Yes, they, as an industry, might value narrative and believe it is necessary, but I'm not so sure we, as the players, are all that sold on it. Sure, you have your die hard JRPG fans darting from cutscene to cutscene, but I think most of us playing a game like to write our own stories.
Most gamers like to talk about what they did in the game. Narrative fucks that up to some extent, and is nearly always at odds with the player's goals for the game thereby breaking the illusion they hope to set up.
Much like the recent All Important Astronomy is Out to Prove Extra-Terrestrial Life phenomenon, I believe there are a lot of scientists are picking topics because they are worried about funding. You must admit that there isn't a whole lot of money in an opposition opinion on this subject.
This has nothing to do with the value of Yahoo! to the market. It has to do with the value of Yahoo! to Microsoft. Yahoo! can smell the stench of desperation all over Microsoft, and as much as Microsoft is trying to play hardball, Yahoo! knows they can and will cave to any demands no matter how ridiculous.
If all current assumptions are true. In a field where getting a measurement to an order of magnitude is a major victory, I think claiming a 2% margin of error on something like the age of the universe which is measured so indirectly is nothing more than scientific hubris.
Heck, I could be wrong, but much like Jim Carrey, cosmologists make a living talking out of their ass.
I love how people trot out anecdotal evidence for global warming much more frequently than actual scientific arguments for it. Climate changes without any help from us. You have to prove that all you said is from something we did, and that is harder than most people think. Desertification is a prime example of this. The Sahara grew to the size it is without any help from us. Might we be helping it get bigger a little faster... maybe, but it is also possible that CO2 emissions are slowing its growth.
Climatology is not even close to an exact science, and many scientists, many respectable scientists, disagree on the role CO2 is playing in the changes we see. Like in the late 80s with the "ozone hole," the debate about global warming is politically driven not scientifically driven. Does that mean people like Al Gore are wrong? No. But it is important to realize that he is cherry picking studies to prove his point, and much to his own dismay, is absolutely not a scientist.
The ozone hole debate fizzled. Scientists who asked questions like, "Why is the CFC use in the North, and the hole in the South?" got marginalized, ridiculed, and shamed. Now the hole is still there, and it was likely always there. We found it the first time we looked. People ran around like chickens with their heads cut off about skin cancer from the ozone hole, ignoring completely that people were tanning a hell of a lot more than they ever were.
Will Global Warming become another Ozone Hole? Who knows, but overreactions of the past do inspire reasonable skeptics today.
To combat Global Warming I have heard staunch environmentalists change their stance on Nuclear Energy... NUCLEAR ENERGY! Nuclear Energy was supposed to kill us all. You mean all those studies about its safety were actually true?
It makes you wonder who to believe, and who will be singing a different tune in a decade when the political winds change.
I wasn't aware that "multi-tasking" had ascended to the throne of proper English. It is business jargon pilfered from computer jargon. For all of your elitist hobnobbery, you are talking about a word that most writers would consider slang.
People pay for a download rate, and the cable company provides it. This is nothing more than a scheme to hit customers with additional charges that they have no way of monitoring.
I used to live in a small town in NE Pennsylvania. The only place I could get broadband was the local podunk phone company. I paid $70/month for 512 Kb/s, and I got it all the time if I wanted it. I think that Time Warner could do what my backwoods, East Bumblefuck phone company did if they really cared about a rise in bandwidth usage.
"The cloud itself is roughly 10,000 light-years across, and generates the energy of about 10,000 Suns. The cloud shines brightly in gamma rays due to a reaction governed by Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2. Integral found that the cloud extends farther on the western side of the galactic center than it does on the eastern side. Integral found certain types of binary systems near the galactic center are also skewed to the west. Because the two "pictures" of antimatter and hard low-mass X-ray binaries line up strongly suggests the binaries are producing significant amounts of positrons."
The cloud of antimatter is big and hot. When matter and antimatter come together they produce lots of Gamma rays, and that is happening. There are certain types of neutron stars or black holes that are orbiting in pairs that appear in the same pattern as the cloud or antimatter (positrons) so astronomers think it is likely that the pairs are causing the cloud.
Other moderations of my work include "-1 I don't have to say 'fuck' to be funny," "+1 I pay good money for weed to think like you," and the ever popular "-1 I don't know. I just wish you were dead."
I have no plans to go to Toronto. I may find myself there at one point or another, but now I'm just struggling to sustain myself in NYC so travel is not an option for the near future.
I understand your point. This is a typical ideal vs. reality discussion. We need to be more toward the ideal than we are now, because the reality has moved. I don't ask for much from a job--enough money to live, see an Islanders game or two, see the doctor, buy clothes, etc. I don't have to be high up or a big player. My ambitions are elsewhere.
Your line of work wouldn't really apply to me, because I couldn't sell Evian in the desert. However, I do believe that the best employer/employee relationship is symbiotic, and I think if the employee works hard for you, you should return the favor. If I were in a situation where I had to hire and fire people, I would rather go to bat for a good employee than avoid trouble and deal with replacing him or her. Of course, this is just a thought experiment for me, and it sounds like you have to deal with it in real life. Even though, there should be a balance.
And besides, you must know this better than I do -- nothing breeds acceptance as quickly as humour.
Oh man. If I didn't have a bunch of charisma and a sense of humor, I would be so homeless. I don't get by on just a smile, trust me, but damn that smile helps.
You will undoubtedly find employers who will refuse to work with you for such reasons. And I support their having to do so. Of course, I also support your going out on your own, throwing everything you have at your comedy, and finding out if it's worth doing full-time.
If you know someone who organizes a comedy show, then you know it isn't as easy as just "doing it full-time." I've been plugging away for a year and a half, and I'm about to get my first paid gig.
But let me respond with the italicized text, and throw a monkey wrench in your argument.
I am also transgendered. If a client finds about about that and gets upset, would you have any business firing me? It is something that offends some people... but it doesn't affect my competence, and even more so than my comedy is something about myself I cannot change.
How about something more mundane? What if I protest the war in Iraq on a day off, and that offends a client?
All possibilities for me. People can be offended by anything you do outside of work. Do you as an employer have a right to punish me for any of that? I would say no, because I show up to work on time and do what is asked of me on the job. People should have a right to be themselves outside work.
The real issue is that the job has no right to can me if I do nothing wrong at work.
I am looking for work now. I cannot afford to tell them upfront unless it is useful to my job. They will know after they hire me. Jobs are not that easy to come by.
Here is a problem with that. I am a comedian. A lot of my work is offensive, yet I do not show my comedy work to anyone at my paying job. I need me to be on what I do to eventually get paying comedy work. I shield what I can, but it is impossible for me to completely hide myself.
Funny, I think we will try nano-bots. The initial results on test animals will probably be too horrific to guarantee future funding, but it won't matter, because the knowledge of the human machine will outpace the need for such devices.
Slashdot Mirror
I became a comedian.
Yes, they, as an industry, might value narrative and believe it is necessary, but I'm not so sure we, as the players, are all that sold on it. Sure, you have your die hard JRPG fans darting from cutscene to cutscene, but I think most of us playing a game like to write our own stories.
Most gamers like to talk about what they did in the game. Narrative fucks that up to some extent, and is nearly always at odds with the player's goals for the game thereby breaking the illusion they hope to set up.
Much like the recent All Important Astronomy is Out to Prove Extra-Terrestrial Life phenomenon, I believe there are a lot of scientists are picking topics because they are worried about funding. You must admit that there isn't a whole lot of money in an opposition opinion on this subject.
This has nothing to do with the value of Yahoo! to the market. It has to do with the value of Yahoo! to Microsoft. Yahoo! can smell the stench of desperation all over Microsoft, and as much as Microsoft is trying to play hardball, Yahoo! knows they can and will cave to any demands no matter how ridiculous.
If all current assumptions are true. In a field where getting a measurement to an order of magnitude is a major victory, I think claiming a 2% margin of error on something like the age of the universe which is measured so indirectly is nothing more than scientific hubris.
Heck, I could be wrong, but much like Jim Carrey, cosmologists make a living talking out of their ass.
I once worked for an activist group started by Nader for 1 day. Nader can go fuck himself.
I love how people trot out anecdotal evidence for global warming much more frequently than actual scientific arguments for it. Climate changes without any help from us. You have to prove that all you said is from something we did, and that is harder than most people think. Desertification is a prime example of this. The Sahara grew to the size it is without any help from us. Might we be helping it get bigger a little faster... maybe, but it is also possible that CO2 emissions are slowing its growth.
Climatology is not even close to an exact science, and many scientists, many respectable scientists, disagree on the role CO2 is playing in the changes we see. Like in the late 80s with the "ozone hole," the debate about global warming is politically driven not scientifically driven. Does that mean people like Al Gore are wrong? No. But it is important to realize that he is cherry picking studies to prove his point, and much to his own dismay, is absolutely not a scientist.
The ozone hole debate fizzled. Scientists who asked questions like, "Why is the CFC use in the North, and the hole in the South?" got marginalized, ridiculed, and shamed. Now the hole is still there, and it was likely always there. We found it the first time we looked. People ran around like chickens with their heads cut off about skin cancer from the ozone hole, ignoring completely that people were tanning a hell of a lot more than they ever were.
Will Global Warming become another Ozone Hole? Who knows, but overreactions of the past do inspire reasonable skeptics today.
To combat Global Warming I have heard staunch environmentalists change their stance on Nuclear Energy... NUCLEAR ENERGY! Nuclear Energy was supposed to kill us all. You mean all those studies about its safety were actually true?
It makes you wonder who to believe, and who will be singing a different tune in a decade when the political winds change.
23 skidoo
I wasn't aware that "multi-tasking" had ascended to the throne of proper English. It is business jargon pilfered from computer jargon. For all of your elitist hobnobbery, you are talking about a word that most writers would consider slang.
People pay for a download rate, and the cable company provides it. This is nothing more than a scheme to hit customers with additional charges that they have no way of monitoring.
I used to live in a small town in NE Pennsylvania. The only place I could get broadband was the local podunk phone company. I paid $70/month for 512 Kb/s, and I got it all the time if I wanted it. I think that Time Warner could do what my backwoods, East Bumblefuck phone company did if they really cared about a rise in bandwidth usage.
... 9/11 was bad
"The cloud itself is roughly 10,000 light-years across, and generates the energy of about 10,000 Suns. The cloud shines brightly in gamma rays due to a reaction governed by Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2. Integral found that the cloud extends farther on the western side of the galactic center than it does on the eastern side. Integral found certain types of binary systems near the galactic center are also skewed to the west. Because the two "pictures" of antimatter and hard low-mass X-ray binaries line up strongly suggests the binaries are producing significant amounts of positrons."
The cloud of antimatter is big and hot. When matter and antimatter come together they produce lots of Gamma rays, and that is happening. There are certain types of neutron stars or black holes that are orbiting in pairs that appear in the same pattern as the cloud or antimatter (positrons) so astronomers think it is likely that the pairs are causing the cloud.
It also assumes that
"god commanded the Israelites to kill the men of the rival tribe and take the women as sex slaves"
is not good.
I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty hot.
At least they will finally see something.
Only if you mean it.
Other moderations of my work include "-1 I don't have to say 'fuck' to be funny," "+1 I pay good money for weed to think like you," and the ever popular "-1 I don't know. I just wish you were dead."
I have no plans to go to Toronto. I may find myself there at one point or another, but now I'm just struggling to sustain myself in NYC so travel is not an option for the near future.
Poverty is Comedy and Comedy is Poverty. ^_^
I understand your point. This is a typical ideal vs. reality discussion. We need to be more toward the ideal than we are now, because the reality has moved. I don't ask for much from a job--enough money to live, see an Islanders game or two, see the doctor, buy clothes, etc. I don't have to be high up or a big player. My ambitions are elsewhere.
Your line of work wouldn't really apply to me, because I couldn't sell Evian in the desert. However, I do believe that the best employer/employee relationship is symbiotic, and I think if the employee works hard for you, you should return the favor. If I were in a situation where I had to hire and fire people, I would rather go to bat for a good employee than avoid trouble and deal with replacing him or her. Of course, this is just a thought experiment for me, and it sounds like you have to deal with it in real life. Even though, there should be a balance.
And besides, you must know this better than I do -- nothing breeds acceptance as quickly as humour.
Oh man. If I didn't have a bunch of charisma and a sense of humor, I would be so homeless. I don't get by on just a smile, trust me, but damn that smile helps.
Ha! I can spell UNIX. Heck I can even use UNIX... a little. It was more of a joke tan anything.
Still the Linked In advice is good. I might try that. Thanks.
No chance you're looking for people in New York City is there? ^_^
You will undoubtedly find employers who will refuse to work with you for such reasons. And I support their having to do so. Of course, I also support your going out on your own, throwing everything you have at your comedy, and finding out if it's worth doing full-time.
If you know someone who organizes a comedy show, then you know it isn't as easy as just "doing it full-time." I've been plugging away for a year and a half, and I'm about to get my first paid gig.
But let me respond with the italicized text, and throw a monkey wrench in your argument.
I am also transgendered. If a client finds about about that and gets upset, would you have any business firing me? It is something that offends some people... but it doesn't affect my competence, and even more so than my comedy is something about myself I cannot change.
How about something more mundane? What if I protest the war in Iraq on a day off, and that offends a client?
All possibilities for me. People can be offended by anything you do outside of work. Do you as an employer have a right to punish me for any of that? I would say no, because I show up to work on time and do what is asked of me on the job. People should have a right to be themselves outside work.
The real issue is that the job has no right to can me if I do nothing wrong at work.
I am looking for work now. I cannot afford to tell them upfront unless it is useful to my job. They will know after they hire me. Jobs are not that easy to come by.
Here is a problem with that. I am a comedian. A lot of my work is offensive, yet I do not show my comedy work to anyone at my paying job. I need me to be on what I do to eventually get paying comedy work. I shield what I can, but it is impossible for me to completely hide myself.
Should I pay for chasing my dreams?
Funny, I think we will try nano-bots. The initial results on test animals will probably be too horrific to guarantee future funding, but it won't matter, because the knowledge of the human machine will outpace the need for such devices.
I've never personally purchased a weave, but I hear many women do.
I like how a post about a woman's hair gets no moderation, but a reply about computer wires with exactly the same point gets +5.
Since this is Slashdot, all must be right with the universe.