Yawn? You're too tired to name one? Come on, I want a name so I can show you precisely how it's government supported. Stop being such a chicken shit and dodging questions.
It would be on topic if this were posted in the late 1980s. I would assume this discussion taking place in 2007 would assume we're looking for games less than 20 years old.
A couple years ago I worked for a company whose management decided that spam was a good way to communicate with customers. Everybody loves email, right? After ignoring warnings that sending half a dozen emails daily to our entire customer base would be counter-productive and eventually prevent truly important email from going through, they forced us to implement their stupid ideas. It didn't take long until we were on the junk mail list at more than one major email provider. I'm not sure how much business that generated, but I'm fairly certain the profit was less than the cost of having our attorney's spend their time wrangling with the attorney's at these email providers trying to get us off their spam filter, not to mention the time IT spent trying to find ways to route email around the filter while the lawyering was going on.
Management is not somehow magically more competent than IT, just because their management. Read The Dilbert Principle for more details.
Sorry, it was late and I was tired when I replied. I see what you're saying now, but I still disagree. There is no such thing as a god given right, all rights exist only because they're socially agreed on. The Constitution is an incredible document written by very intelligent, passionate people, but it's still a compromise reached by the society of it's time. At any time, those "god given" rights could be revoked by a 2/3 majority of congress. If that's the case, then they can't be "god given", can they?
A better question would be why the rest of the world has singularly failed to take libertarianism seriously
Because libertarianism is about keeping power at the lowest level possible. Towns, or possibly even neighborhoods should be responsible for education, not the federal government. Libertarianism is about not allowing power to concentrate at the top in the hands of just a few individuals. The current elite, the Clintons and Bushes of the world, despite their differences share a common interest in making sure libertarianism remains a fringe idea. Abortion, global warming, etc. have been very effective in keeping people from thinking about things at a deeper level.
Yep, it might bring DVD ripping and disc free media servers back into the spotlight. If I recall there was one company who was able to away with it through a loophole in their contract with the DVD consortium, which was promptly sealed. Though that may have changed, I haven't stayed on top of that area. Thanks to DVDDecrypter and AutoGK all my movies are sitting on a server and the DVDs are sitting in a box in the basement.
And once media servers become widely accepted, maybe we can stop worrying about crap like HDDVD and BluRay and just be able to watch the damn movie without having to pick sides in some ridiculous format battle.
It shouldn't really be surprising. Neither Google nor Microsoft have much of a stake in content creation. What they have in common is creating systems which aggregate and display content. If the NFL had it's way you wouldn't be able talk to your co-workers about the previous nights game. That would definitely get in the way of both companies' business model.
If you want lots of open space, peace and quiet, and low housing prices, you live in the country and sacrifice certain things like convenience. If rural dwellers can demand broadband, can I demand cheap land in the middle of the city? Or maybe I can demand demolishing the houses all around me so I don't have another 12 feet from me. Trade-offs, they're a part of life.
So you want cheap land to have all the amenities that expensive land has? I'd love to buy a car at Kia prices that's as good as a Ferrari, but it isn't gonna happen.
Beyond that, what kind of incompetent programmers would hard code a limit based on a particular hardware configuration? Either the author is an idiot or a liar.
If you're a libertarian, then shouldn't you be questioning why this is a city ordinance? The cabs are privately owned. If the cab company wants GPS, they can put it in. If not, why should the government be forcing them?
I personally wrote software which did this back in 1995. It was a search engine built with features specifically for legal documents and the front end had very similar functionality to what you're describing. It's really not a huge leap of creativity to imagine that given the first few letters of a word, you can look up all words that begin with those letters. People have been looking things up in the dictionaries and other reference books using such a system for hundreds of years.
Exactly. They were secrets. If you don't want anybody to make copies of your "intellectual property" then keep it a secret. Don't tell anybody. On the other hand, the modern media conglomerations want to sell us unending copies of the same non-secret information. If they don't want anybody to have their precious property, maybe they should reconsider the practice of making millions of copies and sending them to store shelves around the world.
Circumventing anti-copying measures? So if I wrote a piece of software which used a protection measure that created files and placed them on the users desktop, they'd be breaking the law by deleting them?
You can have cross-compatibility without decentralization. In fact decentralization is easier when you don't have vendor lock-in, which is essentially what we have now. A bunch of disparate sites all with different abilities, but no system to easily move from one to another and link any of the data from one to the other.
Slashdot Mirror
You say talk about these non-utility monopolies but you can't even fucking name one. Shut the fuck up you worthless chicken shit.
Yawn? You're too tired to name one? Come on, I want a name so I can show you precisely how it's government supported. Stop being such a chicken shit and dodging questions.
It would be on topic if this were posted in the late 1980s. I would assume this discussion taking place in 2007 would assume we're looking for games less than 20 years old.
Name one monopoly that isn't government protected.
You don't think the patent and copyright system which props up companies like Microsoft doesn't count as government protection?
Libertarianism allows for competition, something government protected monopolies do not.
Hey dipshit, ever notice that all of the monopolies we have right now are government granted and protected?
Google parachutes are still in beta.
Not about the end user? If you ignore the end user and shut off their signal, who the hell is going to watch all those new-fangled digital broadcasts?
A couple years ago I worked for a company whose management decided that spam was a good way to communicate with customers. Everybody loves email, right? After ignoring warnings that sending half a dozen emails daily to our entire customer base would be counter-productive and eventually prevent truly important email from going through, they forced us to implement their stupid ideas. It didn't take long until we were on the junk mail list at more than one major email provider. I'm not sure how much business that generated, but I'm fairly certain the profit was less than the cost of having our attorney's spend their time wrangling with the attorney's at these email providers trying to get us off their spam filter, not to mention the time IT spent trying to find ways to route email around the filter while the lawyering was going on.
Management is not somehow magically more competent than IT, just because their management. Read The Dilbert Principle for more details.
Sorry, it was late and I was tired when I replied. I see what you're saying now, but I still disagree. There is no such thing as a god given right, all rights exist only because they're socially agreed on. The Constitution is an incredible document written by very intelligent, passionate people, but it's still a compromise reached by the society of it's time. At any time, those "god given" rights could be revoked by a 2/3 majority of congress. If that's the case, then they can't be "god given", can they?
Protecting your "property" with DRM is not a right either. Perhaps it's you who needs to read the Consitution again.
I wish I could mod you higher than 5.
Yep, it might bring DVD ripping and disc free media servers back into the spotlight. If I recall there was one company who was able to away with it through a loophole in their contract with the DVD consortium, which was promptly sealed. Though that may have changed, I haven't stayed on top of that area. Thanks to DVDDecrypter and AutoGK all my movies are sitting on a server and the DVDs are sitting in a box in the basement.
And once media servers become widely accepted, maybe we can stop worrying about crap like HDDVD and BluRay and just be able to watch the damn movie without having to pick sides in some ridiculous format battle.
It shouldn't really be surprising. Neither Google nor Microsoft have much of a stake in content creation. What they have in common is creating systems which aggregate and display content. If the NFL had it's way you wouldn't be able talk to your co-workers about the previous nights game. That would definitely get in the way of both companies' business model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-35W_Mississippi_Riv er_Bridge_Collapse
d en
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Gar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
For every government success there's a massive screw up. If I were a betting man, I'd wager against the government every time.
Is that a threat?
If you want lots of open space, peace and quiet, and low housing prices, you live in the country and sacrifice certain things like convenience. If rural dwellers can demand broadband, can I demand cheap land in the middle of the city? Or maybe I can demand demolishing the houses all around me so I don't have another 12 feet from me. Trade-offs, they're a part of life.
So you want cheap land to have all the amenities that expensive land has? I'd love to buy a car at Kia prices that's as good as a Ferrari, but it isn't gonna happen.
Beyond that, what kind of incompetent programmers would hard code a limit based on a particular hardware configuration? Either the author is an idiot or a liar.
If you're a libertarian, then shouldn't you be questioning why this is a city ordinance? The cabs are privately owned. If the cab company wants GPS, they can put it in. If not, why should the government be forcing them?
I personally wrote software which did this back in 1995. It was a search engine built with features specifically for legal documents and the front end had very similar functionality to what you're describing. It's really not a huge leap of creativity to imagine that given the first few letters of a word, you can look up all words that begin with those letters. People have been looking things up in the dictionaries and other reference books using such a system for hundreds of years.
Exactly. They were secrets. If you don't want anybody to make copies of your "intellectual property" then keep it a secret. Don't tell anybody. On the other hand, the modern media conglomerations want to sell us unending copies of the same non-secret information. If they don't want anybody to have their precious property, maybe they should reconsider the practice of making millions of copies and sending them to store shelves around the world.
Circumventing anti-copying measures? So if I wrote a piece of software which used a protection measure that created files and placed them on the users desktop, they'd be breaking the law by deleting them?
You can have cross-compatibility without decentralization. In fact decentralization is easier when you don't have vendor lock-in, which is essentially what we have now. A bunch of disparate sites all with different abilities, but no system to easily move from one to another and link any of the data from one to the other.