I've mentioned this incident a couple of times on Slashdot so apologies to anyone who has read it before.
I was given a ticket for driving in an incorrectly-marked bus lane. The police officers knew it wasn't marked correctly, but they had been orderd to give tickets to everyone. Months later I received a threat of a court summons, or I could pay a fine. A lawyer advised me to just pay the fine. Why? If I didn't then I'd have to go to court TWICE in a city hundreds of miles away, which would cost a couple of hundred £££, and in the unlikely event that I won I wouldn't be able to recover expenses. And, the worst part, because it was the police that had issued the ticket instead of the council, I would get a criminal record. After all the research I had done, and my lawyer's advice, I was sure that the court would rule against me, and I couldn't risk the criminal record.
Yes it's a racket. Yes I'm ashamed that I didn't fight it. But I was scared that a criminal record would prevent me from working abroad.
Motoring fines have very little to do with justice or upholding the law. They have become a revenue source for governments desperate to create the illusion of low taxes.
People who do not use PayPal do not get ripped-off, betrayed, or stolen from, by PayPal. Surely there must, must, MUST be something we can conclude from this?
Firstly, just to state the obvious: I know that most people using these hacks will be running pirated games, and only the tiniest number will be using homebrew software.
But having said that...
Sony's statement refers to both pirated software AND "unauthorised" software. In that context, unauthorised must = homebrew. Software that you've written yourself, or the author intends you to use. Yet if you use it, Sony will cut you off from PlayStation Network, greatly reducing what you can do with the official games you've bought.
How is that even legal?!?!
I own my PS3. Sony shouldn't be able to take any action that prevents me from using it. If I want to pirate games (which I don't) then Sony can pursue me through the courts. They shouldn't be able to "confiscate" all of my legally-bought games as punishment, which is effectively what they're going to do.
This was a demonstration of how fast a machine can push a buzzer after receiving a message saying it's time to push the buzzer. Knowledge and language parsing were not the determining factors in the victory.
Mirror's Edge is one of the most tense and atmospheric games I've ever played, and it deserved to sell better than it did. Unfortunately it gave me extreme motion sickness. One time after playing it for just a couple of minutes I felt so nauseous that I had to go and lie down, and I slept for the rest of the day. It's such a shame because it was a brilliant game, but I could only play it for tiny amounts of time so I gave up by about halfway through the second level.
Nokia and Microsoft join forces for combined FAIL
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
On behalf of everyone who is developing software for Android smartphones or iPhone/iPad, I would like to thank Microsoft and Nokia for their support.
I first heard about Microsoft and Nokia joining forces when someone told me the vaguest details, and I assumed Microsoft would be adopting Nokia's Symbian operating system for their phones. That would have made sense. You see, despite the appalling sales figures for Windows phones, the truth of the matter is that the devices themselves have been superb, and the current version of Windows Mobile is actually very good -- it's just that nobody outside the business world buys Windows phones anymore because Microsoft isn't cool. People want cool. It doesn't matter that Windows Mobile is good if it isn't cool. No cool = no sale.
Of course my assumption was wrong. It's Symbian that is being ditched, and now Nokia phones will use a Microsoft operating system. Which isn't going to make much difference to Microsoft, but it's going to neuter Nokia's attempts to become any kind of relevant player in the smartphone market.
So it's just Android and iOS now. Hurrah! Well done Nokia -- you just achieved one of the most epic fails in computing history. You had a cool brand, and you've thrown it away.
"stick it all on a thumb drive and include it with every new machine"
To quote Neo, the problem is choice.
The solution being proposed involves giving consumers a greater choice. The aim of bloatware is to discretely deny choice. In the eyes of the PC makers, the solution and the aim are incompatible.
If I'm punching you in the face, me stopping punching you is not a solution I'm interested in. You need to start thinking about moving away.
Unfortunately, regardless of the poor signage, my lawyer advised me that I would almost certainly be found guilty and then I would have a criminal record. Yes, a criminal record, for driving in a bus lane that I didn't know was a bus lane. It's probable that at some point in my career I'm going to want to work abroad, and I can't risk having a criminal record that may create work visa problems.
That's to say nothing of the 6 points on my driving license and a fine of up to £1000. And in motoring cases, the courts seem to think that "up to" means "this is how much the fine should be".
The whole thing stinks. It's a stealth tax, enforced by intimidation.
Last year I was driving in Glasgow city centre for the first time, and I drove along an unmarked bus lane. (Signs in the wrong place, no markings on the road, etc.) Two police officers stopped me and although they knew the lane was inadequately marked, they had been told to give everyone a ticket so that's what they did. They said it would never go to court and, even if it did, I was sure to win. They were really nice about it, or so I thought at the time.
Months later I received notice of court action, with an offer to avoid court action by paying a £60 fine. That's when I spoke to a lawyer for advice. His advice with to just pay it, because the system is stacked against you.
Here's what would happen if I didn't pay:
1. I'd have to go to court TWICE in a city hundreds of miles away. Let's say £40 fuel each time. If I had to stay overnight then let's say another £40 for a hotel each time. So that's £160.
2. Courts are known for ignoring the law on bus lanes. Legally the lane must be marked in certain ways, but courts don't take that in to account. If the lane is registered with the council as bus-only then you've broken the law.
3. In the very unlikely event that you win, you can't claim back your fuel / hotel costs, or any kind of compensation.
This has been going on for decades.
All the record / movie companies are doing now is exactly what the police have been doing for a very long time. They give people two choices:
1. Pay a relatively small fee to avoid court action, or 2. Prove yourself innocent and pay more.
As much as I can see the bad side of what I'm about to say, I believe the law needs to change so that settlement offers are outlawed. Police, councils, individuals, copyright holders, or whoever, must either take you to court or leave you alone. Intimidation, which is the intent of settlement offers, should be a criminal offence.
You may not feel that way if you'd seen his last few films. Leo was a no-no for me until the trailer for Shutter Island caught our eye, so we went to see that and my opinion of Leo certainly changed. Him being in Inception didn't spoil it at all for me. Don't get me wrong, I still can't say I like him much, but he doesn't spoil a film for me anymore.
"US release date: May 3rd. It will release worldwide three days later"
Games companies are forever bleeting on about piracy, so why the hell do they release a game in one country and tell everyone else in the world that they have to wait THREE days? As if loads of those people aren't going to pirate the game, when they may well have gone and bought it if they'd had the chance.
It is one of the first fighting games, and has been believed to be the first to use today's common side-perspective. However, Heavyweight Champ, released in Japan by Sega, used the same perspective and predates Karate Champ by eight years.
I have zero interest in this product. I don't want it. If it was on the market right now, and it worked perfectly, and it cost £1, I wouldn't buy it. If it was free, I wouldn't take it. It does not appeal to me in any way whatsoever.
Companies have been banging on about "smell-o-vision" for TV for years. I don't think anyone is interested in that either.
Scent cartridges? Jeez give me a break. As if anyone is going to waste money on smelly video games.
This isn't a problem for me because I don't put my address or phone number on Facebook. And within 2 minutes of me reading this on Slashdot, the good lady was informed and now she has removed her phone number.
I also don't allow ANY apps. I use Facebook to keep in contact with people, not as a pass-time.
What I see as the real problem for the greater Facebook population is when, inevitably, Facebook allows advertisers (or anyone else who will pay) carte blanche access to people's profile information without their permission or knowledge.
There are two facts here: 1. Facebook's business model relies on advertisers being able to access people's information. 2. Generally people do not want advertisers to access their information.
I am sure there will come a time when Facebook decides that the siter's users don't need to be involved in the decision about who has access to their information.
Slashdot Mirror
I've mentioned this incident a couple of times on Slashdot so apologies to anyone who has read it before.
I was given a ticket for driving in an incorrectly-marked bus lane. The police officers knew it wasn't marked correctly, but they had been orderd to give tickets to everyone. Months later I received a threat of a court summons, or I could pay a fine. A lawyer advised me to just pay the fine. Why? If I didn't then I'd have to go to court TWICE in a city hundreds of miles away, which would cost a couple of hundred £££, and in the unlikely event that I won I wouldn't be able to recover expenses. And, the worst part, because it was the police that had issued the ticket instead of the council, I would get a criminal record. After all the research I had done, and my lawyer's advice, I was sure that the court would rule against me, and I couldn't risk the criminal record.
Yes it's a racket. Yes I'm ashamed that I didn't fight it. But I was scared that a criminal record would prevent me from working abroad.
Motoring fines have very little to do with justice or upholding the law. They have become a revenue source for governments desperate to create the illusion of low taxes.
People who do not use PayPal do not get ripped-off, betrayed, or stolen from, by PayPal. Surely there must, must, MUST be something we can conclude from this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12510702
"As part of the entry, they need the last 4 digits of a social security number"
Want, not need.
Firstly, just to state the obvious: I know that most people using these hacks will be running pirated games, and only the tiniest number will be using homebrew software.
But having said that...
Sony's statement refers to both pirated software AND "unauthorised" software. In that context, unauthorised must = homebrew. Software that you've written yourself, or the author intends you to use. Yet if you use it, Sony will cut you off from PlayStation Network, greatly reducing what you can do with the official games you've bought.
How is that even legal?!?!
I own my PS3. Sony shouldn't be able to take any action that prevents me from using it. If I want to pirate games (which I don't) then Sony can pursue me through the courts. They shouldn't be able to "confiscate" all of my legally-bought games as punishment, which is effectively what they're going to do.
This was a demonstration of how fast a machine can push a buzzer after receiving a message saying it's time to push the buzzer. Knowledge and language parsing were not the determining factors in the victory.
"via embedding links to their own indexing sites in the filenames and bundled TXT files"
Ah, those would be the text files that I uncheck before I start the download, ensuring that they never reach my computer.
If I'm downloading a torrent for one file, and there are other files in the torrent, they all get unchecked first.
Mirror's Edge is one of the most tense and atmospheric games I've ever played, and it deserved to sell better than it did. Unfortunately it gave me extreme motion sickness. One time after playing it for just a couple of minutes I felt so nauseous that I had to go and lie down, and I slept for the rest of the day. It's such a shame because it was a brilliant game, but I could only play it for tiny amounts of time so I gave up by about halfway through the second level.
For anyone who doesn't know, the author has since disowned the book. See his comment on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0974458902
On behalf of everyone who is developing software for Android smartphones or iPhone/iPad, I would like to thank Microsoft and Nokia for their support.
I first heard about Microsoft and Nokia joining forces when someone told me the vaguest details, and I assumed Microsoft would be adopting Nokia's Symbian operating system for their phones. That would have made sense. You see, despite the appalling sales figures for Windows phones, the truth of the matter is that the devices themselves have been superb, and the current version of Windows Mobile is actually very good -- it's just that nobody outside the business world buys Windows phones anymore because Microsoft isn't cool. People want cool. It doesn't matter that Windows Mobile is good if it isn't cool. No cool = no sale.
Of course my assumption was wrong. It's Symbian that is being ditched, and now Nokia phones will use a Microsoft operating system. Which isn't going to make much difference to Microsoft, but it's going to neuter Nokia's attempts to become any kind of relevant player in the smartphone market.
So it's just Android and iOS now. Hurrah! Well done Nokia -- you just achieved one of the most epic fails in computing history. You had a cool brand, and you've thrown it away.
"stick it all on a thumb drive and include it with every new machine"
To quote Neo, the problem is choice.
The solution being proposed involves giving consumers a greater choice. The aim of bloatware is to discretely deny choice. In the eyes of the PC makers, the solution and the aim are incompatible.
If I'm punching you in the face, me stopping punching you is not a solution I'm interested in. You need to start thinking about moving away.
Unfortunately, regardless of the poor signage, my lawyer advised me that I would almost certainly be found guilty and then I would have a criminal record. Yes, a criminal record, for driving in a bus lane that I didn't know was a bus lane. It's probable that at some point in my career I'm going to want to work abroad, and I can't risk having a criminal record that may create work visa problems.
That's to say nothing of the 6 points on my driving license and a fine of up to £1000. And in motoring cases, the courts seem to think that "up to" means "this is how much the fine should be".
The whole thing stinks. It's a stealth tax, enforced by intimidation.
Settle-or-else cases need to be made illegal.
Last year I was driving in Glasgow city centre for the first time, and I drove along an unmarked bus lane. (Signs in the wrong place, no markings on the road, etc.) Two police officers stopped me and although they knew the lane was inadequately marked, they had been told to give everyone a ticket so that's what they did. They said it would never go to court and, even if it did, I was sure to win. They were really nice about it, or so I thought at the time.
Months later I received notice of court action, with an offer to avoid court action by paying a £60 fine. That's when I spoke to a lawyer for advice. His advice with to just pay it, because the system is stacked against you.
Here's what would happen if I didn't pay:
1. I'd have to go to court TWICE in a city hundreds of miles away. Let's say £40 fuel each time. If I had to stay overnight then let's say another £40 for a hotel each time. So that's £160.
2. Courts are known for ignoring the law on bus lanes. Legally the lane must be marked in certain ways, but courts don't take that in to account. If the lane is registered with the council as bus-only then you've broken the law.
3. In the very unlikely event that you win, you can't claim back your fuel / hotel costs, or any kind of compensation.
This has been going on for decades.
All the record / movie companies are doing now is exactly what the police have been doing for a very long time. They give people two choices:
1. Pay a relatively small fee to avoid court action, or
2. Prove yourself innocent and pay more.
As much as I can see the bad side of what I'm about to say, I believe the law needs to change so that settlement offers are outlawed. Police, councils, individuals, copyright holders, or whoever, must either take you to court or leave you alone. Intimidation, which is the intent of settlement offers, should be a criminal offence.
Thank you! I stand corrected :-)
"The 19-year old claims that his solar device has the intensity of 5,000 suns."
Surely it has the intensity of 5,800 x the amount of solar energy collected by a tiny mirror 93m miles away from the sun?
Also lol @ it being destroyed in a shed fire -- I wonder how that came about? :-)
You may not feel that way if you'd seen his last few films. Leo was a no-no for me until the trailer for Shutter Island caught our eye, so we went to see that and my opinion of Leo certainly changed. Him being in Inception didn't spoil it at all for me. Don't get me wrong, I still can't say I like him much, but he doesn't spoil a film for me anymore.
Not odd. Honest.
Why not just watch it? It's a good film, you'd probably enjoy it.
I know. Read the quote :-)
"US release date: May 3rd. It will release worldwide three days later"
Games companies are forever bleeting on about piracy, so why the hell do they release a game in one country and tell everyone else in the world that they have to wait THREE days? As if loads of those people aren't going to pirate the game, when they may well have gone and bought it if they'd had the chance.
It's on the Karate Champ page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karate_Champ
It is one of the first fighting games, and has been believed to be the first to use today's common side-perspective. However, Heavyweight Champ, released in Japan by Sega, used the same perspective and predates Karate Champ by eight years.
"it was the first ever side view beat'em up"
That's according to Wikipedia. Also according to Wikipedia, another side-view beat-em-up preceeded it by eight years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavyweight_Champ
I have zero interest in this product. I don't want it. If it was on the market right now, and it worked perfectly, and it cost £1, I wouldn't buy it. If it was free, I wouldn't take it. It does not appeal to me in any way whatsoever.
Companies have been banging on about "smell-o-vision" for TV for years. I don't think anyone is interested in that either.
Scent cartridges? Jeez give me a break. As if anyone is going to waste money on smelly video games.
Sharing militarily-valuable technology with a potential military enemy doesn't seem wise.
This isn't a problem for me because I don't put my address or phone number on Facebook. And within 2 minutes of me reading this on Slashdot, the good lady was informed and now she has removed her phone number.
I also don't allow ANY apps. I use Facebook to keep in contact with people, not as a pass-time.
What I see as the real problem for the greater Facebook population is when, inevitably, Facebook allows advertisers (or anyone else who will pay) carte blanche access to people's profile information without their permission or knowledge.
There are two facts here:
1. Facebook's business model relies on advertisers being able to access people's information.
2. Generally people do not want advertisers to access their information.
I am sure there will come a time when Facebook decides that the siter's users don't need to be involved in the decision about who has access to their information.