I second Stardock's games, and would recommend them to anyone.
Introversion's Darwinia, Uplink and so forth are excellent as well.
Steam has quite a few games for download, most of them without DRM.
Hehe, but if you removed your blog from blogspot, it means you're worried about who own's your blog.:P Is not a blog and slashdot comments along the same lines, in being public and in the ease of people being able to comment on, copy and email and so forth?
Just start reading the terms of service for internet content companies. Facebook, Yahoo, MS, Photobucket, the list goes on... they have a similar clause in their terms of use. Not sure how many have "unlimited" though, but I'll bet it's more than just Google.
I say standard because so many of them do have it.
It remains to be seen whether or not the EULA would withstand scrutiny in a court of law.
And yes, the TOS could allow Google to do that. Just as Yahoo's could allow it to do that, from their sites, and MS could do it, and FaceBook, and so on and so forth. It's STANDARD language in content companies' terms of use. Slashdot could put out a book, "Idiots who post here.", and use our posts as examples.
And the moral of the story is: Read the fucking license agreement.:)
Every company that hosts web based email has that exact same paragraph in their Terms of Service. So by singling out Google, you're not being exactly fair.
Secondly, my comparison is not silly, for anything you post to Slashdot (or any other SourceForge property) is subject to the same terms. Including things that you might have an expectation of privacy on. SourceForge's terms are a blanket, just like Google, and therein lies the comparison.
Google has also stated in it's "Legal Terms" section of their terms of use and privacy policy: We will not use any of your content for any purpose except to provide you with the Service.
Also, Google did not give itself permission to read your email. You may have, by agreeing to use their service.
And are you really claiming that no other company, except Google, could be irresponsible with the services it provides?
That's what gets me, people acting surprised by this.
I can understand people wondering why such language was included in the TOS for Chrome, and they were lining up to jump on the "Lets bash Google" bandwagon... only to act sheepish when Google admitted it was a case of copy'n'paste-itis.
Read what you're agreeing to, if you don't like it or don't understand it, don't click the effing OK button.
Check just about any service that allows you to upload content. Facebook. Geocities. MicroSoft sites are covered by a blanket TOS/TOE/EULA as well, with almost the exact same language.
This is a story how?
A few years too late.
From Slashdot's terms of use, linked there at the bottom of the page...
6. LICENSING AND OTHER TERMS APPLYING TO CONTENT POSTED ON THE SourceForge SITES:
Use, reproduction, modification, and other intellectual property rights to data stored on the SourceForge Sites will be subject to licensing arrangements that may be approved by SourceForge as applicable to such Content. For the SourceForge Site SourceForge.net, use, reproduction, modification, and other intellectual property rights to data stored in CVS or as a file release and posted by any user on SourceForge.net ("Source Code") shall be subject to the OSI-approved license applicable to such Source Code, or to such other licensing arrangements as may be approved by SourceForge.net as applicable to such Source Code.
With respect to text or data entered into and stored by publicly-accessible site features such as forums, comments and bug trackers ("SourceForge Public Content"), the submitting user retains ownership of such SourceForge Public Content; with respect to publicly-available statistical content which is generated by the site to monitor and display content activity, such content is owned by SourceForge. In each such case, the submitting user grants SourceForge the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the terms of any applicable license.
With respect to Content posted to private areas of the SourceForge Site SourceForge.net (e.g., private development tools or mail), the submitting user may grant to SourceForge or other SourceForge.net users such rights and licenses as the submitting SourceForge.net user deems appropriate.
Content located on any SourceForge-hosted subdomain which is subject to the sole editorial control of the owner or licensee of such subdomain, shall be subject to the appropriate license applicable to such Content, or to such other licensing arrangements as may be approved by SourceForge as applicable to such Content.
From Picasa's Terms of Service, section 4.
Your Rights
Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Picasa Web Albums. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Picasa Web Albums and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Picasa Web Albums, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content through Picasa Web Albums, including RSS or other content feeds offered through Picasa Web Albums, and other Google services. In addition, by submitting, posting or displaying Content which is intended to be available to the general public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services. Google will discontinue this licensed use within a commercially reasonable period after such Content is removed from Picasa Web Albums. Google reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion.
Look at the two bold sections for Slashdot and Google respectively... looks almost exactly the same. You'll find that sentence, almost exactly the same each time, for every site that takes
The chances of someone taking my reply to the OP as a first impression is relatively small. And I would posit that most folks reading here read a few posts first before posting themselves.
Secondly, this is IDLE... and most of the comments are about trolls. The OP's post could be taken as trolling, depending on the mod, so yes, I'd like people to understand how trolls are treated.:)
And what... you were in such a rush to teach me some etiquette that you forgot to log in?:P
And it's been said lots of time... you don't have to read it and you can change your preferences so Idle doesn't show up on the main page. It's very frustrating telling people where to go.:P
The cops and Batman and Dent were all trying to figure out who the heck the Joker was, where he came from, what was his background, what does he want...
SURPRISE! You get nothing. Chaos personified as people turn themselves inside out and backwards to try to get one step ahead of the Joker.
Even Batman got tricked with the ol' switch-er-roo... not once, but twice.
If you thought there were only ten seconds of genuine heart in the film, you must've been taking a long washroom break after downing the bladder-buster cola.
What of the comparison between the Burmese bandit and the Joker, when they were trying to figure out the Joker's motivations?
Or "the girl" saying Bruce Wayne was the only person someone could trust in Gotham?
Or the confrontation between Batman and the Joker in the holding cell?
Lots of heart, decent writing. And there were lots of other scenes I could point out too.
A mess of loose ends, hmm? Sounds like the Joker wins even as he loses.:P
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't have DRM in the way the OP was talking about...
"problems caused by the various intrusive, and sometimes damaging DRM schemes"
"along with verification requirements and major restrictions on installations"
It may be digital rights management software, but it allows you to play the games you own on any computer able to download, install and run the games.
When Steam first came out, there were issues, but they've had many years to iron everything out.
I second Stardock's games, and would recommend them to anyone. Introversion's Darwinia, Uplink and so forth are excellent as well. Steam has quite a few games for download, most of them without DRM.
Heh, they should automate it so that the first post of every IDLE thread is that link or info on how to change your preferences. :P
You can make it so that Idle doesn't show on the main page. Checked your user preferences lately?
No, the extra "ram" went to the animal fucker in the first email.
Hehe, but if you removed your blog from blogspot, it means you're worried about who own's your blog. :P Is not a blog and slashdot comments along the same lines, in being public and in the ease of people being able to comment on, copy and email and so forth?
Just start reading the terms of service for internet content companies. Facebook, Yahoo, MS, Photobucket, the list goes on... they have a similar clause in their terms of use. Not sure how many have "unlimited" though, but I'll bet it's more than just Google. I say standard because so many of them do have it.
It remains to be seen whether or not the EULA would withstand scrutiny in a court of law.
:)
And yes, the TOS could allow Google to do that. Just as Yahoo's could allow it to do that, from their sites, and MS could do it, and FaceBook, and so on and so forth. It's STANDARD language in content companies' terms of use. Slashdot could put out a book, "Idiots who post here.", and use our posts as examples.
And the moral of the story is: Read the fucking license agreement.
Yet you're still posting on Slashdot, which has the same clause.
As for the "you carelessly discuss something related to possible takeover terms using Gmail" comment, it was excellently rebutted here: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=959671&cid=24948017
Every company that hosts web based email has that exact same paragraph in their Terms of Service. So by singling out Google, you're not being exactly fair.
Secondly, my comparison is not silly, for anything you post to Slashdot (or any other SourceForge property) is subject to the same terms. Including things that you might have an expectation of privacy on. SourceForge's terms are a blanket, just like Google, and therein lies the comparison.
Google has also stated in it's "Legal Terms" section of their terms of use and privacy policy: We will not use any of your content for any purpose except to provide you with the Service.
Also, Google did not give itself permission to read your email. You may have, by agreeing to use their service.
And are you really claiming that no other company, except Google, could be irresponsible with the services it provides?
Uhm, which government are you talking about exactly?
Only if the blog is public.
They retain the right to publish them. But also retain the right to refuse to publish them. It specifically says they do not own them.
:D
Go ahead and post them, chances are the cops will be knocking in a few hours/days, and you'll have been hoisted by your own petard.
That's what gets me, people acting surprised by this. I can understand people wondering why such language was included in the TOS for Chrome, and they were lining up to jump on the "Lets bash Google" bandwagon... only to act sheepish when Google admitted it was a case of copy'n'paste-itis.
Read what you're agreeing to, if you don't like it or don't understand it, don't click the effing OK button.
Geez... no wonder the I-Love-U virus did so well.
All this really is, is proof that no one reads the TOS/TOE/EULA. Don't act effing surprised if you can't be bothered to read what you're agreeing to.
:)
If you read this post, you agree to send me five dollars via paypal.
Now to wait for the profits...
Yet you post on slashdot, which has the same language in it's terms of services. OHNOES!!!!oneoneone
Check just about any service that allows you to upload content. Facebook. Geocities. MicroSoft sites are covered by a blanket TOS/TOE/EULA as well, with almost the exact same language.
This is a story how?
A few years too late.
From Slashdot's terms of use, linked there at the bottom of the page...
6. LICENSING AND OTHER TERMS APPLYING TO CONTENT POSTED ON THE SourceForge SITES:
Use, reproduction, modification, and other intellectual property rights to data stored on the SourceForge Sites will be subject to licensing arrangements that may be approved by SourceForge as applicable to such Content. For the SourceForge Site SourceForge.net, use, reproduction, modification, and other intellectual property rights to data stored in CVS or as a file release and posted by any user on SourceForge.net ("Source Code") shall be subject to the OSI-approved license applicable to such Source Code, or to such other licensing arrangements as may be approved by SourceForge.net as applicable to such Source Code.
With respect to text or data entered into and stored by publicly-accessible site features such as forums, comments and bug trackers ("SourceForge Public Content"), the submitting user retains ownership of such SourceForge Public Content; with respect to publicly-available statistical content which is generated by the site to monitor and display content activity, such content is owned by SourceForge. In each such case, the submitting user grants SourceForge the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the terms of any applicable license.
With respect to Content posted to private areas of the SourceForge Site SourceForge.net (e.g., private development tools or mail), the submitting user may grant to SourceForge or other SourceForge.net users such rights and licenses as the submitting SourceForge.net user deems appropriate.
Content located on any SourceForge-hosted subdomain which is subject to the sole editorial control of the owner or licensee of such subdomain, shall be subject to the appropriate license applicable to such Content, or to such other licensing arrangements as may be approved by SourceForge as applicable to such Content.
From Picasa's Terms of Service, section 4.
Your Rights
Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Picasa Web Albums. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Picasa Web Albums and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Picasa Web Albums, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content through Picasa Web Albums, including RSS or other content feeds offered through Picasa Web Albums, and other Google services. In addition, by submitting, posting or displaying Content which is intended to be available to the general public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services. Google will discontinue this licensed use within a commercially reasonable period after such Content is removed from Picasa Web Albums. Google reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion.
Look at the two bold sections for Slashdot and Google respectively... looks almost exactly the same. You'll find that sentence, almost exactly the same each time, for every site that takes
The chances of someone taking my reply to the OP as a first impression is relatively small. And I would posit that most folks reading here read a few posts first before posting themselves.
:)
:P
Secondly, this is IDLE... and most of the comments are about trolls. The OP's post could be taken as trolling, depending on the mod, so yes, I'd like people to understand how trolls are treated.
And what... you were in such a rush to teach me some etiquette that you forgot to log in?
Any time. :)
And it's been said lots of time... you don't have to read it and you can change your preferences so Idle doesn't show up on the main page. It's very frustrating telling people where to go. :P
Says the guy posting AC? :P
Neither is your mom. :)
And that's the Joker, through and through.
The cops and Batman and Dent were all trying to figure out who the heck the Joker was, where he came from, what was his background, what does he want...
SURPRISE! You get nothing. Chaos personified as people turn themselves inside out and backwards to try to get one step ahead of the Joker.
Even Batman got tricked with the ol' switch-er-roo... not once, but twice.
If you thought there were only ten seconds of genuine heart in the film, you must've been taking a long washroom break after downing the bladder-buster cola.
:P
What of the comparison between the Burmese bandit and the Joker, when they were trying to figure out the Joker's motivations?
Or "the girl" saying Bruce Wayne was the only person someone could trust in Gotham?
Or the confrontation between Batman and the Joker in the holding cell?
Lots of heart, decent writing. And there were lots of other scenes I could point out too.
A mess of loose ends, hmm? Sounds like the Joker wins even as he loses.