Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment You need better content (Score 1) 1825

You don't need to fix bugs or change the user experience. You need better content. You know what that means, people have been complaining about bad summaries, things that don't make sense, things that are obviously advertising, etc. Make that good again, then the users will start to complain about the irrelevant stuff like bugs and user experience.

Comment "in at least six precincts" (Score 2) 634

In "at least" six precincts, what does that mean exactly? To me that implies that there were more precincts where they had to decide by coin toss, which means there could have been another 6 where Sanders won. Anyone can cherry pick a sub group of tosses out of a bigger total that came out with an unlikely result..

Comment "dismissed game design as 'not art.'" (Score 1) 153

So what? Games don't *have* to be art, they have to be games. If we get into the debate as it is presented (ie "are videogames art?"), we concede on a very important point that we shouldn't: art is not better than games. Games don't have to "rise up" to the level of art, they're already on the same level. They're important for human development in their own way, just like art is. How come nobody goes up to an artists and asks "this is nice, but is this a videogame?".

Comment Re:GRID (Score 1) 55

Which is actually the smartest move they can make for that brand, given, although I think I'm the only parson in the world to ever make the connection. One of my favorite things at GDC for the past ~3 years was going to their booth and asking "are you seriously sticking with GRID? All caps?", they seemed to be completely clueless about it..

Comment Re:Why is trust an issue? (Score 1) 174

It's true that consumers don't have to "trust" anyone to make a good console. Even if you go by the reasoning that they'll dump some money on the console with the promise that there'll be good games in the future, you'll still have to pay for those games. Consumer trust on a brand is useless for the consumer, they won't get anything in return, there's no reciprocal relationship, the brands only cares about the consumer's money, and the consumers only get what they pay for.

Developers however, they have to trust the platform because they have to invest a bunch of money on it, and they will get a bunch of money in return. It's a reciprocal relationship, they put something in, they get something back. I don't know if trust is the right word, but they're asking themselves if they can take the risk or no.

So far apple has been pretty bad to develop for, especially games, especially if they want to have big games, their tools won't cut it; but as a market ios is great, many developers will probably trust that, and put up with the bad tools.

Comment Re:"I am about to be killed, tortured, or exiled," (Score 1) 706

Ok, so you agree that I'm not charged for murder, because the actual murder is committed by someone else? That's the whole point. I don't really care what the "DA might throw", this is not a TV show; I don't even know which country we're talking about, this is about some guys from who knows where (probably multiple countries) dumping a database from a canadian site, with consequences to to some guy from some ass-backwards country were they kill people for being gay. It's more of an ethical discussion to me. Also do you agree that these guys didn't conspire with anyone, didn't instruct anyone to do anything, didn't pay anyone to kill anyone else, they just dumped a database?

Comment Re:"I am about to be killed, tortured, or exiled," (Score 1) 706

I don't know if it's morally neutral, but if I'm ever tried for my actions I will be responsible for telling someone the location of Sam Hamwich and not for killing Sam Hamwich. If, instead of a person, it was a computer asking me to program in the coordinates of Sam Hamwich so it can shoot a missile at him, then yes, I'm responsible, because the computer is just a deterministic machine, it will do what it's programmed to with the information I input, but the hit man is a man, he has free will and can make his own decisions, I'm not responsible for his actions, only for my own.

The actual interesting argument (this is where I thought you were going) is, is the person who paid the hit man also responsible for the death of Sam Hamwich? He didn't actually killed him, he paid money to a hit man (who can make his own decision, etc). But the hackers who published the Ashley Madison database did not pay anyone to do anything as far as I know, so I'm gonna say it's irrelevant :p

Comment Re:"I am about to be killed, tortured, or exiled," (Score 1) 706

Of course it is possible, that's why the first thing I say is that the hackers are violating people's privacy. I'm not saying the hackers are blameless, I'm saying everyone is responsible for their actions, and everyone has to answer/be punished for their actions and not somebody else's. The hackers hacked, and the killers killed. But the hackers did not kill.

Slashdot Top Deals

On a paper submitted by a physicist colleague: "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." -- Wolfgang Pauli