If they dropped the $120/mo cable package and sold the 50 inch plasma TV, they'd solve two problems at once: their children's access to inappropriate TV and their having to work 5 jobs to afford a house full of luxuries. It's a win-win!
I think your two examples show that no matter how edited a scene is, no matter how little (or none, in your examples) actual graphic content is shown, there is still someone, somewhere, who will consider it offensive.
I'll turn it around: How is the advertiser supposed to create content that is both effective and guaranteed not to offend anyone? I submit that for any TV clip out there, anything at all, given enough people, SOMEBODY is going to find the clip inappropriate for children. What's the answer from the point of view of the content producer?
When someone makes a controversial claim, then simply backs it up with something like, "It's a fact." or "That's the truth." you know they probably full of it and have no actual evidence. I'd expect this on the political blogs, not a technical forum. You sound like, "9/11 was an inside job. That's a fact!"
and the argument about saving yourself from a rogue government seems completely lost now. You can't. They have bigger guns. Oh, and nukes. Which is crazy - right?
Tell that to the Iraqi insurgency. The kid hiding in a bush with a $20 AK-47 has proven to be quite effective against the supposedly higher tech, better armed U.S. military. No military in the world stands a chance against a sufficiently armed, motivated, and organized group of civilians defending their homes.
The founding fathers of the U.S. were wise to very deliberately guarantee INDIVIDUALS the right to bear arms, as a final check against an out of control government.
Exactly... The iPhone app store is Apple's first attempt at NOT treating third party developers with utter contempt. They're having growing pains. I bet in a few years, they'll be much better. They might even stop poisoning 3rd party developers' food and kicking their dogs.
As others have pointed out, Sins of a Solar Empire is NOT DRM-free, because of the "Impulse" DRM program which phones home and is required to patch critical bugs.
Stardock was particularly evil, as they pulled a big bait and switch. Advertise the product as "DRM FREE!! SEE, WE CARE!" , then after they get your money you find out you need to install DRM to get the thing in a usable state. Evil.
* Discard all cookies acquired during the private session.
* Not record sites visited to the browser's history.
* Not autofill passwords, and not prompt the user to save passwords.
* Remove all downloads done during the session from the browser's download manager.
These are good web surfing practices to begin with. These seem more like bug fixes to me. Why not make them the default? Why would I ever want to browse without these safeguards?
Re:It maters not what the review says
on
Review: Spore
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Comment needs to remain upmodded, as it looks like the backlash (presumably from EA) has begun. Apparently, Gamespot is now censoring reviews critical of DRM. Does EA buy advertising here at Slashdot?
You are supposed to be outraged because next, it's your ISP. They'll even be able to point to Facebook and say, "Well, FACEBOOK censors people, and nobody complained, so why can't we?"
So, you're claiming that government is the ONLY organization that is capable of educating students and building roads?
I will grant you criminal justice as probably something that only an elected government can do properly and fairly. I wouldn't mind paying a small tax to have a lean, functional court system.
Just checking my router's logs, I probably average around 4-5GB a day. This would put me in the 120-150GB/mo range. And this is just with a few torrents, some game patches (these can get very large, 0.5-1GB each), a few CD images. I don't consider myself a heavy torrenter or a download addict by any means. Not even in the top 1% I'm sure.
I'm sure if I wanted to, I could hit 250GB/mo. It's not even beyond thinking that within a year or two, people will be downloading 1TB/mo. Look at the size of HD movies.
Incarceration is a growth industry. The more things we make illegal, the more "employees" the prisons have. The other poster made a joke about "Big Jail" but in reality, Big Jail is a major lobby in Washington DC, always pushing for harsher and harsher laws. Gotta keep those jails PACKED full of non-violent "offenders" to feed the business.
Is it really possible, here in 2008, to "create a central hub for XYZ on the web where XYZ-ers can gather to talk about XYZ, do XYZ, and find people interested in XYZ" and have it actually work? Does it work to start from scratch and plan such an empire, or do you have to have the patience to let these kind of sites naturally evolve?
Is it even possible to have a "central hub" of _anything_ on the web? What's wrong with this thinking?
Stardock is the perfect example of a company who gained the trust of their user base and then proceeded to shit all over it.
Their original party line for Sins of a Solar Empire was, "We aren't going to treat our users like criminals. We're going for simplicity, no DRM, no copy protection. Our customers are grownups."
Then, the bait and switch.
Now, in order to even DOWNLOAD A PATCH for their game, you have to install their "Impulse" crapware. As far as I can tell, Impulse provides "download" technology, which apparently my browser is no longer good enough for. What else does it do besides "help" you download? Who knows. It appears to require Internet connectivity, so one can only assume it subsequently behaves as spyware, snooping around the software you legitimately bought and reporting back to home base (reporting what else, who knows?) Hmm... Sounds a lot like DRM, copy protection, and other malware that is more and more starting to ship with legitimate games software.
For a company that built their fan base on their pro-customer attitude, it's Shameful.
"Mozilla has unveiled a spectacular new concept browser, dubbed Aurora. The bleeding-edge browser is part of a new Mozilla Labs initiative, in which the open-source foundation is encouraging people to contribute ideas and designs for the browser of the future. The Aurora browser demonstration shows a highly advanced way of collaborating data gathered on the web, and represents a spectacular introduction to the new Mozilla Labs, which much like Google Labs looks to become a home for offbeat projects which would otherwise probably never see the light of day. More details, and a video demonstration, are on the Mozilla Labs site."
Is this a Slashvertisement or what? You can tell that a piece was written by a PR department when, despite all the LOUD and OBNOXIOUS adjectives, it barely describes the thing it is hyping.
Now I'm getting into this:-) A court could find it unenforceable due to unconscionability.
From Wikipedia: "A court of law will consider evidence that one party to the contract took advantage of its superior bargaining power to insert provisions that make the agreement overwhelmingly favor the interests of that party."
Consider this... if it's setup such that a server can be 100% sure about who it's communicating with, then we could probably come close to eradicating spam and malware......and whistle-blowers and rape/abuse victims and critics of totalitarian governments and anyone else who may just want to discuss a controversial or taboo topic anonymously.
IANAL either, but AFAIK, contracts are either totally or partially unenforceable if the contract as a whole or some part of the contract either violates a state or federal statute or violates public policy.
In other words, if you sign a contract agreeing to let me murder your wife, it's not enforceable.
2. Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
3. Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
[...]
Even at 1,000 feet, though, I guess you could take a pretty good picture.
When there is no penalty for speculative litigation, litigation becomes a business method instead of an instrument of last resort.
Um, I hate to tell you, but even with the possibility of dismissal with prejudice, litigation is still a HUGE business. You just need to go for higher awards to offset the risk associated with the penalties.
The litigation-for-profit industry is alive and well and not going anywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
So, if I make a controversial comment, then send you a dollar in the mail, you're responsible for what I said?
If they dropped the $120/mo cable package and sold the 50 inch plasma TV, they'd solve two problems at once: their children's access to inappropriate TV and their having to work 5 jobs to afford a house full of luxuries. It's a win-win!
I think your two examples show that no matter how edited a scene is, no matter how little (or none, in your examples) actual graphic content is shown, there is still someone, somewhere, who will consider it offensive.
I'll turn it around: How is the advertiser supposed to create content that is both effective and guaranteed not to offend anyone? I submit that for any TV clip out there, anything at all, given enough people, SOMEBODY is going to find the clip inappropriate for children. What's the answer from the point of view of the content producer?
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm late for Halliburton/Disney Re-education Camp.
You mean, public school?
When someone makes a controversial claim, then simply backs it up with something like, "It's a fact." or "That's the truth." you know they probably full of it and have no actual evidence. I'd expect this on the political blogs, not a technical forum. You sound like, "9/11 was an inside job. That's a fact!"
and the argument about saving yourself from a rogue government seems completely lost now. You can't. They have bigger guns. Oh, and nukes. Which is crazy - right?
Tell that to the Iraqi insurgency. The kid hiding in a bush with a $20 AK-47 has proven to be quite effective against the supposedly higher tech, better armed U.S. military. No military in the world stands a chance against a sufficiently armed, motivated, and organized group of civilians defending their homes.
The founding fathers of the U.S. were wise to very deliberately guarantee INDIVIDUALS the right to bear arms, as a final check against an out of control government.
Exactly... The iPhone app store is Apple's first attempt at NOT treating third party developers with utter contempt. They're having growing pains. I bet in a few years, they'll be much better. They might even stop poisoning 3rd party developers' food and kicking their dogs.
As others have pointed out, Sins of a Solar Empire is NOT DRM-free, because of the "Impulse" DRM program which phones home and is required to patch critical bugs.
Stardock was particularly evil, as they pulled a big bait and switch. Advertise the product as "DRM FREE!! SEE, WE CARE!" , then after they get your money you find out you need to install DRM to get the thing in a usable state. Evil.
Specifically, the mode would:
* Discard all cookies acquired during the private session.
* Not record sites visited to the browser's history.
* Not autofill passwords, and not prompt the user to save passwords.
* Remove all downloads done during the session from the browser's download manager.
These are good web surfing practices to begin with. These seem more like bug fixes to me. Why not make them the default? Why would I ever want to browse without these safeguards?
Comment needs to remain upmodded, as it looks like the backlash (presumably from EA) has begun. Apparently, Gamespot is now censoring reviews critical of DRM. Does EA buy advertising here at Slashdot?
If all the cell providers have basically the same contract, then there is no real choice.
What about the choice not to enter into a cell phone contract? Or, has contract cell phone service suddenly become a necessity of life, like water?
You are supposed to be outraged because next, it's your ISP. They'll even be able to point to Facebook and say, "Well, FACEBOOK censors people, and nobody complained, so why can't we?"
So, you're claiming that government is the ONLY organization that is capable of educating students and building roads?
I will grant you criminal justice as probably something that only an elected government can do properly and fairly. I wouldn't mind paying a small tax to have a lean, functional court system.
Actually, it's a fantastic comparison.
Taxes are, essentially, money (that we own) taken from us at gunpoint. If you don't believe that, watch what happens when you fail to pay them.
Just checking my router's logs, I probably average around 4-5GB a day. This would put me in the 120-150GB/mo range. And this is just with a few torrents, some game patches (these can get very large, 0.5-1GB each), a few CD images. I don't consider myself a heavy torrenter or a download addict by any means. Not even in the top 1% I'm sure.
I'm sure if I wanted to, I could hit 250GB/mo. It's not even beyond thinking that within a year or two, people will be downloading 1TB/mo. Look at the size of HD movies.
See also, Corrections Corporation of America.
Incarceration is a growth industry. The more things we make illegal, the more "employees" the prisons have. The other poster made a joke about "Big Jail" but in reality, Big Jail is a major lobby in Washington DC, always pushing for harsher and harsher laws. Gotta keep those jails PACKED full of non-violent "offenders" to feed the business.
Forget games, for a minute.
Is it really possible, here in 2008, to "create a central hub for XYZ on the web where XYZ-ers can gather to talk about XYZ, do XYZ, and find people interested in XYZ" and have it actually work? Does it work to start from scratch and plan such an empire, or do you have to have the patience to let these kind of sites naturally evolve?
Is it even possible to have a "central hub" of _anything_ on the web? What's wrong with this thinking?
No, No, No, No, No!
Stardock is the perfect example of a company who gained the trust of their user base and then proceeded to shit all over it.
Their original party line for Sins of a Solar Empire was, "We aren't going to treat our users like criminals. We're going for simplicity, no DRM, no copy protection. Our customers are grownups."
Then, the bait and switch.
Now, in order to even DOWNLOAD A PATCH for their game, you have to install their "Impulse" crapware. As far as I can tell, Impulse provides "download" technology, which apparently my browser is no longer good enough for. What else does it do besides "help" you download? Who knows. It appears to require Internet connectivity, so one can only assume it subsequently behaves as spyware, snooping around the software you legitimately bought and reporting back to home base (reporting what else, who knows?) Hmm... Sounds a lot like DRM, copy protection, and other malware that is more and more starting to ship with legitimate games software.
For a company that built their fan base on their pro-customer attitude, it's Shameful.
"Mozilla has unveiled a spectacular new concept browser, dubbed Aurora. The bleeding-edge browser is part of a new Mozilla Labs initiative, in which the open-source foundation is encouraging people to contribute ideas and designs for the browser of the future. The Aurora browser demonstration shows a highly advanced way of collaborating data gathered on the web, and represents a spectacular introduction to the new Mozilla Labs, which much like Google Labs looks to become a home for offbeat projects which would otherwise probably never see the light of day. More details, and a video demonstration, are on the Mozilla Labs site."
Is this a Slashvertisement or what? You can tell that a piece was written by a PR department when, despite all the LOUD and OBNOXIOUS adjectives, it barely describes the thing it is hyping.
Now I'm getting into this :-) A court could find it unenforceable due to
unconscionability.
From Wikipedia: "A court of law will consider evidence that one party to the contract took advantage of its superior bargaining power to insert provisions that make the agreement overwhelmingly favor the interests of that party."
Consider this... if it's setup such that a server can be 100% sure about who it's communicating with, then we could probably come close to eradicating spam and malware... ...and whistle-blowers and rape/abuse victims and critics of totalitarian governments and anyone else who may just want to discuss a controversial or taboo topic anonymously.
Companies need to be responsible as well. You can't just write any old thing into a contract and expect it to hold the weight of law.
IANAL either, but AFAIK, contracts are either totally or partially unenforceable if the contract as a whole or some part of the contract either violates a state or federal statute or violates public policy.
In other words, if you sign a contract agreeing to let me murder your wife, it's not enforceable.
According to Section 119 of Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations you have to maintain a minimum altitude:
[...]
2. Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
3. Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
[...]
Even at 1,000 feet, though, I guess you could take a pretty good picture.
When there is no penalty for speculative litigation, litigation becomes a business method instead of an instrument of last resort.
Um, I hate to tell you, but even with the possibility of dismissal with prejudice, litigation is still a HUGE business. You just need to go for higher awards to offset the risk associated with the penalties.
The litigation-for-profit industry is alive and well and not going anywhere.