Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Orogogus

Real Name Orogogus   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 22, 2003, 03:15
Total Comments 1716 (Pro)
User ID 16241
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 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 ] Older >


News Comments > Into the Black
28. Re: Into the Black Aug 20, 2017, 21:20 Orogogus
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 19:40:
I mean, you get that those fired weren't "pro Trump" but marching under Nazi flags, right?

Yeah. This is where the slippery slope comes into play. People being uncomfortable is a shitty metric to base work decisions on. A company can institute a "no Nazis, Klanmen or skinheads" rule because they're evil and that's simple enough, but if you justify it by saying it's making people uncomfortable then your company is probably already a hellhole playground designed to cater to the whims of those at the top. How great would it be if someone had an abortion and then got doxxed and fired because co-workers, clients and vendors were deeply uncomfortable? Or because of sexual orientation/gender identification?

Far more bad uses than good, and I generally don't trust the top of the corporate ladder. Getting a few dozen racists fired isn't worth letting companies keep stepping on millions of the usual unfortunates. Companies run on consistent and just rules will do more for equality than ones run on the whims of management, relying on those in power to be good people.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Mass Effect: Andromeda Single-player Support Ends
16. Re: Mass Effect: Andromeda Single-player Support Ends Aug 20, 2017, 16:21 Orogogus
 
GothicWizard wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 14:49:
The Half Elf wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 14:22:
Hey Captain New's Flash, we knew this was going to happen as soon as it was announced. Why? Um... Maxis, Murky Foot, Bullfrog, Dice (not as bad as the others) etc, etc, etc.

Go back and see the heat I took for saying so back then soon after the purchase. Many online felt otherwise. And thanks for proving my point as to why I said so. History.. doomed to repeat.. etc

Your post history only goes back to February 2017.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
26. Re: Into the Black Aug 20, 2017, 11:55 Orogogus
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 10:17:
The Constitution rightfully protects women and minorities from being fired for bullshit personal reasons. It's not perfect, but it's something.

I fail to see how you compare firing people for being hateful assholes to that, though. Of course companies should. Again, if the guy in the office next to you marched on weekends to advocate for your extermination, would you want to work with him? Would you be as effective collaborating with him? Would you be as happy going in to the office and seeing him? Would you be proud of your company? Would those you do business with be happy doing business with a guy who advocates for such things?

Of course not, and that's why these people get fired.

The Constitution protects women and minorities from being fired for being women and minorities, not because of bullshit personal reasons. Companies that open the door to bullshit personal reasons typically apply them unfairly. Bad people are very quick to seize upon or manufacture controversy to get rid of people they don't like. Firing people for non-work related reasons just shouldn't be a tool in HR's arsenal. There's just no reason to believe that it will only, mostly or even ever be used for good.

Basic professionalism requires most employees to give 100% even when working with people they don't like. If I tell HR I can't work with this guy because he makes a lot of stupid pro-Trump posts on Facebook, then I'm the problem, not him. Likewise someone who's gay should be able to put on their game face and collaborate with an anti-gay marriage bigot, and so on, because that's what the company pays them for. Bringing in outside reasons is workplace drama, which quickly dominates office politics to the detriment of anyone not playing.

If you really want to play the touchy-feely uncomfortableness game, how many business owners and board members do you think skew left vs. right? Which side do you think wins when a nuclear option is on the table? On the West Coast the progressives might just eke out a win with the giant corporations, but how many people get thrown to the wolves in the rest of the country?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Metaverse
13. Re: Spintires: MudRunner Announced Aug 20, 2017, 10:51 Orogogus
 
jdreyer wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 02:14:
Orogogus wrote on Aug 20, 2017, 00:22:

I don't think that's how it works. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe patents let you apply pressure to someone who had independently invented and fielded something before your patent application.

The way it works now is this: If you're a large megacorp, you try to patent everything you can think of, and see what sticks. There's no predicting what will or will not be accepted by the USPTO, and if you make a judgement about something not being patented, then a competitor submits it and gets it accepted, then you're paying your competitor for that right instead of vice versa.

So the blame lay not with Amazon, who simply played the game as written and "won." The blame lay partly with the USPTO, and more with the government for not funding the USPTO to the level they need to be in our burgeoning modern high-tech economy. You need highly educated specialists working these cases. You need to entice them with six-figure salaries. And you need a lot of them due to the incredible number of patents filed daily.

Again, I don't think you can patent a technology and then force someone who was already using it to start paying you. I don't think it's called prior art for patents, but it's the same sort of idea.

And you also have Tesla, who treats its patents as open source, letting anyone use them for free. Amazon could always have opted to do the same, and just adopt a policy of not suing anyone for a basic idea that anyone could have thought of, but they didn't. They're as complicit as anyone else in the patent swamp.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Metaverse
10. Re: Spintires: MudRunner Announced Aug 20, 2017, 00:22 Orogogus
 
NKD wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 23:23:
Parallax Abstraction wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 22:22:
jdreyer wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 16:03:
Ozmodan wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 14:45:
Sad state of patents when someone can patent a 1 click operation. What a bunch of idiots reside in the patent office. Bezos should be banned for life from ever getting a patent again.
Don't blame Bezos. He's just playing by the rules as written. There are so many bad patents out there. Blame the Repubs for defunding the patent office.

That you play by shitty rules doesn't excuse you from being shitty yourself. No one forced him to.

Look at it from their perspective. If they didn't patent it, someone else would have, and probably muscled them into some enormously costly deal to allow them to use it. That's as good as putting a gun to his head, in terms of the business perspective.

I don't think that's how it works. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe patents let you apply pressure to someone who had independently invented and fielded something before your patent application.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
24. Re: Into the Black Aug 19, 2017, 22:21 Orogogus
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 20:16:
I mean, you just made a slippery slope argument then said "it's not a slippery slope."

It's already a done deal. The ship already sailed. Any company that fired Nazis because of something on the Internet was probably already firing people for petty, vindictive reasons and citing intangibles like their corporate values or coworkers complaining about being uncomfortable. To believe otherwise is to believe that these corporations have somehow managed to keep power out of the hands of those who want to abuse it, in contravention of basically every power structure ever. Firing a white supremacist seems far less likely to be a sign of a company taking action after seeing a line being crossed than of one justifying the shitty practices it's been engaging in all along.

People -- usually women and minorities -- are already fired too often for bullshit personal reasons. Firing white supremacists is a new thing, but overall I think getting companies involved in employees' personal lives is like abusing the DMCA for a good cause. In my opinion clawing back employees' rights and establishing an expectation that people are treated by their employers based on their job performance would be of greater overall benefit than getting a handful of white supremacists fired.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
21. Re: Into the Black Aug 19, 2017, 19:04 Orogogus
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 19, 2017, 12:00:
I'd argue that marching in a White Power demonstration does this more than doxing.

These aren't anonymous people on the internet, these are people choosing to protest minorities existing, doing so in public, in front of reporters. I'd very much want to know if the guy in the office next to me did that, and imagine most of his coworkers would. And I wouldn't want to work with him. I'd imagine most wouldn't. He'd be rightfully fired for making his fellow coworkers uncomfortable.

If that's an issue, don't march in white power parades. I get why people may think this is a slippery slope, but I'm a bit tired of people whining a slippery slope that the "left" keeps calling everyone Nazis because it's calling people marching under a Nazi flag Nazis. If you align with white power, your life will come crashing down. Just all there is.

I think people being "uncomfortable" is used for bad more than it's used for good. It gets people fired because they worked as dancers, modeled in Playboy, had a child out of wedlock, committed a crime in the past, or didn't stand for the national anthem. And it's a non-quantifiable metric that lets companies fire people for non-work related reasons. You're making people uncomfortable, you're out.

It's not a slippery slope. If companies have this tool then bad people will use it for shitty purposes more often than for firing Nazis, and it doesn't take a majority or a plurality or even more than a handful of actors in management or HR to set the course. It encourages drama in the workplace and my experience is that bad people are much better than good people at wielding this kind of chaos.

Politically, I don't think it's scoring any points. Fox News generally paints the left as a mob. Their coverage of Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, assorted campus protests and antifa sets up a contrast of normal people living normal lives versus a pack of violent, spiteful children. As far as I can tell the Democrats have been losing every seat they've been hoping to pick up in the wake of the Trump election, and I can't see the aftermath of this tragedy swinging more votes left than right.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Agents of Mayhem Released
17. Re: Agents of Mayhem Released Aug 16, 2017, 13:08 Orogogus
 
Did your autocorrect revolt on you? You spelled Volition correctly in previous posts, but it's well and gone haywire now.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > BATTLETECH Delayed
6. Re: BATTLETECH Delayed Aug 15, 2017, 03:02 Orogogus
 
pacbowl wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 23:26:
No multiplayer is the only reason I didn't fund this. I used to play the tabletop/dirtmaps using tape measures and still have painted pewter mechs. Without coop it just doesn't feel right.

You know co-op and multiplayer are two different things, right? It's going to launch with PVP multiplayer.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
17. Re: Out of the Blue Aug 13, 2017, 07:18 Orogogus
 
jdreyer wrote on Aug 13, 2017, 03:34:
Walmart says back-to-school gun display was a prank.

"It was a joke!"

Well, I guess our president says the same thing all the time, so it's not without precedent.

They seem to be saying that someone pranked them, not that they set it up like that intentionally.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Interviews
2. Re: Evening Interviews Aug 11, 2017, 13:11 Orogogus
 
Yeah; good article, but wow, there are some real extremist nuts out there with too much time on their hands.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Starflight Remake Plans?
12. Re: Starflight Remake Plans? Aug 9, 2017, 17:55 Orogogus
 
Star Control II was basically a remake of Starflight. Not identical, but very, very similar. Close enough that you have to believe that SC2 would have been a different game if Starflight never existed.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
5. Re: Morning Tech Bits Aug 9, 2017, 14:56 Orogogus
 
Bodolza wrote on Aug 9, 2017, 12:32:
This is especially true in California, which is an at-will employment state.

It's somewhat less true in California. All 50 states are at-will employment states. But like several other states, California has a public policy exception, an implied contract exception and an implied covenant of good faith & fair dealing exception, all limiting the power of at-will employment.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
17. Re: Morning Tech Bits Aug 9, 2017, 11:14 Orogogus
 
Bodolza wrote on Aug 8, 2017, 17:09:
Orogogus wrote on Aug 8, 2017, 16:14:
it's illegal in California.
FYI, their was a huge drop in diversity of colleges in California after that law was passed.

Citation? The first few search hits I see for college diversity rankings has California schools dominating the top of the lists in 2016. And if they're able to do that without racial preferences, isn't that a good thing?

It would seem Google agrees with you.

It seems to me that they say they do, but then they fired the guy anyway. Meaning that it's the kind of company that puts out a suggestion box but then tracks down and punishes anyone who uses it. If their open communication atmosphere is such an obvious sham, their diversity push probably is, too.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
6. Re: Morning Tech Bits Aug 8, 2017, 16:14 Orogogus
 
Bodolza wrote on Aug 8, 2017, 15:51:
Pretty much everything listed under "The Harm of Google's biases". Every decision is discriminatory in one way or the other. People choose colors, what car they drive, their shoes -- all based on discriminatory choices. Google has chosen to discriminate based on race and gender towards the goal of increasing diversity and inclusion. Those are the values that the company leadership has decided to embrace.

I don't think that answer is good enough to declare that the author is anti-diversity. I think you should be allowed to talk about the methods used to improve diversity. The kinds of affirmative action hiring practices described in that section are one method, and they're controversial enough when used by colleges -- it's illegal in California.

I don't believe silencing discussion is productive. You say discrimination is okay if it's for a good cause. Maybe it is, but if you're not allowed to even talk about it then how do you know if it's gone too far, or far enough? Would it be okay for a company to fire x number of white employees to make room for diversity hires? If a company instituted completely token positions for people to be paid to do nothing for the sake of looking good on paper, wouldn't it be okay to say, maybe this isn't the best way of going about this?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
3. Re: Morning Tech Bits Aug 8, 2017, 15:26 Orogogus
 
I read it, and I don't think it was anti-diversity or inclusion. It seemed to me it was a lot more about the mechanics of policies relating to diversity. Which parts did you find particularly anti?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > U.K. Sales Charts
3. Re: UK Sales Charts Aug 7, 2017, 17:26 Orogogus
 
My impression is that GFK Chart-Track doesn't have access to Steam sales data, which distorts the results. PUBG and other Steam-only titles never show up, and PC games seem to rank lower than expected in the combined lists.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
17. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Jul 31, 2017, 13:11 Orogogus
 
HorrorScope wrote on Jul 31, 2017, 11:09:
Cutter wrote on Jul 30, 2017, 21:34:
How on earth is it a noble job, or even necessary?

I just wanted to answer to state this doesn't deserve an answer.

The left siding Cutter just went on a whim, as far right as you can with this one.

It's only the deep libertarians on the right that are anti-law enforcement. Tough on crime/blue lives matter are generally right wing positions.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
3. Re: etc. Jul 27, 2017, 14:16 Orogogus
 
From the article and just the title, it seems to me that House Party got axed because people complained, the same way that comments violating the rules usually get removed on Blue's boards when they get reported, not because they're necessarily the most egregious violations. Of course, people have been whining about double standards here for forever, too.

As for copyright violations -- you can violate copyright as long as the IP holder doesn't sue you. Witness Hasbro's extraordinarily lenient attitude towards third party Transformers toys.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
10. Re: 111 N.F.L. Brains. All But One Had C.T.E. Jul 26, 2017, 13:01 Orogogus
 
RedEye9 wrote on Jul 26, 2017, 12:35:
Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 26, 2017, 12:21:
Brain damage due to concussion is a serious problem in American football. That said, headlines like this are, in part, the reason news media is under increasing attack. The study is statistically invalid because a majority of the brains were donated because the person had shown signs of dementia or other symptoms. Anyone wanting to discredit it, wouldn't have to work hard. This despite the fact it is indeed a serious problem which needs to be addressed.
There is nothing misleading about the headline, study or article. I don't see how anyone could discredit the results.
The article even states “There’s a tremendous selection bias,” noting that many families have donated brains specifically because the former player showed symptoms of C.T.E.
Repeated trauma to the brain causes C.T.E., now maybe dipshits like Jerry Jones and parents who push their children into dangerous sports will take note.
“It is no longer debatable whether or not there is a problem in football — there is a problem,” Dr. McKee said.

Recognizing a "tremendous selection bias" doesn't make it go away. If this were an autism and vaccine study that relied solely on donated material, most of it from subjects who'd already showed signs of autism, you'd recognize the problem, wouldn't you?

The article does mention that even if these 110 positives represented all the positives from the ~1,300 former players who have died, an 8% rate (the article says ~9%, I'm not sure why; maybe they have a more precise total than 1,300) is still "vastly" higher than that of the general population. But it would have been nice if they had said what that general rate was.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1716 Comments. 86 pages. Viewing page 10.
< Newer [ 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 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo