great saying by the Goblins in WoW. but truthfully, i'd have no issue taking a pay cut. that just means, less wear and tear on my car, less gas, maybe even cutting down on my insurance, less chance of getting a ticket and less headaches. probably the only issue for me is just losing some of the immediacy to my coworkers that i enjoy at times. not all the time, but it's good having people around you sometimes like when you're encountering a particularly difficult problem or just want someone to chat with. sometimes IMS isn't a great substitute for a physical sit down.
this is what i think. Google doesn't need the MPAA. the MPAA needs Google though. i've felt that considering the amount of content/money that Google possesses they could either simply just throw a kill switch against the studios or start buying them up one by one. hell, i blogged a while back that Google should simply create a larger VC type of fund for independent film makers and do more to help promote those people (and other independent artists for that matter).
i think the biggest mistake Microsoft had made was integrating IE into Windows with ActiveX controls, etc. maybe that allowed them to get a huge share of the market for a while, but the long term effects it had i don't think were worth the effort. too much insecurity and lack of trust. i hope that Chrome doesn't make similar mistakes.
i agree. the first two are classics. everything else stunk. i never cared for Fincher's version. i refuse to watch Resurrection, despite owning it (I have the 4-pack). and AVP didn't look that great to me either.
besides, if you really want to watch so-called sequels, just tune to the SyFy channel. it seems as though all they do is regurgitate 80's SyFy plots with D rated actors and bad CGI.
i used to fear death prior to going to my university. i think my fear dealt more with the idea of not having any possibility of thought or that the identity that i have come to experience as myself no longer would exist in any form. also, i would fear for the things that i cared about in my life. what would happen to them when i'm gone?
however, a friend of mine at the university once told me, "When you're gone, the pain stops." That whole notion really comforted me. Especially when you look at all the BS that you have to deal with these days. as you get older, you would hope that the quality of your life improves along with the advancement of civilization. Instead, you start to realize that the world sucks for the most part because of the design where everyone is out for themselves for the most part and that we deal with things like limited resources. Only by chance if you're in that rare percentile where you don't have to worry about the daily grind, then you can probably enjoy yourself for the most part. However, for an average joe like myself, you just see more bureaucracy and show stoppers that exist to squash your dreams.
A while back my father was in a nursing home after suffering a horrible stroke that left him half paralyzed and unable to speak. I pitied him that he could not potentially ever again enjoy things. I was hoping that if I worked hard enough and he could survive that somehow I could help him and provide him with something that would help recover him from his condition. That never came to be. Later, I kinda envied him in some ways in that he wasn't alive having to deal with all the garbage in the world. Maybe in some perverse way, he was the lucky one. When he was in the hospital, I would see him crying constantly. I heard that happened with patients. I wasn't certain if that was physically being wrought or emotionally wrought. But if it were emotional as a result of him fearing for his life, I would've told him that he's not really missing anything these days.
Anyway, my saying these days is simply: "I no longer fear death. Just inconvenience."
part of me believes the whole increased pressure to catch this guy is because he's going to expose one of the top banks. last time a big smear campaign occurred like this when some women were involved was with Elliot Spitzer. My conspiracy theory says that similar people are or have set Assange up.
i find my server to be pretty obnoxious on average. too many rude players. also, endless ganks which make questing impossible. and of course, Blizzard really doesn't care in the end.
i play on a PVP server (mainly because my friend was on there). the whole race to 80 for me was mostly because i kept getting ganked and just got sick of it. i still get ganked as an 80 but at least i have somewhat of a chance. i can't imagine for someone completely new to the game how they'd react if they inadvertently chose a PVP server and knew no one that could help them out. the one thing i wish the game addressed is making PVP more fair with regards to this. make it so that people can PVP only at the zone level unless they had their PVP flag turned on.
well, then again i'm thinking of starting from scratch on a PVE server. maybe i can actually enjoy leveling...
actually, i think they did become retarded. essentially, they are going back to pre-BC times. my guess is that it's a way to shutdown the current WoW franchise because certain people inside probably are sick of dealing with it (which imo is why they call it "Cataclysm").
What you're saying is true about creating more drama. I'm in a guild and people are cool right up to the point where we start wiping multiple times. Then people become extremely belligerent.
From a game mechanics point of view, I think the vast majority currently playing are probably going to end up getting pissed and leaving permanently. From what I understand, this happens on every expansion. Unfortunately, the way these games work is that they force you to play the expansion, even if you don't have the expansion. It sucks for people who don't have money, especially on PVP realms because there's a lot of jackasses who gank all the time.
Also, I really don't consider this an "expansion". This is almost a re-write of the game. IMO, an expansion would've been like WOTLK, where you have a deeper talent tree (or more available talent points) and more exposed areas that people without the expansion could not access. I don't see a lot to be excited with in the extra 5 levels and the elimination of abilities on loot makes the game seem even less strategic in some ways. Allowing races more classes seems more like a bling thing since the base race abilities aren't all that fantastic to begin with.
At any rate, I think the changes are more superficial than anything. I'd feel sorry for the newbie coming in with his level 20 getting ganked left and right on PVP realms by guys who obtain level 85 in less than a week from the air. That's what the game truly feels like at this point without having participated in the Beta.
Actually, I think they want to return to the roots of the game by over-simplifying the game. Part of that is evident in them thinning the talent tree and forcing people to choose one branch (which I think is stupid as an expansion).
As far as not wanting to play with people you don't like, well, I think making the game harder and forcing people to group up is going to cause even more issues. In essence, people want to reap quick rewards so I can see tempers flaring in the game. Already happens when I'm with guildies. Now, it might mean the expectations are higher for people, so people who aren't as serious but want to experience end game content will get marginalized as a result (which I think is the vast majority of people). Dying a lot together doesn't really sound fun and I see more finger pointing than anything else.
i completely agree with your sentiments on management ruining great products. i think technologists need to step up to the plate more often and take complete ownership of technology rather than let business people push them around.
I think it was "More Crap". Everytime this guy opens his mouth, someone should just copy and paste a link to that episode as a reminder that Boner is the world's biggest piece of crap. Matt and Trey must've had a premonition of Boner into a bigger piece of fecal matter when they came up with that episode.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/111250/
i feel that what this means is that America (and maybe even the world) has given the Democrats, more or less, a slate to work on. The ball is in their court and the people and the world have massive expectations.
But to ensure that this slate isn't written on with invisible ink, the people in the US and the world must constantly remind the government that we've given them a job to do, not a right, but something that supports us, rather than just a few interest groups.
If it's true that this administration wants to hear from us or dissenting voices, we have to write in and tell them constantly the direction that the country should head towards. This time it's not going to be just a party matter, but the matter of the entire American politics and the perception of America as a world leader. The government cannot slowly reveal hidden agendas along the way because it'll simply imply that the two party system is wrong and that everyone there is corrupt.
I know the party isn't going to make things perfect. But I'd love to see *SOME* progress (money well spent, programs that clearly show improvements in scores, higher wages without inflation or taxes, money/credit given to green companies, money invested into research, universal health care, a meaningful social security system, punishing those crooks on Wall Street, etc). Even three of the items above would mean more than anything to me just to demonstrate something was done.
well, the other thing i don't know if people had looked at is that it's only been a year since Terry Semel got canned. I blame a lot of Yahoo's stagnation when Semel took charge. He really didn't have any clue about the internet and so the innovative nature in Yahoo at one time went down quickly. Worse yet, they bought out duplicate services or even avoided great buys while Semel was in charge.
Also, people for some reason think that the recent departures of all the execs are alarming. I'm probably in the minority in believing this "house cleaning" is a great thing. I mean, if you think about it, these execs who are leaving were probably the same people who allowed Yahoo to stagnate. So seeing them flee for higher grounds means hopefully that more motivated people underneath can rise to the occasion (if Jerry and Co allow such a reorganization to take place).
I think the company needs to be re-structured and given about 2-3 years (from today) to rebuild. It's dead obvious that M$ + Yahoo = bad for the market. But something like this needs a fair amount of time to get new strategy and see how things go. Some of the more recent affairs look enticing such as Search Monkey, BOSS or their mentioned Apps platform. They definitely need more of that.
However, with those situations, it'll take a fair amount of time before applications start rolling in and Yahoo can see any true benefit to this strategy, imo. The most unfortunate part is the antsy shareholders who look at their pennies rather than the whole picture. Well hopefully those people lose out no matter what.
i doubt forming a new political party will do anything. they'll fall into the same trap of special interest, corporate lobbying, etc. perhaps, people should re-examine American politics on a whole and see just how damaged it has become. I mean, it's basically a postmodern bunch of fiefdoms, something ironically that the so-called pioneers of the country sought to avoid.
I figured that if Obama gets elected, he'd have about 2-3 years max to repair the country. Afterwards, if people don't at least perceive improvement with regards to jobs, security, progress, etc., then the country as a whole will be irreparably damaged by in terms of the rest of the world's viewpoint and the majority of the American people. If McCain gets the vote, Democrats will get off easy and simply continue to push the politics of blame to divert attention to the fact that they're doing little to nothing else for the American people; in other words, it's actually a bigger advantage for McCain to win than Obama for the Democratic party, especially come 2012.
But as I mentioned if Obama wins and does nothing or worse, acts and the country continues to spiral downward, people simply will lose faith and perhaps more drastic things will happen (cf Hurricane Katrina).
and put them out of their misery. Or Google. I think it'd be a good complimentary move along with partnering with Google. Yahoo already has their own ISP service so why not gain obtain that part of the market and consolidate it? Then get rid of the entire sales directors who make these asinine rules and improve the customer support sections.
the government is absolutely useless. in fact, governments in general are useless these days. the only thing governments have are military power. they don't serve anyone except the special interest that keep them in power. the saddest part is that people continue to obey an invisible force dictated through fear rather than reasoning.
besides, i don't see what this G8 is going to accomplish. more politicians holding hands, publicly agreeing on some non-issues and then spreading more fear and getting money from their butt buddies hiding in the shareholders' rooms. corporations are the only institutions that have any real power these days. it just depends on what side of the corporation you're on that matters.
This is what should happen:
1) Google sues Viacom back for breach of privacy.
2) Google sues the judge
3) Google should hire a private detective to see how much the judge was paid off behind the scenes
4) Google should stop serving any ads and search results from Viacom and/or raise their fees by 1000% just for them.
5) Everyone should sue Viacom for crimes against humanity in terms of creating MTV and turning America into a place of idiots.
This is war
I wrote up a little follow up on my article (I won't show it for fear of being/.'d). But I think a good follow up question to this article is how to prevent these people from either getting to this level or staying. I've been in two separate companies where someone on the IT executive level (either a director or CIO) fell into what was outlined in the article. Being that in both places they worked in Japan, I think most people felt compelled not to rebel as most staff here almost never voice their concerns. However, in both instances there were high turn over rates. In one company, long after I left, the director got kicked out (he claimed personal issues). In the first situation, eventually people in management heard about what was going on and gave him the boot. He couldn't find a job anymore in Tokyo because he developed a terrible reputation around town, spread by others who were terrorized by him and his henchmen. In the other case, all the IT staff is far too weak to speak up, especially as the CIO continues to replace all the key tech management positions with his people. I still have friends in that company and I feel bad for them coming under pressure.
Still, I feel that the IT staff should have the ability to do something from within to protest the fact that these executive types are viruses and do more harm to the industry than anything else. I've had different ideas like IT unions, stricter contracts, feedback systems to HR, limited terms, the inability to poach from previous positions, and even a higher degree of accountability when certain goals are not met (kinda like how CEOs and CFOs are even more responsible than before in public companies). Anyway, it would be interesting to hear others' opinions on this matter.
Slashdot Mirror
great saying by the Goblins in WoW. but truthfully, i'd have no issue taking a pay cut. that just means, less wear and tear on my car, less gas, maybe even cutting down on my insurance, less chance of getting a ticket and less headaches. probably the only issue for me is just losing some of the immediacy to my coworkers that i enjoy at times. not all the time, but it's good having people around you sometimes like when you're encountering a particularly difficult problem or just want someone to chat with. sometimes IMS isn't a great substitute for a physical sit down.
this is what i think. Google doesn't need the MPAA. the MPAA needs Google though. i've felt that considering the amount of content/money that Google possesses they could either simply just throw a kill switch against the studios or start buying them up one by one. hell, i blogged a while back that Google should simply create a larger VC type of fund for independent film makers and do more to help promote those people (and other independent artists for that matter).
i think the biggest mistake Microsoft had made was integrating IE into Windows with ActiveX controls, etc. maybe that allowed them to get a huge share of the market for a while, but the long term effects it had i don't think were worth the effort. too much insecurity and lack of trust. i hope that Chrome doesn't make similar mistakes.
i agree. the first two are classics. everything else stunk. i never cared for Fincher's version. i refuse to watch Resurrection, despite owning it (I have the 4-pack). and AVP didn't look that great to me either. besides, if you really want to watch so-called sequels, just tune to the SyFy channel. it seems as though all they do is regurgitate 80's SyFy plots with D rated actors and bad CGI.
i thought that would be bigger news.
i used to fear death prior to going to my university. i think my fear dealt more with the idea of not having any possibility of thought or that the identity that i have come to experience as myself no longer would exist in any form. also, i would fear for the things that i cared about in my life. what would happen to them when i'm gone?
however, a friend of mine at the university once told me, "When you're gone, the pain stops." That whole notion really comforted me. Especially when you look at all the BS that you have to deal with these days. as you get older, you would hope that the quality of your life improves along with the advancement of civilization. Instead, you start to realize that the world sucks for the most part because of the design where everyone is out for themselves for the most part and that we deal with things like limited resources. Only by chance if you're in that rare percentile where you don't have to worry about the daily grind, then you can probably enjoy yourself for the most part. However, for an average joe like myself, you just see more bureaucracy and show stoppers that exist to squash your dreams.
A while back my father was in a nursing home after suffering a horrible stroke that left him half paralyzed and unable to speak. I pitied him that he could not potentially ever again enjoy things. I was hoping that if I worked hard enough and he could survive that somehow I could help him and provide him with something that would help recover him from his condition. That never came to be. Later, I kinda envied him in some ways in that he wasn't alive having to deal with all the garbage in the world. Maybe in some perverse way, he was the lucky one. When he was in the hospital, I would see him crying constantly. I heard that happened with patients. I wasn't certain if that was physically being wrought or emotionally wrought. But if it were emotional as a result of him fearing for his life, I would've told him that he's not really missing anything these days.
Anyway, my saying these days is simply: "I no longer fear death. Just inconvenience."
part of me believes the whole increased pressure to catch this guy is because he's going to expose one of the top banks. last time a big smear campaign occurred like this when some women were involved was with Elliot Spitzer. My conspiracy theory says that similar people are or have set Assange up.
i find my server to be pretty obnoxious on average. too many rude players. also, endless ganks which make questing impossible. and of course, Blizzard really doesn't care in the end.
i play on a PVP server (mainly because my friend was on there). the whole race to 80 for me was mostly because i kept getting ganked and just got sick of it. i still get ganked as an 80 but at least i have somewhat of a chance. i can't imagine for someone completely new to the game how they'd react if they inadvertently chose a PVP server and knew no one that could help them out. the one thing i wish the game addressed is making PVP more fair with regards to this. make it so that people can PVP only at the zone level unless they had their PVP flag turned on. well, then again i'm thinking of starting from scratch on a PVE server. maybe i can actually enjoy leveling...
actually, i think they did become retarded. essentially, they are going back to pre-BC times. my guess is that it's a way to shutdown the current WoW franchise because certain people inside probably are sick of dealing with it (which imo is why they call it "Cataclysm"). What you're saying is true about creating more drama. I'm in a guild and people are cool right up to the point where we start wiping multiple times. Then people become extremely belligerent. From a game mechanics point of view, I think the vast majority currently playing are probably going to end up getting pissed and leaving permanently. From what I understand, this happens on every expansion. Unfortunately, the way these games work is that they force you to play the expansion, even if you don't have the expansion. It sucks for people who don't have money, especially on PVP realms because there's a lot of jackasses who gank all the time. Also, I really don't consider this an "expansion". This is almost a re-write of the game. IMO, an expansion would've been like WOTLK, where you have a deeper talent tree (or more available talent points) and more exposed areas that people without the expansion could not access. I don't see a lot to be excited with in the extra 5 levels and the elimination of abilities on loot makes the game seem even less strategic in some ways. Allowing races more classes seems more like a bling thing since the base race abilities aren't all that fantastic to begin with. At any rate, I think the changes are more superficial than anything. I'd feel sorry for the newbie coming in with his level 20 getting ganked left and right on PVP realms by guys who obtain level 85 in less than a week from the air. That's what the game truly feels like at this point without having participated in the Beta.
Actually, I think they want to return to the roots of the game by over-simplifying the game. Part of that is evident in them thinning the talent tree and forcing people to choose one branch (which I think is stupid as an expansion). As far as not wanting to play with people you don't like, well, I think making the game harder and forcing people to group up is going to cause even more issues. In essence, people want to reap quick rewards so I can see tempers flaring in the game. Already happens when I'm with guildies. Now, it might mean the expectations are higher for people, so people who aren't as serious but want to experience end game content will get marginalized as a result (which I think is the vast majority of people). Dying a lot together doesn't really sound fun and I see more finger pointing than anything else.
Apparently, he forgot to learn all the important lessons in that movie. Again. Where's Noah Wyle when you need him?
i completely agree with your sentiments on management ruining great products. i think technologists need to step up to the plate more often and take complete ownership of technology rather than let business people push them around.
I think it was "More Crap". Everytime this guy opens his mouth, someone should just copy and paste a link to that episode as a reminder that Boner is the world's biggest piece of crap. Matt and Trey must've had a premonition of Boner into a bigger piece of fecal matter when they came up with that episode. http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/111250/
i feel that what this means is that America (and maybe even the world) has given the Democrats, more or less, a slate to work on. The ball is in their court and the people and the world have massive expectations. But to ensure that this slate isn't written on with invisible ink, the people in the US and the world must constantly remind the government that we've given them a job to do, not a right, but something that supports us, rather than just a few interest groups. If it's true that this administration wants to hear from us or dissenting voices, we have to write in and tell them constantly the direction that the country should head towards. This time it's not going to be just a party matter, but the matter of the entire American politics and the perception of America as a world leader. The government cannot slowly reveal hidden agendas along the way because it'll simply imply that the two party system is wrong and that everyone there is corrupt. I know the party isn't going to make things perfect. But I'd love to see *SOME* progress (money well spent, programs that clearly show improvements in scores, higher wages without inflation or taxes, money/credit given to green companies, money invested into research, universal health care, a meaningful social security system, punishing those crooks on Wall Street, etc). Even three of the items above would mean more than anything to me just to demonstrate something was done.
well, the other thing i don't know if people had looked at is that it's only been a year since Terry Semel got canned. I blame a lot of Yahoo's stagnation when Semel took charge. He really didn't have any clue about the internet and so the innovative nature in Yahoo at one time went down quickly. Worse yet, they bought out duplicate services or even avoided great buys while Semel was in charge. Also, people for some reason think that the recent departures of all the execs are alarming. I'm probably in the minority in believing this "house cleaning" is a great thing. I mean, if you think about it, these execs who are leaving were probably the same people who allowed Yahoo to stagnate. So seeing them flee for higher grounds means hopefully that more motivated people underneath can rise to the occasion (if Jerry and Co allow such a reorganization to take place). I think the company needs to be re-structured and given about 2-3 years (from today) to rebuild. It's dead obvious that M$ + Yahoo = bad for the market. But something like this needs a fair amount of time to get new strategy and see how things go. Some of the more recent affairs look enticing such as Search Monkey, BOSS or their mentioned Apps platform. They definitely need more of that. However, with those situations, it'll take a fair amount of time before applications start rolling in and Yahoo can see any true benefit to this strategy, imo. The most unfortunate part is the antsy shareholders who look at their pennies rather than the whole picture. Well hopefully those people lose out no matter what.
i doubt forming a new political party will do anything. they'll fall into the same trap of special interest, corporate lobbying, etc. perhaps, people should re-examine American politics on a whole and see just how damaged it has become. I mean, it's basically a postmodern bunch of fiefdoms, something ironically that the so-called pioneers of the country sought to avoid. I figured that if Obama gets elected, he'd have about 2-3 years max to repair the country. Afterwards, if people don't at least perceive improvement with regards to jobs, security, progress, etc., then the country as a whole will be irreparably damaged by in terms of the rest of the world's viewpoint and the majority of the American people. If McCain gets the vote, Democrats will get off easy and simply continue to push the politics of blame to divert attention to the fact that they're doing little to nothing else for the American people; in other words, it's actually a bigger advantage for McCain to win than Obama for the Democratic party, especially come 2012. But as I mentioned if Obama wins and does nothing or worse, acts and the country continues to spiral downward, people simply will lose faith and perhaps more drastic things will happen (cf Hurricane Katrina).
that you can't trust politicians because they will simply back whomever puts enough money into their campaigns.
and put them out of their misery. Or Google. I think it'd be a good complimentary move along with partnering with Google. Yahoo already has their own ISP service so why not gain obtain that part of the market and consolidate it? Then get rid of the entire sales directors who make these asinine rules and improve the customer support sections.
the government is absolutely useless. in fact, governments in general are useless these days. the only thing governments have are military power. they don't serve anyone except the special interest that keep them in power. the saddest part is that people continue to obey an invisible force dictated through fear rather than reasoning. besides, i don't see what this G8 is going to accomplish. more politicians holding hands, publicly agreeing on some non-issues and then spreading more fear and getting money from their butt buddies hiding in the shareholders' rooms. corporations are the only institutions that have any real power these days. it just depends on what side of the corporation you're on that matters.
This is what should happen: 1) Google sues Viacom back for breach of privacy. 2) Google sues the judge 3) Google should hire a private detective to see how much the judge was paid off behind the scenes 4) Google should stop serving any ads and search results from Viacom and/or raise their fees by 1000% just for them. 5) Everyone should sue Viacom for crimes against humanity in terms of creating MTV and turning America into a place of idiots. This is war
i didn't even realize they could turn on their computer.
I wrote up a little follow up on my article (I won't show it for fear of being /.'d). But I think a good follow up question to this article is how to prevent these people from either getting to this level or staying. I've been in two separate companies where someone on the IT executive level (either a director or CIO) fell into what was outlined in the article. Being that in both places they worked in Japan, I think most people felt compelled not to rebel as most staff here almost never voice their concerns. However, in both instances there were high turn over rates. In one company, long after I left, the director got kicked out (he claimed personal issues). In the first situation, eventually people in management heard about what was going on and gave him the boot. He couldn't find a job anymore in Tokyo because he developed a terrible reputation around town, spread by others who were terrorized by him and his henchmen. In the other case, all the IT staff is far too weak to speak up, especially as the CIO continues to replace all the key tech management positions with his people. I still have friends in that company and I feel bad for them coming under pressure.
Still, I feel that the IT staff should have the ability to do something from within to protest the fact that these executive types are viruses and do more harm to the industry than anything else. I've had different ideas like IT unions, stricter contracts, feedback systems to HR, limited terms, the inability to poach from previous positions, and even a higher degree of accountability when certain goals are not met (kinda like how CEOs and CFOs are even more responsible than before in public companies). Anyway, it would be interesting to hear others' opinions on this matter.