Clearly, the fact that some phenomena are exceptions to global warming is further evidence of the pervasiveness of global warming and our complicity in same....
But, seriously. Global warming is pretty overblown, and highly politicized. This not just because of the economic effects that an anti-global-warming regulatory regime would impose, but also because of the political interests that desire just such a regime (for various reasons, but be aware that socialists have been very active in the enviromental movement for a long time). As long as this situation persists, expect to hear a lot of those mostly-irrelevant notes whenever the talking heads can squeeze them in.
No, I think the RIAA is a problem because it's a large, centralized group without serious competition. And, I think that's pretty much what a proposal for a 'working group' of Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and any other major players in the videogame industry would probably produce.
The videogame industry has enough problems already. Do you really propose we 'solve' any of those problems by adding in a large bureaucracy of lawyers and reducing competition in the process?
A real unified platform would be awesome for game developers, but it would be iffy for consumers, and a waste of time for the console producers (Buy our console! It's just like everyone else's!). And a big industry consortium to steer the direction of the industry for its own benefit? Brilliant.
Have you learned nothing from the MP/RIAA and their behavior? For heaven's sake, let the market take care of it.
Level grinding isn't an integral part of the RPG, though. Hell, levels aren't. Story is. Some sort of ruleset is, but it can be as complicated or as simple as the developer or audience wants.
Anyway, you're talking past me, and probably past the guy from the article. I played through FFV ages ago (around 1998, actually). Maxed the jobs, probably skipped max levels by a few. It's a good thing I enjoy that (or did at the time), because I don't recall the story being worth the trouble. (Incidentally, I bought FFI&II, FFIII, FFIV, FFV, and FFVI for the GBA and DS. With the exception of FFIII, it's the second or third time that I've purchased each of those games, and, for most of them, the second console I have or will have played them on. Never mind the other console and PC RPGs I've got laying around. Please: STFU about the superfan e-penis contest. I am not a casual gamer, and you are missing the point.)
The current model for many, many CRPGs involves rewarding tedium (level grinding, fetch quests, etc) with bits of story. (Hell, I beat most of the story portion of FFXII with the same gambit setup on every character.) IME, tedium is synonymous with boredom (I read multiple books and magazines while 'playing' most of Suikoden IV), and more or less antonymous with fun. The result is that the game doesn't reward hard work, but bloody-mindedness.
Obviously, there are people who enjoy that. Still, maybe it could stand a re-think? Some games provide a lot of optional content, often to cater to the obsessive-compulsive or hardcore. Now, if you're the sort that's going to explore every nook and cranny to ferret out all that information anyway, why object to the idea that you shouldn't have to put up with thirty hours of filler to get to the ten hours of stuff that actually moves the story along? You'd still get to wave your ewang around on GameFAQs (or wherever, I really don't care), and normal people might actually get something out of the game.
Maybe instead of writing "why I hate fantasy RPGs" after forcing yourself play these games you don't really like, just pick up something you do enjoy and have some fun? Maybe instead of writing "why I hate people who disagree with me" after forcing yourself read [sic] these threads you don't really like, just do something you do enjoy and have some fun?
Responses like this do make me wonder: are the "hardcore" RPG fans devoted masochists, or are they stupid? Because you're rapidly convincing me that they're condescending.
He's talking about CRPGs, not just the MMO sort. You may have noticed that he specifically bitched about FFXII?
Incidentally, if you read to the end of the article, he pretty much cme to the conclusion you just noted: no more games that take more than 10-12 hours.
Someone else already hit on the other thing you missed: it doesn't sound like he's upset about character levels, per se. He was aggravated about having to do piddly little bullshit for hours on end so he could move on to the bits of the game that mattered. It took this guy 47 hours to get through FFXII. Hell, it took me 120+ and I didn't do every quest or collect every Esper--or very many of either, actually. (I generally liked FFXII, but mostly because the grinding was less tedious than it had been for some time.)
I guess the question he's trying to get at is this: why isn't the game made such that you gain whatever levels you need by the time you get to where you need them?
If your only tool is a hammer, eh? I'm not worried about complexity getting in the way of the teacher teaching. I'm worried about complexity interfering with the kid learning.
Remote terminals of the sort you described aren't that new. I remember something similar a few years back when thin clients were a big thing last (still?). Woo. Hardware and infrastructure still cost money, as does support for same. (They may not need anyone on staff, but they'll still need someone to fix things when they do, inevitably, break. No system is perfect, after all.) That's all pretty much orthogonal to my point, so I suppose it's just as well you're not holding against me something that doesn't even matter.
None of what you address really deals with the question of course material, which is still likely to be sub-par. Even if you solve the hardware and infrastructure problem, you have still solved a problem that doesn't exist by introducing additional complexity without any obvious benefit. The problem simply isn't "How do I use technology to teach kindergarteners?", it's "How do I teach kindergarteners?" If the solution involves technology, that's great. But it's not really a requirement, for the same reason that teaching math doesn't have to involve a calculator (and, in fact, there are benefits to learning to do as much math by hand as possible).
I'm thinking quite logically about this. Given the state of educational software, it's reasonable to conclude that this guy will either need to write his own or rely on software which is insufficient for his needs and which is likely to be less effective than traditional methods of instruction. Given the competence of the average software developer, the former seems an ill-conceived idea. It should be obvious from what I've said so far why I think the latter course a poor choice as well.
Consider further: a computer will cost more money, introduce wholly unnecessary complexity, be less reliable, and probably less effective than using traditional means to teach the exact same material, to some dubious, equivocable, and mostly non-existent gain. Teaching kids to read and write is a solved problem, and one in which re-inventing the wheel is unlikely to produce real benefit. There are workbooks and primers and what have you. It may not be as sexy or innovative as sitting a kid in front of a computer to learn their ABCs, but it does work.
Maybe, just maybe, the one who's not thinking about this rationally is you: why does a kindergartener need to use a computer?
As a teaching tool, eschew technology. We're talking about five and six-year-olds. Teach them to count, and to read and write: for that you need phonics, pencil and paper. After that, it's all gravy. I'd even go so far as to say that trying to integrate computing into a kindergarten curriculum is really putting the cart before the horse. I'd wager that technology at that age is more likely to be an impediment to learning than a boon: skip it. Computers will still be there in a few years, by which time, they'll (hopefully) be able to read, write, and do arithmetic. (Never mind that schooling is probably too regimented in the first place: why make the kids sit still even longer?)
It's not particularly new. I've played some other (PC) games with that sort of feature, although it's usually just simpler to turn off the in-game voice chat. Sounds like the big deal is mapping that function (mute a single player) to a single button. A refinement, but not a revolution by any stretch.
On the whole, I don't recall there being much that was especially new or innovative about Halo when I played it on the PC. The graphics were nice, but the biggest thing it had going for it was polish, not innovation. The gameplay struck me as fairly typical FPS fare, slightly simplified and refined. (Vehicles were, likewise, not new when Halo was under development, let alone when it was released. They did a nice job with them, though.) Maybe Halo 2 had more to offer. Dunno, since I don't own an X-Box.
Anyway, I guess what I'm getting at is that it's somewhat debatable as to how much of Halo has ever been new by the time Halo got to it.
I think you sort of get the point--and then ignore it. There is enormous value in being able to carry around a mediocre screwdriver/saw/knife/pliers/etc in one pocket instead of a toolbox containing good versions of each. Not so much that a carpenter lives his toolbox at home when he works, though.
Besides, we're not (currently) discussing a situation where your metaphorical Leatherman would cover the functions of a dozen or more otherwise dedicated devices, however poorly, while taking up less space than any of them. We're talking about taking two devices, each about the size of a deck of cards and fair-to-good at their jobs, and replacing them with one device that is slightly larger than either, with no more advantage than fitting in one pocket instead of two. I would submit that, if my phone is now too large to fit in my pocket with my car keys or wallet, I have gained nothing if I no longer have to carry around a separate MP3 player that already doesn't fit in my pockets. In fact, it's a loss: I can always leave the MP3 player at home. I might actually need the phone, and now it's too large to carry some place comfortably.
Anyway, I did preface that whole comment with a pile of your-mileage-may-vary TLAs. It's not like I presented this conclusion as incontrovertible fact.
IMO, YMMV, etc, etc: Convergence is overrated inasmuch as I don't need a PDA/phone/camera/music player/video player/heart monitor/glucometer/food pellet dispenser/etc. Combinations of functionality that make sense are actually fine. A video player that does double duty as a music player? Fine. My DVD player can do this already, and, in fact, so does my TiVo. A phone that syncs to a PIM and covers major PDA functionality (appointments, contact info, limited notes) is also fine (I don't need a smartphone, but I'd appreciate a bit more functionality than my RAZR actually has).
Consider the claw hammer: it can drive nails, and remove them (and act as a wrecking bar in a pinch). It does both of these things fairly well, even though it will never be a saw. And that's just fine for most people.
As regards the widescreen-iPod-that-doesn't-exist: I want one. It's what I'm waiting on to dump my iPod photo, because I need more hard drive space than a Nano (or an iPhone, for that matter) can give me. I'm not sure I'd bet on it happening, though.
Seems dubious to me. Will these new iPods (fictional edition, very rare) also include sensors that can detect your current mood and select music appropriately? Perhaps they will have an attachment that will let you record your thoughts by directly tapping your brain. In fact, I predict that the next iPod will eschew headphones entirely and instead will manipulate your brain such that you will only think that you are hearing music.
I am not new around here. I'm pretty sure I remember when Slashdot wasn't a site you logged into, and certainly when it wasn't something anybody subscribed to. Can you ding-a-lings cut out the HAR-HAR-U-MUST-B-NU-HEAR garbage already? I'm not now, I wasn't when you were, and I'm not going to be ten minutes from now when next one of you clever knobs gets it in his head to post a know-nothing response to something. Seriously. It was lame and tired back when it might have even been accurate.
Several other commenters have claimed that all or most of those apps work under Vista (with the apparent exception of iTunes, about which a notice was posted a while back), so we're really just talking about support issues, which I'm sure is a matter of time.
In which case, could the MacZealots and 101st M. S. Brigade (Slashbot division) please shut up?
Strange. I just dropped digg last week because, their write-ups were almost consistently asinine (and equally exaggerated), and their comments actually managed to be less informed and level-headed than the ones at Slashdot.
Seriously, suit yourself and good luck to you, but I don't miss digg cluttering up my RSS reader much at all.
I gave up on FFX because it took me 40 hours to reach the area where you can train chocobos (mentioned as a landmark; I don't recall where this was), and I was bored stiff: the story failed to grab me, most of the characters were jerks or were crushingly stupid (in fact: Auron was the only character I was able to sympathise with, and he's a raging asshole through most of the game that I played). So I stopped.
Granted, I've had difficulty with most of the recent FF games: 7 was fun enough; but 8 was depressing and, although I loved 9 right up to the end, I never did beat the last boss after he managed a one-hit-kill on his first attack: removed the disc from the PS2, have not bothered to put it back in yet. The thought of spending ten hours grinding my way to a level where I could actually beat the last boss simply turned me off.
I spent hundreds of hours building up all the characters in FF3/6 ages ago, when I was in high school and had not a thing better to do. I no longer care to do that sort of thing. There are better ways for me to spend my time. (That said: FFXII was awesome.)
Sounds like, from some of the other comments, that the conviction probably had less to do with hate speech laws and more to do with stalking, trespassing, or restraining orders, though.
California is a very, very different place from the rest of the US. (It may say something that the Ninth Circuit is the most overturned on appeal.)
As was noted elsewhere, the case would probably have been overturned on appeal. Sounds like an unfortunate combination of stupid hate crime legislation, a stupid judge/jury, and a poor-to-mediocre defense attorney.
Slashdot Mirror
Clearly, the fact that some phenomena are exceptions to global warming is further evidence of the pervasiveness of global warming and our complicity in same. ...
But, seriously. Global warming is pretty overblown, and highly politicized. This not just because of the economic effects that an anti-global-warming regulatory regime would impose, but also because of the political interests that desire just such a regime (for various reasons, but be aware that socialists have been very active in the enviromental movement for a long time). As long as this situation persists, expect to hear a lot of those mostly-irrelevant notes whenever the talking heads can squeeze them in.
No, I think the RIAA is a problem because it's a large, centralized group without serious competition. And, I think that's pretty much what a proposal for a 'working group' of Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and any other major players in the videogame industry would probably produce.
The videogame industry has enough problems already. Do you really propose we 'solve' any of those problems by adding in a large bureaucracy of lawyers and reducing competition in the process?
You've mangled that linke to the Curmudgeon Gamer article.
A real unified platform would be awesome for game developers, but it would be iffy for consumers, and a waste of time for the console producers (Buy our console! It's just like everyone else's!). And a big industry consortium to steer the direction of the industry for its own benefit? Brilliant.
Have you learned nothing from the MP/RIAA and their behavior? For heaven's sake, let the market take care of it.
Level grinding isn't an integral part of the RPG, though. Hell, levels aren't. Story is. Some sort of ruleset is, but it can be as complicated or as simple as the developer or audience wants.
Anyway, you're talking past me, and probably past the guy from the article. I played through FFV ages ago (around 1998, actually). Maxed the jobs, probably skipped max levels by a few. It's a good thing I enjoy that (or did at the time), because I don't recall the story being worth the trouble. (Incidentally, I bought FFI&II, FFIII, FFIV, FFV, and FFVI for the GBA and DS. With the exception of FFIII, it's the second or third time that I've purchased each of those games, and, for most of them, the second console I have or will have played them on. Never mind the other console and PC RPGs I've got laying around. Please: STFU about the superfan e-penis contest. I am not a casual gamer, and you are missing the point.)
The current model for many, many CRPGs involves rewarding tedium (level grinding, fetch quests, etc) with bits of story. (Hell, I beat most of the story portion of FFXII with the same gambit setup on every character.) IME, tedium is synonymous with boredom (I read multiple books and magazines while 'playing' most of Suikoden IV), and more or less antonymous with fun. The result is that the game doesn't reward hard work, but bloody-mindedness.
Obviously, there are people who enjoy that. Still, maybe it could stand a re-think? Some games provide a lot of optional content, often to cater to the obsessive-compulsive or hardcore. Now, if you're the sort that's going to explore every nook and cranny to ferret out all that information anyway, why object to the idea that you shouldn't have to put up with thirty hours of filler to get to the ten hours of stuff that actually moves the story along? You'd still get to wave your ewang around on GameFAQs (or wherever, I really don't care), and normal people might actually get something out of the game.
Maybe instead of writing "why I hate fantasy RPGs" after forcing yourself play these games you don't really like, just pick up something you do enjoy and have some fun?
Maybe instead of writing "why I hate people who disagree with me" after forcing yourself read [sic] these threads you don't really like, just do something you do enjoy and have some fun?
Responses like this do make me wonder: are the "hardcore" RPG fans devoted masochists, or are they stupid? Because you're rapidly convincing me that they're condescending.
He's talking about CRPGs, not just the MMO sort. You may have noticed that he specifically bitched about FFXII?
Incidentally, if you read to the end of the article, he pretty much cme to the conclusion you just noted: no more games that take more than 10-12 hours.
Someone else already hit on the other thing you missed: it doesn't sound like he's upset about character levels, per se. He was aggravated about having to do piddly little bullshit for hours on end so he could move on to the bits of the game that mattered. It took this guy 47 hours to get through FFXII. Hell, it took me 120+ and I didn't do every quest or collect every Esper--or very many of either, actually. (I generally liked FFXII, but mostly because the grinding was less tedious than it had been for some time.)
I guess the question he's trying to get at is this: why isn't the game made such that you gain whatever levels you need by the time you get to where you need them?
My last reply, too, but you really need to read closer. I didn't say it can't be done. I question whether the return is worth the investment.
If your only tool is a hammer, eh? I'm not worried about complexity getting in the way of the teacher teaching. I'm worried about complexity interfering with the kid learning.
Remote terminals of the sort you described aren't that new. I remember something similar a few years back when thin clients were a big thing last (still?). Woo. Hardware and infrastructure still cost money, as does support for same. (They may not need anyone on staff, but they'll still need someone to fix things when they do, inevitably, break. No system is perfect, after all.) That's all pretty much orthogonal to my point, so I suppose it's just as well you're not holding against me something that doesn't even matter.
None of what you address really deals with the question of course material, which is still likely to be sub-par. Even if you solve the hardware and infrastructure problem, you have still solved a problem that doesn't exist by introducing additional complexity without any obvious benefit. The problem simply isn't "How do I use technology to teach kindergarteners?", it's "How do I teach kindergarteners?" If the solution involves technology, that's great. But it's not really a requirement, for the same reason that teaching math doesn't have to involve a calculator (and, in fact, there are benefits to learning to do as much math by hand as possible).
I'm thinking quite logically about this. Given the state of educational software, it's reasonable to conclude that this guy will either need to write his own or rely on software which is insufficient for his needs and which is likely to be less effective than traditional methods of instruction. Given the competence of the average software developer, the former seems an ill-conceived idea. It should be obvious from what I've said so far why I think the latter course a poor choice as well.
Consider further: a computer will cost more money, introduce wholly unnecessary complexity, be less reliable, and probably less effective than using traditional means to teach the exact same material, to some dubious, equivocable, and mostly non-existent gain. Teaching kids to read and write is a solved problem, and one in which re-inventing the wheel is unlikely to produce real benefit. There are workbooks and primers and what have you. It may not be as sexy or innovative as sitting a kid in front of a computer to learn their ABCs, but it does work.
Maybe, just maybe, the one who's not thinking about this rationally is you: why does a kindergartener need to use a computer?
As a teaching tool, eschew technology. We're talking about five and six-year-olds. Teach them to count, and to read and write: for that you need phonics, pencil and paper. After that, it's all gravy. I'd even go so far as to say that trying to integrate computing into a kindergarten curriculum is really putting the cart before the horse. I'd wager that technology at that age is more likely to be an impediment to learning than a boon: skip it. Computers will still be there in a few years, by which time, they'll (hopefully) be able to read, write, and do arithmetic. (Never mind that schooling is probably too regimented in the first place: why make the kids sit still even longer?)
It's not particularly new. I've played some other (PC) games with that sort of feature, although it's usually just simpler to turn off the in-game voice chat. Sounds like the big deal is mapping that function (mute a single player) to a single button. A refinement, but not a revolution by any stretch.
On the whole, I don't recall there being much that was especially new or innovative about Halo when I played it on the PC. The graphics were nice, but the biggest thing it had going for it was polish, not innovation. The gameplay struck me as fairly typical FPS fare, slightly simplified and refined. (Vehicles were, likewise, not new when Halo was under development, let alone when it was released. They did a nice job with them, though.) Maybe Halo 2 had more to offer. Dunno, since I don't own an X-Box.
Anyway, I guess what I'm getting at is that it's somewhat debatable as to how much of Halo has ever been new by the time Halo got to it.
Air quality won't be so great, and the acid rain would be a problem, but the sunsets will be fantastic.
You had no imagination as a child, did you?
I think you sort of get the point--and then ignore it. There is enormous value in being able to carry around a mediocre screwdriver/saw/knife/pliers/etc in one pocket instead of a toolbox containing good versions of each. Not so much that a carpenter lives his toolbox at home when he works, though.
Besides, we're not (currently) discussing a situation where your metaphorical Leatherman would cover the functions of a dozen or more otherwise dedicated devices, however poorly, while taking up less space than any of them. We're talking about taking two devices, each about the size of a deck of cards and fair-to-good at their jobs, and replacing them with one device that is slightly larger than either, with no more advantage than fitting in one pocket instead of two. I would submit that, if my phone is now too large to fit in my pocket with my car keys or wallet, I have gained nothing if I no longer have to carry around a separate MP3 player that already doesn't fit in my pockets. In fact, it's a loss: I can always leave the MP3 player at home. I might actually need the phone, and now it's too large to carry some place comfortably.
Anyway, I did preface that whole comment with a pile of your-mileage-may-vary TLAs. It's not like I presented this conclusion as incontrovertible fact.
No. It will just give you cancer.
IMO, YMMV, etc, etc: Convergence is overrated inasmuch as I don't need a PDA/phone/camera/music player/video player/heart monitor/glucometer/food pellet dispenser/etc. Combinations of functionality that make sense are actually fine. A video player that does double duty as a music player? Fine. My DVD player can do this already, and, in fact, so does my TiVo. A phone that syncs to a PIM and covers major PDA functionality (appointments, contact info, limited notes) is also fine (I don't need a smartphone, but I'd appreciate a bit more functionality than my RAZR actually has).
Consider the claw hammer: it can drive nails, and remove them (and act as a wrecking bar in a pinch). It does both of these things fairly well, even though it will never be a saw. And that's just fine for most people.
As regards the widescreen-iPod-that-doesn't-exist: I want one. It's what I'm waiting on to dump my iPod photo, because I need more hard drive space than a Nano (or an iPhone, for that matter) can give me. I'm not sure I'd bet on it happening, though.
Seems dubious to me. Will these new iPods (fictional edition, very rare) also include sensors that can detect your current mood and select music appropriately? Perhaps they will have an attachment that will let you record your thoughts by directly tapping your brain. In fact, I predict that the next iPod will eschew headphones entirely and instead will manipulate your brain such that you will only think that you are hearing music.
Seriously. The 4-digit uid, right? I know.
I am not new around here. I'm pretty sure I remember when Slashdot wasn't a site you logged into, and certainly when it wasn't something anybody subscribed to. Can you ding-a-lings cut out the HAR-HAR-U-MUST-B-NU-HEAR garbage already? I'm not now, I wasn't when you were, and I'm not going to be ten minutes from now when next one of you clever knobs gets it in his head to post a know-nothing response to something. Seriously. It was lame and tired back when it might have even been accurate.
Several other commenters have claimed that all or most of those apps work under Vista (with the apparent exception of iTunes, about which a notice was posted a while back), so we're really just talking about support issues, which I'm sure is a matter of time.
In which case, could the MacZealots and 101st M. S. Brigade (Slashbot division) please shut up?
Thanks for the PSA, I guess. Slow news day?
Strange. I just dropped digg last week because, their write-ups were almost consistently asinine (and equally exaggerated), and their comments actually managed to be less informed and level-headed than the ones at Slashdot.
Seriously, suit yourself and good luck to you, but I don't miss digg cluttering up my RSS reader much at all.
I gave up on FFX because it took me 40 hours to reach the area where you can train chocobos (mentioned as a landmark; I don't recall where this was), and I was bored stiff: the story failed to grab me, most of the characters were jerks or were crushingly stupid (in fact: Auron was the only character I was able to sympathise with, and he's a raging asshole through most of the game that I played). So I stopped.
Granted, I've had difficulty with most of the recent FF games: 7 was fun enough; but 8 was depressing and, although I loved 9 right up to the end, I never did beat the last boss after he managed a one-hit-kill on his first attack: removed the disc from the PS2, have not bothered to put it back in yet. The thought of spending ten hours grinding my way to a level where I could actually beat the last boss simply turned me off.
I spent hundreds of hours building up all the characters in FF3/6 ages ago, when I was in high school and had not a thing better to do. I no longer care to do that sort of thing. There are better ways for me to spend my time. (That said: FFXII was awesome.)
Well. Provided it wasn't contradicted elsewhere. I certainly didn't repeat the claim because I was pushing an agenda in the reply.
Never argued otherwise.
Sounds like, from some of the other comments, that the conviction probably had less to do with hate speech laws and more to do with stalking, trespassing, or restraining orders, though.
California is a very, very different place from the rest of the US. (It may say something that the Ninth Circuit is the most overturned on appeal.)
As was noted elsewhere, the case would probably have been overturned on appeal. Sounds like an unfortunate combination of stupid hate crime legislation, a stupid judge/jury, and a poor-to-mediocre defense attorney.
The Mythical Man Month is over thirty years old. There are still many, many people in the software biz that have never read it--or heard of it.