Discovery ripped my premise

[krma]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

<VENT>
Zombies!!!!

</VENT>

I'm there!

[makumozo]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Awesome. I just set up a reminder on my phone to notify me 15 minutes before the presentation start time.

[renderman]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

I've calmed down a bit. I've got a couple slides frameworked for when the show drops and I get a look at the actual produced show.

Hopefully it will compliment my talk and some of my ideas. I'm aiming to make it so that you don't need to have a stacked deck of hand picked 'survivors' in order to start rebuilding society. I approached things from a disaster recovery point of view used in IT. Worked rather well, hope you all think so.

[theprez98]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

So is there going to be a talk about this topic at DC 17? If so, I am there, front row & center.

Yes! See here. 10AM Saturday morning. We will be looking for you.

[makumozo]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

So is there going to be a talk about this topic at DC 17? If so, I am there, front row & center.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Twenty-five years old, and these are still timely:

Survival-Guns

Tappan on Survival

yeap, i've been seeing ads for Tappan's books in magazines and catalogs for almost as long as i can remember. it's interesting how i've seen a change over time of surivivalism and all its relevant resources and authors now being couched under the designation of the "preparedness movement" as a way of sounding not so extreme or alarmist. (not saying i disagree with that change of context, given that there were and still are some figures in that world who come across as near-total-nutbags)

i know that every single firearm i have ever purchased (with one exception) has been geared around not only usefulness and accuracy in the modern age but also reliability and usefulness in trying times should they ever come.

[Thorn]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Heh... ironic that this sort of thinking is getting popular again (it sort of comes in phases and cycles, like many themes) since in a bar a couple nights ago i was having the "survival guns" discussion with someone... all about how many modern arms are technology designed for use in controlled conditions with lots of support infrastructure. cleaning, care, and replacement parts are easy for most armed forces nowadays... thus having a Stoner rifle (or even a bullpup rifle) is possible for most.

You can have intricate parts, lighter hardware, and sometimes even "smaller" designs. The flaws of weak components, possible fouling, and rather low-impact ordinance are mitigated by supply lines and the ability to call-in support from elsewhere if things get bad.

In a survival situation, when you can't always rely on spare part availability, large numbers of comrades, etc... suddenly a lot of modern guns don't seem very worthwhile. An M-14 or even an old Mosin-Nagant can do a hell of a lot more for you than the equipment carried by most modern armies... at least as far as anti-zombie or anti-robot fighting is concerned.

Heh, if you guys wind up doing a post-talk bull session at a bar or something,

don't be surprised if i drop in my $0.02 on the matter.

Twenty-five years old, and these are still timely:

Survival-Guns

Tappan on Survival

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Heh... ironic that this sort of thinking is getting popular again (it sort of comes in phases and cycles, like many themes) since in a bar a couple nights ago i was having the "survival guns" discussion with someone... all about how many modern arms are technology designed for use in controlled conditions with lots of support infrastructure. cleaning, care, and replacement parts are easy for most armed forces nowadays... thus having a Stoner rifle (or even a bullpup rifle) is possible for most.

You can have intricate parts, lighter hardware, and sometimes even "smaller" designs. The flaws of weak components, possible fouling, and rather low-impact ordinance are mitigated by supply lines and the ability to call-in support from elsewhere if things get bad.

In a survival situation, when you can't always rely on spare part availability, large numbers of comrades, etc... suddenly a lot of modern guns don't seem very worthwhile. An M-14 or even an old Mosin-Nagant can do a hell of a lot more for you than the equipment carried by most modern armies... at least as far as anti-zombie or anti-robot fighting is concerned.

Heh, if you guys wind up doing a post-talk bull session at a bar or something, don't be surprised if i drop in my $0.02 on the matter.

[theprez98]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Here is where Renderman posted his intention to speak on this topic, and that was back in January.

Didn't Renderman include this in one of his presentations/break-out sessions at Defcon in the past, of things that he would like to see covered in future presentations?

Render and I had independently been doing some work on seperate talks up until that point, and have been discussing it ever since then. We were fortunate enough to get picked up. ;)

[TheCotMan]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Here is where Renderman posted his intention to speak on this topic, and that was back in January.

Didn't Renderman include this in one of his presentations/break-out sessions at Defcon in the past, of things that he would like to see covered in future presentations?

[makumozo]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

I should mention that the new issue of 2600 is going to have an article on Post-Apocalyptic technologies by one of the guys from HackMiami.com

This subject is very rich for research, and getting as many people involved and making as many developments as possible is a positive thing.

Multiple sources of information will lead to multiple innovations.

[bjaming]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

maybe you could borrow some of the "frightening" imagery I'm sure they will use on their show for the background for your slides?

when life gives you lemons...

oh and zombies? I'm there!

[streaker69]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

People that face a risk of death together, and share the moments of fear, and accept their own mortality

This is a very important point. While these shows are billed as 'reality' they are far from it. People will react very differently when their life, or someone else's life is actually on the line. Anyone who's been in a life and death situation can attest that they probably did things that they didn't know they were capable of, while others may just freeze in panic.

You could address that in your talk in relation to critiquing Discovery's version. What they displayed is far from how people would really react.

[TheCotMan]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Anyone else have the experience of an idea scooped before you could present?

If episodes will air before Defcon, provide constructive criticism on where they have failed, and how it could have been done better. Frequently, with infortainment and reality-based programming, their primary focus is not on accuracy, or weighting of skills based on importance; they provide contrived, unrealistic scenarios designed to sell advertising space and time.

Additionally, when there is a genuine threat of death, and harm, and people actually understand that they can't just scream out, "I give up, get me out of here," and go to a hospital, or home and take a shower, they really do act differently. People that face a risk of death together, and share the moments of fear, and accept their own mortality, end up having very different relationships with each other than when they happen to miss some sort of immunity challenge or weren't the top [model|singer|island-bastard]. People that have had to choose between saving lives, and which lives to save also begin to think differently about the people they involve themselves with, and how close they get to people they don't know.

When facing life or death scenarios, I would expect that most people are willing to kill other humans to stay alive, and create and use tools that are primarily lethal, and meant to stop their attacker for ever, not tools to confuse, disorient, or simply injure (but not incapacitate) their attackers.

I'm sure you can find a great deal more to criticize, and provide details and real examples, and don't you think most people interested in your talk will be interested in real world research and pure information, not what might pass for information, but only if it sells ad space?

Oh, and just to re-iterate, I have Zombies in my talk. Much better than discovery's simple little plague to deal with.

Zombies are awesome. I want more brains too. Am I a zombie? :-)

One more thing, there was a show on TV called, "The Survivors (1975-1977)," which was a better-than-usual telling of how people might be challenged with an end-of-the-world scenario. (I've not seen the remake (2008) yet.)

Constructive criticism allows you to do two things:
1) Show the failure in content provided by the presentation that scooped you
2) Provides information that people are interested in learning about

If you omit, "2," then it just comes off as bitter diatribe, and omission of, "1," risks people wondering why you make no mention of the scoop, and the uninformed will blindly assume that you are copying someone else.

My $0.02 :-)

[renderman]

Re: Discovery ripped my premise

Yes alcohol was a factor in the OP, however the anger still persists.

At the very least it may be timely, but the fact there is a new TV show means that I have to once again re-visit my slides and re-work them from the ground up so as to not look like I'm copying them. This will be the 3rd time my slides get a further once over.

Anyone else have the experience of an idea scooped before you could present?

Oh, and just to re-iterate, I have Zombies in my talk. Much better than discovery's simple little plague to deal with.