Have fun with that. Because I know how it will turn out, I am already laughing pretty hard. Also, "Argument from Authority" / "Argumentum ad populum" Fallacy.
The thing is that Occulus and others must sell a lot of units before people wise up to this little problem. Best scenario for them is a lot of people buying the equipment before there is a lot of content.
Inverted "Argument from authority" Fallacy. Marks you as stupid and full of yourself. Also as not having any good arguments.
Incidentally, a smart person can often determine characteristics of a thing without actually having to try it out. But I guess you lack that experience.
There is a sucker born every minute, and the best suckers are those that do not notice they have been suckered, as these can be recycled in the next hype/scam. True, such people get some amount of happiness (usually by an unjustified perception of superiority) by the con-game they fell for so this is not all bad for them.
Incidentally, even if it is difficult to understand, the question is not whether _you_ can effortlessly afford it (I can too), the question is whether millions of people can. Rather obviously I was referring to that. And that question is important got you as well, as it will determine content availability.
If it is purely physical mechanisms, then the question of ethics and responsibility get eliminated. You cannot be responsible for things you cannot control. Now, I am not arguing that physicalism is bad because it has that effect. I am arguing that accepting Physicalism if untrue or unproven (which is the current state of affairs) is bad because it has that effect. If it should turn out that Physicalism is actually the correct model (unlikely, but not impossible), then we will find that basically all thoughts on morals, ethics, laws, motivation, etc. are all bogus and worthless and that all of that will have to be re-though from scratch.
Very true. And there are a lot of idiots that believe them. The question is will they find enough idiots? I think their price-tag is just a bit too high for that...
I agree that the writers are clueless here. The problem may be that BART uses some decidedly non-standard part (because standards are for morons, right?) and it has to be manufactured for them. That is a whole different story though.
Actual engineers use standardized components exactly because they are easy to get and replace and their characteristics are well-known. The morons designing BART though they were so much better than everybody, they ended up much, much worse. There are countless cities, many in Europe, that have working, fast, reliable public transportation, with equipment often spanning half a century or more in age-difference. The trick is to go with standards and to decidedly not believe the rules of solid engineering do not apply to you.
...the better the chance this hype will have fizzled and that you will not have to buy anything! VR is about as "ready" as 3D television, which is completely over because it does not really work at this time. The same is true for VR.
You are kidding yourself. Most people are not able to see that writing and running code is "applying" anything. Most people are not smart enough for that. I have seen it time and again while teaching.
Hehehehe, nice. And they followed the letter of the contract, but not the spirit.
Good engineering cannot be formalized. It needs understanding, insight and experience on the part of the person doing it. That is why so much bad engineering is around these days, but software is by far the worst offender.
So you think reality is a shared fantasy or hallucination? Possibly, but not a model I favor. It seems to not really explain quite a few observable things.
Well, there is a hole system of cops and laws to keep bad drivers in check to some degree. No such thing for coding and coding is far, far more difficult. To be fair, while entirely possible, it is also more difficult to kill people with code than with a car. And then there is the additional problem that while driving is ephemeral, code may stay around fro a long, long time.
But I see your point. Possibly we just need a few additional really huge IT disasters before bad (and cheap) coders will be out of work permanently.
You are making invalid assumptions. You are assuming everything observable at the outer interface is created inside. That is a rather simplistic and unsophisticated model. There is no reason to assume it is true.
Why would I need to explain it? Are you of the school of though that a theory is only valid if it explains everything and has no gray areas and leaves no unexplained things? If so, you are exceptionally stupid. This is, incidentally, an idea that is also frequently encountered in fundamentalist religion.
Slashdot Mirror
Have fun with that. Because I know how it will turn out, I am already laughing pretty hard. Also, "Argument from Authority" / "Argumentum ad populum" Fallacy.
The thing is that Occulus and others must sell a lot of units before people wise up to this little problem. Best scenario for them is a lot of people buying the equipment before there is a lot of content.
And that is just the point: Generating content that does not make people sick is very hard and basically unsolved at this time.
Inverted "Argument from authority" Fallacy. Marks you as stupid and full of yourself. Also as not having any good arguments.
Incidentally, a smart person can often determine characteristics of a thing without actually having to try it out. But I guess you lack that experience.
Nice!
There is a sucker born every minute, and the best suckers are those that do not notice they have been suckered, as these can be recycled in the next hype/scam. True, such people get some amount of happiness (usually by an unjustified perception of superiority) by the con-game they fell for so this is not all bad for them.
Incidentally, even if it is difficult to understand, the question is not whether _you_ can effortlessly afford it (I can too), the question is whether millions of people can. Rather obviously I was referring to that. And that question is important got you as well, as it will determine content availability.
This is a valid question.
If it is purely physical mechanisms, then the question of ethics and responsibility get eliminated. You cannot be responsible for things you cannot control. Now, I am not arguing that physicalism is bad because it has that effect. I am arguing that accepting Physicalism if untrue or unproven (which is the current state of affairs) is bad because it has that effect. If it should turn out that Physicalism is actually the correct model (unlikely, but not impossible), then we will find that basically all thoughts on morals, ethics, laws, motivation, etc. are all bogus and worthless and that all of that will have to be re-though from scratch.
Very true. And there are a lot of idiots that believe them. The question is will they find enough idiots? I think their price-tag is just a bit too high for that...
Ah, no? Not if you stick to standards and sane planning.
Naaaa, that would be, I don't know, smart? The US does not do "smart" in public transportation, that would be Socialism!
Just look at the number of idiots here defending the stupid decisions BART made back then and you see what I mean.
I agree that the writers are clueless here. The problem may be that BART uses some decidedly non-standard part (because standards are for morons, right?) and it has to be manufactured for them. That is a whole different story though.
Let's talk again in 100 years or so.
Actual engineers use standardized components exactly because they are easy to get and replace and their characteristics are well-known. The morons designing BART though they were so much better than everybody, they ended up much, much worse. There are countless cities, many in Europe, that have working, fast, reliable public transportation, with equipment often spanning half a century or more in age-difference. The trick is to go with standards and to decidedly not believe the rules of solid engineering do not apply to you.
...the better the chance this hype will have fizzled and that you will not have to buy anything! VR is about as "ready" as 3D television, which is completely over because it does not really work at this time. The same is true for VR.
Hehehehe, nice!
Hehehehe, right on the mark.
Could not agree more. Physicalists are an utterly demented fundamentalist bunch that mistake their beliefs for science.
You overestimate the mental capabilities of the typical /. poser. (No, not a typo.)
You are kidding yourself. Most people are not able to see that writing and running code is "applying" anything. Most people are not smart enough for that. I have seen it time and again while teaching.
Hehehehe, nice. And they followed the letter of the contract, but not the spirit.
Good engineering cannot be formalized. It needs understanding, insight and experience on the part of the person doing it. That is why so much bad engineering is around these days, but software is by far the worst offender.
So you think reality is a shared fantasy or hallucination? Possibly, but not a model I favor. It seems to not really explain quite a few observable things.
Well, there is a hole system of cops and laws to keep bad drivers in check to some degree. No such thing for coding and coding is far, far more difficult. To be fair, while entirely possible, it is also more difficult to kill people with code than with a car. And then there is the additional problem that while driving is ephemeral, code may stay around fro a long, long time.
But I see your point. Possibly we just need a few additional really huge IT disasters before bad (and cheap) coders will be out of work permanently.
You are making invalid assumptions. You are assuming everything observable at the outer interface is created inside. That is a rather simplistic and unsophisticated model. There is no reason to assume it is true.
Why would I need to explain it? Are you of the school of though that a theory is only valid if it explains everything and has no gray areas and leaves no unexplained things? If so, you are exceptionally stupid. This is, incidentally, an idea that is also frequently encountered in fundamentalist religion.
Nicely clueless. Proves my point.