BluRay has a lot more space on those disks, and if the disk manufacturers step up and take advantage of that space (eg more than one movie per disk or crazy special features, or some such), then there will be a pretty clear case for picking one format over the other.
Yeah, more space, which they use to add more DRM. HD-DVD gets my vote simply because it's not quite as bad DRM-wise as BluRay.
Many new systems being sold through retail stores only come with Vista.
Right, and they use Vista as a selling point, encouraging people to upgrade to it, instead of warning them off as they should if they actually cared about the experience their customers were going to have. They should be waiting at least until the first service pack is out.
Developers are still free to create what they want and market it to grown-ups carrying identification.
They are now, and may continue to be if the ratings are enforced by the game sellers. If the ratings aren't enforced, then we'll see more efforts to ban certain types of games outright. That should not happen.
It's about passing the blame. If Gamestop succeeds with this, then parents can only blame themselves for buying it, or they can blame their older children for buying it, or they can blame their kids' friends, or whatever, but they can't blame the games industry.
Welcome to America! I hope you enjoy your time here, but I think you should know something about the people here. They don't blame themselves for anything. If the parents can't blame Gamestop for selling the game to their kid, then they'll try to blame them for selling the game, period. If that doesn't work, they'll blame the publisher for publishing the game (after all, publishers often have deep pockets). Failing that, they'll blame the developer for creating the game. Actually, who am I kidding, they'll probably try to do all three simultaneously to begin with. Parents will never accept blame for what their kids are doing unless we make them accept it. But given that there are a whole lot of parents in the country that don't want to be blamed for anything, I see it as a rather tough battle.
Compare to M. Night Shyamalan's The Sixth Sense and Signs, which say great things in a PG-13 framework.
And I'm sure we'll see plenty of great games within a PG-13 framework as well. But developers shouldn't be constrained only to that framework, and that is the goal here. Keep developers free to create what they want.
Google provides advertising. It is not their responsibility to judge their customers or their activities. It is not for Google to investigate and determine if in Google's opinion their activities are illegal. The only time Google should need concern themselves is if the image of the site would negatively reflect upon Google's own image.
Exactly. And really, what Google is doing should help bring sites like this to public attention, and if they're doing something illegal, then the government can go after them. I really don't see the issue here.
Yes, you are. Just because you write an idea down, it doesn't suddenly become something more than an idea. Only copyright law gives it any greater status.
If I make something and you copy it without my permission, that's wrong. Copyright has nothing to do with it.
Then we have an astoundingly different idea of right and wrong regarding ideas made public. In fact, you seem to disagree with the founders of the US who created copyright law. They didn't believe there was any natural law granting anyone ownership of their ideas or the expressions of those ideas. They thought that such a right, granted for a limited time, would serve the public interest, and so created it. Ideas, by their very nature, are spread easily and quickly from one person to another. You can't really rid yourself of an idea once you have it, and you can't say that any idea is truly your own, as it was developed through your encounters with countless other ideas. So then, since nature seems to be entirely against the protection of ideas, why then do you believe in some natural law governing the copying of ideas?
If Thag carves his story on a boulder, then Thag owns that physcial representation of his story. Not the story. If Grod starts making duplicate boulders without Thag's permission, Thag has the right to bop him on the head with a big stick. Thag doesn't need copyright law to understand that.
You're intermingling copyright and plagiarism. If Thag carves his story on the rock, and it is seen by Grod, and then Grod starts carving it on other boulders, then no, Thag has no rights whatsoever to stop him in the absence of some sort of copyright law. Now, if Grod starts making copies on other boulders and claiming that he created the story, then that would be plagiarism, and while there may still be no law against it, there is a much more intuitive ethical position against it, as it is a lie.
Um, did you KNOW that Santorum was one of the 20 Most Corrupt Politicians last year? So "just trying to help AccuWeather profit" was most likely putting dough in his own campaign chest or wherever.
Of course it was, that was sort of my point. I'm sure he wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his heart. They promise support and contributions and he helps them get rid of an obstacle to higher profits for them. Win-win for them, big loss for the public.
... The journey to the seed-vault would be fraught with danger. Mutants, savages, the ever-present raiders, hot-zones and weather run amok all dog our heros on their journey. I say heros, because of course we need a team. There has to be the strong and capable ranger-type who doesn't quite trust the kid; the plucky heroine, tomboyish until she lets her hair down and we discover just how beautiful she is; the kid's geeky friend who knows how to fix things; the brawny muscle-type with a secret heart of gold who sacrifices himself when all seems lost, and the sneaky one who turns out to be a traitor like we always suspected he would.
Wow... use a smaller font and you might be able to pack a few more cliches in there... Sadly, you probably have a bright future in Hollywood....
What a funny example. If everybody made do with quick short-term solutions, there would be no commercial GPS receivers, becaus there would be no GPS satellite constellation! Those satellites weren't designed and launched by a scrappy startup in a month.
I think what he's getting at is that not everything needs to be a major undertaking. Yes, launching satellites is something that requires a huge effort. You really have to make sure you get it right the first time because it's extremely expensive to fix things if you don't. It's not the same situation with most electronic devices, even those used in combat. You want to make sure they work well enough to get the job done, but it's better to be able to build them for a reasonable price and ship a bunch of spares than to insist on perfection and spend years developing a device that is very expensive and doesn't get rolled out until the war is over. For the troops over there now, something is better than nothing.
I said further, as in further than what Senator Santorum wants.
It's not further than what Santorum wants, it's something completely different! Santorum is just trying to help AccuWeather profit. I definitely didn't see anything about him making AccuWeather rely only on their own satellites rather than government satellites.
What is a conspiracy? It may be no more than two people discussing some things that they *might* do some time in the future. No criminal act, you see. But still deemed to be a crime. Why is conspiracy a crime and not intention? I believe the real reason is simply that intentions have not previously been detectable or provable.
The best way to avoid this ever becoming reality is for we, the citizenry, to demand that if such laws are to be considered or passed, that the politicians be the first to be analyzed. Then, once they're all in prison, we can elect a new bunch to get rid of the law.
(1) Three reliable witnesses saw you plunge the knife into the victim's heart. Guilt proven.
(2) Three reliable witnesses saw somebody else plunge the knife into the victim's heart, and the Dalai Lama swears you were trekking with him in Nepal at the time. Innocence proven? Nope. You may have hired/conspired with the person who did the deed.
The difference is that it's always possible to postulate some plausible scenario in which the apparently innocent are actually guilty participants in the crime. If its plausible you might kill somebody, it's equally plausible that you might pay somebody else to do it while you establish an alibi.
You're talking about two different crimes though. If you are accused of actually stabbing the person, you can prove that you're innocent of that. If they accuse you of conspiring to murder someone, or have them murdered by someone else, that's a completely different crime and accusation. That situation would be much harder to prove your innocence in. Also harder to prove guilt. That's why we have the "reasonable doubt" criteria. We just have to get close enough to proving it, it doesn't have to be proven to the point where there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever.
You've gotta be trolling, but even still, that statement is moronic. Santorum wasn't trying to abolish NWS, he was trying to make it easier to AccuWeather to sell us what we have already paid for. That's the worst of both worlds right there.
What I like about the Zaurus is the very fact that its so portable. I can turn on Kismet and keep it in my jacket pocket while out and about, logging APs all the way. You really can't do that with a laptop if you want to go around on foot.
I guess you could if you have one of those jackets with the big pocket on the back. Perfect for sliding a laptop into. Probably only doable in cold weather though, as the laptop will definitely keep you warm...
Another thought: how many good Wii games are there that don't rely on that gimmicky remote control?
The PS2 controller was gimmicky at one time as well. Now it's basically the standard. Games are either good or not. Whether they rely on the controller or not doesn't really matter. It's still either a good/fun game or it isn't.
I don't like setting a prescident that we do science by consensus. I suspect that many of the advocates for global warming are really just environmentalists frustrated that their previous conservation messages have failed to resonate and that this is their new banner.
Not consensus of the general populace, of course. But consensus among the scientists studying the issue is certainly a good sign that something is accurate. There is virtually unanimous consensus among the people doing the research that the earth is warming and that humans have contributed significantly to the process.
There may be some very good research at sites like RealClimate but I don't like having science shouted at me. Honestly, if the fanatiscism and zealotry were taken out of the equation, I'd be much more likely to look at their research.
Maybe you don't like the way they're "shouting" their message, but maybe they wouldn't have to resort to such methods if they didn't think it was extremely important that the government listen to them. You're basically saying that you don't really care whether we're causing global warming or not, and you aren't interested in looking at the evidence because you don't like the way they're presenting it. That's why people are frustrated with conservatives. You hate the environmentalists and other activists so much that you're willing to simply ignore the fact that we're screwing up in a serious and probably catastrophic way. Yet it's your willingness to ignore the issue (along with money from oil and other industries) that makes it easy for the government to ignore it, which makes it necessary for scientists to use these tactics to be heard in the first place.
So called "Big Oil" does NOT CARE about "emissions standards" or any "green" laws, except those that attempt to impose communism and steal their assets.
Right, so basically any law that prohibits screwing up the environment even more than we already have will have a negative impact on them, and they will fight against that. I get it.
That's right, BP, Mobil, and most of the other large energy companies are the largest investors in alternative energy sources.... So how would stopping this process help them in any way?
Of course. That's just good business sense. Besides, gotta use all that money for something. But they're going to drag their feet for as long as possible so that they can keep profiting from oil, which they already have the infrastructure for, and which is very profitable. It has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the environment. They probably haven't yet figured out how they'll profit as much from new energy sources yet either. Business hates uncertainty.
Where's your conspiracy now, hippie?
Conspiracy implies secrecy. The political power of the oil industry is quite obvious and largely out in the open. Just makes it all the more disturbing.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm thinking about it now... it's... it's so beautiful...
Yeah, more space, which they use to add more DRM. HD-DVD gets my vote simply because it's not quite as bad DRM-wise as BluRay.
Right, and they use Vista as a selling point, encouraging people to upgrade to it, instead of warning them off as they should if they actually cared about the experience their customers were going to have. They should be waiting at least until the first service pack is out.
They are now, and may continue to be if the ratings are enforced by the game sellers. If the ratings aren't enforced, then we'll see more efforts to ban certain types of games outright. That should not happen.
Welcome to America! I hope you enjoy your time here, but I think you should know something about the people here. They don't blame themselves for anything. If the parents can't blame Gamestop for selling the game to their kid, then they'll try to blame them for selling the game, period. If that doesn't work, they'll blame the publisher for publishing the game (after all, publishers often have deep pockets). Failing that, they'll blame the developer for creating the game. Actually, who am I kidding, they'll probably try to do all three simultaneously to begin with. Parents will never accept blame for what their kids are doing unless we make them accept it. But given that there are a whole lot of parents in the country that don't want to be blamed for anything, I see it as a rather tough battle.
And I'm sure we'll see plenty of great games within a PG-13 framework as well. But developers shouldn't be constrained only to that framework, and that is the goal here. Keep developers free to create what they want.
Exactly. And really, what Google is doing should help bring sites like this to public attention, and if they're doing something illegal, then the government can go after them. I really don't see the issue here.
Wow. That was painful to read. Especially that last page.
Not since they changed the name to Everquest...
Yes, you are. Just because you write an idea down, it doesn't suddenly become something more than an idea. Only copyright law gives it any greater status.
Then we have an astoundingly different idea of right and wrong regarding ideas made public. In fact, you seem to disagree with the founders of the US who created copyright law. They didn't believe there was any natural law granting anyone ownership of their ideas or the expressions of those ideas. They thought that such a right, granted for a limited time, would serve the public interest, and so created it. Ideas, by their very nature, are spread easily and quickly from one person to another. You can't really rid yourself of an idea once you have it, and you can't say that any idea is truly your own, as it was developed through your encounters with countless other ideas. So then, since nature seems to be entirely against the protection of ideas, why then do you believe in some natural law governing the copying of ideas?
You're intermingling copyright and plagiarism. If Thag carves his story on the rock, and it is seen by Grod, and then Grod starts carving it on other boulders, then no, Thag has no rights whatsoever to stop him in the absence of some sort of copyright law. Now, if Grod starts making copies on other boulders and claiming that he created the story, then that would be plagiarism, and while there may still be no law against it, there is a much more intuitive ethical position against it, as it is a lie.
Of course it was, that was sort of my point. I'm sure he wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his heart. They promise support and contributions and he helps them get rid of an obstacle to higher profits for them. Win-win for them, big loss for the public.
Wow... use a smaller font and you might be able to pack a few more cliches in there... Sadly, you probably have a bright future in Hollywood....
I think what he's getting at is that not everything needs to be a major undertaking. Yes, launching satellites is something that requires a huge effort. You really have to make sure you get it right the first time because it's extremely expensive to fix things if you don't. It's not the same situation with most electronic devices, even those used in combat. You want to make sure they work well enough to get the job done, but it's better to be able to build them for a reasonable price and ship a bunch of spares than to insist on perfection and spend years developing a device that is very expensive and doesn't get rolled out until the war is over. For the troops over there now, something is better than nothing.
It's not further than what Santorum wants, it's something completely different! Santorum is just trying to help AccuWeather profit. I definitely didn't see anything about him making AccuWeather rely only on their own satellites rather than government satellites.
The best way to avoid this ever becoming reality is for we, the citizenry, to demand that if such laws are to be considered or passed, that the politicians be the first to be analyzed. Then, once they're all in prison, we can elect a new bunch to get rid of the law.
You're talking about two different crimes though. If you are accused of actually stabbing the person, you can prove that you're innocent of that. If they accuse you of conspiring to murder someone, or have them murdered by someone else, that's a completely different crime and accusation. That situation would be much harder to prove your innocence in. Also harder to prove guilt. That's why we have the "reasonable doubt" criteria. We just have to get close enough to proving it, it doesn't have to be proven to the point where there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever.
You've gotta be trolling, but even still, that statement is moronic. Santorum wasn't trying to abolish NWS, he was trying to make it easier to AccuWeather to sell us what we have already paid for. That's the worst of both worlds right there.
Actually, it's the lack of *effective* regulation of Microsoft in the U.S. that's the problem.
I guess you could if you have one of those jackets with the big pocket on the back. Perfect for sliding a laptop into. Probably only doable in cold weather though, as the laptop will definitely keep you warm...