Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - 🅵🅰🆄🆂🆃

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 295
1
Principia Discussion / Re: Me and my questions
« on: Yesterday at 08:15:13 am »
The Richard Nixon Presents: Alaska?

Periodically The Richard Nixon school of Ballet and the arts puts on a presentation of amateur dramatics, Alaska was his last production.

2
Bring and Brag / Re: Great game from the world of Chaos- Game Torah Online
« on: November 18, 2014, 11:22:21 am »
Got to

" You need to find at that address, in a palace Lois mystery, the green room. It says that we should do next. "

Lois mystery green room sounds too much like the chapel perilous, not getting tricked in there twice.

3
It turns out that the black holes gravitational force is being generated by Stanley Kubrick spinning in his grave

4
Customer demo tomorrow morning (after being flown back to Ireland) and visual studio decides to go tits up on me.

I am banging my head off the desk here.

 :argh!:

To put it in context, a tool I've been using for the last thee months that has worked fine until now breaks while I was changing the last few bits for configuration with the customers machines.

If I cant get it working before I leave for my flight I think I'm going to have to cancel on them which will make me look like a fool.

5
Customer demo tomorrow morning (after being flown back to Ireland) and visual studio decides to go tits up on me.

I am banging my head off the desk here.

6
There are a few exceptions, Alien Isolation had fairly glowing reviews and it's the most creative and enjoyable game I've played all year, and despite it being first person, and having guns in it, it manages to entrench itself firmly in the First person stealth genre more so than thief (this years mediocre one) or even Dishonored.

It's very entertaining to play a game that gives you several guns when no situation is improved by using them.

It doesn't mean that they dont treat the journalistic outlets as any less of an extension of their marketing department then say COD does, rather in spite of that, it coincidentally happened to be a great game.

7
Can of Worms Status Update: opened.

As far as I can see, there are two Gamergates.  One is about ethics in gaming journalism (srsly).  The other is about harassing women (srsly).

Sometimes those two groups overlap.  Sometimes they fail to denounce the actions of so-called "allies" hard enough.  But sometimes they don't.

Personally, my feeling is that it's been obvious for a long time that gaming journalism is corrupt as fuck, and the Zoe Quinn saga, while pretty blatant, is nothing especially new.  The outlets most responsible for such things are quite happy to highlight the (actually horrific) harassment of female developers and game commentators, if only to avoid responsibility for their own actions.
Ay, If the harassment crowd could be dropped into an oubliette,  you'd get a clear portrait of valid gripes, where pretty much all large gaming media sites are a pay for positive review for whatever iterative shit comes out. Of course these gripes are and remain Indistinguishable from the ethics in movie reporting via large media outlets.

If anything carving out the gaming subset of ethics in journalism at all seems strange.

8
I'm really surprised with his attitude. Sure I've seen elitism around funding and stuff for peoples phd/msc level but to actually say anyone less then a post doc isn't a scientist is baffling.

What was the title of his thesis? Because I would be very interested in reading his valuable contribution to the scientific community and why it qualifies him as a scientist over everyone else.

9
Gamergaters

A common misconception, it's not about gaming, It's actually about harassing women.

10
The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Demanding parents
« on: November 06, 2014, 08:49:10 am »
I posted it simply because I liked it. I am pretty certain it is fair use. An extended review in a magazine may quote that much text. I didn't add anything to it because I thought it was pretty perfect at the time. I still think that.

Faust, are you saying the plagiarism detector said the original text was changed? I'm not 100% sure, but I think I just copied it out of the book. I believe attachment parenting has been a thing for longer than we can remember (I mean thousands of years), and it only went out of vogue briefly. But the truly interesting thing about Sue Gerhardt's book (which is a great book in a number of ways) is that she has a great deal or well-organised neurobiological as well as psychological evidence for these claims. Cortisol has been mentioned recently, for instance (in the how to help mad people thread): she is all over cortisol in that book.
It was changed but only in regards to a couple of paragraphs were snipped. Its fine, just link to the source next time.

Actually, I think I was foolish enough to type it in from a paper book. What's the norm here? Full academic citation, or is Author-Book-Page number sufficient?
This is the first time it's come up really, for copyright stuff that's come up I've deleted links to TV shows and Comics that were posted in their entirety before, you know, the obvious stuff they that gets targeted.

There's no rule on this but the done thing is generally quote the name of the author and the work title with a link to where the source was pulled in case people want to read more and to give fair accreditation.

11
The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Demanding parents
« on: November 06, 2014, 07:01:41 am »
I posted it simply because I liked it. I am pretty certain it is fair use. An extended review in a magazine may quote that much text. I didn't add anything to it because I thought it was pretty perfect at the time. I still think that.

Faust, are you saying the plagiarism detector said the original text was changed? I'm not 100% sure, but I think I just copied it out of the book. I believe attachment parenting has been a thing for longer than we can remember (I mean thousands of years), and it only went out of vogue briefly. But the truly interesting thing about Sue Gerhardt's book (which is a great book in a number of ways) is that she has a great deal or well-organised neurobiological as well as psychological evidence for these claims. Cortisol has been mentioned recently, for instance (in the how to help mad people thread): she is all over cortisol in that book.
It was changed but only in regards to a couple of paragraphs were snipped. Its fine, just link to the source next time.

12
The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Demanding parents
« on: November 05, 2014, 08:49:20 pm »
Its is Sue Gerhardt's "why love matters" and is her copyright.

It's available online so I redistrubuting small excerpts should be an issue , it would be a worse if he had posted the whole book verbatim.

There is another issue: because it's paraphrased and chopped in bits the way it should be presented is with Sue's material in quote blocks, with original material outside the quote block, with a link to Sue's stuff as reference source in the OP.

I don't think it would be a legal issue for me, but if Sue complained I would Nuke the thread.

I don't think any of it's commentary, that's the baffling thing. The whole post appears to simply be an excerpt.

Sorry yes, I passed it through a plagiarism detector and it found interspersed original lines, they are where the content was shortened or otherwise snipped.

13
The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Demanding parents
« on: November 05, 2014, 08:01:04 pm »
Its is Sue Gerhardt's "why love matters" and is her copyright.

It's available online so I redistrubuting small excerpts should be an issue , it would be a worse if he had posted the whole book verbatim.

There is another issue: because it's paraphrased and chopped in bits the way it should be presented is with Sue's material in quote blocks, with original material outside the quote block, with a link to Sue's stuff as reference source in the OP.

I don't think it would be a legal issue for me, but if Sue complained I would Nuke the thread.

14
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Prism and Verizon surveillance discussion thread
« on: November 04, 2014, 03:51:49 pm »
No, Apple have actually designed a system where it's pretty much impossible for either marketing companies or governments to access the kind of data they want, and are currently implementing it on one of their newer services (I can't remember which, not inclined to search atm).  I think if it were a matter of limited access and no screwing around with the safety parameters, they may be more inclined to agree, but it's not.  Full access means everything laid bare, and purposefully degrading security measures (the NSA and GCHQ's major activity after bulk surveillance) puts their systems at major risk of being compromised by hackers. 

Given some of the more sophisticated hacks of late, including the Morgan Stanley one, I can definitely see that worrying more capital intensive firms...like Apple.  Not to mention degraded security, like in the case of the iCloud hack, seriously threaten the prestige of the firm.  If actors and other influential celebs don't feel secure, they wont back a product, making the product less viable overall.

Even more specifically then potential threats: Remember the google mail hack from a few years back by both chinese scam sites and more importantly Chinese intelligence services gained direct access to users mail accounts after having discovered the back door google had been ordered to implement.

Apple, microsoft etc almost certainly don't give a conceivable shit about peoples privacy. It is because the intrusive methods of the NSA have violated the one and only thing that is sacred to these companies:

It cost them money. Huge amounts of money for security audits after intrusions occur, loss of revenue over not being able to share certain information deemed sensitive with advertising companies and slowing down design and development to facilitate these idiotic dictates of intelligence agencies.

Yeah, I don't believe they really care one way or another about principle whatsoever - it's clearly a "bottom line" issue for them.

Of course, the more interesting question is, bureaucratic inertia aside, why are the European and American governments so determined to keep and expand every aspect of their intelligence programs?  I mean, we all know its not about terrorism.  OK, we can use control freakery or voyeurism as an excuse, but only so far.  Yet they act like you're proposing sacrificing their firstborn to Moloch whenever you mention that, maybe, we don't need to insert CCTV into the ocipital nerve of every living thing in the country.

It would be the perfect platform for almost untraceable insider trading/corporate espionage, a lot of people could get very rich from it, and could potentially stack the market in specific groups favor.

15
Principia Discussion / Re: What is the Principia's "John 3:16"?
« on: November 04, 2014, 11:15:52 am »
Nothing is true, everything is permitted

or

A conclusion is simply where you stopped thinking.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 295