| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
jongalt
   |
Posted - 2007.10.22 19:37:00 -
[1]
i am not trying to dissuade anybody from investing - its nicely written; but i do have some "questions".
conceptually, how is this different from complex farming? or macro-mining?
with an operation of this scale (144+ characters "designed" to maximize data core yield after the expansion), is this not similiar? why wouldnt this fall under the conceptual umbrella of complex-farming or macro-mining?
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 20:04:00 -
[2]
i understand the "literal" comparisons differ. which is why i asked about the "conceptual" idea.
at the scale you are proposing (144+ characters), wouldnt the conceptual means be the same?
its not macro-mining in the literal sense. but to claim its on the same conceptual level as afk-mining when you are using 144+ characters seems to be a pretty big distortion of the definition given the "scale".
im sure you are EULA compliant to the letter. however, i wonder if the spirit of the game is compromised. (perhaps that is only my loss.)
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 20:07:00 -
[3]
to address the lab example: running a lab provides a service or a product to customers willing to pay.
i dont see a service or a product in the harvesting of datacores. am i misunderstanding the analogy?
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 20:17:00 -
[4]
after thinking about it, i suppose the increased supply of data cores to the public would be the service you are providing.
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 20:58:00 -
[5]
ok.
thanks for acknowledging what is "lost" and what is "gained".
im sure you already know this but if you dont, Rells is lobbying for a nerf on your datacores in the test server forum.
since he still believes in the "arborescent" model of political change as opposed to the "rhizomatic" model that the devs seem to respond to, i doubt he will be successful.
good luck with your IPO.
i dont mean this as a parthian shot, but i wonder if this model of "meta-gaming" encourages a certain ethic (or lack thereof) of "big-business". and if so, is that a good thing?
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 14:24:00 -
[6]
 Quote:
Personally I think it's plenty within the spirit of the game. EVE is the most open game I've ever played. Pretty much anything goes here, and if you have the imagination to think it up and the means to pull it off, you can do whatever you want, so long as it's within the terms of the EULA, which this indeed is.
EVE is a game that rewards creativity.
i understand its a sandbox game. im not advocating some kind of neo-marxist economy.
however, i question the "ethics" of that justification: anything is "okay", as long as its legal. if "ethics" have nothing to do with business, i guess im either naive, or see nothing but bad examples being set by big-business in rl. while eve is not "rl" in the literal sense, it is created by people who live in "rl" and could be considered a "mirror" to "rl" with lessons to be learned or unlearned.
and that, to me, is more valuable than circumsribing the differences between eve and "rl", or ruling out the possibility that eve offers any insight into larger "rl" questions.
i dont want to derail the thread any more; i only wanted to cautiously point out what was "lost" and what was "gained" as some kind of milestone (or barometer) of "market ethics".
matalino, thanks for your patience.
-jg.
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.12.30 21:29:00 -
[7]
negligence does not necessarily imply malicious intent.
but rationalization might.
-jg.
|
| |
|