The Immigration Debate - Or Is It?

I find myself uniquely qualified to chime in on the immigration debate that has recently been sparked by Arizona's new law.

You see, when I was in Japan I experienced this exact situation. Japanese law allows police to request proof of a person's visa status, and on multiple occasions I was stopped and asked to show my identity card.

You know what? That makes sense to me. I wasn't offended, because I had nothing to hide. It is a country's right to enforce the integrity of the system that gives citizenship to the people living there, as well as a duty; it is necessary to protect the lawful citizens of a nation from those who don't respect the law.

The fact that they are making it illegal on a state level to be in the country illegally (which would be federal law) just goes to show that the federal government isn't effectively addressing the problem. A state ought to have the right to pass a law like this and look after its own, especially when the feds aren't doing anything to resolve the problem.

America has been incredibly lenient on illegal immigration for a long time, and I think it is a good thing that we're going to start taking things a little more seriously. If you are lawfully in the country, you have nothing to worry about.

In my opinion, though this is starting out as an immigration debate, I think that ultimately it will turn into a state's rights battleground. The federal government will try to impose its will on Arizona, and Arizona (and probably Texas) will fight against this. When the dust settles, I can only hope that the states will have reaffirmed their right to govern themselves with minimal federal interference.

Update on Net Neutrality

Recently I talked about a court ruling on how much power the FCC has for regulating the net.

A good friend of mine sent me a very interesting article that shows the FCC isn't in fact as powerless as we thought. Looks like Net Neutrality could still be a reality. Good news after all!

The Age of Litigation (Or: I Exercise My Noble Freedom to be an Asshole)

So instead of considering the fine art of procrastination today, I want to comment on the recent iphone fiasco and Gizmodo in particular. (I'll try to get to the other topic in early May.)

You see, some guy found a prototype of the next gen iphone and sold it to a journalist-blogger website, which started revealing a lot of juicy secrets. Apple didn't like them reporting all about it, so they had the police get involved.

Now we've got a debate over whether or not bloggers are protected under journalist laws, as well as what exactly the laws entitle journalists to do.

In my opinion, it is obvious that this is a case of private property which is still in a prototype stage and that releasing information on it is almost certainly harmful to the company. By purchasing it and then analyzing and reporting on it, Gizmodo did something definitely unethical and probably unlawful.

I agree with the people who claim that journalistic legal protection does not extend to committing illegal acts for the sake of creating a source; they exist so that journalists cannot be forced to reveal sources. There's a significant difference here.

Furthermore, I'm not a particular fan of Gizmodo in the first place. A while back they pulled a "prank" that in my opinion shows that their modus operandi is basically selfish and antisocial.

What they did wasn't a prank, in my opinion. It could have been, if they didn't take it so far, and if they had revealed what they were up to shortly after pulling it. But the worst part in my opinion is their lame justification and complete lack of regret.

They paint their actions by associating them with the noble idea of "civil disobedience", claim that the prank "pays homage to the notion of independence and independent reporting", and say that any journalists who criticize their actions are obviously just corporate lapdogs who have sold out.

Seriously? This is the worst sort of self-righteous closed-mindedness, and it pisses me off. So I'm really not that surprised to know that Gizmodo is claiming a moral high ground and suggesting that the purchase of known stolen property and then revealing trade secrets is somehow related to freedom of information.

Suppose some kid I don't know steals my neighbor's diary, then sells it to me for five bucks because he knows I'm always desperate for any old topic to blog about, and I start revealing Old Man Thompson's secret obsession with Hello Kitty... is this seriously about freedom of information?

The problem with modern day society is that we keep taking ideals of freedom far past their logical extension. The justification of selfish and antisocial behavior, wrapped up in the guise of something noble, is so pervasive that we have to debate about whether or not its wrong to steal something secret and then make it public. This type of thing used to be common sense.

The fact that its not is exactly what's wrong with our modern day society.

**Update 4/30**
Here's some info about the guy who originally found & sold the iphone. Sounds like he's full of regret now that he might get in trouble!

On the fine art of procrastination...

Actually I'll just post about this on Wednesday.

The Eikaiwa Industry

When I was in Japan, I worked for NOVA, which was the largest English conversation school (eikaiwa) up until it went bankrupt. Their bankruptcy was a huge shock to the industry, which was quite the juggernaut throughout Japan's bubble economy and still sizable up until NOVA's late 2007 bust. Many students lost thousands of dollars already spent on prepaid tuition, which is the industry's standard system of payment. Naturally, people lost trust in the industry and the remaining companies struggled to keep what they could of a declining customer-base.

Eventually a large conglomeration which specializes in taking over failed companies and making them profitable again purchased NOVA and took over operations. I stayed on with them (off and on, long story) until I came back home.

A few days ago, Geos (another one of the "big four" names in the industry) went bankrupt. Back before I came home in late 2009, we had been hearing rumors that they were having cash-flow problems... so I can't say that I'm all that surprised. It is interesting, however, to hear that the same company which purchased NOVA is taking over Geos in a similar fashion. Sounds like they were ready to move this time around.

For students, this is a good thing. For the young people who see teaching as a convenient means to support themselves while spending a year or two in Japan, however...

In the eikaiwa industry, pay & working conditions are inevitably on the decline. I think that makes sense given the economy and all, and don't begrudge the companies for making hard decisions. But at the same time, I can't help but feel like the industry is changing irreversibly, and that makes me sad. My time in Japan, made possible by the eikaiwa schools, really helped me to grow as a person and simultaneously have some amazing adventures.

To all my friends still in Japan, good luck in an uncertain future! (Drink some Super Dry for me, will ya?)

**Update 4/28**
The Japan Times has a new article explaining how this is gonna work out. Sounds like the Geos teachers will get a much better deal than the NOVA folks did.

Technology & Human Culture

I've been thinking a lot lately about how technology has really changed the rules regarding socialization. With free social networking sites and voice-chat services, long-distance relationships (both platonic and otherwise) have taken a completely different form from even fifteen years ago.

I lived in Japan for a few years, and was able to talk to my parents for free using the internet. While not a replacement for being able to spend time together physically, it was nonetheless a convenient way to stay in touch and made the distance feel far less than "on the other side of the world".

Now I'm back in America, but I still chat daily with the friends I made in Japan. I'll admit that I'm an incredibly lazy guy, so if snail mail was the only means to keep in touch then I couldn't be bothered.

Another interesting this is how simple it is to talk with people from other countries, nowadays. I've had random people from China & Vietnam contact me on Skype just because they were curious about meeting an American. The ease with which you can reach out to people on the other side of the planet is pretty amazing, and I imagine will go a long ways towards eroding cultural biases all over the world.

Of course, with new technology comes new problems of etiquette. Often times, I'm busy with multiple tasks while I'm chatting, which means I tend to only pay attention sporadically. Countless times, my lack of immediate response is taken by a friend to mean that I'm offended by something.

Another thing: I often hear the joke "it isn't real until its on facebook" regarding break-ups. And don't get me started on how our friendships are now codified and displayed via text! Relationships as well, though they include the convenient "its complicated" catch-all.

I just find the new technological aspect to human social interaction to be quite fascinating.

The Net: Tomorrow's Battleground?

The United States military is asserting its right to "fire back" as a defense not only in real-life, but also on the web. As a completely uninformed civilian, I'd say that sounds reasonable to me. But it makes me think: will tomorrow's world wars be fought in server-rooms and offices?

Many economic and diplomatic experts these days claim another world war is impossible due to the fully internationalized economy; we're all so integrated with each other that it simply wouldn't be possible. Perhaps they are correct when it comes to a physical war, but what if it was a world war fought only on cyber battlefields? (And no, I'm not talking about a first-person-shooter :P)

It is an interesting thing to think about. Would the civilians of this type of war not even know it was being waged? Or would they constantly have their bank accounts disappear, infrastructure destroyed, basic services shut down, etc?

I suppose tomorrow's soldiers might look quite a bit different from the ones we've known previously. Goodbye muscles, hello sickly looking kid with glasses? Haha :)

How much control should the government have over internet usage?

Korea is taking strong measures to prevent citizens from staying up all night playing their favorite games. This isn't a new concept; China did something similar back in 2005.

Some places have laws about how late a bar can be open, so I suppose there's a precedent of government intervening in the hours that we're allowed to engage in behavior that may be harmful to ourselves, but I'm not convinced that a lack of self-discipline with video games is the same thing as imbibing powerful intoxicants.

When China did this, it made a lot of news but I personally didn't find it to be incredibly worrisome; China is an authoritarian dictatorship. South Korea, on the other hand, is supposed to be a democratic republic... and I'm a bit shocked and quite worried about this type of heavy-handed authority being used in a nominally free society.

Do you think this type of thing is justified? How much authority does the government have when it comes to limiting freedoms in the name of the greater good?

On Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality is an issue that I've been following avidly for some time.

For anyone who isn't aware of what net neutrality is or the implications of it, here's a brief run-down:

Basically as things stand, the internet is a realm of equals. There is no premium service where certain websites get better connection or more bandwidth; everyone has the same access to anything.

This guarantees that, for example, a small independent news site can be accessed by anyone on any ISP, authoritarian regimes and their censorship notwithstanding. Net Neutrality guarantees the free flow of information and communication.

Without it, an ISP could block access to Fox News, or make it so that Fox News was the only website you could view. They could also start charging a premium rate for access to popular websites. The possibilities for corporate control over information are endless and terrifying.

Recently, a panel of three judges decided that the FCC can no longer enforce the idea of Net Neutrality. (Link here.) It boils down to a lack of legislation supporting the FCC's claim of the right to enforcement.

I strongly hope that Congress will enact the legislation necessary to give the FCC some teeth when it comes to these issues, because the alternative has the potential to be downright Orwellian!

Wanna work in the gaming industry?

As promised: If you're interested in working in the gaming industry, I just might have some tips for you!

At PAX East, I attended the So You Want to Get into the Game Industry panel. The biggest thing they pushed was networking. In particular (if you don't already have some contacts) interning can be a great option. If you do land an intern job, work hard. It sounds like common sense to me, but supposedly a lot of people get in and then think "I won't work hard until I get paid", and of course they end up not getting the job at all.

If you're going after a job, start working at it before you apply. Build some game mods, or maintain a blog. (^_^) Try to attend unofficial meetings / groups of industry insiders. Apparently in the urban hubs, there are plenty of these around and newcomers are welcome.

Include a cover-letter with your application. A well written cover-letter. Mention any people you know; name-drop. If you met the person at a panel years before, mention it. Also talk about games that you love (show your passionate side) and in particular games from the company you're applying for.

When going for an interview, don't overdress. Apparently (and I'd double check but this is seriously what they told us) the industry frowns upon people who dress super business-like for their interview. Something business casual is preferred.

Make sure you do your homework before the interview. When a company asks if you've played their games, don't be in a position where you have to say no or lie. Play some of their games & know what the company is about!

Once you have the job, don't act entitled. Work your butt off. Meet deadlines. And don't think that it isn't a real job just because its in the gaming industry; maintain an appropriate level of professionalism. Also, don't be discouraged by setbacks. Layoffs happen a lot in this industry, and the industry is relatively small. Do not burn bridges, or take a layoff personally.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is all that I'm willing to share. (Hey, its a competitive industry after all; gotta keep an edge.)

Good luck in your futures, and hopefully we'll meet up to work on Fallout 4 or Civilization 6 together!

Civilization 5

I remember the first time I played Civilization 4... the game loaded, and then began singing to me. I had been worried about all the changes they were making to my beloved series, but in the end it turned out to by my favorite iteration yet! A lot of folks are similarly worried about Civ 5, but I have to say that after seeing the demo, I'm not too worried. Our highly anticipated game is in safe hands.

The game world is beautiful. Absolutely beautiful. Now bear in mind, the build we were shown was an early Alpha, so this information may not remain accurate. From what we were told: roads are no longer going to be integral for your empire, but rather will act as a trade link. You'll want to build roads as minimally as possible, because they will actually hinder resources gathered from the tiles they exist in.

Did I say tile? I meant to say hex. If you haven't heard, Civ 5 is switching to a hexagon system that I think looks pretty interesting. It will certainly add a lot of new strategic possibilities when units are engaged in combat. The design team said that they really wanted to revolutionize the way wars occur in Civ 5. To this end, they're limiting military units to one per hex, giving ranged units the ability to fire from afar, and making units a lot more expensive and a lot more powerful. Combat will no longer necessarily leave one unit wiped out, and ranged units can play a significant role in backing up melee units.

They are also limiting cities to where only one unit can garrison them. The general idea is that wars will occur and be decided outside of the cities. And obviously, no more Stacks of Doom. I love the direction combat is taking since one of my least favorite aspects of Civ is unit spam.

I asked a few questions towards the end of the session. From what I was told:
-Civilization/Leader traits will be very distinct and heavily contribute to the playstyle
-Unique Units will truly be unique, not just a small stat bonus but something that other units can't do
-City States are in the game to "make things happen" between the larger empire-like civilizations, and are very effective at that; they provide substantial bonuses if you're friendly with 'em (depending on the city's focus, such as war or economics), but can also be captured
-Conquest no longer requires you to eliminate all over civilizations; just take and hold all their capitals (which I'm not too thrilled about, actually)
-Barbarians will have a "home city", and if you capture the home city you stop the barbarians (unknown if this is going to be literally one home city on a world, or if it'll be lots of home cities that spawn barbarians continuously and can be captured one by one)
-You can spend gold to "purchase" an expansion of your cities borders
-Cities will expand an additional hex, rather than two like in previous games it'll go out to work up to three hexes away

Overall, I'm really excited about what I saw and looking forward to the finished product. I can't wait!

PAX East, Part 2: Panels and Games!

The first panel I attended on Friday was Online Gaming Communities and "Real Life" Relationships, which I thought was quite interesting, having met several good friends online prior to meeting up face-to-face.

After that, I had hoped to attend Storytelling in the World of Interactive Fiction, but it was unfortunately already full by the time I rushed to the auditorium after the former panel was finished.

I also attended Girls and Games: The Growing Role of Women in the Game Industry. In an industry / subculture that's overwhelming dominated by males, I thought this would be quite interesting. Unfortunately, it turned out to be sort of ridiculous. There was a male moderator who kept repeating the questions, like verbatim, to the panel... as if they needed a translator or something. Everyone could hear just fine, the questions were spoken into a microphone the first time. It seemed almost sexist, as if they couldn't have an all-woman panel without a male to make sure things worked well.

There were plenty of other panels without a moderator, so I'm just not sure what was going on there. But to me, the worst part of it all was that there were tons of questions and these repetitions really ate into the time-slot. The moderator kept making stupid jokes (which also tended to be border-line sexist) and generally seemed unnecessary.

During the weekend, I also got a chance to try out 3D gaming, which was pretty awesome. I played a first person shooter and had to admit, the 3D technology was pretty amazing. Just like the movies, only its interactive! Pretty rad stuff.

I also got to see a hands-on preview of Civilization 5! I'll talk more about that next time, but I will say that the game is absolutely gorgeous.

My favorite panel, by far, was So You Want to Get into the Game Industry?  It was ran by several industry insiders, including the legend: Chris Avellone. He wasn't fielding any questions on Fallout: New Vegas, unfortunately... but it was pretty amazing to actually see the man behind some of my favorite games.

This panel was extremely informative for those of us interested in joining the industry, and I took copious notes. This Monday, I'll share the advice we were given; look for it then.

PAX East, Part 1

So arriving in Boston, I was immediately surrounded by a throng of folk obviously there for the same reason, and who took the same train. In fact, on the train itself it was fairly obvious that there was a large contingent of nerds on their way to PAX East.

From the very beginning, I noticed how loud and annoying and obnoxious they were. Not to say that every person heading to PAX on the train was engaging in such behavior, but I do think that a general lack of awareness / concern for social norms is the rule rather than the exception throughout the "geek" subculture. I find this interesting, and ponder why it is so.

Don't get me wrong. I'm the last person to try and subject societal norms on people arbitrarily, just to "fit in". But there are certain behaviors that I would consider "anti-social"; things that you don't do in public because it is rude and disruptive to everyone around you. And based on my experience at the convention, I suppose that just isn't commonly understood amongst geeks.

In all seriousness, this convention really opened up my eyes to why there exists so many negative stereotypes about the geek subculture. I hadn't realized, I guess because I am a hybrid geek / normal person who drinks alcohol, attends parties, etc... It was disappointing to realize, because I love geek culture!

That said, there were plenty of normal folks with normal social skills at PAX East so please don't mistake my meaning.

The convention wasn't too crowded outside of events, but a lot of the time panels and such that I wanted to attend were quickly at full capacity. I missed out on a few that way (quite disappointing!) and hope that in the future they'll work on having bigger spaces available.

I never had to look hard for an enforcer (the helpful go-to folks) so that was nice. They had food within the convention area, but I tended to end up with a chunk of free time every day so I always left the convention itself and bought something in the mall. The con food smelled nice, though!

All in all the area was quite nice, and I feel like they chose the venue well.

Next time, I'll talk about some specific panels.

Still sick...

..but I'm on the mend! My plan is to take it easy this weekend and return to regular posting on Monday.