UPDATE: Now That's Just Wrong

NASA needs a name for a piece of the International Space Station, and they've decided to put it to a vote. The choices they offered are Earthrise, Legacy, Serenity, and Venture. Now, anyone who knows me knows what I voted for (and they'll let you vote once a day, so I keep going back). Apparently there's a lot of people who agree with me too, because Serenity was up to 89% of the votes.

Until Stephen Colbert decided to butt in. Yeah, Colbert. The Comedy Central guy. (I'll warn you, the site makes the unpardonable sin of making the video play immediately.) This is just sick and wrong. I don't watch much tv, so I apparently don't even know how to pronounce the guy's name, but I still highly doubt that he has much of anything to do with space, and I'd be very surprised if he's done anything worthy of getting even a small rock named after him, let alone a space station. He's a comedian. And he seems to think we should vote for him. Uh, no. Sorry.

But he's winning. (The numbers on the site don't reflect the suggestions.)

Gratefully, NASA doesn't have to listen. From their rules:

NASA will take into consideration the results of the voting. However, the results are not binding on NASA and NASA reserves the right to ultimately select a name in accordance with the best interests of the agency, its needs, and other considerations. Such name may not necessarily be one which is on the list of voted-on candidate names. NASA’s decision shall be deemed final.

So basically, we need two things. We need people who actually care what the thing might be called to vote, and we need to pray that NASA isn't so stupid as to take a suggestion like this seriously.

Go vote. And go back tomorrow and vote too.

UPDATE: While Colbert didn't win, NASA didn't take it's own poll very seriously anyway. It has been named Tranquility.

What is With People Anyway?

"If you can't say something nice, don't say nothin' at all."

I've been noticing this for a while now, but I finally found some examples that aren't full of profanity. The internet seems to be overflowing with people who insist on making extremely negative comments. Why they feel this need is beyond me. It seems like they could find something productive to do, but then again, that would defeat the purpose of the internet.

First example. Take a look at Wired Magazine's gallery for the new Tesla Roadster. Gorgeous car, ridiculously expensive, insanely fast, and all electric. Now, I have to applaud the fact that there's no "First post!" on this (I'd bet that Wired would just delete it anyway), but if you look at the second post, it starts with "B O R I N G !" Yeah, it's so terribly boring that you decided to not only read it, but take the time to comment on it.

Another example. The Sci-Fi Wire recently changed their format completely, and they've been getting all kinds of complaints ever since then. There was a recent article about a Harry Potter actor getting murdered, and some genius decided to put "Why state the obvious? And why is this story, tragic though it is, deemed suitable for inclusion on this site?"

I think you get the point. I'm in some ways glad that I don't have a blog popular enough to have to worry about these things.

So Apparently My Idea's Been Done

I've been gathering research material for the board game I'm working on, and making some progress. Then I bought this Transformers board game from Wal-Mart, and it has almost exactly the game mechanic I was planning on using. Now, this doesn't mean that I'm going to quit working on the game, because mine will have a bit more depth than the Transformers one, and mine has freakin' Superman (no offense to Optimus Prime or anything), so it just has to be done. Stay tuned. If you're still reading, that is. :-)

My Prediction For Sarah Connor

I have a prediction on how Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles will end. At least, this is how I would end it.

We'll jump back for a moment to Terminator 2.

John Connor: Can you learn stuff you haven't been programmed with so you could be... you know, more human? And not such a dork all the time?

The Terminator: My CPU is a neural net processor; a learning computer. But Skynet pre-sets the switch to read-only when we're sent out alone.

Sarah Connor: Doesn't want you doing too much thinking, huh?

The Terminator: No.

Skynet controlled him completely, which logically means that Skynet has direct control over every single terminator and machine that works under it. Skynet is a single computer that has become a single consciousness. In effect, a single person.

Now, Sarah Connor's strategy for keeping Skynet from taking over is to make sure that no computer ever becomes that powerful. This seems a little extreme to me. One computer tries to take over the world, so all computers are evil? Wait, uh... No. I don't think so. Call me ridiculously geeky since we're talking about computers, but that sounds like racism to me.

We've seen a few terminators that have been perfectly capable of not only protecting humans, but getting right close to loving them. There's even a small group of people in the series that are trying to keep John Connor from falling in love with Cameron. If he's in love with a machine, how can he fight them?

Well, there's the problem. There is no "them." There is only one machine that they have to fight.

And here's my solution. If I were fighting a big powerful machine, you know what I would want? My own big powerful machine. And I believe that's what John Connor will want to do. We've already seen him embrace technology. We've seen him trust machines. I personally would like to see the series end with an army of terminators marching on Skynet.

How awesome would that be? Yeah, that's what I'm talkin' about... :-D

I Don't Think Anyone Understands Autism

Jenny was just diagnosed autistic last week. Honestly, it doesn't mean a whole lot to us, except that she gets to go to preschool now. She barely meets the qualifications for autism.

I have been reading up a bit on autism lately, and a news article just happened to pop up that I found rather interesting. There's a belief out there that autism is being caused by vaccines (there's also some that believe it's caused by the way our food is processed).

Now, I'm not the only person who thinks that autism is pretty closely related to ADHD (I was diagnosed with adult ADHD about 6 months ago). They seem pretty similar to me.

Anyway, I have a theory on why we're seeing it more than we used to. I think it's just that. We're seeing it more. It's not that it is happening more, it's just that it's diagnosed more. No one said I was ADHD when I was a kid, they just said I was really active. It wasn't until recently (after a head injury that seems to have made it worse) that I even worried about it. I tend to think that a lot of people I knew growing up would have been diagnosed autistic if they were kids now.

I also have a problem with calling anything of the sort a disorder, but that's another rant for another day perhaps.

Five Ways to Fix Broken MMOs

This is in direct response to the Fidgit article "Five reasons MMOs are Broken," and since no one ever reads this blog, I'll probably post this in the comments for the original article as well.

Let me start by saying that I don't play MMOs. I tried Guild Wars, and hated the grind. I'm too cheap for WoW. I'm looking forward to seeing what some of the up and coming MMOs have to offer, especially Star Wars: The Old Republic, but I'm not holding my breath.

5) The problem: subscription fees

The solution: A one time fee, or a subscription. Not both. It is ridiculous to think that for me to get into WoW now, I would have to pay almost $100 for the games, and then have to pay $15 a month to play the game that I already payed for.

4) The problem: aggro

The solution: Don't make the enemy AI so obviously stupid. There is a real world precedent for the strongest one in the team to be a distraction, but at some point the enemy should figure out that they're being played.

3) The problem: button lock

The solution: Get rid of all the freakin' numbers already! You don't hear people in the military referring to anyone as an "E5 Soldier," they say "Sergeant." No one (well, outside of the geek community) says their health is down to 50%, they actually describe how they feel. And is it so much to ask for a minimalist approach to the HUD?

2) The problem: static worlds

The solution: Start with user generated content. I don't necessarily mean importing 3d models and textures, I just mean let the player actually build something. As far as the quests go, don't make them so easy. If it's something that people will have to team up to do, and takes them a very long time, then it's something they can be proud of. Especially if there was another group racing to do the same thing.

1) The problem: you can't play with the people you want to play with

The solution: Is this really a problem? Everyone I know that plays WoW is usually talking to their friends at work about the raid that they're going to do that night. In any case, the best way to make more advanced players want to group with new players is to have some sort of reward for it that can't be achieved any other way, just as teachers do in the real world.

My MMORPG Idea

MMO ideas are like (insert your own analogy here) - everybody's got one, and they all... whatever. But anyway, here's mine. Just so my reader (if I have such a thing) is aware, I don't really play MMOs. World of Warcraft is not my thing. There are a few MMOs coming out that look promising, but as of right now, I don't play.

So far I'm calling my idea "Sovereign." Honestly, it wouldn't matter whether it was sci-fi or fantasy. I would like to see a game that encourages people to really group together. None of this "Yeah, well, so-and-so is in my guild, so you don't want to mess with me!" garbage. I mean get together and make a city.

The player would start in an existing city where there is no PvP. There would be NPCs that could do pretty much anything you need - sell, trade, train, whatever. This stuff is pretty normal.

In that city your home would be in a sort of apartment complex. You might give the player an instance of their own sort of home that they could play with a bit, kind of like Playstation Home has now.

What would set this apart though would be the ability to leave the city, go to the PvP area, and build a home. This would be a persistent addition to the game, meaning that even after you log off, the house is still there. Here's where the problem with a persistent world becomes the strength of this game. So, you're not online. Your house is just sitting there, and you're hoping no one attacks it. What's the best plan? Some security would help, and that would definitely be in the game, but the best way is to find someone who can defend it. And it would take more than one guy to have it always defended, so you'd end up with this small community of people all helping each other out.

It would of course be best for that community if each member had something more to contribute than just a sword (or whatever weapon they have). The community should be self-sustaining. Forget the NPC's. Let the players have professions that help each other. Soon those communities would become cities and maybe even countries. Alliances would be formed, wars would start. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.

I would also allow for players to become some sort of gypsy, nomad, mercenary, traveling salesman, or other type of character that doesn't necessarily have a home. Maybe a vehicle for a home. Not everyone feels like being friendly.

Okay, so now the weakness in my plan. It would only work if there were a LOT of people in the game. No, we don't need 11 million like WoW, but there would have to be quite a few, and it would probably have to be worldwide so someone can watch your house at night.

The technical requirements might be a bit of a pain, but not impossible. We already have games where we can build our own stuff, and we already have vehicles. It would also require a lot of professions. A bunch of mini-games would have to be thrown in for those professions, like raising livestock, mining, that sort of thing.

Anyway, the benefits of this kind of game would mostly be the sense of community that would develop. The other would be that players would have a sense of obligation to continue playing on a regular basis, because other players depend on them.

So there's the overall plan for an MMO. I have plenty of ideas for some of the little details, but they're things that I'd like to see in any MMO, so I'll save them for another post.