However I don't understand why the RIAA is so resistant to changing the model.
Because *all* businesses are "resistant to changing [their business] model". Fear of the unknown.
Technology regularly causes problems with business practices. The larger the company the more money they can spend to garantee their business model doesn't change. Look at the moderate to large corporations in the world...what percentage of them have undergone a complete change in business model in response to some new technology? My guess: *Very* few (bordering on none).
I'd love to see the RIAA look around and decide that their business model just wasn't practical in the face of new technology. The two options are give up while you are ahead (the most honest thing you can do for your shareholders), or pick a diferent model (a *very* dangerous thing for an established business...uncertain outcomes).
Come on RIAA...those are your two options. It's better to choose now than waste money trying to avoid the inevitable. There's still a place for you in todays music market, it's just not what it used to be. The longer you wait, the more likely some little pip-squeak startup will fill that new niche you are denying the existence of.
Ok, I agree that your rights can be violated. Why are we violating *my* rights to preserve yours? There is *already* a mechanism for establishing reparations when your rights are violated. That's the the whole point of the courts. Instead of persecuting the 99% of us who are not violating your rights chase the 1% who are. This is the whole *point* of copyright law. To establish what is and isn't legal, *not* to prevent those illegal activities.
Find a fucking hammer, stop using my forehead to hammer your nails.
I hear this all the time. The people who say we do it to "screw MS" are confused. The simple fact is the hardware provided in the xbox is cheaper than buying it in separate pieces and putting it together. Not to mention that its smaller, and it works with every television ever made.
733Mhz P3 DVD/CD combo drive 8/10 Gig Hard Drive 64M ram 10/100 BaseT ethernet 4 USB-1 ports (modified form factor) high end nVidia chipset dolby capable sound NTSC/PAL/HD video out (that's a possible 1920x1080i)
Go to your bargain basement store and find those specs for $200(USD). Who cares who makes the console...its a good deal.
The only time this ever happened to me I didn't even consider accepting the counter-offer. It's my employer's responsibility to know my worth to him. If I wasn't worth that to him yesterday, there's no reason I should believe he thinks I'm worth it today.
There are always mitigating factors of course. Startups, for example, often don't have the ability to pay employees what they are worth. That's fine, money isn't all that's important, it's mainly about respect.
If you knew you would be willing and able to pay me more and you didn't then you've lost mine. Call it naivete, call it communism, it's my own personal ethics.
It is obvious that the author and I are very different. Ethical standards always are. It's a contest of ethics...read your own house rules and play.
Douglas Addams, froody dude, now turned prophet?
on
Listening to Leonids
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
so...since the Vogons can now have their freaky communications device, and we *already* have babelfish what are we waiting for next?
The primary problem with Hydrogen as a fuel source is not generation (which can be accomplished in large facilities dedicated to the task), but rather in safe, efficient delivery.
One of the most interesting systems I have seen recently is the Powerballs system. It does appear to be a well considered, functional, and (most importantly) *available* system. I don't think this is anything (scientifically) extraordinary, but it is available now.
Hopefully the site will take a slashdotting, they deserve a little publicity, and I'd like to see what others think of the basic idea...I'm not enough of a chemist to understand the efficiency or practicality of their method.
I'll wait for the wearables
on
The Dream Handheld
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
So many possibilities...
handheld with projection system. It has the standard touch sensitive lcd (or LEP or whatever), but it uses a single chip reflective projector to put a *huge* picture up on any viewable surface. It's not very steady, so integrate some motion sensors in the device and some hardware to steady the projection (IR for distance to surface (image size), accelerometer for lateral stabalization).
When the projection is running, the touch screen on the device is still the input method.
But really, why not go all the way. I wear glasses, so give me a covert HMD. Something that can't be seen by the rest of the world, but that gives me unrestricted hands free access to my "handheld".
Then steal an idea from MIT and put a ring on each index finger. Radio connected, position sensing, and presure sensitive. Touch the left one with your thumb and the on-disply pointer tracks with movements of the right. Tap the right one, and it clicks, rotate the right one (around your finger) and it's like that little roller on your mouse.
Think all this is fantasy? I read too much science fiction? I think not.
I'm not entirely certain I know how to respond to this, but the thinly veiled sarcasm and factual inaccuracies beg a response so I'll give it a try.
...you also have houses composed of zillions of individual 'brick' objects...
This isn't really true. You seem to be taking concepts from *one* game, taking them to absurd lengths, and applying them to the whole of the project.
Therefore, to clarify, we are talking about Mason, a game which is primarilly a proof of concept game. I suggest the interested look at the overview, located here.
Since this game is centered around *construction* there is a high degree of user involvement in the construction of new things. This does not imply that *all* games will focus so tightly on this one aspect, but rather that future games will be built upon the discoveries and developments made through implementing Mason.
...peasants make their houses brick by brick
This is highly deceptive. Peasants *can* make buildings brick by brick if they so choose, and in a large game you can be certain several will want to (see the "I want to bake bread" article). However there are higher level methods for building objects. You could contract to get your house built, paying an NPC to build it from a blueprint that you provide, or that you select from the ones the builder might provide. Or, if you don't really want the immersive feel, just have the builders point and click and *bamf* insta house. These options are *game* specific, not specific to the underlying software.
Who knows what you can do in a game where you can dynamically create wholly new types of objects due to the great flexibility of the underlying software! I'll tell you- you can sit there holding half a brick.
First of all, half a brick isn't a new type of object, it's just a different sized brick. As to the *point* of what you are trying to say, yes, you can dynamically create things in Mason which were not initially in the game. That is the *point* of the game. The natural question that follows is: "Is this useful? Will it make the game more interesting?"
to this I can only respond with an opinion:
This is this same flexibility that will allow truly innovative solutions to game problems. The ability to create new, unexpected things (traps, weapons, mazes with sliding walls), to alter the game world (avalanche/mudslide, dams, earthworks, canals) and to integrate those things into the world will add to the richness of the world. An interesting, changing world will captivate the imagination of the gamer, something sorely lacking in most computer games today.
...there is a (laudable) pacifist streak...
I have no idea where this notion came from.
Though pacifism may be laudable, it is not overly present in the hallowed halls of worldforge. Combat is not central to our current development. When we have more foundation, combat systems will be implemented. If you look around the web site you can probably find references to how such things will be designed. However, there are more fundamental things to develop before any usable system could be implemented. If you can't wait I suggest you go play quake.
Yep, huge, slow, steady, and relatively unstoppable. Good description.
...dozens of tiny servers to manage each part of the protocol stack...
hmm...I think you may misunderstand the reasons for those "dozens of tiny servers". I won't dispute the WF has created many servers, but most of them are developmental. As I see it, once everything is in place a world will be made up of 4 servers:
1) a metaserver (so you can find the game you want)
2) a media server (providing all the graphics in your chosen game)
3) the game server (you know...the thing that actually does something)
4) the AI "server" (which looks like a client to the game server, running the NPCs)
all of these can be colocated if you choose, but we are developing with a goal of distributed world processing, so it makes *sense* to do some subdivisions.
...no one is really certain what's going to be done and how it's going to get done.
This is really only half true. We *do* have a good idea of what is going to be done. I suggest you look at the documentation on the Mason game. All of that is planning, determining what needs to be done, and what *doesn't* need doing (yet in some cases).
Sadly, I do have to admit to not knowing how it's all going to get done. As I've never done it, or anything like it, previously this is new territory. I find that part of it's appeal, the exploration of something new.
...the success or failure of most open source projects can be directly correlated to the amount of obsession some central figure...
This is close, but not quite correct I think. Who is the obsessive figurehead behind Mozilla, Linux, Gimp? Maybe they do have one, but my guess is on something more fundamental: Vision. The developers of all successful open source projects have a common vision, and that vision is what binds and drives them. Sometimes that *is* one inspired person, and at other times it is a community vision.
Yes, WorldForge has explored the possibility of a peer to peer system. Though there have been some discussions of methods for making P2P systems, it has been generally agreed that they cannot match the security of a trusted server. Without a trusted system it is extremely unlikely that any large scale environment could be maintained in any playable fasion.
I personally hope to see a peer-to-peer system in the future. I do, however, realise that there are tremendous technical challenges involved in creating one that is secure (if that is even possible). So for the time being I will continue to be:
-Scott Tillman aka SpeedBump
Worldforge developer for the STAGE server
Slashdot Mirror
However I don't understand why the RIAA is so resistant to changing the model.
Because *all* businesses are "resistant to changing [their business] model". Fear of the unknown.
Technology regularly causes problems with business practices. The larger the company the more money they can spend to garantee their business model doesn't change. Look at the moderate to large corporations in the world...what percentage of them have undergone a complete change in business model in response to some new technology? My guess: *Very* few (bordering on none).
I'd love to see the RIAA look around and decide that their business model just wasn't practical in the face of new technology. The two options are give up while you are ahead (the most honest thing you can do for your shareholders), or pick a diferent model (a *very* dangerous thing for an established business...uncertain outcomes).
Come on RIAA...those are your two options. It's better to choose now than waste money trying to avoid the inevitable. There's still a place for you in todays music market, it's just not what it used to be. The longer you wait, the more likely some little pip-squeak startup will fill that new niche you are denying the existence of.
Ok, I agree that your rights can be violated. Why are we violating *my* rights to preserve yours? There is *already* a mechanism for establishing reparations when your rights are violated. That's the the whole point of the courts. Instead of persecuting the 99% of us who are not violating your rights chase the 1% who are. This is the whole *point* of copyright law. To establish what is and isn't legal, *not* to prevent those illegal activities.
Find a fucking hammer, stop using my forehead to hammer your nails.
-SpeedBump
I hear this all the time. The people who say we do it to "screw MS" are confused. The simple fact is the hardware provided in the xbox is cheaper than buying it in separate pieces and putting it together. Not to mention that its smaller, and it works with every television ever made.
733Mhz P3
DVD/CD combo drive
8/10 Gig Hard Drive
64M ram
10/100 BaseT ethernet
4 USB-1 ports (modified form factor)
high end nVidia chipset
dolby capable sound
NTSC/PAL/HD video out (that's a possible 1920x1080i)
Go to your bargain basement store and find those specs for $200(USD). Who cares who makes the console...its a good deal.
-SpeedBump
Don't worry. I'm sure it will be back up at sunrise tomorrow.
The only time this ever happened to me I didn't even consider accepting the counter-offer. It's my employer's responsibility to know my worth to him. If I wasn't worth that to him yesterday, there's no reason I should believe he thinks I'm worth it today.
There are always mitigating factors of course. Startups, for example, often don't have the ability to pay employees what they are worth. That's fine, money isn't all that's important, it's mainly about respect.
If you knew you would be willing and able to pay me more and you didn't then you've lost mine. Call it naivete, call it communism, it's my own personal ethics.
It is obvious that the author and I are very different. Ethical standards always are. It's a contest of ethics...read your own house rules and play.
so...since the Vogons can now have their freaky communications device, and we *already* have babelfish what are we waiting for next?
I guess I'll hold out for the frictionless car.
The primary problem with Hydrogen as a fuel source is not generation (which can be accomplished in large facilities dedicated to the task), but rather in safe, efficient delivery.
One of the most interesting systems I have seen recently is the Powerballs system. It does appear to be a well considered, functional, and (most importantly) *available* system. I don't think this is anything (scientifically) extraordinary, but it is available now.
Hopefully the site will take a slashdotting, they deserve a little publicity, and I'd like to see what others think of the basic idea...I'm not enough of a chemist to understand the efficiency or practicality of their method.
So many possibilities...
handheld with projection system. It has the standard touch sensitive lcd (or LEP or whatever), but it uses a single chip reflective projector to put a *huge* picture up on any viewable surface. It's not very steady, so integrate some motion sensors in the device and some hardware to steady the projection (IR for distance to surface (image size), accelerometer for lateral stabalization).
When the projection is running, the touch screen on the device is still the input method.
But really, why not go all the way. I wear glasses, so give me a covert HMD. Something that can't be seen by the rest of the world, but that gives me unrestricted hands free access to my "handheld".
Then steal an idea from MIT and put a ring on each index finger. Radio connected, position sensing, and presure sensitive. Touch the left one with your thumb and the on-disply pointer tracks with movements of the right. Tap the right one, and it clicks, rotate the right one (around your finger) and it's like that little roller on your mouse.
Think all this is fantasy? I read too much science fiction? I think not.
single chip projectors
accelerometers for displacement
covert HMDs
The One Ring (fictional, I think)
I'm not entirely certain I know how to respond to this, but the thinly veiled sarcasm and factual inaccuracies beg a response so I'll give it a try.
...you also have houses composed of zillions of individual 'brick' objects...
...peasants make their houses brick by brick
...there is a (laudable) pacifist streak...
This isn't really true. You seem to be taking concepts from *one* game, taking them to absurd lengths, and applying them to the whole of the project.
Therefore, to clarify, we are talking about Mason, a game which is primarilly a proof of concept game. I suggest the interested look at the overview, located here.
Since this game is centered around *construction* there is a high degree of user involvement in the construction of new things. This does not imply that *all* games will focus so tightly on this one aspect, but rather that future games will be built upon the discoveries and developments made through implementing Mason.
This is highly deceptive. Peasants *can* make buildings brick by brick if they so choose, and in a large game you can be certain several will want to (see the "I want to bake bread" article). However there are higher level methods for building objects. You could contract to get your house built, paying an NPC to build it from a blueprint that you provide, or that you select from the ones the builder might provide. Or, if you don't really want the immersive feel, just have the builders point and click and *bamf* insta house. These options are *game* specific, not specific to the underlying software.
Who knows what you can do in a game where you can dynamically create wholly new types of objects due to the great flexibility of the underlying software! I'll tell you- you can sit there holding half a brick.
First of all, half a brick isn't a new type of object, it's just a different sized brick. As to the *point* of what you are trying to say, yes, you can dynamically create things in Mason which were not initially in the game. That is the *point* of the game. The natural question that follows is: "Is this useful? Will it make the game more interesting?"
to this I can only respond with an opinion:
This is this same flexibility that will allow truly innovative solutions to game problems. The ability to create new, unexpected things (traps, weapons, mazes with sliding walls), to alter the game world (avalanche/mudslide, dams, earthworks, canals) and to integrate those things into the world will add to the richness of the world. An interesting, changing world will captivate the imagination of the gamer, something sorely lacking in most computer games today.
I have no idea where this notion came from.
Though pacifism may be laudable, it is not overly present in the hallowed halls of worldforge. Combat is not central to our current development. When we have more foundation, combat systems will be implemented. If you look around the web site you can probably find references to how such things will be designed. However, there are more fundamental things to develop before any usable system could be implemented. If you can't wait I suggest you go play quake.
-SpeedBump the even more verbose
...just plain glacial.
...dozens of tiny servers to manage each part of the protocol stack...
...no one is really certain what's going to be done and how it's going to get done.
...the success or failure of most open source projects can be directly correlated to the amount of obsession some central figure...
Yep, huge, slow, steady, and relatively unstoppable. Good description.
hmm...I think you may misunderstand the reasons for those "dozens of tiny servers". I won't dispute the WF has created many servers, but most of them are developmental. As I see it, once everything is in place a world will be made up of 4 servers:
1) a metaserver (so you can find the game you want)
2) a media server (providing all the graphics in your chosen game)
3) the game server (you know...the thing that actually does something)
4) the AI "server" (which looks like a client to the game server, running the NPCs)
all of these can be colocated if you choose, but we are developing with a goal of distributed world processing, so it makes *sense* to do some subdivisions.
This is really only half true. We *do* have a good idea of what is going to be done. I suggest you look at the documentation on the Mason game. All of that is planning, determining what needs to be done, and what *doesn't* need doing (yet in some cases).
Sadly, I do have to admit to not knowing how it's all going to get done. As I've never done it, or anything like it, previously this is new territory. I find that part of it's appeal, the exploration of something new.
This is close, but not quite correct I think. Who is the obsessive figurehead behind Mozilla, Linux, Gimp? Maybe they do have one, but my guess is on something more fundamental: Vision. The developers of all successful open source projects have a common vision, and that vision is what binds and drives them. Sometimes that *is* one inspired person, and at other times it is a community vision.
-SpeedBump the verbose
Yes, WorldForge has explored the possibility of a peer to peer system. Though there have been some discussions of methods for making P2P systems, it has been generally agreed that they cannot match the security of a trusted server. Without a trusted system it is extremely unlikely that any large scale environment could be maintained in any playable fasion.
I personally hope to see a peer-to-peer system in the future. I do, however, realise that there are tremendous technical challenges involved in creating one that is secure (if that is even possible). So for the time being I will continue to be:
-Scott Tillman aka SpeedBump
Worldforge developer for the STAGE server