Microsoft hides their API's, they suck!
Microsoft divulges their API's, they suck!
Agreed. We also now seem to have an attitude here that "one big release every 3-4 years" is crazy. So perhaps Microsoft should update things frequently? But then people complain about being an upgrade treadmill and having to constantly buy new versions, or of having to constantly download service packs. You can't win.
I thought it was a very good game. However, I agree with the complaint about seeing what was going on. This game was not portable. I only played it at home in a spot in the room where the lighting was perfect. I also agree that the cards were stupid. I never fully got what was going on there. However, in spite of these minor flaws, I still thought it was a lot of fun. What was wrong with the controls?
the account number and signature must match their records (you could write the information on a napkin and the bank would take it, it is a valid check)
Is this really true? I'm not familiar with the laws regarding negotiable instruments, they are weird. Is it the case that if I owed someone money and didn't have a checkbook, I could make a check from scratch with a pen and scrap paper and the bank would honor it so long as it included the right information?
The appeal here is mainly nostalgia. The hope is that people who were really turned on by these games when they were twelve will now find them silly and fun, and it will be a nice throwback to those days.
They would need to have control of my connection at the packet level.
Did you read the article? If it is possible (which it is in the world the article predicts) to regulate so that you are only allowed to run a secure OS (which would theoretically be enforced by your hardware), then that secure OS would only let you run secure software. At that point "they" already control what you can do at the packet level, since your apps and OS won't let you do things you're not supposed to.
Which is good, because if you had asked how to get a question mark in there, I'd have to teach you to use your shift key, and then we'd both be in real trouble.
both times I've ordered they've screwed it up. The first time they sent me the correct CD immediately. I still haven't received the correct CD for my second order however
Technically, I'm not sure if sending the correct CD immediately cunts as "screwing up". What did you expect them to do?
if I can't rip the tracks to my iTunes library and transfer them to my iPod, the CD's broken
I don't see why you not being able to use it makes it broken. I can't play XBOX games on my gamecube, should I buy them and get angry about it? If it's in a format you can't use, you shouldn't buy it. If enough people do that, there'll be economic incentive to release them in different formats too. As long as the packaging clearly labels who can and can't use the CD (I understand that it often doesn't, and I agree that that sucks) there's no problem.
They got noticed by UPLOADING SONGS IN DIGITAL FORMAT and posting on other bands' web forums asking their fans to try out their music. And now their bitching about the same-style format that got them where they are today.
So? Just because a band chooses to release some of their songs at some time online means that they have to also agree to have all of their songs released that way forever? That's ridiculous. It's their music, let them decide what to release how. What is this, would you argue that if a girl voluntarily has sex once, that makes it okay for anyone to raper her forever?
You never hear more people in love with record labels than when these stories come up. FWIW, we don't all agree that the label should decide exactly how and when the artists' music gets released (as albums, as singles, online, in stores) and the band who made it should have no say.
they positively encouraged fans to tape live shows and trade the tapes
Um, they still do.
from the Black Album onwards, everything they've done has been complete rubbish.
That's just an exagerration. They put out two bad albums (load & reload), but the new album (st. anger) is great, s&m was very good, and they finally released their garage stuff. Many bands with a history as long as metallica's has at least two bad albums.
Once little Johnny next door and big Johnny business realize it's pay for Windows or use linux/*BSD/cowboynealOS/"I don't use an OS, you insensitive clod" then we will see the collapse of Microsoft mindshare and the wide-scale adoption of open-source.
Things won't work out this nicely when there are laws (in the US at least) requiring DRM, and making much free software "illegal".
the other thing that makes people fat is 'Low Fat' food.
if all you eat is low-fat stuff, your body never gets the nutrition it needs, and hence you have to eat more of the stuff to make up your body's requirements
Similarly studies have shown (I don't have them available) that people who switch to light cigarettes in an attempt to aid their health just end up smoking more of them so that they get the same amount of nicotine, and as a result actually hurt their health.
New technology does make a few very rich, a few more somewhat rich, but leaves most people about the same or worse off. That is history
No, history shows the opposite. Technology has, on the whole, made everyone richer. Of course, there are plenty of poor people in the US today, but they are far better off than poor people were a thousand years ago, or even a few hundred. And they are far better off then poor people (which is almost everyone) in undeveloped countries.
I don't think this is going to make people switch. People don't automatically use stuff because a company has more money or we'd all be using OS/2 right now
Switching search engines requires much less time and effort than switching operating systems (or environments, or whatever OS/2 was).
The number on the back is sort of the same concept as a PIN, but not quite. The difference is that if someone were to get physical access to your credit card (e.g., if someone stole your wallet), the number on the back wouldn't provide you any protection from them using it, whereas a secret PIN would.
Rather than asking this question of strangers on the internet, why not just try them yourself and see what's so special? It will help you understand what McKenna is talking about more than debating with geeks on slashdot ever could.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. We also now seem to have an attitude here that "one big release every 3-4 years" is crazy. So perhaps Microsoft should update things frequently? But then people complain about being an upgrade treadmill and having to constantly buy new versions, or of having to constantly download service packs. You can't win.
I thought it was a very good game. However, I agree with the complaint about seeing what was going on. This game was not portable. I only played it at home in a spot in the room where the lighting was perfect. I also agree that the cards were stupid. I never fully got what was going on there. However, in spite of these minor flaws, I still thought it was a lot of fun. What was wrong with the controls?
Is this really true? I'm not familiar with the laws regarding negotiable instruments, they are weird. Is it the case that if I owed someone money and didn't have a checkbook, I could make a check from scratch with a pen and scrap paper and the bank would honor it so long as it included the right information?
The appeal here is mainly nostalgia. The hope is that people who were really turned on by these games when they were twelve will now find them silly and fun, and it will be a nice throwback to those days.
Did you read the article? If it is possible (which it is in the world the article predicts) to regulate so that you are only allowed to run a secure OS (which would theoretically be enforced by your hardware), then that secure OS would only let you run secure software. At that point "they" already control what you can do at the packet level, since your apps and OS won't let you do things you're not supposed to.
Which is good, because if you had asked how to get a question mark in there, I'd have to teach you to use your shift key, and then we'd both be in real trouble.
Technically, I'm not sure if sending the correct CD immediately cunts as "screwing up". What did you expect them to do?
I don't see why you not being able to use it makes it broken. I can't play XBOX games on my gamecube, should I buy them and get angry about it? If it's in a format you can't use, you shouldn't buy it. If enough people do that, there'll be economic incentive to release them in different formats too. As long as the packaging clearly labels who can and can't use the CD (I understand that it often doesn't, and I agree that that sucks) there's no problem.
So? Just because a band chooses to release some of their songs at some time online means that they have to also agree to have all of their songs released that way forever? That's ridiculous. It's their music, let them decide what to release how. What is this, would you argue that if a girl voluntarily has sex once, that makes it okay for anyone to raper her forever?
You never hear more people in love with record labels than when these stories come up. FWIW, we don't all agree that the label should decide exactly how and when the artists' music gets released (as albums, as singles, online, in stores) and the band who made it should have no say.
Um, they still do.
That's just an exagerration. They put out two bad albums (load & reload), but the new album (st. anger) is great, s&m was very good, and they finally released their garage stuff. Many bands with a history as long as metallica's has at least two bad albums.
Things won't work out this nicely when there are laws (in the US at least) requiring DRM, and making much free software "illegal".
No mention of Rocky Horror?! I think that would end it right there.
I just tried this and, wow, the reviews I found were not too hot, to say the least. To say the most, it seems that people fucking hate this thing.
Yes, please waste my tax dollars on having the government hold tons of bogus resumes.
Are you sure you don't want to recursively map f onto the tail of your list?
I've used freenet and belive me, there's nothing quick or painless about it.
Why?
Similarly studies have shown (I don't have them available) that people who switch to light cigarettes in an attempt to aid their health just end up smoking more of them so that they get the same amount of nicotine, and as a result actually hurt their health.
No, history shows the opposite. Technology has, on the whole, made everyone richer. Of course, there are plenty of poor people in the US today, but they are far better off than poor people were a thousand years ago, or even a few hundred. And they are far better off then poor people (which is almost everyone) in undeveloped countries.
Actually, it would only require finding 99 people.
Why do you think that entrepeneurs are non-conformists? That's not obvious to me at all.
Switching search engines requires much less time and effort than switching operating systems (or environments, or whatever OS/2 was).
The number on the back is sort of the same concept as a PIN, but not quite. The difference is that if someone were to get physical access to your credit card (e.g., if someone stole your wallet), the number on the back wouldn't provide you any protection from them using it, whereas a secret PIN would.
Rather than asking this question of strangers on the internet, why not just try them yourself and see what's so special? It will help you understand what McKenna is talking about more than debating with geeks on slashdot ever could.
Yes