Ok, lets take a successful console game system, the PS2. It retailed for $300 (US) ~212 (according to Google). And from being released in 2000 to when the last games come out for it, it will be 10 years. Do you honestly expect a computer to last that long? I mean, the PS2 was released before the Pentium 4, do you expect a P4 to be able to play any sort of new game? Not to mention that thanks to being a console just about everything is cheaper, etc.
In short, no. However, I do think there will be a point where we can know enough to figure out all the known illnesses, however there will always be new ones.
d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.
That seems to allow them to have it hosted on Splashtop's site. If they didn't even attempt to contact Asus, much less Google Splashtop and look at their site, I don't see how you can call it a violation.
We could nuke Iraq and Afghanistan and the mission would be a "success", heck, already it is a success, terrorist groups now are even more underground making the possibility of them hitting the USA again unlikely. However, when we killed a ton of the terrorists, those there began to attack us, and its a lot easier to commit a murder if you simply go down three blocks than having to fake papers and fly into the USA.
Sure, but in these countries which are so corrupt, who is to say that the 3rd party isn't bribed? Its a heck of a lot easier to fake a paper election, however, its a lot easier to trace an electronic election that was rigged.
Racism always solves itself through the free market. Always. The only time that it doesn't is when there are laws promoting the racism thus making the market non or less free.
The thing is though, there are only 2 other major OS makers who are publicly traded, that are in competition to RH Apple and MS. Even if Chrome, Ubuntu or SuSE ends up taking away a lot of RH marketshare, all RH has to do is take the ideas and code from them and add it to their product. On the other hand, MS can't exactly take code from OS X and neither can Apple take code from Windows.
The problem is, cops tend to be jerks no matter who they are. Heck, you can give anyone power and see that they are jerks especially when given very little oversight (if you don't like the president you can vote them out of office, but the most you can do to a police officer that you don't like is recommend them to have disciplinary action... to another police officer).
And as for racism, everyone is racist to some degree. As evidenced by it we target marketing to certain ethnic groups, fill out ethnic information on census forms, etc.
What really needs to be done is elect police officers on a neighborhood (in larger cities) or town (in smaller cities) basis to make them accountable to the public.
Exactly, plus the fact that in the USA depending on your carrier you might end up with a strange phone. For example, you might have a ton of functions on your AT&T Razr (though mixed in with all kinds of awful crap from AT&T) then you go to Verizion and their phones are totally neutered. I mean, aside from having a horrid UI, there are some things that you simply just can't change that you can on every other phone.
It should be regulated so long as we have draconian laws that let Apple say that jailbreaking violates copyright ( http://news.cnet.com/apple-iphone-jailbreaking-violates-our-copyright/ ) and so long as we have a legal system that awards outrageous "damages" for "infringements" we need regulation to keep them in check.
Everything is supposed to be a compromise, if the government didn't help businesses at all, than we wouldn't need laws protecting consumers, similarly when the government over-protects consumers you need balance by giving businesses certain rights. With copyright you have a few publishers screwing the masses and so long as the DMCA and other similarly absurd copyright laws are in effect, you need government protection to protect you from them.
Exclusivity arrangements promote competition and innovation in device development and design. We work closely with our vendors to develop new and exciting devices that will attract customers. When we procure exclusive handsets from our vendors we typically buy hundreds of thousands or even millions of each device. Otherwise manufacturers may be reluctant to make the investments of time, money and production capacity to support a particular device
Exclusivity arrangements do not provide competition, competition should be done with -gasp- the networks. Lets see, AT&T is pretty expensive, but they have a decent 3G network, T-Mobile is a bit cheaper, but their 3G is lacking outside of major cities. Verizon is CDMA and so is Sprint and I'm not a fan of CDMA phones so I doubt I will ever use them. That is how competition is supposed to work. Not -insert major phone maker here- just announced a new phone exclusive to -insert network here- so you buy the plan to get the phone. Thats not how its supposed to work at all.
It depends on the game, give us a fun engine and you can add all the content you so desire. For example, I remember playing Tales of Symphonia for the GC many, many, many times over. It seemed to be the perfect balance between an action game and an RPG. No matter how many battles you were in it never really got old. Add in some puzzles and decent enough directions and a good storyline and you have a good game. I also similarly feel cheated with games that have a pathetically short single player mode and expect to make it up with good multiplayer (I'm looking at you Halo), yes, you can replay the game in legendary and that will take a while, but seriously, I don't want to play the same 10 or so levels over and over again.
And to add to the cost, so many consoles (especially the Wii) require buying extra peripherals, which will also end up going to the wayside. It's just not worth it anymore.
Every console except perhaps the PS3 (too expensive initial price so I really haven't looked into it much) does too and the 360 is worse than the Wii. By the time you invest $100 into a HD, $100 into a Wi-Fi adapter plus an extra $50 for all the accessories needed to play an online game (not to mention the XBL Gold subscription itself) you have a very, very, very expensive console.
If you don't mind using a controller rather than a keyboard (I never really enjoyed using a keyboard), you can find a lot of these games for the 360/PS3 a lot cheaper. You can buy Left 4 Dead for ~$30 used easily if you have a few gaming shops nearby, and same with Fallout 3. The thing I hate about Steam (besides all the things about PC gaming) is the fact that their prices are so expensive. For example, the Orange Box which I can pick up for about $15 costs twice as much, and if you just want to play a certain component it costs almost as much as the collection itelf (Portal, while a pretty fun game, isn't worth $20). About the only benefit is you get the SDK so you can mod some things but thats still $15 more.
Your logic makes no sense. Even though the developers got the money in the first place (from the original purchaser) and assuming no copies of the games are duplicated, you aren't ripping anyone off. The cost of deploying DLC is very, very, very small especially if you use P2P and related technologies to distribute it. DLC isn't stand-alone and requires the game to be played. So please tell me, other than the $.0001 in distribution costs how is this getting extra content without paying the developers?
Lets just get some sane copyright reform first. That would take care of this, and many other cases if we went to something less absurd than life + 70 years.
The problem is it makes no sense to rent digital non-physical items especially at the retail level. It makes sense to rent a house, it takes a lot of time and a lot of resources to build a house and two families can't exactly live as easily in the house as they could if they were the only ones there. It makes sense to rent a book (like with a library) because books aren't free to produce and its hard to have two people reading the same book at the same time. It even makes sense in some ways to rent movies, VHS tapes and DVDs when bought pre-recorded aren't exactly cheap and its somewhat inconvenient to watch them without having full control on pause, stop, rewind, etc. However, when you deal with digital media it makes no sense to rent. For example, it costs the exact same if I were to transfer a digital movie that was "rented" and "expires" than a non-expiring one. Heck, it doesn't cost any extra (especially not with P2P) if someone downloads one copy or five million. Renting, while a good concept just seems totally pointless when applied to anything digital, and people will soon realize that.
Um, in case you haven't noticed, even if I have all the DLC for Halo 3 and I sell my disk, the DLC is only on my HD of my 360 and it didn't get sold. As for used HDs, I don't see the huge deal if you can resell DLC/patches just like books, its not like books where it costs more to produce each copy.
Exactly, I wonder what their advertising says for new artists compared to what they say when they pull the "ZOMG OUR KIDS ARE GOING TO STARVE IF WE DON"T SUE YOU FOR $3.6 million per song!!!111!1!1".
Depends, I would favor copyrights that would allow for books that are still in-print to still have copyright otherwise it expires in ~10 years with registration with the possibility of renewal only if it is in print. And really, with trademarks and such if it had gone public domain, he could effectively control all "official" printings of his book (for example, he couldn't stop someone from making a movie, but it couldn't say or hint that it was authorized), doing this would allow for the control but would lack the "getting paid for doing nothing" that exists today.
...Vietnam was effectively the cold war. Rather than fight each other an an arena that had very high stakes (an invasion of Russia and the USA) the USA and Russia decided to fight in a number of "proxy" wars such as Vietnam and Korea.
And similarly, the cold war would have already ended itself. Soviet Russia while an interesting "experiment" ended up failing due to the fact that human nature plus the Soviet version of communism ended up with a government who could not financially sustain itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, lets take a successful console game system, the PS2. It retailed for $300 (US) ~212 (according to Google). And from being released in 2000 to when the last games come out for it, it will be 10 years. Do you honestly expect a computer to last that long? I mean, the PS2 was released before the Pentium 4, do you expect a P4 to be able to play any sort of new game? Not to mention that thanks to being a console just about everything is cheaper, etc.
...An Intel Atom CPU would do the job for storage. The point is to store the data, not so you can play games on max settings.
In short, no. However, I do think there will be a point where we can know enough to figure out all the known illnesses, however there will always be new ones.
d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.
That seems to allow them to have it hosted on Splashtop's site. If they didn't even attempt to contact Asus, much less Google Splashtop and look at their site, I don't see how you can call it a violation.
You are assuming the average computer has a Blu-Ray drive, most don't.
We could nuke Iraq and Afghanistan and the mission would be a "success", heck, already it is a success, terrorist groups now are even more underground making the possibility of them hitting the USA again unlikely. However, when we killed a ton of the terrorists, those there began to attack us, and its a lot easier to commit a murder if you simply go down three blocks than having to fake papers and fly into the USA.
Sure, but in these countries which are so corrupt, who is to say that the 3rd party isn't bribed? Its a heck of a lot easier to fake a paper election, however, its a lot easier to trace an electronic election that was rigged.
Not really a meme, but rather simply a statement, because really they are, defective by design.
Racism always solves itself through the free market. Always. The only time that it doesn't is when there are laws promoting the racism thus making the market non or less free.
The thing is though, there are only 2 other major OS makers who are publicly traded, that are in competition to RH Apple and MS. Even if Chrome, Ubuntu or SuSE ends up taking away a lot of RH marketshare, all RH has to do is take the ideas and code from them and add it to their product. On the other hand, MS can't exactly take code from OS X and neither can Apple take code from Windows.
The problem is, cops tend to be jerks no matter who they are. Heck, you can give anyone power and see that they are jerks especially when given very little oversight (if you don't like the president you can vote them out of office, but the most you can do to a police officer that you don't like is recommend them to have disciplinary action... to another police officer).
And as for racism, everyone is racist to some degree. As evidenced by it we target marketing to certain ethnic groups, fill out ethnic information on census forms, etc.
What really needs to be done is elect police officers on a neighborhood (in larger cities) or town (in smaller cities) basis to make them accountable to the public.
Exactly, plus the fact that in the USA depending on your carrier you might end up with a strange phone. For example, you might have a ton of functions on your AT&T Razr (though mixed in with all kinds of awful crap from AT&T) then you go to Verizion and their phones are totally neutered. I mean, aside from having a horrid UI, there are some things that you simply just can't change that you can on every other phone.
It should be regulated so long as we have draconian laws that let Apple say that jailbreaking violates copyright ( http://news.cnet.com/apple-iphone-jailbreaking-violates-our-copyright/ ) and so long as we have a legal system that awards outrageous "damages" for "infringements" we need regulation to keep them in check.
Everything is supposed to be a compromise, if the government didn't help businesses at all, than we wouldn't need laws protecting consumers, similarly when the government over-protects consumers you need balance by giving businesses certain rights. With copyright you have a few publishers screwing the masses and so long as the DMCA and other similarly absurd copyright laws are in effect, you need government protection to protect you from them.
Exclusivity arrangements promote competition and innovation in device development and design. We work closely with our vendors to develop new and exciting devices that will attract customers. When we procure exclusive handsets from our vendors we typically buy hundreds of thousands or even millions of each device. Otherwise manufacturers may be reluctant to make the investments of time, money and production capacity to support a particular device
Really? Because T-Mobile, even though they don't have an iPhone offered still supports it. (see http://consumerist.com/5243325/t+mobile-provides-iphone-support-despite-not-offering-iphone for a reference).
Exclusivity arrangements do not provide competition, competition should be done with -gasp- the networks. Lets see, AT&T is pretty expensive, but they have a decent 3G network, T-Mobile is a bit cheaper, but their 3G is lacking outside of major cities. Verizon is CDMA and so is Sprint and I'm not a fan of CDMA phones so I doubt I will ever use them. That is how competition is supposed to work. Not -insert major phone maker here- just announced a new phone exclusive to -insert network here- so you buy the plan to get the phone. Thats not how its supposed to work at all.
It depends on the game, give us a fun engine and you can add all the content you so desire. For example, I remember playing Tales of Symphonia for the GC many, many, many times over. It seemed to be the perfect balance between an action game and an RPG. No matter how many battles you were in it never really got old. Add in some puzzles and decent enough directions and a good storyline and you have a good game. I also similarly feel cheated with games that have a pathetically short single player mode and expect to make it up with good multiplayer (I'm looking at you Halo), yes, you can replay the game in legendary and that will take a while, but seriously, I don't want to play the same 10 or so levels over and over again.
And to add to the cost, so many consoles (especially the Wii) require buying extra peripherals, which will also end up going to the wayside. It's just not worth it anymore.
Every console except perhaps the PS3 (too expensive initial price so I really haven't looked into it much) does too and the 360 is worse than the Wii. By the time you invest $100 into a HD, $100 into a Wi-Fi adapter plus an extra $50 for all the accessories needed to play an online game (not to mention the XBL Gold subscription itself) you have a very, very, very expensive console.
If you don't mind using a controller rather than a keyboard (I never really enjoyed using a keyboard), you can find a lot of these games for the 360/PS3 a lot cheaper. You can buy Left 4 Dead for ~$30 used easily if you have a few gaming shops nearby, and same with Fallout 3. The thing I hate about Steam (besides all the things about PC gaming) is the fact that their prices are so expensive. For example, the Orange Box which I can pick up for about $15 costs twice as much, and if you just want to play a certain component it costs almost as much as the collection itelf (Portal, while a pretty fun game, isn't worth $20). About the only benefit is you get the SDK so you can mod some things but thats still $15 more.
Your logic makes no sense. Even though the developers got the money in the first place (from the original purchaser) and assuming no copies of the games are duplicated, you aren't ripping anyone off. The cost of deploying DLC is very, very, very small especially if you use P2P and related technologies to distribute it. DLC isn't stand-alone and requires the game to be played. So please tell me, other than the $.0001 in distribution costs how is this getting extra content without paying the developers?
Its not a success until Netcraft confirms it.
Lets just get some sane copyright reform first. That would take care of this, and many other cases if we went to something less absurd than life + 70 years.
The problem is it makes no sense to rent digital non-physical items especially at the retail level. It makes sense to rent a house, it takes a lot of time and a lot of resources to build a house and two families can't exactly live as easily in the house as they could if they were the only ones there. It makes sense to rent a book (like with a library) because books aren't free to produce and its hard to have two people reading the same book at the same time. It even makes sense in some ways to rent movies, VHS tapes and DVDs when bought pre-recorded aren't exactly cheap and its somewhat inconvenient to watch them without having full control on pause, stop, rewind, etc. However, when you deal with digital media it makes no sense to rent. For example, it costs the exact same if I were to transfer a digital movie that was "rented" and "expires" than a non-expiring one. Heck, it doesn't cost any extra (especially not with P2P) if someone downloads one copy or five million. Renting, while a good concept just seems totally pointless when applied to anything digital, and people will soon realize that.
Um, in case you haven't noticed, even if I have all the DLC for Halo 3 and I sell my disk, the DLC is only on my HD of my 360 and it didn't get sold. As for used HDs, I don't see the huge deal if you can resell DLC/patches just like books, its not like books where it costs more to produce each copy.
Exactly, I wonder what their advertising says for new artists compared to what they say when they pull the "ZOMG OUR KIDS ARE GOING TO STARVE IF WE DON"T SUE YOU FOR $3.6 million per song!!!111!1!1".
Depends, I would favor copyrights that would allow for books that are still in-print to still have copyright otherwise it expires in ~10 years with registration with the possibility of renewal only if it is in print. And really, with trademarks and such if it had gone public domain, he could effectively control all "official" printings of his book (for example, he couldn't stop someone from making a movie, but it couldn't say or hint that it was authorized), doing this would allow for the control but would lack the "getting paid for doing nothing" that exists today.
...Vietnam was effectively the cold war. Rather than fight each other an an arena that had very high stakes (an invasion of Russia and the USA) the USA and Russia decided to fight in a number of "proxy" wars such as Vietnam and Korea.
And similarly, the cold war would have already ended itself. Soviet Russia while an interesting "experiment" ended up failing due to the fact that human nature plus the Soviet version of communism ended up with a government who could not financially sustain itself.