The level structure is still a perfectly valid mechanism for a game. It provides the player with clear objectives and motivation and allows for variety within the game (e.g. level 1 = streets, level 2 = building, level 3 = chase baddies to the north pole).
The fact that other games have developed alterantive methods of providing structure doesn't mean that existing methods have been surpassed. Linear Movie plots are still being written even after Pulp fiction. heterosexual romance plots are still being written after Brokeback Mountain.
Well, if I understand correctly, these virtual items are bought and sold for real money, so they certainly have a value. And he deprived the owners of the items whilst gaining it himself.
It could be seen as analogous to an illegal bank transfers, but that really seems to be in a completely different league from this. Prosecuting him for wire fraud would be horribly unfair. Aside fromt that, it is a valid point that these "items" are really quite intangible.
Current prosthetic legs are already getting good enough that they're considering this. Specialised state of the art prosthetics are pretty good - Some people claim runners' legs actually give one legged athletes an advantage.
"Hi. I can't find your restaurant. Where are you?"
"33 Washington Street"
"Okay. How do I get there"
"Well, where are you now"
"Uhmm.. On a street. There's some houses along there"
"What street"
"Dunno"
"Are there any landmarks"
"No"
"Any shops at all?"
"Oh, wait. There's a sign. It says I'm in 'Brigston'"
"I never even heard of that town!"
I'm not sure if it's even that. Do you actually go to the credits fo the games people claim to have worked on? Most people I know are pretty honest about it and interviewers are more interested in thespecifics of what you did rather than the game you worked on.
I think it's entirely about recognition. And developers get short shrift a lot of the time. I heard a story about a game release party; The publishers gave an award to pretty much everyone who was involved apart from the development team.
You know, NASA only paid $4 a piece for those million dollar pens. They were developed entirely by private industry and were better than the pencils that both the Russians and NASA were using.
If the US wants a space station under US jurisdiction, then they can make their own. Nothing stopping them, and they can certainly afford to.
If they want to claim its international and get other countries involved then they'll have to compromise. The US has essentiall ygiven a gift to the international community. It's a very kind and thoughtful gift and we're all grateful, but now they've given it away they don't get to demand how it's used. Sorry. It's everyone's now.
Season 6 was fine. I liked season 3 a lot more. Willow being all evil and veiney isn't the same as Willow being an evil vampire. And I felt a bit cheated by how the season 6 evil Willow was resolved.
I repurchased the drive and while I was checking the contents to ensure it was a hard drive this time, the store manager came up, took the box from me and said to take it up with the manufacturer.
As several commenters pointed out on consumerist.com, he's paid for it. He's the legal owner. Best Buy's manager stole his hard drive.
She's using the whole song, and distributing copies to anyone who wants to see her video. Someone who wants to listen to the song may well choose to go to her video rather than buy a legitimate copy of iTunes. All of these will count against her with a fair use defence.
But it does show how wrong the law is in this respect. People make copies of tapes all the time (which is acknowledged in the Audio home recording act), will lend people tapes of things they recorded of TV (may or may not be fair use), and want to add commercial music to videos they make (most likely not legal). But nobody sees anything wrong with this. And they're quite right not to. The fact is that people are not going to watch the video instead of buying the music. They could do. It's technically quite trivial. It's just that people don't behave that way. Typically this sort of behaviour only increase music sales when someone hears the music and decides to buy it.
This is something I wrote a while ago after buying Ryanair tickets. It seems appropriate to repost here.
If airlines ran Burger King
"I'd like a cheese burger please"
"That will be £1.20".
"But it was only 99p yesterday!"
"That was the weekend special price."
"Okay. Here you go"
"Oh, there's also 21p VAT"
"Riiight... any other hidden charges?"
"no. By the way, please pay the £2.15 purchase fee"
"I see. So that's not a hidden charge?"
"No. It's simply an extra surcharge that you are obliged to pay for the burger."
"Okay. What else will I have to pay?"
"Nothing at all. So, what would you prefer - Beef burger or vegetarian?"
"beef please"
"Okay, That will cost 45p on top"
"Oh. I'll go for the vegetarian option"
"Good choice. Certainly. That's only 60p"
"Right. Do I get my burger now?"
"No. You'll only be able to eat it between 20:00 and 21:00 though. Please check in at least half an hour early or you may forfeit your burger"
Last time I took a short flight (London to Dublin) I was delighted that I didn't get a meal. Airline meals are awful, usually unneccesary for a flight shorter than 3 hours, and add a fixed per-passenger cost to a flight which will reduce their ability to lower their minimum ticket prices.
But that's not true. They still have the freedom the original author gave them. They can easily modify the orginal public domain piece of code. The fact that someone else has a copy doesn't detract from this ability.
How does it benefit anyone to crush a car? You just end up with a pile of mostly unrecyclable car parts, a waste of resources and possibly the destruction of an item of historical interest. Sounds like jealousy of the rich. You'd get a lot more benefit to society if the cars were auctioned.
Slashdot Mirror
The level structure is still a perfectly valid mechanism for a game. It provides the player with clear objectives and motivation and allows for variety within the game (e.g. level 1 = streets, level 2 = building, level 3 = chase baddies to the north pole).
The fact that other games have developed alterantive methods of providing structure doesn't mean that existing methods have been surpassed. Linear Movie plots are still being written even after Pulp fiction. heterosexual romance plots are still being written after Brokeback Mountain.
The way I read it - guy posts a comment to Slashdot. Has email address linked.
Spammer harvests all email addresses from all sites and records the site he got them from.
Sends out spams assuming that at least some email addresses are going to be the address of the owner of the site.
Judge claims that the title is not misleading.
Guy assumes that means that this means he owns the slashdot.org domain.
They seem to have changed things in the past when people kicked up a big enough stink.
Yes! Then everybody loses! They lose a customer and the player loses hours of enjoyment.
Or alternatively people can complain, Blizzard will come up with a mutually acceptable policy and everyone wins.
Well, if I understand correctly, these virtual items are bought and sold for real money, so they certainly have a value. And he deprived the owners of the items whilst gaining it himself.
It could be seen as analogous to an illegal bank transfers, but that really seems to be in a completely different league from this. Prosecuting him for wire fraud would be horribly unfair. Aside fromt that, it is a valid point that these "items" are really quite intangible.
Current prosthetic legs are already getting good enough that they're considering this. Specialised state of the art prosthetics are pretty good - Some people claim runners' legs actually give one legged athletes an advantage.
"Hi. I can't find your restaurant. Where are you?"
"33 Washington Street"
"Okay. How do I get there"
"Well, where are you now"
"Uhmm.. On a street. There's some houses along there"
"What street"
"Dunno"
"Are there any landmarks"
"No"
"Any shops at all?"
"Oh, wait. There's a sign. It says I'm in 'Brigston'"
"I never even heard of that town!"
They have no idea how to trumpet a format.
But what about Minidisc, SACD, Sony Memory Stick, UMD, and the ATRAC music format? Are you saying they were all failures?
The PS3 might have skewed those figures a bit.
f two people write collaboratively, the credit will read -
written by
J. Random Bozo and Hank Slashdot
Wouldn't that be "J. Random Bozo & Hank Slashdot"? I'm sure the difference between "&" and "and" is significant.
I'm not sure if it's even that. Do you actually go to the credits fo the games people claim to have worked on? Most people I know are pretty honest about it and interviewers are more interested in thespecifics of what you did rather than the game you worked on.
I think it's entirely about recognition. And developers get short shrift a lot of the time. I heard a story about a game release party; The publishers gave an award to pretty much everyone who was involved apart from the development team.
Jeez. That's such a predictable comment. So predictable that I was going to post it myself:)
You know, NASA only paid $4 a piece for those million dollar pens. They were developed entirely by private industry and were better than the pencils that both the Russians and NASA were using.
Uhm... Yeah....
If the US wants a space station under US jurisdiction, then they can make their own. Nothing stopping them, and they can certainly afford to.
If they want to claim its international and get other countries involved then they'll have to compromise. The US has essentiall ygiven a gift to the international community. It's a very kind and thoughtful gift and we're all grateful, but now they've given it away they don't get to demand how it's used. Sorry. It's everyone's now.
Who gets to define what "hate speech" is?
Depends on the country. Either a jury of your peers or whatever means the appropriate country chooses to determine the exact meaning of the law.
Mobile phones haven't quite got to the stage yet where they're convenient for printing out envelopes for Christmas cards.
Have PCs? I don't know a lot of people who do this even if they have the equipment.
Season 6 was fine. I liked season 3 a lot more. Willow being all evil and veiney isn't the same as Willow being an evil vampire. And I felt a bit cheated by how the season 6 evil Willow was resolved.
Season 6 had Tabula Rasa and Once More with Feeling.
Season 3 had Earshot, and Graduation day, not to mention the whole Mayor thing, Faith, and Evil Willow.
Sorry, but my vote goes to S3.
I repurchased the drive and while I was checking the contents to ensure it was a hard drive this time, the store manager came up, took the box from me and said to take it up with the manufacturer.
As several commenters pointed out on consumerist.com, he's paid for it. He's the legal owner. Best Buy's manager stole his hard drive.
No it wouldn't. It might. It depends on whether a court considers the amount of the song used to be fair use or not.
No it's not.
She's using the whole song, and distributing copies to anyone who wants to see her video. Someone who wants to listen to the song may well choose to go to her video rather than buy a legitimate copy of iTunes. All of these will count against her with a fair use defence.
But it does show how wrong the law is in this respect. People make copies of tapes all the time (which is acknowledged in the Audio home recording act), will lend people tapes of things they recorded of TV (may or may not be fair use), and want to add commercial music to videos they make (most likely not legal). But nobody sees anything wrong with this. And they're quite right not to. The fact is that people are not going to watch the video instead of buying the music. They could do. It's technically quite trivial. It's just that people don't behave that way. Typically this sort of behaviour only increase music sales when someone hears the music and decides to buy it.
This is something I wrote a while ago after buying Ryanair tickets. It seems appropriate to repost here.
If airlines ran Burger King
"I'd like a cheese burger please"
"That will be £1.20".
"But it was only 99p yesterday!"
"That was the weekend special price."
"Okay. Here you go"
"Oh, there's also 21p VAT"
"Riiight... any other hidden charges?"
"no. By the way, please pay the £2.15 purchase fee"
"I see. So that's not a hidden charge?"
"No. It's simply an extra surcharge that you are obliged to pay for the burger."
"Okay. What else will I have to pay?"
"Nothing at all. So, what would you prefer - Beef burger or vegetarian?"
"beef please"
"Okay, That will cost 45p on top"
"Oh. I'll go for the vegetarian option"
"Good choice. Certainly. That's only 60p"
"Right. Do I get my burger now?"
"No. You'll only be able to eat it between 20:00 and 21:00 though. Please check in at least half an hour early or you may forfeit your burger"
Last time I took a short flight (London to Dublin) I was delighted that I didn't get a meal. Airline meals are awful, usually unneccesary for a flight shorter than 3 hours, and add a fixed per-passenger cost to a flight which will reduce their ability to lower their minimum ticket prices.
But that's not true. They still have the freedom the original author gave them. They can easily modify the orginal public domain piece of code. The fact that someone else has a copy doesn't detract from this ability.
That's terrible.
How does it benefit anyone to crush a car? You just end up with a pile of mostly unrecyclable car parts, a waste of resources and possibly the destruction of an item of historical interest. Sounds like jealousy of the rich. You'd get a lot more benefit to society if the cars were auctioned.