Maybe not these idiots, but the other guys who downloaded it and could like it enough to buy the original version, or their next game, won't. Many won't even know this version was broken on purpose, will just assume this company makes crappy games and won't likely buy from them in the future.
Piracy is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is quality. You make a quality product and ask a reasonable price for it and people will buy it.
Just to give you an example, minecraft has no DRM is easily pirated, and it was actually pirated from day 1 and a lot. Still Notch sold millions of copies and the game was a great and very profitable success.
I can give you several more examples. Hundreds of indie games that sold very well, producing results from small but reasonable profits to outstanding profits, like minecraft. All of them DRM free and widely pirated.
Nope. I am reading exactly what the message implies. If you choose to be a fool and deny reality it is your problem, but do not try to bring people who would rather exert their ability to think to your club.
U$ 1600,00 in sells in a single day for an obscure and very low tech title is very reasonable. Be honest with yourself, do you really think they would sell more than this if piracy didn't exist?
Usually a pirated copy will be better than the original one. It will have all the former features and none of its DRM. The few times I bought games with DRM I ended downloading a "pirate" copy of the very same games to be able to play them without annoyances and anywhere I want.
But it is a message nonetheless, and inaccurate as such, defeating the purpose of the manifest, which was to imply that piracy ruins game companies. All in all they only succeeded in making fools of themselves and sabotaging their own game by antagonizing their potential customers.
It has absolutely nothing to do with a straw man argument. You just proved that besides being unable to read and comprehend text you have absolutely no clue about logical fallacies either.
The "pirated" version makes you fail unconditionally due to piracy. The company is therefore making a manifest through this version and by doing it implying that piracy ruins any game as an inexorable force, manifest whose whole basis is disproved by their own success.
Apparently you have read and comprehension problems. That is exactly what the poster you are criticizing said. Additionally he said that it is ironic because they proved the idea is false by pirating their own game (the simulator) and still having profit, as you fail to understand.
Nah. "My world"is a world where artists are paid as everyone else, on a job base, and not on a life long artificial monopoly based on artificial scarcity. Unfair is "artists" using our public domain works as basis to "create" their art and sequestering the results from the same public domain.
If you want to make money being an artist, great: just perform. Work like everybody else, and do not count on copyrights for your retirement plan. Just save money, again, like everybody else.
Copyright will disappear, not because I want or because it is right or wrong, but because it can't be enforced in our world anymore. It is an obsolete concept.
The differences between a current and a tradeable commodity (especially virtual tradeable commodities) are not so clear anymore these days, and tend to get even more cloudy as time passes.
And even now many still can without using copyright in any way, and you will live in "my world" sooner or later, because enforcing copyright is becoming progressively unsustainable, and that is happening very quickly.
The logic fail is on your part. When you dismiss the idea that third part sales are economically relevant you dismiss the need to take measures against it, especially considering the measures add annoyances to your users. If you, as a publisher, still decide for adding those measures, either you are a complete idiot or you want to prevent those sales, making them relevant.
You may be less productive if you cannot dedicate exclusive to your art, but to society as a whole it makes very little difference. Art will always exist and the art you cannot deliver, for not being in your ideal conditions to create it, is not so relevant as to sustain the argument that artificial scarcity is benign or desirable.
Furthermore, society has no obligation to give artists retirement plans in excess of other people's. If you are a musician, for example, and want a retirement plan, save the money you make with your shows, which will be far in excess of the money you will end making selling songs though record companies anyway.
Publishers nowadays pay very little, and very few of them give even a passing thought about the quality of what they publish. They don't pay entire teams, and they don't even pay well a single professional with adequate qualifications. It is usually the author script and nothing else, except for maybe a proof reading if that much.
Furthermore textbook knowledge is quite limited and not that well organized many times. On the other hand you can find reasonably organized and well explained material about almost anything in the Internet, free, made by people who do it just to help spread knowledge and nothing else, and these people are not just a few, but many.
And the term "paper" originally came from the Latin word "papyrus", which comes from the greek , both meaning a material produced from the pith of the papyrus plant. So?
(a) Nope, "White Paper" is an accepted term well outside any IT field as well as within them, regardless of any personal bias or dislike you have toward the term.
(b) Monographs are nothing more than published papers. They have no intuit of being didactic or serving as learning material.
Regarding the availability of content, your ignorance and inability to find knowledge does not make the Internet a less rich resource. I understand that you need people to hold your hand but that is a limitation you have and not a problem with the content available in the Internet.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe not these idiots, but the other guys who downloaded it and could like it enough to buy the original version, or their next game, won't. Many won't even know this version was broken on purpose, will just assume this company makes crappy games and won't likely buy from them in the future.
Sure it was not. The point was to accomplish whatever AcidPenguin9873 thinks it should. Everybody knows that.
Piracy is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is quality. You make a quality product and ask a reasonable price for it and people will buy it.
Just to give you an example, minecraft has no DRM is easily pirated, and it was actually pirated from day 1 and a lot. Still Notch sold millions of copies and the game was a great and very profitable success.
I can give you several more examples. Hundreds of indie games that sold very well, producing results from small but reasonable profits to outstanding profits, like minecraft. All of them DRM free and widely pirated.
Nope. I am reading exactly what the message implies. If you choose to be a fool and deny reality it is your problem, but do not try to bring people who would rather exert their ability to think to your club.
U$ 1600,00 in sells in a single day for an obscure and very low tech title is very reasonable. Be honest with yourself, do you really think they would sell more than this if piracy didn't exist?
Not anymore. Welcome to the last 10 years.
Usually a pirated copy will be better than the original one. It will have all the former features and none of its DRM. The few times I bought games with DRM I ended downloading a "pirate" copy of the very same games to be able to play them without annoyances and anywhere I want.
But it is a message nonetheless, and inaccurate as such, defeating the purpose of the manifest, which was to imply that piracy ruins game companies. All in all they only succeeded in making fools of themselves and sabotaging their own game by antagonizing their potential customers.
It has absolutely nothing to do with a straw man argument. You just proved that besides being unable to read and comprehend text you have absolutely no clue about logical fallacies either.
The "pirated" version makes you fail unconditionally due to piracy. The company is therefore making a manifest through this version and by doing it implying that piracy ruins any game as an inexorable force, manifest whose whole basis is disproved by their own success.
Apparently you have read and comprehension problems. That is exactly what the poster you are criticizing said. Additionally he said that it is ironic because they proved the idea is false by pirating their own game (the simulator) and still having profit, as you fail to understand.
Nah. "My world"is a world where artists are paid as everyone else, on a job base, and not on a life long artificial monopoly based on artificial scarcity. Unfair is "artists" using our public domain works as basis to "create" their art and sequestering the results from the same public domain.
If you want to make money being an artist, great: just perform. Work like everybody else, and do not count on copyrights for your retirement plan. Just save money, again, like everybody else.
Copyright will disappear, not because I want or because it is right or wrong, but because it can't be enforced in our world anymore. It is an obsolete concept.
The differences between a current and a tradeable commodity (especially virtual tradeable commodities) are not so clear anymore these days, and tend to get even more cloudy as time passes.
As it happens with bitcoins everywhere but in Canada now, apparently.
And even now many still can without using copyright in any way, and you will live in "my world" sooner or later, because enforcing copyright is becoming progressively unsustainable, and that is happening very quickly.
The logic fail is on your part. When you dismiss the idea that third part sales are economically relevant you dismiss the need to take measures against it, especially considering the measures add annoyances to your users. If you, as a publisher, still decide for adding those measures, either you are a complete idiot or you want to prevent those sales, making them relevant.
You may be less productive if you cannot dedicate exclusive to your art, but to society as a whole it makes very little difference. Art will always exist and the art you cannot deliver, for not being in your ideal conditions to create it, is not so relevant as to sustain the argument that artificial scarcity is benign or desirable.
Furthermore, society has no obligation to give artists retirement plans in excess of other people's. If you are a musician, for example, and want a retirement plan, save the money you make with your shows, which will be far in excess of the money you will end making selling songs though record companies anyway.
If that was the case there would be no motive to make it harder (or impossible).
MIT OCW certainly is a start. The lectures will certainly help a lot in ways the textbook could not.
Then for reading material you could use some or all of these (if you like it chewed up for you):
http://www.jirka.org/ra/
http://www.webskate101.com/webnotes/home.htmld/home.html
http://www.trillia.com/zakon-analysisI.html
If you can deal with non linear information even Wikipedia has very extensive articles on Analysis. You can start from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_analysis
Or MathWorld:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/classroom/Analysis.html
Apparently your ability for self-delusion is quite something.
Exactly.
Publishers nowadays pay very little, and very few of them give even a passing thought about the quality of what they publish. They don't pay entire teams, and they don't even pay well a single professional with adequate qualifications. It is usually the author script and nothing else, except for maybe a proof reading if that much.
Furthermore textbook knowledge is quite limited and not that well organized many times. On the other hand you can find reasonably organized and well explained material about almost anything in the Internet, free, made by people who do it just to help spread knowledge and nothing else, and these people are not just a few, but many.
Just tell me the subject you are looking for and I will do you this favor. Once.
And the term "paper" originally came from the Latin word "papyrus", which comes from the greek , both meaning a material produced from the pith of the papyrus plant. So?
Your class may "require" stupid irrelevant textbooks.
Only if the bought teacher forces you to have it.
Otherwise what you said is basically false, especially for real CS stuff.
(a) Nope, "White Paper" is an accepted term well outside any IT field as well as within them, regardless of any personal bias or dislike you have toward the term.
(b) Monographs are nothing more than published papers. They have no intuit of being didactic or serving as learning material.
Regarding the availability of content, your ignorance and inability to find knowledge does not make the Internet a less rich resource. I understand that you need people to hold your hand but that is a limitation you have and not a problem with the content available in the Internet.