After this we can tax people who breathe, because I am sick of hearing opinions that I don't agree with. If someone wants to tell me something I am not interested in hearing, they must interact with my token agent and pay me a fee. If they don't pay the fee, then they will have to stop breathing.
(Bush would be dead in seconds)
1) The writing is on the wall. A digital music backbone that can be integrated with any other number of system has been a long time coming. The point isn't that it is a guitar and it's digital. The point is that eventually all the audio signals in a performance/recording will be digital. You get ease of use (plug in the jack and assign a channel digitally), clarity of sound, much easier signal processing (effects), as well as piggybacking additional control signals. As a station manager of a radio station, I would love this sort of system built into our mixing board. A physical location wouldn't necessarily correspond to a channel in the mixing board, just like a physical port in the wall doesn't necessarily correspond to a particular IP address.
2) The dinosaur analog lovers will always bitch about digital, but there will eventually be a time when digital quality surpasses analog. I still prefer records to cds because of the more continuous signal, and more physical control over playback, but digital technology isn't far off from replacing this. People talk about the warmth of a tube amplifier, but it is physically possible to model the second harmonic distortion of the tube amp much at a much lower cost. Nobody is saying that you as an analog guitar player have to use this technology. They will probably still be making analog guitars hundreds of years from now. In the future, though, if someone has a system like Magic installed, they might have a ADC hooked up to your pickup. Nobody except the top studios are going to rush out and gut their entire studio and go digital, but this will happen eventually, and this system has a good chance of surviving.
internet dorks find simulating meatspace interaction with other internet dorks unappealing?
The Matrix won't need full fledged VR. It just needs a place to post text bitching.
There is no reason for the federal government to regulate or secure "the internet" for national security measures.
The government is strictly responsible for its own security. The recent attempts to infer that the entire datasphere is necessary to be government regulated is frightening.
If a government agency is compromised, that is their responsibility. If a private network that affects individuals is compromised (such as a utility), it is that private company's responsibility to provide their own security.
In a very conspiracy theorist sort of way I am very afraid of the government stepping in and regulating. If you look at the way the FCC regulates the radio airwaves to the benefit of the moneyholders (radio station owners), you must argue with diligence to convince me that they won't act under similar paradigms when controlling internet security.
In direct response to your post, it seems that you are interested in the goverment keeping government data secure. I think we both agree on this. I worry, however, about blanket calls for government intervention.
I'm not sure if you are being tounge in cheek or not.
In my experience, people tell me that I try to subdivide things too much. Since this is a site for nerds and geeks, I figure this is where my early toilet training should be appreciated.
On one hand, for example, Zelda and FF are both good video games, so why complain or subdivide. My aim is to add to the language the tendency to specify the differences between these games. We do occasionally specify that Zelda is an "Adventure" game (i.e. real time moving a character around with the jumping and the slashing). Also the FF games are turn based (or phased time) combat games with leveling and weapons. There should be an easier or simpler way to state those things (also the many different kinds of RPGs besides that).
My opinion is that if we are clear about what we want, game houses, or independent mod creators will be more receptive to that.
I wish that we could spontaneously agree upon what to call our two different kinds of games. There are two totally different design ideals when creating a game with leveling and weapons, and when creating a game that has more interactivity and dialog. Granted most games shouldn't be all one or the other, but most games are.
I absolutely hate Diablo, NWN, Eversmack, FF6+ but I want the industry to keep creating games like that for people that want games like that. I absolutely love games that focus more on story and intricate conversation, and the ability to do very many different things in very many different ways (i.e. completely divergent plotlines). I don't like to bring in the double edged sword of the english language to further subdivide the RPG market, but perhaps it is time. Any suggestions?
www.mygeekdom.com My favorite place on the net to bitch about Bush.
RPG's need something that has very rarely been done: Role Playing. Less focus should be spent on combat, aquiring weapons and armor, and hit point management.
Recent developments in user moded rpgs should start to let the plot, dialog, and interactivity of games shine over the same old same old. Big game houses are currently focu$ed on making a product ship with success. Small, part-time mod creators just want to make someone happy.
www.mygeekdom.com A little corner of the net I call home.
Combat is not role playing or story telling. While I cannot deny you your opinion, it is yours, Ultima 7 had a wonderful storyline with well developed conversations and quests. I rather liked that much of the battles were abstracted away leaving more time for thinking and talking. Luckily for both of us Origin released U5 and U7 We can all be happy.
Slashdot Mirror
is put my keys down, then the baby, then my cellphone. Uh oh, baby has a tumor. But damn, my cell phone is a-charged!
After this we can tax people who breathe, because I am sick of hearing opinions that I don't agree with. If someone wants to tell me something I am not interested in hearing, they must interact with my token agent and pay me a fee. If they don't pay the fee, then they will have to stop breathing. (Bush would be dead in seconds)
You forgot set on fire. Do we really want cars that are set on fire flying around in the air.
they just kept them in memory...and turned the power off.
1) The writing is on the wall. A digital music backbone that can be integrated with any other number of system has been a long time coming. The point isn't that it is a guitar and it's digital. The point is that eventually all the audio signals in a performance/recording will be digital. You get ease of use (plug in the jack and assign a channel digitally), clarity of sound, much easier signal processing (effects), as well as piggybacking additional control signals. As a station manager of a radio station, I would love this sort of system built into our mixing board. A physical location wouldn't necessarily correspond to a channel in the mixing board, just like a physical port in the wall doesn't necessarily correspond to a particular IP address.
2) The dinosaur analog lovers will always bitch about digital, but there will eventually be a time when digital quality surpasses analog. I still prefer records to cds because of the more continuous signal, and more physical control over playback, but digital technology isn't far off from replacing this. People talk about the warmth of a tube amplifier, but it is physically possible to model the second harmonic distortion of the tube amp much at a much lower cost. Nobody is saying that you as an analog guitar player have to use this technology. They will probably still be making analog guitars hundreds of years from now. In the future, though, if someone has a system like Magic installed, they might have a ADC hooked up to your pickup. Nobody except the top studios are going to rush out and gut their entire studio and go digital, but this will happen eventually, and this system has a good chance of surviving.
Getting scientific information from New Scientist is like getting international news from USA Today.
internet dorks find simulating meatspace interaction with other internet dorks unappealing? The Matrix won't need full fledged VR. It just needs a place to post text bitching.
The government is strictly responsible for its own security. The recent attempts to infer that the entire datasphere is necessary to be government regulated is frightening.
If a government agency is compromised, that is their responsibility. If a private network that affects individuals is compromised (such as a utility), it is that private company's responsibility to provide their own security.
In a very conspiracy theorist sort of way I am very afraid of the government stepping in and regulating. If you look at the way the FCC regulates the radio airwaves to the benefit of the moneyholders (radio station owners), you must argue with diligence to convince me that they won't act under similar paradigms when controlling internet security.
In direct response to your post, it seems that you are interested in the goverment keeping government data secure. I think we both agree on this. I worry, however, about blanket calls for government intervention.
Point taken. Maybe as the software technology, we can weave bots that affect plot through dialog. Until then I'm "stuck" interacting with humans.
In my experience, people tell me that I try to subdivide things too much. Since this is a site for nerds and geeks, I figure this is where my early toilet training should be appreciated.
On one hand, for example, Zelda and FF are both good video games, so why complain or subdivide. My aim is to add to the language the tendency to specify the differences between these games. We do occasionally specify that Zelda is an "Adventure" game (i.e. real time moving a character around with the jumping and the slashing). Also the FF games are turn based (or phased time) combat games with leveling and weapons. There should be an easier or simpler way to state those things (also the many different kinds of RPGs besides that).
My opinion is that if we are clear about what we want, game houses, or independent mod creators will be more receptive to that.
On the other hand I chalk up your vote as a NO.
www.mygeekdom.com Geek radio? Does it hurt?
I wish that we could spontaneously agree upon what to call our two different kinds of games. There are two totally different design ideals when creating a game with leveling and weapons, and when creating a game that has more interactivity and dialog. Granted most games shouldn't be all one or the other, but most games are.
I absolutely hate Diablo, NWN, Eversmack, FF6+ but I want the industry to keep creating games like that for people that want games like that. I absolutely love games that focus more on story and intricate conversation, and the ability to do very many different things in very many different ways (i.e. completely divergent plotlines). I don't like to bring in the double edged sword of the english language to further subdivide the RPG market, but perhaps it is time.
Any suggestions?
www.mygeekdom.com My favorite place on the net to bitch about Bush.
RPG's need something that has very rarely been done: Role Playing. Less focus should be spent on combat, aquiring weapons and armor, and hit point management. Recent developments in user moded rpgs should start to let the plot, dialog, and interactivity of games shine over the same old same old. Big game houses are currently focu$ed on making a product ship with success. Small, part-time mod creators just want to make someone happy. www.mygeekdom.com A little corner of the net I call home.
Combat is not role playing or story telling. While I cannot deny you your opinion, it is yours, Ultima 7 had a wonderful storyline with well developed conversations and quests. I rather liked that much of the battles were abstracted away leaving more time for thinking and talking. Luckily for both of us Origin released U5 and U7 We can all be happy.
Sounds like Dithering to me.