Modding is an important part of gaming because it allows the player to enhance and expand the game's limitations without shelling out additional money for what is essentially no additional work for the creator. If anything, modding disallows milking a game forever by selling skins, maps or new game modes because these things get offered by the community for free.
That game studios are not happy about this is a given. But in the end, disabling modding means only that players will eventually stop buying games and play the games they have that allow them to play them the way they want to, not the way the maker allows them provided the players let themselves get nickled and dimed.
Is there a company other than Blizzard where I can buy Overwatch?
The vendor lock-in already starts with the fact that you can buy certain games only from certain companies and only at their conditions. You wanna play, you gonna swallow it.
No, of course not, who cares if a law is good or bad? All a law has to do is please the ruling party or parties, that has nothing to do with its quality.
Not believing something is basically the default position for any rational being. When you're trying to find out what is and what is not, there are essentially two points where you can start. Either by requiring positive proof, i.e. assuming nothing is until its existence is proven, or by requiring negative proof, i.e. assuming everything is until clearly shown to be not. Now, the latter is not only fairly impossible to do, it's also pretty inconvenient. Especially for those who want to believe. Because if we assume everything is until falsified, we'll have to assume that all gods exist, and it's on you now to show that yours is the only "true" one.
Religions are usually defined as mutually exclusive, i.e. you believe in one you cannot believe in another, or at the very least, that the god(s) of one religion get really angry if you believe in other god(s). Which in turn also make it the most sensible position to not believe in any until shown which one is the correct one because it's the least effort position, since worshiping all of them is not only impossible due to time constraints, some creeds have quite conflicting tenets, for example it's really hard to align the ideals of Sikhism with the demands that Xipe Totec puts on his followers.
Not only. Because no matter how this ends up, eventually it's gonna make everyone unhappy. Google and other bigwigs will not foot the bill but instead use their market share and leverage to muscle a better deal for themselves, making it harder for any emerging competition to get a foothold, especially since this competition will have to pick up the slack here. Artists won't see more money for the very same reason but with more work and poor PR, and everyone else will just suffer through weeks and months of uncertainty and kinda-sorta working services that are unavailable at the most inconvenient times.
Apple is successful, but it doesn't have a monopoly position by far. Even in their strongest branch, phones and tablets, they don't even remotely hold half of the market.
With Google you're looking at a very dominant position in the search engine (and related ad) market and I hope we needn't go into detail of FBs position in social media.
Imagine you're sitting down to have dinner and every other minute some bozo steps in front of your window and takes a picture of you. Of course with flash, even in broad daylight, because he's too lazy and/or stupid to figure out how to turn it off.
Dude, if I get photographed every other minute without getting paid for it, the 5th person doing it will have a hard time swallowing his cell phone. It's gonna go down easier for the 6th because I'll crush it first.
They don't know anything we don't. All they did was get lucky with their first business endeavors. It worked out for them. It didn't for the 99.9999% others who tried, failed, and you never heard about them.
You're doing it wrong. You have to put on a black turtleneck, black slacks and shoes, slick back your black-dyed hair and wear glasses with round lenses. Stand in line, then when it's your turn, step aside and tell them you still need some more time to feel the ambiance before you can order, and that they should take other orders first because you do not wish to be a burden to the world.
Wait for your time, it comes when someone who takes himself super important starts rattling off his order, then you step in, declare that you have been here first and that it shall only take a moment of time and that the person should reflect upon the experience rather than rush through his life because it's the only one he has.
Then you order a regular black coffee, just a simple, humble brew, with no milk to tarnish the pitch black color of the purest nectar, and of course without sugar because you wish to savour the bitterness of our time without the fake and artificial tarnish the lesser beings add in a vain attempt to pretend it ain't so.
I mean, when you're going to give people a show, at least do it right.
The difference is by no means subtle, I can't imagine anyone not understanding the difference between hiring equal numbers of men and women and hiring ignoring the gender of the employee. Hiring based on quotas (for men, women, people of various backgrounds, sexual orientations, religions...) is NEVER going to be fair. It cannot be. Unless you first find out just how many (insert group here) are looking for a job in a particular field, there is no way to create fairness here. And just hiring equal numbers it not going to cut it. By that logic, if you have 10 women and 1 man applying for two positions, you HAVE TO hire that man, even if two women were more qualified. Is that fair?
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have access to throwaway mail addresses, throwaway names and throwaway addresses?
Nice try derailing the discussion.
Modding is an important part of gaming because it allows the player to enhance and expand the game's limitations without shelling out additional money for what is essentially no additional work for the creator. If anything, modding disallows milking a game forever by selling skins, maps or new game modes because these things get offered by the community for free.
That game studios are not happy about this is a given. But in the end, disabling modding means only that players will eventually stop buying games and play the games they have that allow them to play them the way they want to, not the way the maker allows them provided the players let themselves get nickled and dimed.
Is there a company other than Blizzard where I can buy Overwatch?
The vendor lock-in already starts with the fact that you can buy certain games only from certain companies and only at their conditions. You wanna play, you gonna swallow it.
Considering that we'll get the same Magic-8-ball decisions just without corruption, the decisions can only be better.
Plus, AIs usually don't care for bullshit like religions.
You're right. I don't waste my time on people like that. I have people for that.
No, of course not, who cares if a law is good or bad? All a law has to do is please the ruling party or parties, that has nothing to do with its quality.
Not believing something is basically the default position for any rational being. When you're trying to find out what is and what is not, there are essentially two points where you can start. Either by requiring positive proof, i.e. assuming nothing is until its existence is proven, or by requiring negative proof, i.e. assuming everything is until clearly shown to be not. Now, the latter is not only fairly impossible to do, it's also pretty inconvenient. Especially for those who want to believe. Because if we assume everything is until falsified, we'll have to assume that all gods exist, and it's on you now to show that yours is the only "true" one.
Religions are usually defined as mutually exclusive, i.e. you believe in one you cannot believe in another, or at the very least, that the god(s) of one religion get really angry if you believe in other god(s). Which in turn also make it the most sensible position to not believe in any until shown which one is the correct one because it's the least effort position, since worshiping all of them is not only impossible due to time constraints, some creeds have quite conflicting tenets, for example it's really hard to align the ideals of Sikhism with the demands that Xipe Totec puts on his followers.
Not only. Because no matter how this ends up, eventually it's gonna make everyone unhappy. Google and other bigwigs will not foot the bill but instead use their market share and leverage to muscle a better deal for themselves, making it harder for any emerging competition to get a foothold, especially since this competition will have to pick up the slack here. Artists won't see more money for the very same reason but with more work and poor PR, and everyone else will just suffer through weeks and months of uncertainty and kinda-sorta working services that are unavailable at the most inconvenient times.
Breaking up monopolies is socialist now?
So the world did turn 180 degrees while I wasn't looking...
I give it 5 minutes 'til someone comes up with an aggregating page.
Apple is successful, but it doesn't have a monopoly position by far. Even in their strongest branch, phones and tablets, they don't even remotely hold half of the market.
With Google you're looking at a very dominant position in the search engine (and related ad) market and I hope we needn't go into detail of FBs position in social media.
Whoever wins, we lose.
That's the part that is actually true.
First we wrote the software, then we wrote the specs. It was way easier to meet the target that way.
Erh... the people who lived in the GDR? I kinda doubt they're all paid shills for the western governments...
If it means that it would keep the Parisians in, I guess the rest of France would gladly chip in.
Hell, make it a European project and double the wall height.
True. The only tourists more obnoxious are the ones from the US.
Imagine you're sitting down to have dinner and every other minute some bozo steps in front of your window and takes a picture of you. Of course with flash, even in broad daylight, because he's too lazy and/or stupid to figure out how to turn it off.
I'd like to see how you enjoy your meal.
Pardon my French...
Is that like "Maybe you should have thought of that before putting on that miniskirt"?
Dude, if I get photographed every other minute without getting paid for it, the 5th person doing it will have a hard time swallowing his cell phone. It's gonna go down easier for the 6th because I'll crush it first.
They don't know anything we don't. All they did was get lucky with their first business endeavors. It worked out for them. It didn't for the 99.9999% others who tried, failed, and you never heard about them.
You're doing it wrong. You have to put on a black turtleneck, black slacks and shoes, slick back your black-dyed hair and wear glasses with round lenses. Stand in line, then when it's your turn, step aside and tell them you still need some more time to feel the ambiance before you can order, and that they should take other orders first because you do not wish to be a burden to the world.
Wait for your time, it comes when someone who takes himself super important starts rattling off his order, then you step in, declare that you have been here first and that it shall only take a moment of time and that the person should reflect upon the experience rather than rush through his life because it's the only one he has.
Then you order a regular black coffee, just a simple, humble brew, with no milk to tarnish the pitch black color of the purest nectar, and of course without sugar because you wish to savour the bitterness of our time without the fake and artificial tarnish the lesser beings add in a vain attempt to pretend it ain't so.
I mean, when you're going to give people a show, at least do it right.
Well, the GDR at least really existed, so...
The difference is by no means subtle, I can't imagine anyone not understanding the difference between hiring equal numbers of men and women and hiring ignoring the gender of the employee. Hiring based on quotas (for men, women, people of various backgrounds, sexual orientations, religions...) is NEVER going to be fair. It cannot be. Unless you first find out just how many (insert group here) are looking for a job in a particular field, there is no way to create fairness here. And just hiring equal numbers it not going to cut it. By that logic, if you have 10 women and 1 man applying for two positions, you HAVE TO hire that man, even if two women were more qualified. Is that fair?