First, in your previous post, you said Unless you're a historian, politician, or archaeologist, history doesn't matter. Chemistry--you have to work in CSI or medicine for any well-recognized function. Same applies to biology. You didn't limit yourself to high school.
Second, reading a bunch of Greek poems has value in understanding humanity. If you see no value in it, don't study it, but understand that it does have some vale. These poems have existed and been studied for over a thousand years and still have relevance in today's world. Do you think a firm grasp of windows XP or linux will still have relevance 1000 years from now?
If you're increasing life expectancy 50%, it seems like decreased fertility would be a benefit, not a drawback. You don't want to cause a population boom.
Are you really stupid enough to think education only has value if it's directly a marketable skill?
BTW, I have a Math degree, and the crap that passes for "Math" in HS may be sheer memorization but Math sure isn't. In fact, lesson 1 in all my first year math classes was "forget everything you learned about this subject in high school"
Surprised they're so open about what they do!...or is this just they stuff they admit to?"
They can still have excellent security while being totally upfront about it. It's only certain governments that feel the need to hide everything about "security" in the shadows.
This is also good customer friendlyness. If I go to a casino and there's a big sign that says they do facial scanning to catch cheaters, I have no problem with their scanning and I'll still go in. If they do it sneakily and I find out later, I'll feel violated and never go back to that casino.
DPSing is stupid, becuase a mage or a rogue are soooo much more efficient then them, specially in a 5 man instance
Funny, my 60 warrior out damages all the rogues in high level instances. I also out damage mages except in places like DM where there's a lot of AoE mobs.
In a 15-person UBRS, 2 of the top 3 spots are always warriors.
In a 5-man, the warrior should tank the Bosses and be DPS the rest of the time.
You're saying using tax dollars to practically give away computers to middle class people who don't need them is community service?
This is the same as if your city collected $1M in extra tax revenue and then gave $1000 to each of 1,000 people. There is no way that's good for the community.
Funny, I've seen so many horde do what you claim to be doing that I often go on retalitory rampages with my 60 killing every horde lowbie I can find.
I'm levelling a rogue (46) now just to park in ogrimar. I'll log to it between WSG matches on my current 60 and kill a few horde hearthing back from contested territory. Then log back and WSG some more while my rogue's timers cool down and the horde 60's waste their time looking for me in ogr.
I suppose this can be taken as a protest agains the lack of endgame instances that don't need 40 players. If I could spend my time there I wouldn't be killing lowbies in the horde's own capital.
Loot from large raids MUST be better than single group loot or there is zero incentive to raid.
And why should there be an incentive to Raid? RPGs have been about the small party since DnD in the 70's, and even into the computer format. It was only Evergrind that came up with the 40 man party. It was a stupid idea at the time, and it's even stupider now.
Not only that, but the realism takes a major hit if single group loot is the same as some uber god's loot.
The realism takes a far larger hit when you intend for the players to grind through the same 10 bosses (MC) hundreds of times for loot. How can you kill Rag 100 times for loot, he's one boss?
The work involved in running, organizing, and maintaining a guild necessitates that the rewards must be higher, otherwise, why the F would I want to be part of a guild, and have my nightly activities decided for me?
This is the key area we seem to disagree. The "work" involved in running, organizing, and maintaining a guild spoils the game. It is a game, not "work".
In this game that's supposed to be fun, exactly, why the F do you want to have your nightly activities decided for you? It spoils the fun and you're saying they have to bribe people to spoil their fun with better loot. It's a fundamentaly flawed model.
For me, I'd rather stay in a guild of friends I've been with since the server launched even though we have no chance of doing MC in the next few months.
So why does it hurt you if that is left as is and there are 5-player instances that are balananced to be as hard as DWL and drop the same loot?
Then you can have your fun agonizing over organizing 40 player groups that will get along and all be on at once. You can fight your 2 million HP bosses where individual player skill and actions mean nothing. I can have my meaningful end-game where only having 5 players mean the skills of individual players make a huge differencce.
With 40 players, each player is a cog. A priest for example is strictly a healer, usually assigned to a couple of players to concentrate on...oooh what fun, cast heal over and over for 30 minutes. A warrior simply spams high threat spells and holds the mob in place where the group wants it.
With 5 players each player is doing a lot more. Maybe the total group DPS is too low, so the preist will have to deal damage as well as healing. Or the warrior can go into damage dealing mode to raise group DPS but they'll take more damage too making things harder on the priest. You have all sorts of options and can play the way you want to see what works for you. Compared to 40-player where everything is a a precisely-scripted minor role, 5-man is far more fun and takes far more skill.
Compare it to an office, in a small office with 5 people, one of the office workers will also have to run the company's website, and support the computer network as well as doing normal office work. It's more interesting because they do a diverse set of things at work. In a 40 person office you probably have a dedicated web admin and net admin, and the work is much less diverse because they're each doing the same thing over and over.
At work, this is a good thing because it allows them to specialize and it's work, not play. WoW is supposed to be a game, you play for fun, so more diverse and interesting things to do in a dungeon is better.
Up to level 60, the game is great regardless of your time commitment.
Once you hit 60, the end-game content is only accessible to groups of 40 players. That restriction limits the content to serious gamers who can form an uber-guild to play it, and because of the time commitment needed by so many people at once, the only people who can get into and stay in an uber-guild are the ones with a huge time commitment.
I don't know if you're on a pvp server or not, but on my pvp server, most of the lvl 60's spend their time going around ganking lowbies because there's just nothing for them to do at 60.
The good news for you is that 50-60 is much easier than 40-50, but the bad news is you'll have nothing to do at 60.
As it is now, all the interesting end game instances are limited to raids of 40 players. The logistics of setting up such a large group of people willing to work together well enough to complete the dungeon means this content is limited to a very small minority of player.
As well, in a 40 player group, each player is a minor cog and individual skill counts for nothing as long as nobody does anything too stupid.
The real challenges of such a dungeon are in the organization, not the game play, and that means with 40 players involved, only a couple of leaders are "playing" the rest are minor machines. This might mirror a real life army, but it's not fun in a game.
Your "efforts" at addressing this seem to be introducing a 20 player instance with inferior gear to what is available at 40.
How about having a 5 player instance that is balanced to be as hard as DWL is for 40 and have it dop the *same* quality of gear at the same rate per player-hour?
On ebay people are paying real money to buy WoW gold... while some guy in Korea murdered another guy over a rare sword that existed only in an MMORPG.
I tried to sell some gold on ebay and had my auction pulled with ebay claiming it violated copyright and trademark law. That's total BS; it violates Blizzards ToS (and I was willing to risk my account being pulled) but it is not illegal and ebay had no right to pull the auction.
I replied with a protest of their decision and listed 20 "farmers" auctions for gold. They never replied to me and left the farmers auctions alone.
My guess is blizzard likes the farmers because it's thousands of additional accounts and big income for them. They attack people competing with the farmers who might cause the farmers to close up shop and yank their $15/month.
So Fedex has to change their business model to make it harder for someone who legitimately wants the boxes to ship via fedex to get.
In other words, they make their paying customers suffer to try and prevent themselves from being ripped off. Isn't that just like adding copyright to a piece of software?
If FedEx did start charging $3 for a box but giving a $3 discount to ship something in their box, Slashdot would roast them for being customer hostile.
That describes most commentators in most sports. Almost everyone I know watches sports with the volume muted to avoid having to listen to that meaningless babble.
When CBC's French hockey commentators went on strike a few years ago, the CBC played the normal game/crowd sounds without and commentary. It was the best ratings they ever had as a large number of English speakers turned to the French channel so they could hear the game without the chatter.
So you refuse to visit any site at a big name free host.
That means you're saying people only have a valuable opinion or can provide useful information if they're willing to pay you to listen to them. What a dangerous attitude.
Besides that, there are thousands of free web hosts just because you know the names of 10 or so of the largest doesn't mean you aren't visiting others.
Even if the majority of dodgy sites are hosted on free sites, the majority of content on free sites can be quite valuable.
As part of political free speech it should be constitutionally protected that free sites can operate without collecting personal information if they want. If the government forces personal authentication, they can track you if they don't agree with what you say. That will inhibit what legetimate messages you're comfortable posting, and it would be a serious blow to free speech.
1) The world wide web was invented in 1989 at CERN by Tim Berners-Lee. It was text based. Netscape did not invent the web.
2) Netscape was not even the first graphical browser, I was using NCSA Mosaic long before netscape came out (and I'm not sure Mosaic was first). Mosaic and Netscape were written by the same person but they were separate programs.
Slashdot Mirror
First, in your previous post, you said Unless you're a historian, politician, or archaeologist, history doesn't matter. Chemistry--you have to work in CSI or medicine for any well-recognized function. Same applies to biology. You didn't limit yourself to high school.
Second, reading a bunch of Greek poems has value in understanding humanity. If you see no value in it, don't study it, but understand that it does have some vale. These poems have existed and been studied for over a thousand years and still have relevance in today's world. Do you think a firm grasp of windows XP or linux will still have relevance 1000 years from now?
If you're increasing life expectancy 50%, it seems like decreased fertility would be a benefit, not a drawback. You don't want to cause a population boom.
What is "copyright theft"? It sounds like a different charge than "theft". Do you have the number of the charge in the California Code?
Are you really stupid enough to think education only has value if it's directly a marketable skill?
BTW, I have a Math degree, and the crap that passes for "Math" in HS may be sheer memorization but Math sure isn't. In fact, lesson 1 in all my first year math classes was "forget everything you learned about this subject in high school"
No court in the world recognizes "copyright infingement" as theft. In the example being discussed, nothing was stolen and paid back later.
Surprised they're so open about what they do! ...or is this just they stuff they admit to?"
They can still have excellent security while being totally upfront about it. It's only certain governments that feel the need to hide everything about "security" in the shadows.
This is also good customer friendlyness. If I go to a casino and there's a big sign that says they do facial scanning to catch cheaters, I have no problem with their scanning and I'll still go in. If they do it sneakily and I find out later, I'll feel violated and never go back to that casino.
DPSing is stupid, becuase a mage or a rogue are soooo much more efficient then them, specially in a 5 man instance
Funny, my 60 warrior out damages all the rogues in high level instances. I also out damage mages except in places like DM where there's a lot of AoE mobs.
In a 15-person UBRS, 2 of the top 3 spots are always warriors.
In a 5-man, the warrior should tank the Bosses and be DPS the rest of the time.
You're saying using tax dollars to practically give away computers to middle class people who don't need them is community service?
This is the same as if your city collected $1M in extra tax revenue and then gave $1000 to each of 1,000 people. There is no way that's good for the community.
Funny, I've seen so many horde do what you claim to be doing that I often go on retalitory rampages with my 60 killing every horde lowbie I can find.
I'm levelling a rogue (46) now just to park in ogrimar. I'll log to it between WSG matches on my current 60 and kill a few horde hearthing back from contested territory. Then log back and WSG some more while my rogue's timers cool down and the horde 60's waste their time looking for me in ogr.
I suppose this can be taken as a protest agains the lack of endgame instances that don't need 40 players. If I could spend my time there I wouldn't be killing lowbies in the horde's own capital.
How is it a money sink? It takes metals out of the game, therefore raising the values of those metals, but the total money supply is not changed.
Loot from large raids MUST be better than single group loot or there is zero incentive to raid.
And why should there be an incentive to Raid? RPGs have been about the small party since DnD in the 70's, and even into the computer format. It was only Evergrind that came up with the 40 man party. It was a stupid idea at the time, and it's even stupider now.
Not only that, but the realism takes a major hit if single group loot is the same as some uber god's loot.
The realism takes a far larger hit when you intend for the players to grind through the same 10 bosses (MC) hundreds of times for loot. How can you kill Rag 100 times for loot, he's one boss?
The work involved in running, organizing, and maintaining a guild necessitates that the rewards must be higher, otherwise, why the F would I want to be part of a guild, and have my nightly activities decided for me?
This is the key area we seem to disagree. The "work" involved in running, organizing, and maintaining a guild spoils the game. It is a game, not "work".
In this game that's supposed to be fun, exactly, why the F do you want to have your nightly activities decided for you? It spoils the fun and you're saying they have to bribe people to spoil their fun with better loot. It's a fundamentaly flawed model.
For me, I'd rather stay in a guild of friends I've been with since the server launched even though we have no chance of doing MC in the next few months.
So why does it hurt you if that is left as is and there are 5-player instances that are balananced to be as hard as DWL and drop the same loot?
Then you can have your fun agonizing over organizing 40 player groups that will get along and all be on at once. You can fight your 2 million HP bosses where individual player skill and actions mean nothing. I can have my meaningful end-game where only having 5 players mean the skills of individual players make a huge differencce.
With 40 players, each player is a cog. A priest for example is strictly a healer, usually assigned to a couple of players to concentrate on...oooh what fun, cast heal over and over for 30 minutes. A warrior simply spams high threat spells and holds the mob in place where the group wants it.
With 5 players each player is doing a lot more. Maybe the total group DPS is too low, so the preist will have to deal damage as well as healing. Or the warrior can go into damage dealing mode to raise group DPS but they'll take more damage too making things harder on the priest. You have all sorts of options and can play the way you want to see what works for you. Compared to 40-player where everything is a a precisely-scripted minor role, 5-man is far more fun and takes far more skill.
Compare it to an office, in a small office with 5 people, one of the office workers will also have to run the company's website, and support the computer network as well as doing normal office work. It's more interesting because they do a diverse set of things at work. In a 40 person office you probably have a dedicated web admin and net admin, and the work is much less diverse because they're each doing the same thing over and over.
At work, this is a good thing because it allows them to specialize and it's work, not play. WoW is supposed to be a game, you play for fun, so more diverse and interesting things to do in a dungeon is better.
Up to level 60, the game is great regardless of your time commitment.
Once you hit 60, the end-game content is only accessible to groups of 40 players. That restriction limits the content to serious gamers who can form an uber-guild to play it, and because of the time commitment needed by so many people at once, the only people who can get into and stay in an uber-guild are the ones with a huge time commitment.
I don't know if you're on a pvp server or not, but on my pvp server, most of the lvl 60's spend their time going around ganking lowbies because there's just nothing for them to do at 60.
The good news for you is that 50-60 is much easier than 40-50, but the bad news is you'll have nothing to do at 60.
As it is now, all the interesting end game instances are limited to raids of 40 players. The logistics of setting up such a large group of people willing to work together well enough to complete the dungeon means this content is limited to a very small minority of player. As well, in a 40 player group, each player is a minor cog and individual skill counts for nothing as long as nobody does anything too stupid. The real challenges of such a dungeon are in the organization, not the game play, and that means with 40 players involved, only a couple of leaders are "playing" the rest are minor machines. This might mirror a real life army, but it's not fun in a game. Your "efforts" at addressing this seem to be introducing a 20 player instance with inferior gear to what is available at 40. How about having a 5 player instance that is balanced to be as hard as DWL is for 40 and have it dop the *same* quality of gear at the same rate per player-hour?
On ebay people are paying real money to buy WoW gold... while some guy in Korea murdered another guy over a rare sword that existed only in an MMORPG.
I tried to sell some gold on ebay and had my auction pulled with ebay claiming it violated copyright and trademark law. That's total BS; it violates Blizzards ToS (and I was willing to risk my account being pulled) but it is not illegal and ebay had no right to pull the auction.
I replied with a protest of their decision and listed 20 "farmers" auctions for gold. They never replied to me and left the farmers auctions alone.
My guess is blizzard likes the farmers because it's thousands of additional accounts and big income for them. They attack people competing with the farmers who might cause the farmers to close up shop and yank their $15/month.
Tell that to Kodak and the people who bought their instamatic.
So Fedex has to change their business model to make it harder for someone who legitimately wants the boxes to ship via fedex to get.
In other words, they make their paying customers suffer to try and prevent themselves from being ripped off. Isn't that just like adding copyright to a piece of software?
If FedEx did start charging $3 for a box but giving a $3 discount to ship something in their box, Slashdot would roast them for being customer hostile.
That describes most commentators in most sports. Almost everyone I know watches sports with the volume muted to avoid having to listen to that meaningless babble.
When CBC's French hockey commentators went on strike a few years ago, the CBC played the normal game/crowd sounds without and commentary. It was the best ratings they ever had as a large number of English speakers turned to the French channel so they could hear the game without the chatter.
The public library provides free web access, but not webspace.
You have blinders on.
So you refuse to visit any site at a big name free host.
That means you're saying people only have a valuable opinion or can provide useful information if they're willing to pay you to listen to them. What a dangerous attitude.
Besides that, there are thousands of free web hosts just because you know the names of 10 or so of the largest doesn't mean you aren't visiting others.
Even if the majority of dodgy sites are hosted on free sites, the majority of content on free sites can be quite valuable.
As part of political free speech it should be constitutionally protected that free sites can operate without collecting personal information if they want. If the government forces personal authentication, they can track you if they don't agree with what you say. That will inhibit what legetimate messages you're comfortable posting, and it would be a serious blow to free speech.
You did know that computer animation studios have huge render farms, right?
A human eyeball is *much* larger than a cubic inch.
I don't think it means what you think it means.
The operating system-like piece of software formerly known as Windows.
1) The world wide web was invented in 1989 at CERN by Tim Berners-Lee. It was text based. Netscape did not invent the web. 2) Netscape was not even the first graphical browser, I was using NCSA Mosaic long before netscape came out (and I'm not sure Mosaic was first). Mosaic and Netscape were written by the same person but they were separate programs.