No, the devs are thieves. They've lied about what they're selling customers then trying to get out of the refunds by victim blaming.
If you sell me a shoddy bill of goods, then you're a fraud no matter how hard I try to make your garbage work. And I deserve a refund after seeing that I was lied to.
The blub says it "Uses atmospheric oxygen for fuel."
Which is exactly wrong. It uses atmospheric oxygen AS AN OXIDIZER. Not as a fuel. The fuel is what the oxygen burns. And it still carries fuel onboard.
FFS.
Butt... What if the simulated universe was huffman coded (or compressed in some other way)? Would it stand to reason that "information storage" in a "natural universe" isn't done at the mathematically optimum level, and therefore compressible? And if we can make the universe use less space, ie resources ie matter (and mass) then can't a simulated universe, in theory, use less energy than a "natural universe"?
I know it's almost certainly not that simple, but I'd like to know why I'm wrong.
ITT was probably not worth it for me, but I must say, when I was going to ITT my Linux teacher was very good at what he did and taught me a lot. He was also one of the math teachers, and really let me stretch out and explore (I was lapping my classmates by lightyears in math, and the teacher is a published mathematician.)
I fucking hate everything about the economics class though. That teacher had an obvious agenda he flogged constantly, and wouldn't stop talking about his pet theories about deficit spending. It was a micro-econ class and he just wouldn't shut up about public choice theory either.
It was very expensive, compared with Community College, and I of course don't have an accredited degree, so it's worthless if I want to go back to real college.
It was all during a terribad time in my life. Why do we force teenageers to go to college where they usually can't do anything but fuck up? You look at the rates of graduation for older students compared with the people who go straight from high school to college, and you can see that what would be best is to give kids out of high school a chance to live in the real world for a while, then decide whether they want to go to college at all.
The only motivating factor for me was that without some kind, any kind, of degree, I'm basically unemployable.
It wears off quickly and is opaque. Also rather expensive. The spray on stuff is also pretty sensitive to temperature and pH. It dissolves in bases.
I learned that trying to treat my shower so it'd stay clean. Turns out the coating dissolves in soap and shampoo.
Is free content worth the near certainty of getting your machine infected with malware? Malware that can cryptolock your hard drive, or log your passwords for your bank accounts? No? Then shut the fuck up.
The advertizers are asking us to dig into a bin full of used needles in exchange for a tasty cookie. If I can get that cookie by wearing lead-lined gloves to dig in the bin, then I will. Because I'm not stupid.
If the city is in the business of biting the bullet, they could spring for a sidewalk on the near-side of the street (relative to the speedcam footage), and/or widen the street further so there's a better buffer zone between the street and people's lawns where children play.
Not disagreeing with speedbumps.
It's all about differential pricing. But the fact is, the distributors can never hide the fact that they're profiting off of people paying half as much as you are. And the only things enforcing this segregation are stupid laws written by the distributors themselves, who then paid lawmakers to pass them.
They're trying to enforce an 18th century business model of sailing ships and ox-wagons on the internet. They must be stopped, because they're a fucking burden on the modern economy.
Whatever. The important point is that they charge less elsewhere while still making a profit, and the internet renders such practices transparently bullshit. The companies need to compete globally or fucking get out of the game.
The idea is: People in, say, sub-saharan Africa have less money and less disposable income, so they can price their product cheaper there and make up for it in volume. While people in, say, the US have a lot more disposable income and can withstand paying twice or three times as much as those in SSA.
The problem with this model is that Americans know that if the company is selling it cheaper elsewhere they're still definitely making a profit there, and price discrimination based on geography is bullshit. They're making money in Sub-saharan Africa charging $2, AND ALSO making MORE money in the US charging $12. It's totally bullshit for them to charge ME $12 when Mbutu only pays $2 while still turning a profit for the company. Why should I pay anything when the company is just trying to bilk me out of an EXTRA $10 when they're still making money on $2? Fuck them, I'm pirating and giving them $0 instead.
That kind of thing. The idea of geographic segregation only makes sense if there's actually barriers to delivery that are different between areas and ALSO an asymmetry of information. There is neither since the internet exists, so any geographical segregation is utter bullshit and laughable.
They think that geographic segregation can benefit them because they still think that it takes half a year by sea to get from England to America. The studio executives are fucking ancient morons who need to just die already. Let younger people who actually understand the world step up and have their time to actually manage the businesses correctly from a temporal perspective less than 200 years old.
Then why is there such a thing as design patents at all?
I mean, ever single time they've been explained to me, they seem much better served by copyright. Why do they get a patent instead of a copyright that's likely to last [retroactively applied ever increasing amounts of time]?
That's why I said "kind of". They only have to sue if the guy doing the infringement won't play ball at all, and if the guy doing the infringement causes confusion about who owns and endorses the brand. In this circumstance the wording on the promotional material all includes the language "unofficial" preceding the statements that it's a PAX kickoff party and that it's pokemon themed. Pokemon International could have chosen to:
Overlook it
Contact the promoter asking for a different wording on promotional material with an emphasis on the fact that it wasn't endorsed by Nintendo.
Contact the promoter asking them to pay a nominal one-time fee, in addition to the clarification.
Contact the promoter asking them to join in a program for minor users of the trademark and become some kind of partner to the licensing scheme, in addition to the aforementioned steps.
Contact the promoter asking them to cease and desist (possibly even with a legal threat)
All acceptable actions, with graduated response built in. All more even handed than what Pokemon International did. And it would have likely resulted in making them look diplomatic at best, and unnoticed at worst.
Pokemon International and Nintendo are managed by morons.
The fourth word on that poster is "UNOFFICIAL". That's how you know it isn't actually related to PAX in any official capacity. Funny how the prefix "un" negates your presumption.
You interpreted it correctly. Hey man, I just clocked out of work on a Friday. So, could you cut me just a little slack. I'm usually a grammar nazi, but honestly, I'm having trouble getting my eyeballs to focus.
That never happens. And also, you're confusing copyright with trademark. You don't lose copyright if you don't defend it. Otherwise CreativeCommons wouldn't exist.
Trademark on the other hand does require active defense.
I haven't read the exact details, but if they're suing for copyright it's completely unnecessary and at their discretion. It's something they chose to do.
If they're suing for trademark, then they kind of have to.
It's still a dick move on Pokemon International's part. They ought to just enjoy the publicity. There's millions of non-licensed depictions all over the web generating small amounts of money for millions of people, yet they go after a guy doing a theme party? This basically is proof that they'll sue anyone whose address they can find.
I know the law, and what you say is true. What I'm saying is that it's not particularly egregious and super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly, and it makes them look like pathetic money-grubbers who can't just sit back and enjoy their already massive popularity. It'd be better for them to just not fucking sue people and be liked, rather than sue people and make themselves look like acquisitive morons.
On the other hand, the little piece of information YOU forgot is that this event was free. If they were charging at the door, then sure, sue away. But seriously, if someone isn't even charging for the event, then who gives a fuck? Pokemon Int'l shouldn't. They should enjoy the free publicity and save the lawyer fees for something useful... Like drafting up new TOS agreements for the Wii U. You know, the good honest work that lawyers typically do.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the devs are thieves. They've lied about what they're selling customers then trying to get out of the refunds by victim blaming. If you sell me a shoddy bill of goods, then you're a fraud no matter how hard I try to make your garbage work. And I deserve a refund after seeing that I was lied to.
The blub says it "Uses atmospheric oxygen for fuel." Which is exactly wrong. It uses atmospheric oxygen AS AN OXIDIZER. Not as a fuel. The fuel is what the oxygen burns. And it still carries fuel onboard. FFS.
Butt... What if the simulated universe was huffman coded (or compressed in some other way)? Would it stand to reason that "information storage" in a "natural universe" isn't done at the mathematically optimum level, and therefore compressible? And if we can make the universe use less space, ie resources ie matter (and mass) then can't a simulated universe, in theory, use less energy than a "natural universe"? I know it's almost certainly not that simple, but I'd like to know why I'm wrong.
ITT was probably not worth it for me, but I must say, when I was going to ITT my Linux teacher was very good at what he did and taught me a lot. He was also one of the math teachers, and really let me stretch out and explore (I was lapping my classmates by lightyears in math, and the teacher is a published mathematician.)
I fucking hate everything about the economics class though. That teacher had an obvious agenda he flogged constantly, and wouldn't stop talking about his pet theories about deficit spending. It was a micro-econ class and he just wouldn't shut up about public choice theory either.
It was very expensive, compared with Community College, and I of course don't have an accredited degree, so it's worthless if I want to go back to real college.
It was all during a terribad time in my life. Why do we force teenageers to go to college where they usually can't do anything but fuck up? You look at the rates of graduation for older students compared with the people who go straight from high school to college, and you can see that what would be best is to give kids out of high school a chance to live in the real world for a while, then decide whether they want to go to college at all.
The only motivating factor for me was that without some kind, any kind, of degree, I'm basically unemployable.
Fuck that noise.
It wears off quickly and is opaque. Also rather expensive. The spray on stuff is also pretty sensitive to temperature and pH. It dissolves in bases. I learned that trying to treat my shower so it'd stay clean. Turns out the coating dissolves in soap and shampoo.
I'd rather just not deal with getting malware in the first place. As long as adnetworks are serving out malware, then NoScript and uBlock it is.
Is free content worth the near certainty of getting your machine infected with malware? Malware that can cryptolock your hard drive, or log your passwords for your bank accounts? No? Then shut the fuck up. The advertizers are asking us to dig into a bin full of used needles in exchange for a tasty cookie. If I can get that cookie by wearing lead-lined gloves to dig in the bin, then I will. Because I'm not stupid.
If the city is in the business of biting the bullet, they could spring for a sidewalk on the near-side of the street (relative to the speedcam footage), and/or widen the street further so there's a better buffer zone between the street and people's lawns where children play. Not disagreeing with speedbumps.
Eh. I was hoping to argue with a smart person. I guess I'll have to swallow my disappointment.
Could you try that again, in English?
Lol, someone claiming a reductio ad absurdum, then offers up a slippery slope as what we should really be afraid of.
Link to original article is in the header.
Mod this commenter up!
It's all about differential pricing. But the fact is, the distributors can never hide the fact that they're profiting off of people paying half as much as you are. And the only things enforcing this segregation are stupid laws written by the distributors themselves, who then paid lawmakers to pass them.
They're trying to enforce an 18th century business model of sailing ships and ox-wagons on the internet. They must be stopped, because they're a fucking burden on the modern economy.
Whatever. The important point is that they charge less elsewhere while still making a profit, and the internet renders such practices transparently bullshit. The companies need to compete globally or fucking get out of the game.
The idea is: People in, say, sub-saharan Africa have less money and less disposable income, so they can price their product cheaper there and make up for it in volume. While people in, say, the US have a lot more disposable income and can withstand paying twice or three times as much as those in SSA.
The problem with this model is that Americans know that if the company is selling it cheaper elsewhere they're still definitely making a profit there, and price discrimination based on geography is bullshit. They're making money in Sub-saharan Africa charging $2, AND ALSO making MORE money in the US charging $12. It's totally bullshit for them to charge ME $12 when Mbutu only pays $2 while still turning a profit for the company. Why should I pay anything when the company is just trying to bilk me out of an EXTRA $10 when they're still making money on $2? Fuck them, I'm pirating and giving them $0 instead.
That kind of thing. The idea of geographic segregation only makes sense if there's actually barriers to delivery that are different between areas and ALSO an asymmetry of information. There is neither since the internet exists, so any geographical segregation is utter bullshit and laughable.
They think that geographic segregation can benefit them because they still think that it takes half a year by sea to get from England to America. The studio executives are fucking ancient morons who need to just die already. Let younger people who actually understand the world step up and have their time to actually manage the businesses correctly from a temporal perspective less than 200 years old.
Then why is there such a thing as design patents at all?
I mean, ever single time they've been explained to me, they seem much better served by copyright. Why do they get a patent instead of a copyright that's likely to last [retroactively applied ever increasing amounts of time]?
Serves that pile of human garbage right. Take them for every dime. Leave them out on the streets.
That's why I said "kind of". They only have to sue if the guy doing the infringement won't play ball at all, and if the guy doing the infringement causes confusion about who owns and endorses the brand. In this circumstance the wording on the promotional material all includes the language "unofficial" preceding the statements that it's a PAX kickoff party and that it's pokemon themed. Pokemon International could have chosen to:
Overlook it
Contact the promoter asking for a different wording on promotional material with an emphasis on the fact that it wasn't endorsed by Nintendo.
Contact the promoter asking them to pay a nominal one-time fee, in addition to the clarification.
Contact the promoter asking them to join in a program for minor users of the trademark and become some kind of partner to the licensing scheme, in addition to the aforementioned steps.
Contact the promoter asking them to cease and desist (possibly even with a legal threat)
All acceptable actions, with graduated response built in. All more even handed than what Pokemon International did. And it would have likely resulted in making them look diplomatic at best, and unnoticed at worst.
Pokemon International and Nintendo are managed by morons.
The fourth word on that poster is "UNOFFICIAL". That's how you know it isn't actually related to PAX in any official capacity. Funny how the prefix "un" negates your presumption.
You interpreted it correctly. Hey man, I just clocked out of work on a Friday. So, could you cut me just a little slack. I'm usually a grammar nazi, but honestly, I'm having trouble getting my eyeballs to focus.
That never happens. And also, you're confusing copyright with trademark. You don't lose copyright if you don't defend it. Otherwise CreativeCommons wouldn't exist. Trademark on the other hand does require active defense. I haven't read the exact details, but if they're suing for copyright it's completely unnecessary and at their discretion. It's something they chose to do. If they're suing for trademark, then they kind of have to.
It's still a dick move on Pokemon International's part. They ought to just enjoy the publicity. There's millions of non-licensed depictions all over the web generating small amounts of money for millions of people, yet they go after a guy doing a theme party? This basically is proof that they'll sue anyone whose address they can find.
I know the law, and what you say is true. What I'm saying is that it's not particularly egregious and super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly, and it makes them look like pathetic money-grubbers who can't just sit back and enjoy their already massive popularity. It'd be better for them to just not fucking sue people and be liked, rather than sue people and make themselves look like acquisitive morons.
On the other hand, the little piece of information YOU forgot is that this event was free. If they were charging at the door, then sure, sue away. But seriously, if someone isn't even charging for the event, then who gives a fuck? Pokemon Int'l shouldn't. They should enjoy the free publicity and save the lawyer fees for something useful... Like drafting up new TOS agreements for the Wii U. You know, the good honest work that lawyers typically do.