People always like what is out there. A $20,000 family car is more than enough to transport you from point A to point B. Yet hundreds of thousands of people buy cars worth over $150k boasting amazing lap times around Nurbugring, fast 0-100 time and all that...and the funny thing is, probably a tiny, tiny, tiny portion actually race their cars. Most just drive around normally.
Marketing means that when people go to buy something, the mere existence of something better lulls them to it. So while your 5 year old graphics card renders your web pages and email fine, when you go to buy a new graphics card, customers would be drawn away from the dull, cheap rigs to the more expensive ones. Then they'll remember some lagginess, some slowness in certain instances and justify the expense.
Hell, I'm a prime example of this. Unlike my mates, I rarely game. I used to video edit a lot, but not really more. But I spent huge money on my current computer, buying massive heatsinks, overclocking it to the max, buying top end parts, etc. Certainly didn't 'need' it. But I did 'want' it.
And as long as people and society are like this - GPU's are not in a bind. They just have to keep releasing something better and people will want it.
For instance, I prefer playing realistic racing simulators to more arcade style ones like NFS. Of course, full reality would be having to live with the damages to a car, or physical damage to yourself in a car crash. Obviously, we don't want realism to go that far...but to a point, realism can add to games. Even if it makes it more challenging.
Unskilled players talk about unstoppable six-ling rushes, but really SCV's can beat them if managed well. Have a few SCV's attacking the zerglings, moving the ones that go to low health to the back of the formation and used to repair the ones up the front. Similarly good micro for Protoss Probes and Zerg Drones can protect against rushes.
And scouting is half of it. Good players scout early (with a few exceptions), and they can predict the rush simply be seeing low amounts of drones and assuming they're going for an early Spawning Pool, or if you're not that good, noticing the zerglings leaving base.
Rushes like that are more used to slow down the opponents economy, and are usually followed up by continuous attacks to keep on the offense and to prevent them from expanding. But the game rarely ends in the first few minutes (and when it does it's a do-or-die scenario, since usually all your workers are used in your rush as well).
This happens regardless of speed. Just seems to happen on certain torrents for some reason.
For instance, one torrent might be downloading at 200kB/s with 10kB/s upload without any issues. Another one might be at 60kB/s down and 10kB/s up and the rest of the net slows to a crawl.
Yeah, it is a big problem. Especially since we've got a very basic router with no type of throttling or priority features.
Generally when downloading a torrent from certain trackers and large amounts of peers, the whole internet pretty much goes down for every other person in the house. Or goes to dial-up rates. Drives my Dad nuts.
It wouldn't be a problem if I had a proper router, but with this feature, it should help if it works well. =)
I never said anything was illegal about it at all. But unlike Google, TPB aims at being a site which stores hashes to copyrighted content. Kinda like Asta-Killer, which is a search engine that searches through crack/serial code sites. It doesn't host any keygen's itself, but it's purpose is fairly clear.
On the other hand, I suspect that their About [thepiratebay.org] page might still be useful in deriving their purpose.
Right, because in their About page they're going to say "The Pirate Bay is a website dedicated for all crackers and movie/music pirates to upload their warez!".
Just as you said the name isn't very indicative of their purpose, their About page is hardly useful in deriving their purpose as well.
You're talking about setting a legal definition, one that can be proved in court. And the issue is that they can argue that "Look! We have legal torrents! That's what we made this tracker for! Not our fault people put movies, software and albums up there...", and it may be hard to prove otherwise...but do you honestly think that the people who *created* the website envisioned a place that made open-sourced software, Linux distro's and other similar stuff available?
With such an provocative name such as the Pirate Bay, it really makes that seem silly right? They made the site with the vision of it being a big tracker for all kinds of 'pirated' content. Hiding behind the 'but we serve legal content' is an argument that's used in the courtroom to try to force people to come up with 'evidence' otherwise. But really, we all know what ThePirateBay is for.
I'm not talking about how to define a tracker as being 'created for' illegal content or not, I'm talking about what was most likely going through the minds of the creators. Whether it was just a place that they could find all sorts of illegal stuff, or whether it was a direct protest to draconian copyright laws, they certainly didn't aim at creating a website that hosted legal torrents.
If the fact that ThePirateBay hosts a few legal things means that it should legally be allowed to exist means that there is a problem in the law.
If there is some underground club which encourages the use of illicit drugs, and seems to be created for the main purpose of creating a haven for drug-use, then they can't argue "But we also serve alcohol legally!" when the cops shut it down.
Fact is, ThePirateBay was created, and exists as a source for illegal downloads. Anyone who argues that it's there for legal content is either an idiot, or one of their lawyers who are trying to use the law to their advantage.
Of course, I'm not necessarily advocating that ThePirateBay should be shut down. I love my illegal content. But I'm saying that ThePirateBay doesn't really have a right to exist, based on what the *laws* are. (You can argue that those laws should be changed - but that's a separate issue)
It has nothing to do with interests at all. Sure, to an extent if you're good at something people admire (ie, something like sports), then sure, people may like you out of respect and admiration. But really, it's how you act, your personality, etc that defines how people deal with you. I've known people who are very popular, despite being epic Maths/Science geeks. But they don't carry themselves like geeks. They're cool guys and fun guys to hang out with.
Sure, because you may be into that kinda stuff people may *assume* that you may be nerdy based on your interests so on that generalization people may be asses to you and put you lower on the social chain, but mostly, if you have a fun, friendly and cool personality, people aren't gonna socially discriminate against you.
In Melbourne, Australia, once upon a time at *all* ages, fights were about honour, pride. One on one, see who wins. These days, at school, you start fighting a person in a one on one fight, and if he starts losing, you'll be jumped by his mates. Or if he loses, he'll come back and attack you behind your back. There's no honour.
At higher ages, or after school, what started off as a fist fight will now lead to people pulling out knives. Hell, there was one instance here a while back where a bunch of Asians were ganging up on some guy outside a club. One completely seperate guy came and broke up the fight. The group of aggressors followed this guy to a convenience store and stabbed him to death in front of his girlfriend.
This kinda shit happens way too often these days. Hell, people attacking people for no reason in numbers and nearly killing them.
So yeah, I'd love to be in a society where I knew that if I stood up for myself and fought, the worst I was risking was a broken nose, or a black eye. But at the moment, at higher ages you're risking death and at younger ages you're risking being attacked by bigger numbers - and no one will really look down on that person as 'dishonourable' really.
Isn't it obvious that in your job, or anywhere else in life, competency and skills only account for a *part* of your success? My parents always drilled into my head that regardless of how good I was, if I had bad social skills, didn't present myself well or didn't create a good impression, I'd never go anywhere. And from my experiences so far, that seems easily correct.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be competent, but marketing yourself seems to be a big part of life in general. You can't expect people to go out of their way to try to find out how awesome you are.
Except that Child A (assuming of course that he *is* inquisitive and *isn't* lazy either) will only learn what interests him. So sure, he may start learning about how everything works. He may learn the basics of quantum mechanics by the time he's ready for uni. But he doesn't sit there drilling integrals as practice. So when he gets to uni, he can't solve even the most basic of problems. He hasn't ever prepared a report, so has no idea how to present his ideas/findings/solutions in a proper way.
Half the point of education at school is it solidifies some fundamentals in *all* areas. And when you get to university, they *expect* that those fundamentals have been completed.
Let's not forget that school builds up someone socially (of course, it can damage someone...), but getting used to various social environments can't be a bad thing.
I remember when entertainment media was effectively licensed for use within a person's house and/or on their person.
Now it appears that this media is now being limited to individual people (at least individual people online at the same time).
This is what happens when you don't have consumer protection agencies, or if they turn a blind eye to consumer rights for things they don't understand.
Because that's a business model that's way too easy to pirate.
Look, all my mates are avid gamers. But in the last 6 years, they've probably purchased 3-4 games and pirated like 30. The only games they haven't pirated are games that are associated to an *account* and have online play as a focus. Steam games (Source, CS, Half Life, etc), MMO's, etc etc. It has nothing to do with them trying to fuck over the consumer so much as a viable model to stop piracy. Oh sure, you can download pirated versions of all these games which work on LAN, or on other servers, but to get the full experience, you need to pay...and there's no way around that.
No, they haven't. You can't have 2 of the same keys online at the same time, but you can log into your own "account" from someone elses computer, with someone elses key.
This is wholly different. One account, one key.
Me and all my friends use the same CD key and we could always get a maximum of 2 people on the same B.net server at the same time. Anyone more and the third person wouldn't be allowed on, but yeah, two people worked fine.
That being said, it does seem like the Empire relies highly on numbers in their average military force.
I mean take the Imperial Navy. Tie Fighters don't have hyperdrives, don't have shields and don't have missiles...just lasers and a cockpits. They're not amazingly maneuverable like an A-wing - they're just cannon fodder. Enough to keep civilian vessels in line, or overwhelm enemies with numbers.
Now sure, good pilots got to fly in Tie interceptors, and then Tie Advanced fighters, or later in the books, Tie Defenders - both of which came with secondary weapons, higher maneuverability, shielding and hyperdrives. It certainly seems like for the Navy, expert flying isn't so necessary to be a TIE pilot. I'm sure those that are good graduate to more elite squadrons.
I'm sure its the same thing with Stormtroopers. Most of them are meant to look intimidating to the civilian population, and be used in numbers against enemies...while the good ones probably go into more specialized and elite positions. As someone else mentioned, the Storm Troopers used in the attack on Tantive IV seemed pretty leet. The ones in the Death Star purposefully let the rebels go to track them. And yeah.
Of course, you can always can point holes in Star Wars universe. Like it always annoyed me how in the first Death Star...a massive space station only housed like one squadron of TIE's. I mean c'mon, the Rebels should have attacked and been swamped by thousands of TIE's like they did in the second Death Star battle. I mean something like the Death Star, presumably is more than just something to blow up planets (A minimalist version was used in the book Darksaber, where they just had the firing mechanism). I'd imagine it's meant to be a mobile fortress - self sufficient with the ability to hold vast majority of troops and fighters. Consider that even a Victory-class Star Destroyer has more than that. Most likely being on a budget and lack of CGI is the reason why. =P
Sometimes I do find that struggling to keep up with say, taking notes, or with a cramped up hand in pain, I automatically seem to start forgetting to write in certain letters. Or sometimes just write the blatantly wrong letter (despite the fact I know how to spell the word). That and, consciously trying to paraphrase so I can keep up with say, whatever notes I'm trying to take down.
Typing I'm a lot more comfortable with, and faster...so I don't get those problems. Sure, typing so much has probably made my handwriting spelling/grammar drop, but not because I'm picking up bad habits from typing so much as just not keeping up my skills in writing.
Korea is one of their biggest markets, and in Korea multi-player is where the market is.
By releasing a good single-player mode, they can expect a good years worth of sales world wide. But by making it fun to play multiplayer wise, they can guarantee sales for the next 10 years - like Starcraft. Starcraft has a multi-billion dollar industry based around the professional Starcraft gaming sector, with two TV channels dedicated to 24/7 broadcasts of Starcraft matches and Starcraft-related things 10 years into the future.
If Starcraft just has a good single player, it'll be just another decent game which has a big hype for a year or two in most countries, then it'll disappear and people will move onto something else.
I find a lot of people who do science in school - and even do well - don't really understand the concepts. They just know the method in how to solve problems via drilling into their head many practice problems, but they don't really understand how or why they're doing a certain equation.
And IMO pure Maths is a lot easier to forget then reasoning and concepts.
Don't try to term personal discussions into academic arguments. Who cares if what she says doesn't make logical sense - just let it go and try to work through it from a different angle. Something all us geeks struggle with a lot. And in my experience, even geeky women start to make illogical, silly arguments when it's personal.
Though this applies to all women really. I'm sure anyone who has a mother has learnt this lesson during their teenage years. =P
I have no real statistical evidence to back it up, but here in Australia, I'm pretty sure the average uni graduate probably gets less than a tradesman coming out of his apprenticeship. The problem is many people equate "uni" to "success". But the only course that interests them is Arts or Commerce. We've got *heaps* of Arts/Commerce students at our school. And most of them will probably end up in a fairly average job. While tradies usually have many jobs readily available, and get paid a shitload for it. Of course, most tradies will also say they hate their job more than people in professions.
Slashdot Mirror
It has nothing to do with what is 'enough'.
People always like what is out there. A $20,000 family car is more than enough to transport you from point A to point B. Yet hundreds of thousands of people buy cars worth over $150k boasting amazing lap times around Nurbugring, fast 0-100 time and all that...and the funny thing is, probably a tiny, tiny, tiny portion actually race their cars. Most just drive around normally.
Marketing means that when people go to buy something, the mere existence of something better lulls them to it. So while your 5 year old graphics card renders your web pages and email fine, when you go to buy a new graphics card, customers would be drawn away from the dull, cheap rigs to the more expensive ones. Then they'll remember some lagginess, some slowness in certain instances and justify the expense.
Hell, I'm a prime example of this. Unlike my mates, I rarely game. I used to video edit a lot, but not really more. But I spent huge money on my current computer, buying massive heatsinks, overclocking it to the max, buying top end parts, etc. Certainly didn't 'need' it. But I did 'want' it.
And as long as people and society are like this - GPU's are not in a bind. They just have to keep releasing something better and people will want it.
But more reality isn't necessarily a bad thing.
For instance, I prefer playing realistic racing simulators to more arcade style ones like NFS. Of course, full reality would be having to live with the damages to a car, or physical damage to yourself in a car crash. Obviously, we don't want realism to go that far...but to a point, realism can add to games. Even if it makes it more challenging.
Exactly.
Unskilled players talk about unstoppable six-ling rushes, but really SCV's can beat them if managed well. Have a few SCV's attacking the zerglings, moving the ones that go to low health to the back of the formation and used to repair the ones up the front. Similarly good micro for Protoss Probes and Zerg Drones can protect against rushes.
And scouting is half of it. Good players scout early (with a few exceptions), and they can predict the rush simply be seeing low amounts of drones and assuming they're going for an early Spawning Pool, or if you're not that good, noticing the zerglings leaving base.
Rushes like that are more used to slow down the opponents economy, and are usually followed up by continuous attacks to keep on the offense and to prevent them from expanding. But the game rarely ends in the first few minutes (and when it does it's a do-or-die scenario, since usually all your workers are used in your rush as well).
This happens regardless of speed. Just seems to happen on certain torrents for some reason.
For instance, one torrent might be downloading at 200kB/s with 10kB/s upload without any issues. Another one might be at 60kB/s down and 10kB/s up and the rest of the net slows to a crawl.
Yeah, it is a big problem. Especially since we've got a very basic router with no type of throttling or priority features.
Generally when downloading a torrent from certain trackers and large amounts of peers, the whole internet pretty much goes down for every other person in the house. Or goes to dial-up rates. Drives my Dad nuts.
It wouldn't be a problem if I had a proper router, but with this feature, it should help if it works well. =)
~Jarik
I never said anything was illegal about it at all. But unlike Google, TPB aims at being a site which stores hashes to copyrighted content. Kinda like Asta-Killer, which is a search engine that searches through crack/serial code sites. It doesn't host any keygen's itself, but it's purpose is fairly clear.
On the other hand, I suspect that their About [thepiratebay.org] page might still be useful in deriving their purpose.
Right, because in their About page they're going to say "The Pirate Bay is a website dedicated for all crackers and movie/music pirates to upload their warez!".
Just as you said the name isn't very indicative of their purpose, their About page is hardly useful in deriving their purpose as well.
You're talking about setting a legal definition, one that can be proved in court. And the issue is that they can argue that "Look! We have legal torrents! That's what we made this tracker for! Not our fault people put movies, software and albums up there...", and it may be hard to prove otherwise...but do you honestly think that the people who *created* the website envisioned a place that made open-sourced software, Linux distro's and other similar stuff available?
With such an provocative name such as the Pirate Bay, it really makes that seem silly right? They made the site with the vision of it being a big tracker for all kinds of 'pirated' content. Hiding behind the 'but we serve legal content' is an argument that's used in the courtroom to try to force people to come up with 'evidence' otherwise. But really, we all know what ThePirateBay is for.
I'm not talking about how to define a tracker as being 'created for' illegal content or not, I'm talking about what was most likely going through the minds of the creators. Whether it was just a place that they could find all sorts of illegal stuff, or whether it was a direct protest to draconian copyright laws, they certainly didn't aim at creating a website that hosted legal torrents.
Are you honestly trying to argue that ThePirateBay was set up with the intention of being a tracker for legal torrents?
If the fact that ThePirateBay hosts a few legal things means that it should legally be allowed to exist means that there is a problem in the law.
If there is some underground club which encourages the use of illicit drugs, and seems to be created for the main purpose of creating a haven for drug-use, then they can't argue "But we also serve alcohol legally!" when the cops shut it down.
Fact is, ThePirateBay was created, and exists as a source for illegal downloads. Anyone who argues that it's there for legal content is either an idiot, or one of their lawyers who are trying to use the law to their advantage.
Of course, I'm not necessarily advocating that ThePirateBay should be shut down. I love my illegal content. But I'm saying that ThePirateBay doesn't really have a right to exist, based on what the *laws* are. (You can argue that those laws should be changed - but that's a separate issue)
It has nothing to do with interests at all. Sure, to an extent if you're good at something people admire (ie, something like sports), then sure, people may like you out of respect and admiration. But really, it's how you act, your personality, etc that defines how people deal with you. I've known people who are very popular, despite being epic Maths/Science geeks. But they don't carry themselves like geeks. They're cool guys and fun guys to hang out with.
Sure, because you may be into that kinda stuff people may *assume* that you may be nerdy based on your interests so on that generalization people may be asses to you and put you lower on the social chain, but mostly, if you have a fun, friendly and cool personality, people aren't gonna socially discriminate against you.
I wish shit was still like that.
In Melbourne, Australia, once upon a time at *all* ages, fights were about honour, pride. One on one, see who wins. These days, at school, you start fighting a person in a one on one fight, and if he starts losing, you'll be jumped by his mates. Or if he loses, he'll come back and attack you behind your back. There's no honour.
At higher ages, or after school, what started off as a fist fight will now lead to people pulling out knives. Hell, there was one instance here a while back where a bunch of Asians were ganging up on some guy outside a club. One completely seperate guy came and broke up the fight. The group of aggressors followed this guy to a convenience store and stabbed him to death in front of his girlfriend.
This kinda shit happens way too often these days. Hell, people attacking people for no reason in numbers and nearly killing them.
So yeah, I'd love to be in a society where I knew that if I stood up for myself and fought, the worst I was risking was a broken nose, or a black eye. But at the moment, at higher ages you're risking death and at younger ages you're risking being attacked by bigger numbers - and no one will really look down on that person as 'dishonourable' really.
Isn't it obvious that in your job, or anywhere else in life, competency and skills only account for a *part* of your success? My parents always drilled into my head that regardless of how good I was, if I had bad social skills, didn't present myself well or didn't create a good impression, I'd never go anywhere. And from my experiences so far, that seems easily correct.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be competent, but marketing yourself seems to be a big part of life in general. You can't expect people to go out of their way to try to find out how awesome you are.
Except that Child A (assuming of course that he *is* inquisitive and *isn't* lazy either) will only learn what interests him. So sure, he may start learning about how everything works. He may learn the basics of quantum mechanics by the time he's ready for uni. But he doesn't sit there drilling integrals as practice. So when he gets to uni, he can't solve even the most basic of problems. He hasn't ever prepared a report, so has no idea how to present his ideas/findings/solutions in a proper way.
Half the point of education at school is it solidifies some fundamentals in *all* areas. And when you get to university, they *expect* that those fundamentals have been completed.
Let's not forget that school builds up someone socially (of course, it can damage someone...), but getting used to various social environments can't be a bad thing.
I remember when entertainment media was effectively licensed for use within a person's house and/or on their person.
Now it appears that this media is now being limited to individual people (at least individual people online at the same time).
This is what happens when you don't have consumer protection agencies, or if they turn a blind eye to consumer rights for things they don't understand.
Because that's a business model that's way too easy to pirate.
Look, all my mates are avid gamers. But in the last 6 years, they've probably purchased 3-4 games and pirated like 30. The only games they haven't pirated are games that are associated to an *account* and have online play as a focus. Steam games (Source, CS, Half Life, etc), MMO's, etc etc. It has nothing to do with them trying to fuck over the consumer so much as a viable model to stop piracy. Oh sure, you can download pirated versions of all these games which work on LAN, or on other servers, but to get the full experience, you need to pay...and there's no way around that.
~Jarik
No, they haven't. You can't have 2 of the same keys online at the same time, but you can log into your own "account" from someone elses computer, with someone elses key.
This is wholly different. One account, one key.
Me and all my friends use the same CD key and we could always get a maximum of 2 people on the same B.net server at the same time. Anyone more and the third person wouldn't be allowed on, but yeah, two people worked fine.
That being said, it does seem like the Empire relies highly on numbers in their average military force.
I mean take the Imperial Navy. Tie Fighters don't have hyperdrives, don't have shields and don't have missiles...just lasers and a cockpits. They're not amazingly maneuverable like an A-wing - they're just cannon fodder. Enough to keep civilian vessels in line, or overwhelm enemies with numbers.
Now sure, good pilots got to fly in Tie interceptors, and then Tie Advanced fighters, or later in the books, Tie Defenders - both of which came with secondary weapons, higher maneuverability, shielding and hyperdrives. It certainly seems like for the Navy, expert flying isn't so necessary to be a TIE pilot. I'm sure those that are good graduate to more elite squadrons.
I'm sure its the same thing with Stormtroopers. Most of them are meant to look intimidating to the civilian population, and be used in numbers against enemies...while the good ones probably go into more specialized and elite positions. As someone else mentioned, the Storm Troopers used in the attack on Tantive IV seemed pretty leet. The ones in the Death Star purposefully let the rebels go to track them. And yeah.
Of course, you can always can point holes in Star Wars universe. Like it always annoyed me how in the first Death Star...a massive space station only housed like one squadron of TIE's. I mean c'mon, the Rebels should have attacked and been swamped by thousands of TIE's like they did in the second Death Star battle. I mean something like the Death Star, presumably is more than just something to blow up planets (A minimalist version was used in the book Darksaber, where they just had the firing mechanism). I'd imagine it's meant to be a mobile fortress - self sufficient with the ability to hold vast majority of troops and fighters. Consider that even a Victory-class Star Destroyer has more than that. Most likely being on a budget and lack of CGI is the reason why. =P
Sometimes I do find that struggling to keep up with say, taking notes, or with a cramped up hand in pain, I automatically seem to start forgetting to write in certain letters. Or sometimes just write the blatantly wrong letter (despite the fact I know how to spell the word). That and, consciously trying to paraphrase so I can keep up with say, whatever notes I'm trying to take down.
Typing I'm a lot more comfortable with, and faster...so I don't get those problems. Sure, typing so much has probably made my handwriting spelling/grammar drop, but not because I'm picking up bad habits from typing so much as just not keeping up my skills in writing.
Korea is one of their biggest markets, and in Korea multi-player is where the market is.
By releasing a good single-player mode, they can expect a good years worth of sales world wide. But by making it fun to play multiplayer wise, they can guarantee sales for the next 10 years - like Starcraft. Starcraft has a multi-billion dollar industry based around the professional Starcraft gaming sector, with two TV channels dedicated to 24/7 broadcasts of Starcraft matches and Starcraft-related things 10 years into the future.
If Starcraft just has a good single player, it'll be just another decent game which has a big hype for a year or two in most countries, then it'll disappear and people will move onto something else.
I can see some epic pranks happening with this service in the future. =P
I find a lot of people who do science in school - and even do well - don't really understand the concepts. They just know the method in how to solve problems via drilling into their head many practice problems, but they don't really understand how or why they're doing a certain equation.
And IMO pure Maths is a lot easier to forget then reasoning and concepts.
Don't try to term personal discussions into academic arguments. Who cares if what she says doesn't make logical sense - just let it go and try to work through it from a different angle. Something all us geeks struggle with a lot. And in my experience, even geeky women start to make illogical, silly arguments when it's personal.
Though this applies to all women really. I'm sure anyone who has a mother has learnt this lesson during their teenage years. =P
I have no real statistical evidence to back it up, but here in Australia, I'm pretty sure the average uni graduate probably gets less than a tradesman coming out of his apprenticeship. The problem is many people equate "uni" to "success". But the only course that interests them is Arts or Commerce. We've got *heaps* of Arts/Commerce students at our school. And most of them will probably end up in a fairly average job. While tradies usually have many jobs readily available, and get paid a shitload for it. Of course, most tradies will also say they hate their job more than people in professions.
Aww hell no...don't tell me we should expect a line of riced up Asimo's with GT wings, neon lights and massive body kits in the future... Jeez.
And will Mugen (Honda's motorsport and tuning division) and TRD (Toyota Racing Developments) be supplying aftermarket parts for it?