In the grand scheme of things, it doesnt sound like a bad idea.
If same file instances are tracked in the registry, you could probably create many many instances of the same file and overload the registry. This could be a potential denial of service attack.
By the same token, knowing that your file is a link to another file/global file also means you know weaknesses that exist in that configuration.
If another Dufus wanted to make an exact copy of my configuration file,jsut add a few extra features to it.
if they are sharing my.cshrc file for example, why not add: chown -R myuser ~
This is an example and maybe a bad one at that.. But think of the possibilities.
KDE does and has had a file manager for quite some time. It is arguably too similar to the explorer and also acts as a simple web browser. It will allow you to navigate your files, copy,move, delete,etc... even includes a trash can.. err recycle bin.. err whatever.
This is not intended as a flame, but please do your research.
in addition, there are some other file managers, which although unintegrated into the window manager allow the user to modify filesystems from a graqphical interface.
Pretty soon we will need industrial quality cooling systems on these commercial harddisks. alot of the 10,000 rpm drives get so hot now that you can fry an egg on them.
It is very likely that in order for this company to release this emulator to the public, they will have to put copy protection on it to prevent copied cds to work in it.. only the original sony distributions.
The courts have frequently upheld the right to reverse engineering. In the case of DVD's its to access purchesed data in a scrambled format. In the case of Virtual Game Station, they ripped off the whole machine If the courts determine that the later is ok? Then by what reason do we have to put up with the MPAA?
The answer to your question is this. The MPAA is a essentially a marketing company for the movie industry. By dissasembling the software protection, you are limiting thier ability to effectively market thier product. thier customers are not the general public, but the movie industry who relies upon the MPAA to keep the original works protected from copyright infringment.
As far as reverse engineering is concerned, I am just as adamant that it should be legal as anyone else. Being an engineer like most many of us at/., I like to look at the guts of it.
I draw the line when someone is undercutting my business by preventing me from making a profit with my product. either by scaring off my investors or my giving away my work to allow others to break the copyright.
do you fear for the future of dvd's and media.. well you should..
when the cd-based media was originally proposed to filmmakers, nearly every one of them turned it down flat. why ? Because they were all concerned with the potential for piracy from the very beginning. People wonder why Lucas Films havent come out on DVD. Well a pretty good guess is that he does not trust the MPAA to protect his works. how did that change? The reason most of these companies ended up signing off on dvd technology is because of that lame encryption scheme. Its possible the MPAA knew that the encryption scheme would be broken eventually but thier goal was not to make an unbreakable scheme.. It was to make something that would be fast enough to play and to put some protection in there so that the moviemakers would sign off on it.. why is mounting this campaign generally a bad idea ? The main reason is this. totally disregard the MPAA and thier piss-poor policy for a minute and imagine how the movie companies will react when they feel thier product is threatened. this would be an obvious threat you couldnt see as many companies pull support from a product thatn you would see here if this happened.
My feeling is that the MPAA doesnt give a rats ass about you and I. They are there for the sole purpose of making money and DVD is thier cash cow. If all the investors and moviemakers pulled thier support from DVD, this would hurt quite a bit. You always have to take into account motivation. ther are people with good intentions and people with bad intentions. Please consider the outcome of actions before taking them especially when it affects our whole community.
This isnt intended to be a flame magnet but a differing viewpoint.
There are crimes being commited on both sides of this issue. I think there are too many people at blame to count.
1. Obviously we know that being restrictd from viewing dvd movies on Linux because a large organization chooses so for thier own twisted reasons is unfair practice and should be frowned upon.
2. On the other hand, reverse enginnering a product and ther distributing some elses work regardless of the type of work/art it is should also be frowned upon.
The only provision that the court should make is that the MPAA cannot deny the rights of linux developers to license the code to develop linux based dvd movie players. Proponent companies for linux should see this as an opportunity to gain alot ofmarket share by licensing this algorithm the same as thier windows counterparts and for the same monetary sum. im doing this, they can provide this functionality for thier customers and at the same time protect the technology holders who despite being misguided, have brought us this exciting new technology and with the proper motivation, will contnue to do so.
sorry for the run-ons.
if windows video card manufacturers can package dvd players with thier cards, then linux developers should be able to do the same.. and by the same token windows developers dont arbitrarily give out the source code for software that they license.. so should it be under linux.
I believe people have the right to practivce religion or lack thereof any way they wish until it impedes upon others.
the problem i have with your initial statement is that you are accusing mr Katz of anti-religious sentiment in this article when there is no evidence of it.
if we make assu,mptions about all of Jon Kats' postings that there will be some anti-religious, anti-cultural sentiment in them then we can just recycle the flames from all the previous articles he posts.
wouldnt it better to read the post and make a determination based on the article and not the author.
It is only a possible solution to the problem of squatting and brokering.
regardless of whether brokering is good or ethical, in the end it is not good for the user. This is because it promotes squatting. As far as I am concerned, squatting and brokering are the same thing. Brokering is a euphemism used by adults that dont consider themselves 3l33t Haxx0r$.
We can argue forever about whether brokering is a viable business solution, but it comes down to a matter of opinion.
My reasoning is based on what I consider in the best interest of the internet and its users. When I say this, i dont give anymore credit to business than I do to an individual.
The problem is morality and corruption. Even Communism looks good on paper, but lacks not in principle but foresight.
I dont care for government intervension where the internet is involved but the only solution I see for thsi problem is to take the motivation away. In order to do this, it should be mandated that domains cannot be sold for more than they were purchased. Domains legally will be sold for a flat fee. this allows the woodbe entreprenuer to claim a domain and conduct business on it. Selling the domain if it is no longer of any use. This would negate the effect that broerking has had. The institution of domain name registration should be handled strictly by a not-for-profit agency.
this may not be the ideal situation for brokers, but then logging is a dying industry as well. If there are no good domain names left, what will you sell?
A domain name is similar to a patent/landholding in many ways. by registering a domain name, you are actually placing a patent on on a name ( a way to locate your computer system(s) on the internet.. )
Just because your grandfather took a dump on a piece of land 100 years doesnt mean that he owned it..
Its likely that he claimed ownership of it after he had driven off the indians who actually owned the land before your ilk was on it.
Most would argue that squatting is a Bad Thing, but there are many who say its just like land. I own it by virtue of being here first and buying it.
By this logic, I could find a spot I believe you have a interest in purchasing, buy it, and jack up the price for you.
for instance, i know that there is a piece of real estate that I know that Microsoft is looking to buy to erect a new sales office. If i can get in and buy the property before M$ has a chance to bid on it, I can jack up the price and force M$ to pay that price tro find another location.
But that not the whole story.. In and of itself, that may not be illegal. Maybe just a bit unethical.
The difference is that a plot of land doesnt hold any name patents or otherwise. I know that M$ has a new product coming out called "Microsoft Linux 1.0" so i go out and register MicrosoftLinux.com *.org *.net *.cc, etc. I did this with the specific intention of dforcing Microsoft to purchase this recognized name from me in order to turn a quicxck buck.. I have no right to the name and cannot legally conduct business under such name in any state or country.
Often the line is very gray here.. but equating domain name registration to land purchases is missing one major point. people generally dont identify you by where your corporate office is. They do recognize you by name.
as far as im concerned, there is no such thing as legal domain brokering.
its a practice too difficult to govern and defeats the original purpose.
To understand my motivations, you have to look at the history of the domain name registration systems.
registering a domain used to be free. 2 reasons why we now pay to egister domains.
1. charging for domain registrations and limiting them to 2 yer terms was intended to prevent people from abusing the system and squatting.
2. Internic decided they werent making enough money as a not-for-profit institution and instituted a per/register policy.
its even a poorer idea to give people discounts on multiple registrations.
again, there is no easy way to govern this and abuse hasnt stopped just because of the price tag. its just that now tha abusers have a much larger pocketbook.
Jon, In your commentary on society and culture, do you occasionally play the devils advocate in order to illicit negative or adverse responses. If so, do you find that the response is often a better indicator than a well thought and formed response? People often give clues to thier true nature when they give an emotional response as opposed to a logical/factual one.
If you are considering investing in intrusion detection software, there are a number of drawbacks that you should be aware of before you rely too heavily on these security methods.
1. IDS systems are notorious for dropping packets. Attacks to your network can be missed when the bandwith utilization on your network exceeds a certain percentage. Many IDS systems are only reliable in this fashion up to 10Mb connections.
2. Intrusion detection programs generally will not reorder packets. Any attacks with fragmented packets, out of order packets, and so on will often slip by without being detection. This is also a good way to penetrate a firewall packet filtering rule that does not reorder/reassemble packets.
3. IDS systems tend uto use a string matching algorithm to detect network attacks ( such as a phf or php ) and variances in the attack string can also potentially bypass the IDS without generating an event.
An intrusion detection system is a good tool to top off your networks security policy.. It should not replace human intervention or other security measures including a firewall and proactive network scanning.
The finder in MacOS was one of the few things i really liked about the interface.
I happen to own a next box with the All in one directory browser. I just have one thing to say.. It stinks. After having used explorer,finder,xfm, and any other relatively descent file browser, getting used to the Next browser was like pulling teeth.. One major reason why most of my next operations are performed from the (sh) rather than from it.
I like to have things in separate windows, having to rely on copy, cut, and paste for physical files seems totally illogical to me (even in windows). I want to have multiple windows.
This is likely the biggest mistake in thier new interface.. but i guess well just have to wait for the final product.
There are soo many things invented this century that have benefitted our lives so this is a difficult decision. 1. The transistor: This invention made way for pretty much every consumer device we rely on today. Without this infant step, nearly everything we take for granted now would not be there.. TV's and computers, cars, planes, alarm systems, tele-communication devices and so n and so on. Nearly every device we use now uses or is based off technology from this simple gadget. 2. combustion engine: Along with the transistor, this device revolutionized outr world buy allowing us to keep in touch with others, to migrate places, to transport us to places farther than we could have dreamed possible and to make it fast and effient enough that nearly anyone could afford to do so. Sure we had carriages and boats. A trip across the country or oversees in one of these probably signified a major life change. The engine has given us the ability to take vacations and visit relatives and generally improved the quality of our lives. this is followed closely by a steam engine, but i feel the impact of this was less far reaching.. besides.. i believe it was developed prior to this century.
A registry is a piss poor idea. Programs should run independently of system level configuration options. A registry is a bad idea in the same way that copying proprietary drivers into the system directory is a bad idea. this thinking put pieces and parts of programs all over your disk and you never have a clear idea how much space your application is taking up. also, if your uninstall information is deleted, corrupted, you are unable to uninstall the program completely unless you know exactly where all files are, whether they are shared files, and what registry keys the installer put in.
The way that Unix has accomplished the task of configuration for many years is the most logical way. It is certainly a bit more complex and having a graphical configuration utility that could assist with configuration of multiple applications from one gui is a good idea, but puttig all configation data into one file is twisted logic.
maybe the solution is to put all configuration files into one directory or as much as possible..
oh yeah.. they already do that.. its called/etc/ and anyone who has used unix/linux for mor than an hour can figure out how to cat/more any file in there, figure out where it belongs.. assuming the name of the file is not self explanatory.
Let me first say that I can relate to alot of this story as I served my time in the gaming industry.
The entire development process in game companies has become far too similar to that of the movie/film industry. Projects are regularly run by producers. Many of the producers I had the pleasure of working with were not gamers, but were taking on the role of a gamers advocate when defining the features of thier repective games. In truth, many producers are nothin more than high level managers with good time management skills and the ability to manage a cutthroat budget.
I think the author put too much emphasis on the fact that he was upset about not getting his name into products that he worked on. I agree that contribution recognition is important in a game as with any other creative medium, but it made the articel sound like more of a personal rant rather than "the future of console gaming"
Of all the games i have worked on, I was only privelaged to have my name put into about 50% of them. Some of those, i would have rather not been included on as I am not proud of the product that i ws forced to ship to customers.
for those of us who are dedicated gamers, it is difficult to let a game with potential slip out the door sorely lacking but these decision are made by producers and marketing.
the big problem is that this industry is now so solely driven by marketing that software quality takes a distant back-seat. Most game manuyfacturers ( pc games in general ) do not make exhorbatant amounts of money. The pc game market is so cutthroat that getting a game to market is the most important thing to making a sale. Marketing arrangments with magazines are made in excess of 6 months in advance. even before the software is complete and bug-tested and the compay looses money each day after its marketing deadline slips.
I am not dissatisfied that i didnt get my name into all the games I worked on. I am dissatisfied that my company gave up early on onb making a "#1 title" in any category ( genre ) was content making in the top 5 in each category knowing roughly the maount of sales in the top 5 category slots.
With the exception of a few companies, my feeling is that the best games come from smaller companies that produce a game and then sell it to a large distributor like EA or GT. unfortunately, these companies are few and far between. Large publishers can save money by sacrificing when developers are in house and tend to buy the smaller companies once they have a marketable title. Then they build a "franchise" on the title.
on Sequels: Reusing code is the staple of the 90's game market. titles are marketed and re-marketed with little or no changes. engine changes are minimal and graphics are rarley improved. As the author says, this is a very poor excuse for a sequel.
the problem here is that designing a product from the gound up nowadays and keeping with recent technology generally takes between 1 year and 2 years of research and development before any actual game coding actually occurs. Very few companies are unwilling to pay this much money to innovate.
unfortunately, the real issue here is that people who dont know any better.. the average consumer is unknowingly signing away privelages and functionality by not knowing the consequences of selecting what appears to be a beneficial feature. If AOL were required to put a warning that expressed more accurately, the possible negative poits, then more people might avoid making this mistake.
in the future, fewer people will make the mistake of signing on to the esp ( evil service provider ) in the first place.
When does the anti-aol education campaign start where competent internet users intelligently explain why aol is such a bad investment?
LW This has been a test of the opinion broadcast system
bn.com.. this is frightening that any company that does real business would use an unstable beta product as a mission critical internet server. Through my job, I have had the pleasure of using win2k since rc1 and although I am impressed with many of the changes in the new systems, I couldnt with good conscience run a mission critical server on it.
win2k RTM'd in the last 2 weeks.. I certainly hope they plan a server upgrade.
although an upgrade to freeBSD might be more advantageous:) *grin*
Slashdot Mirror
LW
If same file instances are tracked in the registry, you could probably create many many instances of the same file and overload the registry. This could be a potential denial of service attack.
By the same token, knowing that your file is a link to another file/global file also means you know weaknesses that exist in that configuration.
If another Dufus wanted to make an exact copy of my configuration file,jsut add a few extra features to it.
if they are sharing my .cshrc file for example, why not add: chown -R myuser ~
This is an example and maybe a bad one at that.. But think of the possibilities.
This is not intended as a flame, but please do your research.
in addition, there are some other file managers, which although unintegrated into the window manager allow the user to modify filesystems from a graqphical interface.
check out:
xfm
xfileman
non x:
mc
LW
LW
LW
The answer to your question is this. The MPAA is a essentially a marketing company for the movie industry. By dissasembling the software protection, you are limiting thier ability to effectively market thier product.
thier customers are not the general public, but the movie industry who relies upon the MPAA to keep the original works protected from copyright infringment.
As far as reverse engineering is concerned, I am just as adamant that it should be legal as anyone else. Being an engineer like most many of us at /., I like to look at the guts of it.
I draw the line when someone is undercutting my business by preventing me from making a profit with my product. either by scaring off my investors or my giving away my work to allow others to break the copyright.
LW
do you fear for the future of dvd's and media.. well you should..
when the cd-based media was originally proposed to filmmakers, nearly every one of them turned it down flat.
why ?
Because they were all concerned with the potential for piracy from the very beginning. People wonder why Lucas Films havent come out on DVD. Well a pretty good guess is that he does not trust the MPAA to protect his works.
how did that change?
The reason most of these companies ended up signing off on dvd technology is because of that lame encryption scheme. Its possible the MPAA knew that the encryption scheme would be broken eventually but thier goal was not to make an unbreakable scheme.. It was to make something that would be fast enough to play and to put some protection in there so that the moviemakers would sign off on it..
why is mounting this campaign generally a bad idea ?
The main reason is this. totally disregard the MPAA and thier piss-poor policy for a minute and imagine how the movie companies will react when they feel thier product is threatened. this would be an obvious threat you couldnt see as many companies pull support from a product thatn you would see here if this happened.
My feeling is that the MPAA doesnt give a rats ass about you and I. They are there for the sole purpose of making money and DVD is thier cash cow. If all the investors and moviemakers pulled thier support from DVD, this would hurt quite a bit.
You always have to take into account motivation. ther are people with good intentions and people with bad intentions. Please consider the outcome of actions before taking them especially when it affects our whole community.
This isnt intended to be a flame magnet but a differing viewpoint.
LW
1. Obviously we know that being restrictd from viewing dvd movies on Linux because a large organization chooses so for thier own twisted reasons is unfair practice and should be frowned upon.
2. On the other hand, reverse enginnering a product and ther distributing some elses work regardless of the type of work/art it is should also be frowned upon.
The only provision that the court should make is that the MPAA cannot deny the rights of linux developers to license the code to develop linux based dvd movie players.
Proponent companies for linux should see this as an opportunity to gain alot ofmarket share by licensing this algorithm the same as thier windows counterparts and for the same monetary sum. im doing this, they can provide this functionality for thier customers and at the same time protect the technology holders who despite being misguided, have brought us this exciting new technology and with the proper motivation, will contnue to do so.
sorry for the run-ons.
if windows video card manufacturers can package dvd players with thier cards, then linux developers should be able to do the same.. and by the same token windows developers dont arbitrarily give out the source code for software that they license.. so should it be under linux.
my rant for the day.
LW
the problem i have with your initial statement is that you are accusing mr Katz of anti-religious sentiment in this article when there is no evidence of it.
if we make assu,mptions about all of Jon Kats' postings that there will be some anti-religious, anti-cultural sentiment in them then we can just recycle the flames from all the previous articles he posts.
wouldnt it better to read the post and make a determination based on the article and not the author.
Last Warrior.
It is only a possible solution to the problem of squatting and brokering.
regardless of whether brokering is good or ethical, in the end it is not good for the user. This is because it promotes squatting. As far as I am concerned, squatting and brokering are the same thing. Brokering is a euphemism used by adults that dont consider themselves 3l33t Haxx0r$.
We can argue forever about whether brokering is a viable business solution, but it comes down to a matter of opinion.
My reasoning is based on what I consider in the best interest of the internet and its users. When I say this, i dont give anymore credit to business than I do to an individual.
LW
The problem is morality and corruption.
Even Communism looks good on paper, but lacks not in principle but foresight.
I dont care for government intervension where the internet is involved but the only solution I see for thsi problem is to take the motivation away. In order to do this, it should be mandated that domains cannot be sold for more than they were purchased. Domains legally will be sold for a flat fee. this allows the woodbe entreprenuer to claim a domain and conduct business on it. Selling the domain if it is no longer of any use.
This would negate the effect that broerking has had.
The institution of domain name registration should be handled strictly by a not-for-profit agency.
this may not be the ideal situation for brokers, but then logging is a dying industry as well. If there are no good domain names left, what will you sell?
LW
A domain name is similar to a patent/landholding in many ways. by registering a domain name, you are actually placing a patent on on a name ( a way to locate your computer system(s) on the internet.. )
Just because your grandfather took a dump on a piece of land 100 years doesnt mean that he owned it..
Its likely that he claimed ownership of it after he had driven off the indians who actually owned the land before your ilk was on it.
LW
By this logic, I could find a spot I believe you have a interest in purchasing, buy it, and jack up the price for you.
for instance,
i know that there is a piece of real estate that I know that Microsoft is looking to buy to erect a new sales office. If i can get in and buy the property before M$ has a chance to bid on it, I can jack up the price and force M$ to pay that price tro find another location.
But that not the whole story.. In and of itself, that may not be illegal. Maybe just a bit unethical.
The difference is that a plot of land doesnt hold any name patents or otherwise.
I know that M$ has a new product coming out called "Microsoft Linux 1.0" so i go out and register MicrosoftLinux.com *.org *.net *.cc, etc. I did this with the specific intention of dforcing Microsoft to purchase this recognized name from me in order to turn a quicxck buck.. I have no right to the name and cannot legally conduct business under such name in any state or country.
Often the line is very gray here.. but equating domain name registration to land purchases is missing one major point. people generally dont identify you by where your corporate office is. They do recognize you by name.
LW
its a practice too difficult to govern and defeats the original purpose.
To understand my motivations, you have to look at the history of the domain name registration systems.
registering a domain used to be free.
2 reasons why we now pay to egister domains.
1. charging for domain registrations and limiting them to 2 yer terms was intended to prevent people from abusing the system and squatting.
2. Internic decided they werent making enough money as a not-for-profit institution and instituted a per/register policy.
its even a poorer idea to give people discounts on multiple registrations.
again, there is no easy way to govern this and abuse hasnt stopped just because of the price tag. its just that now tha abusers have a much larger pocketbook.
LW
LW
so publish the source in a book and sell it.
it is also the legal way to get encryption outside of the country.
LW
1. IDS systems are notorious for dropping packets. Attacks to your network can be missed when the bandwith utilization on your network exceeds a certain percentage. Many IDS systems are only reliable in this fashion up to 10Mb connections.
2. Intrusion detection programs generally will not reorder packets. Any attacks with fragmented packets, out of order packets, and so on will often slip by without being detection. This is also a good way to penetrate a firewall packet filtering rule that does not reorder/reassemble packets.
3. IDS systems tend uto use a string matching algorithm to detect network attacks ( such as a phf or php ) and variances in the attack string can also potentially bypass the IDS without generating an event.
An intrusion detection system is a good tool to top off your networks security policy.. It should not replace human intervention or other security measures including a firewall and proactive network scanning.
LW
This will increase the sales of new keyboards due to spew splatter.
I happen to own a next box with the All in one directory browser. I just have one thing to say.. It stinks. After having used explorer,finder,xfm, and any other relatively descent file browser, getting used to the Next browser was like pulling teeth.. One major reason why most of my next operations are performed from the (sh) rather than from it.
I like to have things in separate windows, having to rely on copy, cut, and paste for physical files seems totally illogical to me (even in windows). I want to have multiple windows.
This is likely the biggest mistake in thier new interface.. but i guess well just have to wait for the final product.
LW
this is followed closely by a steam engine, but i feel the impact of this was less far reaching.. besides.. i believe it was developed prior to this century.
LW.
also, if your uninstall information is deleted, corrupted, you are unable to uninstall the program completely unless you know exactly where all files are, whether they are shared files, and what registry keys the installer put in.
The way that Unix has accomplished the task of configuration for many years is the most logical way. It is certainly a bit more complex and having a graphical configuration utility that could assist with configuration of multiple applications from one gui is a good idea, but puttig all configation data into one file is twisted logic.
maybe the solution is to put all configuration files into one directory or as much as possible..
oh yeah.. they already do that.. its called /etc/ and anyone who has used unix/linux for mor than an hour can figure out how to cat/more any file in there, figure out where it belongs.. assuming the name of the file is not self explanatory.
LW
The entire development process in game companies has become far too similar to that of the movie/film industry. Projects are regularly run by producers. Many of the producers I had the pleasure of working with were not gamers, but were taking on the role of a gamers advocate when defining the features of thier repective games. In truth, many producers are nothin more than high level managers with good time management skills and the ability to manage a cutthroat budget.
I think the author put too much emphasis on the fact that he was upset about not getting his name into products that he worked on. I agree that contribution recognition is important in a game as with any other creative medium, but it made the articel sound like more of a personal rant rather than "the future of console gaming"
Of all the games i have worked on, I was only privelaged to have my name put into about 50% of them. Some of those, i would have rather not been included on as I am not proud of the product that i ws forced to ship to customers.
for those of us who are dedicated gamers, it is difficult to let a game with potential slip out the door sorely lacking but these decision are made by producers and marketing.
the big problem is that this industry is now so solely driven by marketing that software quality takes a distant back-seat. Most game manuyfacturers ( pc games in general ) do not make exhorbatant amounts of money. The pc game market is so cutthroat that getting a game to market is the most important thing to making a sale. Marketing arrangments with magazines are made in excess of 6 months in advance. even before the software is complete and bug-tested and the compay looses money each day after its marketing deadline slips.
I am not dissatisfied that i didnt get my name into all the games I worked on. I am dissatisfied that my company gave up early on onb making a "#1 title" in any category ( genre ) was content making in the top 5 in each category knowing roughly the maount of sales in the top 5 category slots.
With the exception of a few companies, my feeling is that the best games come from smaller companies that produce a game and then sell it to a large distributor like EA or GT. unfortunately, these companies are few and far between. Large publishers can save money by sacrificing when developers are in house and tend to buy the smaller companies once they have a marketable title. Then they build a "franchise" on the title.
on Sequels:
Reusing code is the staple of the 90's game market. titles are marketed and re-marketed with little or no changes. engine changes are minimal and graphics are rarley improved. As the author says, this is a very poor excuse for a sequel.
the problem here is that designing a product from the gound up nowadays and keeping with recent technology generally takes between 1 year and 2 years of research and development before any actual game coding actually occurs. Very few companies are unwilling to pay this much money to innovate.
LW
in the future, fewer people will make the mistake of signing on to the esp ( evil service provider ) in the first place.
When does the anti-aol education campaign start where competent internet users intelligently explain why aol is such a bad investment?
LW This has been a test of the opinion broadcast system
I believe this means that he is not y2k compliant.
win2k RTM'd in the last 2 weeks.. I certainly hope they plan a server upgrade.
although an upgrade to freeBSD might be more advantageous :)
*grin*