What did you people [Universal] do before records? You existed and your people made money.
No they didn't. Media companies didn't exist before Records. Universal Music Group didn't exist before 1934 (as Decca Records). Vinyl Records were invented in 1881. Audio radio broadcasting didn't take off until the 20's. Basically, the media companies were born from these technologies, therefore they did nothing before these technologies existed. Now the Internet has started pushing the media companies into irrelevance and they feel the noose closing around their necks. They're having trouble finding new talent that want to sign with them because YouTube and Patreon and others have already performed the massive distribution for these artists without signed in blood contracts that Lucifer would be proud of. Every distribution mole Media Companies try to whack down, two more pop up, and the spring on the original mole recoils back harder causing the corps to hit themselves in the head with the mallet each time. They're finding that when both their former customers AND people with talent that's worth anything want nothing to do with them it's getting more and more difficult to survive.
Hopefully they'll find out sooner than later that they can't.
I should have probably mentioned in my other post on this level that my experience is meant as an agreement to the parent and giving a baseline datapoint of the minimum level that one must meet to be considered a real answer that shows Open Drivers on ATI/AMD can outperform the Open nouveau driver on nVidia, given that AMD's proprietary offering could not beat an equivalent nVidia offering (according to Tom's Hardware) using the open offering on my system, and was torn to shreds using nVidia's proprietary offering.
Single data point, personal experience anecdotal and all that jazz, but:
In my Linux Desktop rig (Mint 17 Desktop) I've run an ATI R9 270 using Catalyst and an nVidia GeForce 760 using nouveau and CUDA (not at the same time); I've been a lot happier with the GeForce with the nouveau drivers than the performance out of the Radeon. Also, installing the CUDA drivers to take advantage of the parallel compiling/processing has taken the performance through the roof and IMHO blew away the 270. The nVidia ran cooler when 100% pegged never even reaching 60C (usually topped off at 56-58C) where the R9 would easily reach 70-80C under load, occasionally maxing out at 85C. Blender-Renders using the Cycles engine and CUDA drivers also took about 3/4-7/8 of the time to render a scene than the ATI would... if and when I could get Blender to recognize the OpenCL drivers for GPU processing on the ATI.
To summarize, in my experience nVidia/Intel has just been a more stable and more powerful platform than the recent AMD/ATI offerings. Yeah, you pay more, but there's a lot more value when high end processing matters. It's a shame too. For the 2000's we were an AMD house, and we were happy with what we got. For the higher price of Intel at the time, there just wasn't the performance gain to justify it over AMD; unlike now. The next AMD system we built in 2011 as an HTPC wound up being an unstable heap under Windows and Linux. Unless AMD can suddenly get its shit together in the next year or two, it looks like at least the 2010's are gonna be owned by Intel/nVidia.
Actually Vice Versa. Premera got hacked long before Anthem; Anthem just didn't have nearly as much time between breach and releasing the fact to the public as Premera did.
If it weren't for the AC my "Days since last Sarkeesian Incident" counter would still be counting, instead of writing 68 to the database and resetting to 0.
If you didn't do the online grind on BattleNet, there was quite the story to follow with D2. Yes, Diablo helped to create the Real Life Work Simulators that we have today by using the grind mechanic on BattleNet. I never played for the epic gear, I played for the quests, puzzles, and story progression.
As another example I watch my roommate play Destiny from time to time, and I just don't get it. He's always playing the same fucking maps over and over just to get achievements and the new shiny armor/gun... I played it for about 20 minutes and it bored the hell outta me. Halo did better for me, even though it grates on my roommate's skin that I have all kinds of Achievement holes. I just tell him to STFU, my games my way, your games yours. I don't want to leave one grind for another when I get home from work. Especially now I look for stuff that is (relatively) low action, high interaction, and quick and deep with the story rewards.
How is that any different from purchasing something on Amazon.com?
No difference there. However, there's a crapton of difference from when I buy an offline game from my local flea-market. Guess who doesn't get any tracking information from that purchase? Some games I've purchased this way: Doom 3, Diablo II BattleChest (fraction of the cost Wal-fart wants for it), Oblivion, GTA3...etc. Yes they're older. Yes these types of games are getting harder and harder to find as everyone goes to the Online Market. I just find that these older games have so much more to offer than the new crap that's coming out. Creativity in story and gameplay just doesn't seem to factor into anything anymore. It's all whack 37 more moles to get shiny golden hammer that can whack another 150 stronger moles so you can get the Platinum Hammer with a flamethrower to whack another 300 armor plated moles.... grinding for the sake of grinding. I could barely stand Grinding for the sake of Story.
So what happens when the speed limit drops 20 mph suddenly with no warning nor change in environment that would obviously require a drop in speed, as opposed to the arbitrary drop? Locals who know that this happen tend to be prepared for it and can follow the "don't speed" rule easily. People passing through will not necessarily be prepared for this sudden change and won't know about it until the blue lights are flashing in their mirror.
In response to you, the defense is "Sometimes easier said than done, especially in corrupt municipalities."
For you and me, this is a non-issue. Games are supposed to be fun. For my roommate who's a real achievement/gamerscore whore, I'd have to hear him bitching about him having to re-do all the back-bending he's done to get those obscure achievements. He goes after these things like he's actually making money off of them, instead of realizing that it's sucking his wallet and soul dry. For people like that, games are work; while they'll say they're having fun, their attitude doesn't show it one bit.
If we were talking about the physical drives with heads, platters, sectors, motors, etc you'd be correct. We're talking about Solid State Drives. No moving parts. Which means no moving heads. Also means that sectors (if that's even the correct term on an SSD) can't be killed by a non-existent head.
I think I see what you're trying to say here, but what you actually said is incorrect. To put it the way you did, 5% of $3000 is $150. In the context of the license, which is what you seem to be thinking of here, a game using UE4, Epic does not charge for any revenue the game makes up to $3,000 in a quarter. This would mean, provided I understand the wording correctly, that at $3,001, Epic makes five cents that quarter. A game that generates $10,000 gross revenue in a single quarter would net Epic $350 for the engine (5% of $7,000 eligible dollars).
Except when the only thing I'd wind up using the service for over the course of 5 years (as if that were even an option with Apple) would be for a battery replacement. I've never had a screen crack, and the one time I've had a phone develop a dead pixel line after 3 years of use (Samsung Infuse 4g) I had my upgrade to use anyway; I've never had a phone just stop working; I've never dropped my phone in a puddle, let alone a toilet; and I've never had to call customer service to troubleshoot a phone. I have, however, had to get a new battery for a phone about every year to year and a half. More often than not a battery replacement came not because of any difference in how long it kept a charge, but in performing my normal monthly inspection of the battery (which can't be done on a sealed battery) visible swelling had occurred.
Now in getting a battery replaced, I'd be plopping $20-50 on a replacement battery either online or at RadioShack or BatteriesPlus, having it within a few days if not immediately, and then inserting it in my phone and plugging it up overnight. I'd be without a phone only as long as overnight; which is fine because I do not accept calls after 9pm as a rule, anyway. Compare that with what would happen with AppleCare: I'd have to take a day off from work to drive the phone to Atlanta during Apple Store business hours(nearest Apple Store location, about 2 hours drive time). Have the Condescending Hipster behind the counter inspect the device to make sure that it hasn't been exposed to too much humidity (welcome to Georgia) and thus valid for the replacement battery (as opposed to charging me the deductible for a replacement phone in the event that I let the phone sweat too much), having him keep the phone for him to send it out to get the battery replaced (about a week) after which I'd have to make another drive up to Atlanta to pick it up. In the mean time, if I didn't have a spare phone to use, I'd be SOL for getting calls in that time, because of course they don't offer loaners. So actually you're right; not only is it essentially $99 for the battery, but it's also the opportunity cost of 2 days off from work, half a tank of gas, 8 hours worth of travel time, and a week without a phone; just for a stinking battery.
Read the argument that I indicated was the straw man. Read it carefully. Now read the way I tore it down. I only said the government would be hard pressed to make a decisive override, not that they couldn't. To point out, Shakrai made the direct question [paraphrased to include context] "Can Uncle Sam override some States' decisions as a matter of public policy not to engage in public solid waste collection but rather to rely on the private sector for such services?" To answer the question in Shakrai's favor to the argument he is trying to make, the answer would be "No."
My response tears down the half of the argument that tries to make a 1:1 comparison between solid waste disposal within state boundaries and municipal internet services that by definition create interstate commerce. Your argument that through tonal interpretation seems to come as a defense to Shakrai in an attempt to berate me actually pulls down the rest of his argument as a house of cards. Your argument shows that in using Federal Regulatory policies and procedures over solid waste disposal, Uncle Sam actually can, in fact, override any decision the States' have made in whether they can rely on the private sector for the services.
In essence, with your help, we have shown Shakrai that yes, the Federal Government can and often does override decisions made by the States, and that his argument held no ground whatsoever to stand on. So, the argument was definitely a Straw Man. I chose not to tear it completely down. You did that for me.
To summarize: Through the EPA, the Federal Government can regulate and override decisions that states can make regarding solid state waste management, including whether or not public entities can use private companies for management or that it must manage waste itself. Through the FCC, the Federal Government can dictate and override decisions that states can make regarding internet connectivity, including whether or not public entities can build out their own networking infrastructure to connect to the internet; which the FCC now says that they must be allowed to.
Some States have decided as a matter of public policy not to engage in public solid waste collection but rather to rely on the private sector for such services. Can Uncle Sam override such decisions?
Objection: Straw Man Argument!
There is nothing that has to cross state lines when it comes to solid waste collection, so the Government would be hard pressed to prove that interstate commerce is affected by the state deciding a private company can manage their trash. With the Internet, however, you cannot set up a municipal network and not immediately be connected to infrastructure that links that community with the rest of the world, let alone every other state in the nation. This alone give the Federal Government the ability to regulate and override state laws regarding the creation of such networks.
If on the other hand a municipality was creating a network just for its own borders and does not have the potential to be able to communicate over the Internet, then this the state could regulate without having to worry about the Feds coming down on them (in theory anyway; Feds would probably still try and then it would be decided in the courts, which have a tendency to side with the Feds using Article 1 Section 8 clause 3 of the Constitution.
By the way... For all these people saying that the FCC is overstepping its bounds with this decision and that Congress will overturn this ruling: The only way Congress can do that at this point is by dissolving the FCC because this is exactly the sort of thing that Congress created the FCC to regulate in the first place... and by its creation, Congress gave the FCC its current authority to regulate interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. And do you seriously think that Congress will vote to abolish a government revenue stream such as the FCC?
Actually, the light from the events in question reached us and were recorded on film to be released to the public with added dramatization scenes for a better narrative in 1977, 1980, and 1983. Unfortunately, the initial events that alerted our scientists to these epic space battles could only be documented and not captured on film due to limitations of technology at the time. This led to the events being reproduced roughly 20 years later instead of being a live broadcast, leading to a degradation in the narrative... Kinda like Rescue 911.
I compete with myself, trying to be a better person today than yesterday. Does that mean I am aggressive with myself?
Yes.
If you fail, do you just not even care? Or do you get a twinge of frustration with yourself and proclaim that you will do better tomorrow? If the former, then what even motivates you to get out of bed, let alone self improve? If it's the latter, that frustration...that anger... you feel is aggression. Without it, there is no improvement.
Slashdot Mirror
But is it also trivial to ensure that your music is truly original, not an infringing accidental copy of an existing song?
Because the labels are so very good at making sure that songs stay musically original.
What did you people [Universal] do before records? You existed and your people made money.
No they didn't. Media companies didn't exist before Records. Universal Music Group didn't exist before 1934 (as Decca Records). Vinyl Records were invented in 1881. Audio radio broadcasting didn't take off until the 20's. Basically, the media companies were born from these technologies, therefore they did nothing before these technologies existed. Now the Internet has started pushing the media companies into irrelevance and they feel the noose closing around their necks. They're having trouble finding new talent that want to sign with them because YouTube and Patreon and others have already performed the massive distribution for these artists without signed in blood contracts that Lucifer would be proud of. Every distribution mole Media Companies try to whack down, two more pop up, and the spring on the original mole recoils back harder causing the corps to hit themselves in the head with the mallet each time. They're finding that when both their former customers AND people with talent that's worth anything want nothing to do with them it's getting more and more difficult to survive.
Hopefully they'll find out sooner than later that they can't.
I should have probably mentioned in my other post on this level that my experience is meant as an agreement to the parent and giving a baseline datapoint of the minimum level that one must meet to be considered a real answer that shows Open Drivers on ATI/AMD can outperform the Open nouveau driver on nVidia, given that AMD's proprietary offering could not beat an equivalent nVidia offering (according to Tom's Hardware) using the open offering on my system, and was torn to shreds using nVidia's proprietary offering.
Single data point, personal experience anecdotal and all that jazz, but:
In my Linux Desktop rig (Mint 17 Desktop) I've run an ATI R9 270 using Catalyst and an nVidia GeForce 760 using nouveau and CUDA (not at the same time); I've been a lot happier with the GeForce with the nouveau drivers than the performance out of the Radeon. Also, installing the CUDA drivers to take advantage of the parallel compiling/processing has taken the performance through the roof and IMHO blew away the 270. The nVidia ran cooler when 100% pegged never even reaching 60C (usually topped off at 56-58C) where the R9 would easily reach 70-80C under load, occasionally maxing out at 85C. Blender-Renders using the Cycles engine and CUDA drivers also took about 3/4-7/8 of the time to render a scene than the ATI would... if and when I could get Blender to recognize the OpenCL drivers for GPU processing on the ATI.
To summarize, in my experience nVidia/Intel has just been a more stable and more powerful platform than the recent AMD/ATI offerings. Yeah, you pay more, but there's a lot more value when high end processing matters. It's a shame too. For the 2000's we were an AMD house, and we were happy with what we got. For the higher price of Intel at the time, there just wasn't the performance gain to justify it over AMD; unlike now. The next AMD system we built in 2011 as an HTPC wound up being an unstable heap under Windows and Linux. Unless AMD can suddenly get its shit together in the next year or two, it looks like at least the 2010's are gonna be owned by Intel/nVidia.
Actually Vice Versa. Premera got hacked long before Anthem; Anthem just didn't have nearly as much time between breach and releasing the fact to the public as Premera did.
kill -9!!! Kill -9!!!! Why isn't it working!?!?!? Where's the Parent!? KILL THE PARENT PROCESS!!! NOW!!!!
If it weren't for the AC my "Days since last Sarkeesian Incident" counter would still be counting, instead of writing 68 to the database and resetting to 0.
If you didn't do the online grind on BattleNet, there was quite the story to follow with D2. Yes, Diablo helped to create the Real Life Work Simulators that we have today by using the grind mechanic on BattleNet. I never played for the epic gear, I played for the quests, puzzles, and story progression.
As another example I watch my roommate play Destiny from time to time, and I just don't get it. He's always playing the same fucking maps over and over just to get achievements and the new shiny armor/gun... I played it for about 20 minutes and it bored the hell outta me. Halo did better for me, even though it grates on my roommate's skin that I have all kinds of Achievement holes. I just tell him to STFU, my games my way, your games yours. I don't want to leave one grind for another when I get home from work. Especially now I look for stuff that is (relatively) low action, high interaction, and quick and deep with the story rewards.
How is that any different from purchasing something on Amazon.com?
No difference there. However, there's a crapton of difference from when I buy an offline game from my local flea-market. Guess who doesn't get any tracking information from that purchase? Some games I've purchased this way: Doom 3, Diablo II BattleChest (fraction of the cost Wal-fart wants for it), Oblivion, GTA3...etc. Yes they're older. Yes these types of games are getting harder and harder to find as everyone goes to the Online Market. I just find that these older games have so much more to offer than the new crap that's coming out. Creativity in story and gameplay just doesn't seem to factor into anything anymore. It's all whack 37 more moles to get shiny golden hammer that can whack another 150 stronger moles so you can get the Platinum Hammer with a flamethrower to whack another 300 armor plated moles.... grinding for the sake of grinding. I could barely stand Grinding for the sake of Story.
You damn kids can get off my lawn anytime now.
Narwhal Narwhal Swimming in the ocean...
Thanks Sprint for getting that little ditty forever ingrained in my brain. Right next to NyanCat.
So what happens when the speed limit drops 20 mph suddenly with no warning nor change in environment that would obviously require a drop in speed, as opposed to the arbitrary drop? Locals who know that this happen tend to be prepared for it and can follow the "don't speed" rule easily. People passing through will not necessarily be prepared for this sudden change and won't know about it until the blue lights are flashing in their mirror.
In response to you, the defense is "Sometimes easier said than done, especially in corrupt municipalities."
For you and me, this is a non-issue. Games are supposed to be fun. For my roommate who's a real achievement/gamerscore whore, I'd have to hear him bitching about him having to re-do all the back-bending he's done to get those obscure achievements. He goes after these things like he's actually making money off of them, instead of realizing that it's sucking his wallet and soul dry. For people like that, games are work; while they'll say they're having fun, their attitude doesn't show it one bit.
If we were talking about the physical drives with heads, platters, sectors, motors, etc you'd be correct. We're talking about Solid State Drives. No moving parts. Which means no moving heads. Also means that sectors (if that's even the correct term on an SSD) can't be killed by a non-existent head.
Boy these anti-piracy ads are getting really mean.
What are ya?
I'm a naughty little boy
*WHACK*
-repeat-
That's Johnny Five to you. Johnny Number Five to Patel over there. Oh. And Laser Lips! Yo' mamma was a Snowblower!
Nope. Not a damn one of us.
I think I see what you're trying to say here, but what you actually said is incorrect. To put it the way you did, 5% of $3000 is $150. In the context of the license, which is what you seem to be thinking of here, a game using UE4, Epic does not charge for any revenue the game makes up to $3,000 in a quarter. This would mean, provided I understand the wording correctly, that at $3,001, Epic makes five cents that quarter. A game that generates $10,000 gross revenue in a single quarter would net Epic $350 for the engine (5% of $7,000 eligible dollars).
...it's not $99 for a replacement battery
Except when the only thing I'd wind up using the service for over the course of 5 years (as if that were even an option with Apple) would be for a battery replacement. I've never had a screen crack, and the one time I've had a phone develop a dead pixel line after 3 years of use (Samsung Infuse 4g) I had my upgrade to use anyway; I've never had a phone just stop working; I've never dropped my phone in a puddle, let alone a toilet; and I've never had to call customer service to troubleshoot a phone. I have, however, had to get a new battery for a phone about every year to year and a half. More often than not a battery replacement came not because of any difference in how long it kept a charge, but in performing my normal monthly inspection of the battery (which can't be done on a sealed battery) visible swelling had occurred.
Now in getting a battery replaced, I'd be plopping $20-50 on a replacement battery either online or at RadioShack or BatteriesPlus, having it within a few days if not immediately, and then inserting it in my phone and plugging it up overnight. I'd be without a phone only as long as overnight; which is fine because I do not accept calls after 9pm as a rule, anyway. Compare that with what would happen with AppleCare: I'd have to take a day off from work to drive the phone to Atlanta during Apple Store business hours(nearest Apple Store location, about 2 hours drive time). Have the Condescending Hipster behind the counter inspect the device to make sure that it hasn't been exposed to too much humidity (welcome to Georgia) and thus valid for the replacement battery (as opposed to charging me the deductible for a replacement phone in the event that I let the phone sweat too much), having him keep the phone for him to send it out to get the battery replaced (about a week) after which I'd have to make another drive up to Atlanta to pick it up. In the mean time, if I didn't have a spare phone to use, I'd be SOL for getting calls in that time, because of course they don't offer loaners. So actually you're right; not only is it essentially $99 for the battery, but it's also the opportunity cost of 2 days off from work, half a tank of gas, 8 hours worth of travel time, and a week without a phone; just for a stinking battery.
Read the argument that I indicated was the straw man. Read it carefully. Now read the way I tore it down. I only said the government would be hard pressed to make a decisive override, not that they couldn't. To point out, Shakrai made the direct question [paraphrased to include context] "Can Uncle Sam override some States' decisions as a matter of public policy not to engage in public solid waste collection but rather to rely on the private sector for such services?" To answer the question in Shakrai's favor to the argument he is trying to make, the answer would be "No."
My response tears down the half of the argument that tries to make a 1:1 comparison between solid waste disposal within state boundaries and municipal internet services that by definition create interstate commerce. Your argument that through tonal interpretation seems to come as a defense to Shakrai in an attempt to berate me actually pulls down the rest of his argument as a house of cards. Your argument shows that in using Federal Regulatory policies and procedures over solid waste disposal, Uncle Sam actually can, in fact, override any decision the States' have made in whether they can rely on the private sector for the services.
In essence, with your help, we have shown Shakrai that yes, the Federal Government can and often does override decisions made by the States, and that his argument held no ground whatsoever to stand on. So, the argument was definitely a Straw Man. I chose not to tear it completely down. You did that for me.
To summarize: Through the EPA, the Federal Government can regulate and override decisions that states can make regarding solid state waste management, including whether or not public entities can use private companies for management or that it must manage waste itself. Through the FCC, the Federal Government can dictate and override decisions that states can make regarding internet connectivity, including whether or not public entities can build out their own networking infrastructure to connect to the internet; which the FCC now says that they must be allowed to.
Some States have decided as a matter of public policy not to engage in public solid waste collection but rather to rely on the private sector for such services. Can Uncle Sam override such decisions?
Objection: Straw Man Argument!
There is nothing that has to cross state lines when it comes to solid waste collection, so the Government would be hard pressed to prove that interstate commerce is affected by the state deciding a private company can manage their trash. With the Internet, however, you cannot set up a municipal network and not immediately be connected to infrastructure that links that community with the rest of the world, let alone every other state in the nation. This alone give the Federal Government the ability to regulate and override state laws regarding the creation of such networks.
If on the other hand a municipality was creating a network just for its own borders and does not have the potential to be able to communicate over the Internet, then this the state could regulate without having to worry about the Feds coming down on them (in theory anyway; Feds would probably still try and then it would be decided in the courts, which have a tendency to side with the Feds using Article 1 Section 8 clause 3 of the Constitution.
By the way... For all these people saying that the FCC is overstepping its bounds with this decision and that Congress will overturn this ruling: The only way Congress can do that at this point is by dissolving the FCC because this is exactly the sort of thing that Congress created the FCC to regulate in the first place... and by its creation, Congress gave the FCC its current authority to regulate interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. And do you seriously think that Congress will vote to abolish a government revenue stream such as the FCC?
Kinda like speedy IBM...
Actually, the light from the events in question reached us and were recorded on film to be released to the public with added dramatization scenes for a better narrative in 1977, 1980, and 1983. Unfortunately, the initial events that alerted our scientists to these epic space battles could only be documented and not captured on film due to limitations of technology at the time. This led to the events being reproduced roughly 20 years later instead of being a live broadcast, leading to a degradation in the narrative... Kinda like Rescue 911.
I've seen worse Icon schemes than what Win10 promises.
I compete with myself, trying to be a better person today than yesterday. Does that mean I am aggressive with myself?
Yes.
If you fail, do you just not even care? Or do you get a twinge of frustration with yourself and proclaim that you will do better tomorrow? If the former, then what even motivates you to get out of bed, let alone self improve? If it's the latter, that frustration...that anger... you feel is aggression. Without it, there is no improvement.