It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:16 am

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:54 am
Posts: 1816
Location: Right behind you.
stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
Publishing Rights were more important when books were actually read.


You make it sound like people don't read books.

stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
Patents were important when we were an industrial society that actually built things.


Right, because nobody builds things anymore. Everything just grows out of the dirt nowadays. :roll:

stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
I was asking YOU to let go of YOUR copyright on any new content YOU created. You are never, never, never allowed to profit at the expense of another human being. Never! Stop thinking of ways you can take advantage of other people.


Now I'm a little confused. Was this statement directed at me specifically or is it a general statement? I'm just going to assume it was a general comment, because either way, I don't understand why you would expect anybody, myself or anyone else, to give up their copyrights to something. This is the sort of thing I hear from publishing sharks in the music industry trying to rip off suckers. "It's better if you give me your publishing and copyrights so we can both benefit." I have never, ever seen that turn out well, so forgive me if I'm somewhat suspicious.

You are right in saying we shouldn't profit at the expense of another human being, but I think the contention here seems to be what you consider to be "at the expense of". Slavery is at the expense of another human. Sex trafficking is at the expense of another human. But by holding my copyrights and charging for a product I create, I am in no way making a profit off of someone else's dignity or humanity. I am not forcing them to buy something from me. Refer back to my furniture example; if I make a chair and sell it, is that profiting at the "expense" of another person? At the expense of their wallet, maybe-- but unless their wallet is surgically attached to their body, there is no injustice there. They paid a fair value for a service they desired. So I'm not really sure why you think people should have to give up copyrights to something. If they chose to, fine, that's their choice; but if I spend hours and hours and hours creating something, there is no way I am going to just give my rights to someone. This whole idea of "let's all share our stuff" is really completely unnecessary. Even Cyan knows better than this. They're not releasing their copyrights; it's their work! Making it freeware would be like throwing it down the toilet and erasing their name from the product entirely.

Now, you can give the right for someone to reproduce your work, or make variations of it without giving up your intrinsic property rights. All it takes is a basic contract or some tangible evidence of the agreement. You can give someone expressed permission to do something that otherwise only you can do; that's the whole point of copyrights! You have the right do certain things with your work, and others do not, unless you say so. The risk of just giving away rights is that someone is far more likely to steal it from you and turn a profit of their own. There is a line between being generous and being stupid. If you want to protect yourself, then you can't assume everyone has your best interests in mind.

People make their livelihood off of their copyrights and the things they own and create, such as games. To degrade the value of copyrights or publishing rights is to reduce the ability for millions of people to support themselves. I can't make money off my music if someone snatches it out of my hands and passes it around the moment I put it in public.

I'm not suggesting we should all start charging for our content or the things we make for OpenURU. But that doesn't mean we all have to give up our rights to our productions, either. Your ideas are setting people up to get taken advantage of and ripped off. The reason I am disagreeing with you so strongly is because I am afraid people might do what you are suggesting.

_________________
I miss my old signature.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:09 am
Posts: 13
Quote:
you are making a specific design claim.

I like to think I’m making a generic concept claim. I posted once before and someone said I was being vague so I posted again tried to be specific. In truth the specifics of my design was invented in the time between to the two posts. I have no loyalty to my specifics. To me they are just a communication device; A way for people to relate back to the general concept.

Here are some general concepts which I don’t really think are debatable:

We new age creators are a pathetic, inept and lazy lot. I know that’s insulting but I include myself in this ‘insult’. Even if there are some among us who actually worked for Cyan on URU itself (and therefore are capable of professional work), as a volunteer content creator you will be a pathetic, inept and lazy version of your former professional self. The rest of us are pathetic, inept and lazy versions of our unprofessional selves.

The internet has it own strength and weaknesses. We who are lazy need to trust the strength of the internet to carry us to success in spite of our ineptness. Fighting the true nature of the internet not only takes great effort but you can only succeed in being a rock in the river. The internet will flow around you.

Strength comes from parallel weakness. It doesn’t matter that we are weak if our strength is in our numbers. We don’t have to give our up individually if we let the internet connect us in a parallel way.

Quote:
looks like more of a natural selection thing going on

Yes! Precisely; natural selection within the boundaries of a breeding population is another example of an ‘organic super computer’. A decision is being made. But if there is no human to selectively breed the population then who is it that makes the decision? Every individual in the breeding population is making the same kind of decision in a parallel relationship to every other individual in the population.

If one of my parents had a long tail and my other parent choose them as a mate because of the long tail then this increases the probability that my children will inherit both the gene that displays the long tail and the gene to select the long tail in a mate. This creates a positive feedback loop which causes a statistical explosion and the long tail becomes the standard for the entire breeding population.

The selection of the long tail over the short tail can be completely arbitrary. There doesn’t need to be a survival advantage. The feedback loop guarantees only 'one' choice will be made the ‘entire’ group. If there is a survival advantage then that is what makes the choice. But it is still the feedback loop the guarantees this choice will quickly be displayed by the ‘entire’ group.

One of the other points you made, that I completely agree with, is that consistency is important in artwork. Even when there is only one artist working on a painting, conscious effort needs to be put towards learning consistency. When multiple people are working on one painting then the conscious effort becomes even more important.

However, natural selection creates consistency of outcome through parallel decisions and feedback loops. No consciousness is needed.

Quote:
Renaissance workshops

I love that you said this. The internet is like a big pinata; you have to whack quite a few times but eventually something truly wonderful falls out. It never would have occurred to me to think of an open source project like URU in terms of a pre-industrial assembly line; but it does fit amazing well.

The great strength of the internet lies in ability to mass reproduce and mass distribute certain kinds of files. On the internet it is as easy to spam a million people as it is to e-mail one person. This is why some businesses like newspapers or the music industry are so legitimately threatened. The very things they create is the kind of thing the internet can duplicate and send far better then the businesses themselves. Other businesses like car manufactures are not threatened because the internet can not reproduce and distribute the cars. So the assembly line aspect of a Renaissance workshop fits the strength of the internet.

The artistic aspect fits URU. There is a masterful consistency to URU. I want open source URU to become the national park Rand envisioned. I want new ages in URU to be consistence with the Cyan ages that already exist. Being of Cyan-Quality implies a certain artistic quality. And yet just like the Renaissance art the workshops created it is clearly much too large for any one person to create on their own.

We must work together towards a consistent goal but how can we without losing our individual creativity?

Quote:
why would most people want to do that?

Why would a creative person give up the individual expression of their creativity?

They wouldn’t! We are all creative animals regardless of our skill level. We all need and seek out validation of this creative side.

Motivation is a key concept and many things motivate us. Not just our individual creativity. It snowed heavy where I live and I helped someone push their car their car out. Why would I do that? I'm late for work. I'm tired from shoveling my own driveway. To pull over I have to park near where they are stuck and might get stuck myself. Why would I make myself a slave to their master?

But, I did do it. No words were exchanged. Both the goal and strategy were obvious. I could see what they were trying to do. I put my hands on their car and pushed when they pushed. There was no need for me to put myself in charge of them. No need for me to lose my individually to them. No argument over who owns the car. No signing of paper giving me special permission to touch their property.

I used to make a living as a programmer. You don't need to be smart to be a programmer, but it doesn't take a special mentality to read code all day long and not go insane. I have a personality type that fits. I can not tell you how often I want to break into the code of the software I run on my computer at home. I don't want steal anything. I just want to fix it. I can just see something that's wrong or something that could be better, smoother, enhanced. I desperately want to track down the code that controls it and see if I fix it or improve it. It is just in my blood.

At work I use MS office and at home I use a open source office product. The MS stuff is better but it is still frustrating. I can only do what MircoSoft has decided I should be able to do. But at work I'm not being paid to fix the word processor or the spreadsheet code so I wouldn't fix anything even if I could. At home I use open source stuff, not because it is better, not because I can't afford to buy MS office, but because it reduces my frustration. I have never put any of the changes I have made back on the internet. It isn't about me making the world better. It isn't about me make money off my programming. It is just about reducing my frustrating by letting myself do then work that I am motivated to do.

Why would I want to do this? I don't know but I do.

There has to be a way to let you (the creative independent person) control the content of the one official version of your age. While at the same time allow you to be the recipient of a hundred programmers who independently fixed the same bug for you and are now offering their 'improvements' back to you. You then have to do the extra work of picking one and incorporating it into your official age in a consistent manner.

There has to be a way that allows us to use the natural strength of the internet. A way that lets hundreds of parallel helpers do what they are naturally motivated to do. A way that allows the outcome to be consistent and artistic.

Quote:
The great thing is that this dicussion doesn't matter, really! People are going to do what they want, not what you are I think they should do. And we'll get to see how it all works out

I agree completely. The key argument seems to be that consistent art needs a designer but why would anyone want to be a team member when they can be the designer.

My point is that any work that could be done with one person before can now be done with multiple people working in parallel over the internet. This includes design work. We don't need a single designer so much as a separate design step which uses a 100 person design team to produce one design.

However, the decision whether to do things the old way or the new way is itself work. And any work including this decision can be made multiple times by multiple people. My own idea doesn't allow itself to be the only way allowed. It will be fun to see how it all works out.

Quote:
You make it sound like people don't read books.

Quote:
Right, because nobody builds things anymore. Everything just grows out of the dirt nowadays.

I think we agree more than I think you think we agree.

Hyperbole.

If I had written “No one reads anymore” it would be a classic example of hyperbole. It couldn't literally since the person reading the sentence must be reading it. However, exaggeration to create emphasis can be a very effective communication device.

I'll assume you already knew this. I'll assume you were trying to 'win an argument' by intentional misinterpreting what I said in a way that makes me sound stupid. If I'm stupid then everything I say can be dismissed.

This is a reasonable approach until you consider that you first had to pretend that you have never encountered hyperbole before. If you make yourself sound stupid then it is everything you say that gets dismissed. This is the danger of this tactic. Yet politicians employ it all the time and you can see where it gets them… and us.

The reason we agree more than you think is that my point was exact opposite of the hyperbole. I was saying that publishing rights and patent rights exist and are important. Software Rights also exist and are important. The hyperbole was meant to convince you how strong a defender of Software Rights I am.

The law is out of my control. I don't get to define what is or isn't legal. And I am much too lazy to tilt at windmills.

Quote:
Now I'm a little confused. Was this statement directed at me specifically?

The confusion is entirely my fault; poor communication skills. That's why I write such long posts. If I could get my point across in one pithy paragraph I would. Instead, I try to say the same thing in hundred different parallel ways.

The ‘YOU,YOU,YOU’ is meant to refer to whoever reads the sentence. In that sense, Yes, it meant you as you read it. But it would also mean that hapless google searcher (who was trying to remember the title of that Blues Brothers song but could only remember a few of the lyrics) as they read it. The true answer is no, I didn’t want anyone on this thread to think of you personally as they read it; including you.

Quote:
They're not releasing their copyrights; it's their work!

I agree. That’s what the ‘YOU, YOU, YOU’ part was about. I wasn’t taking about Cyan’s copyright but the content creator’s copyright. Any time a deal seems too good to be true; It Is! Either you are taking advantage of someone else or they are setting you up to be taken advantage of. Either way you don’t want in on the deal.

I didn’t mean to imply that you could steal Cyan’s or any other persons work.

It was about you and how you interact with the stuff on the internet. You download some thing good, make it better and put it back. You don’t own the thing when you start, you don’t own the thing when you end. If you don’t respect the copyright on the things you find on the internet don’t expect anyone to respect your copyright to the improvements you make to it.

Quote:
I think the contention here seems to be what you consider to be "at the expense of".

From a political science standpoint, this will always be the contention. When we control ourselves we will all have our own considerations. This is the nature of the individual. When society controls us they will have legal definitions quite different than our own. This is the nature of society. I’m not giving anyone legal advice. If you ever go before a judge or jury then claiming ‘this guy on the internet said it was okay’ isn’t going buy you anything.

Making another person weak so you exploit them is classic ‘at their expense’ behavior. It was illegal to teach slaves to read. The slaves needed to be weak so they could be controlled. To be so concerned with copyrights that you cripple the internet of its primary nature (reproduce and distribute) makes you the bad guy. To take away from everyone who uses the internet the strength it could have given us, just so we stay weak like we were before the internet, just so you can make money the way you did before the internet, is evil.

It’s not the ‘making money’ that is evil; it is the ‘I must prevent others from becoming strong’ that is evil. (and no I don't think you personally are advocating this position)

Quote:
The reason I am disagreeing with you so strongly is because I am afraid people might do what you are suggesting.

Disagreement needs no explanation; strength requires no excuse.

I meant nothing personal in anything I posted so I apologize for any negative emotions I might have created for you. I took nothing you posted personally so you have nothing apologize for.

Agreement is the most useless of things. (hyperbole) I already think what I think so I don’t need you to tell me that stuff. What I have never heard of before or the new perspective on an old idea is what has the greatest value to me.

I do agree with your assessment of our disagreement. You fear what will happen if people are too cavalier with copyrights. Whether with their own or Cyan’s. I fear what will happen if people are too timid about new content creation. Too timid with their own potential, the internet’s potential, URU’s potential.





Calam, your problem on this thread is that you are bring out your best Bugs vs. Elmer material but there is no Elmer Fudd in the cartoon. If I was in the cartoon with you I would be Daffy Duck. Now, Elmer and Daffy are both Loony Toons and you as Bugs Bunny will always win out over both of us. But you have to know who your comic foil is if you want your jokes to work.

I am not some anti-capitalist, napster-loving, world-communal-property type. Napster was a scam. It was a business. Napster was able and willing to offer a billion dollars to settle the law-suit because they knew they could make billions more if they were allow to keep doing what they were doing. The whole 'everything of internet should be free' argument was a smoke screen for what Napster was really doing.

When I brought up Publishing Rights and Patent Rights I wasn't suggesting that we can ignore them. Just the opposite. I was saying we can NOT IGNORE Software Copyrights!

I created the confusion by saying 'plagiarism is not stealing'. A poor word choice I regret. Both plagiarism and stealing are legal terms so naturally everyone when down the well-worn napster path.

I was a profession computer programmer and the guy I worked for did literally say: “don't hide your eyes; plagiarize”. The only plagiarism I did was within the boundaries of that programming group. We all worked for the same company which owned the copyrights so there was no crossing of legal lines. Within, the group we my have been doing communism but the company was doing free market capitalism.

It is also worth noting that when we argued with that same 'guy we worked for' he would often let us do it our way. If he forced us to do it his way, we would have no motivation and if it turnout poorly we would just blame 'his way'. If we got to do something our own way, we worked twice as hard and made sure it worked well just so we could prove the 'old man' wrong. The point is you can also do individual competition inside a communist group; just as you can do communism inside a capitalism company,

If I had it to say again I would use 'copying is not always cheating'. The always would imply that strategies are always contextual. You have to chose a goal first and then a good strategy is anything that helps reach that goal. You can't evaluate the strategy outside the context of the goal. In some situations copying is cheating, but within the boundaries of the URU open source community it should not always be considered so.




Here's my proposition and it has nothing to do with Legal Rights. I know this will sound daffy to you, so I'm not trying to convince that I am correct. I just want to define myself so you can see how un-Fudd like I am.

In any 'self improving' system you will find 3 mechanisms and 2 feed back loops.
A status-quo mechanism to hold on to the good you already have.
A small-step variation mechanism to try new things.
An evaluation mechanism to find the above average performers.
A feed back loop from the evaluation to the small-step variation so each new thing we try has an increased probability of getting better and better.
A feed back loop from the evaluation to the status-quo so if we find a better way it quickly becomes the one way everything gets done.

The discussions we should be having is on how do we use the unique nature of the internet to implement evaluation mechanisms and feed back loops.

The small-step variation mechanism has always been about individuality, creativity and private property so it works the way every one is used to. Status-Quo is authoritarian control stuff so there nothing new there either. The only new thing is that the Status-Quo is controlled by the evaluation\feed back loop so it is not one-person being in charge of the rest of us. The Status-Quo is as controlled as it is controlling.

The uniqueness of the internet comes down to two things. One) every job will be done by incompetent people with little time and short attention spans. Two) every job will get done better than ever before.

Better because it is being done multiple times by multiple people in multiple ways. There is a relentless nature to internet. Even with whole cities removed from the network the e-mail will still get through. This is what the internet was born to do. The water will flow around the rock.

We are no longer links in a chain. We are weak strands in a cable. We do every job poorly because we must do every job ourselves; we stretch ourselves too thin. However, this weakness is made up for by the fact there are so many strands in the cable.

One person working on one age will produce poor results. A hundred people work on one age can produce Cyan-Quality results. The Key, the Control and the Consistency is in the evaluation mechanisms and the feed back loops.

Therefore, the discussions we should be having is on how do we use the unique nature of the internet to implement evaluation mechanisms and feed back loops.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:45 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:15 am
Posts: 579
stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
Here are some general concepts which I don’t really think are debatable:
Okay, I'm taking the bait - hook, line and sinker.
Here goes:
Quote:
We new age creators are a pathetic, inept and lazy lot. I know that’s insulting but I include myself in this ‘insult’. Even if there are some among us who actually worked for Cyan on URU itself (and therefore are capable of professional work), as a volunteer content creator you will be a pathetic, inept and lazy version of your former professional self. The rest of us are pathetic, inept and lazy versions of our unprofessional selves.

I'm not insulted by this at all, simply because I feel you're 100% incorrect. Just as you are probably speaking from your own experience, believing it is applicable to most other people, I am going to do the same here:

Most of the employed or employable artists and technicians I know are automatically - by definition - not "inept". If they were, they wouldn't have had their professions for very long or would have starved to death. If they were capable and adept in their professions, they certainly didn't become suddenly inept the moment they began working on their own personal projects.

And as for "lazy", I know that when I have time that can be devoted to my own personal ambitions, I become focused. I know exactly what I need to achieve, because it's the stuff I've been daydreaming about while I've been working for someone else. When I'm working for myself, I'm driven, because I know how little time I may have to devote to my own endeavors. My standards become very high, not only because this work represents my self - but also because I know I won't likely have the opportunity to revisit this effort in the future.

Conversely, when I'm working for someone else, I am almost always only doing so because I am paid. I am hired to bring someone else's visions to reality, and frankly that makes me feel very lazy somehow! Even if it's work that I am good at, it's a rare job that offers an end product that I feel personally committed to, that makes me want to put in the same level of effort that I would invest in my own brilliant ideas (!)
Later in your post, you cite your example of having worked hard (on someone else's project) to prove your boss wrong - but this is not the scenario we expect to see applied in URU agebuilding.

I don't need to tell you in detail the gambles that an employer takes when they hire you and a staff of people to take on a task that may or may not be successful, one that ultimately may or may not repay the employer's investment in your labor. I don't need to go into detail about the gambles and investments Cyan made in developing URU. I'm just a strong advocate of having penultimate respect for art and artists and the sanctity of their visions - no matter whether they were employed by Cyan or they are an independent agecrafter in our community.

Quote:
The internet has it own strength and weaknesses. We who are lazy need to trust the strength of the internet to carry us to success in spite of our ineptness. Fighting the true nature of the internet not only takes great effort but you can only succeed in being a rock in the river. The internet will flow around you. Strength comes from parallel weakness. It doesn’t matter that we are weak if our strength is in our numbers. We don’t have to give our up individually if we let the internet connect us in a parallel way.

On the contrary, if one is inept, the internet will at best ignore you, and at worst will bury you. And if you believe you can define the "true nature of the internet", you have a great future ahead of you. If an individual is lazy and reliant on the "strength of the internet" for success, their tendency will be to subvert their own ideas and ideals to adopt whatever notions the consensus mindset on the internet dictates. Your model even sounds less like Kevin Kelly's concepts of the "hive mind" and more like a religion...no, a cult in which one must relinquish individuality to achieve "parallel connectedness". And your phrase "Strength comes from parallel weakness" has some very, very ominous historical and cultural associations that I won't even delve into right now...

Being a "rock in the river" isn't a bad thing, not at all: what if all rivers flowed with no impediments whatsoever directly from their source to the ocean? You'd have destruction, erosion, flooding, and not much beauty (ponds, lakes, flora, fauna) along the river's route.

Quote:
The selection of the long tail over the short tail can be completely arbitrary. There doesn’t need to be a survival advantage. The feedback loop guarantees only 'one' choice will be made the ‘entire’ group. If there is a survival advantage then that is what makes the choice. But it is still the feedback loop the guarantees this choice will quickly be displayed by the ‘entire’ group.

No: if the initial selection is completely arbitrary and there is no survival advantage, the propagation of an additional generation from such parents would only assure that one more generation may or may not carry such genes forward, and in no way guarantees their success in future generations. In fact, there is an equal chance that such traits may be considered highly undesirable by the species or the tribe at large, that these "freaks" may be regarded as outcasts or worse, thereby guaranteeing the failure of these traits.

Quote:
The great strength of the internet lies in ability to mass reproduce and mass distribute certain kinds of files. On the internet it is as easy to spam a million people as it is to e-mail one person. This is why some businesses like newspapers or the music industry are so legitimately threatened. The very things they create is the kind of thing the internet can duplicate and send far better then the businesses themselves.

Where I believe the Internet has achieved success is in storage of data that can be retrieved by knowledgable users, not in "mass reproduction" or "mass distribution". From my perspective any of the "push"-based technologies have been a abject failure: no adbots have ever successfully targeted my personal marketing niche, no RSS feeds have ever figured out my interest zones without sending me garbage in the mix. You essentially called spam a "great strength of the internet" - nope, that's simply "not debatable".

Quote:
There has to be a way to let you (the creative independent person) control the content of the one official version of your age. While at the same time allow you to be the recipient of a hundred programmers who independently fixed the same bug for you and are now offering their 'improvements' back to you. You then have to do the extra work of picking one and incorporating it into your official age in a consistent manner.
.....You download some thing good, make it better and put it back. You don’t own the thing when you start, you don’t own the thing when you end. If you don’t respect the copyright on the things you find on the internet don’t expect anyone to respect your copyright to the improvements you make to it.

Here we get into the core of some upcoming quandaries, and some very iffy territory. We know there will be agebuilders that will throw their work to the winds, clearly stating that the world can do what it will with their work. And we know that other agebuilders, having labored mightily to achieve their personal visions in great detail, would feel violated to their core if people decided to download their work of art, "make it better" and put altered versions back on the internet for the world to see. It's just as unlikely that the downloader that proudly modified the original work would do so anonymously as it is that the original creator would agree their work had been "improved upon"! We know that even if the protective creator places any form of restrictions, General Public Licenses, whatever on their release, someone will nevertheless open it up and hack it technically or aesthetically. We know that only the major software companies have had the resources to fight hacking, certainly any URU agebuilder will not be able to do so. I don't have an easy answer for this problem. And yes, if an artist's effort is enormous and personal and is given selflessly to the community and is then bastardized by someone who wants to "fix" it - - - that's a problem, in my book.

In terms of "not owning the thing when you start and not owning it when you put it back", well that depends on how much of the original thing you started with was left in the end result. If you take a texture from a "free download" site, then crop it and tile it and posterize it and airbrush it and optimize its palette and incorporate it in a model in an age, are you obligated in some way? (We know that 90% of the "free texture" sites are supported by ad banners and the like, and that's fine - just let's be clear about that as opposed to postulating that their efforts are borne of altruism or the like!)

If an image is "stolen" from a source that didn't authorize its re-use, then repurposed to the point that the original is almost unrecognizable, will the user be "caught"? Is the user "guilty" in beginning with someone else's image of the Eiffel Tower rather than flying to Paris and shooting the image themselves? Again, I have no easy answers.

Quote:
To be so concerned with copyrights that you cripple the internet of its primary nature (reproduce and distribute) makes you the bad guy. To take away from everyone who uses the internet the strength it could have given us, just so we stay weak like we were before the internet, just so you can make money the way you did before the internet, is evil. It’s not the ‘making money’ that is evil; it is the ‘I must prevent others from becoming strong’ that is evil.

Wow. It's possible I'm misinterpreting what you're saying here, but your message seems pretty clear to me.
Firstly: I disagree that one can define, much less distill, the Internet's "primary nature", and if it were possible I disagree that the answer would be "reproduce and distribute".
Secondly: to posit that any individual artist, even any mega-corporation, could in any way "take away the strength of the Internet" by wishing to deter others from mangling their vision-made-real....is just ludicrous overstatement. Okay, call it hyberbole, if you will.
Thirdly: you've stated that the hacker who has been thwarted (technically, legally - doesn't matter) has been "prevented from becoming strong". More "hyperbole"?
Fourthly: you've called the artist that doesn't want their work altered "evil"....

Quote:
One person working on one age will produce poor results. A hundred people work on one age can produce Cyan-Quality results.

This has been discussed up and down, and there is by no means any such consensus that these opinions are in any way correct. We have already seen incredibly promising work coming from individual agebuilders at a very early stage in the development of their technical and artistic skills. Conversely we've seen projects that dozens of dedicated people signed on to fail - and not due to failures in consistency or feedback loops!

In an earlier post, you wrote:
Quote:
Once you have a large number of new content creators then you need a organizes them as a 'team' in a parallel structure. The outcome will take care of itself.

Here's where you're encountering some skepticism, and I think it's well-founded! First, if the "new content creators" aren't at least semi-experienced, the project will turn into more of a classroom than anything else. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it doesn't produce ages at the pace you've described elsewhere. Organization doesn't happen by itself, structure has to be either imposed from the top or democratically developed over time; either way it's not the self-organizing, self-structuring automatic process you seem to be desiring.

Quote:
The Key, the Control and the Consistency is in the evaluation mechanisms and the feed back loops.

Without a clear, single vision guiding your "parallel-structured" age development, it's unlikely that the Consistency you speak of will occur: it's completely antithetical in a project where "the outcome takes care of itself."

Quote:
....the discussions we should be having is on how do we use the unique nature of the internet to implement evaluation mechanisms and feed back loops.

Stealth, these things have already been in place for years.
For example, when Cyan readied new ages for release, there would be a betatest period in which experienced URU fans would subject the age to the worst abuse they could come up with (pretty bad abuse!) and the most critical eyes would be trained on the way the ages looked (very very critical eyes!)
That was the feedback loop.
But once the ages were released, the feedback loop ended. That was it, no more suggestions, no more modification. Period. That was the way Cyan wanted it, and most of us have had enough respect for Cyan's wishes to honor their request NOT to borrow/steal from, or modify, their Work Of Art (in my opinion) or Content (in legal terms).

The upcoming release of the code and tools will not open Cyan's game content to modification. But Cyan's released code will of course be modified repeatedly, recursively, extensively, uncontrollably. If this is some of the "whacking" you mentioned, undoubtedly some good things will shake out of this process, will be recognized by the community, and the cream will eventually rise to the top. The downside is that during that sorting-out process, a lot of newcomers will likely be very confused and frustrated due to conflicts between different branches of code conflicting with various new ages, will turn away and will tell other potential players. However, eventually, the chaff will blow away, forms will emerge and procedures will evolve: your feedback loops will inevitably occur over time.

Based on my responses above, I truly don't understand what is "not debatable" about any of the concepts you've put forth thus far.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:54 am
Posts: 1816
Location: Right behind you.
J'Rahm, your post was enormous and there is no possibly way I could respond to all of what you said (additionally, it would be a colossal waste of my time because I don't think this topic is quite important enough for a 4,000 word reply) so I'm going to just respond to what I can only guess were the main points.

stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
There has to be a way to let you (the creative independent person) control the content of the one official version of your age. While at the same time allow you to be the recipient of a hundred programmers who independently fixed the same bug for you and are now offering their 'improvements' back to you. You then have to do the extra work of picking one and incorporating it into your official age in a consistent manner.


This is a perfectly reasonable scenario, however the problem I see with this suggestion is that there is no inherent way to protect the rights of the original author. This can be easily remedied by having people request to mess with content before they do it, and by pledging not to misuse their permission to do so. This keeps everyone happy. Those who want to improve other people's work can do so, those who don't want their work messed with can protect themselves, and even those that do permit others to use their work have some sort of simple written agreement between themselves and other coders over how their work will be edited and what for. There is no reason to go prostituting our creations when there is no need.

stealth in J'Rahm Age wrote:
I'll assume you already knew this. I'll assume you were trying to 'win an argument' by intentional misinterpreting what I said in a way that makes me sound stupid. If I'm stupid then everything I say can be dismissed.

This is a reasonable approach until you consider that you first had to pretend that you have never encountered hyperbole before. If you make yourself sound stupid then it is everything you say that gets dismissed. This is the danger of this tactic. Yet politicians employ it all the time and you can see where it gets them… and us.


Since you seem to be one that enjoys splitting hairs, allow me to explain to you that first of all, when you use exaggeration through written words, if done poorly, at best it doesn't work, or at worst conveys the exact opposite message that you intended. I think you did it poorly, because the way you structured your sentence: "Publishing Rights were more important when books were actually read." Using the phrase "were more" implies past-tense, and since they're in reference to the importance of publishing rights, the impression is that they were important then but not now. You essentially wrote the exact opposite of what you were trying to say, and then launched into an educating paragraph on hyperbole when you were misunderstood. When I said "it sounds like you're saying people don't read books anymore," I meant exactly what I said; it sounded like that was what you were saying, hence giving you a chance to clarify. You chose not to. Additionally, I was using another literary and verbal term known as "sarcasm" in my responses due to the lack of clarity in your sentence, since the unintended message that you ended up conveying was the total opposite of what was being implied, and I was pointing it out.

How's that for splitting hairs?

Now that you've pointed out what you were trying to say, I can't say that I totally disagree with you. But by the time I reached that point in your post, I lost interest in the amount left yet to be read, and chose to simply reply to the first few paragraphs.

_________________
I miss my old signature.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 1:04 am
Posts: 4134
Similarly, another way to "win an argument" (not quite sure why that merited sarcasm quotes) is to write a massive essay and bore everyone else out of their skulls.

And what is this with new age creators being lazy and all that rot? The only person who fits your description is you because you obviously haven't looked at any of the rather spectacular ages out there. Of course, they're not all shining glee-inducing jewels but their creators are not as you describe.

_________________
-Whilyam
Cavern Link:My IC Blog


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:41 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 7:59 am
Posts: 889
Location: Healing and Lifelong Learning
The stranger wrote:
I would like to see age creation groups- groups of people working together on an age, rather than a single writer.


I'm just now making my way through the topic, but I already agree with this. I also believe there are already groups working on ages, yes?

The more eyes, the more opinions, and the more time it takes, but it also often means better the quality in the end. I'm sure someone has already said this, so don't yell at me... I'll find your post and quote it! /ducks

_________________
We are the shapers and the caretakers of this metaverse. How we honor ourselves and others largely determines what we bring into being.

A story: De Landria

Ghaelen: Moula.2 KI #64299


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:29 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 5:28 am
Posts: 2266
As far as I can tell, more people are working on their own ages, rather than working with other people. This is from me as an outsider - could be wrong. I am so OK with people working on their own ages, for lots of reasons - labor of love, demonstrated productivity, and we aren't talking about a game development company!

I also don't think are age creators are lazy - what a weird thing to say. I don't think any of our player or age creators are lazy. What a weird thing to say.

_________________
mszv, amarez in Uru, other online games, never use mszv anymore, would like to change it
Blog - http://www.amarez.com, Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/amareze


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:32 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 7:59 am
Posts: 889
Location: Healing and Lifelong Learning
mszv wrote:
As far as I can tell, more people are working on their own ages, rather than working with other people. This is from me as an outsider - could be wrong. I am so OK with people working on their own ages, for lots of reasons - labor of love, demonstrated productivity, and we aren't talking about a game development company!

I also don't think are age creators are lazy - what a weird thing to say. I don't think any of our player or age creators are lazy. What a weird thing to say.


I don't know about the group/individual age creation, so I'll take your word for that. For the longest time I had been under the impression that there were not groups. Don't know where I got that idea from.

On the lazy creator part... hmmmm... If you mean when a person is sitting still and visualizing what it is they are going to create, working out mentally how each element or piece will fit together, and in what order certain things need to be set down or laid out.... perhaps for an outsider that looks lazy. But having done that on a good number of different types of projects, I can tell you it takes a great deal of effort. In a production-oriented society that effort isn't considered productive. "Move it, use it, make it, do it -- get that product out there. Sell it!"

The creativity silently churning and turning in the stillness behind that "productivity" isn't valued very much.

_________________
We are the shapers and the caretakers of this metaverse. How we honor ourselves and others largely determines what we bring into being.

A story: De Landria

Ghaelen: Moula.2 KI #64299


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 2598
Location: Israel
Well, I still hope the writers can make a easy to use ages making program.

_________________
Previously known as "The stranger"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 12:33 am
Posts: 1182
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Any program for creating Ages will always require a knowledge of 3D modelling. The best that we can hope to do is to make a tool that integrates nicely with a 3D Modelling program to allow the handling of settings through a graphical interface.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 2598
Location: Israel
Yeah, that's what I mean... but I wonder if the writers can do a model library, with lot's of models, and age builders can upload the model to their age. Maybe even build your own model through parts. But that may be too big, I guess.

_________________
Previously known as "The stranger"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:44 pm 
Offline
Creative Kingdoms

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 pm
Posts: 6226
Location: Everywhere, all at once
Holy cow.

Whilyam wrote:
Similarly, another way to "win an argument" (not quite sure why that merited sarcasm quotes) is to write a massive essay and bore everyone else out of their skulls.

JWPlatt: Guilty! :wink:

Wedge: Look at the size of that thing!
Red Leader: Cut the chatter, red two.

_________________
OpenUru.org: An Uru Project Resource Site : Twitter : Make a commitment.
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:30 pm
Posts: 1115
At moments like these I do see the value of something I considered worthless hitherto: Twitter :lol:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 12:32 am 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:46 am
Posts: 1620
Location: Here, there, you know. Around.
Whilyam wrote:
Similarly, another way to "win an argument" (not quite sure why that merited sarcasm quotes) is to write a massive essay and bore everyone else out of their skulls.


This is even more snicker-worthy when you look at the thread title, and actually remember what the original discussion was about. :lol:

I think it'll be usual internet results... we;ll get a lot of ages with quantity. Many will be decent ages (a lot of work goes into making even just a simple age) but nothing special. Mixed in with those will be some real gems like we've seen, the few people who go put in all that extra work to make it not just a good age but a good Age. If you understand what I'm getting to. It's not just a place, it's a real world, like Cyan's ages (well, tetsonot excepted, but it's part of the same age as the other pods so still)
It'll take some digging to find the good ages, but they'll be there, and will get promoted, and it'll push the quantity to raise ther individual bars up to that level too... so over time it'll remain with lots of decent but mediocre ages (but with time 'mediocre' will be superior to that of a lot of fan-work for other games out there) and the few that stand out and get noticed.

_________________
You know, I wish we would learn Atrus loved the 1812 overture, and in turn we had a copy for our relto.
That's right, a canon canen cannon!

MOULa KI: #00027582 #7425022
100% Authentic Gondar! Accept no substitutes, imitations, or knock-offs!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:22 pm
Posts: 1810
Location: California
Wow… people that make longer posts than me… kewl.

Paradox wrote:
Any program for creating Ages will always require a knowledge of 3D modeling. The best that we can hope to do is to make a tool that integrates nicely with a 3D Modeling program to allow the handling of settings through a graphical interface.


Yes and no… For building in the Uru world it appears that will be the case. However, several of the existing MMO’s and developing MMO’s either have or are looking at ways to have easy content creation. THERE and SL have simplified content creation. It seems that is the direction things are headed. Since I think you mean knowledge of 3D modeling as is used in Uru now, I think that ‘always’ is quickly becoming inaccurate.
Sophia wrote:
At moments like these I do see the value of something I considered worthless hitherto: Twitter :lol:

:) :) :) :) :) :) I love your post

There is a lot of interesting stuff about teams and how Uru fans work. To actually know what is going on one must be involved. Otherwise we are relegated to trying to keep up by reading forums. So it is difficult to know what our community is doing and what is working or not.


[spoiler]Image[/spoiler]
Within SL I can litterly watch 3 or 4 teams of Myst-Uru types and knowing the people have an idea of how they work. Talking with them I get an idea of what they are planning and see what is materializing. We have a mixture of team building and independent builds in Eder D’Uru. The day/night desert of Minkata is there. They are solving the SL challenges of touching a stone and seeing the galaxies change. There is Eder Gira with, I think a more realistic Ae’gura and Gira. There is Vulcan Myst, an older build that is a loose interpretation of Eder Gira and other parts of Uru. Then there is the Puzzle age in process (hush-hush) that is Myst like in the puzzles. In THERE the Uruites are winning awards for build quality (well THERE level stuff).

I’m not privy to all the thinking and details of how each is teamed up and working. It looks like two of them are two person teams and one a larger team where individuals also have their own projects. In two of them homes shops are rented out to help pay for the cost of the sim.

One can actually visit these places and talk with people while they are there building. You can see the process at work. They have classes and interactive learning. Hands on building where one can see what is being done. With voice, visuals and hands on the learning is much faster than a forum read, translate to what you think, see some pictures, do what you think and look at a result. Plus all the learning channels are touched at once, auditory, visual, sort of kinesthetic. An instructor is there to help catch oops as they happen. More builders are coming on line and adding to what the community can do in other worlds. While much of the knowledge is transferable, I don’t know how many will actually make the transfer from other worlds back to MOOS. Several have stated that intension.

It is possible to get out of the theoretical and go see this stuff in action. One can participate in projects or start there own and learn whether their ideas will work.

_________________
Nalates - GoC - 418 - MOULa I: Nal KI#00 083 543, MOULa II: KI#00 583 875Nalates 111451 - Second Life: Nalates Urriah
Guild of Cartographers Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron