Apparently you have not been playing WoW long enough to get there is a world of difference between the 25 man raiders and the casual guilds. The large, "we have two groups raiding black temple" type guilds are definitely the way you describe them. I've met quite a few people like that in WoW who would fuck anyone over for a piece of purple, that doesn't mean it's the norm. I'm in a casual guild (biggest thing we do is raid karazhan, very infrequently) and it's completely reversed. I actually like these people, we have met in real life and we do get along well.
I guess in the end, it's just like in real life, shit always floats to the top.:P
Ah, yes, this is one of the reasons I don't miss E3 at all. I'll never forget standing in front of my game, and having slack-jawed idiots come try to chat me up, and then NOT BELIEVE ME when I told them I was the lead programmer on the game I was showing off. Year after year, I still hear lunk-headed idiots hauling out the same old tropes about women not being able to code, and women gamers being attention whores, and women not being interested in games due to various half-baked evolutionary psychology theories, over and over and over again. Seriously, it gets old. Well for me it's (hopefully) not about "women just not being good at games", it's that every time I meet a girl who's somehow into technology it's a surprise to me. Go back about 7-10 years and the number of girls playing video games was incredibly low. The number of women in technology is not that very high. The number of women studying CS with me was less than 10% of the total. So yeah, my head turns when I see a lead designer on a game is a woman or women playing games, just because it used to be so incredibly rare and is not yet a very common occurrence.
I think the people taking the pessimistic interpretation of people just not thinking women are up to the job are the people who have had to deal with one too many idiots. Given the overtly sexual nature of the E3 show I can very much understand the problems you ran into. Luckily the industry is (finally) moving away from that kind of madness.
I agree completely with the above. Also like to add that many countries in Europe have in recent years moved towards allowing a "parental leave" for fathers as well, removing one of those last sources of inequality in the workplace the GP was referring to. If a man and a woman have equal chance of going on leave when they have a child at least employers will start to judge them more by the same standards. (and not, how likely is she to have a child etc.)
Most of the time it's shorter for men than for women. I've often argued for extending it (for the above reason) but ironically many women are against making it the same length since they don't think it's fair.
A lot of games which grudgingly offered women as playable characters, gimped their stats in various ways. Just because, you know, in a game where you shoot fireballs, ride dragons, and generally rape the laws of physics, chemistry and biology with a vengeance, it would be _so_ unrealistic if a woman (even a rare, exceptional, non-typical one) could possibly have the same strength or constitution as a guy. I can't really think of any games that did this. The only thing I can think of were games where the man was the big burly guy (e.g. has strength/const) and the woman is the nimble, agile fighter/rogue (e.g. more agi/int or something). It's quite stereotypical but then at the same time they could have put in a nimble, agile guy and a big burly woman. Unfortunately that doesn't fit with our preconceptions much, and it is to these preconceptions that games will cater.
Anyway some examples would be good, can't really think of any.
Since then we have seen a rise in the view that only the State is allowed to protect people, not the people themselves. This view is very strong in Europe & Canada. Often you can get in more trouble defending yourself in England than the attacker will for attacking you. Most likely because shooting burglars in the back is not considered self defence in Europe.
Makes you kind of wonder about the Saudi case where the rape VICTIM was given 40 (?) lashes. Yeah I get it, Europe and Canada are just like Saudi Arabia. Who can argue with THAT logic.
I've read till now wondering how it is nobody points out that BR is a noir in a SF background. Sam Spade in the future. I think because most people saw the director's cut, which loses a lot of the noir feeling.
Some people recommend watching the theatrical release first, presumably because they agree with the studio that the film was too hard to follow otherwise. Seems to me most people who hate the voice over hate it more because of the trivia fact that Scott didn't want it in than because there was actually something wrong with the voice over. The tired way in which the voice over was done is exactly the way it should be done.
Revisionism is never good. The director's cut effectively created an entirely diffferent movie. It's no surprise that many people like it, but a lot of people still like the original. Me, I wish they wouldn't have fucked with a finished product in the first place. Let it stand on its own and move on to something else. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Also, there's a bunch of stuff that annoyed me in the director's cut that you will find mentioned in the article, such as edits they bungled and A/V sync going off. The director's cut really was a crap cut, especially if you saw the original first. Why else would a director feel the need to make a final cut anyway? (well, except to get more money out of us consumers of course)
I didn't say that coal was what we should stick with either (thanks for putting words in my mouth though). I am simply saying that wind generation, while a good idea for supplimental power, is not the solution to meet base load. It won't be able to do what the article claims. Yes nuclear is the cleaner between itself and coal, unless there's an accident with the plant, the fuel, or the waste, and then it becomes much more dirty for a much longer time. Furthermore, I think we need to continue to investigate solar, geothermal, and other means of generation before we say that nuclear is the best solution.
The poster correctly made a logical assumption. If there are 2 technologies that can provide baseload and you don't support one, then you must support the other. If you don't support either then you fail it. I hear this talk all the time from environmentalists "solar is getting better all the time!", "wind farms are booming!", "look what they managed to do in iceland!". We need power now, not in some brightly colored version of the future that only exists in people's heads. I agree that eventually we need to move away from coal and nuclear, but even if we manage to make great strides in technology we'll still need time to roll it out. In the meantime we still need power.
Sorry to jump on this like that, but greens in my country oppose both coal and nuclear energy, so they're proposing we get stuck with aging (inefficient, polluting) coal plants, shut down our nuclear plants and buy nuclear energy from other countries. Only they can't seem to wrap their heads around that, instead believing that if we ban every technology we have a magical fairy will drop a clean infinite power source in our laps.
Also, research is not an either/or proposition. Spend a little less money on buying cruise missiles and a little more on researching all alternatives, you'll eventually be better of.
I'd just like add that to the original poster I would recommend picking up some programming/design books from various schools of thought. One I could recommend is Refactoring by Martin Fowler.
In his opinion (which I happen to share) refactoring is a way in the very short term to make your code cleaner, easier to understand and modify, allowing you to work faster in the long term. You're a professional for crying out loud, don't let your boss tell you how to do your job. He's there to tell you what to do, you're supposed to take the fastest way there, which is usally not by hacking it all up. Not if there's a chance you'll be working on the code for longer than a week or 2. This aligns nicely with the parent's post of course but it can't be said enough. Faster in the short term is almost never faster in the long term.
And if your boss doesn't agree with you using refactoring techniques or taking time out to review and clean up your code, just don't tell him. As long as you get the job done right?
Talking about limited imagination, I see no error. There's no assignment to the m_* variables AFAICT. The fact we're even having this issue shows clearly the code is utterly unreadable though.
Many people in guantanamo (possibly not the largest faction, but a sizable one) were picked up because they were fingered by someone labelled a terrorist, then questioned and never given a trial. Some of them even have the US nationality. A lot of them are guilty of what amounts to thought crimes, i.e. they were conspiring with other terrorists to blow buildings up, or possibly they were just joking around with their friends. No way for us to know till they are given a proper trial. A bunch of them are from Afghanistan sure, but from what I hear the US forces aren't very particular about who they ship off to guantanamo, weapons or none.
It's not because the OP or any of his friends is not in guantanamo that his point is false btw. Of course he's not in there, he's likely not muslim or of middle eastern origin, so it would be unlikely the US government considers him a threat.
Thinking that it's okay to lock up anyone who's not a US citizen who hasn't committed any crimes (by your own words) is pretty fucked up IMHO. Whatever the laws, there's such a thing as the spirit of the law and it doesn't say you can lock up anyone you want to from any country you want to. That's the kind of stuff the soviet union used to do, and it saddens me to see americans defend it with such passion.
Which anyone even remotely familiar with fark knew when they read the headline. I think this poster in the linked fark blog got my sentiments just right: "I can't believe how many people in the blogosphere are falling for it."
True, as I understand it there's a big market for laptop skins, but a quick google doesn't turn up any results for WoW specific skins. I think whoever put that out there would make a lot more money than dell will on this laptop. I can't see the market for a 5k$ WoW-specific skin personally.
There were a couple of months last year where the servers went down every other week. Both in the US and Europe. There were a bunch of stories about it at the time. Since then they've apparently learned that "emergency downtime" isn't supposed to happen every two weeks in a service business.
These days they go down now and then but never very long and usually separately (e.g. one or two, not entire groups or all of them).
The real funny part of this thread is that the GP seems more willing to travel to Russia than to the US. It's not the first time I've come across that type of sentiment. Kinda makes you think, doesn't it?
Just FYI, the guy who made that comment later said he made a mistake and they made a new estimate of closer to 70k users I believe. It's somewhere on/. if you feel like looking for it.:)
I don't think the GP meant to say there was not a good reason for them being blamed. The problem btw was trying to run a world empire in the first place, not the particulars of the ways they went about it. (which could never ever have worked out for the good)
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently you have not been playing WoW long enough to get there is a world of difference between the 25 man raiders and the casual guilds. The large, "we have two groups raiding black temple" type guilds are definitely the way you describe them. I've met quite a few people like that in WoW who would fuck anyone over for a piece of purple, that doesn't mean it's the norm. I'm in a casual guild (biggest thing we do is raid karazhan, very infrequently) and it's completely reversed. I actually like these people, we have met in real life and we do get along well.
:P
I guess in the end, it's just like in real life, shit always floats to the top.
I think the people taking the pessimistic interpretation of people just not thinking women are up to the job are the people who have had to deal with one too many idiots. Given the overtly sexual nature of the E3 show I can very much understand the problems you ran into. Luckily the industry is (finally) moving away from that kind of madness.
I agree completely with the above. Also like to add that many countries in Europe have in recent years moved towards allowing a "parental leave" for fathers as well, removing one of those last sources of inequality in the workplace the GP was referring to. If a man and a woman have equal chance of going on leave when they have a child at least employers will start to judge them more by the same standards. (and not, how likely is she to have a child etc.)
Most of the time it's shorter for men than for women. I've often argued for extending it (for the above reason) but ironically many women are against making it the same length since they don't think it's fair.
Anyway some examples would be good, can't really think of any.
The only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history at all.
[citation-needed]
My mistake, I figured that was pretty much the definition. Understanding the film is not the problem for me, but the director's cut lacks soul.
:edit .
Can you link to the bug? AFAICT the behaviour between nvi and vim is exactly the same. Assuming my nvi is not similarly broken then.
Because it added atmosphere!
BTW nobody likes to be called dumb.
Revisionism is never good. The director's cut effectively created an entirely diffferent movie. It's no surprise that many people like it, but a lot of people still like the original. Me, I wish they wouldn't have fucked with a finished product in the first place. Let it stand on its own and move on to something else. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Also, there's a bunch of stuff that annoyed me in the director's cut that you will find mentioned in the article, such as edits they bungled and A/V sync going off. The director's cut really was a crap cut, especially if you saw the original first. Why else would a director feel the need to make a final cut anyway? (well, except to get more money out of us consumers of course)
I didn't say that coal was what we should stick with either (thanks for putting words in my mouth though). I am simply saying that wind generation, while a good idea for supplimental power, is not the solution to meet base load. It won't be able to do what the article claims. Yes nuclear is the cleaner between itself and coal, unless there's an accident with the plant, the fuel, or the waste, and then it becomes much more dirty for a much longer time. Furthermore, I think we need to continue to investigate solar, geothermal, and other means of generation before we say that nuclear is the best solution.
The poster correctly made a logical assumption. If there are 2 technologies that can provide baseload and you don't support one, then you must support the other. If you don't support either then you fail it. I hear this talk all the time from environmentalists "solar is getting better all the time!", "wind farms are booming!", "look what they managed to do in iceland!". We need power now, not in some brightly colored version of the future that only exists in people's heads. I agree that eventually we need to move away from coal and nuclear, but even if we manage to make great strides in technology we'll still need time to roll it out. In the meantime we still need power.
Sorry to jump on this like that, but greens in my country oppose both coal and nuclear energy, so they're proposing we get stuck with aging (inefficient, polluting) coal plants, shut down our nuclear plants and buy nuclear energy from other countries. Only they can't seem to wrap their heads around that, instead believing that if we ban every technology we have a magical fairy will drop a clean infinite power source in our laps.
Also, research is not an either/or proposition. Spend a little less money on buying cruise missiles and a little more on researching all alternatives, you'll eventually be better of.
I'd just like add that to the original poster I would recommend picking up some programming/design books from various schools of thought. One I could recommend is Refactoring by Martin Fowler.
In his opinion (which I happen to share) refactoring is a way in the very short term to make your code cleaner, easier to understand and modify, allowing you to work faster in the long term. You're a professional for crying out loud, don't let your boss tell you how to do your job. He's there to tell you what to do, you're supposed to take the fastest way there, which is usally not by hacking it all up. Not if there's a chance you'll be working on the code for longer than a week or 2. This aligns nicely with the parent's post of course but it can't be said enough. Faster in the short term is almost never faster in the long term.
And if your boss doesn't agree with you using refactoring techniques or taking time out to review and clean up your code, just don't tell him. As long as you get the job done right?
Talking about limited imagination, I see no error. There's no assignment to the m_* variables AFAICT. The fact we're even having this issue shows clearly the code is utterly unreadable though.
:-)
Yeah, not a very good example.
Does that even work? Where do you reverse the range? And what's up with the two letter variable names?
Many people in guantanamo (possibly not the largest faction, but a sizable one) were picked up because they were fingered by someone labelled a terrorist, then questioned and never given a trial. Some of them even have the US nationality. A lot of them are guilty of what amounts to thought crimes, i.e. they were conspiring with other terrorists to blow buildings up, or possibly they were just joking around with their friends. No way for us to know till they are given a proper trial. A bunch of them are from Afghanistan sure, but from what I hear the US forces aren't very particular about who they ship off to guantanamo, weapons or none.
It's not because the OP or any of his friends is not in guantanamo that his point is false btw. Of course he's not in there, he's likely not muslim or of middle eastern origin, so it would be unlikely the US government considers him a threat.
Thinking that it's okay to lock up anyone who's not a US citizen who hasn't committed any crimes (by your own words) is pretty fucked up IMHO. Whatever the laws, there's such a thing as the spirit of the law and it doesn't say you can lock up anyone you want to from any country you want to. That's the kind of stuff the soviet union used to do, and it saddens me to see americans defend it with such passion.
Which anyone even remotely familiar with fark knew when they read the headline. I think this poster in the linked fark blog got my sentiments just right: "I can't believe how many people in the blogosphere are falling for it."
True, as I understand it there's a big market for laptop skins, but a quick google doesn't turn up any results for WoW specific skins. I think whoever put that out there would make a lot more money than dell will on this laptop. I can't see the market for a 5k$ WoW-specific skin personally.
How is this "corrupt". Where are they taking money to circumvent the system? What rules are they violating?
8th graders indeed.
There were a couple of months last year where the servers went down every other week. Both in the US and Europe. There were a bunch of stories about it at the time. Since then they've apparently learned that "emergency downtime" isn't supposed to happen every two weeks in a service business.
These days they go down now and then but never very long and usually separately (e.g. one or two, not entire groups or all of them).
The real funny part of this thread is that the GP seems more willing to travel to Russia than to the US. It's not the first time I've come across that type of sentiment. Kinda makes you think, doesn't it?
Just FYI, the guy who made that comment later said he made a mistake and they made a new estimate of closer to 70k users I believe. It's somewhere on /. if you feel like looking for it. :)
I don't think the GP meant to say there was not a good reason for them being blamed. The problem btw was trying to run a world empire in the first place, not the particulars of the ways they went about it. (which could never ever have worked out for the good)