> Why would you spend a couple of years to write a book if the moment you showed it to a bunch of publishers they could copy it and sell it as their own?
2 Counter Examples that blow this "argument" right out of the water:
> The fact that something so debilitating, so damaging to the user's health, is sold over the counter while other less harmful drugs are strictly regulated says a lot about the true functioning of the FDA.
* Want to put in 16 characters for a password (think passphrase)? Nope, not allowed because some idiot thought you shouldn't be able to enter more then 8 chars. * Enter in a password only to have it rejected? Tell us _which_ characters are allowed and which ones aren't !
Either you *do* have a billion dollars OR you *don't*. There is only _one_ use case.
If this rasterizer is 51x faster at stencil operations, but only 4x then MESA everywhere else, then there it is perfectly fine to say "Up to 51x faster".
What is the _context_ ? That's the crux of the issue.
Every new tech displaces people from doing menial boring work. Do you complain that your automobile, washing machine, dryer, mining equipment, etc. put people "out of work" ?? Because that ship sailed a LONG time ago.
Unemployment isn't the problem, it is the symptom of the broken design of a system requiring money to live on the planet you were born on, but I digress.
I wonder what ever happened to my Populous Level Name Generator... it would print out all the World Names for every level.:-) Was quite handy because when you beat a level you would jump +2 or +3 levels ahead.
When money is involved, paying someone to intentionally "throw" the game, so the other side can profit is most definitely abusing the spirit of the game. Gambling is illegal in most places.
-- Money is like cancer; it tends to eventually corrupts everything it comes in contact with.:-/
> Just to be clear, Planck units have no physical significance.
Technically, we have no way to measure anything smaller then Planck Length and Plank Time, so whether they have any physical significance is undetermined.
While you're not wrong you forgetting one key thing.
Consciousness grows at different levels. (Both at an individual and national level.)
An analogy: You don't place a child in Grade 12 until they have had time for their mind to grow, understand, and internalize the concepts started in Kindergarten (or Grade 1), ALONG WITH demonstrating that they understand all of the preceding prerequisites.
It look Americans ~200 years to spiritually grow up and realize slavery was wrong.
Sometimes the only way to learn whether X is good is to have it, then you realize you _don't_ want it.
We can discuss all day how morally bankrupt politicians are but we need to keep in mind that, Politicians, which are just people, only reflect what society _currently_ values. They are the spiritual barometer of the nation.
As a famous teacher once said:
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi
As a species we still kill one another using any excuse and justification we can. We are not _yet_ sick of war. Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best:
A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane [, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, ] cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.
If the **data** _isn't_ open, then the propaganda and conclusions about the popularity (or lack of it) should be taken with a LARGE grain of salt and healthy skepticism about the validity of the data.
i.e. * If the data isn't open, question the validity of the data!
e.g. The only people who trust out-of-date and inaccurate data like the Nielsen Ratings are the people buying and selling broadcast licenses to cable companies.
> The problem with content on the internet is knowing who paid for it, and what other affiliations they have.
Since the Rust compiler is written in Rust, it must be built by a precompiled "snapshot" version of itself (made in an earlier state of development). As such, source builds require a connection to the Internet, to fetch snapshots, and an OS that can execute the available snapshot binaries.
If I appear angry it is because after shipping games on PC, PSX, PS 2, Wii, etc., I get tired of other people without a fucking clue about game development constantly tell me what I do for a living isn't "Art" by their self-imposed and artificial definition. They need to get off their high horse.
We make games because we want to entertain -other- people.
> a video game can be artistic when judged for their artistic elements, but since they have primary functions beyond art, they cannot be wholly works of art
The word is called super set. As in Form + Function designed to bring out emotions.
Guess what, most movies at the box office have a function beyond art too: Too make money.
This is a red herring.
> I don't think something can be art in the traditional sense if it is digital.
You're going to tell me all those artists who used to shoot pictures/movies in analog, such as photographer Sebastião Salgado, and now shoots digitally are now magically not creating art?? i.e. Salt of the Earth
1. That's completely disrespectful to them, their craft, and their skill.
2. How fucking retarded can you get???
Why the hell does the medium even matter??
It doesn't for painting. It doesn't for photography. It doesn't for film. It doesn't for sculpting. It doesn't for acting.
So why single out the digital medium??
Video game programming also can involve creative use of the hardware in solving problems. Writing efficient code is an art form, in contradistinction to it being just a purely deterministic process.
> Art must have the potential to be a failure.
1. Says who?? Who died and made you king of definitions???
2. Whether the medium is analog or digital **both** have the potential for failure:
Oh look! My memory card died and I lost my pictures. Or, my hard drive died and I lost my pictures. Or, the program corrupted my picture. Or, I over-wrote my original and I no longer have it.
Gee, room for failure in the digital world too.
> Digital photography captures images and editing alters those images whereas film captures single, uneditable moments./sarcasm Riiiight, because there was zero variation or control in exposure, shutter settings, or in the darkroom film developing process. NOT.
How about _actually_ educating yourself about photographers such as Ansel Adams instead of making ignorant claims.
Adams developed all his own film, using a small space in his parents home, and while in the field. He first used matte and changed to glossy paper to increase the tonal values. He spoke often about using the natural light and small apertures with long exposures. Adams also suggested to "visualize" each image before taking it. This means, taking your time, walking around looking at things from different points of view.
Adams, was a promoter of "pure photography" "Pure photography is defined as possessing no qualities of technique, composition or idea, derivative of any other art form.' Soft focus lenses were prohibited, but in Adams earlier work of the Monolith, he used a strong red filter to create a black sky. Adams mounted a camera platform on the top of his station wagon, to get a better vantage point over the immediate foreground and a better angle for expansive backgrounds. Most of his images from 1943 forward were made from the roof of his car.
Whether you use filters pre-processing or post-processing is completely irrelevant. The effect is the same. You are still _interpreting_ and _presenting_ a representation of the scene that _you_ find interesting. Whether this is done chemically, or digitally, this doesn't change the intent.
To present a beautiful picture.
Bullshit excuses like "soft lenses were prohibited" doesn't change this fact.
-- Why is always the people who have never written a game are always the one trying to make excuses for why games "can't" be labeled as art???
Slashdot Mirror
* Poor Management - people, time, money, hardware
* Poor Code -- either assumptions, or sloppy code
* Lack of Quality Assurance
Usually one or more.
There are both pros' and con's for both sides.
You missed the part where the older guys are tired of the latest buzzword of the week, some "SilverBullet" Library, and ad-hoc design.
There is no need to fix what isn't broken.
Some of the new guys love change just for the sake of change.
The weakness of the older guys is inflexibility, where it is a strength of the younger guys.
The strength of the older guys is stability; the younger guys lack experience and wisdom -- there weakness is instability.
> Why would you spend a couple of years to write a book if the moment you showed it to a bunch of publishers they could copy it and sell it as their own?
2 Counter Examples that blow this "argument" right out of the water:
* Fashion Industry thrives inspite of complete lack of copyright proves your premise entirely wrong
* /sarcasm Someone should Mathematics / Mathematicians that for the last few thousand years they have been doing it wrong!
Not everything has to be viewed through myopic capitalism and the greed of artificial monopolies.
Agreed that In-N-Out is a top notch. Great role model on how to treat employees and customers.
I miss them not being outside California. :-/
**Anything** can be used, or mis-used. Film at 11.
What you're describing isn't new.
And who cares? /sarcasm Because no-one ever clones physical hardware
Whether a product is open or closed is irrelevant. It won't stop people from cloning it.
--
Only an self-entitled idiot wants to rob Paul to pay Peter
> The fact that something so debilitating, so damaging to the user's health, is sold over the counter while other less harmful drugs are strictly regulated says a lot about the true functioning of the FDA.
Wait, what, we're not talking about Alcohol ? :-)
* Hard to Others + Self
Some sites have a horrible password schemas:
* Want to put in 16 characters for a password (think passphrase)? Nope, not allowed because some idiot thought you shouldn't be able to enter more then 8 chars.
* Enter in a password only to have it rejected? Tell us _which_ characters are allowed and which ones aren't !
It isn't me you have to worry about, but all the other people you ripped off that just _might_ have something to say about it.
You're comparing Apples and Oranges.
Either you *do* have a billion dollars OR you *don't*. There is only _one_ use case.
If this rasterizer is 51x faster at stencil operations, but only 4x then MESA everywhere else, then there it is perfectly fine to say "Up to 51x faster".
What is the _context_ ? That's the crux of the issue.
Holy shit, miracles DO happen! :-)
> If you did this more often, many more people would like you, ya know...
I'll second that.
Oh please already.
Every new tech displaces people from doing menial boring work. Do you complain that your automobile, washing machine, dryer, mining equipment, etc. put people "out of work" ?? Because that ship sailed a LONG time ago.
Unemployment isn't the problem, it is the symptom of the broken design of a system requiring money to live on the planet you were born on, but I digress.
You have 2 choices:
* Adapt, or
* Die
> I really miss Populous on the Amiga.
The PC VGA version was pretty good too.
I wonder what ever happened to my Populous Level Name Generator ... it would print out all the World Names for every level. :-) Was quite handy because when you beat a level you would jump +2 or +3 levels ahead.
When money is involved, paying someone to intentionally "throw" the game, so the other side can profit is most definitely abusing the spirit of the game. Gambling is illegal in most places.
-- :-/
Money is like cancer; it tends to eventually corrupts everything it comes in contact with.
> Just to be clear, Planck units have no physical significance.
Technically, we have no way to measure anything smaller then Planck Length and Plank Time, so whether they have any physical significance is undetermined.
Thanks for the clarification; I'm not interested in debating the actual legalistic time frame.
Regardless, the greater point still stands.
While you're not wrong you forgetting one key thing.
Consciousness grows at different levels. (Both at an individual and national level.)
An analogy: You don't place a child in Grade 12 until they have had time for their mind to grow, understand, and internalize the concepts started in Kindergarten (or Grade 1), ALONG WITH demonstrating that they understand all of the preceding prerequisites.
It look Americans ~200 years to spiritually grow up and realize slavery was wrong.
Sometimes the only way to learn whether X is good is to have it, then you realize you _don't_ want it.
We can discuss all day how morally bankrupt politicians are but we need to keep in mind that, Politicians, which are just people, only reflect what society _currently_ values. They are the spiritual barometer of the nation.
As a famous teacher once said:
As a species we still kill one another using any excuse and justification we can. We are not _yet_ sick of war. Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best:
* Full transcript & audio of the brilliant speech:
http://www.americanrhetoric.co...
So pointing out how spiritual ignorant and immature our brothers and sisters are "solves" nothing. Focus on the problem, not the people.
I leave you with this advice:
Indeed.
Fix the broken first past the goal post voting system.
Agreed.
If the **data** _isn't_ open, then the propaganda and conclusions about the popularity (or lack of it) should be taken with a LARGE grain of salt and healthy skepticism about the validity of the data.
i.e.
* If the data isn't open, question the validity of the data!
e.g.
The only people who trust out-of-date and inaccurate data like the Nielsen Ratings are the people buying and selling broadcast licenses to cable companies.
> The problem with content on the internet is knowing who paid for it, and what other affiliations they have.
^ This.
* https://github.com/rust-lang/r...
If I appear angry it is because after shipping games on PC, PSX, PS 2, Wii, etc., I get tired of other people without a fucking clue about game development constantly tell me what I do for a living isn't "Art" by their self-imposed and artificial definition. They need to get off their high horse.
We make games because we want to entertain -other- people.
That is the very definition of art.
No different from a screen-play, aka, movies.
It really doesn't get any simpler then this.
> From the article:
Which one? And which page is that on?
Because I'm not seeing that phrase in the PDF:
* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.0362...
Nor in the main article:
* http://www.theatlantic.com/sci...
> a video game can be artistic when judged for their artistic elements, but since they have primary functions beyond art, they cannot be wholly works of art
The word is called super set. As in Form + Function designed to bring out emotions.
Guess what, most movies at the box office have a function beyond art too: Too make money.
This is a red herring.
> I don't think something can be art in the traditional sense if it is digital.
You're going to tell me all those artists who used to shoot pictures/movies in analog, such as photographer Sebastião Salgado, and now shoots digitally are now magically not creating art?? i.e. Salt of the Earth
1. That's completely disrespectful to them, their craft, and their skill.
2. How fucking retarded can you get???
Why the hell does the medium even matter??
It doesn't for painting.
It doesn't for photography.
It doesn't for film.
It doesn't for sculpting.
It doesn't for acting.
So why single out the digital medium??
Video game programming also can involve creative use of the hardware in solving problems. Writing efficient code is an art form, in contradistinction to it being just a purely deterministic process.
> Art must have the potential to be a failure.
1. Says who?? Who died and made you king of definitions???
2. Whether the medium is analog or digital **both** have the potential for failure:
Oh look! My memory card died and I lost my pictures.
Or, my hard drive died and I lost my pictures.
Or, the program corrupted my picture.
Or, I over-wrote my original and I no longer have it.
Gee, room for failure in the digital world too.
> Digital photography captures images and editing alters those images whereas film captures single, uneditable moments. /sarcasm Riiiight, because there was zero variation or control in exposure, shutter settings, or in the darkroom film developing process. NOT.
How about _actually_ educating yourself about photographers such as Ansel Adams instead of making ignorant claims.
Whether you use filters pre-processing or post-processing is completely irrelevant. The effect is the same. You are still _interpreting_ and _presenting_ a representation of the scene that _you_ find interesting. Whether this is done chemically, or digitally, this doesn't change the intent.
To present a beautiful picture.
Bullshit excuses like "soft lenses were prohibited" doesn't change this fact.
--
Why is always the people who have never written a game are always the one trying to make excuses for why games "can't" be labeled as art???
Exactly. Roger Ebert was a fucking idiot.
So let's get this straight ... A game can include:
* Music
* Pictures
* Videos
* Writing
Basically, 4 different art-forms and yet these retards try to claim that somehow a game "magically" isn't art??? Yeah right.
The medium is irrelevent for art.
Movies, aka screen-play weren't considered art either at first. Gee, looks like history repeated itself.
/Oblg. Futurama Internet Ads