own personal Saurons and Sarumans...
Re:I wonder how much of this is quality . . .
on
Critics Pan Nemesis
·
· Score: 2
Re:I wonder how much of this is quality . . .
on
Critics Pan Nemesis
·
· Score: 1
Shakespeare isn't actually Middle English, it's called Elizabethan English, and that's basically because it is still recognizable as modern English though the idiom is different.
Chaucer was the great Middle English author, with The Canterbury Tales being his best known work. Back when Middle English was spoken English was the language of the lower classes, with Latin belonging to the priest class and French being the language of the nobility. It had a lot of differences with modern English, see this article for details, Middle English.
When I was at Rutgers, we were studying Middle English in my Chaucer class. We would listen to tapes to learn correct pronunciation. "Whan that Ahpril with his Shoers swaat the drocht of March hath pierc-ed to the root..." (Note this is probably no longer accurate as I haven't had this course in quite a while.. it's just to give you an idea of the phonetic differences between Modern and Middle English.)
Hmm, I don't know the best way to learn Shakespeare. I suggest reading some history of the period that Shakespeare lived (biographies of King Henry VIII, Queen Elizabeth I and King James I), and some books like The Elizabethan World Picture. This is mainly to get references to things that Elizabethans took for granted but that cause a great deal of difficulty for the modern reader in following Shakespeare.
Some of Shakespeare's plays have been transformed into modern stories, and since we are talking about Star Trek I should note that a movie that I've always seen as a sort of precursor to Star Trek: The Original Series, Forbidden Planet was actually a remake of The Tempest.
(I have a BA in English with a minor in History, which was mostly English history. I also have a BS in Computer Science. So, I've spent most of my life in school...)
Wiggum explains, "Let me tell you what I tell everyone who comes in here: The law is powerless to help you."
Astonished, Marge asks, "Do i have to be dead before you'll help me?"
"No, not dead... dying."
She gets up to leave.
"No, no, no, no. Don't walk away," Wiggum insists. " How about this: just show me the knife... in your back. Not too deep, but it should be able to stand by itself."
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Towers/9151/educate .html
There have been articles on this in Japanese newspapers, the prime minister even hamfistedly addressed the issue. Everything I've ever read about Japanese schools makes me tend to believe they are real hellholes, worse than American schools. (Well, not the worst of American schools.) There is even a dystopian movie about them called Battle RoyaleThis article gave me the same feeling as that article, as I see two reasons to create an online game:
1. The game will be fun and engaging, people will want to try their skill at playing against/with other people.
2. Why sell a game once when you can sell it over and over again? (The same philosophy behind the original Divx, "Why sell a DVD once when you can sell it over and over again to the same person?")
Well, I think Sims Online falls into the latter category. I also have to wonder who they think plays online game? When I was heavily into MUCKing, I had no social life at all outside of the MUCKs I was on. (My life basically sucked.) If I had had to pay to MUCK, I might have (though I was making pitiful money at my K-Mart and Winn Dixie jobs.) My life was not even close to "mainstream" though, and I think if the majority of people had lives like that then suicide/killing spree statistics would reflect it.
If the quote is accurate (and knowing as much as I do about Lyndon Baines Johnson, I actually think it is far from accurate, there was a man who loved to live well on the public's dime) it just goes to show how much more arrogant people in goevernment are now. Actually, I think the difference is that Johnson liked to pretend that he loved the simple, lower-middle class life while craving luxury and power. Nowadays, the government types don't understand why they have to pretend. To paraphrase the Bard, "What need they fear when none can call their power to account."
Or how about Cool Spot where you play the spot on the front of the 7-Up can?
Oh, and if you are Japanese, you might enjoy the "Pepsi-man Game."
This of course ignores games that have advertising placed in them, like Nike or Red Bull ads.
Fancy hotels give federal travelers a break
You can always understand why the people did it. Warner Brothers assured Nolan Bushnell he would still be in charge of Atari before they forced him out. Many of TSR's problems were caused by Gary Gygax's sneaky venture capital guys (not to mention his vindictive ex-wife and the widow of a former partner). Some of the people at the top of Infocom from the very start were only interested in big bucks and wanted to enter the lucrative business software field and leave games behind. The founders of Dragon thought they would have time and money to pursue other projects related to their interests.
Another thing, any company with a successful software product needs to be worried about embrace, extend and extinguish, not just from Microsoft, but from other big software companies. Look at Bleem! versus Sony. You'll always have to look over your shoulder for big, politically connected competitors with an unfair advantage in our mercantilist legal system. Money can help here, money can get you through frivolous lawsuits designed not to be won but to drain the life out of you. Money can even help you when your well-heeled competitors use pressure tactics at retail locations if they stock your product instead of theirs. Face it, in software or videogames and in most other businesses small only remains an option if you manage to remain under the big comglomorates and monopolists radar.
Even a small company can face a hostile take over if any of its operating or startup expenses come from outside sources.
Eluding tariffs
We can see the same thing elsewhere, with copyright, the DMCA, softwood tarrifs(designed to increase logging profits in the US which is faced with Canadian competition) and the like.
The essence of mercantilism is to reward your cronies with government favors (corporate welfare, monopolies, tax breaks) while harming their competitors, and anyone else who happens to get in their way.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that Microsoft has secured its position as a beneficiary of "honest graft"
I mean, I hope no one thinks it was in the interests of justice that they got a slap on the wrist in the anti-trust case.
Focus: Part one The human cost - 'Does Tony have any idea what the flies are like that feed off the dead?'
The trouble is that many American people don't seem to understand that the US is planning to liberate the Iraqi's (some of them) from their mortal coils. The rest will be placed under a US friendly dictator, who will crush and suppress them for the US government, much as Saddam Hussein did before he went "off the reservation."
Of course, some people are both bloodthirsty enough and feel safe enough that they don't care about the people the US State is planning to kill for the greater glory of mercantilism. I like to think that most people have just been anesthetized by propaganda, though.
Hmm... It seems to that if they want a Mac because they need "one mouse click" they'll be disappointed if they use Windows ports. In those cases you really need a regular mouse, unless you enjoy holding down the control button and clicking to emulate a right click. (This is no fun in an FPS where you need to right-click quickly.)
Now, if the companies that loved DRM would stop deliberately screwing people, they'd probably let most ordinary people come to accept DRM. Then in the future, when they clamped down, people would be more used to DRM. Sure, people like me would still worry about how DRM could be used, but if it were not being used in objectionable ways, we'd be stuck with theoretical arguments. A lot of these people will look at me like I'm a wild eyed fanatic if I start up with doomsday scenarios based on theoretical abuses of DRM. However, if I can tell my sister that her favorite old TV series won't play on her DVD player because of it, she immediately starts to care.
Personally, it makes me happy when DRM loving companies turn the screws in a way that ordinary consumers get screwed. It is music to my ears when a large number of CD players can't play DRM "enabled" (i.e. disabled) CDs. Because it irritates people, and if enough people are irritated, you might get enough public support to take on the plutocrats (who still depend on consumer good will at the end of the day, no matter how much they may hate them.) and get rid of DRM. It won't happen if they manage to keep the vast majority happy, though.
1. Fails to stop Microsoft from committing illegal acts. Not just violating anti-trust laws, but breaking contract laws and the like.
2. Extends copyright in perpetuity for all practical purposes, effectively legislating away the public domain.
3. In the interest of two big media cartels (RIAA and MPAA), passes laws like the DMCA.
I'm supposed to believe that they are going to pass a law that seriously harms Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Walmart, Target and most of the members of MPAA/RIAA who sell licenses to their copyrighted content to video game studios or own interests in video game studios?
No, I'll tell you what this is. This is a shakedown. It's very simple, the State is looking for money. It will probably come in the form of campaign contributions or quid-pro-quo ("Representative Smith, while we don't agree with your law, we do find your ideas on protecting our children insightful. Ah! If only we had someone like you working for our company as a media consultant. Well, maybe someday...")
Of course, you should write your Congresspersons and Senators, but remember, people who actually matter in Washington will also be fighting this idiotic law. Washington isn't St. Louis.
You know about this, right?
Atari TV Classic 10 Games w/stick
For about $25 you can play:
* Asteroids
* Adventure
* Missile Command
* Centipede
* Gravitar
* Yar's Revenge
* Breakout
* Pong
* Circus Atari
* Real Sports Volleyball
All inside a retro-looking Atari game stick that you hook to your TV...
This is a form of literary snobbery, I was just reading an article about it. Basically, they can't successfully touch fantasy that is in the canon (such as good old fantasist Bill Shakespeare or his predecessors like Homer. They try though, oh how they try...), but they can savage any fantasy that isn't in the canon. (Forget about science fiction, it's too new to be in the canon.) Actually, if you are going for being a conformist in the area where I live, talking about Shakespeare will run you the risk of running into reverse snobbery. You would be far better off having an opinion on how well John Gruden is coaching the Bucs.
What he is really talking about is conformism. Companies, or their HR departments, are often not looking for geniuses but for good organization men. You know people who won't "rock the boat."
Of course, for a person who is intellectually inclined, such a corporation might resemble a particularly horrible part of Hell, so I think it is better to be yourself, and not try to mold yourself into an acceptable stooge.... unless it is between that job and sleeping in a box on the street.
Unfortunately, the barriers for small business are quite high in this country. People don't realize it. Big, giant behemoths are able to fend off the attacks of the State and other predators (such as other behemoth-sized businesses).
Despite this, I still plan to take the plunge. I'm scrimping and saving and developing business contacts. I'm hoping that in 24 months, I'll be able to open a business. I have some ideas, we'll see.
Of course, I could get laid off tommorrow, you never know, no matter what they tell you.
Incidentally, one of my in-laws was recently laid off from an electrical engineering job, and she's now looking to go into computer science, maybe because she saw that I bounced back into a pretty good job after being laid off during the crash while she hasn't had any offers.
My friend Amornthep calls 'Craft-type games "planning games."
And if the burglar decides he also wants your girlfriend?
My Dad experienced this first hand when he was in the airforce. He saw something on radar (he was working in radar at the time) that was moving too fast. Later he surmised that it was a Blackbird (although it was long enough ago it could have been an Archangel or other classified high speed military plane). None of this was explained to him at the time and it was literally a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object). The Blackbird wasn't declassified until many years later. That was when he put two and two together.
"You want a piece of me, boy?!?"
"Absolutely."
"Battlecruiser reporting."
"Need a light?"
"Never know what hit em."
"Can I take your order?"
Sigh.. oh well...
Do you have a link to this?
Here's an interesting story about Gulf War I:
Into Temptation
Yep, we're living in Mordor...Ordinary police search for criminals; the secret police designate who they are. -- Zarko Petan
If that's not the case, then what is the purpose of the project? Why continue Darwin on x86? Why not just abandon it and turn to other pursuits?
I believe in Free Software. I'm not a purist, whatever that means, but I'm willing to be inconvienienced and put in extra time and effort in order to run a mostly Free system as opposed to a mostly proprietary one. (What I mean is Free software that actually works, even if it is clunky. Not Free software that doesn't actually work right now but might someday.) Even though I don't really use it, except for a few packages which I could download, I bought the GNU/Darwin set when it came out and intended to buy the next upgrade. But I don't need to add to the pile of FreeOS's disk sets I have bought for my x86 unless there is a really compelling reason, since I only really need Mandrake, and I already have umpteen versions of that. (Plus Slackware, FreeBSD, RedHat and many others. Not to mention Yellow Dog Linux, which I bought for my Apple but don't use. I couldn't get it to work the way I wanted it to.)
I bought a Mac for one reason, and that was the fact that Apple was willing to stake their future on a partially Free OS. I also don't see any of the major x86 players (unless Walmart should be considered a major player) staking their futures on Free OSs. They mostly grovel before Microsoft.
So, in my opinion, Apple has raised the bar. Not perfect? No. Find me a PC solution that is perfect and works, and I'll consider it. Until then, I'll happily use my TiBook and sleep the sleep of the just.
Of course, the idea that anything can be greater than politics or exist outside of politics is offensive to those who worship the State. Worship of progress could be the worship of science, but it usually refers to an agenda that seeks to "scientifically" plan out a perfect human future. Of course, the "science" that these planners usually adopt is the most pernicious quackery, and reflects there own bigotries and hatreds. (This is why "scientifically" planned societies, like the Third Reich or Soviet Russia end up as charnel houses.)
So, while the rest of us enjoy a good fantasy story, let us all be thankful that those who gibber and rave against them are mere media critics and not our own personal Saurons and Sarumans...
I take it you didn't like Forbidden Planet then....
Chaucer was the great Middle English author, with The Canterbury Tales being his best known work. Back when Middle English was spoken English was the language of the lower classes, with Latin belonging to the priest class and French being the language of the nobility. It had a lot of differences with modern English, see this article for details, Middle English.
When I was at Rutgers, we were studying Middle English in my Chaucer class. We would listen to tapes to learn correct pronunciation. "Whan that Ahpril with his Shoers swaat the drocht of March hath pierc-ed to the root..." (Note this is probably no longer accurate as I haven't had this course in quite a while.. it's just to give you an idea of the phonetic differences between Modern and Middle English.)
Hmm, I don't know the best way to learn Shakespeare. I suggest reading some history of the period that Shakespeare lived (biographies of King Henry VIII, Queen Elizabeth I and King James I), and some books like The Elizabethan World Picture. This is mainly to get references to things that Elizabethans took for granted but that cause a great deal of difficulty for the modern reader in following Shakespeare.
Some of Shakespeare's plays have been transformed into modern stories, and since we are talking about Star Trek I should note that a movie that I've always seen as a sort of precursor to Star Trek: The Original Series, Forbidden Planet was actually a remake of The Tempest .
(I have a BA in English with a minor in History, which was mostly English history. I also have a BS in Computer Science. So, I've spent most of my life in school...)