Are you saying that since the guy received real cash for his virtual muggings that real world jurisdiction comes into play?
Absolutely. Even though it's 'virtual', the offender deprived the other players of the value of their possssions. There's no way around that fact.
Tell me...if someone steals some stock that you own (you don't physically have it in your posession, it's all just numbers in a computer system), have they committed a crime?
If game makers want to allow theft in their games, they better figure out a way to remove any real-world velue from the stolen items.
Theft. Once the stuff was sold for real-world money, the items take on real-world value. When you deprive someone of something of value that is rightfully theirs, it is theft. Further, once real money is involved, is is no longer accurate to refer to actions like these as "in-game".
I'm happy he got busted - I hope this sets good example.
It is up to the developers to determin what is a fun gaming experience.
Hardly. It's up to those who play it- THEY are the ones who decide whether or not buy it, and how long they will continue to subscribe- as such, they are the ones who ultimately decide whether it's fun or not. Did I mention that I used to play Lineage 2?
This arrest is wrong, and sets a bad precedent. The game companies themselves ought to be up in arms against this action. It takes away their authority to enforce in-game rules,
Me thinks you've never played Lineage 2 or had to deal with NCSoft.
One thing you're overlooking is the fact that something was taken from other players in-game, and converted into very real cash. Tell me that's not theft. As soon as it enters the physical world, it is governed under the jurisdiction of the physical world- i.e., the police.
I played Lineage 2 for a while, and in some ways, I still miss it. There are several things that are "possible" but against the rules. For one, you can't take advantage of certain locations where you have the abilty to deal damage to mobs, but they cannot get at you. These exist in the game because of minor design flaws, but it doesn't mean anyone INTENDED for this to happen.
The farming/bot problem has been ongoing, and I think many players have the feeling that NCSoft just sort of turned a blind eye to it (the accounts used for this purpose do generate revenue, after all). It's not that the developers intended this, it's that there are people who will take advantage of ANYTHING from which they can derive benefit. Make no mistake about it, though- farmers and bots can make an otherwise interesting game SUCK.
As for rules and enforcement, to suggest that being a virtual fantasy game precludes some reasonable rules and their enforcement is to ignore the fact that games like Lineage2 require a VERY, VERY real investment of time (or money, if you're a cheater), on the part of those who play it. This suggestion carries with it the notion that no-one's time, effort, and in-game accomplishments matter. If that's the case, then why even play it?
It's a sickening feeling to know that you spent the better part of your free time the last few weeks collecting enough raw materials, or saving enough gold to buy your next bow, only to have it scammed by some moron who can't bring themselves to play fairly. NCSoft will argue that scamming is part of the game. Maybe, but they can't have it both ways - they can't have a game that requires an UNGODLY commitment, AND situations where someone can easily lose what they've worked so hard to accomplish. It's possible, but in theory, it just doens't work out very well. People WILL garner resentment when this happens, and I don't blame them. Time is a limited resource.
Her reasoning plays on a most fundamental human trait - laziness. Summed up, it goes like this: "If you don't know what it's costing you, don't do anything." Problem solved.
How would "first to file" be of any benefit over what we currently have? This would just seem to make it easier for patent speculators to churn out patents without producing, or intent to produce, a damn thing, and then leaching off the sweat of everyone else's brow.
The older I get, the more I realize that I picked the wrong career.
There are enough bottom-feeding psuedo-professionals in this country. Every one LESS we can manage is a positive, not a negative, no matter how you look at it.
The Escapist web site is for the web what Wired was to print media. It is completely over-designed to the point that it defeats its purpose - miserably. To its credit, Wired calmed down after a bit- let's hope that the Escapist has the same epiphany.
I've always advocated a boycott (and have done this myself for a few years now). As long as one is purchasing used CDs that are legal, it's killing two birds with one stone....well, about 1.5 birds, because the RIAA is still getting the money from the first sale. Seems like an OK compromise for those who just have to get their fix.
Don't be an ass. There aren't many of these kinds of questions being asked- most of them are about gameplay. This one is technical, and will definitely be of interest to a few, including myself.
Exactly, and only for a limited period of time after the inital posting - 5 minutes or so. Any editing would forfeit any moderation, eliminating any problems with the "post, get moderated up, then change it to something completely different" scenario which seems to be mentioned most often.
There is still a good deal of gray area as to who should own the technology. For once, I'd like to see Microsoft playing second fiddle. It doesn't have to dominate EVERYTHING.
Anecdotes like this will become very useful during the next anti-trust suit filed against Microsoft. What you are seeing is the result of vendor lock-in. When people are forced to avoid competing alternatives that are every bit as capable, but lack interoperability because of proprietary document formats, they are effectively locked in to using the products from one vendor. This is something the first suit failed to address, but hopefully the next one will.
Working on a software project at your home IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO AN INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE. Tell that to a prospective employer and you'll get laughed at.
They'd be fools, because that's pretty much how Google started. The only people laughing are its owners...all the way to the bank.
How so? Most students don't have any practical experience, and this gave them a chance to get some working on a real project. If they finished, they got paid- quite a bit more than if they were to work on a FOSS project by themselves.
If the film was fair and balanced, it would have footage of the massive environmental destruction these 'birds' have wrought upon their habitat, for instance.
Such as?
If it's the homo birds that bother some people, they might be even more disconcerted to learn about a species of chimps (which are much closer to humans genetically) where homosexual expression is as natural as its heterosexual counterpart.
If this is a matter of intelligence, I think I can reasonably argue that it's completely STUPID to hand over personal information without knowing exactly what it will be used for, and by whom. Typically, once it's out of your hands, it's out of your control. As for me personally, a store would need to have something pretty damed impressive up its sleeve in order for me to justify this constant monitoring of my purchasing preferences. Incremental changes to make things slightly more "convenient" just don't cut it.
But, you can tell that they are really keeping an eye on their data. For example, as trends go one direction or another, you see those items getting pulled into the more visible areas of the store and, sometimes, put on sale for brief periods of time.
Nothing I've read so far explains why any of this requires a loyalty card. Trends will exist with or without being able to identify individual customers (as they always have). In fact, I can't think of ANY reason that a company would need this, other than to make money off of selling your personal information.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you saying that since the guy received real cash for his virtual muggings that real world jurisdiction comes into play?
Absolutely. Even though it's 'virtual', the offender deprived the other players of the value of their possssions. There's no way around that fact.
Tell me...if someone steals some stock that you own (you don't physically have it in your posession, it's all just numbers in a computer system), have they committed a crime?
If game makers want to allow theft in their games, they better figure out a way to remove any real-world velue from the stolen items.
Ever wonder why certain people get put in key positions in the whitehouse? Bush, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Poindexter...etc.
I'm sure this will open new avenues for cheating that no one thought of.
Hm...maybe I should switch to another provider. With carnivore installed, they don't need to provide anything- the fed will just take what they want.
What exactly was the crime here?
Theft. Once the stuff was sold for real-world money, the items take on real-world value. When you deprive someone of something of value that is rightfully theirs, it is theft. Further, once real money is involved, is is no longer accurate to refer to actions like these as "in-game".
I'm happy he got busted - I hope this sets good example.
It is up to the developers to determin what is a fun gaming experience.
Hardly. It's up to those who play it- THEY are the ones who decide whether or not buy it, and how long they will continue to subscribe- as such, they are the ones who ultimately decide whether it's fun or not. Did I mention that I used to play Lineage 2?
This arrest is wrong, and sets a bad precedent. The game companies themselves ought to be up in arms against this action. It takes away their authority to enforce in-game rules,
Me thinks you've never played Lineage 2 or had to deal with NCSoft.
One thing you're overlooking is the fact that something was taken from other players in-game, and converted into very real cash. Tell me that's not theft. As soon as it enters the physical world, it is governed under the jurisdiction of the physical world- i.e., the police.
I played Lineage 2 for a while, and in some ways, I still miss it. There are several things that are "possible" but against the rules. For one, you can't take advantage of certain locations where you have the abilty to deal damage to mobs, but they cannot get at you. These exist in the game because of minor design flaws, but it doesn't mean anyone INTENDED for this to happen.
The farming/bot problem has been ongoing, and I think many players have the feeling that NCSoft just sort of turned a blind eye to it (the accounts used for this purpose do generate revenue, after all). It's not that the developers intended this, it's that there are people who will take advantage of ANYTHING from which they can derive benefit. Make no mistake about it, though- farmers and bots can make an otherwise interesting game SUCK.
As for rules and enforcement, to suggest that being a virtual fantasy game precludes some reasonable rules and their enforcement is to ignore the fact that games like Lineage2 require a VERY, VERY real investment of time (or money, if you're a cheater), on the part of those who play it. This suggestion carries with it the notion that no-one's time, effort, and in-game accomplishments matter. If that's the case, then why even play it?
It's a sickening feeling to know that you spent the better part of your free time the last few weeks collecting enough raw materials, or saving enough gold to buy your next bow, only to have it scammed by some moron who can't bring themselves to play fairly. NCSoft will argue that scamming is part of the game. Maybe, but they can't have it both ways - they can't have a game that requires an UNGODLY commitment, AND situations where someone can easily lose what they've worked so hard to accomplish. It's possible, but in theory, it just doens't work out very well. People WILL garner resentment when this happens, and I don't blame them. Time is a limited resource.
Her reasoning plays on a most fundamental human trait - laziness. Summed up, it goes like this: "If you don't know what it's costing you, don't do anything." Problem solved.
You're not, erm, a Christian, are you?
How would "first to file" be of any benefit over what we currently have? This would just seem to make it easier for patent speculators to churn out patents without producing, or intent to produce, a damn thing, and then leaching off the sweat of everyone else's brow.
The older I get, the more I realize that I picked the wrong career.
There are enough bottom-feeding psuedo-professionals in this country. Every one LESS we can manage is a positive, not a negative, no matter how you look at it.
The Escapist web site is for the web what Wired was to print media. It is completely over-designed to the point that it defeats its purpose - miserably. To its credit, Wired calmed down after a bit- let's hope that the Escapist has the same epiphany.
I've always advocated a boycott (and have done this myself for a few years now). As long as one is purchasing used CDs that are legal, it's killing two birds with one stone....well, about 1.5 birds, because the RIAA is still getting the money from the first sale. Seems like an OK compromise for those who just have to get their fix.
Don't be an ass. There aren't many of these kinds of questions being asked- most of them are about gameplay. This one is technical, and will definitely be of interest to a few, including myself.
Exactly, and only for a limited period of time after the inital posting - 5 minutes or so. Any editing would forfeit any moderation, eliminating any problems with the "post, get moderated up, then change it to something completely different" scenario which seems to be mentioned most often.
There is still a good deal of gray area as to who should own the technology. For once, I'd like to see Microsoft playing second fiddle. It doesn't have to dominate EVERYTHING.
Of course not. It's the LAWYERS who think otherwise, because it's good for business.
Anecdotes like this will become very useful during the next anti-trust suit filed against Microsoft. What you are seeing is the result of vendor lock-in. When people are forced to avoid competing alternatives that are every bit as capable, but lack interoperability because of proprietary document formats, they are effectively locked in to using the products from one vendor. This is something the first suit failed to address, but hopefully the next one will.
Working on a software project at your home IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO AN INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE. Tell that to a prospective employer and you'll get laughed at.
They'd be fools, because that's pretty much how Google started. The only people laughing are its owners...all the way to the bank.
It wasn't an internship. It is exploitation.
How so? Most students don't have any practical experience, and this gave them a chance to get some working on a real project. If they finished, they got paid- quite a bit more than if they were to work on a FOSS project by themselves.
It's called "job security".
If the film was fair and balanced, it would have footage of the massive environmental destruction these 'birds' have wrought upon their habitat, for instance.
Such as?
If it's the homo birds that bother some people, they might be even more disconcerted to learn about a species of chimps (which are much closer to humans genetically) where homosexual expression is as natural as its heterosexual counterpart.
If this is a matter of intelligence, I think I can reasonably argue that it's completely STUPID to hand over personal information without knowing exactly what it will be used for, and by whom. Typically, once it's out of your hands, it's out of your control. As for me personally, a store would need to have something pretty damed impressive up its sleeve in order for me to justify this constant monitoring of my purchasing preferences. Incremental changes to make things slightly more "convenient" just don't cut it.
But, you can tell that they are really keeping an eye on their data. For example, as trends go one direction or another, you see those items getting pulled into the more visible areas of the store and, sometimes, put on sale for brief periods of time.
Nothing I've read so far explains why any of this requires a loyalty card. Trends will exist with or without being able to identify individual customers (as they always have). In fact, I can't think of ANY reason that a company would need this, other than to make money off of selling your personal information.