User-generated content is great, but it must exist within pre-defined limits or constructs such that abuse is largely mitigated. As the freedom of the user to generate content is increased, the complexity of the construct required to maintain reasonable parameters of play increases exponentially. The trick is in balancing the complexity of the construct you have to maintain behind the scenes with the level of freedom your players wish to enjoy. It also helps if you're able to entice your most gifted users into telling you when they find an abusable loophole.
In the end, it seems a lot simpler to build a sandbox with enough carrots and sticks that it becomes more profitable and efficient to work within the construct. That alone will take out a large number of those who are otherwise just looking for shortcuts to success. As for the "hackers" who will continue to hunt for any cracks in the system just for the pleasure of doing so? Find a way to reward their efforts such that they'll tell you rather than their buddies when they find those cracks.
The holy grail with that would be to have every ~100km^3 cube able to be run on a separate node and dynamically load-balanced between them. Of course, what then do you do with a missile that goes from one to the next, and how do you track all of that information across nodes efficiently and correctly, etc.
Really though, it's a shame you left when you did. I don't generally notice any lag in a system with less than ~800 players anymore. Jita can get laggy at times, but even at ~1200+ in system, it's usable. It used to be that once you hit 600 or so, the whole thing slowed to a ridiculous crawl.
It's not a Democracy, it's a Republic, and it's not even purely that.
All we're talking about here is a small group of individuals chosen by the players to put a face on player interests and concerns. The representatives aren't sitting down at a CCP terminal to code in what they want, nor is CCP making the absurd mistake of being a slave to player demands. What they're actually doing is using the CSM to filter the chaos of player complaints/ideas/suggestions into a simpler and more comprehensible form such that CCP can then make informed decisions on how to prioritize various changes or additions to the game.
Other countries have used military botnets. Therefore, a campaign against botnets might even count as "defense", in addition to the "welfare" and "commerce" arguments that others have made.
Other countries have used military aircraft. Therefore, a campaign against military aircraft might even count as "defense".
So the Federal government can mandate that everyone purchase anti-aircraft artillery.
If it was a Plutonium weapon, they likely hid flaws in the implosion timing and geometry designs.
If it was a Uranium "gun" design, your weapon failed because you're an idiot. I mean seriously, a couple first-year engineering students with access to Wikipedia and a few thousand bucks can build those. Weaponizing the ore is the toughest part, and that's not difficult (just dangerous to your health).
I'm also in favor of enhancing the smell of NYC cabs. Either invest in something which removes all odors from all environments or possibly introduce hygiene requirements for licensed cab drivers.
It's too big. Cut the size in half and add mobile broadband options in addition to wifi. Otherwise it should be good.
It's essentially a PADD from Star Trek, and once someone figures out that copying that design will result in huge profits, we'll see some really cool gear.
...Things like "hate speech" laws, holocaust denial laws...
If the hate speech isn't true, is it slanderous? And if it is slander is it protected by the 1st amendment?
Hate speech is commonly things like: "ALL NIGGERS ARE SMELLY AND STUPID!" or something along those same lines. Hate speech typically isn't true, as it's motivated by irrational anger at an entire race, religion, etc.
Slander and libel are not protected as they result in harm to a specific individual. For either to be proven, it must be shown that a reasonable person could believe what's being said (or written) is true. The previous example would not be slanderous or libelous because it's not directed at a specific individual and no reasonable person would believe it's an objective and factual statement.
I think your post needs to be read aloud in every classroom in America at the beginning of every month of the school year from grade 1 right through grad/law/medical school.
At least someone else besides me has read the US Constitution without wearing Blinders of Idiocy +3.
The troubling thing is that it'd be tough to put down on paper what the Constitution does in any more simple language. I find that troubling because if it takes so little time to completely distort the meaning of such simple words even in the face of so much supporting information on the meaning of those words (Federalist Papers, etc), then what can any of us do to preserve liberty over any length of time?
Threats of physical violence, libel, incitement to violence, and speech which presents a "clear and present danger" (the example most commonly used is of shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theatre) are about the only examples of unprotected free speech in the US.
Things like "hate speech" laws, holocaust denial laws, and other backwards anti-liberty, anti-speech laws haven't quite made it here yet, but they're probably coming at some point.
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone who believes it's their God-given duty to send doctors performing abortions right to Hell as part of the world's salvation?
It's a true/false test. Yes, someone is religious. You assume that makes them a nutjob Imagine phrasing it a different way, with a different assumption:
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone who believes their gang affiliation is the best and rival gangs deserve to die? (Minorities.)
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone whose hormones regularly go out of whack and cause them to want to hurt people around them? (Women.)
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone whose political alliance is with our foreign enemies? (Immigrents.)
Now, obviously, if any of the extreme cases are true, you don't want to give them weapons. But to assume that they are based on prejudice... well that's so wrong it's illegal.
I never said how you should act on the information. Personally, I'd look at a question like that as a red flag if they're looking at a role where they'd have their hands on potentially dangerous things. I'd say it'd be a good idea to bring up that point further to distinguish between the simply religious applicant and the fanatical lunatic applicant.
You don't have to assume the worst for the question to have value.
Okay, so write the "short and simple" question on a note and pass it to your co-worker instead. Or send an email and ask it. Phrase it in terms of a yes or no question if you prefer.
What's the difference? Why does the employer doing it make it acceptable, when it would rightly be unacceptable sexual harrassment if any employee did it?
Yet again, application for employment != watercooler chat
Sexual harassment? That's a pretty light definition considering this is a simple true/false test.
Here's a test: go to one of your co-workers (someone you're not on personal terms without outside of work) and strike up a conversation about their sex life, and start asking about their sexuality, whether they're attracted to members of the same sex.
Let us know how you get on.
Which would make sense if that's what we were talking about, but it isn't.
We're talking about short and simple true/false questions as part of an application for employment.
69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex
Both questions could count as sexual harassment. (Aside from the fact, most sane people would tell the questioner to fuck off and mind there own business)
Sexual harassment? That's a pretty light definition considering this is a simple true/false test. First of all, it's largely a test of conformity. If you continue answering questions no matter how uncomfortable they make you, then you're apt to simply follow along with what you're told to do.
They're not telling you that you have to share detailed sexual fantasies while the interviewer wanks; they're giving you a simple True/False test. It could even be directly relevant to the job if that job requires completely undistracted attention without professional training.
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
Surely questions about your health that are not job releted are illegal?
Depends on the job. If you're a cop chasing down a murderer or you're a soldier on the battlefield and you're regularly made useless by health conditions, then you're a threat to the lives of others. It's extremely relevant, depending on the job.
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
LOL ! Don't get me started on the legality of this one!
Why's that? Maybe putting guns/chemicals/bomb making materials/etc in the hands of religious fanatics isn't the best idea? Maybe there's some liability in that? I don't know, what do you think? Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone who believes it's their God-given duty to send doctors performing abortions right to Hell as part of the world's salvation?
I'm honestly amazed these questions are considered acceptable.
Here, they WOULD bring the law crashing down on you.
Then your law there is absurd. For many jobs dealing with life and death situations, the tender sensitivities of applicants take a back seat to the lives and limbs of those potentially affected. Sorry, but if these questions are too offensive for some people, they should simply withdraw their application for employment from the employers asking these questions and go work for the tooth fairy.
People who don't code have no clue how long things actually take to do. They assume you're spending 98% of your days hanging out at Starbucks and playing pinball like some kind of wizard out of an old rock and roll band tune with the other 2% spent waving some magic wand to magically make their stuff work.
I have customers who want things like database-driven ASP.NET web services to create and maintain customer mailing lists with automatic bounce detection (determining hard or soft bounce failure), automatic removal for hard bounces only, secure remote customer login for manual management, overrides for all behavior, online mailer creation, scheduled delivery options, throttling options (to avoid tripping spam filters at Hotmail, Yahoo, etc), customer-usable import/export functions for the mailing list (imported directly from.xls files full of irrelevant info), and a customized "theme" for his secure remote interface that exactly mirrors his intranet site interface.
And I shit you not, he literally goes, "can you take care of this for me tonight so I can start mailing customers tomorrow?".
Me: "No, Pete, this is going to take some time to do."
Him: "Really? I figured you guys could whip up something simple like that in like 15, 20 minutes."
She was brought to the school's office because she refused to stop texting despite a teacher's repeated orders for her to do so during class. Once in the office, she was questioned and lied multiple times. The school's officer questioned several witnesses whose stories all agreed with the teacher's, meaning the student was almost certainly lying. (Her own friends ratted her out) After confronting her with this, she continued to maintain her lies.
It was at this point, having refused to cooperate with the teacher to end her disruptive behavior, having refused to cooperate with the school's officer, having lied to multiple school officials, and refusing to cooperate with anyone there that she was finally informed that she would be arrested for disorderly conduct. The school's officer then requested her parents' contact numbers so they could be informed. The student gave multiple (different) incorrect numbers for her father. She then provided a correct number for her mother, who was called to the school. She was then searched by a female officer, who located the phone on her.
The school officer did what he could, giving her every opportunity to cooperate.
It was her decision to refuse time and time again and to provide false information time and time again, and now she's living with the consequences.
My self-interest is in a nation based on law and order. The reason we have laws, such as immigration laws, is for the public good. We need to know who is trying to enter the country and why. The number of crimes committed by illegal immigrants (especially sex crimes) is staggering. Some who have been deported numerous times simply re-cross the border to offend time and time again.
I have absolutely zero problem with legal immigrants coming from whatever country and adding to our labor pool and tax base. Immigrants are definitely a necessary and helpful part of our nation, whether they're coming for school or to provide a better life for their family.
Illegal immigrants bring crime, disease, and a total disrespect for the laws of our country. They're the sort we definitely do not need here, whatever their country of origin.
"[i]Maybe you should legalize all those immigrants so you can collect taxes from them.[/i]"
So you're saying that we should reward lawbreakers with amnesty while those who've been following the law from the beginning are forced to sit in their home country for a much longer time because the job they could have come to this country to get has been taken by the guy who broke all the rules to get there first?
Oh yes, that's fair and just alright.
Whenever I hear someone pulling for amnesty for illegals, I just think back to that poor guy who's been waiting for years to get into the US because he's chosen to have respect for our laws and our country. He's stuck there waiting, so why should the guy who didn't give a damn about laws, respect, or even his fellow citizens get the free ride?
Let's see, of the four times I've filed petitions, one was taken care of in seconds, two within a day, and the last (which would have required some digging into logs on their part) about a week. In all cases, staff was nothing but friendly and as helpful as they could be.
I've played for several years now, and I've seen my share of bugs (as you see in any other software). Of all the bugs I've encountered myself, only two persisted very long (more than a week), and only one continues to be an intermittent problem today. The first was a bug (since quashed) which resulted in improper arrangement of items within a storage container. For some odd reason, they always wanted to occupy only a single column every time there was a session change until I resized the window for that storage container. That one lasted a couple of months. The other is a very intermittent issue that happens almost exclusively after combat wherein right-clicking for a context menu on an object in space doesn't work unless it has an icon (only man-made objects have these icons) on which to click. The problem will persist for less than a minute and then fix itself. It works fine if I right-click in the overview.
99% of the bugs I've seen have been killed within days, unlike plenty of other games (hey there Dungeon Lords). So I'm curious what all these different bugs are in the game which have been complained about for years which I've somehow never managed to encounter throughout Empire, 0.0, low-sec space, mining, ratting, trading on the open market, fighting in fleet combat, and running missions.
If you have a particular idea that's really -that- good, make a copy of everything you have on it, then mail it to yourself certified mail. When you get it, DO NOT OPEN IT and lock it in a fire-proof safe or put it in a deposit box at your local bank.
Certified mail is time-stamped by the Federal government. While not fool-proof, it's the closest thing you can get to proving you had the idea before someone else.
The interface as a whole doesn't lend itself to being intuitive so much as it lends itself to being highly available for quick access to an enormous amount of stuff on a moment's notice (particularly useful when you're under siege by a half dozen people and you're trying to wiggle your way out of it). The tutorial is really there as an introduction to the basic mechanics simply because there's no other way to learn them. While people in the "newbie" chat are extremely helpful for specific questions, asking "how do I move" (as just a generic example of basic mechanics) is not going to yield a positive response at all. Another related issue there is that much of the interface and the basic functionality becomes so second-nature to long-term players that some questions become honestly difficult to answer. If a 3-year old asked you how to swallow food, could you articulate what's necessary to do that in language that would make sense to them?
That's not to berate new players (everyone started out knowing little to nothing about what to do) so much as it goes to show why the tutorial sticks more to the basics. For more exciting information, the forums have a number of walk-throughs on doing things like scanning systems for hidden complexes, ruins, anomalies and such. Those are generally very well written, but they still require that you have a solid understanding of the basic mechanics along with some knowledge of the interface.
Regarding the question about getting back to the "newbie zone", that's not really a question that makes sense for Eve. While many games have a "school" area or "newbie" area, Eve is just a collection of solar systems. That system you start in on day one can be visited by anyone at any time. The only part of the game which makes any distinction in that respect is the tutorial itself. At this point, I couldn't tell you which systems are ones in which new players start in beyond saying that they're probably all 1.0 security systems. I probably go through them all the time, but there's nothing special about them in that regard.
Eve does dump a vast amount of information at you, but something to keep in mind is that all of that information is basic and relevant depending on the situation. As I was saying to another poster, if Eve's tutorial system moved along at a pace where most people could follow it, understand it, and remain interested in it, you'd still be learning basic mechanics 2 years down the road. I've been playing for almost three years now and I learn new stuff almost every time I log into the game. In terms of what's in the tutorials, that's really just enough to get you moving so you can discover everything else for yourself.
It's really designed around helping you to get walking so you can go out and explore the world yourself. If it tried to teach you everything, the entire game would be nothing but tutorials, and that's not fun at all.
Slashdot Mirror
User-generated content is great, but it must exist within pre-defined limits or constructs such that abuse is largely mitigated. As the freedom of the user to generate content is increased, the complexity of the construct required to maintain reasonable parameters of play increases exponentially. The trick is in balancing the complexity of the construct you have to maintain behind the scenes with the level of freedom your players wish to enjoy. It also helps if you're able to entice your most gifted users into telling you when they find an abusable loophole.
In the end, it seems a lot simpler to build a sandbox with enough carrots and sticks that it becomes more profitable and efficient to work within the construct. That alone will take out a large number of those who are otherwise just looking for shortcuts to success. As for the "hackers" who will continue to hunt for any cracks in the system just for the pleasure of doing so? Find a way to reward their efforts such that they'll tell you rather than their buddies when they find those cracks.
The holy grail with that would be to have every ~100km^3 cube able to be run on a separate node and dynamically load-balanced between them. Of course, what then do you do with a missile that goes from one to the next, and how do you track all of that information across nodes efficiently and correctly, etc.
Really though, it's a shame you left when you did. I don't generally notice any lag in a system with less than ~800 players anymore. Jita can get laggy at times, but even at ~1200+ in system, it's usable. It used to be that once you hit 600 or so, the whole thing slowed to a ridiculous crawl.
I hear it's murder. ;)
It's not a Democracy, it's a Republic, and it's not even purely that.
All we're talking about here is a small group of individuals chosen by the players to put a face on player interests and concerns. The representatives aren't sitting down at a CCP terminal to code in what they want, nor is CCP making the absurd mistake of being a slave to player demands. What they're actually doing is using the CSM to filter the chaos of player complaints/ideas/suggestions into a simpler and more comprehensible form such that CCP can then make informed decisions on how to prioritize various changes or additions to the game.
Other countries have used military botnets. Therefore, a campaign against botnets might even count as "defense", in addition to the "welfare" and "commerce" arguments that others have made.
Other countries have used military aircraft. Therefore, a campaign against military aircraft might even count as "defense".
So the Federal government can mandate that everyone purchase anti-aircraft artillery.
If it moves, tax it.
If it keeps moving, regulate it.
If it stops moving, subsidize it.
If it was a Plutonium weapon, they likely hid flaws in the implosion timing and geometry designs.
If it was a Uranium "gun" design, your weapon failed because you're an idiot. I mean seriously, a couple first-year engineering students with access to Wikipedia and a few thousand bucks can build those. Weaponizing the ore is the toughest part, and that's not difficult (just dangerous to your health).
I'm also in favor of enhancing the smell of NYC cabs. Either invest in something which removes all odors from all environments or possibly introduce hygiene requirements for licensed cab drivers.
It's too big. Cut the size in half and add mobile broadband options in addition to wifi. Otherwise it should be good.
It's essentially a PADD from Star Trek, and once someone figures out that copying that design will result in huge profits, we'll see some really cool gear.
...Things like "hate speech" laws, holocaust denial laws...
If the hate speech isn't true, is it slanderous? And if it is slander is it protected by the 1st amendment?
Hate speech is commonly things like: "ALL NIGGERS ARE SMELLY AND STUPID!" or something along those same lines. Hate speech typically isn't true, as it's motivated by irrational anger at an entire race, religion, etc.
Slander and libel are not protected as they result in harm to a specific individual. For either to be proven, it must be shown that a reasonable person could believe what's being said (or written) is true. The previous example would not be slanderous or libelous because it's not directed at a specific individual and no reasonable person would believe it's an objective and factual statement.
I think your post needs to be read aloud in every classroom in America at the beginning of every month of the school year from grade 1 right through grad/law/medical school.
At least someone else besides me has read the US Constitution without wearing Blinders of Idiocy +3.
The troubling thing is that it'd be tough to put down on paper what the Constitution does in any more simple language. I find that troubling because if it takes so little time to completely distort the meaning of such simple words even in the face of so much supporting information on the meaning of those words (Federalist Papers, etc), then what can any of us do to preserve liberty over any length of time?
Threats of physical violence, libel, incitement to violence, and speech which presents a "clear and present danger" (the example most commonly used is of shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theatre) are about the only examples of unprotected free speech in the US.
Things like "hate speech" laws, holocaust denial laws, and other backwards anti-liberty, anti-speech laws haven't quite made it here yet, but they're probably coming at some point.
It's a true/false test. Yes, someone is religious. You assume that makes them a nutjob Imagine phrasing it a different way, with a different assumption:
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone who believes their gang affiliation is the best and rival gangs deserve to die? (Minorities.)
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone whose hormones regularly go out of whack and cause them to want to hurt people around them? (Women.)
Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone whose political alliance is with our foreign enemies? (Immigrents.)
Now, obviously, if any of the extreme cases are true, you don't want to give them weapons. But to assume that they are based on prejudice... well that's so wrong it's illegal.
I never said how you should act on the information. Personally, I'd look at a question like that as a red flag if they're looking at a role where they'd have their hands on potentially dangerous things. I'd say it'd be a good idea to bring up that point further to distinguish between the simply religious applicant and the fanatical lunatic applicant.
You don't have to assume the worst for the question to have value.
Okay, so write the "short and simple" question on a note and pass it to your co-worker instead. Or send an email and ask it. Phrase it in terms of a yes or no question if you prefer.
What's the difference? Why does the employer doing it make it acceptable, when it would rightly be unacceptable sexual harrassment if any employee did it?
Yet again, application for employment != watercooler chat
Sexual harassment? That's a pretty light definition considering this is a simple true/false test.
Here's a test: go to one of your co-workers (someone you're not on personal terms without outside of work) and strike up a conversation about their sex life, and start asking about their sexuality, whether they're attracted to members of the same sex.
Let us know how you get on.
Which would make sense if that's what we were talking about, but it isn't.
We're talking about short and simple true/false questions as part of an application for employment.
20.My sex life is satisfactory
69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex
Both questions could count as sexual harassment. (Aside from the fact, most sane people would tell the questioner to fuck off and mind there own business)
Sexual harassment? That's a pretty light definition considering this is a simple true/false test. First of all, it's largely a test of conformity. If you continue answering questions no matter how uncomfortable they make you, then you're apt to simply follow along with what you're told to do.
They're not telling you that you have to share detailed sexual fantasies while the interviewer wanks; they're giving you a simple True/False test. It could even be directly relevant to the job if that job requires completely undistracted attention without professional training.
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
Surely questions about your health that are not job releted are illegal?
Depends on the job. If you're a cop chasing down a murderer or you're a soldier on the battlefield and you're regularly made useless by health conditions, then you're a threat to the lives of others. It's extremely relevant, depending on the job.
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
LOL ! Don't get me started on the legality of this one!
Why's that? Maybe putting guns/chemicals/bomb making materials/etc in the hands of religious fanatics isn't the best idea? Maybe there's some liability in that? I don't know, what do you think? Do you think it's a good idea to put automatic weapons in the hands of someone who believes it's their God-given duty to send doctors performing abortions right to Hell as part of the world's salvation?
I'm honestly amazed these questions are considered acceptable.
Here, they WOULD bring the law crashing down on you.
Then your law there is absurd. For many jobs dealing with life and death situations, the tender sensitivities of applicants take a back seat to the lives and limbs of those potentially affected. Sorry, but if these questions are too offensive for some people, they should simply withdraw their application for employment from the employers asking these questions and go work for the tooth fairy.
People who don't code have no clue how long things actually take to do. They assume you're spending 98% of your days hanging out at Starbucks and playing pinball like some kind of wizard out of an old rock and roll band tune with the other 2% spent waving some magic wand to magically make their stuff work.
I have customers who want things like database-driven ASP.NET web services to create and maintain customer mailing lists with automatic bounce detection (determining hard or soft bounce failure), automatic removal for hard bounces only, secure remote customer login for manual management, overrides for all behavior, online mailer creation, scheduled delivery options, throttling options (to avoid tripping spam filters at Hotmail, Yahoo, etc), customer-usable import/export functions for the mailing list (imported directly from .xls files full of irrelevant info), and a customized "theme" for his secure remote interface that exactly mirrors his intranet site interface.
And I shit you not, he literally goes, "can you take care of this for me tonight so I can start mailing customers tomorrow?".
Me: "No, Pete, this is going to take some time to do."
Him: "Really? I figured you guys could whip up something simple like that in like 15, 20 minutes."
She wasn't simply arrested for texting in class.
She was brought to the school's office because she refused to stop texting despite a teacher's repeated orders for her to do so during class.
Once in the office, she was questioned and lied multiple times.
The school's officer questioned several witnesses whose stories all agreed with the teacher's, meaning the student was almost certainly lying. (Her own friends ratted her out)
After confronting her with this, she continued to maintain her lies.
It was at this point, having refused to cooperate with the teacher to end her disruptive behavior, having refused to cooperate with the school's officer, having lied to multiple school officials, and refusing to cooperate with anyone there that she was finally informed that she would be arrested for disorderly conduct.
The school's officer then requested her parents' contact numbers so they could be informed.
The student gave multiple (different) incorrect numbers for her father.
She then provided a correct number for her mother, who was called to the school.
She was then searched by a female officer, who located the phone on her.
The school officer did what he could, giving her every opportunity to cooperate.
It was her decision to refuse time and time again and to provide false information time and time again, and now she's living with the consequences.
My self-interest is in a nation based on law and order. The reason we have laws, such as immigration laws, is for the public good. We need to know who is trying to enter the country and why. The number of crimes committed by illegal immigrants (especially sex crimes) is staggering. Some who have been deported numerous times simply re-cross the border to offend time and time again.
I have absolutely zero problem with legal immigrants coming from whatever country and adding to our labor pool and tax base. Immigrants are definitely a necessary and helpful part of our nation, whether they're coming for school or to provide a better life for their family.
Illegal immigrants bring crime, disease, and a total disrespect for the laws of our country. They're the sort we definitely do not need here, whatever their country of origin.
"[i]Maybe you should legalize all those immigrants so you can collect taxes from them.[/i]"
So you're saying that we should reward lawbreakers with amnesty while those who've been following the law from the beginning are forced to sit in their home country for a much longer time because the job they could have come to this country to get has been taken by the guy who broke all the rules to get there first?
Oh yes, that's fair and just alright.
Whenever I hear someone pulling for amnesty for illegals, I just think back to that poor guy who's been waiting for years to get into the US because he's chosen to have respect for our laws and our country. He's stuck there waiting, so why should the guy who didn't give a damn about laws, respect, or even his fellow citizens get the free ride?
Let's see, of the four times I've filed petitions, one was taken care of in seconds, two within a day, and the last (which would have required some digging into logs on their part) about a week. In all cases, staff was nothing but friendly and as helpful as they could be.
I've played for several years now, and I've seen my share of bugs (as you see in any other software). Of all the bugs I've encountered myself, only two persisted very long (more than a week), and only one continues to be an intermittent problem today. The first was a bug (since quashed) which resulted in improper arrangement of items within a storage container. For some odd reason, they always wanted to occupy only a single column every time there was a session change until I resized the window for that storage container. That one lasted a couple of months. The other is a very intermittent issue that happens almost exclusively after combat wherein right-clicking for a context menu on an object in space doesn't work unless it has an icon (only man-made objects have these icons) on which to click. The problem will persist for less than a minute and then fix itself. It works fine if I right-click in the overview.
99% of the bugs I've seen have been killed within days, unlike plenty of other games (hey there Dungeon Lords). So I'm curious what all these different bugs are in the game which have been complained about for years which I've somehow never managed to encounter throughout Empire, 0.0, low-sec space, mining, ratting, trading on the open market, fighting in fleet combat, and running missions.
Just filled up in New Jersey at $1.67 per (US) gallon.
And it's full-service (they come out and pump it for you), which was nice, as it was snowing and below freezing.
If you have a particular idea that's really -that- good, make a copy of everything you have on it, then mail it to yourself certified mail. When you get it, DO NOT OPEN IT and lock it in a fire-proof safe or put it in a deposit box at your local bank.
Certified mail is time-stamped by the Federal government. While not fool-proof, it's the closest thing you can get to proving you had the idea before someone else.
The interface as a whole doesn't lend itself to being intuitive so much as it lends itself to being highly available for quick access to an enormous amount of stuff on a moment's notice (particularly useful when you're under siege by a half dozen people and you're trying to wiggle your way out of it). The tutorial is really there as an introduction to the basic mechanics simply because there's no other way to learn them. While people in the "newbie" chat are extremely helpful for specific questions, asking "how do I move" (as just a generic example of basic mechanics) is not going to yield a positive response at all. Another related issue there is that much of the interface and the basic functionality becomes so second-nature to long-term players that some questions become honestly difficult to answer. If a 3-year old asked you how to swallow food, could you articulate what's necessary to do that in language that would make sense to them?
That's not to berate new players (everyone started out knowing little to nothing about what to do) so much as it goes to show why the tutorial sticks more to the basics. For more exciting information, the forums have a number of walk-throughs on doing things like scanning systems for hidden complexes, ruins, anomalies and such. Those are generally very well written, but they still require that you have a solid understanding of the basic mechanics along with some knowledge of the interface.
Regarding the question about getting back to the "newbie zone", that's not really a question that makes sense for Eve. While many games have a "school" area or "newbie" area, Eve is just a collection of solar systems. That system you start in on day one can be visited by anyone at any time. The only part of the game which makes any distinction in that respect is the tutorial itself. At this point, I couldn't tell you which systems are ones in which new players start in beyond saying that they're probably all 1.0 security systems. I probably go through them all the time, but there's nothing special about them in that regard.
Eve does dump a vast amount of information at you, but something to keep in mind is that all of that information is basic and relevant depending on the situation. As I was saying to another poster, if Eve's tutorial system moved along at a pace where most people could follow it, understand it, and remain interested in it, you'd still be learning basic mechanics 2 years down the road. I've been playing for almost three years now and I learn new stuff almost every time I log into the game. In terms of what's in the tutorials, that's really just enough to get you moving so you can discover everything else for yourself.
It's really designed around helping you to get walking so you can go out and explore the world yourself. If it tried to teach you everything, the entire game would be nothing but tutorials, and that's not fun at all.