Okay, A)Never said they'd keep multiplayer or any online aspects within games hosted on their servers. but B) Offline mode exists, and I figure it's mostly what they'd be prepared to do if they go under. (and yes I know it still has to connect once after you choose it, and yes I think that's pretty dumb, but after that it's offline and all games you have downloaded will start just fine)
Actually, you can already do it per-computer if you want. Just go into offline mode. It'll connect once to verify you (why it can't already know if you're already logged in? no idea...) and then you can run all your games without being connected.
I ran it like that for weeks up until yesterday when I connected again to check if there were any interesting new games.
Wow, thank you for assuming I'm obese. I actually had in mind a room possibly for exercise where gravity could be increased. Are people who try to see all sides of a hypothetical technology fat in your mind? Hah! Really thanks for that. Made my day.:)
Okay, I'm going to put aside the fact that I know gravity waves != gravity (explained in other comments quite well). I would seriously enjoy the ability something along the lines of a room where I could experience adjustable gravity. Sure, if gravity control could exist it would be misused, but there would be beneficial uses found as well.
I'm not saying the glass is half full either. Heck, there might be only a few drops in the proverbial glass, but my point is that they exist.
Did you RTFA? These "accelerators" are merely additions which allow users to retrieve related content without leaving a webpage. Highlighting a street address and having a map appear is mentioned as an example.
No, stop, please, you two are in agreement. You have been from the beginning. You just don't seem to understand that. "the idiot" in your first post matches MOPC's "too fast for conditions". "Speeding" in his usage is ONLY applying to the definition used in laws. He never called them evil. He just stated that speeding and "too fast for conditions" are not necessarily the same. All you're arguing over boils down to a slight disagreement over semantics.
"I personally believe that US Americans are unable to do so because some people out there in our nation don't have maps and that I believe our education like such as South Africa and the Iraq, and everywhere, such as, and I believe that they should our education over here in the US, should help the US, or should help South Africa and help the Iraq and the Asian countries so that we will be able to build out our future for us."
Okay, so it's not science, but our schools really aren't helping matters. (Quote comes from here if anyone missed it or is unfamiliar with the event)
92A Internet service provider must have policy for terminating accounts of repeat infringers
(1) An Internet service provider must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances, of the account with that Internet service provider of a repeat infringer.
(2) In subsection (1), repeat infringer means a person who repeatedly infringes the copyright in a work by using 1 or more of the Internet services of the Internet service provider to do a restricted act without the consent of the copyright owner.
So basically all this adds is that, on top of what's already in place, if someone says you infringe more than once, then the ISP has to cut you off. Everything else already exists under the current law. I've tried looking but I don't see much in the way of what is "proof" beyond 92D:
92D Requirements for notice of infringement
A notice referred to in section 92C(3) mustâ"
(a) contain the information prescribed by regulations made under this Act; and
(b) be signed by the copyright owner or the copyright ownerâ(TM)s duly authorised agent.
Maybe some lawyer can shed light on this, but IANAL.
"What would happen is simple. Right holders could log on to public file-sharing sites, just as anyone can, and note which IP addresses are being used to upload pre-release music or films or large amounts of copyright-infringing material.
They would then prepare evidence, complete with details of the names of the copyrighted files being uploaded, exact timestamps and the protocol used, and send it to the relevant ISP. They would never see the personal details of the person behind that IP address."
So basically you just take a screenshot, edit the IP addresses to match the judges/lawmakers, and send it to ISPs. Apparently that's proof enough.
actually that's still wrong, it's the combination of the star and pentagon shapes that has the religious meanings. I don't know what the name of that is off the top of my head. Thought it was pentagram but that's just the star shape according to wikipedia...
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, A)Never said they'd keep multiplayer or any online aspects within games hosted on their servers. but B) Offline mode exists, and I figure it's mostly what they'd be prepared to do if they go under. (and yes I know it still has to connect once after you choose it, and yes I think that's pretty dumb, but after that it's offline and all games you have downloaded will start just fine)
Broken window kid approves.
Actually, you can already do it per-computer if you want. Just go into offline mode. It'll connect once to verify you (why it can't already know if you're already logged in? no idea...) and then you can run all your games without being connected. I ran it like that for weeks up until yesterday when I connected again to check if there were any interesting new games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis
Wow, thank you for assuming I'm obese. I actually had in mind a room possibly for exercise where gravity could be increased. Are people who try to see all sides of a hypothetical technology fat in your mind? Hah! Really thanks for that. Made my day. :)
Thank you, Mr. Uninformed Ranter. It has been said, again and again that if Steam's servers are taken offline, access controls will be removed.
Technically, yes. Realistically, that's not going to happen. AFAIK it's pretty common to have a law against being stopped in an intersection.
Okay, I'm going to put aside the fact that I know gravity waves != gravity (explained in other comments quite well). I would seriously enjoy the ability something along the lines of a room where I could experience adjustable gravity. Sure, if gravity control could exist it would be misused, but there would be beneficial uses found as well.
I'm not saying the glass is half full either. Heck, there might be only a few drops in the proverbial glass, but my point is that they exist.
Nobody writes jokes in base 13.
*AA lawyers are a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first against the wall when the rebellion comes.
There's still a virtual impossibility (therefore a finite improbability) that a good joke will be made.
*Awaits lynching from group of respectable physicists*
Because the map appears without leaving the current webpage.
Did you RTFA? These "accelerators" are merely additions which allow users to retrieve related content without leaving a webpage. Highlighting a street address and having a map appear is mentioned as an example.
IE's add-ins are literally app-killers!
Remarkable VM, the Parrot, idn'it, ay? Beautiful interface!
No, stop, please, you two are in agreement. You have been from the beginning. You just don't seem to understand that. "the idiot" in your first post matches MOPC's "too fast for conditions". "Speeding" in his usage is ONLY applying to the definition used in laws. He never called them evil. He just stated that speeding and "too fast for conditions" are not necessarily the same. All you're arguing over boils down to a slight disagreement over semantics.
Fast forward to the answer: Like "Fox" or "Fooks" (think "books"), and not like the obvious.
Yes, think of the snakes! What will they eat now?
"I personally believe that US Americans are unable to do so because some people out there in our nation don't have maps and that I believe our education like such as South Africa and the Iraq, and everywhere, such as, and I believe that they should our education over here in the US, should help the US, or should help South Africa and help the Iraq and the Asian countries so that we will be able to build out our future for us."
Okay, so it's not science, but our schools really aren't helping matters. (Quote comes from here if anyone missed it or is unfamiliar with the event)
Sorry games are fun.
You should try games that aren't sorry, they're even better.
"Two blank pieces of paper may look identical, but if you hold them to a light, you can see that in fact they're unique mashups of fibers."
In other news, the sun rose again this morning.
Going to the source now: Source
The whole of "section 92A":
92A Internet service provider must have policy for terminating accounts of repeat infringers
(1) An Internet service provider must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances, of the account with that Internet service provider of a repeat infringer.
(2) In subsection (1), repeat infringer means a person who repeatedly infringes the copyright in a work by using 1 or more of the Internet services of the Internet service provider to do a restricted act without the consent of the copyright owner.
So basically all this adds is that, on top of what's already in place, if someone says you infringe more than once, then the ISP has to cut you off. Everything else already exists under the current law. I've tried looking but I don't see much in the way of what is "proof" beyond 92D:
92D Requirements for notice of infringement
A notice referred to in section 92C(3) mustâ"
(a) contain the information prescribed by regulations made under this Act; and
(b) be signed by the copyright owner or the copyright ownerâ(TM)s duly authorised agent.
Maybe some lawyer can shed light on this, but IANAL.
Okay, from a quick perusal of TFA:
"What would happen is simple. Right holders could log on to public file-sharing sites, just as anyone can, and note which IP addresses are being used to upload pre-release music or films or large amounts of copyright-infringing material.
They would then prepare evidence, complete with details of the names of the copyrighted files being uploaded, exact timestamps and the protocol used, and send it to the relevant ISP. They would never see the personal details of the person behind that IP address."
So basically you just take a screenshot, edit the IP addresses to match the judges/lawmakers, and send it to ISPs. Apparently that's proof enough.
actually that's still wrong, it's the combination of the star and pentagon shapes that has the religious meanings. I don't know what the name of that is off the top of my head. Thought it was pentagram but that's just the star shape according to wikipedia...
pentagon != pentagram