Well, the idea would be to play them on the consoles themselves. I *hate* wasting my computer's resources on games. When I'm on a computer, I want to gather or process information, files, etc. I don't want to play games.
Now... if Nintendo would sell development kits to individual software groups to develop their own SNES or N64 games in a few years, not only might they make some pocket change on the side, but the consoles might become popular again, and I'd buy one! (Mmm... Super Nintendo...)
Is there any real evidence of this? Any proof? It seems to me that, until there is, that's what we need to be concentrated on -- finding some! Until then, it's just an RIAA-smearing campaign...
"...not that there's anything wrong with that." (Seinfield's a genius.)
It occurs to me that one of the largest barriers to finding all the species on earth in the past has been that so many of them are hidden deep in the Amazon rain forest. Exactly how do we plan to find them without destroying what has not yet been destroyed? Okay, assume that's accomplished. Then what? So we've found and named every species on earth! Good job! You get a cookie! Umm... Now what did that get us?
I still prefer [nameless client] over Kazaa by a long shot. I've been using it since Napster first went under, and it's by far been the best method of acquiring new music... except, of course, for Usenet (newsgroups), which is the only efficient means of acquiring entire albums.
p.s.-- The client remains nameless out of superstition. As long as it works and very well at that, I'd rather the enemies of the MP3 not be aware of it. I'm certain that they are, but let's not let them know that it has any preference in the world, mkay?
God! 95 years is ridiculous! What better to restrict the development of knowledge than to prohibit its use? Good job, America!
Side note: what if someone comes up with a very similar idea, so similar that it resembles copyrighted material? Are they not allowed to develop their own creation just because someone else came up with something similar?
Gah, America can be such a horrible place to live... except for everywhere else.
Do the copyrights on games expire in the same way that copyrights expire on everything else? Or, since the company theoretically will still be around in [X] years, is the copyright thus interminable?
As long as I get a copy of any new Super Mario games that may be released, I will be the happiest boy on earth! (And a 22-year-old boy before any of those games saw the light of day.)
On a side note, I think that new Super Mario Bros. games should be made anyway. I want a Gamecube disc full of expanded versions of all the old side-scrolling Mario games. Man, I'd buy a Gamecube just to get at that! (Nothing beats the functionality or fun of the classic Mario games!)
With the radical changes inherent in a cell design (as nebulously defined as the term is right now), I can't see how they could pull off the same trick twice. In theory, if they managed to do a full software emulation of PS2, they'd get free PS1 support.
I'd say it's unlikely that they'll still be using the PS1 CPU for anything in the PS3, so even if they offer "full" emulation of the PS2, they probably wouldn't be able to do anything with the PS1.
If the majority really ruled, than Al Gore would be President. Fact is, the majority is only right when it can do something about it or when it isn't wrong (or else how would desegregation have ever happened?)...
You'll discover that all the flavors of Linux and the open-source software that runs on it are getting more and more like Windows... Linux may be more efficient and faster, but if you're going to play the features game, you're bound to lose. That's Microsoft's real specialty.
I have never considered myself to have an unhealthy bias favoring Windows or opposing Linux. I have used Windows since 3.1, and I have used Linux (though significantly less) since Slackware 3.5.
While there are certainly many advantages that each has over the other, the biggest advantage that Windows offers to me is insanely greater practical interoperability -- the type of interoperability that connects me with the people I want to be connected with. People I know use Microsoft Internet-ware. My school and place of employment use Microsoft Office. Everywhere I need to be on my computer, Microsoft can get me there. I'm not operating a server, nor will I from a cable modem.
Certainly, Windows is the most popular. Just as certainly, Linux is gaining ground in the home desktop market. But I think Linux/UNIX systems are and will remain dominant in the server market, and Windows systems will remain dominant in the home market. And as long as I am not operating a business that needs 24/7 secure operation, Windows does everything I need it to do, and then some.
And I can't underestimate the bias generated by familiarity with scores of Windows-based applications....
No, but they advertised it then, and presumably many people signed on to their service as a result of those ads. Now they are not serving what they promised to serve, once upon a time. I think a lawsuit would be stupid... if people don't like it, they should switch to another service. But this is America! We are the culture of making everything convenient for us with the least effort possible, no matter who it hurts.
Ask not how they can worsen our web-surfing, but how we can fight them back! They are stamping over our right to the "pursuit of happiness", not to mention privacy issues. Last I checked, newspapers don't contain popup ads (popup books are just scary!)... There must be something we can do. Hire a good cyberlawyer.:-)
I think a boycott could very well improve things, and standing for our principles would be highly noble, in my opinion. But giving up CDs and DVDs only means giving in to the makers of bigger hard drives and such... Who would we sell out to next?
We're better off being politically active, taking on (or over) the government, and getting the laws passed that we want passed. A government by the people doesn't do the people's bidding if the people aren't involved.
Forget jail time... Splash him with gasoline, light him on fire, and toss him off a bridge into a lake where, if the drop is quick enough, he may be free to swim to his safety... I think he'd never set fire to anything again.
Um, you have either misinterpreted or overinterpreted my comments. I said I watch the accompanying movie before reading the book -- if there is no movie, and a story is worth my time, then I read it. Take Poe for example, or Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged -- truly wonderful stories, and I would probably not want to see either on a screen.
As for Shakespeare -- his stories, if they are even his, bore me. Only about six of the twenty-something I have read have I enjoyed. I'm not quite sure why I don't enjoy most of his tragedies, but I don't.
I would rather read the book first. That way you get the complete author's version of the events, in the way they were INTENDED.
I can concede your point, but by reading the book after I see the movie, not only to I get what the author really intended, but I often get a correction to the story. Since I generally always prefer the book over the movie, I only increase my enjoyment (and my understanding) of the story being told.
This is leftover from my school days when I was incapable of (or too lazy for) reading into the literature very well on my own, so I required other interpretation(s) before I really understood what I had read. Watching the movie first saves me the trouble of reading a book twice, which -- no matter how good it is -- I never have time to do.
(A glimpse at my bookshelf would make this obvious; I have about 600 books, most of them nonfiction, and I have read only about 50 of them. But I am on chapter 2 or 3 of around another 100 or so. I love being able to pick up where I left off -- in any of a hundred stories -- and still know exactly what's going on!)
If you watch a movie based on a book before you've read the book, then the book will fill in details and often provide an alternate plot or story.
If you watch a movie based on a book after you've read the book, then the movie will often bastardize the book and ruin the whole story for you from that point forward.
So I rarely read books if I know there is a movie -- I only read them (like Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter) after the fact in order to fill in details.
I hate it when I read news on Slashdot that I heard about days before. Slashdot, in my opinion and because of its millions of "reporters", is supposed to find all the cool news no longer than forty-five minutes after it breaks! Why the dealy on so many good news articles?
Yes, very. I'm all about loyalty to the story itself, and thus to the fans. Americans might not catch the British humor, and it might not do well at the Box Office, but a good production would be satisfying to me!
(1) Windows is compatible with the software that most of my classes require me to use.
(2) Windows is compatible with the software that I enjoy using.
(3) I've seen no compelling reasons to switch or even to adapt to anything else. Windows does what I need it to do -- Mac, Linux, and others can probably do a lot of it, but there is no way that any of them can do it all with all the software available for Windows.
(4) I know Windows tricks. I've used it for years and I have a very particular method of getting around a logical system using a combination of (mostly) keyboard shortcuts and (fewer) mouse clicks. I don't feel like trying to learn a new system, and again, I have not been compelled to.
(5) And finally, and to some lesser extent than all the other reasons, but it's still a factor -- I like to defy the arrogant, pseudo-intelligent, elitist know-it-alls who wish simply to force Linux, Macs, or [insert OS here] upon Windows users simply because "Bill Gates bl0ws g0ats" or "Windows sux0rs". I don't want to hear your shitty reasons for switching over -- I'm not you. I want strong evidence that suggests why everyone should switch. Only then, I'm guessing, will I be even slightly persuaded.
(6) I am a diehard American capitalist Liberarian who thinks indepedently, votes Republican, and would like nothing more than to destroy the ideas of an American welfare state, the "thought police" (socialist/christian left) and the "morality police" (christian right), and that any majority or minority opinion may ever suppress the opinion of any other when it is universally regarded as something that doesn't matter much (such as abortion, sex between/among consenting adults, choosing an operating system, etc.).
Please note: this does not mean that I believe Windows is the greatest operating system on earth. It does mean, though, that it does everything I need it to do, and I'm content enough with it that I do not require change. (Besides, if people actually took the time to learn how to use it, it's actually quite manageable.)
Slashdot Mirror
Now... if Nintendo would sell development kits to individual software groups to develop their own SNES or N64 games in a few years, not only might they make some pocket change on the side, but the consoles might become popular again, and I'd buy one! (Mmm... Super Nintendo...)
"...not that there's anything wrong with that." (Seinfield's a genius.)
I fail to see where this is a practical endeavor.
p.s.-- The client remains nameless out of superstition. As long as it works and very well at that, I'd rather the enemies of the MP3 not be aware of it. I'm certain that they are, but let's not let them know that it has any preference in the world, mkay?
Side note: what if someone comes up with a very similar idea, so similar that it resembles copyrighted material? Are they not allowed to develop their own creation just because someone else came up with something similar?
Gah, America can be such a horrible place to live... except for everywhere else.
Do the copyrights on games expire in the same way that copyrights expire on everything else? Or, since the company theoretically will still be around in [X] years, is the copyright thus interminable?
On a side note, I think that new Super Mario Bros. games should be made anyway. I want a Gamecube disc full of expanded versions of all the old side-scrolling Mario games. Man, I'd buy a Gamecube just to get at that! (Nothing beats the functionality or fun of the classic Mario games!)
I'd say it's unlikely that they'll still be using the PS1 CPU for anything in the PS3, so even if they offer "full" emulation of the PS2, they probably wouldn't be able to do anything with the PS1.
If the majority really ruled, than Al Gore would be President. Fact is, the majority is only right when it can do something about it or when it isn't wrong (or else how would desegregation have ever happened?)...
...but the site has already been slashdotted! I suppose I'll just read it late tonight after the "mass hysteria" has settled.
Hmm. Good point.
I have never considered myself to have an unhealthy bias favoring Windows or opposing Linux. I have used Windows since 3.1, and I have used Linux (though significantly less) since Slackware 3.5.
While there are certainly many advantages that each has over the other, the biggest advantage that Windows offers to me is insanely greater practical interoperability -- the type of interoperability that connects me with the people I want to be connected with. People I know use Microsoft Internet-ware. My school and place of employment use Microsoft Office. Everywhere I need to be on my computer, Microsoft can get me there. I'm not operating a server, nor will I from a cable modem.
Certainly, Windows is the most popular. Just as certainly, Linux is gaining ground in the home desktop market. But I think Linux/UNIX systems are and will remain dominant in the server market, and Windows systems will remain dominant in the home market. And as long as I am not operating a business that needs 24/7 secure operation, Windows does everything I need it to do, and then some.
And I can't underestimate the bias generated by familiarity with scores of Windows-based applications....
No, but they advertised it then, and presumably many people signed on to their service as a result of those ads. Now they are not serving what they promised to serve, once upon a time. I think a lawsuit would be stupid... if people don't like it, they should switch to another service. But this is America! We are the culture of making everything convenient for us with the least effort possible, no matter who it hurts.
Hmmm. False advertising lawsuit, anyone?
Ask not how they can worsen our web-surfing, but how we can fight them back! They are stamping over our right to the "pursuit of happiness", not to mention privacy issues. Last I checked, newspapers don't contain popup ads (popup books are just scary!)... There must be something we can do. Hire a good cyberlawyer. :-)
We're better off being politically active, taking on (or over) the government, and getting the laws passed that we want passed. A government by the people doesn't do the people's bidding if the people aren't involved.
...and it was rejected. I'm confused.
Silly arsonist. No play with matches!
As for Shakespeare -- his stories, if they are even his, bore me. Only about six of the twenty-something I have read have I enjoyed. I'm not quite sure why I don't enjoy most of his tragedies, but I don't.
I can concede your point, but by reading the book after I see the movie, not only to I get what the author really intended, but I often get a correction to the story. Since I generally always prefer the book over the movie, I only increase my enjoyment (and my understanding) of the story being told.
This is leftover from my school days when I was incapable of (or too lazy for) reading into the literature very well on my own, so I required other interpretation(s) before I really understood what I had read. Watching the movie first saves me the trouble of reading a book twice, which -- no matter how good it is -- I never have time to do.
(A glimpse at my bookshelf would make this obvious; I have about 600 books, most of them nonfiction, and I have read only about 50 of them. But I am on chapter 2 or 3 of around another 100 or so. I love being able to pick up where I left off -- in any of a hundred stories -- and still know exactly what's going on!)
If you watch a movie based on a book before you've read the book, then the book will fill in details and often provide an alternate plot or story.
If you watch a movie based on a book after you've read the book, then the movie will often bastardize the book and ruin the whole story for you from that point forward.
So I rarely read books if I know there is a movie -- I only read them (like Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter) after the fact in order to fill in details.
I hate it when I read news on Slashdot that I heard about days before. Slashdot, in my opinion and because of its millions of "reporters", is supposed to find all the cool news no longer than forty-five minutes after it breaks! Why the dealy on so many good news articles?
Yes, very. I'm all about loyalty to the story itself, and thus to the fans. Americans might not catch the British humor, and it might not do well at the Box Office, but a good production would be satisfying to me!
(2) Windows is compatible with the software that I enjoy using.
(3) I've seen no compelling reasons to switch or even to adapt to anything else. Windows does what I need it to do -- Mac, Linux, and others can probably do a lot of it, but there is no way that any of them can do it all with all the software available for Windows.
(4) I know Windows tricks. I've used it for years and I have a very particular method of getting around a logical system using a combination of (mostly) keyboard shortcuts and (fewer) mouse clicks. I don't feel like trying to learn a new system, and again, I have not been compelled to.
(5) And finally, and to some lesser extent than all the other reasons, but it's still a factor -- I like to defy the arrogant, pseudo-intelligent, elitist know-it-alls who wish simply to force Linux, Macs, or [insert OS here] upon Windows users simply because "Bill Gates bl0ws g0ats" or "Windows sux0rs". I don't want to hear your shitty reasons for switching over -- I'm not you. I want strong evidence that suggests why everyone should switch. Only then, I'm guessing, will I be even slightly persuaded.
(6) I am a diehard American capitalist Liberarian who thinks indepedently, votes Republican, and would like nothing more than to destroy the ideas of an American welfare state, the "thought police" (socialist/christian left) and the "morality police" (christian right), and that any majority or minority opinion may ever suppress the opinion of any other when it is universally regarded as something that doesn't matter much (such as abortion, sex between/among consenting adults, choosing an operating system, etc.).
Please note: this does not mean that I believe Windows is the greatest operating system on earth. It does mean, though, that it does everything I need it to do, and I'm content enough with it that I do not require change. (Besides, if people actually took the time to learn how to use it, it's actually quite manageable.)
And why, again, does domino manipulation constitute hacking? I ask only because I am ignorant of the answer...