Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Capntastic]

I would argue that Toady and his work is certainly valued in many ways that someone making a similar income is not.  It's hard to discuss this any further without spinning off into socio-economic tangents and derailing things.  But I can understand the sentiment of wanting Toady to be more secure.

[Nil Eyeglazed]

Lol, that's awesome Capn!  I had no idea!

So I read that article, and I feel like it really like it really shows off what I mean.  For instance, Weinar doesn't write about Gaga's bedroom; doesn't talk about Gaga's relationship status; doesn't talk about whether Gaga has ever used drugs; doesn't talk about Gaga's nutritional habits.  Weinar writes (and I would claim, writes fawningly, although I like Lady Gaga a lot too ) about her work, and about what her work means.

Now, Gaga's got handlers, and that probably helps.

EDIT: Oh, this could count as relationship status.  Contrast and compare:

"She talks in interviews about wanting to die husbandless, surrounded by stage props, and about wanting to scare boys rather than arouse them."

vs

"Tarn has been single since graduate school, when he dated a Cisco systems administrator for a short time."

Now, clearly, there's a difference in the ways that Gaga and Adams present the info.  But Weinar's presentation of their presentation is totally different too.  Gaga's is romantic, artsy (and it could just as easily be presented as pretentious and sad.)  Adams's is unfulfilled, unhappy (when it could just as easily have been presented as a man who doesn't have time for romance).

[Gatleos]

Lol, that's awesome Capn!  I had no idea!

So I read that article, and I feel like it really like it really shows off what I mean.  For instance, Weinar doesn't write about Gaga's bedroom; doesn't talk about Gaga's relationship status; doesn't talk about whether Gaga has ever used drugs; doesn't talk about Gaga's nutritional habits.  Weinar writes (and I would claim, writes fawningly, although I like Lady Gaga a lot too ) about her work, and about what her work means.

Now, Gaga's got handlers, and that probably helps.

Judging by the DF article, it looks like the author got to spend some personal time with the Adams themselves. I doubt that was the case with the GaGa article.

[Capntastic]

To be fair, Weiner wasn't chilling in Gaga's house for a while; he was working solely off of her outward persona, which was the point of the article.   It wasn't fawning (phrases like pretentious pop starlet and exquisite horror speak against that), but it also wasn't aimlessly disparaging.  It was simply an assessment of her unique media presence.

[Drevlin]

Nice article, I hope that many people will read it.

He calls games like Angry Birds or Bejeweled [...] “abusive”

Armok bless you, Tarn.

"Minecraft, which is in many ways a more user-friendly version of Dwarf Fortress"

Come on! This is sort of dwarf-blasphemy

And finally, this is awesome:

[Nil Eyeglazed]

Pretentious is certainly not disparaging in the context of that article-- "her pretentiousness—the heady name-dropping, the high-concept video, the wild get-ups—hangs halolike around her music, encouraging us to consider the songs in a different and more radiant light," and "exquisite horror" is clearly praise.

Here are more fawning phrases:

"except this was no ordinary music video," "ingeniously spastic use of a wheelchair," "her robotically decadent techno hits," "highbrow bibliography" et al, "to her credit," "the canny way," "a teasing pre-emptive strike," "there's something fresher at work with her, too."

If these phrases are taken out of context, please forgive me; it's only because I don't want to just copy-paste the whole article.  It's not long.

[zwei]

A bit sad, a bit inspiring. Melodramatic. Sort of human interest story. Sometimes very suprising, sometimes not suprising at all. It has awokem very mixed bag of emotions in me.

It would make for good documentary rather than article. I would watch that documentary. It is sort of documentary you could air at TV and both shock and awe audience.

[Capntastic]

Those things can all be true without the article being fawning. Edit:  I never said 'pretentious' was disparaging; merely that it wasn't fawning.  It's a true thing. Acting like any positive words in her direction is based in some prejudiced agenda is kind of does a disservice to the article and its author.  I don't want this to get too far from the main thing here, which is that I think the article is pretty fairly written, seems to be truthful, doesn't seem to shy away or exaggerate, and most importantly, is in the New York Times.

[Gatleos]

And finally, this is awesome:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yeah, I kind of want that on a t-shirt now.

A bit sad, a bit inspiring. Melodramatic. Sort of human interest story. Sometimes very suprising, sometimes not suprising at all. It has awokem very mixed bag of emotions in me.

It would make for good documentary rather than article. I would watch that documentary. It is sort of documentary you could air at TV and both shock and awe audience.

Never mind. Screw the t-shirt, we are starting a donation drive to get this documentary made RIGHT NOW. Even if it ends up playing at 3am on PBS or something.

[iceball3]

Just... Awesome. Nice work Toady and Threetoe.

[Johuotar]

I wonder what to think of all this. I'm a bit worried off his lifestyle, doesn't sound too good way to live in long run. Especially the thing about having to drink soft drinks instead of water to avoid headache.

Then there's what he said off angry birds and minecraft, it makes me wonder what he'd think of me, who's played a lot minecraft and spread knowledge about it. I even host server for my friends who I managed to buy the game. I've played quite a lot of angry birds too on my Ipod, I wonder if he'd think of me as its "slave."

"You can call that kind of game fun, but only if you call compulsive gambling fun"

I need to check what "magnanimously" means. ->

[Siquo]

As long as it doesn't cost us dev-time

So Toady One/ThreeToe, how do you feel about this article? Regrets you didn't close the bedroom door?

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

I wonder what to think of all this. I'm a bit worried off his lifestyle, doesn't sound too good way to live in long run. Especially the thing about having to drink soft drinks instead of water to avoid headache.

Then there's what he said off angry birds and minecraft, it makes me wonder what he'd think of me, who's played a lot minecraft and spread knowledge about it. I even host server for my friends who I managed to buy the game. I've played quite a lot of angry birds too on my Ipod, I wonder if he'd think of me as its "slave."

"You can call that kind of game fun, but only if you call compulsive gambling fun"

I need to check what "magnanimously" means. ->

He's probably just got a caffeine addiction. He could try switching from soda to tea and it'd likely take care of the headaches while being much healthier.

As to "abusive" gameplay, I'm right there with him and applaud him for saying it -- I had to quit playing MMOs cold turkey because they were simply too goddam addictive, like bad-damaging-my-life addictive. These days DF is just about the only game I play on a consistent basis, and it's because it's a sandbox, not a feedback loop.
I don't think he's criticizing everyone who plays those games, just criticizing designers who knowingly design games that are painfully addictive but otherwise empty (i.e., everquest, etc.)
(I haven't played Minecraft or Angry Birds, so i'm just commenting regarding MMO's. Honestly, I suspect Minecraft will suck me in worse than DF ever did, so I want to get various DF fort ideas built first before I try it )

[Lancezh]

Reading that article brought a sad smile to my face. I have tremendous respect for Tarn, his close relationship with his family, his strength of principals and character, and his drive to pursue his goals despite any sacrifices he might have to make. It's like the result of distilling selfless human creative ambition, and putting it into the receptacle of an awkward and beardy mathematician. I have nothing but honest admiration for him.

What makes me sad is that, despite everything that he represents as an man, a giver, and a truly uncommon artist, society will continue to value the uninspired and uninspiring, or the careless and thoughtless at hundreds of times the value he will ever be- those derivative and selfishly created things that permeate the markets of the world, consume the smallest and most inspiring enterprises, and bleed them dry. Billions will be paid for shallow sequels to played-out films and stories, and games that tread those same, thoroughly explored waters of creative mediocrity. All the while, something groundbreaking sees its creator drinking soda like water, because he doesn't get enough calories in the one meal he can afford to eat per day... because we live in a culture that values the ability of an idea to earn money independently from its actual and intrinsic value.

To say it's truly heartbreaking would be melodramatic- especially considering the world and its people as a whole- but within the sphere of our culture, and its evolution and progress, it's simply not right.

I have a serious problem with this kind of view, as i encounter it in alot of other places as well about other topics.

First its telling other peoples that they suck for admiring the wrong stuff and that its only money and cash that matters. In the same breath though you say it matters that Toady is getting rich because of his creation and getting the "attention he deserves" about a work that he doesnt do for money or attention actually. He COULD work as a mathematician and earn enough money and respect, he COULD have sold the franchise, so stop treating him as a poor farmer that does not have enough to eat. Its his own decision and it seems he's having the freedom to do what he loves as a result. That he shares his work on the way with others is just a sideeffect. To mourn about someone not being "successful" in terms of recognition and money implies that art is only valuable when it a) pays off or b) is adapted by a lot of people. Or that whenever you pop champagne and hot ladies in your 400m2 Villa you "made" it. I detest that kind of view to the deepest.

[cephalo]

(deraily post removed)