Slashdot Mirror


User: AnEmbodiedMind

AnEmbodiedMind's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
157
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 157

  1. New XML standard: SML on Oasis Gives SAML 1.0 a Thumbs-Up · · Score: 1

    I was cleaning my teeth the other day, and looked at the plug for the sink. It had SML written on it. Thats gotta stand for Sink Markup Language... right?? ;)

  2. Definitions on Top Ten Mac OS X Tips for Unix Geeks · · Score: 1
    Well I've never heard them called a 'File Folder' myself, but apparently you're right =)

    But still, the terms' file' and 'folder' seem to be used interchangeably:

    file n. A container, such as a cabinet or folder, for keeping papers in order.
    Clearly, a file is a folder under at least one common definition.

    Attempting to use them both as distinct metaphors in a file system seems to be a a bit misguided. Maybe the designers who started the 'folder' rather then 'directory' term, didn't think of a file and folder as being interchangeable terms like others do...?

  3. Folders Vs Files on Top Ten Mac OS X Tips for Unix Geeks · · Score: 1

    I don't know why they introduced the whole 'Folders' metaphore... You try teaching a naive user the difference between a 'File' and a 'Folder' and then expect them to remember which was which...

    A file is a folder in the real world, so why the hell is it different on the computer?

  4. Re:What we need is a ISO standard on Tim Bray on Microsoft Office · · Score: 2, Informative
    From OpenOffice:

    The OpenOffice.org XML project contains support for and implementation of the XML based file format.

    Mission
    Our mission is to create an open and ubiquitous XML-based file format for office documents and to provide an open reference implementation for this format.

    Core Requirements (these items are absolutely required)

    • The file format must be capable of being used as an office program's native file format. The format must be "non-lossy" and must support (at least) the full capability of a StarOffice/OpenOffice document. The format is likely to be used for document interchange but that use alone is not enough.
    • Structured content should make use of XML's structuring capabilities and be represented in terms of XML elements and attributes.
    • The file format must be fully documented and have no "secret" features.
    • OpenOffice must be the reference implementation for this file format.
    Core Goals (these items are highly desired)
    • The file format should be developed in such a way that it will be accepted by the community and can be placed under community control for future development and format evolution.
    • The file formats should be suitable for all office types: text processing, spreadsheet, presentation, drawing, charting, and math.
    • The file formats should reuse portions of each other as much as possible (so for example a spreadsheet table definition can work also as a text processing table definition).
    Standardization and Inter-Office Cooperation
    There is a office_standards mailing lists hosted on this site, intended to foster cooperation between the various office suites. At this early state no results have been achieved, but we are certainly excited about the prospects. For details, look at http://xml.openoffice.org/standardisation/ .
    Its on its way... maybe
  5. Re:What I heard.... on Tim Bray on Microsoft Office · · Score: 2, Funny
    More like
    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
    <!DOCTYPE msword PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD WORD 1.0//EN"
    "http://www.microsoft.com/word11.dtd">
    < worddoc >
    <![CDATA[ ??????????You'd be lucky????????? ]]>
    </worddoc>
    ;)
  6. Re:Arts funding on Postmodern Computer Science · · Score: 1

    You don't get a 'grade' on papers you submit to OOPSLA... They are not students either. You're obviously really onto it today ;)

  7. Ask Psychological experts, not media experts on Violent Games Good for Kids · · Score: 1

    The relationship between media violence and behaviour is a complex question which is very difficult to research. For ethical reasons you can't do longitudinal exposure studies with young people randomly assigned which provide sound proof. Therefore the area is hotly contested. Wherever you get strong business interests you always can round up a group of scholars to argue your case. Take the effect of tobacco and global warming as two cases in point. In any scientific area anyone with half a clue can trawl through the literature and mount an argument by the way they spin the rhetoric. People reading it from outside the discipline have no way of judging the credibility of the argument. If I wanted to get some sense about how to write complex code for designing computer games I would not expect to find it from a group which consisted of thirty one psychologists and assorted types and only one trainee games programmer and one professional programmer. What would a group like that know about writing code?

    In this case you are expecting me to believe a group pontificating about media violence which consists of 31 people whose job it is to sell and comment on the media and one trainee psychologist and one professional. Interestingly the spin in the media falsely hams up the weight of the psychology input - the Free Expression Project describes the academics as "scholars in the fields of media, psychology, and culture" - psychology should come a pathetic last in this list. The Reuters story describes them as "...the group of scholars, who included social psychologists, and media experts.." milking the tiny contribution from a couple of psychologists.

    The Free Expression Policy Project is part funded by the Andy Warhol Foundation, these guys are getting their fifteen minutes of fame, while we get little enlightenment.

    If I want to know about writing game code I would talk to the experts. If I want to know about the effect of media violence on children I would go to the American Psychological Association, they are worried, very worried, and so should we all be. There comment on television violence is below.

    Here are the disciplines of the "experts group" providing advice on child psychology and media violence.

    • Communications
    • Film and Television studies
    • Education in culture
    • History and American studies
    • English
    • Psychology (still doing their doctorate)
    • Media psychology
    • Communications
    • Author
    • Communications
    • Humanities
    • Author
    • Radio television and film studies
    • Film and interdisciplinary humanities
    • English
    • Sociology
    • Humanities and screen studies
    • Hypermedia
    • Gender studies and critical studies
    • Film television and school, documentary maker
    • Language literature and communications
    • Multimedia designer, artist and games
    • researcher
    • Film studies
    • Sociology and communications
    • Editor of Cineaste magazine
    • Journalist
    • Communications
    • Film and television studies
    • Media studies
    • Film studies
    • Film studies
    • Editor of Children's Software Review
    Finaly, a quote from a comment from American Psychological Association On TV Violence
    Does TV really intensify violent behavior? After review of hundreds of research findings, three major national studies have concluded that heavy exposure to televised violence is one of the significant causes of violence in society:
    • The Surgeon General?s Commission Report (1972).
    • The National Institute of Mental Health Ten-Year Follow-up (1982).
    • The report of the American Psychological Association?s Task Force on Television in Society (1992).
    Viewing violence on the screen has the following negative effects:
    • It increases the viewer's fear of becoming a victim of violence, with a resultant increase in self-protective behaviors and increased mistrust of others.
    • It desensitizes the viewer to violence, resulting in a calloused attitude toward violence directed at others and adecreased likelihood of taking action to help a victim of violence.
    • It increases the viewer?s appetite for becoming involved with violence.
    • It often demonstrates how desirable commodities can be obtained through the use of aggression and violence.
    • Sexual violence in X- and R-rated videotapes widely available to teenagers has also been shown to cause an increase male aggression against females.
    These effects are both short term and long lasting. A longitudinal study of boys found a significant relation between exposure to TV violence at 8 years of age and antisocial acts--including serious violent criminal offenses and spouse abuse--22 years later.