"If you interview weirdos, of course you will get a biased sample."
This bears repeating -- nowhere does the study mention a "random sample" of the population, or even a "random sample" of porn viewers, or even better, a "random sample" of porn addicts.
Sample not random? Statistical study not valid.
Sample not random? Anecdotal study not valid unless analysis is within the context of the sample set.
On the other hand, there have been a ton of peer-reviewed studies showing that people who believe they are acting in anonymity are more likely to cross behavioral boundaries. To say nothing of ease of access in this case.
I think kiddie pr0n IS more prevalent than it used to be. Not that more people are into it, just that more people are doing it -- because they don't have to meet anyone face-to-face to buy it.
"[Sony] let the unwashed masses of sheeple into a place where the did not belong."
I beg to differ -- they created their own market while expanding the current market. Upset with the intrusion? Without it, you wouldn't have anywhere near the variety of games we've seen in the past decade.
The technorati that you feel was violated, that was "opened up" to the unwashed masses -- it's still there. It's called PC Gaming, and if you bemoan the lack of quality titles, how much worse would it be without the giant market for gaming in general?
There is no reason you can't still have your elitist attitude, because you like the underground games, or whatever -- but there is also no reason that the "sheeple" shouldn't be as into their version of gaming as you are into yours. Who knows, maybe the next great developer will come from the younger sibling or child of one of your "sheeple."
Very interesting, that the author sees that modern-day computer viruses are perhaps less virulent, while they do whatever it is they were designed to do.
Reminds me of syphilus -- when first discoverd in Europe, syphilus was a virulent disease that ravaged the body, killing victims off relatively quickly. Natural selection dictated that syphilus strains that avoided early detection were more successful at passing along their DNA to new hosts. Virulent, crippling strains died off. [1]
Today, syphilus is rarely fatal, the symptoms are often just a little annoying for a long time. Plenty of time for new partners to be infected.
Computer virues are very similar -- viruses that avoid detection and quietly do their work of replication, transfer, and whatever else they are designed for, end up surviving. Emergency patches don't happen unless the virus (or worm, whatever) disrupts enough computers.
I read through the article, and it struck me that "The Escapist"[1] -- as he styles himself -- is basically saying that game developers need to be in charge. Take over financing (and therefore control); take over distrbution (or control of it); take over retail (by not going through brick-and-mortar distribution).
Sure, because every developer thinks they know best... the truth is, we all think we're experts on every subject until faced with doing it. At least Costikyan admits that developers need help with the marketing.
What's really needed is for the leader of a development company to leverage their connections and personal charisma to get all these things done. Think about the leaders of the gaming industry, and these people get it done, in the current development structure.
My biggest pet peeve in the article is that Costikyan thinks that the key to marketing is to appeal to the "indie spirit" of the hardcore gamer -- and to develop that spirit if possible.
First, that spirit already exists. He just wants the retail industry to tap into it -- which, in effect, destroys it... although a ton of money can be made in the process.
Second, he says that the casual gaming crowd is not the target. Au contraire, mon frere, the casual gamer is the crowd that puts you over the profitability edge.
In all, Costikyan is trying to come up with a scheme to build one market-changing game. If I had complete creative control, if I could ignore the current distribution scheme, if I could just change the market to suit my model, then I'd have a hit game -- that happens to be oh so cool, becaue it's indie!!
On the plus side, I foresee publishers releasing divergent games -- the marketing-driven blockbuster (along with the personality-driven profit-making drivel) balanced with riskier games, that may make a killing.
I see the current distribution scheme changing -- for PC games (Steam, etc -- although it needs some fixin').
I see the market naturally developing an indie movement, as major media (and EA, etc are major media) begin controlling a ton of the content.
So, Costikyan is saying: what we need is what's happening already.
[1] My apologies to Michael Chabon, author of "The Amazaing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay"
The problem with directed taxes is that they place an unequal tax burden on different segments of the population. NO would be off their rocker (prior to the current catastrophe, of course) to increase any of the taxes on the tourism industry.
One of the main tenets of the current tax structure (in theory, not in practice) is that taxes are collected fairly amongst the population.
Re; rebuilding, either you rebuild where it is, or you rebuild nearby. There is a need for a port city there,and that need will be fulfilled. Either way, you've got to decontaminate the area.
Rebuilding the city like Venice isn't very practical. Too many fluctuations in water level... and if you want to avoid that, you've got to spend a ton of money pumping water and building levees anyway.
I'd like to see the historic areas picked up, moved uphill, and a new NO built around them. Clean the contaminants, let the basin between the lake and the river do what it would naturally do...
"Until teleportation becomes a viable technology or the Midwest becomes a desert there's going to be a city there"
Not so.
The residential and downtown areas can be built in a better location. There is no reason, with modern transportation technology, that the port could not also be moved to a better location. Look at the Meadowlands in NJ -- river delta surrounding the Port of Newark/Elizabeth. Do we get Cat. Fives up here frequently? No, but the flooding isn't as bad, except for localized areas.
Besides, didn't they already move the port facilities once?
I'd rather not politicize this debate by discussing our big-eared friend...
.
Cuts to levee-maintenance programs did not start with him, even if they've gotten worse. And yes, we have the technology and the resources to do better this time around.
However, why fight the current when we don't have to? We have a unique opportunity to allow part of the Mississippi delta to revert to a more natural state, while rebuilding in a manner that is cost-effective, and will likely lessen the suffering further hurricanes could cause.
"Long before anyone built levees and floodgates, barrier islands were serving to block dangerous storm surges. Of course, those islands often fall victim to coastal development.
"
Levees and floodgates, as used in the US, do not generally mitigate the damage caused by storm surges -- they are used to block flooding from inland sources like rivers.
"...some artificial barrier islands, rather than further changing the face of the earth"
Artificial barrier islands = changing the face of the earth
Barrier islands migrate into the land over time. They are really just giant versions of the sand ripples you'll see at the edge of almost any (near still) body of water. If we really want our coastlines to operate in a natural fashion, we've got to allow barrier islands to form, move to land, and respawn.
The real problem with NOLA is that the Mississippi River delta is not allowed to regenerate itself by silt deposition. Most conservationists would argue that less flood control is necessary, not more.
(1) I'm not so sure we want to be taking flood control advice from Bangladesh.
(2) I'm not sure that attempting to control nature is the best route here. Sure, there are significant historical and cultural aspects of NOLA that we don't want to lose, but wouldn't it be cheaper (and safer) to move them to a different location?
Flood plains, barrier islands, river paths: all of these are not static features. We have an abundance of land (as opposed to some of the examples cited). If we rebuild NOLA in the same location, aren't we just pissing into the wind?
At the very least, this has prompted more attention to the fact that SSL 2.0 is not so secure.
Even if some sites continue to use it, it is never a bad idea to bring attention to a flawed security system when a fix is easily available.
Of course, some of us now might have to have two legacy browsers installed in order to use all the sites we want to (IE & an older FF) -- unless SSL 2.0 is reversibly disabled.
"Over the history of animated films, there has developed the concept of "suspension of disbelief" " (emphasis mine)
Willing suspension of disbelief is not specific to animated films, nor did it develop along with them. Willing suspension of disbelief has been around as long as literature has been; for example, Aesop's fables require it for true understanding.
The trick with both realistic graphics and fantastical graphics is to not interrupt the flow. Inconsistencies will disrupt the suspension of disbelief -- but the disbelief has more to do with content than with style.
We choose to accept that Mario can leap five times his height, regardless of graphics style.
The nice thing about games like Nethack is that the immersion is due to
(1) gameplay & UI
(2) imagination.
When pseudo-realistic graphics are used, I think it sometimes detracts from immersion by drawing attention to defects in the realism... I think several other posters have noted this.
double-blind studies
on
Pornified
·
· Score: 5, Funny
FTR: "I found fascinating, for example, that a number of double-blind studies of the effects of pornography were completed over twenty years ago, but that the results were so damning that it has been difficult to follow up on them (emphasis mine)
WTF? I was always told it would make me go blind, but how much did they have to do it to go double-blind?
My feeling is that most games released at console launch are half-baked; the launch deadline can be really tough o the developers. I hesitate to purchase any game released at launch, and see no reason to change now.
Please, take your sweet time and make the game the best you can!
FTA: "Is the point of gaming to recreate reality, or should it go beyond realism, into the realm of art?"
Realism and art are not opposed; rather, realism is one method of creating art.
IMO, the point of games such as the Zelda franchise is player immersion. Some people can feel immersed without realistic graphics; others have a harder time making the leap.
"Be Bush's polices good or bad ( i wont get into that debate at all ), we wont feel its true effects until some time into the *next* administration"
Hate to break it to you, but economic reaction time is in no way that simple... there is no magic 4-year delay, or even 8-year delay.
The truth of the matter is that we'll feel some of the effects now, some during the next administration, and some in the next decade and decades down the road.
For an example, let's look at fuel costs, since they have myriad effects n the economy. What affects them? Whose policies have affected the current supply in the US? Whose have affected the current demand in the US? Pretty much everyone since Eisenhower.
Any Presidential administration will inherit an economic situation from their predecessor. But there are near-immediate impacts of Presidential policy on the economy, such as:
(1) Consumer confidence
(2) Economic costs/benefits of war and war production
(3) Budgetary finance methods -- cutting of government programs vs. debt financing; cutting government programs would have an immediate, as well as longer-term, effect on the economy.
The key then, is for any administration to acknowledge responsibility for those parts of the economy which their actions or policies have directly affected.
I am aware of what TFA said. My point is this: 100k URLs is not a lot; I was merely pointing out that 40k docs can be > 100k URLs, and this means that capacity become an issue very quickly.
I guess TFA being from the you-know-for-the-kids-dept explains it pretty well.
It's not just virus-writers that he is tracking down.
FTA: "It has also filed 243 civil actions related to Internet safety threats, such as spam"
OK, Spam is annoying, but an "Internet safety threat?" Maybe phishing.
"Mr. Fifka is also combating traditional crimes like software-counterfeiting"
This is what Fifka was originally hired to do. It just so happens that tracking down people on the internet applies just as well to virus writers and spammers as it does to software counterfeiters.
All in all, this is a win-win. MS gets good publicity, and doesn't lose as much customer goodwill due to vulnerability; we get free[1] hi-tech international investigation.
It's the international part that really helps; public law enforcement has to jump through hoops to operate in a foreign country.
However, donations to the Red Cross go into their general fund, and are not earmarked for specific disasters.
Also, it should be realized that the 8% overhead pays for administrative employees and other admin costs. Pay for employees actually doing the relief work in the field is included in the 92% that they "turn over".
They are still, however, one of the most reliable and trustworthy charities to give to.
"It seemed that all the meteorologists knew the impact of Katrina, even in the 18 hours before when we knew she would hit New Orleans, but that this didn't get through to the government that everyone is now blaming for failing to respond"
What do you mean, it didn't get through to the government? The government has its own meteorologists, who were just as aware of the storm's status as anyone else.
Is it private industry's responsibility to report things that might be of concern to the federal government? No, it is the government's responsibility to get that information.
In the government's defense, the storm surge did not hit New Orleans directly -- that was the event that was most feared, that surge water would rush in from the Gulf. I think the government backed down the response when it was realized that N.O. was west of the storm center.
Someone in the chain of command should have realized, though, that a direct hit by storm surge was not the only event that could have flooded N.O. -- levee failure should have been prepared for.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you interview weirdos, of course you will get a biased sample."
This bears repeating -- nowhere does the study mention a "random sample" of the population, or even a "random sample" of porn viewers, or even better, a "random sample" of porn addicts.
Sample not random? Statistical study not valid.
Sample not random? Anecdotal study not valid unless analysis is within the context of the sample set.
On the other hand, there have been a ton of peer-reviewed studies showing that people who believe they are acting in anonymity are more likely to cross behavioral boundaries. To say nothing of ease of access in this case.
I think kiddie pr0n IS more prevalent than it used to be. Not that more people are into it, just that more people are doing it -- because they don't have to meet anyone face-to-face to buy it.
Sorry for feeding the troll.
"[Sony] let the unwashed masses of sheeple into a place where the did not belong."
I beg to differ -- they created their own market while expanding the current market. Upset with the intrusion? Without it, you wouldn't have anywhere near the variety of games we've seen in the past decade.
The technorati that you feel was violated, that was "opened up" to the unwashed masses -- it's still there. It's called PC Gaming, and if you bemoan the lack of quality titles, how much worse would it be without the giant market for gaming in general?
There is no reason you can't still have your elitist attitude, because you like the underground games, or whatever -- but there is also no reason that the "sheeple" shouldn't be as into their version of gaming as you are into yours. Who knows, maybe the next great developer will come from the younger sibling or child of one of your "sheeple."
High horse -- get off it.
Very interesting, that the author sees that modern-day computer viruses are perhaps less virulent, while they do whatever it is they were designed to do.
Reminds me of syphilus -- when first discoverd in Europe, syphilus was a virulent disease that ravaged the body, killing victims off relatively quickly. Natural selection dictated that syphilus strains that avoided early detection were more successful at passing along their DNA to new hosts. Virulent, crippling strains died off. [1]
Today, syphilus is rarely fatal, the symptoms are often just a little annoying for a long time. Plenty of time for new partners to be infected.
Computer virues are very similar -- viruses that avoid detection and quietly do their work of replication, transfer, and whatever else they are designed for, end up surviving. Emergency patches don't happen unless the virus (or worm, whatever) disrupts enough computers.
[1] Evolution? I'd say so...
I read through the article, and it struck me that "The Escapist"[1] -- as he styles himself -- is basically saying that game developers need to be in charge. Take over financing (and therefore control); take over distrbution (or control of it); take over retail (by not going through brick-and-mortar distribution).
Sure, because every developer thinks they know best... the truth is, we all think we're experts on every subject until faced with doing it. At least Costikyan admits that developers need help with the marketing.
What's really needed is for the leader of a development company to leverage their connections and personal charisma to get all these things done. Think about the leaders of the gaming industry, and these people get it done, in the current development structure.
My biggest pet peeve in the article is that Costikyan thinks that the key to marketing is to appeal to the "indie spirit" of the hardcore gamer -- and to develop that spirit if possible.
First, that spirit already exists. He just wants the retail industry to tap into it -- which, in effect, destroys it... although a ton of money can be made in the process.
Second, he says that the casual gaming crowd is not the target. Au contraire, mon frere, the casual gamer is the crowd that puts you over the profitability edge.
In all, Costikyan is trying to come up with a scheme to build one market-changing game. If I had complete creative control, if I could ignore the current distribution scheme, if I could just change the market to suit my model, then I'd have a hit game -- that happens to be oh so cool, becaue it's indie!!
On the plus side, I foresee publishers releasing divergent games -- the marketing-driven blockbuster (along with the personality-driven profit-making drivel) balanced with riskier games, that may make a killing.
I see the current distribution scheme changing -- for PC games (Steam, etc -- although it needs some fixin').
I see the market naturally developing an indie movement, as major media (and EA, etc are major media) begin controlling a ton of the content.
So, Costikyan is saying: what we need is what's happening already.
[1] My apologies to Michael Chabon, author of "The Amazaing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay"
What is not true? That funding has been cut? That levee maintenance was inadequate?
Plenty of people in the ACE have a vested interest in saying what the current administration wants them to say.
I'm not saying that I know the truth or that what you say is incorrect -- we just don't know right now.
But the original post here and the subsequent conversation are not about fault or blame, they are about rebuilding.
The problem with directed taxes is that they place an unequal tax burden on different segments of the population. NO would be off their rocker (prior to the current catastrophe, of course) to increase any of the taxes on the tourism industry.
One of the main tenets of the current tax structure (in theory, not in practice) is that taxes are collected fairly amongst the population.
Re; rebuilding, either you rebuild where it is, or you rebuild nearby. There is a need for a port city there,and that need will be fulfilled. Either way, you've got to decontaminate the area.
Rebuilding the city like Venice isn't very practical. Too many fluctuations in water level... and if you want to avoid that, you've got to spend a ton of money pumping water and building levees anyway.
I'd like to see the historic areas picked up, moved uphill, and a new NO built around them. Clean the contaminants, let the basin between the lake and the river do what it would naturally do...
"Until teleportation becomes a viable technology or the Midwest becomes a desert there's going to be a city there"
Not so.
The residential and downtown areas can be built in a better location. There is no reason, with modern transportation technology, that the port could not also be moved to a better location. Look at the Meadowlands in NJ -- river delta surrounding the Port of Newark/Elizabeth. Do we get Cat. Fives up here frequently? No, but the flooding isn't as bad, except for localized areas.
Besides, didn't they already move the port facilities once?
I'd rather not politicize this debate by discussing our big-eared friend...
. Cuts to levee-maintenance programs did not start with him, even if they've gotten worse. And yes, we have the technology and the resources to do better this time around.
However, why fight the current when we don't have to? We have a unique opportunity to allow part of the Mississippi delta to revert to a more natural state, while rebuilding in a manner that is cost-effective, and will likely lessen the suffering further hurricanes could cause.
"Fail loudly, blaming the other side for their lack of concern for data security. That's the way to bring about change."
Or get media attention, and customers who contact you demanding a change.
The stimulus for change doesn't have to be painful... but it helps!
"Long before anyone built levees and floodgates, barrier islands were serving to block dangerous storm surges. Of course, those islands often fall victim to coastal development. "
Levees and floodgates, as used in the US, do not generally mitigate the damage caused by storm surges -- they are used to block flooding from inland sources like rivers.
"...some artificial barrier islands, rather than further changing the face of the earth"
Artificial barrier islands = changing the face of the earth
Barrier islands migrate into the land over time. They are really just giant versions of the sand ripples you'll see at the edge of almost any (near still) body of water. If we really want our coastlines to operate in a natural fashion, we've got to allow barrier islands to form, move to land, and respawn.
The real problem with NOLA is that the Mississippi River delta is not allowed to regenerate itself by silt deposition. Most conservationists would argue that less flood control is necessary, not more.
(1) I'm not so sure we want to be taking flood control advice from Bangladesh.
(2) I'm not sure that attempting to control nature is the best route here. Sure, there are significant historical and cultural aspects of NOLA that we don't want to lose, but wouldn't it be cheaper (and safer) to move them to a different location?
Flood plains, barrier islands, river paths: all of these are not static features. We have an abundance of land (as opposed to some of the examples cited). If we rebuild NOLA in the same location, aren't we just pissing into the wind?
Good move by Mozilla.
At the very least, this has prompted more attention to the fact that SSL 2.0 is not so secure.
Even if some sites continue to use it, it is never a bad idea to bring attention to a flawed security system when a fix is easily available.
Of course, some of us now might have to have two legacy browsers installed in order to use all the sites we want to (IE & an older FF) -- unless SSL 2.0 is reversibly disabled.
Related to style, but doesn't quite apply:
"Over the history of animated films, there has developed the concept of "suspension of disbelief" " (emphasis mine)
Willing suspension of disbelief is not specific to animated films, nor did it develop along with them. Willing suspension of disbelief has been around as long as literature has been; for example, Aesop's fables require it for true understanding.
The trick with both realistic graphics and fantastical graphics is to not interrupt the flow. Inconsistencies will disrupt the suspension of disbelief -- but the disbelief has more to do with content than with style.
We choose to accept that Mario can leap five times his height, regardless of graphics style.
The nice thing about games like Nethack is that the immersion is due to
(1) gameplay & UI
(2) imagination.
When pseudo-realistic graphics are used, I think it sometimes detracts from immersion by drawing attention to defects in the realism... I think several other posters have noted this.
FTR: "I found fascinating, for example, that a number of double-blind studies of the effects of pornography were completed over twenty years ago, but that the results were so damning that it has been difficult to follow up on them (emphasis mine)
WTF? I was always told it would make me go blind, but how much did they have to do it to go double-blind?
My feeling is that most games released at console launch are half-baked; the launch deadline can be really tough o the developers. I hesitate to purchase any game released at launch, and see no reason to change now.
Please, take your sweet time and make the game the best you can!
FTA: "Is the point of gaming to recreate reality, or should it go beyond realism, into the realm of art?"
Realism and art are not opposed; rather, realism is one method of creating art.
IMO, the point of games such as the Zelda franchise is player immersion. Some people can feel immersed without realistic graphics; others have a harder time making the leap.
"Be Bush's polices good or bad ( i wont get into that debate at all ), we wont feel its true effects until some time into the *next* administration"
Hate to break it to you, but economic reaction time is in no way that simple... there is no magic 4-year delay, or even 8-year delay.
The truth of the matter is that we'll feel some of the effects now, some during the next administration, and some in the next decade and decades down the road.
For an example, let's look at fuel costs, since they have myriad effects n the economy. What affects them? Whose policies have affected the current supply in the US? Whose have affected the current demand in the US? Pretty much everyone since Eisenhower.
Any Presidential administration will inherit an economic situation from their predecessor. But there are near-immediate impacts of Presidential policy on the economy, such as:
(1) Consumer confidence
(2) Economic costs/benefits of war and war production
(3) Budgetary finance methods -- cutting of government programs vs. debt financing; cutting government programs would have an immediate, as well as longer-term, effect on the economy.
The key then, is for any administration to acknowledge responsibility for those parts of the economy which their actions or policies have directly affected.
I am aware of what TFA said. My point is this: 100k URLs is not a lot; I was merely pointing out that 40k docs can be > 100k URLs, and this means that capacity become an issue very quickly.
I guess TFA being from the you-know-for-the-kids-dept explains it pretty well.
From the Summary: "a reasonably indepth review of the Google search appliance."
If, by "resonably indepth review", you mean lots of pretty pictures and a narrative about opening the box and the case, then sure.
Rather than calling this a review, perhaps it could be re-titled "One man's demonstration of the Google search appliance."
That said, I'm a little concerned about how many URLs it can handle... 100,000? According to TFA, 40,000 documents overloaded this thing.
The article did not address how this could be overcome, except by eliminating some of the URLs from the crawl. How scalable is it?
It's not just virus-writers that he is tracking down.
n g-fees
FTA: "It has also filed 243 civil actions related to Internet safety threats, such as spam"
OK, Spam is annoying, but an "Internet safety threat?" Maybe phishing.
"Mr. Fifka is also combating traditional crimes like software-counterfeiting"
This is what Fifka was originally hired to do. It just so happens that tracking down people on the internet applies just as well to virus writers and spammers as it does to software counterfeiters.
All in all, this is a win-win. MS gets good publicity, and doesn't lose as much customer goodwill due to vulnerability; we get free[1] hi-tech international investigation.
It's the international part that really helps; public law enforcement has to jump through hoops to operate in a foreign country.
[1] Free-as-in-we-already-paid-for-it-through-licensi
"I can't speak to any specific crimes that [the Secret Service ECTF] had been involved in"
Yes, it wouldn't be a good idea to tell the public what crimes the Secret Service is perpetrating.
A .9 mm? Is that a pistol or a mechanical pencil?
However, donations to the Red Cross go into their general fund, and are not earmarked for specific disasters.
Also, it should be realized that the 8% overhead pays for administrative employees and other admin costs. Pay for employees actually doing the relief work in the field is included in the 92% that they "turn over".
They are still, however, one of the most reliable and trustworthy charities to give to.
"It seemed that all the meteorologists knew the impact of Katrina, even in the 18 hours before when we knew she would hit New Orleans, but that this didn't get through to the government that everyone is now blaming for failing to respond"
What do you mean, it didn't get through to the government? The government has its own meteorologists, who were just as aware of the storm's status as anyone else.
Is it private industry's responsibility to report things that might be of concern to the federal government? No, it is the government's responsibility to get that information.
In the government's defense, the storm surge did not hit New Orleans directly -- that was the event that was most feared, that surge water would rush in from the Gulf. I think the government backed down the response when it was realized that N.O. was west of the storm center.
Someone in the chain of command should have realized, though, that a direct hit by storm surge was not the only event that could have flooded N.O. -- levee failure should have been prepared for.