Even somebody with a technical background might have overlooked the possibility that a data cartridge wasn't actually made by the company shown on the label
Wrong. It was clearly labeled as an unauthorized release. Only a total idiot could've read the following and thought it had anything to do with Disney Inc:
MODE 7 BRINGS YOU::: MONSTERS INC. (C) THQ::: IT's BEEN AWHILE since OUR last RELEASE, but WE'RE still AROUND.. STAY tuned FOR more! - REMEMBER true SCENERS DON'T care ABOUT CRC'S AND untouched DUMPS, those THAT do
CAN FUCK off and DIE! - OUR respect TO THE following: CAPITAL . illusion . aggression . ANTHROX . sneakers . SWAT . menace . EURASIA . VENOM . lightforce . OK! THAT'S all FOR now, SEE you IN THE next ONE (DO you GUYS even READ this FAR?)
And while it's very possible that a person might not have read that paragraph at all, if that were the case, then he'd never see the offending word to complain about.
(Quoted text changed to mixed-case to avoid lame filter)
However, surely any link from a non-trusted site could contain a virus just as easily if it was in the location it appears?
Nope. Today, many websites include features like "forums" and "message boards" that allow untrusted users to insert HTML code and links, without the priviledge to upload binaries.
Consider the page you're reading now- it would be basically plausible for someone to post with a link to "Fixed Firefox installer for Windows XP" which appears to be on mozilla.org or slashdot.org, but is really on r00tkit.net.
Um, you see, pushy social workers who think the government knows more about raising children than their own parents are a stereotypically Democrat creation. So disabling social workers would be a more Republican action...
Although really, all these changes are much more Libertarian than anyhing else.
Are they? Yet that is exactly type of argument that legitimized home VCRs
No they're not. The keyword from the VCR lawsuit was "substantial noninfringing use". Mathmatically, I think it's clear that much less than 10% of VCR operation was infringing, while it appears that greater than 90% of bittorrent traffic is in violation of some law.
IP is not as real as money. Money is rivalrous even when intangible, whereas ideas are never rivalrous.
That's wrong, for a subtle reason. Many people make the mistake of using Intellectual Property to refer to books or music- but that's actually a shorthand. The property is the right to control the copying of the story or song.
The work itself is nonrivalrous, but the government granted monopoly on profiting from that work is rivalrous. Both copyrights and money are intangible ideas made "property" by government assertion. And in fact, if you somehow managed to illegally deprive someone of a copyright, you could be charged with theft just like you'd stolen negotiable bonds or some such.
But violating someone else's copyright cannot be theft. It's always just "copyright infringement".
"IP theft" is a euphemism for unauthorized copying.
Many people use it that way, but they're of course wrong.
Most of the Disney property has continued to be promoted, refined, added
Why should Disney be the only one allowed to expand on those works? If other corporations were free to make their own modifications to the classic animations, then competition would create better quality, lower prices, or both.
write software for internal use, for which copyright is mostly irrelevant
Wrong. Copyright is why internal software STAYS internal. It's copyright that makes it a crime for an employee to anonymously release a corporation's private code on alt.sources.java- and more importantly, copyright also makes it illegal for other people to redistribute that code.
Without copyright, the only thing stopping this would be whatever threats the company can hold against each of its employees; firing and maybe breach-of-contract lawsuits. The most they could do is punish the one offender; they'd have no legal justification to act against all the total strangers enjoying the code.
PS. Prior to the global Berne copyright revision, nonpublished materials weren't copyrightable. But that was decades ago...
Maybe that's what you're trying to write, but it's not what comes out. Comments on this page get added as HTML, meaning that multiple consequetive spaces are condensed down to just one. (As a demonstration, I put 3-5 spaces after each word of the previous sentence. View Source to see them). The original was correct.
Re:!Windows Emulator, Wine Is Not an Emulator.
on
Does Linux Have Game?
·
· Score: 1
Who do you trust: the project documentation writer, or a non-technical dictionary?
Since they both agree that Wine is an emulator, why chose?
Re:!Windows Emulator, Wine Is Not an Emulator.
on
Does Linux Have Game?
·
· Score: 1
Emulation IS software pretending to be HARDWARE period.
No, you are completely wrong. That is simply not what "emulation" means. It's not what the word means in any dictionary, or in any popular use.
There are emulators, and there are hardware emulators, which are only one kind of emulator. Software emulators are another kind... is that concept really so hard for you to grasp??
Of course she does, they have the legal authority to refuse service for any reason
Wrong. In the USA there is a list of things you can't discriminate on, such as race, sex, religion, and age. (The last bit is rarely enforced, but the law exists)
legally unable to purchase ANYTHING under US contract law.
That's part of an argument for why software EULAs are nonbinding, not that children can't buy software. Despite publishers' claims to the contrary, software is not licensed: it is sold.
False. Attach "anymore" to the end of the sentence and it becomes true. But as written, it was a simple lie: Valve will NOT allow you to play HL2 without an Internet connection
But... Doom3 contributes to de-illumination, as 1000s of gamers were forced to quench their home-lights each night to have even a vague chance to discern monsters on the gloomy screen. So it supports astronomy, you should be happy!
You shouldn't have expected much more then a maze of twisty little passages all a like. iD games are like that.
If Doom3 was just the same old id-game with a prettier engine, that would've been fine. But it was far less fun than the previous Doom and Quake series, both because it was too dark, and the monster population was too sparse.
Both games adhered to the 'one path to next objective' game structure that locks a player's options and defines boredom.
Are you by any chance an "experienced gamer"? You may be facing the "critic's dilemma"... what you see as hackneyed and derivative appears new and exciting to the less-travelled members of the mass public (and that mass market is where big sales come from)
The "one path rule" is supported by customers who want to see the art content they've paid for, and don't want to wander around a lot to do it... that's like having to work, when they just want to sit back and have fun. The more parellel paths that exist, the shorter it takes to "finish" the game- and today's reviewers are careful to point out how many hours of play one can expect from every title.
..but more Linux desktops were sold last year than macs
What percent of those Macs sold were capable of playing a modern game? Close to 100% (all recent models, certainly).
What percent of "Linux desktops" can? Close to 0%, since the typical Linux desktop was a $200 Linspire job (which not only can't run HL2 , but has no AGP slot to even take upgrade cards). (People who want a better Linux computer will just buy barebones and install themselves)
For a company that uses Steam-like technology to protect its assets, there is no longer a temptation to scan user's system for 3-rd party software, to install low-level drivers
For all you know, Steam already does all of those things. And even if they don't yet, they can in the future, because Steam itself is self-updating and mandatory.
none of this stupidity; authentication seems to be enough.
Authentication has been done before (and better!) without Steam.
I'm sorry, but if you honestly believe the lighting and textures were bad, then you must have played it on a mid to low-end rig.
So you're telling me that a faster videocard will actually expand the flashlight's field of view, or enable some kind of "photonic reflectance" effects to illuminate the other walls of the room?
A child walks up to the counter and attempts to purchase GTA: San Andreas.
Where do you live that kids with $60 in their pockets are seen with a parent in a public store? In all my detailed observations, that simply isn't how mall-rat culture works.
Your scenario about how this is creating some kind of "Buy Games for Underage Kids" underground is a bit far fetched however and not a really great argument against it.
True, if they're forced underground, they'll just "pirate" the games, rather than give money to a corporation that's working to block their patronage. I expect carding would make PS2-copiers more prevalent...
Yea, I've got to say, Steam makes a lot of sense to me.
Your defense of Steam is the same flavor of logical fallacy George W Bush uses to defend his unilateral policies: the false dichotomy.
For one example (out of many possibilities), there is no reason Steam couldn't give you all the benefits you listed without also denying non-internet connected persons the ability to play a CD-ROM copy of Half-Life 2 purchased in shop.
The only way OSS games will ever take off in any meaningful way is if companies can prevent the vast majority of piracy
That does not compute.
Piracy of an OSS game is virtually impossible- "OSS" means the author allows anyone to redistribute copies, and "piracy" means someone distributing copies without permission. (Kinda like how tattooing "Yes" on your private parts makes you immune to rape)
Possibly, a corporation selling a closed-source modification of an OSS game could qualify as a "pirate", but that's a far cry from what most game publishers are afraid of.
I just don't understand why companies that manage to create really bad-ass and publically adored characters insist on making
Not only are they not publicly adored (virtually anonymous), but "Master-Chief / Spartan" don't even qualify for the word "character". (One is a rank, the other an armor)
Of course, since Halo is a First Person game, this is normal and expected. Since you're not looking at a character through the whole game, she/he has no opportunity to make an impression on the player. To test this, list off famous video-game characters, and see if any of them come from FPS.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. It was clearly labeled as an unauthorized release. Only a total idiot could've read the following and thought it had anything to do with Disney Inc:
And while it's very possible that a person might not have read that paragraph at all, if that were the case, then he'd never see the offending word to complain about.
(Quoted text changed to mixed-case to avoid lame filter)
However, surely any link from a non-trusted site could contain a virus just as easily if it was in the location it appears?
Nope. Today, many websites include features like "forums" and "message boards" that allow untrusted users to insert HTML code and links, without the priviledge to upload binaries.
Consider the page you're reading now- it would be basically plausible for someone to post with a link to "Fixed Firefox installer for Windows XP" which appears to be on mozilla.org or slashdot.org, but is really on r00tkit.net.
They are all becoming Democrats!
Um, you see, pushy social workers who think the government knows more about raising children than their own parents are a stereotypically Democrat creation. So disabling social workers would be a more Republican action...
Although really, all these changes are much more Libertarian than anyhing else.
Are they? Yet that is exactly type of argument that legitimized home VCRs
No they're not. The keyword from the VCR lawsuit was "substantial noninfringing use". Mathmatically, I think it's clear that much less than 10% of VCR operation was infringing, while it appears that greater than 90% of bittorrent traffic is in violation of some law.
In theory, I could have earned 41 billion dollars. But in practice, if I mug Bill Gates, I'll still be shot at.
IP is not as real as money. Money is rivalrous even when intangible, whereas ideas are never rivalrous.
That's wrong, for a subtle reason. Many people make the mistake of using Intellectual Property to refer to books or music- but that's actually a shorthand. The property is the right to control the copying of the story or song.
The work itself is nonrivalrous, but the government granted monopoly on profiting from that work is rivalrous. Both copyrights and money are intangible ideas made "property" by government assertion. And in fact, if you somehow managed to illegally deprive someone of a copyright, you could be charged with theft just like you'd stolen negotiable bonds or some such.
But violating someone else's copyright cannot be theft. It's always just "copyright infringement".
"IP theft" is a euphemism for unauthorized copying.
Many people use it that way, but they're of course wrong.
Most of the Disney property has continued to be promoted, refined, added
Why should Disney be the only one allowed to expand on those works? If other corporations were free to make their own modifications to the classic animations, then competition would create better quality, lower prices, or both.
write software for internal use, for which copyright is mostly irrelevant
Wrong. Copyright is why internal software STAYS internal. It's copyright that makes it a crime for an employee to anonymously release a corporation's private code on alt.sources.java- and more importantly, copyright also makes it illegal for other people to redistribute that code.
Without copyright, the only thing stopping this would be whatever threats the company can hold against each of its employees; firing and maybe breach-of-contract lawsuits. The most they could do is punish the one offender; they'd have no legal justification to act against all the total strangers enjoying the code.
PS. Prior to the global Berne copyright revision, nonpublished materials weren't copyrightable. But that was decades ago...
however it's 'period','space','space','capital letter',
Maybe that's what you're trying to write, but it's not what comes out. Comments on this page get added as HTML, meaning that multiple consequetive spaces are condensed down to just one. (As a demonstration, I put 3-5 spaces after each word of the previous sentence. View Source to see them). The original was correct.
Who do you trust: the project documentation writer, or a non-technical dictionary?
Since they both agree that Wine is an emulator, why chose?
Emulation IS software pretending to be HARDWARE period.
No, you are completely wrong. That is simply not what "emulation" means. It's not what the word means in any dictionary, or in any popular use.
There are emulators, and there are hardware emulators, which are only one kind of emulator. Software emulators are another kind... is that concept really so hard for you to grasp??
I felt sympathy and kindness from those who could appreciate the tragedy
Tradegy? That's a little harsh, isn't it?
Or do you just have poor language skills, and not know that a tradegy, by definition, is the victim's own fault?
for a trade paperback), and then tell me which is more graphic.
Quills. That was too easy, give me another one! Or just consider the definition of "graphic" in relationship to books...
Of course she does, they have the legal authority to refuse service for any reason
Wrong. In the USA there is a list of things you can't discriminate on, such as race, sex, religion, and age. (The last bit is rarely enforced, but the law exists)
legally unable to purchase ANYTHING under US contract law.
That's part of an argument for why software EULAs are nonbinding, not that children can't buy software. Despite publishers' claims to the contrary, software is not licensed: it is sold.
you have to connect to a Valve server
True, which is why this is a lie:
Voila, you can play without being connected.
False. Attach "anymore" to the end of the sentence and it becomes true. But as written, it was a simple lie: Valve will NOT allow you to play HL2 without an Internet connection
Doom 3 should be the #1 gaming low of the year.
But... Doom3 contributes to de-illumination, as 1000s of gamers were forced to quench their home-lights each night to have even a vague chance to discern monsters on the gloomy screen. So it supports astronomy, you should be happy!
You shouldn't have expected much more then a maze of twisty little passages all a like. iD games are like that.
If Doom3 was just the same old id-game with a prettier engine, that would've been fine. But it was far less fun than the previous Doom and Quake series, both because it was too dark, and the monster population was too sparse.
Both games adhered to the 'one path to next objective' game structure that locks a player's options and defines boredom.
Are you by any chance an "experienced gamer"? You may be facing the "critic's dilemma"... what you see as hackneyed and derivative appears new and exciting to the less-travelled members of the mass public (and that mass market is where big sales come from)
The "one path rule" is supported by customers who want to see the art content they've paid for, and don't want to wander around a lot to do it... that's like having to work, when they just want to sit back and have fun. The more parellel paths that exist, the shorter it takes to "finish" the game- and today's reviewers are careful to point out how many hours of play one can expect from every title.
..but more Linux desktops were sold last year than macs
What percent of those Macs sold were capable of playing a modern game? Close to 100% (all recent models, certainly).
What percent of "Linux desktops" can? Close to 0%, since the typical Linux desktop was a $200 Linspire job (which not only can't run HL2 , but has no AGP slot to even take upgrade cards). (People who want a better Linux computer will just buy barebones and install themselves)
For a company that uses Steam-like technology to protect its assets, there is no longer a temptation to scan user's system for 3-rd party software, to install low-level drivers
For all you know, Steam already does all of those things. And even if they don't yet, they can in the future, because Steam itself is self-updating and mandatory.
none of this stupidity; authentication seems to be enough.
Authentication has been done before (and better!) without Steam.
I'm sorry, but if you honestly believe the lighting and textures were bad, then you must have played it on a mid to low-end rig.
So you're telling me that a faster videocard will actually expand the flashlight's field of view, or enable some kind of "photonic reflectance" effects to illuminate the other walls of the room?
A child walks up to the counter and attempts to purchase GTA: San Andreas.
Where do you live that kids with $60 in their pockets are seen with a parent in a public store? In all my detailed observations, that simply isn't how mall-rat culture works.
Your scenario about how this is creating some kind of "Buy Games for Underage Kids" underground is a bit far fetched however and not a really great argument against it.
True, if they're forced underground, they'll just "pirate" the games, rather than give money to a corporation that's working to block their patronage. I expect carding would make PS2-copiers more prevalent...
Yea, I've got to say, Steam makes a lot of sense to me.
Your defense of Steam is the same flavor of logical fallacy George W Bush uses to defend his unilateral policies: the false dichotomy.
For one example (out of many possibilities), there is no reason Steam couldn't give you all the benefits you listed without also denying non-internet connected persons the ability to play a CD-ROM copy of Half-Life 2 purchased in shop.
The only way OSS games will ever take off in any meaningful way is if companies can prevent the vast majority of piracy
That does not compute.
Piracy of an OSS game is virtually impossible- "OSS" means the author allows anyone to redistribute copies, and "piracy" means someone distributing copies without permission. (Kinda like how tattooing "Yes" on your private parts makes you immune to rape)
Possibly, a corporation selling a closed-source modification of an OSS game could qualify as a "pirate", but that's a far cry from what most game publishers are afraid of.
I just don't understand why companies that manage to create really bad-ass and publically adored characters insist on making
Not only are they not publicly adored (virtually anonymous), but "Master-Chief / Spartan" don't even qualify for the word "character". (One is a rank, the other an armor)
Of course, since Halo is a First Person game, this is normal and expected. Since you're not looking at a character through the whole game, she/he has no opportunity to make an impression on the player. To test this, list off famous video-game characters, and see if any of them come from FPS.