There is no such thing as a "used" game on Steam or other license/DRM management content systems. If someone sells you a "used" original CD of a game that's already been registered on Steam (for example), it's a fair bet that the CD key was already tied to a Steam account and it won't work for you.
First, we must trust they will not leak the data of "who surfs what".
Second, we must trust they will not get hacked and this information stolen.
Third, we must trust them to be the judge of "good and bad".
Fourth, we must trust they won't get hacked and their list either modified by adding or removing site.
Don't fall into the trap of "Oh it's Opera, of course we trust them". Let me put it this way. If Microsoft announced this, what would your reaction be?
One of the biggest pains in using my cellphone (RAZR) for web surfing is the entry of URLs and addresses via the number keypad. To enter an "M", you press 6. To enter an "O", you press 6 3 times in a row. To enter an M and then an O, you press 6, you pause for a while, then press 666. If I was EVER going to pick a domain name for a phone based site, I would make sure it had no two letters in a row that lived on the same number key.
DinoHunters is a FPS built on the Valve Source engine that's full on advergaming for Schick razors. Production quality isn't that hot in place (except for Candy, and she's hot) but the writing is pretty funny. They also have a Total Hunting Channel companion site that is a pretty good bit of marketing. You can even "accidentally" get into some of the intranet pages.
Very much more advanced. In fact it fails the "can you figure it out in 30 seconds?" test.
Teddy is FAR simpler to use, and I think if you are targeting non-3d/tech users, that's hugely important. Put a "Teddy like" application in the hands of kids and let them create new game content in a Spore-like game. Put it in something like Second Life. Put it in a game so people can customize their multiplayer characters.
THe answer is in your very first sentence perhaps.
""I'm working at a major university in the US, and have been charged with posting pod-casts of class lectures on the internet."
In other words, you have been assigned to post the pod-casts. Have you been assigned to make policy? Are you questioning someone elses policy?
Any kind of "proof you were there" system you come up with is going to be a pain. There will be human error, mistakes, people forgetting the "magic code of the day" and so forth. You will have a much larger support bill in order to make this happen than if you just put them up for download. Are you ready for that? Have the support staff?
... then the border worlds would be a LOT more stable. I mean geez, it's like the story of a lot of open source projects - one guy can make it, or totally break it. Thank god we've got the G-man around to keep things interesting. Well, him and the Vortigaunts.
Put three guys in a room (U.S., China, Russia) blindfolded. Tell them the first that leaves the room will live, and the rest will die, but if they all stay put, they will all live. Then tell them there is unlimited power for the first one out the door. What do you think will happen?
They will argue about what kind of takeout to order?
There is a press release right here from BYU that has links to various videos and other media. Can't seem to find any papers or articles about the process, though I noticed it's being patented so there may not be a lot available (?)
Time to straighten out all those knees that jerked a while back. Time for everyone that gleefullythrashedMicrosoft to eat a little crow and basically admit the system did exactly what it was supposed to do - block an illegal copy of Windows.
It's classic debugging to know that when you try to solve a problem and keep thinking, "But this HAS to work!" you are making an incorrect conclusion somewhere. In this case, trusted person who knows how it is supposed to work has (he incorrectly assumes) a legit copy of Windows, Windows says it's a copy, nobody believes it is a copy. Many jump on anti-Microsoft bandwagon (the knee jerk helps with the jump) and just assume it's evil Microsoft. Did anyone ever post in the thread, "Gee maybe he has an illegal copy?"
Um, probably not publicity stunt. More like they knew exactly where to find him and when. It was right there in the program. They KNEW he would be there and he no doubt KNEW he was treading some kind of space of questionable legality so would be sort of waiting. But his ego (mentioned in the article) would not allow him to skip out on the chance to be up there on the podium talking. Perfect chance to grab him at a place he couldn't resist going to.
I keep going to click on a tab to activate it and I close it by mistake - losing that tab and how ever the hell I got there.
And I keep going over to click the red X on the right hand side to close my active tab - and instead I just close what ever tab is on the right.
This imo is bad, bad, bad user interface design. Surely I can't be the only person who has gotten mixed up by the new design and closed tabs by accident?
Here's one that could use a little attention. It includes senior faculty attempting to squash the publications of grad students that contradict their own findings, deans and professors "in bed" with industry, etc.
The Biscuit Fire publication controversy refers to an academic controversy which occurred in January 2006, when the U.S. Forest Service and a group of professors (including six at the Oregon State University College of Forestry), wrote a letter to the prestigious scientific journal Science requesting that a controversial forestry paper written by an OSU Forestry graduate student (and others) not be published in the journal's print edition, arguing the article was "short on qualifiers and context". Alternatively, the group requested that Science publish a sidebar illustrating their concerns alongside the paper. Science refused, and the paper (which had already undergone peer review and had been approved for publication) appeared in the January 20, 2006 edition of the journal. The paper had previously been published in the online edition of Science, prior to the controversial letter being written.
The paper, written by graduate student Dan Donato and several colleagues, concerned the effects of logging the remains of the 2002 Biscuit Fire, a massive wildfire which burned nearly a half million acres (2,000 km) in southwestern Oregon. Some forestry scientists, as well as the Bush administration, have proposed that so-called salvage logging--removal of dead trees after a fire (many of which may still be useable as timber)--is necessary for fire safety and forest regeneration. The paper claimed, however, that after examining sections of the burn which had been subjected to salvage logging and sections which had not, it was found that the unlogged portions had over three times the number of conifer seedlings that were found in the logged portions. The paper suggested that soil disturbance and materials left over from the logging process may have disturbed the growth of seedlings.
The incident, and its aftermath, have had significant repercussions in the forestry community, and has highlighted the political issues surrounding forestry research. Originally, when the letter came to light, the College of Forestry was subjected to heavy criticism from both within and outside for what was perceived as an unwarranted attack on academic freedom. Accusations of politically-motivated bias have flown in both directions, and critics of the incident have noted that the College receives 10% of its funding from a tax on logging, and that many professors have ties with the Forest Service and the logging industry. Outside observers predicted the incident would have a "chilling effect" on researchers at the College, especially those whose work opposes the interests of the logging industry. [citation needed] Hal Salwasser, the dean of the College of Forestry, eventually apologized for the incident on behalf of the College, and reaffirmed OSU's support for academic freedom.
Science has invited the scientists to submit a rebuttal for potential publication in a future issue; which the scientists have indicated that they will do. In addition, the letter's primary author, OSU forestry engineering professor John Sessions, has claimed that the paper's publication constitutes a failure of the peer review process, and that he would appeal the matter to the board of Science. Science editor-in-chief Donald Kennedy has stated, in a letter to The Oregonian, that it "would be foolish to argue that no consideration of the political extensions of this finding could have entered the decision" regarding publication; however, he believes that the paper would have "made it (to publication) on its own".
Donato and his colleagues have stated that they stand behind their results.
Irrespective of "summary is flamebait!" and other "this is NOT a limit on first amendment rights!" comments, it seems like this puts a bit of a chill on anyone who speaks out about things. It doesn't matter about truth per se, but more perception - what people are going to think versus what's fact.
Of course maybe this is GW's way of getting set up to fire some ex Generals:^)
If you want to believe the post above, I have a bridge in FUD to sell you.
You seem to be mushing (har har) all virtual world games into one with your comment. Alphaville for example has nothing to do with Second Life. Alphaville is in the Sims Online - which is not Second Life.
There IS an economy in Second Life, and it's based on "Linden Dollars". Players have to pay REAL dollars to Linden Labs for an account, but only if they choose to own land.
Basically someone interested in making a Source version of Zork. It's got some interesting potential, as long as the original feel is kept and it doesn't go overboard w/"stuff"
What a bunch of MFUD! I'm not arguing the merit of the product, I'm arguing the holes in the argument. When I saw the first point I just had to reply (I blame the intarweb's alure)...
Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment,
n'est-ce pas? I would think it unseemly to manufacture a product that has deficiencies, then
sell a product to protect against those deficiencies.
So, if I go to install some program, and it's got spyware that installs with it, that's bad architecture? Or if deep in the EULA there's a little clause that says I'll get "something extra" when I install, it's Microsoft's fault I didn't read the EULA? Or that it was written by lawyers?
And I know some claim this isn't Microsoft's fault that spyware happens, but it really
mostly is. They designed Windows to be as easy and automatic to use as possible, which
really is the gateway for much of the malware wreaking computer havoc.
Easy and automatic to use. You mean like a Macintosh? Or like Linux is trying to become? If "easy to use" was a criteria then Macs would be swimming with malware.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no such thing as a "used" game on Steam or other license/DRM management content systems. If someone sells you a "used" original CD of a game that's already been registered on Steam (for example), it's a fair bet that the CD key was already tied to a Steam account and it won't work for you.
First, we must trust they will not leak the data of "who surfs what".
Second, we must trust they will not get hacked and this information stolen.
Third, we must trust them to be the judge of "good and bad".
Fourth, we must trust they won't get hacked and their list either modified by adding or removing site.
Don't fall into the trap of "Oh it's Opera, of course we trust them". Let me put it this way. If Microsoft announced this, what would your reaction be?
With microwave protection, Peeps will be unstoppable!
One of the biggest pains in using my cellphone (RAZR) for web surfing is the entry of URLs and addresses via the number keypad. To enter an "M", you press 6. To enter an "O", you press 6 3 times in a row. To enter an M and then an O, you press 6, you pause for a while, then press 666. If I was EVER going to pick a domain name for a phone based site, I would make sure it had no two letters in a row that lived on the same number key.
...
Oh do the math and figure it out!
Because usually, where there is smoke there is fire.
DinoHunters is a FPS built on the Valve Source engine that's full on advergaming for Schick razors. Production quality isn't that hot in place (except for Candy, and she's hot) but the writing is pretty funny. They also have a Total Hunting Channel companion site that is a pretty good bit of marketing. You can even "accidentally" get into some of the intranet pages.
Very much more advanced. In fact it fails the "can you figure it out in 30 seconds?" test.
Teddy is FAR simpler to use, and I think if you are targeting non-3d/tech users, that's hugely important. Put a "Teddy like" application in the hands of kids and let them create new game content in a Spore-like game. Put it in something like Second Life. Put it in a game so people can customize their multiplayer characters.
THe answer is in your very first sentence perhaps.
""I'm working at a major university in the US, and have been charged with posting pod-casts of class lectures on the internet."
In other words, you have been assigned to post the pod-casts. Have you been assigned to make policy? Are you questioning someone elses policy?
Any kind of "proof you were there" system you come up with is going to be a pain. There will be human error, mistakes, people forgetting the "magic code of the day" and so forth. You will have a much larger support bill in order to make this happen than if you just put them up for download. Are you ready for that? Have the support staff?
... then the border worlds would be a LOT more stable. I mean geez, it's like the story of a lot of open source projects - one guy can make it, or totally break it. Thank god we've got the G-man around to keep things interesting. Well, him and the Vortigaunts.
They will argue about what kind of takeout to order?
Wow this could have made Half-Life 2 come out YEARS sooner. At least there's still time to apply it to Duke Nukem Forever...
There is a press release right here from BYU that has links to various videos and other media. Can't seem to find any papers or articles about the process, though I noticed it's being patented so there may not be a lot available (?)
Time to straighten out all those knees that jerked a while back. Time for everyone that gleefully thrashed Microsoft to eat a little crow and basically admit the system did exactly what it was supposed to do - block an illegal copy of Windows.
It's classic debugging to know that when you try to solve a problem and keep thinking, "But this HAS to work!" you are making an incorrect conclusion somewhere. In this case, trusted person who knows how it is supposed to work has (he incorrectly assumes) a legit copy of Windows, Windows says it's a copy, nobody believes it is a copy. Many jump on anti-Microsoft bandwagon (the knee jerk helps with the jump) and just assume it's evil Microsoft. Did anyone ever post in the thread, "Gee maybe he has an illegal copy?"
Um, probably not publicity stunt. More like they knew exactly where to find him and when. It was right there in the program. They KNEW he would be there and he no doubt KNEW he was treading some kind of space of questionable legality so would be sort of waiting. But his ego (mentioned in the article) would not allow him to skip out on the chance to be up there on the podium talking. Perfect chance to grab him at a place he couldn't resist going to.
http://www.davidjaffe.typepad.com/
;^)
Why someone would put up a news post with a link to a news post about a blog post is beyond me - unless they just wanted to drive traffic to 1up
I keep going to click on a tab to activate it and I close it by mistake - losing that tab and how ever the hell I got there.
And I keep going over to click the red X on the right hand side to close my active tab - and instead I just close what ever tab is on the right.
This imo is bad, bad, bad user interface design. Surely I can't be the only person who has gotten mixed up by the new design and closed tabs by accident?
To quote from the Wikipedia entry entry on the story...
Irrespective of "summary is flamebait!" and other "this is NOT a limit on first amendment rights!" comments, it seems like this puts a bit of a chill on anyone who speaks out about things. It doesn't matter about truth per se, but more perception - what people are going to think versus what's fact.
:^)
Of course maybe this is GW's way of getting set up to fire some ex Generals
If you want to believe the post above, I have a bridge in FUD to sell you.
You seem to be mushing (har har) all virtual world games into one with your comment. Alphaville for example has nothing to do with Second Life. Alphaville is in the Sims Online - which is not Second Life.
There IS an economy in Second Life, and it's based on "Linden Dollars". Players have to pay REAL dollars to Linden Labs for an account, but only if they choose to own land.
You might want to read up on Second Life's economic system a bit at http://secondlife.com/whatis/marketplace.php
Respect - plain and simple. Too often it seems like IT can become the domain of little nazis and control freaks.
Psh - come one. It's because eggs like to be seduced, not just coddled.
Rod Boswell and his plasma thruster. He's slow, but he get's 'em there!
You might want to check out this mod project page at http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Zork_Chron icles
Basically someone interested in making a Source version of Zork. It's got some interesting potential, as long as the original feel is kept and it doesn't go overboard w/"stuff"