• Advertisement


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2979 Excellent


About mikeman

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Interests
  1. A Common Thread

    The thing is, it's not like there's not a grain of truth in what Kavik Kang says - as part of the designing team of SFB it's possible he has significant experience in designing games and is actually competent at it. From the wiki page : ---- Star Fleet Battles was inducted into the Academy of Adventure Gaming, Arts, & Design Hall of Fame in 2005 where they stated that "Star Fleet Battles literally defined the genre of spaceship combat games in the early 1980s, and was the first game that combined a major license with 'high re-playability'."[15] In his 2007 essay, Bruce Nesmith stated "No other game in hobby game history so completely captures the feel of ship-to-ship combat in space than Star Fleet Battles. The fact that it does so in the Star Fleet Universe is icing on the cake."[1] ---- Brush Nesmith, btw, is one of those table-top designers that the industry "never hires" apparently, except Bethesda did and he made, oh, you know, those small obscure games, Daggerfall, Oblivion and Skyrim https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Nesmith And what do you know, the main designer of Morrowind and Oblivion(and I should also mention Amalur, which was pretty excellent despite its unfortunate commercial failure) came from tabletop-game fame too, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Rolston The whole thing about the game industry not "paying its dues" to the tabletop industry is nonsense anyway - perhaps the most famous book about the game industry is "Masters of Doom" and a good portion of it is dedicated to describe how the id guys spent all their free time playing D&D games with Carmack as DM - "Quake" was one of the characters in one of those games. And it's not like nobody ever hired Kavik either - he's the designer of Sinistar Unleashed. So all in all, there is a grain of truth in what he says - having worked on SFB should be condidered some serious credentials when it comes to be hired for a space game. My guess is he's actually probably knowledgeable and competent enough when it comes to designing games, but terrible at presenting himself, his ideas, incredibly off-putting attitude, and probably impossible to work or even converse with at this point. You woudn't be able to have him sit down and explain his ideas to the rest of the team without making speeches that make Fidel Castro's look like 30-second commercials. (As to the purpose of this thread - my impression is that Kavik really actually enjoys all this process - this is a venue for him to vent. And...we are bored. Better than nothing... ).
  2. A Common Thread

    The important question is...can Rube be used to power robot communism?
  3. A Common Thread

    I've got to say, I have rarely seen such defeatist attitude from a person. It actually makes me angry. Nowdays the tools that developers have in their disposal are numerous and quite efficient, especially for making quick prototypes. If I had a design idea that I was sure was revolutionary, and assuming I didn't have enough funds to hire a programmer, I would invest 6months-1year to learn some programming myself, even if I absolutely hated it, whip out a working prototype in Unity that showcased the amazing abilities of my design, blow everyone away, and watch the $$$ come from Kickstarter in order to make the real thing. Then come back here and rub it in our ignorant, amateur faces. Yet here you are, for years on end, shouting at nobody in particular, harping on and on about how you don't get the proper respect, as if that matters in any way. Go. Build. Your. Thing.
  4. A Common Thread

    Kavik Kang: American capitalism is the greatest thing ever because everyone is free to choose the trade they want and nothing stops them from thriving in it by being the best in providing goods and services that people want. Also Kavik Kang: My failures is everyone else's fault, the system doesn't recognize my genius, I've done everything I can to break into the industry but everyone in it is an idiot and doesn't know what they're doing and out to get me so it's impossible so I give up, read my 430293402937 page blog, also my grandpa founded CIA or something. Wah wah wah fucking wah.
  5. I can't speak about mathematics, just a simple observation/question : In capitalism, the free market is supposed to act as a giant "diffused" calculator that assigns prices to each item, correct? Obviously this "calculator"(composed of ~6 billion human brains atm) has some finite information and computational power. How could it be *impossible* for a central computation to "replicate" this? I was the one that mentioned Mises in the first place, but it always seemed to me the most crucial problem is how to get true(or as true as possible) information about the wants and needs of the population into that central planning body.
  6. One thing I would like to ask @deltaKshatriya is how would this "central planning" AI would work? How would it : a) know the wants and needs of the people b) know the most cost-effective means in which it could satisfy them?
  7. >>> As for the US standing alone... no problem. "Go ahead, punks... Make our day!" Like many today, you probably believe that "we better not attack Iran, they'll sink are navy!". If that is the case, the the US military is about 1,000,000 times more capable than you believe it too be. >>> You are obsessed with war and spydom, dude. In this case, "standing alone" would mean banning the invention and use of advanced autonomous machines that, if used wisely, could take off the burden of human labourers without resulting in mass poverty - freeing up time for more creative activities, and distributing the wealth created by the machines to the population according to its needs. What are you going to do, bomb Canada and Europe if they implement UBI correctly, establish a 20-hour work week, their population starts living lives much better than yours, have zero working accidents and their sewages are cleaned by robots? You're being ridiculous here.
  8. Re fascist and nazis : There is indeed an effort to brand them "left-wing", since they're mostly universally hated, and thus show that the "Left" deserves to be hated too. And besides, they called themselves "National Socialists", so, you know, there. I'm just going to point out that fascists and nazis are not hated because of their ideas about their economy. They were extremely nationalistic, tradionalists(they seeked to "restore" some mythical heroic past), war-loving, anti-internationalists, extremely racist and antisemitic. This lead to WW2 and the Holocaust, which is exactly why they are hated. None of those elements is something the "Left" has. Nobody would hate the nazis(and thus nobody would consider a comparison with them an insult) if their key characteristic was simply some socialist-like state interventionism in the national economy and otherwise they were internationalists(or at least not so extremely nationalistic and racist), not antisemitic and not, you know, responsible for WW2 and the Holocaust. In any case, both the "Left vs Right" and "Authoritarian vs Libertarian" diagrams are really incomplete and mostly useless, as far as I'm concerned. Show me your actual ideas. For example, in the "political diagram" test that positions you in this 2D axis, is there a question "do you believe there are superior and inferior races or nations, and do you believe you are part of the superior ones"? Where do you fall in the "Left vs Right" or "Authoritarian vs L:ibertarian" axes if you answer "yes" or "no"?
  9. One thing we haven't talked about is that, today, most jobs, in the West at least, is not in sectors like farming or manufacturing, but in the service sector. For example...suppose starbucks can replace all their barristas with robots with voice-recognition that will take your order and prepare your coffee just as good as any human... is it actually desirable for them to do it? Maybe customers simply will prefer to interact with humans in such cases? In other words, talking jobs where a key part part of the service is the human interaction itself. Maybe we'll all just become barristas and bartenders?
  10. >>The United States is 50-100 years of the rest of the world in just about every way, not just military, I'm interested to hear what exactly this means, since you said "not just military". We're both 2 average people, you're living in the US, I'm living in Eiurope(Sweden currently). What is it that you enjoy that I don't? Better workplace conditions? Better technology? More leisure time? Better healthcare? Better public transportation? More clean environment? Please elaborate. Do you guys have flying cars and the medi-pods from Elysium over there?
  11. @Kavik Kang okay, so back to the actual topic, if we assume that mass automation of jobs reaches a critical point where it destroys more jobs than it creates, leaving a large segment of the population unemployed, what is your proposal to deal with this crisis? Let's be clear : We're talking about autonomous machines with advanced programming that are capable of doing work such as building houses, building bridges, mining, driving trucks, farming, etc etc. Let's not start talking about robots that start to have feelings and demand rights just yet. That's a completely different topic. What is your proposal to deal with this problem?
  12. >>Communism tries to do away with the elite, and take away all kind of ownership. It doesn't though. It really, *really* doesn't. I don't know why this point never gets through - I think it's because capitalism doesn't make the distinction between "owning a TV" and "owning a TV factory" - it's all just "ownership". Socialists do make this distinction though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_property#Personal_versus_private_property I mean, I'm sure there has been some sect on some time or another that preached we shouldn't even have *personal* possessions, and all possessions should be communal, but that is by no means marxist. There is no reason for the marxists to care about what you do with your personal possessions. All they care about is putting the tools of production under public control. We are talking about the public/common ownership of capital goods, *not* consumer goods.
  13. I don't think Kavik is able to make any distinction between "communist" and "Russian". Communist means being in the sphere of influence of Russia, nothing more. As he already said, nothing has changed since the fall of the Soviet Union, except that Russia has lost its "colonies"(meaning non-russian members of the USSR like Ukraine and satellite nations like Chezchoslovakia and East Germany). In other words, "communism" is fancy word for "Russian spydom". For children of the Cold War like him, it's always been the Russians and it will always be the Russians.
  14. Ok, so if there are only 3 basic forms of government, which one Russia follows today? Do you think Russia still has communism?
  15. >>That isn't actually relevant. A republic is a government formed of elected representatives of the people. Slavery has nothing to do with it. It is entirely relevant. If a Republic is a government formed of elected repesentatives of the people, then, by definition, African Americans, for the longest time, lived in the United States of America but did not live in a Republic. Their owners lived in a Republic, but not them.
  • Advertisement