But I mean most of those responses weren't really relevant to your games anyway, since you already seem to go out of your way to make them accessible to gamers.
Did you really get THAT much out of it? It doesn't seem that way from the conclusions.
I just lost a lot of respect for cliffski. I own (legitimately) two of his games, Democracy and Democracy 2. They are awesome games. Half the reason I bought them was because they were cheap, from an independent developer and had no DRM (Sorry but I don't think a serial key counts as DRM, maybe technically, but not when we compare it to what most people get pissed off about).
I don't think a lot of people buy them though and as an independent he can't afford marketing. So he goes on this faux-crusade to try and "understand" consumers, which he could have done simply by reading any Slashdot article relating to games, which is essentially just a huge marketing exercise (He has ads littered through his "article") and then tries to qualify his actions by saying "Oh I've taken aboard what you've said, no more serial keys".
That's a really good point, and I never thought of it.
But did the hundreds of authors of those books check in with each other? If they all had their own universes, I don't think the CREATOR of the universe can be blamed for changing things around.
Then I realised it was more likely that someone with mod-points logged out of their account, posted that crap anonymously, logged back in and then modded it up.
No, this isn't an "Ignorance of the law" argument. Well that really isn't an argument anyway, I don't think their lawyer would be dumb enough to run it. The thing with copyright is that it's only a "infringement" if the item is indeed under copyright and it's labelled as such. If it isn't labelled how is the person to know whether or not it's under copyright? This is what is being argued here. The defendant saying "It was innocent infringement because whilst I accept downloading the songs I didn't know they were under copyright".
This is so insanely off-topic, but it is hardly "liberal" on social issues. If by "liberal" you mean either the liberalist philosophy of personal freedom. Anti-terror laws? Mandatory detention? The official party stance on stem cells and abortion? Attitudes towards people of an NESB? Attitudes towards the arts?
No, my point is to make a new law regarding the prolonged abuse and harassment of a child by an adult. Not to charge her for something stupid regarding TOS.
Yes that's also a problem. And she should probably be charged with harassment or something like that. But she isn't. Instead we're setting stupid precedents with far-reaching ramifications that won't do anything to stop bullying or punish bullies.
Seriously, my only point has been that the problem is bullying. Let's focus on that. If there isn't a criminal charge for the pre-mediated and long-term harassment of a child by an adult then there should be. Deal with that problem before screwing up things you don't understand.
I don't mean offence to you, but what you're saying is kind of silly. Your logic goes "Well it was her first boyfriend and she was teen. So therefore she committed suicide. And if you were a teen and it was your first girlfriend, you would also have committed suicide".
If that was the case, a lot of people wouldn't be alive. Why can't you just accept that I find it extremely hard to believe that being dumped by an online boyfriend who said mean things about her was the only thing that went wrong in her life and was the only factor in her suicide?
No, you blame the person who's harassing you, which is exactly what's going on in this case.
You're completely wrong and that's the issue. The women is not being charged with harassment. Or abuse. Or anything like that. She's being charged for violating a websites T&C's, regardless of what she did with her fake persona. And while I think this "free speech" thing is getting rather sensational and distracting us from the issue of bullying, I think it sets a dangerous precedent regarding forcing people to reveal their real identities. But I guess it's only MySpace, who cares.
Imagine your whole life is changed because you met one girl. Everything you thought mattered is irrelevant, and the only thing you want is to be with her, and take care of her. You get comfortable, it looks like you can make it happen, you work so hard, she smiles, she laughs. You start to realize you never really knew joy or happiness, and that you truly understand what life is about now. Next day. She hates you. End of story.
I realise this is Slashdot, and not Lavalife, but I don't need to imagine. My girlfriend of a few years cheated on me. Am I killing myself? No.
This is silly. Sometimes people have to take responsibility for their actions, or maybe look a bit further for what the root causes were of the problem. I'm not trying to understate her death in anyway. I'm trying to say that I find it difficult to believe that her life is just peachy and then when her internet friend whom she's never met says nasty things about her, she commits suicide. I think that this whole "MySpace/Internet/Evil Adult" thing is taking us away from the real discussion which should be about bullying and mental illness.
She didn't know it was an adult bullying her. And it wasn't even a "stupid jock type" in a school environment. It was someone acting like a douche bag via text. Words.
My point is that kids get bullied everyday. Face-to-face. They get abused emotionally, physically. That's not a good thing. It's a terrible thing. But it happens, and only a small proportion actually kill themselves. This girl apparently killed herself because someone she'd never met was writing bad words about her. Bullying is not good and it's not acceptable. I'm not that it is. But it's also foolish to pretend that this one particular case is all that's needed to make someone commit suicide.
That's why I think there were other problems with this girl - be they other forms of bullying at school or some kind of mental illness. If the real problem is bullying or mental illness then THOSE are the issues that should be argued about and debated in the media and in Parliament/Congress. Not things like MySpace's Terms and Conditions.
This is Slashdot. I bet 90% of us here would have come into contact with bullying or emotional harassment. Sure we've gotten our own back, but when you're a kid things are different. While I think the OP is being a little insensitive, I don't think you can draw a line from "Internet boyfriend acting like a dickhead" to "Ok I'm going to commit suicide".
Suicide is not a natural response to bullying, especially when that's not even face-to-face, which is what we experienced. If it was, most of us wouldn't be here. Either the girl had other problems which lead to her suicide (likely) or she was simply mentally unstable. In either of those cases the medium through which the straw that broke the camels back travelled is not relevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously the funniest post on Slashdot I have ever read.
Look, that's fair enough.
But I mean most of those responses weren't really relevant to your games anyway, since you already seem to go out of your way to make them accessible to gamers.
Did you really get THAT much out of it? It doesn't seem that way from the conclusions.
If Britain was replaced with "America" the response would be "both parties are the same!!!!!!!". Why do you think Britain is different?
Man, I agree.
I just lost a lot of respect for cliffski. I own (legitimately) two of his games, Democracy and Democracy 2. They are awesome games. Half the reason I bought them was because they were cheap, from an independent developer and had no DRM (Sorry but I don't think a serial key counts as DRM, maybe technically, but not when we compare it to what most people get pissed off about).
I don't think a lot of people buy them though and as an independent he can't afford marketing. So he goes on this faux-crusade to try and "understand" consumers, which he could have done simply by reading any Slashdot article relating to games, which is essentially just a huge marketing exercise (He has ads littered through his "article") and then tries to qualify his actions by saying "Oh I've taken aboard what you've said, no more serial keys".
That's a really good point, and I never thought of it.
But did the hundreds of authors of those books check in with each other? If they all had their own universes, I don't think the CREATOR of the universe can be blamed for changing things around.
Ahahaha, that's what I thought as well.
Then I realised it was more likely that someone with mod-points logged out of their account, posted that crap anonymously, logged back in and then modded it up.
This should've been funny, not informative.
Mods not getting the joke? Hint, use a dictionary.
What's the difference between the government and the Mafia?
One of them is organised.
Righto, thanks.
Moral of the story: Copyright law in the US is fucked.
That was exactly my point and the guy who replied apparently shot that down...
Then what the hell is the defence argument based on?
No, this isn't an "Ignorance of the law" argument. Well that really isn't an argument anyway, I don't think their lawyer would be dumb enough to run it. The thing with copyright is that it's only a "infringement" if the item is indeed under copyright and it's labelled as such. If it isn't labelled how is the person to know whether or not it's under copyright? This is what is being argued here. The defendant saying "It was innocent infringement because whilst I accept downloading the songs I didn't know they were under copyright".
"You're not a journalist! You're a hack!"
I know, shoot me.
Two seconds of Googling:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party#Etymology
This is so insanely off-topic, but it is hardly "liberal" on social issues. If by "liberal" you mean either the liberalist philosophy of personal freedom. Anti-terror laws? Mandatory detention? The official party stance on stem cells and abortion? Attitudes towards people of an NESB? Attitudes towards the arts?
I'm Australian. Our conservative party is called "The Liberal Party". I have no idea what that quote means.
Or a wannabe martyr?
No, my point is to make a new law regarding the prolonged abuse and harassment of a child by an adult. Not to charge her for something stupid regarding TOS.
Yes that's also a problem. And she should probably be charged with harassment or something like that. But she isn't. Instead we're setting stupid precedents with far-reaching ramifications that won't do anything to stop bullying or punish bullies.
Seriously, my only point has been that the problem is bullying. Let's focus on that. If there isn't a criminal charge for the pre-mediated and long-term harassment of a child by an adult then there should be. Deal with that problem before screwing up things you don't understand.
I don't mean offence to you, but what you're saying is kind of silly. Your logic goes "Well it was her first boyfriend and she was teen. So therefore she committed suicide. And if you were a teen and it was your first girlfriend, you would also have committed suicide".
If that was the case, a lot of people wouldn't be alive. Why can't you just accept that I find it extremely hard to believe that being dumped by an online boyfriend who said mean things about her was the only thing that went wrong in her life and was the only factor in her suicide?
No, you blame the person who's harassing you, which is exactly what's going on in this case.
You're completely wrong and that's the issue. The women is not being charged with harassment. Or abuse. Or anything like that. She's being charged for violating a websites T&C's, regardless of what she did with her fake persona. And while I think this "free speech" thing is getting rather sensational and distracting us from the issue of bullying, I think it sets a dangerous precedent regarding forcing people to reveal their real identities. But I guess it's only MySpace, who cares.
Imagine your whole life is changed because you met one girl. Everything you thought mattered is irrelevant, and the only thing you want is to be with her, and take care of her. You get comfortable, it looks like you can make it happen, you work so hard, she smiles, she laughs. You start to realize you never really knew joy or happiness, and that you truly understand what life is about now. Next day. She hates you. End of story.
I realise this is Slashdot, and not Lavalife, but I don't need to imagine. My girlfriend of a few years cheated on me. Am I killing myself? No.
This is silly. Sometimes people have to take responsibility for their actions, or maybe look a bit further for what the root causes were of the problem. I'm not trying to understate her death in anyway. I'm trying to say that I find it difficult to believe that her life is just peachy and then when her internet friend whom she's never met says nasty things about her, she commits suicide. I think that this whole "MySpace/Internet/Evil Adult" thing is taking us away from the real discussion which should be about bullying and mental illness.
She didn't know it was an adult bullying her. And it wasn't even a "stupid jock type" in a school environment. It was someone acting like a douche bag via text. Words.
My point is that kids get bullied everyday. Face-to-face. They get abused emotionally, physically. That's not a good thing. It's a terrible thing. But it happens, and only a small proportion actually kill themselves. This girl apparently killed herself because someone she'd never met was writing bad words about her. Bullying is not good and it's not acceptable. I'm not that it is. But it's also foolish to pretend that this one particular case is all that's needed to make someone commit suicide.
That's why I think there were other problems with this girl - be they other forms of bullying at school or some kind of mental illness. If the real problem is bullying or mental illness then THOSE are the issues that should be argued about and debated in the media and in Parliament/Congress. Not things like MySpace's Terms and Conditions.
This is Slashdot. I bet 90% of us here would have come into contact with bullying or emotional harassment. Sure we've gotten our own back, but when you're a kid things are different. While I think the OP is being a little insensitive, I don't think you can draw a line from "Internet boyfriend acting like a dickhead" to "Ok I'm going to commit suicide".
Suicide is not a natural response to bullying, especially when that's not even face-to-face, which is what we experienced. If it was, most of us wouldn't be here. Either the girl had other problems which lead to her suicide (likely) or she was simply mentally unstable. In either of those cases the medium through which the straw that broke the camels back travelled is not relevant.
Turn in your geek card. How could you be confused! Energy-mass equivalence is only described by the most well known formula in history.
E=mc^2