"If someone does that study, and finds the expected 100% correlation between life and death, the report of that study on/. will undoubtedly be greeted with "Correlation != causation" posts."
- And you know what? they'd actually be completely correct. Life does not cause death.
so you're saying that what I'm buying when I buy WoW is a license to the game, and not the game itself?
And that's a license that is only valid if I follow the EULA?
What the hell? IMO if I buy the game, I'm buying the content on the bloody CD/DVD, and I can do what I want with that content. Blizzard can choose to allow or disallow me on the servers, but I own the rights to do what I want with the content on the CD, I bought it, it's mine.
If a user wants to use the content as he sees fit from the CD he owns, then good for him.
If a user wants to use the content as he sees fit from the CD he owns to profit from selling in-game stuff for real money, then good for him.
- the bloody idiots should realize that what they're doing is censoring something which isn't illegal.
EULAs shouldn't be used to stop someone from using the software he buys, it should only be used to remove liability to the company if the software screws up unexpectedly.
Copyright shouldn't be used to stop someone from using the software he buys, it should only be used to deter people from profiting from copying the product.
People using glider either for their own personal use, or to make cash from the game don't fit into these, they're not selling any part of the blizzard software to make money.
The people creating glider are giving people an option to do what they want with their content purchase.
- I've never used glider as it's not how I like to play the game, if other people use it, that's fine by me, how does it hurt me? It doesn't. It's a game for chrissakes.
This is the same as saying iD should be sued for allowing "iddqd" in their Doom games, or that all mods for Diablo 2 are now banned and suable.
God I hope they appeal and win, this is just stupid.
""You might be able to grow asparagus in it really well.... It is very exciting for us."" "And I thought I didn't get out much."
- I'd have thought that growing asparagus.. On Another Planet.. would be classified as a really exciting from most people.. so it's true.. you don't get out much.
You can definitely see that the problem is that microsoft.com and Windows update are handled by 2 teams, and each program is handled by an individual team, so in the end it gets hard to say who should do what and how.
it's a problem with having too much distance between what a team offers to the public, and the public access, and the lack of the teams control.
- I'd have thought one solution would be to just set up microsoft.com as a sharepoint/wikipedia site, give the teams responsible for the software complete ownership of the part they use, and leave windows update out of it. they then themselves have control to display the content however they like. The problems might still show up, but you wouldn't have to talk to 5 different departments just to fix what is basically a download-link problem.
It's what happens when you don't trust the teams to do what's right, and think you have to have other departments thinking for them, in the end it complicates things.
Which is similar to what Microsoft did with Vista, they complicated things because the user isn't trusted to use the machine. Basic design philosophies matter alot, they help create some wonderful things for instance I'd name CoreAVC as a brilliant solution which comes from a good basic design philosophy, but in the case of Vista, the basic design philosophy of not trusting the user was a bad one, and was probably bred because that's how Microsoft works today, departments thinking for other departments because of trust issues.
That's why I'm thinking that the new OS will be different, It'll be based on server 2008, and with anything that the people at microsoft think "this is something that I'll use for myself" they tend to do a good job, as soon as they start thinking "this is something I'm programming for someone other than me" - that's where you get problems because you trust yourself, but not others.
--- just an opinion btw, probably a dumb one, but it's all mine.
I'm a windows savvy user, and I've never had problems with viruses or malware, mostly because I know when to make sure what I'm about to run isn't malware.
That means I know generally what's already in my computer, and when I'm about to install or run something new, I either know it's from a legitimate source, and thus don't worry about it, or I scan the file before using it.
that's why I applaud things like the firefox virusscanner, it's actually combating the risk of infection at the point-of-entry rather than scanning everything all the time, over and over and over again, and hogging your resources while it's at it. In this regard, current virus software only helps when you've already gotten a virus and you need to clean it, which in my opinion is too late. the solution should be at the point of entry.
It's also why I hate UAC, UAC doesn't help people to understand where the point of entry of malware is, and it only teaches people to click yes to everything, or to google how to disable it.
Dark matter should never have been postulated as real matter, or even hinted at it being real. It's basically a discrepancy between the models we use to mimick the real world and the real world.
Where that discrepancy lies, that's the big hunt, but believing that dark matter exists is ridiculous.
I think most people don't understand that the line between ethical and unethical is an arbitrary one.
Is it ethical to eat a baby? Well, when you eat veal, that's what you're doing, it's not the same species as you, but you're eating a child of that species, a living, breathing individual with its own characteristics and persona.
Children are being killed, eaten and abused of all types of species, is that ethical? If we take this to the extreme, left: is it ethical to kill any other living thing for your consumption? right: is it ethical to deny your right to kill and eat what you wish?
If you accept that we kill individuals and children from other species for food and we deem that as ethical, why do we deem embryo testing as something unethical?
I'm guessing it's the ignorance of news-media and the people consuming the news that's the problem.
In my opinion the experiments are of legitimate use, it's up to the experts and the companies they work at to make sure that they at least define the line for themselves and the regulations to keep them on the right side of their own definitions.
"Now if Slashdot does want to compete with digg and reddit for the top nerd sensationalist website then fine. People like me will simply stop visiting."
No you will bitch and moan and whimper "get off my lawn!" but that's about it, you'll still become bored enough to check what's on slashdot and roast-reply some stupid non-news article.
There's one thing which I've never seen people think about, and that's the center of gravity when dealing with fake-gravity-via-rotation.
Let's say you have a cylinder-shape, and it's rotating with people floating inside in no gravity.. one of them decides to step onto the rotating cylinder and get the effects of gravity. The person exerts equal amount of force against the cylinder as the cylinder exerts on him, and as the cylinder is free-floating, the center of gravity has now changed to include the cylinder, and the person, and the whole thing would get out of control.
fake gravity isn't possible as most people would like it to act, it could only be used in a very controlled way for astronauts to exercise in a limited fashion.
Of course, if Nasa has already thought of this and come up with a solution, please let me know, I'd be interested in the solution.
"I worry that this portends a day when consoles (and even blu-ray movie players) will REQUIRE an internet connection and do something similar to verify their games/movies."
I'll never use media which phones home to make sure it's legitimate, there are moral alternatives available already and I hope that one day the moral alternative will finally be the legal one as well.
this is the EA side of spore showing its (dark) colours. Some executive going "OMG! this has taken too long, can't we sell something right now?"
Who wants to play with just the editor??? I'd have thought the first stage of spore would have been a much more interesting as a standalone, buy the first part (for DS, PC, Xbox, PS3, mac) download the full game for just XX.99 extra
The timing is just right for a "omg it's just around the corner", but the completely wrong part of the game is being sold off as a standalone.
Conspiracy theory #2 is that they don't want to pay artists to create the models of things for the final launch, better to sell the useless editor and make people do the work for them.
I at first didn't like the "AwesomeBar" because the first thing I did after installing the new version is to try out a web-game a friend of mine had suggested. The webgame meant repeatedly going to pages again and again, and even though I just played it for a few session at the start, it was always.. ALWAYS suggesting that piece of crap for the weeks after.
If you're going to use it, make sure you only visit the pages you use day to day, after a few days you can go check the rest of the crap.
I'd say it's a nice feature, but you need to trim useless pages it pops up with as well.
"6 weeks pregnant because you were raped? Abort if you want. 38 weeks pregnant because you were raped? Sorry, too late."
- This is of course your opinion. If it was you who was pregnant and you were seriously contemplating abortion, wouldn't you want to exercise what you think is right?
That's why, in my opinion, let the individuals themselves decide, it's a tough choice even if you ignore outside pressure or influence.
"I would hope that Mr Zuckerburg invests in a CEO or COO-- someone over 40 that can at least give the appearance of a "real" company."
And I would hope that Mr. Zuckerburg invests in a monkey with a beerbong-- some ape-like creature that can at least give the appearance of a "fun" company.
Of course, if you invest into this backup feature, not only can you backup your HD-DVDs to harddrive or to burn on BR discs, you can backup your Bluray discs.
I'd say for future savings that this would be a good option for those who don't want to repurchase their crap again and again because of scratched discs or other mishaps.
Copyright should be restricted to civil courts, thus negating any and all need for the government, or any other firm to _do_their_work_for_them_
The copyright argument aside, why the hell are we letting them avoid doing the work of protecting their own crap?
Just my opinion really. If the government would refuse to waste money on the **AA plight to save their failing business model, then they'd have to change their business model, or shrivel to the size that the current business model allows. Both options are fine enough for me.
Slashdot Mirror
"If someone does that study, and finds the expected 100% correlation between life and death, the report of that study on /. will undoubtedly be greeted with "Correlation != causation" posts."
- And you know what? they'd actually be completely correct. Life does not cause death.
so you're saying that what I'm buying when I buy WoW is a license to the game, and not the game itself?
And that's a license that is only valid if I follow the EULA?
What the hell? IMO if I buy the game, I'm buying the content on the bloody CD/DVD, and I can do what I want with that content. Blizzard can choose to allow or disallow me on the servers, but I own the rights to do what I want with the content on the CD, I bought it, it's mine.
If a user wants to use the content as he sees fit from the CD he owns, then good for him.
If a user wants to use the content as he sees fit from the CD he owns to profit from selling in-game stuff for real money, then good for him.
- the bloody idiots should realize that what they're doing is censoring something which isn't illegal.
EULAs shouldn't be used to stop someone from using the software he buys, it should only be used to remove liability to the company if the software screws up unexpectedly.
Copyright shouldn't be used to stop someone from using the software he buys, it should only be used to deter people from profiting from copying the product.
People using glider either for their own personal use, or to make cash from the game don't fit into these, they're not selling any part of the blizzard software to make money.
The people creating glider are giving people an option to do what they want with their content purchase.
- I've never used glider as it's not how I like to play the game, if other people use it, that's fine by me, how does it hurt me? It doesn't. It's a game for chrissakes.
This is the same as saying iD should be sued for allowing "iddqd" in their Doom games, or that all mods for Diablo 2 are now banned and suable.
God I hope they appeal and win, this is just stupid.
""You might be able to grow asparagus in it really well. ... It is very exciting for us.""
"And I thought I didn't get out much."
- I'd have thought that growing asparagus.. On Another Planet.. would be classified as a really exciting from most people.. so it's true.. you don't get out much.
That's a real interesting read.
You can definitely see that the problem is that microsoft.com and Windows update are handled by 2 teams, and each program is handled by an individual team, so in the end it gets hard to say who should do what and how.
it's a problem with having too much distance between what a team offers to the public, and the public access, and the lack of the teams control.
- I'd have thought one solution would be to just set up microsoft.com as a sharepoint/wikipedia site, give the teams responsible for the software complete ownership of the part they use, and leave windows update out of it. they then themselves have control to display the content however they like. The problems might still show up, but you wouldn't have to talk to 5 different departments just to fix what is basically a download-link problem.
It's what happens when you don't trust the teams to do what's right, and think you have to have other departments thinking for them, in the end it complicates things.
Which is similar to what Microsoft did with Vista, they complicated things because the user isn't trusted to use the machine. Basic design philosophies matter alot, they help create some wonderful things for instance I'd name CoreAVC as a brilliant solution which comes from a good basic design philosophy, but in the case of Vista, the basic design philosophy of not trusting the user was a bad one, and was probably bred because that's how Microsoft works today, departments thinking for other departments because of trust issues.
That's why I'm thinking that the new OS will be different, It'll be based on server 2008, and with anything that the people at microsoft think "this is something that I'll use for myself" they tend to do a good job, as soon as they start thinking "this is something I'm programming for someone other than me" - that's where you get problems because you trust yourself, but not others.
---
just an opinion btw, probably a dumb one, but it's all mine.
"Could someone(preferably a Suomi speaker) please smack them over the head and pound some sense into them?"
- There fixed that for ya.
... a mile away.
I'm a windows savvy user, and I've never had problems with viruses or malware, mostly because I know when to make sure what I'm about to run isn't malware.
That means I know generally what's already in my computer, and when I'm about to install or run something new, I either know it's from a legitimate source, and thus don't worry about it, or I scan the file before using it.
that's why I applaud things like the firefox virusscanner, it's actually combating the risk of infection at the point-of-entry rather than scanning everything all the time, over and over and over again, and hogging your resources while it's at it. In this regard, current virus software only helps when you've already gotten a virus and you need to clean it, which in my opinion is too late. the solution should be at the point of entry.
It's also why I hate UAC, UAC doesn't help people to understand where the point of entry of malware is, and it only teaches people to click yes to everything, or to google how to disable it.
Dark matter should never have been postulated as real matter, or even hinted at it being real. It's basically a discrepancy between the models we use to mimick the real world and the real world.
Where that discrepancy lies, that's the big hunt, but believing that dark matter exists is ridiculous.
"Also, most Mormons (myself included) believe that the practice of plural marriage..."
- A social group which has examples in nature, gorillas and lions for isntance, uncommon among humans though.
"will be re-instituted prior to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ"
- a most unlikely situation, the mans' been dead for 2000 years.
"(some suspect it will be re-instituted after the collapse of the U.S. economy"
It didn't happen in the depression, using that as an estimate for future collapses, I doubt there's a correlation between economy and polygamy.
"when the Saints are called to gather in Zion: Jackson County, Missouri [Kansas City])."
- I'd move it to Las Vegas, better chance Elvis can show up as well.
I think most people don't understand that the line between ethical and unethical is an arbitrary one.
Is it ethical to eat a baby? Well, when you eat veal, that's what you're doing, it's not the same species as you, but you're eating a child of that species, a living, breathing individual with its own characteristics and persona.
Children are being killed, eaten and abused of all types of species, is that ethical? If we take this to the extreme, left: is it ethical to kill any other living thing for your consumption? right: is it ethical to deny your right to kill and eat what you wish?
If you accept that we kill individuals and children from other species for food and we deem that as ethical, why do we deem embryo testing as something unethical?
I'm guessing it's the ignorance of news-media and the people consuming the news that's the problem.
In my opinion the experiments are of legitimate use, it's up to the experts and the companies they work at to make sure that they at least define the line for themselves and the regulations to keep them on the right side of their own definitions.
K.
"Now if Slashdot does want to compete with digg and reddit for the top nerd sensationalist website then fine. People like me will simply stop visiting."
No you will bitch and moan and whimper "get off my lawn!" but that's about it, you'll still become bored enough to check what's on slashdot and roast-reply some stupid non-news article.
There's one thing which I've never seen people think about, and that's the center of gravity when dealing with fake-gravity-via-rotation.
Let's say you have a cylinder-shape, and it's rotating with people floating inside in no gravity.. one of them decides to step onto the rotating cylinder and get the effects of gravity. The person exerts equal amount of force against the cylinder as the cylinder exerts on him, and as the cylinder is free-floating, the center of gravity has now changed to include the cylinder, and the person, and the whole thing would get out of control.
fake gravity isn't possible as most people would like it to act, it could only be used in a very controlled way for astronauts to exercise in a limited fashion.
Of course, if Nasa has already thought of this and come up with a solution, please let me know, I'd be interested in the solution.
"I worry that this portends a day when consoles (and even blu-ray movie players) will REQUIRE an internet connection and do something similar to verify their games/movies."
I'll never use media which phones home to make sure it's legitimate, there are moral alternatives available already and I hope that one day the moral alternative will finally be the legal one as well.
K.
this is the EA side of spore showing its (dark) colours. Some executive going "OMG! this has taken too long, can't we sell something right now?"
Who wants to play with just the editor??? I'd have thought the first stage of spore would have been a much more interesting as a standalone, buy the first part (for DS, PC, Xbox, PS3, mac) download the full game for just XX.99 extra
The timing is just right for a "omg it's just around the corner", but the completely wrong part of the game is being sold off as a standalone.
Conspiracy theory #2 is that they don't want to pay artists to create the models of things for the final launch, better to sell the useless editor and make people do the work for them.
Am I right? Or am I right?
nonono.. not water closet 3, warcraft 3.. get your facts straight from the cow (in the cow level)
"There was a definite surge last year of GPL3 projects"
- Does that mean the surge is working?
I at first didn't like the "AwesomeBar" because the first thing I did after installing the new version is to try out a web-game a friend of mine had suggested. The webgame meant repeatedly going to pages again and again, and even though I just played it for a few session at the start, it was always.. ALWAYS suggesting that piece of crap for the weeks after.
If you're going to use it, make sure you only visit the pages you use day to day, after a few days you can go check the rest of the crap.
I'd say it's a nice feature, but you need to trim useless pages it pops up with as well.
Plus, from the article, he only wanted the donations to buy more cards so that he could make sure that the drivers worked for them as well.
Although I wouldn't deny him using some of it as beer allowance for a job well done.
"6 weeks pregnant because you were raped? Abort if you want.
38 weeks pregnant because you were raped? Sorry, too late."
- This is of course your opinion. If it was you who was pregnant and you were seriously contemplating abortion, wouldn't you want to exercise what you think is right?
That's why, in my opinion, let the individuals themselves decide, it's a tough choice even if you ignore outside pressure or influence.
K.
"I, for one, welcome our new dirty, spelling-challenged, sensationalizing user-submitted story-posting editor overlords!"
- In soviet Russia, our new dirty, spelling-challenged, sensationalizing user-submitted story-posting editor overlords welcomes you!
"Yes you can. COW breast milk."
- Moost interesting.
K.
"I would hope that Mr Zuckerburg invests in a CEO or COO-- someone over 40 that can at least give the appearance of a "real" company."
And I would hope that Mr. Zuckerburg invests in a monkey with a beerbong-- some ape-like creature that can at least give the appearance of a "fun" company.
"SOME IDIOT ON THE INTERNET!!!!!1!!1!!!!lim(x->0)[sin(x)/x]."
- Kudos.
Actually in Iceland the response rate was 98% who "believe" in Evolution, I guess they asked a few immigrants from USA as well.
K.
Of course, if you invest into this backup feature, not only can you backup your HD-DVDs to harddrive or to burn on BR discs, you can backup your Bluray discs.
I'd say for future savings that this would be a good option for those who don't want to repurchase their crap again and again because of scratched discs or other mishaps.
K.
Copyright should be restricted to civil courts, thus negating any and all need for the government, or any other firm to _do_their_work_for_them_
The copyright argument aside, why the hell are we letting them avoid doing the work of protecting their own crap?
Just my opinion really. If the government would refuse to waste money on the **AA plight to save their failing business model, then they'd have to change their business model, or shrivel to the size that the current business model allows. Both options are fine enough for me.
K.