Household names teaming up with an industry award winner? Leave the crowdfunding for the people without deep pockets and industry access/connections.
Hmm. I'm in two minds about this:
0. If you get paid to do work, then Kickstarter funds are payment for that work and should reduce the end cost to consumers. Work totally funded by Kickstarte? Distribute it for "free" since we paid you to do work. You want more money? Do more work for us, like a car mechanic, home builder or any other labor market in the world not trying to sell ice to eskimos -- er, bits to folk with computers...
1. Let the big guys legitimize Kickstarter and other crowd funding. This is the transitionary period that can finally spell the eradication of publishers. Each time they Kickstarter it's another nail in the coffin of Publishers trying to make mony via artifically scarce information. (What's scarce is the ability to do work, market that, not the infinitely reproducable bits). Everyone should crowd fund 100%. Completely eliminate all piracy and copyright law would be moot -- Only work when money is garaunteed, then you don't need to monopolize your work (you have your monopoly over your work before you do it, not afterwards).
What I want to know, is which of these are they aiming to further, and if they've talked to their Publisher about how this, and if they're OK with you trying to kill the Publishing business model via leveraging Kickstarter?
I sometimes practice self censorship too. However, other times I think back to 1776, and how the founders of this great nation wouldn't stand for their unfair treatment: I'm 99% sure they started a Revolution Instead! (I wasn't there, so there's at least a 1% chance the history books are lying). Then, I make innocuous posts including words like, "Give me Liberty, or Give me Death," which showed real courage and are thought to trigger the anti-establishment or anarchy detection filters -- Purely for the express purpose of creating a false flag in their data... Signal to noise, and all that.
Sure, this plan could blow up in my face one day like a hand grenade, or improvised explosive but I'm hoping for one of those inflatable rafts that some Cubans try to float here on instead. I'd rather risk going to jail on trumped up charges as a martyr for free speech than let fear strip away my first amendment rights -- I'm not just giving them up! You'll have to pry them from my cold dead hands. I mean, Big Brother isn't really watching everything you do online in real time; They might record it, but have to look it up after the fact to discover your terrorist ties if you did anything crazy. It doesn't work preemptively, the Boston Bombing showed us that. You're appealing to a computer algorithm, if anyone, and really all you've done is get yourself on their radar. Might as well say what you think instead.
The ultimate weapon against such spying would be a thesaurus!
Meh, on average they're glad to help folk get their one token patch into the Kernel. I take everything Linus says with a grain of salt. That's just the way he communicates: It's harsh, but you have to take offense yourself. He doesn't care if people are offended. He's also equally as harsh to himself, readily calling himself an idiot (especially his past self). Why, I even remember the time he wrote that if he ever revved the Kernel beyond the 2.x.x series to 3.x.x it would mean he'd gone bat-shit insane and rewritten the whole thing in VB... Salt. Take some. Chill.
This is kinda putting the horse before the cart. The fact that galaxies exist as localized clumping of matter is postulated to be due to this "dark matter" substance that does not interact with anything else, including itself, in any way except by gravity. I.e., dark matter is the proposed explanation for galaxies, not the other way around.
Speaking of cart drawn horseages...
If gravity warps space time, then we agree space time can be warped. We observe that cosmic background radiation from the big bang isn't perfectly smooth. So, what if the structure of space is just slightly "warped?" Dark matter could just be space time curvature. Instead of the clustering up of galaxies being the result of more matter being present, the matter could just be pooling into places that are already more curved. In other words: You turn on a light, you generate an EM field, You can turn it off and decrease the EM field in the area. You look up at night and see variation in the EM field, not a constant smooth glow... So, when I look up at the night sky and see galaxies, but no dark matter, I simply see variations in the Higgs Field...
I am a scientist. I call into question the assumption that, "Patents are Beneficial for Society as a Whole". This is an untested hypothesis. Until we have PROOF that patents are beneficial for our society, they should not be allowed. What if patents are irreparably harming the innovation of mankind?! You have NO PROOF to show whether they are or are not harmful or helpful. There is only conjecture and assumptions. Prove they are beneficial, until then abolish them.
If I hand you a gun and tell you to put it to your head and pull the trigger, It's beneficial for you. Would you just assume I'm telling the truth? A rational being would examine the gun first to ensure it was not actually harmful... Some would test fire it to ensure it was not harmful. The most rational would require proof that it was beneficial before even touching the damn thing.
We're slowly blowing our culture's brains out with the legal weapons called patent and copyright. I'm a scientist, so if you think otherwise, then I have two words for you: PROVE IT. As it stands my statement that patents are harmful is just as valid a hypothesis as that they are beneficial. It's unconscionably reckless to continue subjecting the world's economy and culture to this potential danger.
Wait, I say there's no proof either way, but there is evidence that patents are not required at all. Neither the automotive or fashion industries are allowed copyright or patents for their designs yet look how innovative they are in design; Indeed often design is their core selling point. That's two real world data points indicating patents are not necessary. I've read many responses that say, "Without patents businesses wouldn't fund innovation." These statements are equally bogus because this statement: "Without patents ______," is bogus. We don't the-hell know what it would be like until we run the damn test. The potential risk associated with not performing the experiment should be enough for any rational being to give pause.
Abolish patents. It's the only rational thing to do. The hypothesis must be tested. Only then will the argument for or against them have any leg to stand on. We can re-institute any laws we want once we're sure they're not harmful. If the scientific method is good enough to develop things that could be patentable, then why turn a blind eye and ignore the fact that no one has applied the scientific method to the patent system itself?
The judges seem to echo what I posted on another slashdot post that software instructions and data structures create a machine -- very similar to an equivalent machine that could be created with off-the-shelf hardware, custom ASICs or FPGAs. Therefore software patents should enjoy same protection that hardware patents enjoy.
They are both the same in functionality and somewhat in implementation, only hardware is faster, more parallel but limited in functionality. Whereas software is slower, less parallel but has vastly more functionality than hardware.
No. General purpose Hardware for implementing algorithms, be it ASIC or x86, should not be patentable. Your transistor assembly shouldn't be patentable if it just does the same shit I can do on a general purpose computer. Here's the test: Can I run the algorithm myself given a pencil and some graph paper? If No, then it's not implementable in a general purpose computer. If yes, then it shouldn't be patentable -- Didn't you watch Terminator or The Matrix?! You want to give humans immunity for thinking about certain algorithms, but it's OK to prevent a machine from thinking about the same damn thing? That's how you start the damn Robot War! It's Racist!
I dont know about prisons in Sweden but here in the UK they get access to games consoles (and France appears Xbox exclusive), satellite TV and more so I fail to see the harm in a calculator even if it was designed to be user hackable.
They have that in American Prisons too; Keeps the maladjusted from harming society without cutting them off completely -- Except, they don't call them "prisons", they call them "parent's basements" here.
If you've ever seen an dispute between basement dwellers, you'd know full well the danger of adding graphing calculators to the mix...
why class warfare is alive and well and why everyone hates the government so fucking much?
You have few real options other than 401k... Which is basically a life raft for the stock market and corporate controlled tax racked / devaluation weapon all rolled into one. Moo. You're being farmed.
HA ha! Reminds me of back in the 70's and 80's when there weren't any laws about hacking. This is the kind of crap we'd do for some hackish fun between friends. Cracking each other's servers and BBSs, defacing the login page, appending stupid messages for bragging rights "BoardBurner waz Hear!", ANSI bombing the sysop's terminal (remapping all the keys), messing with TradeWars scores, etc. One day you'd be the victim, the next you'd be the victimizer. Hell, the wise guys would "false flag" a crack and claim to have been the clever work of another hacker's handle to deflect blame (and hacks) onto another lamer's systems... create rivalries where there were none, or sew seeds of doubt among alliances. They would usually be sporting and leave some subtle clues so you could tell who it really was -- Why not take the bait though and get 'em both just for good measure? Ah, good ol' days: Back when two "cyber armies" could have pizza and play skeeball with each other and joke about the hacks after the latest round of the "war".
Now you have to be a member of the select few in a Nation's "cyber army" to escape the laws, but it's interesting to see the goings on mirror those same old childish prankish tricks. Script Kiddies and social engineers can pull off the hacks these folks are capable of too, but the laws are more strictly set against them so a smaller percentage of people that are capable actually try their hand at cracking others' systems. The "whitehats" hack indoors, and try not to be disruptive, while the others run amok for fun and profit -- until they get caught. Ah, but if you're doing it for your country, then you don't have to worry about your nation's police force going after you.
We've seen this game play out before, several times, so expect them to get bored with defacing as they mature and if they last long enough some might even start to study some machine level hacks, and become "real" hackers. Eventually they'll learn not to crow like a rooster and strut your skill when you compromise a system, instead you silently take the helm and use the foothold to infiltrate deeper, spreading your web of control as wide as possible to pull strings behind the scenes and gather information about your enemies, and only disrupt the services if it's worth losing the control: once maximum damage can be done, or you think you'll get caught. In a way they've done just that, it's just that the "maximum damage" they were capable of coming up with (mentally?) was to mess with some social feeds and deface some stories...
Oh No! LulzSec Mk.2! Hide your Kids! Hide your Wives! 'Caus They hackin' 'erry body round here!
My only real fear is that when we finally create self aware AI soldiers, we'll have used up all the good names: "Electronic Army", awe, they're not cyborgs?
Lame. /me eats popcorn.
Just scroll right down and you'll read a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started at Google IO,
and it involves a ship.
Some fool was a dreamer of sailing men,
All naked -- That's for sure!
"They'd 'innovate'; No, it won't be gay",
Said the blogger du jour -- A blogger"du jour"!
The commenters started getting rough,
The idyllic ship was tossed,
It wrought imagery of a lawless few:
Your privacy would be lost -- Yar! "privacy wood" be "lost!"
The ship made port at a private pier:
A Google-owned desert isle,
With Googliaaaaans!
The Blogger too...
Some billionaires,
(but no wives),
Home "movie" stars,
Terms of Service-er, and
Hairy Mans!
Here on Googlian's Isle!
Son, evolution is a cold-hearted bitch and she doesn't care if it's a one-sided fight, she will straight-up murderize your entire clutch of eggs.
There is a difference between nature and evolution. You've personified the former, the latter doesn't act on anything but genes, and can't "murderize your entire clutch of eggs" unless you mean that through random mutation you've become sterile and your eggs are duds... In which case I reiterate: Can't murder what ain't alive.
I built an Uninterrupted Power Supply out of capacitors for my experimental server rack, I can clean the power, simulate surges, or modulate the electron waves... If Nintendo claims copyright on me playing a game, then I claim copyright on the electricity signature that produced the gameplay. Since they used my electron wave modulations to play their game software on, then it's a derivative work of my UPS modulations. Additionally, since this is Alternating Current on the line side, when I modulate my voltage usages it affects the power grid, so I want derivative rights for all TV and radio that are being played over the creative electron fields that I'm producing.
Furthermore, I purchased many early games for both Nintendo and their competition. I directly controlled the available revenue stream they used to make additional games, and even informed them which games to make by my past purchasing habits. I want a cut of the profit for their use of my creative endeavors. Could they have been successful without me? Who knows!? Probably not! The creator of the Famicom didn't have any faith in it, yet I did. My influence among peers increased their sales and decreased sales in just the right way to get them where they are today. Time to pay up.
If only butterflies were sentient, they'd own all copyright by Nintendo's logic.
Well, I make games, and If I saw my latest game on a review website with ads next to it, I'd be fucking pissed, because I haven't even finished it or released it yet!:-P
The output of playing a game is the video. That gameplay was created by a human, and rendered by a machine. If anything the copyright should belong to the player since they're the one transforming it into an entertaining video. Go watch Red Vs Blue, then tell me that Microsoft should be able to get a cut of their revenue because they made their comedy inside a virtual setting.
Moderation is key though, with anything. Eg, a few intellectual bits, but not too much, a few heavy action scenes, but not too much, a few chases, but not a whole move of them. With JJ, it's all lensflare all the time. I don't care how cool and artistic they are, they're fucking over-used to the point that it's distracting from the film, not adding to it.
Also, I already watched Star Trek 2, it was better, makes more sense, and no amount of referential nods to it in the new version will save the fact that the new Star Trek movies are made by folks who don't "get" the series, and why it remains a favourite over all these years. These new movies aren't memorable, they don't encourage you think, they only make you pay $20.00 for popcorn at one sitting, before fading into the sameness of the other action sci-fi. Protip: In the 1st reboot, You can call that crap a mining ship, but no, it's a damn deathstar. The philistines are finally right: "Wanna watch a sci-fi?" Sure, which one? " Doesn't matter, they're all the same shit."
Maybe if a bunch of folks are saying: "Shit man, I like lens flare, but that's too much." Then just maybe it is? Just say, "Yes, We like excessive lens flare, it's a fashion statement." The "fuck you" just makes Peg out to be a fool.
If you actually do any PW cracking, you'd know that comic is wrong. Dictionary attacks with not just words, but with phrases and 1337 replacements, and exclamations, and numbers after or before or in between words, runs of N repeating characters to 'pad out' a password, etc, all get tried before brute force. One of the results of having leaked password databases published online is that the crackers could see all the tricks people use to construct their "memorable" passwords. Unurprisingly, appending 123xcv or other quick keyboard combinations are rather common, and thus added to the cracking database. Any trick you can think of someone else uses too, and is likely a known trick. Type a word with the left hand, but shifted over and up? Yep, it's in the cracking dictionary too, that one's easy to encode, so it saves space... Maybe memorize a passage from a book (not a popular passage) and use some letters from each word, etc.
Clever is Dead. Generate your passwords randomly or use with a salted hash of the domain name and a master password. I use a HMAC bookmarklette employing this technique, and I can re-create all of my passwords using any computer, phone, or web browser. If I can't get to my bookmark, or implementation of a hashing algorithm, then I'm not in a position to need the passwords.
Slashdot Mirror
Increment Overflow Not resulting in Zero? There would have to be a whole other Docto--er, Console, that we didn't know about.
Household names teaming up with an industry award winner? Leave the crowdfunding for the people without deep pockets and industry access/connections.
Hmm. I'm in two minds about this:
0. If you get paid to do work, then Kickstarter funds are payment for that work and should reduce the end cost to consumers. Work totally funded by Kickstarte? Distribute it for "free" since we paid you to do work. You want more money? Do more work for us, like a car mechanic, home builder or any other labor market in the world not trying to sell ice to eskimos -- er, bits to folk with computers...
1. Let the big guys legitimize Kickstarter and other crowd funding. This is the transitionary period that can finally spell the eradication of publishers. Each time they Kickstarter it's another nail in the coffin of Publishers trying to make mony via artifically scarce information. (What's scarce is the ability to do work, market that, not the infinitely reproducable bits). Everyone should crowd fund 100%. Completely eliminate all piracy and copyright law would be moot -- Only work when money is garaunteed, then you don't need to monopolize your work (you have your monopoly over your work before you do it, not afterwards).
What I want to know, is which of these are they aiming to further, and if they've talked to their Publisher about how this, and if they're OK with you trying to kill the Publishing business model via leveraging Kickstarter?
I sometimes practice self censorship too. However, other times I think back to 1776, and how the founders of this great nation wouldn't stand for their unfair treatment: I'm 99% sure they started a Revolution Instead! (I wasn't there, so there's at least a 1% chance the history books are lying). Then, I make innocuous posts including words like, "Give me Liberty, or Give me Death," which showed real courage and are thought to trigger the anti-establishment or anarchy detection filters -- Purely for the express purpose of creating a false flag in their data... Signal to noise, and all that.
Sure, this plan could blow up in my face one day like a hand grenade, or improvised explosive but I'm hoping for one of those inflatable rafts that some Cubans try to float here on instead. I'd rather risk going to jail on trumped up charges as a martyr for free speech than let fear strip away my first amendment rights -- I'm not just giving them up! You'll have to pry them from my cold dead hands. I mean, Big Brother isn't really watching everything you do online in real time; They might record it, but have to look it up after the fact to discover your terrorist ties if you did anything crazy. It doesn't work preemptively, the Boston Bombing showed us that. You're appealing to a computer algorithm, if anyone, and really all you've done is get yourself on their radar. Might as well say what you think instead.
The ultimate weapon against such spying would be a thesaurus!
He didn't get no edumacation.
He don't needed no foursed corntroll.
Correction: We've forked the article and have re-implemented the parts that were not, in fact, invented here.
Meh, on average they're glad to help folk get their one token patch into the Kernel. I take everything Linus says with a grain of salt. That's just the way he communicates: It's harsh, but you have to take offense yourself. He doesn't care if people are offended. He's also equally as harsh to himself, readily calling himself an idiot (especially his past self). Why, I even remember the time he wrote that if he ever revved the Kernel beyond the 2.x.x series to 3.x.x it would mean he'd gone bat-shit insane and rewritten the whole thing in VB... Salt. Take some. Chill.
This is kinda putting the horse before the cart. The fact that galaxies exist as localized clumping of matter is postulated to be due to this "dark matter" substance that does not interact with anything else, including itself, in any way except by gravity. I.e., dark matter is the proposed explanation for galaxies, not the other way around.
Speaking of cart drawn horseages...
If gravity warps space time, then we agree space time can be warped. We observe that cosmic background radiation from the big bang isn't perfectly smooth. So, what if the structure of space is just slightly "warped?" Dark matter could just be space time curvature. Instead of the clustering up of galaxies being the result of more matter being present, the matter could just be pooling into places that are already more curved. In other words: You turn on a light, you generate an EM field, You can turn it off and decrease the EM field in the area. You look up at night and see variation in the EM field, not a constant smooth glow... So, when I look up at the night sky and see galaxies, but no dark matter, I simply see variations in the Higgs Field...
Click this link from your seats... ...
That's right!
You get to be a Hacker,
And You get to be a Hacker,
And You get to be a Hacker
I am a scientist. I call into question the assumption that, "Patents are Beneficial for Society as a Whole". This is an untested hypothesis. Until we have PROOF that patents are beneficial for our society, they should not be allowed. What if patents are irreparably harming the innovation of mankind?! You have NO PROOF to show whether they are or are not harmful or helpful. There is only conjecture and assumptions. Prove they are beneficial, until then abolish them.
If I hand you a gun and tell you to put it to your head and pull the trigger, It's beneficial for you. Would you just assume I'm telling the truth? A rational being would examine the gun first to ensure it was not actually harmful... Some would test fire it to ensure it was not harmful. The most rational would require proof that it was beneficial before even touching the damn thing.
We're slowly blowing our culture's brains out with the legal weapons called patent and copyright. I'm a scientist, so if you think otherwise, then I have two words for you: PROVE IT. As it stands my statement that patents are harmful is just as valid a hypothesis as that they are beneficial. It's unconscionably reckless to continue subjecting the world's economy and culture to this potential danger.
Wait, I say there's no proof either way, but there is evidence that patents are not required at all. Neither the automotive or fashion industries are allowed copyright or patents for their designs yet look how innovative they are in design; Indeed often design is their core selling point. That's two real world data points indicating patents are not necessary. I've read many responses that say, "Without patents businesses wouldn't fund innovation." These statements are equally bogus because this statement: "Without patents ______," is bogus. We don't the-hell know what it would be like until we run the damn test. The potential risk associated with not performing the experiment should be enough for any rational being to give pause.
Abolish patents. It's the only rational thing to do. The hypothesis must be tested. Only then will the argument for or against them have any leg to stand on. We can re-institute any laws we want once we're sure they're not harmful. If the scientific method is good enough to develop things that could be patentable, then why turn a blind eye and ignore the fact that no one has applied the scientific method to the patent system itself?
The judges seem to echo what I posted on another slashdot post that software instructions and data structures create a machine -- very similar to an equivalent machine that could be created with off-the-shelf hardware, custom ASICs or FPGAs. Therefore software patents should enjoy same protection that hardware patents enjoy.
They are both the same in functionality and somewhat in implementation, only hardware is faster, more parallel but limited in functionality. Whereas software is slower, less parallel but has vastly more functionality than hardware.
No. General purpose Hardware for implementing algorithms, be it ASIC or x86, should not be patentable. Your transistor assembly shouldn't be patentable if it just does the same shit I can do on a general purpose computer. Here's the test: Can I run the algorithm myself given a pencil and some graph paper? If No, then it's not implementable in a general purpose computer. If yes, then it shouldn't be patentable -- Didn't you watch Terminator or The Matrix?! You want to give humans immunity for thinking about certain algorithms, but it's OK to prevent a machine from thinking about the same damn thing? That's how you start the damn Robot War! It's Racist!
Plank Time.
I'm done explaining.
He's up in ur Interwebs, trollin' all da gubbermints!
I dont know about prisons in Sweden but here in the UK they get access to games consoles (and France appears Xbox exclusive), satellite TV and more so I fail to see the harm in a calculator even if it was designed to be user hackable.
They have that in American Prisons too; Keeps the maladjusted from harming society without cutting them off completely -- Except, they don't call them "prisons", they call them "parent's basements" here.
If you've ever seen an dispute between basement dwellers, you'd know full well the danger of adding graphing calculators to the mix...
why class warfare is alive and well and why everyone hates the government so fucking much?
You have few real options other than 401k... Which is basically a life raft for the stock market and corporate controlled tax racked / devaluation weapon all rolled into one. Moo. You're being farmed.
HA ha! Reminds me of back in the 70's and 80's when there weren't any laws about hacking. This is the kind of crap we'd do for some hackish fun between friends. Cracking each other's servers and BBSs, defacing the login page, appending stupid messages for bragging rights "BoardBurner waz Hear!", ANSI bombing the sysop's terminal (remapping all the keys), messing with TradeWars scores, etc. One day you'd be the victim, the next you'd be the victimizer. Hell, the wise guys would "false flag" a crack and claim to have been the clever work of another hacker's handle to deflect blame (and hacks) onto another lamer's systems... create rivalries where there were none, or sew seeds of doubt among alliances. They would usually be sporting and leave some subtle clues so you could tell who it really was -- Why not take the bait though and get 'em both just for good measure? Ah, good ol' days: Back when two "cyber armies" could have pizza and play skeeball with each other and joke about the hacks after the latest round of the "war".
Now you have to be a member of the select few in a Nation's "cyber army" to escape the laws, but it's interesting to see the goings on mirror those same old childish prankish tricks. Script Kiddies and social engineers can pull off the hacks these folks are capable of too, but the laws are more strictly set against them so a smaller percentage of people that are capable actually try their hand at cracking others' systems. The "whitehats" hack indoors, and try not to be disruptive, while the others run amok for fun and profit -- until they get caught. Ah, but if you're doing it for your country, then you don't have to worry about your nation's police force going after you.
We've seen this game play out before, several times, so expect them to get bored with defacing as they mature and if they last long enough some might even start to study some machine level hacks, and become "real" hackers. Eventually they'll learn not to crow like a rooster and strut your skill when you compromise a system, instead you silently take the helm and use the foothold to infiltrate deeper, spreading your web of control as wide as possible to pull strings behind the scenes and gather information about your enemies, and only disrupt the services if it's worth losing the control: once maximum damage can be done, or you think you'll get caught. In a way they've done just that, it's just that the "maximum damage" they were capable of coming up with (mentally?) was to mess with some social feeds and deface some stories...
Oh No! LulzSec Mk.2! Hide your Kids! Hide your Wives! 'Caus They hackin' 'erry body round here!
/me eats popcorn.
My only real fear is that when we finally create self aware AI soldiers, we'll have used up all the good names: "Electronic Army", awe, they're not cyborgs?
Lame.
Just scroll right down and you'll read a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started at Google IO,
and it involves a ship.
Some fool was a dreamer of sailing men,
All naked -- That's for sure!
"They'd 'innovate'; No, it won't be gay",
Said the blogger du jour -- A blogger "du jour"!
The commenters started getting rough,
The idyllic ship was tossed,
It wrought imagery of a lawless few:
Your privacy would be lost -- Yar! "privacy wood" be "lost!"
The ship made port at a private pier:
A Google-owned desert isle,
With Googliaaaaans!
The Blogger too...
Some billionaires,
(but no wives),
Home "movie" stars,
Terms of Service-er, and
Hairy Mans!
Here on Googlian's Isle!
Moon, didn't you know it is your right to have an atmosphere.
The moon's atmosphere is made of regolith, You insensitive clod! Solid rock strata means its stratosphere is a lot tougher than ours!
Could the entire moon explode if a bigger asteroid hits it?
Yes, but the ass would have to be on some killer steroids.
Son, evolution is a cold-hearted bitch and she doesn't care if it's a one-sided fight, she will straight-up murderize your entire clutch of eggs.
There is a difference between nature and evolution. You've personified the former, the latter doesn't act on anything but genes, and can't "murderize your entire clutch of eggs" unless you mean that through random mutation you've become sterile and your eggs are duds... In which case I reiterate: Can't murder what ain't alive.
No wrapping one's head in a damp towel. Better get your ass to Mars!
Prostitutes with only three boobs?
Hey, man, I got five kids to feed!
I built an Uninterrupted Power Supply out of capacitors for my experimental server rack, I can clean the power, simulate surges, or modulate the electron waves... If Nintendo claims copyright on me playing a game, then I claim copyright on the electricity signature that produced the gameplay. Since they used my electron wave modulations to play their game software on, then it's a derivative work of my UPS modulations. Additionally, since this is Alternating Current on the line side, when I modulate my voltage usages it affects the power grid, so I want derivative rights for all TV and radio that are being played over the creative electron fields that I'm producing.
Furthermore, I purchased many early games for both Nintendo and their competition. I directly controlled the available revenue stream they used to make additional games, and even informed them which games to make by my past purchasing habits. I want a cut of the profit for their use of my creative endeavors. Could they have been successful without me? Who knows!? Probably not! The creator of the Famicom didn't have any faith in it, yet I did. My influence among peers increased their sales and decreased sales in just the right way to get them where they are today. Time to pay up.
If only butterflies were sentient, they'd own all copyright by Nintendo's logic.
Well, I make games, and If I saw my latest game on a review website with ads next to it, I'd be fucking pissed, because I haven't even finished it or released it yet! :-P
The output of playing a game is the video. That gameplay was created by a human, and rendered by a machine. If anything the copyright should belong to the player since they're the one transforming it into an entertaining video. Go watch Red Vs Blue, then tell me that Microsoft should be able to get a cut of their revenue because they made their comedy inside a virtual setting.
Moderation is key though, with anything. Eg, a few intellectual bits, but not too much, a few heavy action scenes, but not too much, a few chases, but not a whole move of them. With JJ, it's all lensflare all the time. I don't care how cool and artistic they are, they're fucking over-used to the point that it's distracting from the film, not adding to it.
Also, I already watched Star Trek 2, it was better, makes more sense, and no amount of referential nods to it in the new version will save the fact that the new Star Trek movies are made by folks who don't "get" the series, and why it remains a favourite over all these years. These new movies aren't memorable, they don't encourage you think, they only make you pay $20.00 for popcorn at one sitting, before fading into the sameness of the other action sci-fi. Protip: In the 1st reboot, You can call that crap a mining ship, but no, it's a damn deathstar. The philistines are finally right: "Wanna watch a sci-fi?" Sure, which one? " Doesn't matter, they're all the same shit."
Maybe if a bunch of folks are saying: "Shit man, I like lens flare, but that's too much." Then just maybe it is? Just say, "Yes, We like excessive lens flare, it's a fashion statement." The "fuck you" just makes Peg out to be a fool.
If you actually do any PW cracking, you'd know that comic is wrong. Dictionary attacks with not just words, but with phrases and 1337 replacements, and exclamations, and numbers after or before or in between words, runs of N repeating characters to 'pad out' a password, etc, all get tried before brute force. One of the results of having leaked password databases published online is that the crackers could see all the tricks people use to construct their "memorable" passwords. Unurprisingly, appending 123xcv or other quick keyboard combinations are rather common, and thus added to the cracking database. Any trick you can think of someone else uses too, and is likely a known trick. Type a word with the left hand, but shifted over and up? Yep, it's in the cracking dictionary too, that one's easy to encode, so it saves space... Maybe memorize a passage from a book (not a popular passage) and use some letters from each word, etc.
Clever is Dead. Generate your passwords randomly or use with a salted hash of the domain name and a master password. I use a HMAC bookmarklette employing this technique, and I can re-create all of my passwords using any computer, phone, or web browser. If I can't get to my bookmark, or implementation of a hashing algorithm, then I'm not in a position to need the passwords.