Here we have at Tucker what is called the "hoe squad" and it is what it sounds like.
No... No it isn't.
I've always enjoyed Sierra's Space Quest series. No other game series I can think of had "taste" and "smell" as valid commands. "This rough area tastes strangely like blood. Oh, that is blood. You've shredded your tongue. Your mother should've warned you about licking strange areas." Gary Owens was a great narrator.
For a more subtle brand of humour, Sierra's Quest for Glory series was great. The subject matter was often serious, but the developers threw in plenty of awful puns and simply bizarre non-sequiturs which really added to the world.
After that, I don't think I played anything genuinely funny for years until the Sam & Max episodes from Telltale. Their Strong Bad's Cool Game for Attractive People had its moments, and I really enjoyed Episode 1 of PA's On The Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness (haven't played #2 yet).
I absolutely adore Wind Waker. I played the hell out of that game. I'd love to see more games done in the same style (well sure, Phantom Hourglass. But still).
If it works for CSI, it'll work for me!
No wait, Visual Basic GUIs are only good for tracing IP addresses.
This is a pure ad-hominem attack. You show absolutely no understanding of the message, you don't even mention it with one single word, but you feel you can bash the messenger.
That word: I do not think it means what you think it means.
How is calling him a very smart man, whom I respect, bashing the messenger? All I'm doing is saying he's not the best person to be delivering this particular message.
The interesting fact is, Hawkings has not even taken on genetics itself (of which he is no expert), he states taht human evolution is determined by more than just genes, as we are a species that leaves behind us more information than just what is stored in our genes. So he wasn't even talking from the podium of a geneticist; his was a larger-picture stance looking at humankind as more than just an animal species.
Let me repeat what one of my friends -- a molecular biologist -- said in response to the question "Haven't humans somehow halted or artificially altered the course of evolution?"
Simply put? No, we haven't. This is a common misconception and you'll even see some biologists uttering it but it couldn't be further from the truth. Have we changed our fitness landscape with modern medicine and all that? Certainly. But there is still natural selection going on, we have just managed to alter those selective constraints. One could actually argue that because of modern medicine we now have more raw material for evolution in the human population. Genetic variants that would have been lethal 50 years ago (killed you before you reproduced) may not be now, this allows humans, as a population, to explore deeper "fitness valleys". Compensatory mutations may then turn these negative traits into net positives down the road, we really can't predict anything about the path evolution will take.
So no, all we have done is altered what is important and visible to natural selection through our ingenuity and shifted the emphasis of natural selection, not removed it from the picture.
Does that show sufficient understanding of the message for you?
Sir Stephen Hawking is a very smart man, and I have the utmost respect for him.
However, he should stick to the areas of his expertise and let biologists talk about evolution, because that's their area of expertise.
I wouldn't expect anyone to take Dr. Richard Dawkins' thoughts on quantum mechanics as definitive, and this is no different.
We want to create puppets that pull their own strings. - Ann Marion