Maybe you're thinking of the Outer Space Treaty? Wikipedia says it forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet, but doesn't say much about private entities AFAIK.
Frankly, the ability to withdraw from the treaty is irrelevant. The stern words and looks would just come when they withdrew from the treaty, instead of when they claimed their bit of the moon (actually, they'd probably receive some of the words and looks then, too).
The treaty doesn't say anything about them not being able to mine the shit out of the moon.
Never said it did.
It just says they can't claim territory or place nukes in space (which you can be damned sure we've already breached) It also says the parties retain rights over whatever the launch into space, so should they start building mining platforms and shipping stuff back, we couldn't touch the equipment without breaching the treaty.
We wouldn't need to touch the equipment, just implement trade sanctions on whatever they mined out (or the resulting products made from them).
Considering that China has signed and ratified the Outer Space Treaty (which explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet), they'd probably get a few stern words and looks. On the other hand, if they actually manage to mine and transport something back, then there might be some mild repercussions.
I guess the news is that Google released similar functionality as a built-in, then removed it. Sounds nasty.
They didn't release it, per se. The code was there, but it was only accessible with third party tools. Not saying disabling access to it was the right choice, but it isn't as nasty as it sounds.
No you didn't, because when someone posts anonymously, they don't get notifications about replies, so they will most likely never know that you replied. Remember, only reply to ACs if you think it will help some other reader. Replying to them in the hopes that they will read your reply is delusional.
There's a good reason why Microsoft is the standard for business computing and that's because their products are almost always better than open source.
No, it's because Microsoft is better at running legacy software (or at least that's how businesses see it). And business computing is all about legacy software.
Valve controls a big part of PC game sales through Steam. They can use that by providing incentives (like taking a slightly smaller cut of the sales) to devs who support linux. Maybe different levels of incentives for those who support linux, those who treat linux equally with windows (same release dates, features, patch dates), those who favour linux, and maybe eventually for linux-exclusives.
Valve is a pretty patient corporation. They're not expecting linux to dethrone windows overnight.
If a game is going to do that, then it should make it very clear that you're screwed, so you don't spend ridiculous amounts of time trying to find a way forward that doesn't exist.
And you shouldn't be able to save an unwinnable game, though this is less important in a game with frequent and numerous autosaves.
Slashdot Mirror
Whenever you see a science headline that says something retarded, you should assume bad science journalism, rather than bad science.
Law of truly large numbers is the applicable law here, but the mistake is understandable.
Maybe you're thinking of the Outer Space Treaty? Wikipedia says it forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet, but doesn't say much about private entities AFAIK.
And no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
Looking at the videos, I don't see why they don't airbag the whole head.
Because certain death from suffocation is worse than potential death from head trauma.
Frankly, the ability to withdraw from the treaty is irrelevant. The stern words and looks would just come when they withdrew from the treaty, instead of when they claimed their bit of the moon (actually, they'd probably receive some of the words and looks then, too).
The treaty doesn't say anything about them not being able to mine the shit out of the moon.
Never said it did.
It just says they can't claim territory or place nukes in space (which you can be damned sure we've already breached) It also says the parties retain rights over whatever the launch into space, so should they start building mining platforms and shipping stuff back, we couldn't touch the equipment without breaching the treaty.
We wouldn't need to touch the equipment, just implement trade sanctions on whatever they mined out (or the resulting products made from them).
I said mild.
Considering that China has signed and ratified the Outer Space Treaty (which explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet), they'd probably get a few stern words and looks. On the other hand, if they actually manage to mine and transport something back, then there might be some mild repercussions.
I guess the news is that Google released similar functionality as a built-in, then removed it. Sounds nasty.
They didn't release it, per se. The code was there, but it was only accessible with third party tools. Not saying disabling access to it was the right choice, but it isn't as nasty as it sounds.
No notification in that case either.
Made you look!
No you didn't, because when someone posts anonymously, they don't get notifications about replies, so they will most likely never know that you replied. Remember, only reply to ACs if you think it will help some other reader. Replying to them in the hopes that they will read your reply is delusional.
There's a good reason why Microsoft is the standard for business computing and that's because their products are almost always better than open source.
No, it's because Microsoft is better at running legacy software (or at least that's how businesses see it). And business computing is all about legacy software.
No, you don't grasp that, I DO NOT UPGRADE, THEY DO.
and you carry the cost, whether it be in the form of actual money, or increased amount and obnoxity of ads.
Because some syntaxes are better at expressing some concepts while others are better at expressing other concepts.
Yup. This isn't about the land, this is about the sea around it.
They wouldn't be able to sell anything on the US market, which is considerable.
I wonder if this "Dread Pirate Roberts" is only one person, given how the name was used in The Princess Bride.
Hmph. Stupid facts always ruining my jokes :(.
Europe doesn't have magic fairy dust that lets them manufacture drugs nobody else can.
Yes they do. It's called "patents".
Valve controls a big part of PC game sales through Steam. They can use that by providing incentives (like taking a slightly smaller cut of the sales) to devs who support linux. Maybe different levels of incentives for those who support linux, those who treat linux equally with windows (same release dates, features, patch dates), those who favour linux, and maybe eventually for linux-exclusives.
Valve is a pretty patient corporation. They're not expecting linux to dethrone windows overnight.
I was surprised when I first saw how extensive the coverage on Buffy is, but there's actually a pretty good reason for that.
If a game is going to do that, then it should make it very clear that you're screwed, so you don't spend ridiculous amounts of time trying to find a way forward that doesn't exist.
And you shouldn't be able to save an unwinnable game, though this is less important in a game with frequent and numerous autosaves.
HAAAX!
I find myself extremely reluctant to pay any additional fees if I've already paid for the base game.