"Using obscene language in the gameâ(TM)s broadcast channels, for instance, was clearly against the gameâ(TM)s EULA and was both a petition-able and actionable offense, regardless of any individual playerâ(TM)s desires or preferences. Droning, on the other hand, was equally clearly an acceptable tactic as determined both by the game design and as confirmed by lack of moderator intervention on any petitionerâ(TM)s behalf." Would suggest that the product vendor was fine with the tactics employed.
"In fact, fairly often, players with multiple accounts (controlling both heroes and villains) would invite Twixt into hero teams that were then used to aid surreptitious villain activities against him. This kind of collusion and increasingly hostile environment forced Twixt to operate largely independently and, over time, habitually refuse team invitations." would suggest that numerous players were behaving like wankers and not playing in the so called 'spirit' of the game (which would vary between player to player).
"There were some other players â" not many â" who, after observing Twixtâ(TM)s success in the zone, copied his tactics and attitude. But, in all cases, this copycat play had the support of some larger social group that also opposed, for various reasons, conventional and socially sanctioned behavior." would suggest that just like any culture people have different ideas on what is and is not allowed. The professor was not alone in his actions and some players support his method of play.
So in short the professor played within the rules defined by the owner of the product, inline with how the owner intended the product to be played (Player VERSUS Player) and had various other players support his actions.... while other people cried great big tears of furstration at their pathetic real lives... oops... i mean having their arses handed to them in a make believe far away land.
Nowhere in the article does it say that the man 'taunted'... you believe wrong. What the article does quote him as saying is "Yay, heroes. Go good team. Vills lose again" which IS NOT insulting but a statement of fact, because according to the game mechanics as defined by the creators and *owners of the product* the hero had indeed won and the villians lost. Also if he was loosing and the others winning I doubt they would have been so upset as to gang up on him. It's more the fact they were loosing and not the disruption that caused their negative emotional responses.
Do you watch motor racing? Many times unnecessary bumps occur. Trash talking before the race, trash talking after the race. If you throw your hat in the ring then its what you get. It doesn't disappear because a few racers decide its not 'honourable'.
http://nascar.suite101.com/article.cfm/tony_stewart_kurt_busch_feud
Same goes for boxing with the odd illegal hit slipping in here and there. He went out of his way to illicit an emotional response to make others players react and play the game as intended. The article states that his behaviour encouraged them to gang up and take him on thus aligning then with the intentions of the PvP area. The 'v' in PVP stands for versus. This idea of 'player rules' is a concept, just like facing the door when in an elevator and not turning around to look at the people behind you. Because heaven forbid they have self esteem issues and believe in some unwritten 'rule' that it's wrong to look at a person. Further the PIT maneuver is countered with the lead car breaking at the last minute and turning into the pursuit car thus 'Pitting' the initial pitter. If this is allowed within the rules as established by the track owner then fair play, live by the sword... die by the sword. Or as Truman would say "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".
How about this... I decide to go go-karting. I rock up and pay my money knowing that when I am on the track I will be racing other people to win. In front of me is a kids birthday party... all 10 of them. We get on the track and I'm racing round corners, banging into the slow ones, picking my line to prevent being over taken and I win. I respond to the kids that insult me by insulting them back. The kids birthday party start having a cry because they just wanted to have fun and drive the cars waving at each other and my driving style took all the 'fun' out of the event. They complain to the owner of the track about my behaviour. Owner says too bad it's a race track, thats what I built if for, when I take peoples money thats the service i provide. Should I not get what I paid for? Or have death threats, because others have informally and without the race track owners permission decided to implement a false set of expectations and treat them as rules?
[parent]Why do you say that going around beating up villains is actually "playing the game" and the people standing around and chatting aren't? Who gets to say what the game actually is? The developers or the people who play it?[/parent]
Ummm... the people that write the code that is the application get to make the rules. Or the people who pay the developers to write code get to make the rules, the people selling the services. The people who do not get to make the rules are the people who do not own the product or service. If you actually read his paper he WAS NOT SUPRISED to find people having a cry. Low and behold people behave like people online and buy into social norms online and are subject to group think online just like in real life. What he was surprised about was how stong their resentment was with death threats etc. obviously he needs to get online more.
At the end of the day he had fun, beat them by the established rules, furthered research into human behaviour, publish a paper and got written up on slashdot and other sites. I would say he came out ahead and everyone that had a cry needs to harden up and deserves to be laughed at because they were outsmarted and out played. He is not worried by them as he has gone very public with who he is.
My personal opinion is that the people getting smacked about played 'make believe' to escape real life where they are weak submissive individuals. Playing 'make believe' allowed them to clutch at threads of self esteem and when the professor removed that straw man they reacted in anger at having 'fake life' mirror 'real life'.
Bass cranked up at 3am is illegal, public nuisance for starters. What the professor did is not illegal. Your examples suck.
Obviously English is your second language so I will go easy on you. Again... they are not forced to trust Microsoft. Forced means they have no option. They have several options. Your second sentence makes no sense. A compromise is "A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions" (thefreedictionary.com) in this situation Microsoft is making NO concessions. The word 'may' is "used as an auxiliary to indicate the possibility that something could happen" (thefreedictionary.com) which is the complete opposite of 'force' "to compel (a person, group, etc.) to do something". I can see what youâ(TM)re trying to say in your 3rd sentence (even though it makes no sense as a property is a characteristic which is not a synonym for choice and reality is a concept unable to be defined with characteristics) and we are not discussing the broad concept of reality. We are discussing if people are forced to trust Microsoft. This question is Boolean, it is either true or not true. It IS NOT TRUE that people are forced to trust Microsoft. Further if we really want to split hairs TCP is the most popular vehicle for malware delivery or packets or copper maybe even light itself. But thatâ(TM)s probably not what you meant and there in is the problem, what you mean and what your say are two different things. Iâ(TM)m not even sure what you mean is correct either.
"And yes, the users are forced to trust Microsoft as the average Joe's computer skills are not on the par with the skills of malware manufacturers." No they choose to trust Microsoft because they do not have computer skills. Even if they switched to another OS they would CHOOSE to trust that vendor because they do not have computer skills. It's the same as choosing to have your car serviced by the dealer due to lack of skill or desire to do it yourself. Your not forced to have it serviced.
I have a mate who is an absolute wizard with the ladies, always pulls 10's, it's like magic. I have another mate that's not... always pulls trolls. Me? I always seem to get girls that after six months turn in dragons.
If your good at what you do then you'll be fine... hell even people that aren't good at what they do are sometimes fine. I know young guys that kick arse, I know old guys that kick arse and I know young and old guys that make eveyones life difficult because they suck. Don't underestimate wisdoms value along side intelligence, dealing with customers, understanding ROI, TCO, office politics... all things that young grads may not have.
Remember is order to ban these sites public servants have to visit them and view the content. As a result the images are downloaded both to their local machines AND departmental AND isp proxy caches. This means that not only are public servants viewing child porn (in order to classify it) but actively distributing it to others servers. The administrators of these server are probably unaware that individuals on behalf of the Australian government are causing child porn to be placed in their servers. Further for proxy servers to work they need to keep a list of servers visited, this would include the banned servers. Heaven forbid their cache list becomes public.
"What gets me is that you don't even considered how wrong you are when your reaching to make your own point." Seems to be a lot of this going around... have you considered that your infected and a carrier?
I didn't say the NAS had been running 10 years, I said it had files on it 10 years old. They were migrated there a few years ago. I also note you cherry picked which FACTS I presented to reply to eg. NOT mentioning storage costs (another WRONG generalisation). Further more your not in a position to comment regarding if the government does or does not hire the best and brightest for this particual role in the whitehouse. But thats ok, it's become apparent that you ARE the kind of person that throws around generalisations to cover your own OBVIOUS lack of knowledge and experience. Which was somewhat apparent in your earlier posts. Parent is still right and your still an idiot.
BTW I just put my rose colored glasses on and your getting laid. Go work out that pent up frustration somewhere else, no one here cares. Oh and happy new year.:)
...and clutching at straws. Fully agree with parent. This is the white house we are talking about. This is coming out of the US budget that can afford expensive military aricraft etc. and they can't afford the hardware and man power to stay on top of something like this? I don't think so. A quick look over our NAS shows files ten years old which would if I checked also exist on tape media in addition to disk. Oh and given the price of 500gb drives and NAS devices IT IS NOT EXPENSIVE TO KEEP LARGE AMOUNTS OF DATA AROUND. Case in point is the servers at work that store all the CCTV footage for a 1000+ employee department for a month. And we are talkikng cameras at all entrances and exits, to all building on all floors etc. the size of which would smash text based email communications. Again... your an idiot.
"Those lonely nights spend in front of a computer are ones you'd probably rather spend hooking up with a girl you met at a bar instead of learning the intricacies of Yacc or device drivers. And it drives you absolutely fucking insane that everyone else is in on the fuck-fest that is life except you."
Gold, absolute gold.
Although I do believe that analytical prowess and IQ can to a large extent overcome Aspergers issues. Analysis of body language, analysis of tone etc. can all be linked back to documentation eg. books on body language and experiences that similiar siutations and events have shown to be positive or negative. Then an appropriate course of action can be selected even if a sufferer doesn't understand why it is the appropriate course of action. Of course the sufferer is screwed if either they don't have the analytical skill, IQ or process the information quick enough and introduce uncomfortable delays from a social point of view. Thrown in physical apperance issues, self estem or take anyalytics or IQ out of the equasion and those returns quickly deminish.
Food for thought, and not aimed at the parent but to anyone interested: The more girls you date the more girls you discover are broken and sometimes its the girls you say 'no' to that defined you as a man, not the girls that say 'yes' to you.
Exactly!!! I know a girl that is very physically attractive but always goes on and on about how her boyfriends leave her for less attractive women. It never occurs to her that she is shallow and self obsessed and while these other girls are less attractive physically that they really are great girls with depth and easy to get along with. I asked her what she thought about the fact that a series of disconnected guys all exhibit the same behaviour and she is the commonality between the events. She thought for a minute and then replied with "Guys suck". Some people just don't understand that they influence behaviour in others and that's why said behaviour is all around them. If some tinfoil hat nut bag went off at me, my family or friends damn right I would go around and get in their face and stir them up and if said nut bag is doing it all over the place they can expect ramifications to be coming back to them from all over the place.
Nail on the head. Burn it to DVD send it home. Or if your really paranoid burn two DVDs in case one doesn't make it, and encrypt the contents on both and leave no return address and and get someone else to address it. But really that's just being paranoid... unless of course you have something to be paranoid about... then its both paranoid and rational at the same time.
And then YOU go explain to the children that got silver or bronze or no medal that they didn't get what they deserved even though they and their country played by the rules. Maybe taking the gold away from the child THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE will make that child see the regime for what it is... in it for the purposes of the regime and NOT the people. Moron.
A programmer could become a reasonable voice over guy quicker than a voice over guy could become a reasonable programmer.
By reasonable I mean acceptable to the video game playing audience. Bad speech I can live with... bugs and crashes I don't think so.
You would be surprised what a good voice coach and / or producer can do with a bad voice... just look at half the 'pop' stars out there.
Slashdot Mirror
"Using obscene language in the gameâ(TM)s broadcast channels, for instance, was clearly against the gameâ(TM)s EULA and was both a petition-able and actionable offense, regardless of any individual playerâ(TM)s desires or preferences. Droning, on the other hand, was equally clearly an acceptable tactic as determined both by the game design and as confirmed by lack of moderator intervention on any petitionerâ(TM)s behalf." Would suggest that the product vendor was fine with the tactics employed.
"In fact, fairly often, players with multiple accounts (controlling both heroes and villains) would invite Twixt into hero teams that were then used to aid surreptitious villain activities against him. This kind of collusion and increasingly hostile environment forced Twixt to operate largely independently and, over time, habitually refuse team invitations." would suggest that numerous players were behaving like wankers and not playing in the so called 'spirit' of the game (which would vary between player to player).
"There were some other players â" not many â" who, after observing Twixtâ(TM)s success in the zone, copied his tactics and attitude. But, in all cases, this copycat play had the support of some larger social group that also opposed, for various reasons, conventional and socially sanctioned behavior." would suggest that just like any culture people have different ideas on what is and is not allowed. The professor was not alone in his actions and some players support his method of play.
So in short the professor played within the rules defined by the owner of the product, inline with how the owner intended the product to be played (Player VERSUS Player) and had various other players support his actions.... while other people cried great big tears of furstration at their pathetic real lives... oops... i mean having their arses handed to them in a make believe far away land.
Nowhere in the article does it say that the man 'taunted'... you believe wrong. What the article does quote him as saying is "Yay, heroes. Go good team. Vills lose again" which IS NOT insulting but a statement of fact, because according to the game mechanics as defined by the creators and *owners of the product* the hero had indeed won and the villians lost. Also if he was loosing and the others winning I doubt they would have been so upset as to gang up on him. It's more the fact they were loosing and not the disruption that caused their negative emotional responses.
Do you watch motor racing? Many times unnecessary bumps occur. Trash talking before the race, trash talking after the race. If you throw your hat in the ring then its what you get. It doesn't disappear because a few racers decide its not 'honourable'. http://nascar.suite101.com/article.cfm/tony_stewart_kurt_busch_feud Same goes for boxing with the odd illegal hit slipping in here and there. He went out of his way to illicit an emotional response to make others players react and play the game as intended. The article states that his behaviour encouraged them to gang up and take him on thus aligning then with the intentions of the PvP area. The 'v' in PVP stands for versus. This idea of 'player rules' is a concept, just like facing the door when in an elevator and not turning around to look at the people behind you. Because heaven forbid they have self esteem issues and believe in some unwritten 'rule' that it's wrong to look at a person. Further the PIT maneuver is countered with the lead car breaking at the last minute and turning into the pursuit car thus 'Pitting' the initial pitter. If this is allowed within the rules as established by the track owner then fair play, live by the sword... die by the sword. Or as Truman would say "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".
How about this... I decide to go go-karting. I rock up and pay my money knowing that when I am on the track I will be racing other people to win. In front of me is a kids birthday party... all 10 of them. We get on the track and I'm racing round corners, banging into the slow ones, picking my line to prevent being over taken and I win. I respond to the kids that insult me by insulting them back. The kids birthday party start having a cry because they just wanted to have fun and drive the cars waving at each other and my driving style took all the 'fun' out of the event. They complain to the owner of the track about my behaviour. Owner says too bad it's a race track, thats what I built if for, when I take peoples money thats the service i provide. Should I not get what I paid for? Or have death threats, because others have informally and without the race track owners permission decided to implement a false set of expectations and treat them as rules?
[parent]Why do you say that going around beating up villains is actually "playing the game" and the people standing around and chatting aren't? Who gets to say what the game actually is? The developers or the people who play it?[/parent] Ummm... the people that write the code that is the application get to make the rules. Or the people who pay the developers to write code get to make the rules, the people selling the services. The people who do not get to make the rules are the people who do not own the product or service. If you actually read his paper he WAS NOT SUPRISED to find people having a cry. Low and behold people behave like people online and buy into social norms online and are subject to group think online just like in real life. What he was surprised about was how stong their resentment was with death threats etc. obviously he needs to get online more. At the end of the day he had fun, beat them by the established rules, furthered research into human behaviour, publish a paper and got written up on slashdot and other sites. I would say he came out ahead and everyone that had a cry needs to harden up and deserves to be laughed at because they were outsmarted and out played. He is not worried by them as he has gone very public with who he is. My personal opinion is that the people getting smacked about played 'make believe' to escape real life where they are weak submissive individuals. Playing 'make believe' allowed them to clutch at threads of self esteem and when the professor removed that straw man they reacted in anger at having 'fake life' mirror 'real life'. Bass cranked up at 3am is illegal, public nuisance for starters. What the professor did is not illegal. Your examples suck.
Obviously English is your second language so I will go easy on you. Again... they are not forced to trust Microsoft. Forced means they have no option. They have several options. Your second sentence makes no sense. A compromise is "A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions" (thefreedictionary.com) in this situation Microsoft is making NO concessions. The word 'may' is "used as an auxiliary to indicate the possibility that something could happen" (thefreedictionary.com) which is the complete opposite of 'force' "to compel (a person, group, etc.) to do something". I can see what youâ(TM)re trying to say in your 3rd sentence (even though it makes no sense as a property is a characteristic which is not a synonym for choice and reality is a concept unable to be defined with characteristics) and we are not discussing the broad concept of reality. We are discussing if people are forced to trust Microsoft. This question is Boolean, it is either true or not true. It IS NOT TRUE that people are forced to trust Microsoft. Further if we really want to split hairs TCP is the most popular vehicle for malware delivery or packets or copper maybe even light itself. But thatâ(TM)s probably not what you meant and there in is the problem, what you mean and what your say are two different things. Iâ(TM)m not even sure what you mean is correct either.
"And yes, the users are forced to trust Microsoft as the average Joe's computer skills are not on the par with the skills of malware manufacturers." No they choose to trust Microsoft because they do not have computer skills. Even if they switched to another OS they would CHOOSE to trust that vendor because they do not have computer skills. It's the same as choosing to have your car serviced by the dealer due to lack of skill or desire to do it yourself. Your not forced to have it serviced.
How about 3D space. As opposed to 2D space.
What like google? Or facebook? Both new kids on the block against big business like an established yahoo or LinkedIn or mySpace in their day.
I have a mate who is an absolute wizard with the ladies, always pulls 10's, it's like magic. I have another mate that's not... always pulls trolls. Me? I always seem to get girls that after six months turn in dragons.
http://ozsoapbox.com/rest-of-australia/internet-filtering-why-stephen-conroy-cannot-be-trusted/
... and your worried? You're one third of the way there:
1. Start conversation
2. Small talk
3. Get phone number
I think the issue here is how your looking at the situation. The glass is half full.
If your good at what you do then you'll be fine... hell even people that aren't good at what they do are sometimes fine. I know young guys that kick arse, I know old guys that kick arse and I know young and old guys that make eveyones life difficult because they suck. Don't underestimate wisdoms value along side intelligence, dealing with customers, understanding ROI, TCO, office politics... all things that young grads may not have.
The irony is that many people will see the /. effect as censorship in action.
Remember is order to ban these sites public servants have to visit them and view the content. As a result the images are downloaded both to their local machines AND departmental AND isp proxy caches. This means that not only are public servants viewing child porn (in order to classify it) but actively distributing it to others servers. The administrators of these server are probably unaware that individuals on behalf of the Australian government are causing child porn to be placed in their servers. Further for proxy servers to work they need to keep a list of servers visited, this would include the banned servers. Heaven forbid their cache list becomes public.
"Unneeded data? Your choice of words betrays your mindset, as it applies to your understanding of the subject at hand."
Well played old chap your deserve a high five, check and mate.
"What gets me is that you don't even considered how wrong you are when your reaching to make your own point." Seems to be a lot of this going around... have you considered that your infected and a carrier?
P.S. Your an idiot.
I didn't say the NAS had been running 10 years, I said it had files on it 10 years old. They were migrated there a few years ago. I also note you cherry picked which FACTS I presented to reply to eg. NOT mentioning storage costs (another WRONG generalisation). Further more your not in a position to comment regarding if the government does or does not hire the best and brightest for this particual role in the whitehouse. But thats ok, it's become apparent that you ARE the kind of person that throws around generalisations to cover your own OBVIOUS lack of knowledge and experience. Which was somewhat apparent in your earlier posts. Parent is still right and your still an idiot.
:)
BTW I just put my rose colored glasses on and your getting laid. Go work out that pent up frustration somewhere else, no one here cares. Oh and happy new year.
...and clutching at straws. Fully agree with parent. This is the white house we are talking about. This is coming out of the US budget that can afford expensive military aricraft etc. and they can't afford the hardware and man power to stay on top of something like this? I don't think so. A quick look over our NAS shows files ten years old which would if I checked also exist on tape media in addition to disk. Oh and given the price of 500gb drives and NAS devices IT IS NOT EXPENSIVE TO KEEP LARGE AMOUNTS OF DATA AROUND. Case in point is the servers at work that store all the CCTV footage for a 1000+ employee department for a month. And we are talkikng cameras at all entrances and exits, to all building on all floors etc. the size of which would smash text based email communications. Again... your an idiot.
"Those lonely nights spend in front of a computer are ones you'd probably rather spend hooking up with a girl you met at a bar instead of learning the intricacies of Yacc or device drivers. And it drives you absolutely fucking insane that everyone else is in on the fuck-fest that is life except you."
Gold, absolute gold.
Although I do believe that analytical prowess and IQ can to a large extent overcome Aspergers issues. Analysis of body language, analysis of tone etc. can all be linked back to documentation eg. books on body language and experiences that similiar siutations and events have shown to be positive or negative. Then an appropriate course of action can be selected even if a sufferer doesn't understand why it is the appropriate course of action. Of course the sufferer is screwed if either they don't have the analytical skill, IQ or process the information quick enough and introduce uncomfortable delays from a social point of view. Thrown in physical apperance issues, self estem or take anyalytics or IQ out of the equasion and those returns quickly deminish.
Food for thought, and not aimed at the parent but to anyone interested: The more girls you date the more girls you discover are broken and sometimes its the girls you say 'no' to that defined you as a man, not the girls that say 'yes' to you.
"The shroud of the dark side has fallen, begun the Clone Wars have." - Yoda
Exactly!!! I know a girl that is very physically attractive but always goes on and on about how her boyfriends leave her for less attractive women. It never occurs to her that she is shallow and self obsessed and while these other girls are less attractive physically that they really are great girls with depth and easy to get along with. I asked her what she thought about the fact that a series of disconnected guys all exhibit the same behaviour and she is the commonality between the events. She thought for a minute and then replied with "Guys suck". Some people just don't understand that they influence behaviour in others and that's why said behaviour is all around them. If some tinfoil hat nut bag went off at me, my family or friends damn right I would go around and get in their face and stir them up and if said nut bag is doing it all over the place they can expect ramifications to be coming back to them from all over the place.
Nail on the head. Burn it to DVD send it home. Or if your really paranoid burn two DVDs in case one doesn't make it, and encrypt the contents on both and leave no return address and and get someone else to address it. But really that's just being paranoid... unless of course you have something to be paranoid about... then its both paranoid and rational at the same time.
And then YOU go explain to the children that got silver or bronze or no medal that they didn't get what they deserved even though they and their country played by the rules. Maybe taking the gold away from the child THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE will make that child see the regime for what it is... in it for the purposes of the regime and NOT the people. Moron.
A programmer could become a reasonable voice over guy quicker than a voice over guy could become a reasonable programmer. By reasonable I mean acceptable to the video game playing audience. Bad speech I can live with... bugs and crashes I don't think so. You would be surprised what a good voice coach and / or producer can do with a bad voice... just look at half the 'pop' stars out there.