A barely legible article that contains the absolute minimum information about a potentially lethal operation involving jillions of volts of capacitance and using power tools to cut almost-but-not-quite into one of the most toxic substances around, which, not at all incidentally, we are advised to just "dispose" of when we're done with it. Gee, I wonder what the author did with his? Tossed it in the garbage, or throw it into the sewer?
Frankly I'd rather that we just linked to bomb making instructions, as it would probably result in fewer acute injuries and chronic health problems.
Has about a 12 inch waist. No adult female can look anything like that. Please feel free to go back to wanking over drawings of pre-adolescent girls with implants.
playboy.com gets filtered for anyone who can't figure out how to use a web proxy outside Australia (i.e. politicians).
HorseAndDogBondageUpTheButtSex.mpg et al is still readily available on eDonkey; in fact, it's now more available than playboy.com to little Bruce and Sheila.
Conclusion: politicians declare a victory, playboy loses some advertising revenue, a few 'technical advisors' buy new Mercedes, and vetinary schools in Australia see a big rise in applications.
"As if the fact that the Nokia N-Gage is a pile of shit was not enough by itself to keep gamers everywhere from purchasing it, the head of Nokia's entertainment division decided to insult his target audience. In an article over at Gamespot he had this to say regarding their competition.
"Game Boy is for 10-year-olds," said Ilkka Raiskinen, head of Nokia's entertainment and media arm. "If you're 20 or 25 years old, it's probably not a good idea to draw a Game Boy out of your pocket on a Friday night in a public space."
Dear Mr. Nokia, my name is Gabe. You might know me better as a member of the lucrative 18-25 year old male demographic. That's right, I am a 24 year old early adopter with disposable income just burning a hole in my pocket and a thirst for the latest technological gadgets. I also happen to be a gamer which makes me the exact sort of person who might purchase your new cellular phone/portable game system. Unfortunately for you that will never happen.
Your first mistake was creating a dual purpose product that fails miserably at both of its purposes. Your phone is awkward and uncomely. Your game system is undesirable and insipid.
Your second mistake was in allowing Mr. Raiskinen to ever open his fucking mouth in public. His statement is so absurd that it borders on the humorous. In fact if I were not quite certain that he was serious I would think it was a joke. Not a good idea to take out a game boy in a public place? Does this man even live on this planet? Did he make these comments from inside some kind of protective bubble orbiting the earth, insulated from the day to day happenings of it's inhabitants? If I am out with my buddies on a Friday night and we are waiting in line for a movie or some other event I can guarantee that Game Boys will come out. Not one of my friends is without a GBA. They are practically a necessity at this point. Like bread or water. It is the poor young man still playing snake on his cell phone in the airport that gets the pitting look from our group.
We even strung our link cables across the seats in the airplane on our way to E3 in order to partake in some four player Puyo Pop. Whereas airline regulations will not even allow me to turn on your masterfully designed game system while anywhere near a fucking airplane much less play a game to pass the time. Oh and speaking of great design, having to remove the battery in order to change games...brilliant.
Between your insulting advertising, shitty fucking product and infuriating public comments it's almost like you are TRYING to get gamers to hate you. I honestly cannot understand how a single company could make so many mistakes. I await your next move with absolute fear because at this rate there is no telling what you might do. Perhaps Nokia agents will scour the globe seeking out gamers and then kicking them firmly in the yam sack. Or maybe letters! Mailed out to gamers worldwide that upon opening release deadly nanomachines into the air that once inhaled by the gamer begin to devour him from the inside out. God only knows what horrors await us gamers at the hands of these Finnish devils. Stay vigilant my friends!
"
They could argue fair use, but they'd have to argue it. It's not clear on the face of it. They are making commercial use, but only of a small part of the work and with no effect on its market. "quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment" might be stretched to cover it, but I agree that until they prove otherwise, it's infringement.
The "fair use" defence in this case would have to be using a small subset for "criticism or review", is one of the things that Sony's Digital Rights Miminiser attempts to prevent. However you argue it, they are not practicing what they preach.
King Aethelred of Wessex announced that he had purchased protection from the Viking raiders that have plagued our shores. "It was really easy," announced Aethelred, "all I had to do was pay money to another bunch of pirates to protect us from the first bunch. Now the problem is solved for ever, and I can't see any potential downsides." On the news, shares in PlunderCorp rose 35% in anticipation of a rich and ongoing new revenue stream.
This is about Red Hat charging more for supporting modified systems.
So what is Microsoft's response to those people who 'modify' their systems (inadvertently) by installing the Sony DRM-rootkit?
[Paraphrased] "h4h4h4h4 j00 f413 17!!!! Upgrade to 64 bit Windows."
Red Hat will at least offer support if you modify your system. Microsoft just tells you to take it up with whoever modified it. Who would you rather go with?
Yes, yes, you did IP law 101. We're talking about the specific case here of a copyright holder licensing their work under "GPL 2.0 or any future version". Does your understanding of rights not include the right to limit duplication or use?
I am totally going to donate money to this guy, because according to my calculations, some of the inevitable side effects will be the generation of anti-gravity and a THEREE INCH PENNIS EXTENSHION OVERNITE!!!
There should be one set of privacy laws and standards, particularly in regard to storage of information online. Now, who can we get to administrate that single standard? Hmmm.
Why is it "impossible" that GPL 3.0 isn't going to hurt your rights? Please be specific in your answer, and remember that your audience are coders. We generally use binary logic, not fuzzy.
Very, very interesting question. From their web site:
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Boston, MA, USA.
The Free Software Foundation is directed by:
* Richard M. Stallman, President * Peter T. Brown, Executive Director
The Free Software Foundation has six people on its board of directors. They are:
* Geoffrey Knauth, Senior Software Engineer at SFA, Inc. * Lawrence Lessig, Professor of Law at Stanford University * Eben Moglen, Professor of Law and Legal History at Columbia University * Henri Poole, Founder of CivicActions, a grassroots campaign technology consulting firm * Richard M. Stallman, Founder of FSF and the GNU Project and author of the GNU GPL * Gerald J. Sussman, Professor of Computer Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
They also have 'associate members', but the status of the entity that we know as the Free Software Foundation is unclear. There's no mention of a constitution, and they don't appear to be incorporated. It looks, on the face of it, like a private members' club.
It would be very interesting to see the FSF's constitution, particularly the terms that cover what exactly it is (private club? limited company? corporation?), who exactly controls it and what control they have, and the process for getting onto the board.
Which option is more evil (and therefore more likely)? I'm guessing that they'll only make the crippled version, but will make and distribute plenty of the bits that turn it into a usable system at a grossly inflated price.
What would you rather do? Wait indefinitely for the real system (knowing that they might never make enough for you to get one), or buy the retared one plus the (let's face it, required) add ons today?
When you consider the number of Linuz Xealots using binary-only display drivers and BIOSes.
Then why would the employees stay?
on
Pixar For Sale?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Unless Disney give them serious personal investment in the company, they'll just up and leave to form a new competing studio. That's pretty much par for the course.
You'd need many millions of dollars and to have an agenda based more on discrediting the GPL than on protecting any particular copyrighted work. Know anyone who fits that Bill?
Slashdot Mirror
A barely legible article that contains the absolute minimum information about a potentially lethal operation involving jillions of volts of capacitance and using power tools to cut almost-but-not-quite into one of the most toxic substances around, which, not at all incidentally, we are advised to just "dispose" of when we're done with it. Gee, I wonder what the author did with his? Tossed it in the garbage, or throw it into the sewer?
Frankly I'd rather that we just linked to bomb making instructions, as it would probably result in fewer acute injuries and chronic health problems.
Has about a 12 inch waist. No adult female can look anything like that. Please feel free to go back to wanking over drawings of pre-adolescent girls with implants.
playboy.com gets filtered for anyone who can't figure out how to use a web proxy outside Australia (i.e. politicians).
HorseAndDogBondageUpTheButtSex.mpg et al is still readily available on eDonkey; in fact, it's now more available than playboy.com to little Bruce and Sheila.
Conclusion: politicians declare a victory, playboy loses some advertising revenue, a few 'technical advisors' buy new Mercedes, and vetinary schools in Australia see a big rise in applications.
"We come swinging the olive branch of peace."
"As if the fact that the Nokia N-Gage is a pile of shit was not enough by itself to keep gamers everywhere from purchasing it, the head of Nokia's entertainment division decided to insult his target audience. In an article over at Gamespot he had this to say regarding their competition.
"Game Boy is for 10-year-olds," said Ilkka Raiskinen, head of Nokia's entertainment and media arm. "If you're 20 or 25 years old, it's probably not a good idea to draw a Game Boy out of your pocket on a Friday night in a public space."
Dear Mr. Nokia, my name is Gabe. You might know me better as a member of the lucrative 18-25 year old male demographic. That's right, I am a 24 year old early adopter with disposable income just burning a hole in my pocket and a thirst for the latest technological gadgets. I also happen to be a gamer which makes me the exact sort of person who might purchase your new cellular phone/portable game system. Unfortunately for you that will never happen.
Your first mistake was creating a dual purpose product that fails miserably at both of its purposes. Your phone is awkward and uncomely. Your game system is undesirable and insipid.
Your second mistake was in allowing Mr. Raiskinen to ever open his fucking mouth in public. His statement is so absurd that it borders on the humorous. In fact if I were not quite certain that he was serious I would think it was a joke. Not a good idea to take out a game boy in a public place? Does this man even live on this planet? Did he make these comments from inside some kind of protective bubble orbiting the earth, insulated from the day to day happenings of it's inhabitants? If I am out with my buddies on a Friday night and we are waiting in line for a movie or some other event I can guarantee that Game Boys will come out. Not one of my friends is without a GBA. They are practically a necessity at this point. Like bread or water. It is the poor young man still playing snake on his cell phone in the airport that gets the pitting look from our group.
We even strung our link cables across the seats in the airplane on our way to E3 in order to partake in some four player Puyo Pop. Whereas airline regulations will not even allow me to turn on your masterfully designed game system while anywhere near a fucking airplane much less play a game to pass the time. Oh and speaking of great design, having to remove the battery in order to change games...brilliant.
Between your insulting advertising, shitty fucking product and infuriating public comments it's almost like you are TRYING to get gamers to hate you. I honestly cannot understand how a single company could make so many mistakes. I await your next move with absolute fear because at this rate there is no telling what you might do. Perhaps Nokia agents will scour the globe seeking out gamers and then kicking them firmly in the yam sack. Or maybe letters! Mailed out to gamers worldwide that upon opening release deadly nanomachines into the air that once inhaled by the gamer begin to devour him from the inside out. God only knows what horrors await us gamers at the hands of these Finnish devils. Stay vigilant my friends! "
Can't they just download the patches?
They could argue fair use, but they'd have to argue it. It's not clear on the face of it. They are making commercial use, but only of a small part of the work and with no effect on its market. "quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment" might be stretched to cover it, but I agree that until they prove otherwise, it's infringement.
The "fair use" defence in this case would have to be using a small subset for "criticism or review", is one of the things that Sony's Digital Rights Miminiser attempts to prevent. However you argue it, they are not practicing what they preach.
King Aethelred of Wessex announced that he had purchased protection from the Viking raiders that have plagued our shores. "It was really easy," announced Aethelred, "all I had to do was pay money to another bunch of pirates to protect us from the first bunch. Now the problem is solved for ever, and I can't see any potential downsides." On the news, shares in PlunderCorp rose 35% in anticipation of a rich and ongoing new revenue stream.
This is about Red Hat charging more for supporting modified systems.
So what is Microsoft's response to those people who 'modify' their systems (inadvertently) by installing the Sony DRM-rootkit?
[Paraphrased] "h4h4h4h4 j00 f413 17!!!! Upgrade to 64 bit Windows."
Red Hat will at least offer support if you modify your system. Microsoft just tells you to take it up with whoever modified it. Who would you rather go with?
FIGHT THE POWER!
Yes, yes, you did IP law 101. We're talking about the specific case here of a copyright holder licensing their work under "GPL 2.0 or any future version". Does your understanding of rights not include the right to limit duplication or use?
I am totally going to donate money to this guy, because according to my calculations, some of the inevitable side effects will be the generation of anti-gravity and a THEREE INCH PENNIS EXTENSHION OVERNITE!!!
If it were possible to make $100 laptops without making a loss, then why is nobody undercutting the incumbents and selling me a $105 laptop right now?
There should be one set of privacy laws and standards, particularly in regard to storage of information online. Now, who can we get to administrate that single standard? Hmmm.
Why is it "impossible" that GPL 3.0 isn't going to hurt your rights? Please be specific in your answer, and remember that your audience are coders. We generally use binary logic, not fuzzy.
Very, very interesting question. From their web site:
They also have 'associate members', but the status of the entity that we know as the Free Software Foundation is unclear. There's no mention of a constitution, and they don't appear to be incorporated. It looks, on the face of it, like a private members' club.
It would be very interesting to see the FSF's constitution, particularly the terms that cover what exactly it is (private club? limited company? corporation?), who exactly controls it and what control they have, and the process for getting onto the board.
Which option is more evil (and therefore more likely)? I'm guessing that they'll only make the crippled version, but will make and distribute plenty of the bits that turn it into a usable system at a grossly inflated price.
What would you rather do? Wait indefinitely for the real system (knowing that they might never make enough for you to get one), or buy the retared one plus the (let's face it, required) add ons today?
Is that a bit like how foetuses are prematurely 'released' from the womb?
When you consider the number of Linuz Xealots using binary-only display drivers and BIOSes.
Unless Disney give them serious personal investment in the company, they'll just up and leave to form a new competing studio. That's pretty much par for the course.
Curiously, I find myself in agreement with the gist of his reviews a lot more than I do with this 'Zonk' guy.
Half Life 2 runs like a dream on my Athlon 1200, 768MB RAM and GeForce 4 ti4800 card. The Doom 3 engine is a pig in a wig.
You'd need many millions of dollars and to have an agenda based more on discrediting the GPL than on protecting any particular copyrighted work. Know anyone who fits that Bill?
Where in the GPL version 2 does it say "irrevocable and in perpetuity"?