You forget that a SDI system would be valuable if a missle carrying nuclear weapons was accidentally launched from a country such as Russia (you remember how faulty and outdated their equipment is?). I'd personally feel safer knowing that in the unlikely occurance of an accidental strike, we could stop one of the world's cities from being wiped out.
My biggest concern is the car CD players that actually are computers not being able to play these discs. Presumably the copy protection will be broken soon enough, so thats not really an issue.
Why would the breaking of the copy protection help those with cars? Maybe I'm just being ignorant or misunderstanding the above statement, but I don't see how this would work.
I don't know about you but I think this whole debate is irrelevant, as Microsoft Access is clearly the only product one would use for their database needs.;-)
People are wrong in assuming copy protection will never work, or if it does, no one will buy it. Some will be rather rudely surprised when the public blindly adopts the new standards. Yeah, copying will still be possible, but all the media giants have to do is make it more trouble than it's worth. This could happen sooner than you think.
I don't know about you, but I'll be moving to a place where freedom from inherently evil large corporations is absolute: North Korea.
Again, the reason it is so believable isn't the amount of information, but again, language choice. In The Silmarillion Tolkien creates a believable history of Middle Earth party because the style is familiar. The language is The Silmarillion is modeled after one of the most believed books in western history: the Bible.
In Lord of the Rings Tolkien also uses language to give the characters believable personalities. He writes much of it like a personal account (his thrid person viewpoint not withstanding). And the fact that his world was so much more fleshed out than he showed, meant that he avoided inconsistancies between the stories or nonsensical happenings.
Indeed, you are correct, but his mastery has little to do with plot, but rather with language.
The hate of literary critics for The Lord of the Rings baffles me, as it is one of the best-written books in history. Tolkien, a linguist, makes better use of language than any author in history.
For example: he is able to show point of view by word choice. In The Return of the King passages that focus on Merry or Pippen usually are riddled with short Anglo-Saxon words, those that focus on Gandalf have more of an Old-English flavor, and battle scenes often contain many more words with Latin origins.
Tolkien also is incredibly poetic, using such Shakespearian concepts as Iambic Pentameter frequently, as well as varied Alliteration.
Tolkien is underappriciated, not just by the general public, but by literary critics, it seems.
I think he meant that like 90% of the shots seemed to have some computer wankery behind them. Either adding shit into the background or fancy tricks. The actors weren't animated, and even Katz isn't dumb enough to think otherwise.
while Sega and Sony's stocks just dive lower and lower
While Sega's stock in indeed flirting with prices usually only seen by 3dfx owners because of Sega's console woes, the dip in Sony's price has little to do with their consoles which are extremely profitable (particularly the original Playstation, which has a huge installed user base perfect to sell $0.50 CDs to for $50). Sony's stock is a victim of the overall tech slump as well as some consumer electronics disasters (who knows how much money they lost on minidisc players?)
The Gamecube isn't going to happen for three reasons
1) Nintendo doesn't have enough hardware developers to develop a game console with the power of the Playstation2 or X-Box. Sony and Microsoft can afford to hire the best (Sony already has them from their home electronics division actually) and even Sega has a background in arcades that helps with the development of high quality graphics hardware needed for a new console.
2) Nintendo doesn't need a new console to make money. They are already making a fortune off the Pokemon franchise and the Gameboy (which generates far more profit than consoles which often have to be sold for a loss.) Nintendo could go the same path Sega went and focus on game development, an area far more profitable than hardware. Furthurmore, to compete with Microsoft and Sony, both of which can afford to sell the system for a loss which theyd recoup selling games, periferal hardware and software liscenses, Nintendo would have to sell their new console at a loss that might not be compensated later on.
3) The Gamecube was a likely failure anyway, lacking many third party developers, less powerful than the PS2 or Xbox and arriving a year later probably. Nintendo cannot survive by making games like Pokemon that are not only suitable for children, but designed with children in mind. Parents would be less likely to sink $300 - $400 into a Gamecube than to spend the $100 for a Dreamcast, even if more children want the Gamecube. Nintendo would have to appeal to an older age group to successfully market the Gamecube (they have made steps in this direction, though, with the adult-themed Conker.)
Yes, however the UN has no real "power" of its own. All of its influence comes from the voluntary cooperation from its member nations. This is unlike ICANN, which has concrete power of an element of world affairs, able to do as it pleases without need for cooperation from national governments. Hope this clears things up.
Here's how they go out of bussiness: debt. If you accumulate interest on your loans faster than you bring in money from subscriptions then you go bankrupt.
I would guess that before going under the publisher would arrange to sell the lucrative subscription rights to another publisher. So your subscription fees would be transfered to the new publisher.
How could they leave out John Romero, who advanced the gaming industry 10 years by showing every other developer what NOT to do if some suits hand you a company? What were they thinking? Sid Meier? Bah, all he showed how to do was be successful! John Romero showed us how to make the Battlefield Earth of computer games and still be able to suggest a sequel. I'm not even going to mention how they left out Cliffy B...
The reason these sites are getting charged up the wazoo is because they are huge! No wonder some sites pay thousands of dollars in bandwidth fees a month, their pages are 200k +! A lot of these are text based sites, which is even more perplexing. As broadband access has gotten cheaper for the masses, bandwidth for webmasters is still expensive as living hell, the difference is that they can now serve up a 500k page without worrying about the schmoe on a 14.4 modem that it would take years to load for (face it, almost EVERYBODY who uses the internet regularly has at least a 56k.) If you can make your page smaller, then you pay less for bandwidth, and get more profit. Certainly, there needs to be a better way to make money on the net, but thats only because its so easy to LOSE money running a site.
I wouldn't bet on it, as id has NEVER done a convincing story-based first person shooter. DOOM and Wolfenstein were great because they were first person shooters, who cared WHY you were fighting the aliens/nazis?! I won't doubt id, but the odds are against them: since to my knowledge
1) they employ NO professional writers.
2) they employ NO professional storyboarders.
3) most of their level designers from the DOOM era have left the company
I can think of no game EVER that does not break one of their rules (even if you disregard the one about 3d acceleration.) The gaming industry IS already extremely innovative, but it innovative one step at a time. A groundbreaking game like Deus Ex did not just happen but was built on the backs of Theif, System Shock and Ultima Underworld. I agree the flashy buzzwords should be removed, but almost any developer that would be interested in such a set of rules wouldn't use them anyway.
The prohibition on standard subjects (Rule 4) is especially absurd. There have been VERY VERY few games that did not include one of those. Some of the most innovative games of all time have! (Ultima had them, DOOM had them, Diablo had them)
These rules would force game developers to reinvent the wheel each time they start development. They would not only have to hire programmers and artists, but also a team of writers, and about a dozen designers. The idea that graphics should be representational instead of explicit has its merits (I like Ultima a lot better before Origin told me what the Avatar looked like), but has no place in todays game world.
Much like those they mention in rule #10, these fools should be kicked straight back to art school and stay there, as it is clear that they have not only never developed a great game, it seems they have never played one.
These are all good points, but I disagree about interactivity. There are very fun and successful games built around interactivity, such as the Sims. There is no goal in the Sims, it is just an "interactive sandbox" where the player can do whatever he or she pleases.
I understand your point (I love all three of those games) but they were all great because they let you assume a role of your choosing. In HalfLife you were Gordon Freeman, and you only knew and saw what he saw. It was linear, but it gave you the sensation of being otherwise. System Shock 2 is the same way.
Deus Ex on the otherhand is something else entirely. I'm not writing off all single-player games, just all linear ones. Deus Ex is incredibly non-linear. You could conceivably play it an infinate number of ways, and "create your own story."
The best games are not the ones with a linear, complex, plot (Metal Gear). All too often, the story takes over the game and we begin playing just to see the next cinema scene. Usually it devolves into a movie with a crappy interactive sequence in between each scene. There is promise in games like Deus Ex, but they still ignore the fact that games can be much more enjoyable if players are allowed to create their own story.
For example, some of my experiences playing UT or Tribes have rivaled action movies in excitement and drama. But since I'm taking part in it with other people, rather than following a predetermined path, the excitement is increased because I know that my next move determines what happens. If given a choice would you rather see through Superman's eyes or BE Superman. That's the difference in choice between these two game types.
While these E-Books are certainly nifty, if they are to ever be "the end of books as we know them" then that may be the end of comic books entirely. At the resolutions these e-books are running at now, comic books would lose a lot of their flexibility, and that's not even mentioning the lack of color. Though these things could be improved, there would be little incentive to do so, since words would overwhelmingly be the most popular feature. Words at 700+ DPI (at which many comics are printed) look much the same as words at 100 DPI. The only difference is that they are much more expensive.
Furthermore, comics are usually on larger size paper than books. If these E-books are paperback size, it would render most comics unreadable.
Not like this is going to happen though, since I doubt E-Paper will ever be cheaper than the real thing.
Unfortunately, you have almost no legal ground to stand on. There are almost NO limitations on how a private corporation can violate your rights, if you give them permission. If this is a public University (Clemson right?), you might have some options if they try to limit your freedom of speech (say the revoke your account because you posted uncomplimentary statements about the school.) Then you could sue. But if they are just making sure no one is using their connection for kiddie-porn, illegal hacking, etc, then theres not much you can do (or should do, really, since its harmless to you).
I honestly don't know how any small computer manufacturers can survive anymore. Gateway and Dell offer good prices and excellent support for Joe Consumer. (Compaq offers pretty colors for Joe Consumer.) Most high-performance users (gamers) will shop with a copmany like Falcon Northwest or Alienware, or build the computer themselves.
I used to know a guy who ran a small computer manufacturer. He's out of bussiness now, even though his bussiess was one of the first to do customization of computer systems (this was back in like 1992). It's just impossible to compete in price with Dell and Gateway, and in quality to Alienware and Falcon.
Slashdot Mirror
You forget that a SDI system would be valuable if a missle carrying nuclear weapons was accidentally launched from a country such as Russia (you remember how faulty and outdated their equipment is?). I'd personally feel safer knowing that in the unlikely occurance of an accidental strike, we could stop one of the world's cities from being wiped out.
Why would the breaking of the copy protection help those with cars? Maybe I'm just being ignorant or misunderstanding the above statement, but I don't see how this would work.
I don't know about you but I think this whole debate is irrelevant, as Microsoft Access is clearly the only product one would use for their database needs. ;-)
I don't know about you, but I'll be moving to a place where freedom from inherently evil large corporations is absolute: North Korea.
In Lord of the Rings Tolkien also uses language to give the characters believable personalities. He writes much of it like a personal account (his thrid person viewpoint not withstanding). And the fact that his world was so much more fleshed out than he showed, meant that he avoided inconsistancies between the stories or nonsensical happenings.
Indeed, you are correct, but his mastery has little to do with plot, but rather with language.
For example: he is able to show point of view by word choice. In The Return of the King passages that focus on Merry or Pippen usually are riddled with short Anglo-Saxon words, those that focus on Gandalf have more of an Old-English flavor, and battle scenes often contain many more words with Latin origins.
Tolkien also is incredibly poetic, using such Shakespearian concepts as Iambic Pentameter frequently, as well as varied Alliteration.
Tolkien is underappriciated, not just by the general public, but by literary critics, it seems.
I think he meant that like 90% of the shots seemed to have some computer wankery behind them. Either adding shit into the background or fancy tricks. The actors weren't animated, and even Katz isn't dumb enough to think otherwise.
While Sega's stock in indeed flirting with prices usually only seen by 3dfx owners because of Sega's console woes, the dip in Sony's price has little to do with their consoles which are extremely profitable (particularly the original Playstation, which has a huge installed user base perfect to sell $0.50 CDs to for $50). Sony's stock is a victim of the overall tech slump as well as some consumer electronics disasters (who knows how much money they lost on minidisc players?)
1) Nintendo doesn't have enough hardware developers to develop a game console with the power of the Playstation2 or X-Box. Sony and Microsoft can afford to hire the best (Sony already has them from their home electronics division actually) and even Sega has a background in arcades that helps with the development of high quality graphics hardware needed for a new console.
2) Nintendo doesn't need a new console to make money. They are already making a fortune off the Pokemon franchise and the Gameboy (which generates far more profit than consoles which often have to be sold for a loss.) Nintendo could go the same path Sega went and focus on game development, an area far more profitable than hardware. Furthurmore, to compete with Microsoft and Sony, both of which can afford to sell the system for a loss which theyd recoup selling games, periferal hardware and software liscenses, Nintendo would have to sell their new console at a loss that might not be compensated later on.
3) The Gamecube was a likely failure anyway, lacking many third party developers, less powerful than the PS2 or Xbox and arriving a year later probably. Nintendo cannot survive by making games like Pokemon that are not only suitable for children, but designed with children in mind. Parents would be less likely to sink $300 - $400 into a Gamecube than to spend the $100 for a Dreamcast, even if more children want the Gamecube. Nintendo would have to appeal to an older age group to successfully market the Gamecube (they have made steps in this direction, though, with the adult-themed Conker.)
Yes, however the UN has no real "power" of its own. All of its influence comes from the voluntary cooperation from its member nations. This is unlike ICANN, which has concrete power of an element of world affairs, able to do as it pleases without need for cooperation from national governments. Hope this clears things up.
Here's how they go out of bussiness: debt. If you accumulate interest on your loans faster than you bring in money from subscriptions then you go bankrupt.
I would guess that before going under the publisher would arrange to sell the lucrative subscription rights to another publisher. So your subscription fees would be transfered to the new publisher.
How could they leave out John Romero, who advanced the gaming industry 10 years by showing every other developer what NOT to do if some suits hand you a company? What were they thinking? Sid Meier? Bah, all he showed how to do was be successful! John Romero showed us how to make the Battlefield Earth of computer games and still be able to suggest a sequel. I'm not even going to mention how they left out Cliffy B...
The reason these sites are getting charged up the wazoo is because they are huge! No wonder some sites pay thousands of dollars in bandwidth fees a month, their pages are 200k +! A lot of these are text based sites, which is even more perplexing. As broadband access has gotten cheaper for the masses, bandwidth for webmasters is still expensive as living hell, the difference is that they can now serve up a 500k page without worrying about the schmoe on a 14.4 modem that it would take years to load for (face it, almost EVERYBODY who uses the internet regularly has at least a 56k.) If you can make your page smaller, then you pay less for bandwidth, and get more profit. Certainly, there needs to be a better way to make money on the net, but thats only because its so easy to LOSE money running a site.
I agree, this case is straightforward. Blizzard wins easily. I bet New Line is already dreaming up new names for their movie.
I wouldn't bet on it, as id has NEVER done a convincing story-based first person shooter. DOOM and Wolfenstein were great because they were first person shooters, who cared WHY you were fighting the aliens/nazis?! I won't doubt id, but the odds are against them: since to my knowledge
1) they employ NO professional writers.
2) they employ NO professional storyboarders.
3) most of their level designers from the DOOM era have left the company
The prohibition on standard subjects (Rule 4) is especially absurd. There have been VERY VERY few games that did not include one of those. Some of the most innovative games of all time have! (Ultima had them, DOOM had them, Diablo had them)
These rules would force game developers to reinvent the wheel each time they start development. They would not only have to hire programmers and artists, but also a team of writers, and about a dozen designers. The idea that graphics should be representational instead of explicit has its merits (I like Ultima a lot better before Origin told me what the Avatar looked like), but has no place in todays game world.
Much like those they mention in rule #10, these fools should be kicked straight back to art school and stay there, as it is clear that they have not only never developed a great game, it seems they have never played one.
These are all good points, but I disagree about interactivity. There are very fun and successful games built around interactivity, such as the Sims. There is no goal in the Sims, it is just an "interactive sandbox" where the player can do whatever he or she pleases.
Deus Ex on the otherhand is something else entirely. I'm not writing off all single-player games, just all linear ones. Deus Ex is incredibly non-linear. You could conceivably play it an infinate number of ways, and "create your own story."
For example, some of my experiences playing UT or Tribes have rivaled action movies in excitement and drama. But since I'm taking part in it with other people, rather than following a predetermined path, the excitement is increased because I know that my next move determines what happens. If given a choice would you rather see through Superman's eyes or BE Superman. That's the difference in choice between these two game types.
Furthermore, comics are usually on larger size paper than books. If these E-books are paperback size, it would render most comics unreadable.
Not like this is going to happen though, since I doubt E-Paper will ever be cheaper than the real thing.
Unfortunately, you have almost no legal ground to stand on. There are almost NO limitations on how a private corporation can violate your rights, if you give them permission. If this is a public University (Clemson right?), you might have some options if they try to limit your freedom of speech (say the revoke your account because you posted uncomplimentary statements about the school.) Then you could sue. But if they are just making sure no one is using their connection for kiddie-porn, illegal hacking, etc, then theres not much you can do (or should do, really, since its harmless to you).
Isn't it obvious what they can gain? (Hint: it starts with "m" and ends with "oney")
I used to know a guy who ran a small computer manufacturer. He's out of bussiness now, even though his bussiess was one of the first to do customization of computer systems (this was back in like 1992). It's just impossible to compete in price with Dell and Gateway, and in quality to Alienware and Falcon.
How about asking Nvidia what happened to my $200 of 3dfx stock? :-)