If you said to a group of Freshman Mechanical Engineers, "Come up with a couple ideas to protect a device from impact," don't you think EVERY SINGLE ONE would propose this crap? How is this even close to being non-obvious. I can't think of a solution that is LESS obvious.
Whether or not it would result in an Anti-trust judgement down the road, I don't think Google is in a position to deny Firefox as a customer.
The DOJ has Google under the gun right now, and they would be wise not to do anything stupid. Using their monopoly in search to hurt a broswer competitor would be considered anti-competitive by quite a few experts.
It's actually much more interesting that the correlation only explained 10% of the variance! So in a certain sense, it's very unexpected- and misrepresented by the researchers.
What if the story was more accurately called "Study shows Piracy mostly unrelated to Critic Scores?"
Meh, mediocre games get announced all the time. I'm not sure why this merited any attention other than the perturbance regarding the story being broken early and Pitchfork's childish retort. It's sometimes interesting I guess to see what executives really think (Twitter) without their PR departments filtering everything.
The Ars article was right on the spot, but it's not a huge suprise that publishers and games "journalists" have a parasitic/symbiotic weird thing going on with their business models.
Most of this type of funding is a rounding error in the budget. The NSF gets $7B I believe. It's really not worth talking about cutting except for ideological reasons...
By taking that stand, you're basically saying his "art" is above criticism. Which cannot be true. I could poop on a USB stick and claim that it's a game about religion, but that doesn't mean it's art or pushing the limits of what it means to be a game. It's really just a filthy USB stick.
I can't even tell what this "game" has to do with religion. At it's most basic, Religion is a shared set of beliefs that propagates in some way. This is an ITEM with some rules attached. It has value because it is the only one of its kind.
Because you and I both know it would become the Anti-Terrorism and Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2012 whereby people who resell electronic media would be considered terrorists.
I agree with you to a point, and then no further. Teachers have to be careful not to distill everything down to the level of a Science & Industry Museum exhibit, where there's a bunch of fun knobs to twist and the student comes away understanding nothing but the bare essentials. It is critical to get kids hooked on science and math so that they are willing to put in the long hours learning abstract concepts. At some point, they're going to have to learn to write the linked list.
I actually feel like the world might be a better place if we focused on the 5 kids who innately love programming and put a curriculum for them together, rather than the 500 who love video games and want a video-game based curriculum.
This confused me as well. I'm also not convinced "resting" is an appropriate control. Perhaps reading or TV or cards or anything using the brain results in varying glucose levels & increased consumption.
Personally, I think it's brilliant. Someone out there was assigned the job of getting as many people as possible to read some really boring emergency preparedness webpage, and they succeeded a million times over. It's on the front page of the WSJ.
Perhaps rather than an emotional reaction ("This sucks!"), the author meant TapJoy will react by coming up with another clever mechanism to game the system?
Clearly it's nothing to do with technlogy, languages, or regional differences, but some sort of business/political reason. I'd be interested to know why.
Channel conflict. You can't give huge special preferences to online distribution and expect your CUSTOMERS (retailers) to be happy about it. Heck, they're already scared to death about it. Giving online distribution a few day advance on release would be like pissing in their faces.
The reality is that if you're a publisher and your customer is Walmart, you don't really call the shots, they do. The US has drifted into a cozy point with media (DVD, game) releases on Tuesday. Other countries like to release on Thursday. It's one of those stable, slightly non-optimal things that is really, really hard to get away from because a bunch of competitors (retailers) would have to sit down and coordinate. Then you'd have the anti-trust people up in arms.
With all the libertarians on here, I'm suprised how many folks want to be able to tell Amazon how to run their business. Amazon should have the right to refuse to do business with an entity they think may be unprofitable due to legal reasons or technical support reasons (e.g. surviving a DDoS on Wikileaks itself). Heck, even if they're wrong, they have the right to make the wrong business decision.
Nothing gives you the right to interfere between two parties that want to buy/sell in a legal transaction.
The email (from an alum acting in a non-official role) warns not to make posts about this on Facebook, Twitter, etc. It didn't say "Don't read them." It's really nowhere near as crazy or interesting as the submitter wishes it were.
I doubt being "out of touch" is the reason they declined to hear the case. Supreme Court justices aren't just sitting in some dusty old room reading law books alone, they have an entire organization of clerks to do research and advise them. It's common for 25 year olds (the top of the classes from Harvard/Yale law) to have tremendous sway over the court and our nations' laws through their clerk duties. A justice here and there may say something dumb, but the Court as a whole is quite well informed.
This particular case is beyond stupid, and not the one anyone who hates current copyright law should want to see before the Supreme Court. At issue (IMO) is the fact that laws written for Organized Criminals are being enforced in casual/personal usage situations. [Aside- I happen to believe they probably ARE appropriate for folks making their living off copyright violations.] Her claim of innocence does not strike at the root cause for our problems.
I believe the submitter misread the article. Everywhere else is saying that he hacked the Cleveland Reserve and separately stole the credit cards. The Fed banks have no reason to keep credit card numbers.
Have you worked in any product development or research labs for tangible products (non-software)? Are you even talking about actual engineering or network "engineering." I can assure you that there is an entire generation of mechanical and electrical who grew up without Google and who expect hardware vendors (esp scientific instruments) to be on the phone providing documentation and support. If I'm designing a project and I have a problem with a servo, you better believe I'm gonna talk to the engineer at the vendor. If MS provides drivers for the product, they're telling me they stand behind their product for this type of engineering. Hence my original comment that they SHOULD not provide drivers unless they really are serious about it.
I have a guess- When you provide drivers, you're implicitly supporting the project for non-entertainment purposes. Having 50 engineers a day calling up for support on their pet robotics project is probably not something MS wants to do. If they were really into the idea of supporting this, they'd develop a dev package for it and charge $2000.
Slashdot Mirror
If you said to a group of Freshman Mechanical Engineers, "Come up with a couple ideas to protect a device from impact," don't you think EVERY SINGLE ONE would propose this crap? How is this even close to being non-obvious. I can't think of a solution that is LESS obvious.
Whether or not it would result in an Anti-trust judgement down the road, I don't think Google is in a position to deny Firefox as a customer.
The DOJ has Google under the gun right now, and they would be wise not to do anything stupid. Using their monopoly in search to hurt a broswer competitor would be considered anti-competitive by quite a few experts.
It's actually much more interesting that the correlation only explained 10% of the variance! So in a certain sense, it's very unexpected- and misrepresented by the researchers.
What if the story was more accurately called "Study shows Piracy mostly unrelated to Critic Scores?"
Meh, mediocre games get announced all the time. I'm not sure why this merited any attention other than the perturbance regarding the story being broken early and Pitchfork's childish retort. It's sometimes interesting I guess to see what executives really think (Twitter) without their PR departments filtering everything.
The Ars article was right on the spot, but it's not a huge suprise that publishers and games "journalists" have a parasitic/symbiotic weird thing going on with their business models.
The Rise and Fall of the British Empire has absolutely nothing to do with it's patent regulations.
Those Fascists who run the Patent office are a bunch of Commies...
Aww that's just Apple being Apple. They understand how to make your user experience better than you do.
Most of this type of funding is a rounding error in the budget. The NSF gets $7B I believe. It's really not worth talking about cutting except for ideological reasons...
A better story:
Careless Skydiver Killed by His Own iPhone
By taking that stand, you're basically saying his "art" is above criticism. Which cannot be true. I could poop on a USB stick and claim that it's a game about religion, but that doesn't mean it's art or pushing the limits of what it means to be a game. It's really just a filthy USB stick.
I can't even tell what this "game" has to do with religion. At it's most basic, Religion is a shared set of beliefs that propagates in some way. This is an ITEM with some rules attached. It has value because it is the only one of its kind.
Because you and I both know it would become the Anti-Terrorism and Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2012 whereby people who resell electronic media would be considered terrorists.
The sample set for this data is people who are dumb enough to type their unlock code into a fake login app which has been removed from the app store.
I wonder if this is representative of the population as a whole.
"We disagree that Mozilla has stopped caring about the enterprise. They never cared about the enterprise."
I agree with you to a point, and then no further. Teachers have to be careful not to distill everything down to the level of a Science & Industry Museum exhibit, where there's a bunch of fun knobs to twist and the student comes away understanding nothing but the bare essentials. It is critical to get kids hooked on science and math so that they are willing to put in the long hours learning abstract concepts. At some point, they're going to have to learn to write the linked list.
I actually feel like the world might be a better place if we focused on the 5 kids who innately love programming and put a curriculum for them together, rather than the 500 who love video games and want a video-game based curriculum.
This confused me as well. I'm also not convinced "resting" is an appropriate control. Perhaps reading or TV or cards or anything using the brain results in varying glucose levels & increased consumption.
Worthy of further study, certainly.
Personally, I think it's brilliant. Someone out there was assigned the job of getting as many people as possible to read some really boring emergency preparedness webpage, and they succeeded a million times over. It's on the front page of the WSJ.
Perhaps rather than an emotional reaction ("This sucks!"), the author meant TapJoy will react by coming up with another clever mechanism to game the system?
Clearly it's nothing to do with technlogy, languages, or regional differences, but some sort of business/political reason. I'd be interested to know why.
Channel conflict. You can't give huge special preferences to online distribution and expect your CUSTOMERS (retailers) to be happy about it. Heck, they're already scared to death about it. Giving online distribution a few day advance on release would be like pissing in their faces.
The reality is that if you're a publisher and your customer is Walmart, you don't really call the shots, they do. The US has drifted into a cozy point with media (DVD, game) releases on Tuesday. Other countries like to release on Thursday. It's one of those stable, slightly non-optimal things that is really, really hard to get away from because a bunch of competitors (retailers) would have to sit down and coordinate. Then you'd have the anti-trust people up in arms.
With all the libertarians on here, I'm suprised how many folks want to be able to tell Amazon how to run their business. Amazon should have the right to refuse to do business with an entity they think may be unprofitable due to legal reasons or technical support reasons (e.g. surviving a DDoS on Wikileaks itself). Heck, even if they're wrong, they have the right to make the wrong business decision.
Nothing gives you the right to interfere between two parties that want to buy/sell in a legal transaction.
The email (from an alum acting in a non-official role) warns not to make posts about this on Facebook, Twitter, etc. It didn't say "Don't read them." It's really nowhere near as crazy or interesting as the submitter wishes it were.
I doubt being "out of touch" is the reason they declined to hear the case. Supreme Court justices aren't just sitting in some dusty old room reading law books alone, they have an entire organization of clerks to do research and advise them. It's common for 25 year olds (the top of the classes from Harvard/Yale law) to have tremendous sway over the court and our nations' laws through their clerk duties. A justice here and there may say something dumb, but the Court as a whole is quite well informed.
This particular case is beyond stupid, and not the one anyone who hates current copyright law should want to see before the Supreme Court. At issue (IMO) is the fact that laws written for Organized Criminals are being enforced in casual/personal usage situations. [Aside- I happen to believe they probably ARE appropriate for folks making their living off copyright violations.] Her claim of innocence does not strike at the root cause for our problems.
I believe the submitter misread the article. Everywhere else is saying that he hacked the Cleveland Reserve and separately stole the credit cards. The Fed banks have no reason to keep credit card numbers.
Have you worked in any product development or research labs for tangible products (non-software)? Are you even talking about actual engineering or network "engineering." I can assure you that there is an entire generation of mechanical and electrical who grew up without Google and who expect hardware vendors (esp scientific instruments) to be on the phone providing documentation and support. If I'm designing a project and I have a problem with a servo, you better believe I'm gonna talk to the engineer at the vendor. If MS provides drivers for the product, they're telling me they stand behind their product for this type of engineering. Hence my original comment that they SHOULD not provide drivers unless they really are serious about it.
I have a guess- When you provide drivers, you're implicitly supporting the project for non-entertainment purposes. Having 50 engineers a day calling up for support on their pet robotics project is probably not something MS wants to do. If they were really into the idea of supporting this, they'd develop a dev package for it and charge $2000.
Wave was about getting work done more effectively (boring).
This is about broadcasting narcissistic media snippets more effectively (exciting)!