Illegally? You keep doing that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. (That is to say, Valve would have spoken to their lawyers before doing this). The fact that they've started to roll it back is due to consumer backlash, not any perceived law breaking.
But here is the kicker.. Valve is the publisher, they're publishing via Steam. They don't have anyone over in the EU for them to prosecute. The EU writes up their fancy summons to EU court and delivers it to who? They could send some dude over on a boat to the US to give it to gaben, and when he doesn't show up they can.. send another fancy summons?
Magical? Hardly. The unit now costs $179, including some HD-DVD movies. Remove the $20 commodity hardware, replace with the $x (where x = $179 - $20 - profit margin - case - connectors - cabling - power supply - control panel/electronics) So yeah, I'd expect the price to be within $100 of the current unit.
And that's 100 dollars for a piece of hardware that is of $0 value to me. I am probably not looking at buying HD movies of either sort for the next 5+ years, and if/when I do get around to watching one it will be on the reasonably good quality dedicated player I've invested in. Microsoft/Sony can shovel their HD boatanchor on their own dime, not mine.
So you're using some kind of magical economics system where you can replace a 20 dollar piece of commodity hardware with a 200 dollar HD drive that hasn't even won the standards war yet and then somehow make it cost effective by discarding a few bucks worth of plastic.
The fact is that Sony were dumbasses for trying to force people to buy into the Bluray thing when they just wanted to play games, and Microsoft would be just as retarded for forcing HD-DVD onto us through a gaming console.
Those networks are for Secret and Top-Secret.
I don't think you realise how much information out there is classified but isn't Secret+.
The administrative overhead with a Secret+ document can be horrifying, you don't just want to slap it onto every document the government touches.
Ownership of "intellectual property" can only exist with the aid of a government. You seem to think that everything begins and ends with the law, completely ignorant of nature.
Not so, in the absence of government, IP could still exist. It would just be defended with industrial espionage, guns and explosives rather than laws and judges.
Nice factory you've got here, it would be a shame if anything were to happen to it. Say, have you got our 'factory licence'?
Open source? This goes to show that you don't fuck with IBM and Novell. (And especially not if they're allied on something). It doesn't show anything about Open Source.
We use sametime as well, and when I've been asking some of our team leaders to do something I've been given gems such as "2day or 2mrw" for instance. This plague must be eradicated at all costs.
Essentially, they are claiming a right to redirect your traffic without your consent.
They have the right to define the service that they offer, and I'm sure that their terms and conditions allow them to do this (if they don't right now, they will within a few hours). If you don't like it, there are plenty of other upstream providers out there that offer a product more to your liking.
At a minimum, I'd make sure that the patch you're installing isn't going to BSOD every PC in your enterprise. Because if you've got more than a handful of desktops (say 50,000 like my last job) you're going to end up having a very bad day.
At a minimum, -any- sysadmin who is doing their job should be setting up a wsus server with all the patches disabled by default. On patch day, the admin then comes in and reviews/installs all the patches on his own PC. Assuming his PC isn't a paperweight by the end of the day, then you could consider opening -specific patches- up to the company at large.
Anything else is just begging to be sacked.
PS: In said last job, the people who administer our centralised deployment server let some application (not a patch, some tiny app designed to monitor net usage) slip through without adequate testing and BSOD'd 2/3rds of those 50K workstations. Now, they -were- having a very bad day.
Yes, you're right that the judicial system should be punished when it breaks it's own rules. But it should be punished by putting the offenders in jail, not by letting the obviously guilty go free.
In Australia mod chips are legal provided they don't allow you to play pirated media. So, we have a thriving industry in mod chips that allow us to play imports and install XBMC and what have you.
Paying $200 for an overclocked gamecube that doesn't provide much over the past generation other than a magic wand gimmick seems overpriced to me -- and a console with all the connectivity and processing power of a high-end desktop sure seems innovative, even if that's not what you meant to imply.
Well now, one of these is making just under a hojillion dollars a millisecond in profit, and the other is languishing on store shelves. Regardless of which one you think is 'innovative' and 'overpriced', the parent made a decision that is going to net him a nice chunk of cash. That's the bottom line.
Slashdot Mirror
Under the 'disabling shit remotely' act of 2006 no doubt.
Illegally? You keep doing that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. (That is to say, Valve would have spoken to their lawyers before doing this). The fact that they've started to roll it back is due to consumer backlash, not any perceived law breaking.
Maybe.. maybe.
But here is the kicker.. Valve is the publisher, they're publishing via Steam. They don't have anyone over in the EU for them to prosecute. The EU writes up their fancy summons to EU court and delivers it to who? They could send some dude over on a boat to the US to give it to gaben, and when he doesn't show up they can.. send another fancy summons?
Because laws in the EU don't apply to Valve until they setup a shop over there. World Government, where are you when we need you?
And that's 100 dollars for a piece of hardware that is of $0 value to me. I am probably not looking at buying HD movies of either sort for the next 5+ years, and if/when I do get around to watching one it will be on the reasonably good quality dedicated player I've invested in. Microsoft/Sony can shovel their HD boatanchor on their own dime, not mine.
So you're using some kind of magical economics system where you can replace a 20 dollar piece of commodity hardware with a 200 dollar HD drive that hasn't even won the standards war yet and then somehow make it cost effective by discarding a few bucks worth of plastic.
The fact is that Sony were dumbasses for trying to force people to buy into the Bluray thing when they just wanted to play games, and Microsoft would be just as retarded for forcing HD-DVD onto us through a gaming console.
Those networks are for Secret and Top-Secret. I don't think you realise how much information out there is classified but isn't Secret+. The administrative overhead with a Secret+ document can be horrifying, you don't just want to slap it onto every document the government touches.
RTFM. It -was- published first. Doesn't make it right, but it sure does make you wrong.
Not so, in the absence of government, IP could still exist. It would just be defended with industrial espionage, guns and explosives rather than laws and judges.
Nice factory you've got here, it would be a shame if anything were to happen to it. Say, have you got our 'factory licence'?
Open source? This goes to show that you don't fuck with IBM and Novell. (And especially not if they're allied on something). It doesn't show anything about Open Source.
I think that one other guy is planning on upgrading his card though.
We use sametime as well, and when I've been asking some of our team leaders to do something I've been given gems such as "2day or 2mrw" for instance. This plague must be eradicated at all costs.
Is it the efficiency or the fact that crimes are being solved that the ACLU is objecting to?
If that was true, EVE Online 0.0 zones would be griefer free. That is not the case.
They have the right to define the service that they offer, and I'm sure that their terms and conditions allow them to do this (if they don't right now, they will within a few hours). If you don't like it, there are plenty of other upstream providers out there that offer a product more to your liking.
The one nation party disbanded years ago. Also, I certainly haven't noticed an increase in 'sword attacks'.
Exactly! Facts would only get in the way of your rage.
At a minimum, -any- sysadmin who is doing their job should be setting up a wsus server with all the patches disabled by default. On patch day, the admin then comes in and reviews/installs all the patches on his own PC. Assuming his PC isn't a paperweight by the end of the day, then you could consider opening -specific patches- up to the company at large.
Anything else is just begging to be sacked.
PS: In said last job, the people who administer our centralised deployment server let some application (not a patch, some tiny app designed to monitor net usage) slip through without adequate testing and BSOD'd 2/3rds of those 50K workstations. Now, they -were- having a very bad day.
I'd recommend Be-os as two syllables! I can't help with the last line though.
Yes, you're right that the judicial system should be punished when it breaks it's own rules. But it should be punished by putting the offenders in jail, not by letting the obviously guilty go free.
Compared to dying of cancer, that sounds pretty good.
In Australia mod chips are legal provided they don't allow you to play pirated media. So, we have a thriving industry in mod chips that allow us to play imports and install XBMC and what have you.
Well now, one of these is making just under a hojillion dollars a millisecond in profit, and the other is languishing on store shelves. Regardless of which one you think is 'innovative' and 'overpriced', the parent made a decision that is going to net him a nice chunk of cash. That's the bottom line.
A single attack? I guess you don't have much time for world news when there is WORLDS WORST MURDERCHEFS coming up next on FOX.
Have you considered Muslim fundamentalism?