Do you seriously think that any court will award any damages to consumers just because they've had to go and get a product replaced? It's the same thing you have to go through if you get it replaced under warranty
Not at all. In this case, your player and everyone else's was systematically broken on purpose. If the BD+ guys came round with a hammer and smashed everyone's player, then told all the consumers they could get free replacements, do you think that would go down well with the judge? Because that's effectively what's happening.
The outcome of that lawsuit won't matter for consumers.
Are you kidding? The consumers have had to mess around lugging physical equipment back to the shop. And once they've found out why they had to... class action lawsuit.
I think you will find that the bank has lent your money to someone else at a better rate than what they are paying you.
I think you'll find that if you quoted my whole paragraph, I covered this.
No it didn't get us into the mess, what you're describing IS the mess. That's why it's called a credit FREEZE - ie: money stopped going round because banks stopped trusting each other.
No, money stopped going round because banks realised that the game was up and that value which didn't exist couldn't be used to leverage any more.
You may have noticed that the wires of which you speak run under the road of which you speak. And I'm damned if the road is getting dug up every time some company comes offering my neighbour a dollar off his phone bill.
So perhaps you might build tubes under the road, and then any number of companies can come and lay their wires without disruption. Well, of course, wires also occupy physical space, so it isn't any number. And who owns the tubes? Why not just give the same entity the right to own the wires?
Cash in the bank is money sitting idle. You want your money out there, earning for you.
You're with the wrong bank. My money does earn when it's sitting in the bank. Not as much as it could if I had it tied up in some enterprise where I couldn't use it to pay my employees, but it's also less at risk.
The problem with your line of thought is that its logical conclusion is that money has to keep moving in order to be useful, which is exactly what got us into this whole mess.
Re:False positive and double blind negatives...
on
Torture in Games
·
· Score: 1
I'm not even really referring to saving up problems: I'm saying, torture a thousand people today, and more than 500 of them will simply tell you what they think you want to hear.
The author makes the case that the failure of most media to properly portray how horrible torture actually is (for example, on the TV show 24), and the increased focus on real-world topics like Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and waterboarding, could make games the perfect venue for demonstrating the "devastating repercussions" of torture.
Yep, just like everyone who's ever played a FPS knows exactly how terrible the horrors of war are.
And I've played enough Tetris in my life to know exactly what it's like to be a bricklayer.
Re:False positive and double blind negatives...
on
Torture in Games
·
· Score: 1
We (you and I) reject torture on those grounds, sure. But to appeal to others (e.g. Neo-Cons) to stop doing it we have to make what is, in essence, an economic argument; that on balance, you'll get information of less value than if you took other approaches.
"Yesterday I set out in search of a way to eat my cake, pastries and sweetmeats without ceasing to have them. What did I come up with? Nothing."
Just keep good backups of your current data, and every time you buy a new hard drive, create a folder called "contents of old hard drive" and copy everything into that. You'll still have the other 90% of the new drive's capacity to fill up with new stuff.
Both of those goals are hard to meet since (1) the necessary number of units sold would be extreme because it would only be one specific manufacturer's problem (consumers would be clueless and only say: "this disc works fine in Joe's player but not in my fucking Craptech player").
Yes, but as long as someone -- one person -- knows why it doesn't work, there's a class action lawsuit in the making.
(2) it must be extremely difficult to reverse-engineer a player so perfectly considering how e.g. current C64 emulators and others still have some problems matching the real thing - even though there are specs available. Players on the other hand, have been designed to be as hard as possible to reverse-engineer.
Part of that has to do with the amazing tricks C64 programmers used to use to push the maximum performance out of their machines. Given the complexity of the BD+ system, it's likely that most implementations of it are in software. All it takes is for one of those implementations to be leaked, and you've got a VM indistinguishable from the real thing, and if future discs block it, you've got a class action lawsuit as described above.
I doubt it works, because how would the player differentiate between information being streamed from a Blu-Ray disc and information being streamed from a rip of a Blu-Ray disc?
Slashdot Mirror
FAIL
Why don't you sign in and say that ;)
Do you seriously think that any court will award any damages to consumers just because they've had to go and get a product replaced? It's the same thing you have to go through if you get it replaced under warranty
Not at all. In this case, your player and everyone else's was systematically broken on purpose. If the BD+ guys came round with a hammer and smashed everyone's player, then told all the consumers they could get free replacements, do you think that would go down well with the judge? Because that's effectively what's happening.
The outcome of that lawsuit won't matter for consumers.
Are you kidding? The consumers have had to mess around lugging physical equipment back to the shop. And once they've found out why they had to... class action lawsuit.
It's physical.
Those "manholes" are what gives access to the tubes I'm talking about. So, again, why are you happy for tubes to be a natural monopoly and wires not?
I think you will find that the bank has lent your money to someone else at a better rate than what they are paying you.
I think you'll find that if you quoted my whole paragraph, I covered this.
No it didn't get us into the mess, what you're describing IS the mess. That's why it's called a credit FREEZE - ie: money stopped going round because banks stopped trusting each other.
No, money stopped going round because banks realised that the game was up and that value which didn't exist couldn't be used to leverage any more.
If by "this whole mess" you mean the entire progress of the world economy since the invention of currency
I don't: I mean since currency ceased to be tied to anything of actual value, e.g., gold.
There's a bug in Internet Explorer. That must mean the entire internet is broken
Nope -- just the web ;)
You may have noticed that the wires of which you speak run under the road of which you speak. And I'm damned if the road is getting dug up every time some company comes offering my neighbour a dollar off his phone bill.
So perhaps you might build tubes under the road, and then any number of companies can come and lay their wires without disruption. Well, of course, wires also occupy physical space, so it isn't any number. And who owns the tubes? Why not just give the same entity the right to own the wires?
I don't get it. The currency may be worth a lot less, but it's still costing the lender.
But since these are loans, they will be repaid.
Unless you're underestimating the scope of the problem.
Actually, the law changed to allow for sub-prime lending before it happened.
Cash in the bank is money sitting idle. You want your money out there, earning for you.
You're with the wrong bank. My money does earn when it's sitting in the bank. Not as much as it could if I had it tied up in some enterprise where I couldn't use it to pay my employees, but it's also less at risk.
The problem with your line of thought is that its logical conclusion is that money has to keep moving in order to be useful, which is exactly what got us into this whole mess.
I'm not even really referring to saving up problems: I'm saying, torture a thousand people today, and more than 500 of them will simply tell you what they think you want to hear.
Once again: the manufacturer will not replace them, because it's not the manufacturer facing the lawsuit.
The author makes the case that the failure of most media to properly portray how horrible torture actually is (for example, on the TV show 24), and the increased focus on real-world topics like Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and waterboarding, could make games the perfect venue for demonstrating the "devastating repercussions" of torture.
Yep, just like everyone who's ever played a FPS knows exactly how terrible the horrors of war are.
And I've played enough Tetris in my life to know exactly what it's like to be a bricklayer.
We (you and I) reject torture on those grounds, sure. But to appeal to others (e.g. Neo-Cons) to stop doing it we have to make what is, in essence, an economic argument; that on balance, you'll get information of less value than if you took other approaches.
Amazon S3. dirt cheap, there forever.
For unpredictably short values of forever.
To the OP... your question reads like this:
"Yesterday I set out in search of a way to eat my cake, pastries and sweetmeats without ceasing to have them. What did I come up with? Nothing."
Just keep good backups of your current data, and every time you buy a new hard drive, create a folder called "contents of old hard drive" and copy everything into that. You'll still have the other 90% of the new drive's capacity to fill up with new stuff.
Yes, but it will be a class action lawsuit against the manufacturer.
Why so? Again, all it takes is one person to know the truth of why the player no longer plays the discs.
My point being the OP is wrong in implying that the only reason to fight the powers-that-be is to assume power for oneself.
Both of those goals are hard to meet since (1) the necessary number of units sold would be extreme because it would only be one specific manufacturer's problem (consumers would be clueless and only say: "this disc works fine in Joe's player but not in my fucking Craptech player").
Yes, but as long as someone -- one person -- knows why it doesn't work, there's a class action lawsuit in the making.
(2) it must be extremely difficult to reverse-engineer a player so perfectly considering how e.g. current C64 emulators and others still have some problems matching the real thing - even though there are specs available. Players on the other hand, have been designed to be as hard as possible to reverse-engineer.
Part of that has to do with the amazing tricks C64 programmers used to use to push the maximum performance out of their machines. Given the complexity of the BD+ system, it's likely that most implementations of it are in software. All it takes is for one of those implementations to be leaked, and you've got a VM indistinguishable from the real thing, and if future discs block it, you've got a class action lawsuit as described above.
I doubt it works, because how would the player differentiate between information being streamed from a Blu-Ray disc and information being streamed from a rip of a Blu-Ray disc?
Also good because the longer the industry spends fighting the inevitable, the harder they will fall.
When was the last time Bill Gates wrote a line of code?