Yes, Debian has constructed a far more complicated and overengineered solution that will most likely be far more painful of a transition than it needs to be. Woot!
So they are doing it in a stupid way to be different? Go Debian! Yeah, let's not follow something that has worked just fine for Red Hat for years now. Let's be incompatible to be incompatible!
It doesn't work for multiple people hence why they mention that in TFA.
The only major limitation is that it can only track the location of a single user's eyes. Thus the technology is not appropriate for TVs where multiple users may be watching from different angles.
Umm.. half of the examples you gave weren't remakes, they were just sequels or movie adaptations of an existing TV show.
It doesn't matter if it was a remake or not. The point is that they can flog these comic book dead horses over and over again.
And yet you did manage to miss the fact that they may already be planning to "reboot" Batman again after the Dark Knight Rises in order to tie-in with a possible JLA movie.
I didn't miss that at all. My list wasn't meant to be exhaustive just to show that a single comic book character can be reused over and over and over again to produce movies.
Since when has Hollywood ever done that? Hollywood has almost never come up with original material. Since the beginning the bulk of movies were adaptations of books, plays, comic books/strips etc.
No because most likely you have a contract that prevents you from doing so because you signed away your rights to your works to your company. On the other hand, this was a case of Lucas purchasing industrial props and because of this the copyright expired thus allowing this guy to make replicas. Now if your company's copyrights to the works you did for them happened to also expire, yes, you could start creating and selling what you invented for your company.
On the contrary, Blu Ray player shipments are a small part of LG's business while they are a major part of Sony's.
Since when? Sony makes $88 billion in revenue a year and it's highly doubtful that a major part of that is Blu-Ray players or Blu-Ray royalties considering how many divisions make up Sony. If you care to show otherwise, please cite their financials.
Looking forward to Sony retreating with tail between its legs on this one. Couldn't happen to a nicer company.
So he CAN still engage in acts of circumvention of TPMS in the PS3 System to access, obtain, remove, or traffic in NON-copyrighted works.
Which compromises what? 1% of the users that will be using these decryption keys whereas the vast, vast majority will be to play pirated games and cheat?
You seem to think that the "editors" of Slashdot actually care about accuracy, spelling, grammar, etc. No, it's all about driving ad clicks and page views. These intentionally misleading articles being posted helps drive up the page hits.
And exactly what does he gain from lying? Microsoft has in the past restored accounts that they wrongfully banned. Why would they suddenly now do just the opposite?
What happens when you're playing an offline game and your internet connection is down (no connection to XBox Live) and you get three achievements while offline? When you get your connection back, do all three achievements get fed up to XBL at the same time? Would that be considered cheating?
That's what I was thinking. If the "cheater" label is public, then it looks to me like a libel case.
*facepalm* Libel laws do not work that way. For them to win a case, Microsoft would have to be intentionally and maliciously falsely claiming that this person is a cheater. Even then it is most likely it would get thrown out.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Debian has constructed a far more complicated and overengineered solution that will most likely be far more painful of a transition than it needs to be. Woot!
This is about having both 64-bit and 32-bit libs on the system at once and implementing the filesystem paths to support this.
So they are doing it in a stupid way to be different? Go Debian! Yeah, let's not follow something that has worked just fine for Red Hat for years now. Let's be incompatible to be incompatible!
It means they are finally supporting the part of LSB that defines /lib64 for x86_64 libraries which has been part of the standard for like 7 years now.
Woot! Only 7 years late to the party Debian.
It doesn't work for multiple people hence why they mention that in TFA.
The only major limitation is that it can only track the location of a single user's eyes. Thus the technology is not appropriate for TVs where multiple users may be watching from different angles.
No highs, no lows. Must be Bose!
Umm.. half of the examples you gave weren't remakes, they were just sequels or movie adaptations of an existing TV show.
It doesn't matter if it was a remake or not. The point is that they can flog these comic book dead horses over and over again.
And yet you did manage to miss the fact that they may already be planning to "reboot" Batman again after the Dark Knight Rises in order to tie-in with a possible JLA movie.
I didn't miss that at all. My list wasn't meant to be exhaustive just to show that a single comic book character can be reused over and over and over again to produce movies.
No need for cgi. Just lots of makeup and some digital touchup. They do it all the time on actresses anyway.
No problems with that as they will just remake them all again. Batman is a great example of them doing so repeatedly.
Since when has Hollywood ever done that? Hollywood has almost never come up with original material. Since the beginning the bulk of movies were adaptations of books, plays, comic books/strips etc.
No because most likely you have a contract that prevents you from doing so because you signed away your rights to your works to your company. On the other hand, this was a case of Lucas purchasing industrial props and because of this the copyright expired thus allowing this guy to make replicas. Now if your company's copyrights to the works you did for them happened to also expire, yes, you could start creating and selling what you invented for your company.
Dude, relax.
He was joking....
On the contrary, Blu Ray player shipments are a small part of LG's business while they are a major part of Sony's.
Since when? Sony makes $88 billion in revenue a year and it's highly doubtful that a major part of that is Blu-Ray players or Blu-Ray royalties considering how many divisions make up Sony. If you care to show otherwise, please cite their financials.
Looking forward to Sony retreating with tail between its legs on this one. Couldn't happen to a nicer company.
Don't hold your breath. You'll suffocate waiting.
Because OnLive cares about your petty OS wars?
they mean streaming-wise as netflix's new model is going to be streaming content...
New model? Netflix has been doing streaming for over 3 years now.
You cant blame him for thinking he was within the law on this one
Then maybe he shouldn't have been hacking on the game OS and causing all this to come on his head to begin with?
So he CAN still engage in acts of circumvention of TPMS in the PS3 System to access, obtain, remove, or traffic in NON-copyrighted works.
Which compromises what? 1% of the users that will be using these decryption keys whereas the vast, vast majority will be to play pirated games and cheat?
So other people will invite him to work on their products, which he'll do, and that'll generate buzz and excitement for those products.
Sure if he wants to face contempt of court and legal issues. Did you fail to read the part that said:
he can no longer 'engage in acts of circumvention of TPMS in the PS3 System to access, obtain, remove, or traffic in copyrighted works.'
you can compile and run native code on Android,
Sure if you want code that still runs just as crappy as the regular stuff since it all still runs in the VM.
but that, of course, has the drawbacks of native code.
The drawback of having to be a competent programmer rather than a mouth-breathing Java code slinger?
Unless Google can whip out 166 billion from it's ass, there's a fat chance of that.
You seem to think that the "editors" of Slashdot actually care about accuracy, spelling, grammar, etc. No, it's all about driving ad clicks and page views. These intentionally misleading articles being posted helps drive up the page hits.
And exactly what does he gain from lying? Microsoft has in the past restored accounts that they wrongfully banned. Why would they suddenly now do just the opposite?
What happens when you're playing an offline game and your internet connection is down (no connection to XBox Live) and you get three achievements while offline? When you get your connection back, do all three achievements get fed up to XBL at the same time? Would that be considered cheating?
No, it wouldn't.
That's what I was thinking. If the "cheater" label is public, then it looks to me like a libel case.
*facepalm* Libel laws do not work that way. For them to win a case, Microsoft would have to be intentionally and maliciously falsely claiming that this person is a cheater. Even then it is most likely it would get thrown out.