NPC highsec refiner is angry that his highsec business doesn't make as much money as null refiners. And now for the weather.

i hear compression is the new black these days, do you think he should try that instead?

When the fark was refining ever a profession?

i hear compression is the new black these days, do you think he should try that instead?

OK, so there are 3 types of jobs in eve

If you're treating Eve as a job you're either farming gold or doing it wrong.

Isk p/h != fun p/h

Well, you can say that about real life too!
If you hate your day job, you can quit life by jumping off a bridge anytime =D

Hmm - well, there certainly is an opportunity to further expand reprocessing. Perhaps reprocessing should take some time (instead of being instant), and have further skills to speed up reprocessing time etc (and add skills per resource being reprocessed in terms of time). Maybe add a further system cost if everyone is using the same reprocessing station.

Drive up dem costs!!

Well that escalated quickly...

Pisspoor analogy btw, real life is a damn sight more serious than a form of completely voluntary digital entertainment.

Or they can share the same skills such as Industry, etc...
And current manufacturing can have it's time/cost reduced to compensate.

The point isn't to make everything more expensive, the point is to turn reprocessing into an actual source of isk gain instead of the time sink it is right now.

I mean, it does have logistic value due to reduced m3/isk, but logistics and industry are not really supposed to share the same skill set.

Besides, if you were to make a rl analogy, extracting minerals from ore DOES take time!

Tell that to Neo!
What, exactly, makes life "more serious" than a video game? is it the additional senses such as pain, etc?

The point of a video game is to immerse yourself in it. If you don't take the game seriously, the game failed it's responsibility towards you, the customer.

My point being, you being alive is just as optional. The only difference is the "fear of the unknown", as in you can predict the outcome of quitting the game, but you can't predict the outcome of quitting life.

One clothes and feeds you, the other rarely does.
The point of a video game is escapism, nowhere else do I get to tool around in spaceships spewing fiery death at other people.
Life is only optional if you care nothing for it.

Quitting a video game can enhance your life, quitting life does not, as it generally means you're either dead or living in a cardboard box under a bridge.

Well, you can say that about real life too!
If you hate your day job, you can quit life by jumping off a bridge anytime =D

No you can say that about life.

After several near death experiences, I can tell you... death is like getting stung by a bee.
Watching it hover you is far more painful than the actual needle.

OK, so CCP added a bunch of refining changes in order to make it more like a "profession"...

Did they realize, within a few days, hundreds (or even thousands) of re-prefected refiners would flood the market with their service, making perfect refining close to worthless?

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Have you ever performed a medically assisted suicide?

Tell that to Neo!
What, exactly, makes life "more serious" than a video game? is it the additional senses such as pain, etc?
The point of a video game is to immerse yourself in it. If you don't take the game seriously, the game failed it's responsibility towards you, the customer.
My point being, you being alive is just as optional. The only difference is the "fear of the unknown", as in you can predict the outcome of quitting the game, but you can't predict the outcome of quitting life.

Have you ever performed a medically assisted suicide?

What, exactly, makes life "more serious" than a video game?

Just ignore the guy already.

Overinflated ego craving attention...

Why, oh why, if life was so serious, does Adam Sandler make more money than a doctor?

Yea, you can make billions of dollars by competing in the female makeup industry.
Yes, having a high level vocabulary will land you a job.
Of course, good amounts of sophistry will make for a great investment banker.

The most profitable "jobs" in the world are actually games - activities that contribute nothing to the 'serious' side of life.
Some of them are even -video games-! Where are stock tickers posted?

And when I compare today, where Merck stands as the third largest corporation in the world, to ancient greece, where people all sought to die in battle at the humble age of 35

Money made in a profession varies, so that part is irrelevant. As for the fact that it's Adam Sandler movies, you understand that he puts a lot of work into those and get paid out for it right? It's his job because that's what he does for a living. It doesn't mean that the product itself is a job though. Watching an Adam Sandler movie isn't a job. Unless you are an EVE dev or a paid tester, playing EVE isn't a job either.

You seem to have wildly missed the point that was being made. That is that EVE is a game designed for entertainment. It is not a job. If you can find someone to hire you to play EVE, then treating it like a job is understandable, but without that, treating it like a job and that it's as important as your real life is simply a sign that you need serious professional help.

If you treat an activity in EVE as something you "have" to do (Man, gotta logn and mine minerals for 4 hours so I can get my plex for next month), then yes, you have issues.

EVE is a First World luxury entertainment service, and should be treated with the amount of seriousness one would expend on a First World luxury entertainment service (that's very little, for the thinking impaired).

all comedians have an inherent comedic perspective on life

Adam sandler may work hard, but all comedians have an inherent comedic perspective on life. It's part of the job requirements. And according to economic data, that comedic perspective is more profitable than the 'serious' perspective.

Besides, taking EVE as an example, political borders (and subsequent political strife) exist because - people like competition! - and competition is..... drumroll.... A FORM OF ENTERTAINMENT!

Do you think society -NEEDS- 10 different car insurance companies? (or cars, for that matter)
Do you think society -NEEDS- 4 different brands of mayonnaise? (or mayo, for that matter)

This was precisely why communism doesn't function... The ENTERTAINMENT value of COMPETITION is what make people more involved.

Keep that in mind, when you're trying to calculate optimal refining rates in order to COMPETE on the market... That competition is inherently USELESS, and exists solely for ENTERTAINMENT value.

The actual gruntwork of society is taken on the shoulders of minimum wage employees, who struggle to get health insurance.
That. is. hysterical.

What the actual **** is going on here?

Irony ho-ho

http://www.downloadjpeg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/robin_williams_background_wallpaper.jpg

Competition in the market has more to do with choice, actually. Pure socialism doesn't work because people don't get a choice. Pure capitalism doesn't work because people don't get a choice. You go from one extreme to the other, you'll get the same result, lack of choice for consumers. That's why the best economic structures, the most stable, are mixed economies. I don't find competition entertaining myself at all, but, as it is, I do get to choose between an assortment of different mayonnaises. If there was only one brand of mayonnaise, and I didn't like it, I probably wouldn't buy it.

Mayonnaise is kinda trivial though, let's talk government elections. Pretend, for a second, there was no competition. You had one choice and one choice only for national leadership. What does that sound like to you?

What you're thinking of is conflict. In any good story, there is a conflict that occurs in order to produce the body of the story. The conflict is sparked in the beginning of the story, the body is used to portray the conflict and its effects, and the conflict is then resolved in order to produce an ending. Conflict is entertaining.

Competition is necessary for a dynamic market where consumers have a choice. Competition plays a role in forcing big companies on the market to act with decency in offering the goods or services they provide to consumers, and essentially drives the market. A company with no competition producing a vital infrastructure or service can take advantage of that. In the past, Hollywood did, as did many national telco companies around the world, and a fair few utilities do it now in various parts of Australia due to legal loopholes.

starving people to death

Competition in the market has more to do with choice, actually. Pure socialism doesn't work because people don't get a choice. Pure capitalism doesn't work because people don't get a choice. You go from one extreme to the other, you'll get the same result, lack of choice for consumers. That's why the best economic structures, the most stable, are mixed economies. I don't find competition entertaining myself at all, but, as it is, I do get to choose between an assortment of different mayonnaises. If there was only one brand of mayonnaise, and I didn't like it, I probably wouldn't buy it.

Mayonnaise is kinda trivial though, let's talk government elections. Pretend, for a second, there was no competition. You had one choice and one choice only for national leadership. What does that sound like to you?

What you're thinking of is conflict. In any good story, there is a conflict that occurs in order to produce the body of the story. The conflict is sparked in the beginning of the story, the body is used to portray the conflict and its effects, and the conflict is then resolved in order to produce an ending. Conflict is entertaining.

Competition is necessary for a dynamic market where consumers have a choice. Competition plays a role in forcing big companies on the market to act with decency in offering the goods or services they provide to consumers, and essentially drives the market. A company with no competition producing a vital infrastructure or service can take advantage of that. In the past, Hollywood did, as did many national telco companies around the world, and a fair few utilities do it now in various parts of Australia due to legal loopholes.

Oh, and about freedom.
Yes, you have to choose between mayos at the STORE. Why? Because, as a child, you were OBLIGATED by law to spend half your awake time in school, learning various facts including the math you'll need to buy that mayo. Opportunity cost? Learning how to make your OWN mayo, mayo that you inherently like.

What the actual **** is going on here?

For that matter, where are the ISDs with the magical "off-topic post removal" eraser thingy?

SO if I automatically buy the cheapest of anything, what does that mean in your analysis?

It means you'll have to pick up a lot more skills than the ones they taught you in school, because labor costs money.

Wood to make the bed.
Duck feathers for the pillow.
Threads for the linen.
Eggs for the mayo.
Fish for the tuna salad.
Clay for the bricks.
Etc...

And lots and lots of skills, none of which are taught in mandatory education.

No, I actually love logging on... I made this post not to talk about the "grind" of eve, but to point out how refining, and a few other mundane eve activities, are not only pretty boring (more boring than mining!) but also have zero profit margin... So you can't do it for competitive value either... it's just this button stuck in the interface

They should add some minigames to these things, or something.

If they -really- wanted to make refining a profession, they would have to add time constraints to refining, and maybe reduce manufacturing costs to rebalance finished goods price.

Trying to see if we can get back on-topic:



So, the question is, would having time constraints for reprocessing activities be a good idea? This could be an interesting bottleneck if reprocessing couldn't keep up with ore availability. Ore prices would drop, and reprocessing added-value would make this a good money-maker and mineral supply would become more finite in the sense you can't grind/glut the market like you currently could wiith ore and insta-processing.

You can also throw in some logistics complexity where particular stations may excel in only certain reprocessing activities (salvage, scordite etc), instead of finding a simple 50% base processor for everything.

I dunno...I like the potential of exploring this further.

Trying to see if we can get back on-topic:



So, the question is, would having time constraints for reprocessing activities be a good idea? This could be an interesting bottleneck if reprocessing couldn't keep up with ore availability. Ore prices would drop, and reprocessing added-value would make this a good money-maker and mineral supply would become more finite in the sense you can't grind/glut the market like you currently could wiith ore and insta-processing.

You can also throw in some logistics complexity where particular stations may excel in only certain reprocessing activities (salvage, scordite etc), instead of finding a simple 50% base processor for everything.

I dunno...I like the potential of exploring this further.

There's a difference between craving attention and correcting retards.

Tell that to Neo!
What, exactly, makes life "more serious" than a video game? is it the additional senses such as pain, etc?
...
My point being, you being alive is just as optional.

Wait, was this thread about refining or the nature of life and death?

I seem to have lost track somewhere along the way...