Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
View Profile
« May 2010 »
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
...sick...
You are not logged in. Log in
Re: Marge
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
Will platform games put pc games out of business? Which do you prefer platform games or pc games?
Now Playing: the pounding in my head....
Topic: ...sick...
In my opinion I highly doubt that platform games will destroy the huge market that PC games have built up over the years. There is something about PC gaming that is very alluring to a large group of people nowadays.

I, myself, prefer the good ole' platform console games. I just prefer sitting in front of the TV with a controller than sitting in front of a computer with a keyboard and mouse... I think it's more nostalgia than anything else. I just grew up with the controller in my hand. The thought of blowing eight hours in front of a computer trying to beat the boss in sonic?it?s just not right! I do have a newfound affection for the excitement of playing some computer games over the Internet with other live people. But companies like Sony and Microsoft have already combated that by introducing the online add-ons to their systems, and games that are focused entirely on the addition of that new element to their already classic and superbly approved style of gaming.

With all that is happening to the technology today, and how it is transforming endlessly into the reality of tomorrow, I believe that PC games AND platform games are a thing of the past?that will continue on into the future. They have come so far that I think the will both be able to co-exist peacefully with the diverse groups that flock inherently towards each separate side.

Posted by crazy3/clearly_obscure at 07:53 CST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Big Brother's internet capability
Well I think the obvious answer to that is :It doesn?t matter. Since when did the government base their constraints off of what we believe to be moral and virtuous? Of course, I would say that it is morally wrong for them to invade our privacy. But, now, if it were for our own safety, does that make the morality slightly skewed? Therein lies the ambiguity.
I believe that there should be some fixed height of shady activity that, once passed, requires Big Brother to step in for a constant bird?s eye view. That way Colonel So-and-so can?t just read your love letters for personal ?jollies?.
Nobody likes the idea that the government can and will read their private documents or interactions online; but really what can we do about it? Nothing, we have no control over the power of the government, as bad as it sounds. I believe we should just cope with the unnervind uncertainty for now, becuase some day it might turn into some communist internet dictatorship and then we will be pleased to have this situation back.
However bad something sounds, it could always get worse. And according to Murphy's Law, "What ever could go wrong, will."

Posted by crazy3/clearly_obscure at 07:42 CST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Should Virus writers be protected under the first amendment? Why or why not? Have you ever been attacked by a virus?
Mood:  caffeinated
Now Playing: "Buddy Holly" by Weezer
I recently read an Article on cell phone viruses. It was basically describing one of the many viruses presenting our technological world. The article revolves around a relatively new virus called ?Lasco.A?. This virus acts much like a computer worm, in the sense that, it attaches itself to a user?s files. From there it attempts to spread by either being carried to other phones through the programs, or by ?jumping? users using the wireless Bluetooth technology. These new viruses are very discouraging, to me at least. This blatantly shows that now matter how far we advance in science (just like everything else in the world) there will be people who make it their sole purpose to annoy and hinder the progress of others. But then again some say that this is helpful in a way because it keeps software developers on the edge and doesn?t allow for sub-par distribution of products.

I guess one could argue that virus writers should be protected under the first amendment; much like one could argue many facets of the amendments that are both pointless and controversial in moral ambiguity. To some extent we need experimentation in order to bring about revolutions. But how far does that experimentation go? And do the people performing such experimentation plan to abide by rules? Of course not. If you have the tools and knowledge to gain ultimate power and control, you are going to go for it. We have to find some way to get everybody to work on the same team and increase our knowledge and power exponentially. But it?s sad to say that that will never happen. I mean, come on, who honestly thinks a hardcore (or [337 haha!) hacker will actually say, ?No, thanks Dark Side. I have heard your promises of infinite power and exponential wealth. But I think I?d rather work for these guys getting a decent salary (still paling, of course, to the possibility of wealth that hacking presents). Sorry Vader.?

And, No, (Knock on Wood!) I have never been attacked by a vir-??wait?Fatal Erro?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Posted by crazy3/clearly_obscure at 23:24 CST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post

Newer | Latest | Older