> Not being a game developer I wonder what game devs would prefer,
You are asking two questions:
What do game devs prefer for software? What do game devs prefer for hardware?
When I used to work with PS3 developers -- they almost _always_ lead their development on the XBox 360. It was _very_ rare was it to see a studio lead on the PS3 -- but those that did -- tended to have a better engine for load-balancing at the end of the day (it is easier to scale down, then scale up.)
Microsoft is a software company, Sony is a hardware company.
The tools MS provided were _perceived_ as being easier and better. (I can and will not comment on the reality.)
WRT hardware, game devs appreciated the power the PS3 + SPUs even if it involved the crap load of work to get it running 100% load-balancing. Having to worry about LHS (Load-Hit-Stores) was a total PITA for PS3 developers -- memory access was pretty much ignored on the XBox 360. The bigger problem was Sony using a 64-bit OS (all pointers were 64-bits !!) when the dam console only has 512 MB address space?!?! This kind of "Sony ignorance/arrogance" being out of touch with developers was not uncommon.
PC + Xbox Developers tend to want a AMD/Intel approach to hardware for _ease of _use. Sony / Nintendo developers tend to prefer multi-core / dedicated CPUs for everything for _performance_.
One or the other isn't wrong -- just a different focus.
I've shipped PS2 games and worked with numerous developers that have shipped PS3 games.
Sony's problem is the Not-Invented-Here syndrome. They have yet to learn the lesson that Apple mastered years ago in the 80's -- use off the shelf commodity parts!! Why? They will become DIRT cheap in a few years. Why waste millions of dollars investing into R&D of new hardware when in 5 years somebody else will have a no-name version of it at a fraction of the price??
e.g. Sony is _slowly_ learning this lesson. After how many man-years of a buggy PS2 GS (Graphics Synthesizer) that couldn't even properly do z-tesing (!?!/!) the PS3 RSX is (mostly) a GTX 7800+ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'
When the PS2 first came out everyone bitched how difficulty it was, yet it was a beautiful thing to see all of its 7 CPUs working full speed load-balancing the system. It laid the foundation that multi-core programming was the future. When the PS3 came out everyone bitched how even more difficult it would be. Developers just sucked it up and now we are even seeing A.I. running on the SPE/SPUs on second-gen and 3rd-gen PS3 games! That's pretty cool to see a modern game engine utilizing every core it can.
Using stock parts: CPU + GPU is a great way to minimize costs. You don't get the same performance benefits of true dedicated design but the commodity parts are cheap enough that the pricing curve naturally takes care of that. Kind of a no-brainer if Sony decides to use an AMD or Intel CPU for the PS4.
Killzone 2 utilizes roughly only 60 per cent of the SPU's. "It's incredible to see huge levels and see the deferred rendering and note that on all the SPU's, even on the heaviest load were coming up to about 60%," Haynes said. "They weren't coming close to maxing out. They had about 40% of space before they started tripping or saw slow down on some of the processes."
and
Killzone 3 uses 100% of SPU's. we're having a footprint of a level that's ten times bigger than the average Killzone 2 level. Killzone 2 was not a small game, but that was as far as we could push it back then.
> but she didn't wait the 5 seconds it takes to boot Why the hell isn't it a _priority_ to have these devices fully functional within 1 second?? Is firmware (software in cars) _already_ that bloated??
> You can't fix stupid. Sadly, that is the root problem: Unawareness / not mindful.:-(
> And every time I'm on the expressway, I wish I had a camera for my blind spots.
You're doing it wrong. Seriously, when you mirrors are _properly_ configured in a car you should NOT have ANY blind spots.
Angle your mirrors out more. You should be able to track a car in your rearview mirror, to your side mirror, to the right/left WITHOUT moving your head.
Most people "toe in" their mirrors WAY too much, which means they need to move forward to see "more." This is inefficient, lazy, and just bad (as in accident prone.)
i.e. "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.
If you are in the US there are ways out of them. There are legal exemptions. e.g. Occupants of a motor home, Certified phobia of seat belts, Religious Divine Providence, etc.
My brother doesn't wear one and was recently ticketed for not wearing one. He did his homework filing the necessary paperwork before his court date came up. The judge admitted this was "Certainly an interesting case" and ruled against them. He appealed to the Superior Court and had the case dismissed because the Judge realized he _couldn't_ provide a ruling as that would set a very dangerous precedent for the courts. i.e. "Public Safety" is NOT the issue as there not one case showing where not wearing a seat belt has presented a danger to others. This is not just a one-off as his Father-In-Law has used the exact tactics for the past 20+ years in New York and in Carolina -- the root issue is: The seat belt law is inconsistent with Constitutionally protected exemptions. i.e. Exemptions for Public Schooling (home school) and Inoculations.
If you are going to go down this route you had better well have all your ducks in a row! It all comes down to you need to pick and chose your battles. You can win the battle yet still lose the war.
Microsoft is a software company that doesn't understand hardware, and is learning about user experience. Sony is a hardware company that doesn't understand software NOR user experience Apple is a company that understands hardware, software, and user experience. They are not perfect but were the first to understand that the "Out-of-the Box" experience should be the highest priority. Sadly it is the _lowest_ priority in Sony's case.
This stupidity of proprietary cable nonsense needs to stop.
> all including the cult of "science". To discriminate would not be "scientific"
You're forgetting this is/. -- they aren't simply not interested in accepting that Science has Faith and will cry out heresy the instant you show them they worship Pseudo-Skeptics.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can not be created nor destroyed, only change its form. <-- This right here is the "God" of Science. (Religion states "God (always) was, is, and will be. He/she can not be created nor destroyed. God simply exists, or "is".) By this Law the [physical] universe must have _always_ existed in some form or another.Same shit, different perspective!
The universe is digital. This is currently a problem because scientists have no way to measure anything smaller then the Planck Scale nor measure anything that travels faster then the Speed of Light. Since humans have only inspected < %0.00000001 of the universe they are forced to take these things on faith.
> The problem with "science" and it's religious followers (see: Nearly all/.ers) is that it only accounts for what is provable now with no consideration that other factors
No, the problem with Science is that it is an "Subtractive" model.
To use an analogy there are 2 types of color models:
1) Subtractive, and 2) Additive.
When you print colors you use the subtractive model. That is, as you add colors, the final pigment goes towards muddy brown. (You used to need to add a black ink to achieve true black because the pigments weren't ideal, but the point stands.)
In contradistinction all display devices such as CRTS, LCD, LEDs, Plasmas, use the additive model. As you add colors the final pigment goes towards white.
How does this apply to Science and Religion?
Science is a subtractive model. You can never "create" truth -- you can never "prove truth" -- you can only subtract falsehood. i.e. You keep removing _errors_, and what is (hopefully) left is truth. Why? Because of the paradox of truth! one Truth does not negate another Truth, but Truth will remove Falsehood.
True Knowledge, Gnosis, is an additive model. You keep adding truth one level at a time by what you live. What makes Science a Cult is that espouses "There is only ONE way to know the Truth" and refuses to to acknowledge other ways. Ironically since Time is meta-physical and Consciousness is meta-physical then there MUST be other ways to arrive at the answer but Science is NOT interested in exploring questions outside its domain so it remains forever blind to the meta-physical. This is the point you were trying to make.
When scientists die, they will be in for a rude awakening of just how deep consciousness goes.
A perfect example of this will be that science will eventually discover * White holes are on the opposite sides of Black holes -- when they invent the Plasma Lens they will see them. * There are 6 fundamental forces of nature, not 4. * All things are conscious and there are levels to awareness * What we call the Physical is only 1/8 of reality
I tried e17 ages ago and it was one of my few favorite window managers. Never did spend any time configuring it but your posts make me want to check that out.
> *some* gamers just want gameplay. Some gamers want story.
Uh, did you miss the part where I said "For the MOST part gamers..." ?
First, You seem to be arguing when I AM agreeing with you -- you are not just not paying attention to what I am writing.
Second, you're preaching to the choir here. I've played my share of RPGs, Adventure Games, FPSs etc., where the story was the most important aspect, games where story didn't matter, and everything in between. Ico was a masterpiece precisely because of story. Modern games such as Uncharted, Grand Theft Auto, etc., alternate between gameplay and story.
Now you can argue how much that story matters to people -- whether it is 1% or 100% across all the genres. No one seems to know the exact percentage for sure however for FPSs you can gauge the numbers accurately.
> The problem is, you can't generalize gamers like that. Yes you can, and I have the stats to back it up.
1. I am an admin on the most popular L4D server. Almost none of the players give a shit about the back story judging by the number of player we serve. However, when we play custom maps players routinely make comments about the environments. Anytime the topic of L4D2 comes up it quickly polarizes people into 2 groups -- those that hate it, and those that love it. Story is never mentioned. Character Design is.
2. Counter-strike has more playing then ALL the other first person shooters combined. They play because of the gameplay not the story.
3. Do you understand why the latest Battlefield and the Call of Duty sell millions? This is along the point you are making, but not grasping: For single player games, story is significantly more important. For multi player games, story is insignificant, over time.
Some people read each and every quest in WoW. They know every sub-story and sub-plot. Again, having been in some of the biggest guilds on the server I used to play on, and from seeing the popularity of Thottbot, Allakhazam Wowhead, etc. "most. don't. care." They just want to know "where do I go, and who do I have to kill?"
So yes, story matters based on the genre, and to some, but for the most part it doesn't matter.
> What you may not have noticed, because you don't work in the UX department My boss would probably beg to differ since my official job title is Senior User Experience Developer.
> The problem with voice is you can't be specific enough to target an on-screen object with voice. That's one.
You also missed the bigger issues such as training and context:
- If you have a cold voice recognition is screwed. If you have an accent voice recognition is also totally screwed. People refuse to put up with voice training simply because it is so inaccurate. Ideally there has to be NO training.
- If you are having a conversation and mention "Did you catch show _x_ that was on channel 5 last night?" how does the device know that it should ignore your command?
Voice recognition is a pipe dream for the next 50 years.
>What about the kinect? How do people learn how to use it? We did a prototype with Kinect. It was a disaster. Why? Because you are ignoring basic kinesiology.
People holding their hands up for any length of time is extremely tiring. Gestures work on a _tablet_ and mouse because your hands have something to rest on.
Giving game tutorial are fine and great, but in the real world most people don't remember invisible interfaces. Most people do not use a command line for the same reason.
> The problem with visual gestures is that it's awkward to control. That is part of the problem.
It is also extremely low precision.
> The hard part isn't doing it, the hard part is thinking about what to do. > Obviously, what you need to do is combine them. Visual gestures for objects, voice for verbs. There, problem solved. Actually, obviously you are smarter then our entire team_s_ working on this that we should just hire you to _implement_ the solutions.
Come back to me when you have at least tried to _implement_ some of the next gen UIs. The problems are non-trivial. There are reasons why keyboard / remote works so well and will continue to be the dominate choice for user _input_.
> They are government-granted privileges, like a drivers license.
Which is in contradistinction to your "Right To Travel." Government granted privileges come from the power of the people.
e.g. "Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business for private gain." Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82; Willis vs. Buck, 263 P.l 982.
"The right of the citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus." State vs. City of Spokane, 186 P. 864.
What is this Right of the Citizen which differs so "radically and obviously" from one who uses the highway as a place of business? Who better to enlighten us than Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of Washington State? In State vs. City of Spokane, supra, the Court also noted a very "radical and obvious" difference, but went on to explain just what the difference is:
"The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a common right to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary."
"The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784; Thompson vs. Smith, supra.
I noticed you had some complaints regarding Zynga's game "Dream Heights". I'm sorry they copied you like that. That's not cool. It sure looks like they're huge gans of yours. Though it looks like you guys are huge fans of someone too. There's a game called "Corporation Inc." I'm sure you've heard of it. It was pretty popular a few months back.
It's a bit similar to your game "Tiny Tower", only it was released 4 months prior to the release of your game. I wouldn't say "Tiny Tower" is a copy of Corporation Inc., I'd say its more of an elaboration or continuation, it could easily be called "Corporation Inc 2". Tiny Tower is has a lot of different features and gameplay, but the core it seems a bit familiar.
In fact, "Corporation Inc.", Zynga's "Dream Heights" and your "Tiny Tower" are all quite similar to SimTower, which Corporation Inc. credits in their flash game. I don't own your game. So I don't know if you give credit to anyone for your "inspiration", but I certainly hope you did (especially since you're upset with Zynga for being overly "inspired" by you.)
It's not just you guys or Zynga. It's quite common in the App market. Everyone does it. Even "Angry Birds" (possible the most popular app out there) was quite "inspired" by flash games, particular a game called "Crush the Castle" designed by Chris Condon and Joey Betz. It was released 7 months before Angry Birds. They made a killing by replicated a flah game that was already popular (which is quite the trend now.)
Please, don't get me wrong. I think it's great that these types of games are gaining popularity due to the success of the smart phone. Just please don't pretend like you're the victim. I don't know anybody who has any respect for Zynga, and if you want anyone to have respect for you guys at Nimblebit, don't whine about these things over the internet. Leave your fans to do your dirty work.
In fact, "Corporation Inc.", Zynga's "Dream Heights" and your "Tiny Tower" are all quite similar to SimTower, which Corporation Inc. credits in their flash game. I don't own your game. So I don't know if you give credit to anyone for your "inspiration"
Your conclusion faulty, based on a faulty premise.
The root problem is greed. The symptom is that money got involved with laws. He who can afford the most lawyers can win. Notice this is the SAME problem & symptom in Politics.
The solution is to remove money from the equation:
If one side wants to pay one lawyer more then half of it should be given to the other side. That is, pool the resources, so one side does not have a monetary advantage.
OR,
the better long term solution: Get rid of money. Now you're probably thinking -- LOLz , what?!
What do you think money _is_? Money is nothing more then the exchange of energy.
We all get "free" energy from the Sun everyday. It doesn't ask for anything back. It just gives and gives. Therefor, research alternative ways to provide "free" energy.
When everyone has a safe portable energy generator in their home that is equivalent to the power of a nuclear reactor you don't think the world is going to change?
That is what is coming down the pipe ~ 50 to 100 years.
The maturity of removing greed from systems, because greed is a cancer -- it causes whatever system it touches to implode.
> Maybe that means a mic or a kinect that lets us talk or gesture. Maybe it means having a little display on a tablet. I don't know. I just know that what we have now is a huge mess.
I work for a company that is working on the next-gen UI for TVs.
There is a reason that mic's or gestures will never become popular.
They are _invisible_ interfaces.
How is a user supposed to know what the different gestures are? Or what the _available_ voice commands are?
Mic's will never work because they fail on this usage case: If you have an accent the software is fucked.
WIMP (Windows, Image, Mouse/Menu, Pointer) and Keyboards work because you get immediate feedback plus you can directly see the effects of pushing a button, dragging, clicking a menu item, etc.
One thing I've observed is that every country has their own version of the "south" / "hicks" / "rednecks" where they are made fun for living life at a slower pace -- this permeates their speech, etc. The rest of the country doesn't usually share their love of guns and their lazy approach to solving problems. i.e. see "you might be a redneck if" https://www.google.com/search?q=you+might+be+a+redneck+if&tbm=isch
Guess people like to make fun of other people that are different:-/
> It's very hard to have a game ride on its gameplay alone; you need to give the player a reason to keep playing, a reason to care about the characters involved, a reason to be interested in the world they're playing in.
Total bullshit. Counter-examples.
* Tetris * Marble Madness * Minecraft * TF2
There is a time and a place for story, but not every fricken GAME needs a story.
You are correct. For the most part gamers don't give a shit about cut scenes or story -- they just want to play the dam game.
TF2 has the right balance -- there is a back story IF you are interested, but it doesn't keep you from just hopping and blowing shit up.
There is a time and a place for cut scenes. But for the majority of them they just get in the way. Especially the unskippable cut scenes when you are replaying the game, can't pause it due to interruptions such as kids, food, neighbor, etc. Not that I don't love Ico, Uncharted, etc, but too many designers forget that it is a computer GAME first and fore-most, not a fricken movie.
faith, noun 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability. 2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. 3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims. 4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty. 5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
Ignoring definition 1 doesn't make it go away.
You keep assuming faith has been hijacked by religion.
Everyone has beliefs.
Beliefs can fall into two categories * Rational Beliefs * Irrational Beliefs
If you never do anything with those beliefs, they are just that beliefs. But once you act upon them, the beliefs become faith. Again, the reason may either be rational, or irrational. Grounded Faith, or Blind Faith.
Scientists have faith (rational beliefs) that the Scientific Method is way to gain truth (by removing falsehood.)
i.e If you are married you have faith that your partner will remain faithful to you. That is, not have unprotected sex without telling you. You live a certain lifestyle based on faith -- again, either a rational or irrational belief.
> Actually, Judaism believes that once the Messiah comes, there will be eternal world peace. Correct.
> Since we obviously don't have world peace, Jews reason that the Messiah hasn't come yet. And he never will.
> We recognize that many people have come forward to claim the title of "Messiah" but none of them have panned out. Messiah = anointed one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messianism
In one of the oldest existing Bibles, Codex Bezae, we read: "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
The basic problem is that Judaism reads the Talmud literally and is blind to the allegorical and spiritual meanings.
Rabbi Simeon said
"If a man looks upon the Torah as merely a book presenting narratives and everyday matters, alas for him! Such a torah, one treating with everyday concerns, and indeed a more excellent one, we too, even we, could compile. More than that, in the possession of the rulers of the world there are books of even greater merit, and these we could emulate if we wished to compile some such torah. But the Torah, in all of its words, holds supernal truths and sublime secrets.
"See how precisely balanced are the upper and the lower worlds. Israel here below is balanced by the angels on high, concerning whom it stands written: "who makest thy angels into winds" (Psalms 104:4). For when the angels descend to the earth they don earthly garments, else they could neither abide in the world, nor could it bear to have them. But if this is so with the angels, then how much more so it must be with the Torah: the Torah it was that created the angels and created all the worlds and through Torah are all sustained. The world could not endure the Torah if she had not garbed herself in the garments of this world. (temple of Solomon, and within us)
"Thus the tales related in the Torah are simply her outer garments, and woe to the man who regards that outer garb as the Torah itself, for such a man will be deprived of portion in the next world. Thus David said:" Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law" (Psalms 119:18), that is to say, the things that are underneath. See now. The most visible part of a man are the clothes that he has on, and they who lack understanding, when they look at the man, are apt not to see more in him than these clothes. In reality, however, it is the body of the man that constitutes the pride of his clothes, and his soul constitutes the pride of his body.
"So it is with the Torah. Its narrations which relate to the things of the worlds constitute the garments which clothe the body of the Torah; and that body is composed of the Torah's precepts, gufey-torah (bodies, major principles). People without understanding see only the narrations, the garment; those somewhat more penetrating see also the body. But the truly wise, those who serve the most high King and stood on mount Sinai, pierce all the way through to the soul, to the true Torah which is the root principle of all. These same will in the future be vouchsafed to penetrate to the very soul of the soul of the Torah.
"See now how it is like this in the highest world, with garment, body, soul and super-soul. The outer garments are the heavens and all therein, the body is the Community of Israel and it is the recipient of the soul, that is 'the Glory of Israel'; and the soul of the soul is the Ancient Holy One. All of these are conjoined one within the other.
"Woe to the sinners who look upon the Torah as simply tales pertaining to things of the world, seeing thus only the outer garment. But the righteous whose gaze penetrates to the very Torah, happy are they. Just as wine must be in a jar to keep, so the Torah must also be contained in an outer garme
Slashdot Mirror
The better question is what is Science's answer for why women who live in the same house have their periods synchronized ?
> Not being a game developer I wonder what game devs would prefer,
You are asking two questions:
What do game devs prefer for software?
What do game devs prefer for hardware?
When I used to work with PS3 developers -- they almost _always_ lead their development on the XBox 360. It was _very_ rare was it to see a studio lead on the PS3 -- but those that did -- tended to have a better engine for load-balancing at the end of the day (it is easier to scale down, then scale up.)
Easier: Multi-Core --> Few-Core (PS3 --> Xbox360)
Harder: Few-Core --> Multi-Core (XBox 360 --> PS3)
Microsoft is a software company,
Sony is a hardware company.
The tools MS provided were _perceived_ as being easier and better. (I can and will not comment on the reality.)
WRT hardware, game devs appreciated the power the PS3 + SPUs even if it involved the crap load of work to get it running 100% load-balancing. Having to worry about LHS (Load-Hit-Stores) was a total PITA for PS3 developers -- memory access was pretty much ignored on the XBox 360. The bigger problem was Sony using a 64-bit OS (all pointers were 64-bits !!) when the dam console only has 512 MB address space?!?! This kind of "Sony ignorance/arrogance" being out of touch with developers was not uncommon.
PC + Xbox Developers tend to want a AMD/Intel approach to hardware for _ease of _use. Sony / Nintendo developers tend to prefer multi-core / dedicated CPUs for everything for _performance_.
One or the other isn't wrong -- just a different focus.
I've shipped PS2 games and worked with numerous developers that have shipped PS3 games.
Sony's problem is the Not-Invented-Here syndrome. They have yet to learn the lesson that Apple mastered years ago in the 80's -- use off the shelf commodity parts!! Why? They will become DIRT cheap in a few years. Why waste millions of dollars investing into R&D of new hardware when in 5 years somebody else will have a no-name version of it at a fraction of the price??
e.g.
Sony is _slowly_ learning this lesson. After how many man-years of a buggy PS2 GS (Graphics Synthesizer) that couldn't even properly do z-tesing (!?!/!) the PS3 RSX is (mostly) a GTX 7800+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'
When the PS2 first came out everyone bitched how difficulty it was, yet it was a beautiful thing to see all of its 7 CPUs working full speed load-balancing the system. It laid the foundation that multi-core programming was the future. When the PS3 came out everyone bitched how even more difficult it would be. Developers just sucked it up and now we are even seeing A.I. running on the SPE/SPUs on second-gen and 3rd-gen PS3 games! That's pretty cool to see a modern game engine utilizing every core it can.
Using stock parts: CPU + GPU is a great way to minimize costs. You don't get the same performance benefits of true dedicated design but the commodity parts are cheap enough that the pricing curve naturally takes care of that. Kind of a no-brainer if Sony decides to use an AMD or Intel CPU for the PS4.
References:
See: PS3 games list & SPE usages
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=184843
i.e.
and
> but she didn't wait the 5 seconds it takes to boot
Why the hell isn't it a _priority_ to have these devices fully functional within 1 second?? Is firmware (software in cars) _already_ that bloated??
> You can't fix stupid. :-(
Sadly, that is the root problem: Unawareness / not mindful.
> And every time I'm on the expressway, I wish I had a camera for my blind spots.
You're doing it wrong. Seriously, when you mirrors are _properly_ configured in a car you should NOT have ANY blind spots.
Angle your mirrors out more. You should be able to track a car in your rearview mirror, to your side mirror, to the right/left WITHOUT moving your head.
Most people "toe in" their mirrors WAY too much, which means they need to move forward to see "more." This is inefficient, lazy, and just bad (as in accident prone.)
I prefer MakeMKV as its free (as in beer but not in speech)
http://www.makemkv.com/download/
When Avatar came out within a couple of days they had an upgraded version that would you tip your copy.
> You may not agree, but driving on publicly owned roads is not a right.
Total nonsense.
Are you really _that_ ignorant of case laws and history?
http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/96-right-to-travel.html
i.e.
"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.
Google: Right To Travel
> I have a problem with mandatory seatbelt laws.
If you are in the US there are ways out of them. There are legal exemptions. e.g. Occupants of a motor home, Certified phobia of seat belts, Religious Divine Providence, etc.
My brother doesn't wear one and was recently ticketed for not wearing one. He did his homework filing the necessary paperwork before his court date came up. The judge admitted this was "Certainly an interesting case" and ruled against them. He appealed to the Superior Court and had the case dismissed because the Judge realized he _couldn't_ provide a ruling as that would set a very dangerous precedent for the courts. i.e. "Public Safety" is NOT the issue as there not one case showing where not wearing a seat belt has presented a danger to others. This is not just a one-off as his Father-In-Law has used the exact tactics for the past 20+ years in New York and in Carolina -- the root issue is: The seat belt law is inconsistent with Constitutionally protected exemptions. i.e. Exemptions for Public Schooling (home school) and Inoculations.
If you are going to go down this route you had better well have all your ducks in a row! It all comes down to you need to pick and chose your battles. You can win the battle yet still lose the war.
Notice that non-religious people oppose the practice too.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/the-fraud-of-seat-belt-laws/
> You can't escape The Google.
Huh, you DO know about to block most of that crap, right??
http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm
or
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/
doubleclick.com? BLOCKED.
Google-Analytics? BLOCKED.
Problem solved.
This is why I continue to say:
Microsoft is a software company that doesn't understand hardware, and is learning about user experience.
Sony is a hardware company that doesn't understand software NOR user experience
Apple is a company that understands hardware, software, and user experience. They are not perfect but were the first to understand that the "Out-of-the Box" experience should be the highest priority. Sadly it is the _lowest_ priority in Sony's case.
This stupidity of proprietary cable nonsense needs to stop.
Sad to see Microsoft and Sony wasting so many man-hours duplicating each other efforts. One day Apple is going to wake up and officially add a dual analog stick and then Sony will really be screwed.
i.e.
http://www.cultofmac.com/128086/thinkgeek-finally-releases-icontrolpad-the-d-pad-for-your-iphone/
> all including the cult of "science". To discriminate would not be "scientific"
You're forgetting this is /. -- they aren't simply not interested in accepting that Science has Faith and will cry out heresy the instant you show them they worship Pseudo-Skeptics.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can not be created nor destroyed, only change its form. <-- This right here is the "God" of Science. (Religion states "God (always) was, is, and will be. He/she can not be created nor destroyed. God simply exists, or "is".) By this Law the [physical] universe must have _always_ existed in some form or another. Same shit, different perspective!
The universe is digital. This is currently a problem because scientists have no way to measure anything smaller then the Planck Scale nor measure anything that travels faster then the Speed of Light. Since humans have only inspected < %0.00000001 of the universe they are forced to take these things on faith.
> The problem with "science" and it's religious followers (see: Nearly all /.ers) is that it only accounts for what is provable now with no consideration that other factors
No, the problem with Science is that it is an "Subtractive" model.
To use an analogy there are 2 types of color models:
1) Subtractive, and
2) Additive.
When you print colors you use the subtractive model. That is, as you add colors, the final pigment goes towards muddy brown. (You used to need to add a black ink to achieve true black because the pigments weren't ideal, but the point stands.)
In contradistinction all display devices such as CRTS, LCD, LEDs, Plasmas, use the additive model. As you add colors the final pigment goes towards white.
How does this apply to Science and Religion?
Science is a subtractive model. You can never "create" truth -- you can never "prove truth" -- you can only subtract falsehood. i.e. You keep removing _errors_, and what is (hopefully) left is truth. Why? Because of the paradox of truth! one Truth does not negate another Truth, but Truth will remove Falsehood.
True Knowledge, Gnosis, is an additive model. You keep adding truth one level at a time by what you live. What makes Science a Cult is that espouses "There is only ONE way to know the Truth" and refuses to to acknowledge other ways. Ironically since Time is meta-physical and Consciousness is meta-physical then there MUST be other ways to arrive at the answer but Science is NOT interested in exploring questions outside its domain so it remains forever blind to the meta-physical. This is the point you were trying to make.
When scientists die, they will be in for a rude awakening of just how deep consciousness goes.
A perfect example of this will be that science will eventually discover
* White holes are on the opposite sides of Black holes -- when they invent the Plasma Lens they will see them.
* There are 6 fundamental forces of nature, not 4.
* All things are conscious and there are levels to awareness
* What we call the Physical is only 1/8 of reality
Thanks for the link !
I tried e17 ages ago and it was one of my few favorite window managers. Never did spend any time configuring it but your posts make me want to check that out.
Nice to see we have some choices!
* Ubuntu -> Gnome
* Kubuntu -> KDE
* Bodhi -> Enlightenment
> *some* gamers just want gameplay. Some gamers want story.
Uh, did you miss the part where I said "For the MOST part gamers..." ?
First, You seem to be arguing when I AM agreeing with you -- you are not just not paying attention to what I am writing.
Second, you're preaching to the choir here. I've played my share of RPGs, Adventure Games, FPSs etc., where the story was the most important aspect, games where story didn't matter, and everything in between. Ico was a masterpiece precisely because of story. Modern games such as Uncharted, Grand Theft Auto, etc., alternate between gameplay and story.
Now you can argue how much that story matters to people -- whether it is 1% or 100% across all the genres. No one seems to know the exact percentage for sure however for FPSs you can gauge the numbers accurately.
> The problem is, you can't generalize gamers like that.
Yes you can, and I have the stats to back it up.
1. I am an admin on the most popular L4D server. Almost none of the players give a shit about the back story judging by the number of player we serve. However, when we play custom maps players routinely make comments about the environments. Anytime the topic of L4D2 comes up it quickly polarizes people into 2 groups -- those that hate it, and those that love it. Story is never mentioned. Character Design is.
2. Counter-strike has more playing then ALL the other first person shooters combined. They play because of the gameplay not the story.
3. Do you understand why the latest Battlefield and the Call of Duty sell millions? This is along the point you are making, but not grasping:
For single player games, story is significantly more important.
For multi player games, story is insignificant, over time.
Some people read each and every quest in WoW. They know every sub-story and sub-plot. Again, having been in some of the biggest guilds on the server I used to play on, and from seeing the popularity of Thottbot, Allakhazam Wowhead, etc. "most. don't. care." They just want to know "where do I go, and who do I have to kill?"
So yes, story matters based on the genre, and to some, but for the most part it doesn't matter.
> What you may not have noticed, because you don't work in the UX department
My boss would probably beg to differ since my official job title is Senior User Experience Developer.
> The problem with voice is you can't be specific enough to target an on-screen object with voice.
That's one.
You also missed the bigger issues such as training and context:
- If you have a cold voice recognition is screwed. If you have an accent voice recognition is also totally screwed. People refuse to put up with voice training simply because it is so inaccurate. Ideally there has to be NO training.
- If you are having a conversation and mention "Did you catch show _x_ that was on channel 5 last night?" how does the device know that it should ignore your command?
Voice recognition is a pipe dream for the next 50 years.
>What about the kinect? How do people learn how to use it?
We did a prototype with Kinect. It was a disaster. Why? Because you are ignoring basic kinesiology.
People holding their hands up for any length of time is extremely tiring. Gestures work on a _tablet_ and mouse because your hands have something to rest on.
Giving game tutorial are fine and great, but in the real world most people don't remember invisible interfaces. Most people do not use a command line for the same reason.
> The problem with visual gestures is that it's awkward to control.
That is part of the problem.
It is also extremely low precision.
> The hard part isn't doing it, the hard part is thinking about what to do.
> Obviously, what you need to do is combine them. Visual gestures for objects, voice for verbs. There, problem solved.
Actually, obviously you are smarter then our entire team_s_ working on this that we should just hire you to _implement_ the solutions.
Come back to me when you have at least tried to _implement_ some of the next gen UIs. The problems are non-trivial. There are reasons why keyboard / remote works so well and will continue to be the dominate choice for user _input_.
> They are government-granted privileges, like a drivers license.
Which is in contradistinction to your "Right To Travel." Government granted privileges come from the power of the people.
e.g.
"Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business for private gain." Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82; Willis vs. Buck, 263 P.l 982.
"The right of the citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus." State vs. City of Spokane, 186 P. 864.
What is this Right of the Citizen which differs so "radically and obviously" from one who uses the highway as a place of business? Who better to enlighten us than Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of Washington State? In State vs. City of Spokane, supra, the Court also noted a very "radical and obvious" difference, but went on to explain just what the difference is:
"The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a common right to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary."
"The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784; Thompson vs. Smith, supra.
I mentioned previously -- see post http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2671969&cid=39046335
The letter in question was
http://i.imgur.com/ajaYt.jpg
And this letter ... http://i.imgur.com/ajaYt.jpg
Your conclusion faulty, based on a faulty premise.
The root problem is greed. The symptom is that money got involved with laws. He who can afford the most lawyers can win. Notice this is the SAME problem & symptom in Politics.
The solution is to remove money from the equation:
If one side wants to pay one lawyer more then half of it should be given to the other side. That is, pool the resources, so one side does not have a monetary advantage.
OR,
the better long term solution: Get rid of money. Now you're probably thinking -- LOLz , what?!
What do you think money _is_? Money is nothing more then the exchange of energy.
We all get "free" energy from the Sun everyday. It doesn't ask for anything back. It just gives and gives. Therefor, research alternative ways to provide "free" energy.
When everyone has a safe portable energy generator in their home that is equivalent to the power of a nuclear reactor you don't think the world is going to change?
That is what is coming down the pipe ~ 50 to 100 years.
The maturity of removing greed from systems, because greed is a cancer -- it causes whatever system it touches to implode.
> Maybe that means a mic or a kinect that lets us talk or gesture. Maybe it means having a little display on a tablet. I don't know. I just know that what we have now is a huge mess.
I work for a company that is working on the next-gen UI for TVs.
There is a reason that mic's or gestures will never become popular.
They are _invisible_ interfaces.
How is a user supposed to know what the different gestures are? Or what the _available_ voice commands are?
Mic's will never work because they fail on this usage case: If you have an accent the software is fucked.
WIMP (Windows, Image, Mouse/Menu, Pointer) and Keyboards work because you get immediate feedback plus you can directly see the effects of pushing a button, dragging, clicking a menu item, etc.
Tablets? Now I could see that as a possibility.
Presumably OSX.
OSX (bsd/mach hybrid) + X11 + VMWare/Virtual Box and you have the best and worse of 3 worlds: Windows, Mac, and Unix. :-/
Newfies. /ducks =)
One thing I've observed is that every country has their own version of the "south" / "hicks" / "rednecks" where they are made fun for living life at a slower pace -- this permeates their speech, etc. The rest of the country doesn't usually share their love of guns and their lazy approach to solving problems.
i.e. see "you might be a redneck if" https://www.google.com/search?q=you+might+be+a+redneck+if&tbm=isch
Guess people like to make fun of other people that are different :-/
> It's very hard to have a game ride on its gameplay alone; you need to give the player a reason to keep playing, a reason to care about the characters involved, a reason to be interested in the world they're playing in.
Total bullshit. Counter-examples.
* Tetris
* Marble Madness
* Minecraft
* TF2
There is a time and a place for story, but not every fricken GAME needs a story.
You are correct. For the most part gamers don't give a shit about cut scenes or story -- they just want to play the dam game.
TF2 has the right balance -- there is a back story IF you are interested, but it doesn't keep you from just hopping and blowing shit up.
There is a time and a place for cut scenes. But for the majority of them they just get in the way. Especially the unskippable cut scenes when you are replaying the game, can't pause it due to interruptions such as kids, food, neighbor, etc. Not that I don't love Ico, Uncharted, etc, but too many designers forget that it is a computer GAME first and fore-most, not a fricken movie.
> but why do you have to confuse the issue with this "grounded faith" thing?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith
faith, noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
Ignoring definition 1 doesn't make it go away.
You keep assuming faith has been hijacked by religion.
Everyone has beliefs.
Beliefs can fall into two categories
* Rational Beliefs
* Irrational Beliefs
If you never do anything with those beliefs, they are just that beliefs. But once you act upon them, the beliefs become faith. Again, the reason may either be rational, or irrational. Grounded Faith, or Blind Faith.
Scientists have faith (rational beliefs) that the Scientific Method is way to gain truth (by removing falsehood.)
i.e
If you are married you have faith that your partner will remain faithful to you. That is, not have unprotected sex without telling you. You live a certain lifestyle based on faith -- again, either a rational or irrational belief.
> Actually, Judaism believes that once the Messiah comes, there will be eternal world peace.
Correct.
> Since we obviously don't have world peace, Jews reason that the Messiah hasn't come yet.
And he never will.
> We recognize that many people have come forward to claim the title of "Messiah" but none of them have panned out.
Messiah = anointed one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messianism
Christians believe he was anointed via Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 7, and John 12
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anointing_of_Jesus
In one of the oldest existing Bibles, Codex Bezae, we read:
"Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
The basic problem is that Judaism reads the Talmud literally and is blind to the allegorical and spiritual meanings.
Rabbi Simeon said