One of the most interesting aspects of the original Half-Life is that Gordon Freeman never spoke - all of the lines written by Laidlaw were generic enough that you could imagine yourself asking the question or making the comment which provoked the line. It drew you into the story even further by making you project your own dialog into it. It's strange that very few other games have tried this technique, as it seems to have worked very well.
Quite a few reviewers play games at lower difficulty levels so that they can get a quick sense of the content without having to play a particular level five times just to see the next level. I wonder if that does figure into some of the complaints.
I agree totally - you need to know the facts, or far less informed people may believe the FUD and influence how your company works with Open Source software. I was in an email discussion recently where an idiot BusDev (business development/OEM) person tried to scare a software engineer about using Open Source. It was quite satisfying to see the software guy rip the BusDev guy a new one.:-)
SCO vs. Linux: The time of the conspiracy theories
In history around SCO and the source code from SCO existence, rich at idioms and twists, possibly transferred after Linux, new turns are to be reported. With the conspiracy theory that Microsoft behind SCO stands, it associates the theory that the refusal of the requirements of SCO is a only one, well camouflaged campaign of IBM. Thus the InfoWorld reported that SCO boss sees Darl McBride IBM as an author of the dirt campaign. IBM caused Novell to place itself against SCO meant McBride, employed long years with Novell as a director/conductor of the Netware Embedded division (NEST). IBM has talks floated to complain against SCO means it in addition. Also Eric Raymond of the open SOURCE initiative would stand on the pay roll IBMs, which would finance besides the Free software Foundation and thus the lawyer evenly Moglen, continued to implement Darl McBride.
While IBM as talk has the accusations lapidary for nonsense explained and about Novell none came, Eric Raymond raffte itself up to send an open letter at Darl McBride. In it answered in the negative Raymond by IBM to be paid did not deny however IBM to have helped. Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."
Off the roaring star Wars Rhetorik Eric Raymond used the open letter, in order to make attentive on a Petition of the Linux Community, which were read out on the SCOForum. In their the SCO Group is requested to give up and all inkriminierten places in the SOURCE code call the confrontation course. In response the Linux programmers want to assure to revise all questionable places: "if right right-hurt-hurting that code in the Linux Kernel to be present should become, we it remove, because our community would not like to have a part of this Kernels."
The polite request will possibly remain without answer, because SCO with first, on which SCOForum published proofs could not convince. Apart from the problem of the "Greek" code is in the meantime the Berkeley presented by SCO pack filter (BPF) into the center of the interest moved. The SCO example originates from the file/sys/net/bpf.c, which is available here. In the cutout shown by SCO is missing the BSD Lizenzbedigungen, which is to be always called in accordance with BSD license: "Redistributions OF SOURCE code must retain the above copyright notice, this cunning OF conditions and the following more disclaimer." Because they are missing, code experts go such as Bruce Perens and Greg Lehey of the fact out that SCO with the example proved that the license conditions were removed agreement-adversely.
Thus a classical self-gate could be present, particularly since other possibilities are impossible. Like that the programmer of the version used in Linux was employed by BPF, Jay trainingist, with Caldera, wrote however the Clean Room variant of BPF before its time with Caldera. From the circles of former Caldera developers several persons can remember that in the SCO Trees in many places with the BSD code the copyright notes were missing. The procedure to cut "redundant" licenses off seems to have practiced also at other companies. Thus heise on-line developers to, that experienced the "technology" at Siemens Nixdorf, announced themselves. If the proof situation in the case SCO should confirm itself, then the code Hunter of this company excavated a proof, which occupies the exact opposite of the accusations by SCO. At least in the case of BPF SCO the power POINT presentation would not only have ( when ppt , when pdf ) separate the whole code make public, in order to weaken the suspicion.
Doesn't the creation of Linux tools for interfacing with Windows just further validate a needlessly Microsoftian System?
No, this is exactly what is needed to displace Mictosoft. Other than email, the second biggest use by client computers of a server is for file-serving. No matter how good Linux is, Microsoft has an iron-clad hold on that area for Windows clients, because users can browse and print through the interface they know so well. If that can be subbed out in a way invisible to the user, the reason for having Windows servers gets a great deal weaker. Breaking Microsoft's server hold is critical - if they can't control the protocols that they talk to the client in, then they cannot create propietary standards on the client, which eventually allows real competition.
Obviously, he's not a fan of breast enlargement or viagra, but instead of creating a process to keep him from getting those offers, why doesn't he just support legislation which forces spammers to user correct return addresses and accurate subject lines? This simply puts him more out of touch with the problems of his constituents.
The RIAA can't win here - the very business dynamic they are trying to exploit is what will hurt them the most. Just like the major airlines, which make a majority of their money from Business Class passengers, the music indutry makes its money from a small number of acts (Britney, etc). Those acts and albums will be shared, whether in the US or overseas (out of RIAA reach), so they will be hurt regardless. Much like Southwest Airlines disrupting the major airlines business through a new, low-cost overhead business model, things will change. This current negative PR campaign of "suing your customers" will only hasten this trend.
We're going to have to get used to this. For massively multiplayer games to flourish, they have to move beyond the hard-core gaming market into mass market. You can see similar choices being made on The Sims Online (the emphasis on relationships over items acquired) which are geared towards bringing the audience of casual games into the loop. The average housewife is not going to play when some thirteen year old can harass her without consequence. The upside is that a rising tide lifts all boats - a larger gaming audience allows for more games, higher budgets, and more variety. This will be a little painful in the short term, but long term it is far better for the market overall.
Microsoft and Intel saw this coming a couple of years ago, which is why they started pushing for broadband adoption (and, if I remember correctly, Microsoft even invested in cable). So what happens? Telco monopolies kill off DSL competitors, and Hollywood's unwillingness to make content available over the net does not drive consumer adoption (no killer app). The only thing that comes close to being a killer app right now are online games. Funny how everyone may be dependent on The Sims Online to drive upgrades...
Slashdot Mirror
One of the most interesting aspects of the original Half-Life is that Gordon Freeman never spoke - all of the lines written by Laidlaw were generic enough that you could imagine yourself asking the question or making the comment which provoked the line. It drew you into the story even further by making you project your own dialog into it. It's strange that very few other games have tried this technique, as it seems to have worked very well.
Quite a few reviewers play games at lower difficulty levels so that they can get a quick sense of the content without having to play a particular level five times just to see the next level. I wonder if that does figure into some of the complaints.
I agree totally - you need to know the facts, or far less informed people may believe the FUD and influence how your company works with Open Source software. I was in an email discussion recently where an idiot BusDev (business development/OEM) person tried to scare a software engineer about using Open Source. It was quite satisfying to see the software guy rip the BusDev guy a new one. :-)
If they are making blatantly untrue statements, shouldn't the SEC get involved? How should we file a complaint?
SCO vs. Linux: The time of the conspiracy theories
In history around SCO and the source code from SCO existence, rich at idioms and twists, possibly transferred after Linux, new turns are to be reported. With the conspiracy theory that Microsoft behind SCO stands, it associates the theory that the refusal of the requirements of SCO is a only one, well camouflaged campaign of IBM. Thus the InfoWorld reported that SCO boss sees Darl McBride IBM as an author of the dirt campaign. IBM caused Novell to place itself against SCO meant McBride, employed long years with Novell as a director/conductor of the Netware Embedded division (NEST). IBM has talks floated to complain against SCO means it in addition. Also Eric Raymond of the open SOURCE initiative would stand on the pay roll IBMs, which would finance besides the Free software Foundation and thus the lawyer evenly Moglen, continued to implement Darl McBride.
While IBM as talk has the accusations lapidary for nonsense explained and about Novell none came, Eric Raymond raffte itself up to send an open letter at Darl McBride. In it answered in the negative Raymond by IBM to be paid did not deny however IBM to have helped. Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."
Off the roaring star Wars Rhetorik Eric Raymond used the open letter, in order to make attentive on a Petition of the Linux Community, which were read out on the SCOForum. In their the SCO Group is requested to give up and all inkriminierten places in the SOURCE code call the confrontation course. In response the Linux programmers want to assure to revise all questionable places: "if right right-hurt-hurting that code in the Linux Kernel to be present should become, we it remove, because our community would not like to have a part of this Kernels."
The polite request will possibly remain without answer, because SCO with first, on which SCOForum published proofs could not convince. Apart from the problem of the "Greek" code is in the meantime the Berkeley presented by SCO pack filter (BPF) into the center of the interest moved. The SCO example originates from the file/sys/net/bpf.c, which is available here. In the cutout shown by SCO is missing the BSD Lizenzbedigungen, which is to be always called in accordance with BSD license: "Redistributions OF SOURCE code must retain the above copyright notice, this cunning OF conditions and the following more disclaimer." Because they are missing, code experts go such as Bruce Perens and Greg Lehey of the fact out that SCO with the example proved that the license conditions were removed agreement-adversely.
Thus a classical self-gate could be present, particularly since other possibilities are impossible. Like that the programmer of the version used in Linux was employed by BPF, Jay trainingist, with Caldera, wrote however the Clean Room variant of BPF before its time with Caldera. From the circles of former Caldera developers several persons can remember that in the SCO Trees in many places with the BSD code the copyright notes were missing. The procedure to cut "redundant" licenses off seems to have practiced also at other companies. Thus heise on-line developers to, that experienced the "technology" at Siemens Nixdorf, announced themselves. If the proof situation in the case SCO should confirm itself, then the code Hunter of this company excavated a proof, which occupies the exact opposite of the accusations by SCO. At least in the case of BPF SCO the power POINT presentation would not only have ( when ppt , when pdf ) separate the whole code make public, in order to weaken the suspicion.
Doesn't the creation of Linux tools for interfacing with Windows just further validate a needlessly Microsoftian System?
No, this is exactly what is needed to displace Mictosoft. Other than email, the second biggest use by client computers of a server is for file-serving. No matter how good Linux is, Microsoft has an iron-clad hold on that area for Windows clients, because users can browse and print through the interface they know so well. If that can be subbed out in a way invisible to the user, the reason for having Windows servers gets a great deal weaker. Breaking Microsoft's server hold is critical - if they can't control the protocols that they talk to the client in, then they cannot create propietary standards on the client, which eventually allows real competition.
Obviously, he's not a fan of breast enlargement or viagra, but instead of creating a process to keep him from getting those offers, why doesn't he just support legislation which forces spammers to user correct return addresses and accurate subject lines? This simply puts him more out of touch with the problems of his constituents.
The RIAA can't win here - the very business dynamic they are trying to exploit is what will hurt them the most. Just like the major airlines, which make a majority of their money from Business Class passengers, the music indutry makes its money from a small number of acts (Britney, etc). Those acts and albums will be shared, whether in the US or overseas (out of RIAA reach), so they will be hurt regardless. Much like Southwest Airlines disrupting the major airlines business through a new, low-cost overhead business model, things will change. This current negative PR campaign of "suing your customers" will only hasten this trend.
We're going to have to get used to this. For massively multiplayer games to flourish, they have to move beyond the hard-core gaming market into mass market. You can see similar choices being made on The Sims Online (the emphasis on relationships over items acquired) which are geared towards bringing the audience of casual games into the loop. The average housewife is not going to play when some thirteen year old can harass her without consequence. The upside is that a rising tide lifts all boats - a larger gaming audience allows for more games, higher budgets, and more variety. This will be a little painful in the short term, but long term it is far better for the market overall.
Microsoft and Intel saw this coming a couple of years ago, which is why they started pushing for broadband adoption (and, if I remember correctly, Microsoft even invested in cable). So what happens? Telco monopolies kill off DSL competitors, and Hollywood's unwillingness to make content available over the net does not drive consumer adoption (no killer app). The only thing that comes close to being a killer app right now are online games. Funny how everyone may be dependent on The Sims Online to drive upgrades...
No connectors = no way to record... :-)
Doh! Forgot the URL: http://www.gnutellanews.com/article/5490
It concentrates on Lessig's crusade to overturn the 1998 law. A good read.
Following line (just before the nuclear missile hits): Oh, I've wasted my life.