If anyone's interested in a possible glimpse of a transhumanist future, you may want to try John C. Wright's SF novel The Golden Age. Best treatment of transhumanism I've seen since Pohl's "Day One Million".
A misdemeanor is a type of crime. I'll be the first to admit that a) the RIAA are a bunch of sleazeballs, and b) the punishments for digitally infringing on copyright are unconstitutionally harsh. But pretending that somehow sharing copyrighted songs over P2P isn't even illegal is another matter.
There is no case precedence for calling peer-to-peer digital file sharing "illegal" as all of the big-name newspapers (owned by the media companies of course)
My god man, how can you say there's no precedent? RIAA has successfully litigated against napster, mp3.com, all those college kids, and many more. Judges have ruled repeatedly that P2P filesharing is copyright infringement.
It's not at all clear that sharing a file with a friend is illegal, and it's clearly not immoral.
If you were sharing a file with a friend they would be hard pressed to find you. You'd probably do it via e-mail, or instant messenger or something.
The people they catch are the ones who are making the works available indiscriminately to the world at large. Do you really claim distributing thousands of copies of something to people who you don't even know falls under fair use?
Actually, it's pretty clear. Distributing copyrighted material without the copyright holder's permission is illegal. Nothing murky about it. The sense that I seem to get from slashdot is people really, really want to share files, so they tell themselves there's nothing wrong with it.
According to the ACLU, because I'm consolidating public information, I'm a national security threat. I should also be forced to submit to even more beaurocratic loopholes to get data that's already public, or be stopped from accessing to much public data to begin with. And I thought the ACLU was all about personal freedom and open governments
Good. You may be inconvenienced, but in the long run it's a lot more advantageous for us to gain some protection from overzealous spooks than it is for us to be able to research properties a little faster. Annoying for you, maybe, but just because the governmental agency you work for is benign, doesn't mean they all are.
I recently learned that you are a ham radio operator. I think both the open source community and ham community share very similar views on most issues. Do you see any ways the two communities can benefit each other?
Do you really want to get two groups of people with that much sexual magnetism together? The resulting condensation of machismo might create some sort of irresistable sexual vortex, drawing women irresistably in.
You are wrong on the military front. China is stronger than any other country in Asia
It's not. A lot of people assume it is because of it's size, but it really doesn't have the capability to wage long-term, modern war.
China could easily beat India (the presence of WMD simply means that there won't be any "real" war).
If China incurred far enough into India to get at it's resources, India would launch nukes; they'd figure they didn't have a choice.
Taiwan is a joke, compared to China.
Absolutely not. Taiwan has cutting-edge stuff; the US sells them equipment that we're using ourselves. There is no way for China to invade Taiwan--the Chinese navy would be instantly detected leaving port, tracked by radar, and blown to smithereens. They can't wage war overseas, they just don't have the capability.
Military people don't like to admit this but don't forget that there is something called "war of attrition". Basically you just keep sending your soldiers until they win by sheer numbers. China can easily do this.
A modern war of attrition requires resources. China just doesn't have enough of them.
They have all the latest Russian stuff
No, they had the latest Russian stuff in the 1950's maybe. Their air force numbers under 5,000 planes, and most of them are incredibly obsolete. Hell, they're still using stuff WE gave them in WW2. Check out this link:
For isntance, China has far greater number of submarines and aircraft carriers than Japan.
China's submarines are, like most of their hardware, very, very obsolete. And China has no aircraft carriers whatsoever. If they managed to marshal the resources to build or buy one, it would be the first thing hit when war broke out.
Not really true if you are practicising totalitarianism. The tyrannical governments that fail are non-totalitarian systems like dictatorships (one evil dude), monarchy, etc. But systems like Communism and fascism can survive for a long time. Soviet Union survived for quite a while and could have survived even longer if Gorbachev et al wanted to.
The Soviet Union didn't last long at all. Generally totalitarianism just can't exist in a large state successfully. Look at North Korea, and what that whacko has to do to keep the system in place.
Unfortunately for many people there is no commercial, paying field which they'd enjoy.
If he's really worried about procrastination on the job, however, something a little more structured like systems administration might be a better choice. When you have people screaming at you because they just lost all connectivity, the urge to procrastinate for the most part vanishes.
Population: sheer mass counts. If US has 1 genius in 1 million people, than we have 400 geniuses in the US. But China would have 1.100 which is quite an advantage.
Population is more of a disadvantage than an advantage at this point. And "genius" isn't just a matter of statistics, it requires an environment that fosters it. Renaissance Venice didn't have a very high population.
Education system: The US has a better starting position, but China is rapidly gaining. Chinese have thrown away all Mao anti-illectual rubbish and know to value knowledge these days.
Unfortunately they've replaced the Maoist garbage with extremist nationalist garbage that is just as dangerous. And the extreme poverty that so much of China lives in drags down the education system. There are computer science departments in some area colleges that don't have, well, any computers.
Traditions: The confucian traditions imply total devotion to work and society. However, the US tradition imply total devotion to self interest and egoism. So, the Chinese society have much better chance to complete large scale and high effort projects.
Confucianism isn't as strong as it once was, which is a good thing; it's a very nasty, hierarchical, heavily class-based system. Its adherence to family and social obligations also encourages nepotism and cronyism, which is one of the central reasons why so many third-world economies hit the ropes so easily.
Take e.g. Iraq we have our boys just a few months there, but already the press is whining that some of them are dying. Even worse the US economic system is based on these "values", so we can't change them without having our society collapse.
Well it sounds like you have a definite ideological bias there, but the diversity of viewpoints is an advantage, not a disadvantage (though the right inevitably tries to smear dissent as "unpatriotic", at least when they're in power).
Resources: China has many natural resources. Even more there are much resources in the neighboring countries.
China has a fair amount of resources due to it's sheer size, but they're missing some things (such as enough arable land).
These are very weak, so China has just to blackmail or to conquer them to get the resources.
Well I definitely disagree with this. China is actually surrounded by smaller, yet militarily stronger countries. India is weaker than China in terms of pure military power, but they do have nuclear weapons and would probably react to any incursion with them. Japan has a smaller military, but far more advanced, and would probably beat China even without US help. Taiwan also has a very small, but very high-tech military, and China's obsolete transports and air force would be cut down pretty quickly if they tried anything. Russia, even now, is no pushover, and has a stronger military and a larger nuclear arsenal if it came to that. The southeast side of the country is slightly less intimidating, but I don't even think the Chinese government will go near the psychopaths who run North Korea.
Legal bonds: there is not much copyright and IP enforced in China. So free from all patent and IP bounds China's economics and science can develop much faster.
Yes, but I don't think they have the economy to drive the science, even if they have the information. And to get the foreign investment they really crave they'll have to start cracking down on IP issues.
Less restricted goverment: In China the goverment doesn't have to obey very much restrictions. So they don't have to spend so much money on their own people or to protect human rights.
True, which results in such things as the Three Gorges Dam. But a tyrannical government has no stability, as history has shown again and again.
IT wa$ TH3 83$t 0f +1m35, 1t wa$ th3 Wor$+ 0pH +1me$, i+ W@5 TEH @GE 0PH W15dOM, IT W@5 Th3 @ge 0PH f00li$Hn35$, 1T W4$ tHE 3PocH 0PH bELI3pH, IT W45 +h3 3P0Ch Of 1ncreduL1ty, iT W45 th3 $eA5on 0PH L1GH+, it w4$ TEh $3450N oF d@rKN3$$, 1+ w@$ +H3 5pR1nG 0Ph HoP3, IT W@5 teh wiN+3R OF De5p@IR, We h4D ev3rY+h1NG 83PHOR3 u5, W3 H4d n0th1n9 bEforE Us, w3 wEre alL 90iN9 D1REC+ +o h34ven, we WEre @Ll 90Ing d1r3cT the O+heR WAY--iN $h0Rt, The p3rIOD W@5 5O ph@R liKe TH3 PR3SeNt p3Ri0D, tH4+ 5OM3 0Ph i+5 no15I35T 4u+hor1+ie$ 1N$i$Ted 0n 1+$ 8EIng R3C31v3d, F0R g0oD 0R fOr eViL, in The 5upeRl4tIv3 d39R33 0PH C0mPAR1$On oNLY.
TH3re w3RE 4 K1ng wi+H @ L4R93 JAw AND 4 kW33N WI+H 4 pL@iN F4cE, 0N +hE +hr0n3 Of eNGL4nd; TH3RE Wer3 4 K1NG wi+H @ L@R93 j@W 4ND a kwEEn W1+H @ fA1r pH4Ce, 0n th3 +hR0ne oF phRANCe. 1n 8O+h cOun+R13$ 1+ w@5 CLe@rER +H4n cRY5+4l To tHe LORd$ of T3H $T4+3 prEseRvE$ of lo4VE5 @Nd ph1$h3$, +H@+ Th1N95 In gEneR@l w3r3 $3++l3D f0R EveR
1t W4S the YE4r 0Ph OUR LORd on3 THoU5@Nd 5eVEn HundRed @Nd 53v3n+Y-f1V3. 5p1Ritu4l REVel4t1On5 w3r3 Conc3DeD +O 3N9L4nD 4T tH4t f@V0URED PErI0D, 4 54+ +hi$. mR5. $0uTHco+T h4D rEcEn+LY 4t+@1N3d H3r f1Ve- 4Nd-twEN+IETh bL3$seD B1RTHD@y, OPH WH0m a Proph3TIc pR1v4t3 1n +h3 liPh3 9u4rd5 H@D HeR4lD3d +H3 $u8LIm3 APpE4R@Nce BY 4nnOUnCIN9 +h4+ 4rR4NG3m3NT$ wERE M4D3 fOr t3h 5w@lLoW1ng up oF LonD0n ANd W35+MIN5TER. 3V3N Th3 cocK-l4n3 9HOS+ h@d b3En l4id 0nlY @ rOunD D0z3n 0PH Y34R5, @ftER r@PPin9 0U+ ItS m3$$A9Es, 45 +eH $P1r1+5 of TH15 V3rY Y3aR L4$+ p@5+ (5UpERn4+UR@LLy DeF1CiENT iN 0r1G1nal1Ty) r@pp3d 0ut TH31r5. mER3 Me55@9E5 1n tHe 34R+HlY 0RDer 0ph 3vEn+5 h4d lA+3Ly c0me +o +H3 3n9L15H cR0wN 4ND p30PlE, FR0M @ C0N9r355 Of Bri+15H 5uBj3C+5 IN @m3R1C@: wHIch, $tr4ng3 +0 r3L@t3, HAV3 PR0V3d Mor3 ImP0R+4nt +0 tEh huMAn r@cE +H4n aNY COMmunIC4+I0N5 y3+ r3c31ved +Hr0UGH 4ny Of +he CH1ck3N5 0PH THe C0Ck-l4NE bro0d
Will you people stop saying "It's the story, not the graphics"? Yes, we know. We knew before you told us. Even if we hadn't known, reading it 3 million times on the posts here would have clued us in. Your 3 million and 1st wasn't necessary.
That said, if IBM hires good writers then they can make good movies too. Pixar's stories are good. They're very good. They're not, however, the greatest stories ever written, and people don't collapse to their knees at the end of the film, weeping copiously in gratitude for being permitted to see such movies.
Sure, I agree about the money, but it's also about whining. Are you a political threat? You sure are. You make your $80K and whine that you're exploited, mis-treated, screwed-over, and your boss is Dilbert's boss. You want your employer to give you a lifetimne job, but you can quit any time on two week's notice. If you take an additional breath beyond the quota you've established, you want overtime.
Never actually worked in IT, have we? Most of the programmers I've known are salaried, not hourly, don't get overtime (yet still put in a lot of overtime hours), and are a lot more loyal to their company than their company is to them.
Does anyone else see Brave New World here? Artificial industries created in allowing humans to be free of worry and work...merely players in a game whose goal is to increase consumption.
The problem is the people who actually own the robots are the only ones who are going to see the benefits. You think they're going to share what the resources produce for free? They're going to sell them, only the people actually put out of work by the robots won't have the money.
God, why is everyone on slashdot completely and utterly devoid of either humor or the simple ability to understand simple literary constructions such as hyperbole or irony.
Let me explain it to you.
My comments weren't meant to be taken literally. Try to read things carefully next time.
My point was simply that slashdot is giving the SCO issue far too much coverage. More importantly, it's seeped into stories where it doesn't really belong.
so.... STFU or leave, but quit wasting my bandwidth with your whining.
Awww, poor little guy can't stomach criticism of his beloved slashdot.
Here's an idea, you cretin, why don't you try making me leave? Hmm, no way to do that, is there? So I'm going to continue to say what I want to, and you're going to continue to sit there taking it.
I've heard this a lot, but my attitude is, if you're willing to put your engine in a nice box and sell it for $50, you better be willing to accept criticism.
Maybe it's just that there's absolutely no reason why they have to keep making the same story in the same settings. The great thing about UT was the wide variety of settings. Space ships, new age temples, city streets, etc. The dungeon-with-occasional-demonic-biological-growths gets real old. It's the same amount of effort on the parts of the artists and level designers, why not make a change?
Re:Do activision really care when it's released ?
on
No Doom 3 This Year?
·
· Score: 1
Hell yes. DX1 was the best FPS I've ever played. All Id does is remake Doom 1 every year or so.
Who really cares? By the time it finally comes out we'll have been playing better designed and more exciting games (think half-life 2) for several months. All Doom 3 will be is standard Id product; a pretty engine, and graphics and a storyline ripped off the cover of a bad 80's heavy metal album.
Slashdot Mirror
If anyone's interested in a possible glimpse of a transhumanist future, you may want to try John C. Wright's SF novel The Golden Age. Best treatment of transhumanism I've seen since Pohl's "Day One Million".
I am going to step out on a limb here and guess that that he/she is a HURD developer.
No need to get insulting...
A misdemeanor is a type of crime. I'll be the first to admit that a) the RIAA are a bunch of sleazeballs, and b) the punishments for digitally infringing on copyright are unconstitutionally harsh. But pretending that somehow sharing copyrighted songs over P2P isn't even illegal is another matter.
There is no case precedence for calling peer-to-peer digital file sharing "illegal" as all of the big-name newspapers (owned by the media companies of course)
My god man, how can you say there's no precedent? RIAA has successfully litigated against napster, mp3.com, all those college kids, and many more. Judges have ruled repeatedly that P2P filesharing is copyright infringement.
It's not at all clear that sharing a file with a friend is illegal, and it's clearly not immoral.
If you were sharing a file with a friend they would be hard pressed to find you. You'd probably do it via e-mail, or instant messenger or something.
The people they catch are the ones who are making the works available indiscriminately to the world at large. Do you really claim distributing thousands of copies of something to people who you don't even know falls under fair use?
when their 'crime' is murky at best.
Actually, it's pretty clear. Distributing copyrighted material without the copyright holder's permission is illegal. Nothing murky about it. The sense that I seem to get from slashdot is people really, really want to share files, so they tell themselves there's nothing wrong with it.
According to the ACLU, because I'm consolidating public information, I'm a national security threat. I should also be forced to submit to even more beaurocratic loopholes to get data that's already public, or be stopped from accessing to much public data to begin with. And I thought the ACLU was all about personal freedom and open governments
Good. You may be inconvenienced, but in the long run it's a lot more advantageous for us to gain some protection from overzealous spooks than it is for us to be able to research properties a little faster. Annoying for you, maybe, but just because the governmental agency you work for is benign, doesn't mean they all are.
I recently learned that you are a ham radio operator. I think both the open source community and ham community share very similar views on most issues. Do you see any ways the two communities can benefit each other?
Do you really want to get two groups of people with that much sexual magnetism together? The resulting condensation of machismo might create some sort of irresistable sexual vortex, drawing women irresistably in.
Their blogs may be the only clue to the higher level of thinking that they operate at
Well let's not get delusions of grandeur here...
You are wrong on the military front. China is stronger than any other country in Asia
It's not. A lot of people assume it is because of it's size, but it really doesn't have the capability to wage long-term, modern war.
China could easily beat India (the presence of WMD simply means that there won't be any "real" war).
If China incurred far enough into India to get at it's resources, India would launch nukes; they'd figure they didn't have a choice.
Taiwan is a joke, compared to China.
Absolutely not. Taiwan has cutting-edge stuff; the US sells them equipment that we're using ourselves. There is no way for China to invade Taiwan--the Chinese navy would be instantly detected leaving port, tracked by radar, and blown to smithereens. They can't wage war overseas, they just don't have the capability.
Military people don't like to admit this but don't forget that there is something called "war of attrition". Basically you just keep sending your soldiers until they win by sheer numbers. China can easily do this.
A modern war of attrition requires resources. China just doesn't have enough of them.
They have all the latest Russian stuff
No, they had the latest Russian stuff in the 1950's maybe. Their air force numbers under 5,000 planes, and most of them are incredibly obsolete. Hell, they're still using stuff WE gave them in WW2. Check out this link:
http://www.comw.org/cmp/fulltext/iddschina.html for a rundown of China's military forces.
For isntance, China has far greater number of submarines and aircraft carriers than Japan.
China's submarines are, like most of their hardware, very, very obsolete. And China has no aircraft carriers whatsoever. If they managed to marshal the resources to build or buy one, it would be the first thing hit when war broke out.
Not really true if you are practicising totalitarianism. The tyrannical governments that fail are non-totalitarian systems like dictatorships (one evil dude), monarchy, etc. But systems like Communism and fascism can survive for a long time. Soviet Union survived for quite a while and could have survived even longer if Gorbachev et al wanted to.
The Soviet Union didn't last long at all. Generally totalitarianism just can't exist in a large state successfully. Look at North Korea, and what that whacko has to do to keep the system in place.
Recommend exercise on /.? R u nutz?
ya u r right, we dun like even typing in all the lettrs.
Unfortunately for many people there is no commercial, paying field which they'd enjoy.
If he's really worried about procrastination on the job, however, something a little more structured like systems administration might be a better choice. When you have people screaming at you because they just lost all connectivity, the urge to procrastinate for the most part vanishes.
My record is 55 hours of straight coding.
Followed, no doubt, by six weeks of debugging.
Population: sheer mass counts. If US has 1 genius in 1 million people, than we have 400 geniuses in the US. But China would have 1.100 which is quite an advantage.
Population is more of a disadvantage than an advantage at this point. And "genius" isn't just a matter of statistics, it requires an environment that fosters it. Renaissance Venice didn't have a very high population.
Education system: The US has a better starting position, but China is rapidly gaining. Chinese have thrown away all Mao anti-illectual rubbish and know to value knowledge these days.
Unfortunately they've replaced the Maoist garbage with extremist nationalist garbage that is just as dangerous. And the extreme poverty that so much of China lives in drags down the education system. There are computer science departments in some area colleges that don't have, well, any computers.
Traditions: The confucian traditions imply total devotion to work and society. However, the US tradition imply total devotion to self interest and egoism. So, the Chinese society have much better chance to complete large scale and high effort projects.
Confucianism isn't as strong as it once was, which is a good thing; it's a very nasty, hierarchical, heavily class-based system. Its adherence to family and social obligations also encourages nepotism and cronyism, which is one of the central reasons why so many third-world economies hit the ropes so easily.
Take e.g. Iraq we have our boys just a few months there, but already the press is whining that some of them are dying. Even worse the US economic system is based on these "values", so we can't change them without having our society collapse.
Well it sounds like you have a definite ideological bias there, but the diversity of viewpoints is an advantage, not a disadvantage (though the right inevitably tries to smear dissent as "unpatriotic", at least when they're in power).
Resources: China has many natural resources. Even more there are much resources in the neighboring countries.
China has a fair amount of resources due to it's sheer size, but they're missing some things (such as enough arable land).
These are very weak, so China has just to blackmail or to conquer them to get the resources.
Well I definitely disagree with this. China is actually surrounded by smaller, yet militarily stronger countries. India is weaker than China in terms of pure military power, but they do have nuclear weapons and would probably react to any incursion with them. Japan has a smaller military, but far more advanced, and would probably beat China even without US help. Taiwan also has a very small, but very high-tech military, and China's obsolete transports and air force would be cut down pretty quickly if they tried anything. Russia, even now, is no pushover, and has a stronger military and a larger nuclear arsenal if it came to that. The southeast side of the country is slightly less intimidating, but I don't even think the Chinese government will go near the psychopaths who run North Korea.
Legal bonds: there is not much copyright and IP enforced in China. So free from all patent and IP bounds China's economics and science can develop much faster.
Yes, but I don't think they have the economy to drive the science, even if they have the information. And to get the foreign investment they really crave they'll have to start cracking down on IP issues.
Less restricted goverment: In China the goverment doesn't have to obey very much restrictions. So they don't have to spend so much money on their own people or to protect human rights.
True, which results in such things as the Three Gorges Dam. But a tyrannical government has no stability, as history has shown again and again.
IT wa$ TH3 83$t 0f +1m35, 1t wa$ th3 Wor$+ 0pH +1me$, i+ W@5 TEH @GE 0PH W15dOM, IT W@5 Th3 @ge 0PH f00li$Hn35$, 1T W4$ tHE 3PocH 0PH bELI3pH, IT W45 +h3 3P0Ch Of 1ncreduL1ty, iT W45 th3 $eA5on 0PH L1GH+, it w4$ TEh $3450N oF d@rKN3$$, 1+ w@$ +H3 5pR1nG 0Ph HoP3, IT W@5 teh wiN+3R OF De5p@IR, We h4D ev3rY+h1NG 83PHOR3 u5, W3 H4d n0th1n9 bEforE Us, w3 wEre alL 90iN9 D1REC+ +o h34ven, we WEre @Ll 90Ing d1r3cT the O+heR WAY--iN $h0Rt, The p3rIOD W@5 5O ph@R liKe TH3 PR3SeNt p3Ri0D, tH4+ 5OM3 0Ph i+5 no15I35T 4u+hor1+ie$ 1N$i$Ted 0n 1+$ 8EIng R3C31v3d, F0R g0oD 0R fOr eViL, in The 5upeRl4tIv3 d39R33 0PH C0mPAR1$On oNLY.
TH3re w3RE 4 K1ng wi+H @ L4R93 JAw AND 4 kW33N WI+H 4 pL@iN F4cE, 0N +hE +hr0n3 Of eNGL4nd; TH3RE Wer3 4 K1NG wi+H @ L@R93 j@W 4ND a kwEEn W1+H @ fA1r pH4Ce, 0n th3 +hR0ne oF phRANCe. 1n 8O+h cOun+R13$ 1+ w@5 CLe@rER +H4n cRY5+4l To tHe LORd$ of T3H $T4+3 prEseRvE$ of lo4VE5 @Nd ph1$h3$, +H@+ Th1N95 In gEneR@l w3r3 $3++l3D f0R EveR
1t W4S the YE4r 0Ph OUR LORd on3 THoU5@Nd 5eVEn HundRed @Nd 53v3n+Y-f1V3. 5p1Ritu4l REVel4t1On5 w3r3 Conc3DeD +O 3N9L4nD 4T tH4t f@V0URED PErI0D, 4 54+ +hi$. mR5. $0uTHco+T h4D rEcEn+LY 4t+@1N3d H3r f1Ve- 4Nd-twEN+IETh bL3$seD B1RTHD@y, OPH WH0m a Proph3TIc pR1v4t3 1n +h3 liPh3 9u4rd5 H@D HeR4lD3d +H3 $u8LIm3 APpE4R@Nce BY 4nnOUnCIN9 +h4+ 4rR4NG3m3NT$ wERE M4D3 fOr t3h 5w@lLoW1ng up oF LonD0n ANd W35+MIN5TER. 3V3N Th3 cocK-l4n3 9HOS+ h@d b3En l4id 0nlY @ rOunD D0z3n 0PH Y34R5, @ftER r@PPin9 0U+ ItS m3$$A9Es, 45 +eH $P1r1+5 of TH15 V3rY Y3aR L4$+ p@5+ (5UpERn4+UR@LLy DeF1CiENT iN 0r1G1nal1Ty) r@pp3d 0ut TH31r5. mER3 Me55@9E5 1n tHe 34R+HlY 0RDer 0ph 3vEn+5 h4d lA+3Ly c0me +o +H3 3n9L15H cR0wN 4ND p30PlE, FR0M @ C0N9r355 Of Bri+15H 5uBj3C+5 IN @m3R1C@: wHIch, $tr4ng3 +0 r3L@t3, HAV3 PR0V3d Mor3 ImP0R+4nt +0 tEh huMAn r@cE +H4n aNY COMmunIC4+I0N5 y3+ r3c31ved +Hr0UGH 4ny Of +he CH1ck3N5 0PH THe C0Ck-l4NE bro0d
Will you people stop saying "It's the story, not the graphics"? Yes, we know. We knew before you told us. Even if we hadn't known, reading it 3 million times on the posts here would have clued us in. Your 3 million and 1st wasn't necessary.
That said, if IBM hires good writers then they can make good movies too. Pixar's stories are good. They're very good. They're not, however, the greatest stories ever written, and people don't collapse to their knees at the end of the film, weeping copiously in gratitude for being permitted to see such movies.
Sure, I agree about the money, but it's also about whining. Are you a political threat? You sure are. You make your $80K and whine that you're exploited, mis-treated, screwed-over, and your boss is Dilbert's boss. You want your employer to give you a lifetimne job, but you can quit any time on two week's notice. If you take an additional breath beyond the quota you've established, you want overtime.
Never actually worked in IT, have we? Most of the programmers I've known are salaried, not hourly, don't get overtime (yet still put in a lot of overtime hours), and are a lot more loyal to their company than their company is to them.
Does anyone else see Brave New World here? Artificial industries created in allowing humans to be free of worry and work...merely players in a game whose goal is to increase consumption.
The problem is the people who actually own the robots are the only ones who are going to see the benefits. You think they're going to share what the resources produce for free? They're going to sell them, only the people actually put out of work by the robots won't have the money.
God, why is everyone on slashdot completely and utterly devoid of either humor or the simple ability to understand simple literary constructions such as hyperbole or irony.
Let me explain it to you.
My comments weren't meant to be taken literally. Try to read things carefully next time.
My point was simply that slashdot is giving the SCO issue far too much coverage. More importantly, it's seeped into stories where it doesn't really belong.
so.... STFU or leave, but quit wasting my bandwidth with your whining.
Awww, poor little guy can't stomach criticism of his beloved slashdot.
Here's an idea, you cretin, why don't you try making me leave? Hmm, no way to do that, is there? So I'm going to continue to say what I want to, and you're going to continue to sit there taking it.
This whole situation is really a gauge of the 'apathy' factor. How many peopel will be outraged and yet do nothing?
I cared about it until slashdot started posting stories about it 24x7. Now I don't care and am just sick of hearing about it. Nice job, slashdot.
That's a meaningless division, much like republican vs. democrat.
How is it meaningless? There are wide-ranging, noticeable differences in our society depending who's in power.
I've heard this a lot, but my attitude is, if you're willing to put your engine in a nice box and sell it for $50, you better be willing to accept criticism.
s gets real old. It's the same amount of effort on the parts of the artists and level designers, why not make a change?
Maybe it's just that there's absolutely no reason why they have to keep making the same story in the same settings. The great thing about UT was the wide variety of settings. Space ships, new age temples, city streets, etc. The dungeon-with-occasional-demonic-biological-growth
Hell yes. DX1 was the best FPS I've ever played. All Id does is remake Doom 1 every year or so.
Who really cares? By the time it finally comes out we'll have been playing better designed and more exciting games (think half-life 2) for several months. All Doom 3 will be is standard Id product; a pretty engine, and graphics and a storyline ripped off the cover of a bad 80's heavy metal album.