Yeah. The reason I never got into Pokémon isn't that it's kiddy - it's that it's too deep. I don't play games nearly long enough to get into such a complex game. I actually admire kids nowadays - the games we used to play were much simpler than the stuff they play nowadays. I think we're raising a new breed of super-intelligent humans, thanks to Pokémon:-)
Okay, now you sould as if you were holding some kind of grudge against them. Grudge? No. I'm just not an Apple fanboi.
Okay, I see. You really don't hold a grudge against Apple. Just against the people who use their products, at least some of whom you feel the need to call "fanbois," and even with the stupid teenie spelling mistake. The people who bring out the "fanboy" argument are always the most biased, in my experience. It's a cheap shot, an ad hominem people use when they have no real evidence to back up their claims.
Where do they claim they invented something they didn't? Read up on your history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look_and_feel You can also find plenty of examples among Apple's patent filings.
So you don't actually have an argument other than "look it up." Thanks, that's what I expected.
I don't say that often, especially not to people I have never met in real life, but it seems quite clear to me that you're an insensitive asshole.
I happen to know people who suffer or have suffered from mental problems. A former girlfriend of mine tried to kill herself twice. She's no longer ill, and she's glad she wasn't able to do it.
Even if you think "preventing" somebody from committing suicide is "restricting their freedom," that doesn't mean that you have to supply them with everything they need if it comes to it.
If anyone else does this, nobody complains. If it's Apple, all hell breaks loose.
I don't know of anybody else who sells DRM-free music but embeds personal information; if you do, please let us all know. (The link you give just points to an article about Apple.)
No, it doesn't. Read it again. It notes that Pragmatic Programmers e-Books embed the buyer's name, and everyone thinks it's great because it means they can publish plain, unprotected e-Books.
The place where I buy most of my DRM-free music, eMusic, doesn't embed any plain text information about me in the mp3.
They also don't have to figure out a deal with major labels.
Admit it, you just love to hate Apple.
I have nothing against Apple per-se; I criticize Apple for the same things I criticize other companies: when they don't respect my privacy,
Great. Please point me to your article where you complain about the fact that The Pragmatic Programmers embed personal data when you buy e-Books from them.
and when they misrepresent who actually invented the technology they are shipping. Unfortunately, Apple does both fairly frequently.
Okay, now you sould as if you were holding some kind of grudge against them. Where do they claim they invented something they didn't?
"I found a bug and I'm not going to tell you what is its" is not QA.
His argument, which is an argument widely shared by those in the "open disclosure" camp, is that Apple ignored previous PRIVATE disclosures he made to them about vulnerabilities.
If that was his argument, he could just do what everyone else does in those cases: Release the details to Apple and publish them a fixed amount of time - such as a week - later. That's not what he's doing. For the record, the argument is only "widely shared" by the people who read zdnet.
Finally, he did not say that he would report the information to Apple if asked. He said plainly "we no longer report vulnerabilities to that vendor."
So, you're saying that cell phones haven't revolutionized society? Dunno, I think it has changed a whole freaking lot of stuff. Social interactions, for one.
The issue with TV series like Lost, Heroes or Prison Break is that the creators never know how long their series is going to run. So they have to start out with a story that could go anywhere from one season (or even less) to pretty much an infinite number of seasons, and could at all times provide some kind of satisfactory ending if the show should be cancelled. Which leads to meandering plots that never quite go anywhere and are always ready to end at a moment's notice.
24 and Dexter get around this by having a fresh story each season, so they only ever have to plan a fixed number of episodes ahead.
As long as games stick to "24 style" episodic content, where each season provides a finished story line, I have absolutely no issues with episodic content.
I think they've all but confirmed that Sam & Max will come to the Wii. I'm happy!
Also, the DS is turning out to be a great platform for Adventure lovers. And to think, after all these years, our favourite genre is having a bona fide revival!:-D
Yeah, great - link to a long and rambling article by an Apple fanboy which basically boils down to repeating Apple's and Maynor's statements and claiming that the former is the truth and the latter is filthy lies.
Yeah, calling others fanboys really shows how unbiased you are. Thanks for making my point.
Did you even read the article? How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that Apple orchestrated a smear attack against Maynor and got Dalrymple and Chartier to say what Lynn wanted? Do you also think that the moon landing was staged? I bet you're really proud of your flat earth society member card.
For the record, both Dalrymple and Chartier publicly stated that Lynn did not contact them. How stupid do you think they would have to be to let Apple tell them what to write?
Ou is a paranoid conspiracy theorist. His ideas are laughable. If you can't see that, you should be asking yourself whether that whole "fanboy" idea might apply to you.
The issue seems be the notion that it is somhow "wrong" for Maynor to disclose the vulnerabilites without informing Apple and giving them time to fix it. Maynor claims that IN THE PAST Apple has been uncooperative WITH HIM. So based on his OWN PAST EXPERIENCE he chose to release the vulnerabities publically. He did nothing wrong.
Okay, let's assume that what he says is true (it clearly isn't, but let's assume it anyways). So he claims Apple has been uncooperative. Does that give him the right to publicly announce that he has found vulnerabilities, and then not give them to anyone? This is the kind of shit that got him in the AirPort mess in the first place, and even if Apple screwed him over, it's still wrong to take revenge on them - and by proxy, on all users of the software - by doing that.
How in the world is this "nothing wrong"? Even if Apple was uncooperative, he's an asshat to behave like this. How old is he, 3 years? "HAHA, I've found serious security issues in your code, but I'm not going to tell you where they are because you were mean to me!"
Pray tell me, what "valuable free work" is Maynor doing?
Geez, if you really believe that whole Ou-invented idea that Apple somehow "orchestrated" a smear campaign against Maynor and got Dalrymple and Chartier to play along with them, you should stop reading zdnet and start reading a real news outlet. It's one of the most inane tech conspiracy theories I've ever heard.
I'll bite. Maynor described vulnerabilites. Maynor immeadately goes public with Mac vulnerabilites because he (in the past anyway) has claimed that Apple has ignored private disclosures. I've has exactly the same experience (many years ago) so I can support him on this point
Looking at changelists for bugfix releases of Mac OS X, Apple regularly fixes non-public vulnerabilities and credits the people who found them. They do downplay these issues, and some managers from Apple have publicly lied about vulnerabilities in the past, but they do fix them pretty quickly and give proper credit.
For all we know, Maynors own account of his issues with Apple bear little resemblance to what really happened.
releasing software with remotely exploitable bugs to the general public to the fanfare of the press (release of safari is in all major news) by a large company is surely a more irresponsible act than a bug report about the said software.
Yes. Every application release ever by a large company was irresponsible. And why limit it to large companies? No software should ever have been released because they all contain bugs which could be exploited by hackers!
What Maynor does is absurd. We all know software has bugs. The developers must be held accountable. But you can't do that unless you tell them what the hell the bug is, because they can't fix the bug until you tell them what it is!
Agree about Burnout. While - in my opinion - it had some duds (Revenge), it's generaly an awesome franchise, and I can't wait for a real next-gen entry. Burnout Racing + Motorstorm Car Destruction == Pure Awesome.
I probably won't use it for the VC, but who knows?:)
I bought some multiplayer games. Love how you can play 5-player games with four Remotes and a Gamecube pad. 5-Player Bomberman and Battle Lode Runner rule.
Those committing gun crimes are by definition criminals.
Injuries != crimes. For example, in Switzerland, there is a direct correlation between availability of handguns and male suicides. Whether there is a causation is anyone's guess, but the correlation is there (sorry, source is in german).
Another example to consider: Break-ins in occupied homes are rare, but a family member unexpectedly coming home late at night is not. I doubt having a gun at home makes your family saver.
On one side you have gun crime, which we punish and should punish more. On the other side you have crimes adverted by legal carry. Carry stems from the right to self defense. That is an individual responsibility with individual liability. The police keep the peace and investigate after the fact.
I'm sceptical about the crimes adverted by gun owners. Frankly, I'd prefer not to have wannabe cowboys without proper gun training running around protecting me. Doesn't really make me feel saver.
I have insurances for such things. If somebody wants to rob me, don't risk my life, thank you.
There are actually commercial games created specifically for the GP2X (check out the store), but this is hardly the GP2X's point. Then what is the GP2X's point in practice? Emulators?
Yes.
Tetris clones like the one I made?
Yes.
The point is whatever you want it to be.
I use mine to play Neo Geo games on-the-go on a nice, big screen. I also use it to play around with some game ideas. You could use it to watch TV shows. Or as a Walkman replacement. Or as an organizer. Or to show your pals the game you've made. Or to read a book. It's a toy. You use it for whatever the hell you want.
Also, I don't know what it costs to get a GP2X in the USA. I'm from Europe. I know the GP2X was cheaper than a DS plus a DS-X (which I also own, by the way, as well as a PSP. I just don't actually write software for them because it's so much easier with the GP2X).
Actually, it's part of what killed the Amiga. During the end of the Amiga's life cycle, many game devs stopped support for the Amiga and moved to the Genesis and SNES instead, because piracy on the Amiga was so rampant.
Turrican III, for example, one of the archetypical Amiga games, came out for the Genesis first, and was only later ported back to the Amiga. Factor 5 quoted piracy as the reason why the franchise moved to the Genesis.
There are actually commercial games created specifically for the GP2X (check out the store), but this is hardly the GP2X's point. Calling it a "knock-off," as Joreallean has done, is about the stupidest, most uninformed thing I've ever heard.
It's a handheld for people who are into the whole homebrew thing and don't want to a) constantly fight Sony with firmware upgrades or b) buy expensive hardware to get homebrew to run on an unsupported handheld like the DS. The GP2X is a fully supported, programmable, Linux-running handheld. If you want to go into a store and buy games, it's not for you. This handheld isn't for everybody. It's for a very specific subset of all gamers, and for them, it's a great piece of hardware.
But how does the JavaScript game running in the web page take Control Pad and button press events for itself, as opposed to Opera performing its default function for each button?
I'm guessing you can catch the key events and then cancel bubbling? I haven't tried that, but it works in other browsers.
Which is why you report the iPod as stolen and get a signed police report. Anyway, since it would be so easy to frame somebody that way, I doubt anyone will get sued if his files turn up on sharing networks. It's probably more of a way for Apple and the record companies to track how many of the sold files make it to sharing networks, and a little incentive for users to not share their files.
In other news, Word files contain your name. If you register an application, it stores files containing your name on your disk. In fact, your OS stores your name on your hard drive! Just imagine what happens if somebody steals your computer... The thief would have access to your name!
If Apple had wanted the embedded names a secret, or if this was some kind of conspiracy, they would have encrypted them. They are there in plain text and can easily be removed if you so desire. In fact, even transcoding them to MP3 removes the names.
Quite frankly, I have no idea why this turned into this huge controversy. I doubt this can even be used to go after file sharers. After all, it's easy to fake the information and embed somebody else's names into an iTunes AAC file.
It's a little "Do not step on the lawn" sign. It doesn't keep you from stepping on the lawn, but it's a reminder that you shouldn't.
I don't know. I think it started out as a N64 game and was converted during development, but I don't know when the switch was announced. Do you? Would be interesting to know.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. The reason I never got into Pokémon isn't that it's kiddy - it's that it's too deep. I don't play games nearly long enough to get into such a complex game. I actually admire kids nowadays - the games we used to play were much simpler than the stuff they play nowadays. I think we're raising a new breed of super-intelligent humans, thanks to Pokémon :-)
Okay, I see. You really don't hold a grudge against Apple. Just against the people who use their products, at least some of whom you feel the need to call "fanbois," and even with the stupid teenie spelling mistake. The people who bring out the "fanboy" argument are always the most biased, in my experience. It's a cheap shot, an ad hominem people use when they have no real evidence to back up their claims.
Where do they claim they invented something they didn't? Read up on your history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look_and_feel You can also find plenty of examples among Apple's patent filings.So you don't actually have an argument other than "look it up." Thanks, that's what I expected.
I don't say that often, especially not to people I have never met in real life, but it seems quite clear to me that you're an insensitive asshole.
I happen to know people who suffer or have suffered from mental problems. A former girlfriend of mine tried to kill herself twice. She's no longer ill, and she's glad she wasn't able to do it.
Even if you think "preventing" somebody from committing suicide is "restricting their freedom," that doesn't mean that you have to supply them with everything they need if it comes to it.
No, it doesn't. Read it again. It notes that Pragmatic Programmers e-Books embed the buyer's name, and everyone thinks it's great because it means they can publish plain, unprotected e-Books.
The place where I buy most of my DRM-free music, eMusic, doesn't embed any plain text information about me in the mp3.They also don't have to figure out a deal with major labels.
Admit it, you just love to hate Apple. I have nothing against Apple per-se; I criticize Apple for the same things I criticize other companies: when they don't respect my privacy,Great. Please point me to your article where you complain about the fact that The Pragmatic Programmers embed personal data when you buy e-Books from them.
and when they misrepresent who actually invented the technology they are shipping. Unfortunately, Apple does both fairly frequently.Okay, now you sould as if you were holding some kind of grudge against them. Where do they claim they invented something they didn't?
"I found a bug and I'm not going to tell you what is its" is not QA.
His argument, which is an argument widely shared by those in the "open disclosure" camp, is that Apple ignored previous PRIVATE disclosures he made to them about vulnerabilities.If that was his argument, he could just do what everyone else does in those cases: Release the details to Apple and publish them a fixed amount of time - such as a week - later. That's not what he's doing. For the record, the argument is only "widely shared" by the people who read zdnet.
Finally, he did not say that he would report the information to Apple if asked. He said plainly "we no longer report vulnerabilities to that vendor."
So, you're saying that cell phones haven't revolutionized society? Dunno, I think it has changed a whole freaking lot of stuff. Social interactions, for one.
The issue with TV series like Lost, Heroes or Prison Break is that the creators never know how long their series is going to run. So they have to start out with a story that could go anywhere from one season (or even less) to pretty much an infinite number of seasons, and could at all times provide some kind of satisfactory ending if the show should be cancelled. Which leads to meandering plots that never quite go anywhere and are always ready to end at a moment's notice.
24 and Dexter get around this by having a fresh story each season, so they only ever have to plan a fixed number of episodes ahead.
As long as games stick to "24 style" episodic content, where each season provides a finished story line, I have absolutely no issues with episodic content.
I think they've all but confirmed that Sam & Max will come to the Wii. I'm happy!
Also, the DS is turning out to be a great platform for Adventure lovers. And to think, after all these years, our favourite genre is having a bona fide revival! :-D
Yeah, calling others fanboys really shows how unbiased you are. Thanks for making my point.
Did you even read the article? How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that Apple orchestrated a smear attack against Maynor and got Dalrymple and Chartier to say what Lynn wanted? Do you also think that the moon landing was staged? I bet you're really proud of your flat earth society member card.
For the record, both Dalrymple and Chartier publicly stated that Lynn did not contact them. How stupid do you think they would have to be to let Apple tell them what to write?
Ou is a paranoid conspiracy theorist. His ideas are laughable. If you can't see that, you should be asking yourself whether that whole "fanboy" idea might apply to you.
Okay, let's assume that what he says is true (it clearly isn't, but let's assume it anyways). So he claims Apple has been uncooperative. Does that give him the right to publicly announce that he has found vulnerabilities, and then not give them to anyone? This is the kind of shit that got him in the AirPort mess in the first place, and even if Apple screwed him over, it's still wrong to take revenge on them - and by proxy, on all users of the software - by doing that.
How in the world is this "nothing wrong"? Even if Apple was uncooperative, he's an asshat to behave like this. How old is he, 3 years? "HAHA, I've found serious security issues in your code, but I'm not going to tell you where they are because you were mean to me!"
Pray tell me, what "valuable free work" is Maynor doing?
No, he was not.
Geez, if you really believe that whole Ou-invented idea that Apple somehow "orchestrated" a smear campaign against Maynor and got Dalrymple and Chartier to play along with them, you should stop reading zdnet and start reading a real news outlet. It's one of the most inane tech conspiracy theories I've ever heard.
Looking at changelists for bugfix releases of Mac OS X, Apple regularly fixes non-public vulnerabilities and credits the people who found them. They do downplay these issues, and some managers from Apple have publicly lied about vulnerabilities in the past, but they do fix them pretty quickly and give proper credit.
For all we know, Maynors own account of his issues with Apple bear little resemblance to what really happened.
Yes. Every application release ever by a large company was irresponsible. And why limit it to large companies? No software should ever have been released because they all contain bugs which could be exploited by hackers!
What Maynor does is absurd. We all know software has bugs. The developers must be held accountable. But you can't do that unless you tell them what the hell the bug is, because they can't fix the bug until you tell them what it is!
Agree about Burnout. While - in my opinion - it had some duds (Revenge), it's generaly an awesome franchise, and I can't wait for a real next-gen entry. Burnout Racing + Motorstorm Car Destruction == Pure Awesome.
I bought some multiplayer games. Love how you can play 5-player games with four Remotes and a Gamecube pad. 5-Player Bomberman and Battle Lode Runner rule.
Also, Zelda and ActRaiser :-)
Admit it, you just love to hate Apple.
If anyone else does this, nobody complains. If it's Apple, all hell breaks loose.
Injuries != crimes. For example, in Switzerland, there is a direct correlation between availability of handguns and male suicides. Whether there is a causation is anyone's guess, but the correlation is there (sorry, source is in german).
Another example to consider: Break-ins in occupied homes are rare, but a family member unexpectedly coming home late at night is not. I doubt having a gun at home makes your family saver.
On one side you have gun crime, which we punish and should punish more. On the other side you have crimes adverted by legal carry. Carry stems from the right to self defense. That is an individual responsibility with individual liability. The police keep the peace and investigate after the fact.I'm sceptical about the crimes adverted by gun owners. Frankly, I'd prefer not to have wannabe cowboys without proper gun training running around protecting me. Doesn't really make me feel saver.
I have insurances for such things. If somebody wants to rob me, don't risk my life, thank you.
Yes.
Tetris clones like the one I made?Yes.
The point is whatever you want it to be.
I use mine to play Neo Geo games on-the-go on a nice, big screen. I also use it to play around with some game ideas. You could use it to watch TV shows. Or as a Walkman replacement. Or as an organizer. Or to show your pals the game you've made. Or to read a book. It's a toy. You use it for whatever the hell you want.
Also, I don't know what it costs to get a GP2X in the USA. I'm from Europe. I know the GP2X was cheaper than a DS plus a DS-X (which I also own, by the way, as well as a PSP. I just don't actually write software for them because it's so much easier with the GP2X).
Actually, it's part of what killed the Amiga. During the end of the Amiga's life cycle, many game devs stopped support for the Amiga and moved to the Genesis and SNES instead, because piracy on the Amiga was so rampant.
Turrican III, for example, one of the archetypical Amiga games, came out for the Genesis first, and was only later ported back to the Amiga. Factor 5 quoted piracy as the reason why the franchise moved to the Genesis.
There are actually commercial games created specifically for the GP2X (check out the store), but this is hardly the GP2X's point. Calling it a "knock-off," as Joreallean has done, is about the stupidest, most uninformed thing I've ever heard.
It's a handheld for people who are into the whole homebrew thing and don't want to a) constantly fight Sony with firmware upgrades or b) buy expensive hardware to get homebrew to run on an unsupported handheld like the DS. The GP2X is a fully supported, programmable, Linux-running handheld. If you want to go into a store and buy games, it's not for you. This handheld isn't for everybody. It's for a very specific subset of all gamers, and for them, it's a great piece of hardware.
Sorry for the rant.
I'm guessing you can catch the key events and then cancel bubbling? I haven't tried that, but it works in other browsers.
Which is why you report the iPod as stolen and get a signed police report. Anyway, since it would be so easy to frame somebody that way, I doubt anyone will get sued if his files turn up on sharing networks. It's probably more of a way for Apple and the record companies to track how many of the sold files make it to sharing networks, and a little incentive for users to not share their files.
In other news, Word files contain your name. If you register an application, it stores files containing your name on your disk. In fact, your OS stores your name on your hard drive! Just imagine what happens if somebody steals your computer... The thief would have access to your name!
If Apple had wanted the embedded names a secret, or if this was some kind of conspiracy, they would have encrypted them. They are there in plain text and can easily be removed if you so desire. In fact, even transcoding them to MP3 removes the names.
Quite frankly, I have no idea why this turned into this huge controversy. I doubt this can even be used to go after file sharers. After all, it's easy to fake the information and embed somebody else's names into an iTunes AAC file.
It's a little "Do not step on the lawn" sign. It doesn't keep you from stepping on the lawn, but it's a reminder that you shouldn't.
I don't know. I think it started out as a N64 game and was converted during development, but I don't know when the switch was announced. Do you? Would be interesting to know.
This is such a tired, stupid cliché that I do not even know anymore whether people who say it are serious.
Anyway, since most gun injuries are inflicted by non-outlaws, only outlaws - and the police, obviously - having guns would probably be a good thing.