I think GP meant the other way around, like adblock, but for google search results. You can already do it in single searches, by adding -site:, but not automatically for every search afaik.
If I were google I'd simple remove their results altogether, and wave these proposals around the courtroom when the inevitable lawsuits come.
Yup, as it happens, 1999 was not just 'the year of napster' but the year the industry got slapped for price fixing. So the 8 billion there may very well have been caused by that. And even if it's not the only real cause, it's still highly inflated or plain wrong to attribute that 8 billion only to 'piracy'.
You know, every time this comes up, ISPs talking about charging content providers for use of bandwidth, I wonder what would happen if the content providers turned it around, and start talking about charging ISPs for delivering *their* content.
How much would Google suffer if Comcast users can't reach their servers anymore? How much would Comcast suffer if their users can't reach Google anymore?
Not even talking about regulation, but this would seem like a dangerous game for all involved.
Perhaps on a related note, I was thinking that while Linus has obviously scaled vertically to his full extent, there is still plenty of room for him to scale horizontally.
I suspect the next step is to try to get device makers not to support any format that does not have MPEG 7. And the one after that to prohibit any that do not, if that's still necessary.
How many physical dvd players nowadays do not enforce region codes?
It seems the current patent system encourages leeches and parasitic behaviour, which sucks life out of creativity and innovation, and suck you dry for money and blood, even when you have success.
One would almost think this system is written by lawyers.
i think he is referring to another game that is like geometry wars, but less good. I don't know for sure, we don't get the indy games over here (loved both geometry wars games though)
I'm assuming that 50 there is a typo; most second-hand games i've seen in stores are about 10% cheaper, which for me has always been the reason not to buy them (for only 10% more i have a shiny new one).
Apart from that, I think the vast majority of the money received by people selling their old games goes straight into new ones, so if the publishers 'defeat' second-hand sale, people who usually sell their games won't have as much to spend on new ones. People who usually buy used games might buy a few more new ones now, but less than they would second-hand. So the only thing the publishers are really taking here is second-hand markup by stores. And while that is quite a bit of money, I'm not convinced that that amount is worth screwing your real customers over.
But then again, service to customers has been lost down the drain of shareholders for quite some time now. As customers, we're the meat being sold, not the other way around.
Then just see it as a 'service' for the people that do buy your game to not use digital restrictions. Those are your customers, not the ones downloading it. They probably wouldn't have bought it even if it was impossible to download anyway.
There's casual and there's casual. If you want an arcade racer, sure your money is well wasted elsewhere. However if you want to have a more simulation-like experience on specific known tracks with cool cars, but are a casual gamer in the sense that you don't want to invest a few working weeks to unlock those, the original comment stands. I kind of have the same gripe with local multiplayer games (like on the wii) that make you unlock the multiplayer fun in singleplayer. Don't know how GT works in this sense (never played it), but if it does, that sucks for those kind of casual players. Sometimes there are unlock codes, but not always.
Once the manufacturers get into the action and build devices that send all their logs to the appropriate agency. Then those will be mandated for everyone who can't keep their logs themselves. And the rest will be red-flagged.
Those patches are no fix, they only make the attack a little bit harder, and were easy to do without changing the current protocol or authoritative server software.
Most of the proposed interim solutions do require a change in the protocol and/or authoritative server software, and those will need to be supported until the end of time (or when DNS goes away, which is probably not before a decade after that), and make debugging of misconfigurations that much harder, especially when several of these additions would be combined.
That is why some people are hesitant to standardize these solutions (or implement DNSSEC, for that matter).
While I do agree with you, I must say I think that the Zelda and Mario franchises are bad examples, at least in the earlier iterations. Mario 1, 2, 3, and 64 were completely different games, as were the Zelda's up to and including Ocarina of Time.
IMHO staying within the setting but building a completely new game around it is no problem at all.
Repeating the same game but with fancier graphics or two added gimmicks is a whole different thing. And that is where the newer versions probably went wrong. Although I still liked them:p
Slashdot Mirror
I think GP meant the other way around, like adblock, but for google search results. You can already do it in single searches, by adding -site:, but not automatically for every search afaik.
If I were google I'd simple remove their results altogether, and wave these proposals around the courtroom when the inevitable lawsuits come.
Well, games, of course! Windows Solitaire is so much better than the linux versions.
Yup, as it happens, 1999 was not just 'the year of napster' but the year the industry got slapped for price fixing. So the 8 billion there may very well have been caused by that. And even if it's not the only real cause, it's still highly inflated or plain wrong to attribute that 8 billion only to 'piracy'.
Somehow that made me lose the game.
You know, every time this comes up, ISPs talking about charging content providers for use of bandwidth, I wonder what would happen if the content providers turned it around, and start talking about charging ISPs for delivering *their* content.
How much would Google suffer if Comcast users can't reach their servers anymore?
How much would Comcast suffer if their users can't reach Google anymore?
Not even talking about regulation, but this would seem like a dangerous game for all involved.
Perhaps on a related note, I was thinking that while Linus has obviously scaled vertically to his full extent, there is still plenty of room for him to scale horizontally.
See you all on the next hype.
Signing off.
ack, oh how we get old.
Hehe, I remember the first reviews of EGA cards, 'PC graphics now look as good as those on Amiga and MSX!'.
I suspect the next step is to try to get device makers not to support any format that does not have MPEG 7. And the one after that to prohibit any that do not, if that's still necessary.
How many physical dvd players nowadays do not enforce region codes?
One would almost think this system is written by lawyers.
i think he is referring to another game that is like geometry wars, but less good. I don't know for sure, we don't get the indy games over here (loved both geometry wars games though)
I'm assuming that 50 there is a typo; most second-hand games i've seen in stores are about 10% cheaper, which for me has always been the reason not to buy them (for only 10% more i have a shiny new one).
Apart from that, I think the vast majority of the money received by people selling their old games goes straight into new ones, so if the publishers 'defeat' second-hand sale, people who usually sell their games won't have as much to spend on new ones. People who usually buy used games might buy a few more new ones now, but less than they would second-hand. So the only thing the publishers are really taking here is second-hand markup by stores. And while that is quite a bit of money, I'm not convinced that that amount is worth screwing your real customers over.
But then again, service to customers has been lost down the drain of shareholders for quite some time now. As customers, we're the meat being sold, not the other way around.
True, and in this case it's not even a chip, just a game card where you can insert a memory card, and run your own stuff.
I have one, and it only contains one game; nethack-ds. I fail to see how that would be illegal.
Then just see it as a 'service' for the people that do buy your game to not use digital restrictions. Those are your customers, not the ones downloading it. They probably wouldn't have bought it even if it was impossible to download anyway.
To quote a speaker I saw on this topic; "The Internet is for (.)corn"
There's casual and there's casual. If you want an arcade racer, sure your money is well wasted elsewhere. However if you want to have a more simulation-like experience on specific known tracks with cool cars, but are a casual gamer in the sense that you don't want to invest a few working weeks to unlock those, the original comment stands. I kind of have the same gripe with local multiplayer games (like on the wii) that make you unlock the multiplayer fun in singleplayer. Don't know how GT works in this sense (never played it), but if it does, that sucks for those kind of casual players. Sometimes there are unlock codes, but not always.
I have just calculated a digit that's much further. It's 7, and it's somewhere around the 8 trillionth decimal. Give or take a few.
My Prediction for 2010: First big public case of Social-Networking-App-Gone-Ponzi
*looks at irc window, idle since joining 9.5 hours ago*
*looks at source code editor*
*looks at year in calendar: 2009*
what was that big difference again?
Oh right, no /. yet.
Once the manufacturers get into the action and build devices that send all their logs to the appropriate agency. Then those will be mandated for everyone who can't keep their logs themselves. And the rest will be red-flagged.
And apparently they have by now given up all appearances that they are not extortionists.
"Nice shop you've got there, would be a shame if some accident happened..."
Those patches are no fix, they only make the attack a little bit harder, and were easy to do without changing the current protocol or authoritative server software.
Most of the proposed interim solutions do require a change in the protocol and/or authoritative server software, and those will need to be supported until the end of time (or when DNS goes away, which is probably not before a decade after that), and make debugging of misconfigurations that much harder, especially when several of these additions would be combined.
That is why some people are hesitant to standardize these solutions (or implement DNSSEC, for that matter).
or any of the original/classic zombie films, where there quite often were very few (or even just one) zombies.
While I do agree with you, I must say I think that the Zelda and Mario franchises are bad examples, at least in the earlier iterations. Mario 1, 2, 3, and 64 were completely different games, as were the Zelda's up to and including Ocarina of Time.
IMHO staying within the setting but building a completely new game around it is no problem at all.
Repeating the same game but with fancier graphics or two added gimmicks is a whole different thing. And that is where the newer versions probably went wrong. Although I still liked them :p