So you think the resale value of video games is high enough to prevent people from purchasing them, I have my doubts.
I think resale value is not considered in 99% of video game purchases, so therefore prices would not need to move at all.
All that happens is that the people buying used video games can no longer buy them, but that money never went to Sony anyway.
I loath my hard copies, perhaps it has something to do with my xbox360 and my laziness. I just don't see the appeal to getting up, finding the right cd, hoping it's not scratched, then putting it in, waiting for it to load, and that's not even the worst part, the xbox's DVD drive spins so fast my floor shakes.
Almost none of the games for my old systems work anymore. The cds for ps1 are past their lifetimes, and my NES games have no hope in ever working again.
Please, let me have some legitimate digital copies that I can backup. Key them to me so only I can make copies, whatever. Apparently the file-sharing community has no problem making digital copies, and hell, they are easier to find than legitimate paid downloads.
I only purchase games I can dl straight to the HD, but for some weird reason, they are always slow to release digital copies. I suppose all that extra revenue from not paying for brick and mortar stores clogs their brain, or more likely, they deem it necessary to employ these incompetent people at Gamestops all around the nation (who create the very used game market I thought they so disliked). Perhaps the fear of those video game nerds/sale associates going into IT is too much to look past.
I also don't understand how it is 'used', it's digital. The 0's and 1's should be the same as the original, and if they aren't, it's not 'used', it's corrupt.
There's no difference between a buyer who bought the game legit the first round and plays it for one year, and someone who plays it for 6 months, sells it to another person, who plays it for another 6 months. What gives.
The second person didn't purchase another game. That's $50 lost, or if you wanted to spend $15 on an arcade game, but bought a used game instead, that's $15 lost.
So by not catering to the market that gives them NO money makes them lose money?
Used books/CDs cut into sales, of course, how could they not?
Comparing physical commodities, like cars, where resale value is a huge buying point, to these digital arts, where resale value is never considered, is nonsensical.
Perhaps used stereos would be a better comparison, but still, Sony doesn't have to do anything at all if I sell my stereo to someone else. In this case, when I sell my video game to someone else, they need to create a new login and provide me with service I have NOT paid for.
Perhaps the price is too high, but considering it's the same for just 1 month of WOW, it seems pretty cheap to me.
Perhaps in our new digital age 1 year is far too long. Just file the patent before it comes out, you just have to "file" it, you don't need to receive the patent.
Perhaps for small companies this could be relevant, but any midsize or bigger company (this includes basically every tech company) knows how to file patents, has patent lawyers, and really has no excuse not to file, unless this is exactly what they intended.
I'm surprised you can still buy used games at all. Considering I only purchase digital copies (perhaps due to my innate fear of leaving my apt, or perhaps the utterly horrible sales associates), I have never partaken in this 'used' video game market.
Used games will surely disappear in our digital age soon enough, so this is sure to be only be a fleeting policy.
On a side note, I actually did go into a Gamestop the other day to see if they had splitter for my Kinect (I got the new one with an xbox), so I could split it into a normal USB and a power supply (like they sell for the old xbox models), the purpose being to be able to 'hack' it on my computer and do something fun. He called me a hacker, told me his store does not support these policies, it's illegal, blah blah please leave.
I countered with MS releasing/soon to release the SDK, so it could be for legitimate purposes; to which he replied "what is an SDK?"
a way to enjoy the same legal protections granted to a number of other ethoses (ethoi?) which are demonstrably more counter-productive and childish than any amount of file-sharing could ever be.
So you picked a fringe 'religion' to complain about that almost nobody follows and that the law was never designed for.
That tax breaks are meant for the major religions that spend billions upon billions in charity, and in so far as you are an actual religion, I don't see it as some huge problem.
It boggles my mind how Scientology has been able to play with these loop-holes for so long, but I see it as no different to other large corporations exploiting the tax code to their benefit.
Still, there is no RIGHT to share other people's creations. I have no inherent 'right' to steal what you write or create and start distributing it freely.
Christian religions donate food to charity, and believe in the Bible which says it's ok to steal food if you are hungry; yet the churches aren't stealing all the food from our farmers and shipping it to poor nations. They aren't robbing banks to give the money to charity.
This whole notion of stealing as a right is not held by other religions as has never been as issue. These people are the problem and need to be told that, unequivocally. Nobody is telling them not to create their own movies and share them, they are just saying don't steal mine. This whole fiasco is not going to do anything to help with the issue.
"You religious 'rights' cannot include stealing my products and distributing them to whoever you see fit. " Done.
They have the right to produce their own music or art and distribute it freely, nobody is infringing on their rights. But absurdly, they think they have the right to steal anything anyone else creates.
Their lack of ability to create art or other useful software that isn't open source doesn't give you a free pass to steal.
You aren't being forced to use software that costs money, you aren't even forced to use a computer, just look at the Amish.
and finally wind up doing it better or at least more cheaply than we can.
You mean more cheaply, I haven't been hearing any rave reviews of quality Chinese products. A punitive tariff on Chinese products seems to make more and sense, as this is not some mutually beneficial relationship, it's extremely onesided.
The only thing we are getting are worse quality products, although marginally cheape
I have to admit, I actually read some articles. It's over a TW peak and 392 GW average, but there is no storage, so this can only supply power during the daytime hours.
It's even worse, total cost is estimated to be around $2 billion, so it's $5/watt.
That does seem ridiculous. But this is a new technology, so perhaps with mass production costs would collapse? Perhaps after they have built this one, building another one will be really cheap.
Otherwise I don't understand why they are doing this either.
So if I write a book, can I include TOS that makes it illegal for anyone to use the information within the book?
If I write a book about how much my boss sucks, and how I slack off at work, can I include TOS so that nobody is allowed to relay that information to him?
Even if I only sell my book to members of a book club, I wouldn't think this changes anything.
If you intentionally post information about yourself on a widely viewable forum, I would expect other people might read it.
Slashdot Mirror
So you think the resale value of video games is high enough to prevent people from purchasing them, I have my doubts. I think resale value is not considered in 99% of video game purchases, so therefore prices would not need to move at all.
All that happens is that the people buying used video games can no longer buy them, but that money never went to Sony anyway.
I loath my hard copies, perhaps it has something to do with my xbox360 and my laziness. I just don't see the appeal to getting up, finding the right cd, hoping it's not scratched, then putting it in, waiting for it to load, and that's not even the worst part, the xbox's DVD drive spins so fast my floor shakes.
Almost none of the games for my old systems work anymore. The cds for ps1 are past their lifetimes, and my NES games have no hope in ever working again. Please, let me have some legitimate digital copies that I can backup. Key them to me so only I can make copies, whatever. Apparently the file-sharing community has no problem making digital copies, and hell, they are easier to find than legitimate paid downloads.
I only purchase games I can dl straight to the HD, but for some weird reason, they are always slow to release digital copies. I suppose all that extra revenue from not paying for brick and mortar stores clogs their brain, or more likely, they deem it necessary to employ these incompetent people at Gamestops all around the nation (who create the very used game market I thought they so disliked). Perhaps the fear of those video game nerds/sale associates going into IT is too much to look past.
I also don't understand how it is 'used', it's digital. The 0's and 1's should be the same as the original, and if they aren't, it's not 'used', it's corrupt.
There's no difference between a buyer who bought the game legit the first round and plays it for one year, and someone who plays it for 6 months, sells it to another person, who plays it for another 6 months. What gives.
The second person didn't purchase another game. That's $50 lost, or if you wanted to spend $15 on an arcade game, but bought a used game instead, that's $15 lost.
So by not catering to the market that gives them NO money makes them lose money? Used books/CDs cut into sales, of course, how could they not?
Comparing physical commodities, like cars, where resale value is a huge buying point, to these digital arts, where resale value is never considered, is nonsensical.
Perhaps used stereos would be a better comparison, but still, Sony doesn't have to do anything at all if I sell my stereo to someone else. In this case, when I sell my video game to someone else, they need to create a new login and provide me with service I have NOT paid for.
Perhaps the price is too high, but considering it's the same for just 1 month of WOW, it seems pretty cheap to me.
Perhaps in our new digital age 1 year is far too long. Just file the patent before it comes out, you just have to "file" it, you don't need to receive the patent.
Perhaps for small companies this could be relevant, but any midsize or bigger company (this includes basically every tech company) knows how to file patents, has patent lawyers, and really has no excuse not to file, unless this is exactly what they intended.
I'm surprised you can still buy used games at all. Considering I only purchase digital copies (perhaps due to my innate fear of leaving my apt, or perhaps the utterly horrible sales associates), I have never partaken in this 'used' video game market.
Used games will surely disappear in our digital age soon enough, so this is sure to be only be a fleeting policy.
On a side note, I actually did go into a Gamestop the other day to see if they had splitter for my Kinect (I got the new one with an xbox), so I could split it into a normal USB and a power supply (like they sell for the old xbox models), the purpose being to be able to 'hack' it on my computer and do something fun. He called me a hacker, told me his store does not support these policies, it's illegal, blah blah please leave.
I countered with MS releasing/soon to release the SDK, so it could be for legitimate purposes; to which he replied "what is an SDK?"
They still let you buy used games, I see that as something that will soon disappear in our digital age.
I agree, you are free to evolve at the pace of the natural environment. Perhaps in another billion years you will grow a wheel or a spade on your arm.
a way to enjoy the same legal protections granted to a number of other ethoses (ethoi?) which are demonstrably more counter-productive and childish than any amount of file-sharing could ever be.
Yet never an example.
So you picked a fringe 'religion' to complain about that almost nobody follows and that the law was never designed for. That tax breaks are meant for the major religions that spend billions upon billions in charity, and in so far as you are an actual religion, I don't see it as some huge problem.
It boggles my mind how Scientology has been able to play with these loop-holes for so long, but I see it as no different to other large corporations exploiting the tax code to their benefit.
Still, there is no RIGHT to share other people's creations. I have no inherent 'right' to steal what you write or create and start distributing it freely.
Christian religions donate food to charity, and believe in the Bible which says it's ok to steal food if you are hungry; yet the churches aren't stealing all the food from our farmers and shipping it to poor nations. They aren't robbing banks to give the money to charity.
This whole notion of stealing as a right is not held by other religions as has never been as issue. These people are the problem and need to be told that, unequivocally. Nobody is telling them not to create their own movies and share them, they are just saying don't steal mine. This whole fiasco is not going to do anything to help with the issue.
"You religious 'rights' cannot include stealing my products and distributing them to whoever you see fit. "
Done.
They have the right to produce their own music or art and distribute it freely, nobody is infringing on their rights. But absurdly, they think they have the right to steal anything anyone else creates.
Their lack of ability to create art or other useful software that isn't open source doesn't give you a free pass to steal.
You aren't being forced to use software that costs money, you aren't even forced to use a computer, just look at the Amish.
and finally wind up doing it better or at least more cheaply than we can.
You mean more cheaply, I haven't been hearing any rave reviews of quality Chinese products. A punitive tariff on Chinese products seems to make more and sense, as this is not some mutually beneficial relationship, it's extremely onesided.
The only thing we are getting are worse quality products, although marginally cheape
That's not the point, coal is about $1/watt to build out a plant. The running costs are much much lower obviously, it's cents per kwh to the consumer.
I have to admit, I actually read some articles. It's over a TW peak and 392 GW average, but there is no storage, so this can only supply power during the daytime hours.
It's even worse, total cost is estimated to be around $2 billion, so it's $5/watt.
That does seem ridiculous. But this is a new technology, so perhaps with mass production costs would collapse? Perhaps after they have built this one, building another one will be really cheap.
Otherwise I don't understand why they are doing this either.
.
Since you were off by 10 so was I, so make it a little less than 10%.
You mean 100kW per acre.
It's not 1000w/m^2, that's what hits the atmosphere. And I think you forgot about nighttime.
So it's closer to 5-10% efficiency.
But $/watt is much more important in the USA, since we have plenty of land.
Thats 2.5 watts/ square meter.
That's less than 1% efficiency.
But if it's super cheap, who cares.
yea, all those crops growing out in the desert.
How many birds die from flying into windows? Should we ban glass windows.
Aren't hard drives still using 1,000's of atoms per bit?
And now you know why poor inner cities have 50% unemployment.
I don't know how good of a comparison this is.
So if I write a book, can I include TOS that makes it illegal for anyone to use the information within the book? If I write a book about how much my boss sucks, and how I slack off at work, can I include TOS so that nobody is allowed to relay that information to him? Even if I only sell my book to members of a book club, I wouldn't think this changes anything.
If you intentionally post information about yourself on a widely viewable forum, I would expect other people might read it.