(no subject)

In the article, "Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years", it is asserted that it takes at least ten years to become any good at a new skill.

So, if I were to switch careers today, I'd be 37 before I became any good at it.

(no subject)

An Escapist Magazine article laments the whoring of our video game heroes, citing Mario as a prime example, and the sale of "Super Mario Bros 2" in the US as the day America gave Nintendo permission to rebrand bad games into top sellers.

But I disagree with the specific example of Mario:

Finally, just when I thought they could go no lower, comes Dance, Dance Revolution: Mario Mix. Yes, now the old plumber has learned how to dance. Apparently, Britney Spears simply is not marketable enough, so why not do it with ye old staple! This kind of mass exploitation confirms two things. One: People like Mario. Two: Nintendo is well aware of this fact. This fall he takes to dancing; I do not even dare speculate what they will have Mario do next.

My take on Nintendo's tendency to put Mario in random cross-genre games is a little different. I find that Mario tends to add something to whatever genre he's thrown into. Super Smash Bros Melee is second only to Soul Calibur 2 as a fighting game at parties, and Mario Kart is equally popular as a social game. And Mario Mix looks like the perfect opportunity to add some spice to the dance game genre, where the only new feature in five years has been the freeze arrow.

However, they seem to have nailed Atari spot-on:

Never was this trend more apparent than with the company now called "Atari." Originally Infogrames, a French company, they branded their North American face Atari after the legendary, but defunct gaming company enshrined in pop-culture. The aim? To sell more games. Quite simply, consumers take a game more seriously when it bears that logo. In recent years, I have seen Hollywood celebrities presenting awards at internationally televised events wearing the Atari company logo on their t-shirt. Would they ever do that with Infogrames? Of course not. Thus, the name change. In today's gaming culture it has become easier to simply reincarnate yourself as an old icon than to create a new one. This same mindset is what allows Mario to dance and hawk ice cream sandwiches.

I used to wear the T-shirts constantly myself, but shortly after they started selling them, Atari started to suck. They bought out successful game companies my friends were working at, and gutted them. They hired other friends of mine and worked them harder than they'd ever be able to get away with in France. But nobody seems to have noticed, have they?

Why is the author worried about the long-term effects to Nintendo?

Using Mario in this way goes against a basic principle of marketing. While a company can make a quick buck by plastering a brand unto a different product, it harms the long-term viability of that brand.

But, if Atari can get away with looting its brand for this long, how long will it take for Nintendo to feel the effects? Atari churned out all its founders and original employees in less than fifteen years. Nintendo still has many of the same employees that were there when Donkey Kong came out. Their star designed, Shigeru Miyamoto, even demonstrates a capacity for self-criticism that one almost never sees in public life anymore. Nintendo not only has the cult following, but it seems to have the strength to back it up for a long time.

(no subject)

Something Awful is kinda sorta down, because their servers are in New Orleans. They're trying to move them to Kansas City.

They were also running a donation thingy. They raised $20,000 and then suddenly Paypal shut down their account due to "suspicious behavior". It's as if there's a conspiracy to prevent people from helping out.