It's exactly what they did for PS1 backwards compatability on the PS2, so it probably seems more like a tried and true option than a gamble from their perspective.
This is actually a mistatement, but common to brief or informal descriptions of negligence. That isn't a definition "negligence" that is a description of failure of the "general duty"
It's actualy the definition of neglegence out of the OED.
I would give VB6 points for something else too, but it'll sound like a slam... The fact that VB6 was the best thing available for hacking together GUI DB frontends spurred the development of much simpler, better tools for the task. VB6 sucked... in hindsight. It was a logical extension of languages like DBase3, though, and it taught us what not to do when designing the languages and APIs we use today. I don't long for the days when I made a living writing VB, but I certainly don't regret it one bit.
Too bad that common wisdom doesn't take into account that most software is incredibly simple and task oriented. For most home grown software maintnence consists of periodic backups. You know, the kind of tasks that basic offshoots like DBase and languages like PHP are perfect for.
Good engineers choose the best tool for the task at hand. Sometimes that tool is PHP. It would be hard to argue that BASIC was still the perfect tool for anything anymore, but 12 years ago that argument could be made and won.
"Best practices" have wrecked countless five minute apps.
Re:I miss the times Microsoft was the top bad guy
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 1
Our rights are being ripped in a astonishing fast pace, and hollywood is suceeding in making things that even Microsoft never dreamed off.
Never dreamed of? Go look at their home entertainment profits and tell me with a straight face that the Xbox product line exists to make a profit selling video games. Not only has Microsoft dreamed of it, but they are well on their way to becoming the only middleman in the business, and all the money that hollywood gets is going to flow through them first.
Fear the day that there is an Xbox in 50% of US households. That is the day that any media rights you currently enjoy go away, and mainstream electronic entertainment requires giving Microsoft a direct link to your bank account. The future of DRM has a name, and it's called "Xbox Live".
Even with a sudden loss of pressure, if the material is designed not to tear easily, the items should mostly stay inside. Just because it's inflatable doesn't mean it has to pop like a latex balloon when it gets a hole in it. Once the initial discharge of gas is complete, there will be nothing forcing the objects to leave the inside.
I'd rather check a more authoritative sources on what the law of negligence is about, like, e.g., the huge section of my Torts casebook and and the accompanying hornbook that cover Negligence law, but its not really an area I need to double check.
You've moved this conversation from a philosophical debate to one of actual law. I don't disagree with you on how it works in our current legal system. I'm saying I disapprove of how it works.
Negligence is "failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances". You can be held financially responsible for negligence civily, as you say, as long as there is "a harm inflicted for which the breach of a legal duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff [as] the proximate cause". But here's my problem with that: I disagree with what you can typically convince a jury or a judge is "reasonable". There should be nothing that you can be held cripplingly responsible for that is subjective. This is especially true since we, as a society, have a fixation on vengence and are deluded into thinking it's the same thing as justice.
The way the law is now is the reason a tresspasser can sue a landowner when he injures himself on the trespassee's property and win. If a few people have their lives ruined and are unable to recover damages financially because we are unable to enumerate every possible way that you can be criminally neglegent in the text of the law, I say so be it. It's a small price to pay for not having your future security be at the whim of a stranger and what a jury things you should have done.
Just to tie things together in the context of this article, sure my opinion would allow vendors to get away with shipping product that causes damage to their customers, but once they know about the issue, if they continue to sell the product they become guilty of other crimes. So, while it would suck to be one of the customers hit by such a software flaw, there would still be justice.
The Inq does seem to have a somewhat poor reputation on this site and elsewhere; any chance anyone could tell me why?
Ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf?
The Inq. tends to print first and ask question later, because they would rather be first than right. They come back and correct themselves when they say something dumb, but those aren't the kind of stories that get linked on a site like this.
The Register doesn't have this rep, yet they share common DNA and I've seen at least one case where they have actually had their integrity called into question.
Say what? The Register is just as bad... They don't get the scoop as early anymore though, since the people who knew what they were doing over there left to start The Inq.
I wonder, and I can't seem to find anywhere, how much Microsoft paid for Bungie. The more I think and read about it, I wonder if Bungie sold at firesale... Their previous game was a high-budget, buggy flop, and Halo was years behind schedule and wasn't going to be bringing in loads of reveue as a Mac game anyway. To top it off, all of Microsoft's other high priced game studio acquisitions had their pricetag bragged about in the press... So, they wasted their $370 million (what the hell were they smoking the day they decided that number was good) on Rare, but perhaps they practically stole the jewel in their crown.....or maybe not... I mean, you wrecklessly throw thirds of a billon dollars around enough times and you're likely to accedentally by something of value eventually.
Say what? Negligence is all about looking out for other people. If somebody comes to knock on your door and falls off your porch because there was no railing, technically you were negligent in the repair of your property, but it doesn't change the fact that it was his damned fault for falling off your porch in the first place. Personal responsibility is taking responsibility for yourself, not all that other crap that society has decided we should be held responsible for in the cases where things go wrong.
Criminal negligence, on the other hand, is a case where being negligent about something in particular has been speciffically made illegal. Obeying the law is a personal responsibility no matter how you look at it.
In the case when the customer agrees to a disclaimer of liability, I oppose the idea that it should be taken into account when calculating liability. That's hardly opposing the concept.
However, now that you mention it... Neglegence should never be a factor when you're discussing civil liability. You see, there is this thing called personal responsibility. Nobody forces you to trust anybody else. Criminal liability is another matter.
When you restore from sleep, usually it's the OS and drivers that have to go around waking most things up.
Until you get to the macs with USB, this wasn't the case with Apple equipment. You sent the sleep command the the PMU, and it took care of it for you. The ones with USB require special attention to stop the USB devices from remaining powered up while the system sleeps.
I haven't played with the intel based Macs yet, so I don't know if this is still true.
Is it a 1:1 ratio? so if Windows corrupts millions of customer accounts and doesn't report it and I end up backing up corrupted data I can only ask for $199 in damages?
Yup. You and everybody else who bought windows. The idea is to make buggy software unprofitable, not to make software bugs a crime punishable by a corporate death penalty.
Isn't it a little early to be calling it 'popular'? It doesn't even exist yet. No matter how excited people are about the game *right now*, it can still be a flop (though the fanboy mentality is making that more and more difficult. Nobody seems to want to admit they were wrong anymore).
I believe the term you were looking for was 'hyped'.
Slashdot Mirror
It's exactly what they did for PS1 backwards compatability on the PS2, so it probably seems more like a tried and true option than a gamble from their perspective.
No it doesn't. In fact Samsung, LG, and Acer have already announced dual-format readers.
Just because you read it on slashdot doesn't mean somebody didn't make it up.
This is actually a mistatement, but common to brief or informal descriptions of negligence. That isn't a definition "negligence" that is a description of failure of the "general duty"
It's actualy the definition of neglegence out of the OED.
I would give VB6 points for something else too, but it'll sound like a slam... The fact that VB6 was the best thing available for hacking together GUI DB frontends spurred the development of much simpler, better tools for the task. VB6 sucked... in hindsight. It was a logical extension of languages like DBase3, though, and it taught us what not to do when designing the languages and APIs we use today. I don't long for the days when I made a living writing VB, but I certainly don't regret it one bit.
Crap...
Insert a comma between 'software' and 'maintnence' in the second sentence for my comment to make any sense whatsoever.
Too bad that common wisdom doesn't take into account that most software is incredibly simple and task oriented. For most home grown software maintnence consists of periodic backups. You know, the kind of tasks that basic offshoots like DBase and languages like PHP are perfect for.
Good engineers choose the best tool for the task at hand. Sometimes that tool is PHP. It would be hard to argue that BASIC was still the perfect tool for anything anymore, but 12 years ago that argument could be made and won.
"Best practices" have wrecked countless five minute apps.
Our rights are being ripped in a astonishing fast pace, and hollywood is suceeding in making things that even Microsoft never dreamed off.
Never dreamed of? Go look at their home entertainment profits and tell me with a straight face that the Xbox product line exists to make a profit selling video games. Not only has Microsoft dreamed of it, but they are well on their way to becoming the only middleman in the business, and all the money that hollywood gets is going to flow through them first.
Fear the day that there is an Xbox in 50% of US households. That is the day that any media rights you currently enjoy go away, and mainstream electronic entertainment requires giving Microsoft a direct link to your bank account. The future of DRM has a name, and it's called "Xbox Live".
Even with a sudden loss of pressure, if the material is designed not to tear easily, the items should mostly stay inside. Just because it's inflatable doesn't mean it has to pop like a latex balloon when it gets a hole in it. Once the initial discharge of gas is complete, there will be nothing forcing the objects to leave the inside.
You've moved this conversation from a philosophical debate to one of actual law. I don't disagree with you on how it works in our current legal system. I'm saying I disapprove of how it works.
Negligence is "failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances". You can be held financially responsible for negligence civily, as you say, as long as there is "a harm inflicted for which the breach of a legal duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff [as] the proximate cause". But here's my problem with that: I disagree with what you can typically convince a jury or a judge is "reasonable". There should be nothing that you can be held cripplingly responsible for that is subjective. This is especially true since we, as a society, have a fixation on vengence and are deluded into thinking it's the same thing as justice.
The way the law is now is the reason a tresspasser can sue a landowner when he injures himself on the trespassee's property and win. If a few people have their lives ruined and are unable to recover damages financially because we are unable to enumerate every possible way that you can be criminally neglegent in the text of the law, I say so be it. It's a small price to pay for not having your future security be at the whim of a stranger and what a jury things you should have done.
Just to tie things together in the context of this article, sure my opinion would allow vendors to get away with shipping product that causes damage to their customers, but once they know about the issue, if they continue to sell the product they become guilty of other crimes. So, while it would suck to be one of the customers hit by such a software flaw, there would still be justice.
BZZZZZZT. That's just plain old wrong. If it was true I'd agree with you. Check the dictionary if you don't believe me.
Negligence is about responsibility for the concequences of inaction.
This is also just plain false. You don't need to be criminally liable for anything to be found civilly liable.
Why does everybody assume that there will be a 'winner'.
Hardly ever do two competing technologies produce a winner and a loser. Usually it's just a split market. Betamax was a rare case to the contrary.
It's read plenty, and quickly enough... Just not by the CPU.
Ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf?
The Inq. tends to print first and ask question later, because they would rather be first than right. They come back and correct themselves when they say something dumb, but those aren't the kind of stories that get linked on a site like this.
Say what? The Register is just as bad... They don't get the scoop as early anymore though, since the people who knew what they were doing over there left to start The Inq.
I wonder, and I can't seem to find anywhere, how much Microsoft paid for Bungie. The more I think and read about it, I wonder if Bungie sold at firesale... Their previous game was a high-budget, buggy flop, and Halo was years behind schedule and wasn't going to be bringing in loads of reveue as a Mac game anyway. To top it off, all of Microsoft's other high priced game studio acquisitions had their pricetag bragged about in the press... So, they wasted their $370 million (what the hell were they smoking the day they decided that number was good) on Rare, but perhaps they practically stole the jewel in their crown... ..or maybe not... I mean, you wrecklessly throw thirds of a billon dollars around enough times and you're likely to accedentally by something of value eventually.
Are you under the delusion that those are third party titles?
Negligence is all about personal responsibility;
Say what? Negligence is all about looking out for other people. If somebody comes to knock on your door and falls off your porch because there was no railing, technically you were negligent in the repair of your property, but it doesn't change the fact that it was his damned fault for falling off your porch in the first place. Personal responsibility is taking responsibility for yourself, not all that other crap that society has decided we should be held responsible for in the cases where things go wrong.
Criminal negligence, on the other hand, is a case where being negligent about something in particular has been speciffically made illegal. Obeying the law is a personal responsibility no matter how you look at it.
I didn't say anything about intent.
In the case when the customer agrees to a disclaimer of liability, I oppose the idea that it should be taken into account when calculating liability. That's hardly opposing the concept.
However, now that you mention it... Neglegence should never be a factor when you're discussing civil liability. You see, there is this thing called personal responsibility. Nobody forces you to trust anybody else. Criminal liability is another matter.
Remember when making things sound pesudo-german made you Über-cool?
When you restore from sleep, usually it's the OS and drivers that have to go around waking most things up.
Until you get to the macs with USB, this wasn't the case with Apple equipment. You sent the sleep command the the PMU, and it took care of it for you. The ones with USB require special attention to stop the USB devices from remaining powered up while the system sleeps.
I haven't played with the intel based Macs yet, so I don't know if this is still true.
Is it a 1:1 ratio? so if Windows corrupts millions of customer accounts and doesn't report it and I end up backing up corrupted data I can only ask for $199 in damages?
Yup. You and everybody else who bought windows. The idea is to make buggy software unprofitable, not to make software bugs a crime punishable by a corporate death penalty.
I think that's an idea our society has had for quite a long time.
You think incorrectly. Is asked as a rhetorical question.
You should have to prove intent before that sort of liability kicks in.
Why is Spore so popular?
Isn't it a little early to be calling it 'popular'? It doesn't even exist yet. No matter how excited people are about the game *right now*, it can still be a flop (though the fanboy mentality is making that more and more difficult. Nobody seems to want to admit they were wrong anymore).
I believe the term you were looking for was 'hyped'.
Many, many games don't even have a plot.
Sometimes the damage is -way- more than the cost. I'd say go for something like 10x-100x the software cost.
When, as a society, did we get the idea that when bad things happen to us somebody else should pick up the tab?
This isn't about punishment, vengence, or reparation, it's about discouraging something bad.
Your point being?