> if I ever met one of the characters in a dream, I'd set his creepy muppet ass on fire
You made Fresca come out of my nose.
While I'm a fan of the movie, I remember it being fairly disturbing as a child when I first saw it, but in a weird, good way. I think that's why it stuck with me all these years.
The company I work for, RABA Technologies, was the one who did the hack-into-the-Diebold thing for Maryland; this was one of our primary recommendations to them. Like the article said:
"A national technology consulting firm he hired to review the system in 2003 found security flaws, but state officials said they could be fixed quickly"
Let's hope this yields a chance to fix them. Our report is here. For a funnier take on it, see my boss in this Daily Show clip.
When the first thing you think of when you hear OPM is The Office of Personnel Management. Wow, those guys do gaming too? They probably pwn at Roller Coaster Tycoon.
But I bet they go home, play Splinter Cell, and secretly wish they worked for another three letter agency.
Since this is all web-services driven, it seems to me you could create an interesting cycle with a simple program:
1) Use the API to find a HIT, and sign up to complete it. 2) Create a new HIT that basically asks someone to complete the first HIT,
only for $0.01 less than the original HIT was offering. 3) Do this for every existing HIT. 4) Profit?
This is like the 5th article from Escapist that Slashdot has linked to since the magazine started its publication. So far, just about every article is of interest to the Slashdot gaming crowd. So, just read the magazine already! It's free and stuff!
Oh yeah. Hard to work your way through anything too involved when you've got a family who, for some unfathomable reason, wants to spend time with you.
It's much harder to find "pick-up-and-play" PC games these days that fit into the highly fragmented gaming schedule that you (and I) occupy. Funny you should mention Moria; I've recently picked up Angband http://www.thangorodrim.net/ as a good candidate. It's a bit easier on the consoles; I have an XBox and things like Worms 3D and the various racing games work out wonderfully. My little spud loves watching Burnout 3, so we're doing things "as a family" so to speak.
There are 2 big things coming over the horizon, once Longhorn lets us have advanced 3D graphics on our desktops.
The first is that this can probably be exploited by malware/spyware to make "invisible" interfaces that sit over top of existing applications, happily monitoring everything you're doing. Or, kind of like those one-pixel GIFs that show up on the odd phishing page. No fun.
But by far the worst is going to be the end-user customization. Want transparent yellow spinning windows that change opacity based on the phase of the moon? Bet you can do that! It'll be like the old programs that let you add sounds to all the Windows events. When the average user got a hold of that, it was only a matter of seconds before their machine became the Box Of Annoyance. Thank Jeebus people finally grew out of that (mostly). But watch and see - it's coming again, only this time it's got GRAPHICS.
Now, it may open up a whole new world of "desktop modification pranks." Hmm.
The only thing I disagree with - I don't think they'd get the same pleasure out of chess etc. First, because they're not patient enough, an second because a big part of the FPS world in particular is centered around either extolling or blaming your gaming rig. For example, "I would have won if I had 3 more fps coming out of my video card, I better get more overclocking gear." In pure skill games like the ones you mentioned, you have nothing to blame for a loss but yourself.
'Course, since a lot of this stuff is moving to consoles, how are folks going to measure virtual penis size now? Better buy stock in controller companies, I guess.
He's good at that. See our branch of this thread, where I attempt to explain that my friends and I play for fun and to watch the nice pretty big units blow crap up, and he starts calling us retards.
I totally agree with you -- he's missing the point that people play the game to have fun, and fun is subjective. His way is winning as quickly and as mathematically precisely as possible. Mine, and apparently yours, is not.
For me and my cronies, LAN parties are the only way to go, so we don't have to put up with the asshats or the 133ts. Plus it lets you trash-talk and spill beer on each other, which is the only way to do it.
> hey, as long as you are aware that you and your friends are retarded, you've taken the first step to recovery.
Whoa, nelly! What's with the ad hominem attacks here! I guess I must have forgotten that this is Slashdot - where a normal conversation suddenly turns into pointless name-calling. OK, I'll play.
>please reread the grandparent. it says if your opponent isn't retarded, he won't get crushed.
I know what it says. I was actually agreeing with you, in general. I was trying to make the point that TA is a game that people play differently, and I guess my way of making it must have triggered some deep repressed feelings in you.
Let me put it another way: my friends and I, who are of roughly equal skills, enjoy the epic nature of the big, powerful units and the massive displays of firepower that come with the buildup of big nasty armies. When we used to play with people we didn't know online, we chose the more traditional tactical/strategic mix needed to win, but found it not to be as much "fun" for us. But that's the great part about TA -- it works for many different styles of play, be they games filled with finesse and strategy enough to make Machiavelli blush, or, as you so eloquently and tactfully put it, more "retarded" styles.
> christ, it's like the special olympics.
No, it's not, because you're not getting an "Everybody's A Winner" award this time. Asshat.
> because as soon as you start playing real people, your method won't work
It does if the other people you're playing are of the same demented mindset. We don't like "finesse." Finesse is for French cooking and lovemaking (which bookend a good TA session nicely, by the way). Playing TA is about (metaphorically) smacking your buddy over the head with a Buick and mocking his mother while doing a little dance in the slowly congealing blood.
In summary, good players who use strategy and finesse will likely win everytime against me and my friends. But they will never know the true joy of Total Annihilation, in the Webster's sense.
> TA is such a game that people love building a lot of shit of epic proportion. After all, TA is known for the excesses.
That's the key bit right there. TA isn't about winning, it's about crushing your enemy under a wild excess of firepower.
You want him/her to be sitting there, with their jaw on the floor, as death pours in from all directions, with you screaming "hahahaha!" and spinning around in your chair and frightening the cats.
It's true, good players can generally wipe out someone who's "holding back", as you call it. But really, where's the fun in winning the easy way?
We had a telegraph, and it suited us just fine (spits).
Of course, every now and then a herd o' buffalo would knock down a pole, and we'd have to go ridin' out there to fix it in a blizzard. But, then, I guess you youngsters are used to havin' it easy.
> So how you treat people doesn't matter, as long as they're willing to put up with it? Abuse is OK so long as nobody complains?
Now that I reread my post, it does sort of sound like I'm saying that. Not my intention at all.
Instead of "the company" I should have said "a 'profit at all cost' company like EA."
And it's bad for them to do this. It's very short-term thinking. It leads to high turnover and bad PR, both very very expensive over time.
Look at Google for a good counterexample. I know two people who work there, and they're both raving fans. They're paying top dollar, giving out bonuses like hotcakes, and people would kill to get in that door. They work you hard (very hard!) and don't pay overtime (AFAIK), but they treat you like an employee rather than "human capital." There's probably game development shops that are like this, too.
Taking Slashdot editors to task for poor headlines is kind of like, well, something else pointless. And asking them to read the article? That's just crazy-talk.
> Now if you are a programmer, (I am) I'm sure you work some overtime during crunch time. Do you get overtime for it? I know I don't, it's expected that I work until the job is done. Do you make $91,840? I don't think too many programmers are making 91k nowadays.
<snippy_answers>
I am too. Yes I do. Yes I do. I'm sorry. No, I make more. I think you're looking in the wrong place.
</snippy_answers>
Seriously, there are actually good, well-paying programming jobs out there at companies that don't want to screw you over. I know, I work at one. But it certainly doesn't have the "draw" of games programming. Entertainment companies are notoriously profit-driven, and given their "cool factor" seem to be able to get away with this kind of stuff. Too many people in CS these days want to do "games programming", and when you have a steady supply of cheap, inexperienced, eager laborers, how do you think the company's going to handle it?
But hey, if you want to develop Web-based applications, database front-ends, and other boring non-gaming applications, I know some places that are hiring. Find the industry where there's a limited, experienced talent pool and go there for the bucks, perks, and treatment you want.
The article is nothing but PR fluff. From the article: (emphasis mine)
Although Nintendo obviously would not be willing to divulge what its viral plans are for other upcoming titles, with the company's long history of shaking things up through the Internet medium, you can be sure they'll be at it again when the right game comes along.
I mean, come on? Nintendo is *not* the kind of company that "shakes things up." They stick with tried-and-true franchises, or rebrand ideas into those same franchises, over and over again.
I'm not saying they make bad games - but they're not "edgy" in any sense of the word.
And, while we're at it, has anybody checked Monster.com for ads for "two plumbers wanted - must have experience with mushrooms and handling turtles. Tennis skills optional but desirable."
It seems to me that it would be much, much more secure to allow the user to whitelist sites they wanted to use ActiveX on. For example, Windows Update, and my stupid online paystub page.
I only have a handful of pages that I *need* ActiveX on, and the rest can go pound sand.
Solves the problems of Netscape having to maintain the lists, too.
Slashdot Mirror
>SL has about the same porn/not-porn ratio as the rest of the intarwebs,
So, about 1000:1 then?
> if I ever met one of the characters in a dream, I'd set his creepy muppet ass on fire
You made Fresca come out of my nose.
While I'm a fan of the movie, I remember it being fairly disturbing as a child when I first saw it, but in a weird, good way. I think that's why it stuck with me all these years.
Let's hope this yields a chance to fix them. Our report is here. For a funnier take on it, see my boss in this Daily Show clip.
When the first thing you think of when you hear OPM is The Office of Personnel Management. Wow, those guys do gaming too? They probably pwn at Roller Coaster Tycoon.
But I bet they go home, play Splinter Cell, and secretly wish they worked for another three letter agency.
Since this is all web-services driven, it seems to me you could create an interesting cycle with a simple program:
1) Use the API to find a HIT, and sign up to complete it.
2) Create a new HIT that basically asks someone to complete the first HIT,
only for $0.01 less than the original HIT was offering.
3) Do this for every existing HIT.
4) Profit?
This is like the 5th article from Escapist that Slashdot has linked to since the magazine started its publication. So far, just about every article is of interest to the Slashdot gaming crowd. So, just read the magazine already! It's free and stuff!
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/
More like pretty stupid to buy it. Like an acre of land on the moon or a star name. Selling it was a sensible business decision.
Oh yeah. Hard to work your way through anything too involved when you've got a family who, for some unfathomable reason, wants to spend time with you.
It's much harder to find "pick-up-and-play" PC games these days that fit into the highly fragmented gaming schedule that you (and I) occupy. Funny you should mention Moria; I've recently picked up Angband http://www.thangorodrim.net/ as a good candidate. It's a bit easier on the consoles; I have an XBox and things like Worms 3D and the various racing games work out wonderfully. My little spud loves watching Burnout 3, so we're doing things "as a family" so to speak.
There are 2 big things coming over the horizon, once Longhorn lets us have advanced 3D graphics on our desktops.
The first is that this can probably be exploited by malware/spyware to make "invisible" interfaces that sit over top of existing applications, happily monitoring everything you're doing. Or, kind of like those one-pixel GIFs that show up on the odd phishing page. No fun.
But by far the worst is going to be the end-user customization. Want transparent yellow spinning windows that change opacity based on the phase of the moon? Bet you can do that! It'll be like the old programs that let you add sounds to all the Windows events. When the average user got a hold of that, it was only a matter of seconds before their machine became the Box Of Annoyance. Thank Jeebus people finally grew out of that (mostly). But watch and see - it's coming again, only this time it's got GRAPHICS.
Now, it may open up a whole new world of "desktop modification pranks." Hmm.
Very well put. The last line in particular rocks.
The only thing I disagree with - I don't think they'd get the same pleasure out of chess etc. First, because they're not patient enough, an second because a big part of the FPS world in particular is centered around either extolling or blaming your gaming rig. For example, "I would have won if I had 3 more fps coming out of my video card, I better get more overclocking gear." In pure skill games like the ones you mentioned, you have nothing to blame for a loss but yourself.
'Course, since a lot of this stuff is moving to consoles, how are folks going to measure virtual penis size now? Better buy stock in controller companies, I guess.
> Thank you for repeating what I said, this time.
He's good at that. See our branch of this thread, where I attempt to explain that my friends and I play for fun and to watch the nice pretty big units blow crap up, and he starts calling us retards.
I totally agree with you -- he's missing the point that people play the game to have fun, and fun is subjective. His way is winning as quickly and as mathematically precisely as possible. Mine, and apparently yours, is not.
For me and my cronies, LAN parties are the only way to go, so we don't have to put up with the asshats or the 133ts. Plus it lets you trash-talk and spill beer on each other, which is the only way to do it.
> hey, as long as you are aware that you and your friends are retarded, you've taken the first step to recovery.
Whoa, nelly! What's with the ad hominem attacks here! I guess I must have forgotten that this is Slashdot - where a normal conversation suddenly turns into pointless name-calling. OK, I'll play.
>please reread the grandparent. it says if your opponent isn't retarded, he won't get crushed.
I know what it says. I was actually agreeing with you, in general. I was trying to make the point that TA is a game that people play differently, and I guess my way of making it must have triggered some deep repressed feelings in you.
Let me put it another way: my friends and I, who are of roughly equal skills, enjoy the epic nature of the big, powerful units and the massive displays of firepower that come with the buildup of big nasty armies. When we used to play with people we didn't know online, we chose the more traditional tactical/strategic mix needed to win, but found it not to be as much "fun" for us. But that's the great part about TA -- it works for many different styles of play, be they games filled with finesse and strategy enough to make Machiavelli blush, or, as you so eloquently and tactfully put it, more "retarded" styles.
> christ, it's like the special olympics.
No, it's not, because you're not getting an "Everybody's A Winner" award this time. Asshat.
> because as soon as you start playing real people, your method won't work
It does if the other people you're playing are of the same demented mindset. We don't like "finesse." Finesse is for French cooking and lovemaking (which bookend a good TA session nicely, by the way). Playing TA is about (metaphorically) smacking your buddy over the head with a Buick and mocking his mother while doing a little dance in the slowly congealing blood.
In summary, good players who use strategy and finesse will likely win everytime against me and my friends. But they will never know the true joy of Total Annihilation, in the Webster's sense.
> TA is such a game that people love building a lot of shit of epic proportion. After all, TA is known for the excesses.
That's the key bit right there. TA isn't about winning, it's about crushing your enemy under a wild excess of firepower.
You want him/her to be sitting there, with their jaw on the floor, as death pours in from all directions, with you screaming "hahahaha!" and spinning around in your chair and frightening the cats.
It's true, good players can generally wipe out someone who's "holding back", as you call it. But really, where's the fun in winning the easy way?
Oh yeah. Same with the government Agencies/Bureaus/Departments. I always use this test to see if someone's worked for/with one:
:)
Q: Is this funny?
TLA = Three Letter Acronym
ETLA = Extended Three Letter Acronym, aka a four letter acronym.
If the answer is "Yes", you've got a winner. If the answer is some acronym that means "Yes", walk away quickly
Good times.
We'll show "Emily Dickinson Forever". But we can show you the physics engine now.
Sorry.
Luxury.
We had a telegraph, and it suited us just fine (spits).
Of course, every now and then a herd o' buffalo would knock down a pole, and we'd have to go ridin' out there to fix it in a blizzard. But, then, I guess you youngsters are used to havin' it easy.
(Eagerly awaits even-more-outlandish response)
> So how you treat people doesn't matter, as long as they're willing to put up with it? Abuse is OK so long as nobody complains?
Now that I reread my post, it does sort of sound like I'm saying that. Not my intention at all.
Instead of "the company" I should have said "a 'profit at all cost' company like EA."
And it's bad for them to do this. It's very short-term thinking. It leads to high turnover and bad PR, both very very expensive over time.
Look at Google for a good counterexample. I know two people who work there, and they're both raving fans. They're paying top dollar, giving out bonuses like hotcakes, and people would kill to get in that door. They work you hard (very hard!) and don't pay overtime (AFAIK), but they treat you like an employee rather than "human capital." There's probably game development shops that are like this, too.
Besides, "France Attacks?" Seriously?
(ducks)
Taking Slashdot editors to task for poor headlines is kind of like, well, something else pointless. And asking them to read the article? That's just crazy-talk.
> Now if you are a programmer, (I am) I'm sure you work some overtime during crunch time. Do you get overtime for it? I know I don't, it's expected that I work until the job is done. Do you make $91,840? I don't think too many programmers are making 91k nowadays.
<snippy_answers>
I am too. Yes I do. Yes I do. I'm sorry. No, I make more. I think you're looking in the wrong place.
</snippy_answers>
Seriously, there are actually good, well-paying programming jobs out there at companies that don't want to screw you over. I know, I work at one. But it certainly doesn't have the "draw" of games programming. Entertainment companies are notoriously profit-driven, and given their "cool factor" seem to be able to get away with this kind of stuff. Too many people in CS these days want to do "games programming", and when you have a steady supply of cheap, inexperienced, eager laborers, how do you think the company's going to handle it?
But hey, if you want to develop Web-based applications, database front-ends, and other boring non-gaming applications, I know some places that are hiring. Find the industry where there's a limited, experienced talent pool and go there for the bucks, perks, and treatment you want.
The article is nothing but PR fluff. From the article: (emphasis mine)
Although Nintendo obviously would not be willing to divulge what its viral plans are for other upcoming titles, with the company's long history of shaking things up through the Internet medium, you can be sure they'll be at it again when the right game comes along.
I mean, come on? Nintendo is *not* the kind of company that "shakes things up." They stick with tried-and-true franchises, or rebrand ideas into those same franchises, over and over again.
I'm not saying they make bad games - but they're not "edgy" in any sense of the word.
And, while we're at it, has anybody checked Monster.com for ads for "two plumbers wanted - must have experience with mushrooms and handling turtles. Tennis skills optional but desirable."
It seems to me that it would be much, much more secure to allow the user to whitelist sites they wanted to use ActiveX on. For example, Windows Update, and my stupid online paystub page.
I only have a handful of pages that I *need* ActiveX on, and the rest can go pound sand.
Solves the problems of Netscape having to maintain the lists, too.
Let's get this flame war going!
Who would win in a fight between the Battlestar Galactica (circa 2005) and the TNG Enterprise (not the one from the future, though)?
Hint: The answer is not emacs.
Best. Answer. Ever.
Seriously. Go write a book. You've got your chapters laid out nicely.
> Or maybe I'll just loose my elitism, and start speling like everyone else, and call it the slashdot affect.
Their you go, thats the spirit! You're elitism just seperates you from teh group.