It's about time the writers, artists, etc become hourly employees just like all the rest of us (engineers, programmers, printers, tech document creators,...). Pay them $30/hour for their work and done.
This is borderline retarded.
First, there is no barrier of entry for creative artists. There is no accreditation for writers, painters, photographers, songwriters, etc that is necessary to practice. Can the same be said for engineers, programmers, etc? Can anyone do your job? No. Agreeing to pay anyone $30/hr to write without a formal approval process - how's that sound to you? Stupid? We're in agreement then.
Second, they are creating something with an intangible value. Engineers, etc, all create something with a tangible value, something that - if it works properly - can be measured as worth x because it fulfills a specified need. You are hired because you can produce code or documents or whatever as needed. But so can anyone with the equivalent, measurable skillset. Like it or not, you are to a large degree interchangeable with a thousand others.
A well-written song or novel has no such guaranteed value (it may have no interested audience). Nor does a successful songwriter or novelist (his next work be awful). Nor are the artists interchangeable. This kind of creative work is done on spec because you're only as good as your last piece. And even if what you create is amazing, there's still no guarantee that anyone will be interested.
Can the same be said for a programmer or engineer? If your last project didn't work out, does that mean your skills are in question, your perceived worth gutted, your ability to make a wage practicing your profession gone? Of course not. Your product (code, documentation, etc) has a market even if your current project flops. You still have your measurable skills and the failure wasn't completely yours (giving you the benefit of the doubt). Your profession is collaborative in a way that it isn't with creatives. Songwriters, authors, etc are in control of the entire process in regards to producing a product. Sure, there are session musicians and sound editors etc, but these are paid help. Creatives do everything on spec. If someone takes all the risks, why shouldn't they get all the benefits when it works out well? If you come up with the idea for, and proceeded to write, a piece of code that's worth millions to the world on your own time, wouldn't you expect the same? Yeah, I thought so.
As for the creative types thinking they're better than you, how do they express that exactly? Do they kick sand in your face? Sleep with your girlfriend and brag about it? Laugh at your unicorn poetry?
All that said, I'm completely for this idea. You work it so I get paid $30/hr to write spacegun krazy krazy robot smut novels. I also play the kazoo at an expert level, so I might moonlight to make some extra dough.
The page states the jpegs are 'originals' which is, of course, impossible. The left images have jpeg artifacts, meaning they've clearly been compressed from the original source. Further, they can't be the true photographic originals because in some of the simulated WebP images (really pngs) the same artifacts are not there (e.g. around the football player's head).
In all of the images, the WebP versions are lighter and, for the most part, sharper than their counterparts. The difference in some is quite significant. In the night shot for example, there are red lights at the top and to the right of the structure that are almost imperceptible in the jpeg.
The only image I would consider worse is the final image - it's totally blown out.
No, like Science, it's a framework for investigation. Art is not a 'thing' or value judgement. It's a context things are put into to discover things about them. Art = internal and personal, science = external and impersonal.
He seems to be saying that he not only could be wrong, but that he really isn't qualified to comment.
Well, yes, but that's the galling part. His career is founded upon divining the merit of works within a specific medium - he's the cinematic peer of an art critic. You'd think he'd need at least a somewhat less juvenile definition of art to be qualified to do his job.
I think you're being far too literal in your reading of Duchamp. What's the difference between 'destroying art' and destroying its conventions / expectations? Regardless, he clearly didn't destroy art - but he certainly changed the way it must be approached (intentionally or not).
Art is analogous to Science; it's a framework of investigation (not an aesthetic designation like Ebert seems to think). Internal and emotional as opposed to external and empirical.
Hold on there Jean Luc, I think they were referring to the list in the first link. (unless wanton boobery is afoot and they updated it to cover their tracks)
Tech cult No. 1: The Slashdot Samurai
Tech cult No. 2: The Sirens of the Singularity
Tech cult No. 3: The High Priests of Wikipedia
Tech cult No. 4: The Temple of Drupal
Tech cult No. 5: The Way of the Warp (OS/2)
Tech cult No. 6: The Open Sourcerors
Actually, many of the vendors were already making Mac-specific products. Mac keyboards and printers up until that time used ADB and serial (not PS2 or parallel), so USB meant they could phase out their platform specific hardware.
Melies seems to me vastly more advanced than her three modern video games. He has limited technical resources, but superior artistry and imagination
So he's predicating entry into the category of art on appeal. Art is neither a positive nor negative designation (thus, bad art exists). The definition and evaluation are not the same.
And the idea that participating / winning negates its ability to be considered art is completely arbitrary. There are different genres with different expectations that expand all the time. Most art I can think of already requires participation (also known as viewing, reading, listening, etc) - why should objectives disqualify anything? He gives no answer for that. Pretty weak stuff.
Technically he's right. All boxed versions of the Mac OS are upgrades. All Macs come with an OS so the only reason Apple provides boxed versions are for user upgrades. Apple is generally not in the software business, nor in the hardware business - it's in the integrated hardware / software business.
Well, to be taken seriously, you'd need to ignore the fact that it's a high school lit class. It's tough to say what to choose, since a good lit class should have a 'theme' other than two broad genres. I'd focus on novels / stories that are plot-driven and had more to offer - things that could provide insight into literary trends / techniques.
Orwell is taught anyway in mainstream lit (at least when I was in high school) so I'd pass on him.
I'd second Vance, especially The Eyes of the Overworld / Cugel the Clever. It's a great modern picaresque.
Vonnegut certainly. Hard to say which I'd choose. Probably stay predictable and go with Slaughterhouse Five. He employs some interesting narrative tricks.
It's too bad the Gormenghast novels are prohibitive in length - they're some of the finest fantasy written and avoid the typical genre cliches.
Not a single customer asked to be downgraded to from 10.5. Good thing. It's not possible to downgrade Apple hardware to a Mac OS version prior to the one it shipped with.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about - there is (and has been for at least 10 years) a feature complete education version of Adobe Photoshop . Currently priced at $299. Somewhat reasonable if you consider it's a primary tool in your field. I've spent more than that on books for a single course.
The difference between a commercial version of Photoshop and an Education version of Photoshop is the splash screen and the license: education versions are not to be used for commercial projects. In other words, they're for learning, not making money on. That's the whole point - get it into student's hands so it is the tool they are comfortable using. That way they'll be more likely to want to use it in the future, when they are in the workforce. It's in Adobe's interests to make it feature complete.
The 'hoops' you are referring to seem to be a function of your institution's license and/or misinformation about the product. Any student could purchase a stand-alone, boxed education version of any adobe product with proper ID at any of the schools I have attended.
Does that mean all of the copies students use are legit? Of course not. That would be a silly thing to claim. Almost as silly as claiming all students will pirate Photoshop.
Exactly right. There is an entire field of expertise around UI design and technical writing (and no, they are not in the Marketing department) - what makes you or your boss think you can pick it up in a few hours and do a reasonable job of it?
On second thought, perhaps they're all busy doing application development...
Professionally, as a web developer, I'm ok with this. Getting rid of IE 6 (and good god, my web stats even show 5.5 - c'mon grandma!) in any way possible is a good thing.
And personally I'm ok with it because I'm not a customer.
This would all be true if - suddenly - everyone stopped using IE 6. But that's not going to happen. Instead I'll have to test in standards-compliant browsers, then add conditional tags for IE 6/7 and then add another additional tag for IE 8. What's the benefit to the web developer to add the IE 8 tag, instead of just letting it work as though it were an older version. Just seems like one more tag and one more browser to fire up to make sure it's working as advertised.
Artistic talent is of no value when developing a business model.
Unless the appeal of that artistic talent to the consumer is the very foundation of your business model. Then it's pretty much essential.
But I see your point. His business acumen is relevant to his opinion in this case, not his artistic talent. The opinions of celebrities on subjects other than their craft are often given undue attention. Just because you can shred a guitar, that doesn't mean you have a knowledgeable opinion about deforestation.
I have to go ask my architect about time travel now.
Please, enlighten us to a game that isn't "basically on rails". Many games hide the rails very well, but all games are on them.
Well, I know it's not the genre you're thinking, but The Sims comes pretty close. You can take any path you like. Will a game be successful if your Sims pee on the floor and die in kitchen fires? That depends.
The question is, how do you measure "success" in a game? By completing objectives or by engagement? If your answer is the first, yes, you are restricting the parameters of the game and it must be guided - it is necessary to push it down a fairly straight track (or at least a choice of several). If your primary goal is to be fully engaged in the game itself, then just having a good time playing can be enough, regardless of the scripted objectives completed.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially when he told them about the red commemorative jumpsuits that had to wear for landing.
It's about time the writers, artists, etc become hourly employees just like all the rest of us (engineers, programmers, printers, tech document creators, ...). Pay them $30/hour for their work and done.
This is borderline retarded.
First, there is no barrier of entry for creative artists. There is no accreditation for writers, painters, photographers, songwriters, etc that is necessary to practice. Can the same be said for engineers, programmers, etc? Can anyone do your job? No. Agreeing to pay anyone $30/hr to write without a formal approval process - how's that sound to you? Stupid? We're in agreement then.
Second, they are creating something with an intangible value. Engineers, etc, all create something with a tangible value, something that - if it works properly - can be measured as worth x because it fulfills a specified need. You are hired because you can produce code or documents or whatever as needed. But so can anyone with the equivalent, measurable skillset. Like it or not, you are to a large degree interchangeable with a thousand others.
A well-written song or novel has no such guaranteed value (it may have no interested audience). Nor does a successful songwriter or novelist (his next work be awful). Nor are the artists interchangeable. This kind of creative work is done on spec because you're only as good as your last piece. And even if what you create is amazing, there's still no guarantee that anyone will be interested.
Can the same be said for a programmer or engineer? If your last project didn't work out, does that mean your skills are in question, your perceived worth gutted, your ability to make a wage practicing your profession gone? Of course not. Your product (code, documentation, etc) has a market even if your current project flops. You still have your measurable skills and the failure wasn't completely yours (giving you the benefit of the doubt). Your profession is collaborative in a way that it isn't with creatives. Songwriters, authors, etc are in control of the entire process in regards to producing a product. Sure, there are session musicians and sound editors etc, but these are paid help. Creatives do everything on spec. If someone takes all the risks, why shouldn't they get all the benefits when it works out well? If you come up with the idea for, and proceeded to write, a piece of code that's worth millions to the world on your own time, wouldn't you expect the same? Yeah, I thought so.
As for the creative types thinking they're better than you, how do they express that exactly? Do they kick sand in your face? Sleep with your girlfriend and brag about it? Laugh at your unicorn poetry?
All that said, I'm completely for this idea. You work it so I get paid $30/hr to write spacegun krazy krazy robot smut novels. I also play the kazoo at an expert level, so I might moonlight to make some extra dough.
Completely voluntary. Anyone who doesn't like it will go first.
The page states the jpegs are 'originals' which is, of course, impossible. The left images have jpeg artifacts, meaning they've clearly been compressed from the original source. Further, they can't be the true photographic originals because in some of the simulated WebP images (really pngs) the same artifacts are not there (e.g. around the football player's head).
In all of the images, the WebP versions are lighter and, for the most part, sharper than their counterparts. The difference in some is quite significant. In the night shot for example, there are red lights at the top and to the right of the structure that are almost imperceptible in the jpeg.
The only image I would consider worse is the final image - it's totally blown out.
No, like Science, it's a framework for investigation. Art is not a 'thing' or value judgement. It's a context things are put into to discover things about them. Art = internal and personal, science = external and impersonal.
He seems to be saying that he not only could be wrong, but that he really isn't qualified to comment.
Well, yes, but that's the galling part. His career is founded upon divining the merit of works within a specific medium - he's the cinematic peer of an art critic. You'd think he'd need at least a somewhat less juvenile definition of art to be qualified to do his job.
I think you're being far too literal in your reading of Duchamp. What's the difference between 'destroying art' and destroying its conventions / expectations? Regardless, he clearly didn't destroy art - but he certainly changed the way it must be approached (intentionally or not).
Art is analogous to Science; it's a framework of investigation (not an aesthetic designation like Ebert seems to think). Internal and emotional as opposed to external and empirical.
Hold on there Jean Luc, I think they were referring to the list in the first link. (unless wanton boobery is afoot and they updated it to cover their tracks)
Tech cult No. 1: The Slashdot Samurai
Tech cult No. 2: The Sirens of the Singularity
Tech cult No. 3: The High Priests of Wikipedia
Tech cult No. 4: The Temple of Drupal
Tech cult No. 5: The Way of the Warp (OS/2)
Tech cult No. 6: The Open Sourcerors
Actually, many of the vendors were already making Mac-specific products. Mac keyboards and printers up until that time used ADB and serial (not PS2 or parallel), so USB meant they could phase out their platform specific hardware.
His "definition" of art is pretty naive.
Melies seems to me vastly more advanced than her three modern video games. He has limited technical resources, but superior artistry and imagination
So he's predicating entry into the category of art on appeal. Art is neither a positive nor negative designation (thus, bad art exists). The definition and evaluation are not the same.
And the idea that participating / winning negates its ability to be considered art is completely arbitrary. There are different genres with different expectations that expand all the time. Most art I can think of already requires participation (also known as viewing, reading, listening, etc) - why should objectives disqualify anything? He gives no answer for that. Pretty weak stuff.
Apple is saying "you can only use C, C++, Objective C, and JavaScript as executed by the iPhone's JavaScript engine". No more, no less.
Oh god, I honestly thought it meant Hindi. I have to sleep.
Technically he's right. All boxed versions of the Mac OS are upgrades. All Macs come with an OS so the only reason Apple provides boxed versions are for user upgrades. Apple is generally not in the software business, nor in the hardware business - it's in the integrated hardware / software business.
Well, to be taken seriously, you'd need to ignore the fact that it's a high school lit class. It's tough to say what to choose, since a good lit class should have a 'theme' other than two broad genres. I'd focus on novels / stories that are plot-driven and had more to offer - things that could provide insight into literary trends / techniques.
Orwell is taught anyway in mainstream lit (at least when I was in high school) so I'd pass on him.
I'd second Vance, especially The Eyes of the Overworld / Cugel the Clever. It's a great modern picaresque.
Vonnegut certainly. Hard to say which I'd choose. Probably stay predictable and go with Slaughterhouse Five. He employs some interesting narrative tricks.
It's too bad the Gormenghast novels are prohibitive in length - they're some of the finest fantasy written and avoid the typical genre cliches.
What do you know about 'humane' treatment? Eat some more corpses and go grok yourself.
I can hardly wait to stand on the tundra and wave the good ship Icefloe bon voyage.
February 29 for Mac Minis
Blizzard always releases every one of their games for Mac on the same day as the Windows versions
Apparently you weren't around for the first Diablo release.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about - there is (and has been for at least 10 years) a feature complete education version of Adobe Photoshop . Currently priced at $299. Somewhat reasonable if you consider it's a primary tool in your field. I've spent more than that on books for a single course.
The difference between a commercial version of Photoshop and an Education version of Photoshop is the splash screen and the license: education versions are not to be used for commercial projects. In other words, they're for learning, not making money on. That's the whole point - get it into student's hands so it is the tool they are comfortable using. That way they'll be more likely to want to use it in the future, when they are in the workforce. It's in Adobe's interests to make it feature complete.
The 'hoops' you are referring to seem to be a function of your institution's license and/or misinformation about the product. Any student could purchase a stand-alone, boxed education version of any adobe product with proper ID at any of the schools I have attended.
Does that mean all of the copies students use are legit? Of course not. That would be a silly thing to claim. Almost as silly as claiming all students will pirate Photoshop.
Thank you for submitting your resume. Unfortunately there are no positions currently available.
Exactly right. There is an entire field of expertise around UI design and technical writing (and no, they are not in the Marketing department) - what makes you or your boss think you can pick it up in a few hours and do a reasonable job of it?
On second thought, perhaps they're all busy doing application development...
Professionally, as a web developer, I'm ok with this. Getting rid of IE 6 (and good god, my web stats even show 5.5 - c'mon grandma!) in any way possible is a good thing.
And personally I'm ok with it because I'm not a customer.
This would all be true if - suddenly - everyone stopped using IE 6. But that's not going to happen. Instead I'll have to test in standards-compliant browsers, then add conditional tags for IE 6/7 and then add another additional tag for IE 8. What's the benefit to the web developer to add the IE 8 tag, instead of just letting it work as though it were an older version. Just seems like one more tag and one more browser to fire up to make sure it's working as advertised.
Unless the appeal of that artistic talent to the consumer is the very foundation of your business model. Then it's pretty much essential.
But I see your point. His business acumen is relevant to his opinion in this case, not his artistic talent. The opinions of celebrities on subjects other than their craft are often given undue attention. Just because you can shred a guitar, that doesn't mean you have a knowledgeable opinion about deforestation.
I have to go ask my architect about time travel now.
Well, I know it's not the genre you're thinking, but The Sims comes pretty close. You can take any path you like. Will a game be successful if your Sims pee on the floor and die in kitchen fires? That depends.
The question is, how do you measure "success" in a game? By completing objectives or by engagement? If your answer is the first, yes, you are restricting the parameters of the game and it must be guided - it is necessary to push it down a fairly straight track (or at least a choice of several). If your primary goal is to be fully engaged in the game itself, then just having a good time playing can be enough, regardless of the scripted objectives completed.