Actually, I've found numerous depictions of him dying around the Internet. All somewhat satisfying.
But I'd really rather not see him die in the movie, I'd much rather take place in the killing of the root of all stupidity myself. A nice hands-on experience.
So if these space photos are made on a set (or out in a desert), where would all that money that Bush just announced he's giving NASA go? In my opinion, NASA should forget cameras and go for full-on fraudulent Mars cinematography. Complete with a full cast of Martian characters, leading up to a climax where the main character has to make a decision about whether his best friend lives... or DIES. *cue the tear*
Let's just say he enjoys taking his vehicle out for a spin across neighboring farmers' lands... ever heard of a crop circle? Crop doughnuts? Crop drag racing? Tractor slalom? All good fun on other people's land.
But don't worry, you're still not going to be caught.
Except that the neural interface is based solely on brain impulses. For example, with a mouse, you have to translate the impulses into muscle movements which, I'm assuming, decreases their accuracy. Also, optical mouses occasionally have problems detecting motion.
And what about picking the mouse up to continue moving? That's another hardly intuitive inconvenience of the current physical interface to FPSs.
Lastly, I'll give you the example of Trespasser. If you played the game, you would know how incredibly annoying the controls were (there were buttons to twist your wrist, move your forearm, etc.) Much of my frustration with the controls came about from the fact that the controls were digital. With a neural interface, you can have essentially unlimited unconstrained analog axes. Currently, the physical interface boasts two (x and y axes on the mouse).
Just a few examples. So while I'm still skeptical that people would be so unresponive to biofeedback, even if that were true, an unparalleled amount of control is theoretically possible with a neural interface.
Thanks for the boost. If I had said anything to that effect, I would have been modded off-topic and/or troll. Posting at 0 is very difficult because whenever you make a controversial point or you're trying to make a joke it gets modded down. (To be fair, I probably deserved the 0, but I am now in full control of my faculties =)
I would imagine that there would probably be separate arenas/competitions for physical-interface games and (not sure what the word is) neural-interface games. Just because, like the top-level poster said, it would generate an unfair advantage.
Frankly, I'd prefer to see neural-interface match-ups because then the games become less of a matter of how well you can properly wield a mouse, but it relies more on strategy. Presumably, all the characters would have the same "physical" (in the game) abilities, so it would be up to the players' strategies and luck to determine who would win.
Whoever modded this a troll, would you like to explain what was wrong with my comment? As I recall there weren't any very good, Xbox-only titles available when Halo was released.
Trolls are trying to incite flamewars, right? I'm just looking for another opinion and possibly an answer....
As an aside: just because I have bad karma doesn't mean that every controversial thing I say is a troll.
Maybe they don't realize that they're ruining their lives or they have a distorted view of reality and feel that their life is worthless.
Also, something in the society probably caused such people to turn to games (many examples are given in comments above). So if it's society's fault that these people are ruining their lives, it should probably society's responsibility to help correct this.
Just my thought on the situation. I have done no research, so feel free to debunk my claims.
I don't know how people can stand to play FPSs on consoles. No mouse means that if a guy drops in behind you, you're helpless until your character finally (in ever-so-tiny increments) turns 180 degrees. I enjoyed Goldeneye on the N64 for a while, but the mouse is just so much more responsive and accurate (in my case) I'm never gonna buy a console FPS again.
You may have other opinions, but until I see a console controller that allows me to whip around and target an enemy as fast as a mouse, my opinion will remain the same.
I think people are lavishing praise all over Halo because they feel that it somehow justifies their purchase of an Xbox. Up until Halo, no one ever said I should get an Xbox to play any specific game. After Halo, everyone said Xbox was great because it had Halo.
I'm not saying this is the only reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if it contributed a bit to this revolution of hype (oops, I meant "first person shooters").
Not trying to flame, this is just my perception. I don't own an Xbox and I've only played Halo multiplayer.
As an aside, generally, I feel more comfortable with the Japanese approach, as they admit when they're being group oriented and when they're being individualistic, as opposed to the American stance of pretending to always be individualistic when sometimes being blindingly conformist. But that's a personal rant, neither here nor there.
Rant or not, I think that's a good point and from my experience here in the US, that's a very interesting perspective. But I'm more curious about what will happen once technology is integrated deeply into both societies. Will the two converge? (There's no answer to this question yet, of course, I'm just wondering out loud =)
You know, you say that the US is just as "comformist" as any of the Asian countries, but, in general, the Asian countries are said to be collectivist (as opposed to US, Europe which are individualistic). Supposedly the wellfare of the group is more important in Asia. I don't really know much about the topic, but I've seen this mentioned in several places and I would assume it's somewhat accurate.
Of course, your point is still a very interesting one. I don't play any online games anymore since I got tired of all the morons that live near me =)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I've found numerous depictions of him dying around the Internet. All somewhat satisfying.
But I'd really rather not see him die in the movie, I'd much rather take place in the killing of the root of all stupidity myself. A nice hands-on experience.
Forget the movie, where are the Spaceballs lunch box, breakfast cereal, toliet paper, window/LCD monitors, and flame throwers they promised us?
I hope you weren't suggesting that they call it "Star Wars Forever..." We all know what that does to the development process...
I smell a sitcom!
And they could call it Plan 9 from Outer Space! It's guaranteed to be successful with a name like that! Quick, somebody call Ed Wood!
This is great, now whenever I move, I'll have to transport my extremely expensive and fragile windows around as well! Talk about a great idea!
I hope this process goes as smoothly as when moving the Windows operating system onto a new computer.
Mr. Anderson
During the night, you can just use a handy 25 lb solar-powered flourescent light. I'll tell you more once you fill out the check... ... suckers.
So if these space photos are made on a set (or out in a desert), where would all that money that Bush just announced he's giving NASA go? In my opinion, NASA should forget cameras and go for full-on fraudulent Mars cinematography. Complete with a full cast of Martian characters, leading up to a climax where the main character has to make a decision about whether his best friend lives... or DIES. *cue the tear*
His friend is a talking pie.
Let's just say he enjoys taking his vehicle out for a spin across neighboring farmers' lands... ever heard of a crop circle? Crop doughnuts? Crop drag racing? Tractor slalom? All good fun on other people's land.
But don't worry, you're still not going to be caught.
Except that the neural interface is based solely on brain impulses. For example, with a mouse, you have to translate the impulses into muscle movements which, I'm assuming, decreases their accuracy. Also, optical mouses occasionally have problems detecting motion.
And what about picking the mouse up to continue moving? That's another hardly intuitive inconvenience of the current physical interface to FPSs.
Lastly, I'll give you the example of Trespasser. If you played the game, you would know how incredibly annoying the controls were (there were buttons to twist your wrist, move your forearm, etc.) Much of my frustration with the controls came about from the fact that the controls were digital. With a neural interface, you can have essentially unlimited unconstrained analog axes. Currently, the physical interface boasts two (x and y axes on the mouse).
Just a few examples. So while I'm still skeptical that people would be so unresponive to biofeedback, even if that were true, an unparalleled amount of control is theoretically possible with a neural interface.
Thanks for the boost. If I had said anything to that effect, I would have been modded off-topic and/or troll. Posting at 0 is very difficult because whenever you make a controversial point or you're trying to make a joke it gets modded down. (To be fair, I probably deserved the 0, but I am now in full control of my faculties =)
Good point. But people are going to point the finger at someone and it's probably not going to be themselves.
(I don't really have a good answer to your question, though I do understand the point you've made)
Outsourcing.
(POTENTIAL SPOILER FOR MATRIX REVOLUTIONS)
In Matrix Revolutions, program executes you!
I would imagine that there would probably be separate arenas/competitions for physical-interface games and (not sure what the word is) neural-interface games. Just because, like the top-level poster said, it would generate an unfair advantage.
Frankly, I'd prefer to see neural-interface match-ups because then the games become less of a matter of how well you can properly wield a mouse, but it relies more on strategy. Presumably, all the characters would have the same "physical" (in the game) abilities, so it would be up to the players' strategies and luck to determine who would win.
Whoever modded this a troll, would you like to explain what was wrong with my comment? As I recall there weren't any very good, Xbox-only titles available when Halo was released.
Trolls are trying to incite flamewars, right? I'm just looking for another opinion and possibly an answer....
As an aside: just because I have bad karma doesn't mean that every controversial thing I say is a troll.
Maybe they don't realize that they're ruining their lives or they have a distorted view of reality and feel that their life is worthless.
Also, something in the society probably caused such people to turn to games (many examples are given in comments above). So if it's society's fault that these people are ruining their lives, it should probably society's responsibility to help correct this.
Just my thought on the situation. I have done no research, so feel free to debunk my claims.
I don't know how people can stand to play FPSs on consoles. No mouse means that if a guy drops in behind you, you're helpless until your character finally (in ever-so-tiny increments) turns 180 degrees. I enjoyed Goldeneye on the N64 for a while, but the mouse is just so much more responsive and accurate (in my case) I'm never gonna buy a console FPS again.
You may have other opinions, but until I see a console controller that allows me to whip around and target an enemy as fast as a mouse, my opinion will remain the same.
I think people are lavishing praise all over Halo because they feel that it somehow justifies their purchase of an Xbox. Up until Halo, no one ever said I should get an Xbox to play any specific game. After Halo, everyone said Xbox was great because it had Halo.
I'm not saying this is the only reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if it contributed a bit to this revolution of hype (oops, I meant "first person shooters").
Not trying to flame, this is just my perception. I don't own an Xbox and I've only played Halo multiplayer.
Rant or not, I think that's a good point and from my experience here in the US, that's a very interesting perspective. But I'm more curious about what will happen once technology is integrated deeply into both societies. Will the two converge? (There's no answer to this question yet, of course, I'm just wondering out loud =)
You know, you say that the US is just as "comformist" as any of the Asian countries, but, in general, the Asian countries are said to be collectivist (as opposed to US, Europe which are individualistic). Supposedly the wellfare of the group is more important in Asia. I don't really know much about the topic, but I've seen this mentioned in several places and I would assume it's somewhat accurate.
Of course, your point is still a very interesting one. I don't play any online games anymore since I got tired of all the morons that live near me =)
Walking through it? I was planning on walking on top of it.
I see you're falling right into their trap. That's exactly what they WANT you to do!
... yeah. That's what I meant... No trolling going on here. Move right along.
A hint to the moderators:
When I wrote that post, I was out fishing moving at about 5mph with fishing lines out the back of my boat in the water trying to catch fish.
I was also closely related to a gnome, though slightly larger and more green. I could be found under bridges. I was killed in LOTR.
Now think twice before you mod this post insightful =)