Permanent positions in game development are few, and competition is fierce. It is also a high stress industry (ask a game dev about "crunch time") and pays poorly.
That being said, your basic concept is sound. Stay in your field, but move outside your industry.
I would expect that there is a formula something like the Erlang C equation that could be used to determine IT staffing needs.
I also think that the right question isn't number of non-IT staff to IT staff, but instead, systems to IT staff, or perhaps a combination of the two. For example, while a desktop support person or a helpdesk person is more concerned with users, a developer or operator is more concerned with systems (generally speaking).
At the university where I work, there's around 600 IT staff supporting students, staff and faculty. Let's say about 30,000 students, 2,500 faculty and 2,000 non-IT staff at peak season.
It breaks down to a couple of things. In many states, a doctor (GP) (even an optician) can perform a 'sight test', which is basically the read the lines test.
If anyone is having problem with their eyes, for the love of Bob, go to an optometrist. They can perform an eye exam, and don't consider being able to read letters as the ultimate goal of eyesite.
I was working phone support for a shipping company about 5(?) years ago. Someone from ID once called up, needing help with our software.
When I found out who he worked for, I made a joke about sending me a freebie. He said sure, Told me they were working on DNF and said he'd send a copy to the company, in my name.
I wonder if the guy even still works there, much less remembers?
Try again. Hereis an interview with Richard Taylor, co-founder and head of Effects and Creatures at Weta Workshop, stating that, "Ben designed our female leads." Ben doesn't sound much like Kate.
And while Kate Rose is a costume designer, as far as I can tell, she has no affiliation with Weta, nor would a costume designer likely be brought to the table yet. This is still concept and developement. Eventually sketches like these en dup in the hands of the people that will have to make them a reality, and the arguing begins.
I busted a nut laughing about this post. It seems that in the 'Western' world we still feel that in other parts of the world people need/ want someone to 'welcome' them to the internet and online gaming. I understand your sentiment, and think you almost have a great idea. I'd hope you meant to say that you'd like to welcome them to online gaming in the UK, or NorthAm, or whereever you are from, and that welcoming them to the internet was just a misprint.
The other thing that made me laugh was the notion of a self appointed online welcome wagon. "Welcome to the internet, here's 200MB of free porn, 100MB of MP3s, you RIAA subpoena, and your first emails. There's one from Melissa, and she loves you. As well, someone thinks you may need some, err, enhancements."
Wow. I don't know how to respond to that without getting modded -1 Flamebait.
But I'll try.
Why should "virtual" worlds be excempt from the real world? Let's see... Anonymity, the cost of follow-up and international laws are the first three that come to mind.
Anonymity online is everywhere. Sure for TSO you need a credit card. That's no promise of valid identity. And not all virtual worlds require credit cards.
The cost of follow-up would be insane. Checking into every comment or action that could have legal implications would be insane. Every time someone says, "I'm gonna kick your ass", or slanders another person (I guess if it's in print, it's libel), or says anything that would warrant investigation in the RW, it would cost time and money to investigate.
"But", you say, "we're talking about a little girl being abused!" Yes, and it's a tragedy. And in a perfect world, cost would be no issue. But it is. "I understand that", you say, "but we don't need to look after every case, just the 'tragic' ones." That too would be ideal. But once you look up one, you suddenly can find yourself expected to follow-up all incidents, no matter how minor. Then that can evolve into you being partly accountable for "allowing" something to happen.
Before I get going too much on that, I'll move on to international laws. I'm in Canada. TSO servers are in the US I imagine. We are two countries that/mostly/ get along. But there are some incredible screw ups. Like the US deporting a Canadian citizen to Syria. I don't relish the idea of that same legal system thinking it is responsible for our children. And like I said, that's between countries with good relations. Now throw in counties where the laws are significantly different, or relations are a bit strained. The problems become obvious.
One more thought. If what you said and did in a virtual world could easily come back to haunt you, do you think as many people would be saying or doing wha they do? Probably not.
I would love to see more personal accountability on the internet. But I have no idea how to obtain it.
The whole process is even funnier if you compare it to the number of branded logos people wear.
T-shirt - ogo, brand name name; Hat - small logo; Pants - brand name; Shoes - logo on the side, and brand name on the bottom so there's a chance to leave little brand names on the ground while you walk.
People pay for the right to advertise for another company. There's all this jokes about people walking around with "your logo here" written on them. This is just a variation of that. Now, just write it inside your computer.
and yes, it does have it's uses. But so does wearing someones corp logo.
A nerd is more than an enjoyment of a couple of movies, or games, or anything of the sort.
Absolutely some 'nerd' things age becoming more mainstream. But most of those thing's weren't nerd exclusive. And most of the things the article refers to are entertainment, and a casual interest in it.
I'm guessing there are two things that make a nerd. It's not the object of interest, but the intensity of interest. Star Trek is fun. Lots of people like Star Trek. Not everyone that likes it knows the design specs of all of the Enterprises, or has seen every episode over 20 times, or any of a number of things that say "obsessive".
The Japanese have a great word. Otaku. It's not a good word. Otaku are the people that everyone lokos down on as having no life. And they don't. Not all people labled Nerds are Otaku though. A lot of people with that label are simply interested in the same things as Otaku. Now someone is saying that interest in something that a Nerd is interested in, makes them a Nerd.
I'm thnking that the other thing that makes a nerd a nerd, is a certain type of intelligence. It seems to be a combination of classical thought, with a scoop of imagination. You might say that Nerds are smarter than the average person, but that isn't always true. They just think a little differently. And seem to be alot more prone to sarcasm.
Being a Nerd will always be who you are, not what you like. And chances are, I'll always be a Nerd. And that's a social group I don't mind being a part of.
Of course inacurate or inproperly synced motion cues will cause obvious problems.
I would imagine this would be a huge problem. Syncing the visual motion/ frame rate, with the motion sensation (and it's frame rate) could take a while to perfect.
Another problem would be the secondary issue of actual motion related effects. You lean, does the screen skew? Or even more fun, high G turn, counterbalance against the perception, fall out of your chair (sue Jane's?).
Personally, I'd use this technology to create something truely useless, like another fishing game, but enhanced, by simulating the dizzyness and nausea felt from all the booze you need to consume to keep from being bored out of your skull.
or maybe integrate this with the Virtua Fighter games. Drunken boxing anyone?
"I don't feel so good"
Re:The CIS majors must know something the CS don't
on
In Search of Stupidity
·
· Score: 1
It's difficult to call anything in the technology industry impossible, and might be better to say things like, "may not be possible at this time".
My handwriting comes in two forms: readable, and readable only be me. Maybe one day a computer agent will exist that can read my handwriting, (and that of the average doctor), but due to so much variation in style, angle, size, pressure and so on, it's far away.
Considering that OCR from a textbook is still imperfect (I spend a reasonable ammount of time converting "1" to "l" and so on), universal handwriting "may not be possible at this time".
Jimbo Jones: "Make a note on your Newton to beat up Martin!" Dolph: [writes "Beat up Martin"]
[screen converts it to say "Eat up Martha"]
[Jimbo hucks the Newton at Martin's head]
It looks to me that there are a couple of issues at stake here.
Values: You want your children to adhere to your values, morals and beliefs. Maybe you believe that the human body is a thing that should be covered, and never seen until you are 18. Maybe You are against your children seeing what you consider teh objectification of women (or whatever). Maybe you just think pr0n is bad. It's a branch of ethics. Simply put, of right and wrong. You believe that the internet contains (morally) wrong content. (I'd have to agree with you). I'm guessing you want to restrict their access to it until you feel they are able to respond to it in a (morally) right way. Kudos.
My convcern is this: Have you evaluated why you have these values, and how have you determined that your children are unable to respond appropriately to the material?
If your moral platform is based on, "Because it's wrong." (thank you Buffy), without any more depth, you may need to reevaluate it. If you have determined that your children are unable to have the correct response, based on, "They're not old enough", well, same problem.
I think it is important to monitor and restrict what your children have access to (in teh real world, not just cyberspace) but there are limits. Which bring me to the next, and bigger issue at stake.
Privacy:
The issues regarding privacy are the same no matter whether you are a 12 year old, or a country of a billion people. The big one: Why do you want to invade privacy?
I'll assume it is to protect your children. Which takes us back to values. But what about some of teh many things discussed in this topic? Is it any of your business what they are saying to the person they are dating? Maybe you think yes, maybe not. But you need to determine that. What if they are looking up buying a suprise for you. Do you need to spoil that. Or even more interesting. Maybe they have some huge (to them) life problem, that they just don't feel comfortable talking to a parent about, and are looking it up online, or in communication with a councilling agancy online? Of course there's the other side of the line. Sexual predators, scams, and a million other hazzards.
Privacy vs. protection. Every government in the world has rules and regulations regarding it. What's yours? One more issue.
Parenting:
In alot of ways, parenting is a balance of the two issues. I'm not a parent. May never be one. But I am an orphan, and as aresult, have had a fascination with parents, children, and their relationship. I've watched alot of families. Lived with a few of them. Studies some child and family psychology. Talked to a lot of people with good families. Probably talked to more with bad families. On thing I'vve observed is that love is more important than anything. It helps to keep you from doing dumb things. Now I'm not suggesting any parent doesn't love their children. What I am sayig is that not everything a parent does for their children is out of love. Sometimes it's done because "that's the way it is". No reason really. I've seen parrents do some really bone-headed things. But in cases where they did it out of love, the damage seems to have been less than it could have been.
There is a warning though. Something about the road to hell. Love isn't a catch all. It is, IMHO, the best place to start. From there, move on to reason, then action.
I hope some of this makes sense. If any of it is blatently wrong (other than teh spelling) let me know.
A fair notion. Duplexing makes sense.
Question for anyoneup for the math:
Taking into consideration the speed that a return signal travels, and the distance it travels, how much time would there be before the transmission would be shut down?
If my brain works right, we're about 1.3 light seconds from the moon. So we're looking at about 2.6 seconds, plus whatever time it takes to shut down, or divert the beam.
The math I don't want to bother with is if we assume a tracking motor fails (ie, the beam on the moon stops tracking the target on the earth, and is locked in one position), taking into account the movement of the Earth and Moon, how far would the beam travel in ~3 seconds?
I'm guessing pretty far. But I could be wrong. Anyone out there have the answer?
Slashdot Mirror
Permanent positions in game development are few, and competition is fierce. It is also a high stress industry (ask a game dev about "crunch time") and pays poorly. That being said, your basic concept is sound. Stay in your field, but move outside your industry.
I may steal this for a .sig
I'm bald, and that looks uncomfortable. I'm also wondering how much the final product will weigh.
I'll pass on this technology for shoes. I'd either have to strap my phone to my shoes, or run cables in my clothes. Either method doesn't impress me.
Braveheart?
I would love to see a game made of http://www.larryniven.org/stories/Man_of_Steel_Woman_of_Kleenex.shtml/
... like acting?
... she's good at math. Let's find a way to make her do math, even though she doesn't like it. Does anyone else find this whole topic offensive?
I can't seem to find what it was made of.
I would expect that there is a formula something like the Erlang C equation that could be used to determine IT staffing needs. I also think that the right question isn't number of non-IT staff to IT staff, but instead, systems to IT staff, or perhaps a combination of the two. For example, while a desktop support person or a helpdesk person is more concerned with users, a developer or operator is more concerned with systems (generally speaking). At the university where I work, there's around 600 IT staff supporting students, staff and faculty. Let's say about 30,000 students, 2,500 faculty and 2,000 non-IT staff at peak season.
It breaks down to a couple of things. In many states, a doctor (GP) (even an optician) can perform a 'sight test', which is basically the read the lines test. If anyone is having problem with their eyes, for the love of Bob, go to an optometrist. They can perform an eye exam, and don't consider being able to read letters as the ultimate goal of eyesite.
you're right of course, musta brain farted while typing.
When I found out who he worked for, I made a joke about sending me a freebie. He said sure, Told me they were working on DNF and said he'd send a copy to the company, in my name.
I wonder if the guy even still works there, much less remembers?
And while Kate Rose is a costume designer, as far as I can tell, she has no affiliation with Weta, nor would a costume designer likely be brought to the table yet. This is still concept and developement. Eventually sketches like these en dup in the hands of the people that will have to make them a reality, and the arguing begins.
and as far as the whole 'science' thing goes, accurate measurements of anything are pointless in anything but science.
What's the temperature outside? Cold enough to freeze your nuts off. The effects of the cold are much more useful to people than the exact temp.
Oh well
Until I read your post, I thought it did say GEEK tragedy
The other thing that made me laugh was the notion of a self appointed online welcome wagon. "Welcome to the internet, here's 200MB of free porn, 100MB of MP3s, you RIAA subpoena, and your first emails. There's one from Melissa, and she loves you. As well, someone thinks you may need some, err, enhancements."
But I'll try.
Why should "virtual" worlds be excempt from the real world? Let's see... Anonymity, the cost of follow-up and international laws are the first three that come to mind.
Anonymity online is everywhere. Sure for TSO you need a credit card. That's no promise of valid identity. And not all virtual worlds require credit cards.
The cost of follow-up would be insane. Checking into every comment or action that could have legal implications would be insane. Every time someone says, "I'm gonna kick your ass", or slanders another person (I guess if it's in print, it's libel), or says anything that would warrant investigation in the RW, it would cost time and money to investigate.
"But", you say, "we're talking about a little girl being abused!" Yes, and it's a tragedy. And in a perfect world, cost would be no issue. But it is. "I understand that", you say, "but we don't need to look after every case, just the 'tragic' ones." That too would be ideal. But once you look up one, you suddenly can find yourself expected to follow-up all incidents, no matter how minor. Then that can evolve into you being partly accountable for "allowing" something to happen.
Before I get going too much on that, I'll move on to international laws. I'm in Canada. TSO servers are in the US I imagine. We are two countries that /mostly/ get along. But there are some incredible screw ups. Like the US deporting a Canadian citizen to Syria. I don't relish the idea of that same legal system thinking it is responsible for our children. And like I said, that's between countries with good relations. Now throw in counties where the laws are significantly different, or relations are a bit strained. The problems become obvious.
One more thought. If what you said and did in a virtual world could easily come back to haunt you, do you think as many people would be saying or doing wha they do? Probably not.
I would love to see more personal accountability on the internet. But I have no idea how to obtain it.
"Damn, my computer keeps rolling off of the table."
T-shirt - ogo, brand name name; Hat - small logo; Pants - brand name; Shoes - logo on the side, and brand name on the bottom so there's a chance to leave little brand names on the ground while you walk.
People pay for the right to advertise for another company. There's all this jokes about people walking around with "your logo here" written on them. This is just a variation of that. Now, just write it inside your computer.
and yes, it does have it's uses. But so does wearing someones corp logo.
Absolutely some 'nerd' things age becoming more mainstream. But most of those thing's weren't nerd exclusive. And most of the things the article refers to are entertainment, and a casual interest in it.
I'm guessing there are two things that make a nerd. It's not the object of interest, but the intensity of interest. Star Trek is fun. Lots of people like Star Trek. Not everyone that likes it knows the design specs of all of the Enterprises, or has seen every episode over 20 times, or any of a number of things that say "obsessive".
The Japanese have a great word. Otaku. It's not a good word. Otaku are the people that everyone lokos down on as having no life. And they don't. Not all people labled Nerds are Otaku though. A lot of people with that label are simply interested in the same things as Otaku. Now someone is saying that interest in something that a Nerd is interested in, makes them a Nerd.
I'm thnking that the other thing that makes a nerd a nerd, is a certain type of intelligence. It seems to be a combination of classical thought, with a scoop of imagination. You might say that Nerds are smarter than the average person, but that isn't always true. They just think a little differently. And seem to be alot more prone to sarcasm.
Being a Nerd will always be who you are, not what you like. And chances are, I'll always be a Nerd. And that's a social group I don't mind being a part of.
I would imagine this would be a huge problem. Syncing the visual motion/ frame rate, with the motion sensation (and it's frame rate) could take a while to perfect.
Another problem would be the secondary issue of actual motion related effects. You lean, does the screen skew? Or even more fun, high G turn, counterbalance against the perception, fall out of your chair (sue Jane's?).
Personally, I'd use this technology to create something truely useless, like another fishing game, but enhanced, by simulating the dizzyness and nausea felt from all the booze you need to consume to keep from being bored out of your skull.
or maybe integrate this with the Virtua Fighter games. Drunken boxing anyone?
"I don't feel so good"
My handwriting comes in two forms: readable, and readable only be me. Maybe one day a computer agent will exist that can read my handwriting, (and that of the average doctor), but due to so much variation in style, angle, size, pressure and so on, it's far away.
Considering that OCR from a textbook is still imperfect (I spend a reasonable ammount of time converting "1" to "l" and so on), universal handwriting "may not be possible at this time".
Jimbo Jones: "Make a note on your Newton to beat up Martin!"
Dolph: [writes "Beat up Martin"]
[screen converts it to say "Eat up Martha"]
[Jimbo hucks the Newton at Martin's head]
Values:
You want your children to adhere to your values, morals and beliefs. Maybe you believe that the human body is a thing that should be covered, and never seen until you are 18. Maybe You are against your children seeing what you consider teh objectification of women (or whatever). Maybe you just think pr0n is bad.
It's a branch of ethics. Simply put, of right and wrong. You believe that the internet contains (morally) wrong content. (I'd have to agree with you). I'm guessing you want to restrict their access to it until you feel they are able to respond to it in a (morally) right way. Kudos.
My convcern is this: Have you evaluated why you have these values, and how have you determined that your children are unable to respond appropriately to the material?
If your moral platform is based on, "Because it's wrong." (thank you Buffy), without any more depth, you may need to reevaluate it. If you have determined that your children are unable to have the correct response, based on, "They're not old enough", well, same problem.
I think it is important to monitor and restrict what your children have access to (in teh real world, not just cyberspace) but there are limits. Which bring me to the next, and bigger issue at stake.
Privacy:
The issues regarding privacy are the same no matter whether you are a 12 year old, or a country of a billion people. The big one: Why do you want to invade privacy?
I'll assume it is to protect your children. Which takes us back to values. But what about some of teh many things discussed in this topic? Is it any of your business what they are saying to the person they are dating? Maybe you think yes, maybe not. But you need to determine that. What if they are looking up buying a suprise for you. Do you need to spoil that. Or even more interesting. Maybe they have some huge (to them) life problem, that they just don't feel comfortable talking to a parent about, and are looking it up online, or in communication with a councilling agancy online? Of course there's the other side of the line. Sexual predators, scams, and a million other hazzards.
Privacy vs. protection. Every government in the world has rules and regulations regarding it. What's yours?
One more issue.
Parenting:
In alot of ways, parenting is a balance of the two issues. I'm not a parent. May never be one. But I am an orphan, and as aresult, have had a fascination with parents, children, and their relationship. I've watched alot of families. Lived with a few of them. Studies some child and family psychology. Talked to a lot of people with good families. Probably talked to more with bad families. On thing I'vve observed is that love is more important than anything. It helps to keep you from doing dumb things. Now I'm not suggesting any parent doesn't love their children. What I am sayig is that not everything a parent does for their children is out of love. Sometimes it's done because "that's the way it is". No reason really. I've seen parrents do some really bone-headed things. But in cases where they did it out of love, the damage seems to have been less than it could have been.
There is a warning though. Something about the road to hell. Love isn't a catch all. It is, IMHO, the best place to start. From there, move on to reason, then action.
I hope some of this makes sense. If any of it is blatently wrong (other than teh spelling) let me know.
A fair notion. Duplexing makes sense. Question for anyoneup for the math: Taking into consideration the speed that a return signal travels, and the distance it travels, how much time would there be before the transmission would be shut down? If my brain works right, we're about 1.3 light seconds from the moon. So we're looking at about 2.6 seconds, plus whatever time it takes to shut down, or divert the beam. The math I don't want to bother with is if we assume a tracking motor fails (ie, the beam on the moon stops tracking the target on the earth, and is locked in one position), taking into account the movement of the Earth and Moon, how far would the beam travel in ~3 seconds? I'm guessing pretty far. But I could be wrong. Anyone out there have the answer?