The simple solution is to use the "real" thing from IBM. All the power and performance of the 2 Cell processors instead of Sony's 1 on the PS3 and 2GB of RAM (1GB per core) in a high density blade format. Subsequently you are not wasting a core on the PS3's OS running underneath and you get a real NIC.
Unfortunately the subscription list maintainers have nothing to do with ABP itself and the two should be VERY separated when criticizing one or the other. Therefore, I think it better to put the blame with the subscription and not on ABP directly. Just my.02.
While everyone is whining about how unfair the system is because people will simply park all day, I would be more concerned about theft of service than anything else. Why not get even with the rich "jerks" parking all day and simply bill your parking to them?
I think the greater concern about such a service is the authentication scheme. What about the services and simple technology that allow you to forge your Caller ID? Simply identify someone with the service and you have instant free parking. Now some Caller ID forging services are expensive, but I can think of a TRIVIAL and hugely inexpensive way to achieve the same effect at almost no cost. While tremendously convenient it is grossly inadequate to authenticate via Caller ID alone. I would be willing to wager that scamming, forgery, and stolen services quickly escalate because while previously confined to private parking lots, the service is now city wide with heavy usage.
Did you read the statement? Patches supposed to be available are not ready yet, so it is not that there is not something to fix, the fix is has not been delivered on time.
The >Washington Post is so kind as to hide the identity of website from which they took the screenshots from which they referenced in the article can be easily located with a simple google search...
The software -- viewed by a reporter on one of the sites, which washingtonpost.com is not naming because it remains active -- displays detailed graphs showing the distribution of victims by country. At time of this publication, the site harboring Frost's information was receiving a stream of illicit data from a network of roughly 3,000 infected PCs mostly located in Spain, Germany and Britain.
Oh and here is a feature breakdown from a Russian bulletin board:
In English...
- Invisibility in system
- Implementstion of software FireWalls leak
- Implementation of Polymorthic algorithm
- Implementation of AV Software vulnerability: AV Bases Update Breaker
- Socks5 Proxy Server
- FTP Server
- KeyLogger
- Clipboard Logger
- Implementation of WebMoney Keeper leak: WebMoney Grabber
- Implementation of E-gold security system leak
- Protected Storage Grabber
- Far FTP, TotalCommander FTP, The Bat Passwords Grabber
- Sends logs/files to http server
- Web-based Remote Control
- Implementation of IE leak: Form Grabber
- Implementation of UK banks security system leak: Memorable Info Grabber (at this moment released implementation of 6 most popular UK banks security system leak, no screenshots, only text) (List of vulnerable banks)
- Implementation of DE Banks TAN Security System leak (included security test for 4 DE Banks) (List of vulnerable banks)
- SMS warning if new TAN detected for clients of Russian BeeLine GSM Mobile Operator
To use the international symbol of the Red Cross on a first-aid kit is a violation of its use? It is marked as such because it is a symbol of aid and safety. It is deliberately marked as such to avoid direct attack. Now step back and think about that for a second. How could the virtualization of the real life object (a first-aid kit) be a violation of the trademark? It is a depiction of the actual real object in a virtual context, it is action is the same and it in no way harms or tarnishes the reputation of the owner. Granted the effects of a first-aid kit in game are magnnified dramatically, but so is the entire environment (tempo).
I fail to see how putting the symbol on a first-aid kit, jeep or truck or box does anything to diminish their message. Just as in the games, in real life as well, first aid supplies get bombed, blown up, destroyed, shot, or sabotaged. We watch footage of such acts on CNN daily. Deliberate or accidental it happens and I see no reason to prosecute the video game industry without first prosecuting EVERY single real violation of the same infringement.
Just my.02 on the situation... Seems like the a case of "crying fox in the chicken coop", but ignoring the wolf slaugherting the cows in the barn.
I wonder how Apple feels about their entire product page for the iBook being taken verbatim with only minor modifications and being relabled as iTab?
From the eBay ad...
You Can Take It with You
Built-in wireless capability on every iTab means you can work or play anywhere you can hold a notepad. With AirPort Extreme technology standard, the iTab can surf the Web in any Wi-Fi hot spot, from hotels to bookshops. With an AirPort Extreme or AirPort Express Base Station in your room or office, you can get online from the comfort of your couch. And the included Bluetooth 2.0+EDR module lets you connect wirelessly to a wide range of peripheral devices, from mobile phones to wireless keyboards. The iTab also offers an incredible six hours of battery life, so it keeps going as long as you do.
Fall for iBook
It continues of course. The entire product description. Oh, and they ripped off Apple's CSS style sheets also.
Honestly, I don't think Clinton, Jack Thomson, or the like would care if Rockstar killed every last person in the QA department, they were looking for an example so they can undermine the ESRB and replace it with their own government control. Like the FCC, but this would be even crazier (for reasons I can go on about, but that's a whole other rant...).
You are absolutely right, they were looking for a victim to crucify. And I do think Rockstar did the right thing, it cost them money to fix it, financial restatements had to be made. Talk about maximum suck for them.
My comments were meant to highlight that very fact, that if ESRB had crucified them and Rockstar themselves, congress would have been satisfied. I guess, it was that the ESRB did not extract ENOUGH blood to calm the wolves.
I am a Jew and I celebrate Christmas. Everybody (read most) people do, and I like the excuse to do some nice things for friends who put a lot of stock in it. It is not skin off my back. Besides Harry Potter is faux evil in a historical perspective (as I remind my friends jokingly on Easter, "Happy My people Nailed Your False Prophet to a Wooden Cross and then Rolled a Big Rock in Front of his Grave Which was Subsequently Robbed and You Thought was a Miracle Day!, wanna go eat some chocalte?"). But remember magic is evil:)
"Hark! Christian friends, do you hear a ringing sound throughout America? That clanging cacophony is coming from every movie theater showing Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It is the Lord Jesus using cash registers (a communication device He pioneered with Pat Robertson and perfected with Paul and Jan Crouch) to sound a battle clarion for all True Christians living within earshot of a multiplex: With Harry Potter, it is clear that Satan is doing a much better job of marketing witchcraft than we are of peddling Christianity!"
I'm still confused as hell at what went wrong here. The ESRB rated the game based on the content that was playable. "Hot Coffee" is not part of that content since you can't get to it without intentionally hacking the code. It's like complaining to your cable company that you can see the Playboy channel on your home cable system if you install a 3rd party descrambler and enter a code. WTF?
I will agree. I think the entire issue is stupid. I downloaded HotCoffee just to see what the hell the fuss was. There is hardly anything to make a fuss over. Digital sex in game that uses prositutes as power-ups! MY GOD THE HORROR! Just kidding. My point is, if the ESRB wanted to be taken seriously they would have put the kiabosh on Rockstar for even letting it get out the door like that. Rockstar stated it was never intended to be there, if they are to believed, so my questions becomes what the hell was it doing there in the first place?
I am just using it as an example of a self-regulating body doing more than just, "Gosh, awe shucks..." and impressing everybody with how serious they are about self-regulating. It makes the zealouts feel better and lessens the likiehood of stupid legislation gain ground. Rockstar could have taken the high ground and made an example of the developer/QA/audit person(s) that allowed it to make into the gold. Joke or otherwise.
I have said this before, but I will say it again....
While I agree that it is the role of government to protect its citzens, it is not the role of government to dictate or legislate morality or what is or is not appropriate for my children. The burden of responsibility rests exclusively with parents, not with day care, teachers (who many have turned to to handle their children out of incompotence, frustration or laziness), companies (vote with your wallet if you do not like their product) or the senate (which religious instutions have come to recognize as a cheap and easy police force, it is easier and cheaper than putting butts in pews and does not require consent). It is job of parents to decide what is or what is not appropriate for their children. Having children is a protected right, if you can have a kid without a permit, license, examination or qualification or demonstrated financial stability, then it sure as heck is not the responsiblity of the same government to raise them for you. It is not your T.V.'s, XBox's or teacher's job to raise them either.
Raising kids is work, it requires time, you may be tired, want to do something else, but you wanted or have kids for whatever reason good or bad, tough luck. Now you are parent. Now you have to guide them, educate them, and punish them. It is work and you do NOT get paid to do it. As I stated previously, I am an adult gamer and soon to be father, I am a big game fan. I like a lot of games in the FPS catagory which are typically classified as violent. It is my job to decide if and when my child will be granted access to such material until they achieve legal age to make such determinations for themselves. It is my job to be interested in my child's activities, to notice that they are despondent, angry or frustrated and about do something stupid. It is MY job to help them, guide them, and punish them.
That, said, I want to know who would honestly believes that a child could make/modify a sawed-off shotgun in their garage/basement/room if the parent exercised due diligence. You do not do that quietly. It is not something you are assigned in metal shop. I am definitely not going to ask or even expect the $6.25/hour idiot behind the counter the local EBgames to do it for me either. It is my job to make sure that inapporpriate (which I define and decide upon) does not get in the house, the computer, etc. Take five minutes to walk through kid's room, even if you work two shifts at night. That said, kids do not NEED a computer, they want them, them make work easier. For good reason, it makes homework easier (I do not need to learn to spell or use proper grammar, that is what Word is for). I still own and use a working typerwriter (they still make them) and so will my kids. Some tools BREED laziness. Sometimes it is important to learn how to proof read and use a dictionary (spell checker) the old fashioned analogue way.
Parents may deem content inappropriate for what ever reasons they like, but that does not mean that others are obliged to protect their children from such "evils" if they do not deem it similarly inappropriate. For example, some christian organizations treat Harry Potter as evil for its depictions of magic, etc. That may not be the opinion of another parent, it is not mine. It therefore precludes successful legislation of any kind. It may be necessary to create a rating system, but it is a guide, NOT a rule. I may choose to adhere to it or not. I may choose to take my child to an R rated movie or play a FPS shooter at the age I deem appropriately.
The computer game industry would be smart to buckle down and create a rigid and reasonable rating system. It should enforce it, it should guarantee the guide's integrity and should punish its own when they break it. I think the industry should be embarrased by the GTA fiasco, does that make GTA or Rockstar bad no. If the industry wants to regulate itself, it should grant the regulators the right to impose fines, damages, punative or othe
"Do you really think that the folks in marketing aren't aware that their M-rated games are popular among young teens? Do you think they don't go out of their way to cater to that 11 to 16 audience? Sure they'd never come out and say something like that directly, but I'd imagine that a lot of the marketing done for those 18 and older is really targeted at this 11 to 16 crowd."
That does not change the fact that parents and not legislators, companies, sales guys and ad people are responsible for integrity and teaching children fair play and good form. As an adult gamer and soon to be father, I am a big game fan. I like a lot of games in the FPS catagory which are typically classified as violent. I also think Family Guy is funny. Will my child be granted access to those things? No. Why? Because as a parent I am responsible for their care and upbringing and while I feel the content is suitable for adults, it is by no means appropriate for grade schoolers. FOX is not evil because they animate and air a TV show which has what many think is obvious gender bias and thinly veiled profanity. It is their perogative and right and mine to either watch or not to. As such, I will make efforts to not play those types of games in front of my child or watch those kinds of programs with them or repeat the material in them.
Does that extend me the right to tell someone else what is right for their kids? Hell no! Their situation is different. Maybe I would like to think that they have found their child may understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate, between games and dealing with anger. I could be a foolish optimist, but I am confident that by protecting their rights (morally right or wrong) I in turn protect my own.
Consider the recent line from Family Guy.... Stewie to a prostitute.... "So is there any tread left or is it like throwing a hot dog down a hallway?" I found it funny, I laughed. A child may not even get the reference, but would see "Daddy" laughing and if "Daddy" thinks it funny, then it is okay to repeat on the play ground. Is FOX at fault? Should the FCC regulate television? No. Same applies to games like F.E.A.R. and GTA. Responsibility begins and ends in the home.
Because this is slashdot and posting inane, misleading or false stories makes for better journalistic integrity.
And before I get accused of Microsoft bashing, M$ hating, free linux loving hippiness, I confess to wanting an XBOX360, but I am not going to buy until there is a title out for it worth buying. 12 of 19 ports? Some of them terrible? Let the hungry few get there christmas day release, I am waiting for a couple of titles worth playing and hopefully the market to cool off before I purchase one.
Of the employees I am friends with at MS, all of them are waiting to grab their console after the new year for aforementioned reasons. Now, if that is anything, that is news worthy.
I am probably by myself, but when I saw this I expected to see funny anecdotes about cages, colos, raid arrays, and redundancy. Not how to fix a printer and cleaning desktops.
production servers for sure. I personally think this is a rather stupid idea. Why on earth you would allow this to run is beyond me. You have bigger issues than time management if you run this that is for sure.
could allow for such a statement. As someone said above, how could it be that we are "utterly unique in the entire universe."
By comparison, I relate this as an anecdote (only because my memory is not 100%), there was a forum of leading scientists who came together to discuss and brainstorm about extra terrestrial life. During one event groups were formed and were instructed to draw and depict an "alien". One team returned with a unique drawing (of what specifically I cannot recall), but lacked a bipedal form (our own) and were ridiculed. One memeber of the panel was supposed to have said, "that is is ludicruous, where is the anus?"
The point being, only in our arrogance do we assume a bipedal form that incorpates of all things an _anus_ is capable of evolving intelligence.
Obviously, the sentiment reflects similar thinking. Am I to suppose once again think that the earth is the center of universe? Surely, there can be nothing more important than the planet of our origin.
I think Bill Waterson said it best, "The surest sign intelligent life exists in the universe is that now of it has tried to contact us."
By all means you are correct. Microsoft and SCO are not the only ones. However, on this forum they are the most heavily targetted. Apple too has gone around doing very evil things in attempt to consolidate its market share.
My point is that events like these usually mark a change in the guard sort of speak, when a company shift gears from empowering its consumer base to impairing it.
Which even goes more to the core of the issue. Google is about to IPO, they are now forced to do due diligence in order to satisfy their investors. Just take a look at the Google IPO and you will see that the company's previous "everything is groovy" attitude got dumped for the "got to think about our shareholders" motto.
How many companies had to recall their options because they were illegally issued, whoops. So they have unleashed their houds, I mean lawyers and letting anybody and everybody have it with both barrels. Your example of Yahoo just goes to show you how easy it is to coexist. Cybersquatter or not, it would be a simple matter for Google to simply buy their solution rather than be so heavy handed about it. As countless have show, the guy was their first.
While not necessarily an abuse, this action leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. That a company like Google could stoop to claiming their rights have been infringed upon by an operation that predates their own is extremely disappointing.
What kind of company threatens established buisness with rights disputes because it did not do due dilgence? I can think of at least two.
Just because a company is riding its own wave of success and about to IPO does not give it right or cause to go about stomping on any attempt to infringle its "mark". Google has forgotten their hippy roots and will no doubt follow in the footsteps of other giants like Microsoft and SCO. I think their IPO has gone to their head.
I happen to agree. And you are right, it is not interesting to everybody, but IMHO, I think news worthy. But then again, someone else (and all his buddies) probably think otherwise.
Networks have to make their money and I am sure Pepsi and Coke are fighting over the advertising rights to air a 30 second spot during the technical achievement awards. I can see it now...
Otherwise, boring, uninteresting, technobabbling nerd/geek who did something cool in a movie, but was not in it or in the credits, you just won a digital award!!! What are you going to do?!?
It is a shame really that these people do not receive more recognition for their work. Their contribution is in some cases ground breaking. But since it is not "interesting" they do not get any air time.
As anybody who uses Pro Tools will tell you, it is the end all be all when it comes to the audio spectrum. They defenitely deserved the recognition. And regardless of what you may think of LotR, you have to give props to the Massive project.
Unfortunately, I have little faith in the EU to actually successfully force the issue here. As one reader already commented, any restrictions imposed will almost surely never see light in the US.
Far be it from our own congressional leaders or regulators to take any inspiration from a EU success, but that is a separate tangent.
It is my opinion that Microsoft has the monopoly they have at the behest of the consumer market which continues to support their products with dollars or euros in this case. Dollars have always spoken louder than votes, and until a viable competitor arises any regulation/restrictions/bundling/unbundling current or future will be seen as nothing more than a minor set back for Microsoft, not a solution.
The recent success introducing Linux (or any other alternative) definitely suggests that such a thing is not the barrier, rather it is the mind set. It was "marketing", t-shirts and stupid stuff penguins. And it will take something similar, if more tangible to convince CEOs and CTOs that there is a viable alternative to windows. It is rather ironic that they complain with one handand then buy 100K in licenses with the other. It is the responsibility of the entrenched IT community to instigate change where such change is economically viable. This is not a principal issue, but an economic one and the ultimately, the best solution to the problem will win if presented correctly on a case by case basis.
Of course, this all circles back to my original point. Unless, the mind set of the consume is altered (ideally in the work place where I find most of the user trends are set), then and only then will the "monopoly" be broken. Any attempt to regulate/bundle/unbundle Windows and its products will fail so long as the dollar/euro votes continue to pour in.
I will give them that. The real problem with that pariticular form factor is that youc cannot really upgrade the display easily and think that hurt the overall sales. It is hard to upgrade when the monitor is bolted to the chassis.
But who wants an iMac when you can get a Dual G4 with one of those really pretty cinema displays. I would trade an appendage for that.
I will just have to make do with my BRAND SPANKING NEW powerbook G4. Oh baby. Santa is my friend.
I think I would like convert one of my "garage" projects into a business. Success is not, IMHO, a function of wealth, but a funciton of independence (which may or may not be wealth dependent depending on who you ask).
The important thing to realize that most people judge success as a function of job satisfaction which I think is tough, if not impossible to achieve. Remember, the only thing you can control is yourself, and well a job, that is hard to control. That is why you are paid to do it.
I will never be a CEO, COO, and good help me if I make it to middle management. I am trencher, and will always enjoy being in the muck, but I would like to have a bit of voice when it comes to the decisions (which is probably related to job satisfaction). I guess, success as I define it, can be best described by how I spend my free time. The part I can control. A couple of toys and a paycheck that keeps me happy, healthy and wise:), that is just icing on the cake.
Slashdot Mirror
The simple solution is to use the "real" thing from IBM. All the power and performance of the 2 Cell processors instead of Sony's 1 on the PS3 and 2GB of RAM (1GB per core) in a high density blade format. Subsequently you are not wasting a core on the PS3's OS running underneath and you get a real NIC.
Unfortunately the subscription list maintainers have nothing to do with ABP itself and the two should be VERY separated when criticizing one or the other. Therefore, I think it better to put the blame with the subscription and not on ABP directly. Just my .02.
While everyone is whining about how unfair the system is because people will simply park all day, I would be more concerned about theft of service than anything else. Why not get even with the rich "jerks" parking all day and simply bill your parking to them?
I think the greater concern about such a service is the authentication scheme. What about the services and simple technology that allow you to forge your Caller ID? Simply identify someone with the service and you have instant free parking. Now some Caller ID forging services are expensive, but I can think of a TRIVIAL and hugely inexpensive way to achieve the same effect at almost no cost. While tremendously convenient it is grossly inadequate to authenticate via Caller ID alone. I would be willing to wager that scamming, forgery, and stolen services quickly escalate because while previously confined to private parking lots, the service is now city wide with heavy usage.
Did you read the statement? Patches supposed to be available are not ready yet, so it is not that there is not something to fix, the fix is has not been delivered on time.
Oh and here is a feature breakdown from a Russian bulletin board:
In English...
For those that care.... here is the site.
If you have half a clue you will figure out where to go from there.
Photographic evidence of the above statement.... BBC article.
To use the international symbol of the Red Cross on a first-aid kit is a violation of its use? It is marked as such because it is a symbol of aid and safety. It is deliberately marked as such to avoid direct attack. Now step back and think about that for a second. How could the virtualization of the real life object (a first-aid kit) be a violation of the trademark? It is a depiction of the actual real object in a virtual context, it is action is the same and it in no way harms or tarnishes the reputation of the owner. Granted the effects of a first-aid kit in game are magnnified dramatically, but so is the entire environment (tempo).
.02 on the situation... Seems like the a case of "crying fox in the chicken coop", but ignoring the wolf slaugherting the cows in the barn.
I fail to see how putting the symbol on a first-aid kit, jeep or truck or box does anything to diminish their message. Just as in the games, in real life as well, first aid supplies get bombed, blown up, destroyed, shot, or sabotaged. We watch footage of such acts on CNN daily. Deliberate or accidental it happens and I see no reason to prosecute the video game industry without first prosecuting EVERY single real violation of the same infringement.
Just my
Honestly, I don't think Clinton, Jack Thomson, or the like would care if Rockstar killed every last person in the QA department, they were looking for an example so they can undermine the ESRB and replace it with their own government control. Like the FCC, but this would be even crazier (for reasons I can go on about, but that's a whole other rant...).
You are absolutely right, they were looking for a victim to crucify. And I do think Rockstar did the right thing, it cost them money to fix it, financial restatements had to be made. Talk about maximum suck for them.
My comments were meant to highlight that very fact, that if ESRB had crucified them and Rockstar themselves, congress would have been satisfied. I guess, it was that the ESRB did not extract ENOUGH blood to calm the wolves.
I am a Jew and I celebrate Christmas. Everybody (read most) people do, and I like the excuse to do some nice things for friends who put a lot of stock in it. It is not skin off my back. Besides Harry Potter is faux evil in a historical perspective (as I remind my friends jokingly on Easter, "Happy My people Nailed Your False Prophet to a Wooden Cross and then Rolled a Big Rock in Front of his Grave Which was Subsequently Robbed and You Thought was a Miracle Day!, wanna go eat some chocalte?"). But remember magic is evil :)
...
This makes me laugh.... http://www.bettybowers.com/harrypotter.html
"Hark! Christian friends, do you hear a ringing sound throughout America? That clanging cacophony is coming from every movie theater showing Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It is the Lord Jesus using cash registers (a communication device He pioneered with Pat Robertson and perfected with Paul and Jan Crouch) to sound a battle clarion for all True Christians living within earshot of a multiplex: With Harry Potter, it is clear that Satan is doing a much better job of marketing witchcraft than we are of peddling Christianity!"
Reminds me of the Penny-Arcade comic..... http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/08/26
I'm still confused as hell at what went wrong here. The ESRB rated the game based on the content that was playable. "Hot Coffee" is not part of that content since you can't get to it without intentionally hacking the code. It's like complaining to your cable company that you can see the Playboy channel on your home cable system if you install a 3rd party descrambler and enter a code. WTF?
I will agree. I think the entire issue is stupid. I downloaded HotCoffee just to see what the hell the fuss was. There is hardly anything to make a fuss over. Digital sex in game that uses prositutes as power-ups! MY GOD THE HORROR! Just kidding. My point is, if the ESRB wanted to be taken seriously they would have put the kiabosh on Rockstar for even letting it get out the door like that. Rockstar stated it was never intended to be there, if they are to believed, so my questions becomes what the hell was it doing there in the first place?
I am just using it as an example of a self-regulating body doing more than just, "Gosh, awe shucks..." and impressing everybody with how serious they are about self-regulating. It makes the zealouts feel better and lessens the likiehood of stupid legislation gain ground. Rockstar could have taken the high ground and made an example of the developer/QA/audit person(s) that allowed it to make into the gold. Joke or otherwise.
I have said this before, but I will say it again....
While I agree that it is the role of government to protect its citzens, it is not the role of government to dictate or legislate morality or what is or is not appropriate for my children. The burden of responsibility rests exclusively with parents, not with day care, teachers (who many have turned to to handle their children out of incompotence, frustration or laziness), companies (vote with your wallet if you do not like their product) or the senate (which religious instutions have come to recognize as a cheap and easy police force, it is easier and cheaper than putting butts in pews and does not require consent). It is job of parents to decide what is or what is not appropriate for their children. Having children is a protected right, if you can have a kid without a permit, license, examination or qualification or demonstrated financial stability, then it sure as heck is not the responsiblity of the same government to raise them for you. It is not your T.V.'s, XBox's or teacher's job to raise them either.
Raising kids is work, it requires time, you may be tired, want to do something else, but you wanted or have kids for whatever reason good or bad, tough luck. Now you are parent. Now you have to guide them, educate them, and punish them. It is work and you do NOT get paid to do it. As I stated previously, I am an adult gamer and soon to be father, I am a big game fan. I like a lot of games in the FPS catagory which are typically classified as violent. It is my job to decide if and when my child will be granted access to such material until they achieve legal age to make such determinations for themselves. It is my job to be interested in my child's activities, to notice that they are despondent, angry or frustrated and about do something stupid. It is MY job to help them, guide them, and punish them.
That, said, I want to know who would honestly believes that a child could make/modify a sawed-off shotgun in their garage/basement/room if the parent exercised due diligence. You do not do that quietly. It is not something you are assigned in metal shop. I am definitely not going to ask or even expect the $6.25/hour idiot behind the counter the local EBgames to do it for me either. It is my job to make sure that inapporpriate (which I define and decide upon) does not get in the house, the computer, etc. Take five minutes to walk through kid's room, even if you work two shifts at night. That said, kids do not NEED a computer, they want them, them make work easier. For good reason, it makes homework easier (I do not need to learn to spell or use proper grammar, that is what Word is for). I still own and use a working typerwriter (they still make them) and so will my kids. Some tools BREED laziness. Sometimes it is important to learn how to proof read and use a dictionary (spell checker) the old fashioned analogue way.
Parents may deem content inappropriate for what ever reasons they like, but that does not mean that others are obliged to protect their children from such "evils" if they do not deem it similarly inappropriate. For example, some christian organizations treat Harry Potter as evil for its depictions of magic, etc. That may not be the opinion of another parent, it is not mine. It therefore precludes successful legislation of any kind. It may be necessary to create a rating system, but it is a guide, NOT a rule. I may choose to adhere to it or not. I may choose to take my child to an R rated movie or play a FPS shooter at the age I deem appropriately.
The computer game industry would be smart to buckle down and create a rigid and reasonable rating system. It should enforce it, it should guarantee the guide's integrity and should punish its own when they break it. I think the industry should be embarrased by the GTA fiasco, does that make GTA or Rockstar bad no. If the industry wants to regulate itself, it should grant the regulators the right to impose fines, damages, punative or othe
"Do you really think that the folks in marketing aren't aware that their M-rated games are popular among young teens? Do you think they don't go out of their way to cater to that 11 to 16 audience? Sure they'd never come out and say something like that directly, but I'd imagine that a lot of the marketing done for those 18 and older is really targeted at this 11 to 16 crowd."
.... "So is there any tread left or is it like throwing a hot dog down a hallway?" I found it funny, I laughed. A child may not even get the reference, but would see "Daddy" laughing and if "Daddy" thinks it funny, then it is okay to repeat on the play ground. Is FOX at fault? Should the FCC regulate television? No. Same applies to games like F.E.A.R. and GTA. Responsibility begins and ends in the home.
That does not change the fact that parents and not legislators, companies, sales guys and ad people are responsible for integrity and teaching children fair play and good form. As an adult gamer and soon to be father, I am a big game fan. I like a lot of games in the FPS catagory which are typically classified as violent. I also think Family Guy is funny. Will my child be granted access to those things? No. Why? Because as a parent I am responsible for their care and upbringing and while I feel the content is suitable for adults, it is by no means appropriate for grade schoolers. FOX is not evil because they animate and air a TV show which has what many think is obvious gender bias and thinly veiled profanity. It is their perogative and right and mine to either watch or not to. As such, I will make efforts to not play those types of games in front of my child or watch those kinds of programs with them or repeat the material in them.
Does that extend me the right to tell someone else what is right for their kids? Hell no! Their situation is different. Maybe I would like to think that they have found their child may understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate, between games and dealing with anger. I could be a foolish optimist, but I am confident that by protecting their rights (morally right or wrong) I in turn protect my own.
Consider the recent line from Family Guy.... Stewie to a prostitute
Because this is slashdot and posting inane, misleading or false stories makes for better journalistic integrity.
And before I get accused of Microsoft bashing, M$ hating, free linux loving hippiness, I confess to wanting an XBOX360, but I am not going to buy until there is a title out for it worth buying. 12 of 19 ports? Some of them terrible? Let the hungry few get there christmas day release, I am waiting for a couple of titles worth playing and hopefully the market to cool off before I purchase one.
Of the employees I am friends with at MS, all of them are waiting to grab their console after the new year for aforementioned reasons. Now, if that is anything, that is news worthy.
I am probably by myself, but when I saw this I expected to see funny anecdotes about cages, colos, raid arrays, and redundancy. Not how to fix a printer and cleaning desktops.
production servers for sure. I personally think this is a rather stupid idea. Why on earth you would allow this to run is beyond me. You have bigger issues than time management if you run this that is for sure.
could allow for such a statement. As someone said above, how could it be that we are "utterly unique in the entire universe."
By comparison, I relate this as an anecdote (only because my memory is not 100%), there was a forum of leading scientists who came together to discuss and brainstorm about extra terrestrial life. During one event groups were formed and were instructed to draw and depict an "alien". One team returned with a unique drawing (of what specifically I cannot recall), but lacked a bipedal form (our own) and were ridiculed. One memeber of the panel was supposed to have said, "that is is ludicruous, where is the anus?"
The point being, only in our arrogance do we assume a bipedal form that incorpates of all things an _anus_ is capable of evolving intelligence.
Obviously, the sentiment reflects similar thinking. Am I to suppose once again think that the earth is the center of universe? Surely, there can be nothing more important than the planet of our origin.
I think Bill Waterson said it best, "The surest sign intelligent life exists in the universe is that now of it has tried to contact us."
By all means you are correct. Microsoft and SCO are not the only ones. However, on this forum they are the most heavily targetted. Apple too has gone around doing very evil things in attempt to consolidate its market share.
My point is that events like these usually mark a change in the guard sort of speak, when a company shift gears from empowering its consumer base to impairing it.
Which even goes more to the core of the issue. Google is about to IPO, they are now forced to do due diligence in order to satisfy their investors. Just take a look at the Google IPO and you will see that the company's previous "everything is groovy" attitude got dumped for the "got to think about our shareholders" motto.
How many companies had to recall their options because they were illegally issued, whoops. So they have unleashed their houds, I mean lawyers and letting anybody and everybody have it with both barrels. Your example of Yahoo just goes to show you how easy it is to coexist. Cybersquatter or not, it would be a simple matter for Google to simply buy their solution rather than be so heavy handed about it. As countless have show, the guy was their first.
While not necessarily an abuse, this action leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. That a company like Google could stoop to claiming their rights have been infringed upon by an operation that predates their own is extremely disappointing.
What kind of company threatens established buisness with rights disputes because it did not do due dilgence? I can think of at least two.
Just because a company is riding its own wave of success and about to IPO does not give it right or cause to go about stomping on any attempt to infringle its "mark". Google has forgotten their hippy roots and will no doubt follow in the footsteps of other giants like Microsoft and SCO. I think their IPO has gone to their head.
Networks have to make their money and I am sure Pepsi and Coke are fighting over the advertising rights to air a 30 second spot during the technical achievement awards. I can see it now...
It is a shame really that these people do not receive more recognition for their work. Their contribution is in some cases ground breaking. But since it is not "interesting" they do not get any air time.
As anybody who uses Pro Tools will tell you, it is the end all be all when it comes to the audio spectrum. They defenitely deserved the recognition. And regardless of what you may think of LotR, you have to give props to the Massive project.
Kudos to you.
Unfortunately, I have little faith in the EU to actually successfully force the issue here. As one reader already commented, any restrictions imposed will almost surely never see light in the US.
Far be it from our own congressional leaders or regulators to take any inspiration from a EU success, but that is a separate tangent.
It is my opinion that Microsoft has the monopoly they have at the behest of the consumer market which continues to support their products with dollars or euros in this case. Dollars have always spoken louder than votes, and until a viable competitor arises any regulation/restrictions/bundling/unbundling current or future will be seen as nothing more than a minor set back for Microsoft, not a solution.
The recent success introducing Linux (or any other alternative) definitely suggests that such a thing is not the barrier, rather it is the mind set. It was "marketing", t-shirts and stupid stuff penguins. And it will take something similar, if more tangible to convince CEOs and CTOs that there is a viable alternative to windows. It is rather ironic that they complain with one handand then buy 100K in licenses with the other. It is the responsibility of the entrenched IT community to instigate change where such change is economically viable. This is not a principal issue, but an economic one and the ultimately, the best solution to the problem will win if presented correctly on a case by case basis.
Of course, this all circles back to my original point. Unless, the mind set of the consume is altered (ideally in the work place where I find most of the user trends are set), then and only then will the "monopoly" be broken. Any attempt to regulate/bundle/unbundle Windows and its products will fail so long as the dollar/euro votes continue to pour in.
Just my 2 cents.
I will give them that. The real problem with that pariticular form factor is that youc cannot really upgrade the display easily and think that hurt the overall sales. It is hard to upgrade when the monitor is bolted to the chassis. But who wants an iMac when you can get a Dual G4 with one of those really pretty cinema displays. I would trade an appendage for that. I will just have to make do with my BRAND SPANKING NEW powerbook G4. Oh baby. Santa is my friend.
I think I would like convert one of my "garage" projects into a business. Success is not, IMHO, a function of wealth, but a funciton of independence (which may or may not be wealth dependent depending on who you ask).
:), that is just icing on the cake.
The important thing to realize that most people judge success as a function of job satisfaction which I think is tough, if not impossible to achieve. Remember, the only thing you can control is yourself, and well a job, that is hard to control. That is why you are paid to do it.
I will never be a CEO, COO, and good help me if I make it to middle management. I am trencher, and will always enjoy being in the muck, but I would like to have a bit of voice when it comes to the decisions (which is probably related to job satisfaction). I guess, success as I define it, can be best described by how I spend my free time. The part I can control. A couple of toys and a paycheck that keeps me happy, healthy and wise