Goldmoon Dawn on 28/3/2013 at 01:55
Quote Posted by Vivian
what?
No offense but, either you didnt read what he wrote, or you just arent intelligent enough to grasp it. If you were, you could have either understood and acknowledged where he was coming from or not. You certainly couldnt disagree with anything he said, because he was only talking about his own views the whole time (views shared by many)! He wasnt talking about anyone else, and certainly wasnt bashing anyone if thats what you thought.
june gloom on 28/3/2013 at 04:16
Always with the personal attacks, you.
Vivian on 28/3/2013 at 09:34
I'm not intelligent enough to understand what the last sentence meant, no. I mean, I know what 'extrapolate' means. Extrapolation is, in general, extremely dodgy and generally requires very convincing stats to back it up (all regression based estimates of dinosaur mass vs. my OBVIOUSLY SUPERIOR volumetric reconstruction methods, for instance [entirely incidentally being published in motherfoobing Nature next month AND the subject of a video interview on the site, eat my intellectual dust, peasants]). But I didn't really understand the whole 'it's sad to see people taking it so dreadfully seriously etc' unless it's some kind of 'oh it's all a big joke' bullship. Basically, if this 'we' jtr7 mentions are just drowning this board in horrible fantard fear-sweat 'for a laugh' then they are all terrible, terrible idiots.
jay pettitt on 28/3/2013 at 09:48
Get with the Open Access already :mad:
Talking of stats and extrapolation though - the 'you guys' thing isn't quite right is it.
Vivian on 28/3/2013 at 09:50
I know... Nature is going to regret it's stance on that, and not before too long either. For the moment I want to be able to get a job though, and Science or Nature = must have on CV.
Eh, I'll give you that. 'You guys' would be whoever jtr7 means when he says 'we'. Weaseled.
thiefessa on 28/3/2013 at 10:20
Focus is optional... let us rejoice! :cool:
jay pettitt on 28/3/2013 at 10:41
So can you use your volumetric method to estimate the mass of a Nature publishing group? Jay wonders.
Or the Mass of square-enix and their top down marketing model?
'Cos while I completely agree that fear-sweat isn't maybe the most attractive feature of these murky Internet parts, if you're a somebody who has all this enthusiasm for a franchise and if fanatical, err, fans are part of the territory then you're going to get anxiety when you communicate as badly as square-enix and eidos montreal do - no? It's not like they're an indie developer who openly blog about their development process and how they weigh things up and make decisions on features - which I might argue was an all-together healthier & smarter & more interesting kind of marketing.
(or more importantly - HOW MUCH DOES A BURRICK WEIGH?)
jay pettitt on 28/3/2013 at 10:44
Quote Posted by thiefessa
Focus is optional... let us rejoice! :cool:
If I were Steve Jobs, maybe I'd throw a temper tantrum and insist that anything optional should be thrown away. Maybe optional just waters things down into nondescript mush. Maybe.
thiefessa on 28/3/2013 at 10:54
Steven Jobs never threw temper tantrums. :p
My brother likes his scotch with nothing added... my sister likes it on the rocks (watered down).
Both get to enjoy their glass of scotch. :cool:
Vivian on 28/3/2013 at 10:56
@jay
I used ray-traced cuboid finite elements, but seeing as a magazine is a cuboid anyway, then yes. You could do it with a pen and paper.
Anxiety is understandable, it also something I don't think people are doing enough to avoid, given that it is as you say - a typical overly concerned fabrication in the absence of evidence. But just being overly negative in an attempt to be funny is super lame. Especially if you are actually being unfunny.
NB - if someone has a mesh of a burrick and know's what the mesh dimensions are in real-world units, then yup, I can give you a good estimate of how much it weighs.
