In the interview I got the feeling that Hofstadter prefers to not look at the future. I respect him very much and GEB will always be dear to my heart but "Catcher in the Rye"? Seriously!? It's not a very good book in my opinion and listing it as your favorite is a cliche I didn't think Hofstadter would fit in... for christ sake, it's required reading in school!
Being critical of Kurzweils scenario is important if just to avoid a big nerd circle jerk but dismissing it as "I don't like it"? I'd prefered something more substantial...
Your post is not true. While you can't find a group for every low level instance, a lot of classes have quests in the most important ones. Plus, instancing is currently slower than questing since the leveling changes were implemented a few patches back.
Low level trade goods can be extremely profitable depending on the server you are playing on. We just started two character on a different realms (so no money twinking etc.) and both of us are at 200G at level 35 just from selling copper (5G/Stack), iron (20G/Stack) and leather. If anything the opposite is true: measured by the rarity and the kind of goods you can produced high level materials are actually undervalued since most miners, herbalists etc are level 70 and don't bother to go farming in low level areas (thank god!).
Slowly switching over to nuclear, redirecting federal research money, enforcing existing EPA standards (while sensibly ramping them up over a decade or two), slowly increasing out renewable infrastructures (solar, wind, tidal), and slowly rolling out California like vehicle standards. All of these can be done at minimal costs.
Well, one problem is that CO2 hysteria meets nuclear hysteria. It's just never going to happen. The fear of everything radiation related is burned into societies consciousness never mind the fact that residents near coal plants have higher exposure to radioactive elements than ones living near nuclear plant.
Renewables, meh. Biggest issue with them is that you need to build more coal and gas plants to even out the production on clouded/calm days. I even tend to agree that the cost of higher standard would be bearable, at least in industrialized societies. Compared to the billions in china and india though that's a drop in the bucket. People there can, on average, hardly afford energy, transportation AND food so for them, any increase in price through regulation will have much harsher consquences and might even choke their development.
There really is no excuse for pure inaction.
Well, the science is not very good and the cost calculation is quite uncertain. I recognize you agree with me on ethanol but I see a larger problem: this ill seems to be only manageable though state intervention. For one this is a powerful motivation to keep climate change 'truths' on the agenda far longer than is reasonable and for an other it gives justifications for much larger (and therefore potentially much more harmful) interventions than ethanol subsidies
1-2% GDP growth reduction overall seems a tad optimistic considering food prices rose way beyond that already in part due to ethanol subsidies. Maybe 1-2% per year seems more realistic and would be HUGE. How many people are you willing to sacrifice on the altar of global warming?
Actually it's not. Maybe the pure scientist know this but in the public debate everyone speaks of "climate change" for a reason. A persons lifetime is so small that we tend to view dynamic systems as static and are therefore surprised and feel threatened by (perceived) change. I still remember back when it all started a sensational news item about a glacier in the french alps that retreated so much that a village from the 18th century was unearthed. Even with this powerful demonstration of perspective, the melting ice was attributed wholesale to man made global warming with no futher discussion of the very visible fact that glaciers apparently grow and shrink all by themselves.
Similarly with Mount Kilimanjaro: heralded as global warming coming home to roost after taking a second look nothing is as clear cut anymore. The mountain may only had a glacier for the last 10K years, the retreat is not because of rising temperature but because of decreased rain and some say it may not be retreating at all. Strangely, you only hear about something like this on the news or from politicians if it supports MMGWT...
The signature of the parent is right: Global warming is a doomsday religion and it's disciples will find a way to fit facts in their dogma while viciously attacking the characters of those holding nonconforming views. In pure science that's a big no no and the reason why there no one is called a "string theorist denier".
And neither has temperature. See, that was easy! The point is this: absorption spectra being what they are, I don't think CO2 plays any role in global temperature once water vapor is abundant in the atmosphere.
It's not that simple. The short term cost imposed by subsidies and regulation could well be very much above the long term cost of global warming were it to happen. The "green industry" is a common fallacy that was already unmasked by Frederik Bastiat in his essay about the broken window fallacy. The capital that will be tied up into ending oil dependence at our level of technology (no viable substitutes) can not be used for anything else. Picture the romans trying to build a computer. What could they achieve and what would be the cost to their society?
An example of our time is the rising cost of food due to ethanol subsidies. A field used to produce ethanol can not produce food at the same time.
Causation: CO2 is more efficient at absorbing infrared than N2 or O2. Physics - it works, bitch. What a pity that the main greenhouse gas is water vapor which absorbs well over 90% of emissions and absolutely shadows the band CO2 absorbs...
Causation meet scientist with anti-civilization agenda.
No, a hundred times No! Try imagining what it would have taken had an imaginary world government in the middle ages decided to move from candle light to electricity (end our dependence on wax! No blood for coal!). The effort required would have been staggering and the populance, as always, would be suffering. Just look at what the hell is up with the food markets thanks to the ethanol hype.
Energy, transportation, food: three things critical to prosperity and development are now moved out of reach of the people that could barely afford them by the global warming hysteria. Let alone the developing countries who basically got the big finger when they asked what would drive their industrialization in the absence of fossil fuels.
CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a natural part of our atmosphere and if you got enough oxygen as well it's completely harmless, nay even beneficial to plant and therefore all life.
Oil will not suddenly run out. The price will keep rising as supply fails to meet demand (which is currently not a question of oil availability btw) which in turn will make alternative fuels competitive in the market. The further in the future this happens though, the bigger the capital base available for such investments and the further along related technologies will be.
People keep saying this "oh man, that's just a copy of XYZ" as if it's a bad thing. In all products and technology I wish people would copy more the good stuff from their competitors. As a customer I'm the one benefiting from that.
I'd play eve if it wasn't for the stupid auto targeting. There is just no excuse for it. Dice rolls are an appropriate mechanism if you can't adequately implement a combat mechanic but shooting lasers, missiles, etc in space has been done as early as X-Wing. Every time I try EVE I'm reminded of the fun I had in X-Wing and get sad how I can't find any of it in EVE....
You are a sadist, I hope you are aware. Your post made me a little sad as well.
There is enough of this type of PvP to be had in the real world. Thing is, it's only fun for the griever.
It's a zero sum game and when karma comes back around everybody ends up being the looser. Games are supposed to be fun even to those who don't win in a competitive setting.
judging from the disappointing (not bad, but not on par with expectations) Age of Conan I'd advise developers to look at what WoW does right first if they want to have a fighting chance. RvR could be a clusterfuck if the realms are not balanced. Then everyone will suddenly cry for instanced PvP because open is just so damn unfair (the reverse of what people crying about on the WoW forums). WAR and meaningful PvP? I'm not convinced until I see it... and if it is truly the case the devs should be prepared because any balance issues will be magnified a thousand times by that.
no it's not. Chess is one of the worst analogies to war because it's a perfect information game. War is all about gathering information to gain the upper hand and of course logistics which boils down to which resources, where, at what time. Chess is a visual puzzle where non of these things factor in.
in C&C generals (especially with the expansion or the shock wave mod) defense is quite viable, IF you manage to find the right time to go over to offense.
This isolation is much more to our benefit then it is to theirs. Thing is: the people advocating for leaving such tribes alone don't realize that nature is quite harsh and that those people are not living in paradise. But then they are just a bunch of primitives so it's completely okay if they starve or suffer from maladies that are easily curable in this day and age. Just as long as we get to have a zoo with real people in it!
> However, maybe they know about medicines we only dream of.
No the don't. They are STONEAGE people that die of AGE at 30. What is it about you people? Primitiveness brings no special wisdom...
In a trail I wouldn't be looking at the community but if the game runs on my hardware, the polish of the experience and if the game play as such is fun. The best community in the world wouldn't get me to play AoC as long as I don't have the comp to run it and the revolutionary new combat system is nothing but added tedium over auto attack. Reversely, a bad community would never turn me away from a fun game. Decent people are a lot easier to find then decent games.
A little tangent here: Why is it that cutting edge games like Crysis and AoC are not playable on specs far exceeding the stated minimum requirements and look like shit on the lowest settings? Why can I play WoW with everything on highest and 4xAA fluently and AoC runs slow as hell even though it looks worse on low settings?
Why do you care so much? Don't you think they knew you'd be essentially useless without access? Document what you can (I trust you still got Word), leave your cell number and tell them you'll come in if they need anything but that you won't be spending those weeks sitting on your hands.
poor guy, only got a $100k. That's like 3 euros, right? Seriously though: 'people that drive the success of these games' are NOT the voice over guys. Be glad you got the 100k, there are lot's of people earning way less for work that is a lot harder.
I've really been longing for a marketing stunt lately. There are definitely too few of those... But really, if you want to impress me, build a processor that can play video fluently.
that's very true but then again, the whole of life is endless repetition and a grind of the worst sorts. Just look at golf, tennis, chess or any other sport: it's the same thing over and over and over again.
Hey, leave 'House' out of this! Otherwise I completely agree. I took a break from WoW a quarter of a year ago because I felt like I was wasting my time. When I ended up watching "Germanys Next Top Model" at some friends house I thought 'well, NOW I really need an intervention';)
Indeed, Worth is highly subjective and I certainly wouldn't argue that someone who doesn't like WoW should waste money on the subscription.
To be honest though, if 15 per month seems expensive to you then digital entertainment per se is just not for you. Neither is anything else really. If I were so broke, I'd go find a better job instead of discussing WoW. Surprisingly, this is not meant to be a flame. Really: if you like WoW but can't afford the monthly fee, get a better job.
I think you know that my statement wasn't meant specifically about the Vatican admitting that alien life is possible but since you brought it up: the Catholics are just now catching up to the progress of science. Are we supposed to be relieved that they finally accept things that they burned people for 500 years ago? See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno.
Yes, facts can give rise to disputes but those can and are being settled using the scientific method. Differences over gospel? Not so much. Here in Germany we used to have the reformation wars that were only settled once cities, regions or whole states even where either completely protestant or catholic. You really want to argue that back then "most" people didn't have blood on their hands? Sure, feel free to ignore the strong ties of religion and violence but be aware that history is definitely not on your side.
We like music, ergo God exists. Is that all you got? Really!? I can recommend "Gödel, Escher, Bach - The eternal golden braid" by Douglas Hoffstaeder, it gives a good hint as to why music is so universal.
Slashdot Mirror
In the interview I got the feeling that Hofstadter prefers to not look at the future. I respect him very much and GEB will always be dear to my heart but "Catcher in the Rye"? Seriously!? It's not a very good book in my opinion and listing it as your favorite is a cliche I didn't think Hofstadter would fit in ... for christ sake, it's required reading in school!
...
Being critical of Kurzweils scenario is important if just to avoid a big nerd circle jerk but dismissing it as "I don't like it"? I'd prefered something more substantial
Your post is not true. While you can't find a group for every low level instance, a lot of classes have quests in the most important ones. Plus, instancing is currently slower than questing since the leveling changes were implemented a few patches back.
Low level trade goods can be extremely profitable depending on the server you are playing on. We just started two character on a different realms (so no money twinking etc.) and both of us are at 200G at level 35 just from selling copper (5G/Stack), iron (20G/Stack) and leather. If anything the opposite is true: measured by the rarity and the kind of goods you can produced high level materials are actually undervalued since most miners, herbalists etc are level 70 and don't bother to go farming in low level areas (thank god!).
Well, one problem is that CO2 hysteria meets nuclear hysteria. It's just never going to happen. The fear of everything radiation related is burned into societies consciousness never mind the fact that residents near coal plants have higher exposure to radioactive elements than ones living near nuclear plant.
Renewables, meh. Biggest issue with them is that you need to build more coal and gas plants to even out the production on clouded/calm days. I even tend to agree that the cost of higher standard would be bearable, at least in industrialized societies. Compared to the billions in china and india though that's a drop in the bucket. People there can, on average, hardly afford energy, transportation AND food so for them, any increase in price through regulation will have much harsher consquences and might even choke their development.
There really is no excuse for pure inaction.
Well, the science is not very good and the cost calculation is quite uncertain. I recognize you agree with me on ethanol but I see a larger problem: this ill seems to be only manageable though state intervention. For one this is a powerful motivation to keep climate change 'truths' on the agenda far longer than is reasonable and for an other it gives justifications for much larger (and therefore potentially much more harmful) interventions than ethanol subsidies
1-2% GDP growth reduction overall seems a tad optimistic considering food prices rose way beyond that already in part due to ethanol subsidies. Maybe 1-2% per year seems more realistic and would be HUGE. How many people are you willing to sacrifice on the altar of global warming?
Actually it's not. Maybe the pure scientist know this but in the public debate everyone speaks of "climate change" for a reason. A persons lifetime is so small that we tend to view dynamic systems as static and are therefore surprised and feel threatened by (perceived) change. I still remember back when it all started a sensational news item about a glacier in the french alps that retreated so much that a village from the 18th century was unearthed. Even with this powerful demonstration of perspective, the melting ice was attributed wholesale to man made global warming with no futher discussion of the very visible fact that glaciers apparently grow and shrink all by themselves. ...
Similarly with Mount Kilimanjaro: heralded as global warming coming home to roost after taking a second look nothing is as clear cut anymore. The mountain may only had a glacier for the last 10K years, the retreat is not because of rising temperature but because of decreased rain and some say it may not be retreating at all. Strangely, you only hear about something like this on the news or from politicians if it supports MMGWT
The signature of the parent is right: Global warming is a doomsday religion and it's disciples will find a way to fit facts in their dogma while viciously attacking the characters of those holding nonconforming views. In pure science that's a big no no and the reason why there no one is called a "string theorist denier".
And neither has temperature. See, that was easy! The point is this: absorption spectra being what they are, I don't think CO2 plays any role in global temperature once water vapor is abundant in the atmosphere.
It's not that simple. The short term cost imposed by subsidies and regulation could well be very much above the long term cost of global warming were it to happen. The "green industry" is a common fallacy that was already unmasked by Frederik Bastiat in his essay about the broken window fallacy. The capital that will be tied up into ending oil dependence at our level of technology (no viable substitutes) can not be used for anything else. Picture the romans trying to build a computer. What could they achieve and what would be the cost to their society?
An example of our time is the rising cost of food due to ethanol subsidies. A field used to produce ethanol can not produce food at the same time.
Causation meet scientist with anti-civilization agenda.
No, a hundred times No! Try imagining what it would have taken had an imaginary world government in the middle ages decided to move from candle light to electricity (end our dependence on wax! No blood for coal!). The effort required would have been staggering and the populance, as always, would be suffering. Just look at what the hell is up with the food markets thanks to the ethanol hype.
Energy, transportation, food: three things critical to prosperity and development are now moved out of reach of the people that could barely afford them by the global warming hysteria. Let alone the developing countries who basically got the big finger when they asked what would drive their industrialization in the absence of fossil fuels.
CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a natural part of our atmosphere and if you got enough oxygen as well it's completely harmless, nay even beneficial to plant and therefore all life.
Oil will not suddenly run out. The price will keep rising as supply fails to meet demand (which is currently not a question of oil availability btw) which in turn will make alternative fuels competitive in the market. The further in the future this happens though, the bigger the capital base available for such investments and the further along related technologies will be.
People keep saying this "oh man, that's just a copy of XYZ" as if it's a bad thing. In all products and technology I wish people would copy more the good stuff from their competitors. As a customer I'm the one benefiting from that.
I'd play eve if it wasn't for the stupid auto targeting. There is just no excuse for it. Dice rolls are an appropriate mechanism if you can't adequately implement a combat mechanic but shooting lasers, missiles, etc in space has been done as early as X-Wing. Every time I try EVE I'm reminded of the fun I had in X-Wing and get sad how I can't find any of it in EVE ....
You are a sadist, I hope you are aware. Your post made me a little sad as well. There is enough of this type of PvP to be had in the real world. Thing is, it's only fun for the griever.
It's a zero sum game and when karma comes back around everybody ends up being the looser. Games are supposed to be fun even to those who don't win in a competitive setting.
judging from the disappointing (not bad, but not on par with expectations) Age of Conan I'd advise developers to look at what WoW does right first if they want to have a fighting chance. RvR could be a clusterfuck if the realms are not balanced. Then everyone will suddenly cry for instanced PvP because open is just so damn unfair (the reverse of what people crying about on the WoW forums). WAR and meaningful PvP? I'm not convinced until I see it ... and if it is truly the case the devs should be prepared because any balance issues will be magnified a thousand times by that.
no it's not. Chess is one of the worst analogies to war because it's a perfect information game. War is all about gathering information to gain the upper hand and of course logistics which boils down to which resources, where, at what time. Chess is a visual puzzle where non of these things factor in.
in C&C generals (especially with the expansion or the shock wave mod) defense is quite viable, IF you manage to find the right time to go over to offense.
please define "innocence".
...
This isolation is much more to our benefit then it is to theirs. Thing is: the people advocating for leaving such tribes alone don't realize that nature is quite harsh and that those people are not living in paradise. But then they are just a bunch of primitives so it's completely okay if they starve or suffer from maladies that are easily curable in this day and age. Just as long as we get to have a zoo with real people in it!
> However, maybe they know about medicines we only dream of.
No the don't. They are STONEAGE people that die of AGE at 30. What is it about you people? Primitiveness brings no special wisdom
I wonder if these companies are for or against patents because this is exactly what I would do to demonstrate that patents are absurd.
In a trail I wouldn't be looking at the community but if the game runs on my hardware, the polish of the experience and if the game play as such is fun. The best community in the world wouldn't get me to play AoC as long as I don't have the comp to run it and the revolutionary new combat system is nothing but added tedium over auto attack. Reversely, a bad community would never turn me away from a fun game. Decent people are a lot easier to find then decent games.
A little tangent here: Why is it that cutting edge games like Crysis and AoC are not playable on specs far exceeding the stated minimum requirements and look like shit on the lowest settings? Why can I play WoW with everything on highest and 4xAA fluently and AoC runs slow as hell even though it looks worse on low settings?
Why do you care so much? Don't you think they knew you'd be essentially useless without access? Document what you can (I trust you still got Word), leave your cell number and tell them you'll come in if they need anything but that you won't be spending those weeks sitting on your hands.
poor guy, only got a $100k. That's like 3 euros, right? Seriously though: 'people that drive the success of these games' are NOT the voice over guys. Be glad you got the 100k, there are lot's of people earning way less for work that is a lot harder.
I've really been longing for a marketing stunt lately. There are definitely too few of those ... But really, if you want to impress me, build a processor that can play video fluently.
that's very true but then again, the whole of life is endless repetition and a grind of the worst sorts. Just look at golf, tennis, chess or any other sport: it's the same thing over and over and over again.
Hey, leave 'House' out of this! Otherwise I completely agree. I took a break from WoW a quarter of a year ago because I felt like I was wasting my time. When I ended up watching "Germanys Next Top Model" at some friends house I thought 'well, NOW I really need an intervention' ;)
Indeed, Worth is highly subjective and I certainly wouldn't argue that someone who doesn't like WoW should waste money on the subscription.
To be honest though, if 15 per month seems expensive to you then digital entertainment per se is just not for you. Neither is anything else really. If I were so broke, I'd go find a better job instead of discussing WoW. Surprisingly, this is not meant to be a flame. Really: if you like WoW but can't afford the monthly fee, get a better job.
I think you know that my statement wasn't meant specifically about the Vatican admitting that alien life is possible but since you brought it up: the Catholics are just now catching up to the progress of science. Are we supposed to be relieved that they finally accept things that they burned people for 500 years ago? See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno.
Yes, facts can give rise to disputes but those can and are being settled using the scientific method. Differences over gospel? Not so much. Here in Germany we used to have the reformation wars that were only settled once cities, regions or whole states even where either completely protestant or catholic. You really want to argue that back then "most" people didn't have blood on their hands? Sure, feel free to ignore the strong ties of religion and violence but be aware that history is definitely not on your side.
We like music, ergo God exists. Is that all you got? Really!? I can recommend "Gödel, Escher, Bach - The eternal golden braid" by Douglas Hoffstaeder, it gives a good hint as to why music is so universal.