NOBODY WANTS REGION CODING. (except the publishers)
.
The people who actally make the films really don't care. They get their royalties if the disc is bought in the US, Europe, Taiwan or anywhere else. They really just want to make a living doing what they love.
The end users hate region coding. It means they often have to wait, often end up with an inferior version, and basically reduces consumer choice while increasing their costs.
The manufacturers don't like region coding. It makes their players considerably less popular. They go to considerable lengths to find ways around the region coding requirement. Multi-region is a key selling point of a player to anyone with any interest in importing discs. They're going to do the ame thing to try to get around RFID chips. Or anything else you might like to try. And they're really not going to be happy about having to increase their costs to add an RFID reader. These companies are working on tiny margins. No matter how cheap, RFID readers will eat into this.
You betcha I can. I administer a server for a smallish company and the CEO is absolutely tickled with the antispam efforts I have put in place.
Would he be so happy if you blocked people who were libertarians or shose last name began with a W? Or even if Spamhaus listed some sites he wanted to receive email from?
As I said before, nothing gives you the inalienable right to send me your email, spam or otherwise.
But this is not the point. If you are an admin and you use a bad spammer list then you're incompetent. If you produce a list of known spammers, then you're obliged to make it as accurate as possible. This has absollutely nothing to do with the rights of the sender. It's all about the rights of the recipient. Your job is to block as much spam as possible whilst blocking absolutely no legitimate email ever. If you do block legitimate email then you're not doing your job properly.
Incidentally - I've thought of another possible objection people may have. These lists are also used as a means to bully others into not sending spam, or to get ISPs to remove spammers from their servers. Some people have objections to a self appointed third party decising who may and may not send email.
How about the fact that they don't actually block them?
And criminal masterminds simply tell their stooges to commit crimes. It doesn't make them any less liable.
I have never understood the controversy around SBLs unless you are a spammer.
Accuracy of the lists.
If I subsribe to a SBL it means I don't want your email when you are on the blocked list.
Given that some people have had non-spam email blocked by certain block-lists, and complained about it, it appears that some people use block lists (possibly indirectly through their ISP), and DO want the email, then clearly this is not true in every case.
I can block you if I don't like your tie or bacause you lastname starts with a "W" or because you voted Libertarian.
Indeed you can. You have every right to. Can you also block email addresses of users of a server you administrate based on these same criteria?
Spamhaus just provides me with a convenient list of addresses that they believe harbors spammer.
Spamhaus provide a blocking list that they claim contains known spammers. Trying to rephrase that to make it sound inoccuous is just weasel words.
Look - these lists are a useful tool for spam reduction, and not a silver bullet. Use them as part of an anti-spam policy. The problem is that some people, who should know better, simply apply a generic block to all adressess on them, which affects other people.
I googled for "ignoring goreign lawsuit" and got a page mentioning that Canada will enforce foreign lawsuits. This is, of course, Canada rather than the UK, but they have a similar legal tradition. Could this backfire?
They don't block the spam themselves. How could they?
Yeah. But that's weaselling out of it.
They add IPs to the list knowing full well that those IPS will be blocked, intending that those IPs will be blocked, with the result that those IPs are blocked. For practical purposes, what is the difference between this and actually blocking them?
It looks like there was a pre-existing restraining order. This according to Spamhaus, it was "served" by email. Which is not a legal manner to serve an order and has no effect in the UK anyway.
If the organisation was on the RBL, how do they know they were served?
(Note for the humour impaired - The fact that I have a note for the humour impaired should tell you something).
The people who run these things usually have a rather superior attitude, and a rather childish attitude toward the law.
But this lawsuit seems completely ludicrous. Even with an undefended lawsuit it should have been obvious that this was outside their jurisdiction. Isn't there some restriction here?
But I'm still putting it down to a coincidence. Lucas seems to change his mind quite a lot (which is fine), and then insist that it was the way he always planned it, which just makes me suspicious of anything he says.
So you're pulling it out of thin air; thus there is no reason to believe that your statement regarding how most people view the Wii as a second console choice holds any weight. Glad we got that cleared up.
Bizarre interpretaion.
No. I'm basing it on general evidence I have available. Discussion forums such as this one, people I know. Nobody seems to want a Wii on its own.
You're the one making the wild, unfounded claim.
It's not unfounded. You assumed (Pretty much correctly) that I based this on my small group of friends and what I read on Slashdot. That, and a substantial part of the market for the gamecube was people who had another console. Even if this is not a totally representative sample, this does not imply that the actual data is the exact opposite.
A counter example only works if the assertion was a "for all". I believe I said "Most".
And if graphics have so little importance, why does anyone want a Wii in the first place? Why couldn't nintendo add the controller to the GC? Seems to be the only thing going for it.
I'm basing this on what I've heard and what I know. Do you have any evidence to counter it, or are you just using the debating technique of Argumentum ad ignorantiam?
$250 vs $500-600 Real world: $250 is less than $500 Bizzaroland: $250 is more than $500
But very few people seem to want a Wii as their only console. $250 vs. $0 is a lot. Especially after buying a powerful console that's more than twice the power of the previous generation.
Nintendo innovation = changing the way games are played. PS3 innovation = SHINY! Oh! Oh! We have motion sensitivity too...NO! its not the same. Ours is "Innovative," not that gimmicky crap Nintendo is pulling! Sheesh!
Well, a sophisitcated multiporcessor system is hardly run of the mill. They do have a higher density drive that is considerably more advanced than a DVD. It does have Hi def support (granted also on the X-Box360 but not the Wii). And they're really pushing developers to invest in AI.
Nintendo have given us a motion sensing controller, which may or may not be utilised by gmes. It may end up as a mouse or joypad for all we know. And that's it. Why not just sell it as an add-on for the gamecube?
You are comparing the price of two consoles to one. Shady bookkeeping at best.
Well, okay. Less than a Wii and any other device with HDTV output. The 360 is the cheapest device that boasts that.
It's too expensive. Nintendo spent way too much money on this, and nobody will be able to afford it. And where's the innovation that Nintendo are meant to give us? They just do the same thing they did before. Yet another new controller. A ploy to repeat past success.
I'll wait for the PS3. I can get one of them for less than the cost of an XBox 360 + a Wii. And there's some serious innocvation going on there.
Okay, Wolf3d came before, (and Maze War before that), and Quake was technically much more advanced, but it was Doom that really caught our imagination.
Aside from that, yeah. Elite should be in any list. It did pretty much create the concept of a simulation as a game. It broke a lot of the "classic" rules of games - no lives, no rigid structure. Even the first person viewpoint was unusual.
I'm not so sure. Of course, we'll never know what does happen in the boardroom. It seems to me that Sony are trying to repeat the formula of the PS2, which was succesful because it was considerably more powerful than the competition (at least on paper), and had a DVD player. I'd expect Blu-ray was in the spec right from the start but perhaps they were under a lot of pressure from the very top not to drop it. I imagine there are people who have a lot riding on it.
Slashdot Mirror
NOBODY WANTS REGION CODING. (except the publishers)
. The people who actally make the films really don't care. They get their royalties if the disc is bought in the US, Europe, Taiwan or anywhere else. They really just want to make a living doing what they love.
The end users hate region coding. It means they often have to wait, often end up with an inferior version, and basically reduces consumer choice while increasing their costs.
The manufacturers don't like region coding. It makes their players considerably less popular. They go to considerable lengths to find ways around the region coding requirement. Multi-region is a key selling point of a player to anyone with any interest in importing discs. They're going to do the ame thing to try to get around RFID chips. Or anything else you might like to try. And they're really not going to be happy about having to increase their costs to add an RFID reader. These companies are working on tiny margins. No matter how cheap, RFID readers will eat into this.
You betcha I can. I administer a server for a smallish company and the CEO is absolutely tickled with the antispam efforts I have put in place.
Would he be so happy if you blocked people who were libertarians or shose last name began with a W? Or even if Spamhaus listed some sites he wanted to receive email from?
As I said before, nothing gives you the inalienable right to send me your email, spam or otherwise.
But this is not the point. If you are an admin and you use a bad spammer list then you're incompetent. If you produce a list of known spammers, then you're obliged to make it as accurate as possible. This has absollutely nothing to do with the rights of the sender. It's all about the rights of the recipient. Your job is to block as much spam as possible whilst blocking absolutely no legitimate email ever. If you do block legitimate email then you're not doing your job properly.
Incidentally - I've thought of another possible objection people may have. These lists are also used as a means to bully others into not sending spam, or to get ISPs to remove spammers from their servers. Some people have objections to a self appointed third party decising who may and may not send email.
How about the fact that they don't actually block them?
And criminal masterminds simply tell their stooges to commit crimes. It doesn't make them any less liable.
I have never understood the controversy around SBLs unless you are a spammer.
Accuracy of the lists.
If I subsribe to a SBL it means I don't want your email when you are on the blocked list.
Given that some people have had non-spam email blocked by certain block-lists, and complained about it, it appears that some people use block lists (possibly indirectly through their ISP), and DO want the email, then clearly this is not true in every case.
I can block you if I don't like your tie or bacause you lastname starts with a "W" or because you voted Libertarian.
Indeed you can. You have every right to. Can you also block email addresses of users of a server you administrate based on these same criteria?
Spamhaus just provides me with a convenient list of addresses that they believe harbors spammer.
Spamhaus provide a blocking list that they claim contains known spammers. Trying to rephrase that to make it sound inoccuous is just weasel words.
Look - these lists are a useful tool for spam reduction, and not a silver bullet. Use them as part of an anti-spam policy. The problem is that some people, who should know better, simply apply a generic block to all adressess on them, which affects other people.
Hmmm... The law tends to be affected by national borders. It typically pays no attention to geography.
Okayyy... What's that got to do with what you said?
I googled for "ignoring goreign lawsuit" and got a page mentioning that Canada will enforce foreign lawsuits. This is, of course, Canada rather than the UK, but they have a similar legal tradition. Could this backfire?
What if they say "We recommend you don't buy a (product) because it's made from squashed babies". When the product isn't?
Surely it's bad form to have a spam list that's inaccurate.
How does one complain to the people who use the list? email?
They don't block the spam themselves. How could they?
Yeah. But that's weaselling out of it.
They add IPs to the list knowing full well that those IPS will be blocked, intending that those IPs will be blocked, with the result that those IPs are blocked. For practical purposes, what is the difference between this and actually blocking them?
It looks like there was a pre-existing restraining order. This according to Spamhaus, it was "served" by email. Which is not a legal manner to serve an order and has no effect in the UK anyway.
If the organisation was on the RBL, how do they know they were served?
(Note for the humour impaired - The fact that I have a note for the humour impaired should tell you something).
The people who run these things usually have a rather superior attitude, and a rather childish attitude toward the law.
But this lawsuit seems completely ludicrous. Even with an undefended lawsuit it should have been obvious that this was outside their jurisdiction. Isn't there some restriction here?
But I'm still putting it down to a coincidence. Lucas seems to change his mind quite a lot (which is fine), and then insist that it was the way he always planned it, which just makes me suspicious of anything he says.
If Microsoft (or International Chess University) stole GPL code, would you be saying the same thing?
I would. Be nice to see MS improving their products.
So you're pulling it out of thin air; thus there is no reason to believe that your statement regarding how most people view the Wii as a second console choice holds any weight. Glad we got that cleared up.
Bizarre interpretaion.
No. I'm basing it on general evidence I have available. Discussion forums such as this one, people I know. Nobody seems to want a Wii on its own.
You're the one making the wild, unfounded claim.
It's not unfounded. You assumed (Pretty much correctly) that I based this on my small group of friends and what I read on Slashdot. That, and a substantial part of the market for the gamecube was people who had another console. Even if this is not a totally representative sample, this does not imply that the actual data is the exact opposite.
A counter example only works if the assertion was a "for all". I believe I said "Most".
And if graphics have so little importance, why does anyone want a Wii in the first place? Why couldn't nintendo add the controller to the GC? Seems to be the only thing going for it.
I'm basing this on what I've heard and what I know. Do you have any evidence to counter it, or are you just using the debating technique of Argumentum ad ignorantiam?
You think I should be modded down because I don't subscribe to Slashdot Groupthink. That's an interesting opinion. Tell me more.
$250 vs $500-600 Real world: $250 is less than $500 Bizzaroland: $250 is more than $500
But very few people seem to want a Wii as their only console. $250 vs. $0 is a lot. Especially after buying a powerful console that's more than twice the power of the previous generation.
Nintendo innovation = changing the way games are played. PS3 innovation = SHINY! Oh! Oh! We have motion sensitivity too...NO! its not the same. Ours is "Innovative," not that gimmicky crap Nintendo is pulling! Sheesh!
Well, a sophisitcated multiporcessor system is hardly run of the mill. They do have a higher density drive that is considerably more advanced than a DVD. It does have Hi def support (granted also on the X-Box360 but not the Wii). And they're really pushing developers to invest in AI.
Nintendo have given us a motion sensing controller, which may or may not be utilised by gmes. It may end up as a mouse or joypad for all we know. And that's it. Why not just sell it as an add-on for the gamecube?
You are comparing the price of two consoles to one. Shady bookkeeping at best.
Well, okay. Less than a Wii and any other device with HDTV output. The 360 is the cheapest device that boasts that.
My rebuttal of your rebuttal adressed every single point you made.
No. I'm not wrong. You're wrong. Nyah!
Are you a rabid Nintendo fanboy or something? Hope you like your underpoered system.
It's too expensive. Nintendo spent way too much money on this, and nobody will be able to afford it. And where's the innovation that Nintendo are meant to give us? They just do the same thing they did before. Yet another new controller. A ploy to repeat past success.
I'll wait for the PS3. I can get one of them for less than the cost of an XBox 360 + a Wii. And there's some serious innocvation going on there.
Okay, Wolf3d came before, (and Maze War before that), and Quake was technically much more advanced, but it was Doom that really caught our imagination.
It was the first truly 3D 8 bit game
Surely that was Battlezone.
Aside from that, yeah. Elite should be in any list. It did pretty much create the concept of a simulation as a game. It broke a lot of the "classic" rules of games - no lives, no rigid structure. Even the first person viewpoint was unusual.
I'm not so sure. Of course, we'll never know what does happen in the boardroom. It seems to me that Sony are trying to repeat the formula of the PS2, which was succesful because it was considerably more powerful than the competition (at least on paper), and had a DVD player. I'd expect Blu-ray was in the spec right from the start but perhaps they were under a lot of pressure from the very top not to drop it. I imagine there are people who have a lot riding on it.