I thought I heard somewhere that the final was going to have a singel player game with an actual plot. If not, it is kind of pointless to make a new game out of it. Would have been easier to just make it another expation to Q3.
You ever been to a store? Ever bought a pack of CD-R's? You can buy a few and pay a lot per CD. Or you could buy a big pack, pay more, but less for each one. This would be the same princible. You still come out paying less, by purchasing only a couple of songs, but if you wanted the whole CD, you are better off buying it as a unit.
the plugin never ran, so I just view source'ed and found the addy for the file. pointed Mozilla at it, and downloaded it right off Lego. and it's still in my clipboard, so I'll add it here
Am I the only one who thinks it looks like something out of an ould sci-fi movie. I'm a bit young but the first thing that poped into my head was "Danger Danger"
go to http://www.microsoft.com/mswish/
this is Microsoft's "Send us your wish" website
or, you can email at mswsh@microsoft.com
or fax (425) 936-7329
or snail mail at
Microsoft Corperation
Microsoft Wish
One Microsoft Way
Readmond, WA 98052-6399
I doubt that was the car. While it is very simmilar, it has specialized pieces for the body instead of normal technic pieces. Although, they have made the gear box a 5 speed instead of 2. oh well, give a little, get a little.
you may still be stuck with the hard drive letters, but in the properties for any other drive in device manager, you can specify the begining drive letter.
They pump more air in it. I know blimps are split into a few section inside (went to see one of the goodyear blimps on a field trip). This increases the density of the helium. It then becomes too heavy to float.
sorry about the lack of line breaks, here is a plain old text verson
AN ENDNOTE ON REGULATING CYBERSPACE:
ARCHITECTURE VS LAW?
We need some King Canutes in cyberspace[3].
There is relatively little writing about a general theoretical structure for the regulation of cyberspace. II. THE EVOLVING NATURE OF CYBERSPACE
The Internet and property in information were widely believed to be incompatible, and technology would win against law and set information free.
- A Dystopian View of Cyberspace
In contrast with the digital libertarians is a view of cyberspace which emphasises the likely extent of identification and surveillance in cyberspace, and its potential for misuse.
(i) The Pervasiveness of Cyberspace
(iii) Identity and Digital Personae
(iv) Identification at the Cyberspace / Real Space Interface
Identification occurs at the cyberspace / real space interface.
(v) An Encrypted Space - Public Key Infrastructure
III. THEORIES OF CYBERSPACE REGULATION - DIGITAL REALISM NEEDED
A more comprehensive theoretical approach to cyberspace regulation is advanced by Lawrence Lessig in a number of articles[29]. The `old' Chicago School's anti-law analysis emphasised the effectiveness (in contrast with law) of both markets and social norms as regulators of individual behaviour, and how both markets and norms were relatively impervious to control by law. In summary, these anti-law approaches emphasise the effectiveness of the three other types of constraint -- markets, norms, and `nature'/'architecture' -- at the expense of law.
Digital libertarianism's arguments - that law is destined to be ineffective in cyberspace - are often a particular application of `anti-law' arguments to the new frontier of cyberspace, which to a large extent borrows from the earlier anti-law streams. Both versions see little positive role for law in cyberspace regulation, and that is where Lessig (and Boyle) are correct in differing from them. The rest of this Note supports the view that to understand the control (de facto and de jure) of cyberspace architecture is the key to understanding the regulation of cyberspace.
IV. CYBERSPACE REGULATION AS A FUNCTION OF FOUR CONSTRAINTS
A. Norms, Morality and Self-Regulation
In cyberspace norms play similar roles, and some special ones. Markets constrain behaviours in obvious ways in real space, influenced by property, contract and other laws which regulate those markets. The market constraints in cyberspace are as important as in real space. Unpopular code/architecture can perish where market forces operate. We don't need a law on larceny of real property.
D. Law - Direct and Indirect Regulation
Law typically regulates individual behaviour directly, and does so by threatening ex post facto sanctions. However, in real space as well as cyberspace, law also regulates individual behaviour indirectly, by aiming to change markets, norms or code. As others have done in different contexts, Lessig argues[39] that the anti-law Chicago School is misleading in that it assumes that the other constraints - markets, norms and code/architecture - are independent of law, but in fact they are in part a product of the law. We have to ask to what extent a particular constraint is created by law, and to what extent it can be changed by law. As will be illustrated later in this paper, law in cyberspace will often be more effective if it regulates code/architecture rather than trying to directly regulate individual behaviour.
V. FIVE FEATURES OF CYBERSPACE ARCHITECTURE AS REGULATION
A. Architecture is More than Software
Lessig's characterisation of code as software ("code, or the software that makes cyberspace as it is") is an oversimplification. Protocols are code developed by participatory processes particular to the Internet, and are of vital importance as non-proprietary code.
B. Architecture has Immediacy as a Constraint
Real space architecture typically regulates more directly than law, which threatens punishment after the breach. Cyberspace architecture is often self-executing (for example, passwords and other forms of access controls), but not necessarily so.
Plasticity is a major variable in the extent to which law can regulate a constraint, with more plastic constraints more susceptible to change by law. Recognition of the significance of cyberspace architecture as regulation forces us to look to its origins. Control of cyberspace architecture is at present highly fragmented. As mentioned earlier, Boyle argues that digital libertarians have underestimated the extent to which both private power and governments already determine the architecture of cyberspace. More often, intermediaries such as system operators or Internet Service Providers (ISPs) exercise significant controls over what is and is not possible by individual users.
E. Default Settings Give Regulation by Default
The importance of the default settings in various forms of cyberspace architecture has not yet received sufficient emphasis.
VI. REGULATION BY AND OF CYBERSPACE ARCHITECTURE - ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
Having set out this sketch of a theoretical approach to regulation of cyberspace, the rest of this paper puts forward a number of examples which illustrate both differing aspects of how architecture regulates cyberspace, how cyberspace architecture is already regulated by law, and the regulatory choices that such an analysis can reveal. The work of Lessig, Boyle and Reidenberg provides extensive examples of architecture and its regulation in US law, often with a focus on content regulation and intellectual property. The examples following are drawn from universal Internet technical features, from Australian legislation, and from the German `Multimedia Law'[49], one of the most extensive European attempts to regulate cyberspace architecture by law.
A. Building Anonymity into Architecture
The extent to which the surveillance capacity of cyberspace is limited, and where permitted made controllable by user choice, is perhaps the single key issue in the regulation of cyberspace.
In Australia the `anonymity principle' has been making progress toward becoming a legal requirement of cyberspace architecture. Cookies are an element of Internet protocols, server software and browser software which allow information to be placed on, and retrieved from, the user's hard disk during browsing of websites. Cookies are one of the most significant methods of surveillance of user browsing behaviour on the Internet. Default cookies settings in Netscape Communicator 4.01 (1997)
Regulation of the code of cookies presents similar policy choices.
D. Spam Black Holes - Is Law Safe for `Return To Sender' Architecture?
web users to specify their expectations concerning personal data disclosure practices; and
P3P allows web users to have multiple digital pseudonyms (and therefore multiple digital personae), allowing a user to choose between a `data-poor' or `data rich' personality depending on the site visited[77].
P3P is therefore an instance of where law is necessary to make protections offered by cyberspace architecture meaningful.
F. Stopping Searching - Robot Exclusion Standards
Web spiders and Internet search engines pose issues for copyright and privacy policies.
The architecture of ECMS need not observe any of the public interest limitations built in to copyright law . If `code contracts' replace law, these are not necessarily the same as `law contracts', and may not be in the public interest.
This blueprint for the code in which intellectual property transactions will operate in cyberspace could hardly be more different than the real space code in which IP operates at present, and as regulation this code shares few similarities with IP law. Propagate is principally about the development of cyberspace code - at both the standards and software levels - for digital transactions[98].
H. Copyright Circumvention Devices - Protecting Architecture>
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like a good day to open the windows and let the cool air in. Houston, TX :)
Well, they added plenty of features to Office XP without changing the file types.
Well, Prodigy _was_ one of the first big ones. I remember using their BBS in the late 80's. I'm pretty sure it had hyperlinks of some sort.
Did any one else notice how many cookies for ads this site tried to set? I counted about 5, and each from a different place. That is just offensive.
I find it ironic that the parent got "redundant" while the blatent copy/paste got funny...
um... it looked right in the preview, where did my closing tag go?
yes, but if the only way you could filter Katz was to pay, many might pay for just to get that option.
I just went from a K6-2 500 to a 1.7 P4 and I must say, Mozilla is quite a bit faster.
btw, the only reason I went Intel was that I got it for cheep from intel, there are perks for working retail
I thought I heard somewhere that the final was going to have a singel player game with an actual plot. If not, it is kind of pointless to make a new game out of it. Would have been easier to just make it another expation to Q3.
When there's no word equivalent to calling something crap, what do you call it?
Invent a new word, just like they did the first time they called something crap...
nope, but I forgot what it was. Saw it on Tech TV, they took one apart...
The drive in there is smaller than a PC card.
I know the Netscape plugin will work, but is there a way to get it without haveing Netscape installed?
You ever been to a store? Ever bought a pack of CD-R's? You can buy a few and pay a lot per CD. Or you could buy a big pack, pay more, but less for each one. This would be the same princible. You still come out paying less, by purchasing only a couple of songs, but if you wanted the whole CD, you are better off buying it as a unit.
Hey! Lost World was good. Well... the book was. The movie makers just screwed it up. Their first mistake was not killing Hamond in the first one.
the plugin never ran, so I just view source'ed and found the addy for the file. pointed Mozilla at it, and downloaded it right off Lego. and it's still in my clipboard, so I'll add it here
p ythonlg.mov
http://www.lego.com/studios/screening/media/monty
this is the 3MB one
Am I the only one who thinks it looks like something out of an ould sci-fi movie. I'm a bit young but the first thing that poped into my head was "Danger Danger"
go to http://www.microsoft.com/mswish/
this is Microsoft's "Send us your wish" website
or, you can email at mswsh@microsoft.com
or fax (425) 936-7329
or snail mail at
Microsoft Corperation
Microsoft Wish
One Microsoft Way
Readmond, WA 98052-6399
I doubt that was the car. While it is very simmilar, it has specialized pieces for the body instead of normal technic pieces. Although, they have made the gear box a 5 speed instead of 2. oh well, give a little, get a little.
you may still be stuck with the hard drive letters, but in the properties for any other drive in device manager, you can specify the begining drive letter.
for once this is actualy somewhat on topic...
oh come on, we do it all the time in school. we call it a scantron. put a huge stack into the machine, minutes later, it's done.
They pump more air in it. I know blimps are split into a few section inside (went to see one of the goodyear blimps on a field trip). This increases the density of the helium. It then becomes too heavy to float.
There is something very wrong with your brother if he is see through women's clothes and likeing it...
We all knew it would happen eventualy, Slashdot finaly slashdoted itself
sorry about the lack of line breaks, here is a plain old text verson
AN ENDNOTE ON REGULATING CYBERSPACE:
ARCHITECTURE VS LAW?
We need some King Canutes in cyberspace[3].
There is relatively little writing about a general theoretical structure for the regulation of cyberspace. II. THE EVOLVING NATURE OF CYBERSPACE
The Internet and property in information were widely believed to be incompatible, and technology would win against law and set information free.
- A Dystopian View of Cyberspace
In contrast with the digital libertarians is a view of cyberspace which emphasises the likely extent of identification and surveillance in cyberspace, and its potential for misuse.
(i) The Pervasiveness of Cyberspace
(iii) Identity and Digital Personae
(iv) Identification at the Cyberspace / Real Space Interface
Identification occurs at the cyberspace / real space interface.
(v) An Encrypted Space - Public Key Infrastructure
III. THEORIES OF CYBERSPACE REGULATION - DIGITAL REALISM NEEDED
A more comprehensive theoretical approach to cyberspace regulation is advanced by Lawrence Lessig in a number of articles[29]. The `old' Chicago School's anti-law analysis emphasised the effectiveness (in contrast with law) of both markets and social norms as regulators of individual behaviour, and how both markets and norms were relatively impervious to control by law. In summary, these anti-law approaches emphasise the effectiveness of the three other types of constraint -- markets, norms, and `nature'/'architecture' -- at the expense of law.
Digital libertarianism's arguments - that law is destined to be ineffective in cyberspace - are often a particular application of `anti-law' arguments to the new frontier of cyberspace, which to a large extent borrows from the earlier anti-law streams. Both versions see little positive role for law in cyberspace regulation, and that is where Lessig (and Boyle) are correct in differing from them. The rest of this Note supports the view that to understand the control (de facto and de jure) of cyberspace architecture is the key to understanding the regulation of cyberspace.
IV. CYBERSPACE REGULATION AS A FUNCTION OF FOUR CONSTRAINTS
A. Norms, Morality and Self-Regulation
In cyberspace norms play similar roles, and some special ones. Markets constrain behaviours in obvious ways in real space, influenced by property, contract and other laws which regulate those markets. The market constraints in cyberspace are as important as in real space. Unpopular code/architecture can perish where market forces operate. We don't need a law on larceny of real property.
D. Law - Direct and Indirect Regulation
Law typically regulates individual behaviour directly, and does so by threatening ex post facto sanctions. However, in real space as well as cyberspace, law also regulates individual behaviour indirectly, by aiming to change markets, norms or code. As others have done in different contexts, Lessig argues[39] that the anti-law Chicago School is misleading in that it assumes that the other constraints - markets, norms and code/architecture - are independent of law, but in fact they are in part a product of the law. We have to ask to what extent a particular constraint is created by law, and to what extent it can be changed by law. As will be illustrated later in this paper, law in cyberspace will often be more effective if it regulates code/architecture rather than trying to directly regulate individual behaviour.
V. FIVE FEATURES OF CYBERSPACE ARCHITECTURE AS REGULATION
A. Architecture is More than Software
Lessig's characterisation of code as software ("code, or the software that makes cyberspace as it is") is an oversimplification. Protocols are code developed by participatory processes particular to the Internet, and are of vital importance as non-proprietary code.
B. Architecture has Immediacy as a Constraint
Real space architecture typically regulates more directly than law, which threatens punishment after the breach. Cyberspace architecture is often self-executing (for example, passwords and other forms of access controls), but not necessarily so.
Plasticity is a major variable in the extent to which law can regulate a constraint, with more plastic constraints more susceptible to change by law. Recognition of the significance of cyberspace architecture as regulation forces us to look to its origins. Control of cyberspace architecture is at present highly fragmented. As mentioned earlier, Boyle argues that digital libertarians have underestimated the extent to which both private power and governments already determine the architecture of cyberspace. More often, intermediaries such as system operators or Internet Service Providers (ISPs) exercise significant controls over what is and is not possible by individual users.
E. Default Settings Give Regulation by Default
The importance of the default settings in various forms of cyberspace architecture has not yet received sufficient emphasis.
VI. REGULATION BY AND OF CYBERSPACE ARCHITECTURE - ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
Having set out this sketch of a theoretical approach to regulation of cyberspace, the rest of this paper puts forward a number of examples which illustrate both differing aspects of how architecture regulates cyberspace, how cyberspace architecture is already regulated by law, and the regulatory choices that such an analysis can reveal. The work of Lessig, Boyle and Reidenberg provides extensive examples of architecture and its regulation in US law, often with a focus on content regulation and intellectual property. The examples following are drawn from universal Internet technical features, from Australian legislation, and from the German `Multimedia Law'[49], one of the most extensive European attempts to regulate cyberspace architecture by law.
A. Building Anonymity into Architecture
The extent to which the surveillance capacity of cyberspace is limited, and where permitted made controllable by user choice, is perhaps the single key issue in the regulation of cyberspace.
In Australia the `anonymity principle' has been making progress toward becoming a legal requirement of cyberspace architecture. Cookies are an element of Internet protocols, server software and browser software which allow information to be placed on, and retrieved from, the user's hard disk during browsing of websites. Cookies are one of the most significant methods of surveillance of user browsing behaviour on the Internet. Default cookies settings in Netscape Communicator 4.01 (1997)
Regulation of the code of cookies presents similar policy choices.
D. Spam Black Holes - Is Law Safe for `Return To Sender' Architecture?
web users to specify their expectations concerning personal data disclosure practices; and
P3P allows web users to have multiple digital pseudonyms (and therefore multiple digital personae), allowing a user to choose between a `data-poor' or `data rich' personality depending on the site visited[77].
P3P is therefore an instance of where law is necessary to make protections offered by cyberspace architecture meaningful.
F. Stopping Searching - Robot Exclusion Standards
Web spiders and Internet search engines pose issues for copyright and privacy policies.
The architecture of ECMS need not observe any of the public interest limitations built in to copyright law . If `code contracts' replace law, these are not necessarily the same as `law contracts', and may not be in the public interest.
This blueprint for the code in which intellectual property transactions will operate in cyberspace could hardly be more different than the real space code in which IP operates at present, and as regulation this code shares few similarities with IP law. Propagate is principally about the development of cyberspace code - at both the standards and software levels - for digital transactions[98].
H. Copyright Circumvention Devices - Protecting Architecture>
___