• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mrocktor

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • ICQ 0
  1. The ideal type of game, in my opinion, is the role playing game. Every game of this sort has implicit ethics, many of them have explicit ethics such as the good/evil spectrum in D&D derivates, the light side/dark side spectrum in Star Wars derivates etc. The problem is that these ethics always have altruism as their standard of "good". A good RPG that had a proper ethical spectrum (i.e. gain "good" points for productivity, fighting for your own rights, respecting others', "bad" points for violating rights) would be revolutionary. That alone would make the title controversial and provoking (hey, I made a million bucks and shifted towards good? What the hell?). Also essential would be having the game actually reflect the full consequences of your character's choices. In most RPGs you can steal and kill, but if you help an old lady cross the street the "good" and "bad" cancel out and everyone treats you nicely again. Having non player characters who respond to specific acts would make the game more immersive, and the consequences of individual ethics more realistic. That said, I second the idea that the game should NOT be preachy, and that direct reference to Ayn Rand would only fit if you choose one of her works as a setting (Atlas would make a fantastic setting, though). By all means let the player be a murdering thief - it should be fun to do so, its a game. He should also reach the end of the game being hunted and having to be afraid of his own shadow. No "you conquer the universe and all bow to you" endings for evil characters.
  2. Why do US companies stay in the US?

    The answer, I think, is that they are moving - as much as they can. This is the root of the "outsourcing" phenomenon, just like the "sweatshop" phenomenon before it. Companies have massively moved out their manufacturing, their customer support and are in the process of moving out product development itself. To a very large degree, companies (and more importantly, their capital) have left the US. The fact that they keep their corporate headquarters in the country does not mean that the actual production of values is there.
  3. Immigration

    I read this on the site for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign and the starkness of it was shocking: My emphasis. Other than the part about taxes, since when is that the wrong message? Is that not the principle uppon which America was built? How the hell can a candidate who supposedly is pro-freedom be so direct about the fact that he is against allowing honest people who want to work to enter the USA? I think the answer is the mistaken idea that the "rule of law" can somehow be more important than the actual rights of the individuals it is supposed to defend. When the law is immoral, enforcing it is immoral. So instead of candidates who propose to end illegal immigration by making it legal, we have candidates proposing the building of walls and the creation of high tech bio-identification work permits.
  4. Or, in other words, if you are to actually live and stay in power long enough to reach the goal of eliminating taxation, you have to tolerate taxation for a while. As long as you make it clear that your goal is to eliminate it, and if every step you take is in that direction, this is not immoral or hypocritical.
  5. See? That is a principled argument, not rationalism.
  6. Iran's President to Visit Ground Zero

    Oh, I doubt it. The government can be trusted to protect him from you. Just not the other way around.
  7. And that is called pragmatism. The only difference between that statement and Hillary Clinton's health plan is that she thinks that "point" is when someone gets sick, and not when a war starts. A matter of degree. Either you understand individual rights as a principle, and realize they apply in every context, or you don't.
  8. Iran's President to Visit Ground Zero

    That he is allowed in the country is bad enough.
  9. Favorite war movies

    I second Band of Brothers heartily, despite it not really being a movie. I also like Master and Commander and Enemy at the Gates.
  10. Captain Planet and the Planeteers (1990-1996)

    I gave it a 2 because, though it is really, really bad, it is not nihilistic. Within the distorted framework of environmentalism, the protagonists pursue and achieve values.
  11. Wheel of Time

    Personally I think the quality of the work started to go downhill around the fourth book of the series - but at that point I was "invested" enough in the characters that I wanted to see where the author would take them. It only started to get really bad around book 7-8 or so, but so far I have managed to read all of them. The last entry managed to get teh plot moving again and tie up a few things that have been left hanging for a long, long time - and hopefully Jordan will be able to give the series a satisfying finale - even if it does not measure up to the begining. My recomendation is read the Eye of the World (book 1), it stands for itself and is very good. Whether you go on from there, that is another decision
  12. D.C. Appeals to Supreme Court on Gun Law

    Or, in other words, who exactly is this "we" you speak of?
  13. No, I got the point. I was just commenting that the British Army that faced Washington probably didn't have poorly armored Land Rovers. Your post was a non-sequitur, even though the underlying point you were trying to make was understandable.
  14. Patent Laws to be Revised

    First of all, good questions sjw. No it is not. You have to ignore the creative insight involved in the various ways of fixing stone, wood and metal wheels to axles, the insight in the various means to construct a wooden wheel, the idea of having a contact surface other than the material of the wheel itself, the idea of the tire, the idea of the pneumatic tire, the idea of grooving the pneumatic tire, the idea of using an inner pressure vessel to allow more liberty in designing the actual contact surface, the idea of countouring the wheel to create a seal that allows you to eliminate that inner tube... You have to ignore the intellectual work of thousands of people in order to state that "once roundness was figured out, the rest is just carpentry".