Bah, I'm not sure it would have been a hit. I have yet to meet a movie-based game that's really entertaining. Most of these games are created so quickly that they lack the finesse and details that we've gotten used to. Vice versa is equally true, movies based on games never really are THAT successful. I think only Tomb Raider I and Mortal Kombat I (the movies) can be said to have had a notable success.
wow...all I read are midly-to-very negative comments.
Google is a well established search leader, MS is at best...a toddler, lets at least give them a chance.
Sure the page is cluttered, its full of toys, its "pretty". MS's aim has always been to the general "mr. joe nobody" type of person. and apparently that kind of people think its good if its pretty.
Personally, I think its ok but they'll have to do better than this if they remotely wanna try to challenge google. Google's strong point is "it just works". It works on all browser and it gives relevant results. Pretty simple goal heh ? If MS can do just that, they should do fairly ok.
As always, I believe MS is releasing their search monster early precisely to see the reaction of people so they can know what people want. So lets be constructive.
Hey mr gates, you wanna get my vote ? then stop trying to get me with pretty widgets, what brings me back to google is its search ability so why dont you start by making a strong search engine, if it can do some alchemy to guess what im trying to find, all the better.
>>I just don't think "we" were as myopic about our game selection as that presented in the list.
LOL.
Well, that much is true:)
Although, Zelda and FF are taken to a whole new level in japan... what I meant was, here we like Zelda and FF, you know, they're good games, they sell well, its a hit. but in japan, its really part of the culture of gamers. why do you think square created like 3 final fantasies that were just sold in japan, its because the sales figures were much more impressive over there.
and that much is also true for Doom over here, I remember the nights i spent playing doom 1, then duke nukem.
but you know, list in general, especially when published to the public like this are mainly lobbying sessions, they're in fact pushing for games to be more popular. to what end exactly im not too sure, visibility for the company maybe. As with everything in the net, you gotta take it with lots and lots of salt:)
Essentially, this comes down to Hardcore players VS Casual players issue.
The Hardcore player needs a WoW where lots of grinding is required, long quests, mats that takes time to acquire for the price of very rewarding items such as elite mounts for instance.
The Casual player needs a way to keep up with the hardcore player so that everybody can play more or less on the same level. But because those players cant spend hours & hours collecting items, they're consistently behind....
One version of a game and two types of players that can't exactly coexist on the same server.
Why not make two version of the game ? One favouring grinding and highly rewarding items and one favouring casual players where its not so hard to get to the top but where you will not find the same items.
GIMP servers would be easy to level, easy to get money but without the high rewards L33T Servers would be your regular WoW with money difficult to get, reputation slow to rise. Big rewards.
But then... we might end up with the same issue, casual players wanting to play on l33t servers because there's better loot AND chinese farmers to sell g0ld:)
The question is, on equal footing, even with an engine as strong as google, will people switch to MS ?
If the MS engine is better, will people switch ? My response is that it had better be DAMN good because its gonna take me a lot to more to make me encourage microsoft, the very same company with almost an absolute monopoly on the desktop market and also the very same company who thinks its right to charge me 500$ for their windows software...that cannot even guarantee stability at that price.
I'm not saying I'll stay with google forever but ms had better start delivering more and talk less.
I was always raised to never destroy an idea without suggesting one, otherwise the critic cannot be constructive.
So, bearing that in mind, what would you suggest ?
Personally, I'm not an expert in farming, even less in soybeans, in fact, my expertise area resides in far far away land from the land of farming! What I do know is that we *need* alternate fuels.... and very soon.
What would solve the most issues ? More fossil fuel ? More farming -> soybean fuel ? Nitrogen fuel ? Electric cars ?
All of these possibilities have HUGE ecological impact when you bring them to the world scale. fossil fuel destroy the atmosphere, soybean fuel destroys the soil, nitrogen fuel... hum... ok i dont know about nitrogen fuel's impacts... and electric cars destroys the ecosystem because we'll need more and more power stations. I know that one for a fact because I live in a country with a lot of them, water dams to be precise, it not only affect the rivers it affects miles & miles around the rivers.
Before you explain it, I had no idea that farming had an ecological impact on the soil, in fact, I thought farming was good for the land by transforming an otherwise not very viable soil into a viable one.
Ultimately, I believe we'll need to pick a combination of all possibilities, knowing that each choice will have an ecological impact anyway.
That proves it, humans are incapable of using technology such as computers for important events because there's always someone that tries to/does tamper with the technology to tip the balance.
If even the good ole paper ballot can't do it, exactly who thought something as complex (and programmable) as a computer could make any difference ?
Personally I'm not surprised, it was just waiting to happen.
Hum... I agree with what you say...to a certain extent. Laws of evolution and laws of evolution...of a business dont share all the same properties.
I am certainly not a huge businessman myself but I know a thing or two about it. While you, me, the guy next door won't have a real plan or real goal to attain, a company president will have a goal and a plan. This is why he started a company in the first place. A company will not randomly accept to publish/support/finance anything just to see where it goes. it does so because it believe it can get benefits out of it, not always money, just benefits or some sort.
I know that in google's case, it started as a basement project, just some funny stuff he was doing. but, its turns out google became the biggest and most efficient search engine in the world (or so i believe). It has spread its wings over VoIP, maps, news... anything that relates to information. I have no numbers but the company's worth millions if not billions of dollars. At that scale, you certainly dont do things randomly, you aim at something very particular.
a small starting company might act randomly and try to see what will turn out to be the most profitable, but a big company will know exactly where it wants to go.
or maybe it is that you give too much credit to google.
They allow their employees to work on personal projects for a reason, that avoids them to create a R&D department if all employees are already doing something on their own.
But trust me, i know google is a "dont do evil" company, which is good, but they do all they do for a reason, google has a goal and is working toward it (good or evil). It has shareholders to respond to and as such, will promote any ideas that seems profitable, obviously. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying google has a huge master plan of world domination somewhere but they certainly don't go through the hassle of making a new app available worldwide just see where it goes, its because it matches THEIR (business) plan and they bet on making a profit out of it...in whatever way it is that they make a profit.
You know... that was a great post, because, yes, what you said is so true, i can see it coming 10 miles away.
Although you are right, my optimistic self cannot help but point the followings :
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would help detect babies with genetic disorder before their birth, possibly allowing the correction of the defective genes prior to the baby's birth.
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would most certainly be helpful curing uncurable diseases such as AIDS or Cancer
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would allow a human with missing limbs to have new limbs created for him/her.
well, ive pointed out the three most obvious and i havent read article completely.
The point of my post is to illustrate that there isnt such a thing as a bad-only situation (or good-only). Any breakthrough will bring its share of pros and cons.
Did that ever stop us from advancing ? of course not! Especially in the medicine area. I mean, sure DNA sequencing isnt all that good, but put it this way. What if Pasteur had never created the vaccine ? lots of people would have died of course. But if he hadnt created the vaccine, our body wouldnt have learned to protect against those viruses and if the body hadnt learned to protect itself, the viruses wouldn't have mutated in even more virulent forms of viruses. Does that make us think that the vaccine is a bad thing ?
I got to meetings regularly and... well these "scientific" findings arent really scientific per say.
It only boils down to popular culture regarding meetings. Through comic strip in newspaper, radio ads, tv ads we're constantly reminded that meetings are boring and stressful.
So obviously with such a point of view on meetings, you're negative before even entering the room, there's no way you're gonna think that meetings are useful and creative this way.
Meetings are extraordinary tools to get a global idea of what your team thinks on a given topic. Maybe that meeting is to talk design for your website. Maybe it will be to analyze why the company lost money this year. Whatever is your goal, meetings are a great way to get everyone's point of view on the topic.
Maybe we've just become too individualist to think that the input of others can be helpful, making us think that meetings are a loss of time since they just "dont understand" what you're saying.
I heard once from a man I think highly of that there is no such thing as a bad or good situation. It always depends on you position yourself around it. Meaning that for *any* situation, you can *choose* to view it as a bad thing or a good thing.
I don't give a rat's ass if intel drop the pentium name. There are only two CPU manufacturer, if its not AMD... who do you think its gonna be.
If the "super duper" analyst at intel thinks thats good, let em have at it, its their money after all. and that sure aint gonna make me wanna buy intel anyway:)
However, I'm sure they know that already. Their game is to bash as much as they can on the PS3 because THAT will be their real challenge. You can bet your hand that Sony would do the exact same thing if they had that kind of advantage. It's all about convincing the mass that by buying their product they will have access right here, right now to the 3rd (or 4th ?? whatever) generation of consoles.
They're both releasing xbox 360 early to kill the PS2, that is, what killed the original xbox and also to gain a ground advantage on the upcoming PS3.
Although, I am still unsure as to why exactly Sony is releasing so late (as late as 2007), that's giving MS a whole year of advantage. Business wise, that's not very good. So either they're not ready at all to deliver all they had to promise to effectively kill the 360 or they're really waiting to deliver that Ace in the sleeve that was not shown at E3 to nail 360 in its coffin. I'm purely speculating here, but I'm sure Sony isn't stressed about 360 for a reason, personally, on equal grounds, I'd never let my competitor get a year of advance on me for delivering the same product, more or less.
I don't really intend on bashing on Google, I use google and like google just as a much as anyone else. But that being said, Google's incredible and HUGE success is a bit scary. I can't help but compare it to Microsoft, whom we all love and cherish right ?.... right ?... wrong.
I can't help but notice also that Google has started spreading its wings, its not merely a search engine now, its a mail servive, a VoIP service, a map service..well... basically a truckload of services (that we all like) but nonetheless, they're getting big.
That's also how MS started and god knows how much I hate MS for their strategy to buy the competition, for their release-early, patch later type of software strategy, for the way they acquired (stole?) DOS, I basically hate MS for attempting to be everywhere in my house : the livingroom, the office, the basement.
Well, I know, Google ain't MS, Google are good guys aren't they ?... and this is where I put a question mark, in the end...Bill Gate, Eric Schmidt, Me, You, we're all human right ? By nature, humans are greedy, self conscience makes us control it but at what point will you decide that your company shouldn't grow anymore... what business man in his right mind will say that ? they have investors to feed after all.
So basically, I'm just afraid that we're encouraging another unkillable giant to grow and that once we realize that google just simply owns the net, we'll also realize it sorts of owns us too and that day, it will be too late because we'll be talking to MS #2.
Ok, now I've somewhat bashed on Google on their birthday....not really intended but it seemed fitting to talk about google today.
Now..of course, people might (will:p) disagree with me, but if you reply, try to tell me why I'm wrong (or right) what are your opinions and such, I'd like to avoid anonymous comments like "dud3, j00 sux0rz" and more stuff like "here's why i think you're off the track..."
you're being too serious about it, they're aren't really 10 new networks, its an expression to describe how hard it really is to shutdown file sharing / file swapping , whatever what you want to call it.
on a side note : "but if they *were*, it wouldn't be as easy to convince millions of people to make the switch."
they dont really need to "convince" anyone. I never saw a campaign anywhere to convince users to switch to say, Gnutella instead of Shareaza (for instance). its all word to mouth, there are many networks in the shadows, when one gets in trouble it goes in the shadow and users just go right next to another which instantly becomes in the spotlight and... there you go, you have a cycle going round and round.
This just shows that no matter what the people in legal suits do, they can't kill the sharing... they cannot kill the internet RAWRR!!:-p
Seriously, for any network they "shut down" 10 new will popup. The reason for that is that its hard to prove that they're used only for illegal file sharing, many like, BitTorrents and other havea very legitimate use.
But, that's what makes the world go round these days and lawyers are all the more happy because that's more money in their pockets.
I agree with what you say but by doing that, you're only part of the wave:)
We've seen it all to often that this or that article is
1. not new or 2. not backed up by facts or 3. not news worthy
Then there are these types of people using slashdot:
1. Karma ph4rm3rz : will do any easy empty comment to get a rating. Any easy jokes with star wars / matrix / LoTR reference often works for a +5 rating in funny.
2. Genuinely good commenters : Those that actually make good research on the web to talk about the articel. They dont always end up with good ratings tho but life is unfair.
3. The users that logoff just to post an insignificant/bitchy comment about someone for no apparent reason.
4. The arguers : Those that dont necessarily add up to the discussion and please themselves in contracdicting every single thing you've said but without really trying to prove a point.
5. The disgruntled : That would be where you classify:-p (im putting a smiley here so that you see im not trying to be bitchy). The disgruntled are those surfing/. for good articles and seek good debates and end up frustrated what type of "empty" articles gets posted.
6. The passives : This would be where I classify. They consider/. as a massive community where you have to give some and take some. Just smile and wave when they see a crappy article then go right up to the next article hoping it will be better.
We've seen it before, we'll see it again. As "passive" member, i encourage you to just wave, smile and go to the next article when we get something like this:P
you think i dont know i sent the link for playing cards and not collectible cards ?
cards are cards right ?:p
OK OK, an honest mistake is half forgiven right ?, i read it too fast, cards made me think if what we get at blizzcon and thought id check on the community to see who's coming.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I specified Mortal Kombat I, the others were crappy as well :)
Bah, I'm not sure it would have been a hit. I have yet to meet a movie-based game that's really entertaining. Most of these games are created so quickly that they lack the finesse and details that we've gotten used to. Vice versa is equally true, movies based on games never really are THAT successful. I think only Tomb Raider I and Mortal Kombat I (the movies) can be said to have had a notable success.
wow...all I read are midly-to-very negative comments.
Google is a well established search leader, MS is at best...a toddler, lets at least give them a chance.
Sure the page is cluttered, its full of toys, its "pretty". MS's aim has always been to the general "mr. joe nobody" type of person. and apparently that kind of people think its good if its pretty.
Personally, I think its ok but they'll have to do better than this if they remotely wanna try to challenge google. Google's strong point is "it just works". It works on all browser and it gives relevant results. Pretty simple goal heh ? If MS can do just that, they should do fairly ok.
As always, I believe MS is releasing their search monster early precisely to see the reaction of people so they can know what people want. So lets be constructive.
Hey mr gates, you wanna get my vote ? then stop trying to get me with pretty widgets, what brings me back to google is its search ability so why dont you start by making a strong search engine, if it can do some alchemy to guess what im trying to find, all the better.
>>I just don't think "we" were as myopic about our game selection as that presented in the list.
:)
:)
LOL.
Well, that much is true
Although, Zelda and FF are taken to a whole new level in japan... what I meant was, here we like Zelda and FF, you know, they're good games, they sell well, its a hit. but in japan, its really part of the culture of gamers. why do you think square created like 3 final fantasies that were just sold in japan, its because the sales figures were much more impressive over there.
and that much is also true for Doom over here, I remember the nights i spent playing doom 1, then duke nukem.
but you know, list in general, especially when published to the public like this are mainly lobbying sessions, they're in fact pushing for games to be more popular. to what end exactly im not too sure, visibility for the company maybe. As with everything in the net, you gotta take it with lots and lots of salt
While we played Doom I & II, Quake, Heretic, Wolfenstein, Unreal
they played Final Fantasy, Zelda, Dragon Quest
its a culture thing.
Essentially, this comes down to Hardcore players VS Casual players issue.
:)
The Hardcore player needs a WoW where lots of grinding is required, long quests, mats that takes time to acquire for the price of very rewarding items such as elite mounts for instance.
The Casual player needs a way to keep up with the hardcore player so that everybody can play more or less on the same level. But because those players cant spend hours & hours collecting items, they're consistently behind....
One version of a game and two types of players that can't exactly coexist on the same server.
Why not make two version of the game ? One favouring grinding and highly rewarding items and one favouring casual players where its not so hard to get to the top but where you will not find the same items.
GIMP servers would be easy to level, easy to get money but without the high rewards
L33T Servers would be your regular WoW with money difficult to get, reputation slow to rise. Big rewards.
But then... we might end up with the same issue, casual players wanting to play on l33t servers because there's better loot AND chinese farmers to sell g0ld
oh well...
The question is, on equal footing, even with an engine as strong as google, will people switch to MS ?
If the MS engine is better, will people switch ? My response is that it had better be DAMN good because its gonna take me a lot to more to make me encourage microsoft, the very same company with almost an absolute monopoly on the desktop market and also the very same company who thinks its right to charge me 500$ for their windows software...that cannot even guarantee stability at that price.
I'm not saying I'll stay with google forever but ms had better start delivering more and talk less.
I was always raised to never destroy an idea without suggesting one, otherwise the critic cannot be constructive.
... hum... ok i dont know about nitrogen fuel's impacts ... and electric cars destroys the ecosystem because we'll need more and more power stations. I know that one for a fact because I live in a country with a lot of them, water dams to be precise, it not only affect the rivers it affects miles & miles around the rivers.
So, bearing that in mind, what would you suggest ?
Personally, I'm not an expert in farming, even less in soybeans, in fact, my expertise area resides in far far away land from the land of farming! What I do know is that we *need* alternate fuels.... and very soon.
What would solve the most issues ?
More fossil fuel ?
More farming -> soybean fuel ?
Nitrogen fuel ?
Electric cars ?
All of these possibilities have HUGE ecological impact when you bring them to the world scale. fossil fuel destroy the atmosphere, soybean fuel destroys the soil, nitrogen fuel
Before you explain it, I had no idea that farming had an ecological impact on the soil, in fact, I thought farming was good for the land by transforming an otherwise not very viable soil into a viable one.
Ultimately, I believe we'll need to pick a combination of all possibilities, knowing that each choice will have an ecological impact anyway.
yes but as you know, not everyone's liver works properly, if at all, thus, the good news of finding something that can do it in its place.
That proves it, humans are incapable of using technology such as computers for important events because there's always someone that tries to/does tamper with the technology to tip the balance.
If even the good ole paper ballot can't do it, exactly who thought something as complex (and programmable) as a computer could make any difference ?
Personally I'm not surprised, it was just waiting to happen.
Hum... I agree with what you say...to a certain extent. Laws of evolution and laws of evolution...of a business dont share all the same properties.
... anything that relates to information. I have no numbers but the company's worth millions if not billions of dollars. At that scale, you certainly dont do things randomly, you aim at something very particular.
I am certainly not a huge businessman myself but I know a thing or two about it. While you, me, the guy next door won't have a real plan or real goal to attain, a company president will have a goal and a plan. This is why he started a company in the first place. A company will not randomly accept to publish/support/finance anything just to see where it goes. it does so because it believe it can get benefits out of it, not always money, just benefits or some sort.
I know that in google's case, it started as a basement project, just some funny stuff he was doing. but, its turns out google became the biggest and most efficient search engine in the world (or so i believe). It has spread its wings over VoIP, maps, news
a small starting company might act randomly and try to see what will turn out to be the most profitable, but a big company will know exactly where it wants to go.
or maybe it is that you give too much credit to google.
They allow their employees to work on personal projects for a reason, that avoids them to create a R&D department if all employees are already doing something on their own.
But trust me, i know google is a "dont do evil" company, which is good, but they do all they do for a reason, google has a goal and is working toward it (good or evil). It has shareholders to respond to and as such, will promote any ideas that seems profitable, obviously. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying google has a huge master plan of world domination somewhere but they certainly don't go through the hassle of making a new app available worldwide just see where it goes, its because it matches THEIR (business) plan and they bet on making a profit out of it...in whatever way it is that they make a profit.
You know... that was a great post, because, yes, what you said is so true, i can see it coming 10 miles away.
Although you are right, my optimistic self cannot help but point the followings :
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would help detect babies with genetic disorder before their birth, possibly allowing the correction of the defective genes prior to the baby's birth.
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would most certainly be helpful curing uncurable diseases such as AIDS or Cancer
Cheap and accurate gene sequencing would allow a human with missing limbs to have new limbs created for him/her.
well, ive pointed out the three most obvious and i havent read article completely.
The point of my post is to illustrate that there isnt such a thing as a bad-only situation (or good-only). Any breakthrough will bring its share of pros and cons.
Did that ever stop us from advancing ? of course not! Especially in the medicine area. I mean, sure DNA sequencing isnt all that good, but put it this way. What if Pasteur had never created the vaccine ? lots of people would have died of course. But if he hadnt created the vaccine, our body wouldnt have learned to protect against those viruses and if the body hadnt learned to protect itself, the viruses wouldn't have mutated in even more virulent forms of viruses. Does that make us think that the vaccine is a bad thing ?
I think not.
easy answer : sponsored review....
this is why i take any "review" on slashdot with a grain of salt.
I got to meetings regularly and ... well these "scientific" findings arent really scientific per say.
It only boils down to popular culture regarding meetings. Through comic strip in newspaper, radio ads, tv ads we're constantly reminded that meetings are boring and stressful.
So obviously with such a point of view on meetings, you're negative before even entering the room, there's no way you're gonna think that meetings are useful and creative this way.
Meetings are extraordinary tools to get a global idea of what your team thinks on a given topic. Maybe that meeting is to talk design for your website. Maybe it will be to analyze why the company lost money this year. Whatever is your goal, meetings are a great way to get everyone's point of view on the topic.
Maybe we've just become too individualist to think that the input of others can be helpful, making us think that meetings are a loss of time since they just "dont understand" what you're saying.
I heard once from a man I think highly of that there is no such thing as a bad or good situation. It always depends on you position yourself around it. Meaning that for *any* situation, you can *choose* to view it as a bad thing or a good thing.
Is /. really hurting for news that bad ?
... who do you think its gonna be.
:)
I don't give a rat's ass if intel drop the pentium name. There are only two CPU manufacturer, if its not AMD
If the "super duper" analyst at intel thinks thats good, let em have at it, its their money after all. and that sure aint gonna make me wanna buy intel anyway
Amen bro - especially true for #15 - lots of peeps are just karma whores :)
That's a very good point you know.
However, I'm sure they know that already. Their game is to bash as much as they can on the PS3 because THAT will be their real challenge. You can bet your hand that Sony would do the exact same thing if they had that kind of advantage. It's all about convincing the mass that by buying their product they will have access right here, right now to the 3rd (or 4th ?? whatever) generation of consoles.
They're both releasing xbox 360 early to kill the PS2, that is, what killed the original xbox and also to gain a ground advantage on the upcoming PS3.
Although, I am still unsure as to why exactly Sony is releasing so late (as late as 2007), that's giving MS a whole year of advantage. Business wise, that's not very good. So either they're not ready at all to deliver all they had to promise to effectively kill the 360 or they're really waiting to deliver that Ace in the sleeve that was not shown at E3 to nail 360 in its coffin. I'm purely speculating here, but I'm sure Sony isn't stressed about 360 for a reason, personally, on equal grounds, I'd never let my competitor get a year of advance on me for delivering the same product, more or less.
I don't really intend on bashing on Google, I use google and like google just as a much as anyone else. But that being said, Google's incredible and HUGE success is a bit scary. I can't help but compare it to Microsoft, whom we all love and cherish right ? .... right ? ... wrong.
..well... basically a truckload of services (that we all like) but nonetheless, they're getting big.
... and this is where I put a question mark, in the end...Bill Gate, Eric Schmidt, Me, You, we're all human right ? By nature, humans are greedy, self conscience makes us control it but at what point will you decide that your company shouldn't grow anymore ... what business man in his right mind will say that ? they have investors to feed after all.
..of course, people might (will :p) disagree with me, but if you reply, try to tell me why I'm wrong (or right) what are your opinions and such, I'd like to avoid anonymous comments like "dud3, j00 sux0rz" and more stuff like "here's why i think you're off the track..."
I can't help but notice also that Google has started spreading its wings, its not merely a search engine now, its a mail servive, a VoIP service, a map service
That's also how MS started and god knows how much I hate MS for their strategy to buy the competition, for their release-early, patch later type of software strategy, for the way they acquired (stole?) DOS, I basically hate MS for attempting to be everywhere in my house : the livingroom, the office, the basement.
Well, I know, Google ain't MS, Google are good guys aren't they ?
So basically, I'm just afraid that we're encouraging another unkillable giant to grow and that once we realize that google just simply owns the net, we'll also realize it sorts of owns us too and that day, it will be too late because we'll be talking to MS #2.
Ok, now I've somewhat bashed on Google on their birthday....not really intended but it seemed fitting to talk about google today.
Now
you're being too serious about it, they're aren't really 10 new networks, its an expression to describe how hard it really is to shutdown file sharing / file swapping , whatever what you want to call it.
... there you go, you have a cycle going round and round.
on a side note :
"but if they *were*, it wouldn't be as easy to convince millions of people to make the switch."
they dont really need to "convince" anyone. I never saw a campaign anywhere to convince users to switch to say, Gnutella instead of Shareaza (for instance). its all word to mouth, there are many networks in the shadows, when one gets in trouble it goes in the shadow and users just go right next to another which instantly becomes in the spotlight and
This just shows that no matter what the people in legal suits do, they can't kill the sharing ... they cannot kill the internet RAWRR!! :-p
Seriously, for any network they "shut down" 10 new will popup. The reason for that is that its hard to prove that they're used only for illegal file sharing, many like, BitTorrents and other havea very legitimate use.
But, that's what makes the world go round these days and lawyers are all the more happy because that's more money in their pockets.
I agree with what you say but by doing that, you're only part of the wave :)
:-p (im putting a smiley here so that you see im not trying to be bitchy). The disgruntled are those surfing /. for good articles and seek good debates and end up frustrated what type of "empty" articles gets posted.
/. as a massive community where you have to give some and take some. Just smile and wave when they see a crappy article then go right up to the next article hoping it will be better.
:P
We've seen it all to often that this or that article is
1. not new
or
2. not backed up by facts
or
3. not news worthy
Then there are these types of people using slashdot:
1. Karma ph4rm3rz : will do any easy empty comment to get a rating. Any easy jokes with star wars / matrix / LoTR reference often works for a +5 rating in funny.
2. Genuinely good commenters : Those that actually make good research on the web to talk about the articel. They dont always end up with good ratings tho but life is unfair.
3. The users that logoff just to post an insignificant/bitchy comment about someone for no apparent reason.
4. The arguers : Those that dont necessarily add up to the discussion and please themselves in contracdicting every single thing you've said but without really trying to prove a point.
5. The disgruntled : That would be where you classify
6. The passives : This would be where I classify. They consider
We've seen it before, we'll see it again. As "passive" member, i encourage you to just wave, smile and go to the next article when we get something like this
you think i dont know i sent the link for playing cards and not collectible cards ?
:p
:p
cards are cards right ?
OK OK, an honest mistake is half forgiven right ?, i read it too fast, cards made me think if what we get at blizzcon and thought id check on the community to see who's coming.
and all i get is cold RTFA
http://www.blizzcon.com/swag.shtml
:)
Anyone coming to blizzcon ? ill have the cards before anyone else it seems
hum..... its fun to wake up on the morning and smell the nice scent of bribes.