EA recently released Spore, the brainchild of Will Wright, known for the entire Sim Series, including The Sims, probably the worst thing construed as a computer "game". Somehow I don't understand the relevance of a game that lets you play yourself in a virtual world. I always imagined the idea of the video game was to let you play a role in a story, to help people escape what could be viewed as the boredom of reality. But The Sims takes the idea of reality and instills a bunch of graphics and emoticons into it. Yeah, I don't get it either.
Spore, while still a decent game, is still true to the idea of the older Sim games: creating and nurturing a bunch of virtual beings while giving them the ameneties of a world you create.
However, in a move to combat piracy, the Digital Rights Management have placed a copy-protection mechanism onto the CD, which limits users to installing the game 3 times, before they have to purchase another copy. That is, if you install the game, and then uninstall, one of your installs have been used up. And what would happen if your computer locks up during an install? Does the install get wasted, forcing the user to throw the game packet at the wall, set it on fire and proceed to urinate on the remains all while cursing EA for their idiocy?
Personally, I purchase games legally, but mostly stick to freeware as a distraction from work/real-life. But the DRM has gone a little far on this. What would have been a better solution is a hidden file or log which keeps track of whether the game has been installed on that particular machine, as well as tracking the computer's identity on the CD. That way, should the user uninstall the game, there is no consequence of LEGALLY reinstalling it on the machine for playing later. In the end, the game can be installed only on 3 machines, as opposed to being installed only 3 times. If this is the future of Digital Copyright Protection, then they may have lost more than the gaming fanbase.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Friday, September 12, 2008
Black Holes & Revelations
The CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) was launched on September 10th. And while the significance of this event can't quite match other scientific events, such as Darwin's theory of evolution (no longer a theory, since there is literally scientific evidence of it, I'm looking at you creationists!) or Copernicus's conclusion that the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around (also no longer a theory, since Newton and Kepler's observations agree with it, I'm looking at you 15th-16th Century Religious zealots!), it's still quite a feat considering the possible consequences of launching sub-atomic particles at ridiculously high speeds.
Besides the new doors opening into further topics of investigation regarding sub-atomic physics and the idea of anti-matter, we have the opportunity to get some other awesome findings. Like what mass really is. Sure, we've got the kilogram as our standard measure of mass. But what is it really? Obviously, if we don't know what it exactly is, then we're not putting enough money into it...or energy...or speed. Which is why I have to applaud the scientists at CERN for thinking out the box. From what I've heard (unverifiable observations), speed does actually result in its users being able to "feel mass", in addition to "taste colors".
But of course, the coolest part of the CERN project is the dangers. Physics would never be exciting without the possibility of something blowing up, or someone getting eviscerated (either by experiment or religious zealots). It is said that when the two hadrons travelling at 99.9999999% speed of light collide, micro black holes can form, sucking up all of the planet in its singular infinite mass, causing the planet to implode. Way cool. Equally awesome is the possibility of strangelets being formed, which could possibly cause a chain reaction of epic proportions with the capability of blowing up Europe and the rest of the world with it.
And like all other scientific endeavors, there is always a group of individuals attempting to resist and hinder development. Unlike our ancestors, gone away is the reliance on a blade or a haystack and torch to meet their aims; opting for the other type of blood...green blood. Yes, some doomsayers are relying on lawsuits to bleed the CERN LHC Project dry. A lofty aim, but one that is unlikely to win, since even if these strangelets and micro black holes formed, they would more than likely (about 99.999999%) evaportate and disappear, leaving nothing but a modest amount of energy signature.
Personally, the world isn't going to end, and chances are on October 21st, when the first true collision is scheduled to occur, the world will keep spinning, and the only excited people will be the 7000-odd scientists working on the project. And the 7 others who'll breathe a sigh of relief to see that the world hasn't imploded quite yet.
Besides the new doors opening into further topics of investigation regarding sub-atomic physics and the idea of anti-matter, we have the opportunity to get some other awesome findings. Like what mass really is. Sure, we've got the kilogram as our standard measure of mass. But what is it really? Obviously, if we don't know what it exactly is, then we're not putting enough money into it...or energy...or speed. Which is why I have to applaud the scientists at CERN for thinking out the box. From what I've heard (unverifiable observations), speed does actually result in its users being able to "feel mass", in addition to "taste colors".
But of course, the coolest part of the CERN project is the dangers. Physics would never be exciting without the possibility of something blowing up, or someone getting eviscerated (either by experiment or religious zealots). It is said that when the two hadrons travelling at 99.9999999% speed of light collide, micro black holes can form, sucking up all of the planet in its singular infinite mass, causing the planet to implode. Way cool. Equally awesome is the possibility of strangelets being formed, which could possibly cause a chain reaction of epic proportions with the capability of blowing up Europe and the rest of the world with it.
And like all other scientific endeavors, there is always a group of individuals attempting to resist and hinder development. Unlike our ancestors, gone away is the reliance on a blade or a haystack and torch to meet their aims; opting for the other type of blood...green blood. Yes, some doomsayers are relying on lawsuits to bleed the CERN LHC Project dry. A lofty aim, but one that is unlikely to win, since even if these strangelets and micro black holes formed, they would more than likely (about 99.999999%) evaportate and disappear, leaving nothing but a modest amount of energy signature.
Personally, the world isn't going to end, and chances are on October 21st, when the first true collision is scheduled to occur, the world will keep spinning, and the only excited people will be the 7000-odd scientists working on the project. And the 7 others who'll breathe a sigh of relief to see that the world hasn't imploded quite yet.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Presumptions of the less inclined...
So a group of my colleagues and I had a rather interesting discussion.
Picture this. You are at a get-together with a friend at a bar or pub. He or she is a decent friend, not close enough that you share the same buddies on any online network, but not quite a random acquaintance. Suddenly the conversation turns towards the discussion of an inside joke, locking you out of the circle. Bored and a little desperate, you turn towards the bar, where the drinks are being served in an almost mechanical-like pace. You turn to your right, and a girl (or guy) is at the corner, busy nursing a drink. She spots you and before you know it, you're thrown into the fray and servings of a conversation. You enjoy the new-found company, when you ask that question.
"So, how old are you?"
The answer shocks you. Murmur of a number reaches your ears, and suddenly, for a brief moment, you feel the creep of your own mortality, which washes over you like a damp wind from a marsh. You discover that you are older than the person you thought you had a connection with. Suddenly, all thoughts of continuing this conversation and seeing where it leads, ends, and you decide to retreat back to your friend's table, where he continues to regale his company with an exaggerated tale that half the group, if not more, were all characters in.
How often is it that when you discover someone's age, that your opinion of them changes and all the notions regarding someone that age suddenly come into play into dictating your next moves? I often admit that this is the case with me. Anyone younger than me is instantly an immature and naive about the world (even with my misgivings regarding the true workings of the world) and anyone older than me is too far removed from what I could possibly be interested in, and therefore not an ideal subject to converse with. I often ignore the fact that we were sharing a connection with the thought that "it would never work because she's X years younger/older than me". It's a terrible thing to do, but most of us admitted to having been in such a situation, and having done the same thing outlined above. Which is a shame. Personally, some of my younger friends are far more mature, beyond their years, and some of my older friends are not quite there. Suddenly age isn't quite a number, but it becomes the ultimate deciding factor on whether friendships/relationships should begin or not begin at all.
True, we gravitate towards people our own age, and the likelihood of any meaningful relationship, whether friendship or otherwise is greater with those your own age. After all, you've been on this big ball of mud for roughly the same time, having the same time-scale opportunity to taste what life has to offer. No surprises there.
What is a little surprising is the way sociological pressure has taken its toll. Those who are on the younger part of the spectrum, happen to compensate by physically extolling those features which would associate with someone in the mid-range age (20s). They make themselves up and prepare for an outing as diligently as a medical student prepares for a practical. They practice stories to tell, conversation topics and even exaggerated biographies of themselves to put the facade of maturity. Though I admit, this is an unfair generalization. My experiences as a student leader a while back somewhat gave me the impression, that our youth is growing up faster than we think. As a kid, I remember the age at which we began talking about sex was 14-15. In a few short years, it's down to 12-13.
Personally, I've decided to take a stance of working to go with personality first, age third. While I'll still follow the Fenton Rule down to the decimal (minimum age you can date = your age/2 + 7), I think what's running through the girl's mind has more relevance than a number.
Picture this. You are at a get-together with a friend at a bar or pub. He or she is a decent friend, not close enough that you share the same buddies on any online network, but not quite a random acquaintance. Suddenly the conversation turns towards the discussion of an inside joke, locking you out of the circle. Bored and a little desperate, you turn towards the bar, where the drinks are being served in an almost mechanical-like pace. You turn to your right, and a girl (or guy) is at the corner, busy nursing a drink. She spots you and before you know it, you're thrown into the fray and servings of a conversation. You enjoy the new-found company, when you ask that question.
"So, how old are you?"
The answer shocks you. Murmur of a number reaches your ears, and suddenly, for a brief moment, you feel the creep of your own mortality, which washes over you like a damp wind from a marsh. You discover that you are older than the person you thought you had a connection with. Suddenly, all thoughts of continuing this conversation and seeing where it leads, ends, and you decide to retreat back to your friend's table, where he continues to regale his company with an exaggerated tale that half the group, if not more, were all characters in.
How often is it that when you discover someone's age, that your opinion of them changes and all the notions regarding someone that age suddenly come into play into dictating your next moves? I often admit that this is the case with me. Anyone younger than me is instantly an immature and naive about the world (even with my misgivings regarding the true workings of the world) and anyone older than me is too far removed from what I could possibly be interested in, and therefore not an ideal subject to converse with. I often ignore the fact that we were sharing a connection with the thought that "it would never work because she's X years younger/older than me". It's a terrible thing to do, but most of us admitted to having been in such a situation, and having done the same thing outlined above. Which is a shame. Personally, some of my younger friends are far more mature, beyond their years, and some of my older friends are not quite there. Suddenly age isn't quite a number, but it becomes the ultimate deciding factor on whether friendships/relationships should begin or not begin at all.
True, we gravitate towards people our own age, and the likelihood of any meaningful relationship, whether friendship or otherwise is greater with those your own age. After all, you've been on this big ball of mud for roughly the same time, having the same time-scale opportunity to taste what life has to offer. No surprises there.
What is a little surprising is the way sociological pressure has taken its toll. Those who are on the younger part of the spectrum, happen to compensate by physically extolling those features which would associate with someone in the mid-range age (20s). They make themselves up and prepare for an outing as diligently as a medical student prepares for a practical. They practice stories to tell, conversation topics and even exaggerated biographies of themselves to put the facade of maturity. Though I admit, this is an unfair generalization. My experiences as a student leader a while back somewhat gave me the impression, that our youth is growing up faster than we think. As a kid, I remember the age at which we began talking about sex was 14-15. In a few short years, it's down to 12-13.
Personally, I've decided to take a stance of working to go with personality first, age third. While I'll still follow the Fenton Rule down to the decimal (minimum age you can date = your age/2 + 7), I think what's running through the girl's mind has more relevance than a number.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Breaking Down Mrs. Palin
One of my favorite past times besides increasing my wealth of medical knowledge and drumming happens to be strategics. It matters not what the subject is about; the range of strategic sessions escalating from making an efficient but good-tasting sandwich to hypothetically robbing a bank and leaving with the bulk of the spoils. So when something does occur, I usually create a set of strategies; a sort of 'what-would-I-do-in-his-shoes' sort of game. If anything, it helps pass the time.
With the Republican Convention taking place tonight, much of the country's attention is going to be placed upon the two contenders: Senator John McCain and Sarah Palin. Which got me thinking...why Sarah Palin? True, I'm voting Obama this coming election, but once again, it helps pass the time.
One benefit I can see of a McCain-Palin ticket, is simply, Palin is a woman. Despite the calls for rallying behind Obama, Hillary's fanbase wasn't simply due to support for Clinton in the White House but for a woman in the House. Polemics are still there, who are hard-pressed to support the democrat nominee. So they'll go for the next best thing- a Republican woman.
The other benefit is the difference in age. Palin is a full generation younger than McCain (she's younger than my mom, which says something...). Besides the youth vote, should McCain's health decline (god forbid) during his presidency, it would surely help to have someone youthful as a clear contrast. Along with the generation gap, comes a new flow of ideas and perspectives, which may be a deciding factor for voters everywhere.
But then comes the 'huh?'. First, she's from Alaska. Alaska has little to no strategic value with respect to votes, being a solely red state. In addition, her governing experience is limited to leading a (recently increased) family of 5 and 2 years as a governor. She was a mayor of Wassila for two terms, but seriously, I went there this summer. And to be honest, you could put a senile wheelchair bound, down syndrome afflicted child there and still get the same numbers and results. Nothing happens there. Secondly, while her conviction for pro-life is admirable, considering her most recent child was genetically screened during the fetal stages and diagnosed with down syndrome, yet she still went through the birth, the issue is, would you really trust the judgment of someone who knowing the full consequences of a person with a genetic disorder which is debilitating, painful and fatal in some cases, abandons all logic and decides to bring this life into the world? From the standpoint of a utilitarian, it would be unfeasible, since it drains the resources of the family, support services as well as being a harsh reality for the child to live through. And of course, this begs the question, why have the child at the AGE OF 44, when recent evidence suggests that the chance of a new born with genetic disorders increase 10-fold when the woman reaches 40. And then let's not get started about her 17-year old daughter being pregnant. It definitely says a lot about the effectiveness of abstinance programs at school.
Personally, my feelings towards this are mixed. While I'm happy that this makes the chance of an Obama-Biden presidency more likely, it always pisses me off when I see stupidity in anything.
Edit: And now she outright lies about her past. It'd be interesting to see what the television news sources do about this (which are normally pretty biased)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/politics/03wasilla.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5124&en=e5bdcaf9fedb4cc8&ex=1378180800&partner=facebook&exprod=facebook
With the Republican Convention taking place tonight, much of the country's attention is going to be placed upon the two contenders: Senator John McCain and Sarah Palin. Which got me thinking...why Sarah Palin? True, I'm voting Obama this coming election, but once again, it helps pass the time.
One benefit I can see of a McCain-Palin ticket, is simply, Palin is a woman. Despite the calls for rallying behind Obama, Hillary's fanbase wasn't simply due to support for Clinton in the White House but for a woman in the House. Polemics are still there, who are hard-pressed to support the democrat nominee. So they'll go for the next best thing- a Republican woman.
The other benefit is the difference in age. Palin is a full generation younger than McCain (she's younger than my mom, which says something...). Besides the youth vote, should McCain's health decline (god forbid) during his presidency, it would surely help to have someone youthful as a clear contrast. Along with the generation gap, comes a new flow of ideas and perspectives, which may be a deciding factor for voters everywhere.
But then comes the 'huh?'. First, she's from Alaska. Alaska has little to no strategic value with respect to votes, being a solely red state. In addition, her governing experience is limited to leading a (recently increased) family of 5 and 2 years as a governor. She was a mayor of Wassila for two terms, but seriously, I went there this summer. And to be honest, you could put a senile wheelchair bound, down syndrome afflicted child there and still get the same numbers and results. Nothing happens there. Secondly, while her conviction for pro-life is admirable, considering her most recent child was genetically screened during the fetal stages and diagnosed with down syndrome, yet she still went through the birth, the issue is, would you really trust the judgment of someone who knowing the full consequences of a person with a genetic disorder which is debilitating, painful and fatal in some cases, abandons all logic and decides to bring this life into the world? From the standpoint of a utilitarian, it would be unfeasible, since it drains the resources of the family, support services as well as being a harsh reality for the child to live through. And of course, this begs the question, why have the child at the AGE OF 44, when recent evidence suggests that the chance of a new born with genetic disorders increase 10-fold when the woman reaches 40. And then let's not get started about her 17-year old daughter being pregnant. It definitely says a lot about the effectiveness of abstinance programs at school.
Personally, my feelings towards this are mixed. While I'm happy that this makes the chance of an Obama-Biden presidency more likely, it always pisses me off when I see stupidity in anything.
Edit: And now she outright lies about her past. It'd be interesting to see what the television news sources do about this (which are normally pretty biased)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/politics/03wasilla.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5124&en=e5bdcaf9fedb4cc8&ex=1378180800&partner=facebook&exprod=facebook
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Who says I'm not photogenic...
Today I got my security card for work. For once, I've actually gotten a good picture on my ID. The difference? I tried a full smile with teeth, rather than a half smile or a smile without teeth. It works.
Monday, August 25, 2008
I think when it comes down to it, humanity is ultimately good. When the common man is faced with what could be considered a moral dilemma, he or she will ultimately take the action which brings the greatest benefit to humanity as long as they don't experience a significant loss. All in all, the good actions committed by men slightly outweigh those with more malevolent aim. This is one big thing that encourages me to continue trying to become a doctor. Every patient that I treat, I know will hopefully recover their health to try to continue to do what is ultimately considered, good.
Of course, good can have several meanings. But that is an argument meant for another to pursue.
Of course, good can have several meanings. But that is an argument meant for another to pursue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)