Yes, and it was played in Greece. They had every chance to bid on distribution of FA games in the UK but Sky secured that bid. Instead Greece played the "get out of competition free" card and used their contractually agreed right to broadcast in Greece to broadcast in the UK.
There is nothing remotely competitive about this. It is a complete undermining of contract law and the very essence of the competitive market.
The thing is, the Greeks have purchased broadcast rights separately. They were restricted to broadcasting in Greece only. Now they can broadcast cheaply purchased games in any country in the EU. This will either mean games will become less available in other countries as the big countries don't want to cannibalize their own market, or there will be a massive revenue hit as everyone picks up a satellite to broadcast games from the least expensive country.
Btw, this is *not* a free market solution because it is the government imposing a restriction on what may be agreed upon between consenting parties.
It is pretty much unheard of for a book contract, especially at the $20k advance level. Publishers know writers are writing all the time on numerous topics.
Also, music is music. Contracts are made for the next "album". You can't writer a different album when they have dibs on the next one. Authors receive an advance for a particular work. The publisher knows the work they are buying and in this case they know fully well that the already existant work that they rejected is *not* the work they were buying.
There is significant case law on the matter. Further, an advance of $20k to not work in the entire field of writing for 2 years won't get any traction in court.
Non compete in this sense means those characters/story/universe don't get presented somewhere else. That the publisher gets first release of not just the book, but anything to do with the book.
This is bullying an author, plain and simple. (if the story is as the author has written)
And why must "fun" and "enterprisey" be exclusive? If your definition for enterprisey is scalable and risk-averse, why can't a language that is pleasant to use meet those requirements?
When you give "enterprisey" programmers a decent programming language, a foot shooting contest breaks out.
Capitalism works quite well in regard to University of Phoenix. Nobody respects them. Only at institutions (like the government) where the degree only means a checkbox would your UPhoenix degree mean anything.
If only judges dealing with lying politicians took the same dim view. The "I don't recall" defense works particularly well for politicians, even under oath.
Having played viola I have to point out that the viola part is worse than the cello. It is harmony, played pizzicato. I was plucking 3 strings for every note played on the cello. We played until until our fingers bled, then we switched fingers.
Second violins actually get the same part as the first violins; it is a canon.
I forget what part the bass played, but I'm pretty sure they slept through it.
When you exercise options, you have a tax obligation between your strike price and the current price of the company. So if the option is at $1/share and the current price is $100 a share, he owes tax on $99 a share. Now, if he has a side agreement that he has to sell them at exercise price, he has to sell them at $1 a share, enabling him to take a loss as soon as the actual sale goes through.
This sort of confusion was really big during the.com boom/bust. People would exercise options to get a lot of stock when the price was high but then they *wouldn't* sell them. They would end up holding them and the company might go bust or lose 90% of its value. They would have a massive tax burden and the underlying stock would be worthless to cover it.
From the context of the original post, I was under the impression he would be attending in a "continuing education" context and not full time. This usually means a large school that is moving numbers through and does very little teaching. In this context, he's much better off seeking a school with fewer requirements. These are just the kinds of schools which have large requirements just to bleed students dry.
If you're going full time to a nice school, where you'll have access to professors to give you feedback on a daily basis, then those classes will do you a world of good. If not, they'll merely be expensive speed bumps.
Being able to read/write/reason are all fine and good. But I'm not sure the effort and annoyance of those classes yields a payoff in those areas. You get very little feedback other than a handful of grades. All that for a ton of time and $1-2k for a class. At a whole lot of schools, these classes have become little more than perfunctory checks on writing and attendance. They seem wholly designed to make sure a certain amount of money is extracted from each student. The liberal arts ideals which mandate these classes are simply dead.
I was speaking more toward the general trend which is to no longer release the dedicated server software. The big FPS games lately allow renting the use of a dedicated server. We're moving backwards 9v9 with smaller teams, fewer hosting options, no mapping tools, and no mods.
They've already thought of this. Many of them have wording somewhere to the effect that it is a single player game and multiplayer is just a bonus thrown in. So when the multiplayer is killed off, the gamer hasn't actually lost the game. Never mind that is why the game was actually purchased.
Your attitude is exactly the problem we have with IT. You already "know" it is my build, without ever observing the problem. Not only that, but you go so far as to tell me I should "thank" them for treating me like a moron.
You state that the IT dept wants to keep my machines running. This doesn't seem to be the goal. They want to prevent problems from happening. These are two different things entirely. They don't mind at all that my build machine is effectively shut down because they don't want to put any effort into administering the virus scanners they have deployed and configured.
Please, explain to me how turning off a firewall exception and not notifying the owner is also my fault.
IT vs the development crowd is really what I've experienced. I know they have enough on their plates removing browser toolbars from everyone's desktops.
A good chunk of my work has been gluing disparate systems together. A lot of firewall exceptions over the years. It has been absolutely representative of multiple companies that they will close an exception without notifying the owner of it. I don't even mind the sudden closure so much as the attitude that it is easier to just break my work and let me find them.
Too often a dev group comes to them with the wrong statement of, "we can't get x done without y". Dev should be engaging IT to get a solution. Instead of steering the conversation that way the typical response is, "you can't have y." It's never, "let's explore other options."
It's also been my experience that IT is staffed and managed by "empire builders". This type of group is a natural enemy of the group which wants to get something done quickly. The general process at one big company I was at was that some tools group would get something cool written, where it would then get absorbed by IT. Development on that would grind to a halt and some other tools group would eventually come up with the next solution. At least they had the good sense to semi-recognize that initial development almost had to happen outside IT.
All too often provisioning a new server costs weeks of paperwork and a ton of man hours from both IT and the business dept. Or, they can clone a new server in 30 minutes. There is no simliar service offered by IT, especially at big companies.
IT may have rules and procedures in place for good reasons, but all too often those rules are followed in a passive aggressive manner to put IT in control of business, instead of the other way around. Requests must be submitted with the hope of them being granted. Departments should be stating business cases and needs and IT should be helping figure out how they can help accomplish these. Frequently, this is not how it works.
Too many places, a request is made and IT denies it, telling the user they don't need what they're asking for. No research, no effort given, just a flat, automatic "no." I had a virus scanner fighting with my build, preventing the build from getting done. While our dept. is getting billed by IT for things, they refused to do anything at all about our new inability to build our main program. They had their rules that allowed them to say "no" and leave it at that. So here we are getting billed (internally) for IT support and being treated like no company in the world would treat a client. That is why departments move to the cloud.
The stories from developers fighting with IT are endless and all of them are countered by the same basic fear card and the general statement that users are idiots. In my two years at AT&T, I probably had firewall exceptions turned off a dozen times. They didn't keep their record keeping straight and couldn't justify a port being open between two computers so they shut it down. They didn't notify anyone at all, they just close a port. It would take 30 seconds to look up the paper trail on firewall exceptions and call/email the owner. There is a general arrogance that we are on "their" systems and not that they are managing "our" systems.
It depends on how Orbitz is tacking on their fee. If they are displaying AA's actual price and then charging the customers, that is one thing. More likely they are displaying an artificially high fare, misrepresenting the actual price of flying AA.
Note, of course, that AA has no problem misrepresenting their own fares, not including fees and taxes and everything else that goes into the cost of a ticket.
Of course, people who fly AA are never really deciding the ticket based on cost, unless they are choosing the higher of two numbers.
Normal people also say, I need to add these two numbers. They've been taught to write their math left to right, but how do they actually work it? They write down both numbers top to bottom, then apply an operator to it (for all but the simplest math). Most normal people have their numbers and decide on the operations after they have the numbers. In my experience they frequently try one of each operator until they get something they like.
100% of all K-12 mathematics curricula use infix notation, as do 90+% of all programming languages... so, yes, infix notation is obviously more natural for humans to work with, in the general case.
not so. Give a 2nd grader 35 + 42 and see if they add them across using infix or stack the numbers up and use postfix. When it comes to actually doing the math most people assemble the numbers first and then do the operation. In this sense, RPN is more natural. It just doesn't read well from left to right. It does read well visually; take these numbers and add them. It works for a whole column of numbers too, something which really looks more like a postfix version of Lisp (1 2 3 4 +).
In Excel, we see a mix of the two, with the user creating their own stack with various cells, while each individual cell is defined using infix notation (usually). Sometimes a cell is defined by functions which act on sections of the stack (summing a range for example).
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and it was played in Greece. They had every chance to bid on distribution of FA games in the UK but Sky secured that bid. Instead Greece played the "get out of competition free" card and used their contractually agreed right to broadcast in Greece to broadcast in the UK.
There is nothing remotely competitive about this. It is a complete undermining of contract law and the very essence of the competitive market.
The thing is, the Greeks have purchased broadcast rights separately. They were restricted to broadcasting in Greece only. Now they can broadcast cheaply purchased games in any country in the EU. This will either mean games will become less available in other countries as the big countries don't want to cannibalize their own market, or there will be a massive revenue hit as everyone picks up a satellite to broadcast games from the least expensive country.
Btw, this is *not* a free market solution because it is the government imposing a restriction on what may be agreed upon between consenting parties.
That's typical for a music contract.
It is pretty much unheard of for a book contract, especially at the $20k advance level. Publishers know writers are writing all the time on numerous topics.
Also, music is music. Contracts are made for the next "album". You can't writer a different album when they have dibs on the next one. Authors receive an advance for a particular work. The publisher knows the work they are buying and in this case they know fully well that the already existant work that they rejected is *not* the work they were buying.
There is significant case law on the matter. Further, an advance of $20k to not work in the entire field of writing for 2 years won't get any traction in court.
Non compete in this sense means those characters/story/universe don't get presented somewhere else. That the publisher gets first release of not just the book, but anything to do with the book.
This is bullying an author, plain and simple. (if the story is as the author has written)
And why must "fun" and "enterprisey" be exclusive? If your definition for enterprisey is scalable and risk-averse, why can't a language that is pleasant to use meet those requirements?
When you give "enterprisey" programmers a decent programming language, a foot shooting contest breaks out.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Capitalism works quite well in regard to University of Phoenix. Nobody respects them. Only at institutions (like the government) where the degree only means a checkbox would your UPhoenix degree mean anything.
If only judges dealing with lying politicians took the same dim view. The "I don't recall" defense works particularly well for politicians, even under oath.
Having played viola I have to point out that the viola part is worse than the cello. It is harmony, played pizzicato. I was plucking 3 strings for every note played on the cello. We played until until our fingers bled, then we switched fingers.
Second violins actually get the same part as the first violins; it is a canon.
I forget what part the bass played, but I'm pretty sure they slept through it.
When you exercise options, you have a tax obligation between your strike price and the current price of the company. So if the option is at $1/share and the current price is $100 a share, he owes tax on $99 a share. Now, if he has a side agreement that he has to sell them at exercise price, he has to sell them at $1 a share, enabling him to take a loss as soon as the actual sale goes through.
This sort of confusion was really big during the .com boom/bust. People would exercise options to get a lot of stock when the price was high but then they *wouldn't* sell them. They would end up holding them and the company might go bust or lose 90% of its value. They would have a massive tax burden and the underlying stock would be worthless to cover it.
From the context of the original post, I was under the impression he would be attending in a "continuing education" context and not full time. This usually means a large school that is moving numbers through and does very little teaching. In this context, he's much better off seeking a school with fewer requirements. These are just the kinds of schools which have large requirements just to bleed students dry.
If you're going full time to a nice school, where you'll have access to professors to give you feedback on a daily basis, then those classes will do you a world of good. If not, they'll merely be expensive speed bumps.
Being able to read/write/reason are all fine and good. But I'm not sure the effort and annoyance of those classes yields a payoff in those areas. You get very little feedback other than a handful of grades. All that for a ton of time and $1-2k for a class. At a whole lot of schools, these classes have become little more than perfunctory checks on writing and attendance. They seem wholly designed to make sure a certain amount of money is extracted from each student. The liberal arts ideals which mandate these classes are simply dead.
I was speaking more toward the general trend which is to no longer release the dedicated server software. The big FPS games lately allow renting the use of a dedicated server. We're moving backwards 9v9 with smaller teams, fewer hosting options, no mapping tools, and no mods.
I must have missed the part where Call of Duty was actually patching the exploits.
They've already thought of this. Many of them have wording somewhere to the effect that it is a single player game and multiplayer is just a bonus thrown in. So when the multiplayer is killed off, the gamer hasn't actually lost the game. Never mind that is why the game was actually purchased.
I think this was posted due to /.'s obsession with everything mp3.
Your attitude is exactly the problem we have with IT. You already "know" it is my build, without ever observing the problem. Not only that, but you go so far as to tell me I should "thank" them for treating me like a moron.
You state that the IT dept wants to keep my machines running. This doesn't seem to be the goal. They want to prevent problems from happening. These are two different things entirely. They don't mind at all that my build machine is effectively shut down because they don't want to put any effort into administering the virus scanners they have deployed and configured.
Please, explain to me how turning off a firewall exception and not notifying the owner is also my fault.
IT vs the development crowd is really what I've experienced. I know they have enough on their plates removing browser toolbars from everyone's desktops.
A good chunk of my work has been gluing disparate systems together. A lot of firewall exceptions over the years. It has been absolutely representative of multiple companies that they will close an exception without notifying the owner of it. I don't even mind the sudden closure so much as the attitude that it is easier to just break my work and let me find them.
Too often a dev group comes to them with the wrong statement of, "we can't get x done without y". Dev should be engaging IT to get a solution. Instead of steering the conversation that way the typical response is, "you can't have y." It's never, "let's explore other options."
It's also been my experience that IT is staffed and managed by "empire builders". This type of group is a natural enemy of the group which wants to get something done quickly. The general process at one big company I was at was that some tools group would get something cool written, where it would then get absorbed by IT. Development on that would grind to a halt and some other tools group would eventually come up with the next solution. At least they had the good sense to semi-recognize that initial development almost had to happen outside IT.
All too often provisioning a new server costs weeks of paperwork and a ton of man hours from both IT and the business dept. Or, they can clone a new server in 30 minutes. There is no simliar service offered by IT, especially at big companies.
IT may have rules and procedures in place for good reasons, but all too often those rules are followed in a passive aggressive manner to put IT in control of business, instead of the other way around. Requests must be submitted with the hope of them being granted. Departments should be stating business cases and needs and IT should be helping figure out how they can help accomplish these. Frequently, this is not how it works.
Too many places, a request is made and IT denies it, telling the user they don't need what they're asking for. No research, no effort given, just a flat, automatic "no." I had a virus scanner fighting with my build, preventing the build from getting done. While our dept. is getting billed by IT for things, they refused to do anything at all about our new inability to build our main program. They had their rules that allowed them to say "no" and leave it at that. So here we are getting billed (internally) for IT support and being treated like no company in the world would treat a client. That is why departments move to the cloud.
The stories from developers fighting with IT are endless and all of them are countered by the same basic fear card and the general statement that users are idiots. In my two years at AT&T, I probably had firewall exceptions turned off a dozen times. They didn't keep their record keeping straight and couldn't justify a port being open between two computers so they shut it down. They didn't notify anyone at all, they just close a port. It would take 30 seconds to look up the paper trail on firewall exceptions and call/email the owner. There is a general arrogance that we are on "their" systems and not that they are managing "our" systems.
Or you could just hold it wrong so the transmissions don't reach.
One of the pacman clones was OPECman.
It depends on how Orbitz is tacking on their fee. If they are displaying AA's actual price and then charging the customers, that is one thing. More likely they are displaying an artificially high fare, misrepresenting the actual price of flying AA.
Note, of course, that AA has no problem misrepresenting their own fares, not including fees and taxes and everything else that goes into the cost of a ticket.
Of course, people who fly AA are never really deciding the ticket based on cost, unless they are choosing the higher of two numbers.
Will it have mapping tools? Or do we get to play the same few maps over and over until nobody buys the DLC and we still play the same stock maps?
The presidential ones could also be about NY, California or DC.
Normal people also say, I need to add these two numbers. They've been taught to write their math left to right, but how do they actually work it? They write down both numbers top to bottom, then apply an operator to it (for all but the simplest math). Most normal people have their numbers and decide on the operations after they have the numbers. In my experience they frequently try one of each operator until they get something they like.
100% of all K-12 mathematics curricula use infix notation, as do 90+% of all programming languages... so, yes, infix notation is obviously more natural for humans to work with, in the general case.
not so. Give a 2nd grader 35 + 42 and see if they add them across using infix or stack the numbers up and use postfix. When it comes to actually doing the math most people assemble the numbers first and then do the operation. In this sense, RPN is more natural. It just doesn't read well from left to right. It does read well visually; take these numbers and add them. It works for a whole column of numbers too, something which really looks more like a postfix version of Lisp (1 2 3 4 +).
In Excel, we see a mix of the two, with the user creating their own stack with various cells, while each individual cell is defined using infix notation (usually). Sometimes a cell is defined by functions which act on sections of the stack (summing a range for example).