1) The story was new, the ideas were something that had rarely been seen in games before and the challenges were capable of stimulating even the most arrogantly intelligent people. Also, you couldn't cheat you're way through it. Even if you had a walkthrough, you still had to do the puzzles.
One other one I remembered was (but only if you're into deep stuff) Sphere was a good book (Michael Chriton I believe wrote it). The movie on the other hand sucked.
The trends are because the movie industry is looking fo rsuper hero's again. They've figured out that the random action flicks and horibly bad comedies aren't selling as well as they thought. It's epic stories that make people talk and want to come back for more. Think about it, all of the movies you listed have a definate good guys v. bad guys sort of set up. Ask someone to identify the heros and they give you a group of about 3 -5 characters (for the larger epics) of people that are with out a doubt the good guys. The whole sort of not knowing really who's good or if there is a good that's been presented in a lot of movies recently (Traffic, Training Day, Spy Games etc) doesn't quite sit well with people. We want big battles between good and evil.
Ender's Game really doesn't fit this role, but anyone who's read the book(s) will tell you that if done right it will make an incredible movie. What it all hinges on is whether or not it can come across with the same power that the book does, and make you go hmmm.
For those of you wondering how the story could be told without Peter and Valentine I suggest you try to dig up a copy of the old S.F. magazine "Analog" in the volume labled Anthology #2 Readers Choice (1982 Edition) [if it helps, the magazines Library of Congress number is 80-69078] you will find a short story version of Ender's Game. If I recall correctly, OSC wrote this version long before he wrote the book and went back to the story at much prodding from friends to turn it into a book. Most likely, the movie will follow a formula of this type.
Those of you looking to read some good S.F. & F that is on par with Ender's Game for being cool and visual should read Cobra (by Timothy Zahn) and the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant (by Stephen R. Donaldson)
Ever since I read the prediction from an ol popular science "Computers of the future may only wiegh 2 tons."
Somehow I don't think we can begin to comprehend what we will see in the future. Try telling somone from 1995 that in 5 years he would be able to buy a 30 gig harddrive for $100 and in 7 years 80 gig HDs would ship in computers. Try telling someone from 1990 that in 10 years computers would run standard at 1 ghz. Or try telling someone from 1970 that in 30 years he would be able to hold a super-computer in his lap and it would wiegh about 5 pounds.
For one, the value of the game is much higher than that of music because consumers get a better utility out of the game than out of the music. A game has huge reuse value as compared to a music CD. And there isn't just a demand for lower priced music, there's one for games too. Ever see those warez sites? Same thing. The major difference is that the gaming industry isn't trying to have burners and copies eliminated completely (yes there is copy protection, but it's more to discourage casual piracy rather than complete blockage). The RIAA want's burners to not work period. If the gaming industry did that, we would be up in arms just the same.
Also a game will go down in price over time, music does not.
How many people here are old enough to remember when it was "18.99 cd/12.99 cassette" for all of those time-life or rhino music compilations.
For some of them, it's stil those prices. Prices really haven't come down at all. And seeing as how most music is now digitaly recorded, I wouldn't suprise me if tapes did cost more to produce, but the marketing they're relying on is the same thing that sells iMacs and 2.2 gig intels the "OOH NEW SHINY THING" mentality that a lot of people have.
Most of the time you don't even have to wait 2 years to get a game cheap. After 6 months, it usualy drops in price and then you pick up the cheap resales on ebay.
Hell of a good post. The bonehead mooches in this place who expect to get something for nothing are just a bunch of knuckleheaded whiners.
Most of us just want cheaper, not free. And if you don't want something for nothing, why are you posting as an AC instead of as a registered slshdot user?
'Course, maybe if they didn't blow their meager salaries (from burger flipping no doubt) on Klingon-to-English dictionaries they would have money to buy a CD or two.
This comming from the guy that's spending his time (most likely when he could be out earning money) insulting the people on slashdot.
Ok, here we go, little rant on moderation and I'm going to burn Karma with it, but I don't care.
1) The first Moderation I recieved in the above post was Overrated. Seeing as how I wasn't rated before, being overrated doesn't quite apply. Second of all, if you don't like what I have to say, pick a real reason.
2) The second moderation I recieved was Redundant. Last I checked, redundant meaned repetative, saying what has been said before, nothing new, the same old stuff. Seing as how there were no other replies asking for the parent post to be moderated up, it couldn't have been redundant.
If you people are going to moderate, make sure you know what you're doing. I don't have a problem with losing Karma or being moded down if done so accurately, but do your job and do it right or check the box that says you don't want to moderate.
Re: End "work-for-hire"
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
Exactly, that was basicaly what I was trying to get at.
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
The artist who made the recording. IN making the recording the artist was granted limited short term license to use all the equipment and telents granted to him (or her) to make said recording.
The person who composed the music owns the music. He determines who else can use his music, but by composing it for the recording, he granted the rights to use his music in that recording.
This isn't as complex as it seems, just think it through a bit. The backup singers and guy who wrote the mixing software already have no stake in the song, why should they have any now?
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
There is a difference between signing a contract and transfering a patent. In the contract, prosecution of the copywrite infringement belongs on the inventor's hands. If you transfer the copywrite, theoreticaly, the new owner of the copy write could sue you for violation if you created and sold your own version of said item.
Exactly, as much as I would love to see this go through to hold off pop-unders, I would rather not have the patent at all. I don't like the current patent system, I don't like stupid patents. As cool as this would be for internet users, it's a bad patent, I want this one to be struck down. Besides, I have the Proximatron (search for it on google) I don't deal with pop-unders or overs
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
You shouldn't be able to sell the right to your creation to someone, at least in my opinion. You want to let someone manufacture or produce your product, go for it. You want to limit your copywrite so that only they can produce and no one else, that's fine too. But you shouldn't be able to sell off or transfer your copywrite. A copywrite is designed to protect the inventor and his right to benifit from his own work, once it's transfered, it protects no one it only provides a monetary gain.
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
The screen play itself belongs to the writer. The movie itself belongs to either the producer or director (most likely the director). It's not that complex. Just as I, as a musician, have no stake in a recording of a concert, so an actor wouldn't have stake in a movie.
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
I see where you're going with this, and I do agree there are some iffy things to be worked out. However, speaking from an idealogical standpoint now (which one could argue is how the constitution was writen) if the original creator does not have enough interest in their creation to persue it proper use, then he has no right to complain if some day someone uses it in a way he doesn't want. I suppose you could always set it up so that any contract regarding prosecution of copywrite violations has to be clearly laid out and if there isn't a clear cut case, the matter is brought back to the original holder of said copywrite. The point is, the creator is the person who should be calling shots.
BTW, I have to ask, just based on your user name, are you a Guns And Roses fan?
Apple cases also come with great locking mechanisms. A slide on the back of the G4 locks the case and can be secured with a standard padlock (go to CVS and pick of a master lock for $3)
The laptops are even better, a tiny screw inbetween the F4 and F5 keys. Only a computer junkie could open one of these if they were locked.
I dunno, I've had plenty of PC cases where it may not be the IDE cable, but the power cable has certainly caused me to make a few sacrifices of the Red Cross variety.
The eMachine's case was more than just a basic design rip off, it was a blatent attempt to be a iPC. I doubt apple would have a problem with a pull down case from a PC manufacturer, just not one that was curvy, grey and plastic with funky handles and such. Although, for awsome case design, at least for a desktop model computer (not tower) I'd have to go with an old Dell Optiplex I was toying with the otherday. It was amazingly easy to acess. I wonder where PC cases went wrong.
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
As long as the SWIAA simply tracks the copywrites, they can do so. But actual prosecution against violations falls into the hands of the artist. This way, the artist decides which is more important, persuing every last dime from their past works, or making new works.
i.e. Joe Schmoe is runnign a CD distribution system out of his home, producing exact copies of the original recording of Q's performance. Billy Bob is downloading songs off of the net and download's Q's song. John JJ Schmidt makes a personal copy of the performance for his own use. The SWIAA reports Joe Schmoe and Billy Bob and John JJ Schmidt to the artist. If Q is truly in it for the production of the music and doesn't care about the money, no one gets prosecuted. If Q wants some reimbursement, but if still highly interested in being an mucisian, Joe Schmoe gets taken to court. If Q is really into the money, Billy Bob gets taken to court too. And if Q is just a hard ass who will go cold for selling crap in the near future, everyone will be prosecuted. This is a simplified version, but the point is the same, depending on how you as a creator want to run yourself determines how you use your right to the copywrite.
Re:Just read the Constitution, fer chrissakes.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I'm saying that it's up to the artist to decide what is fair use of his recording. No company should have the rights to your invention, regardless of how much money they pumped into it.
if Band XYZ releases the original recording of a song writen by Q, and Band HIJ wants to perform (and/or record) the song, they would get permission from Q, not from XYZ. However, if someone wanted to broadcast XYZs recording, they would have to ask XYZ for permision.
Re:But who created the content?
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
The song it self belongs to the writer(s).
The performance (or recording of it) belongs to the performer(s).
In this situation, if Band XYZ releases the original recording of a song writen by Q, and Band HIJ wants to perform (and/or record) the song, they would get permission from Q, not from XYZ.
However, if someone wanted to broadcast XYZs recording, they would have to ask XYZ for permision.
Re:Discovery vs Invention
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
I think what the original poster meant on the non-transferable copywrites meant something more along the lines of, Publisher can not go out and prosecute Joe Shmoe for using his home made printer to produce copies of your Great American Novel. They can discover Joe Schmoe and report to you, but the actual prosecution belongs to you and you alone.
Corporations and entities discovered to be sponsering, promoting or participating in the assasination of copywrite and patent holders will be executed.
Slashdot Mirror
Myst was cool for two reasons:
1) The story was new, the ideas were something that had rarely been seen in games before and the challenges were capable of stimulating even the most arrogantly intelligent people. Also, you couldn't cheat you're way through it. Even if you had a walkthrough, you still had to do the puzzles.
2) The game was originaly written with HyperCard
One other one I remembered was (but only if you're into deep stuff) Sphere was a good book (Michael Chriton I believe wrote it). The movie on the other hand sucked.
The trends are because the movie industry is looking fo rsuper hero's again. They've figured out that the random action flicks and horibly bad comedies aren't selling as well as they thought. It's epic stories that make people talk and want to come back for more. Think about it, all of the movies you listed have a definate good guys v. bad guys sort of set up. Ask someone to identify the heros and they give you a group of about 3 -5 characters (for the larger epics) of people that are with out a doubt the good guys. The whole sort of not knowing really who's good or if there is a good that's been presented in a lot of movies recently (Traffic, Training Day, Spy Games etc) doesn't quite sit well with people. We want big battles between good and evil.
Ender's Game really doesn't fit this role, but anyone who's read the book(s) will tell you that if done right it will make an incredible movie. What it all hinges on is whether or not it can come across with the same power that the book does, and make you go hmmm.
For those of you wondering how the story could be told without Peter and Valentine I suggest you try to dig up a copy of the old S.F. magazine "Analog" in the volume labled Anthology #2 Readers Choice (1982 Edition) [if it helps, the magazines Library of Congress number is 80-69078] you will find a short story version of Ender's Game. If I recall correctly, OSC wrote this version long before he wrote the book and went back to the story at much prodding from friends to turn it into a book. Most likely, the movie will follow a formula of this type.
Those of you looking to read some good S.F. & F that is on par with Ender's Game for being cool and visual should read Cobra (by Timothy Zahn) and the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant (by Stephen R. Donaldson)
Ever since I read the prediction from an ol popular science "Computers of the future may only wiegh 2 tons."
Somehow I don't think we can begin to comprehend what we will see in the future. Try telling somone from 1995 that in 5 years he would be able to buy a 30 gig harddrive for $100 and in 7 years 80 gig HDs would ship in computers. Try telling someone from 1990 that in 10 years computers would run standard at 1 ghz. Or try telling someone from 1970 that in 30 years he would be able to hold a super-computer in his lap and it would wiegh about 5 pounds.
For one, the value of the game is much higher than that of music because consumers get a better utility out of the game than out of the music. A game has huge reuse value as compared to a music CD. And there isn't just a demand for lower priced music, there's one for games too. Ever see those warez sites? Same thing. The major difference is that the gaming industry isn't trying to have burners and copies eliminated completely (yes there is copy protection, but it's more to discourage casual piracy rather than complete blockage). The RIAA want's burners to not work period. If the gaming industry did that, we would be up in arms just the same.
Also a game will go down in price over time, music does not.
How many people here are old enough to remember when it was "18.99 cd/12.99 cassette" for all of those time-life or rhino music compilations.
For some of them, it's stil those prices. Prices really haven't come down at all. And seeing as how most music is now digitaly recorded, I wouldn't suprise me if tapes did cost more to produce, but the marketing they're relying on is the same thing that sells iMacs and 2.2 gig intels the "OOH NEW SHINY THING" mentality that a lot of people have.
Most of the time you don't even have to wait 2 years to get a game cheap. After 6 months, it usualy drops in price and then you pick up the cheap resales on ebay.
Hell of a good post. The bonehead mooches in this place who expect to get something for nothing are just a bunch of knuckleheaded whiners.
Most of us just want cheaper, not free. And if you don't want something for nothing, why are you posting as an AC instead of as a registered slshdot user?
'Course, maybe if they didn't blow their meager salaries (from burger flipping no doubt) on Klingon-to-English dictionaries they would have money to buy a CD or two.
This comming from the guy that's spending his time (most likely when he could be out earning money) insulting the people on slashdot.
Ok, here we go, little rant on moderation and I'm going to burn Karma with it, but I don't care.
1) The first Moderation I recieved in the above post was Overrated. Seeing as how I wasn't rated before, being overrated doesn't quite apply. Second of all, if you don't like what I have to say, pick a real reason.
2) The second moderation I recieved was Redundant. Last I checked, redundant meaned repetative, saying what has been said before, nothing new, the same old stuff. Seing as how there were no other replies asking for the parent post to be moderated up, it couldn't have been redundant.
If you people are going to moderate, make sure you know what you're doing. I don't have a problem with losing Karma or being moded down if done so accurately, but do your job and do it right or check the box that says you don't want to moderate.
I would definately buy it, it would be so fricken cool. On the other hand, could you imagine if this thing got a virus:
"Holy shit what the hell is- ACK!!!!!!!!!!!!"
It aint that off topic and it's cool
Exactly, that was basicaly what I was trying to get at.
The artist who made the recording. IN making the recording the artist was granted limited short term license to use all the equipment and telents granted to him (or her) to make said recording.
The person who composed the music owns the music. He determines who else can use his music, but by composing it for the recording, he granted the rights to use his music in that recording.
This isn't as complex as it seems, just think it through a bit. The backup singers and guy who wrote the mixing software already have no stake in the song, why should they have any now?
There is a difference between signing a contract and transfering a patent. In the contract, prosecution of the copywrite infringement belongs on the inventor's hands. If you transfer the copywrite, theoreticaly, the new owner of the copy write could sue you for violation if you created and sold your own version of said item.
Exactly, as much as I would love to see this go through to hold off pop-unders, I would rather not have the patent at all. I don't like the current patent system, I don't like stupid patents. As cool as this would be for internet users, it's a bad patent, I want this one to be struck down. Besides, I have the Proximatron (search for it on google) I don't deal with pop-unders or overs
You shouldn't be able to sell the right to your creation to someone, at least in my opinion. You want to let someone manufacture or produce your product, go for it. You want to limit your copywrite so that only they can produce and no one else, that's fine too. But you shouldn't be able to sell off or transfer your copywrite. A copywrite is designed to protect the inventor and his right to benifit from his own work, once it's transfered, it protects no one it only provides a monetary gain.
The screen play itself belongs to the writer. The movie itself belongs to either the producer or director (most likely the director). It's not that complex. Just as I, as a musician, have no stake in a recording of a concert, so an actor wouldn't have stake in a movie.
I see where you're going with this, and I do agree there are some iffy things to be worked out. However, speaking from an idealogical standpoint now (which one could argue is how the constitution was writen) if the original creator does not have enough interest in their creation to persue it proper use, then he has no right to complain if some day someone uses it in a way he doesn't want. I suppose you could always set it up so that any contract regarding prosecution of copywrite violations has to be clearly laid out and if there isn't a clear cut case, the matter is brought back to the original holder of said copywrite. The point is, the creator is the person who should be calling shots.
BTW, I have to ask, just based on your user name, are you a Guns And Roses fan?
Apple cases also come with great locking mechanisms. A slide on the back of the G4 locks the case and can be secured with a standard padlock (go to CVS and pick of a master lock for $3)
The laptops are even better, a tiny screw inbetween the F4 and F5 keys. Only a computer junkie could open one of these if they were locked.
I dunno, I've had plenty of PC cases where it may not be the IDE cable, but the power cable has certainly caused me to make a few sacrifices of the Red Cross variety.
The eMachine's case was more than just a basic design rip off, it was a blatent attempt to be a iPC. I doubt apple would have a problem with a pull down case from a PC manufacturer, just not one that was curvy, grey and plastic with funky handles and such. Although, for awsome case design, at least for a desktop model computer (not tower) I'd have to go with an old Dell Optiplex I was toying with the otherday. It was amazingly easy to acess. I wonder where PC cases went wrong.
As long as the SWIAA simply tracks the copywrites, they can do so. But actual prosecution against violations falls into the hands of the artist. This way, the artist decides which is more important, persuing every last dime from their past works, or making new works.
i.e. Joe Schmoe is runnign a CD distribution system out of his home, producing exact copies of the original recording of Q's performance. Billy Bob is downloading songs off of the net and download's Q's song. John JJ Schmidt makes a personal copy of the performance for his own use. The SWIAA reports Joe Schmoe and Billy Bob and John JJ Schmidt to the artist. If Q is truly in it for the production of the music and doesn't care about the money, no one gets prosecuted. If Q wants some reimbursement, but if still highly interested in being an mucisian, Joe Schmoe gets taken to court. If Q is really into the money, Billy Bob gets taken to court too. And if Q is just a hard ass who will go cold for selling crap in the near future, everyone will be prosecuted. This is a simplified version, but the point is the same, depending on how you as a creator want to run yourself determines how you use your right to the copywrite.
I'm saying that it's up to the artist to decide what is fair use of his recording. No company should have the rights to your invention, regardless of how much money they pumped into it.
if Band XYZ releases the original recording of a song writen by Q, and Band HIJ wants to perform (and/or record) the song, they would get permission from Q, not from XYZ.
However, if someone wanted to broadcast XYZs recording, they would have to ask XYZ for permision.
The song it self belongs to the writer(s).
The performance (or recording of it) belongs to the performer(s).
In this situation, if Band XYZ releases the original recording of a song writen by Q, and Band HIJ wants to perform (and/or record) the song, they would get permission from Q, not from XYZ.
However, if someone wanted to broadcast XYZs recording, they would have to ask XYZ for permision.
I think what the original poster meant on the non-transferable copywrites meant something more along the lines of, Publisher can not go out and prosecute Joe Shmoe for using his home made printer to produce copies of your Great American Novel. They can discover Joe Schmoe and report to you, but the actual prosecution belongs to you and you alone.
Solution to companies killing patent holders:
Corporations and entities discovered to be sponsering, promoting or participating in the assasination of copywrite and patent holders will be executed.