I'm absolutely blown away by the matchmaking, I've never used anything like it online.
Sounds like what impressed you wasn't so much the game as the support apparatus that surrounds it. Matchmaking and buddy links are great, but (speaking as a software designer) they shouldn't be part of a "game".
Features like that should be in a general support app/library for any X-Box Live title to enjoy. Since Halo is a Microsoft product, those enhancements should've gone to benefit the platform as a whole.
With edonkey network (as well as KaZaA and Gnutella) you can distribute small links to content without requiring either torrent hosts or trackers.
Tell me, has Gnutella become 9000% more efficient in the past year? (Ratio of overhead byte to file data) I haven't looked at it lately, but that's what it would need to become competitive with Bit Torrent.
Torrents suck. There is nothing good about torrents. They are huge, they require gobs of bandwidth and you can't distribute them without setting a server.
Lies. A largish torrent is 30kb. That's not huge. And you don't "need a server" anymore than you do with Kazaa or edonkey (which is to say, you do need a program capable of handling the service, something a modern bittorrent client does transparently) There are many dedicated edonkey servers out there, you know...
Torrents are excellent because the follow the Unix software-design philosophy about separation of functionality ("Do one thing, and do it well"). P2p file transfer and file searching are wholely different tasks, and should be cleanly separated as much as possible.
One useful benefit (amoung many) is that Bit Torrent is legal, while edonkey is often (and unpredictably) illegal... I can join a bittorrent for a free videogame and be 100% certain that 0% of my bandwidth is supporting traffic in handicam movies and child porn.
If the ed2k-style file search feature was actually better enough to be attractive, then it could be easily used in conjunction with bittorrent as an entirely separate application.
PS. ed2k links are fatally flawed. The hash algorithm they use is trivally vulnerable to poisoning: an attacker can easily corrupt everyone's downloads, and the network has no defense mechanism.
Could you please explain to me why exactly my source is wrong any yours is not?
For the FORTH and FINAL time: "my" source is right because it's not "my source"- it's Proc6's source. And since I was responding to Proc6, her source was the pertinent one!
Thus, any legal restrictions on this human right (a direct consequence of the right to life, in the manifestation of the right to self-defense) must be constructed at the state level,
You suggest that states are permitted to suppress the right to bear arms?
Look more closely at the Constitution: while most of the Bill of Rights is devoted to excluding powers from the federal government, the banning of arms is excluded from all levels of government. (Specifically, the other places use text like "Congress shall make no law...", while this amendment says "Shall not be infringed", unconditionally)
The implication is that state governments cannot become local tyrannies, because the state cannot disarm its own poplace- if they try, the federal government must prevent it!
Unfortunately Freenet is an incredibly inefficient method of data transfer.
Which is obviously why they suggested using freenet only to replace the function of supernova: distributing tiny *.torrent files, rather than the huge files being traded.
Under that plan, it is still possible for a detective to connect to a bittorrent tracker and log IP addresses, so it doesn't create the same protection from lawsuits as a full-freenet system would. But, there is no longer a single webmaster as a point-of-failure ("point of lawsuit"?), as there was when supernova.org was shuttered.
What does monitoring and the DMCA have to do with free speech?
Very briefly: Free Speech allows you to discuss copyrighted works, which is almost difficult without copying at least a little of the work, so we have a Fair Use right to make unauthorized partial copies. But because the DMCA outlaws copying technology, Fair Use is attacked, which means Free Speech is attacked.
Just thought clarification was needed for that post.
I wish ignoramuses would stop trying to "clarify". Trying to help is admirable, but spreading misinformation that a 15-second wikipedia search could correct is not. You don't know what a "tracker" is.
In bittorrent P2P, there are 4 components: webserver (provides http links to *.torrent files), downloaders, seeds (including downloaders which have reached 100%), and trackers (inform new downloaders of the IP addresses of seeds and existing downloaders).
Without the tracker, bittorrent couldn't work, for reasons that I hope are too obvious to require elaboration.
Suppose ten people ask, "Where can I find drugs?", and you give out the names?
That would be CVS, Walgreens, Eckerds, and Lloyds... so no, I don't think mentioning a few stores would be illegal.
(This is a reminder of the insanity of the USA running a "War On Drugs", when of course, 99% of drugs are perfectly legal. Oh, and the way the federal government distributes marijuana and methamphetamines...)
No, it's WORSE. Regardless of whether copyrighted material is involved, you still can't describe how to avoid a copy-prevention mechanism. This means that Fair Use can become essentially outlawed- sure, you're technically allowed to copy short bits for criticism, but the technology to make such copies is prohibited...
Looked nothing like Nostromo. Look at real space stations, which are often white inside.
Um, Nostromo was WHITE inside. Bland yes, but white and well-lit. Several posters here seem to have forgotten that many of the interior living space (as opposed to garage/plumbing) rooms were painted a uniform beige.
what would be the legal standing if folks scanned in their old Middle-Earth books into PDF and distributed them free on the net?
That would be quite interesting. You're infringing copyright, but a copyright held by someone who no-longer has the trademark license to sell his own work. (They could change the names to be something different from Tolkien's Middle-Earth and re-release)
All i ever do is set up an access list for MAC addresses, and that can stop anyone you don't want!
Only stops the stupid people. Smarties can just sniff your traffic off the air (since it's unencrypted), see what MAC addresses are getting through, and then reset their own interfaces to use that same MAC. Overriding the factory-set MAC address isn't hard.
Re:what about a commercial game like this
on
Games Knoppix
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This way, as the developer, you would have a custom OS to run/design your game in.
And you can support maybe 50% of the user's hardware, and never ever add drivers for newer things, etc, so the games become useless after a few years...
Re:Tracker for GamesKnoppix
on
Games Knoppix
·
· Score: 1
Anyways, this is just further proof that bittorrent has legitimate non-piracy related uses.
Ahem, the download in question contains xmame and snes, programs that are mainly used for copyright-infringement.
That's not exactly right. There is no clause in the GPL granting you the power to aggregate- rather, that section just reminds how copyright law works. Aggregating is never a copyright infringement, so even if the GPL didn't mention it, you could still do this.
Depending on the tactics allowed and the map, you don't need a quick pitch response for any weapon.
How silly. While it's true that a drastically superior competitor could beat newbies even with a handicap, that's quite uninformative. I suppose that insurgents in Falluja dosn't need bombs, they could hide in careful position themselves in hiding places and wait for marines to walk into knife-range.
If the encounter areas are mostly 2D, you don't need to change your pitch. (Which is what the use of a mouse helps the most with.)
Totally false. Before Quake came out, there was Doom deathmatch (2d terrain), and possessing a mouse was an insurmountable advantage over a keyboarder. Binary inputs are inferior to analog: keyboards can be fast, or precise, but never both.
One is constantly challenged to look at the world and think about what is available to allow the objective to be accomplished more efficiently.
And if you find an alternative solution, and go do it... the game magically prevents you from straying from the official path. For example, there are many situations where you can see the next area across a low fence between buildings. Stack up a few cans, and you can build a staircase to get over. But, AFTER you do all that work collecting physics objects, you are met atop the fence with an invisible force-field.
Anyway, as others have posted, the gameplay mechanism about stacking random objects to get over stuff has been done before in Deus Ex and JP Trespasser. Half-Life's physics is a lot better, but they'd almost have been wiser to make a $19.95 "family-friendly" game focused only on construction.
Instead the GPL itself makes it illegal to distribute it anywhere where the MP3 patents are enforced.
No it doesn't. The GPL says that you can't distribute to someone if you're not able to give him permission to redistribute (such as, for example, if there are classified secrets in the code). But patents don't cover distribution, only execution- you can make as many copies of a patented system as you want, as long as they're never run.
Since the definition established for this discussion was already explained 6 posts ago, your introduction of alternative, wrong sources is meaningless. Proc6 gave a reference she trusted, and I explained that she was incapable of reading it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm absolutely blown away by the matchmaking, I've never used anything like it online.
Sounds like what impressed you wasn't so much the game as the support apparatus that surrounds it. Matchmaking and buddy links are great, but (speaking as a software designer) they shouldn't be part of a "game".
Features like that should be in a general support app/library for any X-Box Live title to enjoy. Since Halo is a Microsoft product, those enhancements should've gone to benefit the platform as a whole.
With edonkey network (as well as KaZaA and Gnutella) you can distribute small links to content without requiring either torrent hosts or trackers.
Tell me, has Gnutella become 9000% more efficient in the past year? (Ratio of overhead byte to file data) I haven't looked at it lately, but that's what it would need to become competitive with Bit Torrent.
Torrents suck. There is nothing good about torrents. They are huge, they require gobs of bandwidth and you can't distribute them without setting a server.
Lies. A largish torrent is 30kb. That's not huge. And you don't "need a server" anymore than you do with Kazaa or edonkey (which is to say, you do need a program capable of handling the service, something a modern bittorrent client does transparently) There are many dedicated edonkey servers out there, you know...
Torrents are excellent because the follow the Unix software-design philosophy about separation of functionality ("Do one thing, and do it well"). P2p file transfer and file searching are wholely different tasks, and should be cleanly separated as much as possible.
One useful benefit (amoung many) is that Bit Torrent is legal, while edonkey is often (and unpredictably) illegal... I can join a bittorrent for a free videogame and be 100% certain that 0% of my bandwidth is supporting traffic in handicam movies and child porn.
If the ed2k-style file search feature was actually better enough to be attractive, then it could be easily used in conjunction with bittorrent as an entirely separate application.
PS. ed2k links are fatally flawed. The hash algorithm they use is trivally vulnerable to poisoning: an attacker can easily corrupt everyone's downloads, and the network has no defense mechanism.
Could you please explain to me why exactly my source is wrong any yours is not?
For the FORTH and FINAL time: "my" source is right because it's not "my source"- it's Proc6's source. And since I was responding to Proc6, her source was the pertinent one!
Thus, any legal restrictions on this
human right (a direct consequence of the right to
life, in the manifestation of the right to self-defense) must be constructed at the state level,
You suggest that states are permitted to suppress the right to bear arms?
Look more closely at the Constitution: while most of the Bill of Rights is devoted to excluding powers from the federal government, the banning of arms is excluded from all levels of government. (Specifically, the other places use text like "Congress shall make no law...", while this amendment says "Shall not be infringed", unconditionally)
The implication is that state governments cannot become local tyrannies, because the state cannot disarm its own poplace- if they try, the federal government must prevent it!
Unfortunately Freenet is an incredibly inefficient method of data transfer.
Which is obviously why they suggested using freenet only to replace the function of supernova: distributing tiny *.torrent files, rather than the huge files being traded.
Under that plan, it is still possible for a detective to connect to a bittorrent tracker and log IP addresses, so it doesn't create the same protection from lawsuits as a full-freenet system would. But, there is no longer a single webmaster as a point-of-failure ("point of lawsuit"?), as there was when supernova.org was shuttered.
First, tell me where in this sentence you see the word "monitoring":
- The DMCA is a blatent spit on the first amendment
Because I'm afraid I can only find "DMCA"...What does monitoring and the DMCA have to do with free speech?
Very briefly: Free Speech allows you to discuss copyrighted works, which is almost difficult without copying at least a little of the work, so we have a Fair Use right to make unauthorized partial copies. But because the DMCA outlaws copying technology, Fair Use is attacked, which means Free Speech is attacked.
Just thought clarification was needed for that post.
I wish ignoramuses would stop trying to "clarify". Trying to help is admirable, but spreading misinformation that a 15-second wikipedia search could correct is not. You don't know what a "tracker" is.
In bittorrent P2P, there are 4 components: webserver (provides http links to *.torrent files), downloaders, seeds (including downloaders which have reached 100%), and trackers (inform new downloaders of the IP addresses of seeds and existing downloaders).
Without the tracker, bittorrent couldn't work, for reasons that I hope are too obvious to require elaboration.
Suppose ten people ask, "Where can I find drugs?", and you give out the names?
That would be CVS, Walgreens, Eckerds, and Lloyds... so no, I don't think mentioning a few stores would be illegal.
(This is a reminder of the insanity of the USA running a "War On Drugs", when of course, 99% of drugs are perfectly legal. Oh, and the way the federal government distributes marijuana and methamphetamines...)
The DMCA is bad, but it isn't quite that bad.
No, it's WORSE. Regardless of whether copyrighted material is involved, you still can't describe how to avoid a copy-prevention mechanism. This means that Fair Use can become essentially outlawed- sure, you're technically allowed to copy short bits for criticism, but the technology to make such copies is prohibited...
Looked nothing like Nostromo. Look at real space stations, which are often white inside.
Um, Nostromo was WHITE inside. Bland yes, but white and well-lit. Several posters here seem to have forgotten that many of the interior living space (as opposed to garage/plumbing) rooms were painted a uniform beige.
what would be the legal standing if folks scanned in their old Middle-Earth books into PDF and distributed them free on the net?
That would be quite interesting. You're infringing copyright, but a copyright held by someone who no-longer has the trademark license to sell his own work. (They could change the names to be something different from Tolkien's Middle-Earth and re-release)
All i ever do is set up an access list for MAC addresses, and that can stop anyone you don't want!
Only stops the stupid people. Smarties can just sniff your traffic off the air (since it's unencrypted), see what MAC addresses are getting through, and then reset their own interfaces to use that same MAC. Overriding the factory-set MAC address isn't hard.
This way, as the developer, you would have a custom OS to run/design your game in.
And you can support maybe 50% of the user's hardware, and never ever add drivers for newer things, etc, so the games become useless after a few years...
Anyways, this is just further proof that bittorrent has legitimate non-piracy related uses.
Ahem, the download in question contains xmame and snes, programs that are mainly used for copyright-infringement.
It's OK under the "mere aggregation" clause
That's not exactly right. There is no clause in the GPL granting you the power to aggregate- rather, that section just reminds how copyright law works. Aggregating is never a copyright infringement, so even if the GPL didn't mention it, you could still do this.
Depending on the tactics allowed and the map, you don't need a quick pitch response for any weapon.
How silly. While it's true that a drastically superior competitor could beat newbies even with a handicap, that's quite uninformative. I suppose that insurgents in Falluja dosn't need bombs, they could hide in careful position themselves in hiding places and wait for marines to walk into knife-range.
If the encounter areas are mostly 2D, you don't need to change your pitch. (Which is what the use of a mouse helps the most with.)
Totally false. Before Quake came out, there was Doom deathmatch (2d terrain), and possessing a mouse was an insurmountable advantage over a keyboarder. Binary inputs are inferior to analog: keyboards can be fast, or precise, but never both.
3 hours a day of CS while at the same time trying to earn an architecture degree
But now the only buildings you can draw are dusty adobes and railroad yards.
One is constantly challenged to look at the world and think about what is available to allow the objective to be accomplished more efficiently.
And if you find an alternative solution, and go do it... the game magically prevents you from straying from the official path. For example, there are many situations where you can see the next area across a low fence between buildings. Stack up a few cans, and you can build a staircase to get over. But, AFTER you do all that work collecting physics objects, you are met atop the fence with an invisible force-field.
Anyway, as others have posted, the gameplay mechanism about stacking random objects to get over stuff has been done before in Deus Ex and JP Trespasser. Half-Life's physics is a lot better, but they'd almost have been wiser to make a $19.95 "family-friendly" game focused only on construction.
Instead the GPL itself makes it illegal to distribute it anywhere where the MP3 patents are enforced.
No it doesn't. The GPL says that you can't distribute to someone if you're not able to give him permission to redistribute (such as, for example, if there are classified secrets in the code). But patents don't cover distribution, only execution- you can make as many copies of a patented system as you want, as long as they're never run.
AC: For instance, in the case of a legit user, a port 80 will never transfer gigabytes of data per day.
Odd. Have you see this site, http://slashdot.org? It transfers 10s of gigabytes daily over port 80, and is completely legit.
-- Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary
Since the definition established for this discussion was already explained 6 posts ago, your introduction of alternative, wrong sources is meaningless. Proc6 gave a reference she trusted, and I explained that she was incapable of reading it.
BTW, the latest game based on a movie license,
No, it's not the latest. There have been several games released after Riddick, including three The Incredibles games, and another two LOTR spin-offs.
Popcorn and soft drinks are where the theaters make their money, not Hollywood
Yes, but theaters are still part of the "film industry", even though the majority are placed outside California.
Agnostics don't believe that the answer is "no" either.
Correct. And since theists are anyone who believes the answer is "yes", while atheists are everybody else, that means agnostics are atheists.
Depending on your definition of atheism that might or might not mean that they are atheists.
Since someone earlier in the thread was already kind enough to paste in the definition from the dictionary, that's what I've been using.
If you define an atheists as someone who assumes that there is no God
And in general, if you define a word to mean something besides what it really means, you can "prove" all kinds of wacky stuff.