<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Radio Free Tomorrow</title>
	<atom:link href="http://radiofreetomorrow.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org</link>
	<description>The 1s and 0s of outrageous fortune</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:25:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Stand on Zanzibar: The Real World catches up&#8230; by Rahadyan S</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/05/03/stand-on-zanzibar/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Rahadyan S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=135#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Sorry I didn&#039;t read  this before 03 May 2010. Thanks for the reminder of how great &lt;i&gt;Stand on Zanzibar&lt;/i&gt; was/is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry I didn&#8217;t read  this before 03 May 2010. Thanks for the reminder of how great <i>Stand on Zanzibar</i> was/is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on RealID: When Good Ideas Go Bad by Alayna</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/07/09/realid-when-good-ideas-go-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Alayna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=149#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Very last comment in Scott&#039;s post is a link to this:

https://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?sid=1&amp;topicId=25968987278

which appears to be Blizzard backing off of the &quot;real names in forums&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very last comment in Scott&#8217;s post is a link to this:</p>
<p><a href="https://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?sid=1&amp;topicId=25968987278" rel="nofollow">https://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?sid=1&amp;topicId=25968987278</a></p>
<p>which appears to be Blizzard backing off of the &#8220;real names in forums&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on RealID: When Good Ideas Go Bad by PK</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/07/09/realid-when-good-ideas-go-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>PK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:50:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=149#comment-32</guid>
		<description>If you buy your game time with game cards instead of credit cards, you don&#039;t have to give Bliz your real name.  Therefore, use a valid, on-time email address and a fake name.  Anonymity achieved.

That said, there are lots of good reasons to use aliases/characters names in public areas in online games, both because of safety and because people want to leave real life at the door when they go into a virtual world.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you buy your game time with game cards instead of credit cards, you don&#8217;t have to give Bliz your real name.  Therefore, use a valid, on-time email address and a fake name.  Anonymity achieved.</p>
<p>That said, there are lots of good reasons to use aliases/characters names in public areas in online games, both because of safety and because people want to leave real life at the door when they go into a virtual world.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on RealID: When Good Ideas Go Bad by Doc Kinne</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/07/09/realid-when-good-ideas-go-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Kinne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:45:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=149#comment-31</guid>
		<description>This has been recinded, apparently:

==========

Hello everyone,

I&#039;d like to take some time to speak with all of you regarding our desire to make the Blizzard forums a better place for players to discuss our games. We&#039;ve been constantly monitoring the feedback you&#039;ve given us, as well as internally discussing your concerns about the use of real names on our forums. As a result of those discussions, we&#039;ve decided at this time that real names will not be required for posting on official Blizzard forums.

It&#039;s important to note that we still remain committed to improving our forums. Our efforts are driven 100% by the desire to find ways to make our community areas more welcoming for players and encourage more constructive conversations about our games. We will still move forward with new forum features such as conversation threading, the ability to rate posts up or down, improved search functionality, and more. However, when we launch the new StarCraft II forums that include these new features, you will be posting by your StarCraft II Battle.net character name + character code, not your real name. The upgraded World of Warcraft forums with these new features will launch close to the release of Cataclysm, and also will not require your real name.

I want to make sure it&#039;s clear that our plans for the forums are completely separate from our plans for the optional in-game Real ID system now live with World of Warcraft and launching soon with StarCraft II. We believe that the powerful communications functionality enabled by Real ID, such as cross-game and cross-realm chat, make Battle.net a great place for players to stay connected to real-life friends and family while playing Blizzard games. And of course, you&#039;ll still be able to keep your relationships at the anonymous, character level if you so choose when you communicate with other players in game. Over time, we will continue to evolve Real ID on Battle.net to add new and exciting functionality within our games for players who decide to use the feature.

In closing, I want to point out that our connection with our community has always been and will always be extremely important to us. We strongly believe that Every Voice Matters, ( http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/mission.html ) and we feel fortunate to have a community that cares so passionately about our games. We will always appreciate the feedback and support of our players, which has been a key to Blizzard&#039;s success from the beginning.

Mike Morhaime
CEO &amp; Cofounder
Blizzard Entertainment</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This has been recinded, apparently:</p>
<p>==========</p>
<p>Hello everyone,</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to take some time to speak with all of you regarding our desire to make the Blizzard forums a better place for players to discuss our games. We&#8217;ve been constantly monitoring the feedback you&#8217;ve given us, as well as internally discussing your concerns about the use of real names on our forums. As a result of those discussions, we&#8217;ve decided at this time that real names will not be required for posting on official Blizzard forums.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s important to note that we still remain committed to improving our forums. Our efforts are driven 100% by the desire to find ways to make our community areas more welcoming for players and encourage more constructive conversations about our games. We will still move forward with new forum features such as conversation threading, the ability to rate posts up or down, improved search functionality, and more. However, when we launch the new StarCraft II forums that include these new features, you will be posting by your StarCraft II Battle.net character name + character code, not your real name. The upgraded World of Warcraft forums with these new features will launch close to the release of Cataclysm, and also will not require your real name.</p>
<p>I want to make sure it&#8217;s clear that our plans for the forums are completely separate from our plans for the optional in-game Real ID system now live with World of Warcraft and launching soon with StarCraft II. We believe that the powerful communications functionality enabled by Real ID, such as cross-game and cross-realm chat, make Battle.net a great place for players to stay connected to real-life friends and family while playing Blizzard games. And of course, you&#8217;ll still be able to keep your relationships at the anonymous, character level if you so choose when you communicate with other players in game. Over time, we will continue to evolve Real ID on Battle.net to add new and exciting functionality within our games for players who decide to use the feature.</p>
<p>In closing, I want to point out that our connection with our community has always been and will always be extremely important to us. We strongly believe that Every Voice Matters, ( <a href="http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/mission.html" rel="nofollow">http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/mission.html</a> ) and we feel fortunate to have a community that cares so passionately about our games. We will always appreciate the feedback and support of our players, which has been a key to Blizzard&#8217;s success from the beginning.</p>
<p>Mike Morhaime<br />
CEO &amp; Cofounder<br />
Blizzard Entertainment</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on CONVergence nattering by Uncle Mikey</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/07/05/convergence-nattering/comment-page-1/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator>Uncle Mikey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:46:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=141#comment-30</guid>
		<description>@David I will definitely keep that in mind!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@David I will definitely keep that in mind!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on CONVergence nattering by David Kloempken</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/07/05/convergence-nattering/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>David Kloempken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=141#comment-29</guid>
		<description>Mike I would be willing to do the podcast with you.  Almost said that when she said that you should do a podcast.  

Dave..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike I would be willing to do the podcast with you.  Almost said that when she said that you should do a podcast.  </p>
<p>Dave..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Keyboard? How Quaint!&#8221;&#8230;well, maybe not? by Blaise Pascal</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/05/03/keyboard-how-quaint-well-maybe-not/comment-page-1/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>Blaise Pascal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 03:25:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=130#comment-25</guid>
		<description>Sally: &lt;em&gt;I think that we may need to think a bit like the computer&lt;/em&gt;.

We&#039;ve been down that road with handwriting recognition.  The earliest consumer-level handwriting recognition devices tried to recognise human handwriting and mostly failed.  Handwriting recognition didn&#039;t take off in consumer devices until Palm introduced Graffiti, in which the humans had to learn how &quot;think a bit like the computer&quot; and write in a prescribed manner.

However, where is handwriting recognition now?  It&#039;s been 9 Moore-doublings since Graffiti was introduced.   Yet a 512-increase in processing power has not resulted in a corresponding increase in acceptance of handwriting recognition.   I&#039;d go as far as to say that handwriting recognition, Graffiti and all, has been rejected by the market.

I suspect there are parallels to the voice recognition issue as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sally: <em>I think that we may need to think a bit like the computer</em>.</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve been down that road with handwriting recognition.  The earliest consumer-level handwriting recognition devices tried to recognise human handwriting and mostly failed.  Handwriting recognition didn&#8217;t take off in consumer devices until Palm introduced Graffiti, in which the humans had to learn how &#8220;think a bit like the computer&#8221; and write in a prescribed manner.</p>
<p>However, where is handwriting recognition now?  It&#8217;s been 9 Moore-doublings since Graffiti was introduced.   Yet a 512-increase in processing power has not resulted in a corresponding increase in acceptance of handwriting recognition.   I&#8217;d go as far as to say that handwriting recognition, Graffiti and all, has been rejected by the market.</p>
<p>I suspect there are parallels to the voice recognition issue as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Keyboard? How Quaint!&#8221;&#8230;well, maybe not? by Berwyn</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/05/03/keyboard-how-quaint-well-maybe-not/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Berwyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 03:04:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=130#comment-24</guid>
		<description>Because typing is difficult for me, I tried VR for a bit.  Was mused that it couldn&#039;t understand simple words like &#039;blue&#039; (glue? flew?), but had no problem at all with &#039;Jararvellir&#039;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because typing is difficult for me, I tried VR for a bit.  Was mused that it couldn&#8217;t understand simple words like &#8216;blue&#8217; (glue? flew?), but had no problem at all with &#8216;Jararvellir&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Keyboard? How Quaint!&#8221;&#8230;well, maybe not? by Charissa</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/05/03/keyboard-how-quaint-well-maybe-not/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>Charissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 01:39:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=130#comment-23</guid>
		<description>Personally, I think the biggest barrier to computers &amp; speech relates more to culture than anything else.  Maybe that&#039;s just context as you noted above, but a word is not just a word. Words grew out of the culture they were created in (or vice versa I&#039;m not an anthropologist, so maybe this is a chicken-and-egg problem or maybe people more knowledgeable than myself know this already) and to take them out of that culture creates issues. Computers don&#039;t really get those subtle elements, and computers today need to be more &quot;multicultural&quot; than they&#039;re capable of being, and so, until you can program cultural subtleties into a computer, voice recognition is never going to be as great as it seems like it should be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I think the biggest barrier to computers &amp; speech relates more to culture than anything else.  Maybe that&#8217;s just context as you noted above, but a word is not just a word. Words grew out of the culture they were created in (or vice versa I&#8217;m not an anthropologist, so maybe this is a chicken-and-egg problem or maybe people more knowledgeable than myself know this already) and to take them out of that culture creates issues. Computers don&#8217;t really get those subtle elements, and computers today need to be more &#8220;multicultural&#8221; than they&#8217;re capable of being, and so, until you can program cultural subtleties into a computer, voice recognition is never going to be as great as it seems like it should be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Keyboard? How Quaint!&#8221;&#8230;well, maybe not? by Sally</title>
		<link>http://radiofreetomorrow.org/2010/05/03/keyboard-how-quaint-well-maybe-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 23:42:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radiofreetomorrow.org/?p=130#comment-22</guid>
		<description>I think that we may need to think a bit like the computer, in order for it to do what we want; or phrase things with the computer in mind.   Just in dealing with data bases, I find myself needing to anticipate what form a particular Chief Complaint or Medication needs to be asked for.  I know this has to do with who programs it, but that&#039;s true in any case. 

Perhaps the verbal recognition dictation is a start for dealing with the wording piece. They have accent packages for that.  There is a particular cardiologist, who I never thought would be able to dictate to a computer, and yet he is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that we may need to think a bit like the computer, in order for it to do what we want; or phrase things with the computer in mind.   Just in dealing with data bases, I find myself needing to anticipate what form a particular Chief Complaint or Medication needs to be asked for.  I know this has to do with who programs it, but that&#8217;s true in any case. </p>
<p>Perhaps the verbal recognition dictation is a start for dealing with the wording piece. They have accent packages for that.  There is a particular cardiologist, who I never thought would be able to dictate to a computer, and yet he is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
