Ah, my point was more for the pay-per-play aspect where the game would present you with a barcode which you would take a picture of, be billed ( to your phone bill perhaps ) and then the game is told it can play via internet or perhaps another connection to the phone ( bluetooth etc. ).
I'm not saying it would be secure, or that it will even happen.. but it is possible and is therefore worrying! I'm sure it would be cracked within a very short amount of time though:)
1) Player launches game 2) Computer "Please take a picture of this 'barcode' to start game" 3) Player does so and gets billed for this instance of playing the game 4) ??? 5) PROFIT!!
I've never had a fresh installation of Windows XP ( Professional and with SP2 rolled in ) provide drivers for on-board ethernet on multiple different motherboards ( never ever had a problem with Linux though ). Does Windows XP only support PCI ethernet cards out of the box?
They are trying to turn paying gamers against "pirate" gamers by basically saying "This is costing you more money and causing you inconvenience because of pirates. Go get them!".
Just to clarify, if the Apple advert says "Fast browsing" then you will most likely focus on the time it takes to browse in the advert, so it isn't immediately obvious that that might not be "true".
On the other hand, it's pretty easy to guess that you couldn't fix a light in another building from your phone. And that a Citroen C4 doesn't transform into a dancing robot
I've not noticed this and the test results say otherwise ( 11ms -> 13ms ). Unless, of course, they aren't stalling ping packets but are stalling everything else which would co-incide with what you are saying.
We get 2.4GB of download before being throttled at *any* time ( as the Virgin Media Traffic Management page says ). It just happens that during the evening, that limit is halved to 1.2GB. So downloading in the early morning or at night doesn't make any difference, we'll still get throttled.
During the throttle period, running P2P results in the ridiculous ping. It takes a minute or so for the ping to rise so I can only conclude that the ISP servers are putting our packets to the bottom of the pile because at any other time, ping is fine even with P2P running.
Personally, I regard this as a download limit. Simply because they are limiting my download speed, therefore the amount I can download in any given time.
Because during my download of Fedora 10, Virgin Media will throttle my connection from 8 to 2 ( mb/s ) and put my ping time ( to Google ) into the 2 second range.
I doubt it, it was the first ever game I have ever seen that stated such a thing on the case. While I think containing such software is very bad on the part of the developers/publishers ( not sure who put it in, I presume developers ), much kudos to whoever put that warning on the back.
I should have probably took it to the front desk and said "I'm not buying this game because it has invasive DRM/copy protection" and left it there. At least then someone would have heard the reason I wasn't buying it, even if it didn't go any further up.
Actually, I was in GAME the other day and while browsing I foudn something ( Dungeons & Dragons 6 or something ) and while I was reading the blurb there was a sentence underneath it reading something like: "This game includes copy protection software which may interfere with other software and hardware on the PC."
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, my point was more for the pay-per-play aspect where the game would present you with a barcode which you would take a picture of, be billed ( to your phone bill perhaps ) and then the game is told it can play via internet or perhaps another connection to the phone ( bluetooth etc. ).
I'm not saying it would be secure, or that it will even happen.. but it is possible and is therefore worrying! I'm sure it would be cracked within a very short amount of time though :)
Hope that makes more sense
Could you elaborate? I don't understand why you brought up the "security" of that scenario
Worryingly..
1) Player launches game
2) Computer "Please take a picture of this 'barcode' to start game"
3) Player does so and gets billed for this instance of playing the game
4) ???
5) PROFIT!!
I've never had a fresh installation of Windows XP ( Professional and with SP2 rolled in ) provide drivers for on-board ethernet on multiple different motherboards ( never ever had a problem with Linux though ). Does Windows XP only support PCI ethernet cards out of the box?
it's their operating system and they can do what they like.
Are they going to start listing the reasons why I no longer use Windows? :)
Are you launching IE as another application or using something like IEtab?
Likewise, however not everyone see's it this way.
Maybe it's divide and conquer.
They are trying to turn paying gamers against "pirate" gamers by basically saying "This is costing you more money and causing you inconvenience because of pirates. Go get them!".
If making a game is always resulting in a loss, it wouldn't make any sense ( business or otherwise ) to continue making games.
Therefore, I can only conclude that making a game is *still* profitable ( despite everything ) and would just like to say:
Be happy you are making profit and stop whining about how much.
That goes for **AA too!
Alt + [0-9] allows me to switch tabs without the mouse ( not sure on any limitations e.g. only up to 10th tab ).
Doesn't choosing 'just one' of anything increase vulnerability due to lack of diversity?
You might as well just put it in your signature and be done with it then :)
Just to clarify, if the Apple advert says "Fast browsing" then you will most likely focus on the time it takes to browse in the advert, so it isn't immediately obvious that that might not be "true".
On the other hand, it's pretty easy to guess that you couldn't fix a light in another building from your phone. And that a Citroen C4 doesn't transform into a dancing robot
I've not seen either of the commercials but maybe it is because one doesn't claim or imply to be able to do the thing it is showing in the advert?
Green boxes, about 4 foot high, full of cables? I have one of those at the bottom of the garden..
I'd be more than happy to pay that. My research was more around the £30/month mark and I was willing to pay that! Thanks, I'll look into it :)
I've not noticed this and the test results say otherwise ( 11ms -> 13ms ).
Unless, of course, they aren't stalling ping packets but are stalling everything else which would co-incide with what you are saying.
Hmmm.. thanks for the info!
We get 2.4GB of download before being throttled at *any* time ( as the Virgin Media Traffic Management page says ).
It just happens that during the evening, that limit is halved to 1.2GB. So downloading in the early morning or at night doesn't make any difference, we'll still get throttled.
We're on cable.
My ping is fine until both these two conditions are met:
Inside throttling period
P2P software running
And just for completeness, here are my Speedtest.net results before and during throttling:
Before: 8482 kb/s 480 kb/s 11 ms Maidenhead ~ 100 mi
After: 2158 kb/s 118 kb/s 14 ms Maidenhead ~ 100 mi
I don't know about your experience but going from ( download ) 1000kb/s -> 30Kb/s and ( upload ) 45kb/s -> 11kb/s looks like throttling to me.
During the throttle period, running P2P results in the ridiculous ping. It takes a minute or so for the ping to rise so I can only conclude that the ISP servers are putting our packets to the bottom of the pile because at any other time, ping is fine even with P2P running. Personally, I regard this as a download limit. Simply because they are limiting my download speed, therefore the amount I can download in any given time.
Because during my download of Fedora 10, Virgin Media will throttle my connection from 8 to 2 ( mb/s ) and put my ping time ( to Google ) into the 2 second range.
I doubt it, it was the first ever game I have ever seen that stated such a thing on the case.
While I think containing such software is very bad on the part of the developers/publishers ( not sure who put it in, I presume developers ), much kudos to whoever put that warning on the back.
I should have probably took it to the front desk and said "I'm not buying this game because it has invasive DRM/copy protection" and left it there. At least then someone would have heard the reason I wasn't buying it, even if it didn't go any further up.
Actually, I was in GAME the other day and while browsing I foudn something ( Dungeons & Dragons 6 or something ) and while I was reading the blurb there was a sentence underneath it reading something like:
"This game includes copy protection software which may interfere with other software and hardware on the PC."
I promptly put it back on the shelf.