Yeah I agree on that tho. I buy pretty much all games from Steam too because its just so much more convenient than walking to store, and comes with extra features like friends lists, community stuff and the ability to always download the game again when you need to.
Well thats probably the case if you go to movies to only watch a movie. I never do just that, but it's nice to sometimes go out with a girlfriend and on the way or after go eat at a restaurant too. In that case the ads dont really bother that much. But if I just want to watch a movie, yeah I rather do it home from my more comfortable bed naked drinking beer.
I know there's lots of people on slashdot who like to justify their pirating with all these "open", "bad bad record labels" etc bullshit, but truth is that people just want stuff for free and conveniently. As surprising it is after all the years of fighting from industry, it was really surprising that Spotify actually offers legit service that is a lot better than downloading warez. And with both free and paid, all-you-can-eat models. Spotify really changed things around here in Europe - it brought lots of people that download mp3's or send them between friends to a legit service.
Well he is also calling it a phishing site, which is just to troll and throw this articles comments offtopic. Even the summary notes that theres tons of people waiting for invitation, so its kind of stupid to think you're just gonna get account like that from their main site.
But interesting note from About Voddler site is "Finally an alternative to illegal downloading is available on the Swedish market.", which makes me think if Voddler is available elsewhere too (atleast nordic and european countries like Spotify has). It might even be that this is specifically developed for Swedish market (at least first), since so large percent of people, specially young, pirate movies and music.
That being said, if this anything close to "Spotify for Movies" I'm really interested. It's been an year that I've used only Spotify for my music listening and it's even more convenience than downloading mp3's and everyone I know is the same thing. Been a premium member for months too.
I don't place mafia wars and my facebook isn't hidden from any facebook user. Why? Because aside from my first name, no other info on there is real.. oh, except that I'm single. That should be a given seeing as I'm posting here.
So basically you're just trying to find a date from Facebook? I hope you have as much luck as this guy.
A British man has been tagged "The Sperminator" for getting 12 girls pregnant after wooing them on social networking site Facebook. Five women are now raising his kids, five were talked into abortions and two are expecting. For years, love rat Dominic Baronet secretly preyed on women with his smooth Internet patter.
When the girls started talking, they realised he’d impregnated them both on the same night. "Dominic should be banned from Facebook. He uses it to juggle scores of girls.
"We call him the Sperminator as he just goes around getting girls pregnant and doesn’t ever think about the consequences," she added.
Well, out of interest I went out and tried it. While remembering Bing is located at www.bing.com, I google'd it because thats faster. Now I'm at the Bing homepage, taking a sip of my morning coffee. I write the query to the search box and
Google (and Bing I think) are displaying quick info on calculations, currency conversations and such too. This is just taking a step further in that, and I gotta admit it's handy. This again actually makes me want to move to Bing again, considering quality of search results are quite equivalent with Google.
I remember 3com from their bluetooth stack for Windows, which was a tons better than the default one. At that time I had to use gprs connection for internet, with bluetooth connection going from my laptop to my phone. Even if there was some nuisances still on the 3com stack (my crappy image of bluetooth still lasts because it was so bad at the launch), most of the problems went away after changing from Windows own one.
Same here, sudo as it is incredibly inconvenient. When you're performing tasks that require root on Linux, you usually have to type in many commands at once to establish that task.
It's a lot more convenient to just su for root, do the thing and then su back, instead of writing the goddamn sudo all the time.
That is exactly how it works. gksudo at least, and whatever they call the sudo gui in OS X.
Double click an administration app that needs root, but under a user account. Oops! There comes your gksudo dialog, from noticing that the app requires root and that you are not root, and asks for a password (Or just gives an ok/cancel button if password caching is on), and then behind the scenes runs the app again under sudo.
I fail to see how that example is not running sudo in response to a task being prohibited based on a user's current account not having a right to permit the task
Do we have to go down the list of every claim now? What about this one thats under it
identifiers, each of the identifiers identifying other accounts having a right to permit the task, wherein the identifiers presented are based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights;
Does gksudo or OS X do this? Because it has to apply as well.
You're forgetting the other claims in the patent. Yeah it's easy to read the summary/abstract of patent and come up with "lol this have been done for so long!" while ignoring what the patent is actually completely claiming. Neither Mac OSX or sudo or gksudo cover what this patent is claiming.
Groklaw article is saying that Microsoft is filing this patent to collect a toll from Linux community for sudo. But there is no case, since if the patent would collide with sudo it would itself be invalid, because sudo has been around since like 1980.
Again the claims do not fully overlap with sudo (or gui's that use it). Every claim has to collide for there to be a case.
It's US patent system's fault, not Microsoft. They have to file these to cover their own ass. And actually I haven't ever seen MS patent trolling, they've even gave their patents to organizations which purpose is to keep them open. Even the TomTom vs. Microsoft case was because TomTom attacked MS first and they had to counter.
As usual, you need to look at the claims of the patent. For example these points dont really cover sudo:
1. One or more computer-readable media having computer-readable instructions therein that, when executed by a computing device, cause the computing device to present a user interface in response to a task being prohibited based on a user's current account not having a right to permit the task, the user interface comprising: information indicating the task and an entity that attempted the task; a selectable help graphic wherein responsive to receiving selection of the selectable help graphic, the computer-readable instructions further cause the computing device to present the information; identifiers, each of the identifiers identifying other accounts having a right to permit the task, wherein the identifiers presented are based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights; one of the identifiers identifies a higher-rights account having a right to permit the task, wherein the one of the identifiers comprises: a graphic identifying the higher-rights accounts associated with the user; and a name of the higher-rights account; an authenticator region capable of receiving, from the user, an authenticator usable to authenticate the higher-rights account having the right to permit the task, wherein: the authenticator comprises a password, and the authenticator region comprises a data-entry field configured to receive the password.
2. One or more computer-readable media having computer-readable instructions therein that, when executed by a computing device, cause the computing device to perform acts comprising: determining multiple accounts capable of permitting a task not permitted by an account of a current user wherein the determining is based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the current user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights; receiving indicators for the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; presenting a graphical user interface, the graphical user interface having: multiple account regions, each account region identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; an authenticator region capable of receiving an authenticator for one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; receiving, through the graphical user interface, the authenticator for one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; and responsive to receiving the authenticator for one of the accounts capable of permitting the task, packaging, into a computer-readable package, the received authenticator and the account capable of permitting the task associated with the authenticator, the package effective to enable authentication of the account capable of permitting the task.
3. The media of claim 2, where the each account region comprises a name identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task.
4. The media of claim 2, where the each account region comprises a graphic identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task.
5. The media of claim 2, further comprising permitting the task.
6. The media of claim 2, further comprising authenticating the account capable of permitting the task and, responsive to authenticating the account capable of permitting the task, temporarily elevating rights of the current user to that of the account capable of permitting the task effective to permit the task.
7. The media of claim 2, wherein rights of the account of the current user are limited by controlled-access software.
8. The media of claim 7, wherein the task is prohibited by the controlled-access software prior to authentication of the account capable of permitting the task and wherein the controlled-access software refrains from prohibiting the task in response to authentication of the account capable of permitting the task.
This slashvertisement conveniently left out the fact that 1) You need to add the hash via their website, which for you need a member account and 2) Member accounts start at $20 an year up to $399 an year
While the trackers itself are "open", as in everyone can get the peers via them, you need to add the hash first for it to function. So no, this isn't open tracker.
Agreed. And another thing is that the good cheaters don't over do it and make people go mad at the cheaters in game. Even if they're still cheaters, they're a lot smaller nuisance than those who run around with 100x speedhack autoaiming and ruining everyones game. There will also be only a few of them, because it requires skill then.
Yeah XNA is great for 360. But as it's directly supported by MS, people don't need to mod or hack their 360 to develop homebrew software for it. Which just strengths my point that only reason people mod their 360 is to play pirated copies.
If you've ever played on any of those private servers, it's clear that the whole game is dead when the official servers go down. Not that I would consider that to happen anytime soon tho.
Other thing killing older games multiplayer side is that there just isn't players anymore. Most of the games you're playing now probably are quite dead in a few years, maybe 5, but surely in 10 years (excluding the few "big" games like Counter-Strike that are still doing good, but that wont be the case for 98% of games)
All of that is useless because you agreed to their terms of service when signing up for Live, which also contain terms about just exactly this. You wouldn't get far in court.
The only problem with this approach is that some (undoubtedly small) percentage of users who are in fact doing creative things by modding their xbox could also fall victim to being a false positive from whatever method Microsoft is using to identify the modders.
Many users seemed to get banned this time after they played their pirated copy of Modern Warfare 2 before it was released, so it shouldn't be a problem for those who aren't modding to play pirated copies. MS isn't of course disclosing their methods to identify modded consoles, but this seemed to happen to many.
The people who mod Xboxes are their best customers. They are the enthusiasts who care enough to learn more about the console.
I really cannot see how they are Microsoft's best customers. How does it improve Microsoft's or game publishers revenue when exactly these people almost never buy games. Considering theres no homebrew scene in Xbox360, the sole reason people get their consoles modded is to play copies.
I doubt that this effort will even result in an increase in revenues that will be enough to pay for the enforcement. There must be better ways to improve profitability.
It is not only that for Microsoft. They also have to care for their game developers, who are obviously going to bitch if theres rampant piracy going on and MS isn't doing anything for it. When there's the constant fear that your console could get banned from online play at any time, people begin to think if its just wiser to get the games they like and not bother with it. Unlike PC's, consoles are just supposed to work, and complicating things takes that aspect off. Yeah it wont stop piracy completely, but it will lower it.
Slashdot Mirror
Random person thinks he knows everything, grows an ego and tells "juicy" stuff to press to boost that said ego while actually knowing nothing.
Nothing to see here. But I suspect lots of Linux/Mac OSX fanatics will be coming in 3.. 2.. 1..
Yeah I agree on that tho. I buy pretty much all games from Steam too because its just so much more convenient than walking to store, and comes with extra features like friends lists, community stuff and the ability to always download the game again when you need to.
Free model is a plus in this.
Well thats probably the case if you go to movies to only watch a movie. I never do just that, but it's nice to sometimes go out with a girlfriend and on the way or after go eat at a restaurant too. In that case the ads dont really bother that much. But if I just want to watch a movie, yeah I rather do it home from my more comfortable bed naked drinking beer.
How exactly pirating movies will boost business?
I know there's lots of people on slashdot who like to justify their pirating with all these "open", "bad bad record labels" etc bullshit, but truth is that people just want stuff for free and conveniently. As surprising it is after all the years of fighting from industry, it was really surprising that Spotify actually offers legit service that is a lot better than downloading warez. And with both free and paid, all-you-can-eat models. Spotify really changed things around here in Europe - it brought lots of people that download mp3's or send them between friends to a legit service.
And I love it.
Well he is also calling it a phishing site, which is just to troll and throw this articles comments offtopic. Even the summary notes that theres tons of people waiting for invitation, so its kind of stupid to think you're just gonna get account like that from their main site.
But interesting note from About Voddler site is "Finally an alternative to illegal downloading is available on the Swedish market.", which makes me think if Voddler is available elsewhere too (atleast nordic and european countries like Spotify has). It might even be that this is specifically developed for Swedish market (at least first), since so large percent of people, specially young, pirate movies and music.
That being said, if this anything close to "Spotify for Movies" I'm really interested. It's been an year that I've used only Spotify for my music listening and it's even more convenience than downloading mp3's and everyone I know is the same thing. Been a premium member for months too.
I don't place mafia wars and my facebook isn't hidden from any facebook user. Why? Because aside from my first name, no other info on there is real .. oh, except that I'm single. That should be a given seeing as I'm posting here.
So basically you're just trying to find a date from Facebook? I hope you have as much luck as this guy.
Well, out of interest I went out and tried it. While remembering Bing is located at www.bing.com, I google'd it because thats faster. Now I'm at the Bing homepage, taking a sip of my morning coffee. I write the query to the search box and
Google (and Bing I think) are displaying quick info on calculations, currency conversations and such too. This is just taking a step further in that, and I gotta admit it's handy. This again actually makes me want to move to Bing again, considering quality of search results are quite equivalent with Google.
how is it misleading? it clearly says its £ . If other story is USD, I dont come bitching its not in euro for me :P
I remember 3com from their bluetooth stack for Windows, which was a tons better than the default one. At that time I had to use gprs connection for internet, with bluetooth connection going from my laptop to my phone. Even if there was some nuisances still on the 3com stack (my crappy image of bluetooth still lasts because it was so bad at the launch), most of the problems went away after changing from Windows own one.
His Linux distro is pretty fucked up if it lets Microsoft to bill him.
Same here, sudo as it is incredibly inconvenient. When you're performing tasks that require root on Linux, you usually have to type in many commands at once to establish that task.
It's a lot more convenient to just su for root, do the thing and then su back, instead of writing the goddamn sudo all the time.
That is exactly how it works. gksudo at least, and whatever they call the sudo gui in OS X.
Double click an administration app that needs root, but under a user account.
Oops! There comes your gksudo dialog, from noticing that the app requires root and that you are not root, and asks for a password (Or just gives an ok/cancel button if password caching is on), and then behind the scenes runs the app again under sudo.
I fail to see how that example is not running sudo in response to a task being prohibited based on a user's current account not having a right to permit the task
Do we have to go down the list of every claim now? What about this one thats under it
identifiers, each of the identifiers identifying other accounts having a right to permit the task, wherein the identifiers presented are based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights;
Does gksudo or OS X do this? Because it has to apply as well.
You're forgetting the other claims in the patent. Yeah it's easy to read the summary/abstract of patent and come up with "lol this have been done for so long!" while ignoring what the patent is actually completely claiming. Neither Mac OSX or sudo or gksudo cover what this patent is claiming.
Groklaw article is saying that Microsoft is filing this patent to collect a toll from Linux community for sudo. But there is no case, since if the patent would collide with sudo it would itself be invalid, because sudo has been around since like 1980.
Again the claims do not fully overlap with sudo (or gui's that use it). Every claim has to collide for there to be a case.
It's US patent system's fault, not Microsoft. They have to file these to cover their own ass. And actually I haven't ever seen MS patent trolling, they've even gave their patents to organizations which purpose is to keep them open. Even the TomTom vs. Microsoft case was because TomTom attacked MS first and they had to counter.
Patent system is the one to blame.
As usual, you need to look at the claims of the patent. For example these points dont really cover sudo:
1. One or more computer-readable media having computer-readable instructions therein that, when executed by a computing device, cause the computing device to present a user interface in response to a task being prohibited based on a user's current account not having a right to permit the task, the user interface comprising: information indicating the task and an entity that attempted the task; a selectable help graphic wherein responsive to receiving selection of the selectable help graphic, the computer-readable instructions further cause the computing device to present the information; identifiers, each of the identifiers identifying other accounts having a right to permit the task, wherein the identifiers presented are based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights; one of the identifiers identifies a higher-rights account having a right to permit the task, wherein the one of the identifiers comprises: a graphic identifying the higher-rights accounts associated with the user; and a name of the higher-rights account; an authenticator region capable of receiving, from the user, an authenticator usable to authenticate the higher-rights account having the right to permit the task, wherein: the authenticator comprises a password, and the authenticator region comprises a data-entry field configured to receive the password.
2. One or more computer-readable media having computer-readable instructions therein that, when executed by a computing device, cause the computing device to perform acts comprising: determining multiple accounts capable of permitting a task not permitted by an account of a current user wherein the determining is based on criteria comprising: frequency of use; association with the current user; and indication of sufficient but not unlimited rights; receiving indicators for the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; presenting a graphical user interface, the graphical user interface having: multiple account regions, each account region identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; an authenticator region capable of receiving an authenticator for one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; receiving, through the graphical user interface, the authenticator for one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task; and responsive to receiving the authenticator for one of the accounts capable of permitting the task, packaging, into a computer-readable package, the received authenticator and the account capable of permitting the task associated with the authenticator, the package effective to enable authentication of the account capable of permitting the task.
3. The media of claim 2, where the each account region comprises a name identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task.
4. The media of claim 2, where the each account region comprises a graphic identifying one of the multiple accounts capable of permitting the task.
5. The media of claim 2, further comprising permitting the task.
6. The media of claim 2, further comprising authenticating the account capable of permitting the task and, responsive to authenticating the account capable of permitting the task, temporarily elevating rights of the current user to that of the account capable of permitting the task effective to permit the task.
7. The media of claim 2, wherein rights of the account of the current user are limited by controlled-access software.
8. The media of claim 7, wherein the task is prohibited by the controlled-access software prior to authentication of the account capable of permitting the task and wherein the controlled-access software refrains from prohibiting the task in response to authentication of the account capable of permitting the task.
9. One or more computer-readable media having co
This slashvertisement conveniently left out the fact that
1) You need to add the hash via their website, which for you need a member account and
2) Member accounts start at $20 an year up to $399 an year
While the trackers itself are "open", as in everyone can get the peers via them, you need to add the hash first for it to function. So no, this isn't open tracker.
And that second group is exactly what? What would be the reason to modify game client on console other than cheating in a game?
Agreed. And another thing is that the good cheaters don't over do it and make people go mad at the cheaters in game. Even if they're still cheaters, they're a lot smaller nuisance than those who run around with 100x speedhack autoaiming and ruining everyones game. There will also be only a few of them, because it requires skill then.
Yeah XNA is great for 360. But as it's directly supported by MS, people don't need to mod or hack their 360 to develop homebrew software for it. Which just strengths my point that only reason people mod their 360 is to play pirated copies.
If you've ever played on any of those private servers, it's clear that the whole game is dead when the official servers go down. Not that I would consider that to happen anytime soon tho.
Other thing killing older games multiplayer side is that there just isn't players anymore. Most of the games you're playing now probably are quite dead in a few years, maybe 5, but surely in 10 years (excluding the few "big" games like Counter-Strike that are still doing good, but that wont be the case for 98% of games)
All of that is useless because you agreed to their terms of service when signing up for Live, which also contain terms about just exactly this. You wouldn't get far in court.
The only problem with this approach is that some (undoubtedly small) percentage of users who are in fact doing creative things by modding their xbox could also fall victim to being a false positive from whatever method Microsoft is using to identify the modders.
Many users seemed to get banned this time after they played their pirated copy of Modern Warfare 2 before it was released, so it shouldn't be a problem for those who aren't modding to play pirated copies. MS isn't of course disclosing their methods to identify modded consoles, but this seemed to happen to many.
The people who mod Xboxes are their best customers. They are the enthusiasts who care enough to learn more about the console.
I really cannot see how they are Microsoft's best customers. How does it improve Microsoft's or game publishers revenue when exactly these people almost never buy games. Considering theres no homebrew scene in Xbox360, the sole reason people get their consoles modded is to play copies.
I doubt that this effort will even result in an increase in revenues that will be enough to pay for the enforcement. There must be better ways to improve profitability.
It is not only that for Microsoft. They also have to care for their game developers, who are obviously going to bitch if theres rampant piracy going on and MS isn't doing anything for it. When there's the constant fear that your console could get banned from online play at any time, people begin to think if its just wiser to get the games they like and not bother with it. Unlike PC's, consoles are just supposed to work, and complicating things takes that aspect off. Yeah it wont stop piracy completely, but it will lower it.