>but reading this deposition has a "comedy of errors" >feeling to it. Lots of things that show that they really don't quite know what's going on.
Actually, I think you wrongly get this impression because (like me) you are unfamiliar with the arena. Reading it, I get the impression of a master at work. The law is not about technology but principles, and so even in this highly technical case some instances of technical accuracy (or innacuracy) are simply of secondary priority to getting other things right - other things that may be so esoteric as to be missed by us, but in this arena can have significant repercussions.
Our whole attitude has been that the ramifications of case are bigger than DeCSS, and Garbus has his mind firmly on getting the job done using the methods that work in the courts. Some of the criticisms posted have been ideologically driven (eg that a particular distinction is important and must be preserved, when such a distinction is only directly important when working in this arena, not his).
>Things that are "real" - physical objects - are in a slump these days in >light of all the cool new digital stuff, but they'll make a comeback once our >glazed eyes get tired of our monitors.
Something else to think about - physical objects have been in a slump for almost a century now. As someone who often makes things with my hands, I can assure you that there are vast volumes of Incredibly Cool things that can be made with today's technology, but never will be, because mechanised manufacturing still cannot touch human skill in so many areas - including many areas of electronics.
Much like you see digital stuff, I see mass-manufactured stuff and wonder when the reversion to skilfully crafted goods will come. Realistically speaking, it will come when utopia gives us the time and money to indulge in such things, and the digital issue may be the same - pinball machines take a lot of assembly per machine. For digital devices, most of the work only has to be done once. This means that barring a revolution in manufacturing technology (nano?) the trend will continue. Pinball designers will go the way of watchmakers, for the same reasons, and just as permanently.
(You might think watchmaking are a bad example, as machines can make adequate watches, but you should have a look at some of the non-watch devices, robots, decorations, and neat stuff that watchmakers have applied their skills to - totally cool, totally amazing, and totally un-manufacturable. And now those skills are disappearing because mass-production is the only way ahead.
On the other hand, a reversion to an 18th century magnitude gap between the rich & poor could also result in enough money being spent indulgently to bring back the old ways like custom-designed furnishings and pinball. I saw an article that talked about this already starting to happen in Beverly Hills.
But someday, I shall own a clockwork Turing machine. And I shall set it ticking away, calculating the (logical) validity of arguments for the existence of God. And I shall be able to point to my clockwork Turing machine as say "That device is calculating the existence of God." And people shall say "What is it?" And I shall sigh.
>hings that are "real" - physical objects - are in a slump these days in light of all the cool new digital stuff, >but they'll make a comeback once our glazed eyes get tired of our monitors.
Possibly, but I suspect what will actually happen is that improving technology will make the digital stuff more physical, and so it will maintain the upper hand.
I am _dying_ to get my hands on "Diamond Age" style nano-paper. CRTs _suck_ and LCD makes CRT look fantastic. Can you imagine a palm pilot that looks and feels as good as a printed page?
That people will use such incredibly bad interfaces could be seen as an indication that the advantages of digital are _huge_, and I think we will see a convergence into the physical rather than a reversion away from the digital.
Dying? I was honestly under the impression that it had been dead for years. Here, all the pinball machines are relegated to the back corner of the arcades or to small fish'n'chip/chinese takeaway shops alongside Arkanoid and the pacman-era-but-not-league games - ancient arcade machines that failed to become collectors items like pac-man and thus are as cheap to hire as pinball...
I've only played a few times in my life, but I do like the physical nature of the game, so someday I might make my own pinball-style game...
The first really cool thing about Battlefield Earth is the damage it has done to Scientology - the next time the scientologists want to influence mass-media, they may find it a lot harder.
The second really cool thing about Battlefield Earth is that since it has bombed big-time, when it finally reaches this country I can actually watch it, rather than stay at home because I refuse to contribute to its success. It has no success for me to contribute to, thus I can satisfy my curiousity (I read the book many years ago and seeing how people turn books into films is often interesting, (not to mention often disasterous)).
This whole outcome rocks!
As to good things about the movie itself, I protest on the grounds that it hasn't reached much of the world yet, so people like me have had no chance to see it, and thus my only input can be of the nature above.
>We should face up to a more serious fact though, which is that if the working conditions in the clothing industry in general were "fair" few of us could afford clothes
I think that this is simply false, for a lot of reasons. Rather than wade into them however, I'll also suggest that it is no great loss if people can afford fewer clothes - the current low price of clothes has not always been the case, yet our ancestors still managed to cloth themselves.
The argument "We can't afford to not use slave labour" has historically been shown false time and time again. We can arrogantly spurn pre-sweatshop price activities such as darning and patching socks (thus doubling their life thus essentially halving their price), but this is just asking for poetic justice...
Just because we have forgotton there is something other than disposable consumer culture doesn't mean we can use that as a reason to continue participating in it at the expense of others.
>People are paying companies large sums of money (ever bought a Tommy t-shirt?) for the "privilege" of advertising for them. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
I've been thinking along similar lines, and having a go at expressing it visually - like the ads in question do. Take a look at my first attempt here - I'd love some feedback as I'm unsure about the caption - I've had so many other ideas for the text (and I'd like to hear other people's suggestions too.)
(You can safely skip the rest of this message if you ignored the link)
The image also works for several different themes, depending on caption, which makes things harder. Is the current caption better than say, something along the lines of: "Is there anything else left to sell?" "Are yours a different colour?" "No Limits. Because I'm Worth It." "J&J Marketing Innovations - We can put your message everywhere." "The eyes never lie." "It's only skin deep, right?"
Is there a more succinct phrasing of one of the above that would work better?
>and these people will be the ones who will hopefully keep society from devolving into some dystopian nightmare.
The unstoppable forces that create evolution have a way of weeding out systems reliant on on such dangeriously fragile controls. And to be honest, I'm leaning in the general direction of Katz here - were are already well down the path, we are still actively walking further down it, and calls to stop walking don't look like they'll be heeded anytime soon.
But there are still some signs of hope.
And if this planet is going downhill, it's my ethical responsibility to Enjoy It While It Lasts:-) (In addition to a few other minor responsibilities - y'know, saving it and suchlike)
But wait! - Buy now, and get a FREE set of Steak Knives - absolutely FREE! For only Three Easy Installments! FREE!
But wait! - I know you want more!
Feeling lonely and unloved in an Increasingly Materialistic Society bent on Celebrating its Orgy of Consumption and Greed? Call 1900-PARTY! Meet new friends! Make a Date! Your first call is FREE! [calls cost $2.95 a minute, callers must be over 18]
Unfulfilled? Consult the Heavens - 1-900-ASTRAL Science has shown us that the Moon is behind tides and movements of the oceans. Our bodies are over 70% water and the movements of the moon and heavens profoundly affect us. Are unsatisfied with your job? love life? Unsure where your life is heading? Call n....#$@%@#$^@
Ah sod it. There is no skill in making fun of what is already more ridiculous than if I had made it up. I give up. Time for some McFAT. (Actually, that last bit is a lie, but do not let that stain the integrity of the previous promises of fulfillment, promises on which you should ACT NOW! as only the FIRST 100 CALLERS get it FREE! (and FOR FREE! as well)).
(The character and sales pitches depicted in this message are not based on non-real productions, and any resemblence to actual marketing is strictly by design)
WARNING: The humour in this message has been undermined and sabotaged by it being previously used in a non-humourous way in the Real World. If this wasn't such a blatent copy, it might have been funnier, however I cannot be held responsible for other people stealing my ideas before I even think of them. There Should Be A Law Or Something.
Did I mention FREE! For FREE!! And it's FREE!
Buy one, get TWELVE!!! That's right - TWELVE!!! exclamation marks FREE!!!!!!
>nor is there any indication that any other company could make video games. Kiosks, embedded displays yes, but how knows about games.
I was under the impression that Sony let pretty much any company make games for the playstation. Which was one of the reasons so many were availible. Nintendo (or Sega, I forget which) required that it okayed or published each and every game (ie get a slice of the pie on every game sold) consequently there were fewer games to draw buyers, and their market share suffered. Good short-term thinking...:-)
We live in a time where many people have considerable material wealth, but no "voice" - little say on what goes on and no-one listening. People prize what they don't have. A CD-player, while nice, becomes of less value than a forum where you have status and influence - where you have a voice. Televised phone-surveys on "current affairs" programs charge callers $1+ for a call where they just get to select #1 or #2. Thousands call. There are a lot of people for whom having a voice - any kind of voice - is of _great_ importance. Karma allows people to post at +2, instantly bringing attention to their voice. For people who (rightly or wrongly) feel repressed by a society that will not listen to them, karma may be far more important in the grand scheme of things than you seem to allow. We are talking about things that start to touch on personal contentment and happiness. You might think this is a big extrapolation - from karma to living a fulfilled life, but if you look at people without the internet, or talkback radio, or a local paper, you'll see that it's not so far fetched. People are strange. So he wants to protect his karma. Big deal.
>I NEVER said computers (property) was important, YOU DID!.
You really think I suggested this? I think it is you who is failing to read/grasp what is being written. I quote for your convenience:
"There are more important things than my computer, but I don't think it immature to take steps to prevent its loss."
Please read consider this in the context of what else I have written. I _never_ claimed property (computer) was important (I even inferred the opposite), I claimed that it is not necessarily "immature" (your word) to protect it. Just like karma.
For the record, any twisting that happened was completely unintentional. While you've obviously written me off as a flamer, I don't think you should automatically assume that this communication problem can be entirely attributed to my evil and sadistic nature.
When writing, ask judge to call their bluff
on
DeCSS Update
·
· Score: 1
It seems pretty clear that the vast majority of "threatening" email is pretty tame - vocal dissent. The judge will likely not be aware of this - my guess is that each email will be printed on a seperate sheet of paper, making a stack an inch thick. Pre-selected (nasty) quotes will be read from the stack. The judge is not going to read the entire stack (if any of it). The defense, or our own letter writing should call attention to the fact that the MPAA has very few even remotely threatening emails, because if we don't do this, the MPAA will seemingly have a _lot_ of _very_ threatening emails, and thus a more solid case.
Perhaps suggest name (but not corporate rank) suppression as a way to ease their dubious fears.
Good record. The only criticism I could try (and probably fail) to level would be that if the market for new and original games was made up of people with similar lists, it doesn't sound like there would be much money in that market. Of course, there are a host of reasons why that's very unconvincing line of reasoning...
(BTW - I whimiscally chose to take your post as a challenge, I'm not at all suggesting that you have no one else to blame:-)
> "So what?" you ask...well, my point here is don't sweat the small stuff. Your >property is important, take care of it. Karma is small, don't sweat it....
I kind of disagree. Property is usually "the small stuff" to me - different people value things differently (if they don't, socitey is in trouble), and if someone greatly values/. karma, let them. It might not make sense to you, but the value that many people place in the stupidist consumer-culture crap doesn't make much sense to me:-)
>And commenting about losing karma only makes you look like you are trying to protect it. Grow up, there are more important >things than/. karma.
There are more important things than my computer, but I don't think it immature to take steps to prevent its loss. Sheesh, if someone wants to protect their karma so much that they'll even contemplate the enormous effort of adding some words to their post (oh the sacrifice!) in the hopes of achieving this, what's the big deal?
I might lose karma for this, but when wondering who is responsible, please take a long, honest look in the mirror. Developers often find that what gamers say they want, and what they _actually_ enjoy (and purchase) when they're offered it are different things. You may be blameless (though I'm not), perhaps you do search for games that are breaking the mould, purchase "indie" games, and so on, but even so, let me paint some of the other side of the picture. I was involved in the development of a 3d game that introduced some new stuff. Took it to E3, and was horrified by the nature of some of the feedback coming from gamers - the controls were not quite like Quake (which tends to happen when you're not making a Quake clone - the game was different and desired some differences in control), and this was a terminal shortfall for a significant number of gamers. It wasn't just the controls either.
With so many games to choose from, a _lot_ of gamers will not take the time to learn a "new" game, and this is understandable - why risk spending two hours learning new concepts, or working through some tutorials, or learning a new approach to X, Y, and Z, only to discover that the game isn't your cup of tea anyway? Quicker, safer, and easier to get something you _know_ you'll like - even if it isn't quite the revolutionary game you hope to play someday, it is an even better version of something you know and love.
Thus many (myself included) choose games that they already know how to play, but also want something "new", not realising that there is a serious conflict here. The result? Games are made with as much "new" stuff as is possible before a learning curve appears. Cooler graphics, new monsters and weapons, jump pads, and so on.
Games that are as "New" as gamers will let them be are out there. Find them (don't expect them to come to you) and support them. See if the registration card is soley for marketing purposes, or whether there are some questions that give info to developers (eg your hardware specs, game preferences, and so on). If so, fill it out and have your say - since no-one actually fills out their registration cards, you'll be speaking with disproportionate influence.
Make a commitment to give games a fair go - it's easy to look at a game and think "What a load of sh-t. Who designed this crap?", but think also "People poured blood, sweat, and tears into this thing for two years of their life - perhaps I haven't clicked on to what they were trying to do?". Some games _are_ crap, but some only look like crap because you stereotype them as "just another X-style game" when a lot of the work went into the non-X-style aspects, and that's where the game really shines - if only you would take the time to learn it and discover this.
Spread the word - gamers can be an unnecessary extra obstacle to "new" games, and if we want new stuff, the least we can do is make sure we're not part of the problem. I think most gamers are completely unaware that they could pose an obstacle to "new" stuff because they support the idea of "new" stuff, but don't connect their actions with the impact it has on "new" stuff.
I'm not saying it's all our fault, I'm saying that one of the biggest problems is one that _we_ can address. We have the power. The price is convenience.
The neat thing about this is that they'll do it to anyone - including someone who only set up their (carefully legit) auction so they could make a lot of noise and call in some lawyers when it gets pulled.
So - anyone out there fed up enough with this shit? Here's you're chance to be a victim with no liability and a fight you can win, regardless of whether you choose trial by court or by media. Ever wished that instead of people bowing to MS, you could take their shoes and fight on the side of right? Now you can do it. And since you're setting them up, you can make damn sure that you know _exactly_ what their policy permits, and exactly what their obligations are.
>So which will it be? Easier patents or harder? I choose "easier". >Why? because a corporation can more readily carry the burden of increased Artcle 56 demands than 'the little guy',
I disagree - the difficulty is smallfry compared to the expense. It is the _cost_ that is most prohibitive of the small guy and no obstacle for the corporation. The hoops you have to jump though are linked to this of course, but focus on the cost first. Right now, a patent for a small guy is a very big investment of hard cash and the chances of seeing any return on that cost are minimal (unless you hit the jackpot with the next "tetrapack".
Well I've given up hope. It's not just that I disagree with Dickenson on many issues, it's that Dickinson's attitude makes it quite clear he's not interested - he continually talks down to O'Reilly, he pontificates from an assumption of moral high-ground when the issues are bigger than his losing face, he resorts to the sort of slimey tactics I wouldn't expect from someone other than a PR propagandist trying to spin something dirty. In fact, "slimey" is a really good one-word description...
And we shouldn't complain about the system being flawed on the grounds that if we really cared, we would have somehow miraculously foreseen the abuses before they were thrust upon us and so lobbied for the appropriate changes in time?!? There are so many fallacies and idiotic assumptions in his reasoning that I despair reason ever coming out of his department.
Not only does he effectively deny any problems whatsoever, he also goes straight into excuse mode whenever a new or potentially useful suggestion is made - anything suggestion that would make any change at all to any part of the process is immediately met with (often pathetic) kneejerk opposition.
This guy refuses to see any problems or shortfalls at all. And if there are no problems, then nothing needs fixing.
"Prices expected to skyrocket this week" claims the heading. The C/net article tells a different story. A 2% base price rise, while it may be the start of a bigger trend, doesn't seem as PaNiC!!!-worthy as the headline suggests.
Ok, I don't know anything about the downstream effects this is going to have, and it does sound like the start of something bigger that will eventually result in much higher prices, but it is definitely yet another of the horde of indicators showing that/. could do with a lot less sensationalism in its journalism.
>Quake is nothing more than a tool... secretly sponsered by the US military... which children are encouraged to play since it is "cool".
Aha! But therin lies the fatal flaw in the (otherwise excellent) conspiracy theory - it is established and irrefragable fact that adults[1] (thus including the military) cannot make things "cool" no matter how hard they try[2].
[1] The guys at id Software are really just big kids. [2] Unless they work for Pokemon Marketing.
And I would also like to point out that yes, "irrefragable" is an actual word, and I think it should be worth some novice-verbosity brownie points for using it (and using it correctly) in a discussion about Quake:-)
Slashdot Mirror
>but reading this deposition has a "comedy of errors"
>feeling to it. Lots of things that show that they really don't quite know what's going on.
Actually, I think you wrongly get this impression because (like me) you are unfamiliar with the arena. Reading it, I get the impression of a master at work. The law is not about technology but principles, and so even in this highly technical case some instances of technical accuracy (or innacuracy) are simply of secondary priority to getting other things right - other things that may be so esoteric as to be missed by us, but in this arena can have significant repercussions.
Our whole attitude has been that the ramifications of case are bigger than DeCSS, and Garbus has his mind firmly on getting the job done using the methods that work in the courts. Some of the criticisms posted have been ideologically driven (eg that a particular distinction is important and must be preserved, when such a distinction is only directly important when working in this arena, not his).
>the Vickys had had their fill of nano-paper by then
4 1214&cid=62
:-)
See my other comment:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=00/06/10/17
Hand made paper only became valuable because the Vickies had almost aristocratic wealth compared to others and not much else to spend it on
>Things that are "real" - physical objects - are in a slump these days in
>light of all the cool new digital stuff, but they'll make a comeback once our
>glazed eyes get tired of our monitors.
Something else to think about - physical objects have been in a slump for almost a century now.
As someone who often makes things with my hands, I can assure you that there are vast volumes of Incredibly Cool things that can be made with today's technology, but never will be, because mechanised manufacturing still cannot touch human skill in so many areas - including many areas of electronics.
Much like you see digital stuff, I see mass-manufactured stuff and wonder when the reversion to skilfully crafted goods will come. Realistically speaking, it will come when utopia gives us the time and money to indulge in such things, and the digital issue may be the same - pinball machines take a lot of assembly per machine. For digital devices, most of the work only has to be done once. This means that barring a revolution in manufacturing technology (nano?) the trend will continue. Pinball designers will go the way of watchmakers, for the same reasons, and just as permanently.
(You might think watchmaking are a bad example, as machines can make adequate watches, but you should have a look at some of the non-watch devices, robots, decorations, and neat stuff that watchmakers have applied their skills to - totally cool, totally amazing, and totally un-manufacturable. And now those skills are disappearing because mass-production is the only way ahead.
On the other hand, a reversion to an 18th century magnitude gap between the rich & poor could also result in enough money being spent indulgently to bring back the old ways like custom-designed furnishings and pinball. I saw an article that talked about this already starting to happen in Beverly Hills.
But someday, I shall own a clockwork Turing machine.
And I shall set it ticking away, calculating the (logical) validity of arguments for the existence of God.
And I shall be able to point to my clockwork Turing machine as say "That device is calculating the existence of God."
And people shall say "What is it?"
And I shall sigh.
>hings that are "real" - physical objects - are in a slump these days in light of all the cool new digital stuff,
>but they'll make a comeback once our glazed eyes get tired of our monitors.
Possibly, but I suspect what will actually happen is that improving technology will make the digital stuff more physical, and so it will maintain the upper hand.
I am _dying_ to get my hands on "Diamond Age" style nano-paper. CRTs _suck_ and LCD makes CRT look fantastic. Can you imagine a palm pilot that looks and feels as good as a printed page?
That people will use such incredibly bad interfaces could be seen as an indication that the advantages of digital are _huge_, and I think we will see a convergence into the physical rather than a reversion away from the digital.
Dying? I was honestly under the impression that it had been dead for years. Here, all the pinball machines are relegated to the back corner of the arcades or to small fish'n'chip/chinese takeaway shops alongside Arkanoid and the pacman-era-but-not-league games - ancient arcade machines that failed to become collectors items like pac-man and thus are as cheap to hire as pinball...
I've only played a few times in my life, but I do like the physical nature of the game, so someday I might make my own pinball-style game...
The first really cool thing about Battlefield Earth is the damage it has done to Scientology - the next time the scientologists want to influence mass-media, they may find it a lot harder.
The second really cool thing about Battlefield Earth is that since it has bombed big-time, when it finally reaches this country I can actually watch it, rather than stay at home because I refuse to contribute to its success. It has no success for me to contribute to, thus I can satisfy my curiousity (I read the book many years ago and seeing how people turn books into films is often interesting, (not to mention often disasterous)).
This whole outcome rocks!
As to good things about the movie itself, I protest on the grounds that it hasn't reached much of the world yet, so people like me have had no chance to see it, and thus my only input can be of the nature above.
>We should face up to a more serious fact though, which is that if the working conditions in the clothing industry in general were "fair" few of us could afford clothes
I think that this is simply false, for a lot of reasons. Rather than wade into them however, I'll also suggest that it is no great loss if people can afford fewer clothes - the current low price of clothes has not always been the case, yet our ancestors still managed to cloth themselves.
The argument "We can't afford to not use slave labour" has historically been shown false time and time again. We can arrogantly spurn pre-sweatshop price activities such as darning and patching socks (thus doubling their life thus essentially halving their price), but this is just asking for poetic justice...
Just because we have forgotton there is something other than disposable consumer culture doesn't mean we can use that as a reason to continue participating in it at the expense of others.
I've been thinking along similar lines, and having a go at expressing it visually - like the ads in question do. Take a look at my first attempt here - I'd love some feedback as I'm unsure about the caption - I've had so many other ideas for the text (and I'd like to hear other people's suggestions too.)
(You can safely skip the rest of this message if you ignored the link)
The image also works for several different themes, depending on caption, which makes things harder.
Is the current caption better than say, something along the lines of:
"Is there anything else left to sell?"
"Are yours a different colour?"
"No Limits. Because I'm Worth It."
"J&J Marketing Innovations - We can put your message everywhere."
"The eyes never lie."
"It's only skin deep, right?"
Is there a more succinct phrasing of one of the above that would work better?
>and these people will be the ones who will hopefully keep society from devolving into some dystopian nightmare.
:-)
The unstoppable forces that create evolution have a way of weeding out systems reliant on on such dangeriously fragile controls. And to be honest, I'm leaning in the general direction of Katz here - were are already well down the path, we are still actively walking further down it, and calls to stop walking don't look like they'll be heeded anytime soon.
But there are still some signs of hope.
And if this planet is going downhill, it's my ethical responsibility to Enjoy It While It Lasts
(In addition to a few other minor responsibilities - y'know, saving it and suchlike)
>There were 10 Nike "swishes" on each shoe.
x /contest/05.html
Fed up with Garish Labels? Loopy Logos and Big Brands? You need NEW "Label Cleaner" from Dingler & Van-den-Brauel!
http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/first/toolbo
But wait! - Buy now, and get a FREE set of Steak Knives - absolutely FREE! For only Three Easy Installments! FREE!
But wait! - I know you want more!
Feeling lonely and unloved in an Increasingly Materialistic Society bent on Celebrating its Orgy of Consumption and Greed? Call 1900-PARTY! Meet new friends! Make a Date! Your first call is FREE! [calls cost $2.95 a minute, callers must be over 18]
Unfulfilled? Consult the Heavens - 1-900-ASTRAL
Science has shown us that the Moon is behind tides and movements of the oceans. Our bodies are over 70% water and the movements of the moon and heavens profoundly affect us. Are unsatisfied with your job? love life? Unsure where your life is heading? Call n....#$@%@#$^@
Ah sod it. There is no skill in making fun of what is already more ridiculous than if I had made it up. I give up. Time for some McFAT.
(Actually, that last bit is a lie, but do not let that stain the integrity of the previous promises of fulfillment, promises on which you should ACT NOW! as only the FIRST 100 CALLERS get it FREE! (and FOR FREE! as well)).
(The character and sales pitches depicted in this message are not based on non-real productions, and any resemblence to actual marketing is strictly by design)
WARNING: The humour in this message has been undermined and sabotaged by it being previously used in a non-humourous way in the Real World. If this wasn't such a blatent copy, it might have been funnier, however I cannot be held responsible for other people stealing my ideas before I even think of them. There Should Be A Law Or Something.
Did I mention FREE!
For FREE!!
And it's FREE!
Buy one, get TWELVE!!! That's right - TWELVE!!! exclamation marks FREE!!!!!!
>nor is there any indication that any other company could make video games. Kiosks, embedded displays yes, but how knows about games.
:-)
I was under the impression that Sony let pretty much any company make games for the playstation. Which was one of the reasons so many were availible. Nintendo (or Sega, I forget which) required that it okayed or published each and every game (ie get a slice of the pie on every game sold) consequently there were fewer games to draw buyers, and their market share suffered. Good short-term thinking...
We live in a time where many people have considerable material wealth, but no "voice" - little say on what goes on and no-one listening. People prize what they don't have. A CD-player, while nice, becomes of less value than a forum where you have status and influence - where you have a voice. Televised phone-surveys on "current affairs" programs charge callers $1+ for a call where they just get to select #1 or #2. Thousands call. There are a lot of people for whom having a voice - any kind of voice - is of _great_ importance. Karma allows people to post at +2, instantly bringing attention to their voice. For people who (rightly or wrongly) feel repressed by a society that will not listen to them, karma may be far more important in the grand scheme of things than you seem to allow. We are talking about things that start to touch on personal contentment and happiness. You might think this is a big extrapolation - from karma to living a fulfilled life, but if you look at people without the internet, or talkback radio, or a local paper, you'll see that it's not so far fetched. People are strange.
So he wants to protect his karma. Big deal.
>I NEVER said computers (property) was important, YOU DID!.
You really think I suggested this? I think it is you who is failing to read/grasp what is being written. I quote for your convenience:
"There are more important things than my computer, but I don't think it immature to take steps to prevent its loss."
Please read consider this in the context of what else I have written. I _never_ claimed property (computer) was important (I even inferred the opposite), I claimed that it is not necessarily "immature" (your word) to protect it. Just like karma.
For the record, any twisting that happened was completely unintentional. While you've obviously written me off as a flamer, I don't think you should automatically assume that this communication problem can be entirely attributed to my evil and sadistic nature.
It seems pretty clear that the vast majority of "threatening" email is pretty tame - vocal dissent. The judge will likely not be aware of this - my guess is that each email will be printed on a seperate sheet of paper, making a stack an inch thick. Pre-selected (nasty) quotes will be read from the stack. The judge is not going to read the entire stack (if any of it). The defense, or our own letter writing should call attention to the fact that the MPAA has very few even remotely threatening emails, because if we don't do this, the MPAA will seemingly have a _lot_ of _very_ threatening emails, and thus a more solid case.
Perhaps suggest name (but not corporate rank) suppression as a way to ease their dubious fears.
I think the parent of this post suggests an idea worth further thinking. I suggest a higher profile :-)
Good record. The only criticism I could try (and probably fail) to level would be that if the market for new and original games was made up of people with similar lists, it doesn't sound like there would be much money in that market. Of course, there are a host of reasons why that's very unconvincing line of reasoning...
:-)
(BTW - I whimiscally chose to take your post as a challenge, I'm not at all suggesting that you have no one else to blame
> "So what?" you ask...well, my point here is don't sweat the small stuff. Your
/. karma, let them. It might not make sense to you, but the value that many people place in the stupidist consumer-culture crap doesn't make much sense to me :-)
>property is important, take care of it. Karma is small, don't sweat it....
I kind of disagree. Property is usually "the small stuff" to me - different people value things differently (if they don't, socitey is in trouble), and if someone greatly values
(This is also why I think the analogy is fine.)
>One thing I really miss in DOOM was the sophisticated puzle aspects.
:-)
Wow, I never thought I'd hear _that_ said with a straight face
Talk about a stinging indictment of modern gaming...
>And commenting about losing karma only makes you look like you are trying to protect it. Grow up, there are more important /. karma.
>things than
There are more important things than my computer, but I don't think it immature to take steps to prevent its loss. Sheesh, if someone wants to protect their karma so much that they'll even contemplate the enormous effort of adding some words to their post (oh the sacrifice!) in the hopes of achieving this, what's the big deal?
>Every company has fights, but when senior people are criticising other senior people in public you don't have a team any more.
>Await implosion.
I put $10 on whichever side Carmack happens to be.
I might lose karma for this, but when wondering who is responsible, please take a long, honest look in the mirror. Developers often find that what gamers say they want, and what they _actually_ enjoy (and purchase) when they're offered it are different things. You may be blameless (though I'm not), perhaps you do search for games that are breaking the mould, purchase "indie" games, and so on, but even so, let me paint some of the other side of the picture.
I was involved in the development of a 3d game that introduced some new stuff. Took it to E3, and was horrified by the nature of some of the feedback coming from gamers - the controls were not quite like Quake (which tends to happen when you're not making a Quake clone - the game was different and desired some differences in control), and this was a terminal shortfall for a significant number of gamers. It wasn't just the controls either.
With so many games to choose from, a _lot_ of gamers will not take the time to learn a "new" game, and this is understandable - why risk spending two hours learning new concepts, or working through some tutorials, or learning a new approach to X, Y, and Z, only to discover that the game isn't your cup of tea anyway? Quicker, safer, and easier to get something you _know_ you'll like - even if it isn't quite the revolutionary game you hope to play someday, it is an even better version of something you know and love.
Thus many (myself included) choose games that they already know how to play, but also want something "new", not realising that there is a serious conflict here. The result? Games are made with as much "new" stuff as is possible before a learning curve appears. Cooler graphics, new monsters and weapons, jump pads, and so on.
Games that are as "New" as gamers will let them be are out there. Find them (don't expect them to come to you) and support them. See if the registration card is soley for marketing purposes, or whether there are some questions that give info to developers (eg your hardware specs, game preferences, and so on). If so, fill it out and have your say - since no-one actually fills out their registration cards, you'll be speaking with disproportionate influence.
Make a commitment to give games a fair go - it's easy to look at a game and think "What a load of sh-t. Who designed this crap?", but think also "People poured blood, sweat, and tears into this thing for two years of their life - perhaps I haven't clicked on to what they were trying to do?". Some games _are_ crap, but some only look like crap because you stereotype them as "just another X-style game" when a lot of the work went into the non-X-style aspects, and that's where the game really shines - if only you would take the time to learn it and discover this.
Spread the word - gamers can be an unnecessary extra obstacle to "new" games, and if we want new stuff, the least we can do is make sure we're not part of the problem. I think most gamers are completely unaware that they could pose an obstacle to "new" stuff because they support the idea of "new" stuff, but don't connect their actions with the impact it has on "new" stuff.
I'm not saying it's all our fault, I'm saying that one of the biggest problems is one that _we_ can address. We have the power. The price is convenience.
The neat thing about this is that they'll do it to anyone - including someone who only set up their (carefully legit) auction so they could make a lot of noise and call in some lawyers when it gets pulled.
:-)
So - anyone out there fed up enough with this shit? Here's you're chance to be a victim with no liability and a fight you can win, regardless of whether you choose trial by court or by media.
Ever wished that instead of people bowing to MS, you could take their shoes and fight on the side of right? Now you can do it. And since you're setting them up, you can make damn sure that you know _exactly_ what their policy permits, and exactly what their obligations are.
As a hobby, it beats model railroad
>So which will it be? Easier patents or harder? I choose "easier".
:)
>Why? because a corporation can more readily carry the burden of increased Artcle 56 demands than 'the little guy',
I disagree - the difficulty is smallfry compared to the expense. It is the _cost_ that is most prohibitive of the small guy and no obstacle for the corporation. The hoops you have to jump though are linked to this of course, but focus on the cost first. Right now, a patent for a small guy is a very big investment of hard cash and the chances of seeing any return on that cost are minimal (unless you hit the jackpot with the next "tetrapack".
Other than that, we pretty much agree
Well I've given up hope. It's not just that I disagree with Dickenson on many issues, it's that Dickinson's attitude makes it quite clear he's not interested - he continually talks down to O'Reilly, he pontificates from an assumption of moral high-ground when the issues are bigger than his losing face, he resorts to the sort of slimey tactics I wouldn't expect from someone other than a PR propagandist trying to spin something dirty. In fact, "slimey" is a really good one-word description...
And we shouldn't complain about the system being flawed on the grounds that if we really cared, we would have somehow miraculously foreseen the abuses before they were thrust upon us and so lobbied for the appropriate changes in time?!? There are so many fallacies and idiotic assumptions in his reasoning that I despair reason ever coming out of his department.
Not only does he effectively deny any problems whatsoever, he also goes straight into excuse mode whenever a new or potentially useful suggestion is made - anything suggestion that would make any change at all to any part of the process is immediately met with (often pathetic) kneejerk opposition.
This guy refuses to see any problems or shortfalls at all. And if there are no problems, then nothing needs fixing.
"Prices expected to skyrocket this week" claims the heading. The C/net article tells a different story. A 2% base price rise, while it may be the start of a bigger trend, doesn't seem as PaNiC!!!-worthy as the headline suggests.
/. could do with a lot less sensationalism in its journalism.
Ok, I don't know anything about the downstream effects this is going to have, and it does sound like the start of something bigger that will eventually result in much higher prices, but it is definitely yet another of the horde of indicators showing that
>Quake is nothing more than a tool ... secretly sponsered by the US military ... which children are encouraged to play since it is "cool".
:-)
Aha! But therin lies the fatal flaw in the (otherwise excellent) conspiracy theory - it is established and irrefragable fact that adults[1] (thus including the military) cannot make things "cool" no matter how hard they try[2].
[1] The guys at id Software are really just big kids.
[2] Unless they work for Pokemon Marketing.
And I would also like to point out that yes, "irrefragable" is an actual word, and I think it should be worth some novice-verbosity brownie points for using it (and using it correctly) in a discussion about Quake