spaceleech:

Hey everyone, it’s Vigilante 8! Remember Vigilante 8? No? Oh…

Weekly Famitsu No. 509, 1998.

I played an unreasonable amount of this game with my brother on the Dreamcast back in the day.

(Reblogged from vgjunk)

Quote “abiogenesis” unquote, wink wink

In a recent episode of the Janet Mefferd show, the “creationist astronomer” Dr. Danny Faulkner discusses the treatment of abiogenesis in the new Cosmos series.

Jant Mefferd: Alright we’re back talking a little bit with Dr. Danny Faulkner, resident astronomer at Answers in Genesis, and we’re discussing this new series Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey and what really is an evolutionary bias which is very obivious when you watch it and tell us Dr. Faulkner where you’ve seen in the first couple of episodes this evidence of an overwhelming evolutionary bias.

Dr. Danny Faulkner: Well we had the first episode, he had a “calendar” of one year in the supposed 13.8 billion year history of the universe, laid it out on this calendar, and he pointed out how late in the whole process the earth came about and how late life, and how late humanity, in the last escond or 2 in the wole thing, and everything about human life is in that last second or two.

J: (concerned) hmmm

D: And he also talked about “abiogenesis”, that’s the belief that non-living things at some point gave rise to living things …

J: (concerned) hmmm

D: … and he termed this one of the “great mysteries of science” or a “great scientific mystery”, well it’s a mystery all right but I wouldn’t call it scientific!

J: (knowingly chuckles)

D: Because, we have 400 years of biology on our side talking about and concluding the Law of Biogenesis. You know, this idea that nonliving things gave rise to living things is an old idea, it goes back to at least the ancient Greeks, and it was believed throughout the middle ages and into fairly modern times, and people don’t know that, but that’s the truth. I remember that 45 years ago now in high school biology and we talked about this and you had people such as Francesco Redi and Louis Pasteur who did work showing, scientifically, the evidence was pretty resounding that abiogenesis does not occur … and we don’t talk about them very much anymore, the law of biogenesis: life from life; and so to argue that life arose spontaneously some time in the past, that actually is contrary to science, there’s no other way to say it it’s kind of the wish and the hope and I would say prayer, but they don’t believe in that apparently…

J: (laughs)

D: …that life somehow began in the past if you don’t belive there’s a creator then you have to hypothesis that life spontaneously arose despite the evidence to the contrary, now that’s a remarkable position for a supposed science show to come to.

This discussion goes on to mock modern scientists for not having a definite answer as to how and where life arose on Earth.

Now, what’s really remarkable here is that a PhD Astronomer either:

A) doesn’t know the difference between the old ideas of Aristotellian spontaneous generation and the collection of modern hypotheses of abiogenesis of the earliest life on Earth, or…

B) knows this distinction and hopes that his audience does not, in order to help reinforce listeners’ beliefs and disdain for prevalent scientific theories.

The belief that Pasteur dispelled was one which said maggots came from meat (not fly eggs), and tapeworms came from internal organs (not tapeworm eggs). This is “abiogenesis” of complex life forms on the scale of minutes, hours, or days.

The abiogenesis that Cosmos posits is the formation of the fundamental forms of life, from the prior necessary components, possibly over and over again, on a geologic timescale of millions of years.

Is Dr. Faulkner intentionally conflating these two ideas, which have nothing in common?

Is this man (with a PhD) simply ignorant and does not know the difference between hypotheses of how life initially arose, and the belief that maggots spontaneously appear ex nihilo in old meat? Or is he a deceptive manipulator of a gullible audience?

I’m afraid I don’t see any other options.

Time to move on.

I always had a fascination with Apple machines. Actually, it might be more accurate to say I’ve had two stages of fascination with Apple machines: at a young age the Apple II and the Macintosh wowed me with what a holistic approach to personal computers could achieve.

Like many people, I couldn’t be bothered to care about whatever numerically-named beige boxes Apple churned out between Jobs’ ousting and his eventual return. The fruits of his NeXT experiment and a return to the Macintosh vision resulted in machines and an OS that I was enamored of, once again.

But behind the friendly UI, pretty much all along, Apple has not been anybody’s friend. Quite the opposite. And yesterday, Apple (along with the only other pragmatic alternative: Microsoft) laid their cards on the table by unleashing lawsuits against the Android operating system and smartphone makers.

Pretty much anybody who makes software or hardware could be a target of Apple’s wrath with such broad patents. As it happens, I make software. So it would appear that I am potentially Apple’s enemy, despite being an OS X and iOS user, and an iOS developer.

For the longest time, I made fun of FOSS advocates, participating in immature namecalling like “freetards”, thinking they were impractical and idealistic. But many recent events (e.g. this patent action and PRISM) have planted seeds of doubt.

I’ve changed my mind. I believe they are right. And I now understand a lot of what they have been advocating all along.

I don’t see any future with Apple that is compatible with these values. I believe that people have a fundamental right to free thought, imagination, and to freely invent. The patent system (specifically software patents) stands in opposition to those rights. The exercise of that system to this end is a direct violation of those rights.

I’m ditching any and all Apple products that I personally own, along with any Apple development activity, and encouraging anybody else to do the same.

The new iPhone 5c is marketed as “for the colorful”.

Color is more than just a hue. It expresses a feeling. Makes a statement. Declares an allegiance. Color reveals your personality. iPhone 5c, in five anything-but-shy colors, does just that. It’s not just for lovers of color. It’s for the colorful.

Compare this to the classic “Here’s to the crazy ones…” text from the Think Different campaign.

Clearly, Apple is pursuing a totally different demographic today, and they know how superficial it really is.

Thumbs-up!

The Homebrew package manager for OS X puts a beer icon in its output. I was curious about how to liven up my shell and thought maybe I could put some graphical icons in it. It’s just a unicode Emoji character, after all.

So looking through the available Emoji, I saw the thumbs-up and thumbs-down, and thought they would be perfect to indicate the status of the last command.

So, here’s a Gist of some code you can stick in your .bash_profile if you would like this functionality:

https://gist.github.com/jcromartie/6613833

Retro JVC stereo specs.

Screw writing “strong” women. Write interesting women. Write well-rounded women. Write complicated women. Write a woman who kicks ass, write a woman who cowers in a corner. Write a woman who’s desperate for a husband. Write a woman who doesn’t need a man. Write women who cry, women who rant, women who are shy, women who don’t take no shit, women who need validation and women who don’t care what anybody thinks. THEY ARE ALL OKAY, and all those things could exist in THE SAME WOMAN. Women shouldn’t be valued because we are strong, or kick-ass, but because we are people. So don’t focus on writing characters who are strong. Write characters who are people.

Words of great wisdom on strong female characters~ by madlori (via laughingskeleton)

Just remember, women are more than half of all people, and have the same range of human variety and experience as all of us overrepresented men.

(via dresdencodak)

(Source: iwantwhatheswearing)

(Reblogged from dresdencodak)

vgjunk:

Write Your Own Fantasy Games For Your Microcomputer.

(Reblogged from vgjunk)

I feel like the stories told in games today have become overblown. The conflict is always on a global, galactic, or universal scale. Limitless power is everywhere. Evil is pressing in from all sides. Only the immensely powerful heroes and their limitless supply of technology/magic/skills can stop it.

It would not be a bad thing if more games were like fairy tales instead of sprawling epics. What if there was just one bad guy? Or what if the hero was only barely capable? Or what if the threat was limited to the hill over there? What if there was only one magic sword? Or one wizard?

I know some indies are keeping it simple. And there is even the occasional AAA (or is it AAAA now?) that is down to earth.

iTunes 11 creates UI color scheme from album art

This is a really awesome touch in iTunes 11. The effect was so seamless and well-done that it took me this long to notice.

Daft Punk Alive automatically-generated color theme in iTunes 11

Buena Vista Social Club automatically-generated color theme in iTunes 11

Brian Eno Ambient 4 automatically-generated color theme in iTunes 11

Boards of Canada Music Has the Right to Children automatically-generated color theme in iTunes 11