Makes you wonder if a low-tech solution might be the answer. That is, no telephones, and no electronic-based communications of any kind. Codes, radio, and messages written and sent via standard mail. It's hard to electronically hack something when the information does not exist electronically. Just a thought, though.
And I agree with cutting out all the middlemen. Assign a small team of about two or three on each side to handle the whole thing. One leader of operations on both sides and two agents operating under them for intelligence gathering and the like.
I have no problems with HDMI at its base. When I've actively used it, it's worked just fine, and as for HDCP, well... name a copy protection scheme that hasn't been chiseled open given a little time (if that's your thing, of course. It's not for me, but ymmv).
No, my problem is actually a more unique one, or at least I think so. I use my laptop now as my main PC since my desktop aged too much and became so slow it was no longer useful to me. The laptop I have features an HDMI port on it, as does the 22" monitor I have (a Hannspree). And for active use, this port works just fine and does everything it should. But since upgrading to Windows 7 on that laptop a couple of years ago, and updating the GPU drivers for it, the monitor won't go to sleep and stay asleep whenever the laptop goes to sleep or turns off. Once the laptop is asleep or is turned off, a couple of seconds later the screen shows a "NO SIGNAL" message right in the middle. When using VGA, this message goes off after a couple of seconds and the monitor itself then goes to sleep. While connected to HDMI, though, it never goes to sleep, even though the laptop is clearly asleep or off.
It's almost as if the HDMI cable is still getting power from the laptop somehow, and the monitor is detecting that, but the monitor is obviously not getting any video feed from the laptop because it's asleep. But the monitor chooses to stay awake anyhow. The only fix is to unplug the HDMI cable after I turn off the laptop but that's a bit of a kludge if you ask me.
At any rate, it's little bugs like these that I hope they work out. And maybe I just haven't gotten the right settings on the laptop to force the HDMI port to turn off when it goes to sleep.
That does appear to be the case. Oh there's still public domain as a sort of status, however temporary. But this renders anything in public domain into what's essentially a nebulous limbo until someone comes along and stakes claim to it to re-up the copyright on it.
Naturally it would be in the best interest for a public domain interest group to form and keep a watchful eye on all works entering into public domain, staking claim to said works as soon as it fall into public domain, then immediately releasing it under a sort of GNU-type license that everyone can have free access to the work(s) in question.
After all, as long as someone has a claim to it, especially if it's a collective group for the express purpose of keeping public domain items free for general use by the public, doesn't that still accomplish what public domain has for all these years anyway? It's just a way of working around this new ruling to render it the same.
Actually that raises a valid point. If that's indeed what they're trying to do, however, there might be another simpler way for them to do it: cease making PC games and go strictly to consoles.
I don't think it's quite the same. You see, with a console, you know what you're getting into when you buy it. You know that the console you purchase today will be the same 10 years from now, 20 years, etc. And the only way to "upgrade" the hardware is to buy the next console that comes out. Most who do this, but want to play the older games too, will keep the older machine laying around. In doing so, you're able to continue to play the older games you like on your old console for as long as you want. You also know that in buying a new console, unless the new console is backwards-compatible with the older console, your game won't work on it. But for consoles, this is a given, and has been so since game consoles were invented.
PC gaming, however, is a different animal. Every PC is, at heart, based on the same hardware and software (generally speaking) as the generation before. Therefore, there should be no conceivable reason why software that currently runs on my machine now can't run in the future if I make a simple upgrade to the same machine (more memory, bigger HDD, different graphics card, etc.). Likewise, if I buy a newer machine, there's a high likelihood that, if I'm running the same base OS (usually Windows), it should still work with little to no extra configuration necessary. PC gamers have relied on this for years, and is one reason dedicated PC gamers who do not own consoles specifically choose not to own a console. It hasn't been until recently that we've had to deal with DRM do the degree that it basically locks a PC gamer into his or her current hardware configuration without the possibility to transfer to another machine (games purchased over Steam excepted).
Perhaps the biggest thing that makes the difference between PC gamers and console gamers is that console gamers can (and do) have multiple consoles in the house. Being smaller in size than a PC gaming rig, gamers will tend to occasionally keep the old boxes to play the old games that the new machines will not play. PC gamers, on the other hand, tend to only have one PC rig in their house, and maybe two if they have the room. That rig then gets updated over time, or eventually replaced. We know that on a hardware and software level, these upgrades or a full replacement should not render the old software inoperable (there are certain cases where it might, but these situations are becoming far and few between). It's just things like DRM that tend to stand in the way.
I'm with you on this. Ubisoft has a history of lying about their DRM and other things, to the point that I don't even believe anything they say anymore, and have lost a great deal of respect for them as a company.
Ubisoft isn't beyond releasing the game with this "DRM on startup only" system, then forcing users to patch the game later in order to keep playing it to a full "must be online always forever until the earth rots" DRM a month hence.
I downloaded that Geometry Wars clone as well. It's a game called PewPew. The controls are a little iffy but after playing a while you do tend to get somewhat used to them. Overall it's a good game, and I don't fault the developer for the control issues.
That said, smart phones are powerful enough to handle complex games. We know this. Most have seen the Kal-El "Glowball" demo that came out recently (if you have not, youtube it). It shows off what the nVidia Tegra 3 quad-core can do, and it only goes up from here. But we need controllers. Desperately.
First, though, we need APIs for it. For the iPhone and Android each, we need an API very similar to DirectX's DirectInput. Something that defines a structured set of rules and specifications for controllers and how various controller functions are handled (thumbsticks, D-pads, buttons, etc.). Once that's in place, then you start having companies develop compatible controllers for it, and have a certification system in place. Then, if you're a game developer, if your game needs to use a more traditional control set, encourage developers to support the platform for the system. In other words, make a gaming API that is very tightly integrated into the OS itself (like DirectX is with Windows), and include a rich, highly-functional input API to handle gaming.
Do this, and gaming on mobile devices will soar, and it won't just be touch-based games either. You'll have real, honest-to-goodness traditional gaming the way it ought to be done.
Second on changing cartridges. A mobile platform should allow you to at least install games to some form of storage memory on the system, whether that be an internal hard drive, SD card, etc. Going to a download service would be a convenience for a mobile platform. Although the PS Vita will also use cartridge-based storage.
That being said, another option would be to include multiple cartridge slots directly in the system. Instead of carrying around a bulky case to house your system and 3-5 games, why not instead have a bay of cartridge slots that would allow you to insert up to three games at once in the system. That would give you a good enough variety to justify needing cartridges while not limiting you down to pretty much just one (unless you want loose carts flopping about in your pocket or having to carry around a bulky storage case).
Ah. I think I understand here. So basically, either an outside OR an inside salesperson makes a sale. But not both. Therefore, if it's the outside guy, that person gets 20% and the inside people get zilch. But if it's an inside guy that makes the sale, the engineering salesperson gets 10-15% while the rest of the engineers as a whole get the remaining 5% to share, and the outside people get to work a little harder next time.
In either case, if this is what you're saying AC (and I believe it is), nobody is making over 20% for any individual sale. So what you're basically doing is setting up a 20% commission and telling both groups that it's up for grabs for whoever is able to make the sale happen.
Seems a little high still at 20%. I'd probably bump that on down to about 10-12% tops with perhaps an additional end-of-year 10% bonus for your top sales rep (either inside or outside, as that gives an incentive to make more sales). Sounds ok unless you're aiming to share the commissions with everyone. In which case, it would take some retooling of the numbers. But every situation is different, of course.
Yes, it's actually a very decent "Halo" clone. Originally for iPhone and later ported to Android. I grabbed it for my Samsung Galaxy S and I've played the heck out of it. It has a good single player campaign mode, and decent online multiplayer. NOVA2 is better, of course, but the original game is nice.
I wouldn't have a problem with them giving me free stuff. But I would say that they should either give me a way to uninstall it, or if they won't do me that service, at least give me the full version of the game to enjoy. One or the other. Unfortunately, Gameloft is notorious for preinstalling a demo of their game on phones and asking you for $5 to unlock the rest of it. My Galaxy S has a demo for "Asphalt 5" preinstalled, which I haven't bought.
I'm afraid I concur. I am quite disappointed in Texas. I don't dislike them by any means, and would still visit their wonderful state. But their legislature folded like a cheap suit on this issue, and I just find that disheartening because if there were any state in the union I would've picked to be a battleground for this, it would've likely been Texas (Florida and Georgia being #2 and #3, due to the large number of airports in Florida, and Georgia due to Atlanta).
That being said, I'm one that refuses to fly anywhere until this nonsense has stopped. I've told my girlfriend that, should we get married, when we get ready to go on a honeymoon or any trip for that matter? If we can't drive there or go by boat, we aren't going. That I refuse to fly until the gate-rapers are gone. I value my liberty and freedom much more than that, and there's more than one way to travel around than on a stupid airplane!
Because for whatever reason, some people seem to think that free software is inferior to paid software, and that a product is only good if you have to shell out money for it. And the more money you shell out, the better it is, because you have to pay for it! At least, that's their thinking. Thus you have products like Norton, McAfee, and websites like DoubleMySpeed and FixMyPcFree (gag) that are actually making money on the same principle, and they do nothing more than a typical end user can do with free software and just a little bit of ingenuity and knowhow, and a cursory glance at Google for directions.
This, plus I gather the MPAA has a part in twisting Google's arm to put certain stipulations in place to cover them. It just doesn't sound like the kind of thing Google would worry about themselves unless there were someone else involved in the deal. All speculation, of course. But food for thought.
This was what I said over on Gizmodo when the story broke there.
In all honesty, if you have a rooted phone, you already know how to stream your own movies from your PC to your phone, or have some other method of getting movies ripped from optical media and into a format that works quite well on your phone (which is either just as good or better than the convenience of downloading through the Android Movie Market in the first place).
I think you're absolutely right about that. When I first started my current job in October of 2009, we were running Windows XP still, but two monitors. It was handy, but I didn't really see the full potential of what having two monitors could do for me as a coder since I still had to fiddle around with maximize and minimize and it was all new concept to me because I'd never used two monitors at once, even though I knew the capabilities were there and had been there for years.
Then we all upgraded to Windows 7 (well most of us anyway. Some are still running XP, but most have jumped to 7), and boy does Windows 7 make it a lot easier to do what you want with your windows! Its multi-monitor support is much more intuitive, so I'm really digging that. The only thing I find odd is that Microsoft still has yet to allow you to directly assign a different background on each window (or if that feature is in there, I haven't found it yet). Also, two seperate taskbars on each window with the task buttons on the bottom representing the apps appearing on that particular window.
Fix these two things, and I would say Windows' multi-monitor support would be perfect. But as it is, it's pretty nice, and quite handy if you're a coder looking at help pages and code at the same time, or two different source code files to compare things or copy bits of code from one file to another or something to that effect.
I'm satisfied with the consumer-end bargains that they're offering for PSN users like myself. The one year of identity theft protection is a big help, plus two game, even downloadable ones, are a nice touch as well. Retail vouchers would've been better, of course.
But the only other thing I can ask is that, going forward, Sony should now be required to answer to a higher-up authority in regards to network security. What I mean is that, since Sony dropped the ball on such a massive scale, it could be argued that Sony should have to retain the services of a third-party security firm (not the government, mind you) to provide auditing and oversight at all times over the PSN, ensuring that this kind of breach can never happen again. Or at least, if such a breach occurs, consumer data is protected against the intrusion. This includes making sure that Sony keeps everything up to date, encrypted appropriately, and completely separate credit card information, personal data, and game-related profiles on their web servers into different locations so that hacking a user's gamer profile doesn't grant access to his/her personal data or credit card info.
I use KeePass primarily because it's the only one I've found for Android that works cross-platform anywhere the way I'd like to use it. KeePass plus a secured DropBox account to keep your password database synced across machines (or databases if you want added security with a secondary password for more private-like info) are an excellent combination. Throw in a key file that you keep locally on your person on either your phone or a small-capacity USB drive kept on a keychain for added security.
I did look at Password Safe, but at the time there was no Android version and I needed something I could keep on my phone and access my passwords there too. Keepass fits the bill quite nicely.
Well, I posted in a thread up above that they're an alternative. And I do own both consoles and use both online to varying degrees depending on what game(s) I'm playing. Whether they're a good alternative or even a better alternative is relative to how one is behaving over the other.
At the moment I'd say they're a good alternative for me. Xbox Live is up. PSN is down. And the Wii? Well, it'd be nice to play a game online on it too but I've never found anyone online on the games I own.
But it's a shame, really. I wanted to play some Portal 2 co-op this weekend after finishing up that single-player campaign, and I got the PS3 version and can't download the PC version at home due to my wireless broadband download cap (thanks, Verizon).
I didn't send any money to the cause and have remained neutral, although I have certainly voiced my opinion concerning the fair use of products purchased and owned by end-users for the purpose the end-user wants to use it for. Though I did not provide funds to this cause, I do have opinions on the money that has been donated, and what my wishes would be had I sent him money.
First of all, I do NOT think Hotz has a right to keep the money for himself. That would be quite dishonest and untrustworthy. Instead, I would rather see the extra money donated to the EFF with the earmark that it be used to fund the defense of similar cases like Sony vs. Hotz. I think that would be a satisfactory action as it would allow the donation money to still be used for what it was intended for by someone that should find need for it, even if it isn't used by the original defendant who requested the funds for his legal expenses (in this case, Hotz).
It's an honor thing. It's not that Japan is being stubborn or just refusing to accept help for no good reason. For them, accepting help would be a display of weakness, which is heavily frowned upon. The Japanese highly value honor and humbleness. They don't like to ask others for things like that because it feels like taking charity. They see more honor in pulling themselves up by the bootstraps and overcoming through their own hard work and solidarity.
Remember that these are a people who, for many centuries, had a proud tradition of disemboweling themselves when they screwed up in order to restore their family's honor. That's pretty hardcore dedication to honor. So I don't figure their refusal for help as unkindness or stubbornness. It's just their tradition and ways, and I respect that, so I really don't feel offended at all at their saying "No thanks."
So what you're saying here is that there's someone even better capable than Sony in spewing out nuclear-grade stupid?
How exactly do they propose to remove Google from the Internet? That's like removing oxygen from the air in an instant.
Actually, I have a suggestion for a better course of action for the MPAA: How about just going back to the business of just making decent movies and quit harassing folks entirely? That way, you get products out there people actually care about, and people don't cringe in anger every time they hear mention of your organization in the news.
Just a thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Makes you wonder if a low-tech solution might be the answer. That is, no telephones, and no electronic-based communications of any kind. Codes, radio, and messages written and sent via standard mail. It's hard to electronically hack something when the information does not exist electronically. Just a thought, though.
And I agree with cutting out all the middlemen. Assign a small team of about two or three on each side to handle the whole thing. One leader of operations on both sides and two agents operating under them for intelligence gathering and the like.
Actually, driving a railroad spike through corruption by organizations like MPAA sound like a mighty fine idea.
I have no problems with HDMI at its base. When I've actively used it, it's worked just fine, and as for HDCP, well... name a copy protection scheme that hasn't been chiseled open given a little time (if that's your thing, of course. It's not for me, but ymmv).
No, my problem is actually a more unique one, or at least I think so. I use my laptop now as my main PC since my desktop aged too much and became so slow it was no longer useful to me. The laptop I have features an HDMI port on it, as does the 22" monitor I have (a Hannspree). And for active use, this port works just fine and does everything it should. But since upgrading to Windows 7 on that laptop a couple of years ago, and updating the GPU drivers for it, the monitor won't go to sleep and stay asleep whenever the laptop goes to sleep or turns off. Once the laptop is asleep or is turned off, a couple of seconds later the screen shows a "NO SIGNAL" message right in the middle. When using VGA, this message goes off after a couple of seconds and the monitor itself then goes to sleep. While connected to HDMI, though, it never goes to sleep, even though the laptop is clearly asleep or off.
It's almost as if the HDMI cable is still getting power from the laptop somehow, and the monitor is detecting that, but the monitor is obviously not getting any video feed from the laptop because it's asleep. But the monitor chooses to stay awake anyhow. The only fix is to unplug the HDMI cable after I turn off the laptop but that's a bit of a kludge if you ask me.
At any rate, it's little bugs like these that I hope they work out. And maybe I just haven't gotten the right settings on the laptop to force the HDMI port to turn off when it goes to sleep.
That does appear to be the case. Oh there's still public domain as a sort of status, however temporary. But this renders anything in public domain into what's essentially a nebulous limbo until someone comes along and stakes claim to it to re-up the copyright on it.
Naturally it would be in the best interest for a public domain interest group to form and keep a watchful eye on all works entering into public domain, staking claim to said works as soon as it fall into public domain, then immediately releasing it under a sort of GNU-type license that everyone can have free access to the work(s) in question.
After all, as long as someone has a claim to it, especially if it's a collective group for the express purpose of keeping public domain items free for general use by the public, doesn't that still accomplish what public domain has for all these years anyway? It's just a way of working around this new ruling to render it the same.
Actually that raises a valid point. If that's indeed what they're trying to do, however, there might be another simpler way for them to do it: cease making PC games and go strictly to consoles.
I don't think it's quite the same. You see, with a console, you know what you're getting into when you buy it. You know that the console you purchase today will be the same 10 years from now, 20 years, etc. And the only way to "upgrade" the hardware is to buy the next console that comes out. Most who do this, but want to play the older games too, will keep the older machine laying around. In doing so, you're able to continue to play the older games you like on your old console for as long as you want. You also know that in buying a new console, unless the new console is backwards-compatible with the older console, your game won't work on it. But for consoles, this is a given, and has been so since game consoles were invented.
PC gaming, however, is a different animal. Every PC is, at heart, based on the same hardware and software (generally speaking) as the generation before. Therefore, there should be no conceivable reason why software that currently runs on my machine now can't run in the future if I make a simple upgrade to the same machine (more memory, bigger HDD, different graphics card, etc.). Likewise, if I buy a newer machine, there's a high likelihood that, if I'm running the same base OS (usually Windows), it should still work with little to no extra configuration necessary. PC gamers have relied on this for years, and is one reason dedicated PC gamers who do not own consoles specifically choose not to own a console. It hasn't been until recently that we've had to deal with DRM do the degree that it basically locks a PC gamer into his or her current hardware configuration without the possibility to transfer to another machine (games purchased over Steam excepted).
Perhaps the biggest thing that makes the difference between PC gamers and console gamers is that console gamers can (and do) have multiple consoles in the house. Being smaller in size than a PC gaming rig, gamers will tend to occasionally keep the old boxes to play the old games that the new machines will not play. PC gamers, on the other hand, tend to only have one PC rig in their house, and maybe two if they have the room. That rig then gets updated over time, or eventually replaced. We know that on a hardware and software level, these upgrades or a full replacement should not render the old software inoperable (there are certain cases where it might, but these situations are becoming far and few between). It's just things like DRM that tend to stand in the way.
I'm with you on this. Ubisoft has a history of lying about their DRM and other things, to the point that I don't even believe anything they say anymore, and have lost a great deal of respect for them as a company.
Ubisoft isn't beyond releasing the game with this "DRM on startup only" system, then forcing users to patch the game later in order to keep playing it to a full "must be online always forever until the earth rots" DRM a month hence.
I downloaded that Geometry Wars clone as well. It's a game called PewPew. The controls are a little iffy but after playing a while you do tend to get somewhat used to them. Overall it's a good game, and I don't fault the developer for the control issues.
That said, smart phones are powerful enough to handle complex games. We know this. Most have seen the Kal-El "Glowball" demo that came out recently (if you have not, youtube it). It shows off what the nVidia Tegra 3 quad-core can do, and it only goes up from here. But we need controllers. Desperately.
First, though, we need APIs for it. For the iPhone and Android each, we need an API very similar to DirectX's DirectInput. Something that defines a structured set of rules and specifications for controllers and how various controller functions are handled (thumbsticks, D-pads, buttons, etc.). Once that's in place, then you start having companies develop compatible controllers for it, and have a certification system in place. Then, if you're a game developer, if your game needs to use a more traditional control set, encourage developers to support the platform for the system. In other words, make a gaming API that is very tightly integrated into the OS itself (like DirectX is with Windows), and include a rich, highly-functional input API to handle gaming.
Do this, and gaming on mobile devices will soar, and it won't just be touch-based games either. You'll have real, honest-to-goodness traditional gaming the way it ought to be done.
Second on changing cartridges. A mobile platform should allow you to at least install games to some form of storage memory on the system, whether that be an internal hard drive, SD card, etc. Going to a download service would be a convenience for a mobile platform. Although the PS Vita will also use cartridge-based storage.
That being said, another option would be to include multiple cartridge slots directly in the system. Instead of carrying around a bulky case to house your system and 3-5 games, why not instead have a bay of cartridge slots that would allow you to insert up to three games at once in the system. That would give you a good enough variety to justify needing cartridges while not limiting you down to pretty much just one (unless you want loose carts flopping about in your pocket or having to carry around a bulky storage case).
Ah. I think I understand here. So basically, either an outside OR an inside salesperson makes a sale. But not both. Therefore, if it's the outside guy, that person gets 20% and the inside people get zilch. But if it's an inside guy that makes the sale, the engineering salesperson gets 10-15% while the rest of the engineers as a whole get the remaining 5% to share, and the outside people get to work a little harder next time.
In either case, if this is what you're saying AC (and I believe it is), nobody is making over 20% for any individual sale. So what you're basically doing is setting up a 20% commission and telling both groups that it's up for grabs for whoever is able to make the sale happen.
Seems a little high still at 20%. I'd probably bump that on down to about 10-12% tops with perhaps an additional end-of-year 10% bonus for your top sales rep (either inside or outside, as that gives an incentive to make more sales). Sounds ok unless you're aiming to share the commissions with everyone. In which case, it would take some retooling of the numbers. But every situation is different, of course.
Yes, it's actually a very decent "Halo" clone. Originally for iPhone and later ported to Android. I grabbed it for my Samsung Galaxy S and I've played the heck out of it. It has a good single player campaign mode, and decent online multiplayer. NOVA2 is better, of course, but the original game is nice.
I wouldn't have a problem with them giving me free stuff. But I would say that they should either give me a way to uninstall it, or if they won't do me that service, at least give me the full version of the game to enjoy. One or the other. Unfortunately, Gameloft is notorious for preinstalling a demo of their game on phones and asking you for $5 to unlock the rest of it. My Galaxy S has a demo for "Asphalt 5" preinstalled, which I haven't bought.
I'm afraid I concur. I am quite disappointed in Texas. I don't dislike them by any means, and would still visit their wonderful state. But their legislature folded like a cheap suit on this issue, and I just find that disheartening because if there were any state in the union I would've picked to be a battleground for this, it would've likely been Texas (Florida and Georgia being #2 and #3, due to the large number of airports in Florida, and Georgia due to Atlanta).
That being said, I'm one that refuses to fly anywhere until this nonsense has stopped. I've told my girlfriend that, should we get married, when we get ready to go on a honeymoon or any trip for that matter? If we can't drive there or go by boat, we aren't going. That I refuse to fly until the gate-rapers are gone. I value my liberty and freedom much more than that, and there's more than one way to travel around than on a stupid airplane!
Because for whatever reason, some people seem to think that free software is inferior to paid software, and that a product is only good if you have to shell out money for it. And the more money you shell out, the better it is, because you have to pay for it! At least, that's their thinking. Thus you have products like Norton, McAfee, and websites like DoubleMySpeed and FixMyPcFree (gag) that are actually making money on the same principle, and they do nothing more than a typical end user can do with free software and just a little bit of ingenuity and knowhow, and a cursory glance at Google for directions.
This, plus I gather the MPAA has a part in twisting Google's arm to put certain stipulations in place to cover them. It just doesn't sound like the kind of thing Google would worry about themselves unless there were someone else involved in the deal. All speculation, of course. But food for thought.
This was what I said over on Gizmodo when the story broke there.
In all honesty, if you have a rooted phone, you already know how to stream your own movies from your PC to your phone, or have some other method of getting movies ripped from optical media and into a format that works quite well on your phone (which is either just as good or better than the convenience of downloading through the Android Movie Market in the first place).
I think you're absolutely right about that. When I first started my current job in October of 2009, we were running Windows XP still, but two monitors. It was handy, but I didn't really see the full potential of what having two monitors could do for me as a coder since I still had to fiddle around with maximize and minimize and it was all new concept to me because I'd never used two monitors at once, even though I knew the capabilities were there and had been there for years.
Then we all upgraded to Windows 7 (well most of us anyway. Some are still running XP, but most have jumped to 7), and boy does Windows 7 make it a lot easier to do what you want with your windows! Its multi-monitor support is much more intuitive, so I'm really digging that. The only thing I find odd is that Microsoft still has yet to allow you to directly assign a different background on each window (or if that feature is in there, I haven't found it yet). Also, two seperate taskbars on each window with the task buttons on the bottom representing the apps appearing on that particular window.
Fix these two things, and I would say Windows' multi-monitor support would be perfect. But as it is, it's pretty nice, and quite handy if you're a coder looking at help pages and code at the same time, or two different source code files to compare things or copy bits of code from one file to another or something to that effect.
I'm satisfied with the consumer-end bargains that they're offering for PSN users like myself. The one year of identity theft protection is a big help, plus two game, even downloadable ones, are a nice touch as well. Retail vouchers would've been better, of course.
But the only other thing I can ask is that, going forward, Sony should now be required to answer to a higher-up authority in regards to network security. What I mean is that, since Sony dropped the ball on such a massive scale, it could be argued that Sony should have to retain the services of a third-party security firm (not the government, mind you) to provide auditing and oversight at all times over the PSN, ensuring that this kind of breach can never happen again. Or at least, if such a breach occurs, consumer data is protected against the intrusion. This includes making sure that Sony keeps everything up to date, encrypted appropriately, and completely separate credit card information, personal data, and game-related profiles on their web servers into different locations so that hacking a user's gamer profile doesn't grant access to his/her personal data or credit card info.
It would certainly be the last password I'd ever use.
I use KeePass primarily because it's the only one I've found for Android that works cross-platform anywhere the way I'd like to use it. KeePass plus a secured DropBox account to keep your password database synced across machines (or databases if you want added security with a secondary password for more private-like info) are an excellent combination. Throw in a key file that you keep locally on your person on either your phone or a small-capacity USB drive kept on a keychain for added security.
I did look at Password Safe, but at the time there was no Android version and I needed something I could keep on my phone and access my passwords there too. Keepass fits the bill quite nicely.
Well, I posted in a thread up above that they're an alternative. And I do own both consoles and use both online to varying degrees depending on what game(s) I'm playing. Whether they're a good alternative or even a better alternative is relative to how one is behaving over the other.
At the moment I'd say they're a good alternative for me. Xbox Live is up. PSN is down. And the Wii? Well, it'd be nice to play a game online on it too but I've never found anyone online on the games I own.
But it's a shame, really. I wanted to play some Portal 2 co-op this weekend after finishing up that single-player campaign, and I got the PS3 version and can't download the PC version at home due to my wireless broadband download cap (thanks, Verizon).
Actually, there are other places to go. PC or Xbox Live. No place for Sony exclusives though. But alternatives, still.
I didn't send any money to the cause and have remained neutral, although I have certainly voiced my opinion concerning the fair use of products purchased and owned by end-users for the purpose the end-user wants to use it for. Though I did not provide funds to this cause, I do have opinions on the money that has been donated, and what my wishes would be had I sent him money.
First of all, I do NOT think Hotz has a right to keep the money for himself. That would be quite dishonest and untrustworthy. Instead, I would rather see the extra money donated to the EFF with the earmark that it be used to fund the defense of similar cases like Sony vs. Hotz. I think that would be a satisfactory action as it would allow the donation money to still be used for what it was intended for by someone that should find need for it, even if it isn't used by the original defendant who requested the funds for his legal expenses (in this case, Hotz).
It's an honor thing. It's not that Japan is being stubborn or just refusing to accept help for no good reason. For them, accepting help would be a display of weakness, which is heavily frowned upon. The Japanese highly value honor and humbleness. They don't like to ask others for things like that because it feels like taking charity. They see more honor in pulling themselves up by the bootstraps and overcoming through their own hard work and solidarity.
Remember that these are a people who, for many centuries, had a proud tradition of disemboweling themselves when they screwed up in order to restore their family's honor. That's pretty hardcore dedication to honor. So I don't figure their refusal for help as unkindness or stubbornness. It's just their tradition and ways, and I respect that, so I really don't feel offended at all at their saying "No thanks."
So what you're saying here is that there's someone even better capable than Sony in spewing out nuclear-grade stupid? How exactly do they propose to remove Google from the Internet? That's like removing oxygen from the air in an instant. Actually, I have a suggestion for a better course of action for the MPAA: How about just going back to the business of just making decent movies and quit harassing folks entirely? That way, you get products out there people actually care about, and people don't cringe in anger every time they hear mention of your organization in the news. Just a thought.