"For the love of michael, just make a legal section. This is not about our rights. Not yours, not mine, just Google's. Sheesh."
And another thing, it really pisses me off that the show was called 'Deep Space Nine' when they went an entire season where they weren't on the station and it was called Terak Nor. For the love of michael, they should have called it Star Trek: Terak Nor for that season!! Of course, after every episode, I was on the internet registerring my complaint throughout the world!
"Make sure you don't click on any of the links in the story. It was submitted by Roland, and by doing so you would just be contributing to his ad revenue and encouraging him to keep posting on Slashdot."
If his stories are generating comments, even if they're "Roland is an ass!" comments, Slashdot will keep him. Haven't you noticed that every reply is fed with a banner ad?
Frankly, you'd also be doing a favor for those of us who don't give a flying fuck.
"It's clever but sad that the salshdot crew are so greedy as to go after table scraps like this."
Who gives a flying fuck? Are you seriously trying to tell me this story isn't news for nerds?
This whole obsession with Roland is really tiring. If you really want him gone, don't post comments in his related stories. Why? If this a form of advertisement, what could be more damaging than to have it shoo people away?
All this modded up blabbering about Roland is giving Slashdot every interest in keeping him (or it?) around. More comments == more measurable hits == better sales pitch to those who buy banner space. D-fucking-duh.
"except that Microsoft's proposal was in the monopoly browser while Google's software is a third-party add-on, and Microsoft's was (originally) on by default while Google's is a button to click."
Betcha this rationalization came after it was decided Google could get away with what Microsoft couldn't.
"If they are rechargable like a Gameboy, then you have the issue of being in the middle of a game and unable to continue because your battery just ran out.
If not, you have to change batteries all the time."
I have a WaveBird controller for my GameCube. I haven't run into either problem you mention.
"Either way, I hope they at least plan to give the option for a corded controller, for those of us that still like them."
I agree with this, but for the reasons you're listing. I'm worried about interference.
"So if the wireless joysticks are standard, does that mean there won't be any joystick "ports" on the box at all?"
Boy I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I've had a good experience with wireless controllers. (Nintendo's Wavebird is battery friendly and very responsive.) I also like the idea of no more controller ports.
On the other hand, I live in an apartment complex. I'm just the sort of asshole that would find it amusing to mess with other people's games.
Not to people with Wavebirds. Can't say what MS has in store, but there are actually people in the world that have a wireless controller that doesn't eat baterries like they were candy.
"If I saw you engulfed in flames, I would be under no legal or ethical obligation to give you the benefit of my fire extinguisher. However, that doesn't mean I would be acting legally and ethically if I were to set you on fire."
Ugh. There's a cheap way to gain karma: Compare MS's business practices to awful crimes and watch everybody nod their heads and say "Yep! It's just like that! I wouldn't put it past Microsoft."
" but after they shutdown FreeCraft and/or the Battlenet server project, I made myself a promise to never give them another cent."
Well, to be fair, FreeCraft etc bypassed their protection mechanisms. There's no way Blizzard could have ignored that. It is not the least bit surprising that Blizzard reacted the way they did.
I admit that maybe I'm biased, but I just don't see what reason there is to be mad about it. If authetnication still happened with Blizzard's servers, that would be a different story altogether.
"if you are planning to pay the monthly subscription can you not just download the game installer for free?"
I imagine because a.) Demand is too high for their ability to supply. (i.e. They can only support so many users. b.) People are actually paying for it. In that case, it'd be stupid not to ask for it. c.) Maybe that's how they justify their current price of subscription. Sorta like how cell phones require a contract.
This is all academic, though. I don't know much about WoW.
"Question (and of course, nobody pays any attention (okay, they get distracted and forget about it, but it amounts to the same thing)). Are these hints that Marvin's brain actually is the Earth? (Or conversely, that his body is its I/O terminal?)"
The implication, as near as I could tell, was that he was very smart, but very under-utilized. Adams had a good chunk of the book to demonstrate that. In a movie, it's a different challenge. Giving him a big cranium, then asking him to answer the door, sells the same point. He's under-utilized and miffed about it. Personally I think they made a thoughtful choice about it.
" Eye candy is there for nothing more than the purpose of looking cool.."
Well, I'm going to get needlessly nitpicky here: Any time Eye Candy is being triggered by something happening, it is Visual Feedback. One of the most useless bits of eye candy I can think of is the Windows Start Menu fading in. I have no use for it. It's pretty, but it interferes with my productivity. (Just as you mentioned...) You have to understand, though, that it is still providing Visual Feedback. It's giving you a moment to let you know something has appeared on the screen as a direct result of pressing the Start button. The benefit doesn't, for me, outweigh the cost. But it's still there.
Anyway, I'm not shooting down your point, simply nitpicking a detail of it.:)
"here's a difference between eye candy and visual cues."
I'm not sure I understand this particular point. (I think I get the rest of your post, though...) Can you give me an example of something that is eye candy without serving as a visual cue?
"I think Linux needs more creative taste and aesthetic in its interfaces. I'm willing to contribute."
Heck, I would too, if I thought anybody'd listen. Not only am I an artist that can create graphics, but I also have some (light) UI design experience.
What really bugs me about the attempts to stop TV from being shared on the web is the lack of thought about cause and effect.
Here's a question: Why would anybody download a show off the internet?
Here's a few answers:
1.) Because I or my TiVo missed it. 2.) I didn't know about the show until after it had aired. 3.) Everybody's telling me about this show, but I want to see the original episode first. 4.) I want to have a copy I can watch over and over again. 5.) The picture quality of the downloaded version is better. (Believe it or not, I really have run into this.) 6.) I can't get that show, I don't have the right channel nor can I get it.
I doubt that an answer like "I'm sick of commercials" would be a widely used one. Who'd want to spend > 1 hour downloading a show to save 12 minutes in commercials? Not a lot.
Imagine what would happen if all of these reasons were addressed. Who would want to acquire unauthorized copies then? What if it became standard for the first episode of any series to be available for download on the show's website? What if DVD releases of TV shows happened closer to when they were originally aired? What if I could pay a couple of bucks to buy download of an episode I missed? Who'd even bother with transferring files over the net then?
"2) alpha blending is expensive on almost all GPUs."
Well, to be fair, compare the task of running Doom 3 to the task of being a pretty desktop UI. Cards will always get better. If the idea takes off, new cards will be tweaked to make the experience more interesting. (For this reason, it's a good thing for all of us that Microsoft is heading in this direction, too.)
Slashdot Mirror
"For the love of michael, just make a legal section. This is not about our rights. Not yours, not mine, just Google's. Sheesh."
And another thing, it really pisses me off that the show was called 'Deep Space Nine' when they went an entire season where they weren't on the station and it was called Terak Nor. For the love of michael, they should have called it Star Trek: Terak Nor for that season!! Of course, after every episode, I was on the internet registerring my complaint throughout the world!
"These researchers have obviously never seen Red Dwarf. They would know the whole concept was doomed to failure."
(Score:1, Interesting) !?
Umm...
"Make sure you don't click on any of the links in the story. It was submitted by Roland, and by doing so you would just be contributing to his ad revenue and encouraging him to keep posting on Slashdot."
If his stories are generating comments, even if they're "Roland is an ass!" comments, Slashdot will keep him. Haven't you noticed that every reply is fed with a banner ad?
Frankly, you'd also be doing a favor for those of us who don't give a flying fuck.
"It's clever but sad that the salshdot crew are so greedy as to go after table scraps like this."
Who gives a flying fuck? Are you seriously trying to tell me this story isn't news for nerds?
This whole obsession with Roland is really tiring. If you really want him gone, don't post comments in his related stories. Why? If this a form of advertisement, what could be more damaging than to have it shoo people away?
All this modded up blabbering about Roland is giving Slashdot every interest in keeping him (or it?) around. More comments == more measurable hits == better sales pitch to those who buy banner space. D-fucking-duh.
"I want a hologram that shows me whether I have bad breath,"
I want a hologram of a chick that doesn't care about my bad breath.
"Using Windows isn't sport, it's masochism."
Unlike installing Linux on a toaster? Pssh. Cast no stones, my friend.
"In other words some lawyer's trophy wife wants a new yacht."
In other words, It's Apple and they can do no wrong.
"Does the government really need to protect me against the cost of a DVD because I didn't read the fine print while ignoring far larger issues?"
Do you really want fine print to be exploitable?
"After all, isn't the nearest magnetar something like 5 kiloparsecs away?"
Pssh. The Millineum Falcon could reach that in no time!
"Do you get out much? Ever touched a girl? These are just some thoughts . . . ."
Why are you thinking instead of doing?
"Microsoft hasn't had to answer to their customers in any meaningful way in years, and you know it!"
Yeah, that's why Microsoft isn't spreading FUD about Linux or FireFox.
"except that Microsoft's proposal was in the monopoly browser while Google's software is a third-party add-on, and Microsoft's was (originally) on by default while Google's is a button to click."
Betcha this rationalization came after it was decided Google could get away with what Microsoft couldn't.
"If they are rechargable like a Gameboy, then you have the issue of being in the middle of a game and unable to continue because your battery just ran out.
If not, you have to change batteries all the time."
I have a WaveBird controller for my GameCube. I haven't run into either problem you mention.
"Either way, I hope they at least plan to give the option for a corded controller, for those of us that still like them."
I agree with this, but for the reasons you're listing. I'm worried about interference.
"So if the wireless joysticks are standard, does that mean there won't be any joystick "ports" on the box at all?"
Boy I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I've had a good experience with wireless controllers. (Nintendo's Wavebird is battery friendly and very responsive.) I also like the idea of no more controller ports.
On the other hand, I live in an apartment complex. I'm just the sort of asshole that would find it amusing to mess with other people's games.
"+5 Insightful"
Not to people with Wavebirds. Can't say what MS has in store, but there are actually people in the world that have a wireless controller that doesn't eat baterries like they were candy.
"Perhaps the kid wouldn't have shot the cops if he couldn't have got access to a Gun."
No, he'd run over them instead.
Solve the problem, not the symptom.
"If I saw you engulfed in flames, I would be under no legal or ethical obligation to give you the benefit of my fire extinguisher. However, that doesn't mean I would be acting legally and ethically if I were to set you on fire."
Ugh. There's a cheap way to gain karma: Compare MS's business practices to awful crimes and watch everybody nod their heads and say "Yep! It's just like that! I wouldn't put it past Microsoft."
"Expecting them to give out their support to people who have paid them no money is ridiculous. How on earth does that make sense to you??" .
... want a little cheese with your Wine?
That's almost exactly what I was gonna say, except I was gonna add:
" but after they shutdown FreeCraft and/or the Battlenet server project, I made myself a promise to never give them another cent."
Well, to be fair, FreeCraft etc bypassed their protection mechanisms. There's no way Blizzard could have ignored that. It is not the least bit surprising that Blizzard reacted the way they did.
I admit that maybe I'm biased, but I just don't see what reason there is to be mad about it. If authetnication still happened with Blizzard's servers, that would be a different story altogether.
"if you are planning to pay the monthly subscription can you not just download the game installer for free?"
I imagine because a.) Demand is too high for their ability to supply. (i.e. They can only support so many users. b.) People are actually paying for it. In that case, it'd be stupid not to ask for it. c.) Maybe that's how they justify their current price of subscription. Sorta like how cell phones require a contract.
This is all academic, though. I don't know much about WoW.
"Question (and of course, nobody pays any attention (okay, they get distracted and forget about it, but it amounts to the same thing)). Are these hints that Marvin's brain actually is the Earth? (Or conversely, that his body is its I/O terminal?)"
The implication, as near as I could tell, was that he was very smart, but very under-utilized. Adams had a good chunk of the book to demonstrate that. In a movie, it's a different challenge. Giving him a big cranium, then asking him to answer the door, sells the same point. He's under-utilized and miffed about it. Personally I think they made a thoughtful choice about it.
" Eye candy is there for nothing more than the purpose of looking cool.."
:)
Well, I'm going to get needlessly nitpicky here: Any time Eye Candy is being triggered by something happening, it is Visual Feedback. One of the most useless bits of eye candy I can think of is the Windows Start Menu fading in. I have no use for it. It's pretty, but it interferes with my productivity. (Just as you mentioned...) You have to understand, though, that it is still providing Visual Feedback. It's giving you a moment to let you know something has appeared on the screen as a direct result of pressing the Start button. The benefit doesn't, for me, outweigh the cost. But it's still there.
Anyway, I'm not shooting down your point, simply nitpicking a detail of it.
"here's a difference between eye candy and visual cues."
I'm not sure I understand this particular point. (I think I get the rest of your post, though...) Can you give me an example of something that is eye candy without serving as a visual cue?
"I think Linux needs more creative taste and aesthetic in its interfaces. I'm willing to contribute."
Heck, I would too, if I thought anybody'd listen. Not only am I an artist that can create graphics, but I also have some (light) UI design experience.
What really bugs me about the attempts to stop TV from being shared on the web is the lack of thought about cause and effect.
Here's a question: Why would anybody download a show off the internet?
Here's a few answers:
1.) Because I or my TiVo missed it.
2.) I didn't know about the show until after it had aired.
3.) Everybody's telling me about this show, but I want to see the original episode first.
4.) I want to have a copy I can watch over and over again.
5.) The picture quality of the downloaded version is better. (Believe it or not, I really have run into this.)
6.) I can't get that show, I don't have the right channel nor can I get it.
I doubt that an answer like "I'm sick of commercials" would be a widely used one. Who'd want to spend > 1 hour downloading a show to save 12 minutes in commercials? Not a lot.
Imagine what would happen if all of these reasons were addressed. Who would want to acquire unauthorized copies then? What if it became standard for the first episode of any series to be available for download on the show's website? What if DVD releases of TV shows happened closer to when they were originally aired? What if I could pay a couple of bucks to buy download of an episode I missed? Who'd even bother with transferring files over the net then?
Lots of business opportunities here. *Sigh*
"2) alpha blending is expensive on almost all GPUs."
Well, to be fair, compare the task of running Doom 3 to the task of being a pretty desktop UI. Cards will always get better. If the idea takes off, new cards will be tweaked to make the experience more interesting. (For this reason, it's a good thing for all of us that Microsoft is heading in this direction, too.)