Interesting points made here and in the other replies to your post.
First, Disposable computers, in addition to the sad trend towards "disposable" items that really arent "disposable" (safe to get rid of) - might be to easy to use for malicious purposes. I hate to be the one to spout the paranoid Homeland Security perspective - but if you have a machine that you could use then easily put to flame, it might be a perfect tool for a black hat.
Second, make the paper writable with a magnetic(?)dry erase pen... then you can have the paper recognize what you write, and you can see it and easily clear it as well.
Tracking documents through a building would be a perfect application for government and businesses with sensitive material which needs to be in a portable hard caopy form.
One thing that would be interesting is if the ePaper could have a biometric scanning device in one corner - and "Ink" that it could turn on or off.
If you had proper access to the sheet - then the ink would display - and only while you were holding your thumb on the scanning square.
also - if you could have it do ink like this - then you could keep hard copies of whatever around - but when you were done with it - just place it in the "printer tray" and it will be re-programmed with new data. So it would be 100% re-useable and not even need traditional recycling. It would just immediately go back into the pool of blanks.
Eventually bandwidth will be eliminated as a problem for Joe Intyernet (obviously there will always be bandwidth bottleneck in some area of computing)
But the real issue is security and trust.
How do you know that your files are safe?
The solution could look a bit better if it was done like this:
Those that want to participate in the scheme assign a certain amount of space on their machine for the DIBS system. A client-like applet runs on the machine of the participating user.
After the user tells the applet to allow 2GB to be used in this system - the applet registers that space with the DIBS MBDB. (mega byte data base)
The MBDB assigns a key to the applet for encrypting the data.
When you register the space that you have available to the MBDB - the MBDB allocates an amount of space equal to that which you have reserved for use by others. (If you allocate 2GB for the DIBS - you get 1GB in return - of distributed space)
When you want to use space with the system the folowing happens.
You decide that you want 500MB of space to store some files. You tell the MBDB. MBDB checks your account and verifies that you have "space credit".
It then creates a virtual route for you. The MBDB provides you with an FTP URL to itself. The MBDB only provides you with half the amount of space that you have available because the system has to ensurethat your files stripe more than one machine.
anyway - thats just a rough stab at how I'd start to implement this.....
Re:US Army
on
Advergames
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This is amamzing and very interesting to think about.
The army provides "games" that are based on the army and its training, philosophy, operations, equipment etc.
Through indoctrinating a nations technical youth at a young age - and getting them to learn realy tactics (from a thinking perspective) and a familiarity with the mechanics of the army, getting them familiar with the equipment they would use - you prepare (in a twisted sort of way) the youth of your technical nation for service in the army.
You provide rewards in the game - and you drive the ego and encourage good performance on missions (performance==patriotic killing, what every soldier is for).
You feed the interest and desire to be in the army and kill.
Then when a player reaches a certain level of skill, you invite them to play against players of their skill level.
Through this - you can attempt real contact with them - and encourage their gameplay and interest in the game, and offer a chance to try some of the weapons that are in the game in real life.
"hey Joe - youve got one great shot there... and are doing a great job in the missions. How would you like to come on down to the base and get a look at the weapons you are using in that game for real. Maybe even get a chance to fire some?"
Or you then offer some of the same training to them in real life. Maybe you have contests, and the winner gets to go to a special boot camp or some such.
There are so many weird ways you could use gaming to train people from a young age for modern combat.
BUT! there is one thing that will never be able to be conveyed - the permanence of Death.
Imagine a country where their young are brouhgt up playing in virtual war games for their nations army. Over and over and over and over and over they have played the missions - fought, died, fought, died, and succeded at them.
Imagine the reality check they get into when they are in REAL combat - with the REAL possiblity of Death - and they maybe see a friend fall. Forever.
Imagine how many minds will be snapping and that point - because their whole life they have played Death as a game.
Leave the games alone. We do not need advertisments in games.
Imagine a whole psycology around ADventure games.
They give you the game for free - they get you to play the game they make so that you are constantly pumped with advertising for the companies - they make the products essential parts of the plot of the game - aside from just the billboards on the virtual walls of city buildings.
"Joe, you need to go to the Pepsi building, here - take the keys to my new Chrysler Gozumma 2000. It has advanced handling and speed that will get you there much faster."
I totally agree with you. The problem here is not that the tech isnt available - or even that the quality is not quite as good as a POTS yet...
The problem is the mindset of the consumers who actually use this stuff.
For example -
The biggest hurdle that things like this have to overcome is the way that this technology is simplified and pushed out the the end consumers (the ones who dont think about technology at all)
The thing is that when Joe User goes to use the phone his goal is to TALK to someone. The regular phone is so established and so easily understood that the challenge is getting new and better ways of making communications fit *perfectly* into the existing public image of the phone and how calls are made.
Here are the problems with doing this:
Form Factor: You need to get these devices to look exactly and work exactly like the ordinary phones that people are used to.
Industry Resistance: Major telcos will resist this technology as long as they possibly can - because the regular phone systems that they have in place make them so much money that making any changes to the communications industry is going to be difficult. They will only start accepting these things when they are in a position to monopolize it. For example these systems can work so easily in a wireless IP based network - but getting the industry to start pushing for that will not happen (I wont go into all the billing and security issues of wireless at this point - even though that is the reason why the major telco's wont push WISPs for a while).
The communications companies dont want you to be able to have one device for calls, organizer, music, internet access, camera etc *unless* they control it and make money on it.
If you want to have this stuff become widespread and cheap - you need to get a company to start doing this *before* its too late and the only companies with enough money and all the control to make is a reality are companies like AT&T and their subs (cometa).
I know that I dont want a company like SBC, AT&T, pac bell or any cell company to handle *all* my traffic in the future. These co's have a proven history of abusing consumers over charging and just having crappy customer service.
Here is the opportunity to bring the communications industry closer to the consumer - and setting up a new model. The opportunity to have a company come in and setup a wifi based telco/isp in major metro areas is perfect right now... the only worrying thing is that the telcos are the only people with the cash and current infrastructure to implement at this point.
anyway - as you can probably tell I dont like AT&T or telcos that much - and I think that now is the best time to go after them. There is more - so much more - but I am tired... you get the idea.
This is something that I have thought a lot about. i thought that i would actually be a lifer - but I am not so sure...
My grandfather was a Nuclear Engineer for GE. That was the only job he ever held. That was a time when you had loyalty to a company and (hopefully) the company showed the same loyalty to you.
Now, the thing is that most people dont have loyalty to a company - and the companies have never even heard of that term before.
What will I be doing when I am 65? well I am 28 now and not even sure what I will be doing when I am 30, or even 35. Thats not to say that I dont have goals, or never did - but the world has just changed so fast that all my goals needed to be re adjusted.
I was planning on working hard in tech till i was 35 - then retiring and building a family somewhere cheap and un-populated. That was when I was married though - and working as a six figure IT worker with 80,000 shares of dot com stock.
well now, I make 50K, no stock... and I'm divorced. So much for loyalty of any type...
I am just happy to have a job that (barely) pays my bills. but I dont have any expectations to be in the same career (unless I work for myself) for life.
I left a post for you over at K5 - and thought I'd hit you up here as well...
I would like to see what other links and info you can provide - for a more coherant line of thought than just the perusal of your comments on K5 and Slashdot.
I would likte to speak with you directly (email) also at some point - rather than in an open forum such as this...
If interested in helping me in my search for understanding, please reply.
you and the other poster who is replying to me seem to miss the fact that I am replying to a post - and not the actual article.
I wasnt talking about the case here at all - why dont you readthe post I am replying to in order to put some more context into what I wrote - you are the one who is ill-informed my friend.
The point I was making is that the post I replied to was using a very sleazy debate tactic in which he attemted to attach our strong emotions on the topic of kiddie porn to this topic. This is a cheap and low minded tactic to try to sway people into agreeing with your point based on their feelings and prejudices for another topic altogether.
Here we have a guy who was downloading MP3s - which I will not discuss the legalities of in this post - then we have a person saying that we should consider the actions of the downloader in the scenario of "What if it was kiddie porn".
The fact remains that we are not talking about kiddie porn - we never were - there is no reason to even think that the MP3 pirate is remotely connected to kiddie porn, but here we should be exceptionally cautious and possibly exceptionally harsh on this activity due to the fact that it *could have been kiddie porn*
IT IS NOT - so there is no point in even making that statement.
Then, regarding anonymity - I was merely stating that there should be no reason that a persons activities should be under the scrutiny by any organization - government or otherwise - or any individual by default. Sure there is no guarantee of anonymity for any extended period, and the anonymity should not be absolute (i.e. you should be able to identify the person if there is reason to do so) - but i dont think that we should rule out anonymity to the point where evey action or transaction should be posted on a billbaord stating the activities of anyone.
Like I said - the downloading of the music is illegal - and I wasnt protesting that, or supporting pirating in my comments what so ever. Try actually reading - then understanding - a post before replying to it.
You will see that i was refuting the logic of the original poster in his poor attempt to make a point stronger by attaching meaningless emotional propaganda-like statements to the end of his post.
"What if instead of MP3s this guy was suspected of transferring 6000 kiddy porn images?"
I HATE this type of logic!!
What if this guy killed 6000 people?! What if this guy raped your sister 6000 times?! What if this guy stuck his finger in your ass all day long?!! What if he traded 6000 images of churches or trees?!
He DIDN'T trade 1 or 6 or 600 or 6 million kiddie porn images - and probably would NEVER THINK OF IT!!
But you on the otherhand did think of it - and are equating this action with it. What the fuck are you thinking.
First of all these two things are not even remotely close. Second there is no point in trying to make him look like a kiddie porn pusher - and last the only reason why you would say something like this is to try to make your weak point look more valid - but instead it just invalidates your point.
First of all - anonymity should not be a guarantee against anything - but that does not mean that you should have no right to be anonymous. Just because you agree with the laws in question doesnt mean that you should claim that any and all actions of another person should be open and scrutinized by any organization or individual.
There should be the right to remain anonymous until you do something wrong.
But for God sakes - not all things that are "wrong" are the same. Pirating overpriced music from a fucked up monopolistic greedy industry (however illegal) is no where in the same solar system as kiddie porn.
"entirely missing from your post is the obvious fact that PC games are (in general) totally different to console games in terms of interaction complexity, depth, robustness, even tone and content"
Uh, no it isnt - I said that "I prefer the level of interaction that a PC can provide" - which I was too lazy to elaborate on.
I prefer the level of complexity that interface of a PC can provide with a game - rather than controlling the game with my thumbs.
as far as the chair and the floor are concerned - I was referring to the fact that I have a whole setup that provides far more comfort than my living room - which is designed around interacting with guests and passively watching the TV - if I want to interect with the TV ala a console system I have to walk across the room and sit on the floor in front of it.
21" viewsonic (paid 300 for it used in 98) yamaha speakers (great speakers - cost 75 in 98) athlon xp 2100 dragon kt333 platinum ultra (cpu mobo combo - 179 3 weeks ago) 512 pc2700 ddr - 100 3 weeks ago. 64 mb geforce 2 ddr ultra - got it in 98. 80Gb HDD - 120 3 weeks ago. case - had it since 97.
boots in literally 25 seconds. to an actually usable desktop.
this was the first time I upgraded my machine in 3 years. (old machine took 2.5 minutes to get to a useable desktop)
the last machine I had was a p3 800 with 512mb RDram - and the only reason why I even upgraded was because my mobo died - and it was just cheaper to buy new stuff.
I dont spend that much on machines (anymore - I used to have a machine that I sunk 10K into for 3d animation....)
but so far this machine has cost me less than I spent on my dreamcast and I get a hell of a lot more use out of it.
I like good games as well, but I am not trying to battle - or open a battle - between PC and console.
For example - here is my thinking:
I have a dreamcast. I bought it the day it came out. I bought the console, two controllers, memory for the controllers (wtf is that) and some games. I spent about 450 the day I bought the thing.
I bought Soul caliber (still one of the best fighting games of all time). I bought about 10 other games for the thing over the next year or two. at $50 a piece. The ONLY game I played on the thing was soul caliber. all the other games were absolutely HORRIBLE.
so 450 + (10*50) = ~1000 that i spent on that console - with which I use to play only one game.
The other thing you should remember that the console hardware (like the xbox) is sold at a *loss* by the company to the consumer. with the expectation that they will get 1) game profits & 2) market share. So this is not a fair comparison.
my main point was that from a new product perspective - i really dont see the ture compelling reason to go buy (or develop) a new console. There are lots of great choices already out there for people who like consoles - and for those who arent hooked on consoles there is a totally viable option of the PC (which bang-for-buck is very close in price.)
The other thing is that, as you mentioned, you were able to harvest your sound and video out of your earlier box when you upgraded. Cant do that with a console. So while youre sitting there waiting for a title that you really might like - your console is getting older - and that title you wait for might not even run on that console when its finally available. which means that a new title that you are really interested in might end up costing $250 for you to really play it.
I grew up with the rise of consoles - from the early ones like the atari and pong - through NES and its siblings to now, the ps2 xbox etc, just as many of us have. But I still do not own one.
I had a sega, I had NES and super NES and dreamcast. But I choose not to buy any new ones now.
I have played computer games religously ever since I was in 3rd grade. I play games on my PC and thats how I like it.
I have a big comfy chair - a huge monitor and a very fast machine - in a room dedicated to computer gaming. I prefer this setup greatly over sitting on the floor in front of my TV. I prefer the level of interaction that a PC can provide.
I dont have any desire for an xbox, ps2 gamecube or other... my PC is just fine. and it serves a hell of a lot more functions than a console system.
The current prices of hardware is incredible. I just built another great system for $400. at just twice the price of an xbox/ps2 I get 1000 times the functionality.
Unless the system they are offering is $25.00 and I dont have to pay any sort of monthly access (like if it were to utilize my *exisiting* lan and broadband connection - without a large price for a lan adapter - i will continue to have no interest in console systems.
What they should do is focus on making a PCI card that you can insert into your PC and utilize its hardware to make it a "console" system in that it can hold the controllers and play all the games - for a minimal cost.
then make all the money off the price of the games (which are already overpriced at $50.)
I wouldnt be worried about injuring some pedestrian as I rode my segway around - I would be worried about some sixth and mission dweller mugging me for it.
I used to ride a go ped around the streets of SF and on more than a few occasions felt really uncomfortable waiting for a light to turn so I could get away from some people who were too interested in my go ped.
thats why i dont buy nike. I saw in macy's a sweatshirt that was really nice. then I looked at the price - and saw that it was $65. I thought "how the hell could this be $65." then I saw it was nike...
While you were incarcerated - were there any attempts at unauthorized access to your ports? How did you manage to secure these ports from would be DoS attacks? Did you have to do a lot of social engineering to keep them safe?
Slashdot Mirror
Just carry around some jars of silt and water from Boston harbor.
Interesting points made here and in the other replies to your post.
First, Disposable computers, in addition to the sad trend towards "disposable" items that really arent "disposable" (safe to get rid of) - might be to easy to use for malicious purposes. I hate to be the one to spout the paranoid Homeland Security perspective - but if you have a machine that you could use then easily put to flame, it might be a perfect tool for a black hat.
Second, make the paper writable with a magnetic(?)dry erase pen... then you can have the paper recognize what you write, and you can see it and easily clear it as well.
Tracking documents through a building would be a perfect application for government and businesses with sensitive material which needs to be in a portable hard caopy form.
One thing that would be interesting is if the ePaper could have a biometric scanning device in one corner - and "Ink" that it could turn on or off.
If you had proper access to the sheet - then the ink would display - and only while you were holding your thumb on the scanning square.
also - if you could have it do ink like this - then you could keep hard copies of whatever around - but when you were done with it - just place it in the "printer tray" and it will be re-programmed with new data. So it would be 100% re-useable and not even need traditional recycling. It would just immediately go back into the pool of blanks.
Brings a whole new permanance to "Crash and Burn" when you dont get 'Tab A' and 'Tab B' to perfectly match up...
Apparently, you have never been hit in the eye with a paper plane sent at mach .001 from across the class.
Eventually bandwidth will be eliminated as a problem for Joe Intyernet (obviously there will always be bandwidth bottleneck in some area of computing)
But the real issue is security and trust.
How do you know that your files are safe?
The solution could look a bit better if it was done like this:
Those that want to participate in the scheme assign a certain amount of space on their machine for the DIBS system. A client-like applet runs on the machine of the participating user.
After the user tells the applet to allow 2GB to be used in this system - the applet registers that space with the DIBS MBDB. (mega byte data base)
The MBDB assigns a key to the applet for encrypting the data.
When you register the space that you have available to the MBDB - the MBDB allocates an amount of space equal to that which you have reserved for use by others. (If you allocate 2GB for the DIBS - you get 1GB in return - of distributed space)
When you want to use space with the system the folowing happens.
You decide that you want 500MB of space to store some files. You tell the MBDB. MBDB checks your account and verifies that you have "space credit".
It then creates a virtual route for you. The MBDB provides you with an FTP URL to itself. The MBDB only provides you with half the amount of space that you have available because the system has to ensurethat your files stripe more than one machine.
anyway - thats just a rough stab at how I'd start to implement this.....
This is amamzing and very interesting to think about.
The army provides "games" that are based on the army and its training, philosophy, operations, equipment etc.
Through indoctrinating a nations technical youth at a young age - and getting them to learn realy tactics (from a thinking perspective) and a familiarity with the mechanics of the army, getting them familiar with the equipment they would use - you prepare (in a twisted sort of way) the youth of your technical nation for service in the army.
You provide rewards in the game - and you drive the ego and encourage good performance on missions (performance==patriotic killing, what every soldier is for).
You feed the interest and desire to be in the army and kill.
Then when a player reaches a certain level of skill, you invite them to play against players of their skill level.
Through this - you can attempt real contact with them - and encourage their gameplay and interest in the game, and offer a chance to try some of the weapons that are in the game in real life.
"hey Joe - youve got one great shot there... and are doing a great job in the missions. How would you like to come on down to the base and get a look at the weapons you are using in that game for real. Maybe even get a chance to fire some?"
Or you then offer some of the same training to them in real life. Maybe you have contests, and the winner gets to go to a special boot camp or some such.
There are so many weird ways you could use gaming to train people from a young age for modern combat.
BUT! there is one thing that will never be able to be conveyed - the permanence of Death.
Imagine a country where their young are brouhgt up playing in virtual war games for their nations army. Over and over and over and over and over they have played the missions - fought, died, fought, died, and succeded at them.
Imagine the reality check they get into when they are in REAL combat - with the REAL possiblity of Death - and they maybe see a friend fall. Forever.
Imagine how many minds will be snapping and that point - because their whole life they have played Death as a game.
Would make a great short story though huh..
Dear God NOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Leave the games alone. We do not need advertisments in games.
Imagine a whole psycology around ADventure games.
They give you the game for free - they get you to play the game they make so that you are constantly pumped with advertising for the companies - they make the products essential parts of the plot of the game - aside from just the billboards on the virtual walls of city buildings.
"Joe, you need to go to the Pepsi building, here - take the keys to my new Chrysler Gozumma 2000. It has advanced handling and speed that will get you there much faster."
This should be fucking OUTLAWED.
I totally agree with you. The problem here is not that the tech isnt available - or even that the quality is not quite as good as a POTS yet...
The problem is the mindset of the consumers who actually use this stuff.
For example -
The biggest hurdle that things like this have to overcome is the way that this technology is simplified and pushed out the the end consumers (the ones who dont think about technology at all)
The thing is that when Joe User goes to use the phone his goal is to TALK to someone. The regular phone is so established and so easily understood that the challenge is getting new and better ways of making communications fit *perfectly* into the existing public image of the phone and how calls are made.
Here are the problems with doing this:
Form Factor: You need to get these devices to look exactly and work exactly like the ordinary phones that people are used to.
Industry Resistance: Major telcos will resist this technology as long as they possibly can - because the regular phone systems that they have in place make them so much money that making any changes to the communications industry is going to be difficult. They will only start accepting these things when they are in a position to monopolize it. For example these systems can work so easily in a wireless IP based network - but getting the industry to start pushing for that will not happen (I wont go into all the billing and security issues of wireless at this point - even though that is the reason why the major telco's wont push WISPs for a while).
The communications companies dont want you to be able to have one device for calls, organizer, music, internet access, camera etc *unless* they control it and make money on it.
If you want to have this stuff become widespread and cheap - you need to get a company to start doing this *before* its too late and the only companies with enough money and all the control to make is a reality are companies like AT&T and their subs (cometa).
I know that I dont want a company like SBC, AT&T, pac bell or any cell company to handle *all* my traffic in the future. These co's have a proven history of abusing consumers over charging and just having crappy customer service.
Here is the opportunity to bring the communications industry closer to the consumer - and setting up a new model. The opportunity to have a company come in and setup a wifi based telco/isp in major metro areas is perfect right now... the only worrying thing is that the telcos are the only people with the cash and current infrastructure to implement at this point.
anyway - as you can probably tell I dont like AT&T or telcos that much - and I think that now is the best time to go after them. There is more - so much more - but I am tired... you get the idea.
This is something that I have thought a lot about. i thought that i would actually be a lifer - but I am not so sure...
My grandfather was a Nuclear Engineer for GE. That was the only job he ever held. That was a time when you had loyalty to a company and (hopefully) the company showed the same loyalty to you.
Now, the thing is that most people dont have loyalty to a company - and the companies have never even heard of that term before.
What will I be doing when I am 65? well I am 28 now and not even sure what I will be doing when I am 30, or even 35. Thats not to say that I dont have goals, or never did - but the world has just changed so fast that all my goals needed to be re adjusted.
I was planning on working hard in tech till i was 35 - then retiring and building a family somewhere cheap and un-populated. That was when I was married though - and working as a six figure IT worker with 80,000 shares of dot com stock.
well now, I make 50K, no stock... and I'm divorced. So much for loyalty of any type...
I am just happy to have a job that (barely) pays my bills. but I dont have any expectations to be in the same career (unless I work for myself) for life.
Hey Fantastic Lad,
I left a post for you over at K5 - and thought I'd hit you up here as well...
I would like to see what other links and info you can provide - for a more coherant line of thought than just the perusal of your comments on K5 and Slashdot.
I would likte to speak with you directly (email) also at some point - rather than in an open forum such as this...
If interested in helping me in my search for understanding, please reply.
thanks
Vade Mecum....
"Not to mention replacing militant Islam with a hip, edgy new "switch" campaign"
I just picture a guy with a bomb strapped to his chest waiting at a Muni bus stop with the slogan "Think Different!" underneath.
I believe the parent is Drew Hess - who packaged and maintains the source for OpenEXR.
Hello Drew, and thanks for all the fish.
If its not a carbon copy - then why is it called "CC"?
you and the other poster who is replying to me seem to miss the fact that I am replying to a post - and not the actual article.
I wasnt talking about the case here at all - why dont you readthe post I am replying to in order to put some more context into what I wrote - you are the one who is ill-informed my friend.
The point I was making is that the post I replied to was using a very sleazy debate tactic in which he attemted to attach our strong emotions on the topic of kiddie porn to this topic. This is a cheap and low minded tactic to try to sway people into agreeing with your point based on their feelings and prejudices for another topic altogether.
Here we have a guy who was downloading MP3s - which I will not discuss the legalities of in this post - then we have a person saying that we should consider the actions of the downloader in the scenario of "What if it was kiddie porn".
The fact remains that we are not talking about kiddie porn - we never were - there is no reason to even think that the MP3 pirate is remotely connected to kiddie porn, but here we should be exceptionally cautious and possibly exceptionally harsh on this activity due to the fact that it *could have been kiddie porn*
IT IS NOT - so there is no point in even making that statement.
Then, regarding anonymity - I was merely stating that there should be no reason that a persons activities should be under the scrutiny by any organization - government or otherwise - or any individual by default. Sure there is no guarantee of anonymity for any extended period, and the anonymity should not be absolute (i.e. you should be able to identify the person if there is reason to do so) - but i dont think that we should rule out anonymity to the point where evey action or transaction should be posted on a billbaord stating the activities of anyone.
Like I said - the downloading of the music is illegal - and I wasnt protesting that, or supporting pirating in my comments what so ever. Try actually reading - then understanding - a post before replying to it.
You will see that i was refuting the logic of the original poster in his poor attempt to make a point stronger by attaching meaningless emotional propaganda-like statements to the end of his post.
Doesnt Self-Regulating Authority == Monopoly?
Or does it just sound like it?
"What if instead of MP3s this guy was suspected of transferring 6000 kiddy porn images?"
I HATE this type of logic!!
What if this guy killed 6000 people?!
What if this guy raped your sister 6000 times?!
What if this guy stuck his finger in your ass all day long?!!
What if he traded 6000 images of churches or trees?!
He DIDN'T trade 1 or 6 or 600 or 6 million kiddie porn images - and probably would NEVER THINK OF IT!!
But you on the otherhand did think of it - and are equating this action with it. What the fuck are you thinking.
First of all these two things are not even remotely close. Second there is no point in trying to make him look like a kiddie porn pusher - and last the only reason why you would say something like this is to try to make your weak point look more valid - but instead it just invalidates your point.
First of all - anonymity should not be a guarantee against anything - but that does not mean that you should have no right to be anonymous. Just because you agree with the laws in question doesnt mean that you should claim that any and all actions of another person should be open and scrutinized by any organization or individual.
There should be the right to remain anonymous until you do something wrong.
But for God sakes - not all things that are "wrong" are the same. Pirating overpriced music from a fucked up monopolistic greedy industry (however illegal) is no where in the same solar system as kiddie porn.
"entirely missing from your post is the obvious fact that PC games are (in general) totally different to console games in terms of interaction complexity, depth, robustness, even tone and content"
Uh, no it isnt - I said that "I prefer the level of interaction that a PC can provide" - which I was too lazy to elaborate on.
I prefer the level of complexity that interface of a PC can provide with a game - rather than controlling the game with my thumbs.
as far as the chair and the floor are concerned - I was referring to the fact that I have a whole setup that provides far more comfort than my living room - which is designed around interacting with guests and passively watching the TV - if I want to interect with the TV ala a console system I have to walk across the room and sit on the floor in front of it.
I dont upgrade that often. (anymore)
Here is what I have:
21" viewsonic (paid 300 for it used in 98)
yamaha speakers (great speakers - cost 75 in 98)
athlon xp 2100
dragon kt333 platinum ultra (cpu mobo combo - 179 3 weeks ago)
512 pc2700 ddr - 100 3 weeks ago.
64 mb geforce 2 ddr ultra - got it in 98.
80Gb HDD - 120 3 weeks ago.
case - had it since 97.
boots in literally 25 seconds. to an actually usable desktop.
this was the first time I upgraded my machine in 3 years. (old machine took 2.5 minutes to get to a useable desktop)
the last machine I had was a p3 800 with 512mb RDram - and the only reason why I even upgraded was because my mobo died - and it was just cheaper to buy new stuff.
I dont spend that much on machines (anymore - I used to have a machine that I sunk 10K into for 3d animation....)
but so far this machine has cost me less than I spent on my dreamcast and I get a hell of a lot more use out of it.
I like good games as well, but I am not trying to battle - or open a battle - between PC and console.
For example - here is my thinking:
I have a dreamcast. I bought it the day it came out. I bought the console, two controllers, memory for the controllers (wtf is that) and some games. I spent about 450 the day I bought the thing.
I bought Soul caliber (still one of the best fighting games of all time). I bought about 10 other games for the thing over the next year or two. at $50 a piece. The ONLY game I played on the thing was soul caliber. all the other games were absolutely HORRIBLE.
so 450 + (10*50) = ~1000 that i spent on that console - with which I use to play only one game.
The other thing you should remember that the console hardware (like the xbox) is sold at a *loss* by the company to the consumer. with the expectation that they will get 1) game profits & 2) market share. So this is not a fair comparison.
my main point was that from a new product perspective - i really dont see the ture compelling reason to go buy (or develop) a new console. There are lots of great choices already out there for people who like consoles - and for those who arent hooked on consoles there is a totally viable option of the PC (which bang-for-buck is very close in price.)
The other thing is that, as you mentioned, you were able to harvest your sound and video out of your earlier box when you upgraded. Cant do that with a console. So while youre sitting there waiting for a title that you really might like - your console is getting older - and that title you wait for might not even run on that console when its finally available. which means that a new title that you are really interested in might end up costing $250 for you to really play it.
Pick a Number Between 1 and 10....
What Color am I thinknig of....
Guess which hand.....
How much do I weigh....
Pong....
Draw!...
Spell!....
and so forth and so forth...
I grew up with the rise of consoles - from the early ones like the atari and pong - through NES and its siblings to now, the ps2 xbox etc, just as many of us have. But I still do not own one.
I had a sega, I had NES and super NES and dreamcast. But I choose not to buy any new ones now.
I have played computer games religously ever since I was in 3rd grade. I play games on my PC and thats how I like it.
I have a big comfy chair - a huge monitor and a very fast machine - in a room dedicated to computer gaming. I prefer this setup greatly over sitting on the floor in front of my TV. I prefer the level of interaction that a PC can provide.
I dont have any desire for an xbox, ps2 gamecube or other... my PC is just fine. and it serves a hell of a lot more functions than a console system.
The current prices of hardware is incredible. I just built another great system for $400. at just twice the price of an xbox/ps2 I get 1000 times the functionality.
Unless the system they are offering is $25.00 and I dont have to pay any sort of monthly access (like if it were to utilize my *exisiting* lan and broadband connection - without a large price for a lan adapter - i will continue to have no interest in console systems.
What they should do is focus on making a PCI card that you can insert into your PC and utilize its hardware to make it a "console" system in that it can hold the controllers and play all the games - for a minimal cost.
then make all the money off the price of the games (which are already overpriced at $50.)
I wouldnt be worried about injuring some pedestrian as I rode my segway around - I would be worried about some sixth and mission dweller mugging me for it.
I used to ride a go ped around the streets of SF and on more than a few occasions felt really uncomfortable waiting for a light to turn so I could get away from some people who were too interested in my go ped.
thats why i dont buy nike. I saw in macy's a sweatshirt that was really nice. then I looked at the price - and saw that it was $65. I thought "how the hell could this be $65." then I saw it was nike...
I try to buy clothes that have no logo.
further - what skill would you say you have increased or bettered while you were away - and what skill(s) would you say have atrophied the most?
(these skill having to do with computers - even though you have not had access to computers during this time)
While you were incarcerated - were there any attempts at unauthorized access to your ports? How did you manage to secure these ports from would be DoS attacks? Did you have to do a lot of social engineering to keep them safe?