If you're an adult and you're offended by anybody, including the government, in a questionable situation telling your kid "Ask your mom for permission first", you're... weird.
That's a silly generalization to make. Maybe the kid did ask his parent, and they said yes. the law wouldn't have required a permission slip, it would have prevented anyone under 18 from buying a game at all. The parent would be required to come down to the store to buy it for them, which is not the same as getting permission.
So you're telling me that, my hypothetical "kid", who is 17, drives a car, and has graduated high school, who I may even trust with a credit card, shouldn't be allowed to buy a video game that you think might be too violent for him? It's really none of your business, and that's where these lines are drawn. You're a Nosy Nelly who thinks they know what is best for everyone, and I think you should MYOB.
I think that for every law that prevents my kid from doing something you think is dangerous or bad for them, there should be a corresponding law from my perspective. So, California gets a law preventing minors from buying Call of Duty, and Texas gets a law preventing minors from buying bibles or attending church without their parents, because I believe that religion is more harmful to minors than just about anything else. Sound like a fair trade?
It's about paternalistic busybodies versus those that believe the right of free speech (and thought) is of paramount importance to our way of life. Either you believe you have the right to tell other people how to live or you don't.
Speech is not guns or alcohol, nor is it rape or imprisonment. All analogies comparing speech to "things that are not speech" are nonsense.
Those who seek to control speech really seek to control thought.
I always thought it was silly that our Tivos were difficult to turn off and instead designed to run constantly, recording two shows I'm not interested in watching, 24 hours a day.
Our new DirecTV DVRs have an "off" button on the remote that puts them in standby at least, so they only wake up to record shows I've asked it to.
Oddly enough, I played NWN when it first came out, and had an active forum account, yet I didn't get notification when they originally were hacked. Now I get an email to one of my EA accounts that isn't attached to any games, but not the other.
Two weeks ago, however, I started getting daily spam to that other EA account, which almost never got spam before (or at least never got spam that wasn't caught by google's filters). It's all related to "games" too, although it appears to be gambling/online casino spam.
But they don't. I've not once been sent to somebody who can't help me by dialling "0" repeatedly or repeating "operator" to the voice recognition system.
I have called systems that, when you keep pressing "0" or anything else not on the presented menu, respond by saying "I'm sorry you're having trouble. Please call back at another time" and then hangs up on you.
I wouldn't normally quote M. Crichton, but I think he summed it up best: "The 'precautionary principle', properly applied, forbids the precautionary principle."
Good thing you don't ride a bike to work like me then because its a never ending stream of "if I don't do something now things could be really bad for me in about five seconds".
For me managing the planet should be like riding a bike. I keep an eye out for developing problems and take action when I think something might kill me. The fact that it hasn't so far doesn't invalidate the assumptions I make.
This is a stupid analogy. Managing a planet is nothing like riding a bike. Whether you cross with or against a light isn't going to determine whether global food prices will rise, whether millions of people will be unable to grow or sell food, or whether pollution will cause thousands of new cases of asthma each year.
The decisions you make while riding a bike are tiny, local, and immediate. The decisions we make about the environment are none of those things.
Considering how badly McAfee's enterprise security software sucks ass, this guy is the last person I'd take security advice from.
I'm not just blowing smoke here, I've worked in IT at companies large and small for 20 years, and every time an employer has used a McAfee anti-whatever solution, I've seen more viruses and malware infected users than you can imagine. Their software simply does not work. I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone scared of the cyber-future. Maybe he'll drive some business to Norton:)
"...gauging factors such as which weapons have been most successful for them in killing enemies."
Aren't these the sorts of stats that most games give you for free right now? I don't play MW online, but I seem to recall TF2 and similar death-match titles giving you boatloads of stats about how much you used each weapon and how many kills you got with them. But I never though that information improved my game. I knew what weapons I was best with. If you can't figure that out on your own, having the raw stats isn't going to help you.
Most GameStop stores will take a preorder with a $5 down payment, which can also be applied to a different purchase if you change your mind. I suppose it's a sad state of affairs that it's news that a company in the entertainment/tech industry will honor orders they could have justifiably cancelled when the product was cancelled, but I suppose it's a little surprising to some people.
Maybe a little off topic, but I got really annoyed the last time I went to my local theater because of this latest outrage: "new" "XD" theaters that charge a couple bucks extra for floor-to-celling screens and slightly larger and cushier seats.
The funny thing is, the screen only seems so big compared to the other ones because it's the same size as they were 25 years ago before they started cutting up the theaters into the tiny sizes they are now. It's the same with the seats. They get smaller and harder for a couple decades, then suddenly someone has the bright idea to revert to the old sizes and charge extra for them.
"We need to get back to a time where developing solid and expansive CORE content -- not extras -- was what mattered."
I hate to tell you, but those days are gone. With piracy so easy and used-game sales so prevalent, publishers have decided the only way to make enough money to support their bloated budgets is to develop lots of extras that you have to pay for in addition to the CORE content, including DLC, charging for online access, single-user registration for each copy, and in-game payments.
Saying 'You have ten weeks to walk, and if you can't, you get an F and you're not allowed to try to walk anymore." is a terrible analogy. Who says that if you fail your CS1 class you can't ever take it again?
Yes, this is certainly a concern. I was just taking umbrage with the article's assertion that ISPs are underestimating current normal usage levels. They aren't, and they know exactly what they are doing. And they are evil. And you are probably right that they are positioning themselves to fight the future desires for bandwidth. That's why we need to focus our energy on things like net neutrality instead of slinging unfounded accusations that make us look like whiny entitled brats.
I'm no lover of Comcast or AT&T, but I think the point about ISPs underestimating normal use is unfair.
It says that Netflix users take up an average of 40GB per month just from streaming media. In my experience, your "average" user isn't doing anything that uses more bandwidth than Netflix. Even with the lower data cap of 150GB, that leaves room for a three-fold increase in streaming bandwidth before you come close to using your allocation, with room left over downlaoding 3 or 4 full-sized games a month. Even with the supposed doubling of that rate for console users (which I doubt), that leaves plenty of room. And Mr. Fogarty needs to check his math, as 80 150*2/3.
Even if console Netflix users were averaging 100GB/mo for streaming, who can use 50GB/mo on email, web surfing, and youtube?
I think the author is overestimating how much bandwidth average users need.
Full disclosure: I am far from an average user. I have Netflix and DirecTV, both of which I use streaming video on. I also download a few DVD-sized images every month, and my wife practically lives on the web in the evenings. And yet according to my Tomato router stats, I've never even hit the halfway mark of my 250GB Comcast cap.
I don't understand why these TOS "surprises" keep making the "news". Who is it that thinks they are creating such amazing things on/., twitpic, and their handheld gaming system that some giant corporation is trolling to steal it and make a boatload of money off them?
You have it backwards. If you insist on going to trial for something then you risk losing and getting hit with the full weight of the current law. If you make a deal first, then you can often get a reduced penalty. You aren't being "penalized" for going to trial, you're getting a "bonus" for saving the system time and effort. Remember, if you insist on exercising your rights you might also go free.
Isn't this the same boilerplate text that's in just about every agreement these days related to technology, content, and the interwebs? It sounds like the same legalese that was recently seen in Twitpic's TOS that everyone freaked out about, until it was pointed out that they weren't just being evil bastards?
As far as I know companies use this text to make sure you can't sue them if they use footage or screenshots for marketing that happen to include something you could otherwise claim an exclusive right to. It seems unlikely to me that Nintendo is going to start trolling through people's handhelds for photos that are better than what their pricey marketing firms could come up with.
I can't tell from TFA if this price is supposed to include a 3G data connection. If it is, that would be revolutionary. If it doesn't, then I imagine the deal would only be interesting to students that get free wifi in their dorms and already have an XBox for their gaming needs. Sounds like a pretty good market, especially if they can get a deal with schools to offer it as part of tuition or dorm rent, etc.
Not to start a flame war with some bored dog lover out there, but the dogs typically used for this type of duty are not known for their brains. They are fairly easy to train obedience into, and they are tough and loyal. But as far as I've read, they are pretty low on the "independent thinking and smarts" department.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're an adult and you're offended by anybody, including the government, in a questionable situation telling your kid "Ask your mom for permission first", you're... weird.
That's a silly generalization to make. Maybe the kid did ask his parent, and they said yes. the law wouldn't have required a permission slip, it would have prevented anyone under 18 from buying a game at all. The parent would be required to come down to the store to buy it for them, which is not the same as getting permission.
So you're telling me that, my hypothetical "kid", who is 17, drives a car, and has graduated high school, who I may even trust with a credit card, shouldn't be allowed to buy a video game that you think might be too violent for him? It's really none of your business, and that's where these lines are drawn. You're a Nosy Nelly who thinks they know what is best for everyone, and I think you should MYOB.
I think that for every law that prevents my kid from doing something you think is dangerous or bad for them, there should be a corresponding law from my perspective. So, California gets a law preventing minors from buying Call of Duty, and Texas gets a law preventing minors from buying bibles or attending church without their parents, because I believe that religion is more harmful to minors than just about anything else. Sound like a fair trade?
It's about paternalistic busybodies versus those that believe the right of free speech (and thought) is of paramount importance to our way of life. Either you believe you have the right to tell other people how to live or you don't.
Speech is not guns or alcohol, nor is it rape or imprisonment. All analogies comparing speech to "things that are not speech" are nonsense.
Those who seek to control speech really seek to control thought.
I always thought it was silly that our Tivos were difficult to turn off and instead designed to run constantly, recording two shows I'm not interested in watching, 24 hours a day.
Our new DirecTV DVRs have an "off" button on the remote that puts them in standby at least, so they only wake up to record shows I've asked it to.
If nothing else I have to give SOE kudos for giving almost 6 months notice. Most MMOs shut down with maybe 2 months warning, if you're lucky.
Oddly enough, I played NWN when it first came out, and had an active forum account, yet I didn't get notification when they originally were hacked. Now I get an email to one of my EA accounts that isn't attached to any games, but not the other.
Two weeks ago, however, I started getting daily spam to that other EA account, which almost never got spam before (or at least never got spam that wasn't caught by google's filters). It's all related to "games" too, although it appears to be gambling/online casino spam.
Question Authority doesn't mean "question the authorities", it means "question that they are actually an authority on the topic as they claim to be".
But they don't. I've not once been sent to somebody who can't help me by dialling "0" repeatedly or repeating "operator" to the voice recognition system.
I have called systems that, when you keep pressing "0" or anything else not on the presented menu, respond by saying "I'm sorry you're having trouble. Please call back at another time" and then hangs up on you.
Don't hate the system, hate the designer :)
I wouldn't normally quote M. Crichton, but I think he summed it up best: "The 'precautionary principle', properly applied, forbids the precautionary principle."
Good thing you don't ride a bike to work like me then because its a never ending stream of "if I don't do something now things could be really bad for me in about five seconds".
For me managing the planet should be like riding a bike. I keep an eye out for developing problems and take action when I think something might kill me. The fact that it hasn't so far doesn't invalidate the assumptions I make.
This is a stupid analogy. Managing a planet is nothing like riding a bike. Whether you cross with or against a light isn't going to determine whether global food prices will rise, whether millions of people will be unable to grow or sell food, or whether pollution will cause thousands of new cases of asthma each year.
The decisions you make while riding a bike are tiny, local, and immediate. The decisions we make about the environment are none of those things.
Considering how badly McAfee's enterprise security software sucks ass, this guy is the last person I'd take security advice from.
I'm not just blowing smoke here, I've worked in IT at companies large and small for 20 years, and every time an employer has used a McAfee anti-whatever solution, I've seen more viruses and malware infected users than you can imagine. Their software simply does not work. I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone scared of the cyber-future. Maybe he'll drive some business to Norton :)
This is exactly why we should not allow internet
"...gauging factors such as which weapons have been most successful for them in killing enemies."
Aren't these the sorts of stats that most games give you for free right now? I don't play MW online, but I seem to recall TF2 and similar death-match titles giving you boatloads of stats about how much you used each weapon and how many kills you got with them. But I never though that information improved my game. I knew what weapons I was best with. If you can't figure that out on your own, having the raw stats isn't going to help you.
Most GameStop stores will take a preorder with a $5 down payment, which can also be applied to a different purchase if you change your mind. I suppose it's a sad state of affairs that it's news that a company in the entertainment/tech industry will honor orders they could have justifiably cancelled when the product was cancelled, but I suppose it's a little surprising to some people.
Maybe a little off topic, but I got really annoyed the last time I went to my local theater because of this latest outrage: "new" "XD" theaters that charge a couple bucks extra for floor-to-celling screens and slightly larger and cushier seats.
The funny thing is, the screen only seems so big compared to the other ones because it's the same size as they were 25 years ago before they started cutting up the theaters into the tiny sizes they are now. It's the same with the seats. They get smaller and harder for a couple decades, then suddenly someone has the bright idea to revert to the old sizes and charge extra for them.
"We need to get back to a time where developing solid and expansive CORE content -- not extras -- was what mattered."
I hate to tell you, but those days are gone. With piracy so easy and used-game sales so prevalent, publishers have decided the only way to make enough money to support their bloated budgets is to develop lots of extras that you have to pay for in addition to the CORE content, including DLC, charging for online access, single-user registration for each copy, and in-game payments.
Saying 'You have ten weeks to walk, and if you can't, you get an F and you're not allowed to try to walk anymore." is a terrible analogy. Who says that if you fail your CS1 class you can't ever take it again?
Yes, this is certainly a concern. I was just taking umbrage with the article's assertion that ISPs are underestimating current normal usage levels. They aren't, and they know exactly what they are doing. And they are evil. And you are probably right that they are positioning themselves to fight the future desires for bandwidth. That's why we need to focus our energy on things like net neutrality instead of slinging unfounded accusations that make us look like whiny entitled brats.
I'm no lover of Comcast or AT&T, but I think the point about ISPs underestimating normal use is unfair.
It says that Netflix users take up an average of 40GB per month just from streaming media. In my experience, your "average" user isn't doing anything that uses more bandwidth than Netflix. Even with the lower data cap of 150GB, that leaves room for a three-fold increase in streaming bandwidth before you come close to using your allocation, with room left over downlaoding 3 or 4 full-sized games a month. Even with the supposed doubling of that rate for console users (which I doubt), that leaves plenty of room. And Mr. Fogarty needs to check his math, as 80 150*2/3.
Even if console Netflix users were averaging 100GB/mo for streaming, who can use 50GB/mo on email, web surfing, and youtube?
I think the author is overestimating how much bandwidth average users need.
Full disclosure: I am far from an average user. I have Netflix and DirecTV, both of which I use streaming video on. I also download a few DVD-sized images every month, and my wife practically lives on the web in the evenings. And yet according to my Tomato router stats, I've never even hit the halfway mark of my 250GB Comcast cap.
So, like religion, being an Apple Fanboi gives you a feeling of superiority? Where's the surprise?
I don't understand why these TOS "surprises" keep making the "news". Who is it that thinks they are creating such amazing things on /., twitpic, and their handheld gaming system that some giant corporation is trolling to steal it and make a boatload of money off them?
You have it backwards. If you insist on going to trial for something then you risk losing and getting hit with the full weight of the current law. If you make a deal first, then you can often get a reduced penalty. You aren't being "penalized" for going to trial, you're getting a "bonus" for saving the system time and effort. Remember, if you insist on exercising your rights you might also go free.
Isn't this the same boilerplate text that's in just about every agreement these days related to technology, content, and the interwebs? It sounds like the same legalese that was recently seen in Twitpic's TOS that everyone freaked out about, until it was pointed out that they weren't just being evil bastards?
As far as I know companies use this text to make sure you can't sue them if they use footage or screenshots for marketing that happen to include something you could otherwise claim an exclusive right to. It seems unlikely to me that Nintendo is going to start trolling through people's handhelds for photos that are better than what their pricey marketing firms could come up with.
I can't tell from TFA if this price is supposed to include a 3G data connection. If it is, that would be revolutionary. If it doesn't, then I imagine the deal would only be interesting to students that get free wifi in their dorms and already have an XBox for their gaming needs. Sounds like a pretty good market, especially if they can get a deal with schools to offer it as part of tuition or dorm rent, etc.
If you don't have a premium membership to The Escapist, you can see the HD version of the video here:
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/the-shrouded-rage/713567
Not to start a flame war with some bored dog lover out there, but the dogs typically used for this type of duty are not known for their brains. They are fairly easy to train obedience into, and they are tough and loyal. But as far as I've read, they are pretty low on the "independent thinking and smarts" department.