Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Probably because it was a sort of mediocre game (Score 1) 374

I didn't even really understand entirely what was bugging me at the time, it wasn't until a friend pointed it out that it became more clear. She's more alert to the details of agency questions.

In FF14, I had a thing where I had a quest to "go tell some guy in a crowded bar that you did a thing", and it had the visual effects for "warning, you're about to be in a huge fight". Of course, what happens is I tell the guy, who is happy, and nothing at all happens, and then there is a disturbance outside and my character automatically runs out, witnesses a confrontation between some people, and ends up taking a side in their battle. Then there's a fight where I am automatically placed on one side of that fight. After that, my character goes back to whatever was previously going on.

I don't get the option of not joining this random unrelated fight.
I don't get the option of, say, interacting further with the poor girl I just defended against thugs, either.

And that's sort of frustrating, because it's great storytelling for the story of a specific character that may not be the one I wanted to create...

Myst's issues were more subtle, but more totally pervasive. I very rarely knew what would happen when I clicked on something.

Comment Re:Very tolerant of them don't you think? (Score 1) 456

Well, "tolerance" which includes saying that people shouldn't be allowed to adopt kids isn't particularly tolerant, and is very bad for society as a whole. We all suffer from kids not getting good homes, and there are more kids needing adoption than there are adoptive families. Preventing gay people from adopting would be bad for everyone, so opposing gay couples adopting is hostile to everyone.

Comment Why advertising might matter... (Score 1) 456

Long story short: People react very strongly to things being unfamiliar or strange. Things you see at least occasionally are much less threatening. If occasional ads include gay couples, then people are a lot more likely to be tolerant of gays and inclined to think gays should get the same basic legal protections other people do. If there are no gay couples on TV, then people are a lot less likely to be tolerant of gays. This is just very basic low-level wiring in the brain; we distrust unfamiliar things, the same way just about all other animals do. And that means that there is significant social impact from having advertisements include, or not-include, particular recognizable classes of people.

Of course, the advertising thing might not have sunk him; it was the adoption thing that sealed the deal.

Comment Re:FFS (Score 1) 456

Probably because they're not relevant to the story. We have technology right now to prevent male or female babies; that doesn't mean that this should be a prominent part of any story about sexism. ("And a reminder, the only reason women are getting treated this way is that people keep having girl babies, despite technology allowing us to detect them very early and abort them.")

Comment Re: FFS (Score 1) 456

Not all phobia is "fear" in the straightforward way. No one worries that spraying materials with scotchguard makes them "afraid" of water.

Secondly... While many anti-gays aren't really exhibiting phobic behavior, some are. Go browse Not Always Right for a while, and look at some of the people who start freaking out and screaming because a store has a gay clerk. That's reasonably categorized as phobia-like.

Comment Re:FFS (Score 1) 456

The first amendment doesn't, really. All the first amendment covers is Congress making laws. That said, the principle of free speech says that they should not be threatened with violence. ... That said, I am pretty suspicious that there's a lot more people saying they were threatened than are actually threatened, because I've never in my life met one of these people who threatens people with violence, and I've met lots of people who said completely different things, then got accused of threatening people with violence. Because there's a lot of people who are pretty clear on the fact that they can say they got threatened and their core demographic will accept it as a given because of course the mean old liberals are actually violently oppressive.

Comment Re:Pfffft (Score 1) 311

You haven't really established that this is the case at all. I got told by a shrink that I was obviously not autistic, and I went on muddling along for a few more years before realizing that he was almost certainly unqualified; went and saw a specialist, and got a lot more information. And one of the things I've gotten, from hanging around with autistics, is that there's a whole heck of a lot of variance, and autistic people don't always react or act the same way.

So, moral of the story, some guy who comes into it overtly hostile and dismissive and hasn't got any relevant qualifications or skills can basically disregard anything. Well-illustrated!

(And yes, I'm familiar with such disorders, and no, that's not "unusual to the point of it being near impossible". That's just you not knowing, at all, what you're talking about.)

Comment Re:Feeling "profound regret"... (Score 1) 311

I think it's more complex than that. Autism and sociopathy are wildly different. Sociopaths don't feel sorry even after getting caught, although they may regret getting caught. Autistics may fail to evaluate other people's emotions or responses even in places where you'd expect "everyone" to, but are not necessarily going to be unconcerned once they do notice or get told.

Slashdot Top Deals

Unix will self-destruct in five seconds... 4... 3... 2... 1...

Working...