I realize that Oblivion is a very popular game that a lot of people like. But I just can't get into it. If anything, it's too open-ended - it feels like someone sat down, made a universe, took a week to throw a plotline into it, and then spent a year or two making side quests. I never feel like I'm having a real impact in the world, and I feel like most of the world is in stasis waiting for me to walk by and solve their problems.
I wouldn't even mind all of that, except that Bethesda appears to have no sense of which features are important and which are not. Sure, you can become a vampire. That's great and all. But why is my inventory so hard to navigate? I could do without becoming a vampire if they'd just make the interface not suck. (Yes, I realize there are now third-party mods for this. A game shouldn't need to be modded to be playable.) At least they're getting better - some of the bugs and glitches in Morrowind were hilarious. It's like nobody ever bothered to sit down and play the game, they just decided to put every awesome feature possible in it without any thought to polish.
I think that, fundamentally, Bethesda needs to sit down and make an MMORPG. Their design style is practically ideally suited for it, and once they see what horrible problems their "game balancing" creates, they might learn how to balance a damn game for once. But I have to say that I'm not excited in the least about what Bethesda does anymore, and I'm deeply saddened that they now own the Fallout series.
It is possible to eat that much space. I worked on a game that ate 8.5gb, after heavy compression, mostly on level textures. We had lighting baked into the texture and it honestly looked great. I suspect there are other high-end effects that you could do with huge amounts of space far more efficiently than trying to generate them in realtime (which simply wouldn't have been viable for us.)
On the other hand, I suspect most studios don't bother with that.
They need to hire better compression coders. I worked on a game once that needed better compression. We got it to fit on a single DVD. Uncompressed it would have been around 50gb. Dual-layer DVD is 8.5gb of space, so what they're saying is that they needed to compress it from 30gb to 25.5gb. Somehow I'm just not that impressed.
The smaller of the two, HD-DVD, has 15gb of space on a single-layer single-sided disc. Invalidating a key likely takes very little space - I'm betting under 1k. Even assuming it's 1k, invalidating a million keys would use a mere 1gb of space.
Essentially, it's not much of an issue. If they have to invalidate a million keys they're screwed anyway.
I mean, even if they don't they're screwed anyway, but at that point at least they ought to realize it.
I am currently holding in my hand a wire transfer request, dating from a few months ago when I sent money to a friend with an unexpected catastrophe. It asks for very few things.
* Date/time of original request * "Teller ID" (I called them to ask how to do this and they gave me this bit of information) * Member name * Member number (this is embedded in the routing number for my savings account) * Daytime phone * Amount * Information on who gets the money * Signature
The only parts of this which could be used for authentication:
* The fact that I called * My name * My member number * My phone number * My signature
Given my tax forms, one could easily find my name and phone number, and if I had chosen the option to wire to or from my checking account, my member number as well. (This is why I would have sent a check, although that doesn't help particularly since the number is still written on the check. I got a refund, however, so they'll be sending me a check instead and I don't have to worry about that particular hole.)
Calling them is easily doable by someone who isn't me. My signature, as much as I hate to admit it, is awful and pretty easily forgeable.
So, in summary: the information on a tax return is a significant fraction of what is needed to withdraw money from someone else's account. It may not be enough. But it certainly helps.
Yeah, I think that's pretty much what everyone expects (at least, everyone besides the people making DRM.)
If I'm interpreting http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122363 correctly, there would be 2^22 or 4 million possible keys available. I honestly don't see them running out anytime soon. On top of that, the AACS encryption could be extended pretty much indefinitely, and if the actual implementation is cleverly done, it may be possible to extend it without breaking any hardware players (at least, any players which aren't already revoked - if they actually start running out of keys it would have to be thanks to lots of hacked keys.) I truly don't expect this to happen - they're smart enough to be careful of this.
Summary, though: a disc can be decrypted by an entire set of keys (I don't know the actual count, but I suspect it's at least thousands) and they can be revoked one at a time on a disc-by-disc basis. They won't be adding new keys (since that creates the exact problem you've described), they'll just be revoking old compromised keys, and presumably they have enough keys ready that they don't believe they will run out.
No, that will work fine too. They haven't changed a global key of any kind. They've just revoked the old key for new media. All the newer keys still work fine. You can conceptually think of it as all discs supporting thousands of keys, some of which are used by players and some of which simply exist for future not-yet-constructed players to use - there's plenty of possible keys left for new players to work on old discs.
When they revoke keys, they simply remove the old compromised keys from new discs, so players relying on those keys can't play anything.
Well, if they already purchased it, it just works - it's not like they can modify the disc media from a distance. Those people have nothing to worry about.
The real issue is people who purchased [i]players[/i] which used the keys which are now expired. Those people must update their players. In the case of WinDVD, that means downloading an update. In the case of the XBox360 drive that will involve downloading an update. (The XBox360 key is not yet revoked, and in theory they might not revoke it.)
Correct. It doesn't count as distribution until someone downloads it. If you can prove nobody downloaded it at any point, and that the CVS repository backend was never accessed by anyone besides you, no crime has been committed. Of course, the instant someone downloads it, it's a different situation than the one here and illegal.
(IANAL, but I believe this is true. That said, whether MS would sue you anyway is an exercise left to the reader.)
BSD does not require attribution (in fact, that clause was specifically removed.) As long as the license appears somewhere in the project, it's sufficient. (IANAL but this is how I understand it.) On top of that, the BSD license is so open that, if the license did not specify that the license must be included, it really wouldn't be necessary - you can take BSD code and do pretty much whatever you want with it, including add it to a GPL project, or modify it and GPL-license the modifications. (Or, for that matter, not modify it and then provide the original source code under the GPL.)
The GPL is different in that regards. If I saw GPL code in a BSD project, and the GPL code was not marked as such, I would have no way of knowing that it would be illegal for me to take that code and treat it as BSD code. As such, any GPL code added to a mostly-BSD-licensed project must be marked explicitly as such.
I don't know what the issue with the Virgin WebPlayer is, but the others are all BSD-licensed code added to a GPL project, which doesn't require any specific notification beyond the BSD license appearing somewhere.
Actually, if anything, I think teachers aren't being paid enough. Ever heard the phrase "those who can, do, those who can't, teach"? It's true - if you can do something, you get a job doing it. If you can't make a living doing it, instead you teach people how to do it. Guess how well this works.
There's three big problems with the American educational system at the moment.
* Money going to the wrong places - computers bought with no plans in mind, new buildings without staff for them, extraordinary administrator salaries for administrators who don't do anything. * Incompetent teachers, paid badly enough to keep all the possibly-skilled teachers far, far away. * America's teacher's union, which essentially requires teachers to be kept or fired based solely on seniority, not competence.
The latter keeps the former two going. If you want to fix the educational system, the first thing you do is get rid of the damn union, the second thing you do is fire crappy teachers, and the third thing you do is raise teacher salaries enough to hire good teachers.
Supply and demand. There's just not enough demand to create a good supply.
The only way Youtube can possibly satisfy every set of laws is by turning it into a country-specific site, and removing videos from specific country sites instead of from the site as a whole. I suspect they'll end up doing this eventually, once they have every country yelling at them for a different contradictory subset of videos.
When I got New Super Mario Bros I played it pretty much constantly until I finished it. Several of my friends did the same. We have semi-regular DS multiplayer bouts, where NSMB and Mario Kart 64 are our staples. Several of us have played and beat Super Mario 64, and several of us own Tetris (I do not, due to a huge game queue at this point, but I did get Mario and Luigi Partners in Time.) I believe several of us own Nintendogs too, though I haven't gotten into that one. (I've been kind of avoiding it since it sounds addictive.)
Nintendo makes fun games. Sony, fundamentally, does not. The vast majority of good Sony-platform games are third-party games, and for whatever reason, the competent third-party developers have largely avoided the PSP (with several notable exceptions.)
I have both a DS and a PSP, and the fact is that the DS has significantly more good games than the PSP does. Yes, a lot of those are more cartoony and have more primary colors and less noir. They're still damn fun games though, and many people don't mind cartoony games with lots of primary colors.
Noise cancelling headphones kind of suck, honestly. I have a pair too. I don't use them anymore. Good isolation headphones or isolation earplugs do the job great - ditch your noice cancelling phones and pick up one of those.
Right now air travel is cheaper and faster than the alternatives. Turns out that's 99% of what people want. Some airlines succeed through slightly better food and service (this is why I fly Southwest when they're not significantly more expensive), some through better comfort amenities (this is why I fly Jet Blue when possible.)
If air travel ends up being even louder and more annoying, I highly suspect that at least one airline will start a "no cell phone" policy.
Of course, you also had a choice to live near another airport or hub if you chose to.
On top of that, you could ask the airline to provide dedicated "no cellphone" flights. If that helped them compete in areas with other competition it might be a good idea. Alternatively, you could ask a no-cellphone airline to start servicing your airport, and if people really disliked cellphones enough, chances are they would.
Or, if you really hated people talking on cellphones, you could get a good pair of isolation headphones or earplugs. That's what I do. The engine noise, even when sitting next to the engines, comes across no louder than a reasonably modern car, and I can play music or handheld games at quite a reasonable volume.
Nobody who talks seriously about this stuff uses "clean" as an absolute term. "Clean" means "significantly cleaner than what we currently have", or possibly "clean enough that it is not a problem". Mining and processing nuclear fuel doesn't necessarily spew greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but our current coal plants do . . . to a much, much lower extent than automobiles do.
Gasoline is less clean than electric-powered cars run off coal plants, which itself is less clean than electric-powered cars run off nuclear plants, which is arguably less clean than electric-powered cars run off solar panels (solar panels are pretty dirty to make and dispose of, but I don't pretend to know hard figures on this matter because I don't.)
(Greenhouse gases are obviously not the only factor in "clean" - toxic and radioactive byproducts are a issue as well. However, radioactive byproducts are much easier to contain than most people think.)
If you want to be completely clean, go kill yourself immediately so you're no longer consuming oxygen or resources. Make sure not to use a gun because guns work with combustion, and also don't use drugs unless you know they're biodegradable. I recommend hanging yourself in the forest using a rope made out of organically-grown hemp (you'll have to harvest it yourself, by hand, of course.) This is still not entirely clean but it's the best option I can come up with at the moment.
Also make sure you do it away from water so your rotting corpse doesn't pollute the water table.
Or, alternatively, new energy sources. There's a huge amount of fuel available for nuclear reactors, and once we perfect fusion, there's an enormous amount of fuel available for that.
Claiming that biofuel is our only other option is misleading at best.
On the other hand, I only recognize the artists, to say nothing of the songs, of two of those - and both are the Beatles. (I can sing both of those songs, however.)
Here's the top 10 of 2002:
1 - Avril Lavigne - Complicated 2 - Nelly - Hot in Here 3 - Mary J. Blige - Family Affair 4 - No Doubt - Hella Good 5 - Eminem - Lose Yourself 6 - Kylie Minogue - Can't Get You Out of My Head 7 - Pink - Get the Party Started 8 - Missy "Misdemeanor" Elliott - Work It 9 - Shakira - Whenever, Wherever 10 - Jimmy Eat World - The Middle
Out of these, I recognize all but one artist, know seven of these songs, and own several.
However, I don't pretend to claim that this means modern music is better. It just means that I prefer modern music, which is true. Likewise, you prefer music from 1964.
Just because you're more familiar with something doesn't mean it's objectively better. I don't actually like several of the songs listed above. But there are several I do quite like. I enjoy the Beatles, but with a few exceptions, most of their music doesn't strike a chord with me.
The issue with saying "back then ____ was better" is confirmation bias combined with Sturgeon's Law and simple human memory. Sturgeon's Law, quite accurately, says that 90% of everything is crap. When you think back to the music of your childhood, do you remember the 90% of songs that you listened to that sucked, or do you remember the 10% that were awesome?
I listen to a huge amount of music, and I will cheerfully admit that most of the music I've listened to is mediocre at best. Some of it, however, is brilliant. I'm eagerly awaiting Poe's next album. Gorillaz never fails to amaze. Godspeed You Black Emperor took me six listens until I realized how much I loved it. I've recently encountered Elastica. Will I continue to enjoy them as much as I currently am? I don't know - but if I don't, I'm not going to be mentioning it next time I talk about good music.
Slashdot Mirror
I see this as terrible news, myself.
I realize that Oblivion is a very popular game that a lot of people like. But I just can't get into it. If anything, it's too open-ended - it feels like someone sat down, made a universe, took a week to throw a plotline into it, and then spent a year or two making side quests. I never feel like I'm having a real impact in the world, and I feel like most of the world is in stasis waiting for me to walk by and solve their problems.
I wouldn't even mind all of that, except that Bethesda appears to have no sense of which features are important and which are not. Sure, you can become a vampire. That's great and all. But why is my inventory so hard to navigate? I could do without becoming a vampire if they'd just make the interface not suck. (Yes, I realize there are now third-party mods for this. A game shouldn't need to be modded to be playable.) At least they're getting better - some of the bugs and glitches in Morrowind were hilarious. It's like nobody ever bothered to sit down and play the game, they just decided to put every awesome feature possible in it without any thought to polish.
I think that, fundamentally, Bethesda needs to sit down and make an MMORPG. Their design style is practically ideally suited for it, and once they see what horrible problems their "game balancing" creates, they might learn how to balance a damn game for once. But I have to say that I'm not excited in the least about what Bethesda does anymore, and I'm deeply saddened that they now own the Fallout series.
I've heard that the XBox and XBox360 already do this. No, it's not stupid, and yes, it would be quite possible.
It is possible to eat that much space. I worked on a game that ate 8.5gb, after heavy compression, mostly on level textures. We had lighting baked into the texture and it honestly looked great. I suspect there are other high-end effects that you could do with huge amounts of space far more efficiently than trying to generate them in realtime (which simply wouldn't have been viable for us.)
On the other hand, I suspect most studios don't bother with that.
They need to hire better compression coders. I worked on a game once that needed better compression. We got it to fit on a single DVD. Uncompressed it would have been around 50gb. Dual-layer DVD is 8.5gb of space, so what they're saying is that they needed to compress it from 30gb to 25.5gb. Somehow I'm just not that impressed.
The smaller of the two, HD-DVD, has 15gb of space on a single-layer single-sided disc. Invalidating a key likely takes very little space - I'm betting under 1k. Even assuming it's 1k, invalidating a million keys would use a mere 1gb of space.
Essentially, it's not much of an issue. If they have to invalidate a million keys they're screwed anyway.
I mean, even if they don't they're screwed anyway, but at that point at least they ought to realize it.
I am currently holding in my hand a wire transfer request, dating from a few months ago when I sent money to a friend with an unexpected catastrophe. It asks for very few things.
* Date/time of original request
* "Teller ID" (I called them to ask how to do this and they gave me this bit of information)
* Member name
* Member number (this is embedded in the routing number for my savings account)
* Daytime phone
* Amount
* Information on who gets the money
* Signature
The only parts of this which could be used for authentication:
* The fact that I called
* My name
* My member number
* My phone number
* My signature
Given my tax forms, one could easily find my name and phone number, and if I had chosen the option to wire to or from my checking account, my member number as well. (This is why I would have sent a check, although that doesn't help particularly since the number is still written on the check. I got a refund, however, so they'll be sending me a check instead and I don't have to worry about that particular hole.)
Calling them is easily doable by someone who isn't me. My signature, as much as I hate to admit it, is awful and pretty easily forgeable.
So, in summary: the information on a tax return is a significant fraction of what is needed to withdraw money from someone else's account. It may not be enough. But it certainly helps.
Yeah, I think that's pretty much what everyone expects (at least, everyone besides the people making DRM.)
If I'm interpreting http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122363 correctly, there would be 2^22 or 4 million possible keys available. I honestly don't see them running out anytime soon. On top of that, the AACS encryption could be extended pretty much indefinitely, and if the actual implementation is cleverly done, it may be possible to extend it without breaking any hardware players (at least, any players which aren't already revoked - if they actually start running out of keys it would have to be thanks to lots of hacked keys.) I truly don't expect this to happen - they're smart enough to be careful of this.
For a system which is fundamentally doomed to failure, AACS is pretty well-designed. :)
I have just answered that same question here :)
Summary, though: a disc can be decrypted by an entire set of keys (I don't know the actual count, but I suspect it's at least thousands) and they can be revoked one at a time on a disc-by-disc basis. They won't be adding new keys (since that creates the exact problem you've described), they'll just be revoking old compromised keys, and presumably they have enough keys ready that they don't believe they will run out.
No, that will work fine too. They haven't changed a global key of any kind. They've just revoked the old key for new media. All the newer keys still work fine. You can conceptually think of it as all discs supporting thousands of keys, some of which are used by players and some of which simply exist for future not-yet-constructed players to use - there's plenty of possible keys left for new players to work on old discs.
When they revoke keys, they simply remove the old compromised keys from new discs, so players relying on those keys can't play anything.
Well, if they already purchased it, it just works - it's not like they can modify the disc media from a distance. Those people have nothing to worry about.
The real issue is people who purchased [i]players[/i] which used the keys which are now expired. Those people must update their players. In the case of WinDVD, that means downloading an update. In the case of the XBox360 drive that will involve downloading an update. (The XBox360 key is not yet revoked, and in theory they might not revoke it.)
If that's "fixing the flaws", then I guess whenever I fill my gas tank I'm "inventing perpetual motion".
The flaws aren't fixed. They're just papered over slightly more aggressively. Don't worry, there'll be more flaws.
Correct. It doesn't count as distribution until someone downloads it. If you can prove nobody downloaded it at any point, and that the CVS repository backend was never accessed by anyone besides you, no crime has been committed. Of course, the instant someone downloads it, it's a different situation than the one here and illegal.
(IANAL, but I believe this is true. That said, whether MS would sue you anyway is an exercise left to the reader.)
BSD does not require attribution (in fact, that clause was specifically removed.) As long as the license appears somewhere in the project, it's sufficient. (IANAL but this is how I understand it.) On top of that, the BSD license is so open that, if the license did not specify that the license must be included, it really wouldn't be necessary - you can take BSD code and do pretty much whatever you want with it, including add it to a GPL project, or modify it and GPL-license the modifications. (Or, for that matter, not modify it and then provide the original source code under the GPL.)
The GPL is different in that regards. If I saw GPL code in a BSD project, and the GPL code was not marked as such, I would have no way of knowing that it would be illegal for me to take that code and treat it as BSD code. As such, any GPL code added to a mostly-BSD-licensed project must be marked explicitly as such.
I don't know what the issue with the Virgin WebPlayer is, but the others are all BSD-licensed code added to a GPL project, which doesn't require any specific notification beyond the BSD license appearing somewhere.
Actually, if anything, I think teachers aren't being paid enough. Ever heard the phrase "those who can, do, those who can't, teach"? It's true - if you can do something, you get a job doing it. If you can't make a living doing it, instead you teach people how to do it. Guess how well this works.
There's three big problems with the American educational system at the moment.
* Money going to the wrong places - computers bought with no plans in mind, new buildings without staff for them, extraordinary administrator salaries for administrators who don't do anything.
* Incompetent teachers, paid badly enough to keep all the possibly-skilled teachers far, far away.
* America's teacher's union, which essentially requires teachers to be kept or fired based solely on seniority, not competence.
The latter keeps the former two going. If you want to fix the educational system, the first thing you do is get rid of the damn union, the second thing you do is fire crappy teachers, and the third thing you do is raise teacher salaries enough to hire good teachers.
Supply and demand. There's just not enough demand to create a good supply.
The only way Youtube can possibly satisfy every set of laws is by turning it into a country-specific site, and removing videos from specific country sites instead of from the site as a whole. I suspect they'll end up doing this eventually, once they have every country yelling at them for a different contradictory subset of videos.
When I got New Super Mario Bros I played it pretty much constantly until I finished it. Several of my friends did the same. We have semi-regular DS multiplayer bouts, where NSMB and Mario Kart 64 are our staples. Several of us have played and beat Super Mario 64, and several of us own Tetris (I do not, due to a huge game queue at this point, but I did get Mario and Luigi Partners in Time.) I believe several of us own Nintendogs too, though I haven't gotten into that one. (I've been kind of avoiding it since it sounds addictive.)
Nintendo makes fun games. Sony, fundamentally, does not. The vast majority of good Sony-platform games are third-party games, and for whatever reason, the competent third-party developers have largely avoided the PSP (with several notable exceptions.)
I have both a DS and a PSP, and the fact is that the DS has significantly more good games than the PSP does. Yes, a lot of those are more cartoony and have more primary colors and less noir. They're still damn fun games though, and many people don't mind cartoony games with lots of primary colors.
Noise cancelling headphones kind of suck, honestly. I have a pair too. I don't use them anymore. Good isolation headphones or isolation earplugs do the job great - ditch your noice cancelling phones and pick up one of those.
Right now air travel is cheaper and faster than the alternatives. Turns out that's 99% of what people want. Some airlines succeed through slightly better food and service (this is why I fly Southwest when they're not significantly more expensive), some through better comfort amenities (this is why I fly Jet Blue when possible.)
If air travel ends up being even louder and more annoying, I highly suspect that at least one airline will start a "no cell phone" policy.
Of course, you also had a choice to live near another airport or hub if you chose to.
On top of that, you could ask the airline to provide dedicated "no cellphone" flights. If that helped them compete in areas with other competition it might be a good idea. Alternatively, you could ask a no-cellphone airline to start servicing your airport, and if people really disliked cellphones enough, chances are they would.
Or, if you really hated people talking on cellphones, you could get a good pair of isolation headphones or earplugs. That's what I do. The engine noise, even when sitting next to the engines, comes across no louder than a reasonably modern car, and I can play music or handheld games at quite a reasonable volume.
Note that there's a lot of redundant information on the FF7 discs. I highly suspect you could fit FF7 on a 2gb stick.
Nobody who talks seriously about this stuff uses "clean" as an absolute term. "Clean" means "significantly cleaner than what we currently have", or possibly "clean enough that it is not a problem". Mining and processing nuclear fuel doesn't necessarily spew greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but our current coal plants do . . . to a much, much lower extent than automobiles do.
Gasoline is less clean than electric-powered cars run off coal plants, which itself is less clean than electric-powered cars run off nuclear plants, which is arguably less clean than electric-powered cars run off solar panels (solar panels are pretty dirty to make and dispose of, but I don't pretend to know hard figures on this matter because I don't.)
(Greenhouse gases are obviously not the only factor in "clean" - toxic and radioactive byproducts are a issue as well. However, radioactive byproducts are much easier to contain than most people think.)
If you want to be completely clean, go kill yourself immediately so you're no longer consuming oxygen or resources. Make sure not to use a gun because guns work with combustion, and also don't use drugs unless you know they're biodegradable. I recommend hanging yourself in the forest using a rope made out of organically-grown hemp (you'll have to harvest it yourself, by hand, of course.) This is still not entirely clean but it's the best option I can come up with at the moment.
Also make sure you do it away from water so your rotting corpse doesn't pollute the water table.
Or, alternatively, new energy sources. There's a huge amount of fuel available for nuclear reactors, and once we perfect fusion, there's an enormous amount of fuel available for that.
Claiming that biofuel is our only other option is misleading at best.
Are there any guns that they would accept which are cheaper than what they're giving out?
It'd be awesome to buy a few dozen cheap guns and make a few thousand dollars of profit in xboxen.
On the other hand, I only recognize the artists, to say nothing of the songs, of two of those - and both are the Beatles. (I can sing both of those songs, however.)
Here's the top 10 of 2002:
1 - Avril Lavigne - Complicated
2 - Nelly - Hot in Here
3 - Mary J. Blige - Family Affair
4 - No Doubt - Hella Good
5 - Eminem - Lose Yourself
6 - Kylie Minogue - Can't Get You Out of My Head
7 - Pink - Get the Party Started
8 - Missy "Misdemeanor" Elliott - Work It
9 - Shakira - Whenever, Wherever
10 - Jimmy Eat World - The Middle
Out of these, I recognize all but one artist, know seven of these songs, and own several.
However, I don't pretend to claim that this means modern music is better. It just means that I prefer modern music, which is true. Likewise, you prefer music from 1964.
Just because you're more familiar with something doesn't mean it's objectively better. I don't actually like several of the songs listed above. But there are several I do quite like. I enjoy the Beatles, but with a few exceptions, most of their music doesn't strike a chord with me.
The issue with saying "back then ____ was better" is confirmation bias combined with Sturgeon's Law and simple human memory. Sturgeon's Law, quite accurately, says that 90% of everything is crap. When you think back to the music of your childhood, do you remember the 90% of songs that you listened to that sucked, or do you remember the 10% that were awesome?
I listen to a huge amount of music, and I will cheerfully admit that most of the music I've listened to is mediocre at best. Some of it, however, is brilliant. I'm eagerly awaiting Poe's next album. Gorillaz never fails to amaze. Godspeed You Black Emperor took me six listens until I realized how much I loved it. I've recently encountered Elastica. Will I continue to enjoy them as much as I currently am? I don't know - but if I don't, I'm not going to be mentioning it next time I talk about good music.
Music quality is subjective. Deal with it.
You may be right on that, I haven't been able to find good info online.