← Older Comments
  • Tox

    @geldonyetich:
    as there’s always more work to be made.
     
    Short answer: No, there isn’t.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    If you insist to be beholden to such a model, I certainly won’t stop you.

  • Tox

    @geldonyetich:
    If you insist to be beholden to such a model, I certainly won’t stop you.
     
    There is never always more work. Work isn’t guaranteed — for anyone. That’s simply not the reality in which we live.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    You didn’t understand the context in which I used the word.  I’d go on to explain the specifics, but frankly it seems I can’t be remotely verbose without being a troll, so that’s going to have to remain one of life’s great mysteries.

  • ToeJob

    I always wonder how much office politics play into who stays and who goes in the gaming industry.  I’ve seen it to a great degree in my field and I can’t help but imagine it has saved a lot of useless twats their jobs in any other office environment.

  • Hatch

    K, I’ll buy a van and paint “THERE’S ALWAYS MORE WORK” on the side, you can drive it around Detroit for a month.

  • JuJutsu

    Hatch:
    K, I’ll buy a van and paint “THERE’S ALWAYS MORE WORK” on the side, you can drive it around Detroit for a month.

     

    See, Geldon just made more work for you. Remember work~= salary or wages
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homemaker
    or even better

    An excerpt from Maya Angelou

    “I’ve got the children to tend
    The clothes to mend
    The floor to mop
    The food to shop
    Then the chicken to fry
    The baby to dry
    I got company to feed
    The garden to weed
    I’ve got shirts to press
    The tots to dress
    The cane to be cut
    I gotta clean up this hut
    Then see about the sick
    And the cotton to pick….”

  • http://twitter.com/D_0ne D-0ne

    Office politics can help you keep your job.  That is a fact of life.  However, office politics alone won’t save your job.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    Really, the issue bogs down into an individual’s perspective of life to the point where I’ve a much chance of budging a person to see that there’s always profitable work to be had as I do to budge them on their religious beliefs.   Capitalism is, after all, a religion of sort, in that it is a societal-grasped construct of ideas to bring about a social order.  As can be found in many specific instances of religious practice, the specifics come to be considered sacred via time-honored transition, even to the point where the inevitable damage to one’s way of life brought about by minds no longer required to think critically comes to undermines the whole of the thing.
     
    So, to get down to the whole of my reasoning, it would give many a good man a headache, and would seem to be spawned in such an ivory tower as to be an impossibility.  Until somebody does it and it succeeds.  In which case people wonder why they had not thought of it earlier.  Or perhaps it would fail and be forgotten?  This is the road of true innovation.

  • Peter S.

    We feel for them because we have sympathy.

    We care about them because we have compassion.

    We note the timing as we also have skepticism, remark because we have sarcasm, but that’s hardly as important as the first two are.

    It isn’t about whether there may be other jobs or what-have-you.  It sucks to get fired.  Getting fired on the heels of success salts the wound.  That frikkin’ hurts.  Show some sympathy, dammit.

  • dartwick

    geldonyetich: Really, the issue bogs down into an individual’s perspective of life to the point where I’ve a much chance of budging a person to see that there’s always profitable work to be had as I do to budge them on their religious beliefs.   Capitalism is, after all, a religion of sort, in that it is a societal-grasped construct of ideas to bring about a social order.  As can be found in many specific instances of religious practice, the specifics come to be considered sacred via time-honored transition, even to the point where the inevitable damage to one’s way of life brought about by minds no longer required to think critically comes to undermines the whole of the thing.   So, to get down to the whole of my reasoning, it would give many a good man a headache, and would seem to be spawned in such an ivory tower as to be an impossibility.  Until somebody does it and it succeeds.  In which case people wonder why they had not thought of it earlier.  Or perhaps it would fail and be forgotten?  This is the road of true innovation.

     

    This is pretty much all your posts.

    You stake out a hard defend position then you get a bunch of attention.
    Eventually you deal with your position in one of 3 ways.
    -you were devils advocate
    -semantics(you were misunderstood, usually because you had a deeper twisted meaning that you didnt elucidate.)
    -its too complicated so you would rather not talk about it anymore.

    The end result is a lot of talking about you.
    Troll

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    The only person here I saw talking about me is you, Dartwick.  But hey, the week’s winding down and apparently we’ve said all we were going to say about this entry, so as we’re apparently both here to invent find something interesting for our brains to nosh on, I’ll answer your troll with my own and hopefully not annoy our host overmuch.
     
    You’re quite right that I’ll touch on those three points but, the way I see it, the reasoning is sound in each case:
     
    1. “Devil’s Advocate” – A term that gets thrown around a lot.  Truth be told, it’s merely arguing against the status quo which, as a fellow relatively distanced from society at large thanks to a string of unemployment and an Arts degree, is something I’m prone to do.  What, does anything that goes against conventional wisdom strike you as so very dangerous it should never be said?  What a drab little society you would build.
     
    2. “Semantics” – As much as I hate it, the bottom line is that people on the Internet don’t take the time to read.  When I take a careful look at many of the people who disagree with what I (or anyone else for that matter) are saying, it’s actually more common than not that the reason why they are disagreeing is that they failed to comprehend what the writer was writing.  Don’t believe that’s entirely the writer’s fault, as communication takes two.  I don’t have the energy I used to, and so I’ve taken to playing the “go back and read that again” card instead of clarifying simply because when I do clarify, the son-of-a-bitch on the other end usually takes it as arguing instead of clarification, a mis-communication atop another mis-communication.  It should be easy to understand why seeing this happen time and time again has severely soured my interest in even trying.
     
    3. “It’s too complicated and I’d rather not talk about it anymore” is an example of a mis-communication if that’s what you think that big thing which you quoted was saying.    No, what I was saying was that the point of contention on this comment thread was brought about by a difference in personal beliefs, and considering how strong beliefs tend to be in a person, words won’t change their mind, though experience might.
     
    However, in the cases where I might say “It’s too complicated and I’d rather not talk about it anymore,” it usually has to do with point #2 above.   if I’m noticing a failure to communicate is occurring, so apparently I lack the necessary skills to communicate the idea to the readers who have no interest in reading what I’m writing anyway.
     
    It’s mighty hypocritical for you to first tell me to stop trolling and then demand I participate in a discussion with you in the same breath.  If the means in which I participate in a discussion is, in your mind, only trolling, then you’re just setting me up.  Knock it off, I’ve indy game development to fail to motivate myself to do, and distractions don’t help.

  • Guy

    Geldo said “Capitalism is, after all, a religion of sort, in that it is a societal-grasped construct of ideas to bring about a social order. ”
    Oh come on man. Capitalism includes unemployment. Variable unemployment. And some of the newly unemployed when unemployment goes up… never work again. (They give up trying to find a job, which funnily enough means they are no longer unemployed, but simply not a part of the work force anymore.)

  • dartwick

    No one demands anything of you. But you always deliver.

  • Tox

    @Guy: The unemployment rate also includes part-time workers.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    @Guy
    I don’t see the connection between what you quoted and what you wrote.  Aside from that, I really can’t disagree with what you wrote, on account of how I never intended to say otherwise.  It seems context has been lost and an argument has been spawned where there was none to be had.  Again.
    @dartwick
    Are you really setting out to say, “Hey, I think everybody should know I think Geldonyetich is a troll because he tends to say things I find provocative?”  Because, if so, that’s sort of a worse use of comment space than what I’m doing here.
     
    Let me tell you about a world where no one can endeavor to introduce a new (and therefore automatically provocative to some) idea without being considered an exhibitionist to be shunned: it went out of style at the end of the Dark Ages.
     

  • dartwick

    geldonyetich:@dartwick Are you really setting out to say, “Hey, I think everybody should know I think Geldonyetich is a troll because he tends to say things I find provocative?”  Because, if so, that’s sort of a worse use of comment space than what I’m doing here.   Let me tell you about a world where no one can endeavor to introduce a new (and therefore automatically provocative to some) idea without being considered an exhibitionist to be shunned: it went out of style at the end of the Dark Ages.

     

    Now you are doing faulty paraphrasing so you can fight a strawman in front of the forum.

  • Guy

    The connection was that you said “there is always work”, which someone disagreed with, to which you responded “hey man, Capitalism is a state of mind, duuude.” Which I though was ironic given that capitalism certainly doesn’t promise never ending work for everyone in the way that, say, enforced full employment by bureaucratic Communism does.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    @dartwick
    So, now you’re throwing the straw man card in response to my telling you that in playing the troll card you’ve essentially just been straw manning me?  This whole me-centric deviation began with you telling me I fall into easy cop outs to win my arguments.  It’s deeply ironic that it immediately manifested not only with one deeply transparent cop out you’re the habit of doing but a cop out within another cop out.
     
    Lets just take a moment to savor that.  Not too long long ago we were talking about Shakespeare, little wonder that base human nature was such a fertile ground for humor and tragedy.  If all the world is a play and we but players, I’m a player who is trying to make the other players aware of the mockery from beyond the fourth wall, but keeps getting dragged back up on stage so that the play can go on.  Life is a cruel critic, isn’t it?
     
    @Guy
    Though I still think you’re a little off in your interpretation, I see I’m not going to get away with the abstract answer with you on the watch.  However, if you’re not going to permit the perfectly abstract answer, we’re left bumbling for the specifics our lack of omniscience permits only to exist in an imperfect manner.   It’s an easy matter to say that “work” exists in a finite, or infinite, quality.  It’s harder to prove it.
     
    Theoretically, in order for this to truly be the case, one has to establish that a person cannot be leveraged productivity by anyone on the entire planet.  If there was truly such a thing as finite work, should we then assume that there should be as much jobs in the 1900s as there are in 2010?  After all, if population increases but work remains finite, then unemployment is inevitable.  That has not been the case, the number of jobs has increased as people had need to support themselves, but why?  Because someone took the time to invent more work to be had.  If that’s all it takes, is work truly finite?  The devil remains in the details.

  • Guy

    I’m not trying to argue that work is finite in that sense. That’s far more theoretical than I feel is even useful to discuss. I’m talking about unemployment in the US, which is very real, and rose sharply recently. The OP was about layoffs of actual people. I mean, I hope they can all find work again quickly. But some might have a hard time doing so. And if you’re unemployed or under-employed, well, that sucks too. Unless you don’t mind, in which case, party on.

  • Peter S.

    As reluctant as I am to get involved in a flamewar (famous last words):

    Talking about work (in the abstract) without also talking about quality of life is nondimensional.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    I suppose 6-8 hours is enough of a wait since my last post, though I prefer there be at least a good 4-5 posts in between lest this become my comment thread again.
     
    Truth be told, I’d rather be armchair abstract theorist than concrete statistical analyst.  Partly because I lack the necessary data and training to be the later to a degree in which I find my findings would be satisfactory.  Partly because if I took two absolutely genius professional concrete statistical analysts, put them in two separate rooms outfitted with a typewriter, instructed one to write a book that proved that jobs are finite and the other to write a book to prove that jobs are infinite, they will both come up with equally persuasive arguments.
     
    Further, I would conjecture that were we to then give both books to the highest echelon movers and shakers in the American business world, they’d give them nary a skim before tossing both in the same incinerator they use to burn the evidence of the illicit business dealings which allow them to outsource the greater bulk of their labor to third world sweat shops.  Why?  Because screw your stuffy intellectualism and whining about eroding the foundations of our own country.  We’re making money hand over fist and, as far as we’re concerned, that’s how it should be.  So long as you dumbasses are still willing to dump money in our big box stores made by fair cheaper labor than you while simultaneously begging us for employment, you can’t do a damn thing about it.
     
    So here we sit on a comment thread with your saying, hey, lets talk about unemployment statistics?  I’m fairly dubious the problems exist in numbers so much as practice.

  • dartwick

    geldonyetich: @dartwick So, now you’re throwing the straw man card in response to my telling you that in playing the troll card you’ve essentially just been straw manning me?  This whole me-centric deviation began with you telling me I fall into easy cop outs to win my arguments.  It’s deeply ironic that it immediately manifested not only with one deeply transparent cop out you’re the habit of doing but a cop out within another cop out.   Lets just take a moment to savor that.  Not too long long ago we were talking about Shakespeare, little wonder that base human nature was such a fertile ground for humor and tragedy.  If all the world is a play and we but players, I’m a player who is trying to make the other players aware of the mockery from beyond the fourth wall, but keeps getting dragged back up on stage so that the play can go on.  Life is a cruel critic, isn’t it?  

     

    “Win?” The issue was just the existence of your ‘arguments’ and the way that you rationalize that existence.

    Why dont you just respect the other posters and argue points you care about on the merits rather than try to manipulate the readers through secondary effects of your posts(since you are no claiming that intention.).

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    Sorry, you don’t get to write this post and pretend you’re an advocate of respecting other posters.

  • dartwick

    The inherent disrespect involved in explaining that someone is generally disrespectful is not invalidate the explanation.
    Anyway. So long for this thread. Yore now just trying to attack me for pointing out that your a troll.

  • http://twitter.com/D_0ne D-0ne

    Tox: @Guy: The unemployment rate also includes part-time workers.

    Very, very, very, few part time people qualify for unemployment and are counted as unemployed. To imply that unemployment includes part-time workers is just asinine.

  • Tox

    The effective unemployment rate includes part-time workers. The rate itself has nothing to do with unemployment benefits.

  • Guy

    Geldo, that is possibly the worst post you’ve ever written. It’s like you’re having a whole separate argument in your own head, and I’m left wondering how in the hell what you wrote is a response to me. Nice try, but saying I’m being the theoretical one here is just… odd. I’m sorry if you think counting the number of people unemployed in the US constitutes highly abstract statistical analysis. You’re hopeless. And I’m really not sure how there being ruthless companies willing to send jobs overseas (which is what you are saying) in the US strengthens your argument that “there is always work”. Seems to do the opposite.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    @dartwick
    Trying to attack you because you’ve made it your mission to discredit me this entire thread?  Gosh, can’t imagine why.  In any case, considering the manner you’ve been conducting yourself over the last few exchanges with me was to barely read my posts before quoting one tiny part out of a giant thing you quoted in order to creatively misinterpret it in such a way as to save face, I can’t say I’ll miss you.  Next time to reply to me, it’d probably be better if I just ignore you, as clearly you’d rather discuss how you don’t like the way I post instead of whatever matter is on the table.
     
    @Guy
    So, lets break down your post here:


    “Geldo, that is possibly the worst post you’ve ever written. [...] You’re hopeless.”
    Hey, thanks for the completely nonconstructive negative feedback.   That you can’t resist writing this shit is a really handy earmarks to know you’re apparently so emotionally riled up you’re not conducting yourself intelligently.  It certainly puts me in a great mood to conduct myself in kind (close sarcasm end tag).
     
    “Nice try, but saying I’m being the theoretical one here is just… odd. ”
    Yeah, that would be pretty odd, considering what I wrote was that, “I’d rather be armchair abstract theorist than concrete statistical analyst,” and didn’t say a thing about what you were.  To put it in your terms:



    “it’s like you’re having a whole separate argument in your own head, and I’m left wondering how in the hell what you wrote is a response to me.”
    Story of my life.  But, actually, the really interesting thing about this is just how true it is as pertains to any Internet discussion and all participants, considering (a) nobody reads and (b) every person’s individual mind will be a reservoir for individual beliefs and unique interpretation of stimuli so as to create a separate argument in their own heads.  Pity you won’t read or understand that thing I just wrote.
     
    “I’m sorry if you think counting the number of people unemployed in the US constitutes highly abstract statistical analysis.”
    Thank you for your condolences I thought that performing an abstract count of the statistics of the unemployed people in the U.S. in order to analyze them was an highly abstract statistical analysis.  Facing the truth is a difficult thing, and it’s only thanks to sympathetic souls like yourself that I’m able to shoulder on.


    “And I’m really not sure how there being ruthless companies willing to send jobs overseas (which is what you are saying) in the US strengthens your argument that ‘there is always work’. Seems to do the opposite.”
    In much the same way that pointing out the light switch is currently in the off position seems to do the opposite of suggesting unlimited light may exist in the room.

  • Brask Mumei

    I feel for Geld’s failure to penetrate the myopism of the indoctrinated.
     
    Let us try a different tactic.  Instead of asking if there is always work, let us suppose instead that there isn’t more work.
     
    Why, exactly, is that a bad thing?  Being truly out of work – having nothing more that must be done – means we are free to play, no?  When I finish washing the dishes I don’t cry that all my dishes are clean.  I rejoice I can move to leisure tasks.  The long term goal of labour saving devices, of robotization, etc, is to put the unemployment rate at 100% where we can all spend our time “working” on tasks of our own desire.
     
    This is where the brainwashing kicks in.  “But how do I pay for my lifestyle without work?”  Well, I thought we had agreed that there was no more work to be done?  Which means that your lifestyle must already be paid for, or else you’d have work to do to maintain it.  (Like I have unending dishwashing to ensure my lifestyle of clean dishes)
     
    Of course, I’m doubtful the average NA lifestyle, being built on cheap oil and economic-slavery, can be maintained if we equalize world workloads.  But, I’m hopeful that we can cut most of the ridiculous overconsumption and maintain a pleasant lifestyle post-equalization.

  • John Smith

    I no longer come here for lum’s posts, but to read the comments.

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    Two days later, looks like no reply is forthcoming.
     
    Yeah, Brask more or less has the long and short of it.   Self-employment has dropped sharply in the past 50 years, increasing he dependence to other parties to hire, and this is where a large part of our, “get a job” mentality comes from.   That as all well and good when “job security” wasn’t an oxymoron, but that has  seen a significant drop in many (if not most) fields thanks in part to the pressures of globalization.
    What we’re looking at here is no longer numbers, but a fundamental change of our society’s mindset towards employment.  We’re not quite to George Jetson’s push-button job yet (and we probably won’t be for a few decades yet) but it seems we can no longer find fulfillment in an honest day’s work.

  • John Smith

    Well Geldonyetich, people just get tired of your shit. You have to remember, this is a comment system on an article or clip, not your own personal debate forums. Sometimes a conversation is finished, whether you like it or not :(

  • http://geldonsgaming.blogspot.com geldonyetich

    John Smith: I just thought you that people are tired of you and I’ve declared the thread over.

    Thanks for the well-meaning redundancy of pointless sentiment.

  • Scott Jennings

    You people realize you’re making me want to nuke this site from orbit just to be sure. You’re aware of this, correct?

  • Peter S.

    Scott Jennings:
    You people realize you’re making me want to nuke this site from orbit just to be sure. You’re aware of this, correct?

     

    Yes (sadly).

    Could you lock the comment thread?

← Older Comments