"Hopefully, if the piracy rate for the game is low, perhaps EA will get comfortable enough to ship with even less DRM in the future."
...Why link DRM to piracy rates, when the DRM on Spore made MORE people pirate it, and most DRM doesn't do much of anything to prevent it? All DRM does is f*ck up computers, infringe on people's legitimate rights (like the right of first sale), and anger and inconvenience customers.
If EA wants a good reason to get rid of its poorly-implemented, rights-infringing crap, it couldn't ask for a much better one than "customers hate it and hate you for it".
As if Joe Public even registers anything about a conversation that involves the phrase "Tabbed web MDI model". Joe was out the door to make a beer run about four sentences back, man.;)
Which leads to what works for me (techie *girls* aren't nearly as forgiven for getting fat, ahem): Not buying the stuff! If it isn't in the house, you're ten times less likely to eat/drink it--and if you *really* need some, go out and buy one! **ONE, mind you**
In other words, put your laziness to work for you. You'll save some pretty serious $$ too.
-PKSC
/me snags patent on Device That Monitors Eyelid State, making possible regulations against closing one's eyes to shut out advertising. Repeat violators will pay a Per-Blink Fee.
(I'll be nice and let somebody else have the Anti-Earplug patent.)
Everyone who makes money off of it says that the skill can be learned. There are people who have it naturally (including one guy I've read about who lacks the ability to forget anything--which really makes his life hell); but I have known people who got very impressive results simply from mnemonic tricks.
One that I learned from a memory-enhancement tape was cool...you can memorize any sequence of numbers and attach that memory to any object (for instance, you could memorize everyone you know's address, birthday and phone number, with a little work) - simply by using a list you devise of words that fit numbers. For instance, if your list is "One - bun, two - glue, three - tree" and you need to remember that Joe's birthday is 1/23, you would imagine Joe eating a bun, which was filled with glue, and getting stuck to a tree.
The concept is that visual memory is more permanent than verbal memory, especially when the image is striking or weird (they tell you to be as freaky as you can with the images you concoct). Having tried this for several things, I can say that it works great - I don't have an especially good memory, but I can remember a grocery list, serial number, or what-have-you pretty reliably with this trick.
BTW, a good fictional treatment of the "original" Greek concept of the mnemonic device is in the book (book, not movie) Hannibal. His exceptional memory, like that of many savants, is tied to a very large, cohesive visual-image archive "in his head" - in his case, a mansion where every object represents something that he wanted to remember. That's a known thing that many people with very impressive memories do.
Yes, if I get to do it again--and I'm constantly trying to figure out how--I certainly will do it with more scientific eyes on it. I'd especially like to do the control group again, because it is my belief that those 12 people dropped out for only one reason, and that was lack of discipline. As I've mentioned hundreds of times, to do this schedule requires a lot of discipline (and/or a lot of help), especially in the beginning. If you're not the type who can haul out of bed in spite of serious exhaustion eight or nine times in a row, yeah, no polyphasic schedule will ever work for you because you won't give it the chance.
Did you read Steve Pavlina's log? (http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2005/10/polyphas ic-sleep/) He did the Uberman and kept records all the way through...he's now been on it more than 3 months and has no plans to go back. He even contests that the adjustment period is shorter and easier than I said it was (which may be true, since I'm operating on sparse notes and memory).
No, I wasn't hooked up to anything, but I was seen by the school psychologist, who said I was fine, and that I seemed "much less tired and strung out" after having been on the schedule a while than I did before I started (remember, I was having sleep problems to begin with).
-K*
Hey, thanks for posting that! I'm the author of the original Everything2.com article, and though I've gotten a shitload of email over the years about people doing some half-assed variant of the schedule and failing (naturally), I hadn't heard about this guy. Here's somebody who actually did it right, stuck to it, and got pretty much exactly the same results I did.
Okay, I wrote the E2 article. I did this for almost 6 months, and I had NONE of the problems you describe, including sleep debt: When I came off the schedule (not because I wanted to), I just started sleeping 8 hrs a night again. Some, but not all, of the sleep disorders that the schedule "cured" for me came back, but not as severely, and over time I got rid of them through other means.
No, light and dark caused me no trouble whatsoever. I didn't get tired when it was dark, and I had no trouble falling asleep in broad daylight (as long as it was naptime). Nor did any time get wasted falling asleep...before this schedule, it used to take me at least an hour to get to sleep (hell, it still takes at least half an hour), but while I was on it I could fall out in less than 5 minutes, every time. I could also, once I was adjusted, wake up after exactly 20 minutes without an alarm clock.
A polyphasic schedule, properly adhered to, is NOT the same as just reducing the amount of time you sleep. It's not just "sleeping less", it's "going to sleep every 4 hours". And for every ten people who say it didn't work (and who all, in my experience, didn't have the discipline to keep the schedule as strictly as is required), there are a few like myself and Steve Pavlina (http://www.stevepavlina.com/ who did it properly and experienced no ill effects whatsoever. (I'm not counting adjustment issues, which can indeed make you feel a little crazy or disoriented for a while, but that's mostly because you're no longer operating on the same wavelength as the rest of the herd, and that does mess with your brain a bit -- you get over it, though.)
For a fuller list of long and short-term side-effects that I felt, you can read my follow-up article (http://pure-doxyk.livejournal.com/229675.html); and I strongly suggest reading Steve's site, since he did a much more thorough job of cataloging his progress as he adopted the schedule.
I've never been a heavy drinker, but when I did it it *was* college, so I was drinking occasionally but not always. I did stay miles away from caffeine, which was hard, but it simply fux0rd the whole cycle if I had more than a cup or two at a time. (I wrote the Everything2 article. I feel so darn-near-sorta-almost famous!;)
Hell yeah, if anybody wants to fund that study, I'm in! I've already proven that I don't go terribly insane when you do it to me! Er, but I can't fund it; I can barely fund my gas tank.;)
-K*
...But I wrote the follow-up pretty recently, and I had to put it on LJ because I lost the pwd on that E2 account like, ages ago, so I imagine nobody's really found it yet.;) It pretty much answers all the questions I've collected over the years about the experiment, and it makes me wish like hell I'd kept better notes.
'Tis here: http://pure-doxyk.livejournal.com/229675.html...Or follow the link on my homepage. I totally miss that schedule, it was the best sleep and the most awesome gig, and thank you all so much for rubbing salt in the wound.;)
Hi, I did the writeup on Everything2 about this schedule. I felt fine for the nearly six months I did it, and I was in school at the time doing 22-credit-hour semesters on a double philosophy and math major. I don't think my grades suffered, but I wasn't monitoring specifically for that at the time, so hmm.
I think you make a good point--and I think the advice to do some initial, during and post-testing is a great idea; somebody should totally do that. Um, I can't at the time being, so it'll have to be somebody else.;)
So obeying another government's law is more important than not being evil, even when the people under control of that government would obviously not support the law? What happened to "making the world safe for democracy" and all that good BS?
Seriously, what could China do to Google, if Google refused to be the government instrument of repression for them? Jack and shit. They could complain, and our corrupt-ass government would beg Google to comply, but again, what could they do? Nothing. The International community would obviously give China no support whatsoever in this. China could block access to Google altogether, but is "we need more money" a valid excuse for Google to break its own rules? I think not. "Don't be evil" means "even if it costs you some money," in the real world.
"Loser pays" or "tort reform" as it's sometimes called does indeed have its problems, but I'd rather see that than what we have now. In Germany, for instance, where they have tort reform, what *don't* they have? Scientology! Because Scientology needs to sue EVERYBODY, and has never won a case -- their lawsuits are pure harrassment, but in OUR system, they're allowed to happen, over and over and over again. (They also don't have Scientology because they were smart enough to outlaw it, but we'll ignore that for now.)
What would probably work BEST is for there to be a set fine -- perhaps the other party's attorney fees plus a punitive percentage -- if the judge or jury determines that the suit was frivolous or malicious. That way there'd be no need to open up a whole new counter-suit for damages (which is WAY too cost-prohibitive on someone who's already been hit with a frivolous or malicious lawsuit to begin with), and you could lay the smack down on jerks like the RIAA with a simple "Motion to Declare an Unfit Suit" or something.
But like I said, I'd be happy even with simple Tort Reform. We just need to do SOMETHING in this country to stop these and other malicious and time-wasting lawsuits (and it is NOT, as the moron President has done, to make certain companies IMMUNE from lawsuits!!). As a future lawyer, I don't like that malicious suits let sharks and ambulance-chasers give the rest of us a bad name...as a patient, I don't like that my doctor has to overcharge me to compensate for ridiculous malpractice insurance fees...and as a citizen, I don't like knowing that the RIAA or whoever could show up at my door tomorrow and bully me around with their money!
You have a right to try, but not to sue people for getting in your way. To quote a wise old fool:
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, [for their private benefit]." --Robert Heinlein, in the short story "Life-Line".
I took a class at Harvard (online) last year, taught by the man heading up the Berkeley Center for Internet & Law (one *very* intelligent J. Palfrey), and he made this point so GLARINGLY clear that you wanted to give him standing ovations.
There are several viable alternate business-models to the RIAA's, now that we no longer need their trucks to deliver CDs to Wal-Marts around the country. All of them would be far better for musicians AND consumers than lining the slimy pockets of a handful of wretched assholes up top of a crumbling pyramid...the trick now is to make the public, and especially the musicians, aware of them.
Slashdot Mirror
If EA wants a good reason to get rid of its poorly-implemented, rights-infringing crap, it couldn't ask for a much better one than "customers hate it and hate you for it".
Home of the executives of companies who innovate elsewhere! Ah well. At least we were *already* known for our fat white guys.
As if Joe Public even registers anything about a conversation that involves the phrase "Tabbed web MDI model". Joe was out the door to make a beer run about four sentences back, man. ;)
Which leads to what works for me (techie *girls* aren't nearly as forgiven for getting fat, ahem): Not buying the stuff! If it isn't in the house, you're ten times less likely to eat/drink it--and if you *really* need some, go out and buy one! **ONE, mind you** In other words, put your laziness to work for you. You'll save some pretty serious $$ too. -PKSC
/me snags patent on Device That Monitors Eyelid State, making possible regulations against closing one's eyes to shut out advertising. Repeat violators will pay a Per-Blink Fee. (I'll be nice and let somebody else have the Anti-Earplug patent.)
Seriously, more people need to remind these kids that Jesus made cops out of meat for a reason. Sheesh. -PD
One that I learned from a memory-enhancement tape was cool...you can memorize any sequence of numbers and attach that memory to any object (for instance, you could memorize everyone you know's address, birthday and phone number, with a little work) - simply by using a list you devise of words that fit numbers. For instance, if your list is "One - bun, two - glue, three - tree" and you need to remember that Joe's birthday is 1/23, you would imagine Joe eating a bun, which was filled with glue, and getting stuck to a tree.
The concept is that visual memory is more permanent than verbal memory, especially when the image is striking or weird (they tell you to be as freaky as you can with the images you concoct). Having tried this for several things, I can say that it works great - I don't have an especially good memory, but I can remember a grocery list, serial number, or what-have-you pretty reliably with this trick.
BTW, a good fictional treatment of the "original" Greek concept of the mnemonic device is in the book (book, not movie) Hannibal. His exceptional memory, like that of many savants, is tied to a very large, cohesive visual-image archive "in his head" - in his case, a mansion where every object represents something that he wanted to remember. That's a known thing that many people with very impressive memories do.
-PD
I promise, when I get back on this schedule--because I *will* dammit, I miss it horribly--I will go to a sleep clinic and let them hooX0r me up. ;)
-K*
Yes, if I get to do it again--and I'm constantly trying to figure out how--I certainly will do it with more scientific eyes on it. I'd especially like to do the control group again, because it is my belief that those 12 people dropped out for only one reason, and that was lack of discipline. As I've mentioned hundreds of times, to do this schedule requires a lot of discipline (and/or a lot of help), especially in the beginning. If you're not the type who can haul out of bed in spite of serious exhaustion eight or nine times in a row, yeah, no polyphasic schedule will ever work for you because you won't give it the chance. Did you read Steve Pavlina's log? (http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2005/10/polyphas ic-sleep/) He did the Uberman and kept records all the way through...he's now been on it more than 3 months and has no plans to go back. He even contests that the adjustment period is shorter and easier than I said it was (which may be true, since I'm operating on sparse notes and memory).
No, I wasn't hooked up to anything, but I was seen by the school psychologist, who said I was fine, and that I seemed "much less tired and strung out" after having been on the schedule a while than I did before I started (remember, I was having sleep problems to begin with).
-K*
Hey, thanks for posting that! I'm the author of the original Everything2.com article, and though I've gotten a shitload of email over the years about people doing some half-assed variant of the schedule and failing (naturally), I hadn't heard about this guy. Here's somebody who actually did it right, stuck to it, and got pretty much exactly the same results I did.
Yay! Science!
-K*
Okay, I wrote the E2 article. I did this for almost 6 months, and I had NONE of the problems you describe, including sleep debt: When I came off the schedule (not because I wanted to), I just started sleeping 8 hrs a night again. Some, but not all, of the sleep disorders that the schedule "cured" for me came back, but not as severely, and over time I got rid of them through other means.
No, light and dark caused me no trouble whatsoever. I didn't get tired when it was dark, and I had no trouble falling asleep in broad daylight (as long as it was naptime). Nor did any time get wasted falling asleep...before this schedule, it used to take me at least an hour to get to sleep (hell, it still takes at least half an hour), but while I was on it I could fall out in less than 5 minutes, every time. I could also, once I was adjusted, wake up after exactly 20 minutes without an alarm clock.
A polyphasic schedule, properly adhered to, is NOT the same as just reducing the amount of time you sleep. It's not just "sleeping less", it's "going to sleep every 4 hours". And for every ten people who say it didn't work (and who all, in my experience, didn't have the discipline to keep the schedule as strictly as is required), there are a few like myself and Steve Pavlina (http://www.stevepavlina.com/ who did it properly and experienced no ill effects whatsoever. (I'm not counting adjustment issues, which can indeed make you feel a little crazy or disoriented for a while, but that's mostly because you're no longer operating on the same wavelength as the rest of the herd, and that does mess with your brain a bit -- you get over it, though.)
For a fuller list of long and short-term side-effects that I felt, you can read my follow-up article (http://pure-doxyk.livejournal.com/229675.html); and I strongly suggest reading Steve's site, since he did a much more thorough job of cataloging his progress as he adopted the schedule.
Ta!
-K*
I've never been a heavy drinker, but when I did it it *was* college, so I was drinking occasionally but not always. I did stay miles away from caffeine, which was hard, but it simply fux0rd the whole cycle if I had more than a cup or two at a time. (I wrote the Everything2 article. I feel so darn-near-sorta-almost famous! ;)
Hell yeah, if anybody wants to fund that study, I'm in! I've already proven that I don't go terribly insane when you do it to me! Er, but I can't fund it; I can barely fund my gas tank. ;)
-K*
...But I wrote the follow-up pretty recently, and I had to put it on LJ because I lost the pwd on that E2 account like, ages ago, so I imagine nobody's really found it yet. ;) It pretty much answers all the questions I've collected over the years about the experiment, and it makes me wish like hell I'd kept better notes.
...Or follow the link on my homepage. I totally miss that schedule, it was the best sleep and the most awesome gig, and thank you all so much for rubbing salt in the wound. ;)
'Tis here: http://pure-doxyk.livejournal.com/229675.html
-K*
Hi, I did the writeup on Everything2 about this schedule. I felt fine for the nearly six months I did it, and I was in school at the time doing 22-credit-hour semesters on a double philosophy and math major. I don't think my grades suffered, but I wasn't monitoring specifically for that at the time, so hmm.
;)
I think you make a good point--and I think the advice to do some initial, during and post-testing is a great idea; somebody should totally do that. Um, I can't at the time being, so it'll have to be somebody else.
Anyway, I wrote a follow-up to the original article that discusses more of the long-term physical effects I noticed, if you care. http://pure-doxyk.livejournal.com/229675.html
-K*
Seriously, what could China do to Google, if Google refused to be the government instrument of repression for them? Jack and shit. They could complain, and our corrupt-ass government would beg Google to comply, but again, what could they do? Nothing. The International community would obviously give China no support whatsoever in this. China could block access to Google altogether, but is "we need more money" a valid excuse for Google to break its own rules? I think not. "Don't be evil" means "even if it costs you some money," in the real world.
This was a cop-out, 100%.
-K*
What would probably work BEST is for there to be a set fine -- perhaps the other party's attorney fees plus a punitive percentage -- if the judge or jury determines that the suit was frivolous or malicious. That way there'd be no need to open up a whole new counter-suit for damages (which is WAY too cost-prohibitive on someone who's already been hit with a frivolous or malicious lawsuit to begin with), and you could lay the smack down on jerks like the RIAA with a simple "Motion to Declare an Unfit Suit" or something.
But like I said, I'd be happy even with simple Tort Reform. We just need to do SOMETHING in this country to stop these and other malicious and time-wasting lawsuits (and it is NOT, as the moron President has done, to make certain companies IMMUNE from lawsuits!!). As a future lawyer, I don't like that malicious suits let sharks and ambulance-chasers give the rest of us a bad name...as a patient, I don't like that my doctor has to overcharge me to compensate for ridiculous malpractice insurance fees...and as a citizen, I don't like knowing that the RIAA or whoever could show up at my door tomorrow and bully me around with their money!
-K*
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, [for their private benefit]." --Robert Heinlein, in the short story "Life-Line".
I took a class at Harvard (online) last year, taught by the man heading up the Berkeley Center for Internet & Law (one *very* intelligent J. Palfrey), and he made this point so GLARINGLY clear that you wanted to give him standing ovations.
There are several viable alternate business-models to the RIAA's, now that we no longer need their trucks to deliver CDs to Wal-Marts around the country. All of them would be far better for musicians AND consumers than lining the slimy pockets of a handful of wretched assholes up top of a crumbling pyramid...the trick now is to make the public, and especially the musicians, aware of them.
-K*