And that's why the others were called "Humble Indie Bundle" and this one is called "Humble THQ Bundle". Want them to blame for your lacking reading comprehension?
Germany has no "Fair Use Right" as in the U.S. sense of it. However, we got something you might translate as "Citation Right", that is: you're allowed to cite a certain amount of a published (and copyrighted) work without infringing on any copyright. The debate therefore is often "how much is a reasonable amount". Clearly "citing" whole articles wouldn't be assumed reasonable.
Exactly. And I know what's coming next: after their page views have dropped to the bottom, they propose a new law. "Google... erhm... 'monopolists' will be forced to crawl each (newspaper) website. Not doing so and/or excluding them from their search index is an abuse of their dominating market position."
I considered Star Citizen to be a fairly safe investment [...]
There's another reason: Star Citizen is different from most Kickstarter projects mentioned here, though. Funding isn't done completely by the crowd, but in this case it's a mixture of traditional VC + crowd-funding. Put (very) simply, Roberts got a deal with investors stating "if I raise (x) money via crowd-funding, you invest (y) money in this game." Lest not forget that he crowd-funded both via Kickstarter and his own web site. You could go so far as to say the crowd-funding was more of a (well-done) PR stunt and reliable test of how many people are interested in such a game instead of a real needed fund-raising.
Side note: while I haven't pledged, I wish those projects all the best, because that would show the big publishers that there's a market outside of version X of established game A.
They get caught doing this so frequently that all of their announcements are automatically suspect
Well, that's actually their plot. It's so obvious that sooner or later noone bothers to check anymore... that'll be the time the things are for really. Brilliant, don't you think?;-)
Iraq under Saddam Hussein did the same shtick, bluffing for years that they had weapons stockpiles that really didn't exist (anymore). The US military went into the Iraq War expecting that chemical and/or biological weapons would be used against their soldiers on the ground. Did that fear really stop George W. Bush and co. from invading? Not really...
Whoever rated this insightful should go back and read a bit about the alleged claims of WMDs. All knew the claims were false, Powell later admitted that the presentation he gave to the UN Security Council about those imaginary WMDs was an error. Some are even convinced he knew the claims were false at the time of the presentation. So in reality there was nothing to be afraid of when sending troops in an GWB knew that pretty well.
Not many, as long as they move when waterline has moved to their front door.
The problem is not people drowning. The problem is that 70% of earth's human population lives near coast lines. Which means you would have to relocate entire cities & countries... try doing that in time.
How are you enjoying those jet engines we invented (British)?
Not so fast, my friend. There was a head to head race between Whittle (British) and von Ohain (German), with both having a somewhat working prototype in 1937. The RAF's lack of interest resulted in Germany taking the lead which in turn resulted in the first mass-produced jet engines (i.e. used by the Me 262).
"Sentinent" in this sense should be understood as "self-aware", which is the right word to use. I.e. recognizing yourself when looking in a mirror. "Sapient" doesn't carry this notion (as far as I can tell).
There is literally nothing you personally can do that will stop China, India, Brazil, Russia, and every other second or third world nation that is only beginning to industrialize from releasing a billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air.
The opposite is true. There's very much you can do. Stop buying products manufactured there and tell the Apples and Mercedes Benz et al of this world why you don't want to buy their products any longer.
I know it's tempting to let them have "their part of luxury", but by the time the average living conditions in those countries have raised to the western world equivalent of today, the climate most likely has changed in so dramatic ways, that they might no longer be able to enjoy the fruits of their work.
Obviously he is not robbing anybody of anything, the 'future generations' do not actually exist and they may not exist for all we know. 'Future generations' is an abstract idea that completely worthless from our perspective, we will never meet them [...]
Interestingly enough, I've already met a couple of members of my "future generation(s)".
Depending on what definition of "Generation" you go by, most of us have met members from even more than one "future generation".
This is why sometimes the solution is fewer regulations, and more direct solutions. If relatively few companies control our banking or money flow, the solution may be to break up some large companies.
I don't see how "break up some large" is anthing other than a reworded "regulation".
Then they hired a new manager who'd previously worked in IT and he fired the guy within a few weeks.
Sounds like a pretty incompetent manager to me. He should have hired a second dev, let them both work together for some time until the second dev is familiar enough with what's there and then get rid off the first dev.
But Scott Adams is right, nobody has such a right, but it's something that is worth fighting for nonetheless.
That might be true for the U.S.. German citiziens do have such a right, labeled "Informationelle Selbstbestimmung" ("Informational self-determination"), by our Bundesverfassungsgericht (German "SCOTUS").
The thing I'm really struggling with is why on Earth would anyone do such a thing
As per TFA:
[...] and we found out that he'd sent the traffic home to ensure that his routing patterns at work were correct," Saccavino told InformationWeek in a recent interview. But after a week, Saccavino said, he'd forgotten to turn it off.
But given the rest of the story, I'm not sure if that's the only reason.
I'm afraid the bold part is their backup. "Oh, we're the copyright holders of <abc> and <adc> looked suspiciously like <abc> to us. We're sorry for the misunderstanding and inconvenience..."
All the ads say "don't illegally download". All the newspaper coverage says "downloaders targeted" But I've yet to see a single case of a downloader who didn't also upload being taken to court.
Right on the spot. By campaigning against "TEH DOWNLOADERZ", they try to eleminate the biding side of the "market" and of course try to make consumers "feel bad" for what is most likely perfectly legal in their country (i.e. in Germany, downloading isn't illegal, uploading is). But as most people aren't computer-literate enough to knw that a torrent client is both an up- and download tool, they're easy prey for the content rights owners.
As for the blank media levy (and other fees), here's an online calculator (German, also based on German laws & regulations) showing you how much one pays by simply buying some devices. Even if you don't speak German, the sheer number of items and the attached price tag will give an idea of just how much you pay to content rights holders before you've even listened to one song.
Another hole in browser plugin. Who cares? Disable the plugin and forget. It's not used for anything these days.
I (unfortunately) beg to differ. The two major (Sabre (Sabre.Red), Amadeus (Selling Platform)) GDS' reservation platforms are Java based. Once upon a time they had dedicated (Windows) clients, but as with anything in the 2000s, they had to go "to the Internet", make it "browser-based". Bad move.
Consider flying. In 1683 (1 century before the Montgolfier brothers) flying was impossible. The technology wasn't far enough. However it was clearly not absolutely impossible, since it was done a century later.
Flyging was possible, even in 1683 (and earlier). Birds and insects already did it for a long time.
It just was not practicable for humans back then. (Although someone might object with the fact that jumping from a cliff would have led to some kind of "flight" - as short as it might have lasted - even for a human)
There's a huge difference between impossible and impracticable.
Slashdot Mirror
And that's why the others were called "Humble Indie Bundle" and this one is called "Humble THQ Bundle". Want them to blame for your lacking reading comprehension?
Germany has no "Fair Use Right" as in the U.S. sense of it. However, we got something you might translate as "Citation Right", that is: you're allowed to cite a certain amount of a published (and copyrighted) work without infringing on any copyright. The debate therefore is often "how much is a reasonable amount". Clearly "citing" whole articles wouldn't be assumed reasonable.
Exactly. And I know what's coming next: after their page views have dropped to the bottom, they propose a new law. "Google ... erhm ... 'monopolists' will be forced to crawl each (newspaper) website. Not doing so and/or excluding them from their search index is an abuse of their dominating market position."
Damnit. It's "Friesland" of course, not "Freisland" ...
If the town leaders like to go "more open" as in "more direct democracy", have a look at Liquid Feedback.
As a reference you might refer them to the German district Freisland. (The decision to implement LF has been made meanwhile)
Bullshit.
Google: "Joschka Fischer" "I am not convinced": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtLwo--n2AA
Joschka Fischer = German Foreign Minister at that time.
There's another reason: Star Citizen is different from most Kickstarter projects mentioned here, though. Funding isn't done completely by the crowd, but in this case it's a mixture of traditional VC + crowd-funding. Put (very) simply, Roberts got a deal with investors stating "if I raise (x) money via crowd-funding, you invest (y) money in this game." Lest not forget that he crowd-funded both via Kickstarter and his own web site. You could go so far as to say the crowd-funding was more of a (well-done) PR stunt and reliable test of how many people are interested in such a game instead of a real needed fund-raising.
Side note: while I haven't pledged, I wish those projects all the best, because that would show the big publishers that there's a market outside of version X of established game A.
Well, that's actually their plot. It's so obvious that sooner or later noone bothers to check anymore ... that'll be the time the things are for really. Brilliant, don't you think? ;-)
Whoever rated this insightful should go back and read a bit about the alleged claims of WMDs. All knew the claims were false, Powell later admitted that the presentation he gave to the UN Security Council about those imaginary WMDs was an error. Some are even convinced he knew the claims were false at the time of the presentation. So in reality there was nothing to be afraid of when sending troops in an GWB knew that pretty well.
The problem is not people drowning. The problem is that 70% of earth's human population lives near coast lines. Which means you would have to relocate entire cities & countries ... try doing that in time.
Not so fast, my friend. There was a head to head race between Whittle (British) and von Ohain (German), with both having a somewhat working prototype in 1937. The RAF's lack of interest resulted in Germany taking the lead which in turn resulted in the first mass-produced jet engines (i.e. used by the Me 262).
"Sentinent" in this sense should be understood as "self-aware", which is the right word to use. I.e. recognizing yourself when looking in a mirror. "Sapient" doesn't carry this notion (as far as I can tell).
The truth is even more terrifying and obvious, if you think about it. The IPCC reports (or better: the data they're based upon) that were finally published, were produced by scientists, but edited and agreed upon before publication by politians. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change#Conservative_nature_of_IPCC_reports
The opposite is true. There's very much you can do. Stop buying products manufactured there and tell the Apples and Mercedes Benz et al of this world why you don't want to buy their products any longer.
I know it's tempting to let them have "their part of luxury", but by the time the average living conditions in those countries have raised to the western world equivalent of today, the climate most likely has changed in so dramatic ways, that they might no longer be able to enjoy the fruits of their work.
Interestingly enough, I've already met a couple of members of my "future generation(s)".
Depending on what definition of "Generation" you go by, most of us have met members from even more than one "future generation".
I don't see how "break up some large" is anthing other than a reworded "regulation".
Exactly. Especially for the former. Perhaps someone should remind them what the verb "to conserve" means ...
Sounds like a pretty incompetent manager to me. He should have hired a second dev, let them both work together for some time until the second dev is familiar enough with what's there and then get rid off the first dev.
That might be true for the U.S.. German citiziens do have such a right, labeled "Informationelle Selbstbestimmung" ("Informational self-determination"), by our Bundesverfassungsgericht (German "SCOTUS").
As per TFA:
But given the rest of the story, I'm not sure if that's the only reason.
I'm afraid the bold part is their backup. "Oh, we're the copyright holders of <abc> and <adc> looked suspiciously like <abc> to us. We're sorry for the misunderstanding and inconvenience ..."
If you had bothered to not only google for it, but read some of them, you would have stumbled over this one (ff.)
To spare you the hassle, posted by Soulskill:
Right on the spot. By campaigning against "TEH DOWNLOADERZ", they try to eleminate the biding side of the "market" and of course try to make consumers "feel bad" for what is most likely perfectly legal in their country (i.e. in Germany, downloading isn't illegal, uploading is). But as most people aren't computer-literate enough to knw that a torrent client is both an up- and download tool, they're easy prey for the content rights owners.
As for the blank media levy (and other fees), here's an online calculator (German, also based on German laws & regulations) showing you how much one pays by simply buying some devices. Even if you don't speak German, the sheer number of items and the attached price tag will give an idea of just how much you pay to content rights holders before you've even listened to one song.
I (unfortunately) beg to differ. The two major (Sabre (Sabre.Red), Amadeus (Selling Platform)) GDS' reservation platforms are Java based. Once upon a time they had dedicated (Windows) clients, but as with anything in the 2000s, they had to go "to the Internet", make it "browser-based". Bad move.
Flyging was possible, even in 1683 (and earlier). Birds and insects already did it for a long time. It just was not practicable for humans back then. (Although someone might object with the fact that jumping from a cliff would have led to some kind of "flight" - as short as it might have lasted - even for a human)
There's a huge difference between impossible and impracticable.