Insert key – why?

Or more specifically, do we really need the Insert key mapped to enabling overtype?

Most computer users (myself included) have just fallen into the practice of using backspace or delete to correct things, and indeed I could’ve used overtype to correct a few mistakes I made while typing this very sentence, but I haven’t.

The reason I ask is that the less computer-literate of our population don’t know what to do when they accidentally hit the Insert key then start typing over a document. They then go and waste the time of people like me in trying to fix it.

Also, surely there’s a good use for another spare key on the keyboard? I can think of one already – using Insert to bring up a ‘template text’ menu, or a modifier-type key, so ‘Insert + C’ or ‘Insert, C’ could insert ‘CONFIDENTIAL’. I would actually end up using something like that.

Fred Nile and racism

(Obligatory warning: incoherent rant ahead.)

I’ve been watching the flamewar between Simon Rumble and Erik de Castro. It’s quite interesting to see how they both misidentify what’s Christian and what’s not.

Firstly, I am a Christian, a member of a mainstream denomination (Presbyterian), and I oppose Fred Nile’s plan to stop Muslim immigration.

I consider the Catholics to be a group related but separate from Christianity, as they have many differences in core beliefs and misinterpret scripture often. They also believe in justification by works. You can stop criticising Christianity for the Crusades and everything up to the Reformation now.

I also consider Christian militia groups to not really be Christian, although since they’re often connected with Catholicism, well…

I did see a link in one post to the Exclusive Brethren. They’re less Christian than Mormons. They have weird beliefs like not following human laws, in the New Testament the Apostle Paul explicitly states that governments are appointed by God and that as a result Christians must follow the laws of the land as well, unless those laws prohibit the exercise of your faith.

About Fred Nile’s idea of ending Muslim migration, I think there are a few issues:

• Depending on how you read it, banning Muslim migration could potentially be prohibited by s. 116 of the Commonwealth Constitution. Getting a constitutional amendment to prohibit Muslim migration… well, Australia didn’t go too well with banning Communism back in the 50s and I’m not sure banning Muslims from coming here would go down too well either.
• As a Christian I think it’s good that Australian Muslims are in a country where Christians can preach freely rather than in the Middle East where they are frequently killed, even by the state.
• In order to get in to parliament you actually have to win elections. And I don’t think either the Coalition or Labor would support this proposal, since we all support multiculturalism nowadays apparently. And the CDP could very well lose support.
• And of course it goes against Aussie values of giving everyone a fair go. It would also seriously damage Christianity’s and Australia’s reputation in the Muslim world, and with Muslim countries and Muslim terrorists right on our doorstep…

edit: One thing I do have to agree on: according to ‘real’ (ie. Protestant, non-liberal) Christians Jesus is the Son of God, the Bible is the unchangeable literal Word of God and it is to an extent totalitarian. You do need to remember that the basis of a lot of Western law ultimately comes from Christian beliefs. (I do support separation of church and state however – power corrupts the church, as we saw in the medieval days.)

Why Current RTS Games Suck – Part 1

Below is Part 1 out of something of a big long rant about RTS games. It’s probably incoherent and not really worth reading. You have been warned.

---

I’m a computer enthusiast who generally doesn’t play too many computer games. Generally when I do play games they are real-time strategy or RTS games.

Recently I’ve found myself playing less and less games and have been trying to figure out why. I think I’ve figured it out. Nowadays I’m finding RTS games boring. I’ve seen MMORPGs like World of Warcraft have taken off and now I understand why…

Current RTS games are very inflexible. The game is played within a specific set of rules. There is little room for the player to really think of interesting new strategies.

Think about it. When playing many RTS games you create certain types of units to do certain things. You build certain buildings to do certain things. When it comes to actually doing something, you do things in a certain way.

Think about it… in most RTS games there is one way to attack. Select a military unit, select its target. Do that with a sufficient army in the right places and you can win.

But there are much more interesting ways of damaging the enemy than simply killing units and destroying buildings with your soldiers. In many RTS games you can’t do that.

There’s also a strange lack of real civilian things in many RTS games. In many games you can create military tanks to transport personnel, but what about a bus? A train system? A lot of RTS games lack these things. In most RTS games there is one main objective and only one: win by military dominance. (This isn’t always the case as there are usually quite a few missions involving economic or scientific advancement, but the main aim is to win by military means.) That gets boring. Economic development is fun as well. But having a strong economy doesn’t really help you (except for the fact that you can train a bigger army.) Only winning by military success counts.

You can’t usually mix things or combine things. You are stuck with the combinations chosen by the game developers. If you could make things up yourself you could do very interesting things.

Another problem is that many RTS games tend to treat people and vehicles as the same things, just units. They are not the same thing. People can’t just be created and suddenly know how to work, whereas vehicles can. Vehicles can’t just drive themselves, they need people. People can’t just be ‘built’, vehicles can.

Due to the military focus of most RTSs, it is difficult to win with a smaller less advanced army. Some RTS games I have played employ a very simple and successful AI that simply builds military units and attacks. These are very difficult to defeat and often players get bored of having to use the same old tactics and just build a bigger
army.

Overall, most RTS games just lack balance – they are too focused on the military and forget about the civilian part, they only provide one real path to winning, they don’t allow the player to change things and work differently, they don’t discriminate between man and machine. RPG games do that, and that IMHO is one reason they are so
successful.

It would be interesting to create a game simulating guerilla warfare, where civilian items are used out of necessity, new strategies must be devised, and the ‘army’ doesn’t consist of too much. Sure, it would be difficult to develop technically, but it would certainly be interesting.

Perhaps the open source/free software community can do a Project Orange/Elephants Dream type thing except developing a really great, commercial quality, free/open game.