Auto-tuning behavior that's built in will probably be the most reliable, easiest, and best-performing way to do this, rather than requiring every Linux distribution to ensure that they're running the same extra scripts and keeping the userspace stuff in sync. Do it once and leave it built-in to the kernel.
Exactly, which is why we got rid of that udev thing and pushed for devfs. udev needed way too much configuration and extra scripts and a daemon running and other bullshit, while devfs just works.
36 hours like 1.5 days... when I had Tetris I played it half an hour a day at lunch and often more. I logged more than that the first 3 months I had Dr Mario for Wiiware... whatever... and I only play it so-so casually. That's half-an-hour a day but you know... blocks of an hour or two to kill major time, not 15 minutes here and there.
My point is that people buying games on phones are buying them to fill minutes of time; people buying phones on handhelds are buying them to play games. Without gaming on phones, maybe you'll buy a handheld; this is doubtful I think. If you agree that lack of phone games will lead to an extremely sharp increase in handheld sales, though, then you must agree that people don't care that much about games on phones. Those that care that much about gaming are going to have a DS to get some better quality titles to fill their 2-3 hour blocks of time.
Saying "what games are available?" is a major purchasing question when buying a phone is simple delusion, given my analysis of the facts. Yours may be different; but then, my assumption of "delusion" encompasses the idea that your analysis is incorrect and based on the wild belief that people stand around looking at iPhone vs Android in the same way they look at 3DSi vs PSP2.
I don't mean that as an analogy between different media; I mean that people look at PSP vs DS and compare the gaming experience as a serious buying factor (videos, networking, etc also factor in these days), and you are asserting that people also look at phones and consider the gaming experience as a serious buying factor. This logically leads us to question why they completely ignore the superior handheld gaming devices entirely-- an extremely strange behavior for a consumer significantly considering the potential handheld gaming experience of the product or, more realistically, the handheld gaming experience they are pursuing (the product is not real to the consumer; the product is a conduit for function).
You must understand that the very argument seems logically unsound to me. When I noticed my phone could play music, I considered it versus an iPod; the phone did what I needed in that respect--and with better sound quality than the iPod! Had it not, I wouldn't have bailed for an iPhone; although that would be an excellent choice if I didn't have other competing factors between iPhone vs Android phone (for example, a physical keyboard). If I needed a digital media player, I would have bought one.
For some people, this will work out extremely well: iPhone is an iPod, end of story. Want an iPod? Get an iPhone, if the iPhone doesn't fail at something critically important. For anyone that considers "gaming on my phone" to be a serious factor, however, they are going to want a 3DS with a cell phone built in. They also won't get that. The 3DS is so much better at gaming (as a purpose-designed platform AND with better quality content available), and the functionality integrated with your cell phone just doesn't match up. The functionality integrated with the cell phone only reaches "casual" which inherently means it's one of the things you basically ignore when purchasing.
Think about it for a minute. It makes sense, doesn't it? Just saying "millions of $2 cell phone games get sold every day" doesn't imply that cell phone gaming is a significant phone purchase decision; it does imply that the cell phone gaming market is significant and substantial, but that's a secondary effect. I believe the conclusion that the cell phone game market is driven by the general purchase of cell phones is more likely than the purchase of specific cell phones being driven by the demand for cell phone games.
I bought games on my Razr, it's true. I played them once in a while, too. Tetris 4 times, Guitar Hero twice. Some other stuff once or twice.
See I'm thinking in terms of "playing hours." That you sold 3 million copies of Pirate Ninja War 2 on Playstation means something: Playstation does nothing but play games, and 3 million people dedicated the primary function of their system to playing Pirate Ninja War for a significant amount of time (if nobody did, it wouldn't sell so much due to bad reviews or simple LACK of reviews). Obviously, people played for solid hours at a time, at the least-- even if the game sucks, they might be there for 2-3 hours before deciding they're bored. With those sales numbers, though, it's more likely the game enjoyed popularity on merit (with a wide array of shovelware, it's unlikely one will enjoy more than mediocre sales).
Now, on the phone it's less clear. People buy Tetris "to have it." They occasionally play when bored. They don't sit at home letting their food get cold and ignoring their friends and work while they grind out hours upon hours of Amazing $2 Cell Phone App 5. Still, accounting for how much people are playing games on their phone is fuzzy; accounting for how much they CARE is even fuzzier, since it's more of a distraction than anything.
When we have titles on DS for $30-$40 selling millions of copies, that's something. When we have $2-$3 titles selling millions of copies, that's throw-away money. Billions of McDonalds hamburgers are sold, but damn near everyone makes better food at higher prices.
It's a persuasion issue. There is "unfair treatment" and then there is "throwing a huge fucking tantrum over unfair treatment." You'll find that being an asshole quickly teaches people not to care about what liberties of yours are being trounced all over--much less over privileges granted by business decisions made by companies.
Nintendo has every right to make their publishing process quite exclusive. While you can argue the profit merits of this or debate the potential impact of indie-gamers on Nintendo's profits and the quality of third party shovelware, you can't really say you have any such "rights" to develop for Nintendo's platform. Your own sob story might draw people to make more philosophical conclusions about Nintendo's decisions; but that cuts both ways, and being an egotistical asshole will only make it cut deeper into you than them.
As for technical considerations, ask the guys who did World of Goo.
Yes, everyone wants their phone to last 2-3 hours playing Quake on the newest nVidia mobile chipset. Nobody buys a phone to be an information device. Cell phones are slowly killing the Dual Screen and 3DSi, of course; just look at Nintendo's unfathomable sales numbers and you'll realize how very soon they are going to collapse under the weight of imponderable demand.
I'm just saying that anti-matter is charge-reversed matter; but charge is really an irrelevant topic for the most part. Electrons (negative charge) are attracted to protons (positive charge). Electrons also move freely, since protons inhabit the nucleus of the matter and electrons orbit. All properties of matter are based on the interaction of electrons with the nucleus-- the orbital levels, valence shells, etc. Swap the charges and, reasonably, you have the same thing.
If you swap the charges and find out that anti-SiO2 (glass, insulator) is a massive conductor of positrons and anti-copper is a massive positron insulator, something very strange has happened. Moreover, although this is "just conjecture," our existing laws of physics pertaining to chemistry would suddenly fall flat-- suddenly we'd find out that not only relative charge matters, but the DIRECTION of charge is immensely significant. That, to our current knowledge, wouldn't seem like an "interesting result of experimentation" -- it'd seem like completely implausible black magic.
The core is negative/neutral mass and the orbit is positive mass. Naturally, anti-matter electrical conductors conduct positive particles rather than negative. The questions of behavior that need to be answered is what exactly causes i.e. electroconductivity. Reversing the charges, in theory, won't affect the behavior insomuch as you have X mobile particles and Y non-mobile particles setting up orbits that should be the same (the nature of electrical charge attraction doesn't change), so anti-copper should conduct positrons like copper conducts electrons etc. The reality... we don't know, of course.
It would be a big thing if someone created anti-copper AND it didn't behave exactly like copper when supplied with an anti-potential from an anti-battery.
Ahh okay. Yeah even more irritating is people sprinkling an unbelievable proportion of their extended vocabulary into their speech. Even when correct, you're now spewing a whole hell of a lot of shit outside my typical daily use of the language; I have to think, which is okay, until I have to spend 15 seconds on every third word to vaguely recall whit it might mean... or pull out a pocket dictionary to figure out wtf you're talking about. That's just ridiculous.
explain how this non-breaking modification suddenly means "slow." Is it following more (if(false-cond...)) etc and doing more processing than necessary just to find out there's nothing more to do? i.e. broken short circuiting?
Fully/well lived? By now or by then? Or is this a continued project?
Consider someone who does nothing.. maybe plays Go, works, comes home and meditates a lot. A person who sits around calming themselves, focusing introspectively, and considering everything around them, thinking about things, trying to understand things. Seems like a waste of time, right?
Many people I know actively reject knowledge. They "don't want to know, don't want to learn" anything new. When I try to explain simple things that are new, I often get cut-off by anyone over 30 who figures they learned enough in college and now should be able to put up a brick wall to all new knowledge and just watch TV and work. (By the way, parenting problems much? You're watching TV, who is watching the kids....)
I have difficulty respecting this. Zero-feedback self enrichment I can respect. You're useless to me but you have a job, you get paid to work, I can't demand more of you. What I can't deal with is people around me that want to just stop, as if they're now working so they're now entitled to close off the entire world and live in their little life like they're finished... well...living. These are the people that get laid off when the company moves on, or that get lost in the growth of technology or the market, and complain it's not fair they no longer have a job. These people are cogs in machines, easily replaced and overall worthless... necessary, but worthless.
Why would you actively avoid any form of self-enrichment, any and all forms of mental exploration, any new knowledge? Why recoil from the thought of putting anything new and technical in your brain? Why throw a tantrum like a child if something suggests you might need to think for fifteen seconds to figure something out? I don't get it.
Well at the moment I consider myself... an okay writer, I guess. Demo mada jouzu ja arimasen.... People praise my writing sometimes but people are biased to give praise to not sound like assholes. It's not completely shitty, so it's accepted.
To that end I am studying technical writing some. A little improvement would go a long way.
Yes that seems to be the case here. If he used SHA-256 it would still break like that; but with 7 character passwords he'd be doing 4-5 bits more just for lower case letters, 5-6 for lower/upper and numbers, almost 7 bits for upper/lower/number/hash. At 4 bits that's 16 hours.. just adding one lower case letter. With complex passwords with 8 characters, 16384 hours or about 2 years. The average case is half that of course. Good luck spending a year to break 8 characters.
The "source" of the problem, in my opinion, is the shifting of education from being something of value in and of itself, to it becoming something of value largely based on the future financial gain to the student. This corrupts the purpose of education, making it a selfish pursuit instead of a noble search for truth. When education becomes a selfish pursuit, it subconsciously licences the student to use whatever means are necessary to receive the credential. Do you think Einstein sought his theory for money? Newton? Galileo? Aristotle? Plato? Socrates? Most of the posts I read here circle around the real philosophical issues without directly addressing them.
This is something I am actually addressing in a book I'm writing that, amusingly enough, is about "being a warrior." Eastern philosophies had warrior-philosophers... monks and bushido samurai, you know? The people that came home, sat down, and watched cherry blossoms bloom and fall from the trees, contemplated the value of life, said that fighting was the struggle for life and giving up was death (because you fight to protect the lives of yourself and those you protect; if you refuse to defend yourself, you are slaughtered). They pursued philosophy and mathematics as a form of self-enrichment to understand the world; the game of Go is largely a manifestation of that, hence why I play.
This is something so profoundly important to me that I had to explore it and understand it, and even write about it. Everyone around me seems in pursuit of an end goal... they want to be rich, famous, have a family, get a job, get a degree... they don't want to live. They want to end life. Morihei Ueshiba O-Sensei said, "Life is growth. If we stop growing, technically and spiritually, we are as good as dead." My parents reached age 20... 22ish? They stopped, bought a house, dad has the same job he has back then... their lives stagnated. They simply want to keep their safe, stable life... retirement is the next thing.
Everyone seems to have this ideal... it's harder to get to now; these days you don't get a factory job at 18, marry a wife at 19, have kids at 20, and build cars or refine steel until you're 65 and then retire. But still, everyone wants the degree, they want to leave school and go to college-- it's what people do now, college. College is a degree. A degree gets you a job. People don't have a path... they have a job they want. Some want to be managers, they get an MBA degree. Some want to be programmers. Some want to be artists (...), teachers... they get a degree in whatever it is. They don't have a plan, they just want to get there as soon as possible and stop. Then marriage, kids, 30-40 years of coasting, and retirement with a million and a half in your 401(k).
They are all dead. They're still talking and breathing, but they're dead.
You're quite right. That's all education is to people. It's valueless, like everything else.
I'm very careful about how I use the term "Shibumi." Mainly I only use it to refer to a particular book by Trevanian, because the concept is really deep and philosophical and also happens to be a title of a book. It makes sense to refer to a book by name; it takes a LOT of contemplation to make sense of deep philosophical topics like the basic nature of aesthetics, though.
That is more an issue of not wanting to be wrong, so not making claims I'm largely uncertain of. I should probably restrict this to when I'm professing knowledge; but any time I speak I'm professing knowledge. If I say something incorrect, some idiot is going to repeat it. On the other hand, it is said in Go: to underplay all the time is not only to lose, but to fail to learn; overplays are mistakes, but each teaches you, and by time and experience you will learn to make less of them and instead make only bold, effective moves instead of weak overplays or safe but meek underplays.
Shibui deals with beautiful things; Shibumi deals with the nature of beauty. To comment in general on the CONCEPT of a vending machine-- not that it's ugly or beautiful, but the very concept of its existence and its effect on life and beauty-- is more a topic of the nature of beauty than on a beautiful thing.
I don't think the machine itself is ugly. Hell, you could decorate it to be quite shibui. I think what it suggests about society and what it encourages is ugly. It is the same trend that leads people to shave with an electric shredder while texting on their cell phone and thinking ineffectively about jumbles of nothing under the honest belief that their worrying is productive, rushing out the door with a bagel they microwaved with a fried egg on it to melt the tasteless processed "cheese" (actually congealed vegetable oil) slice they paid for, only to spend half their day at work getting excited over the latest shiny but ultimately personally useless thing that came out of Apple or Microsoft that's even less functional than the last thing (more DRM, fewer features, lower battery life, does nothing but replace the last thing and force you to buy more...).
I dislike this machine. It offends my universal concept of shibumi.
Yeah, this sort of technology honestly offends my sense of shibumi. Then again so do vending machines in general, but less so. Something to perform a mechanical task is one thing... an avenue for the lazy. Something designed specifically to think for you, to amuse you with strange and pointless mind rot, and to generally add more noise and more information load to your day (it talks, there is auditory load, there are suggestions to think about) is simply disgraceful.
Slashdot Mirror
Auto-tuning behavior that's built in will probably be the most reliable, easiest, and best-performing way to do this, rather than requiring every Linux distribution to ensure that they're running the same extra scripts and keeping the userspace stuff in sync. Do it once and leave it built-in to the kernel.
Exactly, which is why we got rid of that udev thing and pushed for devfs. udev needed way too much configuration and extra scripts and a daemon running and other bullshit, while devfs just works.
You're the kind of person that lands with guys like Simon...
10/Vaporware
36 hours like 1.5 days... when I had Tetris I played it half an hour a day at lunch and often more. I logged more than that the first 3 months I had Dr Mario for Wiiware ... whatever ... and I only play it so-so casually. That's half-an-hour a day but you know... blocks of an hour or two to kill major time, not 15 minutes here and there.
My point is that people buying games on phones are buying them to fill minutes of time; people buying phones on handhelds are buying them to play games. Without gaming on phones, maybe you'll buy a handheld; this is doubtful I think. If you agree that lack of phone games will lead to an extremely sharp increase in handheld sales, though, then you must agree that people don't care that much about games on phones. Those that care that much about gaming are going to have a DS to get some better quality titles to fill their 2-3 hour blocks of time.
Saying "what games are available?" is a major purchasing question when buying a phone is simple delusion, given my analysis of the facts. Yours may be different; but then, my assumption of "delusion" encompasses the idea that your analysis is incorrect and based on the wild belief that people stand around looking at iPhone vs Android in the same way they look at 3DSi vs PSP2.
I don't mean that as an analogy between different media; I mean that people look at PSP vs DS and compare the gaming experience as a serious buying factor (videos, networking, etc also factor in these days), and you are asserting that people also look at phones and consider the gaming experience as a serious buying factor. This logically leads us to question why they completely ignore the superior handheld gaming devices entirely-- an extremely strange behavior for a consumer significantly considering the potential handheld gaming experience of the product or, more realistically, the handheld gaming experience they are pursuing (the product is not real to the consumer; the product is a conduit for function).
You must understand that the very argument seems logically unsound to me. When I noticed my phone could play music, I considered it versus an iPod; the phone did what I needed in that respect--and with better sound quality than the iPod! Had it not, I wouldn't have bailed for an iPhone; although that would be an excellent choice if I didn't have other competing factors between iPhone vs Android phone (for example, a physical keyboard). If I needed a digital media player, I would have bought one.
For some people, this will work out extremely well: iPhone is an iPod, end of story. Want an iPod? Get an iPhone, if the iPhone doesn't fail at something critically important. For anyone that considers "gaming on my phone" to be a serious factor, however, they are going to want a 3DS with a cell phone built in. They also won't get that. The 3DS is so much better at gaming (as a purpose-designed platform AND with better quality content available), and the functionality integrated with your cell phone just doesn't match up. The functionality integrated with the cell phone only reaches "casual" which inherently means it's one of the things you basically ignore when purchasing.
Think about it for a minute. It makes sense, doesn't it? Just saying "millions of $2 cell phone games get sold every day" doesn't imply that cell phone gaming is a significant phone purchase decision; it does imply that the cell phone gaming market is significant and substantial, but that's a secondary effect. I believe the conclusion that the cell phone game market is driven by the general purchase of cell phones is more likely than the purchase of specific cell phones being driven by the demand for cell phone games.
I bought games on my Razr, it's true. I played them once in a while, too. Tetris 4 times, Guitar Hero twice. Some other stuff once or twice.
See I'm thinking in terms of "playing hours." That you sold 3 million copies of Pirate Ninja War 2 on Playstation means something: Playstation does nothing but play games, and 3 million people dedicated the primary function of their system to playing Pirate Ninja War for a significant amount of time (if nobody did, it wouldn't sell so much due to bad reviews or simple LACK of reviews). Obviously, people played for solid hours at a time, at the least-- even if the game sucks, they might be there for 2-3 hours before deciding they're bored. With those sales numbers, though, it's more likely the game enjoyed popularity on merit (with a wide array of shovelware, it's unlikely one will enjoy more than mediocre sales).
Now, on the phone it's less clear. People buy Tetris "to have it." They occasionally play when bored. They don't sit at home letting their food get cold and ignoring their friends and work while they grind out hours upon hours of Amazing $2 Cell Phone App 5. Still, accounting for how much people are playing games on their phone is fuzzy; accounting for how much they CARE is even fuzzier, since it's more of a distraction than anything.
When we have titles on DS for $30-$40 selling millions of copies, that's something. When we have $2-$3 titles selling millions of copies, that's throw-away money. Billions of McDonalds hamburgers are sold, but damn near everyone makes better food at higher prices.
It's a persuasion issue. There is "unfair treatment" and then there is "throwing a huge fucking tantrum over unfair treatment." You'll find that being an asshole quickly teaches people not to care about what liberties of yours are being trounced all over--much less over privileges granted by business decisions made by companies.
Nintendo has every right to make their publishing process quite exclusive. While you can argue the profit merits of this or debate the potential impact of indie-gamers on Nintendo's profits and the quality of third party shovelware, you can't really say you have any such "rights" to develop for Nintendo's platform. Your own sob story might draw people to make more philosophical conclusions about Nintendo's decisions; but that cuts both ways, and being an egotistical asshole will only make it cut deeper into you than them.
As for technical considerations, ask the guys who did World of Goo.
I don't think gaming is a "killer app" on phones.
Bob's game... summary: Stupid whiny bitch throws a tantrum on the Internet.
Yes, everyone wants their phone to last 2-3 hours playing Quake on the newest nVidia mobile chipset. Nobody buys a phone to be an information device. Cell phones are slowly killing the Dual Screen and 3DSi, of course; just look at Nintendo's unfathomable sales numbers and you'll realize how very soon they are going to collapse under the weight of imponderable demand.
I'm just saying that anti-matter is charge-reversed matter; but charge is really an irrelevant topic for the most part. Electrons (negative charge) are attracted to protons (positive charge). Electrons also move freely, since protons inhabit the nucleus of the matter and electrons orbit. All properties of matter are based on the interaction of electrons with the nucleus-- the orbital levels, valence shells, etc. Swap the charges and, reasonably, you have the same thing.
If you swap the charges and find out that anti-SiO2 (glass, insulator) is a massive conductor of positrons and anti-copper is a massive positron insulator, something very strange has happened. Moreover, although this is "just conjecture," our existing laws of physics pertaining to chemistry would suddenly fall flat-- suddenly we'd find out that not only relative charge matters, but the DIRECTION of charge is immensely significant. That, to our current knowledge, wouldn't seem like an "interesting result of experimentation" -- it'd seem like completely implausible black magic.
Sorry, I should have said matter, not mass. Still unclear, but correct. It's made of matter with a positive/negative charge.
The core is negative/neutral mass and the orbit is positive mass. Naturally, anti-matter electrical conductors conduct positive particles rather than negative. The questions of behavior that need to be answered is what exactly causes i.e. electroconductivity. Reversing the charges, in theory, won't affect the behavior insomuch as you have X mobile particles and Y non-mobile particles setting up orbits that should be the same (the nature of electrical charge attraction doesn't change), so anti-copper should conduct positrons like copper conducts electrons etc. The reality... we don't know, of course.
It would be a big thing if someone created anti-copper AND it didn't behave exactly like copper when supplied with an anti-potential from an anti-battery.
Ahh okay. Yeah even more irritating is people sprinkling an unbelievable proportion of their extended vocabulary into their speech. Even when correct, you're now spewing a whole hell of a lot of shit outside my typical daily use of the language; I have to think, which is okay, until I have to spend 15 seconds on every third word to vaguely recall whit it might mean... or pull out a pocket dictionary to figure out wtf you're talking about. That's just ridiculous.
explain how this non-breaking modification suddenly means "slow." Is it following more (if(false-cond...)) etc and doing more processing than necessary just to find out there's nothing more to do? i.e. broken short circuiting?
What the hell is a 'trust system' anyway? Is that part of the Border Gateway Protocol?
Maybe someone needs to take a closer look at this 'trust system.'
This is a classic example of the guy who doesn't know wtf he's talking about being the only one asking the questions that actually need to be asked.
What would Internet Go Server files matter for a project? And don't you use SGF for simple game format saves these days anyway?
Fully/well lived? By now or by then? Or is this a continued project?
Consider someone who does nothing.. maybe plays Go, works, comes home and meditates a lot. A person who sits around calming themselves, focusing introspectively, and considering everything around them, thinking about things, trying to understand things. Seems like a waste of time, right?
Many people I know actively reject knowledge. They "don't want to know, don't want to learn" anything new. When I try to explain simple things that are new, I often get cut-off by anyone over 30 who figures they learned enough in college and now should be able to put up a brick wall to all new knowledge and just watch TV and work. (By the way, parenting problems much? You're watching TV, who is watching the kids....)
I have difficulty respecting this. Zero-feedback self enrichment I can respect. You're useless to me but you have a job, you get paid to work, I can't demand more of you. What I can't deal with is people around me that want to just stop, as if they're now working so they're now entitled to close off the entire world and live in their little life like they're finished ... well ...living. These are the people that get laid off when the company moves on, or that get lost in the growth of technology or the market, and complain it's not fair they no longer have a job. These people are cogs in machines, easily replaced and overall worthless... necessary, but worthless.
Why would you actively avoid any form of self-enrichment, any and all forms of mental exploration, any new knowledge? Why recoil from the thought of putting anything new and technical in your brain? Why throw a tantrum like a child if something suggests you might need to think for fifteen seconds to figure something out? I don't get it.
Well at the moment I consider myself ... an okay writer, I guess. Demo mada jouzu ja arimasen.... People praise my writing sometimes but people are biased to give praise to not sound like assholes. It's not completely shitty, so it's accepted.
To that end I am studying technical writing some. A little improvement would go a long way.
Yes that seems to be the case here. If he used SHA-256 it would still break like that; but with 7 character passwords he'd be doing 4-5 bits more just for lower case letters, 5-6 for lower/upper and numbers, almost 7 bits for upper/lower/number/hash. At 4 bits that's 16 hours.. just adding one lower case letter. With complex passwords with 8 characters, 16384 hours or about 2 years. The average case is half that of course. Good luck spending a year to break 8 characters.
The "source" of the problem, in my opinion, is the shifting of education from being something of value in and of itself, to it becoming something of value largely based on the future financial gain to the student. This corrupts the purpose of education, making it a selfish pursuit instead of a noble search for truth. When education becomes a selfish pursuit, it subconsciously licences the student to use whatever means are necessary to receive the credential. Do you think Einstein sought his theory for money? Newton? Galileo? Aristotle? Plato? Socrates? Most of the posts I read here circle around the real philosophical issues without directly addressing them.
This is something I am actually addressing in a book I'm writing that, amusingly enough, is about "being a warrior." Eastern philosophies had warrior-philosophers ... monks and bushido samurai, you know? The people that came home, sat down, and watched cherry blossoms bloom and fall from the trees, contemplated the value of life, said that fighting was the struggle for life and giving up was death (because you fight to protect the lives of yourself and those you protect; if you refuse to defend yourself, you are slaughtered). They pursued philosophy and mathematics as a form of self-enrichment to understand the world; the game of Go is largely a manifestation of that, hence why I play.
This is something so profoundly important to me that I had to explore it and understand it, and even write about it. Everyone around me seems in pursuit of an end goal... they want to be rich, famous, have a family, get a job, get a degree... they don't want to live. They want to end life. Morihei Ueshiba O-Sensei said, "Life is growth. If we stop growing, technically and spiritually, we are as good as dead." My parents reached age 20... 22ish? They stopped, bought a house, dad has the same job he has back then... their lives stagnated. They simply want to keep their safe, stable life... retirement is the next thing.
Everyone seems to have this ideal... it's harder to get to now; these days you don't get a factory job at 18, marry a wife at 19, have kids at 20, and build cars or refine steel until you're 65 and then retire. But still, everyone wants the degree, they want to leave school and go to college-- it's what people do now, college. College is a degree. A degree gets you a job. People don't have a path... they have a job they want. Some want to be managers, they get an MBA degree. Some want to be programmers. Some want to be artists (...), teachers... they get a degree in whatever it is. They don't have a plan, they just want to get there as soon as possible and stop. Then marriage, kids, 30-40 years of coasting, and retirement with a million and a half in your 401(k).
They are all dead. They're still talking and breathing, but they're dead.
You're quite right. That's all education is to people. It's valueless, like everything else.
I'm very careful about how I use the term "Shibumi." Mainly I only use it to refer to a particular book by Trevanian, because the concept is really deep and philosophical and also happens to be a title of a book. It makes sense to refer to a book by name; it takes a LOT of contemplation to make sense of deep philosophical topics like the basic nature of aesthetics, though.
That is more an issue of not wanting to be wrong, so not making claims I'm largely uncertain of. I should probably restrict this to when I'm professing knowledge; but any time I speak I'm professing knowledge. If I say something incorrect, some idiot is going to repeat it. On the other hand, it is said in Go: to underplay all the time is not only to lose, but to fail to learn; overplays are mistakes, but each teaches you, and by time and experience you will learn to make less of them and instead make only bold, effective moves instead of weak overplays or safe but meek underplays.
Shibui deals with beautiful things; Shibumi deals with the nature of beauty. To comment in general on the CONCEPT of a vending machine-- not that it's ugly or beautiful, but the very concept of its existence and its effect on life and beauty-- is more a topic of the nature of beauty than on a beautiful thing.
I don't think the machine itself is ugly. Hell, you could decorate it to be quite shibui. I think what it suggests about society and what it encourages is ugly. It is the same trend that leads people to shave with an electric shredder while texting on their cell phone and thinking ineffectively about jumbles of nothing under the honest belief that their worrying is productive, rushing out the door with a bagel they microwaved with a fried egg on it to melt the tasteless processed "cheese" (actually congealed vegetable oil) slice they paid for, only to spend half their day at work getting excited over the latest shiny but ultimately personally useless thing that came out of Apple or Microsoft that's even less functional than the last thing (more DRM, fewer features, lower battery life, does nothing but replace the last thing and force you to buy more...).
I dislike this machine. It offends my universal concept of shibumi.
Yeah, this sort of technology honestly offends my sense of shibumi. Then again so do vending machines in general, but less so. Something to perform a mechanical task is one thing... an avenue for the lazy. Something designed specifically to think for you, to amuse you with strange and pointless mind rot, and to generally add more noise and more information load to your day (it talks, there is auditory load, there are suggestions to think about) is simply disgraceful.
If you can do that in 2030 I'll be impressed.
Quake was so fucking awesome on a 33MHz 486SX with no floating point unit.