LyX running in Windows

The first thing I think I should address is the general gripe about LyX: it’s difficulty to learn. Now, I’ll admit that I haven’t been too adventurous in my experimentation with its capabilities but I do know one thing from using it: if you go along with what it tells you, you’ll be fine; fight it, and you’re gonna make things very difficult for yourself. None of that should be an issue though, seeing as it has extensive documentation including an Introduction, Tutorial and User Guide which cover many rudimentary manipulations of basic objects (headers, footers etc.) in good detail. Of course, part of the “difficulty” of LyX is spawned from the sloppy habits of its potential users: the judicious use of word processor type shortcuts. One of the first things any user will notice using LyX is that hitting enter twice to create blank space simply doesn’t work. The second thing you’ll notice is the same goes for the spacebar. However, LyX comes with far superior methods for the creation of whitespace and inter-word spaces and once you discover and become used to these you’ll have little trouble down the line.

This aforementioned difficulty curve is perhaps the program’s one and only flaw in my esteem; and as flaws go it’s hardly grave and easily overcome. For an immensely powerful and beautiful tool that makes creating stylish, professional looking documents so simple I think that such a “flaw” is most certainly admissible anyway.

I really don’t know what else to say about LyX other than I recommend it wholeheartedly and the best thing you can do is to download it from the site and give it a try yourself. While it may perhaps seem a bit overwhelming at the start (I know I found my old word processor ways difficult to discard initially) it’s most certainly worth the investment to get used to it; I promise you won’t be disappointed!

Objectivist theory in action! For more examples, see "Bioshock" the game.

Well, I bought Atlas Shrugged under the impression that it was supposed to appeal to the pasty, D&D-loving, reservedly supercilious nerd within us all. Or at least within me.

Long story short: that wasn’t strictly true.

In Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand pioneers her philosophy of objectivism, wherein human creativity, competition and ingenuity are prized. Sort of like an extremely pure brand of capitalism dominated by haughty nerds. (Oh yes, I’m sure objectivism goes deeper than that, but I don’t like to have to take philosophy courses to obtain a fully fleshed background to something I’m just casually reading.)

Some very minor spoilers ahead (only the first two chapters though, so it isn’t much).

This philosophy is presented to us in the actions and mindsets of her characters. Enter Dagny and Jim Taggart. Dagny Taggart, the champion of objectivism in the book, comes across as a coldly distant (bordering on inhumane) Ice Queen type character (to consolidate this, a quote from the book: Jim Taggart: “You’ve never felt anything at all.” Dagny: “No Jim,” she said quietly,  “I guess I’ve never felt anything at all”. Though, she does seem, on some level, upset by this). Jim Taggart, emblematic of communist ideals, is berated for his “help out the little guy” attitude to economics; instead of buying supplies from big, successful companies he chooses instead to try to be supportive of less reliable, small time companies. In Rand’s objectivist model, this is regarded as something intrinsically bad; yet, for those of us with emotions, we feel far more empathy for Jim than for Dagny.

As for the subject matter of chapter 2, it seems to mostly deal with the concept of family shackling and constricting creative minds because they don’t understand or perceive the grand designs of these paragons of inventiveness that they fetter so.

If I’ve implied that it’s a bad book, let me state that such a thing was not my intention. Merely, the subject matter was different from what I expected. So far, it’s been a well written and interesting piece, offering a different perspective on industry and human thinking and I hope it continues as such.

See? Isn’t that better?

Anyway, this debate was sparked off for me recently when I attended a talk given by a recently graduated law student. I have no doubt that the student was intelligent, having gotten accolades of some merit in their degree; yet, the bothersome thing was that their speech was peppered with vestigial adjuncts such as “like” and “totally”. Now, one might argue that the student was not in a strictly professional mindset on this occasion and that might very well be true; but still, one would treat a (admittedly informal) speech with at least some degree of professionalism, surely? I’m well aware there’s room for oversensitivity here, and I probably am being overly staunch. One thing I do know for certain though is I wouldn’t want a lawyer to write in a letter on my behalf along the lines of: “dear, like, whoever…”

Yet more cases in point come to mind apropos of this subject. I know at least two people who are first year medicine students who still largely talk and behave in this sort of manner, despite being very astute (one would certainly have to be, in order to meet the requirements to study medicine). Who really wants to hear “it seems, like, you’ll make a totally awesome recovery!” from their doctor though?

It is, then, obvious what an appearance professionalism generates: a sense of trust and confidence. Indeed, it would be, and has been, true that one could be ostensibly professional, proving to be thoroughly incompetent and people would have more faith in you than if you were a shaggy, ill-spoken genius in your field.

I am well aware that the same criticism of the “young generation” has been raised time and time again, and yet it never proves itself founded; things always trundle on, the world working as it should. It wasn’t my intention to attempt some ridiculous prediction on the end of society; in fact, I’m sure the people who initiated this train of thought for me will perform with aplomb in their careers. What I’ve attempted to highlight here is not that the world as we know it is being heralded into a new Dark Age by a new generation of ineptitude or some such Nostradamus-esque nonsense. My conclusion from this is actually a very simple and obvious one: I merely now realise with an increased acuteness the value of appearing professional and appropriate to task.

Some of the Moleskine Range

One of the main complaints to be found seems to be that the Moleskine seems to represent for some a coffee shop going, beret wearing English undergrad brand of snobbery. Frankly, this might be true in some cases; however, that’s not to say that everyone shares in that motivation. Most people on the “pro-Moleskine” side just argue that it’s a good quality notebook that holds easily with good binding and some handy features.

Though I had heard about them before, I had only ever bought the small, pocket-sized edition out of which I’ll grant I got little mileage. Recently, I made the acquisition of a bigger (though not A4 size) one and I’m really liking this one. This, naturally, puts me on the pro-Moleskine side. I mentioned just above the sort of self-glorification that some buy the notebook for and I do also think that none of the brand name “oh, Leonardo Da Vinci used it too” nonsense should come into it. My own main reasons for liking it are that it’s tough, well bound and opens up nice and flat on a desk, all good qualities in a notebook, I think you’ll agree.

But don’t take my word for it, read what other people had to say, look into them yourself if you’re interested and, of course, simply buy one, test it out and form your own opinion.

If you’ve got a WordPress account you can leave a post here and you can be reliably assured to within an acceptable degree that I’ll read it.

Should that not float your boat, you can also send an e-mail here.

Hoping you enjoy the posts,

Robbie

I think it goes without saying that there will be huge spoilers for the game in this. So don’t read on if that bothers you.

Anyway, onwards with the intros…

A few important premises are established in the above video. There are three “factions” in Vagrant Story. The protagonist (Ashley Riot, a Riskbreaker) and Callo Merlose (an inquisitor) are working for the VKP (Valendia Knights of the Peace), the cult Müllenkamp led by Sydney Losstarot and the Crimson Blades who work for the Cardinal. It seems that Müllenkamp were being funded by Duke Bardorba and have now invaded his house and taken hostages (but he himself wasn’t there, instead being at his secondary residence). They’re demanding the release of their men and the abdication of the current Cardinal (Batistum). Long story short, Ashley has to go in and do something about Sydney.

The guy with the rapier near the start of the video is Romeo Guildenstern, leader of the Crimson Blades and important character. The guy around 2:10 saying “torch the chambers and kill the hostages” is Sydney’s right-hand man Hardin, another important character who will feature more later. Sydney is introduced (you can’t miss him) and seems to have some rather eerie powers. He also tells Hardin to go with the boy (Joshua, the Duke’s son) to Leá Monde (the city where the game’s action will take place).

Well, it’s Duke Bardorba himself…talking to a mystery man who we’ll be seeing again later. It seems everybody (Ashley, Sydney, Guildenstern and Bardorba’s agent here) are all headed for a city known as Leá Monde. Leá Monde’s history is then elaborated upon (basically an earthquake hit it and everybody there died). Ashley goes through the wine cellars into Leá Monde and Merlose tells him what she knows about Sydney and his cult.

Now, the article.

English grammarian dogmatists; you’ve seen them before. I’m not here to argue for or against so-called “grammar nazis”; I merely intend to express some thoughts on the matter.

Obviously enough, the primary objective of language is to communicate with others. This may be done though (broadly speaking) two mediums: speaking and writing. Of course, there are subdivisions in these categories but the aforementioned broader terms will serve for this article.

As we are taught in school, one must usually adopt a different tone when writing (at least one exception that comes to mind is when writing to a friend). One must strive to be formal, precise and professional. Even in more informal types of writing, one has to think carefully before they put pen to paper in order to compose a coherent essay/discussion. In these cases it would be acceptable and correct to advise people upon the difference between “who” and “whom” and whether or not to end sentences in prepositions: if one is to appear sensible and credible to a readership, one has to demonstrate a competent grasp of grammar and punctuation.

It is in the other method of communication, speaking, that corrections such as the ones mentioned above become irritating, sometimes even being unnatural for a speaker to say. Take this (grammatically correct) example of a sentence: “it is I who am at fault here”. The natural, more idiomatic and colloquial use of such a phrase would be along the lines of “it’s me who’s at fault here”. I’m sure William Shatner would have appreciated the interruption “it’s shouldn’t be ‘to boldly go…’; ‘to go boldly is the correct form. That sounds better, doesn’t it?” during his dramatic (cliché) monologue. Language has evolved with those who use it, if a phrase is deemed correct in vernacular usage, then it should be accepted as such. Yes, one wouldn’t use a phrase such as “them’s the breaks” unintentionally in formal writing; however, it may still be used intentionally for certain purposes and shouldn’t be harshly criticised and decried as being utterly “wrong.”

I’m aware that this is all treaded ground, by the way, and grammarians of such fervored zealotism are rarer and rarer these days. But I’ve written the damn article now so it’s going up.

On an unrelated note, I’m starting up a petition to execute all people who have ever split an infinitive.

P.S. I await the snarky comment that I myself have made some such grammatical error in this very article with venemous ire and a rusty, blunt axe.

“Great…”

It then realised that its mouth was in a most unaccommodating mood as well. Lying there for a while, it decided that it would be best not to panic and wait. Naturally, this got extremely boring, it tried to move its arm again…a twitch, success! Seizing this opportunity for further movement it forced its arm ever higher towards its face, aiming to prise its eyelids open…

Still, nothing but inky blackness. No change.

This revelation now caused some genuine distress for the consciousness; however, it quelled these thoughts and closed its eyelids again. Given time, it would be able to see again, it was sure.

Time passed, and more and more motor functions were recovered anew by the consciousness. Legs, arms…it attempted to open its eyes again…

A new darkness, not as black now presented itself…it was a familiar black, though. It was sure now it was in the bedroom.

Relief washed over him, no longer a mind trapped in an unwilling body, and he went back to sleep again; it had passed and he could rest easy once more.

It could happen to you too!

Well, the premise of the game is pretty simple; it’s basically the same as the first Gears Of War: aliens=bad, so make them dead. You take control of Delta Squad (seemingly the only squad in the entire COG army that can do anything of import) to achieve this. So simply:  make as many aliens of various epic proportions and number as dead as possible.

Obviously the plot isn’t the crux of the game, but why should it be? Gears Of War knew exactly what it wanted to be and it succeeded: a fun, teamwork-based shooter. This brings me on to the real focus of the game: the combat. To put it bluntly: the combat is great. The guns and ammo are well balanced, the cover mechanic is always well implemented and everything always feels “fair” (Note: I played on Hardcore difficulty only). There’s nothing quite so epic as running into the thick of a Locust swarm and chainsaw-bayoneting them to death or firing mortars at a giant monster with massive turrets attached to it. Also, as I played in co-op you get a fantastic sense of teamwork between you and the friend you’re playing it with; it’s as though you really are the squad and you’re working together in beautiful synchronisation to kill the legions of Locust you encounter.

It’s all well and good that the combat is so enjoyable and enthralling; however, combat is supplemented by setting: of course how you’re fighting is the most important thing but where you’re fighting is also an important factor. Here Gears sort of surprised me a lot. Some of the architecture and level design is actually quite nice (the city at the end of the game comes to mind); also, some parts are rather innovative and interesting (the inside of a giant worm. I know that fighting monsters from the inside out is nothing new to video games but it was still a rather unique environment).

Hand in hand with the visual atmosphere goes the audile…so, the music. The music makes a fine supplement to the epic fights and works well as an ambient feature to the game; however, I probably wouldn’t listen to it outside the confines of the game: ultimately, it suits the game well but beyond that it hasn’t got all that much character.

Gears Of War 2 has surprised me. It’s been the most multiplayer fun I’ve had since I played Timesplitters 2 (another fantastic game for its multiplayer options). The plot is somewhat simple but it drives the story forward (aliens are trying to take over the world, what more reason do you need to try and stop them?) and while not being revolutionary it’s still very functional. If you’re a fan of third person shooters (and don’t mind the gritty, hyper-macho characters and one-liners) you should definitely add this game to your collection.

As long as I’ve known it the author hasn’t updated it (which leads me to believe the comic may be on a permanent hiatus). This, for me at least, is unfortunate; but, I think that if the author felt tapped and didn’t want to just churn inferior crap out for the masses then he made the right decision in just leaving it.

If you do decide to check it out, happy reading and I hope you enjoy it.