But I never watched 300. I don't intend on watching 300.
Are you saying I should be angry because some content I don't care about it based on a fictional account of history that's been retold?
Here's a mental exercise. You're not a media conglomerate, so you should have no problem doing this. Try to come up with a completely new idea.
Now, think VERY carefully: has no one ever thought of this idea before? Honestly? Think really hard about the billions of people that have inhabited this planet. Not ONE person has thought what you're thinking right now?
I don't buy conglomerate drek because it's derivative. But I don't necessarily fault works for being derivative because it's hard to produce anything otherwise.
Dude, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THIS CONTENT. Or, rather, I have chosen not to care.
Yes, politicians are corrupt and can be easily bought out. This is news? If I'm not buying the media that has the bad sectors in the first place (how I choose to express my displeasure with DRM and the current crap Hollywood is producing), how am I going to get put in jail for going around the sectors?
(By the way, I have never heard of someone actually being put in jail for violating the DCMA. I have, however, heard of people getting putting away for *SELLING* millions of dollars worth of copied media. There's a big difference).
Again, if I'm not interested in the content being offered that is plagued with DRM, how does this affect me?
* I *DON'T* buy DVDs from major content providers (both because of the DRM and the content). * I *DON'T* buy DVD players with any kind of region coding. * I generally READ BOOKS for my entertainment.
You chose to pick this particular entertainment avenue (I pity you, but what can I say)? In the past 20 years the content providers have been introducing more and more draconian means to control you. WHY do you keep giving them money? WHY NOT put your wallet away? It'd be a far greater argument than pirating the material.
(And I say "pirating" because let's face facts -- most Slashdotters don't just rip a copy for themselves. They keep a copy for themselves unencrypted and when a friend wants a copy of 300 they burn them the DivX. If you have claim to have never done that, I'd have to call you a liar).
1) My child gets a book. He tears out all the pages. Should I have copied every page with a Xerox beforehand or taught him how to use a book? Should I care about making a "backup copy" if the content is less than $20 to buy again (and the child learns a valuable lesson)? 2) Again, if I'm not interested in the content that requires the DRM, how does this affect me exactly?
Maybe I've become desensitized to whole thing, but why should I feel "outraged"?
The powers that be are putting their thumb down on copies of content intended for mass consumption. They're not putting a gun to my head and saying "Buy this Adam Sandler HD-DVD". They're not infringing on my free speech in any way (I'm belittling them right now in front of a potential worldwide audience). They're simply preventing me from making extra copies of content that I had no intention of watching anyway.
If they started *requiring* DRM on HD-DVD/Blu-ray players so that indie companies couldn't publish content freely I'd be concerned. Or if non-DRM content produced by those publishers was degraded in any way. Or if they somehow infected media I do care about with DRM (such as paper books).
But if you're honestly asking saying I should be "outraged" for not being able to copy "300" or any other drek for the masses -- I'd venture to argue you need better things to be angry about.
In short, if you really care this deeply about it, you have a couple ways to fight this. You can (continue to?) pirate the content. Doesn't really help the argument. Or, you could do things the old-fashioned way: with your wallet. Don't buy the content. Don't buy the players. There *are* alternatives out there if you simply look.
Nor do I attempt to speak them. As I mentioned, I don't attempt to engage in any exercise that I know will fail in. Not brain surgery, not holding search engines hostage, and not speaking Ukrainian.
I pointed out the mistake before you did. Do I win a prize?
There's a big difference, by the way, between making a single mistake and pointing it out almost immediately in a lone Slashdot discussion (as I did), versus making multiple mistakes, while not bothering to correct any, in holding worldwide search engines for ransom.
In either case, I applaud your thoroughness in not bothering to read the replies to my post before flinging one of yours on the wall. (I'll leave the examination of the semantics of my last sentence as an exercise for the reader).
This has nothing to do with search engine bugs, but as I'm conversing with offshore programmers/admins/etc. more and more, I'm running into this and it's really starting to irk me.
* If you're going to make declaration in English, please speak properly.
Nothing derails a serious attempt at disclosing security issues more than "[The] purpose of this Month of Bugs is a demonstration of real state with security in search engines, which are the most popular sites in Internet." It should be something like "The purpose of this Month of Bugs is a demonstration of the state of security of the most popular sites on the Internet: search engines."
I understand not everyone is a native English speaker. Fine. But I don't randomly declare I'm going to find security flaws in broken Ukrainian. If anything, simply get a friend fluent in both languages to translate.
(Also, I understand that language doesn't diminish the importance of the finds. However, in all sincerity, why should a random person not into security take this guy's work seriously if he can't spend 5 minutes to get a translator?)
Actually if you read the interviews linked the guys from Bungie said no assets were used from previous games (certainly not Halo 2). Not even the maps/story were used from previous games (even the butchered stuff from the end of Halo 2).
It wouldn't have made much sense to use the previous assets anyway. They're going from 480p to 1080i. You think blurry textures on a 50" HDTV running at 1080i would be acceptable?
Game "p/reviews" that are written by the PR or marketing team of the game developer. They are essentially sent to the gaming mags with the understanding that they are to be printed largely as is, in exchange of a sum of money or continued advertising. The reason this is worse? No editor can influence this. It's essentially an ad disguised as an independent opinion piece, and only controlled by PR/marketing people in the two companies.
I don't know if you've ever worked in the industry, but much of what you said isn't true.
Reviews are written entirely by the individuals. In the case of a television show like XPlay, it's often divided amongst a team. During no part does the game maker consult with the review on the content of the review. The only person who deals with the publisher is the person procuring the game (usually the editor).
Gamemakers typically do not see the reviews until AFTER they're published. That's why you tend to get backlash after the fact.
Previews are another story. In order to land the "exclusive" of previewing a hot game, gamemakers tend to show only certain parts to the rag and basically hands them a press release. Rags play along with this because previews drive advertiser dollars (either encouraging random passersby to pick up the paper rag, or register more pageviews on a website).
This is why you get such a diochomity between previews and reviews. A rag can shower glowing praise on a game during previews then rip it to shreds afterwards in the review.
And one more thing: by and large, reviewers are more than willing to rip games to shreds. They're paid by the review/word and already have their paycheck essentially. It's the editors that worry (or more specifically, the manager editors -- the review editors can care less). They worry about advertising dollars and straining relationships with developers so they can't get the exclusive previews.
I posted this on the original story but it bears repeating...
People act as if this is uncommon. I'm alarmed that people have reacted in this way.
It's very common.
I used to freelance for a large, well-known video game site (not hard to guess which -- there's only a couple). This was back when CD games were first introduced, and a lot of companies were experimenting by cramming as much video as they could onto a disk (with no respect to video quality, acting, and especially gameplay).
Anyway, a company came out with something particularly wretched. Basically some "video game" where interacting involved pushing an arrow key on your keyboard every 10 minutes or so while actors hammed it up. I bluntly gave the game the lowest possible score and walked away.
A few months later, I get an email from editor. The game's maker wasn't happy, and they were threatening to pull advertising from the online rag. Now, the editor didn't say "change the review". He just subtetly requested that another review "rereview it" to give a "counterpoint". That counterpoint would be provided by the editor himself.
Needless to say I wasn't happy, but this was a burgeoning new online rag and I didn't have much say as a freelancer.
However, ever notice when sites like GameSpot or IGN go soft on a review for a crappy game when that same company has front page splash rights (they cover the page in their company or game logo)? Now you know.
Except if you read the article you'd see they were also trading pictures of real child pornography. It'd be more akin to someone playing Counterstrike, then going outside and shooting people. Pretty much and open-and-shut case.
In addition to roleplaying they were trading real-life child pornography. You'd see this if you read the article. That's pretty much an open-and-shut case.
As for "roleplaying fantasy", I never understood why people do this kind of thing on a company's public servers. People don't generally engage in this kind of activity in public -- why do it in a game with many players?
I have. For whatever reason my pristine copy of Max Payne (IE: I own it and there are NO scratches) would not play on my original X-Box. I don't think the DVD drive is failing, as it wouldn't play in my 360 either. So I backed up all my games to (my upgraded) HDD and now play them that way (Everything loads faster now too). Hopefully my Live enabled games don't get Wonky on me either since the Original X-Box needs to stay offline now.
Sorry man, but I don't believe for a minute that this is the real reason you modded. You can find Max Payne for $5 in every bargain bin across the country. You honestly backed up a $5 game?
Modding an Xbox 360 to make it into a media center? Sure, I buy that (although less so given the formats it now plays out of the box). Modding it to put Linux on or whatever? Sure. However, most people mod for one reason only: to play pirated games. Any argument to the contrary is foolish.
For the foreseeable future it's much cheaper to lay down cable than fiber. Many, many areas still don't have access to fiber due to restrictions (distance to teleco, local laws, etc). However, cable is abundant. In my area, for example, we're STILL waiting on Verizon FIOS due to local laws. Cable companies would be happy to lay down more wire to my house on the cheap (and I'd be cool with paying for that).
Remember, don't think of things from technical advantages only. Think about it as a business (which it is). Why, for example, is DSL still successful in markets where FIOS/cable provide better speeds? Cost. If cable companies could lay down wire and give you the exact same speed as fiber (for half the cost), would you go for it? Even if you knew fiber would be likely to surpass it? I might. My neighbor definitely would.
Slashdot Mirror
Bet they tried to drive it wirelessly.
But I never watched 300. I don't intend on watching 300.
Are you saying I should be angry because some content I don't care about it based on a fictional account of history that's been retold?
Here's a mental exercise. You're not a media conglomerate, so you should have no problem doing this. Try to come up with a completely new idea.
Now, think VERY carefully: has no one ever thought of this idea before? Honestly? Think really hard about the billions of people that have inhabited this planet. Not ONE person has thought what you're thinking right now?
I don't buy conglomerate drek because it's derivative. But I don't necessarily fault works for being derivative because it's hard to produce anything otherwise.
Dude, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THIS CONTENT. Or, rather, I have chosen not to care.
Yes, politicians are corrupt and can be easily bought out. This is news? If I'm not buying the media that has the bad sectors in the first place (how I choose to express my displeasure with DRM and the current crap Hollywood is producing), how am I going to get put in jail for going around the sectors?
(By the way, I have never heard of someone actually being put in jail for violating the DCMA. I have, however, heard of people getting putting away for *SELLING* millions of dollars worth of copied media. There's a big difference).
Again, if I'm not interested in the content being offered that is plagued with DRM, how does this affect me?
* I *DON'T* buy DVDs from major content providers (both because of the DRM and the content).
* I *DON'T* buy DVD players with any kind of region coding.
* I generally READ BOOKS for my entertainment.
You chose to pick this particular entertainment avenue (I pity you, but what can I say)? In the past 20 years the content providers have been introducing more and more draconian means to control you. WHY do you keep giving them money? WHY NOT put your wallet away? It'd be a far greater argument than pirating the material.
(And I say "pirating" because let's face facts -- most Slashdotters don't just rip a copy for themselves. They keep a copy for themselves unencrypted and when a friend wants a copy of 300 they burn them the DivX. If you have claim to have never done that, I'd have to call you a liar).
1) My child gets a book. He tears out all the pages. Should I have copied every page with a Xerox beforehand or taught him how to use a book? Should I care about making a "backup copy" if the content is less than $20 to buy again (and the child learns a valuable lesson)?
2) Again, if I'm not interested in the content that requires the DRM, how does this affect me exactly?
Maybe I've become desensitized to whole thing, but why should I feel "outraged"?
The powers that be are putting their thumb down on copies of content intended for mass consumption. They're not putting a gun to my head and saying "Buy this Adam Sandler HD-DVD". They're not infringing on my free speech in any way (I'm belittling them right now in front of a potential worldwide audience). They're simply preventing me from making extra copies of content that I had no intention of watching anyway.
If they started *requiring* DRM on HD-DVD/Blu-ray players so that indie companies couldn't publish content freely I'd be concerned. Or if non-DRM content produced by those publishers was degraded in any way. Or if they somehow infected media I do care about with DRM (such as paper books).
But if you're honestly asking saying I should be "outraged" for not being able to copy "300" or any other drek for the masses -- I'd venture to argue you need better things to be angry about.
In short, if you really care this deeply about it, you have a couple ways to fight this. You can (continue to?) pirate the content. Doesn't really help the argument. Or, you could do things the old-fashioned way: with your wallet. Don't buy the content. Don't buy the players. There *are* alternatives out there if you simply look.
Forgive my ignorance, but WTF is a "Theora"?
Who said I was American?
Nor do I attempt to speak them. As I mentioned, I don't attempt to engage in any exercise that I know will fail in. Not brain surgery, not holding search engines hostage, and not speaking Ukrainian.
I pointed out the mistake before you did. Do I win a prize?
There's a big difference, by the way, between making a single mistake and pointing it out almost immediately in a lone Slashdot discussion (as I did), versus making multiple mistakes, while not bothering to correct any, in holding worldwide search engines for ransom.
In either case, I applaud your thoroughness in not bothering to read the replies to my post before flinging one of yours on the wall. (I'll leave the examination of the semantics of my last sentence as an exercise for the reader).
I don't claim to speak any foreign languages. I also don't attempt to speak them. The same way I don't attempt to do brain surgery.
By the way, before anyone jumps on me, the line should read:
* If you're going to make a declaration in English, please speak properly.
I'm not above fault myself. In my defense, however, I'm not trying to get the attention of a worldwide audience.
This has nothing to do with search engine bugs, but as I'm conversing with offshore programmers/admins/etc. more and more, I'm running into this and it's really starting to irk me.
* If you're going to make declaration in English, please speak properly.
Nothing derails a serious attempt at disclosing security issues more than "[The] purpose of this Month of Bugs is a demonstration of real state with security in search engines, which are the most popular sites in Internet." It should be something like "The purpose of this Month of Bugs is a demonstration of the state of security of the most popular sites on the Internet: search engines."
I understand not everyone is a native English speaker. Fine. But I don't randomly declare I'm going to find security flaws in broken Ukrainian. If anything, simply get a friend fluent in both languages to translate.
(Also, I understand that language doesn't diminish the importance of the finds. However, in all sincerity, why should a random person not into security take this guy's work seriously if he can't spend 5 minutes to get a translator?)
And yet CEOs make more money for less work than any of us can imagine. Got to wonder who the smart ones are.
-- From a guy who got a Computer Science degree and is now working on an MBA because he knows he's screwed.
Just for reference, the Wii is not currently in 1st place. It's in 2nd behind Xbox 360. It'll likely stay that way once Halo 3 comes out.
Actually if you read the interviews linked the guys from Bungie said no assets were used from previous games (certainly not Halo 2). Not even the maps/story were used from previous games (even the butchered stuff from the end of Halo 2).
It wouldn't have made much sense to use the previous assets anyway. They're going from 480p to 1080i. You think blurry textures on a 50" HDTV running at 1080i would be acceptable?
Dichotomy. I was typing quickly. Pointing out spelling flaws is so 1995.
I don't know if you've ever worked in the industry, but much of what you said isn't true.
Reviews are written entirely by the individuals. In the case of a television show like XPlay, it's often divided amongst a team. During no part does the game maker consult with the review on the content of the review. The only person who deals with the publisher is the person procuring the game (usually the editor).
Gamemakers typically do not see the reviews until AFTER they're published. That's why you tend to get backlash after the fact.
Previews are another story. In order to land the "exclusive" of previewing a hot game, gamemakers tend to show only certain parts to the rag and basically hands them a press release. Rags play along with this because previews drive advertiser dollars (either encouraging random passersby to pick up the paper rag, or register more pageviews on a website).
This is why you get such a diochomity between previews and reviews. A rag can shower glowing praise on a game during previews then rip it to shreds afterwards in the review.
And one more thing: by and large, reviewers are more than willing to rip games to shreds. They're paid by the review/word and already have their paycheck essentially. It's the editors that worry (or more specifically, the manager editors -- the review editors can care less). They worry about advertising dollars and straining relationships with developers so they can't get the exclusive previews.
I posted this on the original story but it bears repeating...
People act as if this is uncommon. I'm alarmed that people have reacted in this way.
It's very common.
I used to freelance for a large, well-known video game site (not hard to guess which -- there's only a couple). This was back when CD games were first introduced, and a lot of companies were experimenting by cramming as much video as they could onto a disk (with no respect to video quality, acting, and especially gameplay).
Anyway, a company came out with something particularly wretched. Basically some "video game" where interacting involved pushing an arrow key on your keyboard every 10 minutes or so while actors hammed it up. I bluntly gave the game the lowest possible score and walked away.
A few months later, I get an email from editor. The game's maker wasn't happy, and they were threatening to pull advertising from the online rag. Now, the editor didn't say "change the review". He just subtetly requested that another review "rereview it" to give a "counterpoint". That counterpoint would be provided by the editor himself.
Needless to say I wasn't happy, but this was a burgeoning new online rag and I didn't have much say as a freelancer.
However, ever notice when sites like GameSpot or IGN go soft on a review for a crappy game when that same company has front page splash rights (they cover the page in their company or game logo)? Now you know.
Except if you read the article you'd see they were also trading pictures of real child pornography. It'd be more akin to someone playing Counterstrike, then going outside and shooting people. Pretty much and open-and-shut case.
In addition to roleplaying they were trading real-life child pornography. You'd see this if you read the article. That's pretty much an open-and-shut case.
As for "roleplaying fantasy", I never understood why people do this kind of thing on a company's public servers. People don't generally engage in this kind of activity in public -- why do it in a game with many players?
Sorry man, but I don't believe for a minute that this is the real reason you modded. You can find Max Payne for $5 in every bargain bin across the country. You honestly backed up a $5 game?
Modding an Xbox 360 to make it into a media center? Sure, I buy that (although less so given the formats it now plays out of the box). Modding it to put Linux on or whatever? Sure. However, most people mod for one reason only: to play pirated games. Any argument to the contrary is foolish.
...never had a situation where I needed to use a backup. Must be only pirated games then.
In that case, Microsoft really should ban you.
The question is why you need a modified 360 anymore if it pretty much plays all the video formats one would need in a media player box?
For the foreseeable future it's much cheaper to lay down cable than fiber. Many, many areas still don't have access to fiber due to restrictions (distance to teleco, local laws, etc). However, cable is abundant. In my area, for example, we're STILL waiting on Verizon FIOS due to local laws. Cable companies would be happy to lay down more wire to my house on the cheap (and I'd be cool with paying for that).
Remember, don't think of things from technical advantages only. Think about it as a business (which it is). Why, for example, is DSL still successful in markets where FIOS/cable provide better speeds? Cost. If cable companies could lay down wire and give you the exact same speed as fiber (for half the cost), would you go for it? Even if you knew fiber would be likely to surpass it? I might. My neighbor definitely would.