But this is precisely the point I was ridiculing: They took an ever-present concept of designing games -- one that I'm sure predates videogames themselves -- and market it as an "innovation", claiming it is an implementation of some two-bit psychology thesis with a fancy-sounding name and a colorful chart.
But guess what, games have been fun and addictive before, way before, and I'm willing to bet that it was not by accident that game makers ended up finding that sweet-spot between boing and frustrating -- I posit that they seeked this balance on purpose.
According to this new-fangled theory, an activity is only fun while we are engaged in a challenge that we can actually accomplish; and that if it gets too hard, we get anxious, while if it gets too easy, we get bored.
And they can now prove this with colorful charts and some vague numbers.
This prompts a very big and loud _DUH!_ for whomever came up with such insight.
If you need some pseudo-scientific, quasi-psychiatric thesis to understand this, perhaps you shouldn't be designing games -- GAMES!
You know, games: the epitome of fun; or so I thought.
-dZ.
P.S.> By the way, Tycho did not recommend the game. He mentioned it as hearsay, and recommends you follow the link to where the so-called theory is explained, so that you may also be intrigued by its rationale (the one that scientifically proves that a game is only fun while you are not stomping the controller in frustration, or drooling unconscious on the couch out of boredom).
Unfortunately, the filter now blocks a couple of my favorite webcomics and Wikipedia (filtered because they are "Personal Pages"). I used to use an anonymizer to get around the filter, but they've blocked that too.
Really? THe company I work for makes it a point to let me know that Wikipedia is *NOT* blocked for being "Personal Pages". Whenever I click on a Wikipedia link, I get the following message:
This page is NOT blocked
Before proceeding, please note the following:
This site has been categorized as: Personal Pages, and may contain unsuitable content. Proceed only if you are comfortable with viewing such content.
I tell you, its very annoying to be told, almost on every other site I visit, how it is *NOT* blocked. And the fact that this response is returned on CSS, JS, and image requests just makes for very "interesting" layout styles.
You comparison of a police car on fire, to the rape of a 12 year old girl are so different, that it disgusting of you to even try to compare them. It cheapens the whole debate. Might as well bring in Nazis concentration camps as well.
And by Godwin's Law, I now declare this argument moot and closed.
AP 08/07/2006, Jordan - In related news, a new scroll has been uncovered in the Dead Sea that categorically insists that God most definitely did *NOT* rest on the seventh day, and perhaps worked on the Creation at least half-way through the next week. The Universe is now believed to be 9 1/2 days old; a full 3 days older than originally thought.
Talk to him politely, tell him that the device annoys you and your friends to no end, but that you understand why he would put it up in the first place. Ask him if there is something in particular that prompted him to install the device. Then ask him if he would be so kind as to turn it off, and that you in turn would make sure that your friends (of course, it never was you!) stay off his lawn, do not play loud music after 10pm, throw eggs at his house on Halloween night, or do whatever it was that you did to piss him off in the first place.
Of course, you must make sure you hold your end of the bargain, otherwise all bets are off.
You'll be surprise how effective a short face-to-face encounter in good terms can be. At the very least, it shows you respect him, and that you're willing to reason with him, so if he retorts with a loud "FUCK YOU, YOU LITTLE PISS-HEAD!! AND GET OFF MY PROPERTAH!!!", you can tell the police you tried your best.
This is just another sensationalist, seemingly-controversial, but shameless plug for a Microsoft product, in the good ol' style of John Dvorak. Let me summarize the article:
Is Windows Vista ready? No, God no. But then, what is ready? Is anything ever ready? Does "readiness" matter? I don't think so, so my point is irrelevant. Go figure.
Does Windows Vista suck? Absolutely. But what software doesn't? So then, Windows Vista is as good (or perhaps better) than any other sucky thing out there. See how Vista is starting to look good?
Will Microsoft make their deadline? YES! But I honestly, truly, completely, reallyabsopositutely believe that Microsoft will make it right: every beta is actually better than the one before, see?
What "strength in resisting vandalism"? Some editors were watching the show on TV, so they were able to revert the changes. What about the myriad other instances where vandalism is not announced and showcased on TV worldwide?
I concur. This is just yet another script-kiddie 'sploit toy, and McAfee is just trying to keep itself in the headlines for a little while, so that people don't forget that it is still around.
Many people put too much emphasis on Page Rank, but they shouldn't. Page Rank is not very helpful.
A lot of people depend too much on Page Rank, and this is not good. The results of Page Rank do not give too much information.
Many marketers would do good to not put too much emphasis on Page Rank, as I believe it has little to do with actual results ranking.
Oh, and by the way, did I mention that Page Rank has nothing to do with Google's actual results? At least that's what I think. I mean, I know.
Lets see why Page Rank is not good: Because it doesn't represent actual result ranking. Ergo, people shouldn't really rely on it (although many do, by the by). QED.
And just in case I haven't gotten through yet, I'll repeat: Page Rank is teh s0x0rz.
>> Uh, K&R is slightly older than Java or C#... there was no such thing as memory management or virtual machines (as we know them today) back then.
Didn't Infocom implemented their "database query system" (which eventually became their famous text-adventure game engine) using a virtual machine they called the Z-machine? As far as I know that system predated Java and C# by a few decades.
They *are* complaining. Its called "planting the seed of distrust":
From the article: "Over the last year and a half, we've noticed how bot development in particular has latched on to open-source tools and the open-source development model,"
Further down: Marcus said his company is drawing attention to the open-source trend to educate users, and not as an attempt to discredit open-source alternatives to its own proprietary software products. "We think [open-source antivirus products] are fine. They've never been something that was really in the same class as ours, but we've always been big supporters of open-source antivirus," he said.
In other words, McAfee is saying "Bot writers are using Open Source tools to develop, maintain, collaborate on, and distribute malware. We're just saying, you know. Not that we're accusing them of anything; we're just saying."
Then later in the article they start bad-mouthing Full Disclosure. That's, as you say, a separate topic.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot another important part of The Plan:
When they call the "hotline" phone, make sure to tell them "Missiles? What missiles? Er, no, we did not launch any, uh, missiles."
-dZ.
I wish I had some MOD points for you :)
Thank you, sir, for the laugh!
-dZ.
But this is precisely the point I was ridiculing: They took an ever-present concept of designing games -- one that I'm sure predates videogames themselves -- and market it as an "innovation", claiming it is an implementation of some two-bit psychology thesis with a fancy-sounding name and a colorful chart.
But guess what, games have been fun and addictive before, way before, and I'm willing to bet that it was not by accident that game makers ended up finding that sweet-spot between boing and frustrating -- I posit that they seeked this balance on purpose.
-dZ.
According to this new-fangled theory, an activity is only fun while we are engaged in a challenge that we can actually accomplish; and that if it gets too hard, we get anxious, while if it gets too easy, we get bored.
And they can now prove this with colorful charts and some vague numbers.
This prompts a very big and loud _DUH!_ for whomever came up with such insight.
If you need some pseudo-scientific, quasi-psychiatric thesis to understand this, perhaps you shouldn't be designing games -- GAMES!
You know, games: the epitome of fun; or so I thought.
-dZ.
P.S.> By the way, Tycho did not recommend the game. He mentioned it as hearsay, and recommends you follow the link to where the so-called theory is explained, so that you may also be intrigued by its rationale (the one that scientifically proves that a game is only fun while you are not stomping the controller in frustration, or drooling unconscious on the couch out of boredom).
>> The only real fix for the "unauthentic slimeball problem" is a reputation system that works.
Or developing brains that actually work as intended. I wouldn't hold my breath though.
-dZ.
Really? THe company I work for makes it a point to let me know that Wikipedia is *NOT* blocked for being "Personal Pages". Whenever I click on a Wikipedia link, I get the following message:
I tell you, its very annoying to be told, almost on every other site I visit, how it is *NOT* blocked. And the fact that this response is returned on CSS, JS, and image requests just makes for very "interesting" layout styles.
It should have been translated properly to:
"So long, and thanks for all the flakes!"
-dZ.
From vapor(hard)ware to vapor(soft)ware. How sublime*!
:)
*(pun intended
-dZ.
You comparison of a police car on fire, to the rape of a 12 year old girl are so different, that it disgusting of you to even try to compare them. It cheapens the whole debate. Might as well bring in Nazis concentration camps as well.
And by Godwin's Law, I now declare this argument moot and closed.
Move along.
-dZ.
AP 08/07/2006, Jordan - In related news, a new scroll has been uncovered in the Dead Sea that categorically insists that God most definitely did *NOT* rest on the seventh day, and perhaps worked on the Creation at least half-way through the next week. The Universe is now believed to be 9 1/2 days old; a full 3 days older than originally thought.
-dZ.
>> Anybody know of a forum that's a bit like /. , but run by clueful editors?
Yes, but they don't use the Internet.
-dZ.
>> Indeed. I hear that rock and roll music, comic books, and video games all cause ADHD.
No, you're wrong. Those things turn kids into socio- and psycho-paths. Jeez, keep up with the trends, will 'ya.
-dZ.
Why not try reasoning with him?
Talk to him politely, tell him that the device annoys you and your friends to no end, but that you understand why he would put it up in the first place. Ask him if there is something in particular that prompted him to install the device. Then ask him if he would be so kind as to turn it off, and that you in turn would make sure that your friends (of course, it never was you!) stay off his lawn, do not play loud music after 10pm, throw eggs at his house on Halloween night, or do whatever it was that you did to piss him off in the first place.
Of course, you must make sure you hold your end of the bargain, otherwise all bets are off.
You'll be surprise how effective a short face-to-face encounter in good terms can be. At the very least, it shows you respect him, and that you're willing to reason with him, so if he retorts with a loud "FUCK YOU, YOU LITTLE PISS-HEAD!! AND GET OFF MY PROPERTAH!!!", you can tell the police you tried your best.
-dZ.
Blah. Move along.
-dZ.
Is this like a Godzilla reference?
-dZ.
What "strength in resisting vandalism"? Some editors were watching the show on TV, so they were able to revert the changes. What about the myriad other instances where vandalism is not announced and showcased on TV worldwide?
-dZ.
I concur. This is just yet another script-kiddie 'sploit toy, and McAfee is just trying to keep itself in the headlines for a little while, so that people don't forget that it is still around.
-dZ.
Good one! Take a bow now. :)
-dZ.
My summary of the article follow:
Many people put too much emphasis on Page Rank, but they shouldn't. Page Rank is not very helpful.
A lot of people depend too much on Page Rank, and this is not good. The results of Page Rank do not give too much information.
Many marketers would do good to not put too much emphasis on Page Rank, as I believe it has little to do with actual results ranking.
Oh, and by the way, did I mention that Page Rank has nothing to do with Google's actual results? At least that's what I think. I mean, I know.
Lets see why Page Rank is not good: Because it doesn't represent actual result ranking. Ergo, people shouldn't really rely on it (although many do, by the by). QED.
And just in case I haven't gotten through yet, I'll repeat: Page Rank is teh s0x0rz.
-dZ.
Unfortunately, there aren't many of those who believe in that. Most are more interested in the short-term "gaming the system" routine using magic.
-dZ.
Perhaps they meant trying-way-to-be-hard or trying-way-to-make-it-hard?
-dZ.
>> Uh, K&R is slightly older than Java or C#... there was no such thing as memory management or virtual machines (as we know them today) back then.
Didn't Infocom implemented their "database query system" (which eventually became their famous text-adventure game engine) using a virtual machine they called the Z-machine? As far as I know that system predated Java and C# by a few decades.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-machine
-dZ.
Yes, go ahead, tell McAfee; they are the ones making the obscenely stupid associations. Perhaps they didn't think of those.
-dZ.
I agree with you, which is why I think that the entire article is stupid and plain ol' FUD. I think McAfee is grasping at straws.
-dZ.
They *are* complaining. Its called "planting the seed of distrust":
From the article:
"Over the last year and a half, we've noticed how bot development in particular has latched on to open-source tools and the open-source development model,"
Further down:
Marcus said his company is drawing attention to the open-source trend to educate users, and not as an attempt to discredit open-source alternatives to its own proprietary software products. "We think [open-source antivirus products] are fine. They've never been something that was really in the same class as ours, but we've always been big supporters of open-source antivirus," he said.
In other words, McAfee is saying "Bot writers are using Open Source tools to develop, maintain, collaborate on, and distribute malware. We're just saying, you know. Not that we're accusing them of anything; we're just saying."
Then later in the article they start bad-mouthing Full Disclosure. That's, as you say, a separate topic.
-dZ.