...nobody's saying they don't have the right to make the game. They're just criticizing the game.
Just a pre-emptive strike against those knee-jerk people who, whenever anything is criticized, jump up and say, "People have the right to do this." Yeah, we know; nobody said they didn't.
Chances are a real warez group uploaded it. The "experiment" is in seeing who tries to connect to Steam with it, and banning their accounts.
This is kind of a non-story, as that's standard practice on Steam. But, Slashdot needed an excuse to meet its daily quota of random Steam-bashing, I guess...
Damn MPAA! How dare they sue individual downloaders just like we suggested companies do back in 2000 when Napster was getting sued. Copyrights only matter in cases of GPL "source code theft." Outside that, we're against them!
Wilco explicitly declared their support of downloading. Other artists have not.
Even though we all hate Lars Ulrich, that's all his point ever was. The artists should be the ones giving permission to distribute their content, not P2P downloaders. Wilco has done that, but it doesn't justify the downloading of content by artists who have not done that.
DVDs are good enough for current games/tv and other media.
Hardly. Maybe you like your movies at less than 640x480 but some of us want the detail you get in the theater. Today's growing market of HD-TV makes DVD horribly, horribly obsolete.
By the time the next generation of media finally makes it into production we're going to be downloading everything.
When the next generation media comes out, movies will be up to 40GB in size according to the media it's on. But you can go on downloading your cheesy little 600MB DivX rips if you'd like! The rest of us will happily pay for the HD LOTR boxset and enjoy seeing Gollum with the detail he had on the theater screen.
I remember using Winamp in the 1.x days of the 90s. I remember when the 2.0 release was a big deal.
Sucks to see this go...we'll always have Foobar 2000 (dumb name), but Winamp was just a more pleasant player overall and made music fun. I think people gloss over the fact that everyone used Winamp during the mp3 boom of the late 90s, and that it was as much a part of that revolution as Napster was.
I remember hearing mp3s for the first time with Winamp. Hearing "Stairway to Heaven" in near-CD quality from some 6MB file on my 266mhz Pentium II was the coolest thing I had ever heard.
In the past, I've seen posters argue the very opposite of what you're saying--that there are plenty of Linux experts and that companies will pay less by switching to Linux.
If what you're arguing is true, then you can't be surprised that Linux isn't as widespread as it should be in the corporate world. You basically nailed the very reasons why it's not. The question is how we change that.
When the CherryOS thing happened, it was called "source code theft." The same response is happening with this.
Why is it theft when it comes to GPL OSS programs, but it's suddenly NOT theft (instead, it's a "culture revolution") when it comes to taking music and movies from p2p networks? And why is it bad to violate GPL copyright but okay to violate the copyrights of music artists? I just don't understand the difference there and wonder how people reconcile those viewpoints in their minds. To me, it seems that Slashdot takes a stance against copyright in one breath, then in the next suddenly speaks out against violations of GPL copyright.
Michael seems to take the helm on Sundays, so we get a lot of knee-jerk "your rights" articles that usually never have anything to do with your rights, and are often false or exaggerated. Case in point, this Google image issue where nobody was "censoring" anything at all. You are correct; it has nothing to do with your rights. Google can do whatever the hell it wants anyway because it is a company in the commercial sector, not a government entity attempting to "censor" you.
Then again, this is the editor who cybersquatted Censorware while claiming to be a stalking victim. Michael is the looniest of the editors.
Slashdot has a long, sordid history of posting knee-jerk, reactionary articles with attention-grabbing headlines that turn out to be completely false. These stories never get later retractions and are lucky to received updated additions by Taco.
As usual, I saw the "Google Censors" article and knew it was a Sunday, which meant Michael was posting articles. Only Michael would post some guy's conclusion that Google was "censoring" just because their image index isn't updated in real-time. The completely unwanted political commentary also gave it away ("the story ended on Nov. 2").
World of Warcraft? Talk about getting ripped off, Warcraft 3 was one of the bigger disappointments of the last few years. "Let's mash Starcraft and Diablo together, our biggest sellers. We'll shove it out as Warcraft 3."
It does not take 30 minutes to walk across a room. Have you played The Sims 2? All of your issues are resolved. Whether or not you like it, it's the biggest selling game of all time. That should tell you something. I'd hardly say The Sims looks nice at all, with its four year old 2D engine.
SimCity 4 came out just last year. SimCity 2000 was hardly a "piece of crap" and was a major seller that really placed the SimCity franchise in the spotlight.
Again, I think this whole nostalgia for older games being better is bogus. There are just as many classics coming out today, and there are just as many turds coming out as there were during the 80s and 90s. But selective memory makes you forgot the bad stuff and only remember the good.
Yeah, I hear this over and over from people. "Stuff that's older is better."
Yet, I can find plenty of games with way more playability than the games of yesteryear. I think it's a trend to criticize games for "eye candy" even though there are games like The Sims, SimCity, Grand Theft Auto, Half-Life 2, Fable, Pikmin, etc. etc.
There's just as much crap around that there was five years ago, ten years ago, and even twenty years ago. I don't get this reverence for old stuff just because it's old. Nothing's really changed all that much except your age.
I predict a bunch of whining, even though suing individual file downloaders is exactly what Slashdotters (including CmdrTaco) were saying the RIAA should do back when Napster was the target. Apparently when the RIAA actually started doing so and proved it wasn't bluffing, Slashdot quickly changed its mind. Anything to get out of being called on infringing copyrights, which only seem to matter when the GPL gets violated (i.e. the "PearPC source code theft").
It looks like Slashdot just does a LIMIT in the SQL statement for grabbing comments. As you're reading, new comments are getting posted, so when you click the link for the next page, instead of starting comments where you left off on the previous page, it just does another LIMIT statement and changes the starting offset. Because of the new comments that get added, the results the query returns are "bumped down" and you see a bunch of comments you already saw in the previous page.
Isn't it sad that not only is Slashdotter humor entirely predictable (everyone thought of Visual Basic; it's not some witty comment), but it's decidedly not funny.
The First Amendment prevents the government from censoring you so far as your speech is not blocking someone else's rights. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH PRIVATE GROUPS. It's all about preventing the GOVERNMENT from messing with your rights, not freakin' Slashdot.
I see miscitations of the First Amendment on Slashdot over and over. It doesn't fucking matter. If Slashdot wanted to censor Suicide Girls from their ad rotation, it wouldn't be a violation of the First Amendment. I'm so tired of people misunderstanding what the First Amendment means.
It will be interesting to read how the tech news sites like Slashdot report on this trend as it grows. When some executable trojan goes around in the Windows world, it's labeled a "Microsoft hole," (actual words of a past Slashdot headline) even though it's merely users running executables sent to them and not a Microsoft thing at all. When it happens to Red Hat, it's a "Fake Security Alert," not a "Red Hat Hole."
With the embarrassing increase in major Mozilla flaws (including bugs marked "Confidential" for years at a time), the OSS world will begin to realize what it's like being in the spotlight.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody said they didn't have the right to make the game. What's your point?
I'm so tired of reactionaries who think that whenever something is criticized, someone's rights are being attacked.
...nobody's saying they don't have the right to make the game. They're just criticizing the game.
Just a pre-emptive strike against those knee-jerk people who, whenever anything is criticized, jump up and say, "People have the right to do this." Yeah, we know; nobody said they didn't.
Chances are a real warez group uploaded it. The "experiment" is in seeing who tries to connect to Steam with it, and banning their accounts.
This is kind of a non-story, as that's standard practice on Steam. But, Slashdot needed an excuse to meet its daily quota of random Steam-bashing, I guess...
It's the Aint-It-Cool-News for tech geeks.
Damn MPAA! How dare they sue individual downloaders just like we suggested companies do back in 2000 when Napster was getting sued. Copyrights only matter in cases of GPL "source code theft." Outside that, we're against them!
Wilco explicitly declared their support of downloading. Other artists have not.
Even though we all hate Lars Ulrich, that's all his point ever was. The artists should be the ones giving permission to distribute their content, not P2P downloaders. Wilco has done that, but it doesn't justify the downloading of content by artists who have not done that.
DVDs are good enough for current games/tv and other media.
Hardly. Maybe you like your movies at less than 640x480 but some of us want the detail you get in the theater. Today's growing market of HD-TV makes DVD horribly, horribly obsolete.
By the time the next generation of media finally makes it into production we're going to be downloading everything.
When the next generation media comes out, movies will be up to 40GB in size according to the media it's on. But you can go on downloading your cheesy little 600MB DivX rips if you'd like! The rest of us will happily pay for the HD LOTR boxset and enjoy seeing Gollum with the detail he had on the theater screen.
Your
line
breaks
are
annoying.
I remember using Winamp in the 1.x days of the 90s. I remember when the 2.0 release was a big deal.
Sucks to see this go...we'll always have Foobar 2000 (dumb name), but Winamp was just a more pleasant player overall and made music fun. I think people gloss over the fact that everyone used Winamp during the mp3 boom of the late 90s, and that it was as much a part of that revolution as Napster was.
I remember hearing mp3s for the first time with Winamp. Hearing "Stairway to Heaven" in near-CD quality from some 6MB file on my 266mhz Pentium II was the coolest thing I had ever heard.
In the past, I've seen posters argue the very opposite of what you're saying--that there are plenty of Linux experts and that companies will pay less by switching to Linux.
If what you're arguing is true, then you can't be surprised that Linux isn't as widespread as it should be in the corporate world. You basically nailed the very reasons why it's not. The question is how we change that.
When the CherryOS thing happened, it was called "source code theft." The same response is happening with this.
Why is it theft when it comes to GPL OSS programs, but it's suddenly NOT theft (instead, it's a "culture revolution") when it comes to taking music and movies from p2p networks? And why is it bad to violate GPL copyright but okay to violate the copyrights of music artists? I just don't understand the difference there and wonder how people reconcile those viewpoints in their minds. To me, it seems that Slashdot takes a stance against copyright in one breath, then in the next suddenly speaks out against violations of GPL copyright.
Michael seems to take the helm on Sundays, so we get a lot of knee-jerk "your rights" articles that usually never have anything to do with your rights, and are often false or exaggerated. Case in point, this Google image issue where nobody was "censoring" anything at all. You are correct; it has nothing to do with your rights. Google can do whatever the hell it wants anyway because it is a company in the commercial sector, not a government entity attempting to "censor" you.
Then again, this is the editor who cybersquatted Censorware while claiming to be a stalking victim. Michael is the looniest of the editors.
Slashdot has a long, sordid history of posting knee-jerk, reactionary articles with attention-grabbing headlines that turn out to be completely false. These stories never get later retractions and are lucky to received updated additions by Taco.
As usual, I saw the "Google Censors" article and knew it was a Sunday, which meant Michael was posting articles. Only Michael would post some guy's conclusion that Google was "censoring" just because their image index isn't updated in real-time. The completely unwanted political commentary also gave it away ("the story ended on Nov. 2").
Because the Sims 2 is better than the Sims.
World of Warcraft? Talk about getting ripped off, Warcraft 3 was one of the bigger disappointments of the last few years. "Let's mash Starcraft and Diablo together, our biggest sellers. We'll shove it out as Warcraft 3."
See my sig.
I guarantee most people here knew about the site long before that single recent comment. It's an old site.
It does not take 30 minutes to walk across a room. Have you played The Sims 2? All of your issues are resolved. Whether or not you like it, it's the biggest selling game of all time. That should tell you something. I'd hardly say The Sims looks nice at all, with its four year old 2D engine.
SimCity 4 came out just last year. SimCity 2000 was hardly a "piece of crap" and was a major seller that really placed the SimCity franchise in the spotlight.
Again, I think this whole nostalgia for older games being better is bogus. There are just as many classics coming out today, and there are just as many turds coming out as there were during the 80s and 90s. But selective memory makes you forgot the bad stuff and only remember the good.
Yeah, I hear this over and over from people. "Stuff that's older is better."
Yet, I can find plenty of games with way more playability than the games of yesteryear. I think it's a trend to criticize games for "eye candy" even though there are games like The Sims, SimCity, Grand Theft Auto, Half-Life 2, Fable, Pikmin, etc. etc.
There's just as much crap around that there was five years ago, ten years ago, and even twenty years ago. I don't get this reverence for old stuff just because it's old. Nothing's really changed all that much except your age.
I predict a bunch of whining, even though suing individual file downloaders is exactly what Slashdotters (including CmdrTaco) were saying the RIAA should do back when Napster was the target. Apparently when the RIAA actually started doing so and proved it wasn't bluffing, Slashdot quickly changed its mind. Anything to get out of being called on infringing copyrights, which only seem to matter when the GPL gets violated (i.e. the "PearPC source code theft").
Probably has more to do with supporting alternative cell phone browsers and other embedded devices.
It looks like Slashdot just does a LIMIT in the SQL statement for grabbing comments. As you're reading, new comments are getting posted, so when you click the link for the next page, instead of starting comments where you left off on the previous page, it just does another LIMIT statement and changes the starting offset. Because of the new comments that get added, the results the query returns are "bumped down" and you see a bunch of comments you already saw in the previous page.
Isn't it sad that not only is Slashdotter humor entirely predictable (everyone thought of Visual Basic; it's not some witty comment), but it's decidedly not funny.
Wow. Visual Basic. COM. Ha.
Once again, the First Amendment is mis-cited.
The First Amendment prevents the government from censoring you so far as your speech is not blocking someone else's rights. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH PRIVATE GROUPS. It's all about preventing the GOVERNMENT from messing with your rights, not freakin' Slashdot.
I see miscitations of the First Amendment on Slashdot over and over. It doesn't fucking matter. If Slashdot wanted to censor Suicide Girls from their ad rotation, it wouldn't be a violation of the First Amendment. I'm so tired of people misunderstanding what the First Amendment means.
Let's remember who was in office when the DMCA was first enacted.
It will be interesting to read how the tech news sites like Slashdot report on this trend as it grows. When some executable trojan goes around in the Windows world, it's labeled a "Microsoft hole," (actual words of a past Slashdot headline) even though it's merely users running executables sent to them and not a Microsoft thing at all. When it happens to Red Hat, it's a "Fake Security Alert," not a "Red Hat Hole."
With the embarrassing increase in major Mozilla flaws (including bugs marked "Confidential" for years at a time), the OSS world will begin to realize what it's like being in the spotlight.