"But older, classic games being included in newer products (the original Metroid on the Metroid Prime disc, for example) and even Atari games being bundled with a controller that plugs directly into a TV's AV inputs really prove that there is still money to be made with these old games, and it muddies the moral dilemma."
Except for those of us who had already paid for those games ages ago, there are no moral issues. They got their money.
"Incredible how you make so many demands of being more direct when I post hints, and completely ignore my direct statements. Perhaps you are... a fucking idiot?"
Quite the opposite actually. Your direct statements were clearly in error. I've pointed those out already. Only a fucking idiot would make contradictory claims. And for your post above, if I understand your rules correctly, you are a fucking idiot, top grade.
It's funny how you're trying to twist things around to make us sound like we're the idiots, but so far you've completely failed to do anything to humiliate yourself.
To add insult to injury, you've failed to write anything that's done anything but make me laugh! I'm sure NG'll be laughing too. He's found you quite entertaining as well.;)
"I trust Linux updates. I don't trust MS half-arsed updates."
In the end, you have humans writing these updates. Humans are prone to error. I would have no more faith in SuSE or MS under that aspect of it. To put it another way, SuSE is just as vulernable to that type of problem.
" I in no way ever implied that I had typed out lengthy descriptions of what the evidence was"
Heh you fucking idiot.
"I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
Hmm, I'm not sure you quite get it. So let me show it to you again to give you a little more time to comprehend.
"I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
And, one more time, just for good measure here:
"I have produced
lengthy evidence..."
Damn you're thick! Heheehe.
Oh, and for added measure:
"But then, you seem to live in a country where the best education on such matters is given by a mother(!?)"
I can't tell if you miserably missed the point of my comment or if you were trying to insult me or something. If you were less of a fucking idiot, you could have communicated your idea a little more carefully.:)
"That song always bothered me and I found this site really comforting that it bothered someone else enough to take the trouble to dissect it for everyone."
Isn't it ironic that your analysis was discredited by your taste in music?
I shouldn't have entered this discussion. Sadly, in a rush to get that posted, I skipped a statement that made my point more relevant. It's not just the gov't that gets a hold of this technology, your next door neighor will too. Right now, I have a $500 video camera that lets me see in the dark. I could easily video tape my neighbors from my own apartment. I can have this techology, but it's bad if Law Enforcement has it?
Look, I understand your arguments, but the idea of supporting a police state is going a lot farther than I ever intended to go. As I said, that's a failure on my part.
" Your argument, to me, is the same as saying, "well what if a peeping tom was voyeuring your wife instead of out raping some jogger?"
That's not exactly what I meant to say, but you're right, it's not a very good argument. (I meant to say that I'd rather they have that as a job than an ice-cream man or something where they can physically grab the kids, but as I said it's not a good argument.)
"But this will surely attract the pedophiles and perverts, not the vast majority."
Part of the reason I dimsissed that comment so easily was that I doubt somebody with that sort of record could get into that job. Screeners would be given a good shakedown and investigation before being hired, so to prevent somebody from allowing a suicide bomber in.
Truth be told, one does not need to see somebody naked to get their 'jollies' over it. People like this could probably get a similar effect from visiting a popular pool. This system, though, makes people look like they're sick. I love porn, but I can't imagine using a system like this to 'get my jollies' with. I can honestly say I'm not all that curious at peeking through one.
I guess what I'm saying is that I really don't see pedophiles getting jobs operating these things. I don't see people doing it for any real perverted reason except for rapdily fading curiosity.
" It offends me that a government official can soon be able to drive up outside my house, and literally look inside it, to see how many people are in my house, what kinds of material possesions I have, etc etc."
1.) The technology to do that already exists, it's called a window. Another lesser known technology to do something like this is called a lock-pick. I don't know about Wales, but we have something called a search warrant here.
2.) What is the gov't going to do with that information? At some point, police officers are going to need to see your stuff, especially if you're a victim. What if they chase a suspect who's broken into your house? The same violation is happening to you as with your portable sensor example, so why's it bothering you right now?
The technology will always get better and let us see stuff. (Just wait until the tricorder is invented!) You're going to lose your ability to hide stuff one way or another. You can either trust your government (I doubt they have a bad track record over there), or live in a world of paranoia. In the mean time, your wishes make it harder for law enforcement to catch dangerous people. Which is more important, your right to privacy, or your right to safety? I can handle not being able to keep secrets, but living in an unsafe world is an unbearable thought to me.
"Would you want your wife and kids walking through one of these things knowing that a complete stranger will be looking at them naked?"
Would I want them to die by crashing into a building?
"What if some pedophile gets a job working these things just to get his jollies from watching children go through?"
What if he does that instead of finding kids to extract jollies from?
"What about people that are so self-concious about their weight that they will hold up the line indefinitely rather than go through security?"
That's why security guards have pepper spray.
"Are these scanned images akin to public pornography?"
No. They have to be public to be public. It would be trivial to put the machine in a booth. It's hard enough these days to see what's going on in an X-Ray machine at an airport. These guys will do more to ensure privacy. Secondly, these images are not intended to 'cause sexual arousal'. Truth be told, it'd probably do the opposite in most cases.
"well it was directed at the other guy, so you probably dont have access to all I was talking about. "
I went back to the beginning of the thread where you first called NG an idiot and read downward. I'm confident that I read every thing that you and he both said, and I don't see where you displayed any evidence. The closest thing I could find was a reference to you not understanding his 'yo mama' comment. (Which did make sense btw, he was equating your calling him a 'fucking idiot' to a worthless insult. I got that, no idea why you didn't.)
"Note that I'm not saying that I, personally, wrote out lengthy explanations"
Actually you did claim that earlier.
" I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
See that? You did claim it. Are you taking that back?
You also said this in the same post:
" It was not a lack of understanding, so much as a demand that you explain yourself"
Well, I went back up to the beginning, and found no mention of you demanding anything from him. This is the closest I could find:
"your mother... what? Doesnt want "fucking idiot" on her record? I have no idea where "Yo mama!" by itself would fit in this context."
There's no demand there. There is a subtle "what?" in there, which hardly constitutes a demand. Your post actually reads as a dismissal of his comment.
" I'm just saying the evidence is there, and have pointed out what that evidence [in general] is"
You called him a 'fucking idiot' because you didn't feel that posting anonymously had anything to do with the flame you tried to slap me with. You have said nothing that supports your claim because he said something that you didn't get. You have provided 0 (zero, nada, big goose egg, etc) evidence that he was acting out of idiocy.
If you have pointed this out (maybe I missed one because you were modded down too far?), then I suggest you quote it instead of going into your "the evidence is there" broken record routine.
The possiblity exists that you pointed it out, however your claim that you did it 'clearly' is ridiculous.
It kind of does, considerinng that's what the original post was about.
"You can't say people won't pay $1000 for something if people are paying $1000 for something."
You are absolutely right. However, I think NG was saying that in the case of on-line bidding, you have an individual displaying extreme demand buying that item at that price. Bidding for an item that reaches the $1,000 mark is not the same as releasing an item for $1,000 and measuring demand for it.
I see what you're saying, but I wouldn't toss out what NG said.
"I have little hope of you still reading this but here goes:"
Email notification's great, isn't it?;)
"I _have_ to agree with you that Win2k is the best operating system ever to be produced by Microsoft. Yes I'm counting XP."
I have XP on my laptop. I can honestly say I don't mind it it all. Unfortunately, I cannot measure it's stability against a desktop as my laptop is rebooted twice a day. (I'm not a big fan of it running while I'm in the car.) I can say that I've been doing a lot of 3D work on it and it's been stable for me. I can't give you an up-time estimate, though. I like it as a laptop OS, but have little reason to want to put it on my 2k desktop that's been problem free for ages.
" Which may mean that this particular part of stability comparisons isn't on the Operating System but on the graphical drivers, or at least the graphical sub-system."
I'm quite confident that this is the issue. I've observed it on both Windows and Linux. Start getting 3D graphics involved and suddenly you've got a questionable machine. I wish I could tell you that I had scientific evidence of that, but I don't. My company's building a system using Linux boxes that's running 3D hardware. I was surprised at all the problems they've had. First it was getting the driver to work, then it was getting the app working right when a different video card was used. Then there was software mode. Geez. I can't believe how complex it is. They have to troubleshoot everything.
"I think that Linux will be better than Windows at this part too, once the graphics part is nailed down. What I'm basically saying is: Linux is ready for the office desktop, not for the home desktop."
I, for the most part, agree with you. The problem is that Linux's 'greatness' is only part of the equation. Good drivers still have to be produced. And for that, companies like NVidia will have to say "this is a priority". It's hard to imagine they'll get all that attention while Windows has such a vast majority of the marketshare. However, there is one really strong point to make for Linux: Movie studios are migrating to it. NVidia would not want to let ILM down.
I do think, though, taht Linux will have a very difficult time getting into the home desktop until a company gets involved in making the UI home-friendly. Making a good UI involves more than coders, it involves design people. I haven't been exposed to every free-app out there, but every time I see one it's very easy to see that it's an engineer designed interface. That alone will be a problem for home adoption.
"However on tasks that they can both do (in terms of "designed for the task") I think Linux, and any Unix for that matter will beat the pants off of Windows for the same hardware and demand, both in performance and stability. "
I don't have any issue with that argument. I think you're probably right. To be fair, though, Linux has been developed to do those jobs almost exclusively. (well that may not be the right way of putting it, but I'm in a bit of a hurry and am having difficulty finding the right term.) For example, Microsoft feels that a Windows machine, even a server, must have a good interface. Linux, on the other hand, feels that a server should be a server and little else. So basically, the Linux box is set up once to run the server and is tuned to run that task indefinitely. This is the best way to handle a server setup. Microsoft hasn't dropped down into that level, though supposedly the 2003 server MS made should support running in a CLI mode. Remove the Windows graphic system from the mix, and you greatly reduce the number of threads of things happening there. I can't help but think a huge stabililty boost will grow from that. Who knows? So yeah, I agree, but to be fair MS and the Linux Community have different design philosophy (each with their own strengths) so it's not exactly an apples to apples comp
"A count of bug reports means nothing. The actual bugs themselves are what matters."
It's funny how numbers can startle people, isn't it?
Here's my favorite example: 40% of all sickdays are taken on Mondays and Fridays! Heh. It's funny watching the PHB sit there and think "ppl are lying to get 3-day weekends!"
" Because I have an old Pentium 266 machine sitting under my desk that I've been able to hit, every single time, for over a year."
I've had a great deal of good luck keeping Windows 2000 machines up. It was my job for two years. I had LOTS of time to play around on Slashdot. I also know a fairly broad community of 3D artists who rely on Windows 2000, none of them are mumbling about getting off of it. When it was announced that Lightwave is being ported to Linux, there was a few "uh yeah cool I guess" reactions, and not a whole lot more than that.
If an OS sucks so bad that you lose an overnight rendering, then you suddenly stop using that OS.
Ah yes, the "somebody wrote a web page therefore that substantiates my claim" rebuttal.
"90 day uptimes, brags the NT dude, ha ha ha."
I'd respond to that but I'm going to play Vice City instead. Maybe after that I'll download a game demo or two and see what's next on my 'must acquire' list. Enjoy your computer that's on all the time.:)
Slashdot Mirror
... illustrates demand. If interest in a game is being rekindled, why not find a way to productize it?
"But older, classic games being included in newer products (the original Metroid on the Metroid Prime disc, for example) and even Atari games being bundled with a controller that plugs directly into a TV's AV inputs really prove that there is still money to be made with these old games, and it muddies the moral dilemma."
Except for those of us who had already paid for those games ages ago, there are no moral issues. They got their money.
"...the first caveman to figure out how to throw a spear an "Aerospace Engineer?" :)"
The first Cruise Arrow is tested...
"Incredible how you make so many demands of being more direct when I post hints, and completely ignore my direct statements. Perhaps you are... a fucking idiot?"
;)
Quite the opposite actually. Your direct statements were clearly in error. I've pointed those out already. Only a fucking idiot would make contradictory claims. And for your post above, if I understand your rules correctly, you are a fucking idiot, top grade.
It's funny how you're trying to twist things around to make us sound like we're the idiots, but so far you've completely failed to do anything to humiliate yourself.
To add insult to injury, you've failed to write anything that's done anything but make me laugh! I'm sure NG'll be laughing too. He's found you quite entertaining as well.
"I trust Linux updates. I don't trust MS half-arsed updates."
In the end, you have humans writing these updates. Humans are prone to error. I would have no more faith in SuSE or MS under that aspect of it. To put it another way, SuSE is just as vulernable to that type of problem.
Heh you fucking idiot.
"I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
Hmm, I'm not sure you quite get it. So let me show it to you again to give you a little more time to comprehend.
"I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
And, one more time, just for good measure here:
"I have produced Damn you're thick! Heheehe.
Oh, and for added measure:
"But then, you seem to live in a country where the best education on such matters is given by a mother(!?)"
I can't tell if you miserably missed the point of my comment or if you were trying to insult me or something. If you were less of a fucking idiot, you could have communicated your idea a little more carefully.
"That song always bothered me and I found this site really comforting that it bothered someone else enough to take the trouble to dissect it for everyone."
Isn't it ironic that your analysis was discredited by your taste in music?
"Read one up and to the left: I have given evidence." (a couple of posts back.)
" you can't seem to comprehend that there are ways of showing evidence which do not involve writing out descriptions of the evidence."
Well, you've provided evidence that you're a fucking idiot. When are ya going to learn to keep your lies straight? heh
"There's an easter egg if you find the Weapons of Mass Destruction."
What, Pogo the Monkey will storm the White House and get re-elected?
"and maybe you're paid by MS to tell the ../../poster that *s/he* is paid by MS to sound like a conspiracy nut so that we do ignore that possibility..'
;)
Yes, you have reverse engineered the formula of my joke. Kudos.
I shouldn't have entered this discussion. Sadly, in a rush to get that posted, I skipped a statement that made my point more relevant. It's not just the gov't that gets a hold of this technology, your next door neighor will too. Right now, I have a $500 video camera that lets me see in the dark. I could easily video tape my neighbors from my own apartment. I can have this techology, but it's bad if Law Enforcement has it?
Look, I understand your arguments, but the idea of supporting a police state is going a lot farther than I ever intended to go. As I said, that's a failure on my part.
" Your argument, to me, is the same as saying, "well what if a peeping tom was voyeuring your wife instead of out raping some jogger?"
That's not exactly what I meant to say, but you're right, it's not a very good argument. (I meant to say that I'd rather they have that as a job than an ice-cream man or something where they can physically grab the kids, but as I said it's not a good argument.)
"But this will surely attract the pedophiles and perverts, not the vast majority."
Part of the reason I dimsissed that comment so easily was that I doubt somebody with that sort of record could get into that job. Screeners would be given a good shakedown and investigation before being hired, so to prevent somebody from allowing a suicide bomber in.
Truth be told, one does not need to see somebody naked to get their 'jollies' over it. People like this could probably get a similar effect from visiting a popular pool. This system, though, makes people look like they're sick. I love porn, but I can't imagine using a system like this to 'get my jollies' with. I can honestly say I'm not all that curious at peeking through one.
I guess what I'm saying is that I really don't see pedophiles getting jobs operating these things. I don't see people doing it for any real perverted reason except for rapdily fading curiosity.
" It offends me that a government official can soon be able to drive up outside my house, and literally look inside it, to see how many people are in my house, what kinds of material possesions I have, etc etc."
1.) The technology to do that already exists, it's called a window. Another lesser known technology to do something like this is called a lock-pick. I don't know about Wales, but we have something called a search warrant here.
2.) What is the gov't going to do with that information? At some point, police officers are going to need to see your stuff, especially if you're a victim. What if they chase a suspect who's broken into your house? The same violation is happening to you as with your portable sensor example, so why's it bothering you right now?
The technology will always get better and let us see stuff. (Just wait until the tricorder is invented!) You're going to lose your ability to hide stuff one way or another. You can either trust your government (I doubt they have a bad track record over there), or live in a world of paranoia. In the mean time, your wishes make it harder for law enforcement to catch dangerous people. Which is more important, your right to privacy, or your right to safety? I can handle not being able to keep secrets, but living in an unsafe world is an unbearable thought to me.
"Would you want your wife and kids walking through one of these things knowing that a complete stranger will be looking at them naked?"
Would I want them to die by crashing into a building?
"What if some pedophile gets a job working these things just to get his jollies from watching children go through?"
What if he does that instead of finding kids to extract jollies from?
"What about people that are so self-concious about their weight that they will hold up the line indefinitely rather than go through security?"
That's why security guards have pepper spray.
"Are these scanned images akin to public pornography?"
No. They have to be public to be public. It would be trivial to put the machine in a booth. It's hard enough these days to see what's going on in an X-Ray machine at an airport. These guys will do more to ensure privacy. Secondly, these images are not intended to 'cause sexual arousal'. Truth be told, it'd probably do the opposite in most cases.
"It does basically make you look fat and naked, but you see all this stuff..."
Actually, the fat is what makes you look fat.
Good idea. Give Microsoft a good reason to label modders as terrorists.
"Maybe the whole thing is a Redmond-sponsored false flag operation to provide Microsoft with an "example" in support its DRM lobbying efforts. "
Maybe you're paid by Microsoft to sound like a conspiracy nut so we'll ignore this possiblity.
"well it was directed at the other guy, so you probably dont have access to all I was talking about. "
I went back to the beginning of the thread where you first called NG an idiot and read downward. I'm confident that I read every thing that you and he both said, and I don't see where you displayed any evidence. The closest thing I could find was a reference to you not understanding his 'yo mama' comment. (Which did make sense btw, he was equating your calling him a 'fucking idiot' to a worthless insult. I got that, no idea why you didn't.)
"Note that I'm not saying that I, personally, wrote out lengthy explanations"
Actually you did claim that earlier.
" I have produced lengthy evidence which you have chosen to ignore..."
See that? You did claim it. Are you taking that back?
You also said this in the same post:
" It was not a lack of understanding, so much as a demand that you explain yourself"
Well, I went back up to the beginning, and found no mention of you demanding anything from him. This is the closest I could find:
"your mother... what? Doesnt want "fucking idiot" on her record? I have no idea where "Yo mama!" by itself would fit in this context."
There's no demand there. There is a subtle "what?" in there, which hardly constitutes a demand. Your post actually reads as a dismissal of his comment.
" I'm just saying the evidence is there, and have pointed out what that evidence [in general] is"
You called him a 'fucking idiot' because you didn't feel that posting anonymously had anything to do with the flame you tried to slap me with. You have said nothing that supports your claim because he said something that you didn't get. You have provided 0 (zero, nada, big goose egg, etc) evidence that he was acting out of idiocy.
If you have pointed this out (maybe I missed one because you were modded down too far?), then I suggest you quote it instead of going into your "the evidence is there" broken record routine.
The possiblity exists that you pointed it out, however your claim that you did it 'clearly' is ridiculous.
Regards,
Anonvmous "Also a Fucking Idiot" Coward
"Since you obviously have no idea what the fuck you're talking about either..."
:)
I'm quite aware of what I'm talking about. You haven't defended yourself other than saying "I have evidence I have evidence".
" I'll go ahead and upgrade you to "Also a fucking idiot", congrats!"
Fine with me. It's hard to take anything you're saying very seriously, especially when you won't take any time to explain yourself.
"Because you haven't posted any evidence?"
Judging from his silence now, I'd say you nailed it. Fucking-Idiot-Boy couldn't back up his claim.
I still think it's funny he called you an idiot because he didn't understand the whole posting anonymous thing. Duh.
"What the whole market will pay doesn't matter."
It kind of does, considerinng that's what the original post was about.
"You can't say people won't pay $1000 for something if people are paying $1000 for something."
You are absolutely right. However, I think NG was saying that in the case of on-line bidding, you have an individual displaying extreme demand buying that item at that price. Bidding for an item that reaches the $1,000 mark is not the same as releasing an item for $1,000 and measuring demand for it.
I see what you're saying, but I wouldn't toss out what NG said.
"I have little hope of you still reading this but here goes:"
;)
Email notification's great, isn't it?
"I _have_ to agree with you that Win2k is the best operating system ever to be produced by Microsoft. Yes I'm counting XP."
I have XP on my laptop. I can honestly say I don't mind it it all. Unfortunately, I cannot measure it's stability against a desktop as my laptop is rebooted twice a day. (I'm not a big fan of it running while I'm in the car.) I can say that I've been doing a lot of 3D work on it and it's been stable for me. I can't give you an up-time estimate, though. I like it as a laptop OS, but have little reason to want to put it on my 2k desktop that's been problem free for ages.
" Which may mean that this particular part of stability comparisons isn't on the Operating System but on the graphical drivers, or at least the graphical sub-system."
I'm quite confident that this is the issue. I've observed it on both Windows and Linux. Start getting 3D graphics involved and suddenly you've got a questionable machine. I wish I could tell you that I had scientific evidence of that, but I don't. My company's building a system using Linux boxes that's running 3D hardware. I was surprised at all the problems they've had. First it was getting the driver to work, then it was getting the app working right when a different video card was used. Then there was software mode. Geez. I can't believe how complex it is. They have to troubleshoot everything.
"I think that Linux will be better than Windows at this part too, once the graphics part is nailed down. What I'm basically saying is: Linux is ready for the office desktop, not for the home desktop."
I, for the most part, agree with you. The problem is that Linux's 'greatness' is only part of the equation. Good drivers still have to be produced. And for that, companies like NVidia will have to say "this is a priority". It's hard to imagine they'll get all that attention while Windows has such a vast majority of the marketshare. However, there is one really strong point to make for Linux: Movie studios are migrating to it. NVidia would not want to let ILM down.
I do think, though, taht Linux will have a very difficult time getting into the home desktop until a company gets involved in making the UI home-friendly. Making a good UI involves more than coders, it involves design people. I haven't been exposed to every free-app out there, but every time I see one it's very easy to see that it's an engineer designed interface. That alone will be a problem for home adoption.
"However on tasks that they can both do (in terms of "designed for the task") I think Linux, and any Unix for that matter will beat the pants off of Windows for the same hardware and demand, both in performance and stability. "
I don't have any issue with that argument. I think you're probably right. To be fair, though, Linux has been developed to do those jobs almost exclusively. (well that may not be the right way of putting it, but I'm in a bit of a hurry and am having difficulty finding the right term.) For example, Microsoft feels that a Windows machine, even a server, must have a good interface. Linux, on the other hand, feels that a server should be a server and little else. So basically, the Linux box is set up once to run the server and is tuned to run that task indefinitely. This is the best way to handle a server setup. Microsoft hasn't dropped down into that level, though supposedly the 2003 server MS made should support running in a CLI mode. Remove the Windows graphic system from the mix, and you greatly reduce the number of threads of things happening there. I can't help but think a huge stabililty boost will grow from that. Who knows? So yeah, I agree, but to be fair MS and the Linux Community have different design philosophy (each with their own strengths) so it's not exactly an apples to apples comp
"A count of bug reports means nothing. The actual bugs themselves are what matters."
It's funny how numbers can startle people, isn't it?
Here's my favorite example: 40% of all sickdays are taken on Mondays and Fridays! Heh. It's funny watching the PHB sit there and think "ppl are lying to get 3-day weekends!"
" Because I have an old Pentium 266 machine sitting under my desk that I've been able to hit, every single time, for over a year."
I've had a great deal of good luck keeping Windows 2000 machines up. It was my job for two years. I had LOTS of time to play around on Slashdot. I also know a fairly broad community of 3D artists who rely on Windows 2000, none of them are mumbling about getting off of it. When it was announced that Lightwave is being ported to Linux, there was a few "uh yeah cool I guess" reactions, and not a whole lot more than that.
If an OS sucks so bad that you lose an overnight rendering, then you suddenly stop using that OS.
Ah yes, the "somebody wrote a web page therefore that substantiates my claim" rebuttal.
:)
"90 day uptimes, brags the NT dude, ha ha ha."
I'd respond to that but I'm going to play Vice City instead. Maybe after that I'll download a game demo or two and see what's next on my 'must acquire' list. Enjoy your computer that's on all the time.