Odd, I've never had a problem playing Steam games without a network connection. Once in a while it'll sit there trying to connect when I start a game up, but it'll eventually kick over to offline mode. There's probably even a console command to start it up in offline mode, though I've never looked into it.
Unless you're talking about initial game activation right after installation, in which case, sure. Way less intrusive than most DRM schemes, though, IMO.
Well, I've got it all figured out. Just don't specify what the free downloadable content advertised on the box actually is, and then make sure you always have some really trivial downloadable content available. Like, say, a new desktop icon for the game.
There, now you still have your one-use DLC, but you're still providing something after that one-use is to to satisfy the advertising on the box cover.
Huh. Well, my cereal also tells me they're a prize in the bottom of every box. Clearly, they're in the wrong here, because if I open the box, eat a few bowls of cereal, and dig around and take the toy out, then close my box and resell it to someone, the box still says "A prize in the bottom of every box!" How dare they mislead the people I'm reselling to with their false advertisement! Certainly isn't my job to advertise what shortcomings my used product might have.
Seriously, I hear a lot of people talk about how unreasonable it is to pay for a monthly game, but it isn't like there aren't a heck of a lot more costs on the developers end to support an online game than one that they can just slap on a CD and forget about.
I know I can't really complain since the store obviously let you take it back, but after 30+ hours, you'd think the game makers would deserve at least SOME of your money.
Because if done right, the "lite" version doesn't take much effort to make.
I work for a software company that develops a tool with multiple levels of functionality (lite, basic, pro, etc). If you approach the software design with this in mind from the start, it isn't hard to simply attach and detach components to make different versions of the software that can be marketed at different prices.
This piece of software has plenty of clients more than willing to pay top-dollar for the Pro version, so why would the company charge LESS than they're willing to pay just to pick up some extra customers, who we can instead just sell a Lite version to?
That's true, but you're forgetting the part where the company can simply tell you that you aren't allowed to make personal calls on the phone. If they do that and you still make a personal call, they are allowed to monitor it.
This article seems to assume that I already think Amazon is bad. I don't assume that, but moreover, I'm not sure why I'm supposed to assume that.
Can someone explain to me what it is that they're doing that I'm supposed to be shocked by? From the article, the black mark against them seems to be that they wanted to make money. I'm pretty sure that's not all there is to it.
I was in a number of groups like that, but the answer was always simple: Talk to the people who aren't pulling their weight. If they refuse to do a fair share, talk to the professor. That almost always works.
It's not as if you're "ratting anyone out", especially if you've already talked to them about the fact that they aren't doing squat. And this is like the real world. The exact same thing will happen in the workplace, and the exact same solution can be applied.
The only real problem is when you get someone who is honestly trying their best to pull their own weight, but just can't pull it off. In those cases, you will end up doing a little more than your fair share, but you generally won't resent it.
Anyone know why they decided to delay these episodes so long in the U.S?
Seems like they're doing themselves a disservice. These episodes aired in the UK about 2 months ago. That's plenty of time for the fans to find "alternate ways" of viewing them, rather than waiting the 2 months until they decided to air them in the U.S.
From what I've heard, Sci-Fi usually does this sort of thing to avoid competition from network television. Maybe I'm just overestimating the number of fans who were seeking the episodes out on the net rather than waiting for two months.
I'd have to agree with you. I'd watched previews for the show for two years, and they NEVER made me want to see the an actual episode.
Then one day, my friend brought over about 20 CDs with all of the first two seasons with of episodes. I sat down and ended up watching them all in about a 3 day period. I wasn't expecting to like it... and if I had seen two or three episodes at random out of the two seasons, I probably wouldn't have liked it... but it's REALLY a show that needs you to watch the episodes in the right order.
None of this "planet of the week" crap like on Star Trek, with no real character development and very little continuity between episodes. Farscape builds off previous episodes. Characters CHANGE. They learn.
The show is full of subtleties and nuances that would otherwise be missed if you hadn't seen the previous episodes.
"A law on unsolicited e-mail covering all other industries is expected early next year. The question of whether to apply opt-in or opt-out to e-mail marketing is provoking hot debate; the Commission favors opt-in, but many members of the European Parliament prefer the more industry-friendly opt-out approach."
This seems potentially dangerous. I hate spam mail as much as the next person, but it almost seems dangerous to make laws that say, "You can't talk to this person without their approval". If someone else writes someone email and mentions your product in it, are you liable, or do you have to be the sender? Where's the line between a "company advertisement" and a "personal suggestion". If I email a friend and tell him to check out a computer game that I think is cool, and he didn't solicit that "advertisement", is the company responsible?
What if I mass-mail it to hundreds of people? If the company's name isn't attached to the origin of the email, is it therefore okay? And if so, why wouldn't companies just get third-parties to do such things for them?
It just seems risky to me to make laws that limit the content of communications. As an analogy,. I do hate telemarketing... my phone is usually unplugged from 4pm-7pm every day... but I don't think I'd like a law that made it illegal for them to call me.
"If you feel that web surfing during class is sooo important, then why not skip class and stay in your dorm?"
I don't know about other universities, but where I went to school you could only miss 6 classes before you'd automatically fail the course. Not all teachers enforced that rule, but some did and it was better to not take chances.
"The rest of the class probably doesn't care to hear the keyboard clacking or the various annoying sounds of AIM (some idiots at my school still don't know how to turn off the speakers on the machines!)."
Fair enough, but I had specifically said that IF you aren't disrupting class, then what's the problem. If you're disrupting class in the manner you mentioned, then yeah, I agree with you completely. However, it's not real hard to disable sound. And most laptop keyboards are pretty quiet.
"Some people actually show up to class to learn something. If you have no interest in learning, please don't show up and bother everyone else who's there to learn."
A lot of times, in a one hour lecture there might be about 10 minutes of worthwhile material. If you don't go to class, you'll miss the material. As for bothering everyone else who's there to learn... as I said before, a computer can pretty easily be used without bothering anyone.
In a public High School, I can understand if the school wants to block students from various sites, sending email, or doing any sorts of other stuff. Because High School is kind of like prison.. you don't get a lot of say in matters.
College, on the other hand, is something you choose to go to. You pay to go. If you'd rather be surfing the web or writing email during class, why should it matter to the professors as long as you aren't disrupting their class? If you fail because you weren't paying attention, that's your own problem and your own waste of money.
I went to a school where every student was required to have a laptop. Professors really didn't seem to care as long as you weren't clacking away on your keyboard really loudly, or surfing for porn, or whatnot.
Heh, does this remind you of the movie Office Space? They were also getting hosed by their company and just wanted a little payback. Still illegal, though.
I'm down with them being able to trace the to/from headers on the email, as that's a direct parallel to them tracing phone numbers.
The URL bit bothers me a little though. Not so much that I'm worried (I mean, how many people regularly visit URLs that are highly illegal?), but if you give up that ground, it might be harder not to give up even more ground in the future.
The question of privacy vs. human life isn't a very fair one. Should EVERYONE give up their privacy for a single person's life? Or does it have to be a dozen people? Or 50%? Where's the line.
In a future where privacy was exchanged for security, all they'd need to do is throw some implants in your head that track everything you do and everywhere you go. Any time you do something the government doesn't like, you're instantly busted. It would be a safe world, but it would be a world completely controlled by whoever did the monitoring.
America's prides itself on freedom far more than on security.
Do you actually know anything about the Muslims than what you see in the media when they're talking about terrorist attacks?
The Muslim religion does NOT breed violence and hate... that seems to have more to do with the geography and history of that religion. My roommate of 4 years in college was a Muslim, and he's told me a good deal about his religion. It doesn't preach hate or violence. That's a human trait. Hell, look at the things the Catholic church has done.
Don't group all Muslims together. They're as varied as any other group.
One last thing I'd like to mention is this: When America fought the revolutionary war against England, we were far outnumbered and didn't have a chance. But we were fighting with our hearts, and had a purpose.
By waging a holy war, Afghani's now have that same sort of purpose. They may be far outnumbered and technology inferior, but I'd put my odds on the man fighting with his heart any day of the week.
And we don't have a purpose? Don't you remember September 11th? Or is a week so long that we already forget the horrible deeds done to us?
Slashdot Mirror
Odd, I've never had a problem playing Steam games without a network connection. Once in a while it'll sit there trying to connect when I start a game up, but it'll eventually kick over to offline mode. There's probably even a console command to start it up in offline mode, though I've never looked into it.
Unless you're talking about initial game activation right after installation, in which case, sure. Way less intrusive than most DRM schemes, though, IMO.
Well, I've got it all figured out. Just don't specify what the free downloadable content advertised on the box actually is, and then make sure you always have some really trivial downloadable content available. Like, say, a new desktop icon for the game.
There, now you still have your one-use DLC, but you're still providing something after that one-use is to to satisfy the advertising on the box cover.
Huh. Well, my cereal also tells me they're a prize in the bottom of every box. Clearly, they're in the wrong here, because if I open the box, eat a few bowls of cereal, and dig around and take the toy out, then close my box and resell it to someone, the box still says "A prize in the bottom of every box!" How dare they mislead the people I'm reselling to with their false advertisement! Certainly isn't my job to advertise what shortcomings my used product might have.
What about that price makes it so unreasonable?
Seriously, I hear a lot of people talk about how unreasonable it is to pay for a monthly game, but it isn't like there aren't a heck of a lot more costs on the developers end to support an online game than one that they can just slap on a CD and forget about.
You can already play that online right here.
30+ hours and THEN you returned it?
I know I can't really complain since the store obviously let you take it back, but after 30+ hours, you'd think the game makers would deserve at least SOME of your money.
Because if done right, the "lite" version doesn't take much effort to make.
I work for a software company that develops a tool with multiple levels of functionality (lite, basic, pro, etc). If you approach the software design with this in mind from the start, it isn't hard to simply attach and detach components to make different versions of the software that can be marketed at different prices.
This piece of software has plenty of clients more than willing to pay top-dollar for the Pro version, so why would the company charge LESS than they're willing to pay just to pick up some extra customers, who we can instead just sell a Lite version to?
That's true, but you're forgetting the part where the company can simply tell you that you aren't allowed to make personal calls on the phone. If they do that and you still make a personal call, they are allowed to monitor it.
At a major company that I've done work for, the bathrooms ARE monitored.
There's even a sign on that door that says, "This restroom is monitored for your safety."
I never knew restrooms could be dangerous places.
This article seems to assume that I already think Amazon is bad. I don't assume that, but moreover, I'm not sure why I'm supposed to assume that.
Can someone explain to me what it is that they're doing that I'm supposed to be shocked by? From the article, the black mark against them seems to be that they wanted to make money. I'm pretty sure that's not all there is to it.
Someone please help me out.
Just wondering if anyone knows the answer to this, since this discussion has made me curious:
Is it illegal to record a radio broadcast, strip out the songs you want, and encode them as MP3s for personal listening?
I was in a number of groups like that, but the answer was always simple: Talk to the people who aren't pulling their weight. If they refuse to do a fair share, talk to the professor. That almost always works.
It's not as if you're "ratting anyone out", especially if you've already talked to them about the fact that they aren't doing squat. And this is like the real world. The exact same thing will happen in the workplace, and the exact same solution can be applied.
The only real problem is when you get someone who is honestly trying their best to pull their own weight, but just can't pull it off. In those cases, you will end up doing a little more than your fair share, but you generally won't resent it.
Anyone know why they decided to delay these episodes so long in the U.S?
Seems like they're doing themselves a disservice. These episodes aired in the UK about 2 months ago. That's plenty of time for the fans to find "alternate ways" of viewing them, rather than waiting the 2 months until they decided to air them in the U.S.
From what I've heard, Sci-Fi usually does this sort of thing to avoid competition from network television. Maybe I'm just overestimating the number of fans who were seeking the episodes out on the net rather than waiting for two months.
You forgot smells good.
Soft and smells good.
Unlike this post, which smells faintly of fecal matter.
I'd have to agree with you. I'd watched previews for the show for two years, and they NEVER made me want to see the an actual episode.
Then one day, my friend brought over about 20 CDs with all of the first two seasons with of episodes. I sat down and ended up watching them all in about a 3 day period. I wasn't expecting to like it... and if I had seen two or three episodes at random out of the two seasons, I probably wouldn't have liked it... but it's REALLY a show that needs you to watch the episodes in the right order.
None of this "planet of the week" crap like on Star Trek, with no real character development and very little continuity between episodes. Farscape builds off previous episodes. Characters CHANGE. They learn.
The show is full of subtleties and nuances that would otherwise be missed if you hadn't seen the previous episodes.
"A law on unsolicited e-mail covering all other industries is expected early next year. The question of whether to apply opt-in or opt-out to e-mail marketing is provoking hot debate; the Commission favors opt-in, but many members of the European Parliament prefer the more industry-friendly opt-out approach."
This seems potentially dangerous. I hate spam mail as much as the next person, but it almost seems dangerous to make laws that say, "You can't talk to this person without their approval". If someone else writes someone email and mentions your product in it, are you liable, or do you have to be the sender? Where's the line between a "company advertisement" and a "personal suggestion". If I email a friend and tell him to check out a computer game that I think is cool, and he didn't solicit that "advertisement", is the company responsible?
What if I mass-mail it to hundreds of people? If the company's name isn't attached to the origin of the email, is it therefore okay? And if so, why wouldn't companies just get third-parties to do such things for them?
It just seems risky to me to make laws that limit the content of communications. As an analogy,. I do hate telemarketing... my phone is usually unplugged from 4pm-7pm every day... but I don't think I'd like a law that made it illegal for them to call me.
"If you feel that web surfing during class is sooo important, then why not skip class and stay in your dorm?"
I don't know about other universities, but where I went to school you could only miss 6 classes before you'd automatically fail the course. Not all teachers enforced that rule, but some did and it was better to not take chances.
"The rest of the class probably doesn't care to hear the keyboard clacking or the various annoying sounds of AIM (some idiots at my school still don't know how to turn off the speakers on the machines!)."
Fair enough, but I had specifically said that IF you aren't disrupting class, then what's the problem. If you're disrupting class in the manner you mentioned, then yeah, I agree with you completely. However, it's not real hard to disable sound. And most laptop keyboards are pretty quiet.
"Some people actually show up to class to learn something. If you have no interest in learning, please don't show up and bother everyone else who's there to learn."
A lot of times, in a one hour lecture there might be about 10 minutes of worthwhile material. If you don't go to class, you'll miss the material. As for bothering everyone else who's there to learn... as I said before, a computer can pretty easily be used without bothering anyone.
In a public High School, I can understand if the school wants to block students from various sites, sending email, or doing any sorts of other stuff. Because High School is kind of like prison.. you don't get a lot of say in matters.
College, on the other hand, is something you choose to go to. You pay to go. If you'd rather be surfing the web or writing email during class, why should it matter to the professors as long as you aren't disrupting their class? If you fail because you weren't paying attention, that's your own problem and your own waste of money.
I went to a school where every student was required to have a laptop. Professors really didn't seem to care as long as you weren't clacking away on your keyboard really loudly, or surfing for porn, or whatnot.
Heh, does this remind you of the movie Office Space? They were also getting hosed by their company and just wanted a little payback. Still illegal, though.
Time to get a job as a construction worker.
I'm down with them being able to trace the to/from headers on the email, as that's a direct parallel to them tracing phone numbers.
The URL bit bothers me a little though. Not so much that I'm worried (I mean, how many people regularly visit URLs that are highly illegal?), but if you give up that ground, it might be harder not to give up even more ground in the future.
The question of privacy vs. human life isn't a very fair one. Should EVERYONE give up their privacy for a single person's life? Or does it have to be a dozen people? Or 50%? Where's the line.
In a future where privacy was exchanged for security, all they'd need to do is throw some implants in your head that track everything you do and everywhere you go. Any time you do something the government doesn't like, you're instantly busted. It would be a safe world, but it would be a world completely controlled by whoever did the monitoring.
America's prides itself on freedom far more than on security.
Playing off the recent tragedy like that is about as low as you can get as a human being.
Congratulations.
And what about the Indiana Jones trilogy?
The only thing I can think of is that George Lucas already has all our money. Maybe he's biding his time until we have a little more to spend.
No ticket.
Do you actually know anything about the Muslims than what you see in the media when they're talking about terrorist attacks?
The Muslim religion does NOT breed violence and hate... that seems to have more to do with the geography and history of that religion. My roommate of 4 years in college was a Muslim, and he's told me a good deal about his religion. It doesn't preach hate or violence. That's a human trait. Hell, look at the things the Catholic church has done.
Don't group all Muslims together. They're as varied as any other group.
I liked his previous comment that the media is full of rhetoric. I think his articles prove it.
One last thing I'd like to mention is this: When America fought the revolutionary war against England, we were far outnumbered and didn't have a chance. But we were fighting with our hearts, and had a purpose.
By waging a holy war, Afghani's now have that same sort of purpose. They may be far outnumbered and technology inferior, but I'd put my odds on the man fighting with his heart any day of the week.
And we don't have a purpose? Don't you remember September 11th? Or is a week so long that we already forget the horrible deeds done to us?