Little did I know as I wrote yesterday's review of Heavy Rain that both I and the missus were to finish our respective games during the evening, but let me tell you; it was certainly a singular experience. However, both our endings, and the way we got there, were different in big ways. First off, the missus actually lost the game, if you can use such a term when discussing this particular game, and I won it, even though you don't really win (nor do you lose). "What do you mean?" You may ask, and the question is fitting.
When thinking about video games we're accustomed to thinking in more or less black and white terms. You play, solving puzzles, quests, killing bad guys and saving maidens in distress, but if you run out of lives you're presented with the "Game over" screen. If, however, you manage not to spend all your player lives, and you manage to make it through to the ending and beat the game, you normally get some kind of end-game video sequence or something to that effect. Heavy Rain, however does not work that way.
While playing you get attached to your characters, you sympathize with them, and you want them to prevail. It may not happen right away, and you probably will not know when it has happened, but it will, and when it does you are emotionally invested in the game and your characters. You lead them on their way through the adventure to confront the darkest recesses of the human mind, and as you play on you begin to feel invincible because you're meant to survive and to succeed (and because some parts of the game are deceptively easy). After all, who would let the main characters in a psychological thriller die, let a killer go free and kill a ten year old boy?
Well, as the missus found out, it is possible to get your main characters killed - all of them, and if you do the resulting chain of events is such a heart wrenching affair that you will be devastated. She was saddened, angry, disappointed and surprised all at once, and she was, in fact, so affected by this outcome that she simply went to bed - leaving me to, with slight apprehension, play out my game. But was she presented with the ubiquitous "Game Over" screen? No she was not, because this is not that kind of game. Instead, we were forced to sit through a long end-game sequence in which the origami killer was never identified, in which all the main people were dead, in which an innocent man were given the blame for the murders, and in which the origami killer's latest victim died because no-one who could save him were left alive. We were both at the edge of our seats, and I think I saw tears form in the corners of the missus' eyes. Absolutely devastating.
At this point I guess you're wondering whether or not I am exaggerating for effect, but no I am not. The game really is that effective as long as you are capable of being emotionally tied to something, which most of us are, and it is that effective for a couple of reasons. First there is the obvious emotional connection you surprisingly quickly form with your characters. Secondly it is that effective because you are never given any second chances - what's done is done, and there's nothing you can do about it except start over from scratch. And third, there is the inherent sense of right and wrong that we all share. Killing people is wrong, most of us would agree with this, and thus most of us would agree that killing children is worse still.
We all want murderers to get caught and put to justice, and even though our opinion of what would constitute justice in any given situation might differ, we all share that one conviction; murderers must be held accountable for their crimes. When they are not we are reminded of the frailty of life and ordered society, we are reminded of the potential for evil in humans, and we are reminded of the all too real fact that many killers go free because there is simply not enough evidence to convict or apprehend them. These are all issues we are not used to being confronted with in games, and thus it is doubly effective in particular because you yourself have orchestrated the chain of events that led you to that particular conclusion.
So what about my game? Did I win?
Well, yes - and no. I think it is meaningless to talk about winning or loosing this game, because no matter what you do the game will eventually end. It may not end the way you want it to, or the end result may not be entirely to your liking, but you will get an ending. I won in the sense that I managed to save the origami killer's latest victim, and I managed to identify the killer - I think, but for many of the people involved in the story it was a hollow victory. The origami killer had still killed eight little boys, and so there were eight families who had closure, but their child was still gone. Obviously there is nothing that can be done to avoid this particular issue, but their sadness sticks with you - as does their relief and satisfaction at being given at least some justice for their children. So was it a happy ending? Well, as far as such things go in a story like this, yes it was.
However, I was still left with unanswered questions at the end of it all, and I am sure I will have to play through the game again, but differently, if I want to have them answered. There are many paths to take towards the ending, and as you play the story through different branches the story will unfold in different ways. I am sure I will do so, and I am sure the missus will also want to give it another go in order to get her own closure with the origami killer and provide justice for the parents of all his victims. For my part though, I noticed there is a DLC available that I will play through before giving the main game another go.
In closing I will say that I remain convinced that this game is a must-have for everyone who owns a PS3 - it truly is a remarkable experience.
tirsdag 3. august 2010
mandag 2. august 2010
Game review: Heavy Rain
I may be late in reviewing this game, but I've been late in buying and playing it as well (having six months old twins will cut into your gaming time). So, as I was finally able to pick it up and start playing it, and having read a good number of previous reviews, I had very high expectations for what is touted as an interactive drama more than a game.
While I bought the game primarily for the missus, I was the first that really got my teeth into it - playing a good few hours all in all while she slept or was otherwise engaged. However, now it is proving impossible for me to pry the controller away from her whenever the time for potential gaming arrives (mostly when the twins have been put to bed for the night). None of us have as of yet finished the game, and as it gobbles up time in a pacmanian fashion (I just invented a word) I suspect we still have many game hours to go. So these are my impressions of the game for those of you who, like me, are late to get into it.
As this game is driven by its story and the way you shape it, I cannot reveal much about how the story progress, and thus this review will be about impressions and experiences with the game. While the game installs you are treated to a neat little time-sink to while away the tedium of watching the install bar crawl from left to right. Being a full blown geek I have always loved these kinds of things, and it brought my mind back to the original Command & Conquer on the PC which, as far as I know, was the first game to do something similar. C&C provided you with information screens during the install which let you familiarize yourself with the background story and various units while awaiting the install to complete. Heavy Rain provides instructions for folding an included origami piece yourself, and if done correctly and quickly enough, you should be finished earlier than, or at the time the installation has completed.
As the game opens you are stuck in the role of Ethan Mars during a sunny day at his and his family's home in the sprawling suburbs. This is the prologue, and while it seems daunting and perhaps a little tedious at first to go through the motions of waking up and doing the various morning toiletries with appropriate motions and gestures with the controller, it serves to familiarize yourself with the interface as well as set the mood for the game. Some reviewers have complained about the inclusion of "shake controller to towel off after shower" sequences, and "shake controller to brush teeth" operations, but I thought they were more than appropriate. I will even go so far and argue that these sequences are necessary.
The game is marketed as an interactive psychological drama, and as such the characters in it are the most important aspects of the story (obviously in addition to the story itself). And in order for the characters to be believable, they need to have realistic lives, and that is what the toweling off and shaving sequences do. They add to the immersion in the game, and they provide an effective illusion that these are real people, with real lives and real life problems and obligations that need to be handled. There's only one thing, which I still maintain, that is a small let-down; the voice acting. This game has taken a lot of time and money to develop, and it would definitely have benefited from hiring in some decent talent to do the voice-overs. This is, however a small niggle, and it is one that you'll be able to overlook as the game sinks it's teeth into you and pulls you in.
Playing the game involves makings gestures with, or hitting declared buttons on, the controller according to available options shown on the screen. Some items are interactive, and these show an action icon whenever you are in position to perform it, requiring you to make a gesture with the right stick. Others relate to the way your character respond in conversations or to his own thoughts, and others still are so called quick time events, or "press X right now in order not to die" events.
Normally I would state loudly that I thoroughly hate QTEs, and that I hate them with a passion, but not this time. In Heavy Rain they are necessary, and they are the driving forces of the game as you will only have a limited amount of time to contemplate your response to certain events, and only a split second to contemplate your response to others. The game, however does not care if you find yourself regretting your reflex reaction to an event - it just plows on mercilessly, giving you no chance to go back to try again. Both I and the missus ended up shooting an innocent man in a reflex reaction, and we both would have undone that action if we could have, but the world of the game did not care about our bout of remorse and simply drove the story on, leaving us to our self-inflicted psychological trauma.
This is another of the game's numerous strengths as it breaks new ground in storytelling within games - it gives you no direct control over when to save your progress. Instead, it function by a well-known principle of checkpoints. You play through a certain segment of the story, whereupon you are treated to a loading screen and the game has saved as the new chapter opens. In some games the "reach next checkpoint to save" rule is nothing short of aggravating, and something that has quite possibly kept many from finishing certain games, but in Heavy Rain it is highly effective as a tool both for telling the story as well as keeping you invested and immersed.
You have to open yourself up to the game and world within it, and if you do you will form emotional bonds with the characters that will in many ways leave you feeling as if it is the game that is pulling you along, rather than you driving the game towards the end. There are not many games that are able to incite such deep emotional responses from its players (the scene when Aeris dies in Final Fantasy VII comes to mind), but this is one of them. You want the characters to prevail, you want them to come out on top and you want only good things for them - in spite of all their all too human flaws. But alas, the world does not work that way. The world can be a dark and scary place, filled with danger and people with nefarious intentions that hide in the shadows just waiting to sink a blade into your chest for a pocketful of change. The game will remind you of these things, but it will also show you that there are good things to be had in the world, that in spite of all the misery the sun still shines behind the clouds.
Playing the game you will alternate by playing it through four different people, who all have different stories to tell and different motivations, and whose lives will, or may, intersect. For instance, in my game I had two of the different characters meet briefly in a situation brought on by the main story, whereas in the missus' game this didn't happen because she had reacted differently to a certain earlier problem. These variations both gives the game replayability, as well as lending it a level of open-endedness in that you as a player can directly influence how the story progresses and how it will end. The main story behind always stays the same, but the way you navigate through it will be shaped by your actions and your inactions.
So what is the story in the game? Well, the characters all live in an un-named city that is being terrorized by a particularly clever serial killer dubbed "The Origami Killer". I can not say much more about this without revealing too much of the plot, so I think I will leave it at that. As the game deals with some very mature issues, there are instances of nudity and very coarse language, and as such, this is not a game for children. It requires a mature mind to fully grasp the story and the implications of that story on the simulated people within, thus this is one instance where the age rating on the box is appropriate.
However, the way the game deals with these issues and presents them, come about in a natural way. For example, people are usually naked when taking showers, and as such they are naked when showering in the game. Even the missus, who is usually the first to frown upon the use of gratuitous nudity in movies and games, found the inclusion here to be appropriate and natural. There is, for instance, one scene in which a female character takes a shower displaying a set of high-resolution boobs, but it doesn't feel weird or out of place as many people would probably want a shower in that very same situation. And then there is the language; people swear, it's as simple as that. Swearing is as much a part of everyday language as the words "dinner" and "mail", and again it is used in appropriate ways. It never feels contrived or tacked on for the sake of it.
In addition to all this, the game further adds to the characters by introducing such all too real issues as chronic insomnia, anxiety, substance abuse, domestic abuse and prostitution. By painting the player characters as normal, flawed human beings you will sympathize with them - you believe in the characters and their motivations because you either have first hand experience with the same issues, or because you understand them well enough to be able to identify with them. These are not the invincible action heroes we are used to seeing in games; these are people that could be your neighbours or your co-workers.
Anxiously I await my next chance to play further, and reluctantly I put down the controller as real life obligations claim my attention. It is a truly remarkable game that is, I will dare to say, the first of its kind, and one that belongs in the collection of anyone who owns a Playstation 3. And if you have not yet purchased a PS3, this is the excuse you have been waiting for. It is an emotional roller-coaster ride that will surprise, frustrate and sadden you.
How far would you go to save someone you love?
While I bought the game primarily for the missus, I was the first that really got my teeth into it - playing a good few hours all in all while she slept or was otherwise engaged. However, now it is proving impossible for me to pry the controller away from her whenever the time for potential gaming arrives (mostly when the twins have been put to bed for the night). None of us have as of yet finished the game, and as it gobbles up time in a pacmanian fashion (I just invented a word) I suspect we still have many game hours to go. So these are my impressions of the game for those of you who, like me, are late to get into it.
 |
| It's 18 for a reason; this is a game dealing with mature issues. |
As this game is driven by its story and the way you shape it, I cannot reveal much about how the story progress, and thus this review will be about impressions and experiences with the game. While the game installs you are treated to a neat little time-sink to while away the tedium of watching the install bar crawl from left to right. Being a full blown geek I have always loved these kinds of things, and it brought my mind back to the original Command & Conquer on the PC which, as far as I know, was the first game to do something similar. C&C provided you with information screens during the install which let you familiarize yourself with the background story and various units while awaiting the install to complete. Heavy Rain provides instructions for folding an included origami piece yourself, and if done correctly and quickly enough, you should be finished earlier than, or at the time the installation has completed.
As the game opens you are stuck in the role of Ethan Mars during a sunny day at his and his family's home in the sprawling suburbs. This is the prologue, and while it seems daunting and perhaps a little tedious at first to go through the motions of waking up and doing the various morning toiletries with appropriate motions and gestures with the controller, it serves to familiarize yourself with the interface as well as set the mood for the game. Some reviewers have complained about the inclusion of "shake controller to towel off after shower" sequences, and "shake controller to brush teeth" operations, but I thought they were more than appropriate. I will even go so far and argue that these sequences are necessary.
 |
| A brief moment of family bliss |
The game is marketed as an interactive psychological drama, and as such the characters in it are the most important aspects of the story (obviously in addition to the story itself). And in order for the characters to be believable, they need to have realistic lives, and that is what the toweling off and shaving sequences do. They add to the immersion in the game, and they provide an effective illusion that these are real people, with real lives and real life problems and obligations that need to be handled. There's only one thing, which I still maintain, that is a small let-down; the voice acting. This game has taken a lot of time and money to develop, and it would definitely have benefited from hiring in some decent talent to do the voice-overs. This is, however a small niggle, and it is one that you'll be able to overlook as the game sinks it's teeth into you and pulls you in.
Playing the game involves makings gestures with, or hitting declared buttons on, the controller according to available options shown on the screen. Some items are interactive, and these show an action icon whenever you are in position to perform it, requiring you to make a gesture with the right stick. Others relate to the way your character respond in conversations or to his own thoughts, and others still are so called quick time events, or "press X right now in order not to die" events.
Normally I would state loudly that I thoroughly hate QTEs, and that I hate them with a passion, but not this time. In Heavy Rain they are necessary, and they are the driving forces of the game as you will only have a limited amount of time to contemplate your response to certain events, and only a split second to contemplate your response to others. The game, however does not care if you find yourself regretting your reflex reaction to an event - it just plows on mercilessly, giving you no chance to go back to try again. Both I and the missus ended up shooting an innocent man in a reflex reaction, and we both would have undone that action if we could have, but the world of the game did not care about our bout of remorse and simply drove the story on, leaving us to our self-inflicted psychological trauma.
 |
You have to open yourself up to the game and world within it, and if you do you will form emotional bonds with the characters that will in many ways leave you feeling as if it is the game that is pulling you along, rather than you driving the game towards the end. There are not many games that are able to incite such deep emotional responses from its players (the scene when Aeris dies in Final Fantasy VII comes to mind), but this is one of them. You want the characters to prevail, you want them to come out on top and you want only good things for them - in spite of all their all too human flaws. But alas, the world does not work that way. The world can be a dark and scary place, filled with danger and people with nefarious intentions that hide in the shadows just waiting to sink a blade into your chest for a pocketful of change. The game will remind you of these things, but it will also show you that there are good things to be had in the world, that in spite of all the misery the sun still shines behind the clouds.
Playing the game you will alternate by playing it through four different people, who all have different stories to tell and different motivations, and whose lives will, or may, intersect. For instance, in my game I had two of the different characters meet briefly in a situation brought on by the main story, whereas in the missus' game this didn't happen because she had reacted differently to a certain earlier problem. These variations both gives the game replayability, as well as lending it a level of open-endedness in that you as a player can directly influence how the story progresses and how it will end. The main story behind always stays the same, but the way you navigate through it will be shaped by your actions and your inactions.
So what is the story in the game? Well, the characters all live in an un-named city that is being terrorized by a particularly clever serial killer dubbed "The Origami Killer". I can not say much more about this without revealing too much of the plot, so I think I will leave it at that. As the game deals with some very mature issues, there are instances of nudity and very coarse language, and as such, this is not a game for children. It requires a mature mind to fully grasp the story and the implications of that story on the simulated people within, thus this is one instance where the age rating on the box is appropriate.
 |
| People tend to be naked when taking showers. |
However, the way the game deals with these issues and presents them, come about in a natural way. For example, people are usually naked when taking showers, and as such they are naked when showering in the game. Even the missus, who is usually the first to frown upon the use of gratuitous nudity in movies and games, found the inclusion here to be appropriate and natural. There is, for instance, one scene in which a female character takes a shower displaying a set of high-resolution boobs, but it doesn't feel weird or out of place as many people would probably want a shower in that very same situation. And then there is the language; people swear, it's as simple as that. Swearing is as much a part of everyday language as the words "dinner" and "mail", and again it is used in appropriate ways. It never feels contrived or tacked on for the sake of it.
In addition to all this, the game further adds to the characters by introducing such all too real issues as chronic insomnia, anxiety, substance abuse, domestic abuse and prostitution. By painting the player characters as normal, flawed human beings you will sympathize with them - you believe in the characters and their motivations because you either have first hand experience with the same issues, or because you understand them well enough to be able to identify with them. These are not the invincible action heroes we are used to seeing in games; these are people that could be your neighbours or your co-workers.
Anxiously I await my next chance to play further, and reluctantly I put down the controller as real life obligations claim my attention. It is a truly remarkable game that is, I will dare to say, the first of its kind, and one that belongs in the collection of anyone who owns a Playstation 3. And if you have not yet purchased a PS3, this is the excuse you have been waiting for. It is an emotional roller-coaster ride that will surprise, frustrate and sadden you.
How far would you go to save someone you love?
torsdag 3. juni 2010
Creationists and evolution
Today I got in to the office at my regular time. I made myself a cup of coffee, and then I quickly browsed some news pages and various message boards as I usually do before getting started on the daily grind. Among the sites I visit regularly is FSTDT in order to get my daily fix of fundamentalist misanthropy and crazyness, and that's when I stumbled upon a particularly ignorant and misconceived notion of evolution.
And that brings us to today and my findings during my morning's routine browsings.
It's no secret that creationists and fundamentalists tend to turn a blind eye to the progresses made in various scienific disciplines over the past 500 years or so, and in particular those made in evolutionary biology. I am, in other words, quite used to reading horribly uninformed and wrongful ideas of what evolution is, but I will never get used to the fact that these people seem to revel in being willfully ignorant. There really is no excuse in this day and age where pretty much every conceivable bit of information pertaining to the accumulated knowledge of mankind is available to everyone at the press of a button.
There are many aspects of the theory of evolution that these people seem to not want to understand, and among these is the concept of transitional species - species in between fish and land dwelling animals for instance. These people seem to expect that the way evolution works is by having a duck laying eggs from which a dog hatches, and no matter how many times they're told that evolution does not work that way they just seem incapable of taking it in.
Here's an illustration I found on the Missing Universe Museum website:
They are using the sequence of images to illustrate their idea of how evolution works in order to show how a horse should evolve flight. However, in doing so they're also ignoring the fact that 1) evolution does not work that way, 2) flying mammals have four limbs, not six, 3) a horse would never evolve flight due to weight vs. muscle capacity, 4) aerodynamics doesn't allow for it, and 5) wings wouldn't be a survival trait for a horse. They also don't seem to understand (or don't want to understand) the fact that a winged horse (a Pegasus) would effectively disprove evolution.
1. Evolution doesn't work that way.
No, it really doesn't. Evolution works through natural selection by breeding. Throughout the history of life on our planet it has been the females of the species who has effectively been deciding upon the route evolution would take. If, in some animal society, the favored trait was flamboyant plumage, the more garish the better, then the male animals with the most garish and flamboyant plumage would get to breed with the most females, thus making it an evolutionary trait to have flamboyant plumages and the ones who didn't would get weeded out (look at peacocks).
2. Flying mammals have four limbs, not six.
You need only google flying mammals to see that this is true. Bats, for instance (they are mammals, and not birds as stated in the bible, by the way) fly by the aid of webbed wings that has been stretched between the elongated fingers on their forelimbs. This makes them te only mammals capable of sustained flight, rather than other flying mammals such as flying squirrels who glide rather than fly.
3. Weight vs. muscle capacity.
Birds have evolved for flight through shedding weight and the favorisation of feathers. Their bones are hollow and filled with ar, they have no teeth and their bodies have evolved into highly aerodynamic shapes. The earliest known bird under modern definition is the Archaeopteryx from the late jurassic period (150 - 145 million years ago) which marks a definite step from land dwelling theropod dinosaurs to what we today know as modern avians. Sustained flight takes an enormous amount of muscle energy, and the larger the animal the more muscle vs. weight will be needed. But also aerodynamics play a part in determining the maximum size and weight of any flying animal, which is of course another reason why birds have evolved the way they have (beaks, feathers, low weight, hollow bones and so on). The Condor and the Wandering Albatross are the largest flying animals in the world today. But the largest flying animals in the fossil record are the pterosaurs Quetzalcoatlus and the Hatzegopteryx both with wingspans of 12m or more, making them the size of a small bus. However, these pterosaurs had evolved into highly secialized creatures to be capable of flight, such as, again, hollow air filled bones, elongated snouts for aerodynamics and so on. Horses, on the other hand, are heavy animals with more or less solid bones and are not particularly aerodynamic.
4. Aerodynamics.
Look to point 3.
5. Wings would not be a survival trait for horses.
How does evolution work? It works through the means of natural selection. Natural variation occurs among the individuals of any population of organisms. Many of these differences do not affect survival (such as differences in eye color in humans), but some differences may improve the chances of survival of a particular individual. A rabbit that runs faster than others may be more likely to escape from predators, and algae that are more efficient at extracting energy from sunlight will grow faster. Individuals that have better odds for survival also have better odds for reproduction. Horses do not need flight to escape predators; they have evolved highly effective fight or flight responses as well as high speed and endurance in running across solid ground, making the fastest runners the most likely to proliferate. Thus, the ability to run fast and long is a favored trait in horses, and those that are capable of this will have a greater chance of breeding.
Transitional species.
Creationists seem to always misunderstand the concept of transitional species, often referring to them as "missing links" - which, by the way, is a nonsensical term. They don't understand the fact that evolution is a relentless ongoing process that never rests, never stops and never has any concideration for anything or anyone. Evolution is not a conscious process, and it has no will on it's own. Evolution just is, and every species to ever have existed were, and are, transitional species.
onsdag 2. juni 2010
Pet peeves and aggravations
There are certain things in human society and in everyday life that strike deeper and more noticeable than others. While I am able to maintain my composure and "keep cool" when faced with some of them, there are, however, others that grind at my bones! I am talking about those small things that each and every one of us get worked up or annoyed at, like leaving the toilet seat up, forgetting to put the cap back on the tube of toothpaste or some such inanity. We all have them, and I think we all will agree that some are worse than others - at least to the person affected by them.
I am no different; I have several. So, as an example I can tell you that I like symmetry. I appreciate, for instance, having the various glasses in our cupboards lined up and sorted according to type, shape and size. It does not only look better in my opinion, it's also more practical to keep the same kinds of glasses grouped together. However, if I find that a glass is misplaced, or the lines are messed up I am able to deal with it rationally and calmly, and then I will sort it out. But I would be lying if I said it didn't bother me, it's just that I am able to handle that particular grievance. And of course, that's how it should be. It doesn't do to fly off the handle at every minor annoyance or niggle, no, we rise above them in a magnanimous way.
However, there are a couple of other ... annoyances ... that I simply am just about unable to deal with, and which has me grinding my teeth in discomfort and revulsion. I am referring to people who talk with food in their mouths, and people who chew with their mouths open - or worst of all; people who talk while chewing food at the same time. There is absolutely no conceivable situation in which this is acceptable, and personally I find it to be nothing short of revolting.
There is this one guy at work, for instance, who has a tendency to do this - loudly and without inhibition, and particularly whilst standing behind me in my office. He will barge in with a sandwich in one hand and chewing with his mouth open whilst at the same time talking unabashedly at me, spraying saliva and bits of food that invariably escape this person's considerable gravitational field and the pit that is this man's mouth. And there I'm sitting, trapped by the bulk and shade of what is definitely neither a moon nor a space station, but a man whose bombastic demeanor and repulsive eating habits has repeatedly had me on the verge of projectile vomiting. No, by the way, I am not exaggerating.
How is it that some people find this kind of disgusting behaviour to be acceptable? Or is it just me? Do you think I'm overly sensitive, or that my expectations of certain standards of class from my fellow human beings are unrealistic?
Footnote of completely unrelated origin: I also collect words. The word of the day is: Pandiculation - the act of stretching oneself.
I am no different; I have several. So, as an example I can tell you that I like symmetry. I appreciate, for instance, having the various glasses in our cupboards lined up and sorted according to type, shape and size. It does not only look better in my opinion, it's also more practical to keep the same kinds of glasses grouped together. However, if I find that a glass is misplaced, or the lines are messed up I am able to deal with it rationally and calmly, and then I will sort it out. But I would be lying if I said it didn't bother me, it's just that I am able to handle that particular grievance. And of course, that's how it should be. It doesn't do to fly off the handle at every minor annoyance or niggle, no, we rise above them in a magnanimous way.
However, there are a couple of other ... annoyances ... that I simply am just about unable to deal with, and which has me grinding my teeth in discomfort and revulsion. I am referring to people who talk with food in their mouths, and people who chew with their mouths open - or worst of all; people who talk while chewing food at the same time. There is absolutely no conceivable situation in which this is acceptable, and personally I find it to be nothing short of revolting.
There is this one guy at work, for instance, who has a tendency to do this - loudly and without inhibition, and particularly whilst standing behind me in my office. He will barge in with a sandwich in one hand and chewing with his mouth open whilst at the same time talking unabashedly at me, spraying saliva and bits of food that invariably escape this person's considerable gravitational field and the pit that is this man's mouth. And there I'm sitting, trapped by the bulk and shade of what is definitely neither a moon nor a space station, but a man whose bombastic demeanor and repulsive eating habits has repeatedly had me on the verge of projectile vomiting. No, by the way, I am not exaggerating.
How is it that some people find this kind of disgusting behaviour to be acceptable? Or is it just me? Do you think I'm overly sensitive, or that my expectations of certain standards of class from my fellow human beings are unrealistic?
Footnote of completely unrelated origin: I also collect words. The word of the day is: Pandiculation - the act of stretching oneself.
fredag 28. mai 2010
Charlatans and hustlers
I was just made aware of the fact that the self-proclaimed psychic and healer Lisa Williams is coming to Norway, and I find I'm getting aggravated at the very prospect of it. My problem, however, is not with Lisa Williams per se, but with any and all people that make a living by exploiting and hustling the gullible and the naive. No "psychic" has ever been able to replicate his/her abilities in rigid scientific studies, and most will never attend such studies obviously because they know the results would be negative. There is no way to quantify or measure "psychic ability", but neither is there any proof at all that such abilities exist.
Any and all "psychics" with their own TV-shows, book deals, performance tours and such are in it for one thing, and one thing only: money. To be able to do what they do they employ and perfect various techniques for various settings, and I will talk about the most common.
Cold Reading.
From Wikipedia: "Cold reading is a series of techniques used by mentalists, illusionists, fortune tellers, psychics, mediums and con artists to determine or express details about another person, often in order to convince them that the reader knows much more about a subject than they actually do."
An experienced cold reader is quickly able to deduce many things about a suject simply by observing the subject's facial expressions, hairstyle, style of clothing, jewelry and so on. The cold reader is forcing - or coercing - the subject to cooperate, and blatantly guessing with various questions of high-probability.
Example:
Reader: "Did your husband linger on in the hospital, or did he pass quickly?"
Subject: "Oh, he died almost immediately!"
Reader: "Yes, because he's saying to me, `I didn't suffer. I was spared any pain.'"
In the above example the reader is coercing the subject to believe that the reader knows something he/she didn't. The information was supplied by the subject to be verified by the reader. Why should the reader, for instance, have to aske the question he/she did in the above example?
And that's what cold reading is. The medium is throwing out suggestions and guesses while expecting (and usually getting) feedback from their subjects. "I get an older man here" is a question, a suggestion, and a guess by the "reader" who expects some reaction from the subject. And while the reaction may be very subtle, the reader has trained himself/herself to pick up even the most unnoticeable of changes in facial expressions. The reaction might just be a nod, or a subtle change in the subject's expression or body language (or the occasional gasp), but the affirmation is supplied by the subject, and not by the reader.
Then the reader might start throwing names out into the audience. "They're saying, John, or Johnny. Do you know this man?" is another wild guess, a question and a suggestion. If there was a John or Johnny the subject will affirm and strengthen the identification, but if there is none the reader will move on whilst brushing it off saying that John or Johnny is there, but was not immediately recognized. If, however, Johnny is remembered later, that will be integrated into the farce.
From James Randi Educational Foundation: "You should observe and listen to a video of a reading. In one such by Van Praagh, prepared by the "48 Hours" TV program, a reading that lasted 60 minutes, we found only TWO actual statements made, and 260 questions asked. Both actual statements--guesses--were wrong. Van Praagh was looking for the name of the woman's deceased husband, and he came up with it by asking, "Do you know anyone named, Jack?" The woman answered, "Yes! Jack, my husband!" But Van Praagh didn't identify "Jack" at all. He asked her if SHE would identify him. By that time, Van Praagh had already tried on her 26 other men's names--all wrong. But, the woman--the subject--forgot about those failures, because they were not important to her. "Jack" was important."
Unfortunately I couldn't find that exact video easily available online, but here is another one showing van Praagh failing during a cold-reading session: van Praagh.
Every psychic, medium or stage clairvoyant (Lisa Williams included) has been using the same set of techniques since time immemorial, and since time immemorial their audience has allowed themselves to be deceived in spite of the fact that common sense should tell them not to. Personally I don't understand why. Why this urge or interest in talking to dead relatives?
Now there are probably some that would argue that some people are just seeking some kind of closure after having their spouse unexpectedly and suddenly die, and that their closure is more important than the methods of achieving it. That makes it even worse. Then the so-called medium, or psychic, is not only preying on the gullible, but they're also exploiting someone else's pain and loss for their own gain. Make no mistake; the ones that make it to the big time with their own TV-shows, performance tours and books deals make millions this way.
So now you probably ask why I am so upset about what other people believe. It's their beliefs and I should just respect them right? Wrong. I see no reason why I should respect and condone a set of beliefs that allow some people to prey on the less fortunate, the emotionally scarred or the gullible in order to line their own pockets. I am a fervent supporter of rationality and logic and what constitutes provable reality, and as such I can not, and will not, respect a system of belief that relies on willful and blatant deception in order to be maintained.
Any and all "psychics" with their own TV-shows, book deals, performance tours and such are in it for one thing, and one thing only: money. To be able to do what they do they employ and perfect various techniques for various settings, and I will talk about the most common.
Cold Reading.
From Wikipedia: "Cold reading is a series of techniques used by mentalists, illusionists, fortune tellers, psychics, mediums and con artists to determine or express details about another person, often in order to convince them that the reader knows much more about a subject than they actually do."
An experienced cold reader is quickly able to deduce many things about a suject simply by observing the subject's facial expressions, hairstyle, style of clothing, jewelry and so on. The cold reader is forcing - or coercing - the subject to cooperate, and blatantly guessing with various questions of high-probability.
Example:
Reader: "Did your husband linger on in the hospital, or did he pass quickly?"
Subject: "Oh, he died almost immediately!"
Reader: "Yes, because he's saying to me, `I didn't suffer. I was spared any pain.'"
In the above example the reader is coercing the subject to believe that the reader knows something he/she didn't. The information was supplied by the subject to be verified by the reader. Why should the reader, for instance, have to aske the question he/she did in the above example?
And that's what cold reading is. The medium is throwing out suggestions and guesses while expecting (and usually getting) feedback from their subjects. "I get an older man here" is a question, a suggestion, and a guess by the "reader" who expects some reaction from the subject. And while the reaction may be very subtle, the reader has trained himself/herself to pick up even the most unnoticeable of changes in facial expressions. The reaction might just be a nod, or a subtle change in the subject's expression or body language (or the occasional gasp), but the affirmation is supplied by the subject, and not by the reader.
Then the reader might start throwing names out into the audience. "They're saying, John, or Johnny. Do you know this man?" is another wild guess, a question and a suggestion. If there was a John or Johnny the subject will affirm and strengthen the identification, but if there is none the reader will move on whilst brushing it off saying that John or Johnny is there, but was not immediately recognized. If, however, Johnny is remembered later, that will be integrated into the farce.
From James Randi Educational Foundation: "You should observe and listen to a video of a reading. In one such by Van Praagh, prepared by the "48 Hours" TV program, a reading that lasted 60 minutes, we found only TWO actual statements made, and 260 questions asked. Both actual statements--guesses--were wrong. Van Praagh was looking for the name of the woman's deceased husband, and he came up with it by asking, "Do you know anyone named, Jack?" The woman answered, "Yes! Jack, my husband!" But Van Praagh didn't identify "Jack" at all. He asked her if SHE would identify him. By that time, Van Praagh had already tried on her 26 other men's names--all wrong. But, the woman--the subject--forgot about those failures, because they were not important to her. "Jack" was important."
Unfortunately I couldn't find that exact video easily available online, but here is another one showing van Praagh failing during a cold-reading session: van Praagh.
Every psychic, medium or stage clairvoyant (Lisa Williams included) has been using the same set of techniques since time immemorial, and since time immemorial their audience has allowed themselves to be deceived in spite of the fact that common sense should tell them not to. Personally I don't understand why. Why this urge or interest in talking to dead relatives?
Now there are probably some that would argue that some people are just seeking some kind of closure after having their spouse unexpectedly and suddenly die, and that their closure is more important than the methods of achieving it. That makes it even worse. Then the so-called medium, or psychic, is not only preying on the gullible, but they're also exploiting someone else's pain and loss for their own gain. Make no mistake; the ones that make it to the big time with their own TV-shows, performance tours and books deals make millions this way.
So now you probably ask why I am so upset about what other people believe. It's their beliefs and I should just respect them right? Wrong. I see no reason why I should respect and condone a set of beliefs that allow some people to prey on the less fortunate, the emotionally scarred or the gullible in order to line their own pockets. I am a fervent supporter of rationality and logic and what constitutes provable reality, and as such I can not, and will not, respect a system of belief that relies on willful and blatant deception in order to be maintained.
torsdag 27. mai 2010
The Ultimate Machine - part 6 - Completion
Yesterday I finally completed my Ultimate Machine Mk.I.
Following part 5 there really weren't much left to sort out, but the last finishing touches were required. Today I present to you the final pictures of this build, and at long last a video of the machine in action.
As I left you from part 5 I had a couple of things left to do: staining the arm and the hold-down blocks and modifying the switch. Also, as it turned out, I had to modify the forward lid as well as the force from the arm retracting had the lid pop open. This simply would not do, and so I solved the problem by embedding a couple of neodymium magnets into the frame and the bottom of the lid, very effectively securing the lid while allowing it to be opened if needed.
As you can see I also had to modify the arm slightly because occasionally the arm would stop before completing it's cycle, thus locking the machine. I got around this problem by extending the arm with a small piece of wood (which now also needs to be stained obviously).
The simple, yet in my opinion quite effective, modification I made to the switch involved a couple of short lengths of brass tubing. I used a 3mm brass tube inserted into a 4mm brass tube, superglued them together and filed the top round before gluing them to the switch handle. The result is a lengthened handle, and a better looking switch.
So, Mk.I of my Ultimate Machine is done. The design is not perfect, but for some reason I find the semi-scruffy appearance quite suitable. However, when I build the next one I will refine the design a bit as Mk.II I intend to build to keep at my office - and I think Claude Shannon would approve.
There you have it, the machine is completed and functional. And as promised, here is the video of it in action (I hope you enjoy it as much as I enjoyed building it):
Following part 5 there really weren't much left to sort out, but the last finishing touches were required. Today I present to you the final pictures of this build, and at long last a video of the machine in action.
As I left you from part 5 I had a couple of things left to do: staining the arm and the hold-down blocks and modifying the switch. Also, as it turned out, I had to modify the forward lid as well as the force from the arm retracting had the lid pop open. This simply would not do, and so I solved the problem by embedding a couple of neodymium magnets into the frame and the bottom of the lid, very effectively securing the lid while allowing it to be opened if needed.
As you can see I also had to modify the arm slightly because occasionally the arm would stop before completing it's cycle, thus locking the machine. I got around this problem by extending the arm with a small piece of wood (which now also needs to be stained obviously).
The simple, yet in my opinion quite effective, modification I made to the switch involved a couple of short lengths of brass tubing. I used a 3mm brass tube inserted into a 4mm brass tube, superglued them together and filed the top round before gluing them to the switch handle. The result is a lengthened handle, and a better looking switch.
So, Mk.I of my Ultimate Machine is done. The design is not perfect, but for some reason I find the semi-scruffy appearance quite suitable. However, when I build the next one I will refine the design a bit as Mk.II I intend to build to keep at my office - and I think Claude Shannon would approve.
There you have it, the machine is completed and functional. And as promised, here is the video of it in action (I hope you enjoy it as much as I enjoyed building it):
tirsdag 25. mai 2010
The Ultimate Machine - part 5
The machine is now almost done, and while I have had some good advice given to me for improvements in the finish of the box, I am quite happy with it so far. I might take the advice to heart though, and attempt to improve on the finish provided I have time to do so, and if it is not too late. It will, after all, necessitate smoothing out the edges with spackle, sanding it down smooth, an re-staining and lacquering the edges. Hopefully this is possible to do with the machine in its present condition, but if not I'll just make a mental note of remembering to do so for the next machine I build.
So, the machine has been fully assembled and only a few last tweaks and finishing touches remain to be done. I can gleefully report that the machine works flawlessly, though I will need to modify the switch somewhat in order for the servo to be able to flip it. As you remember from my last post my suppliers sent me the wrong kind of DPDT switches (on-off-on instead of on-on), and so I had to run with it and hope for the best. Well, it turns out that using the DPDT on-off-on switches is possible, and it will work, but the toggle function is a little too stiff for the servo to accomplish. Therefore I will modify the switch with a length of brass tubing for added leverage, and this will also have the effect of tying the looks of the switch in a little more with the looks of the rest of the box. Hopefully I'll get this done tonight, but that depends on whether or not the stain on the arm and two hold-down blocks has dried out sufficiently by the time I get home from work.
Here is today's round of pictures.
The switch has now been mounted roughly 2.5cm from the edge of the lid, and while the switch unmodified is too stiff for the arm to flip, it works flawlessly when the switch is aided with improved leverage. Oh, and by the way, I simply could not be bothered to remove the date-stamp from the pictures, and now that I notice it I am unable to as I'm posting this from work and I have yet to get Photoshop reinstalled.
This next pic shows an internal view. Here you can see the arm mounted to the forward lid, and you can see the hold-down block for the microswitch mounted to the bottom. If you squint a little you can just about make out the microswitch being held down by the arm, and underneatht the forward lid you can see the front edge of the servo.
Here's a shot of the same view but from a different angle. I'm showing the controller board along with the battery pack and the various cables being plugged into the board. Also you can see the business end of the arm peeking out from under the closed lid.
Next I'll flip the forward lid, and you'll see how the servo and the arm is mounted. You can also see the hole I routed out for the switch if you follow the leads. By the way, the leads I've used were originally intended to be used in a project to build my own computer case (I will complete this project as well of course, but for now it's in hiatus), and the ones that are pink were supposed to be red. I think the pink colour is due to these cables being fluorescent, but I still feel they should look a good deal more red than they do.
The servo is held in place by being screwed to a small wooden block screwed tightly to the lid. I tried glueing the block down first, but that didn't take all that well, so in the end I just screwed it down tightly.
Finally here's a full shot of the internals exposed. Not much in the box really, but much of this space is taken by the motion of the arm. This post is made the day following these events, and after these shots were taken I stained the arm and the hold-down blocks. Hopefully these will have dried out by the time I get home so that I may lay down the last few finishing touches such as making the final modifications to the switch. Must remember to go out during lunch to get 3 and 4mm brass tubing.
The next time I post the machine will be done, and I will have a video of the machine in action to show you. Trust me when I say that it's hilarious, and that during beta testing yesterday, I couldn't help but giggle uncontrollably.
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)
