The right choice would be to disable scripting in e-mail messages. Before outlook, it was common knowledge(correct common knowlege, mind you) that you could not get a virus by simply reading an e-mail. It was like that for at least 10 years of Windows, and probably 10 years before that on corporate networks. Outlook comes around, and suddenly everyone has to look over their shoulder.
That sounds like a pretty example of when your software needs to be fixed in a bad way, and not just have a band-aid put over the internet connection. I mean, no other E-mail program on the face of the earth needs to block attachments completely, and those ones even manage to not get hit by viruses. Strange...
You're no security expert. A security expert wouldn't be calling something FUD while talking about the questionable mail he gets every day. Tell me, smart guy, where do you think it came from? I'll give you a subtle hint: OUTLOOK AND OUTLOOK EXPRESS.
Excuse me, SCO, but it seems that now, instead of a couple hundred lines of unsubstantiated code, we now have YOU in massive, willful, and continual violation of the FSFs copyright(The gpl assigns a copyright to the fsf, if I'm not mistaken, probably to assist in attacking offenders). Because of this, you LOSE the court case with IBM by default, you FORFEIT any claim to the Linux Operating System, or the many GPL licensed software packages the platform is built upon, as well as any revenue you have earned through the unlawful sale of Linux, and SCO Group will now be branded as hypocrites forevermore, so the company will be destroyed, and you, Mr. Mcbride, will be held responsible for it's extremely humiliating public defeat.
I recall several weeks ago a story on Slashdot by some psychopath complaining exactly that it HAD been tried in court, and he was complaining that that companies who steal code should have to fess up.
I see, so they'd be liable because they sold you a tool then included a piece of paper inside that said "oh, by the way, you didn't really buy this, it's still ours". I'm glad to see that there's something to protect against stupidity like that, because otherwise, I could see people not owning ANYTHING in the next 10 years or so. It's just too good for the company to be able to make any restrictions it wants and it's just too good for the manufacterers of any given item to not even need to nessessarily "sell" anything, only chargine money for it as if it's been sold, then including a piece of paper saying "Oh, by the way, this is still ours. This is what you're not allowed to do with it..."
Why is this a better solution? I mean, couldn't you just use a hosts file on a regular proxy server to forego any "this ad zapped" sort of pictures at all?
I think I remember popups...From the late '90s, right? Wow. It's been so long since I've seen one of those that I didn't even remember what they looked like. I remember the X10, the "YOU HAVE WON 5 DOLLARS!"... You know, ever since I switched away from that one web browser...what was it called? Intranet Exprawler? I can't remember now. It's been too long. Anyway, ever since then, I haven't really had a problem with popups. In fact, since I installed that special HOSTS file that denies most major banner ad providers, I haven't really seen any...ads, was it?
I can see why X10 would be filing for bankruptcy. Poor them. Pioneers in their artform, they were...
Espionageware. Consider that it almost universally breaks it's way onto a persons computer without their permission, and secretly monitors what they do, sometimes sending back information which may either be direct information, or the results of processing said information...
Actually, I'd be much better off without it. Probably'd get more work done, drive a nicer car, AND be better in bed. I'd taste great and be less filling without slashdot, too!
Actually, I've been here less and less lately. This place is too aggressive, and I'm finding that when I DO go to get real work done on other message boards, I end up thrashing someone with a slashdot-style diatrabe(diatribe? Diettrade? Sally Struthers?), and nobody wants that.
Actually, my first response to this would be, bring it into the real world. Let the soldiers have real names and faces, and let your enemies, large and small, have the same. In this way, one of the most interesting feelings of war which I have ever been told about; that you're here to do a job, and they're here to do a job, and you don't nessessarily hold animousity towards them. I think something interesting and real could be brought to life if both your men and the enemy men were more than faceless drones waiting to be killed. In fact, I think it could be a much greater tribute to our real-life heroes, saying "You're just playing a video game, but these people did it for real. This hell you're about to experience, you can reload from, but the people in this game who died can't come back, so you'd better appreciate each and every one of them"....
I could be wrong though, I'd appreciate any thoughts on the subject.
You know, even for us, there's a point where we can sit back and go "Fuck off. You're a douchebag, and we don't have to answer to you". Here it is. Let the silence resonate in this assholes ears. He's trash, and doesn't even deserve to be graced by our rebuttle.
To show that I'm serious, I'm not going to post another message on slashdot today.
I wonder if a more mature version of this technology could find itself being used in hydro dams in the future....
Re:For Those Who Haven't Played the first....
on
Max Payne 2 Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
No, you're just an idiot. Sorry.
Re:For Those Who Haven't Played the first....
on
Max Payne 2 Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
You're half right. I read
It's examples like that that senators and first ladies point to in horror when they speak of the epic of videogame and movie violence infiltrating our culture. For a long time I thought they were full of shit. But now I start to see how the uberviolent videogames coming out really do cheapen the value of human life, even if only subconsciously.
as an admission that these imbiciles were right. Perhaps you wrote it with a different, more slight meaning, but to me at that moment, the red lights went off in my brain that someone might actually budging to the absolute human atrocity which is the "Video games kill people, so we should censor video games" movement. My entire post was an attempt to, through sheer force of will, knock out out that universally dangerous point of view completely out of orbit.
So kindly calm your hormones.
Listen. You might just be a gamer who isn't taking this too seriously, but the moment "drug wars", a game made in someones free time au gratis, was brought up in congress, this fight became very, very personal to me. Imagine someone walking into your house and arresting you because you decided to some stick-death alike on your website, or because you wrote an article for the local newspaper which graphically described the conditions in Afganistan or Iraq. Imagine being arrested and jailed for years because you were telling some kids at the local high school about a couple fights you got yourself into in your youth. This could be me now. If non-commercial expression is ever restricted, and it looks to me like congress wouldn't be willing to make the distiction, I could be extradited and tried like Skylarov! This isn't id Software's freedom I'm fighting to protect, it's MINE, so if you don't mind, quit pretending this issue doesn't matter just because the police aren't going to run a sting operation at your house, you small minded troglodyte!.
(And if you think my view is unwarranted, I point you to a poem written in WWII in nazi germany which sums things up quite nicely.)
Actually, windows XP won't allow the use of VESA video modes in it's VDM, which seems to be the closest analogue to the framebuffer device. In Windows, you'd let the shell portion (win.com, for lack of a better definition) handle hardware abstraction(through DirectX), rather than relying on the kernel to provide drivers. X already has DirectX substitutes.
There must be a severe problem with your VDM. I've tested Quest for a King on literally thousands of computers over the years, on more than 10 platforms, many of which aren't even windows, with no graphics problems. The only problem which ever presented itself was when a program(in this case, my debugger) took the game out of ModeX and moved it to mode 13h, which simply doesn't happen under normal circumstances.
Do you have problems with other ModeX games under DOS?
Re:For Those Who Haven't Played the first....
on
Max Payne 2 Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
You know what else cheapens human life? Killing tens of thousands of people in REAL life, which senators and first ladies support all the time. Everyone in politics who thinks video games are so horrible are hypocrites. Anyone in the media who has ever celebrated someones death too. The only group which would stand a chance of not being hypocrites might be a group like Amnesty International, whose purpose is to eliminate such deaths orchestratred by man, and you know what? They've got more important things to worry about than some video games that surverys show are played overwhelmingly by consenting adults anyway. They've got ACTUAL hate, ACTUAL pain, ACTUAL death to worry about, instead of playing this disgusting, orwellian game of scapegoating and massive social manipulation which is spreading from video games to to fill the entire spectrum of problems which only really exist in statistics, like the "weight problem of America", whose solutions are so intrusive, it makes one wonder who is truly living in the oppressive regime here -- the people who are being oppressed openly, or the people who are being manipulated in every aspect of their lives, from what they watch on TV to what they eat, to who they love, to who they hate...
Saying that one group of artists deserve legal protection, but another don't because their medium is too alien also cheapens human life.
So no. Video games don't cheapen human life by letting you kill lots of bad guys and letting you take a lot of bullets. People in power who think life is cheap cheapen human life by sending people off to die(in one way or another) or kill, or treating people like scum, or by refusing to protect the weak from the strong, the unpopular from the popular, or the meek from the violent do. Saying otherwise only ignores the truth so an easy answer can be given instead.
i feel that the gameplay was not well balanced nor thought out.
Listen. Until you've got a game under your belt, which I severely doubt, seeing as game developers tend to use capitals(Attention to detail, you see), I'd rethink what you really mean to say. Well thought out gameplay doesn't nessessarily mean gameplay YOU find fun. The Sim* series of games are all very well thought out, and must be, because of the numbers-intensive nature of the games, where complex behaviours must arise out of simple contexts and random numbers can only rarely be used, but most of them bore people to death. Well balanced gameplay is such a subjective thing that short of some tricks, such as sub-quests and mini games which require varying levels of skill, allowing players to choose the path which they find the most fun...though even then, people will ignore their own skill level, find themselves in a heap of trouble, and blame the game for being unbalanced. Balance is further aggrivaed by the fact that many developers use it to control the pace of their games. In Final Fantasy games, for instance, enemy strength on the world map is usually far below that of the player chracters, meaning that players can travel all over the place, and the story moves along quite briskly. This is a stark contrast to a Dragon Warrior game, where a slime can kill an unwary warrior in his first battle. They're both balanced in their own way, but depending on the players, both are likely to be critisized in the same vague way by gamers like you as being "unbalanced" or "not well thought out".
At least now I (and many like me) won't have to pay any money just to dabble with Maya.
Why do you think they're releasing it? The more people who use your software, the better chances that big industry guy X will pick it up. That's what made MS so big, and I'm sure the Maya folks are doing exactly the same thing.
Actually, it was I who brought the software to the forefront. The post I was replying to didn't mention Word at all, it just complained about how the tests weren't equal for hardware reasons, though the video memory arguement falls short when you realize that a game like quake don't benefit from 128MB video cards, let alone 256MB ones, and with that difference removed, there were two systems which were perfecly eligable to compete on an equal playing field, and did so very well; the dualie Opteron blew the dual G5 out of the water by all accounts, even in Photoshop, all without RAID. All machines were tested with 1GB of RAM and a Radeon 9800 video card. The mac version of this high-end card only has 128MB of RAM on it. That wouldn't change Quake.
Yeah, I'm grouchy and antagonistic this week. I'm also having a lot of fun rubbing mac folks the wrong way, because this is the EXACT situation AMD and Intel was in a year ago, and while there was a lot of skeptical people, there was nowhere near the denial on this scale, which questions everything from the amount of RAM in the system(there was 1Gb of RAM in every test system, for example, which a lot of people didn't bother to read about, and decided to go on a tirade about how unbalanced the RAM usage is) to how it's not real 64 bit on the G5 and is therefore useless(which is a silly comeback, seeing as that's the kind of apps you're going to be running for the next few years while software catches up to software).
As for the choice of benchmarks, I think you'd find that all of those applications are considered to be standard benchmarks in the PC world, and only the blind would say that it's wrong and decietful of them to use them in a benchmark against a MAC.
Nothing tells you about the hardware beneath, by that definition, except for a carefully balanced CPU benchmark, which has proven to be quite useless time immemorial(take the Opteron. Gets hurt badly on most CPU benchmarks, but put it in an actual app, and watch it roar! Which is the accurate CPU benchmark?)
Besides which, isn't it a bit hypocritical to be supporting mac users in their tirade against this supposedly unfair mac benchmark, when the most recent Mac speed story I recall that the G5 benchmarks used by Apple were intentionally using uber-optimized libraries and compilers on the Apple while using glib and GCC on the rest of the architectures?
Everybody lies, only the idealistic, destined to be crushed, think that somehow they can make a difference by arguing with complete strangers about subjects they haven't a stake in.
Slashdot Mirror
The right choice would be to disable scripting in e-mail messages. Before outlook, it was common knowledge(correct common knowlege, mind you) that you could not get a virus by simply reading an e-mail. It was like that for at least 10 years of Windows, and probably 10 years before that on corporate networks. Outlook comes around, and suddenly everyone has to look over their shoulder.
That sounds like a pretty example of when your software needs to be fixed in a bad way, and not just have a band-aid put over the internet connection. I mean, no other E-mail program on the face of the earth needs to block attachments completely, and those ones even manage to not get hit by viruses. Strange...
You're no security expert. A security expert wouldn't be calling something FUD while talking about the questionable mail he gets every day. Tell me, smart guy, where do you think it came from? I'll give you a subtle hint: OUTLOOK AND OUTLOOK EXPRESS.
Excuse me, SCO, but it seems that now, instead of a couple hundred lines of unsubstantiated code, we now have YOU in massive, willful, and continual violation of the FSFs copyright(The gpl assigns a copyright to the fsf, if I'm not mistaken, probably to assist in attacking offenders). Because of this, you LOSE the court case with IBM by default, you FORFEIT any claim to the Linux Operating System, or the many GPL licensed software packages the platform is built upon, as well as any revenue you have earned through the unlawful sale of Linux, and SCO Group will now be branded as hypocrites forevermore, so the company will be destroyed, and you, Mr. Mcbride, will be held responsible for it's extremely humiliating public defeat.
Have a nice day.
I recall several weeks ago a story on Slashdot by some psychopath complaining exactly that it HAD been tried in court, and he was complaining that that companies who steal code should have to fess up.
I see, so they'd be liable because they sold you a tool then included a piece of paper inside that said "oh, by the way, you didn't really buy this, it's still ours". I'm glad to see that there's something to protect against stupidity like that, because otherwise, I could see people not owning ANYTHING in the next 10 years or so. It's just too good for the company to be able to make any restrictions it wants and it's just too good for the manufacterers of any given item to not even need to nessessarily "sell" anything, only chargine money for it as if it's been sold, then including a piece of paper saying "Oh, by the way, this is still ours. This is what you're not allowed to do with it..."
Why is this a better solution? I mean, couldn't you just use a hosts file on a regular proxy server to forego any "this ad zapped" sort of pictures at all?
I think I remember popups...From the late '90s, right? Wow. It's been so long since I've seen one of those that I didn't even remember what they looked like. I remember the X10, the "YOU HAVE WON 5 DOLLARS!"... You know, ever since I switched away from that one web browser...what was it called? Intranet Exprawler? I can't remember now. It's been too long. Anyway, ever since then, I haven't really had a problem with popups. In fact, since I installed that special HOSTS file that denies most major banner ad providers, I haven't really seen any...ads, was it?
I can see why X10 would be filing for bankruptcy. Poor them. Pioneers in their artform, they were...
GAH! M1CR0$0FT IS T3H 3V1L! LINUX 15 t3h c00l3st! Workers should own the means of production!
:D
Nah. I'm getting too old for this.
Espionageware. Consider that it almost universally breaks it's way onto a persons computer without their permission, and secretly monitors what they do, sometimes sending back information which may either be direct information, or the results of processing said information...
Actually, I'd be much better off without it. Probably'd get more work done, drive a nicer car, AND be better in bed. I'd taste great and be less filling without slashdot, too!
Actually, I've been here less and less lately. This place is too aggressive, and I'm finding that when I DO go to get real work done on other message boards, I end up thrashing someone with a slashdot-style diatrabe(diatribe? Diettrade? Sally Struthers?), and nobody wants that.
Maybe the trolls.
Actually, my first response to this would be, bring it into the real world. Let the soldiers have real names and faces, and let your enemies, large and small, have the same. In this way, one of the most interesting feelings of war which I have ever been told about; that you're here to do a job, and they're here to do a job, and you don't nessessarily hold animousity towards them. I think something interesting and real could be brought to life if both your men and the enemy men were more than faceless drones waiting to be killed. In fact, I think it could be a much greater tribute to our real-life heroes, saying "You're just playing a video game, but these people did it for real. This hell you're about to experience, you can reload from, but the people in this game who died can't come back, so you'd better appreciate each and every one of them"....
I could be wrong though, I'd appreciate any thoughts on the subject.
You know, even for us, there's a point where we can sit back and go "Fuck off. You're a douchebag, and we don't have to answer to you". Here it is. Let the silence resonate in this assholes ears. He's trash, and doesn't even deserve to be graced by our rebuttle.
To show that I'm serious, I'm not going to post another message on slashdot today.
Let the silence resonate. Let it deafen him.
I wonder if a more mature version of this technology could find itself being used in hydro dams in the future....
No, you're just an idiot. Sorry.
You're half right. I read
It's examples like that that senators and first ladies point to in horror when they speak of the epic of videogame and movie violence infiltrating our culture. For a long time I thought they were full of shit. But now I start to see how the uberviolent videogames coming out really do cheapen the value of human life, even if only subconsciously.
as an admission that these imbiciles were right. Perhaps you wrote it with a different, more slight meaning, but to me at that moment, the red lights went off in my brain that someone might actually budging to the absolute human atrocity which is the "Video games kill people, so we should censor video games" movement. My entire post was an attempt to, through sheer force of will, knock out out that universally dangerous point of view completely out of orbit.
So kindly calm your hormones.
Listen. You might just be a gamer who isn't taking this too seriously, but the moment "drug wars", a game made in someones free time au gratis, was brought up in congress, this fight became very, very personal to me. Imagine someone walking into your house and arresting you because you decided to some stick-death alike on your website, or because you wrote an article for the local newspaper which graphically described the conditions in Afganistan or Iraq. Imagine being arrested and jailed for years because you were telling some kids at the local high school about a couple fights you got yourself into in your youth. This could be me now. If non-commercial expression is ever restricted, and it looks to me like congress wouldn't be willing to make the distiction, I could be extradited and tried like Skylarov! This isn't id Software's freedom I'm fighting to protect, it's MINE, so if you don't mind, quit pretending this issue doesn't matter just because the police aren't going to run a sting operation at your house, you small minded troglodyte!.
(And if you think my view is unwarranted, I point you to a poem written in WWII in nazi germany which sums things up quite nicely.)
I wouldn't worry about it. We're all wasting on anothers time. Slashdot is a waste of time. Just enjoy it. :)
Ooh! A sarcasm detector! That's REAL useful!
Actually, windows XP won't allow the use of VESA video modes in it's VDM, which seems to be the closest analogue to the framebuffer device. In Windows, you'd let the shell portion (win.com, for lack of a better definition) handle hardware abstraction(through DirectX), rather than relying on the kernel to provide drivers. X already has DirectX substitutes.
...because you can't use ancient VESA video modes?
I hope you haven't tried Windows XP, because you'll think that it REALLY sucks as a desktop OS.
There must be a severe problem with your VDM. I've tested Quest for a King on literally thousands of computers over the years, on more than 10 platforms, many of which aren't even windows, with no graphics problems. The only problem which ever presented itself was when a program(in this case, my debugger) took the game out of ModeX and moved it to mode 13h, which simply doesn't happen under normal circumstances.
Do you have problems with other ModeX games under DOS?
You know what else cheapens human life? Killing tens of thousands of people in REAL life, which senators and first ladies support all the time. Everyone in politics who thinks video games are so horrible are hypocrites. Anyone in the media who has ever celebrated someones death too. The only group which would stand a chance of not being hypocrites might be a group like Amnesty International, whose purpose is to eliminate such deaths orchestratred by man, and you know what? They've got more important things to worry about than some video games that surverys show are played overwhelmingly by consenting adults anyway. They've got ACTUAL hate, ACTUAL pain, ACTUAL death to worry about, instead of playing this disgusting, orwellian game of scapegoating and massive social manipulation which is spreading from video games to to fill the entire spectrum of problems which only really exist in statistics, like the "weight problem of America", whose solutions are so intrusive, it makes one wonder who is truly living in the oppressive regime here -- the people who are being oppressed openly, or the people who are being manipulated in every aspect of their lives, from what they watch on TV to what they eat, to who they love, to who they hate...
Saying that one group of artists deserve legal protection, but another don't because their medium is too alien also cheapens human life.
So no. Video games don't cheapen human life by letting you kill lots of bad guys and letting you take a lot of bullets. People in power who think life is cheap cheapen human life by sending people off to die(in one way or another) or kill, or treating people like scum, or by refusing to protect the weak from the strong, the unpopular from the popular, or the meek from the violent do. Saying otherwise only ignores the truth so an easy answer can be given instead.
i feel that the gameplay was not well balanced nor thought out.
Listen. Until you've got a game under your belt, which I severely doubt, seeing as game developers tend to use capitals(Attention to detail, you see), I'd rethink what you really mean to say. Well thought out gameplay doesn't nessessarily mean gameplay YOU find fun. The Sim* series of games are all very well thought out, and must be, because of the numbers-intensive nature of the games, where complex behaviours must arise out of simple contexts and random numbers can only rarely be used, but most of them bore people to death. Well balanced gameplay is such a subjective thing that short of some tricks, such as sub-quests and mini games which require varying levels of skill, allowing players to choose the path which they find the most fun...though even then, people will ignore their own skill level, find themselves in a heap of trouble, and blame the game for being unbalanced. Balance is further aggrivaed by the fact that many developers use it to control the pace of their games. In Final Fantasy games, for instance, enemy strength on the world map is usually far below that of the player chracters, meaning that players can travel all over the place, and the story moves along quite briskly. This is a stark contrast to a Dragon Warrior game, where a slime can kill an unwary warrior in his first battle. They're both balanced in their own way, but depending on the players, both are likely to be critisized in the same vague way by gamers like you as being "unbalanced" or "not well thought out".
At least now I (and many like me) won't have to pay any money just to dabble with Maya.
Why do you think they're releasing it? The more people who use your software, the better chances that big industry guy X will pick it up. That's what made MS so big, and I'm sure the Maya folks are doing exactly the same thing.
Actually, it was I who brought the software to the forefront. The post I was replying to didn't mention Word at all, it just complained about how the tests weren't equal for hardware reasons, though the video memory arguement falls short when you realize that a game like quake don't benefit from 128MB video cards, let alone 256MB ones, and with that difference removed, there were two systems which were perfecly eligable to compete on an equal playing field, and did so very well; the dualie Opteron blew the dual G5 out of the water by all accounts, even in Photoshop, all without RAID. All machines were tested with 1GB of RAM and a Radeon 9800 video card. The mac version of this high-end card only has 128MB of RAM on it. That wouldn't change Quake.
Yeah, I'm grouchy and antagonistic this week. I'm also having a lot of fun rubbing mac folks the wrong way, because this is the EXACT situation AMD and Intel was in a year ago, and while there was a lot of skeptical people, there was nowhere near the denial on this scale, which questions everything from the amount of RAM in the system(there was 1Gb of RAM in every test system, for example, which a lot of people didn't bother to read about, and decided to go on a tirade about how unbalanced the RAM usage is) to how it's not real 64 bit on the G5 and is therefore useless(which is a silly comeback, seeing as that's the kind of apps you're going to be running for the next few years while software catches up to software).
As for the choice of benchmarks, I think you'd find that all of those applications are considered to be standard benchmarks in the PC world, and only the blind would say that it's wrong and decietful of them to use them in a benchmark against a MAC.
Nothing tells you about the hardware beneath, by that definition, except for a carefully balanced CPU benchmark, which has proven to be quite useless time immemorial(take the Opteron. Gets hurt badly on most CPU benchmarks, but put it in an actual app, and watch it roar! Which is the accurate CPU benchmark?)
Besides which, isn't it a bit hypocritical to be supporting mac users in their tirade against this supposedly unfair mac benchmark, when the most recent Mac speed story I recall that the G5 benchmarks used by Apple were intentionally using uber-optimized libraries and compilers on the Apple while using glib and GCC on the rest of the architectures?
Everybody lies, only the idealistic, destined to be crushed, think that somehow they can make a difference by arguing with complete strangers about subjects they haven't a stake in.