You're talking past me here. I agree that the physics was eye-candy. My point that is its existence allowed for a secondary set of experiences in the game that were fun, and which really demanded the CPU horsepower that the XBox had. The fun was there, and it required the XBox specs.
Why would you care about hardware stats? Do they guarantee "better games"?
News, MS and Sony fanbois...the answer is "no". Better games come out of better design which are sensitive to the kinds of passtimes people want to pursue.
But, um, Nintendo fanbois? There's another side to that. Hardware horsepower makes it far easier to build games with a wider scope for play. Remember the Halo grenade hacks? Those were damned fun, and, from talking to the dev manager on the product, I can assure you that nobody expected them or planned for them. They made heavy use of the fact that there was physics in the game -- and that depended on the hardware horsepower of the XBox.
It would depend on the TOS. If they say something to the effect of "AOL may, at its own discretion, characterize any network data as " -- and AOL/TW has good lawyers, so I'd expect them to do that, or something functionally equivalent -- then the contractual terms would grant the provider whatever authority needed to control that definition.
Second, it claims an implicit contract which is not present.
That contract is present. Very, very, very much so.
There's no implicit contract, because, as I said in my original posting:
Second, it claims an implicit contract which is not present. There is an explicit contract between account holder and account provider: that non-spam email as viewed by the account provider will be delivered. Those are the TOS for all free email providers, to which the user acceeded when he or she signed up for the service.
[emphasis added] The explicit contract trumps the alleged implicit contract. The explicit contract says that the service has the right (and, in fact, the responsibility) to remove spam. Hazelton is spewing legalese to try to bamboozle people.
Wow! The EFF and associates have managed to trump their past inanity.
The author complains that his organization is unwilling to pay $2000 to send bulk mail past Hotmail's filters, and then complains that it is a violation of the sender's and receiver's rights to block the resulting mail as junk mail, basing this on an implied contract with the receiver. That reaches new heights of disingenuousness.
First, it ignores the possibility of the recipient creating a new account somewhere else. If AOL gives people free whitelisting, and MSN doesn't -- and there's a solid market for that -- then recipients will add AOL accounts to which the whitelisted people and organizations can send. The market in recipient mailboxes is highly competitive because there's no reason for a recipient to only have one online identity.
Second, it claims an implicit contract which is not present. There is an explicit contract between account holder and account provider: that non-spam email as viewed by the account provider will be delivered. Those are the TOS for all free email providers, to which the user acceeded when he or she signed up for the service.
Third, there's no implicit contract whatsoever with the sender -- and it is the sender who's complaining here, not the recipient. Peacefire.org is free to collect donations for its two grand -- but it won't. OK, but that's a demand the sender has made, not a choice the email provider has sanctioned. In a word...tough. Form a coalition of organizations which will prestamp the mail, if that's an issue.
Not really. BluRay and HD-DVD discs can be mass produced in R/O form. This won't be a replacement for either of those technologies unless it's possible to create multi-million impression runs on an assembly line -- which it currently isn't.
You do realize that Microsoft marketing has been leaking the "documents" which predict the slip for quite a while, don't you? This wasn't a surprise to anyone inside.
Keep this in perspective -- this is a six-week slip on a project which has already slipped three-plus years. From a calendar-year perspective, it's a catastrophe, but viewed in the context of Wasteful...Wistful...err, that's Vista...as a whole, it's small potatoes.
The courts have spoken on the legality of EULAs a great many times, and there are very few which are as aggressive about requiring active click through as the OEM EULAs. You can choose to not accept the EULA; the consequence is that you may only return the cd to the OEM for a refund. No more, no less. As to the rest of the crap -- first sale is the standard theives line, and it doesn't apply. There was no sale of the right to use; you don't have that. Sorry. You have the disk, which you can transfer...as a coaster. The rest isn't yours.
Yes, you can enter into a contract to not move the software to another computer (and using an OEM version of Windows is absolutely considered entering into such a contract.) Yes, it is legal. You got a discount on the OEM copy of Windows, the price of which was the inability to transfer the license to another computer. Yes, that's (part of) why you see restore disks these days.
The question is whether the code is *there*, not whether it is turned on. In SP4 of 2K server, I believe that it is not even turned on by default, but I'd need to go back and check.
Either way, I agree that installing IIS/SMTP by default is a very bad idea.
Windows has shipped with an SMTP server installed since Windows 2000. It's off by default in Server 2003 and in all client versions, and, I think, in 2000 Server, but it's there.
What do you think the spammers use on their zombie boxes? Code they wrote themselves?
If both an American applicant and an H-1B applicant is qualified for a job, the manager will choose the applicant that is more qualified.
[...]
I don't see a contradiction there. [The employer is] offering a fixed amount of money, and looking for the best qualified candidate for that money.
In the circumstances in question, however, the employer is not allowed to search for the best qualified candidate for the job. If you are an American, are qualified for a particular position, and are passed over for a better qualified H1-B candidate, then the organization with which you were interviewing has perjured itself. In order to hire that H1-B applicant, the organzation needed to submit an affadavit to INS stating that there were no qualified US persons who could take the job. That's "no persons" as in "no one who can do the job", not "no persons" as in "no one who can do the job equally well".
Samba may occasionally prevent a complete Unix->Windows migration in some shops, but it's not a sufficiently compelling product to cause migrations in the other direction.
Considering that Microsoft invented AJAX, I'd say that your rather presumptuous (and vapid) claims are pretty silly. More than that, OWA, the original 'AJAX' client, is also the example of the first truely REST-ful web service, up to using complex GET-based queries to specify parameters.
But don't let the facts muddy a good story. This *is*/., after all.
There's no reason for Microsoft to do that. If a game can checksum the DVD through a game and push down a reset, then all Microsoft needs to do is push down a kernel update to your box which will force-update the DVD firmware whenever you turn on the box (or even whenever you insert a DVD, to prevent the obvious 'turn the box on, throw a switch to replace the firmware, and go from there' hack.)
The GNU operating System? Hey, snookums? 2003...err, 2000...err, 1995...umm, and, 2...all called. They want their catch phrase back, particularly seeing as its all each of them ever got out of GNU as far as operating systems go.
Slashdot Mirror
OMGFWTF
BBQ -- as in "it roasted my eyes"
You're talking past me here. I agree that the physics was eye-candy. My point that is its existence allowed for a secondary set of experiences in the game that were fun, and which really demanded the CPU horsepower that the XBox had. The fun was there, and it required the XBox specs.
Why would you care about hardware stats? Do they guarantee "better games"?
News, MS and Sony fanbois...the answer is "no". Better games come out of better design which are sensitive to the kinds of passtimes people want to pursue.
But, um, Nintendo fanbois? There's another side to that. Hardware horsepower makes it far easier to build games with a wider scope for play. Remember the Halo grenade hacks? Those were damned fun, and, from talking to the dev manager on the product, I can assure you that nobody expected them or planned for them. They made heavy use of the fact that there was physics in the game -- and that depended on the hardware horsepower of the XBox.
So game design isn't
It would depend on the TOS. If they say something to the effect of "AOL may, at its own discretion, characterize any network data as " -- and AOL/TW has good lawyers, so I'd expect them to do that, or something functionally equivalent -- then the contractual terms would grant the provider whatever authority needed to control that definition.
What's unsoliticited? What you or I would think is UCE, or what some dumb Bayesian filter would think has the stigmata of spam?
The provider defines what is spam. That's in the contract, guy -- if you don't like it, don't sign it. If you didn't read it...whose fault is that?
Turn it around -- if you get an "important email" about, say, your PayPal account from a hospital computer, do you want it delivered? No, you don't.
Wow! The EFF and associates have managed to trump their past inanity.
The author complains that his organization is unwilling to pay $2000 to send bulk mail past Hotmail's filters, and then complains that it is a violation of the sender's and receiver's rights to block the resulting mail as junk mail, basing this on an implied contract with the receiver. That reaches new heights of disingenuousness.
First, it ignores the possibility of the recipient creating a new account somewhere else. If AOL gives people free whitelisting, and MSN doesn't -- and there's a solid market for that -- then recipients will add AOL accounts to which the whitelisted people and organizations can send. The market in recipient mailboxes is highly competitive because there's no reason for a recipient to only have one online identity.
Second, it claims an implicit contract which is not present. There is an explicit contract between account holder and account provider: that non-spam email as viewed by the account provider will be delivered. Those are the TOS for all free email providers, to which the user acceeded when he or she signed up for the service.
Third, there's no implicit contract whatsoever with the sender -- and it is the sender who's complaining here, not the recipient. Peacefire.org is free to collect donations for its two grand -- but it won't. OK, but that's a demand the sender has made, not a choice the email provider has sanctioned. In a word...tough. Form a coalition of organizations which will prestamp the mail, if that's an issue.
Not really. BluRay and HD-DVD discs can be mass produced in R/O form. This won't be a replacement for either of those technologies unless it's possible to create multi-million impression runs on an assembly line -- which it currently isn't.
You do realize that Microsoft marketing has been leaking the "documents" which predict the slip for quite a while, don't you? This wasn't a surprise to anyone inside.
Keep this in perspective -- this is a six-week slip on a project which has already slipped three-plus years. From a calendar-year perspective, it's a catastrophe, but viewed in the context of Wasteful...Wistful...err, that's Vista...as a whole, it's small potatoes.
The courts have spoken on the legality of EULAs a great many times, and there are very few which are as aggressive about requiring active click through as the OEM EULAs. You can choose to not accept the EULA; the consequence is that you may only return the cd to the OEM for a refund. No more, no less. As to the rest of the crap -- first sale is the standard theives line, and it doesn't apply. There was no sale of the right to use; you don't have that. Sorry. You have the disk, which you can transfer...as a coaster. The rest isn't yours.
Yes, you can enter into a contract to not move the software to another computer (and using an OEM version of Windows is absolutely considered entering into such a contract.) Yes, it is legal. You got a discount on the OEM copy of Windows, the price of which was the inability to transfer the license to another computer. Yes, that's (part of) why you see restore disks these days.
The question is whether the code is *there*, not whether it is turned on. In SP4 of 2K server, I believe that it is not even turned on by default, but I'd need to go back and check.
Either way, I agree that installing IIS/SMTP by default is a very bad idea.
Windows has shipped with an SMTP server installed since Windows 2000. It's off by default in Server 2003 and in all client versions, and, I think, in 2000 Server, but it's there.
What do you think the spammers use on their zombie boxes? Code they wrote themselves?
As far as anyone can tell, none.
Samba may occasionally prevent a complete Unix->Windows migration in some shops, but it's not a sufficiently compelling product to cause migrations in the other direction.
Considering that Microsoft invented AJAX, I'd say that your rather presumptuous (and vapid) claims are pretty silly. More than that, OWA, the original 'AJAX' client, is also the example of the first truely REST-ful web service, up to using complex GET-based queries to specify parameters.
/., after all.
But don't let the facts muddy a good story. This *is*
But this is the March CTP for Atlas, not the final release.
Dumb question: has anyone actually replicated this result? All I've seen is something which could just as easily be a recorded DVD movie...
There's no reason for Microsoft to do that. If a game can checksum the DVD through a game and push down a reset, then all Microsoft needs to do is push down a kernel update to your box which will force-update the DVD firmware whenever you turn on the box (or even whenever you insert a DVD, to prevent the obvious 'turn the box on, throw a switch to replace the firmware, and go from there' hack.)
The GNU operating System? Hey, snookums? 2003...err, 2000...err, 1995...umm, and, 2...all called. They want their catch phrase back, particularly seeing as its all each of them ever got out of GNU as far as operating systems go.
Why would they play each other to console games? Hell, I didn't realize games were ever sad, much less that they needed to be consoled...
I just measured the distance between my ears and my main dev machine. It's less than a metre away.