My bad, I did get a little jumpy. Evolution does it to me, I've had one too many people explain about gods and control and design and whatever. I now tend to pounce on the first sign of ID infiltrating a scientific discussion.
It seems like there is a sizable contingent of the games industry that really, really wishes they were making movies instead. The reason they aren't, obviously, is that they aren't actually good enough. Thus, we get Uncharted foisted upon our hobby, and it is praised as having an amazing story and voice acting despite the fact that as a movie, it would be distinctly third rate, and probably go straight to video.
(I really liked Uncharted and the sequel, so back off, fanboys with mod points.)
Darwinism is a description of natural processes. Cruelty requires intent, and there is no evidence of intent in the underlying processes, never mind the description of those same.
Nature does things for a reason.
Again, there is no evidence of this point of view.
I'm not sure how you got modded up. I can only assume the intelligent design folks somehow got points today.
There only has to be a negative if you assume evolution is guided. If things just continue to work from the survival point of view, it doesn't matter one whit to evolution if there was an advantage lost.
Naturally modded down as Troll. It's good to know that asking a serious question that may expose flaws in Slashdot-approved reasoning should be silenced. How dare I question your gods?
In the end all you need to ask is this: "Do software patents help or hinder a healthy programming environment?" Most people think not.
If that's all I need to ask, you need to cite your answers better. I'm not sure where you get "most" from, but I suspect you aren't even close. I might grant you "most open-source developers think not." I might even grant you "most developers think not."
If you were right, I'd agree with you, but you are mischaracterizing a complex issue with a vast oversimplification.
H.264, for instance, is not the idea of a codec. It is a very specific and very complex implementation of a particular codec. Your analogy is broken despite the fact that Slashdot loves it.
You've missed the overall point. This isn't even alpha quality software, it's in development. They aren't claiming they passed, they are just showing that they are making progress.
What you're doing is kinda like picking on a 2 year old for not having an expansive vocabulary.
I wouldn't bother with either. I don't like this practice, so I'm not buying the game. I'm not going to pirate it, though, since I don't fool myself into believing I'm entitled to the free entertainment.
Your attitude invited the insults. You think your arguments are unique and interesting? It's the same crap the kids were spewing in the heyday of Napster. You aren't a hero, you're just a jerk.
You provided nothing but anecdotes, so you didn't actually prove anything despite your assertions. Feel free to fill in your citations, but until then, realize that your post was the equivalent of screaming "I know you are, but what am I?"
That's you, right there - your stand against DRM is a red herring designed to distract from the fact that you believe you have a right to guaranteed access to entertainment (entitlement!) despite the fact that such a right is not yours to claim, your justifications notwithstanding. You are not enjoying free entertainment as a means of protest, you are protesting as a side effect of enjoying free entertainment. You profit from an arrangement that is not yours to claim, and you behave as though doing so makes you morally superior. You then argue semantics in an attempt to dizzy those around you, but it fails because we aren't stupid here.
Go peddle your bullshit on Digg. Around here, just be proud to be a jerk. There is no point to pretending you have a justification. Don't shit on the heads of game developers and then make them thank you for the hat.
Pirates will latch onto any justification they can to make themselves feel like heroes. I find it wonderfully poetic that they need these justifications, it proves to me that they know they are doing the wrong thing.
Come on, this is Slashdot, where people are considered evil for making any profit at all. Even worse, this is a story about entertainment, and Slashdotters generally carry the attitude that they are entitled to all entertainment for free. I bet somewhere down in this story, someone uses this as justification for pirating the game.
How is the hardware R&D any more valid than software R&D? I have a hard time figuring out this distinction. So far as I can tell, if you're against software patents, you're either against all patents, or you're a hypocrite.
Actually, said iPhone user also has a contract with AT&T specifying acceptable use of the network. Anyone who doesn't like the terms is free to not buy an iPhone. It has nothing to do with being sold by "corporate masters" or whatever rhetoric the entitlement crowd is spouting this week.
You're also free to whine about it on the Internet. Good luck.
I'll get modded down, but my analogy is extremely apt.
What if I want Steve Jobs to suck my dick?
Seriously, what if I wanted that? What is my recourse? He's not offering it to me, in no way has he even made an overture I can interpret that way, so is my desire in any way realistic?
It only proves his point if you throw away the fact that reality doesn't allow for perfection, no matter how hard you wish for it. Academics are famous for discarding real-world constraints to achieve particular theoretical results. It's when we poor sloppy regular humans have to do things in the real world that such dreams evaporate like soap bubbles.
What I'm saying is sure, this proves his point, and all you have to do is discard reality for it to be useful.
The articles you linked indicate that Toyota has attempted a number of different fixes for what it believed were several separate acceleration related issues. I don't have to find links to make my case, you made it for me.
Good news, no one will force you to participate. Isn't it great? You get to ignore it because you hate it, and those of us who don't hate it get to not be ignorant. Life is grand with choice.
Toyota's reaction may well be unacceptable to you, but I find it highly unlikely that they were aware of the cause of the problem and left it alone anyway. Even assuming your economic war theory is true, there are no economic gains to be had by killing your customers.
In any case, this isn't me defending Toyota. Don't argue like a teenage girl.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, sorry about that. Nothing personal :D
My bad, I did get a little jumpy. Evolution does it to me, I've had one too many people explain about gods and control and design and whatever. I now tend to pounce on the first sign of ID infiltrating a scientific discussion.
It seems like there is a sizable contingent of the games industry that really, really wishes they were making movies instead. The reason they aren't, obviously, is that they aren't actually good enough. Thus, we get Uncharted foisted upon our hobby, and it is praised as having an amazing story and voice acting despite the fact that as a movie, it would be distinctly third rate, and probably go straight to video.
(I really liked Uncharted and the sequel, so back off, fanboys with mod points.)
Darwinism is cruel.
Darwinism is a description of natural processes. Cruelty requires intent, and there is no evidence of intent in the underlying processes, never mind the description of those same.
Nature does things for a reason.
Again, there is no evidence of this point of view.
I'm not sure how you got modded up. I can only assume the intelligent design folks somehow got points today.
There only has to be a negative if you assume evolution is guided. If things just continue to work from the survival point of view, it doesn't matter one whit to evolution if there was an advantage lost.
Naturally modded down as Troll. It's good to know that asking a serious question that may expose flaws in Slashdot-approved reasoning should be silenced. How dare I question your gods?
In the end all you need to ask is this: "Do software patents help or hinder a healthy programming environment?" Most people think not.
If that's all I need to ask, you need to cite your answers better. I'm not sure where you get "most" from, but I suspect you aren't even close. I might grant you "most open-source developers think not." I might even grant you "most developers think not."
Good, a semantic argument that isn't even about the point. Thanks! for nothing...
If you were right, I'd agree with you, but you are mischaracterizing a complex issue with a vast oversimplification.
H.264, for instance, is not the idea of a codec. It is a very specific and very complex implementation of a particular codec. Your analogy is broken despite the fact that Slashdot loves it.
You've missed the overall point. This isn't even alpha quality software, it's in development. They aren't claiming they passed, they are just showing that they are making progress.
What you're doing is kinda like picking on a 2 year old for not having an expansive vocabulary.
OMG their technology preview isn't perfect? BURN THEM!
I wouldn't bother with either. I don't like this practice, so I'm not buying the game. I'm not going to pirate it, though, since I don't fool myself into believing I'm entitled to the free entertainment.
Your attitude invited the insults. You think your arguments are unique and interesting? It's the same crap the kids were spewing in the heyday of Napster. You aren't a hero, you're just a jerk.
You provided nothing but anecdotes, so you didn't actually prove anything despite your assertions. Feel free to fill in your citations, but until then, realize that your post was the equivalent of screaming "I know you are, but what am I?"
Entitlement
That's you, right there - your stand against DRM is a red herring designed to distract from the fact that you believe you have a right to guaranteed access to entertainment (entitlement!) despite the fact that such a right is not yours to claim, your justifications notwithstanding. You are not enjoying free entertainment as a means of protest, you are protesting as a side effect of enjoying free entertainment. You profit from an arrangement that is not yours to claim, and you behave as though doing so makes you morally superior. You then argue semantics in an attempt to dizzy those around you, but it fails because we aren't stupid here.
Go peddle your bullshit on Digg. Around here, just be proud to be a jerk. There is no point to pretending you have a justification. Don't shit on the heads of game developers and then make them thank you for the hat.
I like your logic. It makes no sense at all, but you tried really hard to make it seem like it does. It's beautiful.
Do you actually believe your own bullshit? That's the sign of a master.
Pirates will latch onto any justification they can to make themselves feel like heroes. I find it wonderfully poetic that they need these justifications, it proves to me that they know they are doing the wrong thing.
Come on, this is Slashdot, where people are considered evil for making any profit at all. Even worse, this is a story about entertainment, and Slashdotters generally carry the attitude that they are entitled to all entertainment for free. I bet somewhere down in this story, someone uses this as justification for pirating the game.
How is the hardware R&D any more valid than software R&D? I have a hard time figuring out this distinction. So far as I can tell, if you're against software patents, you're either against all patents, or you're a hypocrite.
Actually, said iPhone user also has a contract with AT&T specifying acceptable use of the network. Anyone who doesn't like the terms is free to not buy an iPhone. It has nothing to do with being sold by "corporate masters" or whatever rhetoric the entitlement crowd is spouting this week.
You're also free to whine about it on the Internet. Good luck.
I'll get modded down, but my analogy is extremely apt.
What if I want Steve Jobs to suck my dick?
Seriously, what if I wanted that? What is my recourse? He's not offering it to me, in no way has he even made an overture I can interpret that way, so is my desire in any way realistic?
It only proves his point if you throw away the fact that reality doesn't allow for perfection, no matter how hard you wish for it. Academics are famous for discarding real-world constraints to achieve particular theoretical results. It's when we poor sloppy regular humans have to do things in the real world that such dreams evaporate like soap bubbles.
What I'm saying is sure, this proves his point, and all you have to do is discard reality for it to be useful.
Once we let you in, the precedent was set.
The articles you linked indicate that Toyota has attempted a number of different fixes for what it believed were several separate acceleration related issues. I don't have to find links to make my case, you made it for me.
Good news, no one will force you to participate. Isn't it great? You get to ignore it because you hate it, and those of us who don't hate it get to not be ignorant. Life is grand with choice.
Toyota's reaction may well be unacceptable to you, but I find it highly unlikely that they were aware of the cause of the problem and left it alone anyway. Even assuming your economic war theory is true, there are no economic gains to be had by killing your customers.
In any case, this isn't me defending Toyota. Don't argue like a teenage girl.