Some high up person at Valve stated unofficially somewhere (there is a link from the Steam article on wikipedia) that if Steam ever closed, then they would provide a retirement system so you wouldn't lose your games. But that hardly makes me feel secure.
If you sit and read the Steam TOS it's quite frightening. To summarize: "Valve reserves the right to do whatever it wants with regards to your account. We own all the games. We own your account. You are enjoying our benevolent service."
Now here is my big concern: The same thing could happen for games, with Valve building up an ever-increasing selection of titles on Steam.
When I buy a Steam game, I pay money and then the game is permanently activated in my Steam account. Aside from the fact I can't transfer it to another account, and Valve can shutdown my account at will, IF Steam ever did "go dark", then I wouldn't have any games left...
It's worse for games because unlike music, you really have no choice (for certain games) whether you want to buy them on Steam or not.
Well I think that the language of the client-side web should not be a programming language at all, but a Virtual Machine / bytecode. That way, there could be many source languages all compiling to the "web virtual machine". (Like Java - but it should be as powerful as JavaScript, eg. have full access to the DOM).
So I think if JavaScript is moving towards being a compiled language, that's a good thing. It means that one day, we'll have Python code compiling to a "web client bytecode" file, and then Python, or any other language of your choice, can take the place of JavaScript on the web.
So you're saying, the reason digital storage is so much more expensive is because it's so much cheaper? Perhaps if directors realised this they could curtail their recording just a smidgen, so as to balance out the storage costs?
Yes, about the IE icon on the desktop, I believe this is a valid point.
Try selecting it and hitting 'delete'.
IE is such an integral part of Windows that the IE icon has special significance in the operating system, the same significance as My Computer and Recycle Bin. If you want to remove the IE icon you have to go to Desktop Properties -> Appearance -> Desktop Effects and turn it off there.
But, this could not possibly have something to do with the fact MS wants you to believe IE is the only web browser...
They're half-way in between - they don't disable your software completely. They don't just deny access to servers _they_ run. They activate a flag which denies access to _all_ servers around the world with "anti-cheat" turned on. Which is most of them.
So while this probably isn't illegal in itself, it does make your product useless (if you bought it to play online games). The sad thing is these bastards just get more sales out of it, as desperate gamers buy new copies (and I don't blame them).
Furthermore I think it should be investigated as to the legality of _all_ product terminations. Valve can terminate your game remotely for any reason they like. (As can Blizzard with WoW, or any other online game provider - I think Valve cops it worse because they're doing completely unnecessary online validation of a single player game).
But Valve commonly deactivate games (or at least the multiplayer parts) for online cheating. Leaving aside the discussion of the morality of cheating, who are Valve to terminate your game? Isn't this illegal, denying you the game you paid for?
Oh... I noticed a few changes here and there, and an "older version" button. I did not realise I was one of the 1% of users chosen for the upgrade.
As far as I can tell, it's mostly just a lot of little annoying things. Pages seem to load slower now (the inbox and compose screens start off small and grow over about a second). The drop-down boxes which were once native are now rendered in JavaScript, making them uglier. The email compose font now has annoying serifs. And the title bar now uselessly tells me my own email address (screen clutter!)
If you don't like the government, why campaign against them? The solution is simple: just start your own country, and run it the way you please.
You present an extremely naive solution. It's not about what you're selling in your garage. It's about what the majority of stores in the world are selling. Only regulation can prevent this rampant monopoly.
"This is good news, as the primary fear I've heard from developers is that Silverlight will be locked to Microsoft platforms and products."
Developers need to get their fears straight.
I'm less concerned about Silverlight being locked to Microsoft platforms, than I am about the entire web being locked into Silverlight. I'm sure many here agree...
This article seems primarily concerned with how MS can make the most money. It seems like an interesting standpoint to have. Not even the biggest MS fanboys are concerned with MS making money.
People are just looking at the rate-of-change, not the absolute value... which is quite logical.
In other words, if a closed-source company open sources something, it's a step in the right direction. If an open source company closes something, it's a step in the *wrong* direction.
Besides, open source projects that close source usually get beaten out by competitors or forks. (cf. Ethereal / Wireshark)
Back in the old days of segmentation, x86 offered the NX bit on segments which let the operating system prevent execution. However all major OSes switched to the paged model ages ago which has no equivalent protection, until recently, newer chips have started having these "DEP" (Data Execution Prevention) features. As far as I can tell this is just the same thing as the NX bit from 20 years ago, but for paging.
Anyway it isn't in heavy use at the moment, so it's entirely possible to put x86 code in data and have the IP point to it and execute it.
But that's OK, students don't need to learn assembly these days.
Although this minor update would otherwise be insignificant, it will be the final GPL v2 release So, the fact that it didn't change licenses yet somehow does make it significant?
So the open source community will not be happy if Microsoft attempts to crush ODF with their own apparently-open standard (which clearly is not for technical and legal reasons), and uses its money and manipulative powers to push it through.
AND the open source community will not be happy if Microsoft embraces ODF and then extends it to their own needs and ends up in control of the once-open format.... I for one think the open source community are perfectly reasonable on both counts.
No, it isn't hard. But how many of the millions upon millions of average PC consumers out there are going to do it? This is exactly how an entire planet ends up locked into yet another Microsoft file format.
Thing is, if you're in favour of free software, and you're a BSD person or a public domain person or some kind of very permissive license-favouring person, then you can go "The GPL is evil because it's too restrictive."
But it is absolutely the most hypocritical thing in the world when people who support or develop copyrighted closed source software say "the GPL is evil because it is viral". (Mr. Ballmer, I'm looking at you). The simple fact is, the GPL merely lifts a few restrictions on copyright. If you don't like it, just pretend it doesn't exist and all the GPL software is just copyrighted. Feel better?
(This isn't directed at the parent, just seemed like an appropriate place to say it).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that would be a good policy.
Some high up person at Valve stated unofficially somewhere (there is a link from the Steam article on wikipedia) that if Steam ever closed, then they would provide a retirement system so you wouldn't lose your games. But that hardly makes me feel secure.
If you sit and read the Steam TOS it's quite frightening. To summarize: "Valve reserves the right to do whatever it wants with regards to your account. We own all the games. We own your account. You are enjoying our benevolent service."
Now here is my big concern: The same thing could happen for games, with Valve building up an ever-increasing selection of titles on Steam.
...
When I buy a Steam game, I pay money and then the game is permanently activated in my Steam account. Aside from the fact I can't transfer it to another account, and Valve can shutdown my account at will, IF Steam ever did "go dark", then I wouldn't have any games left
It's worse for games because unlike music, you really have no choice (for certain games) whether you want to buy them on Steam or not.
Well I think that the language of the client-side web should not be a programming language at all, but a Virtual Machine / bytecode. That way, there could be many source languages all compiling to the "web virtual machine". (Like Java - but it should be as powerful as JavaScript, eg. have full access to the DOM).
So I think if JavaScript is moving towards being a compiled language, that's a good thing. It means that one day, we'll have Python code compiling to a "web client bytecode" file, and then Python, or any other language of your choice, can take the place of JavaScript on the web.
(1.1) Viewing movies with the hardware and software of my choice.
Dude, that's silly.
Linux does run on mobile phones, so you are not in any way making a point about light-weight versus heavy-weight (which was your plan, I believe).
You're just making an argument about hardware/software incompatibilities (either deliberate or consequential, I don't wish to debate here).
Wow that fully was an accident.
/\
What I was trying to post:
x <-- The joke
---"WHOOSH" >>>
o <-- Your head
|
(Hey it was a hard thing to get right)
So you're saying, the reason digital storage is so much more expensive is because it's so much cheaper? Perhaps if directors realised this they could curtail their recording just a smidgen, so as to balance out the storage costs?
Yes, about the IE icon on the desktop, I believe this is a valid point.
Try selecting it and hitting 'delete'.
IE is such an integral part of Windows that the IE icon has special significance in the operating system, the same significance as My Computer and Recycle Bin. If you want to remove the IE icon you have to go to Desktop Properties -> Appearance -> Desktop Effects and turn it off there.
But, this could not possibly have something to do with the fact MS wants you to believe IE is the only web browser...
If you were really using that tactic, you'd want to make very sure it failed ...
They're half-way in between - they don't disable your software completely. They don't just deny access to servers _they_ run. They activate a flag which denies access to _all_ servers around the world with "anti-cheat" turned on. Which is most of them.
So while this probably isn't illegal in itself, it does make your product useless (if you bought it to play online games). The sad thing is these bastards just get more sales out of it, as desperate gamers buy new copies (and I don't blame them).
Furthermore I think it should be investigated as to the legality of _all_ product terminations. Valve can terminate your game remotely for any reason they like. (As can Blizzard with WoW, or any other online game provider - I think Valve cops it worse because they're doing completely unnecessary online validation of a single player game).
But Valve commonly deactivate games (or at least the multiplayer parts) for online cheating. Leaving aside the discussion of the morality of cheating, who are Valve to terminate your game? Isn't this illegal, denying you the game you paid for?
Oh ... I noticed a few changes here and there, and an "older version" button. I did not realise I was one of the 1% of users chosen for the upgrade.
As far as I can tell, it's mostly just a lot of little annoying things. Pages seem to load slower now (the inbox and compose screens start off small and grow over about a second). The drop-down boxes which were once native are now rendered in JavaScript, making them uglier. The email compose font now has annoying serifs. And the title bar now uselessly tells me my own email address (screen clutter!)
I switched back...
If you don't like the government, why campaign against them? The solution is simple: just start your own country, and run it the way you please.
You present an extremely naive solution. It's not about what you're selling in your garage. It's about what the majority of stores in the world are selling. Only regulation can prevent this rampant monopoly.
"This is good news, as the primary fear I've heard from developers is that Silverlight will be locked to Microsoft platforms and products."
Developers need to get their fears straight.
I'm less concerned about Silverlight being locked to Microsoft platforms, than I am about the entire web being locked into Silverlight. I'm sure many here agree...
This article seems primarily concerned with how MS can make the most money. It seems like an interesting standpoint to have. Not even the biggest MS fanboys are concerned with MS making money.
People are just looking at the rate-of-change, not the absolute value... which is quite logical.
In other words, if a closed-source company open sources something, it's a step in the right direction. If an open source company closes something, it's a step in the *wrong* direction.
Besides, open source projects that close source usually get beaten out by competitors or forks. (cf. Ethereal / Wireshark)
With an American accent. Saying someone has no accent is like saying they have no language
But the problem is, it isn't possible for the OS to tell the hardware, unless the hardware has DEP built in.
Back in the old days of segmentation, x86 offered the NX bit on segments which let the operating system prevent execution. However all major OSes switched to the paged model ages ago which has no equivalent protection, until recently, newer chips have started having these "DEP" (Data Execution Prevention) features. As far as I can tell this is just the same thing as the NX bit from 20 years ago, but for paging.
Anyway it isn't in heavy use at the moment, so it's entirely possible to put x86 code in data and have the IP point to it and execute it.
But that's OK, students don't need to learn assembly these days.
Such an awesome reply :) As another guy said, should be modded +5 Insightful!
So the open source community will not be happy if Microsoft attempts to crush ODF with their own apparently-open standard (which clearly is not for technical and legal reasons), and uses its money and manipulative powers to push it through.
... I for one think the open source community are perfectly reasonable on both counts.
AND the open source community will not be happy if Microsoft embraces ODF and then extends it to their own needs and ends up in control of the once-open format.
GNU/Word!? That sounds entirely unholy!
No, it isn't hard. But how many of the millions upon millions of average PC consumers out there are going to do it? This is exactly how an entire planet ends up locked into yet another Microsoft file format.
Thing is, if you're in favour of free software, and you're a BSD person or a public domain person or some kind of very permissive license-favouring person, then you can go "The GPL is evil because it's too restrictive."
But it is absolutely the most hypocritical thing in the world when people who support or develop copyrighted closed source software say "the GPL is evil because it is viral". (Mr. Ballmer, I'm looking at you). The simple fact is, the GPL merely lifts a few restrictions on copyright. If you don't like it, just pretend it doesn't exist and all the GPL software is just copyrighted. Feel better?
(This isn't directed at the parent, just seemed like an appropriate place to say it).